> ![](media/image1.png){width="4.409722222222222in"
> height="1.332638888888889in"}
>
> A Report to the

U.S. Department of Education

On Educational Challenges and Technical Assistance Needs

For the Northwest Region

> Prepared by the
>
> Northwest Regional Advisory Committee
>
> Dr. Susan Williamson, Chair
>
> March 31, 2005

Table of Contents

[Preface iii](#__RefHeading___Toc99858892)

[Executive summary 1](#__RefHeading___Toc99858893)

[Background 1](#background)

[The uniqueness of the Northwest Region
1](#the-uniqueness-of-the-northwest-region)

[The educational challenges of the Northwest Region
2](#the-educational-challenges-of-the-northwest-region)

[The recommendations of the Northwest Regional Advisory Committee
4](#the-recommendations-of-the-northwest-regional-advisory-committee)

[Introduction 7](#__RefHeading___Toc99858898)

[Legislative background 7](#legislative-background)

[Outreach efforts and data collection procedures
8](#outreach-efforts-and-data-collection-procedures)

[Public interest and input 9](#public-interest-and-input)

[Regional background 11](#regional-background)

[School and student demographics 11](#school-and-student-demographics)

[Diversity and special populations
11](#diversity-and-special-populations)

[Student achievement (based on NAEP results)
12](#student-achievement-based-on-naep-results)

[Poverty
...............................................................................................13](#poverty)

[Teacher demographics and qualifications
13](#teacher-demographics-and-qualifications)

[Alignment with standards 14](#alignment-with-standards)

[Educational challenges in the Northwest Region
17](#__RefHeading___Toc99858909)

[Challenge #1: Developing leadership that is open to necessary change,
able to develop and sustain improvement models, and able to balance the
managing and instructional aspects of leadership to create an
environment of trust and collaboration among educators and the community
they serve
19](#challenge-1-developing-leadership-that-is-open-to-necessary-change-able-to-develop-and-sustain-improvement-models-and-able-to-balance-the-managing-and-instructional-aspects-of-leadership-to-create-an-environment-of-trust-and-collaboration-among-educators-and-the-community-they-serve)

[Technical assistance needs 22](#technical-assistance-needs)

[Challenge #2: Identifying effective strategies for closing the
achievement gap among diverse populations specific to the Northwest
Region
23](#challenge-2-identifying-effective-strategies-for-closing-the-achievement-gap-among-diverse-populations-specific-to-the-northwest-region)

[Reducing the dropout rate 26](#reducing-the-dropout-rate)

[Identifying or developing, and disseminating proven effective
instructional strategies in order to provide differentiated instruction
for all students
28](#identifying-or-developing-and-disseminating-proven-effective-instructional-strategies-in-order-to-provide-differentiated-instruction-for-all-students)

[Developing or identifying culturally appropriate materials for
curriculum, learning, and assessment appropriate to particular diverse
populations
35](#developing-or-identifying-culturally-appropriate-materials-for-curriculum-learning-and-assessment-appropriate-to-particular-diverse-populations)

[Technical assistance needs 37](#technical-assistance-needs-1)

[Challenge #3: Preparing teachers to work in multi-graded and
multi-subject classrooms and developing culturally appropriate materials
and practices applicable to the culturally and linguistically diverse
populations served in the region, including but not limited to American
Indian, Alaskan Native, and Hispanic students
38](#challenge-3-preparing-teachers-to-work-in-multi-graded-and-multi-subject-classrooms-and-developing-culturally-appropriate-materials-and-practices-applicable-to-the-culturally-and-linguistically-diverse-populations-served-in-the-region-including-but-not-limited-to-american-indian-alaskan-native-and-hispanic-students)

[Technical assistance needs 40](#technical-assistance-needs-2)

[Challenge #4: Engaging all families and communities in schools to
support success for every student
41](#challenge-4-engaging-all-families-and-communities-in-schools-to-support-success-for-every-student)

[Technical assistance needs 43](#technical-assistance-needs-3)

[Conclusion and recommendations 45](#__RefHeading___Toc99858921)

[Recommendations 48](#recommendations)

[Other recommendations 50](#other-recommendations)

[Appendix A: Achievement gap analysis 53](#__RefHeading___Toc99858924)

[Appendix B: Biographical information about members of the Northwest
Regional Advisory Committee 59](#__RefHeading___Toc99858925)

[Glossary 65](#__RefHeading___Toc99858926)

[List of tables 69](#__RefHeading___Toc99858927)

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc99858892 .anchor}Preface

This report of the Northwest Regional Advisory Committee (NW RAC) for
Educational Needs Assessment was commissioned by the U.S. Department of
Education (ED) under a contract number ED04CO0043/0001 awarded to The
CNA Corporation (CNAC). The law governing the RACs requires committee
members from the following stakeholder groups: state education agencies,
local education agencies, practitioners, both education and
non-education researchers, parents, and the business community. RAC
members were not regarded as spokespersons for their stakeholder group,
but rather as leads in soliciting the views of members of those
stakeholder groups. Membership, affiliation, and stakeholder groups for
the NW RAC are listed below.

Ray Barnhardt University of Alaska Fairbanks, Alaska

Marilyn Davidson Kodiak Island Borough School District, Alaska

Mary Alice Heuschel Washington Department of Education, Washington

Wendy Horman Ammon, Idaho

Karen Johnson Raymond School Board, Washington

Patti Kinney Talent Middle School, Oregon

Rob Larson Oregon Department of Education, Oregon

Karen McGee State Board of Education, Idaho

Karen Rehfeld Alaska Department of Education and Early Development,
Alaska

Douglas Reisig Hellgate Elementary Public School #4, Missoula, Montana

Chris Rhines Beaverton School District, Oregon

Dennis Williams Office of Public Instruction, Montana

Susan Williamson William Howard Taft Elementary School, Idaho

The NW RAC received support in preparing this report from its Designated
Federal Official, Carol Chelemer of the ED and from CNAC and its
partners the Institute for Educational Leadership, The McKenzie Group,
IceWEB, InterCall, and Kidz Online. The facilitation team for this
committee included Patricia Hagan and Michelle Perry from The McKenzie
Group. Additional support and assistance on this contract came from
Arthur Sheekey, Corbin Fauntleroy, Laura Wyshynski, and Tara Harrison of
CNAC.

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc99858893 .anchor}Executive summary

# Background

The Northwest Regional Advisory Committee (NW RAC) was appointed by the
Secretary of Education in December 2004 to assess and report on regional
needs in accordance with Section 203 of Title II of the Education
Sciences Reform Act of 2002 (P.L. 207-279). The NW RAC's thirteen
members represented each of the region's five states: Alaska, Idaho,
Montana, Oregon, Washington as well as each of the required stakeholder
groups, state departments of education, rural and urban school
districts, institutions of higher education, practicing educators,
parents, business persons, and researchers.

Between December 2004 and March 2005, the NW RAC engaged in a variety of
activities designed to seek public input and to develop a report. These
activities included sending out press releases, informational letters,
and listserv messages; participating in forums, meetings, and focus
groups to obtain public input; making presentations at state and local
conferences; holding four public meetings; and posting the NW RAC's
draft challenges and technical assistance strategies on a Web site.
Public interest in the NW RAC's work is reflected in the receipt of 60
comments, 56 participants at the NW RAC meetings, and 1522 views
recorded on the Web site.

# The uniqueness of the Northwest Region

The Northwest Region is one of the largest geographic regions of the
country; however, in terms of population density, it has one of the
lowest population totals of any region. Although it does contain
isolated urban pockets, the Northwest Region still remains predominately
rural in nature, with over 60 percent of all school in Montana, Idaho,
and Alaska located in rural communities and between 20 and 25 percent in
Washington and Oregon. More importantly, many of the rural schools are
located in very remote areas, which impacts the availability of "highly
qualified" teachers and administrators who have the expertise necessary
to work in culturally diverse, multi-graded, and high-poverty schools.
It also greatly compounds the problem of providing effective, ongoing
and job-embedded educational services and training that is needed in
order to address student achievement gap issues when put into context of
national population density.

Currently, the need is growing to address the student achievement gap
among racial/ethnic groups as well as for economically disadvantaged
students. Minority students represent 24 percent of the Northwest's
Region total student enrollment. American Indian and/or Alaskan Native
students comprise 25 percent of Alaska's student population and 11
percent of Montana's; the national average is one percent. Data on
student poverty rate shows that Oregon (38 percent) and Idaho (36
percent) are at or above the national rate of 36 percent with Washington
(34 percent) and Montana (32 percent) just below the poverty rate. The
diversity of languages and cultures, as well as, the current poverty
rate among student populations, is a significant feature of the
Northwest region.

The Northwest Region shares the issues of an achievement gap in reading
and mathematics between the performance of White students and both
Hispanic and African-American students based on the National Assessment
of Educational Progress (NAEP). NAEP does not provide data for American
Indian and Alaskan Native students due to small sample size but state
level assessments provide evidence of a similar gap.

# The educational challenges of the Northwest Region

The overriding regional challenge is to close the achievement gap
between White students and students of other cultural and racial groups.
In addressing the student achievement issues, three additional
challenges were identified: (1) improving school leadership at the
state, district, and building level, (2) addressing language, culture,
and diversity among students, and (3) developing strategies to engage
the community, especially families, in effective and meaningful two-way
communication.

Although there is universal agreement on the importance of school
leadership at the building level in the transformation of schools from
low achieving to high achieving, the challenge becomes creating a system
that focuses on processes and not outcomes, that teaches leaders how to
inspire and empower others, how to work collaboratively, how to listen
and communicate effectively with their stakeholders, and how to
transform the school into a learning community. Highly trained and
effective leaders create the environments in which improvement processes
thrive. The large number of rural schools serving diverse communities
necessitates a strong knowledge base centered around cultural competency
and literacy. Currently, schools systems, especially rural schools, are
finding it difficult to attract and keep qualified and highly trained
instructional leaders, to identify and develop prospective leaders, and
to provide the continuous support that is necessary to build capacity at
the local level.

Culturally responsive curricula and instructional strategies that
capitalize upon and are tailored to the diverse populations of the
Northwest Region requires a significant shift in emphasis from the
"one-size-fits-all" composite approach that has been typical of past
response to "diversity" in the schools. The rural nature of the
Northwest Region requires a teaching workforce and educational delivery
structures that can accommodate multi-graded classrooms and
multi-subject teaching expertise, considerations that aren't always easy
to reconcile with current definitions of "highly qualified" educators.
For American Indians and Alaskan Natives the challenge also includes
strengthening the research base concerning which curricular materials
and instructional strategies are most effectively employed.

Finally, schools are institutions of the community and parents are
children's first (and, some would say, most influential) teachers.
Mutual support and effective, ongoing two-way communication between
schools and those they serve are critical. Teachers and administrators
must learn how to engage parents as well as the larger community of
businesses and other institutions and organizations as effective
partners.

Underlying all of this work that is conducted collaboratively between
the technical assistance providers and the clients they seek to serve
must be the understanding that, in the Northwest, the only sustainable
approach to educational improvement involves building local capacity to
address educational issues because of the factors of geographic size,
isolation, and cultural diversity.

# The recommendations of the Northwest Regional Advisory Committee

The NW RAC recommendations are firmly grounded in the unique nature of
the region and its most pressing educational needs. The areas identified
for technical assistance include: 1) improving school leadership, 2)
implementing proven educational programs characterized by differentiated
curriculum and instruction to promote higher achievement of
underachieving racial and ethnic groups, and 3) strengthening the
partnerships of schools with their families and communities. To be
effective the technical assistance needs to (1) make full use of the
capabilities of technology, (2) bring together educators and
administrators across the region in a variety of professional
communities for learning, sharing, and mentoring, (3) support the
development of local capacity for ongoing educational improvement; and
(4) be culturally competent (i.e., knowledgeable and respectful of the
region's diverse cultures, and free of a "one size fits all" mentality
regarding reform processes).

Lastly, the NW RAC recommends that a separate technical assistance
center be based in Alaska (with a satellite center in Montana) and
charged with the responsibility for serving the particular needs of the
Alaskan Native and American Indian children and communities throughout
the Northwest Region.

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc99858898 .anchor}Introduction

The Northwest Regional Advisory Committee (NW RAC) provides an
assessment of the technical assistance needs of educators in our region
in response to a directive from the Secretary of the U.S. Department of
Education (ED). This RAC is one of ten such committees appointed by the
Secretary to conduct the assessment over the period between December
2004 and March 2005. The committee first identified the major challenges
facing the region in improving student achievement and implementing the
provisions of the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act. It then assessed the
types of technical assistance that might enable educators in the region
to overcome these challenges.

