May 3, 2005

HIGHLY QUALIFIED TEACHERS AND

IMPROVING TEACHER QUALITY STATE GRANTS (ESEA TITLE II, PART A)

MONITORING REPORT

Louisiana Department of Public Instruction

**February 23-25, 2005**

**U.S. Department of Education Monitoring Team**

Miriam Lund

Elizabeth Witt

Tamara Morse Azar (Westat)

**Louisiana Department of Public Instruction**

Sheila Talamo, Assistant Superintendent, Office of Quality Educators

Kathy Mouton, Division Director, Division of Professional development

Stan Beauboeuf, Division Director, Certification and Higher Education

Janice Zube, Section Leader, Technical Assistance and Administration

Latikka Magee, Federal Programs Coordinator, Title II and V

Shiela Chavis, Section Leader, Professional Accountability

Janet Langlois, Section Leader, State Level Programs

Kartina Roberts, Section Leader, Staff Development and Assistance

Beth Sciouneaux, Division Director, Division of Education Finance

Pete Lafleur, Subgrantee Assistance Budget Administrator

**New Orleans Public Schools**

Arthur Johnson, Consolidated Programs/External Grants

Tassin Idewu, Title II Coordinator

**Iberia Parish Schools** (phone interview)

Mary Jo Manning, Federal Programs Director

**Caddo Parish Schools** (phone interview)

Ollie Tyler, Superintendent

Wanda Gunn, Federal Program Director

**State Agency for Higher Education (SAHE)**

Lynn Tullos, Assistant Director for Math LaSip

  ------------------------------ --------------------- -------------------
  **[Overview of                                       
  Louisiana;]{.underline}**                            

  **Number of Districts**        68                    

  **Number of Schools**          1,550                 

  **Number of Teachers**         50,461                

                                                       

                                 **FY2003**            **FY2004**

  **State Allocation**           \$66,536,064          \$65,678,887

  **LEA Allocation**             \$62,577,168          \$61,770,995

  **State Activities**           \$1,646,768           \$1,625,552

  **SAHE Allocation**            \$1,646,768           \$1,625,552

  **SEA Administration**         \$583,022             \$575,510

  **SAHE Administration**        \$82,338              \$81,278
  ------------------------------ --------------------- -------------------

**Scope of Review:**

Like all State educational agencies (SEAs), the Louisiana Department of
Education (LDE), as a condition of receiving funds under Title I, Part A
and Title II, Part A of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act
(ESEA), as amended by the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB), provided an
assurance to the U.S. Department of Education (the Department) that it
would administer these programs in accordance with all applicable
statutory and regulatory requirements, including those in Title I, Part
A that concern "Highly Qualified Teachers" and those that govern the use
of Title II, Part A funds. See **§**9304(a)(1) of the ESEA. One of the
specific requirements the Department established for an SEA's receipt of
program funds under its consolidated state application (§9302(b)) was
submission to the Department of annual data on how well the State has
been meeting its performance target for Performance Indicator 3.1: "The
percentage of classes being taught by 'highly qualified' teachers (as
the term is defined in §9101(23) of the ESEA), in the aggregate and in
'high-poverty' schools (as the term is defined in
**§**1111(h)(1)(C)(viii) of the ESEA)."

The purpose of the U.S. Department of Education's (ED) monitoring team
visit to Louisiana was twofold: first, to review the progress of the
State in meeting the Highly Qualified Teacher (HQT) requirements of the
No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB), including the identification of areas
needing corrective action as well as promising practices; and second, to
review the use of ESEA Title II, Part A funds by the State, selected
districts, and the State agency for higher education (SAHE) to ensure
that the funds are being used to prepare, retain, and recruit
high-quality teachers and principals so that all children will achieve
to a high standard.

The monitoring review was conducted on Louisiana Department of Education
office and on-site at the New Orleans Public Schools. In addition to
meeting with State representatives from the Office of Quality Educators,
Division of Professional Development, Certification and Higher
Education, Division of Education Finance, and Federal programs, the team
met with LEA representatives from New Orleans Public Schools and
conducted phone interviews with Iberia and Caddo Parish Schools. The ED
monitoring team conducted the SAHE interview with Lynn Tullos, Assistant
Director for Math LaSip.

