December 10, 2004

**DELAWARE MONITORING REPORT**

**Highly Qualified Teachers and ESEA Title II, Part A**

September 21-23, 2004

**U.S. Department of Education (ED) Monitoring Team**

Robert Stonehill

Peggy Miles

Tamara Morse Azar (Westat)

**Delaware Department of Education**

Valerie Woodruff, Secretary of Education

Amelia Hodges, Title II Coordinator

(and other staff as noted below)

**[Overview of Delaware]{.underline}**

Number of Districts: 19 districts and 13 charter schools

Number of Teachers: 7,789

Total State Allocation (FY 2003):
....................................... \$13,965,246

Allocation for LEAs:
...................................................... \$13,134,314

State Educational Agency (SEA) State Activities Allocation: .......
\$363,031

State Agency for Higher Education (SAHE) Allocation: .............
\$363,031

**[Scope of the Review]{.underline}**

The purpose of ED's monitoring team visit to Delaware was twofold:
first, to review the progress of the State in meeting the Highly
Qualified Teacher requirements of the No Child Left Behind Act,
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 over 3 days at the Delaware State
Department of Education (SEA) office, at the Appoquinimink school
district office, and at the MOT Charter School. Secretary of Education
Valerie Woodruff, Amelia Hodges, Wayne Barton, Adrian Peoples, Mike
Stetter, Nancy Wilson, Tammy Hughes, Jim Lesko, and Pat Carlson,
Executive Director of the Delaware Professional Standards Board, were
present at the State Department of Education. Beverly Correlle of the
Delaware Education Association also participated. In addition, the team
met with the curriculum coordinator for Laurel School District, Sandy
Baker and, at the Appoquinimink school district, with Superintendent
Tony Marchio, Federal programs coordinator Debbie Panchisin, and human
resources director Zen Marusa. Principal Martha Clark and Merrill Hewett
hosted the review team at MOT Charter School. Representatives from the
University of Delaware included John Mannon, Tom Fernsler, Audrey Noble,
and Pamela Stazesky.

