STATE OF HAWAII

Department of Education

Queen Liliuokalani Building

Room 300

Honolulu, HI 98683

![](media/image1.png){width="1.9659722222222222in"
height="1.9326388888888888in"}

**HIGHLY QUALIFIED TEACHER**

**STATE PLAN**

**No Child Left Behind Act of 2001**

**Title II, Part A**

**April 2007**

**Patricia Hamamoto**

**Superintendent of Education**

**TABLE OF CONTENTS**

  ------------------------------------------------------ ----------------
  Contacts                                               Page 3

  Purpose of Highly Qualified Teacher Plan               Page 4

  Hawaii's Educational Structure                         Page 4

  Highly Qualified Data Collection System                Page 5

  Teacher Licensure System                               Page 6

  Hawaii's School Improvement Process                    Page 7

  Hawaii's Unique Location and Teacher Challenges        Page 8

  Hawaii's Revised State HQT Plan                        

  Requirement 1                                          Pages 9 -- 18

  Requirement 2                                          Pages 18 -- 22

  Requirement 3                                          Pages 23 -- 38

  Requirement 4                                          Pages 38 -- 42

  Requirement 5 (See attached Equity Plan)               Pages 42 - 44

  Appendices                                             

  HQT Definitions                                        Appendix A

  2006/2007 Data Collection                              Appendix B

  Framework for School Improvement                       Appendix C
  ------------------------------------------------------ ----------------

**CONTACTS**

  -------------------- --------------------------- -----------------------
  **Planning and                                   
  Implementation                                   
  Team**                                           

  Robert Campbell      HDE - Office of             Director
                       Superintendent              

  Fay Ikei             HDE -- OHR                  Assistant
                                                   Superintendent

  Josephine Yamasaki   HDE -- OHR                  Administrator

  Amy Shimamoto        HDE -- OHR                  Administrator

  Everett Urabe        HDE -- OHR                  HQT Data Lead

  Sean Arai            HDE -- OHR                  Personnel Specialist 

  Greg Dikilato        HDE -- OHR                  Personnel Specialist

  Carol Tenn           HDE -- OHR                  Personnel Specialist 

  Sharon Mahoe         Teacher Standards Board     Executive Director

  Dawn Billings        School Synergy              Partner

  Mardale Dunsworth    School Synergy              Partner

  **Plan                                           
  Contributors**                                   

  Patricia Hamamoto    HDE                         Superintendent of
                                                   Education

  Kathy Kawaguchi      HDE -- OCIS                 Assistant
                                                   Superintendent

  Rod Moriyama         HDE -- OIT                  Assistant
                                                   Superintendent

  Norman Sakamoto      State Senate                Senator, Chair of Ed
                                                   Comm.

  Roy Takumi           State House of              Representative, Chair
                       Representatives             of Ed.

  Margaret Cox         State Board of Education    Chair

  Eileen Clarke        State Board of Education    Member

  Maunalei Love        Charter School Committee    Executive Director

  Paul Ban             HDE -- SPED                 Director

  Kathleen Nishimura   HDE -- OCIS                 Director

  Debbie Farmer        HDE -- SPED                 Administrator

  Sharon Nakagawa      HDE -- Title I              Administrator

  Mel Decasa           HDE -- OIT                  Specialist, Data
                                                   Processing

  Peter Wohora         HDE -- OCR                  Personnel Regional
                                                   Officer

  Lea Albert           Complex Area                Superintendent

  Keith Hayashi        Complex Area                Superintendent

  Mamo Carreira        Complex Area                Superintendent

  Ron Okamura          Complex Area                Superintendent

  Ken Nomura           Complex Area                Superintendent

  Raelene Chock        Complex Area                Superintendent

  Ronn Nozoe           Complex Area                Superintendent

  Estelle Wong         Complex Area                Superintendent

  Meridith Maeda       Castle High School          Principal

  Paul Kingery         University of Hawaii        Assoc. Dean, SAHE

  Valentina            Hawaii Pacific University   Director, Teacher
  Albordonando                                     Education

  Judith Kappenberg    Leeward Community College   Program Officer
  -------------------- --------------------------- -----------------------

**Purpose of Highly Qualified Teacher State Plan**

The purpose of this State Plan is to ensure that all core academic
classes in Hawaii's

K-12 public schools are taught by teachers who are highly qualified.
This plan is designed to coordinate and further define actions currently
a part of the Hawaii Department of Education's (HDE) existing Strategic
Plan. The Hawaii Board of Education and HDE operate with aligned
strategic plans. HDE's 2005-08 Strategic Plan outlines three goals:

Goal 1. Provide a standards-based education;

Goal 2. Provide quality student support; and

Goal 3. Continuously improve performance and quality.

