**Nevada Revised HQT Plan**

**The Analysis of Data and Needs**

**and Specific New Actions the State and Districts Will Take**

**to Reach the HQT Goal in 2006-2007**

**Ensuring that Every Student has Access to**

**a Highly Qualified, Experienced and Effective Teacher**

**to Facilitate Students Performing on Grade Level**

**in Reading and Mathematics by 2014**

**Table of Contents**

**Requirement 1: pp. 2-4**

**Requirement 2: pp. 5-6**

**Requirement 3: pp. 8-15**

**Requirement 4: pp. 16-18**

**Requirement 5: pp. 19-20**

**Requirement 6: p. 20 - Rubric**

**Nevada Equity Plan -- Executive Summary pp. 22-25**

**Nevada Equity Plan -- Background Planning Information pp. 27-75**

**Data and Reporting Systems pp. 35-38**

**Teacher Preparation pp. 39-43**

**Out-of-Field Teaching pp. 43-44**

**Recruitment and Retention of Experienced Teachers: pp. 45-56**

**Professional Development pp. 57-68**

**Specialized Knowledge and Skills pp. 69-71**

**Working Conditions pp. 72-74**

**Policy Coherence p. 75**

**[Appendices (pp. 75-81):]{.underline}**

**A: Clark County School District -- Equity Plan: pp. 76-78 (referenced
p. 23, 29)**

**B: Washoe County School District -- Equity Plan: pp. 79-82 (referenced
p. 23, 29)**

**[Electronic Appendices Attached:]{.underline}**

**C. Non-HQT Data (referenced p. 3)**

**C-1. Clark NHQT/INOI (referenced p. 3)**

**C-2. Clark Data (referenced p. 4)**

**C-3. Washoe Data (referenced p. 4)**

D: Clark County School District - HQT Plan/Equity Plan (ref. p. 7, 23
28, 30)

E: Washoe County School District - HQT Plan/Equity Plan (ref. p. 7, 23
28, 30)

**F. Special Education HQT Powerpoint (referenced p. 8)**

**G. Special Education HQT Technical Assistance Document (referenced p.
9)**

**H. II-A FY07 Supplement (referenced p. 10)**

**I. LEA Template - Rev. HQT District Plan to Include Equity Plan
(ref.p. 28)**

**J. SEA and LEA Poverty/Minority Data % for HQT/Experience (referenced
p. 35)**

**K. Teacher Quality Task Force -- Questions (referenced p. 40)**

**L. LEAs' Use of AB 580 Funds (referenced p. 66)**

**[Nevada Revised Statute 391.100 mirrors the requirements of NCLB
regarding all core teachers meeting the highly qualified teacher
requirements by June 30, 2006.]{.mark}**

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

  ---------------- ------------------------------------------------------
  Y/N/U/NA         Evidence (Nevada Self-Analysis)

  [Y]{.mark}       1\. Does the revised plan include an analysis of
                   [classes taught by teachers]{.underline} who are not
                   highly qualified? Is the analysis based on accurate
                   classroom level data?

  [Y]{.mark}       2\. Does the analysis focus on the [staffing needs of
                   school that are not making AYP]{.underline}? Do these
                   schools have high percentages of classes taught by
                   teachers who are [not highly qualified]{.underline}?

  [Y]{.mark}       3\. Does the analysis identify particular groups of
                   teachers to which the State's plan must pay particular
                   attention, such as [special education teachers,
                   mathematics or science teachers, or multi-subject
                   teachers in rural schools]{.underline}?

  [Y]{.mark}       4\. Does the analysis identify [districts and
                   schools]{.underline} around the State where
                   significant numbers of teachers do not meet HQT
                   standards?

  [Y]{.mark}       5\. Does the analysis identify particular
                   [courses]{.underline} that are often taught by
                   non-highly qualified teachers?
  ---------------- ------------------------------------------------------

[1. ACCURATE CLASSROOM LEVEL DATA]{.underline}

The HQT data is collected at the individual schools which is uploaded to
the LEA's personnel officers who verify it against their system, and
then it is transmitted to the SEA to be uploaded into the SEA computer
system. Validation reports are run against each data element supplied by
the district against the licensing data in our system. The SEA does
periodic audits each school year to verify the data against the
individual giving the instruction. As we became more knowledgeable,
adjustments/changes were made to the system to trap data. We have
periodic meetings with all the school district personnel officers to
review data collection - who and how to report. The latest meeting took
place April 4, 2006 to get specific input from school districts
regarding concerns on meeting the HQT requirements. During the meeting
the Department provided a list of all core academic teachers who had not
met the HQT requirements as of October 1, 2005 and asked that each
school district update the list of teachers by April 22, 2006. This
revealed a significant increase from 68.1% of teachers meeting the HQT
requirements as of the October 1, 2005 District "Contracted Educators
Report", which was the HQT submitted in the March 6, 2006 Consolidated
State Performance Report, to 80.38%.

[1. and 2. DATA AND ANALYSIS OF NON-HQT AT SCHOOLS NOT MAKING
AYP]{.underline}

[See APPENDIX C (electronic attachment): HQT Data]{.mark}

This spreadsheet shows percentages of classes in each core subject not
being taught by highly qualified teachers, by district and school, and
schools in need of improvement (highlighted in yellow).

Note: schools not making AYP for the first year will be added to this
list when CRT results are released in August 2006.

[Do these schools have high percentages of classes taught by teachers
who are not highly qualified?]{.mark}

\* "High percentage" was calculated based on 20% or greater of classes
not taught by highly qualified teachers.

\- In Clark County there are 73 schools that have 20% or greater of
classes not taught by

highly qualified teachers that are in need of improvement.

**[See APPENDIX C-1: Clark NHQT/INOI]{.mark}**

There are no other schools in Nevada that meet this criteria.

**[3. and 5. GROUPS OF NON-HQT ON WHICH THE PLAN MUST
FOCUS;]{.underline}**

[IDENTIFICATION OF PARTICULAR COURSES OFTEN TAUGHT BY
NON-HQT]{.underline}

A. The analysis identifies special education teachers as the main group
of non-highly qualified teachers on which Nevada's plan must pay
particular attention.

> 1\. Elementary school classes taught by certified special education
> teachers who did not pass a subject-knowledge test or have not
> demonstrated subject-matter competency through HOUSSE =
> [42.8%]{.underline} of these teachers.
>
> 2\. Secondary school classes taught by certified special education
> teachers who have not demonstrated subject-matter competency in those
> subjects = [40.5% of these middle school 7-8 teachers]{.underline} and
> [40.33% of these secondary 9-12 teachers]{.underline}.

B. Analysis by identification of particular courses that have a large
percentage of classes taught by non-highly qualified teachers again
reveals the need for focus on the following courses taught by special
education teachers.

  --------------------------- ---------------------- --------------------
  Subject/Grade Level         Periods NHQ/Total      \% NHQ Periods

  SP ED SCIENCE MS 7-8        114/190                60%

  SP ED MATH MS 7-8           317/532                59.58%

  SP ED ENGLISH MS 7-8        612/966                63.35%

  SP ED SOC STUDIES MS 7-8    109/173                63%

  SP ED SCIENCE SEC 9-12      192.5/327              58.86%

  SP ED MATH SEC 9-12         402.5/670              60.07%

  SP ED ENGLISH SEC 9-12      495.5/836              59.27%

  SP ED SOC STUDIES SEC 9-12  241.5/371              65.09%
  --------------------------- ---------------------- --------------------

[4. IDENTIFICATION OF DISTRICTS AND SCHOOLS WITH SIGNIFICANT NUMBERS OF
NON-HQT]{.underline}

Following are the districts that have significant numbers of non --
highly qualified teachers as of 5/1/06.

+------------+-----------+--------------+----------+---------+--------+
| Non HQ     | Elem/Ts.  | Secondary    | SP ED    | ESL     | ALT ED |
|            | Non HQ    |              |          |         |        |
+------------+-----------+--------------+----------+---------+--------+
| CLARK      | 14%       | 16% classes  | 73%      | 23%     | 21%    |
|            |           |              | classes  | classes |        |
| 23%        | 965/7136  | 1            |          |         | c      |
| classes    |           | 0,267/63,879 | 6        | 3       | lasses |
|            |           |              | 021/8280 | 87/1694 |        |
| 16,        |           | teachers:    |          |         | 1      |
| 761/74,303 |           |              | t        | t       | 24/602 |
|            |           | 1954/12,012  | eachers: | eachers |        |
| teachers:  |           |              |          |         | tea    |
|            |           |              | 554/2341 | 104/401 | chers: |
| 26%        |           |              |          |         |        |
|            |           |              |          |         | 50/182 |
| 3,         |           |              |          |         |        |
| 882/14,821 |           |              |          |         |        |
+------------+-----------+--------------+----------+---------+--------+
| WASHOE     | 1%        | 3% classes   | 16%      | 46%     | 9%     |
|            |           |              | classes  |         |        |
| 4% classes | 21/1787   | 405/14898    |          | classes | c      |
|            |           |              | 262/1633 |         | lasses |
| 681/16,247 |           | teachers:    |          | 38/106  |        |
|            |           |              | t        |         | 17/181 |
| teachers:  |           | 104/3043     | eachers: | te      |        |
|            |           |              |          | achers: | tea    |
| 6%         |           |              | 131/723  |         | chers: |
|            |           |              |          | 16/41   |        |
| 242/3830   |           |              |          |         | 17/165 |
+------------+-----------+--------------+----------+---------+--------+

Schools that have significant numbers (20% or higher) of non-HQT are
identified.

[See APPENDIX C-2 (electronic attachment): Clark Data]{.mark}

[See APPENDIX C-3 (electronic attachment): Washoe Data]{.mark}

Schools that have significant numbers of non-HQT are available for all
17 districts.

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

  ---------------- ------------------------------------------------------
  Y/N/U            Evidence (Nevada Self-Analysis)

  [Y]{.mark}       1\. Does the plan identify LEAs that have not met
                   annual measurable objectives for HQT?

  [Y]{.mark}       2\. Does the plan include specific steps that will be
                   taken by LEAs that have not met annual measurable
                   objectives?

  [Y]{.mark}       3\. Does the plan delineate specific steps the SEA
                   will take to ensure that all LEAs have plans in place
                   to assist all non-HQ teachers to become HQ as quickly
                   as possible?
  ---------------- ------------------------------------------------------

[1. THE FOLLOWING LEAS HAVE NOT MET 05-06 ANNUAL MEASURABLE OBJECTIVES
FOR HQT:]{.underline} (\* Designation for not meeting AMOs)

Highly Qualified Teacher Data - 5/1/06

Teachers Meeting HQ

T = Teachers C = Classes

+------------+----------+------------+----------+----------+--------+
| \% & Hrs   | Elem/Ts. | Secondary  | SP ED    | ESL      | ALT ED |
| HQ         | HQ       |            |          |          |        |
+------------+----------+------------+----------+----------+--------+
| \* Carson  | 99.56%   | 99% C      | 67% C    | 89% C    | 86% C  |
| City       |          |            |          |          |        |
|            | 225/226  | 386/393 T  | 23/46 T  | 11/12 T  | 26/28  |
|            |          |            |          |          | T      |
|            |          | 1870/1892  | 107/159  | 50/56 C  |        |
|            |          | C          | C        |          | 63/73  |
|            |          |            |          |          | C      |
+------------+----------+------------+----------+----------+--------+
| \*         | 95%      | 94% C      | 57% C    | 50% C    | NA     |
| Churchill  |          |            |          |          |        |
|            | 106/112  | 179/192 T  | 19/41 T  | 3/10 T   |        |
| [(rura     |          |            |          |          |        |
| l)]{.mark} |          | 988/1048 C | 102/178  | 15/30 C  |        |
|            |          |            | C        |          |        |
+------------+----------+------------+----------+----------+--------+
| \* Clark   | 86%      | 84% C      | 27% C    | 77% C    | 79% C  |
|            |          |            |          |          |        |
|            | 6        | 10         | 554/2341 | 297/401T | 1      |
|            | 171/7136 | 058/12012T | T        |          | 32/182 |
|            |          |            |          | 13       | T      |
|            |          | 53         | 22       | 07/1694C |        |
|            |          | 612/63879C | 59/8280C |          | 47     |
|            |          |            |          |          | 8/602C |
+------------+----------+------------+----------+----------+--------+
| \* Douglas | 100%     | 99% C      | 90% C    | 100% C   | NA     |
|            |          |            |          |          |        |
|            | 189/189  | 403/411 T  | 35/43 T  | 13/13 T  |        |
|            |          |            |          |          |        |
|            |          | 1724/1749  | 116/129  | 45/45 C  |        |
|            |          | C          | C        |          |        |
+------------+----------+------------+----------+----------+--------+
| \* Elko    | 98%      | 95% C      | 91% C    | NA       | 67% C  |
|            |          |            |          |          |        |
| [(rura     | 275/280  | 493/528 T  | 70/81 T  |          | 6/9 T  |
| l)]{.mark} |          |            |          |          |        |
|            |          | 2466/2588  | 179/197  |          | 6/9 C  |
|            |          | C          | C        |          |        |
+------------+----------+------------+----------+----------+--------+
| \*         | 90%      | N/A        | NA       | NA       | NA     |
| Esmeralda  |          |            |          |          |        |
|            | 9/10     |            |          |          |        |
| [(rura     |          |            |          |          |        |
| l)]{.mark} |          |            |          |          |        |
+------------+----------+------------+----------+----------+--------+
| Eureka     | 100%     | 98% C      | NA       | NA       | NA     |
|            |          |            |          |          |        |
| [(rura     | 15/15    | 40/42 T    |          |          |        |
| l)]{.mark} |          |            |          |          |        |
|            |          | 100/102 C  |          |          |        |
+------------+----------+------------+----------+----------+--------+
| \*         | 97%      | 97% C      | 47% C    | 100%     | 100%   |
| Humboldt   |          |            |          |          |        |
|            | 94/97    | 172/178 T  | 8/16 T   | 2/2 T    | 4/4 T  |
| [(rura     |          |            |          |          |        |
| l)]{.mark} |          | 837/863 C  | 26/55 C  | 1/1 C    | 4/4 C  |
+------------+----------+------------+----------+----------+--------+
| \* Lander  | 97%      | 95% C      | NA       | NA       | NA     |
|            |          |            |          |          |        |
| [(rura     | 28/29    | 73/79 T    |          |          |        |
| l)]{.mark} |          |            |          |          |        |
|            |          | 295/310 C  |          |          |        |
+------------+----------+------------+----------+----------+--------+
| Lincoln    | 100%     | 98% C      | NA       | NA       | NA     |
|            |          |            |          |          |        |
| [(rura     | 29/29    | 66/67 T    |          |          |        |
| l)]{.mark} |          |            |          |          |        |
|            |          | 320/326 C  |          |          |        |
+------------+----------+------------+----------+----------+--------+
| \* Lyon    | 97%      | 96% C      | 82% C    | 100%     | NA     |
|            |          |            |          |          |        |
|            | 248/256  | 458/474 T  | 16/19 T  | 3/3 T    |        |
|            |          |            |          |          |        |
|            |          | 2080/2160  | 61/74 C  | 15/15 C  |        |
|            |          | C          |          |          |        |
+------------+----------+------------+----------+----------+--------+
| Mineral    | 100%     | 97% C      | NA       | NA       | NA     |
|            |          |            |          |          |        |
| [(rura     | 22/22    | 41/43 T    |          |          |        |
| l)]{.mark} |          |            |          |          |        |
|            |          | 202/208 C  |          |          |        |
+------------+----------+------------+----------+----------+--------+
| Nye        | 100%     | 99% C      | 100%     | 100%     | NA     |
|            |          |            |          |          |        |
| [(rura     | 151/151  | 333/335 T  | 78/78 T  | 2/2 T    |        |
| l)]{.mark} |          |            |          |          |        |
|            |          | 1526/1530C | 206/206  | 5/5 C    |        |
|            |          |            | C        |          |        |
+------------+----------+------------+----------+----------+--------+
| Pershing   | 100%     | 100%       | 100%     | NA       | NA     |
|            |          |            |          |          |        |
| [(rura     | 25/25    | 67/67 T    | 2/2 T    |          |        |
| l)]{.mark} |          |            |          |          |        |
|            |          | 229/229 C  | 7/7 C    |          |        |
+------------+----------+------------+----------+----------+--------+
| Storey     | 100%     | 98%        | NA       | NA       | NA     |
|            |          |            |          |          |        |
| [(rura     | 17/17    | 47/48 T    |          |          |        |
| l)]{.mark} |          |            |          |          |        |
|            |          | 119/120 C  |          |          |        |
+------------+----------+------------+----------+----------+--------+
| \* Washoe  | 99%      | 97%        | 84%      | 64%      | 91%    |
|            |          |            |          |          |        |
|            | 1        | 2939/3043T | 592/723  | 25/41 T  | 1      |
|            | 766/1787 |            | T        |          | 48/165 |
|            |          | 1          |          | 68/106 C | T      |
|            |          | 4493/14898 | 13       |          |        |
|            |          | C          | 71/1633C |          | 1      |
|            |          |            |          |          | 64/181 |
|            |          |            |          |          | C      |
+------------+----------+------------+----------+----------+--------+
| \* White   | 81%      | 82%        | NA       | NA       | NA     |
| Pine       |          |            |          |          |        |
|            | 29/36    | 58/77 T    |          |          |        |
| [(rura     |          |            |          |          |        |
| l)]{.mark} |          | 274/334 C  |          |          |        |
+------------+----------+------------+----------+----------+--------+
| TOTAL      |          |            |          |          |        |
|            |          |            |          |          |        |
| 80.38%     |          |            |          |          |        |
| classes    |          |            |          |          |        |
|            |          |            |          |          |        |
| 1          |          |            |          |          |        |
| 7914/22287 |          |            |          |          |        |
+------------+----------+------------+----------+----------+--------+

[3. THE STEPS THE SEA HAS TAKEN TO ENSURE LEAS HAVE PLANS IN PLACE TO
ASSIST ALL NON-HQ TEACHERS TO BECOME HQ]{.underline}

[and]{.underline}

[2. SPECIFIC STEPS THAT WILL BE TAKEN BY LEAs THAT HAVE NOT MET THE
ANNUAL MEASURABLE OBJECTIVES]{.underline}

The SEA has required LEAs to provide plans for getting teachers to meet
the highly qualified teacher requirements for the past 3 years as part
of the application for Title II-A funds. This year the SEA required the
LEAs to include a self-assessment using the rubric provided for the SEA
as adapted to LEA needs. Each LEA has a plan outlining specific steps
for getting all teachers to meet the HQT requirements. These revised LEA
plans were submitted June 15, 2006. These include steps such as:

> \- only hiring teachers who have met the HQT requirements; retaining
>
> documentation related to announcing the position, efforts to recruit
> highly
>
> qualified candidates for the position, applications and resumes
> received, and notes
>
> from interviewing and selecting the teacher for employment; including
> in the
>
> contractual agreement, a commitment by the teacher to fulfill
> requirements of a
>
> mutually agreed upon plan to achieve highly qualified status, using
> the most
>
> expedient option and no later than the end of the upcoming or current
> school year;
>
> assurance that the teacher receives support and assistance related to
> content
>
> knowledge and teaching skills needed for the teaching assignment,
> including
>
> teacher mentoring and high-quality professional development as defined
> in NCLB

-   conducting a meeting with each teacher who has not yet met the HQT

> requirements and developing an individual action plan with each
> teacher

-   school site administrator scheduling and conducting periodic checks
    for completion of agreed upon actions in individual plans

-   providing Praxis tapes, study guides and classes to study for the
    Praxis test

A major project of the Nevada National Governors Association task force
funded

by the Title II-A state activities fund was the creation of PRAXIS II
examination

preparation tapes for teachers. The following tapes are available:
Overview,

Principles of Learning and Teaching, English, Science, Social Studies,
Math, Art,

Music, PE/Health, Elementary Education, and Special Education.

Clark County gave a copy of every appropriate tape to all their schools
and made

these tapes available at no charge to all Nevada school districts and to
the

university system. They also broadcast each of the tapes numerous times
over

their instructional television channel.

-   use of district Title II-A funds for taking the Praxis test or
    coursework, providing coursework through the district or regional
    professional development program, and paying for licensing fees
    associated with attaining HQ status in the core assignment

-   reminding teachers they can take USDE eLearning courses to fulfill
    professional development requirements

-   Clark County has also stated that those teachers who do not meet the
    deadline will be placed in a subject area for which they are HQ or
    if they do not meet the criteria in any subject area will be
    suspended pending termination

[See APPENDIX D: Clark County School District -- Revised HQT Plan,
and]{.mark}

[APPENDIX E: Washoe County School District -- Revised HQT Plan]{.mark}

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

  ---------------- ------------------------------------------------------
  Y/N/U            Evidence -- Nevada Self Analysis

  [Y]{.mark}       1\. Does the plan include a description of the
                   technical assistance the SEA will provide to assist
                   LEAs in successfully carrying out their HQT plans?

  [Y]{.mark}       2\. Does the plan indicate that the staffing and
                   professional development needs of schools that are not
                   making AYP will be given high priority?

  [Y]{.mark}       3\. Does the plan include a description of programs
                   and services the SEA will provide to assist teachers
                   and LEAs in successfully meeting HQT goals?

  [Y]{.mark}       4\. Does the plan specifically address the needs of
                   any subgroups of teachers identified in Requirement 1?

  [Y]{.mark}       5\. Does the plan include a description of how the
                   State will use its available funds (e.g., Title I,
                   Part A; Title II, Part A, including the portion that
                   goes to the State agency for higher education; other
                   Federal and State funds, as appropriate) to address
                   the needs of teachers who are not highly qualified?