##### Summary Table \-- DELAWARE

+-----+--------------------------+-------+----------------------------+
| I.A | Has the State developed  | YES   | Delaware has detailed the  |
| .1. | procedures to determine  |       | requirements for new and   |
|     | whether teachers are     |       | experienced teachers to    |
|     | highly qualified?        |       | determine highly qualified |
|     |                          |       | status.                    |
+-----+--------------------------+-------+----------------------------+
| I.A | Does the State have data | NO    | The State is in the        |
| .2. | on the percentage of     |       | process of identifying     |
|     | core academic classes    |       | which of its teachers are  |
|     | that are taught by       |       | highly qualified but has   |
|     | highly qualified         |       | not yet matched teacher    |
|     | teachers?                |       | qualifications to course   |
|     |                          |       | assignments.               |
+-----+--------------------------+-------+----------------------------+
|     | Finding. The State has   |       |                            |
|     | completed a review of    |       |                            |
|     | the qualifications of    |       |                            |
|     | all its teachers;        |       |                            |
|     | however, it cannot at    |       |                            |
|     | this time provide        |       |                            |
|     | classroom-level data.    |       |                            |
+-----+--------------------------+-------+----------------------------+
| I.A | Can the State provide    | NO    | See above                  |
| .3. | estimates of various     |       |                            |
|     | categories of classes    |       |                            |
|     | taught by teachers who   |       |                            |
|     | are not highly           |       |                            |
|     | qualified?               |       |                            |
+-----+--------------------------+-------+----------------------------+
|     | Finding. The State       |       |                            |
|     | cannot provide           |       |                            |
|     | classroom-level          |       |                            |
|     | assignment data.         |       |                            |
+-----+--------------------------+-------+----------------------------+
| I.A | Is there a rigorous      | YES   | The Praxis II is available |
| .4. | State test that assesses |       | for determining that a     |
|     | elementary school        |       | teacher is highly          |
|     | teachers' subject        |       | qualified but it is not    |
|     | knowledge and teaching   |       | required for               |
|     | skills?                  |       | certification.             |
+-----+--------------------------+-------+----------------------------+
| I.A | Has the SEA developed    | YES   | Delaware's highly          |
| .5. | procedures for           |       | qualified teacher          |
|     | determining the          |       | definition for middle and  |
|     | subject-matter           |       | high school instructors    |
|     | competency of new middle |       | includes all of the        |
|     | and secondary teachers?  |       | procedures for determining |
|     |                          |       | highly qualified status.   |
+-----+--------------------------+-------+----------------------------+
| I.A | Does the State have      | YES   | The State has HOUSSE       |
| .6. | procedures to determine  |       | procedures and they        |
|     | whether veteran teachers |       | include all the statutory  |
|     | are highly qualified?    |       | factors.                   |
+-----+--------------------------+-------+----------------------------+
| I.A | Does the State have a    | (     | The Delaware Department of |
| .7. | plan that (a)            | a)YES | Education Strategic Plan   |
|     | establishes annual       |       | for 2004-2008 identified   |
|     | measurable objectives    | (     | highly qualified teachers  |
|     | for each LEA and school  | b)YES | as a primary target area   |
|     | and (b) includes an      |       | and established annual     |
|     | annual increase in the   |       | measurable objectives.     |
|     | percentage of highly     |       |                            |
|     | qualified teachers at    |       |                            |
|     | each LEA and school?     |       |                            |
+-----+--------------------------+-------+----------------------------+
| I.A | Does the State have      | YES   | The hiring district must   |
| .8. | procedures to ensure     |       | confirm a teacher's highly |
|     | that districts are       |       | qualified status during    |
|     | hiring only highly       |       | the employment application |
|     | qualified teachers for   |       | process.                   |
|     | their Title I programs?  |       |                            |
+-----+--------------------------+-------+----------------------------+
|     |                          |       |                            |
+-----+--------------------------+-------+----------------------------+
| **  |                          |       |                            |
| II. |                          |       |                            |
| [AD |                          |       |                            |
| MIN |                          |       |                            |
| IST |                          |       |                            |
| RAT |                          |       |                            |
| ION |                          |       |                            |
| OF  |                          |       |                            |
| E   |                          |       |                            |
| SEA |                          |       |                            |
| TI  |                          |       |                            |
| TLE |                          |       |                            |
| II, |                          |       |                            |
| P   |                          |       |                            |
| ART |                          |       |                            |
| A   |                          |       |                            |
| ]{. |                          |       |                            |
| und |                          |       |                            |
| erl |                          |       |                            |
| ine |                          |       |                            |
| }** |                          |       |                            |
+-----+--------------------------+-------+----------------------------+
| I   | Does the SEA allocate    | YES   | The State properly         |
| I.A | funds according to the   |       | allocates its Title II     |
| .1. | statute, using the most  |       | funds using current Census |
|     | recent Census data as    |       | data.                      |
|     | described in the         |       |                            |
|     | Non-Regulatory Guidance? |       |                            |
+-----+--------------------------+-------+----------------------------+
| I   | Does the SEA require an  | YES   | LEAs apply for Title II,   |
| I.A | application from each    |       | Part A funds as part of    |
| .2. | LEA before providing     |       | Delaware's Consolidated    |
|     | Title II funding?        |       | Federal Programs           |
|     |                          |       | application process.       |
+-----+--------------------------+-------+----------------------------+
| I   | Does the SEA require     | YES   | Delaware requires each LEA |
| I.A | each LEA to describe how |       | to submit an annually      |
| .3. | the activities to be     |       | updated Consolidated       |
|     | carried out are based on |       | Federal Programs           |
|     | the required local needs |       | Application that satisfies |
|     | assessment?              |       | the needs assessment       |
|     |                          |       | requirements.              |
+-----+--------------------------+-------+----------------------------+
| I   | Does the SEA have a      | YES   | Delaware's districts use a |
| I.A | procedure to determine   |       | uniform data reporting     |
| .4. | the amount of funds each |       | system for Federal program |
|     | LEA expended during the  |       | funds.                     |
|     | appropriation period and |       |                            |
|     | to regularly review the  |       |                            |
|     | drawdowns of the LEAs?   |       |                            |
+-----+--------------------------+-------+----------------------------+
| I   | Does the SEA have        | NO    | The State provided written |
| I.A | written procedures       |       | procedures for the         |
| .5. | governing the amount of  |       | reallocation of LEA grants |
|     | funds that a district    |       | that included timelines    |
|     | may carry over and       |       | and the criteria for       |
|     | procedures governing the |       | reallocation. However, the |
|     | reallocation of funds if |       | document does not          |
|     | districts cannot use all |       | illustrate State policies  |
|     | of their allocations?    |       | for carryover funds.       |
+-----+--------------------------+-------+----------------------------+
|     | Finding. The             |       |                            |
|     | reallocation document    |       |                            |
|     | provided by the State    |       |                            |
|     | does not address the     |       |                            |
|     | State's policy for funds |       |                            |
|     | that may be carried over |       |                            |
|     | to the next year.        |       |                            |
+-----+--------------------------+-------+----------------------------+
| I   | If an LEA cannot         | YES   | The SEA has guidelines for |
| I.A | obligate funds within    |       | reallocating funds.        |
| .6. | the 27 months of         |       |                            |
|     | availability (which      |       |                            |
|     | includes the extra year  |       |                            |
|     | of availability          |       |                            |
|     | permitted under the      |       |                            |
|     | Tydings amendment), does |       |                            |
|     | the SEA have a procedure |       |                            |
|     | for reallocating these   |       |                            |
|     | carryover funds to other |       |                            |
|     | LEAs?                    |       |                            |
+-----+--------------------------+-------+----------------------------+
| I   | Does the SEA ensure that | YES   | The State conducts annual  |
| I.A | it and its component     |       | district reviews, and,     |
| .7. | LEAs are audited         |       | additionally, reviews      |
|     | annually, if required,   |       | Title II, Part A funding   |
|     | and that all corrective  |       | requests through the       |
|     | actions required through |       | annual Consolidated        |
|     | this process are fully   |       | Federal Programs           |
|     | implemented?             |       | Application process.       |
+-----+--------------------------+-------+----------------------------+
| I   | Do the LEAs conduct an   | YES   | The State instructs LEAs,  |
| I.B | annual needs assessment  |       | in the Consolidated        |
| .1. | with the involvement of  |       | Federal Programs           |
|     | the district's teachers, |       | Application, to describe   |
|     | including those in       |       | the process through which  |
|     | schools receiving        |       | multiple parties           |
|     | assistance under the     |       | participate in the         |
|     | Title I, Part A program? |       | planning and application   |
|     |                          |       | for funding.               |
+-----+--------------------------+-------+----------------------------+
| I   | Do the LEAs submit an    | YES   | Delaware LEAs must submit  |
| I.B | application to the SEA   |       | a Consolidated Federal     |