Performance Measurement criteria for Goal 3, has three objectives:

> (3.1) continuously improve student performance;
>
> (3.2) continuously improve school quality; and
>
> (3.3) continuously improve system quality.

The first strategy in meeting object 3.2 is to assure Hawaii has
"qualified teachers and school administrators." This plan, along with
the Hawaii Highly Qualified Teacher (HQT) Equity Plan, will define and
delineate Goal 3, Objective 2, Strategy 1.

**Hawaii's Educational Structure**

Hawaii is home to 179,234 students, 282 public schools and 9,164
teachers in its public K-12 system. Of these public schools, 27 are
public charter schools. Hawaii also supports two public universities and
seven community colleges. Hawaii Public Law, Section 302A-101, HRS,
defines "public school" as ". . . all academic and non-college type
schools established and maintained by the department and new century
charter schools chartered by the board of education, in accordance with
law."

The governance and administrative structure of Hawaii's K-12 schools
differs from that of other states in that it is a single, unitary system
headed by the State Superintendent of Education and the State Board of
Education. The Hawaii Department of Education is both the SEA and the
Local Education Agency (LEA). Subsequent use of SEA in this document
means SEA/LEA. Hawaii's educational structure is made up of 15 Complex
Areas (CA) each of which consists of a high school and its feeder middle
and elementary schools. Complex Area Superintendents (CAS) are
accountable to the Superintendent of Education for the implementation of
all SEA activities, including the implementation of the HDE Title II HQT
Plan, hereinafter referred to as the State Plan.

The HDE Strategic Plan which includes performance goals, strategies and
monitoring data is aligned at all three levels of governance: 1) HDE; 2)
Complex Area (CA); and 3) school. Results of statewide performance are
published annually in *Trend Report: Educational and Fiscal
Accountability* with data displayed at the State, CA and school levels.
These data include the: 1) Number of licensed teachers; 2) Average years
of experience; 3) Classes taught by teachers meeting HQT requirements;
and 4) Number of teachers holding advanced degrees.

**Highly Qualified Data Collection System -- Current and Future**

With the enactment of No Child Left Behind in 2001, the state of Hawaii
refocused its efforts to improve the quantity and qualifications of its
teacher workforce statewide. It began with a dedicated effort to collect
school level personnel data. This provided state-level managers with
recruitment and assignment information of its teacher workforce
statewide. This HDE Data System is accessible by schools, CA, and the
SEA, permitting data input and monitoring by principals and teachers at
the school level, CA administrators at the CA level, and HDE
administrators at the SEA level.

The HDE Data System (HDS) contains information reported by individual
schools on teacher qualifications and courses taught. All school
principals are required to update the data by inputting teacher employee
number, courses taught, and when taught. The system also includes
information on each teacher's licensure area and college
degree/certificate. The SEA audits each teacher's background and matches
it to the "courses taught" information in the HDS to verify whether the
teacher is highly qualified. Teacher personnel data are captured on
multiple database systems throughout the Department. While this provides
for a very rich and detailed picture of Hawaii's teaching force and
their qualifications, these data reside in a variety of databases from
which this information must be drawn and then hand assembled to provide
the overall picture.

HDE also developed a centralized student assessment database that
captures student performance across schools and CAs. When combined with
the student assessment database, the HDS provides the capability to
compare teacher qualifications to student performance data. These data
describe the quantity and qualifications of teachers hired, including
their HQT status in the classes(s) they teach and their current state
licensure. It can thus be used to compare teacher qualifications in high
and low poverty areas, Title I to non-Title I schools, and schools
making AYP to those not making AYP.