  [Y]{.mark}       6\. Does the plan for the use of available funds
                   indicate that priority will be given to the staffing
                   and professional development needs of schools that are
                   not making AYP?
  ---------------- ------------------------------------------------------

[1. TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE THE SEA WILL PROVIDE TO ASSIST LEAS IN
SUCCESSFULLY CARRYING OUT THEIR HQT PLANS]{.underline}

[April 4, 2006 Meeting With District Human Resources
Personnel]{.underline}

Periodically the Department has met with district human resources
personnel to discuss the HQT requirements. On April 4, 2006 the
following people met with district human resources personnel for the day
to get specific input from school districts regarding concerns on
meeting the HQT requirements -- Keith Rheault, Superintendent; Jerry
Barbee, Director of Teacher Licensure; Donna Brothers, Licensing
Administrator; Leslie James, Title II-A Consultant; and Rorie
Fitzpatrick, Assistant Director of Special Education, ESEA and School
Improvement Programs. There were many questions about coding teachers
for the data entry and [questions about special education teachers
meeting the HQT requirements]{.underline}. See **[APPENDIX F (electronic
attachment) -- Special Education HQT Powerpoint]{.mark}** on highly
qualified special education teachers which was discussed at the meeting.
During the meeting the Department provided a list of all core academic
teachers who had not met the HQT requirements as of October 1, 2005 and
asked that each school district update the list of teachers by April 22,
2006. This revealed a significant increase from 68.1% of teachers
meeting the HQT requirements as of the October 1, 2005 District
"Contracted Educators Report", which was the HQT data submitted in the
March 6, 2006 Consolidated State Performance Report, to 80.38% of
teachers. As a result of this meeting and technical assistance provided
by the SEA Licensing Office, Clark County identified 1600 more teachers
as meeting the HQT requirements.

[Clarification -- Highly Qualified Special Education
Teachers]{.underline}

July 2005 the SEA provided a Technical Assistance Document for special
education teachers to clarify the HQT requirements articulated in the
Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEA-04) which
was signed into law December 2004, and to provide additional information
on Nevada's regulations and policies and procedures regarding teacher
licensure and the highly qualified requirements. SEA Special Education
consultants met with district personnel to discuss the Nevada guidance.

[See APPENDIX G (electronic attachment): Special Education Technical
Assistance Document]{.mark}.

In addition to reviewing guidance on the HQT requirements for special
education teachers at the April 4, 2006 meeting, the following
clarification was recently provided:

-   In co-teaching models of service delivery the assignation of grades
    and/or credit is not the determining factor for whether the special
    education teacher must be highly qualified in the core subject area,
    but whether the teacher is providing instruction, i.e. delivering
    new information to the student.

-   Additional guidance on how to code "Options" (alternate route to
    certification) teachers in updated reports as highly qualified if
    they have met the criteria outlined including demonstration of
    subject-matter competency.

[Title II-A Monitoring and Accountability Requirements]{.underline}

The Title II-A consultant has required HQT plans for the past three
years and has provided technical assistance to districts in carrying out
their plans. It was discovered this past year for example that Clark
County needed to monitor site level monitoring of individual teacher
plans for becoming HQ. Ideas on how to have site level administration
monitor individual teacher plans were brainstormed and this monitoring
information is in the revised HQT plan submitted June 15, 2006 (p. 41).
As part of the revised HQT plan districts were asked how the SEA can
provide further technical assistance to help them carry out their HQT
plans.

[Teacher-to-Teacher eLearning Course Credit for HOUSSE
Credit]{.underline}

www.ed.gov/teacherinitiative:

Teachers have not taken advantage of the Teacher-to-Teacher eLearning
courses for HOUSSE credit, so districts were reminded about this
opportunity during monitoring.

Teachers can use the NCLB Teacher-to-Teacher eLearning course credit for
HOUSSE credit, Department continuing education units (CEU) for
recertification and at district option, district credit. Teachers can
submit their eLearning Certificate of Completion of the "Video and
Assessment" module (approximately 2 contact hours) to their supervising
administrator who will also monitor fulfillment of the work to complete
the "Implementation" module as decided on with the teacher (13 contact
hours). The supervising administrator will complete and submit an
attendance sheet to the Nevada Department of Education in order to
receive the certificates of credit.

The Title II-A consultant has recently monitored the districts that have
significant numbers of non-highly qualified teachers and discussed the
districts' "improvement plan" to get teachers to meet the HQT
requirements ensuring issues that prevented the district from meeting
the annual measurable objectives are addressed (Section 2141
"Improvement Plan"). The SEA is analyzing the revised HQT plans
submitted June 15, 2006 and will contact districts by August 31, 2006
with any questions about the plan or further suggestions for improving
the plan.

During monitoring the accountability requirement of entering into an
agreement on use of II-A funds to provide PD activities through funding
directly to schools served by the district to meet the objective of 100%
of HQT by 6/30/06 has been discussed with the three districts that are
in jeopardy of not meeting AYP when the AYP results are released in
August 2006 (Clark and Washoe).

[2. STAFFING AND PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT NEEDS OF SCHOOLS THAT ARE NOT
MAKING AYP WILL BE GIVEN HIGH PRIORITY]{.underline}

[Title II-A Application]{.underline}

The Title II-A section of the consolidated application for federal funds
requires:

*The district [must target II-A funds to schools that]{.underline}
\[Guidance E-14\]:*

(1) *have the lowest proportion of highly qualified teachers*

(2) *have the largest average class size, or*

(3) *are identified for school improvement under Section 1116(b) of
    Title I-A \[Section 2122 (b)(3)\].*

*Districts must explain how the district targeted II-A funds for 1, 2,
and 3 above and LIST SCHOOLS targeted.*

[See APPENDIX H (electronic copy): II-A FY07 Supplement]{.mark} to the
consolidated grant application which contains further information
required on staffing and professional development needs.

[State Level Professional Development Targeted To Schools Not Making
AYP]{.underline}

See Section 6 -- Equitable Distribution of Teachers -- Professional
Development,

pp. 29-33.

[3. DESCRIPTION OF PROGRAMS AND SERVICES THE SEA WILL PROVIDE TO ASSIST
TEACHERS AND LEAS IN MEETING HQT GOALS]{.underline}

[SEA Web Guidance]{.underline}

The SEA provides web guidance on HQT requirements.

[Middle School License]{.underline}

In response to the unique circumstances at the middle school level, the
Commission on Professional Standards adopted a new endorsement and
qualifications. The recognized field of teaching of the license is based
on an applicant's field of specialization or concentration, usually
designated as a major or minor or area of concentration. This
endorsement authorizes the teacher to teach in grades 7, 8, and 9 in the
following subject areas: art, English/language arts, foreign language,
mathematics, music, science, or social studies.

[Regional Professional Development Programs]{.underline}

The regional professional development programs support teachers and LEAs
in meeting the HQT goals through a variety of objectives and action
steps including providing credits for many PD courses. A priority is to
provide services to schools in need of improvement.

*The Northwest Nevada Regional Professional Development Program*

*serving Pershing, Storey and Washoe Counties -*

Collaborates with the University of Nevada-Reno, Truckee Meadows
Community College, Sierra Nevada College, and other institutes of higher
education for providing expertise in content specific trainings to
deepen teachers' content knowledge supported with scholarships for
teachers to attend content specific institutes. In addition NWRPDP

collaborates in offering PRAXIS study groups and individual tutorials
for teachers in the region to help them meet the NCLB highly qualified
teacher requirements.

*The Northeast Nevada Regional Professional Development Program*

*serving Elko, Eureka, Humboldt, Lander, and White Pine Counties --*

Collaborates with Great Basin College and provides professional
development in the areas of literacy, mathematics, science,
instructional strategies, and assessment.

*The Southern Nevada Regional Professional Development Program*

*serving Clark, Esmeralda, Lincoln and Nye Counties --*

Collaborates with the University of Nevada -- Las Vegas and Southern
Utah University and provides credit offering in mathematics, science,
reading, technology and social studies. The SNRPDP created and
implemented certificate programs in middle school and high school
mathematics and science to address the teacher shortage and need for
teachers to meet NCLB highly qualified teacher requirements. These are
16 credit programs of study that focus on content that teachers teach at
their particular grade cluster while addressing instructional and
assessment practices, the needs of special populations, and embedding
standards based lessons and teacher expectations into each course. The
SNRPDP in partnership with the Southern Nevada Writing Project has
developed programs to incorporate writing strategies into classroom
instruction. The Governor's Reading Improvement Program has provided a
program of study and a support system for K-3 teachers with a special
emphasis on Kindergarten to have students reading at the earliest
possible levels.

*The Western Nevada Regional Professional Development Program*

*serving Carson City, Churchill, Douglas, Lyon, and Mineral Counties-*

Collaborates with the University of Nevada-Reno and Sierra Nevada
College and provides a professional development training series with the
priority of supporting teachers in need of becoming highly qualified.
The training series includes: classroom management, instructional
strategies, questioning skills, content standards, assessments, coaching
and data analysis.

[Title II-A -- Improving Teacher Quality State Grant - State Agency for
Higher Education]{.underline}

["Nevada Collaborative Teaching Improvement Program"
(NeCoTIP)]{.underline}

For 2005-2006 subgrants in the amount of \$374,624 were provided to the
following partners to support teachers in the following areas for which
credit was available as noted:

-   *Expanding the Focus on Mathematical Understanding Through
    Assessment*

> Clark County School District/University of Nevada, Las Vegas
>
> 25 K-6 teachers/5 administrators

-   *Distance Education for Special Education Rural Teachers*

> Clark, Douglas, Esmeralda, Nye, Pershing and Washoe Districts/
>
> University of Nevada, Reno
>
> 29 participants -- received graduate credit

-   *Transforming Middle School Science Achievement using Instructional
    Technology*

> Clark County School District/University of Nevada, Las Vegas
>
> 18 participants -- received inservice credit

-   *The Nebula Teaching and Learning Community*

> Focus on under-prepared teachers assigned to science in pre K-12
>
> University of Nevada, Reno

32 teachers

[Title II-B -- Math/Science Partnerships]{.underline}

For 2005-2006 subgrants in the amount of \$963,436 were provided to the
following partners to support teachers in the following areas for which
credit was available as noted:

> \- *CCSD Middle School Math Project* -- Developing Mathematical
> Thinking
>
> Clark County School District/University of Nevada, Las Vegas
>
> 150 teachers -- credit available

-   *Integrated Science Content Enhancement Project*

> to increase science content knowledge and instructional sills, use of
> technology in
>
> teaching, understanding of state and local science standards, and
> forming learning
>
> communities)
>
> Washoe County School District and other northern Nevada school
> districts/
>
> University of Nevada, Reno
>
> 30 teachers - credit available

-   *Northeastern Nevada Math Project*

> 3 rural school districts -- White Pine, Elko, Humboldt/University
> Nevada, Reno/
>
> Northeastern RPDP
>
> 37 teachers K-8 - credit available
>
> \- *Nevada Educators Really Doing Science*
>
> Science content aligned with Nevada state standards and scientific
> inquiry
>
> 6 Nevada school districts/University of Nevada, Reno
>
> 22 teachers K-8 - credit available
>
> \- Clark County School District/University of Nevada, Las Vegas
>
> Proficiency and Success in Science -- to improve quality of
> instruction for high
>
> school science students
>
> No data currently available on year 1 participation levels (2005)
>
> *- Great Explorations in Math & Science (GEMS)* materials aligned with
> Nevada and
>
> National science standards
>
> Carson City School District & other districts/Western Nevada Community
> College

60 K-6 teachers

[Title I LEA 5% Set Aside]{.underline}

Title I ensures through monitoring that LEAs use not less than 5% of
funds for professional development activities to ensure that teachers
who are not highly qualified (as well as existing paraprofessionals)
become highly qualified.

[]{.mark}

[4. ADDRESSING NEEDS OF SUBGROUPS OF TEACHERS IDENTIFIED IN REQUIREMENT
1]{.underline}

On pp. 2, 3 elementary and secondary special education teachers are
identified as the

groups of non-highly qualified teachers on which Nevada's plan must
focus.

[Alternate Route to Licensure]{.underline}

Obviously teachers enrolled in ARL programs will not have met the HQ
requirements if they have not yet met all provisional requirements for
Nevada licensure such as passing the Principles of Learning and Teaching
Examination required of all teachers. However they are working towards
becoming HQ through these ARL programs.

*Options Program*

The state provides for teachers with a teaching license to work in an
alternate route to certification program to obtain their special
education license.

Nevada faces an acute shortage of special education teachers. As Nevada
has grown, so too has the problem. During the 2005-2006 school year
Nevada had 421 special education teachers teaching under the "Options
Program".

*Conditional Endorsement*

This alternate route to certification program is for those participants
who do not have an

existing license. During the 2005-2006 school year Nevada had 251
teachers enrolled in this program all of whom are teaching in Clark
County.

[Project DESERT (Distance Education for Special Education)]{.underline}

The Title II-A Improving Teacher Quality State Grant - State Agency for
Higher Education (NeCoTIP) provided funding in the amount of \$79,367
for 2005-2006 and 2006-2007 to the project "Distance Education for
Special Education Rural Teachers" (Project DESERT) University of Nevada,
Reno.

Project DESERT is designed to target licensed elementary and secondary
teachers across Nevada in rural areas who are currently Options teachers
since there is a lack of available teacher education courses for rural
teachers. It provides additional training in content areas specific to
state standards for currently licensed special education teachers in
order to meet the need for highly qualified teachers. Courses are
provided for teachers working with high-incidence disabilities, such as
learning disabilities, as well as continuing education for special
education teachers to address the content areas of English, Science, and
Math to ensure that special education teachers can be considered highly
qualified.

The goal for Project DESERT is to decrease the number of special
education teachers without appropriate teaching licenses, as well as
increase the number of highly qualified special education teachers
providing research-based services to children with disabilities in rural
Nevada. It will also ensure they are effective co-teachers and
collaborators with specialists in content-area instruction.

The goals of DESERT are:

-   Ensure Options teachers, especially in rural areas, become fully
    licensed with the Generalist endorsement

-   Provide training in content areas to increase the number of highly
    qualified special education teachers

-   Provide tuition support

-   Offer continuing professional development opportunities.

The 18 credit sequence of licensure courses is offered online. For
2005-2006 there were 29 participants across grade levels -- 11
elementary school teachers, 6 middle school teachers, 10 high school
teachers and 2 teachers teaching all grades in one school.

[Other Support]{.underline}

Special education teachers have the opportunity to receive the same kind
of district support as other teachers:

-   attend Praxis classes, use Praxis study guides, use tapes for
    studying for the Praxis test

-   have fees paid by district Title II-A funds -- Praxis examination
    fees, coursework fees, and licensing fees associated with attaining
    HQ status in the core assignment

-   participation in USDE eLearning courses to fulfill professional
    development requirements.

[5. STATE USE OF FUNDS (TI-A, II-A including the portion that goes to
the State agency for higher education & any other Federal/State funds)
TO ADDRESS THE NEEDS OF NON-HQT]{.underline}

[]{.mark}

[Praxis Tapes]{.underline}

A major project of the Nevada National Governors Association task force
funded

by the Title II-A state activities fund was the creation of PRAXIS II
examination

preparation tapes for teachers. The following tapes are available:
Overview, Principles of Learning and Teaching, English, Science, Social
Studies, Math, Art, Music, PE/Health, Elementary Education, and Special
Education. A copy of every appropriate tape was provided to all Clark
County schools and these tapes were made available at no charge to all
Nevada school districts and to the university system.

[]{.mark}

[Title II]{.underline}

Title II-A Improving Teacher Quality State Grant - State Agency for
Higher Education and Title II-B Math/Science Partnership funding was
described on pp. 12-13.

[Regional Professional Development Program]{.underline}

See pp. 11-12.

[Mentoring Funds]{.underline}

The Legislature appropriated \$5 million per year of the biennium for
grants to school districts to adopt a program which, in addition to
using for a program of performance pay and enhanced compensation for
recruitment and retention, can be used for mentoring of licensed
personnel at at-risk schools -- which would include use for those
teachers who have not yet met the HQ requirements.

[6. PRIORITY FOR USE OF AVAILABLE FUNDING WILL BE GIVEN TO THE STAFF AND
PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT NEEDS OF SCHOOLS THAT ARE NOT MAKING
AYP]{.underline}

Title II-A Improving Teacher Quality State Grant - State Agency for
Higher Education and Title II-B Math/Science Partnership funding
prioritizes funding for schools that are not making AYP.

The SEA ensures that districts are giving high priority to staffing and
professional development needs of schools that are not making AYP by
asking districts to list schools in the Title II-A section of the
consolidated application for federal funds that have the lowest
proportion of highly qualified teachers and are identified for school
improvement.

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

+---------------+------------------------------------------------------+
| Y/N/U         | Evidence (Nevada Self-Analysis)                      |
+---------------+------------------------------------------------------+
| [Y]{.mark}    | 1\. Does the plan indicate how the SEA will monitor  |
|               | LEA compliance with the LEAs' HQT plans described in |
|               | Requirement 2 and hold LEAs accountable for          |
|               | fulfilling their plans?                              |
+---------------+------------------------------------------------------+
| [Y]{.mark}    | 2\. Does the plan show how technical assistance from |
|               | the SEA to help LEAs meet the 100 percent HQT goal   |
|               | will be targeted toward LEAs and schools that are    |
|               | not making AYP?                                      |
+---------------+------------------------------------------------------+
| [Y]{.mark}    | 3\. Does the plan describe how the SEA will monitor  |
|               | whether LEAs attain 100 percent HQT in each LEA and  |
|               | school:                                              |
|               |                                                      |
|               | -   in the percentage of highly qualified teachers   |
|               |     at each LEA and school; and                      |
|               |                                                      |
|               | -   in the percentage of teachers who are receiving  |
|               |     high-quality professional development to enable  |
|               |     such teachers to become highly qualified and     |
|               |     successful classroom teachers?                   |
+---------------+------------------------------------------------------+
| [Y]{.mark}    | 4\. Consistent with ESEA §2141, does the plan        |
|               | include technical assistance or corrective actions   |
|               | that the SEA will apply if LEAs fail to meet HQT and |
|               | AYP goals?                                           |
+---------------+------------------------------------------------------+

[1. SEA MONITORING OF LEA COMPLIANCE WITH HQT PLANS (Requirement 2)
HOLDING THEM ACCOUNTABLE FOR FULFILLMENT OF PLANS]{.underline}

[and]{.underline}

[2. SEA TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE TO HELP LEAs MEET 100% HQT GOAL TARGETED
TOWARD LEAS AND SCHOOLS NOT MAKING AYP]{.underline}

[Title II-A Monitoring and Accountability Requirements]{.underline}

The Title II-A consultant has required HQT plans for the past three
years and has provided technical assistance to districts in carrying out
their plans. It was discovered this past year for example that Clark
County needed to monitor site level monitoring of individual teacher
plans for becoming HQ. Ideas on how to have site level administration
monitor individual teacher plans were brainstormed and this is in the
revised plan submitted June 15, 2006 (p. 41).

The Title II-A consultant has recently monitored the districts that have
significant numbers of non-highly qualified teachers and discussed the
districts' "improvement plan" to get teachers to meet the HQT
requirements ensuring issues that prevented the district from meeting
the annual measurable objectives are addressed (Section 2141
"Improvement Plan"). The SEA is analyzing the revised HQT plans
submitted June 15, 2006 and will contact districts by August 31, 2006
with any questions about the plan or further suggestions for improving
the plan.

During monitoring the accountability requirement of entering into an
agreement on use of II-A funds to provide PD activities through funding
directly to schools served by the district to meet the objective of 100%
of HQT by 6/30/06 has been discussed with the three districts that are
in jeopardy of not meeting AYP when the AYP results are released in
August 2006 (Clark, Washoe, Carson City). Ways to target schools with a
large number of non-HQ teachers as well as schools not making AYP have
been discussed.

How districts are accomplishing this will be shared with all districts.

[3. SEA MONITORING WHETHER LEAs ATTAIN 100% HQT IN EACH LEA AND SCHOOL -
% OF HQT AT EACH LEA AND SCHOOL AND % OF TEACHERS RECEIVING HQ PD TO
ENABLE SUCH TEACHERS TO BECOME HQ AND SUCCESSFUL]{.underline}

The HQT data is collected at the individual schools as of October 1
Report on Personnel which is uploaded to the LEA's personnel officers
who verify it against their system, and then it is transmitted to the
SEA to be uploaded into the SEA computer system. Validation reports are
run against each data element supplied by the district against the
licensing data in our system. The SEA does periodic audits each school
year to verify the data against the individual giving the instruction.

The Title II-A consultant will do periodic sampling of teachers to check
on whether they are receiving high qualify professional development to
meet HQT requirements and be effective. This performance indicator is
addressed by LEAs in the Title II-A section of the consolidated
application.

[4. SEA PROVISION OF TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE OR CORRECTIVE ACTIONS IF LEAs
FAIL TO MEET HQT AND AYP GOALS]{.underline}

As per ESEA section 2141 Nevada will follow the corrective action as
outlined:

\(c\) ACCOUNTABILITY- After the third year of the plan described in
section 1119(a)(2), if the State educational agency determines, based on
the reports described in section 1119(b)(1), that the local educational
agency has failed to make progress toward meeting the annual measurable
objectives described in section 1119(a)(2), and has failed to make
adequate yearly progress as described under section 1111(b)(2)(B), for 3
consecutive years, the State educational agency shall enter into an
agreement with such local educational agency on the use of that
agency\'s funds under this part. As part of this agreement, the State
educational agency ---

\(1\) shall develop, in conjunction with the local educational agency,
teachers, and principals, professional development strategies and
activities, based on scientifically based research, that the local
educational agency will use to meet the annual measurable objectives
described in section 1119(a)(2) and require such agency to utilize such
strategies and activities; and

(2)(A) except as provided in subparagraphs (B) and (C), shall prohibit
the use of funds received under part A of title I to fund any
paraprofessional hired after the date such determination is made;

\(B\) shall allow the use of such funds to fund a paraprofessional hired
after that date if the local educational agency can demonstrate that the
hiring is to fill a vacancy created by the departure of another
paraprofessional funded under title I and such new paraprofessional
satisfies the requirements of section 1119(c); and

\(C\) may allow the use of such funds to fund a paraprofessional hired
after that date if the local educational agency can demonstrate ---

\(i\) that a significant influx of population has substantially
increased student enrollment; or

\(ii\) that there is an increased need for translators or assistance
with parental involvement activities.

\(d\) SPECIAL RULE- During the development of the strategies and
activities described in subsection (c)(1), the State educational agency
shall, in conjunction with the local educational agency, provide from
funds allocated to such local educational agency under subpart 2
directly to one or more schools served by such local educational agency,
to enable teachers at the schools to choose, with continuing
consultation with the principal involved, professional development
activities that ---

\(1\) meet the requirements for professional development activities
described in section 9101; and

\(2\) are coordinated with other reform efforts at the schools.