| .2. | in order to receive its  |       | Programs Application for   |
|     | Title II funds? Was the  |       | funding.                   |
|     | application based on the |       |                            |
|     | district needs           |       |                            |
|     | assessment, and did it   |       |                            |
|     | describe the activities  |       |                            |
|     | that would be carried    |       |                            |
|     | out?                     |       |                            |
+-----+--------------------------+-------+----------------------------+
| I   | Do the LEAs use their    | YES   | Title II funds were being  |
| I.B | Title II funds on        |       | used for authorized        |
| .3. | authorized activities    |       | purposes and, in general,  |
|     | and are such activities  |       | to provide high-quality    |
|     | designed to enhance      |       | professional development   |
|     | teacher quality and      |       | and higher student         |
|     | improve student          |       | achievement.               |
|     | achievement?             |       |                            |
+-----+--------------------------+-------+----------------------------+
| I   | Do the LEAs provide      | YES   | Delaware uses the          |
| I.B | timely consultation with |       | Consolidated Federal       |
| .4. | its private schools for  |       | Programs Application to    |
|     | the equitable provision  |       | ensure that LEAs are       |
|     | of services?             |       | meeting the statutory      |
|     |                          |       | provision for the          |
|     |                          |       | equitable participation of |
|     |                          |       | independent and private    |
|     |                          |       | school students, teachers  |
|     |                          |       | and other educational      |
|     |                          |       | personnel in applicable    |
|     |                          |       | Federal education          |
|     |                          |       | programs.                  |
+-----+--------------------------+-------+----------------------------+
|     |                          |       |                            |
+-----+--------------------------+-------+----------------------------+
| **I |                          |       |                            |
| II. |                          |       |                            |
| [ST |                          |       |                            |
| ATE |                          |       |                            |
| A   |                          |       |                            |
| CTI |                          |       |                            |
| VIT |                          |       |                            |
| IES |                          |       |                            |
| ]{. |                          |       |                            |
| und |                          |       |                            |
| erl |                          |       |                            |
| ine |                          |       |                            |
| }** |                          |       |                            |
+-----+--------------------------+-------+----------------------------+
| III | Does the State use its   | YES   | State Activities funds are |
| .1. | State Activities funds   |       | being used to promote the  |
|     | to promote the           |       | quality of the teaching    |
|     | recruitment, hiring,     |       | and school leadership      |
|     | training, and retention  |       | force in Delaware.         |
|     | of highly qualified      |       |                            |
|     | teachers and principals? |       |                            |
+-----+--------------------------+-------+----------------------------+
| III | Does the State support   | YES   | See above.                 |
| .2. | activities that focus on |       |                            |
|     | increasing the           |       |                            |
|     | subject-matter knowledge |       |                            |
|     | of teachers and that     |       |                            |
|     | assist teachers to       |       |                            |
|     | become highly qualified? |       |                            |
+-----+--------------------------+-------+----------------------------+
|     | ########                 |       |                            |
+-----+--------------------------+-------+----------------------------+
| **  |                          |       |                            |
| IV. |                          |       |                            |
| [ST |                          |       |                            |
| ATE |                          |       |                            |
| AGE |                          |       |                            |
| NCY |                          |       |                            |
| FOR |                          |       |                            |
| HIG |                          |       |                            |
| HER |                          |       |                            |
| EDU |                          |       |                            |
| CAT |                          |       |                            |
| ION |                          |       |                            |
| (SA |                          |       |                            |
| HE) |                          |       |                            |
| A   |                          |       |                            |
| CTI |                          |       |                            |
| VIT |                          |       |                            |
| IES |                          |       |                            |
| ]{. |                          |       |                            |
| und |                          |       |                            |
| erl |                          |       |                            |
| ine |                          |       |                            |
| }** |                          |       |                            |
+-----+--------------------------+-------+----------------------------+
| IV  | ######## Did the SAHE    | YES   | The Delaware SAHE program, |
| .1. | manage a competition for |       | previously run through the |
|     |  eligible partnerships?  |       | University of Delaware, is |
|     |                          |       | now administered by the    |
|     |                          |       | SEA.                       |
+-----+--------------------------+-------+----------------------------+
| IV  | Does the SAHE have       | NO    | There is only one          |
| .2. | procedures to ensure     |       | high-need school district  |
|     | that eligible            |       | in the State, and it is    |
|     | partnerships include the |       | not a partner in all SAHE  |
|     | required members, i.e.,  |       | eligible partnership       |
|     | an institution of higher |       | grants.                    |
|     | education and the        |       |                            |
|     | division of the          |       |                            |
|     | institution that         |       |                            |
|     | prepares teachers and    |       |                            |
|     | principals, a school of  |       |                            |
|     | arts and sciences, and a |       |                            |
|     | high-need LEA?           |       |                            |
+-----+--------------------------+-------+----------------------------+
| Fi  |                          |       |                            |
| ndi |                          |       |                            |
| ng. |                          |       |                            |
| Al  |                          |       |                            |
| tho |                          |       |                            |
| ugh |                          |       |                            |
| the |                          |       |                            |
| S   |                          |       |                            |
| AHE |                          |       |                            |
| re  |                          |       |                            |
| qui |                          |       |                            |
| red |                          |       |                            |
| t   |                          |       |                            |
| hat |                          |       |                            |
| hig |                          |       |                            |
| h-p |                          |       |                            |
| ove |                          |       |                            |
| rty |                          |       |                            |
| dis |                          |       |                            |
| tri |                          |       |                            |
| cts |                          |       |                            |
| pa  |                          |       |                            |
| rti |                          |       |                            |
| cip |                          |       |                            |
| ate |                          |       |                            |
| in  |                          |       |                            |
| e   |                          |       |                            |
| ach |                          |       |                            |
| "El |                          |       |                            |
| igi |                          |       |                            |
| ble |                          |       |                            |
| Par |                          |       |                            |
| tne |                          |       |                            |
| rsh |                          |       |                            |
| ip" |                          |       |                            |
| gra |                          |       |                            |
| nt, |                          |       |                            |
| the |                          |       |                            |
| S   |                          |       |                            |
| AHE |                          |       |                            |
| did |                          |       |                            |
| not |                          |       |                            |
| use |                          |       |                            |
| the |                          |       |                            |
| d   |                          |       |                            |
| efi |                          |       |                            |
| nit |                          |       |                            |
| ion |                          |       |                            |
| of  |                          |       |                            |
| a   |                          |       |                            |
| "   |                          |       |                            |
| hig |                          |       |                            |
| h-n |                          |       |                            |
| eed |                          |       |                            |
| dis |                          |       |                            |
| tri |                          |       |                            |
| ct" |                          |       |                            |
| c   |                          |       |                            |
| ons |                          |       |                            |
| ist |                          |       |                            |
| ent |                          |       |                            |
| w   |                          |       |                            |
| ith |                          |       |                            |
| the |                          |       |                            |
| st  |                          |       |                            |
| atu |                          |       |                            |
| te. |                          |       |                            |
+-----+--------------------------+-------+----------------------------+