**Summary of Monitoring Indicators**

+----------+--------------------------------------+-------------+-----+
| #        |                                      |             |     |
| Monitori |                                      |             |     |
| ng Area  |                                      |             |     |
| 1: Highl |                                      |             |     |
| y Qualif |                                      |             |     |
| ied Teac |                                      |             |     |
| her Syst |                                      |             |     |
| ems & Pr |                                      |             |     |
| ocedures |                                      |             |     |
+----------+--------------------------------------+-------------+-----+
| *        | **Description**                      | # Status    | # P |
| *Element |                                      |             | age |
| Number** |                                      |             |     |
+----------+--------------------------------------+-------------+-----+
| Critical | Has the State developed and          | Met         | 6   |
| Element  | implemented procedures, consistent   | requirement |     |
| 1.1      | with the statutory definition of     |             |     |
|          | highly qualified, to determine       | C           |     |
|          | whether *all* teachers of core       | ommendation |     |
|          | academic subjects are highly         | Rec         |     |
|          | qualified (§9101(23))?               | ommendation |     |
+----------+--------------------------------------+-------------+-----+
| Critical | Are all new elementary school        | Met         | NA  |
| Element  | teachers (including special          | requirement |     |
| 1.2      | education teachers, as appropriate)  |             |     |
|          | required to pass a rigorous State    |             |     |
|          | test in reading, writing,            |             |     |
|          | mathematics, and the other areas of  |             |     |
|          | the elementary school curriculum to  |             |     |
|          | demonstrate subject-matter           |             |     |
|          | competency (§9101(23)(B)(II))?       |             |     |
+----------+--------------------------------------+-------------+-----+
| Critical | Are all new middle and secondary     | Met         | NA  |
| Element  | school teachers (including special   | requirement |     |
| 1.3      | education teachers, as appropriate)  |             |     |
|          | required to demonstrate              |             |     |
|          | subject-matter competency, in each   |             |     |
|          | core academic subject they teach, in |             |     |
|          | one or more of the following ways    |             |     |
|          | (§9101(23)(B)(II)(ii))?              |             |     |
+----------+--------------------------------------+-------------+-----+
| Critical | Are all veteran (i.e., those who are | Met         | NA  |
| Element  | not new to the profession)           | requirement |     |
| 1.4      | elementary school teachers           |             |     |
|          | (including special education         |             |     |
|          | teachers, as appropriate) required   |             |     |
|          | to demonstrate subject-matter        |             |     |
|          | competency by passing a rigorous     |             |     |
|          | State test or by completing the      |             |     |
|          | State's "High Objective Uniform      |             |     |
|          | State Standard of Evaluation"        |             |     |
|          | (HOUSSE) procedures (§9101(23)(C))?  |             |     |
+----------+--------------------------------------+-------------+-----+
| Critical | Are all veteran middle and secondary | Met         | NA  |
| Element  | teachers (including special          | requirement |     |
| 1.5      | education teachers, as appropriate)  |             |     |
|          | required to demonstrate              |             |     |
|          | subject-matter competency in each    |             |     |
|          | core academic subject they teach?    |             |     |