Requirement 5: The revised plan must explain how and when the SEA will
complete the HOUSSE process for teachers not new to the profession who
were hired prior to the end of the 2005-06 school year, and how the SEA
will limit the use of HOUSSE procedures for teachers hired after the end
of the 2005-06 school year to multi-subject secondary teachers in rural
schools eligible for additional flexibility, and multi-subject special
education who are highly qualified in language arts, mathematics, or
science at the time of hire.

+---------------+------------------------------------------------------+
| Y/N/U         | Evidence (Nevada Self-Analysis)                      |
+---------------+------------------------------------------------------+
| [Y]{.mark}    | 1\. Does the plan describe how and when the SEA will |
|               | complete the HOUSSE process for all teachers not new |
|               | to the profession who were hired before the end of   |
|               | the 2005-06 school year?                             |
+---------------+------------------------------------------------------+
| [Y]{.mark}    | 2\. Does the plan describe how the State will limit  |
|               | the use of HOUSSE after the end of the 2005-06       |
|               | school year to the following situations:             |
|               |                                                      |
|               | -   Multi-subject secondary teachers in rural        |
|               |     schools who, if HQ in one subject at the time of |
|               |     hire, may use HOUSSE to demonstrate competence   |
|               |     in additional subjects within three years of the |
|               |     date of hire; or                                 |
|               |                                                      |
|               | -   Multi-subject special education teachers who are |
|               |     new to the profession, if HQ in language arts,   |
|               |     mathematics, or science at the time of hire, may |
|               |     use HOUSSE to demonstrate competence in          |
|               |     additional subjects within two years of the date |
|               |     of hire.                                         |
+---------------+------------------------------------------------------+

HOUSSE will be limited to the following teachers after the end of the
2005-2006 school year as follows, unless USDE guidance is provided that
extends the use of HOUSSE or further limits the use of HOUSSE, at which
time the plan for the use of HOUSSE will be revised:

-   teachers currently eligible for HOUSSE who were not able to be
    documented as HQ through HOUSSE on the basis of district records and
    who have not yet submitted their documentation to the district
    regarding meeting the HOUSSE requirements. In Nevada eligibility for
    HOUSSE is defined as NOT NEW to the profession meaning they were
    hired [before July 1, 2003]{.underline}.

-   teachers not new to the profession who met the HQT requirements
    through HOUSSE

> for their assignment prior to June 30, 2006 but are changing
> assignments and still meet the HOUSSE criteria for their new
> assignment.

-   multi-subject secondary teachers in rural schools who, if HQ in one
    subject at the time of hire, may use HOUSSE to demonstrate
    competence in additional subjects within three years of the date of
    hire; or

-   multi-subject special education teachers who are new to the
    profession, if HQ in language arts, mathematics, or science at the
    time of hire, may use HOUSSE to demonstrate competence in additional
    subjects within two years of the date of hire.

Note: Districts were recently notified that other states' HOUSSE would
now be reciprocal for teachers who have transferred to Nevada since all
states should now have HOUSSE in place.

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

  ---------------- ------------------------------------------------------
  Y/N/U            Evidence (Nevada Self-Analysis)

  [Y]{.mark}       1\. Does the revised plan include a written equity
                   plan?

  [Y]{.mark}       2\. Does the plan identify [where inequities in
                   teacher assignment exist]{.underline}?

  [Y]{.mark}       3\. Does the plan delineate [specific
                   strategies]{.underline} for addressing inequities in
                   teacher assignment?

  [Y]{.mark}       4\. Does the plan provide [evidence for the probable
                   success]{.underline} of the strategies it includes?

  [Y]{.mark}       5\. Does the plan indicate that the SEA will examine
                   the issue of equitable teacher assignment when it
                   [monitors LEAs]{.underline}, and how this will be
                   done?
  ---------------- ------------------------------------------------------

NEVADA EQUITY PLAN -- EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

***Nevada Policy Agenda for Teacher Quality***

A broad range of national research demonstrates the importance of
prepared, experienced and well-supported teachers and administrators to
promote long-term school improvement and to close the achievement gap,
both goals of NCLB and Nevada Senate Bill 1 of the 19^th^ Special
Session of the 2003 Nevada Legislature. Nevada Revised Statute 391.100
mirrors the requirements of NCLB regarding all core teachers meeting the
highly qualified teacher requirements by June 30, 2006. Nevada made a
significant increase in regard to teachers meeting the NCLB highly
qualified teachers requirement - from 68.1% as of the October 1, 2005
district "Contracted Educators Report" to 80.38% as of May 1, 2006. All
districts have had a plan to get their teachers to meet the HQT
requirements since 2003 which have been updated annually as part of the
Title II-A application for funds.

In 1999 the Nevada State Legislature created a statewide network of
Regional Professional Development Programs. The RPDP created Nevada
Professional Development Standards. Several task forces have been
created to work on the issue of teacher quality including the Nevada
National Governors Task Force on the Recruitment and Retention of
Teachers and the Teacher Quality Task Force to align teacher
preparation, licensing and relicensing.

The 2005 State Improvement Plan supports teacher quality with the
following goals:

-   To improve the performance of all students through the
    implementation of proven practices that enhance instruction in core
    academic subjects and reduce achievement gaps.

-   To implement effective statewide professional development activities
    and educator preservice preparation focused on data-driven needs and
    proven practices that will increase student achievement as
    identified in school, district, and state improvement plans.

***Equitable Teacher Distribution: Nevada's Good Faith Effort***

Nevada has completed Phase I of the Equity Plan as outlined on p. 29 and
is in the process of beginning Phase II as outlined on pp. 29, 30. Phase
II will ensure the Nevada Equity Plan is successful in correcting
staffing inequities by working with the Southwest Comprehensive Center
as a Nevada Committee on Equitable Distribution of Teachers, to include
task forces and representatives from Clark County School District and
Washoe County School District, as outlined in the goal and objectives
listed.

***Nevada's Growth Rate Challenges***

Nevada is the fastest growing state in the nation. We have an influx
each year of more than 13,000 students. For the 05-06 school year 76.2%
of the 3047 newly hired teachers were hired from outside Nevada. Nevada
is unique with 68% of the teachers positioned in Clark County School
District (Las Vegas) -- 14,854 teachers out of the 05-06 school year
State total of 21,686. Clark County as the fifth largest school district
in the United States has significant teacher recruitment and retention
challenges with the need to recruit a majority of its teachers each year
from outside Nevada. In Clark County 80% of the teachers come from
outside of Nevada, 35% of these teachers leave within 3 years, and 50%
leave within 5 years. For the 06-07 school year CCSD is projecting to
hire 1,000 new teachers. The diversity-minority students make up 50% of
the school age population, yet minority teachers make up only 16% of
teaching staff. Because Clark County School District accounts for 68% of
the Nevada teachers and because of the district's challenges -- their
strategies are highlighted throughout this plan and their Equity Plan is
included in [APPENDIX A (and electronic APPENDIX D)]{.mark}. Washoe
County School District is the second largest school district in Nevada
with 3,556 teachers out of the 05-06 school year State total of 21, 686.
Their EQUITY PLAN is included in [APPENDIX B (and electronic APPENDIX
E)]{.mark}.

***Nevada's Analysis of Data***

Inequities in teacher assignment (LEA percent difference between
high/low poverty and high/low minority for HQT and experience data) is
summarized in the following table.

+---------------+------------+------------+------------+-------------+
|               | **HQT**    | **Ex       | **HQT**    | **E         |
|               |            | perience** |            | xperience** |
|               | **by       |            | **by       |             |
|               | Classes**  | **%        | Classes**  | **%         |
|               |            | difference |            | difference  |
|               | **%        | between**  | **%        | between**   |
|               | difference |            | difference |             |
|               | between**  | **high     | between**  | **high      |
|               |            | poverty/** |            | minority/** |
|               | **high     |            | **high     |             |
|               | poverty/** | **low      | m          | **low       |
|               |            | poverty**  | inority/** | minority**  |
|               | **low      |            |            |             |
|               | poverty**  |            | **low      |             |
|               |            |            | minority** |             |
+---------------+------------+------------+------------+-------------+
| **Clark**     | **-        | **-        | **-        | **-         |
|               | 6.42%**    | 14.98%**   | 6.62%**    | 11.48%**    |
+---------------+------------+------------+------------+-------------+
| **Elko        | **-        | **-        | **-        | **-         |
| (rural)**     | 2.75%**    | 19.91%**   | 5.57%**    | 12.54%**    |
+---------------+------------+------------+------------+-------------+
| **Humboldt    |            | **-        | **-        | **-         |
| (rural)**     |            | 26.35%**   | 9.33%**    | 18.56%**    |
+---------------+------------+------------+------------+-------------+
| **Washoe**    |            | **-        |            | **- 4.86%** |
|               |            | 2.69%**    |            |             |
+---------------+------------+------------+------------+-------------+
| **STATEWIDE** |            |            | **- 1.08** | **- 2.71%** |
+---------------+------------+------------+------------+-------------+

The greatest inequity in teacher distribution is in Clark County School
District, the largest school district in Nevada. Clark County School
District has a large number of high-poverty/high-minority schools that
have teachers that have not met the NCLB highly qualified requirements
and have less than 3 years of teaching experience. The percent
difference between high/low minority for experience data is relatively
low in Washoe County School District, which is the second largest school
district in Nevada. There is not inequity in teacher distribution in
this district between high/low poverty for HQT. Elko County School
District and Humboldt County School District are small rural districts
that have some remote schools where it is difficult to attract and
retain highly qualified teachers with experience. However, no "high-need
schools" were identified in these rural districts.

[Nevada "High-Need Schools"]{.underline}

There were 85 "high-need schools" identified in Nevada according to the
criteria of a school having 20% or more non-HQT or teachers with less
than three years of experience at high-poverty (62.2% or greater) or
high-minority schools (\> 50%) that were in need of improvement. There
are 81 "high-need schools" identified in Clark County School District
and there are 4 "high-need schools identified in Washoe County School
District.

***Nevada's Key Goals***

1.  Continuously monitor, through data collection on teacher
    distribution and analyses of identified patterns, that Nevada poor
    and minority students are not being taught at higher rates than
    other children by inexperienced, unqualified and out-of-field
    teachers so they have equitable access to effective teachers who are
    able to teach students to needed levels of achievement.

-   *Measure*: Percentage of highly qualified teachers and/or
    experienced teachers

> in high need schools (high poverty/high minority schools in need of
>
> improvement) versus schools with low poverty/low minority and not in
> need of
>
> improvement.

-   *Publicly Report Progress*: Teacher Quality Report

2.  Increase the percentage of Nevada's teachers meeting the NCLB highly
    qualified requirements to 100%.

-   *Measure*: Percentage of highly qualified teachers in Nevada's
    districts/schools.

-   *Publicly Report Progress*: State Accountability Report

**Nevada's Strategies and Sub-Strategies Listed by Supportive Elements**

> 1\. Increase the relative attractiveness of hard-to-staff schools so
> they can compete
>
> for their fair share of good teachers.
>
> 2\. Make these schools personally and professionally rewarding places
> to work to
>
> retain high quality teachers.

Element 1: Data and Reporting Systems

1.1 Collect and publicly report data on the distribution of teacher
quality.

1.  Program data for data reports on equitable distribution of teachers.
    (p. 38)

Element 2: Teacher Preparation

2.1 Explore the expansion of college and university teacher preparation
initiatives to

prepare, place, and support new teachers in schools with high
percentages of at risk

students. (p. 42)

Element 3: Out-of-Field Teaching

3.1 No longer approve out-of-field teacher assignments in core subjects.
(p. 43)

3.2 After June 30, 2008 no longer issue out-of-field licenses in core
subjects. (p. 43)

3.3 Work with the next legislative session to further address the
hard-to-staff subject

areas of mathematics, science and teaching positions in special
education and English

as a second language in high-poverty, high-minority, and low-performing
schools.

(p. 44)

Element 4: Recruitment and Retention of Experienced Teachers

4.1 Provide 1/5 retirement credit for teachers at " In Need of
Improvement" or "At Risk"

schools. (p. 46)

4.2 Provide grant to LEAs to adopt a program of performance pay and
enhanced

compensation for recruitment, retention and mentoring of licensed
personnel at at-risk

schools. (p. 47)

4.3 Allow retired staff in hard to fill positions to be rehired (p. 48)

\[In CCSD "at high-need schools" - p. 50).

4.4 Investigate the possibility of proposing a change to the Nevada
Revised Statutes to

allow teachers at high need schools the choice of 1/5 of a year's
retirement credit

(currently in place) or a \$3,000-\$5,000 stipend. (p. 55)

4.5 Investigate how teachers are assigned to schools in high need
districts to ensure Title

I comparability and eliminate any unfair budgeting practices. (p. 56)

4.6 List state and federal incentives on the SEA website to ensure
better communication

of this information to teachers and encourage districts to do the same
on their website.

(p. 56)

4.7 Develop a strategic state plan for retaining highly qualified
teachers. (pp. 49, 50)

4.8 CCSD - Allow high need school first pick of teachers. (p. 52)

4.9 CCSD -- Continue pay for performance pilot. (p. 52)

4.10 CCSD -- Continue principal salary schedule based on a point factor
system. (p. 53)

Element 5: Professional Development

5.1 Continue professional development provided by the Regional
Professional

Development Programs to improve the quality of teaching at schools
designated

as "in need of improvement". (pp. 57-63)

5.2 Continue the professional development provided by the Nevada
Association of

School Administrators. (p. 63)

5.3 Continue to partner with the International Center for Leadership in
Education to

study what model schools do to get student achievement results. (p. 65)

5.4 Continue LEA grants to adopt a program of performance pay and
enhanced

compensation for recruitment, retention and mentoring of licensed
personnel at at-risk

schools. (p. 65)

5.5 Continue state initiatives -- Professional Learning Communities;
Assessment for

Learning; Response to Intervention; Curriculum Self-Analysis for
Districts and

Schools Identified for Corrective Action. (pp. 65-67)

5.6 CCSD -- Continue Urban Academy at 22 low performing schools. (p. 67)

5.7 CCSD -- Continue new teacher induction program. (p. 68)

5.8 CCSD -- Continue coaches assigned to low-performing schools in the
Northeast

Region of the district. (p. 68)

Element 6: Specialized Knowledge and Skills

6.1 Continue the work of the Teacher Quality Task Force in writing a
plan to align

preservice, licensure, and re-licensure systems around the knowledge,
skills, and

dispositions needed by teachers working with diverse and at-risk
students. (p. 69)

6.2 Review research that has been done on ensuring teachers have the
specialized

knowledge and skills they need to be effective with students at risk and
closing the

achievement gap to enhance professional development impact on diverse
learners.

(p. 70)

Element 7: Working Conditions

7.1 Continue the Working Conditions Survey in Clark County and Washoe
County

School Districts and increase teacher retention by improving working
conditions.

(p. 72)

7.2 Continue State class size reduction funding. (p. 73)

7.3 Strengthen school leadership by continuing to provide professional
development

through the Regional Professional Development Program as outlined in the

Administrative Strand, through the Nevada Association of School
Administrators,

and through the Professional Learning Community Online Forum for
administrators.

(p. 73)

Element 8: Policy Coherence

8.1 Reduce time required to process teacher certification applications.
(p. 75)

8.2 CCSD -- Reduce time required to process teacher applications. (p.
75)

**Nevada Equity Plan -- Background Planning Information**

**[NCLB REQUIREMENTS]{.underline}**

*States must have a plan in place to ensure that poor or minority
children are not taught by inexperienced, unqualified, or out-of-field
teachers at higher rates than are other children \[ESEA 1111(b)(8)(C)\]*

*In addition, the United States Department of Education requires states
to demonstrate that they are making good-faith efforts to correct
staffing inequities and are on track to meet the HQT goal.*

*[NCLB requires State plans to describe:]{.underline}*

-   *the **specific steps** the SEA will take... to ensure that poor and
    minority children are not taught at higher rates than other children
    by inexperienced, unqualified, or out-of-field teachers, and*

-   *the **measures** the SEA will use to evaluate and publicly report
    the progress of the SEA with respect to such steps. (States will be
    required to demonstrate progress towards the equitable distribution
    of teachers.)*

*\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\--*

[Initial Steps in Preparing the Nevada Written Equity Plan]{.underline}

*USDE Review -- No Nevada Written Equity Plan*; *USDE Guidance Received*

-   As stated in the Protocol for the U.S. Department of Education's
    Review to Assess State Progress in Meeting the HQT Goals, Nevada has
    various strategies for recruiting and retaining experienced and
    high-quality teachers in hard-to-staff schools, but had lacked a
    written equity plan to ensure that poor and minority children are
    not taught by inexperienced, unqualified, or out-of-field teachers
    at higher rates than are other children. The USDE Review noted the
    issue of Nevada having a written equity plan was not brought up
    during Title II-A compliance monitoring which took place June 2004.

> After receiving some guidance at the USDE State Title II-A
> Coordinators meeting March 21-22, 2006 on the issue of states needing
> a written equity plan, the SEA Title II-A Consultant began working
> with the SEA Title I Consultants to look at how this requirement was
> monitored as part of Title I requirements because every state and
> district participating in Title I had to develop an equity plan. This
> revealed that when LEAs were asked about an equity plan for equitable
> distribution of teachers during LEA monitoring, they were focusing on
> ensuring that teachers were meeting the highly qualified teacher
> requirements and various initiatives for equitable distribution of
> teachers in various districts, but none of the LEAs had a written
> equity plan. The Nevada SEA II-A Consultant discussed the need for
> district equity plans and a state equity plan at the April 4, 2006
> meeting at the State Department with school district human resource
> personnel which was held to discuss meeting the HQT requirements.
>
> *CCSSO Guidance*

-   The SEA Title II-A Consultant attended the CCSSO State Teacher
    Quality Network Meeting May 8-9, 2006 to receive further guidance on
    preparing a Nevada written equity plan:

    -   what the USDE is expecting from states

    -   information from drafts of state teacher quality plans

    -   about matching EDT strategies to needs

    -   about building partnerships to increase the likelihood that the
        strategies will work

    -   about presenting evidence for the probably success of the
        strategies presented

    -   about measuring and reporting progress.

> CCSSO shared the following information *(CCSSO powerpoint --
> "Presenting Evidence for the Probably Success of Your Strategies, May
> 8-9, 2006):*
>
> **[The SEA's role in solving the teacher quality gap is
> to:]{.underline}**

1.  Regulate -- e.g., set licensing, monitor for compliance

2.  Build systems -- e.g., state job banks

3.  Build capacity -- e.g., teacher/leadership training; technical
    assistance

4.  Allocate resources -- e.g., state compensation -- loan forgiveness
    etc.

5.  Inform LEAs and schools about what works and what is needed

> **[2 Goals:]{.underline}**
>
> 1\. Increase the relative attractiveness of hard-to-staff schools so
> they can compete
>
> for their fair share of good teachers.
>
> 2\. Make these schools personally and professionally rewarding places
> to work.
>
> **[Ways to ensure an equitable distribution of
> teachers:]{.underline}**
>
> Increase supply -

1.  Create a new pool of teachers

2.  Redistribute existing teachers

> Reduce demand -

3.  Strengthen the skills of teachers already working in high-need
    schools

> (PD; mentoring)

4.  Keep qualified, experienced teachers from leaving

> (PD; improve leadership; incentives; alternative ways to compensate

**[Strategies that are most likely to work are those
that:]{.underline}**

1.  Reward teachers for taking on more challenging assignments

2.  Provide the specialized preparation and training teachers need to be
    successful in challenging classrooms

3.  Improve working conditions that contribute to high teacher turnover

4.  Revise state policies or improve internal processes that may
    inadvertently contribute to local staffing inequities

**[Different ways to target schools in need:]{.underline}**

-   Make it exclusive

> Ex. Teach in VA -- recruit for top high need subject areas & 100 high
> need schools; merit pay for teachers who raise student performance

-   Give priority to certain schools or teachers

> Ex. State sponsored PD; FL- 1^st^ priority discretionary funds for
> schools with D & F

-   Make it increasingly lucrative

> Ex. CA -- loan assumption program for hard to fill subjects/hard to
> staff schools (could be more \$ or faster assumption)
>
> **[Strategies that are NOT likely to close the teacher quality
> gap:]{.underline}**

1.  Involuntary transfers

2.  Simply producing more teachers

3.  Raising all teachers' pay (with conditions not changed)

4.  Purely compensatory measure to make up for bad working conditions,
    lack of resources, and poor leadership

> **[Characteristics of a well-designed state teacher equity
> plan:]{.underline}**

1.  Comprehensive -- address 8 elements

> Take inventory of current policies and programs (multiple examples
> were
>
> provided); Identify new strategies Nevada will adopt -- What is
> missing?

2.  Targeted -- focused on schools that have the greatest needs

3.  Aligned -- to what already doing

4.  Strategic -- way build support

5.  Specific -- set measurable outcomes & timelines; list steps to
    implementation

6.  Balanced -- short and long term strategies --

> what SEAs are doing as well as what LEAs are doing.

*LEA Written Equity Plans Required -- June 15, 2006*

-   The SEA then required the 17 LEAs to write and submit a revised HQT
    plan to include an equity plan by June 15, 2006 by analyzing their
    data which was provided to them and cross checked with their own
    data systems, and information provided in a "Template for District
    Plan" outlining the 8 essential elements of a quality equity plan.
    The LEA template was based on the template provided to states by
    CCSSO for a state equity plan.

[**See APPENDIX I (electronic copy): LEA Revised HQT District
Plan**.]{.mark}

**[See APPENDIX A: Clark County School District -- Equity Plan: pp.
74-76]{.mark}**

**[See APPENDIX B: Washoe County School District -- Equity Plan: pp.
77-80]{.mark}**

**which were submitted to the SEA June 15, 2006.**

**These are also part of electronic APPENDICES D (Clark) and E
(Washoe).**

-   ***Nevada Written Equity Plan -- Phase I***

*SEA strategies, measurable objectives and implementation steps*

> The first phase of preparing the Nevada written equity plan has
> consisted of

-   sharing the CCSSO guidance received May 8, 9 2006 with key SEA and
    LEA personnel

-   collecting new data to identify inequities in teacher distribution
    and identify high need schools

-   reviewing the LEA equity plans received June 15, 2006 and
    highlighting the strategies in the equity plans of Clark County
    School District and Washoe County School District

-   \* taking inventory of SEA current policies and programs to analyze
    what is missing and what is needed

-   listing strategies the SEA has adopted, will adopt and processes to
    adopt further strategies.