**I. [Meeting the Highly qualified Teacher (HQT)]{.underline}**

**[Challenge]{.underline}**

**I.A. [THE STATE LEVEL]{.underline} \--**

######## I.A.1. Has the State developed procedures to determine whether teachers are highly qualified?

> Yes. Delaware has detailed the requirements for new and experienced
> teachers to determine highly qualified status and created a statewide
> data collection system, the Delaware Educator Data System, DEEDS. The
> State requires all teachers holding a current Delaware teaching
> license to provide their teaching qualifications, including current
> licenses they hold, education, certificates, and professional
> development experiences. The State is currently working to link the
> DEEDS educator data system to a student data system. Delaware uses
> unique student identifier codes to track student data.
>
> The DEEDS system is scheduled to provide Statewide teacher-level data
> around November 1, 2004, but it does not at this time provide a link
> to a teacher's current classroom assignment. At the elementary school
> level this is not a serious concern, but at the secondary level (and
> to some extent at the middle school level) this functionality will
> have to be added to the system.
>
> **I.A.2. Does the State have data on the percentage of core academic
> classes that are taught by highly qualified teachers?**
>
> No. The State cannot provide the percentage of classes taught by
> highly qualified teachers because it cannot track current
> assignment-level data at this time. The initial reports on individual
> teachers' credentials will be available November 1, 2004, but will not
> include the highly qualified status at the classroom level. In the
> State's Consolidated Application from September 2003, baseline and
> target highly qualified data were provided based on self-reported
> data.
>
> One barrier to matching credentials with assignment data is
> incongruous data systems among districts and with the State. The State
> has uniform payroll system with uniform position codes for educators
> (PHRST). However, the vast majority of teachers have one position
> code. The State does not have a uniform pupil accounting system
> (Pentamation) to interface with the DEEDS. Once all districts use
> Pentamation, then the State will be able to access teachers' daily
> schedules. Plans are in place for the interface between Pentamation
> and DEEDS.
>
> **Findings.** The State has completed a review of the qualifications
> of all its teachers; however, it cannot provide classroom-level data.
> While this is not a serious problem at the elementary level, at the
> middle and secondary levels, teachers' assignments cannot be mapped to
> the teacher's highly qualified status for each assignment. The match
> of the position code to the actual assignment is accurate when the
> teacher is teaching one content area. The State plans to link data in
> the DEEDS system to a pupil accounting system used statewide
> (Pentamation) to validate teaching assignments and has a contractor
> that is working on this functionality. The State would expects to have
> this ability for the 2005-2006 school year.
>
> **Further Action Required.**

-   The State must continue to develop the functionality of the DEEDS
    system to match the areas for which a teacher is highly qualified
    against the teacher's actual assignments to determine the percentage
    of classes that are taught by highly qualified teachers.

> **I.A.3. Classes taught by teachers who are not highly qualified---For
> those classes being taught by teachers who are *not* highly qualified,
> can you estimate the percentages of those classes in the following
> categories (percentages should add up to 100%)?**

-   Classes taught by elementary teachers who never took a
    subject-knowledge test and have not yet been through the HOUSSE
    procedures,

-   Secondary classes taught by teachers who have not demonstrated
    subject-matter knowledge in those courses (i.e., out-of-field
    classes),

-   Elementary classes taught by special education teachers who have not
    demonstrated subject knowledge,

-   Secondary classes taught by special education teachers who have not
    demonstrated subject knowledge in some or all subjects (e.g., in
    self-contained classrooms),

-   Teachers on emergency certificates or waivers,

-   Other (please describe).

> **Finding.** No. In November, the State will have data on elementary
> school teachers that are not highly qualified, but because the State
> cannot provide classroom-level assignment data at this time it will
> not have similar data at the middle or secondary levels.
>
> State officials verbally reported that at the secondary level,
> teachers instructing out of field, special educators, and
> departmentalized middle school instructors will pose the greatest
> challenge for the State because the State system does not capture
> teachers who teach multiple subjects, either on a second standard
> certificate (full certification) or in an out-of-field situation
>
> **Further Action Required.**

-   As noted above, the State must continue to develop the functionality
    of the DEEDS system to match the areas for which a teacher is highly
    qualified against the teacher's actual assignments to determine the
    percentage of classes that are taught by highly qualified teachers.
    This system will also identify the areas in which teachers are not
    highly qualified. Resources can then be directed to address those
    gaps.

> **I.A.4. Demonstration of competency for [new elementary school
> teachers]{.underline} - Is there a rigorous State test that assesses
> elementary school teachers' subject knowledge and teaching skills in
> reading, writing, mathematics, and the other areas of the elementary
> school curriculum?**
>
> Partially. The State has established cut scores for the Praxis II
> Elementary Education test, and is making it available to teachers for
> purposes of determining highly qualified status, but it is not
> required for licensure. Currently, the State requires Praxis I prior
> to entry into teacher preparation programs. Districts are offering and
> facilitating the Praxis II exam for teachers to meet the highly
> qualified requirements in Title I schools.
>
> The State sponsored a Praxis II test preparation workshop for
> districts. The workshop, given through ETS, gave district staff the
> skills, knowledge, and resources to develop Praxis II test preparation
> workshops at the district level. In August, ETS offered an extra
> administration of Praxis II to enable Delaware teacher candidates to
> demonstrate they were highly qualified before they would be hired.
>
> Based on conversations we had with higher education officials in
> Delaware, institutions of higher education (IHEs) in the State are
> strongly considering implementing the Praxis II as a requirement for
> completion of a State-approved teacher preparation program, but the
> requirement is not currently in place.
>
> Technical assistance was provided on the definition of "new." The
> State was advised that "new" teachers are those who are new to the
> profession and for whom hiring decisions must be made.
>
> **Finding.** Delaware does not require a rigorous assessment of
> elementary school teachers' subject knowledge as a condition of State
> licensure. However, districts require prospective new teachers to pass
> the Praxis II assessment before they can be hired to teach in Title I
> schools.
>
> **Further Action Required.**

-   Although this arrangement is consistent with current statutory
    requirements governing the hiring of Title I teachers, starting in
    school year 2006-2007 all new teachers will have to be highly
    qualified, and the State will need to have a rigorous State test in
    place by which new elementary teachers can demonstrate that they are
    highly qualified.