+----------+--------------------------------------+-------------+-----+
| Critical | If the State has developed HOUSSE    | Met         | NA  |
| Element  | procedures, please provide a copy of | requirement |     |
| 1.6      | the most current version(s). For     |             |     |
|          | each set of HOUSSE procedures the    |             |     |
|          | State has developed, please describe |             |     |
|          | how it meets each of the following   |             |     |
|          | statutory requirements of            |             |     |
|          | §9101(23)(C)(ii).                    |             |     |
+----------+--------------------------------------+-------------+-----+
| Critical | Does the SEA ensure that, since the  | Met         | NA  |
| Element  | beginning of the 2002-03 school      | requirement |     |
| 1.7      | year, districts only hire highly     |             |     |
|          | qualified teachers (including        |             |     |
|          | special education teachers, as       |             |     |
|          | appropriate) to teach in Title I     |             |     |
|          | programs?                            |             |     |
+----------+--------------------------------------+-------------+-----+
| Critical | Has the SEA ensured, since the       | Met         | NA  |
| Element  | beginning of the 2002-03 school      | requirement |     |
| 1.8      | year, that districts that use ESEA   |             |     |
|          | Title II funds to reduce class size  |             |     |
|          | hire only highly qualified teachers  |             |     |
|          | for such positions?                  |             |     |
+----------+--------------------------------------+-------------+-----+
| Critical | Does the SEA's plan establish annual | Met         | NA  |
| Element  | measurable objectives for each LEA   | requirement |     |
| 1.9      | and school to ensure that annual     |             |     |
|          | increases occur:                     |             |     |
|          |                                      |             |     |
|          | -   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               |             |     |
|          |     (§1119(a)(2)(A)).                |             |     |
+----------+--------------------------------------+-------------+-----+
| Critical | Does the SEA have a plan with        | Met         | NA  |
| Element  | specific steps to ensure that poor   | requirement |     |
| 1.10     | and minority children are not taught |             |     |
|          | at higher rates than other children  |             |     |
|          | by inexperienced, unqualified and    |             |     |
|          | out-of-field teachers? Does the plan |             |     |
|          | include measures to evaluate and     |             |     |
|          | publicly report the progress of such |             |     |
|          | steps (§1111(b)(8)(C))?              |             |     |
+----------+--------------------------------------+-------------+-----+
| Critical | Has the State reported to the        | Finding     | 6   |
| Element  | Secretary in its Consolidated State  |             |     |
| 1.11     | Performance Report (CSPR) the number |             |     |
|          | and percentage of core academic      |             |     |
|          | classes taught by highly qualified   |             |     |
|          | teachers, in the aggregate and in    |             |     |
|          | high-poverty schools, consistent     |             |     |
|          | with the statutory definition of     |             |     |
|          | highly qualified (§1111(h)(4)(G);    |             |     |
|          | §9101(23))?                          |             |     |
+----------+--------------------------------------+-------------+-----+
| Critical | Does the State prepare and           | Finding     | 7   |
| Element  | disseminate to the public an Annual  |             |     |
| 1.12     | State Report Card                    |             |     |
|          | (§1111(h)(1)(C)(viii))? If so, how   |             |     |
|          | is it disseminated?                  |             |     |
+----------+--------------------------------------+-------------+-----+