\* Note: Some of the strategies listed under the "8 Essential Elements
of a Solid State Teacher Equity Plan" are not specifically targeted to
high-need schools, but schools statewide or schools districtwide (in the
LEA Equity Plans). However they are listed under these 8 elements as
current state or district policies or programs to consider in aligning
additional strategies for equitable distribution of teachers to what is
currently being done.

The strategies that do specifically target high need schools and/or have
a probable high impact on high need schools are highlighted in
[red]{.underline}.

***[Evidence for the probable success of strategies based on research is
highlighted in [yellow]{.underline}.]{.mark}***

-   ***Nevada Written Equity Plan -- Phase II***

*Refining and extending SEA and LEA strategies, measurable objectives
and*

*implementation steps*

The next phase of ensuring the Nevada Written Equity Plan is successful
in correcting staffing inequities is to work with the Southwest
Comprehensive Center as a Nevada Committee on Equitable Distribution of
Teachers, to include task forces and representatives from Clark County
School District and Washoe County School District, as outlined in the
following goal and objectives. In this phase the committee will want to
review the distribution of key teacher characteristics across schools to
ensure the extent of the problem is fully understood by key stakeholders
in the SEA, LEA and task forces, and that the causes of the staffing
inequities are fully understood, so that the equity plan ensures that
all policy recommendations for schools, districts, higher education and
state policymakers are specific and comprehensive.

*[Southwest Comprehensive Center -- Equity Plan Objective]{.underline}*

As part of the Nevada Southwest Comprehensive Center Project Work Plan
under

Goal 4. Enhance teacher quality in higher education and school districts
is:

Objective 4.4.b Work with NDE to take action to ensure that
inexperienced, unqualified, or out-of-field teachers do not teach poor
or minority children at higher rates than other children by 11/30/07.

4.4.b.1 Meet with NDE and task forces to review the steps the State is
taking to ensure equitable distribution of teachers.

4.4.b. 2 Review research on effective strategies for equitable
distribution of teachers.

4.4.b. 3 Work with NDE and task forces to develop further actions to
ensure that inexperienced, unqualified or out-of-field teachers do not
teach poor or minority children at higher rates than other children.

*Further Analysis of What Assistance Districts Need*

As the State Equity Plan is analyzed and extended/refined with the
assistance of the Southwest Comprehensive Center, it will be important
to analyze LEA equity plans and determine what assistance districts need
to ensure correction of inequities in teacher distribution in
high-poverty/high-minority schools vs. low-poverty/low-minority schools.
For example, in working with SWCC on the equity plan, the SEA will
review research that has been done on ensuring teachers have the
specialized knowledge and skills they need to be effective with students
at risk and closing the achievement gap. This will also support Clark
County School District's plan to review this research in order to
enhance professional development impact on diverse learners.

*LEA Equity Plans -- Reviewed as part of the District Improvement
Planning Process*

LEAs will be required to review their equity plans as part of their
District Improvement Planning process and include these in their
District Improvement Plans November 2007.

[Clark County and Washoe County School District Equity
Plans]{.underline}

*Clark County School District Equity Plan*

*(Appendix A, pp. 75-77 & electronic Appendix D)*

Nevada is unique with 68% of the teachers positioned in Clark County
School District (CCSD) -- 14,854 out of the 05-06 school year State
total of 21,686. Clark County as the fifth largest school district in
the United States has significant \* recruitment and retention
challenges as a district as well as at at risk schools. Therefore Clark
County School District strategies are highlighted throughout this plan.

\* CCSD challenges:

\- 80% of the district's teachers come from out of Nevada

\- 35% of these teachers leave within 3 years

\- 50% leave within 5 years

\- diversity-minority students make up 50% of the school age population,
yet minority

teachers make up 16% of teaching staff.

*Washoe County School District Equity Plan*

*(Appendix B, pp. 78-81 and electronic Appendix E)*

Washoe County School District is the second largest school district in
Nevada with 3,556 teachers out of the 05-06 school year State total of
21, 686.

[Nevada Challenges]{.underline}

The state of Nevada's educational system faces unique challenges,
including but not limited to the following:

1.  The need to recruit a majority of its teachers each year from
    outside the state.

> For the 05-06 school year 76.2% of the 3047 newly hired teachers were
> hired from outside Nevada.

2.  An influx each year of more than 13,000 students, the majority of
    whose parents are attracted by the hope of entry-level service
    industry employment in the hotel industry. Nevada is the fastest
    growing state in the nation.

3.  One of the highest dropout rates in the country.

4.  An achievement gap between

> \* students of color, English language learners - and Caucasian
> students, and
>
> \* between poor children and those with parents in a higher
> socioeconomic group.

[SEA Improvement Planning to Include Quality Teachers and
Administrators]{.underline}

A broad range of national research demonstrates the importance of
prepared, experienced and well-supported teachers and administrators to
promote long-term school improvement and to close the achievement gap,
both goals of NCLB and Nevada Senate Bill 1 of the 19^th^ Special
Session of the 2003 Nevada Legislature. Strategies in the Nevada Equity
Plan also align with goals from the State Improvement Plan:

-   To improve student performance through focused and unwavering
    collaboration with all key partners for a cohesive and aligned
    implementation of statewide improvement processes that drive all
    levels (school, district, and state) and increase student learning,
    effective teaching, and meaningful parental and community
    involvement.

-   To improve teaching and learning through continued use of consistent
    and relevant data at all levels (school, district, and state) to
    support the improvement planning process, to evaluate the
    effectiveness of planned programs, and to drive instructional
    decisions focused on increased student achievement.

-   To improve the performance of all students through the
    implementation of proven practices that enhance instruction in core
    academic subjects and reduce achievement gaps.

> [\[Note: "...States and districts cannot ignore the imbalance in
> teacher quality any longer. It is a primary cause of the achievement
> gap in American education, and as long as that inequality persists, so
> too will the gaps that separate poor and minority students from other
> young people." (*Teaching Inequality: How Poor and Minority Students
> Are Shortchanged on Teacher Quality -- A Report and Recommendations,
> *]{.mark}
>
> [*by Pesky and Haycock, Education Trust, June 2006, p. 13)*\]]{.mark}

-   To implement effective statewide professional development activities
    and educator preservice preparation focused on data-driven needs and
    proven practices that will increase student achievement as
    identified in school, district, and state improvement plans.

[(Note: Out of this goal came the Teacher Quality Task Force work
outlined in the]{.mark}

[Nevada Equity Plan.)]{.mark}

-   To improve student achievement in middle schools and high schools
    through the implementation of a statewide initiative that focuses on
    secondary education, including strategies to improve academic
    achievement, increase graduation rates, decrease dropout rates,
    improve distribution of information to the public, and increase
    post-secondary program enrollment and success rates.

[Monitoring (Rubric item #5)]{.underline}

The SEA will examine the issue of equitable teacher assignment when it
monitors LEAs

through the Title II-A monitoring process each spring. In examining HQT
plans, districts will be required to update data, provide analysis of
data and evaluation results and update Equity Plans as needed as part of
the Title II-A application supplement to the e-grant consolidated
application.

[Public Reporting]{.underline}

The Nevada State statutes require the tracking of teachers meeting the
NCLB "highly qualified teacher" requirements and out-of-field teachers
as part of the accountability report. Data regarding teachers meeting
HQT requirements is also reported by high and low poverty.

The data on equitable distribution of teachers, the strategies to ensure
equitable distribution of teachers, and progress in meeting measurable
objectives will be publicly reported on the Nevada Department of
Education website in a Teacher Quality Report

anually beginning September 2007.

**[8 ESSENTIAL ELEMENTS OF A SOLID STATE TEACHER EQUITY
PLAN]{.underline}**

(A framework for unified comprehensive strategies provided by CCSSO)

[Teaching Quality -- SCTQ Best Practices and Policies]{.underline}

The Southeast Center for Teaching Quality provided the following
recommendation in *Teaching Quality in the Southeast: Best Practices &
Policies,* July 2004:

"States and districts should recognize that meeting the NCLB teaching
quality mandates will not necessarily ensure a high quality teacher.
Beyond NCLB, states should align professional development, working
conditions, quality measures for institutions of higher education,
qualification standards and data reporting requirements under a
comprehensive state teaching quality plan. State teaching quality plans
should use NCLB's minimal content standards for teachers as part of a
much broader strategy to align efforts which ensure students have not
only "qualified" teachers, but also the quality teachers they need to
succeed." (p. 3)

[Education Leaders and Policymakers Confronting the Issue]{.underline}

It is also important to note from "*Teaching Inequality: How Poor and
Minority Students Are Shortchanged on Teacher Quality* (A Report and
Recommendations by the Education Trust", by Peske and Haycock, The
Education Trust, June, 2006, p. 15):

"We do not believe that the inequalities that exist today are the result
of intentional actions to hurt children. And no purpose is served by
pointing fingers of blame, especially at teacher unions. For, while some
contract provisions need to be reconsidered in light of unintentional
consequences, it's worth remembering that every teacher contract has
been approved by a school district. School districts, not teacher
unions, are responsible for balancing competing interests among
stakeholders. It would appear that pleasing powerful constituents has
sometimes forced equity to take a back seat. The simple truth is that
public education cannot fulfill its mission if students growing up in
poverty, students of color and low-performing students continue to be
disproportionately taught by inexperienced, under-qualified teachers...
Education leaders and policymakers must confront this legacy more openly
and honestly than ever before."

**1. [DATA AND REPORTING SYSTEMS]{.underline}** [-- To target efforts
and gauge progress]{.underline}

*How is Nevada planning to develop the teacher data and reporting
systems needed to identify and correct inequities in teacher
distribution in high-poverty/high-minority schools vs.
low-poverty/low-minority schools?*

**[INVENTORY OF CURRENT POLICIES AND PROGRAMS]{.underline}**

**[Rubric item #2]{.underline}** - **Identifying where inequities in
teacher assignment exist**

Nevada was able to expand collection of data from that which was
required in the

March 6, 2006 Consolidated State Performance Report on highly qualified
teacher data, which included percentage of core academic classes taught
by teachers meeting the NCLB highly qualified teacher requirements at
schools reported by

a.  low vs. high poverty

> \[based on state poverty quartile breaks for the 2004-2005 school
> year, the cut-off for percent of students receiving free or reduced
> lunch within a school at the 75^th^ percentile (high poverty) was
> 62.2% and at the 25^th^ percentile (low poverty) was 23.3%\]

to include:

b\. % of HQT -- at low vs. high minority schools

("high minority" defined as \> 50%)

c\. % of experienced teachers -- low vs. high poverty schools

d\. % of experienced teachers -- low vs. high minority schools.

[Nevada "High-Need Schools" Defined]{.underline}

Schools that had large numbers of non-HQ and/or large numbers of
inexperienced teachers were then cross referenced to schools in need of
improvement (had not met AYP targets for 2 or more years) because of low
performance by students of poverty and/or minority students to determine
high need schools. These are the schools considered to be "high-need
schools" in Nevada.

Districts were provided this data in order to target resources and
specific strategies to these high need schools to address inequities in
teacher assignment.

**[Data and Data Analysis]{.underline}**

**[\* See APPENDIX J: SEA and LEA Poverty/Minority %]{.mark}**

This spreadsheet shows the LEA percent difference between high/low
poverty and

high/low minority for HQT and experience data, as well as SEA totals.

Inequities in teacher assignment are evident in the following LEAs as
summarized in

the following table.

+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+
|             | **HQT**     | **E         | **HQT**     | **E         |
|             |             | xperience** |             | xperience** |
|             | **by        |             | **by        |             |
|             | Classes**   | **%         | Classes**   | **%         |
|             |             | difference  |             | difference  |
|             | **%         | between**   | **%         | between**   |
|             | difference  |             | difference  |             |
|             | between**   | **high      | between**   | **high      |
|             |             | poverty/**  |             | minority/** |
|             | **high      |             | **high      |             |
|             | poverty/**  | **low       | minority/** | **low       |
|             |             | poverty**   |             | minority**  |
|             | **low       |             | **low       |             |
|             | poverty**   |             | minority**  |             |
+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+
| **Clark**   | **- 6.42%** | **-         | **- 6.62%** | **-         |
|             |             | 14.98%**    |             | 11.48%**    |
+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+
| **Elko**    | **- 2.75%** | **-         | **- 5.57%** | **-         |
|             |             | 19.91%**    |             | 12.54%**    |
+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+
| *           |             | **-         | **- 9.33%** | **-         |
| *Humboldt** |             | 26.35%**    |             | 18.56%**    |
+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+
| **Washoe**  |             | **- 2.69%** |             | **- 4.86%** |
+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+
| **          |             |             | **- 1.08**  | **- 2.71%** |
| STATEWIDE** |             |             |             |             |
+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+

[Nevada "High-Need Schools"]{.underline}

**\* [See APPENDICES C-2 Clark Data and C-3 Washoe Data]{.mark}**

These spreadsheets identify 85 Nevada "high-need schools".

There are 81 "high-need schools identified in Clark County School
District and

there are 4 "high-need schools identified in Washoe County School
District.

Nevada high-need schools are identified as the following:

*Clark County School District -- 39 Elementary*

Parson, Lynch, Lunt, Cunningham, Rundle, Dailey, Adams, Fitzgerald,
Cambeiro, Watson, Cozine, Ronnow, Herron, Manch, Ullom, Park,
McWilliams, Kit Carson, Lincoln, Craig, Wendell Williams, Kelly, Adcock,
McCall, Warren, Thomas, Fyfe, Sunrise Acres, Tom Williams, Twin Lakes,
Pittman, Vegas Verdes, Wengert, Tate, Harmon, Harris, Moore, Stanford,
Reed

*Clark County School District -- 25 Middle School*

Von Tobel, Garside, Cashman, Smith, Brinley, Bridger, Fremont, Knudson,
Gibson, Orr, Woodbury, Robison, Cannon, West, Keller, Cortney, Monaco,
Sedway, Miley Achievement Center, Morris Credit Retrieval, O'Callashan,
Swainston, Sawyer, Silvestri, Cram

*Clark County School District -- 17 High School*

Clark, Las Vegas, Rancho, Valley, Western, Jeffrey Behavior Program
(Opportunity), Chaparral, Eldorado, Cheyenne, Mojave, Desert Pines,
Sierra Vista, Juvenile Courts, South Continuation, Washington
Continuation, Biltmore Opportunity, Peterson Behavior Program

*Washoe County School District -- Elementary*

Mathews

*Washoe County School District -- Middle School*

Traner

*Washoe County School District -- High School*

Hug, Wooster

**[Clark County School Inventory of Current Policies and
Programs]{.underline}**

[High-Need Schools]{.underline}

CCSD has established a list of high-need schools that have a history of
low academic performance and/or have difficulty attracting qualified
teachers.

[Enterprise Resource Program Data System]{.underline}

The district will be implementing the Enterprise Resource Program which
will allow the district to more easily gather the Clark County data
listed in "Section 1. Data and Reporting Systems" of the CCSSO template
revised by the SEA for LEA use. Once academic testing results are
available - survey results regarding school climate and working
conditions, and attrition rates will be compared to student achievement
data.

**[Identify Where Inequities in Teacher Assignment Exist:]{.underline}**

As of May 22, 2006, the district average percent of minority students
was 60.6%, with the following distribution:

American/Alaskan Native 0.8%

Asian/Pacific Islander 8.5%

Hispanic/Latino 37.0%

Black/African American 14.3%

Of the 48 schools deemed high poverty and in need of improvement, the
percentage of minority students ranged from 62.5% to 98.4%, with a mean
of 88.1%, exceeding the district average, and a median of 90.2%.

An analysis of the percentage of experienced teachers at high-poverty
schools (free and reduce lunch percentages at 62.2% or higher) versus
low-poverty schools (free and reduce lunch percentages of 23.3% or
lower) provided the following:

####### Years of Experience

-   The district average of the percentage of experienced teacher, as of
    May 1, 2006, was 72.1%, with a median percentage of 74.7%.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   High poverty schools, on average, had 64.1% of their teachers who
    have taught three years or more, with a median percentage of 67.2%.

-   Low poverty schools, on average, had 79.4% of their teachers who
    have taught three years or more, with a median percentage of 81.9%.

-   The percent of experienced teachers at high-poverty schools ranged
    from 100% to 37.5% with 29 of the 85 high poverty schools (34.1%)
    having percentages of experienced teachers equal to or higher than
    the district average of 72.1 %.

-   The percent of experienced teachers at low-poverty schools ranged
    from 100% to 55.8% with 69 of the 82 low poverty schools (75.6%)
    having percentages of experienced teachers equal to or higher than
    the district average of 72.1 %.

-   Using the 110% rule allowed in calculating comparability,
    high-poverty schools came within 1.6% (64.1% x 110% = 70.5%) of the
    district's average rate of 72.1% and within 0.8% (67.2% x 110% =
    73.9%) of the district's median rate of 74.7%.

####### Highly Qualified

-   The district average of the percentage of highly qualified teachers,
    as of May 1, 2006, was 73.72%, with a median percentage of 77.41%.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   At high poverty schools, on average, 72.02% of their teachers are
    highly qualified, with a median percentage of 75.56%.

-   At low poverty schools, on average, 78.26% of their teachers are
    highly qualified, with a median percentage of 82.05%.

-   The percent of highly qualified teachers at high-poverty schools
    ranged from 96.88% to 5.63% with 49 of the 85 high poverty schools
    (57.65%) having percentages of experienced teachers equal to or
    higher than the district average of 73.72 %.

-   The percent of highly qualified teachers at low-poverty schools
    ranged from 100% to 50% with 61 of the 82 low poverty schools
    (74.39%) having percentages of experienced teachers equal to or
    higher than the district average of 73.72 %.

-   Using the 110% rule allowed in calculating comparability,
    high-poverty schools exceeded (72.02% x 110% = 79.22%) the
    district's average rate of 73.72 and exceeded (75.76% x 110% =
    83.34%) the district's median rate of 77.14.

Out-of-Field Teachers

The Clark County School District has a total of 63 teachers teaching
core subjects out-of-field. This represents 0.43% of the total number of
teachers, as of May 1, 2006. Of these 63 teachers, 15 (0.41%) teach at
high-poverty schools, while 21 (0.48%) teach at low-poverty schools.
(The database for all schools, high-poverty schools, low-poverty
schools, and mid-level-poverty schools, taken from information furnished
by NVDOE, is provided as a separate attachment.)

**[SPECIFIC STRATEGIES NEVADA WILL ADOPT]{.underline}**

The Department of Information Technology (DoIT) will program data for
data reports on equitable distribution of teachers.

**[SPECIFIC STEPS TO IMPLEMENTATION]{.underline}**

**[Steps/Agency or Persons Responsible/ Resources
Required/Timeline]{.underline}**

**[MEASURES TO EVALUATE AND PUBLICLY REPORT PROGRESS]{.underline}**

Donna Brothers, Licensing Program Officer, will use Title II-A State
Activity Funds to fund the programming work of DoIt. The programming
will take a minimum of 6 months to be completed (at least until December
2006).

**2. [TEACHER PREPARATION]{.underline}**

*How is Nevada planning to build a pipeline of prospective teachers for
high-poverty/*

*low-performing schools?*

**[INVENTORY OF CURRENT POLICIES AND PROGRAMS]{.underline}**

Nevada is the fastest growing state in the nation. For the 05-06 school
year 76.2% of the 3047 newly hired teachers were hired from outside
Nevada.

[Nevada State College]{.underline}

*[Note: Creating this new pool of teachers is not targeting them to the
highest-need schools, and even if beginning teachers are channeled to
the highest-need schools, this does not address equitable distribution
of teachers since high need schools already have more than their fair
share of inexperienced teachers. However this new state college does
address the Nevada teacher shortage.]{.mark}*

In 2000 the Nevada System of Higher Education contracted with Rand
Corporation to provide recommendations regarding the state's population
growth and low college going rate. The need for Nevada State College was
supported by data from the RAND report. The School of Education at
Nevada State College prepares teachers for Bachelors Degrees in
Elementary Education, Elementary Education with concentrations in
Special Education and Bilingual Education, Secondary Education with
concentrations in math, science, history, environmental science, and
English and a Bachelor of Arts in Speech Pathology.

Tasked with a state-wide mission, Nevada State College prepares teachers
for employment in both northern and southern Nevada. To date, 54
students have graduated from the School of Education with 50 employed in
state and 4 out of state. Eight of these graduates were products of
NSC's 2+2 program with Western Nevada Community College and were
employed in northern urban and rural school districts. Currently 239
students are enrolled in the School of Education.

Students in the Clark County STEP UP grow your own program outlined on
p. 40 matriculate to Nevada State College.

[Online Teacher Certification Programs in High Need Subject
Areas]{.underline}

CCSD established partnerships with Rio Salado College and Western
Governors' University which have online teacher certification programs
in high-need subject areas.

[Alternate Route to Licensure Programs]{.underline}

There are 603 participants in Nevada alternative route to licensure
programs. There are 305 of these ARL participants at schools in need of
improvement.

*Special Education "Options Program" Alternate Route to Licensure*

The state provides for teachers with a teaching license to work in an
alternate route to certification program to obtain their special
education license. Nevada faces an acute shortage of special education
teachers. As Nevada has grown, so too has the problem. During the
2005-2006 school year Nevada had 421 special education teachers teaching
without a special education license under the "Options Program".

*Special Education "Conditional Endorsement" Alternate Route to
Licensure*

This alternate route to certification program is for those participants
who do not have an

existing license. During the 2005-2006 school year Nevada had 251
teachers enrolled in this program all of whom are teaching in Clark
County.

[Troops to Teachers]{.underline}

The Title II-A State Activities Fund is providing \$44,000 for the
Troops to Teachers

Program and national publication advertisements for teaching jobs in
Nevada.