> **I.A.5. Demonstration of competency for [new middle and secondary
> school teachers]{.underline} - Has the SEA developed procedures for
> determining the subject-matter competency of new middle and secondary
> teachers that include the following statutory factors?**

-   An academic major,

-   A graduate degree ,

-   Coursework equivalent to an undergraduate academic major,

-   Advanced certification or credentialing,

-   Passing a rigorous State test in the core academic subjects in which
    the teacher teaches.

    Yes. Delaware's highly qualified teacher definition for middle and
    high school instructors includes all of the above procedures. Praxis
    II assessments are available for art, music, English, social
    studies, French, Spanish, mathematics, middle school mathematics,
    chemistry, general science, biology, Earth science, physical
    science, and physics.

> **I.A.6. Demonstration of competency for [teachers not new to the
> profession]{.underline} - Does the State have procedures to determine
> whether veteran teachers are highly qualified, and do they include the
> following statutory factors?**

-   An academic major (secondary only),

-   A graduate degree (secondary only),

-   Coursework equivalent to an undergraduate academic major (secondary
    only),

-   Advanced certification or credentialing (secondary only),

-   Passing a rigorous State test in the core academic subjects ,

-   Completion of HOUSSE procedure.

> Yes. The State has procedures to determine whether veteran teachers
> are highly qualified, and they include all the statutory factors.
> Experienced teachers in Delaware may meet the highly qualified
> requirements through any of the above options. Teachers in the middle
> grades (6-8) and high school (grades 9-12) must have a major or
> coursework equivalent to a major (30 hours) in the content area or
> pass the Praxis II exam in their content area to meet the highly
> qualified teacher requirements.
>
> Also, the State recognizes National Board certification for all
> elementary, middle, and high school teachers in the content area or
> field they currently teach as an advanced certification to meet the
> highly qualified teacher requirements.
>
> The Delaware HOUSSE allows experienced educators to demonstrate
> subject-matter competency through the following activities. Teachers
> must achieve 100 points.

-   Years of teaching experience in the content area or field currently
    taught. **32 points maximum**

-   College coursework related to the content area or field currently
    taught. **No maximum**

-   College coursework in pedagogy and or assessment related to the
    content area or field currently taught. **30 points maximum**

-   Practicums in the content area (only for those teachers with fewer
    than 5 years of experience.) **20 points maximum**

-   State- and district-approved professional development, item writing
    for the State assessments (DSTP), and Clusters related to the
    content area or field currently taught and completed after June
    30, 1995. **50 points maximum**

-   Recognition or professional contribution related to the content area
    or field currently taught and completed after June 30, 1995. This
    includes acting as a lead teacher, recognition as Teacher of the
    Year, teaching a college course, acting as a cooperating teacher,
    writing State content standards, writing articles that are published
    in professional journals, giving research-based presentations. **15
    points maximum**

> Licensure renewal in Delaware is on a 5-year cycle and requires
> teachers to participate in 90 clock hours of continuing professional
> development during that time. Approximately 15 clock hours is
> equivalent to a three-credit college course.
>
> The State offers "Professional Development Clusters" for teachers to
> participate in continuing education experiences. The Clusters can
> include formal college courses, in-school study groups, or portfolio
> and lesson evaluation with peer analysis. Clusters can be proposed and
> created by school building personnel, districts, IHE's, specialty
> groups, or the State. All proposed clusters must be in a prescribed
> format and meet rigorous criteria. The Professional Standards Board
> and the State Board of Education have approval authority for the
> clusters. Each cluster is a minimum of 90 clock hours, and teachers
> can earn up to a 2 percent salary increase for 5 years. Teachers can
> take multiple clusters and earn up to 15 percent increase in their
> salary.
>
> Another Delaware program for delivering professional development is
> the "Teacher to Teacher Cadre." Teachers are hired on staff assignment
> to deliver content professional development to other teachers. The
> Cadre program acts as a career ladder for teachers who leave the
> classroom to become Cadre instructors.
>
> **I.A.7. State plans to improve teacher quality - Does the State have
> a plan that (a) establishes annual measurable objectives for each LEA
> and school and (b) includes an annual increase in the percentage of
> highly qualified teachers at each LEA and school?**
>
> Yes. The Delaware Department of Education Strategic Plan for 2004-2008
> identified highly qualified teachers as a primary target area and
> established annual measurable objectives. Baseline data are
> self-reported. The objective and supporting performance measures are:

-   Long-Term Target 3: By 2005-2006, all students in academic areas, as
    defined by the Federal reauthorization of the Elementary and
    Secondary Education Act known as No Child Left Behind legislation,
    will be taught by highly qualified teachers.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   1.3.1 Performance Measure: The percentage of classes being taught by
    highly qualified teachers, defined as teachers with a standard
    certificate in the grade and subject that they are teaching, will
    increase as follows: 90% by 2003-04; 95% by 2004-05; 100% by
    2005-06.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   1.3.2 Performance Measure: The percentage of teachers receiving
    high-quality professional development (as the term "professional
    development" is defined in ESEA) will increase as follows: 85% by
    2003-04; 95% by 2004-05; 100% by 2005-06.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   1.3.3 Performance Measure: The percentage of highly qualified Title
    I paraprofessionals will increase as follows: 60% by 2003-04; 75% by
    2004-05; 100% by 2005-06.