# Legislative background

Section 203 of Title II of the Education Sciences Reform Act of 2002
(P.L. 107-279) directs the Secretary of the ED to establish 20
comprehensive centers to provide technical assistance to state
educational agencies, local educational agencies, regional educational
agencies, and schools in implementing the goals and programs of NCLB,
and in the use of scientifically valid teaching methods and assessment
tools for use by teachers and administrators in:

-   Core academic subjects of mathematics, science, and reading or
    language arts

-   English language acquisition

-   Education technology

-   Facilitating communication between education experts, school
    officials, teachers, parents, and librarians

-   Disseminating information that are usable for improving academic
    achievement, closing achievement gaps, and encouraging and
    sustaining school improvement to schools, educators, parents, and
    policymakers within the region in which the center is located

-   Developing teacher and school leader in-service and pre-service
    training models that illustrate best practices in the use of
    technology in different content areas.

In addition, these comprehensive centers are expected to coordinate and
collaborate with the regional education laboratories, the National
Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, the Office of
the Secretary of Education, state service agencies, and other technical
assistance providers in the region.

# Outreach efforts and data collection procedures

A main goal of the RAC was to disseminate information regarding its task
and to solicit the views of its respective stakeholder groups on the
roles of the new comprehensive centers. During the Orientation Meeting
in December 2004, the NW RAC developed a work plan that outlined the
outreach activities each member would undertake to reach stakeholders.
Over the months of December, January, and February presentations were
given to state boards of education, professional organizations, and
workshops. An initial outreach letter was developed for members to send
out to their stakeholders describing how to participate in the public
proceedings. Additional outreach efforts included:

-   Press releases, televised interviews, newspaper articles, and
    listserv e-mails

-   Two-day educational needs assessment forum in Alaska which brought
    together all technical assistance providers (to achieve the capacity
    building), co-sponsored by the Alaskan Federation of Natives and
    included representatives from the regional Native Education
    Association

-   Presentations given at a state bilingual, multicultural conference
    which included the deans of the three schools of education in Alaska

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Personal presentations to business, parent-teacher organizations,
    education forum committees, professional organizations across the
    region, such as Washington State School Directors Association

-   A link to the RAC Web site listed on the National Middle School
    Association (NMSA) Web site

-   Parent focus groups conducted in Idaho

-   Information disseminated and collected through the Montana Advisory
    Committee for Indian Education (MACIE) listserv

-   Article in Idaho State School Board Association's publication.

A follow-up letter was produced after the January public meeting to
reconfirm the purpose of the RAC. The success of the RAC's outreach
efforts is evidenced in the number of public members registered to
attend the meetings as well as the number of comments on the Web site
forums (See table 1).

## Public interest and input

The goal of the outreach efforts was to generate public interest and
input in the RAC's deliberations. The RAC Web site (rac-ed.org) provided
the central point for giving the public access to the RAC. Table 1
provides a summary of these interactions. The first line in the table
shows the number of enrollees on the RAC Web site from the Northwest.
The Web site served as the information center for the RAC. The public
was encouraged to provide comments both of a general nature and on
specific RAC ideas in a variety of ways. The next section of the table
shows the amount of input the NW RAC received through online comments
and through the RAC Support Office either through e-mail or regular
surface mail. The third section of the table tries to discern public
interest in a more indirect way by capturing the number of times the
public views comments on the Web site. Another indicator of public
interest is attendance at RAC meetings. Each RAC convened four public
meetings. In the meetings held in Washington, DC, and Houston, TX, the
public was invited to observe the proceedings in person. The other two
meetings were online teleconferences. For the online teleconferences,
the public was invited to observe with a link through the RAC Web site.
The next section of the table shows the number of public attendees at
RAC meetings either in person or through the Web site.

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------
  []{#__RefHeading___Toc99858928 .anchor}Table 1:      
  Public input for the Northwest RAC                   
  ---------------------------------------------------- ------------------
  **Type of input**                                    **Numbers**

  Enrollment on RAC Web site                           285

  Comments                                             60

  On Web site forums                                   38

  Through e-mail to the RAC Support Office             18

  Through surface mail to the RAC Support Office       4

  Views on the RAC Web site                            1522

  Attendance at RAC Public Meetings 1 and 2            38

  Focus Groups                                         4

  \*As of February 28,2005                             
  -----------------------------------------------------------------------

Information obtained through public input was critical to helping the
Northwest RAC accurately represent the needs of the education community
in implementing NCLB. Public input gathered through the above means from
stakeholder groups confirmed issues initially brought up by the RAC such
as the need for improved cultural competence in education. However, the
public input also raised issues that were overlooked, such as the need
to include certain special needs groups. The new issues that were raised
through public comments and reactions to posted RAC efforts were
incorporated into the developed list of challenges. The RAC took these
into consideration when developing technical assistance solutions to
address the needs of the region.

# Regional background

This section provides an overview for the Northwest Region that will
provide a context for the remainder of the report.

## School and student demographics

The Northwest Region includes the following states: Alaska, Idaho,
Montana, Oregon, and Washington. The demographic characteristics of
these states' public school systems vary greatly, from a low of 500
public schools in Alaska to a high of 2,207 schools in Washington. Idaho
and Montana are also relatively small with 660 and 865 schools,
respectively, whereas Oregon is slightly larger with 1,262 public
schools. A similar trend is evident in enrollment. Alaska has the
smallest enrollment (134,364 students), followed by Montana (149,995),
Idaho (248,515), Oregon (554,071), and Washington (1,014,798).

With the exception of Oregon and Washington, schools in the region are
primarily rural. In Washington, 82 percent of districts are urban or
suburban, and in Oregon this rate is 74 percent. By comparison, Montana,
Idaho, and Alaska schools are overwhelmingly rural, with these schools
accounting for 60 percent to 68 percent of the state total.

## Diversity and special populations

Except for Alaska, with its large share of American Indian/Alaska Native
students, Whites account for an overwhelming majority of students in
this region. Whites represent more than 85 percent of all students in
Idaho and Montana and more than 70 percent of students in Oregon and
Washington. In Alaska, American Indians/Alaska Natives comprise more
than 25 percent of the student population, whereas Asian/Pacific
Islanders are six percent of the student population. The large number of
reservations in Montana contributes to its 11 percent American Indian
student population, which is much larger than the national average (one
percent). African-American enrollment is low throughout the region,
including rates of less than one percent in Idaho and Montana. However,
the Hispanic populations of Idaho, Oregon, and Washington exceed 10
percent of all students.

Northwest states have small to moderate numbers of English language
learners. Alaska has the highest rate at 12 percent, followed by Oregon
(nine percent) and Idaho (eight percent). English language learners
represent seven percent of students in Washington and only four percent
of Montana's students.

## Student achievement (based on NAEP results)

In all Northwest states, African-American, and Hispanic students trail
White students in academic achievement based on National Assessment of
Education Progress (NAEP) assessments of fourth graders. The NAEP does
not report out separate data for American Indians and Alaskan Natives,
which are critical subgroups in determining AYP for the Northwest
Region.

In Alaska, 40 percent of White students scored at a rate of proficient
or above in reading, double the rate for African-Americans and
Hispanics. In mathematics, a similar 40 percent proficiency rate for
Whites compared with rates of only 15 percent for African-Americans and
25 percent for Hispanics.

In Idaho, White students were three times more likely than Hispanic
students (34 percent versus 11 percent) to score at the proficiency
level in reading. A similar gap was evident in mathematics, with
proficiency rates of 33 percent for Whites and 12 percent for Hispanics.
No NAEP data were available for African-Americans due to the small
sample size. Montana had comparison data available only in mathematics,
where 34 percent of Whites and 25 percent of Hispanic scored at the
proficiency level or better.

Racial gaps in achievement also are evident in Oregon and Washington.
Among White fourth graders in Oregon, 34 percent were proficient in
reading and 37 percent were proficient in mathematics. Only 20 percent
of African-Americans and 15 percent of Hispanics were proficient in each
category. In Washington, 38 percent of Whites were proficient in
reading, more than double the rate for Hispanics (16 percent) and
substantially above the rate for African-Americans (23 percent). In
mathematics, 40 percent of Whites scored at the proficient level,
compared to only 18 percent of Hispanics and 17 percent of
African-Americans.

High school graduation rates varied across the Northwest states, led by
Idaho and Montana, each with 81 percent in 2001. Oregon and Washington
each had 66 percent graduation rates, whereas Alaska was at 64 percent.

Appendix A includes state specific achievement analysis.

## Poverty

Data on free and reduced-price lunch eligibility shows that two of five
states in the region have poverty rates at or above the national rate of
36 percent. Oregon has the highest rate at 38 percent, followed by Idaho
at 36 percent. Washington at 34 percent and Montana at 32 percent fall
below the national rate, whereas Alaska has the lowest poverty rate
among the student population, at 26 percent.

## Teacher demographics and qualifications

The number of public school teachers in each Northwest state generally
follow the enrollment numbers of public school students, with Alaska
hiring the smallest number (8,080), followed by Montana (10,362), Idaho
(13,896), Oregon (27,126), and Washington (52,953). Montana has the
smallest student to teacher ratio (14:1), followed by Alaska (17:1) and
Idaho (18:1). Oregon and Washington have the largest ratios with (20:1)
and (19:1), respectively.

NCLB also requires that each classroom in a core academic subject have a
highly qualified teacher by the end of the 2005-06 school year.
Northwest states have a mixed record in this area, as shown in Table 2.
Idaho has the highest percentage of classes taught by highly qualified
teachers, at 98 percent. Although Oregon and Washington also have high
rates, only 16 percent of Alaska teachers meet the criteria. Few
teachers in the region are National Board Certified (NBC). The
percentage of secondary teachers who are teaching in their field of
specialty ranges from 53 percent in Alaska and Washington to 62 percent
in Montana.

  -------------------------------- -------------- -------------- -------------- --------------
  []{#__RefHeading___Toc99858929                                                
  .anchor}Table 2: Teacher quality                                              
  indicators                                                                    

  **State**                        **Percent of   **Number of    **NBC teachers **Percent of
                                   classes taught NBC teachers   as a           high school
                                   by highly      (SY2004)**     percentage of  teachers with
                                   qualified                     all teachers** college major
                                   teachers**                                   in the
                                                                                relevant core
                                                                                academic
                                                                                subject**

  Alaska                           16             39             0              53

  Idaho                            98             312            2              56

  Montana                          N/A            35             0              62

  Oregon                           82             102            0              58

  Washington                       80             345            1              53

  N/A indicates data were not                                                   
  available for this state                                                      

  Sources: Center on Education                                                  
  Policy Year 2 of NCLB Report                                                  
  (2002-2003), Measuring Up: 2004                                               
  Education Week's Quality Counts                                               
  2005.                                                                         
  -------------------------------- -------------- -------------- -------------- --------------

## Alignment with standards

The states have mixed records in terms of developing statewide standards
in core subjects.

*Establishing state curriculum standards**.*** Idaho, Montana, Oregon,
and Washington have met the requirements under the NCLB for creating
standards in science, reading and mathematics. However, Alaska has only
partial compliance on standards in each of the three categories.

  -------------------------------- ---------------- ----------------- ----------------
  []{#__RefHeading___Toc99858930                                      
  .anchor}Table 3: Meeting                                            
  requirements to establish state                                     
  standards                                                           

  **State**                        **Reading**      **Mathematics**   **Science**

  Alaska                           Partial          Partial           Partial

  Idaho                            Yes              Yes               Yes

  Montana                          Yes              Yes               Yes

  Oregon                           Yes              Yes               Yes

  Washington                       Yes              Yes               Yes

  Source: Education Commission of                                     
  the States NCLB database                                            
  downloaded November 2004                                            
  -------------------------------- ---------------- ----------------- ----------------

*Test Alignment with State Standards. Education Week* analyzed the
alignment of state assessments with state standards and found that no
Northwest state has assessments aligned with standards across all grade
spans and in all four major subject areas. State exams in Oregon and
Washington are aligned with standards in all grade spans for English,
mathematics, and science but not in social studies/history. For
elementary, middle, and high school, Alaska, Idaho, and Montana have
aligned assessments with state standards in mathematics and English but
not in science and social studies/history.