[Teacher Quality Task Force]{.underline}

***[A strategy to ensure equitable distribution of teachers by reducing
demand is to]{.mark}***

***[give teachers the specialized preparation and training they need to
succeed in the most challenging classrooms to attract and retain
qualified teachers in high need schools.]{.mark}***

*[(CCSSO powerpoint -- "Presenting Evidence for the Probable Success of
Your Strategies", May 8-9, 2006, p. 2)]{.mark}*

In working with the Center for Teacher Quality, the Nevada Teacher
Quality Task Force of stakeholders was created to accomplish the
following objective by November 2006: Identify priorities in teacher
preparation, licensure, and re-licensure in order to develop an action
plan that ensures that all students in Nevada receive instruction from
highly qualified and effective teachers. This will be accomplished
through the alignment of the pre-service, licensure, and re-licensure
systems. Within the SEA, the Office of Teacher Licensure is responsible
for reviewing and approving all inservice, professional development and
continuing education for licensure renewal. The Task Force is using the
Nevada SAGE (Student Achievement Gap Elimination) improvement process to
determine needs, collect data, brainstorm solutions, and write a plan
with timelines, persons responsible and monitoring/evaluation
components.

For example, the TQTF is collecting information to answer the question:
"On what standards of effective practice are the goals of preservice
programs based so that teachers have the skills to meet the needs of
diverse learners (e.g., district performance expectations/teacher
evaluation, NCATE Standards 2000, INTASC Standards, etc.?)".

If this was found to be a need, an objective could be written for
colleges and universities to develop standards and assessments for
candidates linked to effective teaching in high needs schools.

**[See APPENDIX K (electronic copy): Teacher Quality Task Force -
Questions]{.mark}**

**[Clark County School District Strategies]{.underline}**

[Alternative Route to Licensure]{.underline}

CCSD has an alternative route to licensure program to recruit
individuals who have college degrees in subjects other than teaching to
take coursework in teacher preparation and in hard-to-fill subjects.
These individuals are given classroom assignments following 120 hours of
teacher preparation training and have tuition paid for graduate level
college classes that are needed to make them highly qualified teachers.
The district expanded the ARL program to include elementary teachers
with TESL endorsements and secondary English and science teachers

[Grow Your Own Programs]{.underline}

*Magnet School*

Clark High School has a magnet component which focuses on teacher
preparation.

*STEP UP*

CCSD in partnership with the Clark County Education Association has
established the "Student to Teacher Enlistment Project -- Undergraduate
Program" (STEP UP) to encourage minority high school students to enter
the teaching profession. The program allows students to complete
approximately 1/3 of their college classes while in high school, pays
four years of tuition toward a college degree in teaching, and provides
a conditional promise of employment for those students who complete the
program and receive licensure as a highly qualified teacher. In exchange
for this opportunity students are asked to commit to teach in Clark
County for a minimum of 4 years. Currently there are 109 students in the
junior class and 121 students in the senior class. The plan is to
increase the program from 230 students to 460 students. STEP UP is a
privately funded program with CCSD as a partner with 31 other sponsors.
More funding is needed to keep the program funded and growing.

**Specific Strategies Clark County School District Will Adopt**

[Career Path for Support Staff Employees]{.underline}

Encourage a career path for support staff employees to become teachers.
The number of grow-your-own and alternative route to licensure programs
implemented by the Human Resources Division will be expanded by June
2007.

**Specific Strategies Clark County School District is Proposing**

[New Grow Your Own Program]{.underline}

Begin Alternative Route to Licensure Program for candidates who have
licenses in social studies (expertise not currently needed) and who
would be willing to prepare for positions in elementary, English, math,
bilingual education etc.

**[OTHER SPECIFIC STRATEGIES NEVADA WILL ADOPT]{.underline}**

***[To ensure equitable distribution of teachers, a pipeline of
prospective teachers must be built through the following
strategies:]{.mark}***

[]{.mark}

***[- Create a new pool of teachers at high-need schools.]{.mark}***

*[(CCSSO powerpoint -- "Presenting Evidence for the Probable Success of
Your Strategies", May 8-9, 2006, p.1)]{.mark}*

[]{.mark}

***[- "Improve the supply of teachers in critical areas \[at high need
schools\]... The higher-ed world must ramp up the work of supplying
teachers in shortage areas, like math, science, special education and
bilingual education."]{.mark}***

[(*Teaching Inequality: How Poor and Minority Students Are Shortchanged
on Teacher Quality -- A Report and Recommendations*, *by Peske and
Haycock,* *Education Trust, June 2006, p. 14)*]{.mark}

**STRATEGY:**

Explore the expansion of college and university teacher preparation
initiatives through the Nevada Statewide P-16 Council and the Teacher
Quality Task Force to prepare, place, and support new teachers in
schools with high percentages of at risk students to meet state K-12
needs.

\[Note: the Nevada Statewide P-16 Council works to bring coordination
between the P-12 education system, the higher education system, parents,
the business community, and political communities to make policy
recommendations that enhance coordination between the educational
systems, with the overarching goals of preparing all Nevada high school
graduates to begin credit-bearing work in post secondary education, to
successfully complete apprenticeship programs, or to take their place in
well-paying positions in Nevada's workforce.\]

**[SPECIFIC STEPS TO IMPLEMENTATION]{.underline}**

**[Steps/Agency or Persons Responsible/ Resources
Required/Timeline]{.underline}**

The timeline for writing a Teacher Quality Task Force Plan will be
November 2006.

The SEA in collaboration with the P-16 Council will begin exploring
possible teacher preparation initiatives.

**[MEASURES TO EVALUATE AND PUBLICLY REPORT PROGRESS]{.underline}**

Measurable objectives will be written by the P-16 Council by January
2007.

The Teacher Quality Task Force Plan will be written by November 2006 and
will be part of the Teacher Quality Annual Report posted on the SEA
website.

**3. [OUT-OF-FIELD TEACHING]{.underline}**

*How is Nevada planning to reduce the incidence of out-of-field teaching
(particularly in mathematics, science, special education, and bilingual
education/English as a second language) in high-poverty, high-minority,
and low-performing schools?*

**[INVENTORY OF CURRENT POLICIES AND PROGRAMS]{.underline}**

Nevada has .09% of core subject classes taught by out-of-field teachers
(207.5 out of 22,287 core subject classes).

*[Clark County School District Data on Out-of-Field
Teachers]{.underline}*

*The Clark County School District has a total of 63 teachers teaching
core subjects out-of-field. This represents 0.43% of the total number of
teachers, as of May 1, 2006. Of these 63 teachers, 15 (0.41%) teach at
high-poverty schools, while 21 (0.48%) teach at low-poverty schools.*

[Out-of-Field Assignments/Licenses]{.underline}

As of July 2002 the Department will no longer approve out-of-field
teacher assignments in core subjects (Nevada Administrative Code
391.162). After June 30, 2008 the Commission on Professional Standards
will no longer issue out-of-field licenses in core subjects.

[Legislature Incentives]{.underline}

The 2005 Legislature appropriated \$9,369,907 in FY06 and \$49,763,443
in FY07 to support the purchase of the 1/5 retirement credit for
licensed personnel in hard to fill positions such as mathematics
teachers, science teachers, special education teachers, English as a
second language specialists and school psychologists.

In order to offset early retirement, the Legislature passed a law
allowing retired staff in hard to fill positions to be rehired upon
approval from the Superintendent and continue to receive retirement
benefits while actively employed in the state.

**[Clark County School District Strategies]{.underline}**

[Denied Transfer Requests]{.underline}

The CCSD Human Resources Division monitors transfer requests and denies
the transfer of out-of-field teachers to high-poverty, low-performing
schools.

[Denied Contracts]{.underline}

The CCSD Human Resources Division denies contracts to any new teacher
applicant seeking an out-of-field teaching position.

[Expanded Alternative Route to Licensure Programs]{.underline}

The district expanded the ARL program to include elementary teachers
with TESL endorsements and secondary English and science teachers in
order to allow individuals with relevant training in hard-to-fill
subjects to enter the profession.

[Proposed New Grow Your Own Program]{.underline}

Begin Alternative Route to Licensure Program for candidates who have
licenses in social studies (expertise not currently needed) and who
would be willing to prepare for positions in elementary, English, math,
bilingual education etc.

[Coursework in Hard-to-Fill Subject Areas]{.underline}

The district provides tuition reimbursement to out-of-field teachers so
they can become fully certified in the subject area they are teaching.

The district pays for graduate level college courses in the hard-to-fill
subject areas.

CCSD established partnerships with Rio Salado College and Western
Governors' University which have online teacher certification programs
in high-need subject areas.

**[OTHER SPECIFIC STRATEGIES NEVADA WILL ADOPT]{.underline}**

The SEA will work with the next legislative session which begins
February 2007 to further address the hard-to-staff subject areas of
mathematics, science and teaching positions in special education and
English as a second language in high-poverty, high-minority, and
low-performing schools.

**[SPECIFIC STEPS TO IMPLEMENTATION]{.underline}**

**[Steps/Agency or Persons Responsible/ Resources
Required/Timeline]{.underline}**

The SEA will begin this work now and continue through the next 2007
legislative session

which begins February 2007.

**[MEASURES TO EVALUATE AND PUBLICLY REPORT PROGRESS]{.underline}**

Specific measurable objective would be written as legislative policy is
considered.

**4. [RECRUITMENT AND RETENTION OF EXPERIENCED TEACHERS]{.underline}**

*How is Nevada planning to build a critical mass of qualified,
experienced teachers willing to work in hard-to-staff schools?*

*The growing student population in Nevada and the retirement of large
numbers of licensed educational personnel present major challenges to
the state's school districts.*

*In the recent past, the attractive benefit package and the low cost of
living in Nevada have helped attract teachers. However, with escalating
housing costs and with new teachers more interested in purchasing power
than retirement benefits, recruiting teachers is becoming increasingly
difficult. Nevada currently ranks 26^th^ (down from last year's 24^th^
placement) among the 50 states and the District of Columbia in average
teacher salary at \$41,795 (down from last year's average of \$43,394),
according to information from the National Education Association. This
compares to the national average of \$45,776.*

*For the 2005-2006 school year, Clark County hired more than 2,000
teachers and 75% of those teachers came from outside of Nevada. Some
teachers, after initially accepting an offer to teach in Clark County,
subsequently rejected the offer after visiting Las Vegas and finding the
housing available to them within their budget to be unacceptable.
Attracting qualified teachers to remote areas is also difficult,
particularly when teachers can earn more money in more populous areas in
nearby states.*

*School reform research shows that if a school is to make academic
strides, its teachers and administrators must stay together and build
new practices collaboratively for at least five or more years. According
to the American School Board Journal, August 2004, "By the end of five
years, the cumulative attrition rate is 46%." Unfortunately in Clark
County approximately 50% of the teachers leave before the end of five
years.*

**[INVENTORY OF CURRENT POLICIES AND PROGRAMS]{.underline}**

***[Strategy to increase teacher supply/redistribute existing teachers
to ensure an equitable distribution of teachers:]{.mark}***

***[Offer financial incentives to attract and retain experienced,
effective teachers to high need schools.]{.mark}***

***["One of the reasons teachers avoid the most challenging schools is
that they are not compensated for decidedly harder work."]{.mark}***

*[(CCSSO powerpoint -- "Presenting Evidence for the Probable Success of
Your Strategies", May 8-9, 2006, pp.2-4)]{.mark}*

[State Legislature Appropriated Incentives]{.underline}

The State of Nevada has initiated and expanded several incentives to
recruit and

retain experienced, effective teachers, including incentives for
teachers at high needs schools. These are as follows:

-   [Teachers in "Need of Improvement" Schools or Teachers in "At Risk"
    School" Program]{.underline}

Fiscal year 06 is the third year for this incentive to purchase
one-fifth of a year

retirement credit for each qualified employee. For FY 2006 the State
Legislature

appropriated \$16,138,996 for this program, and for FY 2007, it
appropriated

\$18,433,608. Eligibility requires each teacher to have five years of
service in the

Public Employees' Retirement System, to have been employed as a licensed

teacher in Nevada for at least five consecutive years, and either to
have been

employed for two school years at a school within the district that was
designated

as a school "in need of improvement", or at a school which had at least
65 percent

of the pupils classified as at risk. In fiscal year 2006, the
application process

identified 4,264 employees. We expect to distribute this incentive
retirement

credit to 4,870 teachers.

-   [Teacher Signing Bonus -- Teachers New to State]{.underline}

> There is a continuation of signing bonuses for teachers new to the
> state beginning in 2001. The 2005 Legislature appropriated \$6.052
> million in FY06 and \$6.354
>
> million in FY07 to support a bonus of \$2,000 per new teacher hire.
> For FY 2006, there were 3,271 teachers who received a \$2,000 bonus
> through this program; \$6,542,000 was expended by the state for the
> program. For FY 2007 we expect to distribute a signing bonus to 3,177
> new teachers.

-   [Hard-To-Fill Positions - Educator Retirement Credit
    Program]{.underline}

> The 2005 Legislature appropriated \$9,763,433 in FY06 and \$9,763,433
> in FY07 to support the purchase of one-fifth of a year retirement
> credit for teachers who
>
> are eligible. Teachers must hold an endorsement in the field of
> mathematics,
>
> science, special education, English as a second language, or as a
> psychologist,
>
> have five years of service in the Public Employees Retirement System,
> and have
>
> been employed for at least one school year to teach in the subject
> area for which
>
> he/she holds an endorsement in the hard-to-fill category. In fiscal
> year 2006, the
>
> application process identified 2,972 employees. In 2007 we expect to
> distribute
>
> this incentive retirement credit to 3,100 teachers.
>
> [***Pay effective teachers more in high-need schools. "Lock-step
> salary schedules don't recognize great teachers and don't provide
> incentives for teachers to take on the toughest assignments. School
> districts need to get more sophisticated about identifying the most
> effective teachers and pay them more to teach in schools with
> shortages."*** (*Teaching Inequality: How Poor and Minority Students
> Are Shortchanged on Teacher Quality -- A Report and Recommendations*,
> by Peske and Haycock, *Education Trust, June 2006, p. 14*)]{.mark}

-   The Legislature appropriated \$5 million per year of the biennium
    for grants to school districts to adopt a program of performance pay
    and enhanced compensation for recruitment, retention and mentoring
    of licensed personnel at

> at-risk schools. There are no results in yet to study the impact of
> this incentive.

-   In order to offset early retirement, the Legislature passed a law
    allowing retired

> staff in hard to fill positions to be rehired upon approval from the
> Superintendent and continue to receive retirement benefits while
> actively employed in the state. Ten out of seventeen districts have at
> least one retired teacher or principal hired. However, the data is not
> complete yet for the FY06 program. In June 2006 the Office of Teacher
> Licensure sent Clark County a list of 6,000 secondary teachers
> currently not teaching in the CCSD area to help with this recruitment
> effort.

[USDE Teacher Loan Forgiveness at High Poverty Schools]{.underline}

The USDE Teacher Loan Forgiveness Forbearance Program authorizes up to
\$17,500 in loan forgiveness to eligible highly qualified math, science
and special education teachers. The loan forgiveness will provide
substantial relief for existing teachers and an incentive for
prospective teachers to teach in subjects and schools that have
difficulty hiring highly qualified candidates. The loan forgiveness is
available to teachers at schools that are at 31%+ free and reduced lunch
and to new borrowers (teachers with no outstanding loan balances prior
to October 1, 1998, who borrowed eligible loans prior to October 1,
2005.

For information on the program the USDE's Federal Student Aid Customer
Service hotline can be contacted at 1-800-433-7327. The Nevada
Department of Education can also be contacted at 775-687-9228.

[Troops to Teachers]{.underline}

The Title II-A State Activities Fund is providing \$44,000 for the
Troops to Teachers

Program and national publication advertisements for teaching jobs in
Nevada.

[Nevada Educator Recruitment Initiative]{.underline}

Teachers-Teachers.com provides Nevada school members (16/17 school
districts and two charter schools) with access to the nation's largest
and most diverse database of teaching candidates. Teachers-Teachers.com
just completed the second year - third quarter report of the Nevada
Recruitment Initiative. Marketing activities consist of continued work
with provision of information to sixteen contacts at six Nevada
institutions of higher education -- Great Basin College, Nevada State
College, Nova Southeastern University, Regis University -- Las Vegas,
Sierra Nevada College and University of Nevada -- Las Vegas, as well as
job-seekers nationwide. Over the past quarter, the number of licensed
candidate interested in Nevada education positions grew from 12,120 to
13, 498 (11%), and the number of licensed candidates interested in
Nevada special education positions grew from 2,095 to 2,307 (10%).
Nevada members received 1,343 Teachers-Teachers.com applications in
response to posted vacancies and mass marketing emails this quarter, an
increase of 44% when compared to quarter two.

[Nevada National Governor's Association Task Force -- State
Initiatives]{.underline}

In August 2002, the National Governor's Association Center for Best
Practices

selected through a competitive process Nevada as one of five states the
Center would work with over a period of two years to develop strategies
and best practices for the recruitment and retention of high quality
teachers. Under the sponsorship of Governor Kenny Guinn a task force was
brought together to examine strategies and practices already in place in
Nevada and to recommend changes to better enable the state to recruit
and retain the highest quality teachers for Nevada's children. The work
was funded through Title II-A State Activity funds.

The following strategies and practices were put into place:

*Teach4 Nevada Statewide Website*

This website \<Teach4Nevada.com\> provides an opportunity for teacher
applicants throughout the United States to link with various Nevada
school districts. The following are listed -- teacher requirements,
educational opportunities and Nevada communities.

*State Recruitment Fair*

Clark County School District hosted a state recruitment fair for all
interested districts for 03-04 and for 04-05. CCSD reports this was not
a very successful recruiting effort for their district however.

*Statewide Exit Survey*

The statewide exit survey was developed to analyze why teachers leave
their schools and/or the profession. CCSD reports that the return rate
for this survey was low but that it did reveal that the categories of
teachers who were leaving were 1^st^ year teachers, 2^nd^ to 4^th^ year
teachers, and teachers at high need schools. Using this information,
additional focus groups were established made up of teachers who had a
high probability of resigning (see p. 46).

*Working Conditions Survey*

***[Research findings reported by the Southeast Center for Teaching
Quality demonstrate that overall, teachers who left public school
teaching did so primarily because of poor working conditions, such as
lack of administrative or collegial support and unrealistic teaching
loads. Teachers leave when they do not believe they can be effective
teachers.]{.mark}***

***[Teachers who transfer to other schools, but do not leave the
profession, sought more supportive school environments where
administrators and other teachers helped them succeed. School
improvement takes hold when there are consistent professional norms
regarding what constitutes high-quality teaching practice and a
supportive organizational environment that allows those practices to
spread. Teachers' working conditions are at the heart of this supportive
organizational environment crucial for success.]{.mark}***

***["Evidence suggests that teachers will trade off salaries and working
conditions.]{.mark}***

***[\* 2000 Public Agenda survey of beginning teachers found that by
very high margins 'new teachers want to work in schools with involved
parents, well-behaved students, smaller classes, and supportive
administrators, and most would even pass up significantly higher
salaries in favor of working conditions that offer these.'"]{.mark}***

*[(CCSSO powerpoint -- "Presenting Evidence for the Probable Success of
Your Strategies", May 8-9, 2006, p.3)]{.mark}*

The working conditions survey was adapted from the North Carolina
teacher working conditions survey to better reflect the needs of Nevada.
Currently Clark and Washoe County School Districts have utilized the
survey. An online survey process is provided for each educator with a
login code to protect the educator's identity while identifying the
school in which they work. School and district level reports for each of
the domains in the survey are provided for all stakeholders. The domains
are facilities/resources, safety/discipline, professional development,
class size, and leadership. Several data points are provided by the SEA
such as teacher attrition, poverty, school size etc. *Toolkits are
provided on the Center for Teaching Quality website which have
strategies for each working condition domain perceived as a weakness.*

*Administrative Licensure and Recertification Requirements*

[***Place the best principals in the schools that need them the most.
After teachers, principals have the biggest effect on school success.
Supportive, collaborative principals are hugely important to attracting
and holding strong teachers in high-poverty schools. Districts should
provide salary incentives to attract high-quality, experienced
principals to work in schools that serve high concentrations of poor and
minority students. That includes linking principal pay to both improved
conditions and improved achievement in their schools.*** (*Teaching
Inequality: How Poor and Minority Students Are Shortchanged on Teacher
Quality -- A Report and Recommendations*, *Education Trust, June 2006,
p. 14*)]{.mark}

A representative from the Nevada NGA Task force has asked the Commission
on Professional Standards to review the following, but the Commission
does not perceive there is a need for this review:

\- Review administrative licensure requirements and recertification
requirements to ensure

that Nevada has well-defined leadership standards in place for what
administrators

should know and be able to do.

\- Define these standards for administrators as the Nevada Leadership
Standards (NLS).

\- Recommend that standards specifically address the issue of supporting
and retaining

quality teachers.

\- Suggest NLS represent the projected revision of Interstate School
Leaders Licensure

Consortium Standards and recent research by McREL's team of Waters and
Marzano

that identified the characteristics of principals that are tied to
student achievement.

[Southwest Comprehensive Center -- EDT Objective]{.underline}

As part of the Nevada Southwest Comprehensive Center Project Work Plan
under

Goal 4. Teacher Quality

Outcome(s): By January 15, 2007, NDE will have a program for retaining
highly

qualified teachers, including professional development materials and a
process for

information dissemination.

Objective: 4.4.a Assist NDE with strategies for teacher retention:

Work with NDE to examine reasons for teacher attrition, identify
strategies and

develop a strategic plan for retaining highly qualified teachers by
1/15/07.

Activities:

4.4.a.1 Meet with NDE to agree upon objectives, activities and timelines
for a teacher

retention initiative.

4.4.a. 2 Work with the Teacher Quality Content Center to determine the
availability of

existing resources or those being developed.

4.4.a.3 Assist NDE in reviewing research and collecting information on
reasons why

teachers leave the profession. Identify strategies to support retention
of highly qualified

teachers.

4.4.a.4 Assist NDE in developing an initiative, training of trainers
and/or materials to

disseminate information.

4.4.a.5 Assist NDE in the development of ways to use currently available
teacher

retention funds in ways that demonstrate an effect on teacher retention
in Nevada.

**[Clark County School District Strategies]{.underline}**

*[Recruiting Efforts for the 05-06 School Year]{.underline}*

This includes recruiting efforts that began in September 2004 and that
ended March 1006. Beginning in September 2005, the recruiting efforts
were not only for the current 2005-2006 school year but also for the
2006-2007 school year. Recruiting for the 2006-2007 school year
continue.

There were 246 administrators who participated in recruiting. There were
49 states and US territories visited and 12,197 interviews were
conducted. There were 9,301 applicants who submitted applications.