> **I.A.8. Does the State have procedures to ensure that districts are
> hiring only highly qualified teachers for their Title I programs?**
>
> Yes. The hiring district must confirm a teacher's highly qualified
> status during the employment application process. The State and
> districts arranged for an additional administration of the Praxis II
> in Delaware in August 2004 to allow teachers who were being considered
> for hiring (including in Title I programs) an opportunity to
> demonstrate subject-matter competency. On November 1, every school in
> the State was to receive a report on current staff and their status in
> the DEEDS system.

######## I.B. [AT THE DISTRICT LEVEL]{.underline} --

> The requirement that all core academic classes be taught by highly
> qualified teachers does not take effect until the end of the 2005-2006
> school year. The ED monitoring team reviewed the progress of two
> Delaware districts and a charter school in meeting the highly
> qualified teacher requirements.
>
> Districts in Delaware are making significant progress toward meeting
> the highly qualified teacher requirements. The ED monitoring team met
> with two LEAs, Laurel and Appoquinimink, and one charter school, MOT
> Charter.
>
> Laurel, located in the southern part of the State, is also one of the
> State's smallest school districts. Approximately 54 percent of
> students at its five schools are eligible for free or reduced-price
> lunch. The district's 144 teachers serve over 2,000 students. After
> reviewing Laurel's protocol, curriculum director Sandy Baker found
> that five classes were taught by teachers who were not highly
> qualified: three elementary teachers (new to the profession) were
> waiting for scores on the Praxis II exam, and two secondary teachers
> were assigned out-of-field.
>
> At the Appoquinimink school district, the fastest growing in the
> State, a similar pattern existed. Appoquinimink employs 349 teachers
> at its nine schools. The Human Resources director, Zen Marusa,
> estimated that 95 percent of elementary and 94 percent of secondary
> classrooms were taught by highly qualified teachers. On further
> examination, just six secondary teachers who were teaching at least
> one class outside of their licensure area were not highly qualified.
> The district was requiring these teachers to take the Praxis II to be
> able to continue to teach in the second subject area.

**II. [ADMINISTRATION OF ESEA TITLE II, PART A]{.underline}**

######## II.A. [AT THE STATE LEVEL]{.underline} 

######## 

######## II.A.1. State management of the LEA subgrant program - Does the SEA allocate funds according to the statute, using the most recent Census data as described in the Non-Regulatory Guidance?

> Yes. The State properly allocates its Title II funds using current
> Census data. For Delaware's 13 charter schools, the State derives a
> poverty census rate. Rosters from each charter school are mapped back
> to the student's home district.
>
> **II.A.2. Does the SEA require an application from each LEA before
> providing Title II funding? If yes, what information does the SEA
> require in the LEA application?**
>
> Yes. LEAs apply for Title II, Part A funds as part of Delaware's
> Consolidated Federal Programs application process. The online
> application collects information on enrollment, maintenance of effort,
> and distribution of funds by school and program area.
>
> Title II, Part A assurances include:

-   The district must conduct an assessment of local needs in
    professional development and hiring.

-   The district targets funds to school that have the lowest proportion
    of highly qualified teachers.

-   The district targets funds to schools that have the largest class
    size, particularly at the primary level.

-   The district targets funds to schools that are identified for school
    improvement.

-   The district complies with Section 9501 regarding consultation with
    private schools in order to provide professional development
    services for private school teachers.

> **II.A.3. Does the SEA require each LEA to describe how the activities
> to be carried out are based on the required local needs assessment?**
>
> Yes. Delaware requires each LEA to submit an annually updated
> consolidated application that satisfies the needs assessment
> requirements.
>
> **II.A.4. Does the SEA have a procedure to determine the amount of
> funds each LEA expended during the appropriation period and to
> regularly review the drawdowns of the LEAs?**
>
> Yes. Delaware's districts use a uniform data reporting system for
> Federal program funds. Because of this common platform, the SEA can
> monitor expenditures on a daily basis. Also, the SEA receives weekly
> drawdown reports on the previous 10 days' activities.
>
> **II.A.5. Does the SEA have written procedures governing the amount of
> funds that a district may carry over, and procedures governing the
> reallocation of funds if districts cannot use all or part of their
> allocations?**
>
> No and yes, respectively. The SEA appears to have an unwritten
> carryover procedure and it does have a written reallocation procedure.
> The SEA has determined that LEAs should account for the complete
> expenditure of these funds 15 months after the allotment date of
> July 1. An additional 3-month extension may be requested to expend all
> of the allocated funds. The SEA will make any funds not expended after
> this 18-month period available for reallocation to other districts.
> The SEA provided its January 1, 2002, Reallocation Procedure for
> Selected Programs, which applies to the reallocation of program funds,
> including Title II, Part A.
>
> **Finding.** The reallocation document provided by the State does not
> contain a specific State policy for carryover funds.
>
> **Further Action Required.**

-   **The State should establish written procedures governing the amount
    of carryover a district may keep from year to year.** The procedures
    should cover the appropriate range of carryover amounts,
    notification to the State regarding carryover and a justification
    for why it is necessary, and a plan for obligating such funds in a
    timely manner.

> **II.A.6. If an LEA cannot obligate funds within the 27 months of
> availability (which includes the extra year of availability permitted
> under the Tydings amendment), does the SEA have a procedure for
> reallocating these carryover funds to other LEAs?**
>
> Yes. The SEA has procedures for reallocating grant funding. The SEA
> must inform school districts that funds are available for reallocation
> and give the LEAs an opportunity to apply. Selection among the
> applicants must be determined on the basis of need.
>
> **II.A.7. Does the SEA ensure that it and its component LEAs are
> audited annually, if required, and that all corrective actions
> required through this process are fully implemented?**
>
> Yes. The State conducts annual district reviews and reviews Title II,
> Part A funding requests through the annual Consolidated Federal Grants
> Application process.