+----------+---------------------------------------+-------------+-----+
| # Mo     |                                       |             |     |
| nitoring |                                       |             |     |
|  Area 2: |                                       |             |     |
|  Adminis |                                       |             |     |
| tration  |                                       |             |     |
| of ESEA  |                                       |             |     |
| Title II |                                       |             |     |
| , Part A |                                       |             |     |
+----------+---------------------------------------+-------------+-----+
| *        | # Description                         | ### Status  | #   |
| *Element |                                       |             | # P |
| Number** |                                       |             | age |
+----------+---------------------------------------+-------------+-----+
| Critical | Does the SEA allocate funds according | Met         | NA  |
| Element  | to the statute, using the most recent | requirement |     |
| 2.1      | Census Bureau data as described in    |             |     |
|          | the Non-Regulatory Guidance           |             |     |
|          | (§2121(a))?                           |             |     |
+----------+---------------------------------------+-------------+-----+
| Critical | Does the SEA require an application   | Met         | NA  |
| Element  | from each LEA before providing Title  | requirement |     |
| 2.2      | II, Part A funding? If yes, what      |             |     |
|          | information does the SEA require in   |             |     |
|          | the LEA application (§2122(b))?       |             |     |
+----------+---------------------------------------+-------------+-----+
| Critical | Does the SEA require each LEA to      | Met         | NA  |
| Element  | describe how the activities to be     | requirement |     |
| 2.3      | carried out are based on the required |             |     |
|          | local needs assessment (§2122(b))?    |             |     |
+----------+---------------------------------------+-------------+-----+
| Critical | Does the SEA have a procedure to      | Yes         | NA  |
| Element  | determine the amount of funds each    |             |     |
| 2.4      | LEA expended during the period of     |             |     |
|          | availability?                         |             |     |
+----------+---------------------------------------+-------------+-----+
| Critical | Does the SEA have a procedure to      | Yes         | NA  |
| Element  | regularly review the drawdowns of the |             |     |
| 2.5.     | LEAs?                                 |             |     |
+----------+---------------------------------------+-------------+-----+
| Critical | Does the SEA have a written policy on | Yes         | NA  |
| Element  | allowable carryover funds?            |             |     |
| 2.6      |                                       |             |     |
+----------+---------------------------------------+-------------+-----+
| Critical | If an LEA cannot obligate funds       | Yes         | NA  |
| Element  | within the 27 months of availability  |             |     |
| 2.7      | (which includes the extra year of     |             |     |
|          | availability permitted under the      |             |     |
|          | Tydings amendment), does the SEA have |             |     |
|          | a procedure for reallocating these    |             |     |
|          | funds to other LEAs?                  |             |     |
+----------+---------------------------------------+-------------+-----+
| Critical | Does the SEA have records to show     | Met         | NA  |
| Element  | that each LEA meets the maintenance   | requirement |     |
| 2.8      | of effort requirements?               |             |     |
+----------+---------------------------------------+-------------+-----+
| Critical | Does the SEA ensure that it and its   | Met         | NA  |
| Element  | component LEAs are audited annually,  | requirement |     |
| 2.9      | if required, and that all corrective  |             |     |
|          | actions required through this process |             |     |
|          | are fully implemented?                |             |     |
+----------+---------------------------------------+-------------+-----+
| Critical | Has the SEA identified and provided   | Met         | NA  |
| Element  | technical assistance to LEAs that are | requirement |     |
| 2.10     | not making progress toward meeting    |             |     |
|          | their annual measurable objectives in |             |     |
|          | meeting the highly qualified teacher  |             |     |
|          | challenge (§2141)?                    |             |     |
+----------+---------------------------------------+-------------+-----+