*[Projected Teacher Shortage]{.underline}*

*Based on data regarding the number of resignations submitted and the
number of teaching positions needed at the schools opening in August
2006, the district has projected a teacher shortage of approximately
1000 teachers.*

[Salary Increase]{.underline}

For the 2006-2007 school year the district is raising the beginning
teachers's salary from \$30,000 to \$33,000 to help attract more
teachers to the district.

[Recruitment of Retired Teachers and Principals]{.underline}

***[The following strategy ensures equitable distribution of teachers by
creating a new pool of teachers to increase teacher supply.]{.mark}***

*[(CCSSO powerpoint -- "Presenting Evidence for the Probable Success of
Your Strategies", May 8-9, 2006, p.1)]{.mark}*

Under A.B. 555/Nevada Revised Statute, the district recruits retired
teachers and principals to return to the classroom in high-need schools
while continuing to receive their full retirement benefits. The district
plan is to increase the recruitment of teachers and principals who
retired within the last three years to return to the classroom in high
need schools. The personnel responsible for implementation are George
Ann Rice and Jo Schlekewy and the timeline is ongoing. The number of
retired employees who returned to the classroom in high need schools
will be reported in an annual report by June 2007.

[Troops to Teachers]{.underline}

CCSD plans to increase the number of teachers hired through the
recruitment of active-duty military personnel who take coursework
through Rio Salado College or Western Governors' University in order to
become teachers upon discharge from the military. Employee contracts are
offered two years in advance of discharge. The Troops to Teachers
program is also offered to members of the National Guard and Reserves
and to the spouses of military personnel. The personnel responsible for
implementation of this program are Barbara Belak and Jo Schlekewy. The
timeline is listed as ongoing. Progress will be reported in an annual
report by June 2007.

[Teach for America]{.underline}

CCSD provides 6 weeks of intensive training for Teach for America
candidates in the Los Angeles Unified School District.

[Grow Your Own Program -- Support Staff Cohort for Special
Education]{.underline}

For the past ten years CCSD has sponsored the Support Staff Cohort for
Special Education. They fund up to 30 of their support staff employees
and substitutes who have experience in working with special education
students, either an aid or a substitute long-term teacher in a special
education classroom, as a parent, as a relative, as a volunteer etc.

Those selected are required to have at least 60 hours of the college
requirements completed, to have passed the Praxis 1 examination, and
have exemplary references. Their duty assignments are then changed to
the university on a full-time basis. They continue to receive their
wages and benefits and have all contractual rights as they complete
their programs, including student teaching, in one year.

[Teacher Step Program]{.underline}

CCCD pays for a masters' degree for recruited licensed special education
teachers willing to teach children in a self-contained setting.

[Recruiting from Within for Special Education]{.underline}

The teachers who are licensed to teach in special education in
self-contained classes, but who are teaching in other special education
classes are offered a bonus and two moves on the salary schedule to
return to self-contained. Those who were licensed to teach in resource
room classes are offered a bonus and payment for their Master's degree
tuition if they would move to a self-contained classroom. Regular
education teachers are offered a bonus and payment for their Master's
degree if they would move to a special education classroom.

[Foreign Country Teacher Recruitment]{.underline}

CCSD plans to increase the number of teachers hired through foreign
country recruitment. Currently CCSD recruits from 3 foreign countries.
It plans to expand the program for teacher recruitment by adding three
new countries in which recruiting will occur, as well as expanding the
recruiting efforts in the existing three countries. The personnel
responsible for implementation of this strategy are Barbara Belak and Jo
Schlekewy and the timeline is listed as ongoing. Progress will be
reported in an annual report by June 2007.

[Service Credit for Hard-to-Fill Positions]{.underline}

CCSD issues ten years of service credit to teachers new to the district
for teaching experience out of state and two additional years of service
credit for math, self-contained special education, and self-contained
bilingual education teachers.

[Pay For Performance]{.underline}

***[Following is a strategy to pay effective teachers more in high-need
schools.]{.mark}***

*[**"Lock-step salary schedules don't recognize great teachers and don't
provide incentives for teachers to take on the toughest assignments.
School districts need to get more sophisticated about identifying the
most effective teachers and pay them more to teach in schools with
shortages."** (Teaching Inequality: How Poor and Minority Students Are
Shortchanged on Teacher Quality -- A Report and Recommendations, by
Pesky and Haycock, Education Trust, June 2006, p. 14)]{.mark}*

The district, in partnership with the Clark County Education
Association, is investigating the feasibility of implementing "pay for
performance" at four pilot schools (1 high performing, 2 mid level
performing and 1 low performing school), using a "value added" model
that credits teachers for student progress. The school restructuring
model replaces the entire licensed staff of a school, allows the newly
appointed principal the opportunity to hire the best qualified teachers,
compensates those teachers for working an extended school day, and
empowers the staff with more decision-making authority in designing the
instructional plan for the school. CCSD Human Resources Division is
responsible for implementation and the timeline for completion is June
2007.

[High Need School First Pick of Teaching Talent]{.underline}

*[**Use a "draft strategy" -- allow high-poverty, struggling schools to
have the first pick of teaching talent.** (Teaching Inequality: How Poor
and Minority Students Are Shortchanged on Teacher Quality -- A Report
and Recommendations, by Peske and Haycock, Education Trust, June 2006,
p. 13)]{.mark}*

Clark County allows principals at high need schools to accept transfers
from experienced teachers two months before the principals of non-high
need schools.

[Urban Academy at 22 Low Performing Schools]{.underline}

CCSD provides summer classes (16 credits), for teachers new to the
district assigned to high-need schools, in areas such as classroom
management, lesson planning, meeting the needs of diverse learners, and
State standards and benchmarks, and allows them to move to the next step
in the salary schedule prior to the beginning of the school year.

[Identifying Reasons Why Teachers Resign]{.underline}

In May 2005, the Feldman Group established focus groups made up of
teachers who had resigned during the school year. The purpose of the
focus groups was to identify the various reasons why teachers resign.
Using this information, additional focus groups were established made up
of teachers who had a high probability of resigning. This included first
year teachers, teachers who have taught from two to four years, and
teachers who were assigned to high need schools. These focus groups met
in the fall of 2005 and the spring of 2006 to discuss the working
conditions that may cause teachers in the three groups to be more likely
to quit teaching in Clark County, and what the district can do to retain
teachers in these three groups.

[Principal Salary Schedule]{.underline}

[***"Supportive, collaborative principals are hugely important to
attracting and holding strong teachers in high-poverty schools." "Place
the best principals in the schools that need them the most. After
teachers, principals have the biggest effect on school success."
"Districts should provide salary incentives to attract high-quality,
experienced principals to work in schools that serve high concentrations
of poor and minority students. That includes linking principal pay to
both improved conditions and improved achievement in their schools."***
(*Teaching Inequality: How Poor and Minority Students Are Shortchanged
on Teacher Quality -- A Report and Recommendations*, *Education Trust,
June 2006, p. 14*)]{.mark}

A point factor system has been implemented to establish a principal
salary schedule that focuses on those factors that make the
administration of high-need schools more complex and difficult.

[Transfer Policy]{.underline}

Clark County requires teachers to remain at their assigned school for
two years. However teachers are required to remain at a high need school
for only one year to encourage them to try working at high need schools.

**[\[Note: However, "involuntary transfers" is listed as a strategy that
is not likely to close the teacher quality gap. *CCSSO powerpoint --
"Presenting Evidence for the Probable Success of Your Strategies", May
8-9, 2006, p. 1\]*]{.mark}**

**Strategies the Clark County School District will Adopt**

[Recruitment for Special Education Positions]{.underline}

Applicants seeking social studies or counseling positions will be
identified and encouraged to become certified in special education. The
personnel responsible for implementation are George Ann Rice and Jo
Schlekewy and the timeline is ongoing.

**Proposed Clark County Recruiting Enhancements for the 06-07 School
Year**

[Salary Placement]{.underline}

Allow new veteran teachers to bring in all contracted teaching
experience for placement on the salary schedule (currently a maximum of
9 years is allowed -- except for ten years of service credit to teachers
new to the district for teaching experience out of state and two
additional years of service credit for math, self-contained special
education, and self-contained bilingual education teachers). See Clark
Equity Plan for more issues on p. 44.)

[New Programs in Grow Your Own]{.underline}

-   Begin an Elementary Education Cohort similar to the Special
    Education Cohort described under "Teacher Preparation"

-   Target supervisory level casino employees with degrees who would
    like to become teachers.

[Return Teachers to the Classroom]{.underline}

There are currently approximately 1,000 teachers acting as specialists
or facilitators who would move back to the classroom (ideas being
considered are on p. 45 of the CCSD Equity Plan).

[Seek Changes in Licensure Requirements and in State Law]{.underline}

-   Licensure and Nevada State Department of Education

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Recognize Alternative Route to Licensure with teaching experience
    from all states;

-   Institute "real" reciprocity for teachers with teaching experience;

-   Allow three years of substantial substitute experience to count for
    student teaching.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Nevada Revised Statutes

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Allow districts to offer classes leading to a teaching license for
    those people with Bachelor's degree -- similar to what is used in
    the Los Angeles Unified School District and the Houston Unified
    School District.

> **Strategies the Clark County School District May Adopt**

[Attainable Housing Offered as a Financial Incentive]{.underline}

The cost of housing is a major factor in CCSD's difficulty in recruiting
teachers and teacher attrition. CCSD is working with numerous partners
to consider feasibility of offering attainable housing by building on a
land parcel which belongs to the district, but which is not needed for
school sites. The land would be placed in a community land trust and
held in trust. With the land out of the cost equation, the homes could
be made attainable for teachers.

**Other District Requested Legislative Strategies**

Beginning in 2003, Nevada's 17 school boards and their superintendents
joined together to create a blueprint for academic improvement in
Nevada. The result was a document known as iNVest ("Investing in
Nevada's Education, Students and Teachers"). Through the identification
of common needs and goals, Nevada's instructional leaders developed a
statewide vision that would result in increased learning for Nevada's
students. Included with the description of how funds would be used,
accountability measures were also built into the plan so the success of
programs and the increased funding provided could be measured. iNVest is
based on 3 tenets:

-   Districts must have adequate basic support;

-   Districts must have the capacity to attract and retain a quality
    work force;

-   Districts must improve student achievement by increasing
    instructional time and expanding educational opportunities.

In the 2005 legislative session legislators were encouraged to:

-   provide salary increases that enable school districts to attract and
    retain highly qualified educational personnel who are not penalized
    by increases in the cost of living

-   explore and support other methods of attracting and retaining highly
    qualified teachers including strategies such as tuition-free
    graduate courses; loan forgiveness programs, and stipends for
    teachers who receive satisfactory evaluations for four consecutive
    years and who teach either in rural or remote areas, at high-poverty
    schools, or who teach in critical shortage areas such as math,
    science, special education or ELL.

**[OTHER SPECIFIC STRATEGIES NEVADA WILL ADOPT]{.underline}**

**[STRATEGY 1.]{.underline}**

[***Pay effective teachers more in high-need schools. "Lock-step salary
schedules don't recognize great teachers and don't provide incentives
for teachers to take on the toughest assignments. School districts need
to get more sophisticated about identifying the most effective teachers
and pay them more to teach in schools with shortages."*** (*Teaching
Inequality: How Poor and Minority Students Are Shortchanged on Teacher
Quality -- A Report and Recommendations, by Peske and Haycock,*
*Education Trust, June 2006, p. 14*)]{.mark}

The SEA is investigating the possibility of proposing a change to the
Nevada Revised Statutes to allow teachers at high need schools the
choice of 1/5 of a year's retirement credit (currently in place) *or a
\$3,000-\$5,000 stipend*.

[SPECIFIC STEPS TO IMPLEMENTATION]{.underline}

[Steps/Agency or Persons Responsible/ Resources
Required/Timeline]{.underline}

Keith Rheault, SEA Superintendent, is responsible for investigation into
this proposal which would require state fiscal resources. The next
Legislative session begins February 2007 and investigation is currently
being discussed within the SEA.

**[STRATEGY 2.]{.underline}**

***["Ban unfair budgeting practices. District budgeting policies should
not allow the most advantaged schools to "buy" more than their share of
the most highly paid teachers. Staff budgets should be set at the school
level and should be proportionate with student needs." Investigate the
district single-salary schedule that pays all teachers according to the
same criteria since the single-salary schedule does not ensure equality
in how teachers are assigned to schools. "Individual school budgets
should reflect the needs of the students they serve. By weighting
students according to the challenges they present, the system could (1)
create incentives to serve the children who need the most help and (2)
ensure high-poverty schools (as well as schools with more
English-language learners and students with disabilities) have
additional resources to compete for teacher talent. School budgets also
should reflect the actual salaries that teachers are paid to ensure that
funds intended to supplement the education of students growing up in
poverty are actually reaching the schools serving these
students]{.mark}.***

[(*Teaching Inequality: How Poor and Minority Students Are Shortchanged
on Teacher Quality -- A Report and Recommendations, by Peske and
Haycock,* *Education Trust, *]{.mark}

[*June 2006, p. 14*)]{.mark}

In Clark County, Nevada\'s largest school district, the Title I office
already allows Title I schools great flexibility in their hiring
practices, because salary differentials - the amount of difference
between the lowest and highest paid teachers - are picked up in the
district Title I budget, rather than each school being forced to hire
teachers with less experience who would be lower on the salary schedule.
This is one way of ensuring that Title I schools are not always forced
to hire the least experienced teachers.

Investigate how teachers are assigned to schools in high need districts
to ensure Title I comparability and eliminate any unfair budgeting
practices.

[SPECIFIC STEPS TO IMPLEMENTATION]{.underline}

[Steps/Agency or Persons Responsible/ Resources
Required/Timeline]{.underline}

Kathy St. Clair, SEA Title I consultant, will investigate how teachers
are assigned to schools in other high need districts to ensure Title I
comparability and eliminate any unfair budgeting practices by August 31,
2006. Documentation of results will be put in this Equity Plan.

**[STRATEGY 3.]{.underline}**

List state and federal incentives on the SEA website to ensure better
communication of information to teachers and encourage districts to do
the same on their website.

[SPECIFIC STEPS TO IMPLEMENTATION]{.underline}

[Steps/Agency or Persons Responsible/ Resources
Required/Timeline]{.underline}

[MEASURES TO EVALUATE AND PUBLICLY REPORT PROGRESS]{.underline}

Leslie James, Title II-A consultant, will ensure the incentives are
posted to the SEA website, and will contact human resources
administrators requesting they do the same by August 31, 2006 as
verified by posting of incentives on the website and letter on file to
be attached to the SEA Equity Plan.

**5. [PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT]{.underline}**

*How is Nevada planning to strengthen the skills, knowledge, and
qualifications of teachers already working in high-poverty,
low-performing schools?*

**[INVENTORY OF CURRENT POLICIES AND PROGRAMS]{.underline}**

***[A strategy to ensure equitable distribution of teachers by reducing
demand is to strengthen the skills of teachers already working in
high-need schools by providing]{.mark}***

***[job-embedded high quality professional development to faculty groups
and whole schools in support of school-based improvement plans to give
teachers and administrators the support they need to succeed and remain
in high need schools]{.mark}.***

*[(CCSSO powerpoint -- "Presenting Evidence for the Probable Success of
Your Strategies", May 8-9, 2006, p.1)]{.mark}*

***[Other common strategies to improve teaching quality in high-need
schools listed in the CCSSO powerpoint (p. 4) and listed in the
following pages are:]{.mark}***

-   ***[Mentoring and induction]{.mark}***

-   ***[High-quality professional development in content
    areas]{.mark}***

-   ***[Leadership training -- especially in regard to effectively
    retaining high quality teachers]{.mark}***

[]{.mark}

***[Teaching Inequality: How Poor and Minority Students Are Shortchanged
on Teacher Quality -- A Report and Recommendations, by Peske and
Haycock, The Education Trust, June 2006, p. 14, also advocates the
following to ensure equitable distribution of teachers by providing the
following incentives to provide extra support to the teachers who take
on the most challenging work - "Balance the challenge of working in
high-poverty schools by giving teachers... more time to collaborate with
their colleagues and more time for coaching and induction."]{.mark}***

[]{.mark}

***[Note: There is not extensive data on the impact of professional
development received by teachers at high need schools.]{.mark}***

[Regional Professional Development Program]{.underline}

In 1999, the Nevada State Legislature created, under Senate Bill 555, a
statewide

network of Regional Professional Development Programs (RPDP) and charged
it with

the responsibility of training teachers and administrators in the state
to implement

Nevada's academic standards. The law designated four service regions in
the state.

Nevada Professional Development Standards (NPDS) were prepared by the
Statewide

Coordinating Council for Nevada Regional Professional Development
Programs. Each

RPDP has worked with its governing board to develop and implement
five-year

program plans.

The Nevada RPDP Evaluation Report issued by WestEd January 31, 2005 for
the period of Performance from July 2002 through July 2004, states: "The
RPDP has operated a

successful statewide structure consisting of four regional governance
boards, 64 staff

coordinators, and 364 site facilitators at the schools. It has complied
with requirements

under that law to conduct needs assessment, develop five year plans,
train teachers and

administrators, adopt a training model, establish a method of
evaluation, and submit

annual reports. The RPDP's service delivery model has shifted from the
trainer of

trainer model to more job-embedded and on-site assistance offered over
time to faculty

groups and whole schools in support of school-based improvement plans.

Approximately 11,200 teachers and 711 administrators participated in
RPDP training

in 2002-2003 and 11,084 teachers and 1,032 administrators took part in
RPDP training

in 2003-2004... The primary focus of RPDP training has been on improving
content

knowledge and pedagogy. Initial efforts have been made to **assist
schools in respective**

**regions designated as in need of improvement**." (p. i) "Implications
and

recommendations for RPDP action include: ...allocating resources and
attention to

demonstrating impact on teaching and learning; ...**increasing attention
to low-**

**performing schools**; continued attention to school leadership...."
(p. ii) Revised 5 year

regional plans do contain an administrator strand. "Focused studies \[in
one region\]

showed linkages between training, teaching, and student achievement."
(p. 30)

[Southern Regional Professional Development Program (SRPDP)]{.underline}

*Serving Clark, Esmeralda, Lincoln and Nye*

Collaborates with the University of Nevada -- Las Vegas and Southern
Utah University and provides credit offering in mathematics, science,
reading, technology and social studies. The SNRPDP created and
implemented certificate programs in middle school and high school
mathematics and science to address the teacher shortage and need for
teachers to meet NCLB highly qualified teacher requirements. These are
16 credit programs of study that focus on content that teachers teach at
their particular grade cluster while addressing instructional and
assessment practices, the needs of special populations, and embedding
standards based lessons and teacher expectations into each course. The
SNRPDP in partnership with the Southern Nevada Writing Project has
developed programs to incorporate writing strategies into classroom
instruction. The Governor's Reading Improvement Program has provided a
program of study and a support system for K-3 teachers with a special
emphasis on Kindergarten to have students reading at the earliest
possible levels.

*School Improvement Efforts*

-   Provide technical assistance to schools on school improvement
    efforts.

-   Assist schools with the implementation of action research as a
    strategy for further school improvement efforts.

-   Offer courses in root-cause analysis to assist school teams.

-   Assist schools with the change process as they go through the SAGE
    school improvement process.

-   Offer courses to teachers in school improvement planning.

*Content Areas*

-   Continue to offer credit offering in mathematics, science and social
    studies

-   Offer courses to teachers to gain expertise in fields other than
    their primary assignments such as in reading.

-   Continue the implementation of classes in how to teach reading for
    kindergarten and grades one through three.

-   Develop and implement teacher certificate programs for other content
    areas assisting efforts in meeting the HQT requirements.

-   Continue classroom observations by invitation for the purposes of
    coaching within various content areas.

-   Offer a free summer class to prepare teachers to support students in
    taking algebra in the fall.

*Pedagogy*

-   Offer courses to teachers to gain expertise in testing and
    assessment, meeting needs of diverse learners, classroom discipline.

-   Continue implementation of *Backwards Assessment Model*, *Teacher
    Expectancies* and *Components of an Effective Lesson*.

[Western Regional Professional Development Program (WRPDP)]{.underline}

*Serving Carson City, Churchill, Douglas, Lyon and Mineral*

*School Improvement Planning Strand -- Goal*

School improvement teams are in place at each school site. Professional
development and ongoing mentoring is in place at each school site. Staff
development will be implemented based on the identified needs of each
schools' site specific plan. Annual review of the plans will occur.
Modifications of the plans will be based on the results of student
achievement. Other data, such as observation data (Data in a Day),
perception data (parent, student, teacher, and community surveys), and
staff development links will also be analyzed. School improvement teams
will be supported in their efforts to address identified needs through
professional development at all levels of the continuum -- beginning to
expert. Special emphasis will be on differentiated professional
development so that all staff continue to become highly qualified and be
effective.

*Administrator Strand -- Goal*

Current and potential school administrators will become educational
leaders who promote the success of teacher and student learners. All
administrators will have the opportunity to be trained in the classroom
observation model known as Teach for Success. Each site will be visited
by a team of observers to conduct a walk-through observation of
classroom teachers and specialists at the school site. Principals will
be debriefed by the facilitator of the walk-through or by the visiting
team of observers. The data derived by the visiting team will be
presented to the school's improvement team and staff. This information
will become a piece of the data collection for school improvement
planning and subsequent professional development. Teach for Success
observation visits may occur annually. Three times per year regional
administrators will attend structured Administrative Forums covering
relevant topics such as supervision, literacy, implementation of
standards and assessments, and data analysis. A regional Principals'
Academy will be established to train aspiring principals and mentor
novice principals. Study groups for current administrators will focus on
the practice of effective schools and will be guided by principal
coaches in each district.

*Teacher Strand -- Goal*

Teachers new to the profession and/or new to districts will be supported
through the **new teacher induction program**. A priority will be a
program of **mentoring for new teachers as well as for those in need of
becoming "highly qualified" in the content areas to which they are
assigned**. Through HOUSSE a teacher may demonstrate subject matter
competency through 150 contact hours of professional development of
which the WRPDP may provide or link teachers to courses. The training
series for teachers will include classroom management, instructional
strategies, questioning skills, standards, assessments, data analysis,
communication, and coaching.

*Literacy Strand -- Goal*

All teachers and administrators will learn how children become literate.
The teachers and administrators will learn the elements of a
comprehensive school-wide literacy program which will include content
area reading strategies. They will learn to analyze and research
critical elements of reading programs and materials. Teachers will learn
to use assessment tools to target instruction for the increased
achievement of all students. There will be a strong emphasis on the
specialized teaching strategies for English language learners and
special education students. Key literacy coaches will receive ongoing
training in order to support staff development in their districts.