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc99858909 .anchor}Educational challenges in the
Northwest Region

The NW RAC developed a list of challenges that educators struggle with
throughout the region and categorized these into the following priority
topic areas. The challenges do not represent a particular order of
importance.

*Leadership*

-   Promoting a no-excuse educational environment that fosters positive
    change

-   Aiding building level leaders in balancing instructional
    responsibilities with management responsibilities

-   Developing and sustaining successful school improvement models that
    include community participation, particularly in rural, remote sites

-   Creating and sustaining meaningful collaboration among federal,
    state, district, and local school leaders

-   Developing and promoting use of data and data analysis as indicators
    of student performance.

    *Closing the achievement gap for diverse populations (English
    Language Learners, American Indians, Alaskan Natives, Hispanics,
    African-Americans, other high need groups)*

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Reducing the dropout rate

-   Identifying, developing, and disseminating proven effective
    instructional strategies in order to provide differentiated
    instruction for all students

-   Developing and/or identifying culturally appropriate research-based
    materials for curriculum, learning, and assessment relevant to
    particular diverse populations in order to close the achievement gap
    and provide access to higher level learning opportunities for all
    students.

    *Diversity/Language/Culture*

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Developing culturally appropriate curriculum materials, teaching,
    and assessment practices for American Indians and Alaskan Native
    students

-   Preparing teachers to work in culturally diverse,
    multi-graded/subject classrooms, especially in rural areas

-   Identifying and disseminating research based practices that address
    the unique challenges associated with low socioeconomic conditions

-   Identifying and disseminating research based practices associated
    with English Language Learners.

    *Community*

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Identifying and developing strategies for engaging families and
    communities in partnership with schools to support success for all

-   Assisting parents and families in preparing their students for
    school.

    *Technology*

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Identifying and developing effective use of distance learning
    especially for rural and remote areas

-   Developing and disseminating best practices on utilization of
    technology to promote:

-   Sustainable, on-going professional development

-   Avenues for local capacity building to enhance instruction,
    curriculum, and assessment

-   Data based decision-making strategies

-   Opportunities for interactive parent/school communication
    enhancement.

    *Professional development*

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Developing and preparing a highly effective workforce to work in the
    culturally diverse, multi-graded, high-poverty, and rural schools of
    the region

-   Developing and providing continual professional development that can
    be embedded into the daily practice of all staff.

    *Resources*

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Increasing access and capacity to provide intervention programs and
    services

-   Developing and facilitating strategies for sharing resources and
    best practices to meet the needs within each state and the region.

When addressing the technical assistance needs as they pertain to the
region, the committee members determined that the areas of technology,
professional development, and resources were a common thread and are
addressed within the framework of leadership, closing the achievement
gap, diversity/language/culture, and community.

# Challenge #1: Developing leadership that is open to necessary change, able to develop and sustain improvement models, and able to balance the managing and instructional aspects of leadership to create an environment of trust and collaboration among educators and the community they serve

Leading change begins with being able to identify a school's current
reality, the ability to articulate the changes being considered, and a
firm understanding of where the school needs to be headed. Over the past
few years, recent research has identified the primary role of the
principal as a strong instructional leader who has the knowledge,
skills, and ability to create and sustain a supportive, professional
learning organization. Research and common sense support the notion that
improving school leadership at the building level holds tremendous
potential to help schools bolster student academic performance,
particularly for low-income and minority students. Studies of effective
urban schools have found that a key factor in the success of these
schools is the presence of a skilled principal who creates a sense of
shared mission around improving teaching and learning and is able to
delegate authority to educators who have the trust and support they need
to get the job done.[^1] Meanwhile, research shows that schools that
have raised student achievement in spite of students' socioeconomic
backgrounds almost invariably do so with the guidance of an effective
leader.[^2]

Skillful leadership is required to ensure that teachers can operate in
an environment that values and takes advantage of what they know. This
is one reason principals have found their jobs more challenging. Not
only must school leaders perform what Richard Elmore (2000) calls "the
ritualistic tasks of organizing, budgeting, managing, and dealing with
disruptions inside and outside the system,"[^3] today's instructional
leaders must be able to coach, teach, and develop the teachers in their
schools. They must be steeped in curriculum instruction and assessment
in order to supervise a continuous improvement process that measures
progress in raising student performance. They must build learning
communities within their schools and engage the broader school community
in creating and achieving a compelling vision for their schools.

In the words of the blue-ribbon Consortium on Renewing Education: "If we
could do only one thing to build school capacity, we would develop a
cadre of leaders who understand the challenges of school improvement,
relish academic achievement, and rally all stakeholders to higher
standards of learning."[^4]

Although there seems to be universal agreement on the importance of the
principal, school systems, especially rural ones, are finding it
difficult to attract qualified candidates for vacancies created by
retiring administrators. Additionally, few districts have "aspiring
principal" programs to identify and develop prospective leaders, more
and more districts find themselves between a proverbial rock and a hard
place. Consequently, the skillful principals that schools so desperately
need are harder than ever to come by. Current principals need practical
training aimed at helping them do their jobs more effectively from the
start, additional professional development to keep them fresh and
adaptable, and continuous support in order to incorporate new thinking
about what constitutes effective leadership. These leadership qualities
must be developed beyond the principal so leadership is provided by
other educators throughout the system.

Experts note that quality leadership means sharing authority and
responsibility, establishing a culture that supports high achievement,
and continuously using information about student performance to guide
improvement and hold individuals and groups accountable for their work.

Many administrators need continued support in how to inspire and empower
others, work collaboratively, listen and communicate effectively, or
transform the school into a learning community. Existing professional
development for leaders tends to be either too academic or abstract or
too focused on managerial tasks. Programs emphasize discipline, finance,
legal issues, and management but ignore instructional leadership and
exploring better ways to use leadership to raise student achievement.
"The preparation of administrators makes the preparation of teachers
look outstanding. Principals and vice principals and superintendents
rarely have good places to learn."[^5]

The best preparation for principal leadership is participation in
programs "focused around the real work of principals."[^6] Williamson
says principals need to "grapple and deal with issues that are really
important to them, things they can use and apply in their own
schools....It's all about having them identify an issue or a problem and
then researching it and ultimately designing a solution that works for
their own setting."

## Technical assistance needs

The technical assistance needs for state education agencies and local
school districts to address leadership disparities for the Northwest
Region must include assistance in the following:

-   Helping states set up opportunities for current and emerging leaders
    to be mentored by experienced and/or retired educators in order to
    develop effective instructional leadership in the region.

-   Examining ways to replicate successful programs on developing
    effective leadership to spread knowledge about what works in
    principal development. It can form coalitions with key professional
    organizations to consolidate and disseminate research findings.

-   Creating online learning experiences and electronic networks for
    principals to communicate with each other, share ideas, and solve
    problems.

-   Promoting demonstration programs that encourage districts and higher
    education institutions to collaborate on new approaches to
    professional development.

-   Providing tools and methods to evaluate the professional development
    of administrators, including guides and criteria for comparing
    programs and calculating the costs and benefits. Many of these tools
    and programs are developed in states and have evidence of their
    effectiveness, but there is no avenue for sharing or replicating the
    components of these leadership programs.

-   Surveying the leadership of small rural schools in order to
    determine their specific needs.

-   Providing a forum or clearinghouse for district and school level
    leaders to come together with technical assistance providers to
    share challenges and brainstorm solutions including those related to
    implementing NCLB.

-   Helping to resolve audit and compliance issues such as: preparation
    for peer reviews; methodologies and criteria to be used; processes
    of conducting the reviews; and resolving the issues that arise from
    the findings.

# Challenge #2: Identifying effective strategies for closing the achievement gap among diverse populations specific to the Northwest Region

Disparity in academic achievement among the students in the Northwest
Region is evidenced in data analyses based upon race/ethnicity, income
levels, language background, disability status, and gender. These
achievement gaps are documented in a variety of data collection
measures, such as proficiency test results, achievement levels and/or
growth rates, enrollment in advanced classes, high school graduation
rates, and college participation/success rates. The existence of such
disparities is ultimately harmful to the Northwest Region's tax base,
its ability to attract new industry, the health of its communities, and
most of all, the lives of its children. Closing achievement gaps that
exist is not, and will not be an easy task for any school district, any
individual state education agency, or any regional technical assistance
center because it will require the active collaboration of students,
parents, community members, teachers, administrators, and policymakers.

Across the United States, school efforts to close the gap in academic
achievement have been difficult at best. Despite attempts made within
each state comprising the Northwest Region, differences in educational
performance persist in achievement levels, with the greatest gap
involving Alaskan Native students, Native American students, Hispanic
students, African-American students, migrant students, and economically
disadvantaged students in comparison to their White and Asian American
peers. The need for a solution to this problem has new urgency now as
the relationship between educational success and social and economic
opportunity steadily strengthens and the relationship between
educational differences and social conflict becomes more manifest.

Adding to the urgency for a solution has been the implementation of
NCLB. It has placed weighty demands and accountability on public schools
in the Northwest and across the nation. Closing the performance gap is a
key part of the performance requirements. All schools are motivated to
avoid being publicly labeled as "not making adequate yearly progress
(AYP)." Schools are labeled as such if they do not meet state objectives
for student performance in reading/language arts and mathematics, test
participation, and one additional academic indicator. The additional
indicator is attendance in elementary and middle schools in most states
and graduation from high schools in all states. Furthermore, schools are
held accountable not only for all students as a group, but also for
race/ethnic and language minority subgroups, as well as for students
with disabilities and their differing economic status. Title I-funded
schools are especially scrambling to meet performance and participation
demands because they face an array of stronger sanctions. Substantial
funding and administrative control issues ride on continued improvements
in student performance on, and participation in, standardized tests for
these schools. Adding to the crisis is the lack of a systemic, internal
capacity building dissemination model that could be provided through a
regional comprehensive assistance center that could help state and local
education entities develop, implement, and evaluate a broad-scale
approach in addressing student achievement issues inherent in the AYP
considerations of NCLB that will magnify over time.

Moreover, the geographic expanse of the Northwest Region, which contains
isolated urban pockets, but still remains predominately rural and remote
in places only serves to compound the problem of providing effective
technical assistance to address student achievement gap issues when put
into context of national population density. Consider the following
statistics on how much land area needs to be covered to provide
technical assistance to a demographically sparse population:

-   In terms of geographic size, the Northwest Region is one of the
    largest, if not the largest, geographic regions of the country. In
    comparison with the other states, Alaska is the largest of the 50
    states; Montana ranks 4^th^; Oregon 10^th^; Idaho 11^th^; and
    Washington 20^th^.

-   In terms of population density, however, the Northwest Region has
    one of the lowest population totals of any region of the country.
    Compared to the other states, Alaska ranks almost last in population
    by placing 48^th^ among the 50 states; Montana ranks 44^th^; Idaho
    39^th^; Oregon 28^th^; and Washington 15^th^.

Great geographic distances within the Northwest Region must be covered
in order to effectively provide quality technical assistance to state
education agencies and local school districts. The need is growing to
address student achievement gap needs among racial/ethnic groups as well
as for economically disadvantaged students. For example, there are
approximately one half-million (500,000) minority students in the
Northwest Region. These students represent 24 percent of the Northwest's
Region total student enrollment. Today, there are 54,308 teachers and
2,345 principals (not adjusted for schools with shared principals)
serving in schools where more than 10 percent of the enrollment is made
up of American Indian or Alaska Native, Asian or Pacific Islanders,
African-American, or Hispanic students. The principals and staff in
these schools must succeed in creating a school learning environment
that serves the needs of a diverse student population. Understanding how
the student's culture influences his or her learning and social needs
can help teachers and administrators create a learning environment that
is welcoming to all students and fully engages each in learning.

In addition, poverty is widespread across the Northwest Region. Census
data from 2003 indicates that approximately 333,000 school-age children,
or 15.1 percent of Northwest Region school-aged children, are living at
or below the poverty level. Furthermore, another 394,000 school-age
children live in families that qualify for free or reduced-price lunch
(FRPL). Some schools have much higher poverty rates than others, and the
poverty rate for children has been increasing---up almost three
percentage points since 2000. Understanding how poverty impacts
students' lives and learning, and what it means for the school's
instructional program and student support needs to close achievement gap
disparities, is an important challenge for a technical comprehensive
center positioned in the Northwest Region.