+---------+---------------------------------------+-------------+-----+
| #       |                                       |             |     |
| Monitor |                                       |             |     |
| ing Are |                                       |             |     |
| a 3: St |                                       |             |     |
| ate Act |                                       |             |     |
| ivities |                                       |             |     |
+---------+---------------------------------------+-------------+-----+
| **      | # Description                         | ### Status  | #   |
| Element |                                       |             | # P |
| N       |                                       |             | age |
| umber** |                                       |             |     |
+---------+---------------------------------------+-------------+-----+
| C       | Does the State use its State          | Met         | NA  |
| ritical | Activities funds to promote the       | r           |     |
| Element | recruitment, hiring, training, and    | equirements |     |
| 3.1     | retention of highly qualified         |             |     |
|         | teachers and principals?              |             |     |
+---------+---------------------------------------+-------------+-----+
| C       | Does the State support activities     | Met         | 7   |
| ritical | that focus on increasing the          | r           |     |
| Element | subject-matter knowledge of teachers  | equirements |     |
| 3.2     | and that assist teachers to become    |             |     |
|         | highly qualified?                     | Co          |     |
|         |                                       | mmendations |     |
+---------+---------------------------------------+-------------+-----+

+---------+---------------------------------------+-------------+-----+
| #       |                                       |             |     |
| Monitor |                                       |             |     |
| ing Are |                                       |             |     |
| a 4: St |                                       |             |     |
| ate Age |                                       |             |     |
| ncy For |                                       |             |     |
|  Higher |                                       |             |     |
|  Educat |                                       |             |     |
| ion (SA |                                       |             |     |
| HE) Act |                                       |             |     |
| ivities |                                       |             |     |
+---------+---------------------------------------+-------------+-----+
| **      | # Description                         | ### Status  | #   |
| Element |                                       |             | # P |
| N       |                                       |             | age |
| umber** |                                       |             |     |
+---------+---------------------------------------+-------------+-----+
| C       | Did the SAHE manage a competition for | Met         | NA  |
| ritical | eligible partnerships?                | r           |     |
| Element |                                       | equirements |     |
| 4.1     |                                       |             |     |
+---------+---------------------------------------+-------------+-----+
| C       | Does the SAHE have procedures to      | Finding     | 8   |
| ritical | ensure that eligible partnerships     |             |     |
| Element | include the required members, i.e.,   |             |     |
| 4.2.    | an institution of higher education    |             |     |
|         | and the division of the institution   |             |     |
|         | that prepares teachers and            |             |     |
|         | principals, a school of arts and      |             |     |
|         | sciences, and a high-need LEA?        |             |     |
+---------+---------------------------------------+-------------+-----+

**[Area 1: State Procedures to Identify Highly Qualified
Teachers]{.underline}**

**[Critical Element 1.1.]{.underline} Has the State developed and
implemented procedures, consistent with the statutory definition of
highly qualified, to determine whether *all* teachers of core academic
subjects are highly qualified (§9101(23))?**

**[Commendation:]{.underline}** The LDE-produced "Pop Quiz: Define
Highly Qualified" provides an effective public information document and
tool for public school instructors, staff, and administrators. The
folder is designed in a user-friendly way that allows teachers and other
personnel to pull out individual tabs that address each area of the
highly qualified teacher provisions of *No Child Left Behind*, including
information targeted toward new and not-new teachers, paraprofessionals,
and special education teachers. The folder also contains a CD with a
short video explaining the highly qualified definition as it applies in
Louisiana.

**[Recommendation]{.underline}**: The LDE continues to issue temporary
or emergency licenses to address teacher shortages. The Temporary
Authority to Teach (TAT) and the Out-of-Field Authorization to Teach
(OFAT) are waivers from full state licensure. The Department encourages
the State to eliminate its dependency on emergency and temporary
certification to meet shortages, especially in special education at the
elementary and secondary level, and for middle and secondary teachers
who instruct in multiple-subject areas. By the end of the 2005-06
academic year, all teachers of core academic subjects must meet the
definition of highly qualified, which includes holding full State
certification.

**[Critical Element 1.11.]{.underline} Has the State reported to the
Secretary in the Consolidated State Performance Report (CSPR) the number
and percentage of core academic classes taught by highly qualified
teachers in the aggregate and in high-poverty schools, consistent with
the statutory definition of highly qualified (§1111(h)(4)(G);
§9101(23))?**

**[Finding:]{.underline}** While the LDE submitted a complete CSPR to
the Secretary in December 2004, the State used certification and
licensure data to report the percentage of core academic classes taught
by highly qualified teachers. LEAs are working to assess whether their
teachers satisfy the State's HOUSSE procedures but the State does not
yet have data on these instructors. As a result, the State is reporting
the number and percentage of classes in core academic subjects that are
taught by highly qualified teachers based on teacher certification and
licensure data. However, State certification data does not include the
evaluation of a teacher's subject matter mastery as demonstrated through
the State's established highly qualified teacher definition or HOUSSE
procedures.

During the monitoring visit, the LDE clarified that the State has
established and is implementing procedures, consistent with the
statutory definition of highly qualified, to determine that all teachers
of core academic subjects are highly qualified. The State-developed
HOUSSE procedures have been available to districts and the general
public since Spring 2004. The districts are in the process of moving
teachers through the HOUSSE procedures and addressing any content
deficiencies through high-quality professional development activities in
the content area.

**[Citation:]{.underline}** §1111(h)(4)(G) of the ESEA requires each SEA
annually to report to the U.S. Secretary of Education on the percentage
of classes (in core academic subjects) taught by highly qualified
teachers in the State, local educational agency, and school"[^1] (a
summary of which §1111(h)(5) requires the Secretary annually to report
to Congress).