In order to expedite and automate the data collection processes and
integrate data systems, HDE is currently undertaking two projects.

1\) The Office of Information Technology is developing an Electronic
Student Information System (eSIS) By the end of SY 2008-09, all but
charter schools will use eSIS. Charter schools will come on-line the
following year. The system contains student demographic, course, student
performance, and scheduling information.

2\) The Office of Human Resources (OHR) is developing the Collaborative
Human Resources Automation Project (CHAP). CHAP will provide data into
the HDE data warehouse that will link with eSIS in 2008-09. This
application will consolidate data from various human resource systems
(e.g., recruitment, licensure, and employee records) into a single
web-accessible database system.

The first stage of the CHAP project, to be completed by the end of the
2008-09 school year, will automate recruiting and applicant tracking,
and provide a professional development infrastructure to link the school
professional development plans to move non-highly qualified teachers
(NHQT) to HQT. This will additionally provide a monitoring system to
assure the necessary professional development is available to teachers
based on their needs.

Beginning with the hiring process for SY 2008-09, school lists used by
principals for making teaching assignments, will be modified to include
additional fields that show the core academic classes for which each
incumbent teacher is HQ.

Charter school data has not until this year been systematically
collected at the state level. In reviewing the data collection is was
apparent that charter schools were in various points in their
understanding of reporting requirements, definitions and timelines. No
charter school submitted its data in time to be included in the 2006-07
reporting. Because of this, charter school data is not included in the
data sets below. HDE has been engaged in a year long education process
to assist charter schools in their timely and accurate data reporting
and HDE anticipates including charter school data with its reports
beginning in 2007-08.

**Teacher Licensure System**

Hawaii's teacher licensure program rules and regulations are based on
Hawaii Administrative Rules, Title 8, Subtitle 2, Part 1, Chapter 54.

In 1995 the State Legislature created the independent Hawaii Teacher
Standards Board (HTSB) to set licensing standards for Hawaii public
school teachers. New teachers must meet these standards to become
licensed and be hired. These standards require an applicant to: 1)
satisfactorily complete a State-approved teacher education program
(SATEP) or the experience conditions of the Interstate Agreement on
Qualification of Personnel; 2) attain passing scores on the PRAXIS exams
or possess a valid National Board Certification in the field in which
the license is sought while holding a valid license from a state with an
interstate agreement; and 3) clear the professional fitness check.

In July 1998 Governor Benjamin Cayetano approved the first set of
Teacher Performance and Licensing Standards in Hawaii. This was the
result of in-depth research, a statewide teacher survey about the
standards, statewide public hearings about the standards and several
revisions of the standards based on input received from teachers,
teacher educators and the public.

In 2002, the Legislature transferred responsibility for teacher
licensing, state approval of teacher education, and National Board
Certification candidate support to the HTSB. By statute, the
thirteen-member Board is comprised of classroom teachers, school
administrators, the Dean of the UH College of Education, the Chair of
the Board of Education (BOE), and the Superintendent. The Governor
appoints the teacher and administrator representatives to three-year
terms while the Dean, BOE Chair and Superintendent serve by virtue of
their office.

Current re-licensing rules require the licensee to renew his/her license
every five years based on submittal of a Professional Growth Plan
that: 1) adequately addresses the HTSB teacher performance standards; 2)
links with the licensee's subject matter field and with teaching and
pedagogy; 3) focuses on the professional needs of the licensee as
specified in the professional growth plan; 4) has potential for
positively impacting student learning; 5) shows promise for professional
growth and improved performance; 6) uses multiple criteria; 7) is
professionally credible; and 7) provides continued public
accountability.

Hawaii allows the HDE to, under emergency licensure, temporarily hire
teachers when there is no licensed applicant available. Emergency hires
may be employed for a period not to exceed one year at a time, renewable
up to a maximum of four years provided he/she: 1) possesses a
baccalaureate degree from a regionally accredited institution; 2)
submits an official transcript; 3) is actively pursuing appropriate
licensing by enrollment in an appropriate course of study and/or takes
the appropriate PRAXIS exams; and 4) clears the professional fitness
check. Renewal may be granted annually provided the emergency hire is
actively pursuing licensing and submits evidence of satisfactory
progress towards meeting the licensing standards. Emergency hire status
may under no circumstances be renewed beyond four years.