## Reducing the dropout rate

Reducing the dropout rate among the various diverse student populations
must be met in order to affect a workable solution to close the
achievement gap among children in the Northwest Region. State department
of education agencies and local school districts must have technical
assistance that seeks to develop and implement capacity building
education goals that reflect the desires, needs, and values of the
public, of schools, and of parents, which can help generate a shared
commitment to education excellence. To accomplish this, education
entities must implement a rigorous set of standards that form the basis
of curriculum development and instructional practice, specify students\'
competencies by subject and grade, and define the performance standards
and responsibilities of school administrators and teachers. Moreover,
education agencies must be able to disseminate existing researched-based
instructional programs with demonstrated success to individual schools
for adaptation, as appropriate, and dissemination of information about
effective instructional strategies and exemplary practices that are
especially effective in diverse classrooms and among diverse
populations.

Further, to address the significant achievement gap disparity caused by
dropout rates among diverse student populations, schools in the
Northwest Region need technical assistance to build local capacity in
order to effectively provide proactive, positive, and rigorous academic
school climates. Elements in the creation of such school climates
include an active promotion of the expectation that all students can
succeed, a demand that they do so, and the encouragement to prepare for
higher education. In addition, success requires maintaining a school
climate that is conducive to academic productivity by orienting
students\' attitudes and behavior toward excellence and giving them a
sense of efficacy and power regardless of racial/ethnic background.
Directing their time toward productive academic exercises, such as
inquiry, seeking and using help, and identifying and developing every
student\'s potential through individualized assessments, appropriate
placements, and ongoing encouragement from school staff are key
components that cannot be overlooked.

Within the Northwest Region, minority children drop out of schools at
alarmingly higher rates than their White student counterparts (refer to
Table 4). In Oregon, African-American students and Hispanic students
exhibit a nine percent student dropout rate almost three times the rate
for White students (3.6 percent). In Washington, American Indian
students and Hispanic students exhibit a nine percent to 10 percent
student dropout rate almost twice that of White students (3.6 percent).
In Montana, Hispanic students and American Indian students exhibit a six
percent to eight percent student dropout rate compared to only 3.1
percent from their White student counterparts. In Alaska, American
Indian/Alaska Native students and with Hispanic students exhibit a nine
percent to 10 percent student dropout rate, which are approximately
twice the rates White students.

+-----------+----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+
| []{       |          |           |           |           |           |
| #__RefHea |          |           |           |           |           |
| ding___To |          |           |           |           |           |
| c99858931 |          |           |           |           |           |
| .anc      |          |           |           |           |           |
| hor}Table |          |           |           |           |           |
| 4:        |          |           |           |           |           |
| Dropout   |          |           |           |           |           |
| rates, by |          |           |           |           |           |
| race/     |          |           |           |           |           |
| ethnicity |          |           |           |           |           |
| 2002-03   |          |           |           |           |           |
+-----------+----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+
| **State** | **       | **Id      | *         | **        | **Was     |
|           | Alaska** | aho\*\*** | *Oregon** | Montana** | hington** |
|           |          |           |           |           |           |
|           | **Grades | **Grades  | **Grades  | **Grades  | **Grades  |
|           | 9-12**   | 9-12**    | 9-12**    | 9-12**    | 9-12**    |
+-----------+----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+
| State     | 6.2      | 3.9       | 4.4       | 3.6       | 6.7       |
+-----------+----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+
| White     | 5.0      | N/A       | 3.6       | 3.1       | 5.7       |
+-----------+----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+
| African   | 6.2      | N/A       | 9.0       | 3.8       | 10.2      |
| -American |          |           |           |           |           |
+-----------+----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+
| Hispanic  | 10.1     | 6.4       | 9.1       | 6.0       | 11.6      |
+-----------+----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+
| Asia      | 3.1      | N/A       | 3.8       | 1.2       | 4.9       |
| n/Pacific |          |           |           |           |           |
+-----------+----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+
| A         | 9.4      | N/A       | 6.3       | 8.1       | 14.6      |
| mInd/AN\* |          |           |           |           |           |
+-----------+----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+
| \*AmInd = |          |           |           |           |           |
| American  |          |           |           |           |           |
| Indian;   |          |           |           |           |           |
| AN =      |          |           |           |           |           |
| Alaska    |          |           |           |           |           |
| Native;   |          |           |           |           |           |
| N/A       |          |           |           |           |           |
| indicates |          |           |           |           |           |
| data were |          |           |           |           |           |
| not       |          |           |           |           |           |
| available |          |           |           |           |           |
| for this  |          |           |           |           |           |
| state     |          |           |           |           |           |
|           |          |           |           |           |           |
| \*\*      |          |           |           |           |           |
| Retrieved |          |           |           |           |           |
| from the  |          |           |           |           |           |
| Idaho     |          |           |           |           |           |
| D         |          |           |           |           |           |
| epartment |          |           |           |           |           |
| of        |          |           |           |           |           |
| Education |          |           |           |           |           |
| Web site  |          |           |           |           |           |
| March 7,  |          |           |           |           |           |
| 2005,     |          |           |           |           |           |
| www       |          |           |           |           |           |
| .sde.stat |          |           |           |           |           |
| e.id.us/f |          |           |           |           |           |
| inance/dr |          |           |           |           |           |
| opout.asp |          |           |           |           |           |
| Data      |          |           |           |           |           |
| obtained  |          |           |           |           |           |
| from the  |          |           |           |           |           |
| Northwest |          |           |           |           |           |
| Regional  |          |           |           |           |           |
| Ed        |          |           |           |           |           |
| ucational |          |           |           |           |           |
| L         |          |           |           |           |           |
| aboratory |          |           |           |           |           |
+-----------+----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+

To place the dropout crisis among minority students within the Northwest
Region, one needs only to look to Montana and the plight of its American
Indian children. The Equal Educational Opportunity for Native American
Students in Montana Public Schools, Montana Advisory Committee to the
United States Commission on Civil Rights has stated that:

> "Indian children in Montana public schools are in a crisis situation,
> as evidenced
>
> by disparities in education, including dropout rates that are double
> those of
>
> non-Indian students, low achievement levels and test scores, and few
> high
>
> school graduates with little advancement to higher education."[^7]

School organizations, through technical assistance provided by a
comprehensive technical assistance center dedicated to understanding
diverse cultural needs of students and parents, can address student
dropout rate disparities. Moreover, those cultural needs, which are not
monolithic in nature, must be valued as components of the mainstream
society. A balance must be established between a child's native ways of
communicating, learning, and behaving and the need for them to be
educated, to contribute positively to the school and community
environment, and to develop the skills for professional and social
success in adulthood.

## Identifying or developing, and disseminating proven effective instructional strategies in order to provide differentiated instruction for all students

The key to closing the student achievement gap for diverse student
populations can be found in the basic foundation of teaching and
learning that, in fact, incorporates elements of research-based
curriculum and identification of best practices. Provisions must be made
for increased instructional time and innovation in reading, mathematics,
and other basic skills through the use of challenging curricula and
instructional strategies that engage students\' interest, promote
inquiry and discovery, and provide students with a sense of satisfaction
from their own efforts. Again, the educational statistics from the
Northwest Region on state assessment data (see Appendix A) offers a
stark comparison between achievement levels of White students and the
region's minority students in reading and mathematics.

In Idaho, spring 2004 statewide assessment data (grades 3, 4, 7, 8, and
10) suggest that 84.4 percent of all White students were proficient in
reading while 78.9 percent were proficient in mathematics on the Idaho
state assessment protocol. At the same time, Hispanic children and
Native American children were far less proficient than their White
counterparts. The difference between the White students and the Hispanic
students in terms of the percentage of children who were proficient was
24 percentage points. The proficiency difference between White students
and Native American students was 23.4 percent.

In Oregon, spring 2004 statewide assessment data (grade 3) suggest that
87 percent of all White students were proficient in reading whereas 85
percent were proficient in mathematics on the Oregon state assessment
protocol. At the same time, Hispanic children and African-American
children were far less proficient than their White counterparts. The
difference between the White and the Hispanic students in terms of the
percent of children proficient was 24 percentage points. The proficiency
difference between White students and African-American students was 13
percent.

In Washington, spring 2004 statewide assessment data (grade 4) suggest
that 80 percent of all White students were proficient in reading whereas
66.1 percent were proficient in mathematics on the Washington state
assessment protocol. At the same time, Hispanic children, Native
American children, and African-American children were far less
proficient than their White counterparts. The difference between the
White students and the Hispanic students in terms of the percent of
children proficient was 26 percentage points. The proficiency difference
between White students and Native American students was 20.7 percent
whereas the difference between White students and African-American
students was 18.1 percent.

In Alaska, spring 2004 statewide assessment data (grade 3) suggest that
84.3 percent of all White students were proficient in reading while 81.6
percent were proficient in mathematics on the Alaska state assessment
protocol. At the same time, Alaska Native children and Hispanic children
were far less proficient than their White counterparts. The difference
between the White students and the Alaska Native students in terms of
the percentage of children proficient was 33 percentage points. The
proficiency difference between White students and Hispanic students was
15.6 percent.

Finally, in Montana spring 2004 statewide assessment data (grades 4, 8,
and 11) indicate that 66.3 percent of all White students were proficient
in reading whereas 61.2 percent were proficient in mathematics on the
Montana state assessment protocol. At the same time, Native American,
Hispanic, and African-American children were far less proficient than
their White counterparts. The difference between the White students and
the Native American students in terms of the percent of children
proficient was 34.5 percentage points. The proficiency difference
between White students and African-American students was 17.4 percent
whereas the difference between White students and Hispanic students was
15.7 percent.

Recruitment and retention of experienced, effective, and well-qualified
teachers for students of all ability levels who have excellent teaching
skills and a good command of their subject specialties and are held
accountable for students\' performance is key to increased student
achievement. As stated in the leadership section, equally important is
the recruitment and retention of high-performing administrators who
provide pedagogical leadership, require the preparedness and efficacy of
the teachers, and provide ongoing professional development to help
teachers master new curricula and teaching strategies, especially those
teachers who are effective in diverse classrooms, who improve students\'
ability to meet standards, and who treat and challenge all students
equally. Moreover, high-performing administrators are needed to help the
school organization internalize and convey the fact that race/ethnicity
should not affect achievement; that poverty can be overcome to achieve
academic success; and to help solve academic achievement problems
through the use of decision-making tools based on data collection and
analysis, which include a review of school-wide data---current and past
test scores, course enrollment patterns, and disciplinary actions---and
a comparison of these data with those of other students, schools, and
areas to help determine the overall school changes that are likely to
improve student performance.

The need for highly trained and highly qualified teachers and
administrators within the Northwest Region is only exacerbated by the
rural and remote geographic characteristics of the region. The
geographic vastness and subsequent population isolation of the region
inhibits the creation of a coordinated, systemic professional
development model to build local capacity to address the academic needs
of the region's diverse student population. Consider the
geographic/demographic data for the Northwest Region found in Tables 5,
6, and 7.