**B. [AT THE DISTRICT LEVEL]{.underline}**

> **II.B.1. Annual needs assessment - Do the LEAs conduct an annual
> needs assessment with the involvement of the district's teachers,
> including those in schools receiving assistance under the *Title I,
> Part A* program?**
>
> Yes. The State instructs LEAs, in the Consolidated Federal Grants
> Application, to describe the process through which multiple parties
> participate in the planning and application for funding. Further, the
> State requires that student needs and staff and community needs be
> identified through the school/district evaluation/assessment
> activities. For each identified need, the LEA must also list data
> sources. For example, Laurel School District's Consolidated Federal
> Grants Application identified the need to increase staff capacity to
> deal with diverse instructional strategies, based on data from the
> State assessment, other achievement data, professional development
> logs, DEEDS, and other sources.
>
> **II.B.2. LEA application - Do the LEAs submit an application to the
> SEA in order to receive its Title II funds? Was the application based
> on the district needs assessment, and did it describe the activities
> that would be carried out?**
>
> Yes. Delaware LEAs must submit a Consolidated Federal Programs
> Application for funding. See the description provided under the State
> requirements for the funding application. The State provided
> applications from two LEAs for the ED team to review.

######## 

> **II.B.3. Uses of funds - Do the LEAs use their Title II funds on
> authorized activities, and are such activities designed to enhance
> teacher quality and improve student achievement?**
>
> The ED monitoring team reviewed the uses of Title II funds in two
> districts, Laurel and Appoquinimink. Title II funds were being used
> for authorized purposes and, in general, to provide high-quality
> professional development and higher student achievement, as described
> below:

-   The Laurel School District received \$333,135 in Title II funding in
    FY 2003. The funding was used to support professional development
    opportunities for teachers involved in the Delaware Writing Project
    and pay a portion of the salary for a math/science teacher
    specialist who mentors new teachers, coordinates training, and
    guides curriculum alignment to the standards in the subject areas.
    The district also uses funding for hiring highly qualified teachers
    to reduce class size.

-   In Appoquinimink, Title II funds were used to purchase Praxis II
    review materials and to pay teacher stipends to attend evening
    review courses. The LEA also uses Title II funding for two teachers
    who were hired for class size reduction.

######## II.B.4. Services to private schools - Do the LEAs provide timely consultation with its private schools for the equitable provision of services?

########  

> Delaware uses the annual Consolidated Federal Programs Application to
> ensure that LEAs are meeting the statutory provision for the equitable
> participation of independent and private school students, teachers,
> and other educational personnel in applicable Federal education
> programs.
>
> As part of the application, LEAs must sign an assurance that
> representatives of eligible nonpublic schools within the school
> district have engaged in meaningful consultation with the district in
> the development of the consolidated application and in determining the
> allocation of funds that support services to eligible nonpublic school
> students. The district is also charged with maintaining records to
> document nonpublic school involvement and the impact of program
> participation. Further, all nonpublic schools must be invited to
> participate in programs for which they are eligible.

**III. [STATE ACTIVITIES]{.underline}**

> The current program administrator, Amelia Hodges, is new to her
> position and has been unable to find records of FY 2002 expenditures.
> The SEA exercises its ability to combine administrative funds under
> Section 9201, Consolidation of State Administrative Funds for
> Elementary and Secondary Education programs.
>
> The State has made a significant contribution to professional
> development for teachers and principals through dedicated State funds.
> When possible, Delaware uses Title II funds to support larger
> initiatives already underway in the State. Approximately 44 percent of
> Title II, Part A funds were used for class size reduction. An
> additional 11 percent goes for professional development trainers for
> the Teacher to Teacher Cadre.

  --------- ----------- ---------------------------------------------------
  **FY      **FY 2003** 
  2002**                

                        Reforming teacher and principal certification or
                        licensing requirements.

                        Teacher mentoring programs.

                        Creation or expansion of alternative routes to
                        certification.

                        Teacher recruitment and retention programs.

            \$172,960   High-quality professional development in core
                        academic areas.

                        Merit-based differentiated-pay performance systems.
  --------- ----------- ---------------------------------------------------

> **III.1. Does the State use its State Activities funds (2.5 percent of
> its Title II, Part A allocation) to promote the recruitment, hiring,
> training, and retention of highly qualified teachers and principals?**
>
> Yes. State Activities funds are being used to promote the quality of
> the teaching and school leadership force in Delaware. While the larger
> part of these activities are funded by State professional development
> funds, Title II Part A funds are also used to support priority
> activities. Some examples of funded activities include:

-   Teacher to Teacher Cadre training for professional development
    meetings that instruct across content areas and within content
    areas;

-   operating expenses for Professional Development Clusters sponsored
    by the SEA; and

-   an Advisory Council for visual and performing arts.

> As of October 1, 2004, the State expenditures and encumbrances totaled
> \$248,787 from Title II, Part A funds. The remaining \$114,244 went
> toward salaries. The SEA provided the following financial breakouts:

1.  **32% (\$79,611.84)** Supporting activities that ensure that
    teachers are able to use challenging State academic content
    standards, student academic achievement standards, and State
    assessments.

2.  **21% (\$52,245.27)** Providing assistance to teachers to enable
    them to meet certification, licensing, or other requirements needed
    to become highly qualified.

3.  **21% (\$52,245.27)** Developing or assisting LEAs in the
    development and use of proven, innovative strategies to deliver
    intensive professional development programs.

4.  **14% (\$34,830.18)** Providing professional development for
    teachers and principals.

5.  **7% (\$17,415.09)** Fulfilling the SEA's responsibilities
    concerning proper and efficient administration of the programs
    carried out under this part.

6.  **4% (\$9,951.48)** Providing assistance to local agencies for the
    development and implementation of professional development programs
    for principals.

> **III.2. Does the State support activities that focus on increasing
> the subject-matter knowledge of teachers and that assist teachers to
> become highly qualified?**
>
> Yes. See III.1.