Hawaii also has a clearly defined process to add a field to a license.
If a licensee wants his/her license to indicate an additional teaching
field, he/she must: a) complete a state approved teacher education
program including student teaching or validation of teaching in a K-12
setting in the new field; [or]{.underline} b) demonstrate K-12 teaching
experience equivalent to one year of full-time teaching in the new field
within the last five years and successfully complete 18 credit hours of
course work in a state approved teacher education program for the new
field; [or]{.underline} c) demonstrate two years K-12 teaching
experience equivalent to one year of full-time teaching in the new field
within the last five years and submit passing PRAXIS II scores for the
new teaching field. Data shows that teachers most often add fields to
their licenses via options "a" and "c."

The HTSB is currently in the rule revision process. In order to more
closely align the licensure requirements with USDE HQT requirements, the
HDE has proposed the following revisions to the Hawaii Administrative
Rules:

-   Expand on the current requirement for adding a field which currently
    calls for enrollment in a SATEP, and extend to enrollment in a
    regionally accredited instate of higher education; (option a)

-   Increase the credit hour requirement from 18 to 30 to add a field;
    (option b)

-   Requiring successful completion of PRAXIS examination in the new
    field followed by two years of teaching experience in new field;
    (option c)

-   Gradually limit emergency licensure to from 4 to 1 year renewal
    beginning in 2007-08.

In addition, HB25 "Teacher Relicensing: Reciprocity; Out of State
Teacher Licensure," currently in the legislative process would require
HTSB to pursue full teacher license reciprocity with all other states
given comparable testing requirements. The HDE and HTSB is supporting
this bill along with the Senate Committee on Education. The University
of Hawaii and the Hawaii State Teachers Association have submitted
testimony in opposition.

**Hawaii's School Improvement Process**

Hawaii's school improvement process is organized around two essential
questions:

1.  How are the students achieving with respect to the Hawaii Content
    and Performance Standards and General Learner Outcomes?

2.  Is the school doing everything possible to support high achievement
    of those outcomes and standards for all of its students?

This process forms the basis for the development of a three-year School
Strategic Plan (SSP). The SSP is aligned with state and complex area
goals and objectives. To operationalize actions in the SSP, a one-year
Academic and Financial Plan (AcFin) will detail specific activities,
timelines, and assign resources necessary for implementation. The school
improvement process requires a review of relevant performance and
student data, the inclusion of stakeholders, and an annual update of the
SSP and AcFin. The school community annually reviews and updates the SSP
to reflect the most recent data, progress and changes. Each year the
timeline of the SSP is projected one-year forward. Thus, a multi-year
plan guides school improvement activities.

Title I schools that operated schoolwide programs (e.g. schools with a
minimum of 40% free/reduced lunch count) are required under NCLB to
overtly incorporate the following ten schoolwide components into their
school improvement plans (SSP/AcFin):

1.  Incorporate a comprehensive needs assessment;

2.  Identify schoolwide reform strategies;

3.  Provide instruction by highly qualified teachers;

4.  Provide high quality and on-going professional development;

5.  Implement strategies to attract high quality, highly qualified
    teachers;

6.  Implement strategies to increase parental involvement;

7.  Incorporate transition plans;

8.  Include teachers in the discussion;

9.  Ensure students who experience difficulty mastering the proficient
    or advanced levels of academic achievement are provided with
    effective and timely additional assistance; and

10. Coordinate and integrate federal, state, and local services and
    programs.

All public schools identified by the State (i.e. Needs Improvement Year
1, Needs Improvement Year 2, Corrective Action, Planning for
Restructuring, or Restructuring) are to revise their respective school
improvement plan within 90 days of notification.