[Northwest Regional Professional Development Program
(NWRPDP)]{.underline}

*Serving Pershing, Storey and Washoe*

The current work of the NWRPDP includes the following initiatives that
specifically

address the issue of strengthening the skills of teachers working in
**[high need schools]{.underline}**:

*School Improvement Initiatives*

NWRPDP provides direct technical assistance and support to schools
deemed In Need of Improvement. Regional Trainers and Directors provide
facilitation of site leadership teams and assist in the creation,
implementation and review of School Improvement Plans. Regional Trainers
provide sustained professional development, follow-up and coaching in
addressing SIP goals.

*The Student Learning Facilitator Initiative*

The SLF program provides in-depth training in the elements of strategic,
standards-based instruction to a teacher or team of teachers from
schools in Northwest Nevada. Over a two-year period, participating
teachers become site-based specialists in increasing student learning
through the effective application of classroom assessments, essential
understandings, and differentiated instruction. The SLF teacher will
facilitate collegial conversations among staff members to provide a
focus for successful professional development aimed at increasing
student achievement. This program can provide site-based professional
learning communities with a common focus for effective professional
growth.

*Nevada Early Literacy Intervention Program (NELIP)*

Mentors received training in the key elements in addition to extended
training in implementation of the new WCSD K-6 reading adoption. They
will serve as site resources in supporting the new K-6 reading adoption
in WCSD.

NELIP Regional Trainers will continue to provide training and follow-up
to K-3, 4-6 teachers on method and content for teaching fundamental
reading skills using scientifically based research in the following
areas:

-   Phonemic Awareness;

-   Phonics, Vocabulary, Fluency;

-   Comprehension; Writing;

-   Motivation and Management.

Methods will include differentiated and data-driven instruction based on
assessments, developmentally appropriate practices, and standards.

Many schools have implemented Professional Learning Communities (PLCs)
in recent years. PLCs are site-based groups of educators that seek to
improve student achievement by identifying what it is students need to
learn; how they will know when students have learned the intended
curriculum; and what they will do when students have not learned it. As
PLCs progress, they benefit from assistance in establishing group
processes, data collection and analysis, identifying goals and targets,
etc. RCTL staff members are available for consultation, presentations,
and other work designed to support schools' implementation of PLCs.

*Northern Nevada Writing Project*

Through NWRPDP collaboration with the Northern Nevada Writing Project's
cadre of teacher consultants, professional development on writing
instruction and support for schools is provided in the following
formats:

-   Graduate credits offered over the summer months at UNR;

-   In-service credits (six per semester) on topics appropriate for K-12
    teachers;

-   Winter Teacher Leadership workshops designed to maximize a site's
    ability to collaborate professionally on new topics involving
    writing;

-   Internet and print resources for professional learning
    collaborations happening at school sites.

*Teach for Success*

NWRPDP professional development staff members have been trained in the
Teach for Success Observation Protocol developed by West Ed Regional
Laboratory. Teams of observers are available to provide school wide
observation of teaching practices. The findings from the observations
are compiled into a school report to help the school leadership, along
with staff, define the professional development needs of the staff in
order to increase student achievement.

*Teacher Mentoring and Induction*

NWRPDP collaborates in the support of the New Teacher's Academy and the
Novice Teacher Mentor Program. New Teacher's Academy includes essential
required content for newly hired teachers supporting standards based
instruction and assessment in the core content areas. Second year
content includes strategies for meeting the needs of diverse learner
populations through differentiated instruction, research based
instructional strategies training and on working with students of
poverty. The newly formed Novice teacher Mentor Project involves 10 full
time mentors hired to work exclusively in supporting novice teachers
K-12. In addition to the 10 full time mentors over 200 site based
mentors have been trained to work in schools with novice teachers.

*Special Education Teacher Mentor Project*

NWRPDP sponsors and coordinates a regional job-alike special education
teacher mentorship program supporting novice and options special
education teachers through a combination of individual mentoring,
special education compliance trainings and PLC work focusing on
co-teaching and inclusion.

[Northeast Nevada Regional Professional Development
(NNRPDP)]{.underline}

*Serving Elko, Eureka, Humboldt, Lander and WhitePine*

*Site Based Professional Development Based on School Improvement Plans*

Site facilitators help develop and evaluate site based professional
development plans in concert with administrators and teachers with
oversight by a regional coordinator.

Data on instruction is collected by regional coordinator's participation
in Teach for Success (T4S) observations at participating schools.
Regional coordinators provide direct support as dictated by the school's
professional development plan e.g. classroom observations, coaching,
model lessons, follow up. The NNRPDP funds at least one site facilitator
at each school in the region. Additional fiscal support can be provided
as dictated by the professional development needs of the schools e.g.
substitute pay, conference attendance, workshops, T4S trainings.

*Nevada Early Literacy Intervention Program (NELIP)*

Direct financial support is provided to all K-3 schools by funding a
NELIP facilitator in each school. Additional support is provided in the
form of books, materials, trainings and conferences. The NELIP
coordinator structures, monitors, evaluates, and adjusts program
annually.

*Professional Learning Communities (PLCs)*

Content area PLCs are developed across the rural schools such as Special
Education PLC, Secondary Math PLC, etc. Regional Coordinators
participate in the schools' PLCs.

Training of site facilitators in the PLC structure is provided through
NNRPDP workshops and national conferences.

*Focused Regional Coordinator Site Based Intervention With Schools in
Need of Improvement*

Southside Elementary School in Elko is focusing on the content area of
writing. It uses the school-wide, teacher led Writers Workshop model.
Training in pedagogy is provided by the site facilitator. Frequent
classroom observations are conducted by regional coordinators. A
school-wide rubric is used for assessing school improvement effects. The
5^th^ grade writing assessment is used as the student achievement
measure. Efficacy of instruction is measured by classroom observation.

Owyhee Combined School (K-12) on the Duck Valley Indian Reservation in
Elko County School District is focusing on the content areas of writing
and math. Workshops are provided by the regional coordinators. Classroom
observations and videotaped teacher lessons are conducted by regional
coordinators. The 5^th^ grade writing assessment and CRT results are
used as student achievement measures. Efficacy of instruction is
measured by classroom observation.

Sonoma Heights Elementary School in Humboldt County School District is
focusing on the content area of math. Workshops are provided by outside
expert and regional coordinators. Workshops are presented in content and
pedagogy. Classroom observations and videotaped teacher lessons are
conducted by regional coordinators. CRT results will be used as student
achievement measures. Efficacy of instruction is measured by classroom
observation.

*Teacher Induction Programs*

Regional coordinators are involved in new teacher induction programs
being developed by the school districts.

[Nevada Association of School Administrators (NASA)]{.underline}

In the spring of 2004, the Nevada Association of School Administrators
received a

grant from the Statewide Council of the Regional Professional
Development Program

for conducting professional development programs throughout Nevada for
the state's

school administrators. Funding for the 2005-2007 school years is
continuing for

professional development programs. Topics for school administrators
include:

improving student achievement in reading, writing and mathematics;
strategies for

school improvement; how to change recalcitrant staff; and better use of
funds that will

result in improved student achievement. Topics for superintendents and
district office

staff include improving district improvement plans and improving student

achievement district-wide. It is anticipated that a duplicated count of
approximately

1,700 administrators will attend. Essential to the program evaluation
will be an

assessment of whether the attendees have learned and implemented skills
that can be

shared with staff at their work locations.

[[Title II-A Funds and other Federal Funds]{.underline}]{.mark}

All Nevada districts use at least a portion of their Title II-A funds
targeted at schools that have the highest number of teachers not meeting
the NCLB highly qualified teacher requirements and/or schools in need of
improvement. Districts also can use Title I, Title II-D, Title III, and
Title V funds for professional development.

[SEA School Improvement Support]{.underline}

The SEA assists all Nevada public school districts and schools with
school improvement through leadership, resources, assistance, and
oversight. All LEAs, regardless of their accountability designations,
are supported by the SEA in a continuous improvement cycle framework.
All public school districts and schools, as well as the state, conduct
an annual review of their improvement plans to evaluate implementation
and outcomes in order to reassess specific goals and actions for each
upcoming year. The SEA offers school districts and schools training in
the SEA model of improvement planning (*Student Achievement Gap
Elimination*), with a focus on effective facilitation of the process and
the inclusion of best practices relevant to the unique needs of each
site. Additionally, the SEA offers training on targeted initiatives,
such as balanced assessment programs, integrated intervention systems,
and systematic professional learning communities.

The SEA prioritizes support to public school districts and schools that
have failed to make adequate yearly progress (AYP). When a school fails
to make AYP in any of the specified categories for the first time, it is
placed on "watch" status. If a school fails to make AYP in that same
category the next year, the school is designated as In Need of
Improvement Year One. Subsequent failures result in continued In Need of
Improvement designations. Designated schools are faced with specific
consequences, and as the number of successive years of designation
increases so does the significance of the consequences. Schools and
school districts that are designated as In Need of Improvement are
entitled to technical assistance and support from the state.

The SEA provides a graduated level of support to public school districts
and schools that fall into an "in need of improvement" status. For the
In Need of Improvement Year One and Year Two schools, the state requires
that a Technical Assistance Partnership be established that consists of
site level and district level representation. The Technical Assistance
Partnership teams review each school improvement plan to assist in
refocusing the improvement efforts. The SEA also provides training to
potential external facilitators who can work one-on-one with Year One
and Year Two schools as these sites undergo revision and implementation
of their improvement plans. For Title I schools, a portion of Title I
funds are provided to hire an external facilitator in this capacity.

Guided by Nevada Revised Statute 385, the state establishes a School
Support Team for each In Need of Improvement Year Three, Year Four, and
beyond public school. This team analyzes the school's data and assists
the school in targeting its efforts to the most critical areas of need.
For Title I schools, a portion of the Title I funds are provided to hire
a qualified educator to lead the School Support Team.

[The School Support Team Leader Model]{.underline}

Each public school that is designated as In Need of Improvement Year
Three, Year Four, and beyond is assigned a School Support Team (SST).
Each SST consists of a highly qualified teacher and principal who are
not employees of the school, one SEA representative, at least one
administrator at the school district level, and at least one parent or
guardian of a student who is enrolled in the school for which the
support team is established. The team members are assigned to an SST for
a school year, with the possibility of continuing with the team into
additional years if warranted.

The School Support Team reviews and analyzes the data pertaining to the
school improvement plan, the instructional programs, and the operation
for each school that they have been assigned. The SST investigates the
problems and factors that contributed to the AYP designation and assist
the school in targeting revisions to the most critical goals for
improving student performance. Upon completion of the plan revision, the
SST works cooperatively with the school to carry out and monitor the
progress of the plan for improvement. An SST may require the school to
submit plans, strategies, tasks and measures that, in the determination
of the SST, will assist the school in improving the achievement and
proficiency of the students.

For Title I schools, a qualified educator (currently not working
full-time for a school or district) is assigned to lead the School
Support Team in this work. The SST Leader guides the SST and the school
to focus on one or two goals that are integrated into a revised school
improvement plan. The SST Leader coordinates the SST and the site
leadership to monitor the implementation of the plan and the progress
towards the measurable objectives. The SST Leader models effective
leadership strategies and promotes successful practices that address the
school's unique circumstances. The SST Leader becomes the consistent
presence of external assistance at the school.

[Consultant Work]{.underline}

SEA consultants are available to develop and monitor professional
development at the district and school levels as needed.

[Partner with the International Center for Leadership in Education
(ICLE)]{.underline}

For the past two years the SEA has partnered with the International
Center for Leadership in Education to study and present what model
schools from around the country do to get student achievement results,
in order to encourage effective instruction that supports student
achievement. This information and ICLE model schools have been
highlighted for the last two years at the annual [Nevada Mega "Model
Schools" Conference]{.underline}. In addition to ICLE model schools,
eleven successful Nevada schools were selected to be awarded and present
at the conference on their successful practices. Qualitative criteria
for selection of these schools considered curriculum and instruction,
student opportunity and access, professional development, leadership and
partnerships.

[AB 580 -- Programs for Performance Pay and Enhanced Compensation for
the]{.underline}

[Recruitment, Retention, and Mentoring of Licensed
Personnel]{.underline}

***[A strategy to ensure equitable distribution of teachers by reducing
demand is to]{.mark}***

***[fund mentoring and induction programs to give teachers the support
that they need to succeed and remain in high need schools.]{.mark}***

The Nevada Legislature appropriated \$5 million per year of the biennium
for grants to

school districts to adopt a program of performance pay and enhanced
compensation for

recruitment, retention and mentoring of licensed personnel at at-risk
schools.

**[See APPENDIX L: LEAs' Use of AB 580 Funds]{.mark}**

[Professional Learning Communities (PLC) -- State
Initiative]{.underline}

***[Teaching Inequality: How Poor and Minority Students Are Shortchanged
on Teacher Quality -- A Report and Recommendations, by Peske and
Haycock, The Education Trust, June 2006, p. 14, advocates for the
following to ensure equitable distribution of teachers by providing the
following incentives to provide extra support to the teachers who take
on the most challenging work - "Balance the challenge of working in
high-poverty schools by giving teachers... more time to collaborate with
their colleagues."]{.mark}***

***[PLCs can also provide excellent mentoring for new teachers since all
teachers in the PLC team mentor the new teacher(s).]{.mark}***

[]{.mark}

One of the professional development standards adopted by the Statewide
Coordinating Council for the Regional Professional Development program
is:

"Professional development is built into the day-to-day work of educators
at the school level; should foster professional learning communities by
employing collaborative problem-solving work groups within and across
disciplines and grade levels."

(Principle VI)

The SEA also supports this professional development standard and held a
state conference to highlight the elements of a school operating as a
PLC in 2002, highlighted this initiative at the 2006 annual state Mega
conference, as well as developed and facilitates a statewide
administrator online forum since 2005 to provide administrators with
information on how to transform a school culture into a PLC to get
student achievement results. The state has 14/17 districts supporting
schools in their work as PLCs.

[Assessment For Learning (AFL) -- State Initiative]{.underline}

Implementing the principles of assessment for learning to improve
student achievement has been a state initiative since 2005. October 2005
the SEA held a state leadership conference to discuss the need for
assessment for learning, the principles, and ***[the impact on student
achievement -- especially for low-performing students (profound gains
for all students and largest gains for low achievers: .5-2.0 standard
deviation on state assessments]{.mark}**.* Dr. Stiggins of the
Assessment Training Institute participated in the PLC administrator
online forum November 2005 to discuss the need and principles. He also
discussed the need and AFL principles with superintendents in December
2005 and with 160 principals in June 2006. This initiative was
highlighted at the 2006 annual state Mega conference.

[Response to Intervention (RTI) -- State Initiative]{.underline}

Intervention systems for academic and behavioral supports consist of
four components:

1.  Data-Based Decision Making: Rigorous, systematic, and objective
    measures to obtain and use reliable and valid information

2.  Collaborative Outcome Planning: Instructional practices, strengths
    and needs of students, and environmental considerations to improve
    outcomes in students' performance

3.  Monitoring for Progress: Analyzing data to determine if students
    need academic and/or behavioral interventions; Keeping track of
    students' progress towards established criteria while interventions
    are being implemented

4.  Interventions: Changes in instructional practices and/or
    environmental factors that are provided in response to students'
    academic and behavioral strengths and needs; Multi-tiered structure.

Currently in Nevada there is commitment to intervention tiers one and
two, there are statewide pilot schools, as well as school and district
initiatives. Pilot school data to support statewide consistency will be
gathered. There will be integration with district and school improvement
planning. Professional development will be carried out by school
leaders.

[Nevada Comprehensive Curriculum Alignment Tool (NCCAT)]{.underline}

The Nevada Comprehensive Curriculum Alignment Tool is a self-analysis
tool developed by the SEA to help districts and schools identified for
corrective action under state and/or federal mandates to improve
teaching and learning and increase student achievement. They will be
required to do a curriculum self-analysis to see where there are gaps in
the alignment between state standards, district standards, classroom
targets, lesson/unit planning, pedagogy, materials, assessment and
professional development. Based on the analysis they will write a
professional development plan to address this gap to improve student
achievement. This will be piloted at some Clark County Schools fall
2006.

Legislative Authority. Under Section 1116 (b) (10) (C) (ii) of the *No
Child Left Behind Act of 2001*, states have the option of *"instituting
and fully implementing a new curriculum that is based on state and local
academic content and achievement standards, including providing
appropriate professional development based on scientifically based
research for all relevant staff, that offers substantial promise of
improving educational achievement for low-performing students."*

[National Board Certification]{.underline}

From 2001-2005, 125 Nevada teachers have become nationally board
certified.

Title II-A state activity funds help support teachers to become
nationally board certified.

Clark County School District provides NBC teachers with an extra 5% over
a ten year period. However they do not have an incentive to work at
high-need schools.

**[Clark County School District Strategies]{.underline}**

[Urban Academy at 22 Low Performing Schools]{.underline}

CCSD established an Urban Academy at 22 low-performing schools to
provide professional development for teachers new to the district
assigned to those high-need schools. The areas of professional
development include classroom management, lesson planning, meeting the
needs of diverse learners, and State standards and benchmarks.

Earning 16 credits during the summer allows these teachers to move to
the next step on the salary schedule prior to the beginning of the
school year.

[Mentoring Programs for Schools with Large Number of New
Teachers]{.underline}

Clark County School District received \$3.6 million from AB 580 --
"Programs for Performance Pay and Enhanced Compensation for the
Recruitment, Retention, and Mentoring of Licensed Personnel" - [which
will be used to provide a mentoring program at CCSD schools that have
historically had the largest numbers of **new teachers**]{.underline}.
Compensation for time dedicated over and above contracted time for
teacher mentors, teacher mentees, and administrators with a mentoring
program in their school will be funded. Financial incentives for
non-classroom licensed personnel working in at-risk school environments
will also be provided. Highly qualified, experienced teachers will be
paid to serve as mentors for teachers new to the district. Three
projects are being piloted:

-   full-time mentors with learning community components

-   full-time mentors without learning community components

-   experienced teachers at 95 high need schools who are paid a stipend
    to mentor inexperienced and experienced teachers.

The Human Resources Division will review survey results to determine
teacher perceptions of the effectiveness of mentoring services as well
as retention rates at schools which received mentoring services. The
timeline for completion and measurement of effectiveness is June 2007.
An annual report will be used to report results.

[New Teacher Induction -- Differentiated Instruction]{.underline}

All teachers new to the district are required to complete new teacher
induction modules throughout their first year in the district. These
modules are focused on CCSD domains and standards for teaching and
include instruction on teaching strategies to use with diverse learners.
Differentiated instruction is the focus of the training modules in order
to assist teachers new to the district with appropriate strategies to
address the needs of diverse learners. CCSD plans to expand teacher
induction programs to include teachers in their second year with the
district.

[Coaches Assigned to High Need Schools]{.underline}

In the Northeast Region of CCSD, 28 full-time coaches have been assigned
to 21 low-performing schools.

**[OTHER SPECIFIC STRATEGIES NEVADA WILL ADOPT]{.underline}**

**[SPECIFIC STEPS TO IMPLEMENTATION]{.underline}**

**[MEASURES TO EVALUATE AND PUBLICLY REPORT PROGRESS]{.underline}**

**6. [SPECIALIZED KNOWLEDGE AND SKILLS]{.underline}**

*How is Nevada planning to ensure that teachers have the specialized
knowledge and skills they need to be effective with the populations of
students typically served in high-poverty, low-performing schools
(including Native American students, English language learners, and
other students at risk)?*

**[INVENTORY OF CURRENT POLICIES AND PROGRAMS]{.underline}**

*[**A strategy to ensure equitable distribution of teachers is to reduce
demand by keeping qualified, experienced teachers from leaving high-need
schools through strengthening their skills by giving them the
specialized training to succeed in the most challenging classrooms. The
degree to which teachers feel they are effective is critical, i.e.
working with diverse populations.** (CCSSO powerpoint -- "Presenting
Evidence for the Probable Success of Your Strategies", May 8-9, 2006,
p.2)]{.mark}*

*Ruby Payne's Framework for Understanding Poverty*

The Northern Regional Professional Development Program employs three
trainers who have been formally trained as facilitators for Ruby Payne's
Framework for Understanding Poverty. This content is offered in the
region in both site-based and in-service formats.

[Teacher Quality Task Force Plan]{.underline}

The Teacher Quality Task Force is addressing this issue by aligning
preservice, licensure, and re-licensure systems around the knowledge,
skills, and dispositions needed by teachers working with diverse and
at-risk students. A plan will be developed by November 2006.

[Sheltered Instruction]{.underline}

Many districts report that teachers and administrators in schools that
have a high density of limited English proficient students have received
professional development in the Sheltered Instruction Observation
Protocol (SIOP) or High Quality Sheltered Instruction (HQSI).

[Cultural Competence]{.underline}

Some districts have reported professional development in cultural
competence.

[Response to Intervention (RTI) -- State Initiative]{.underline}

Intervention systems for academic and behavioral supports consist of
four components:

1.  Data-Based Decision Making: Rigorous, systematic, and objective
    measures to obtain and use reliable and valid information

2.  Collaborative Outcome Planning: Instructional practices, strengths
    and needs of students, and environmental considerations to improve
    outcomes in students' performance

3.  Monitoring for Progress: Analyzing data to determine if students
    need academic and/or behavioral interventions; Keeping track of
    students' progress towards established criteria while interventions
    are being implemented

4.  Interventions: Changes in instructional practices and/or
    environmental factors that are provided in response to students'
    academic and behavioral strengths and needs; Multi-tiered structure.

Currently in Nevada there is commitment to intervention tiers one and
two, there are statewide pilot schools, as well as school and district
initiatives. Pilot school data to support statewide consistency will be
gathered. There will be integration with district and school improvement
planning. Professional development will be carried out by school
leaders.

[SWCC Work on Equity Plan]{.underline}

In working with SWCC on the equity plan, the SEA will review research
that has been done on ensuring teachers have the specialized knowledge
and skills they need to be effective with students at risk and closing
the achievement gap. This will also support Clark County School
District's plan to review this research in order to enhance professional
development impact on diverse learners (listed below).