**IV. [STATE AGENCY FOR HIGHER EDUCATION (SAHE)
ACTIVITIES]{.underline}**

The State Agency for Higher Education (SAHE), which in Delaware is
administratively part of the State Department of Education, reserves 2.5
percent of the State's Title II, Part A allocation to competitively fund
partnerships that deliver high-quality, research-based professional
development in core academic subjects.

SAHE eligible partnerships funding (FY 2002):......\$365,640

SAHE administration funding (FY2002):............. \$17,391

Carryover funding (FY 2003): .......................... \$126,214

Number of grants awarded in FY 2002: 6

Number of grants awarded in FY 2003: 5

Range of awards: ........................................ \$33,000-
\$70,376

Duration of Project Grants: 1 to 3 years

> **IV. 1. Did the SAHE manage a competition for eligible
> partnerships?**
>
> Yes. The Delaware SAHE program, previously run through the University
> of Delaware, is now administered as a competitive grants program by
> the SEA.
>
> **IV.2. Does the SAHE have procedures to ensure that eligible
> partnerships include the required members, i.e., 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?**
>
> No. Requests for Proposals were distributed to the deans and directors
> of education departments and arts and sciences departments at all
> Delaware institutions. Delaware has five institutions of higher
> education that are eligible partners for the grant program. However,
> based on Census poverty data, the State has only one high-need LEA
> available to partner with the institution.
>
> **Finding.** Although the SAHE required that high-poverty districts
> participate in each "Eligible Partnership" grant, the SAHE did not use
> the definition of a "high-need district" consistent with the statute.
> In fact, only Seaford School District has more than 20 percent of its
> students in poverty, and as the only eligible district in the State
> should be included in all of the funded SAHE "Eligible Partnership"
> grants.
>
> **Further Action Required**

-   Delaware has awarded 3-year SAHE grants that will continue through
    FY 2005. **To the extent that Seaford can be reasonably included in
    at least some of the activities within each grant in the next year,
    the SAHE should work with its grantees to take steps to do so.** If
    this solution is not practicable, the State must -- in any
    subsequent competition -- take steps to ensure that all grants
    include at least one eligible district, whether that is Seaford or
    any other district that may become eligible by that time.

> **IV.3. Descriptions of SAHE-funded projects**
>
> During the SAHE portion of the review, the former SAHE coordinator,
> Audrey Nobel, discussed the five projects funded in FY 2003 and
> explained that the carryover funding from FY 2002 was targeted to
> high-need districts to improve middle-level mathematics. The early
> implementation and piloting of a standards-based mathematics
> curriculum in K-12 is designed to continue work originally begun under
> an NSF-funded Local Systemic Initiative change grant, DEMCI, the
> Delaware Exemplary Mathematics Curriculum Implementation.
>
> [Leadership for Middle Grades Mathematics]{.underline} (\$70,376). The
> goal of this grant is to facilitate a stronger connection between
> district-level support and school-based leaders in all participating
> schools while devoting additional resources to increase the
> achievement level and decrease the achievement gap among the 10 lowest
> performing middle schools.
>
> [Delaware *Math Trailblazers* Lead Teacher Professional Development:
> Phase II]{.underline}. The program is based on a Lead Teacher model,
> with two Lead Teachers in each elementary school participating in
> regional monthly training sessions and then serving as co-instructors
> for teacher colleagues in their regularly scheduled Math Club meeting.
> Math Clubs are designed to prepare classroom teachers to implement the
> standards-based K-5 *Math Trailblazers* curriculum and to enhance
> teacher knowledge of mathematics content, pedagogy, and assessment.
>
> [Promoting Sustainable Change by Building School-Based Communities of
> Learning]{.underline} (\$90,100). In a partnership with Brandywine and
> Christiana School Districts, the program proposes to address
> sustainability of the standards-based reform effort and the
> achievement gap between white and minority students in middle school
> science.
>
> [Staff Development Program in Literacy Development and Reading
> Processes for High School Language Arts Teachers and Their
> Principals.]{.underline} This program is designed to prepare 9^th^
> grade Reading Academy high school teachers to understand and use the
> subject matter knowledge of literacy development and reading
> instruction as this knowledge is defined by the Delaware Content
> Standards. Training in literacy development and reading instruction
> will take place through an intensive and varied staff development
> program.

**[SUMMARY]{.underline}**

The State's substantial investment in improving student achievement is
reflected in its commitment to improving educator quality and providing
ongoing professional development to its teachers and administrators. The
Secretary of Education, the staff at the Delaware Department of
Education, and the local officials we met with are to be commended for
their level of preparation and their candor in sharing with us their
status and remaining challenges.

Delaware is working diligently to meet the NCLB requirement that all
classes be taught by highly qualified teachers and has made significant
progress to attain that goal. Technical assistance was offered to two
districts, and after some discussion and further analysis it appears as
if only a handful of teachers in those districts are not highly
qualified in at least one subject.

Delaware has implemented many statewide, State-funded, professional
development initiatives for teachers and principals based on student
needs across the State. The programs are intended to improve the level
of instruction that students receive and to build leadership capacity.
Delaware's certification and licensing system is structured in a way
that requires teachers to participate in 90 clock hours of content-based
professional development activities during the 5-year span of their
license (note: the State is phasing out a permanent license that was
once issued to veteran educators and now requires renewal every 5
years). The SEA partnered with the University of Delaware to conduct the
Delaware Teacher Supply Survey Analysis in an effort to learn more about
teacher hiring, critical need areas, and recruitment strategies across
the State. Delaware hires approximately 1,000 new teachers each year and
is somewhat disadvantaged in having to compete with Pennsylvania, New
Jersey, and Maryland, all of which offer higher starting teaching
salaries.

The State is committed to a substantial and innovative undertaking in
data collection. The DEEDS data system and a parallel student data
system will provide the State with a valuable source for identifying
both educator and student needs in the future.