**Hawaii's Unique Location and Teacher Retention and Recruitment
Challenges**

The Hawaiian Archipelago is comprised of eight islands extending across
1,500 miles. Other than the Easter Islands, Hawaii is further away from
land than any other land mass on Earth. At a distance of 2,300 miles
from even the west coast of the mainland, HDE struggles to recruit and
retain highly qualified teachers. Each year the department must hire
approximately 1,300 new teachers. HDE estimates it will need to hire
7,500 new teachers in the next five years. In addition, because of the
remote and often isolated nature of the islands, both cost of living and
housing accommodations affect the teacher candidate pool. The average
beginning teacher salary is approximately \$37,615. According to the
American Chamber of Commerce Researchers' Association, Hawaii is ranked
as the fourth most expensive place to live in the country - making it
difficult for Hawaii teachers to make ends meet. It is within this
unique and challenging context that this plan is written.

**Hawaii's Revised State HQT Plan**

The Title II State Plan is aligned with other state plans related to
NCLB and standards-based education. These include:

-   Hawaii's implementation of standards-based education;

-   Consolidated State Application Accountability Workbook;

-   State Performance plan for Special Education; and

-   Aligned Strategic Plans of Hawaii Board of Education and Department
    of Education.

This report is Hawaii's response to the United States Department of
Education (USDE) request for a coherent HQT plan, adequately addressing
No Child Left Behind, Title II regulations. The State Plan addresses
each of the six requirements in the following sections.

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

*1.1 Does the revised plan include an analysis of classes taught by
teachers who are not highly qualified? Is the analysis based on accurate
classroom level data?*

In Hawaii, the "elementary" designation is given to those schools that
include no grades higher than grade five. Secondary schools are defined
as any school that includes grade six or higher. Because some school
configurations do not fit exactly into this definition, for example K-12
schools, in some of the data reported below for secondary schools
"elementary" has been included as a core academic content area. In such
cases, these are self contained classes that are grades K-5. Under the
Hawaii licensure system, 65 teachers are licensed in reading.
Thirty-five of these teachers are classified as elementary and 30 are
included in secondary schools within the core academic area of
English/language arts. All definitions used for HQT data collection and
State Plan implementation are located in Appendix A. All data referenced
in this plan are located in Appendix B.

An advantage in Hawaii's unitary system is that teacher qualification,
course offering data, and school performance data are all housed within
our databases and are verified by school principals and other HDE staff
prior to their final entry into HDE data systems. This results in an
accurate and detailed picture of Hawaii's class offerings, the HQT
status of its teachers, and the poverty and AYP status of each school.
Data displayed below are in three sets, 1) Elementary Classes, 2) Grades
6-12 Core Academic Classes, 3) Special Education Classes.

Table 1.1.1 SY 2006-07. Number and Percentage of Elementary Classes
Taught by HQ and NHQT.

+--------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+
| Total        | HQT Classes | HQT Percent | NHQT        | NHQT        |
|              |             |             |             |             |
| Classes      |             |             | Classes     | Percent     |
+--------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+
| 4,691        | 4,196       | 89%         | 495         | 11%         |
+--------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+

Table 1.1.2 SY 2006-07. Grades 6-12 Number and Percentage of Core
Academic Classes Taught by HQ and NHQT.

+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+-------+
| Core Academic Area    | Total  | HQT    | HQT    | NHQT   | NHQT  |
|                       |        | C      | P      |        |       |
|                       | C      | lasses | ercent | C      | Pe    |
|                       | lasses |        |        | lasses | rcent |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+-------+
| Art                   | 1,130  | 901    | 80%    | 229    | 20%   |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+-------+
| English/Language Arts | 5,321  | 3520   | 66%    | 1,801  | 34%   |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+-------+
| Foreign Language      | 806    | 526    | 65%    | 280    | 35%   |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+-------+
| Mathematics           | 4,444  | 2,440  | 55%    | 2,004  | 45%   |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+-------+
| Science               | 3,559  | 2,430  | 68%    | 1,129  | 32%   |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+-------+
| Social Studies        | 3,699  | 2,775  | 75%    | 924    | 25%   |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+-------+
| Total                 | 18,959 | 12,592 | 66%    | 6,367  | 34%   |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+-------+

Table 1.1.3 SY 2006-07. Number and Percentage of Special Education
classes taught by HQ and NHQT.