  -------------------------------- ------------ ------------ ----------- ------------- ------------ ----------------
  []{#__RefHeading___Toc99858932                                                                    
  .anchor}Table 5(a): Number of                                                                     
  Northwest schools by locale:                                                                      
  school year 2002-03                                                                               

  **Locale**                       **Region**   **Alaska**   **Idaho**   **Montana**   **Oregon**   **Washington**

  Large City (More than 250,000)   359          94           N/A         N/A           133          132

  Mid-size City (50,000-250,000)   890          15           149         63            197          466

  Urban Fringe of Large City       885          31           N/A         N/A           216          638

  Urban Fringe of Mid-size City    599          12           96          38            141          312

  Large Town (25,000-49,999)       82           11           11          29            17           14

  Small Town (2,500-24,999)        616          57           125         99            185          150

  Rural outside MSA                1,532        267          196         572           221          276

  Rural inside MSA                 531          13           83          64            152          219

  Total                            5,494        500          660         865           1,262        2,207

  \*Data source: National Center                                                                    
  for Education Statistics: Common                                                                  
  Core of Data; locale coding by                                                                    
  the Census Bureau: Includes all                                                                   
  schools with reported enrollment                                                                  
  -------------------------------- ------------ ------------ ----------- ------------- ------------ ----------------

  -------------------------------- ------------ ------------ ----------- ------------- ------------ ----------------
  []{#__RefHeading___Toc99858933                                                                    
  .anchor}Table 5(b): Percent of                                                                    
  Northwest schools by locale:                                                                      
  school year 2002-03                                                                               

  **Locale**                       **Region**   **Alaska**   **Idaho**   **Montana**   **Oregon**   **Washington**

  Large City (More than 250,000)   7%           19%          0%          0%            11%          6%

  Mid-size City (50,000-250,000)   16%          3%           23%         7%            16%          21%

  Urban Fringe of Large City       16%          6%           0%          0%            17%          29%

  Urban Fringe of Mid-size City    11%          2%           15%         4%            11%          14%

  Large Town (25,000-49,999)       1%           2%           2%          3%            1%           1%

  Small Town (2,500-24,999)        11%          11%          19%         11%           15%          7%

  Rural outside MSA                28%          53%          30%         66%           18%          13%

  Rural inside MSA                 10%          3%           13%         7%            12%          10%

  Total                            100%         100%         100%        100%          100%         100%
  -------------------------------- ------------ ------------ ----------- ------------- ------------ ----------------

\*Data source: National Center for Education Statistics: Common Core of
Data; locale coding by the Census Bureau: Includes all schools with
reported enrollment

  -------------------------------- ------------ ------------ ----------- ------------- ------------ ----------------
  []{#__RefHeading___Toc99858934                                                                    
  .anchor}Table 6(a): Number of                                                                     
  Northwest students by locale:                                                                     
  school year 2002-03                                                                               

  **Locale**                       **Region**   **Alaska**   **Idaho**   **Montana**   **Oregon**   **Washington**

  Large City (More than 250,000)   163,076      48,889       N/A         N/A           65,986       48,201

  Mid-size City (50,000-250,000)   469,628      6,512        78,379      33,601        112,851      238,285

  Urban Fringe of Large City       515,386      13,364       N/A         N/A           130,584      371,438

  Urban Fringe of Mid-size City    277,005      6,994        51,609      8,790         65,752       143,860

  Large Town (25,000-49,999)       40,809       5,833        6,558       16,249        7,834        4,335

  Small Town (2,500-24,999)        231,196      15,408       45,989      32,021        77,656       60,122

  Rural outside MSA                231,406      33,180       39,622      51,451        46,294       60,859

  Rural inside MSA                 169,185      4,184        26,209      7,883         43,211       87,698

  Total                            2,097,691    134,364      248,366     149,995       550,168      1,014,798

  \*Data source: National Center                                                                    
  for Education Statistics: Common                                                                  
  Core of Data; locale coding by                                                                    
  the Census Bureau                                                                                 
  -------------------------------- ------------ ------------ ----------- ------------- ------------ ----------------

  -------------------------------- ------------ ------------ ----------- ------------- ------------ ----------------
  []{#__RefHeading___Toc99858935                                                                    
  .anchor}Table 6(b): Percent of                                                                    
  Northwest students by locale:                                                                     
  school year 2002-03                                                                               

  **Locale**                       **Region**   **Alaska**   **Idaho**   **Montana**   **Oregon**   **Washington**

  Large City (More than 250,000)   8%           36%          0%          0%            12%          5%

  Mid-size City (50,000-250,000)   22%          5%           32%         22%           21%          23%

  Urban Fringe of Large City       25%          10%          0%          0%            24%          37%

  Urban Fringe of Mid-size City    13%          5%           21%         6%            12%          14%

  Large Town (25,000-49,999)       2%           4%           3%          11%           1%           0%

  Small Town (2,500-24,999)        11%          11%          19%         21%           14%          6%

  Rural outside MSA                11%          25%          16%         34%           8%           6%

  Rural inside MSA                 8%           3%           11%         5%            8%           9%

  Total                            100%         100%         100%        100%          100%         100%
  -------------------------------- ------------ ------------ ----------- ------------- ------------ ----------------

\*Data source: National Center for Education Statistics: Common Core of
Data; locale coding by the Census Bureau

  -------------------------------- ------------ ------------ ----------- ------------- ------------ ----------------
  []{#__RefHeading___Toc99858936                                                                    
  .anchor}Table 7 (a): Number of                                                                    
  Northwest teachers by locale:                                                                     
  school year 2002-03                                                                               

  **Locale**                       **Region**   **Alaska**   **Idaho**   **Montana**   **Oregon**   **Washington**

  Large City (More than 250,000)   8,611        2,728        N/A         N/A           3,328        2,556

  Mid-size City (50,000-250,000)   23,780       375          4,227       2,098         4,998        12,084

  Urban Fringe of Large City       24,721       746          N/A         N/A           6,050        17,925

  Urban Fringe of Mid-size City    14,084       346          2,659       561           3,149        7,370

  Large Town (25,000-49,999)       2,209        312          344         971           345          237

  Small Town (2,500-24,999)        12,655       962          2,676       1,975         3,924        3,120

  Rural outside MSA                15,003       2,145        2,471       4,185         2,712        3,490

  Rural inside MSA                 9,053        254          1,506       571           2,124        4,599

  Total                            110,117      7,867        13,882      10,360        26,629       51,379

  \*Data source: National Center                                                                    
  for Education Statistics: Common                                                                  
  Core of Data; locale coding by                                                                    
  the Census Bureau                                                                                 
  -------------------------------- ------------ ------------ ----------- ------------- ------------ ----------------

  -------------------------------- ------------ ------------ ----------- ------------- ------------ ----------------
  []{#__RefHeading___Toc99858937                                                                    
  .anchor}Table 7(b): Percent of                                                                    
  Northwest teachers by locale:                                                                     
  school year 2002-03                                                                               

  **Locale**                       **Region**   **Alaska**   **Idaho**   **Montana**   **Oregon**   **Washington**

  Large City (More than 250,000)   8%           35%          0%          0%            12%          5%

  Mid-size City (50,000-250,000)   22%          5%           30%         20%           19%          24%

  Urban Fringe of Large City       22%          9%           0%          0%            23%          35%

  Urban Fringe of Mid-size City    13%          4%           19%         5%            12%          14%

  Large Town (25,000-49,999)       2%           4%           2%          9%            1%           0%

  Small Town (2,500-24,999)        11%          12%          19%         19%           15%          6%

  Rural outside MSA                14%          27%          18%         40%           10%          7%

  Rural inside MSA                 8%           3%           11%         6%            8%           9%

  Total                            100%         100%         100%        100%          100%         100%

  \*Data source: National Center                                                                    
  for Education Statistics: Common                                                                  
  Core of Data; locale coding by                                                                    
  the Census Bureau                                                                                 
  -------------------------------- ------------ ------------ ----------- ------------- ------------ ----------------

As Tables 5, 6, and 7 suggest, the most restrictive definition of rural
(that being rural areas outside of metropolitan counties, Locale 7 on
all Tables 5 to 7) includes 28 percent of all schools in the Northwest
region, 11 percent of students, and 14 percent of teachers. Montana is
the most rural with 66 percent of schools, 34 percent of students, and
40 percent of teachers in rural areas outside of metro counties. Alaska
is the next most rural with 53 percent of schools, 25 percent of
students, and 14 percent of teachers in rural areas outside of metro
counties and Idaho is third with 30 percent of schools, 16 percent of
students, and 27 percent of teachers in such areas. Even the most
populated states of the region, Oregon and Washington, have substantial
numbers of non-metro rural schools, 18 percent and 13 percent of
schools, respectively.

The Northwest Region is in dire need of technical assistance centers
that can focus time, energy, and resources to disseminate and provide
professional development on best practice research. To effectively
accomplish the task, regional technical assistance centers must help
Northwest Region educators make efficient use of education technology.
It is the only way to economically bridge the geographic expanse of the
region and address the challenge to develop or identify research based
effective curriculum to close the achievement gap among the region's
diverse student populations.

The use of technology can be an important tool to help expand the reach
of comprehensive technical assistance centers. It can help
administrators and teachers create databases to analyze student
performance data to inform instructional decisions and effect
instructional improvements for the region's diverse student populations.
In school districts where release time for teachers is difficult to
obtain, the use of web-based technologies greatly improves their access
to center services. Technology can permit access from a greater number
of participants and its continuous availability enables access to
content for even the most hard-to-reach educators. Whether a function of
geography, resource restrictions, time, or knowledge, local constraints
in addressing the challenge of developing or identifying research based
effective practices to close the achievement gap can be impacted through
knowledgeable applications of technology.

## Developing or identifying culturally appropriate materials for curriculum, learning, and assessment appropriate to particular diverse populations[^8]

Concrete steps to address the disparity in student achievement in
Northwest Region schools have begun with efforts that are knowledge
based; that is, they are informed by the existence of proven and
promising strategies and by new research pointing to additional
innovative measures. Moreover, it is now widely recognized that schools,
communities, and families must be committed to the achievement of all
children, must begin educating them when they are very young, must make
a long-term commitment to educational improvement, and must develop an
understanding of what has been termed "cultural competency."

Based on information from the Alaska Department of Education & Early
Development and Oregon Department of Education, cultural competency is
based on a commitment to social justice and equity. Culture refers to
integrated patterns of human behavior that include the language,
thoughts, communication, actions, customs, beliefs, values, and norms of
racial, ethnic, religious, or social groups. Cultural competency is a
developmental process occurring at individual and system levels that
evolves and is sustained over time. Recognizing that individuals begin
with specific lived experiences and biases, and that working to accept
multiple worldviews is a difficult choice and task, cultural competence
requires that individuals and organizations do the following:

-   Have a defined set of values and principles, demonstrated behaviors,
    attitudes, policies, and structures that enable them to work
    effectively in a cross-cultural manner.

-   Demonstrate the capacity to:

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Value diversity

-   Engage in self-reflection

-   Facilitate effectively (manage) the dynamics of difference

-   Acquire and institutionalize cultural knowledge

-   Adapt to the diversity and the cultural contexts of the students,
    families, and communities they serve

-   Support actions which foster equity of opportunity and services.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Institutionalize, incorporate, evaluate, and advocate the above in
    all aspects of leadership, policy-making, administration, practice,
    and service delivery while also systematically involving staff,
    students, families, key stakeholders, and communities.

This challenge of addressing the achievement gap is one that truly
requires a universal approach. Through implementation of "cultural
competency" awareness strategies, provision needs to be made for high
quality preschool programs that foster young children\'s development of
social and school readiness skills, develop their interest in learning,
and orient them toward academic achievement. Moreover, it is vital that
parent education programs and family literacy programs (1) promote
respect for diversity, (2) seek to help families learn how to make a
concrete commitment to their children\'s academic success while they are
still very young, (3) seek to teach families to promote a child\'s
cognitive and social development through creation of homes as learning
environments, (4) and seek to encourage families to take advantage of
school and community resources that support achievement. Efforts such as
(1) family support and community involvement networks that promote
active encouragement of parents\' high expectations for their child\'s
academic achievement, (2) development of a home atmosphere conducive to
learning, (3) commitment on the part of the school and community to help
all parents and all students, regardless of racial or ethnic background,
meet performance standards through social functions, meetings, and
workshops where the family involvement in educational success is valued
cannot be overstated if the educational entities are to develop or
identify culturally appropriate materials for curriculum, learning, and
assessment appropriate to particular diverse populations.

## Technical assistance needs

The technical assistance needs for state education agencies and local
school districts to address student achievement gap disparities for the
Northwest Region must include assistance in the following:

-   Helping to build systemic state and local capacities to develop,
    implement, and evaluate a broad-scale approach to address student
    achievement issues required to meet AYP as specified in NCLB

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Assisting states to develop comprehensive, single-state
    accountability systems

-   Working with states to develop coherent and aligned policies around
    NCLB implementation

-   Helping to reconfigure policies and infrastructures at state,
    district, and school levels to develop or identify culturally
    appropriate materials for curriculum, learning, and assessment
    appropriate to particular diverse populations

-   Providing research- or evidence-based professional development to
    build the capacity of all individuals across the educational system
    to implement district or school reform initiatives

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Identifying and disseminating research-based school performance
    audit protocols designed to identify areas of strength and areas of
    concern within school organizational practices to assist schools in
    the implementation of best practice methodologies

-   Identifying or, where necessary, developing training and materials
    for instruction and assessment in the core content areas that are
    aligned with state standards

-   Making professional development more accessible to educators,
    especially those in rural areas, through the use of technology and
    by partnering with educational organizations and professional
    associations to develop and deliver accessible and affordable
    training

-   Creating models to assist schools in training educators on how to
    analyze and use student data to drive effective instructional
    practices for all students.