**[Further Action Required:]{.underline}** The LDE must submit a written
plan with specific procedures and a timeline for reporting corrected
data to the Department, as required by §1111(h), on the percentage of
classes taught by highly qualified teachers at all grade levels and
disaggregated by high-and low-poverty schools, as required for the
Consolidated State Performance Report.

**[Critical Element 1.12.]{.underline} Does the State prepare and
disseminate to the public an Annual State Report Card
(§1111(h)(1)(C)(viii))? If so, how is it disseminated?**

**[Finding:]{.underline}** Louisiana publishes data on the
qualifications of its teachers in an Annual State Report Card and
through multiple other publications. However, the State used
certification and licensure data as a proxy for its highly qualified
teacher determinations.

**[Citation:]{.underline}** §1111(h)(1)(C)(viii) of the ESEA requires
each SEA to include in its Annual State Report Card data on the
percentage of classes in the State not taught (in core academic
subjects) by highly qualified teachers, in high-poverty vs. low-poverty
schools, as the term is defined in §1111(h)(1)(C)(viii) of the ESEA).

[**Further Action Required**:]{.underline} The LDE must submit a written
plan with specific procedures and a timeline for reporting to the
public, as required for the Annual State Report Card and in a manner
consistent with the statutory requirements, as required by §1111(h).

**[Area 3: State Activities]{.underline}**

**[Critical Element 3.2.]{.underline} Does the State support activities
that focus on increasing the subject-matter knowledge of teachers and
that assist teachers to become highly qualified?**

**[Commendation:]{.underline}** The State is commended for using its
Title II, Part A funds to support comprehensive professional development
in the core content areas. In particular, the State is supporting
LaTAAP, the Louisiana Teacher Assistance and Assessment Program for new
teachers and LINCS, Learning-Intensive Networking Communities for
Success.

**[Commendation:]{.underline}** The State has tied professional
development to licensure renewal and requires 150 Continuing Learning
Units of professional development over the course of the five-year
license; also, the State has allocated significant State funds for
professional development.

#### 

**[Area 4: State Agency For Higher Education (SAHE)
Activities]{.underline}**

**[Critical Element 4.2.]{.underline}** **Does the SAHE have procedures
to ensure that eligible partnerships include the required members, i.e.,
an institution of higher education's division that prepares teachers and
principals, a higher education school of arts and sciences, and a
high-need LEA?**

**[Finding:]{.underline}** The SAHE did not use the required Census
poverty data to determine which districts within the state qualify as
high need LEAs. The Louisiana State Agency for Higher Education managed
grant competitions for 2003 and 2004 in which they could not ensure that
the grantees included a high-need LEA as a partner.

**[Citation:]{.underline}** §2131(1)(A)(iii) of the ESEA requires the
SAHE to include a high-need LEA in each eligible partnership. §2102(3)
defines an LEA that satisfies the high-need poverty requirements as one
that:

-   Serves not fewer than 10,000 children from families with incomes
    below the poverty line; or

-   Not less than 20 percent of the children served by the agency are
    from families with incomes below the poverty line.

Because the statute addresses family income, the Secretary has
determined that the Census Bureau data is the only stable and reliable
measure of family income and poverty.

**[Further Action Required:]{.underline}** For the next round of
allocations to eligible partnerships, the SAHE must use the most recent
available Census data (as determined by the Secretary) to identify
high-need LEAs. Other sources of data, such as free and reduced priced
lunch, may not be factored into the calculations. The most recent data
can be found at <http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/saipe/>.

**[Commendation]{.underline}.** The SAHE is commended for demonstrating
a strong partnership with the SEA and for targeting grant awards toward
programs that address statewide goals identified through the State's
needs analysis.

[^1]: The Department currently is requiring States to report data on
    classes taught by highly qualified teachers at the State level only.
    However we reserve the right to require this information in future
    annual State reports to the Secretary.