+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+-------+
| Core Academic Area    | Total  | HQT    | HQT    | NHQT   | NHQT  |
|                       |        | C      | P      |        |       |
|                       | C      | lasses | ercent | C      | Pe    |
|                       | lasses |        |        | lasses | rcent |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+-------+
| Elementary            | 802    | 521    | 65%    | 281    | 35%   |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+-------+
| Art                   | 47     | 1      | 2%     | 46     | 98%   |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+-------+
| English/Language Arts | 1932   | 319    | 17%    | 1613   | 83%   |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+-------+
| Foreign Language      | 1      | 0      | 0%     | 1      | 100%  |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+-------+
| Mathematics           | 1593   | 97     | 6%     | 1496   | 94%   |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+-------+
| Science               | 800    | 58     | 7%     | 742    | 93%   |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+-------+
| Social Studies        | 961    | 124    | 13%    | 837    | 87%   |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+-------+
| Total                 | 6,136  | 1,120  | 18%    | 5,016  | 82%   |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+-------+

The total number of elementary classes offered in all Hawaii schools is
4,691. Of these, 4,196 are taught by HQT for an overall state rate of
89%. Four hundred ninety five elementary classes are taught by NHQT for
an overall rate of 11%.

The total number of core academic classes offered in Hawaii secondary
schools is 18,959. Of these, 12,592 are taught by HQT for an overall
state rate of 66% of Hawaii's core academic classes taught by HQT. There
are 6,367 core academic classes taught by NHQT for an overall rate of
34% of Hawaii's core academic classes taught by NHQT. The two core
academic areas with the greatest numbers of classes taught by NHQT
are: 1) mathematics (2,004); and 2) English language arts (1,801).

The total number of special education classes offered in Hawaii is
6,136. Of these, 1,120 are taught by HQT for an overall state rate of
18% of Hawaii's special education classes taught by HQT. There are 5,016
special education classes taught by NHQT for an overall rate of 82% of
Hawaii's special education classes taught by NHQT. The two core academic
areas with the greatest numbers of special education classes taught by
NHQT are: 1) English/ language arts (1,613) and 2) mathematics (1,496).

Table 1.1.4 Summary of Core Subject Area Classes Taught by NHQT for
Total, Elementary and Secondary Schools for the 2006-07 School Year (Not
including Special Education Core Classes)

  ------------ --------------- --------------- --------------- ----------
  School Type  Total Number of Number of Core  Percentage of   Number of
               Core Academic   Academic        Core Academic   Non HQT
               Classes 2006-07 Classes Taught  Classes Taught  Teachers
                               by NHQT 2006-07 by NHQT 2006-07 

  All Schools  23,650          6,862           29%             1,528
  in State                                                     

  All          4,558           460             10%             460
  Elementary                                                   
  Schools                                                      

  All          19,092          6,402           34%             1,068
  Secondary                                                    
  Schools                                                      
  ------------ --------------- --------------- --------------- ----------

The chart above shows the overall elementary and secondary HQT data for
schools statewide (excluding special education). In 2006-07, of the
23,650 non-special education core academic classes, 29% (6,862) classes
were taught by NHQT. Of the 4,558 non-special education core academic
elementary classes, 10% (460) classes were taught by NHQT. At the
secondary level, of the 19,092 non-special education core academic
classes, 34% (1,068) were taught by NHQT. Statewide 1,528 teachers (460
at the elementary level and 1,068 at the secondary level) taught one or
more core academic classes for which they were NHQ.