-   Sharing research on how high expectations for all students can be
    translated into classroom and school practices that improve student
    engagement in and responsibility for learning

-   Helping schools identify effective strategies for increasing the
    cultural competency of their staff and identify best practices in
    instructional methodologies

-   Helping schools develop instructional programs that build from the
    skill and knowledge base that each child brings from the home and
    community and identifying effective models of parent and community
    involvement that are relevant to the cultural context of their
    schools

-   Developing distance learning infrastructure to support rural schools
    in providing a wider range of curricular offerings with instruction
    guided by highly qualified teachers.

# Challenge #3: Preparing teachers to work in multi-graded and multi-subject classrooms and developing culturally appropriate materials and practices applicable to the culturally and linguistically diverse populations served in the region, including but not limited to American Indian, Alaskan Native, and Hispanic students

There is a growing body of evidence indicating that the way language and
cultural considerations are addressed in the education system can have a
significant impact on the performance of all students, especially those
from particular cultural communities, such as American Indians and
Alaska Natives. Culturally responsive curricula and teaching practices
that capitalize upon and are tailored to the diverse populations that
make up a particular community requires a significant shift in emphasis
from the one-size-fits-all composite approach that has been typical of
past response to "diversity" in the schools.

Additional factors that come into play in addressing these
considerations in the Northwest Region are those associated with the
large number of rural schools serving diverse communities in remote
settings with a small population base. This necessitates a teaching
workforce and educational delivery structures that can accommodate
multi-graded classrooms and multi-subject teaching expertise,
considerations that aren't always easy to reconcile with current
definitions of "highly qualified" teachers.

All five states in the Northwest Region are currently engaged in the
development of some form of "cultural competencies" or "cultural
standards" to identify the characteristics and conditions necessary to
provide a culturally responsive education that prepares students who
have a strong sense of personal efficacy and cultural well being as well
as a solid academic preparation to make their own way in the world. For
example, the *Alaska Standards for Culturally Responsive Schools* spells
out the essential skills, knowledge, and practices associated with
culturally responsive teaching, curriculum, schools, and communities
that provide the support students need "to become responsible, capable
and whole human beings."[^9] In Montana, efforts related to the
implementation of the *Indian Education for All Act* are directed toward
assisting all schools in infusing information about Montana tribes into
their local curriculum, whereas at the same time retaining a focus on
improving academic achievement and reducing dropout rates among
Montana's Indian student population. And, most recently, Oregon,
Washington, and Idaho have initiated efforts to define and establish
"cultural competency" standards to assist schools in implementing
culturally responsive educational services.

As schools seek new, more effective ways to address issues of diversity,
language, and culture that take into account the considerations outlined
above, it is to their own strengths and resources that they must turn
for guidance and support. The role for technical assistance providers in
such circumstances is not one of bringing in experts from outside to
address local issues, but of providing support for building local
capacity to help each school and community address their needs in
locally appropriate and sustainable ways. The federal comprehensive
technical assistance center can facilitate such a process by serving as
a clearinghouse to identify and align existing resources, promote
synergy, and avoid duplication of effort for local service providers.

## Technical assistance needs

Issues of diversity, language, and culture have taken on a renewed
urgency with the current requirements for data disaggregation in the
determination of adequate yearly progress and implementing appropriate
strategies to address the demands of NCLB. The technical assistance
needs associated with responding to the challenges of diversity,
language, and culture for the Northwest Region must include assistance
in the following:

-   Supporting active engagement of members of all cultural and
    linguistic communities in shaping educational programs and services

-   Assisting in the development and utilization of locally oriented
    curriculum materials, assessments, and applications of technology

-   Supporting region-wide collaboration in the development and
    implementation of cultural competency and/or cultural standards

-   Assisting in the implementation of locally based cultural
    orientation programs for new school staff, including an extended
    cultural immersion experience and community mentoring support

-   Infusing effective teaching strategies for multi-graded,
    multi-subject classrooms especially in rural schools

-   Using distance learning to foster local capacity building through a
    "grow your own educators" strategy that increases the diversity of
    school personnel and contributes to continuity, stability, and
    sustainability in the educational system

-   Establishing ongoing partnerships between technical assistance
    providers and community advocacy organizations that represent the
    interests and aspirations of the cultural and linguistic populations
    being served

-   Developing culturally appropriate leadership models of successful
    schools for use by schools and districts serving American Indian and
    Alaska Native students and communities as well as for other
    communities with minority populations.

# Challenge #4: Engaging all families and communities in schools to support success for every student

The educational achievement of students is dependent not only on the
student, teacher, and school but relies on support from the family and
community. Community engagement is a challenging problem. The challenge
for schools becomes how to engage the diverse community and establish a
two-way dialogue for facilitating the achievement of all students.

Schools experience better parent and community relationships, as well as
greater support and respect from the community when parents are actively
engaged[^10] yet it is not uncommon for parents to feel unwelcome at
school and unsure of their role.[^11] It is therefore critical that
schools develop and identify roles in which parents can make meaningful
contributions to their children's schools and teachers can make
meaningful contributions to their students' communities.

Family involvement is known to play a critical role in effective
schooling. Many educators and families agree that any solutions to the
problems facing public education must include a substantial examination
of school and community relationships. A framework for this two-way
communication is necessary to invite parents' unique body of knowledge
into the dialogue and collaboration already occurring in schools.

Members of the NW RAC committee acknowledge that building home-school
partnerships is a process that varies from school to school and,
therefore, they are hesitant to promote a specific model. However,
several key elements are common to effective schools whether they are
rural or urban, large or small. All schools must offer a variety of
opportunities for parents to engage, from general activities such as
attending school functions and parent teacher conferences to specific
opportunities for substantive ongoing participation such as sitting in
advisory capacities or on leadership teams which collaborate to
effectuate positive change.

Research indicates that it is "teacher practices...that \[makes\] the
difference in whether parents are productive partners in children's
education."[^12] Technical assistance efforts should therefore be
focused on educating and supporting teachers and building administrators
in identifying and using best practices in engaging parents as
productive partners.

Providing information about school progress and achievement, and
education policy in a format and context that is understandable to
non-educators is an important element. Parents need to understand the
motivating factors behind school improvement planning in order to
participate in the process. Alternative methods of disseminating
research and information for a school's outreach to its community are a
necessity especially for rural and remote communities. Providing
assistance to schools in using the information to help staff engage
parents and communities will help bridge the gap between community and
school.

## Technical assistance needs

The technical assistance needs for state education agencies and local
school districts to address the community involvement and engagement
disparities for the Northwest Region must include assistance in the
following:

-   Disseminating and coordinating information on state and local
    efforts to foster strong community school partnerships and
    organizing the information in a user-friendly format

-   Identifying processes that can help schools coordinate community
    resources that support learning

-   Providing information on how to use technology to increase
    communication with parents and the community in general

-   Training school staff on effective two-way communication with the
    community, and providing techniques to assist educators in involving
    and informing parents and the community

-   Assisting educators in understanding and utilizing the research in
    regards to the meaningful roles for parents in the school systems

-   Assisting educators in understanding and utilizing the research in
    regards to the meaningful roles for educators interacting in the
    community from which their students come

-   Identifying and disseminating best practices for involving parents
    of diverse cultural and/or linguistic groups.

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc99858921 .anchor}Conclusion and recommendations

Across the United States, school efforts to close the gap in academic
achievement have been difficult at best. Despite attempts made within
each state comprising the Northwest Region, differences in educational
performance persist in achievement levels. The need for a solution to
this problem has new urgency now as the relationship between educational
success and social and economic opportunity steadily strengthens.

In terms of geographic size, the Northwest Region is one of the largest
geographic regions of the country. In terms of population density,
however, the Northwest Region has one of the lowest population totals of
any region of the country. Additionally, the demographic characteristics
of these states' public school systems vary greatly, from a low of 500
public schools in Alaska to a high of 2,207 schools in Washington.

This geographic expanse and low population density of the Northwest
Region, which does contain isolated urban pockets but still remains
predominately rural and in places remote in nature, only serves to
compound the problem of achieving economies of scale in providing
effective technical assistance to address student achievement gap issues
when put into context of national population density.

Currently, the need is growing to address the student achievement gap
among racial/ethnic groups as well as for economically disadvantaged
students. For example, there are approximately one half-million
(500,000) minority students in the Northwest Region. These students
represent 24 percent of the Northwest's Region total student enrollment.

Disparities in academic achievement among the students in the Northwest
Region are evidenced in disaggregated data based upon race/ethnicity,
income levels, language background, disability status, and gender. These
achievement gaps are documented in a variety of data collection
measures, such as proficiency test results, achievement levels and/or
growth rates, enrollment in advanced classes, high school graduation
rates, and college participation/success rates. The existence of such
disparities is ultimately harmful to the Northwest Region's tax base,
its ability to attract new industry, the health of its communities, and
most of all, to the lives of its children. Closing achievement gaps that
exist is not, and will not be an easy task for any school district, any
individual state education agency, or any regional technical assistance
center because it will require the active collaboration of students,
parents, community members, teachers, administrators, and policymakers.
The principals and staff in these schools must create a school learning
environment that serves the needs of a diverse student population.
Understanding how the student's culture influences his or her learning
and social needs will help teachers and administrators create a learning
environment that is welcoming to all students and fully engages each in
learning.

Education agencies must be able to disseminate existing researched-based
instructional programs with demonstrated success to individual schools
for adaptation, as appropriate, and dissemination of information about
instructional strategies and exemplary practices that are especially
effective in diverse classrooms and among diverse populations.

The Northwest Region identified four primary challenges: achievement
gap, leadership, cultural diversity, and community involvement.
Technical assistance must focus on the following areas to address these
challenges. Technical assistance in using research that improves school
leadership at the building level holds tremendous potential to help
schools bolster student academic performance, particularly for
low-income and minority students.

The second area of technical assistance must address language, culture,
and diversity among our students. There is a growing body of evidence
indicating that the way language and cultural considerations are
addressed in the education system can have a significant impact on the
performance of all students, and especially those from particular
cultural communities. Culturally responsive curricula and teaching
practices that capitalize upon and are tailored to the diverse
populations that make up a particular community requires a significant
shift in emphasis from the one-size-fits-all composite approach that has
been typical of past responses to "diversity" in the schools.

A third area must address assisting schools in developing strategies to
engage the entire community and establish a two-way dialogue for
facilitating the achievement of all students. Technical assistance
efforts should be focused on educating and supporting teachers and
building administrators in identifying and using best practices in
engaging parents as productive partners and in defining meaningful roles
for parents.

Finally, technical assistance needs to be provided in the effective use
of technology within a school setting. The use of technology can be an
important tool to help expand the reach of comprehensive technical
assistance centers. It can help administrators and teachers create
databases to analyze student performance data to inform instructional
decisions and effect instructional improvements for the region's diverse
student populations. In school districts where release time for teachers
is difficult to obtain, the use of web-based technologies greatly
improves their access to center services. Technology can permit access
from a greater number of participants and its continuous availability
enables access to content for even the most hard-to-reach educators.
Whether a function of geography, resource restrictions, time, or
knowledge, local constraints in addressing the challenge of developing
or identifying research based effective practices to close the
achievement gap can be impacted through knowledgeable applications of
technology.

Although the needs for technical assistance of the Northwest Region are
similar to that of the rest of the country, the delivery of technical
assistance is exacerbated by the region's geographic vastness and
subsequent population isolation. These factors, unique to the Northwest,
make it difficult to create a coordinated systemic professional
development model to build local capacity to address the academic needs
of the region's diverse student population. The need for highly trained
and highly qualified educators and effective schools within the
Northwest Region must become a priority if achievement gap disparities
are to be reduced.

# Recommendations

The NW RAC recommends that the following priorities be addressed by the
technical assistance center in the Northwest Region.

### Leadership

-   Replicating successful programs on developing effective leadership,
    including mentoring, to spread knowledge about what works in
    principal development

-   Providing a forum or clearinghouse for district and school level
    leaders to come together with technical assistance providers to
    share challenges and brainstorm solutions including those related to
    implementing NCLB

-   Developing and sustaining successful school improvement models that
    include community participation.

###  Closing the student achievement gap

-   Helping to build systemic state and local capacities to develop,
    implement, and evaluate a broad-scale approach to address student
    achievement issues required to meet AYP as specified in NCLB

-   Identifying and disseminating research-based school performance
    audit protocols designed to identify areas of strength and areas of
    concern within school organizational practices to assist schools in
    the implementation of best practice methodologies

-   Making professional development more accessible to educators,
    especially those in rural areas, through the use of technology and
    by partnering with educational organizations and professional
    associations to develop and deliver accessible and affordable
    training

-   Creating models to assist schools in training educators on how to
    analyze and use student data to drive effective instructional
    practices for all students.