**[Clark County School District Strategies]{.underline}**

[Urban Academy at 22 Low-Performing Schools]{.underline}

CCSD provides summer classes (16 credits), for teachers new to the
district assigned to high-need schools, in areas such as classroom
management, lesson planning, meeting the needs of diverse learners, and
State standards and benchmarks.

[Professional Development on Working with Diverse Learners]{.underline}

All teachers receive professional development on working with diverse
learners. Techniques and strategies for teaching diverse learners is
embedded into all professional development activities offered to
elementary, middle school, and high school teachers.

All teachers new to the district are required to complete new teacher
induction modules throughout their first year in the district. These
modules include instruction on teaching strategies to use with diverse
learners. Differentiated instruction is the focus of the training
modules in order to assist teachers new to the district with appropriate
strategies to address the needs of diverse learners.

**Strategy Clark County School District Will Adopt**

[Enhance Professional Development Impact on Diverse
Learners]{.underline}

Review current research to enhance professional development offering and
training materials so teachers can more effectively meet the needs of
diverse learners. Each training program will be evaluated to determine
the amount of growth made by the participants. The Curriculum and
Professional Development Division is responsible for implementation of
this strategy and results will be reported in an annual report by June
2007.

**[OTHER SPECIFIC STRATEGIES NEVADA WILL ADOPT]{.underline}**

The SEA will review research that has been done on ensuring teachers
have the specialized knowledge and skills they need to be effective with
students at risk and closing the achievement gap and will share this
information with LEAs. This will support Clark County School District's
plan to review this research in order to enhance professional
development impact on diverse learners.

**[SPECIFIC STEPS TO IMPLEMENTATION]{.underline}**

**[Steps/Agency or Persons Responsible/ Resources
Required/Timeline]{.underline}**

**[MEASURES TO EVALUATE AND PUBLICLY REPORT PROGRESS]{.underline}**

The Office of Special Education, School Improvement, and ESEA in
collaboration with the Southwest Comprehensive Center will be
responsible for implementation of this strategy as verified by the
research on file in that office and CCSD verification of receipt of this
information by June 2007.

**7. [WORKING CONDITIONS]{.underline}**

*How is Nevada planning to improve the conditions in hard-to-staff
schools that contribute to excessively high rates of teacher
turnover?e.g.,*

*Time: reasonable student loads, protected from duties that interfere
with teaching, time to work with mentors and peers, quality professional
development*

*Facilities and Resources: current technology, access to copy
machines/faxes/phones, adequate clerical help, safe/clean environment*

*School Leadership: shield teachers from disruptions, provide effective
mentors, give priority to supporting teachers*

*Teacher Empowerment: involve teachers in decision-making process,
provide avenues to express concerns, mutual respect*

*Professional Development: enhancing teacher knowledge is a priority,
provide adequate resources, professional development that is based on
school and teacher goals.*

**[INVENTORY OF CURRENT POLICIES AND PROGRAMS]{.underline}**

***[Strategy to ensure equitable distribution of teachers by reducing
demand:]{.mark}***

***[Survey and improve school working conditions i.e.,
facilities/resources, safety/discipline, professional development, class
size, and leadership, to keep qualified, experienced teachers from
leaving high need schools.]{.mark}***

[Working Conditions Survey]{.underline}

The Nevada National Governors Association Task Force for the Recruitment
and Retention of Teachers studied the North Carolina working conditions
survey which was prepared by the Center for Teacher Quality. The working
conditions survey was adapted from the North Carolina teacher working
conditions survey to better reflect the needs of Nevada. Currently Clark
and Washoe Counties have utilized the survey. An online survey process
is provided for each educator with a login code to protect the
educator's identity while identifying the school in which they work.
School and district level reports for each of the domains in the survey
are provided for all stakeholders. The domains are facilities/resources,
safety/discipline, professional development, class size, and leadership.
Several data points are provided by the SEA such as teacher attrition,
poverty, school size etc. Toolkits are provided on the Center for
Teaching Quality website which have strategies for each working
condition domain perceived as a weakness.

[National Education Association KEYS Survey]{.underline}

Some Nevada schools use the KEYS survey. Keys to Excellence For Your
Schools is a survey for schools and external facilitators to use to
embed the KEYS data into larger school improvement systems. NEA KEYS are
as follows:

Key 1. Shared Understanding and Commitment to High Goals

Key 2. Open Communication and Collaborative Problem Solving

Key 3. Continuous Assessment for Teaching and Learning

Key 4. Personal and Professional Learning

Key 5. Resources to Support Teaching and Learning

Key 6. Curriculum and Instruction

For example, Key 6 -- Indicator 5 -- "Instruction Includes Interventions
for Students Who Are Not Succeeding" documents what teachers believe
about their students' learning and how they teach to that belief.
Students come to school with differing needs, motivations and readiness
skills for learning. When students are not progressing as expected,
rather than attributing the lack of success to external conditions, the
teachers and other education employees in high performing schools work
together to find and apply alternative teaching strategies to help these
students succeed.

KEYS align somewhat to the Nevada SAGE improvement planning process
dimensions:

-   Curriculum, Instruction and Assessment

-   Learning Environment and School Culture

-   Parent and Community Involvement

-   Professional Development

> \- School/Community Characteristics

[State Class Size Reduction Funding and Flexibility]{.underline}

According to the U.S. Department of Education Center for Education
Statistics, Nevada has some of the largest class sizes in the nation.
Since 1989 the Legislature has funded state class size reduction. For
the 05-06 school year \$125,552,187 was funded for grades K-3. For 06-07
\$137,922,619 is allocated based on 136,000 students in grades K-3.
Since 2001, Elko County School District has been given flexibility in
their use of state class size reduction funds, allowing them to adjust
class sizes in grades 1-6 as they deem most beneficial for their
students. During the 2003 legislative session, that flexibility was
extended to all Nevada counties except Washoe and Clark. Direct services
are based on unique district knowledge of growth trends and student
needs. By retaining class size reduction funds while allowing local
districts to establish the best use of these funds, there will be
increased student achievement from K-12.

[Strengthen School Leadership to Recruit and Retain
Teachers]{.underline}

Strengthen school leadership by continuing to provide professional
development through the Regional Professional Development Program as
outlined in the Administrative Strand of the RPDP Plans, and through the
Nevada Association of School Administrators

**[Clark County School District Strategies]{.underline}**

[Working Conditions Survey]{.underline}

The Working Conditions Survey was made available to all teachers in
January 2006. There were 8,000 teachers who participated and the
completion rate was approximately 50%. The results are being
disaggregated by school (for those schools with a 35% or higher response
rate) to identify areas of concern at each school regarding working
conditions and to compare teacher satisfaction with school-wide academic
achievement. The Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service is working
with Clark County School District and the Clark County Education
Association to train Teams of administrators called Climate Improvement
Teams (CIT) on interest-based problem solving techniques, focusing on
school climate and working conditions and their effect on student
achievement.

By June 2007 survey results will be analyzed and schools interested in
interest-based problem solving will work with Climate Improvement Teams
to find solutions and to create action plans to improve working
conditions. Results of the survey of those schools using the services of
CITs and those that did not will be compared to determine if teacher
perceptions of working conditions improved at a higher rate at CIT
schools than non-CIT schools. CCSD Human Resources Division is
responsible for implementation.

The Working Conditions Survey results will also be shared with local
universities to see if there is a match between the curriculum of
teacher preparation courses and the perceptions of teachers as to what
they feel is important.

[Region Resources Based on Need]{.underline}

CCSD developed and implemented a weighted funding formula to provide
resources to the 5 district regions based on need.

**[OTHER SPECIFIC STRATEGIES NEVADA WILL ADOPT]{.underline}**

**[SPECIFIC STEPS TO IMPLEMENTATION]{.underline}**

**[Steps/Agency or Persons Responsible/ Resources
Required/Timeline]{.underline}**

**[MEASURES TO EVALUATE AND PUBLICLY REPORT PROGRESS]{.underline}**

**8. [POLICY COHERENCE]{.underline}**

*How is Nevada planning to improve internal processes or revise state
policies that may inadvertently contribute to local staffing
inequities?*

**[INVENTORY OF CURRENT POLICIES AND PROGRAMS]{.underline}**

[Reducing Time Required to Process Teacher Licensure]{.underline}

***[A strategy listed under this element in the CCSSO Template For State
Plan is "Reduce time required to process teacher certification
applications" (p. 27).]{.mark}***

The SEA is in the process of reorganizing the Southern Office of Teacher
Licensure to eliminate the twelve to fourteen week licensure processing
time. When teachers bring in licensure application information, before
leaving this office, teachers will either:

-   know what is needed to complete licensure processing, or

-   receive a printed license if all application information is
    complete.

**[Clark County School District Strategies]{.underline}**

[Reducing Time Required to Process Teacher Applications]{.underline}

CCSD has doubled support staff and added an administrator to speed up
the processing time of applications.

CCSD is going to monitor application status weekly to help shorten the
application process. The CCSD Human Resources Division will report the
results of this strategy to decrease the amount of time needed to
process applications in an annual report by June 2007.

**[OTHER SPECIFIC STRATEGIES NEVADA WILL ADOPT]{.underline}**

**[SPECIFIC STEPS TO IMPLEMENTATION]{.underline}**

**[Steps/Agency or Persons Responsible/ Resources
Required/Timeline]{.underline}**

**[MEASURES TO EVALUATE AND PUBLICLY REPORT PROGRESS]{.underline}**

APPENDIX A

CLARK COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT EQUITY PLAN

**[Identify Where Inequities in Teacher Assignment Exist:]{.underline}**

As of May 22, 2006, the district average percent of minority students
was 60.6%, with the following distribution:

American/Alaskan Native 0.8%

Asian/Pacific Islander 8.5%

Hispanic/Latino 37.0%

Black/African American 14.3%

Of the 48 schools deemed high poverty and in need of improvement, the
percentage of minority students ranged from 62.5% to 98.4%, with a mean
of 88.1%, exceeding the district average, and a median of 90.2%.

An analysis of the percentage of experienced teachers at high-poverty
schools (free and reduce lunch percentages at 62.2% or higher) versus
low-poverty schools (free and reduce lunch percentages of 23.3% or
lower) provided the following:

####### Years of Experience

-   The district average of the percentage of experienced teacher, as of
    May 1, 2006, was 72.1%, with a median percentage of 74.7%.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   High poverty schools, on average, had 64.1% of their teachers who
    have taught three years or more, with a median percentage of 67.2%.

-   Low poverty schools, on average, had 79.4% of their teachers who
    have taught three years or more, with a median percentage of 81.9%.

-   The percent of experienced teachers at high-poverty schools ranged
    from 100% to 37.5% with 29 of the 85 high poverty schools (34.1%)
    having percentages of experienced teachers equal to or higher than
    the district average of 72.1 %.

-   The percent of experienced teachers at low-poverty schools ranged
    from 100% to 55.8% with 69 of the 82 low poverty schools (75.6%)
    having percentages of experienced teachers equal to or higher than
    the district average of 72.1 %.

-   Using the 110% rule allowed in calculating comparability,
    high-poverty schools came within 1.6% (64.1% x 110% = 70.5%) of the
    district's average rate of 72.1% and within 0.8% (67.2% x 110% =
    73.9%) of the district's median rate of 74.7%.

####### Highly Qualified

-   The district average of the percentage of highly qualified teachers,
    as of May 1, 2006, was 73.72%, with a median percentage of 77.41%.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   At high poverty schools, on average, 72.02% of their teachers are
    highly qualified, with a median percentage of 75.56%.

-   At low poverty schools, on average, 78.26% of their teachers are
    highly qualified, with a median percentage of 82.05%.

-   The percent of highly qualified teachers at high-poverty schools
    ranged from 96.88% to 5.63% with 49 of the 85 high poverty schools
    (57.65%) having percentages of experienced teachers equal to or
    higher than the district average of 73.72 %.

-   The percent of highly qualified teachers at low-poverty schools
    ranged from 100% to 50% with 61 of the 82 low poverty schools
    (74.39%) having percentages of experienced teachers equal to or
    higher than the district average of 73.72 %.

-   Using the 110% rule allowed in calculating comparability,
    high-poverty schools exceeded (72.02% x 110% = 79.22%) the
    district's average rate of 73.72 and exceeded (75.76% x 110% =
    83.34%) the district's median rate of 77.14.

Out-of-Field Teachers

The Clark County School District has a total of 63 teachers teaching
core subjects out-of-field. This represents 0.43% of the total number of
teachers, as of May 1, 2006. Of these 63 teachers, 15 (0.41%) teach at
high-poverty schools, while 21 (0.48%) teach at low-poverty schools.
(The database for all schools, high-poverty schools, low-poverty
schools, and mid-level-poverty schools, taken from information furnished
by NVDOE, is provided as a separate attachment.)

[Delineate Specific Strategies for Addressing Inequities in Teacher
Assignment:]{.underline}

Inequities in teacher assignments will be addressed through the
following:

-   Allow principals of high-poverty schools the opportunity to hire
    teachers new to the district and to accept transfers from
    experienced teachers two months before the principals of
    non-high-poverty schools.

-   The results of the Working Conditions Survey and data gathered from
    the focus groups of teachers who have resigned and teachers within
    groups most likely to resign are reviewed to address school climate
    and working conditions at high-need schools in order to retain
    teachers who are already at the school and to encourage experienced
    teachers to transfer to high-need schools.

-   The district is working with the Standards Commission and the Nevada
    Department of Education in seeking approval to allow for complete
    reciprocity for highly qualified teachers who are fully licensed in
    another state.

-   A point-factor system has been implemented to establish a principal
    salary schedule that focuses on those factors that make the
    administration of high-need schools more difficult and complex.

-   This district is piloting a restructuring model that replaces the
    entire licensed staff of a school, allows the newly appointed
    principal the opportunity to hire the best qualified teachers,
    compensates those teachers for working an extended school day, and
    empowers the staff with more decision-making authority in designing
    the instructional plan for the school.

[Evidence for the Probable Success of Strategies:]{.underline}

The district will use data regarding the percentage of inexperienced
staff, the percentage of teachers who are not highly qualified, and
percentage of teachers who are teaching core subjects out-of-field to
set annual goals to decrease the percentage of inexperienced teachers at
high-poverty schools and to reduce district-wide the percentage the
teachers who are not highly qualified or are teaching out-of-field.

[Describe how the District Will Examine the Issue of Equitable Teacher
Assignment by Monitoring Schools:]{.underline}

-   During the 2006-07 school year, the district will implement an
    individualized "Highly Qualified" Teacher Compliance Plan (see
    following page) in which the teachers who are not highly qualified
    and the principal will be informed of the following:

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   The license/endorsements the teacher currently possesses;

-   Licensure provisions that need to be meet;

-   The dates by which the provisions must be removed; and/or

-   The requirements needed to be met by the teacher to become highly
    qualified.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   The principal and the teacher must meet to develop an action plan
    that outlines the objectives and deadlines of reasonable progress
    towards meeting "Highly Qualified" status by December 30, 2006.

-   The Compliance Plan must be signed and dated by the teacher and the
    principal, and a copy sent to Licensed Personnel for compliance
    monitoring.

-   A database is being created to:

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Track teachers who are not highly qualified or are teaching
    out-of-field; and

-   Monitor the percentage of inexperienced teachers at high-poverty
    schools based on goals mentioned above in the evidence of probable
    success strategies.

**APPENDIX B**

**WASHOE COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT EQUITY PLAN**

[Strategies Currently in Place]{.underline}

1\. **Data and Reporting Systems**

-   Collect and report data on teacher turnover and projected teacher
    shortages.

-   Develop district- and school-level databases to analyze teacher
    distribution patterns.

-   Develop electronic teacher data systems to provide current data on
    teacher certificates held and ensure that all teachers are properly
    credentialed in the subjects they are assigned to teach.

-   Develop district teacher data systems that allow teacher
    qualifications to be linked to student achievement.

-   Collect and report school-level data on working conditions
    associated with high teacher turnover.

-   Evaluate and report the impact of teacher reforms to assess their
    strengths and weaknesses and make mid-course corrections.

2\. **Teacher Preparation**

-   Establish college scholarships, loans, and loan forgiveness programs
    to channel prospective teachers toward schools that have difficulty
    attracting sufficient numbers of qualified teachers.

-   Create additional incentive programs to attract teachers to
    high-poverty, low-performing schools.

-   Establish grow-your-own programs to encourage middle and high school
    students to pursue teaching careers in high-need schools.

-   Expand and support high-quality alternative route programs.

3\. **Out-of-Field Teaching**

-   Discourage or ban the hiring of out-of-field teachers in
    high-poverty, low-performing schools.

-   Establish scholarships, loans, and forgivable loans to channel
    teachers of hard-to-fill subjects toward high-need schools.

-   Expand alternative route programs to allow individuals with relevant
    training in hard-to-fill subjects to enter the profession.

-   Work in partnership with institutions of higher education to train
    already licensed teachers to become certified in high-need subject
    areas.

-   Establish formal arrangements that enable districts to recruit and
    hire qualified international teachers of hard-to-fill subjects and
    specializations.

-   Create financial incentives to help attract teachers of hard-to-fill
    subjects to high-need schools.

-   Expand the use of distance learning to permit student access to
    qualified teachers in other schools.

-   Require and fund mentoring and induction for teachers of
    hard-to-fill subjects in low-performing schools.

-   Target intensive professional development to out-of-field teachers
    in high-poverty, low-performing schools.

-   Upgrade inadequate laboratories and equipment in high-poverty
    schools.

4\. **Recruitment and Retention of Experienced Teachers**

-   Create programs to recruit accomplished teachers to serve on teams
    to assist low-performing schools.

-   Create incentives to attract and retain accomplished teachers in
    hard-to-staff schools.

-   Experiment with new forms of teacher compensation that reward
    teachers willing to take on more challenging assignments.

-   Structure National Board Certified Teacher stipends to encourage or
    require NBCTs to work in high-need schools.

-   Rehire retired teachers and principals specifically to work in
    high-need schools.

5\. **Professional Development**

-   Target additional funding for teacher mentoring and induction to
    hard-to-staff schools.

-   Develop teacher coaching programs to assist teachers in the
    lowest-performing schools.

-   Target districtwide professional development to underprepared
    teachers.

-   Develop districtwide programs to assign master teachers, coaches to
    teachers in struggling schools.

6\. **Specialized Knowledge and Skills**

-   Develop professional development and training materials for
    teachers.

-   Require teachers to participate in professional development designed
    to improve their ability to teach diverse learners effectively.

-   Require state or district mentoring and induction programs for new
    teachers to include instruction in the teaching of diverse learners.

-   Support and fund grow-your-own programs for teachers or
    paraprofessionals from the community.

7\. **Working Conditions**

-   Survey teachers to identify and correct conditions that contribute
    to staffing shortages in certain schools.

-   Strengthen leadership in low-performing schools.

-   Reduce disparities in resources across the district by allocating
    district funds according to need.

8\. **Policy Coherence**

-   Reduce time required to process teacher applications.

-   Ensure that systems of rewards and sanctions do not inadvertently
    drive teachers and principals away from schools that serve the
    lowest-achieving students.

[Strategies That May Be Considered]{.underline}

1\. **Data and Reporting Systems**

-   Enhance data collection on teacher quality and experience indicators
    in HRIS.

-   Expand and refine student achievement data collection and analysis
    to identify student progress at District, school and teacher levels.

-   Gather and analyze additional data on working conditions and reasons
    for teacher turnover.

-   Continue to refine the teacher evaluation instrument.

-   Evaluate the results of implementing PLCs.

2\. **Teacher Preparation**

-   The WCSD/WEA Enhanced Compensation Committee will finalize its
    recommendations for incentives to attract and retain teachers in
    hard-to-staff schools and hard-to-fill assignments.

-   Pursue grant funding to support incentives to attract and retain
    teachers in hard-to-staff schools and hard-to-fill assignments.

-   Continue to support legislation to provide incentives to attract
    teachers to high-poverty, low-performing schools, including loan
    forgiveness.

-   The Future Educators of America and the Education Academy at Hugh
    High School are two initiatives that the District and WEA will
    pursue to seek students to pursue teaching careers in high-needs
    schools.

-   The Cultural Competency Committee will pursue expanded partnerships
    with local colleges and universities to inspire students to pursue
    teaching careers in high-needs schools.

3\. **Out-of-Field Teaching**

-   The WCSD/WEA Enhanced Compensation Committee will finalize its
    recommendations for incentives to attract and retain teachers in
    hard-to-staff schools and hard-to-fill assignments.

-   Pursue grant funding to support incentives to attract and retain
    teachers in hard-to-staff schools and hard-to-fill assignments.

-   Continue to support legislation to provide incentives to attract
    teachers to high-poverty, low-performing schools, including loan
    forgiveness.

-   Target additional mentoring and instructional coaching support to
    teachers in high-needs schools.

4\. **Recruitment and Retention of Experienced Teachers**

-   Gather and analyze additional data on working conditions and reasons
    for teacher turnover.

-   The WCSD/WEA Enhanced Compensation Committee will finalize its
    recommendations for incentives to attract and retain teachers in
    hard-to-staff schools and hard-to-fill assignments and to take on
    additional responsibilities.

-   Pursue grant funding to support incentives to attract and retain
    teachers in hard-to-staff schools and hard-to-fill assignments.

-   Target additional mentoring and instructional coaching support to
    teachers in high-needs schools.

5\. **Professional Development**

-   Target existing professional development to teachers and schools in
    greatest need.

6\. **Specialized Knowledge and Skills**

-   The Cultural Competence Committee will implement required training
    in cultural competency.

-   The Diversity and Equity department will expand promotion of the
    grow-your-own program for classified employees.

7\. **Working Conditions**

-   Gather and analyze additional data on working conditions and reasons
    for teacher turnover.

-   Continue to add staff support to the neediest schools through the
    annual budget process.

-   Provide resources such as full-day Kindergarten, portables, and
    rezoning to reduce overcrowding at neediest schools.

8\. **Policy Coherence**

-   The WCSD/WEA Enhanced Compensation Committee will finalize its
    recommendations for incentives to attract and retain teachers in
    hard-to-staff schools and hard-to-fill assignments.

[Those Strategies That Have Not Been Successful]{.underline}

-   Our data collection effort to determine teachers' perceptions of
    working conditions has not been sufficient to produce meaningful
    data.

-   The information systems currently in place do not enable us to link
    teacher and student data.