### Diversity/Culture/Language

-   Supporting active engagement of members of all cultural and
    linguistic communities in shaping educational programs and services

-   Infusing effective teaching strategies for multi-graded,
    multi-subject classrooms especially in rural schools

-   Developing culturally appropriate leadership models of successful
    schools for use by schools and districts serving American Indian and
    Alaska Native students and communities, as well as other communities
    with minority populations.

### Community

-   Training school staff on effective two-way communication with the
    community, and providing techniques to assist educators in involving
    and informing parents and the community.

-   Assisting educators in understanding and utilizing the research in
    regards to the meaningful roles for parents in the school systems
    and for educators interacting in the community from which their
    students come.

-   Identifying and disseminating best practices for involving parents
    of diverse cultural and/or linguistic groups.

### Technology

-   Identifying and developing effective use of distance learning,
    especially for rural and remote areas.

-   Developing and disseminating best practices on utilization of
    technology to promote:

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Sustainable, ongoing professional development

-   Avenues for local capacity building to enhance instruction,
    curriculum, and assessment

-   Data-based decision-making strategies

-   Opportunities for interactive parent/school communication
    enhancement.

# Other recommendations

A second technical assistance center based in Alaska should be retained
to specifically deal with issues involving Alaskan Native and American
Indian students throughout the Northwest Region with a satellite office
in Montana. Priorities for this center would include:

-   Developing and/or identifying culturally appropriate research-based
    materials for curriculum, learning, and assessment relevant to
    particular diverse populations in order to close the achievement gap
    and provide access to higher level learning opportunities for all
    students.

-   Developing culturally appropriate curriculum materials, teaching,
    and assessment practices for American Indians and Alaskan Native
    students

-   Identifying and disseminating research based practices that address
    the unique challenges associated with low socioeconomic conditions

-   Identifying and developing strategies for engaging families and
    communities in partnership with schools to support success for all

-   Developing and preparing a highly effective workforce to work in the
    culturally diverse, multi-graded, high-poverty, and rural schools of
    the region.

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc99858924 .anchor}Appendix A: Achievement gap
analysis

**ALASKA**

  -------------------------------- -------------------- ---------------------
  []{#__RefHeading___Toc99858939                        
  .anchor}Table 9: Achievement                          
  gaps among white, non-Hispanic,                       
  and minority subgroups based on                       
  percentage of students meeting                        
  state standards                                       

  **Subgroup**                     **Reading**          **Mathematics**

  Alaskan Native                   33.00%               28.70%

  American Indian                  13.10%               11.80%

  Asian American/Pacific Islander  12.80%               8.50%

  Hispanic or Latino               15.60%               13.20%

  African-American                 13.80%               20.70%

  Limited English proficiency      29.00%               21.10%
  -------------------------------- -------------------- ---------------------

IDAHO

  -------------------------------- -------------------- ---------------------
  []{#__RefHeading___Toc99858940                        
  .anchor}Table 10: Idaho ISAT                          
  results, Spring 2004:                                 
  Achievement gap summary of all                        
  tested grades (3, 4, 7, 8, 10)                        

  **Subgroup**                     **Percent at or      
                                   above**              

                                   Proficient in        Proficient in
                                   reading              mathematics

  All Students combined            81.40%               76.00%

  Students with disabilities       38.70%               38.30%

  Female                           no data              no data

  Male                             no data              no data

  American Indian/Alaskan Native   61.10%               56.30%

  Asian American                   85.70%               84.80%

  Hispanic or Latino               60.40%               56.20%

  African-American                 77.10%               66.90%

  White, Non-Hispanic              84.40%               78.90%

  Native Hawaiian or Pacific       84.50%               84.00%
  Islander                                              

  Economically Disadvantaged       71.40%               66.60%

  Limited English proficiency      51.20%               50.30%
  -------------------------------- -------------------- ---------------------

  -------------------------------- -------------------- ---------------------
  []{#__RefHeading___Toc99858941                        
  .anchor}Table 11: Achievement                         
  gaps based on percentage of                           
  students meeting state standards                      
  among white, non-Hispanic, and                        
  minority/LEP subgroups                                

  **Subgroup**                     **Reading**          **Mathematics**

  American Indian/Alaskan Native   23.40%               22.60%

  Asian American                   -1.30%               -6.00%

  Hispanic or Latino               24.00%               22.60%

  African-American                 7.30%                11.90%

  Limited English proficiency      30.20%               25.70%
  -------------------------------- -------------------- ---------------------

MONTANA

  -------------------------------- -------------------- ---------------------
  []{#__RefHeading___Toc99858942                        
  .anchor}Table 12: Montana                             
  district-level CRT results by                         
  subgroup, school year 2003-04                         

  **Subgroup**                     **Percent at or      
                                   above**              

                                   Proficient in        Proficient in
                                   reading              mathematics

  All Students combined            62.20%               56.80%

  Students with disabilities       22.50%               20.20%

  Female                           67.60%               57.10%

  Male                             57.10%               56.60%

  American Indian/Alaskan Native   31.80%               25.00%

  Asian American                   69.70%               67.90%

  Hispanic or Latino               50.60%               44.70%

  African-American                 48.90%               35.40%

  White, Non-Hispanic              66.30%               61.20%

  Native Hawaiian or Pacific       66.70%               50.00%
  Islander                                              

  Participates in Free/Reduced     46.00%               40.30%
  Lunch                                                 

  Limited English Proficiency      15.40%               15.50%

  Grade 04                         65.70%               45.20%

  Grade 08                         58.30%               64.00%

  Grade 10                         63.00%               59.90%

  Regular Assessment               62.10%               56.80%

  Alternate Assessment             73.00%               63.90%
  -------------------------------- -------------------- ---------------------

  -------------------------------- -------------------- ---------------------
  []{#__RefHeading___Toc99858943                        
  .anchor}Table 13: Achievement                         
  gaps among white, non-Hispanic,                       
  and minority subgroups based on                       
  percentage of students meeting                        
  state standards                                       

  **Subgroup**                     **Reading**          **Mathematics**

  American Indian/Alaskan Native   34.50%               36.20%

  Asian American                   -3.40%               -6.70%

  Hispanic or Latino               15.70%               16.50%

  African-American                 17.40%               25.80%

  Limited English Proficiency      46.80%               41.30%
  -------------------------------- -------------------- ---------------------

OREGON

  -------------------------------- -------------------- ---------------------
  []{#__RefHeading___Toc99858944                        
  .anchor}Table 14: Oregon                              
  statewide assessment, Spring                          
  2004: Achievement gap summary                         
  for grade 3                                           

  **Subgroup**                     **Percent at or      
                                   above**              

                                   Proficient in        Proficient in
                                   reading              mathematics

  All Students combined            82%                  81%

  Students with disabilities       52%                  57%

  Female                           85%                  81%

  Male                             80%                  81%

  American Indian/Alaskan Native   78%                  73%

  Asian American/Pacific Islander  86%                  85%

  Hispanic or Latino               63%                  63%

  African-American                 74%                  71%

  White, Non-Hispanic              87%                  85%

  Economically Disadvantaged       73%                  72%

  Limited English proficiency      57%                  60%
  -------------------------------- -------------------- ---------------------

  -------------------------------- -------------------- ---------------------
  []{#__RefHeading___Toc99858945                        
  .anchor}Table 15: Achievement                         
  gaps among white, non-Hispanic,                       
  and minority/LEP subgroups based                      
  on percentage of students                             
  meeting state standards                               

  **Subgroup**                     **Reading**          **Mathematics**

  American Indian/Alaskan Native   9%                   12%

  Asian American/Pacific Islander  1%                   0%

  Hispanic or Latino               24%                  22%

  African-American                 13%                  14%

  Limited English proficiency      25%                  21%
  -------------------------------- -------------------- ---------------------

WASHINGTON

  -------------------------------- -------------------- ---------------------
  []{#__RefHeading___Toc99858946                        
  .anchor}Table 16: Washington                          
  assessment of student learning,                       
  Spring 2004: Achievement gap                          
  summary grade 4                                       

  **Subgroup**                     **Percent at or      
                                   above**              

                                   Proficient in        Proficient in
                                   reading              mathematics

  All Students combined            74.40%               59.90%

  Students with disabilities       39.00%               29.10%

  Female                           77.80%               60.90%

  Male                             71.50%               59.30%

  American Indian/Alaskan Native   59.30%               42.40%

  Asian American/Pacific Islander  78.30%               67.20%

  Hispanic or Latino               53.90%               38.90%

  African-American                 61.90%               37.50%

  White, Non-Hispanic              80.00%               66.10%

  Low Income                       61.10%               44.00%

  Limited English proficiency      36.60%               26.60%
  -------------------------------- -------------------- ---------------------

  -------------------------------- -------------------- ---------------------
  []{#__RefHeading___Toc99858947                        
  .anchor}Table 17: Achievement                         
  gaps among white, non-Hispanic,                       
  and minority/LEP subgroups based                      
  on percentage of students                             
  meeting state standards                               

  **Subgroup**                     **Reading**          **Mathematics**

  American Indian/Alaskan Native   20.70%               23.70%

  Asian American/Pacific Islander  1.70%                -1.10%

  Hispanic or Latino               26.10%               27.20%

  African-American                 18.10%               28.60%

  Limited English proficiency      37.80%               33.30%
  -------------------------------- -------------------- ---------------------

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc99858925 .anchor}Appendix B: Biographical
information about members of the Northwest Regional Advisory Committee

*Susan Williamson*, Chair, is currently principal of William Howard Taft
Elementary School in Boise, ID. Taft Elementary is the only school in
Idaho to be selected as a No Child Left Behind Blue Ribbon School by the
U.S. Department of Education. The award recognizes schools that make
significant progress in closing the achievement gap or whose students
achieve at very high levels. Before moving to Idaho, Dr. Williamson was
an assistant superintendent for curriculum and instruction and special
programs for the Wylie Independent School District in Texas. She
received her doctorate from Texas A&M University.

*Ray Barnhardt* is a professor of cross-cultural studies at the
University of Alaska-Fairbanks, where he has been involved in teaching
and research related to Native education issues since 1970. He has
served as the director of the Cross-Cultural Education Development
Program, the Small High Schools Project, the Center for Cross-Cultural
Studies, the Center for Cross-Regional Education Programs and the Alaska
Native Knowledge Network. His research interests include Indigenous
knowledge systems, Native teacher education, distance/distributed
education, small school curriculum, and institutional adaptations to
rural and cross-cultural settings. His experiences in education beyond
Alaska range from teaching mathematics in Baltimore, MD, to research in
Canada, Iceland, India, Malawi, and New Zealand.

*Marilyn Davidson* is the principal of Main Elementary in Kodiak, AK.
She also serves as the director of the English Language Acquisition
Program for the Kodiak Island Borough School District, is a member of
the Alaska Arts Education Consortium Board, representative to the
Kennedy Center Partners in Education program, and is co-director of the
21st Century Community Learning Centers program. She has been a
curriculum coordinator and the director of federal programs for KIBSD.
Her teaching background is in music education, grades K-12. She has
taught in public and private schools in Missouri, Indiana, Grand Cayman,
and Alaska. Davidson holds a bachelor's degree from Anderson University,
Anderson, IN, and a master's degree in education from Indiana
University.

*Mary Alice Heuschel* joined the Washington State Office of
Superintendent of Public Instruction (OSPI) in 1999 as the Assistant
Superintendent of Curriculum, Instruction and Assessment and became the
Deputy Superintendent of Learning and Teaching in 2000. Dr. Heuschel is
responsible for the OSPI Learning and Teaching departments; Assessment
and Research, Curriculum and Instruction, School Improvement, Secondary
Education Reform, Community Outreach, Professional Development, Teacher
Certification, and Federal Programs including No Child Left Behind,
Title I, Special Education, and Migrant/Bilingual. Heuschel earned her
doctorate in Educational Leadership at Seattle Pacific University (SPU).
Her superintendent's certificate is also from SPU and earned the
principal and special programs director certification from Central WA
University. Dr. Heuschel obtained her master's of science degree in
special education from Northwestern University and bachelor's of science
in K-12 education from Wheelock College in Boston. Previously, she was a
principal, an inclusion specialist in special education, and an
assessment specialist for the state department of Hawaii. Heuschel has
taught preschool through adult education with the Department of Defense
Schools throughout the country and in Europe, including the U.S.
Military Academy at West Point.

*Wendy Horman* is a member of the Bonneville School Board in Idaho
Falls, ID. She was elected in 2002 and served as Treasurer for one year.
Horman was elected to the Executive Board of the Idaho School Board
Association (ISBA) in 2003, and elected as vice president in 2004.
Horman is also a sits on the boards of the Idaho Falls Symphony Advisory
Board, Eastern Idaho Chapter of American Guild of Organists, Parents as
Teachers Advisory Board for HELP, Inc., and is the Fine Arts Coordinator
at her children's elementary school. Horman is the mother of five
school-aged children.

*Patti Kinney* is the principal of Talent Middle School in Southern
Oregon. She is president-elect of the National Middle School Association
(NMSA) and was the 2003 MetLife/National Association of Secondary School
Principal's National Middle Level Principal of the Year.

Karen Johnson has been a member of the board of directors for the
Raymond School District in Raymond, WA, for 18 years (4½ terms). She has
also been a member of the Washington State School Director's Association
(WSSDA) Diversity-Multicultural Team for 13 years, holding the chairman
position for six years, and a member of WSSDA's Federal Relations
Committee for the National School Board Association. Johnson is also a
court administrator/manager for two municipal courts.

*Rob Larson* has been an active participant in Oregon education for over
20 years. He has served as a teacher and school administrator in a
number of Oregon school districts during his education career. As
co-author of Design Technology: Children\'s Engineering, he has
consulted across the state and nationally in science education
professional development initiatives. Currently, Larson is the Federal
Liaison for the Oregon Department of Education. He also serves as the
director of the Oregon State Action for Education Leadership Project
(SAELP), a national education leadership initiative, funded by the
Wallace Foundation.

*Karen McGee* is a member of the State Board of Education in Idaho. She
is currently serving her second term as since first being appointed in
April 1999. McGee holds bachelor of science and master of science
degrees in Speech Pathology. She currently resides in Pocatello, ID.

*Karen Rehfeld* has served as Deputy Commissioner of the Alaska
Department of Education & Early Development since June 2003. As deputy
commissioner, Rehfeld has responsibility for policy and administrative
matters of the department and a key role in working with the state
legislature and the State Board of Education & Early Development in
budget, legislation, regulation, and other activities. Prior to becoming
deputy commissioner, she was the department\'s chief finance officer.

*Douglas Reisig* is the Superintendent of Schools for Hellgate
Elementary in Missoula, MT. Dr. Reisig has been involved in Montana
education for the past 29 years as a teacher, middle school/high school
principal, and district superintendent. Reisig received his B.S. and
M.Ed. degrees from the University of Montana and his Ed.D. degree from
Montana State University. Dr. Reisig also serves on the Montana Board of
Public Education Certification Standards and Practices Advisory Council,
the University of Montana President's Advisory Council, the Montana
Office of Public Instruction Testing Assessment Advisory Council, and
the Montana Professional Educators' Preparation Program Standards
Advisory Council.

*Chris Rhines* is currently the Title IA Coordinator for the Beaverton,
OR, School District. Prior to this year Rhines was an NCLB federal
programs specialist and Comprehensive School Reform program coordinator
for the Oregon Department of Education. Rhines has over 25 years of
teaching experience in Oregon schools, and has provided staff
development on a variety of school improvement topics around the state
and nationally.

*Dennis Williams* is Montana's Deputy Superintendent. For the past 30
years, Deputy Superintendent Dennis \"Bud\" Williams has served Montana
schools as a teacher, principal, and for 22 of those years, as a School
Superintendent. He was sworn in as State Deputy Superintendent of
Montana Schools January 2004. Bud is recognized as a state leader for
his work ensuring all Montana school children receive a high quality
education. His focus areas are Indian Education, High School reform and
P-20 initiative with Higher Education. Bud and his wife Eddie have
raised three sons and have 4 grandchildren.

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc99858926 .anchor}Glossary

**ASA---**Association of School Administrators

**AYP---**Adequate Yearly Progress, defined in the NCLB Act as a way to
measure the academic achievement of elementary and secondary school
students in relation individual state student academic achievement
standards.

**CHARTER SCHOOLS---**Public schools that are largely free to innovate,
and often provide more effective programs and choice to underserved
groups of students. Charter schools subject to the "adequate yearly
progress" (AYP) and other accountability requirements of the NCLB Act.

**COMPREHENSIVE TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE CENTERS---**Centers authorized by
Section 203 of the Education Sciences Reform Act of 2002 (P.L. 107-279).
Appropriations for the centers in Fiscal Year for 2005 would enable the
ED to support 20 centers, 10 of which must be in current regions.

**COMMON CORE OF DATA---**The National Center for Education Statistics'
comprehensive, annual, national statistical database of information
concerning all public elementary and secondary schools and local
education agencies.

**CONSOLIDATED STATE PLAN FOR NCLB---**Plan from each state that
demonstrates it has adopted challenging academic content standards and
challenging student academic achievement standards that will be used by
the state, its local educational agencies, and its schools.

**CORE SUBJECTS---**Refers to English, reading or language arts,
mathematics, science, foreign languages, civics and government,
economics, arts, history, and geography \[Section 9101(11)\]. While the
federal statute includes the arts in the core academic subjects, it does
not specify which of the arts are core academic subjects; therefore,
states must make this determination.

**DFO---**Designated Federal Official. A DFO acts as a liaison between a
federal advisory committee and federal agency and must be present at all
committee meetings.

**ELL---**English Language Learners

**FACA---**Federal Advisory Committee Act was created in 1972 (Public
Law 92-463) by the U.S. Congress to formally recognize the merits of
seeking the advice and assistance of our nation's citizens. Congress
sought to assure that advisory committees: provide advice that is
relevant, objective, and open to the public; act promptly to complete
their work; and comply with reasonable cost controls and recordkeeping
requirements.

**FRPL---**Free or Reduced Lunch Program

**HIGHLY QUALIFIED TEACHERS---**States must define a "highly qualified"
teacher. The requirement that teachers be highly qualified applies to
all public elementary or secondary school teachers employed by a local
educational agency who teach a core academic subject. "Highly qualified"
means that the teacher: has obtained full state certification as a
teacher or passed the State teacher licensing examination and holds a
license to teach in the state, and does not have certification or
licensure requirements waived on an emergency, temporary, or provisional
basis; holds a minimum of a bachelor's degree; and has demonstrated
subject matter competency in each of the academic subjects in which the
teacher teaches, in a manner determined by the state and in compliance
with Section 9101(23) of ESEA.

**IDEA---**Individuals with Disabilities Education Act

**LEA---**Local Education Agency

**NAEP---**National Assessment of Education Progress

**NBC---**National Board Certified

**NCLB---**No Child Left Behind Act

**NWEA---**Northwest Evaluation Association

**NWREL---**Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory

**OESE---**Office of Elementary and Secondary Education in the ED

**RACs---**Regional Advisory Committees that are authorized by Education
Sciences Reform Act of 2002 (P.L. 107-279)

**RAC QUORUM---**A majority of appointed members defined as half plus
one. A RAC must have a quorum to meet or hold an official meeting.

**REGIONAL EDUCATIONAL LABORATORIES---**Federally-supported regional
institutions that have operated since 1966 and reauthorized by Section
174 of the Education Sciences Reform Act of 2002

**SBA---**School Board Association

**SDE---**State Departments of Education

**SEA---**State Education Agency

**TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE---**Assistance in identifying, selecting, or
designing solutions based on research, including professional
development and high-quality training to implement solutions leading to
(1) improved educational and other practices and classroom instruction
based on scientifically valid research, (2) improved planning, design,
and administration of programs, (3) assistance in interpreting,
analyzing, and utilizing statistics and evaluations, and (4) other
assistance necessary to encourage the improvement of teaching and
learning through the applications of techniques supported by
scientifically valid research (P.L. 107-279)

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc99858927 .anchor}List of tables

[Table 1: Public input for the Northwest RAC
10](#__RefHeading___Toc99858928)

[Table 2: Teacher quality indicators 14](#__RefHeading___Toc99858929)

[Table 3: Meeting requirements to establish state standards
14](#__RefHeading___Toc99858930)

[Table 4: Dropout rates, by race/ethnicity 2002-03
27](#__RefHeading___Toc99858931)

[Table 5(a): Number of Northwest schools by locale: school year 2002-03
32](#__RefHeading___Toc99858932)

[Table 5(b): Percent of Northwest schools by locale: school year 2002-03
32](#__RefHeading___Toc99858933)

[Table 6(a): Number of Northwest students by locale: school year 2002-03
32](#__RefHeading___Toc99858934)

[Table 6(b): Percent of Northwest students by locale: school year
2002-03 33](#__RefHeading___Toc99858935)

[Table 7 (a): Number of Northwest teachers by locale: school year
2002-03 33](#__RefHeading___Toc99858936)

[Table 7(b): Percent of Northwest teachers by locale: school year
2002-03 33](#__RefHeading___Toc99858937)

[Table 8: Alaska benchmark exam results, Spring 2004: Achievement gap
summary for grade 3 53](#__RefHeading___Toc99858938)

[Table 9: Achievement gaps among white, non-Hispanic, and minority
subgroups based on percentage of students meeting state standards
53](#__RefHeading___Toc99858939)

[Table 10: Idaho ISAT results, Spring 2004: Achievement gap summary of
all tested grades (3, 4, 7, 8, 10) 54](#__RefHeading___Toc99858940)

[Table 11: Achievement gaps based on percentage of students meeting
state standards among white, non-Hispanic, and minority/LEP subgroups
54](#__RefHeading___Toc99858941)

[Table 12: Montana district-level CRT results by subgroup, school year
2003-04 55](#__RefHeading___Toc99858942)

[Table 13: Achievement gaps among white, non-Hispanic, and minority
subgroups based on percentage of students meeting state standards
55](#__RefHeading___Toc99858943)

[Table 14: Oregon statewide assessment, Spring 2004: Achievement gap
summary for grade 3 56](#__RefHeading___Toc99858944)

[Table 15: Achievement gaps among white, non-Hispanic, and minority/LEP
subgroups based on percentage of students meeting state standards
56](#__RefHeading___Toc99858945)

[Table 16: Washington assessment of student learning, Spring 2004:
Achievement gap summary grade 4 57](#__RefHeading___Toc99858946)

[Table 17: Achievement gaps among white, non-Hispanic, and minority/LEP
subgroups based on percentage of students meeting state standards
57](#__RefHeading___Toc99858947)

[^1]: Mendez-Morse, Sylvia (1992). *Leadership Characteristics that
    Facilitate Change*. Austin, TX: Southwest Educational Development
    Laboratory.

[^2]: Keller, Bess (1998). "Principal Matters," *Education Week*, Nov.
    11, 1998.

[^3]: National Staff Development Council (1995). *Learning to Lead,
    Leading to Learn*. Oxford, OH: December 2000.

[^4]: Consortium on Renewing Education (1998). 20/20 Vision: A strategy
    for doubling America's Academic Achievement by the Year 2020.
    Nashville, TN: Vanderbilt University.

[^5]: Alvarado, Anthony (1999). Address to the NSDC 1999 Annual
    Conference, Dallas, Texas.

[^6]: Williamson, Ron (2000). Interview with NSDC researcher.

[^7]: "Equal Educational Opportunity for Native American Students in
    Montana Public Schools, " Montana Advisory Committee to the U.S.
    Commission on Civil Rights (2001).

[^8]: Information retrieved February 13, 2005 from the Alaska Department
    of Education & Early Development Web site:
    http://www.eed.state.ak.us/

    Electronic Resources on Cultural Competency. Retrieved March 17,
    2005 from the Oregon Department of Education Web site:
    http://www.ode.state.or.us/opportunities/grants/saelp/resrcescultcomp.aspx

[^9]: Assembly of Alaska Native Educators. (1998). [Alaska Standards for
    Culturally Responsive Schools]{.underline}. Fairbanks, AK, Alaska
    Native Knowledge Network, University of Alaska Fairbanks.

[^10]: Cotton, K., & Wikelund, K.R. (1989). *Parent Involvement in
    Education.* Portland, OR: Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory.

[^11]: Shartrand, A., Weiss, H., Kreider, H., & Lopez, M. (1997). *New
    skills for new schools: Preparing teachers in family involvement.*
    Cambridge, MA: Harvard Family Research Project.

[^12]: Epstein, J. (1988, Winter). How do we improve programs for parent
    involvement? *Educational Horizons*, 66(2) 58-59.