Table 1.1.5 Number of Core Subject Area Special Education Classes Taught
by NHQT for Total, Elementary and Secondary Schools for the 2006-07
School Year

+------------+---------------+---------------+--------------+---------+
| School     | Total Number  | Number of     | Percentage   | Number  |
| Type       | of Core       | Core Academic | of Core      | of Non  |
|            | Academic      | Special       | Academic     | HQT     |
|            | Special       | Education     | Classes      | T       |
|            | Education     | Classes       | Taught by    | eachers |
|            | Classes       | Taught by Non | Non HQT      |         |
|            | 2006-07       | HQT 2006-07   |              |         |
|            |               |               | 2006-07      |         |
+------------+---------------+---------------+--------------+---------+
| All        | 6136          | 5016          | 82%          | 933     |
| Schools in |               |               |              |         |
| State      |               |               |              |         |
+------------+---------------+---------------+--------------+---------+
| All        | 765           | 265           | 35%          | 265     |
| Elementary |               |               |              |         |
| Schools    |               |               |              |         |
+------------+---------------+---------------+--------------+---------+
| All        | 5371          | 4751          | 88%          | 668     |
| Secondary  |               |               |              |         |
| Schools    |               |               |              |         |
+------------+---------------+---------------+--------------+---------+

The chart above displays data for Hawaii's special education classes. As
in other states across the nation, special education continues to be an
area of concern in the number and percentage of classes taught by NHQT.
In 2006-07, of the 6,136 special education core academic classes, 82%
(5016) classes were taught by NHQT. At the elementary level, of the
total 765 core academic special education classes, 35% (265) were taught
by NHQT. At the secondary level, 88% (4,751) were taught by NHQT.

*1.2 Does the analysis focus on the staffing needs of schools that are
not making AYP? Do these schools have high percentages of classes taught
by teachers who are not highly qualified?*

The following tables contain the school year 2005-06 AYP status data and
the school year 2006-07 HQT data. This current data allows us to look
more closely into the numbers and percentages of HQT and NHQT teachers
in Title I schools overall and those who met AYP and those that did not
meet AYP.

There are a total of 282 schools in Hawaii. Of these, 182 (163
non-charter and 19 charter schools) did not make AYP in SY 2005-06. The
tables below provide data about the classes taught by HQT and NHQT in
both Title I and Non-Title I non-charter schools. Charter schools will
be included in data reports beginning in 2007-08. In these tables,
schools are further divided within each section to display results from
those schools making AYP, those not making AYP and totals overall.

Table 1.2.1 SY 2005-06 Title I Schools by AYP Status with SY 2006-07
Number and Percent Of Classes Taught by NHQT

<table>
<colgroup>
<col style="width: 15%" />
<col style="width: 8%" />
<col style="width: 11%" />
<col style="width: 8%" />
<col style="width: 9%" />
<col style="width: 11%" />
<col style="width: 8%" />
<col style="width: 8%" />
<col style="width: 11%" />
<col style="width: 8%" />
</colgroup>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td rowspan="2"></td>
<td colspan="3"><p>AYP MET</p>
<p>37 Elementary / 7 Secondary</p></td>
<td colspan="3"><p>AYP NOT MET</p>
<p>77 Elementary / 50 Secondary</p></td>
<td colspan="3"><p>ALL TITLE I SCHOOLS</p>
<p>Total Schools = 171</p></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td>Total Core Acad. Classes</td>
<td>Number of Classes Taught by NHQT</td>
<td>Percent of Classes Taught by NHQT</td>
<td>Total Core Acad. Classes</td>
<td>Number of Classes Taught by NHQT</td>
<td>Percent of Classes Taught by NHQT</td>
<td><p>Total Core</p>
<p>Acad.</p>
<p>Classes</p></td>
<td>Number of Classes Taught by NHQT</td>
<td>Percent of Classes Taught by NHQT</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td>TOTAL</td>
<td>1,778</td>
<td>533</td>
<td>30%</td>
<td>15,227</td>
<td>6,403</td>
<td>42%</td>
<td>17,005</td>
<td>6,936</td>
<td>41%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td>ELEMENTARY</td>
<td>838</td>
<td>80</td>
<td>10%</td>
<td>2,329</td>
<td>266</td>
<td>11%</td>
<td>3,167</td>
<td>346</td>
<td>11%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td>ELEM SPED</td>
<td>148</td>
<td>51</td>
<td>34%</td>
<td>418</td>
<td>151</td>
<td>36%</td>
<td>566</td>
<td>202</td>
<td>36%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td>SECONDARY</td>
<td>620</td>
<td>241</td>
<td>39%</td>
<td>9,652</td>
<td>3,468</td>
<td>36%</td>
<td>10,272</td>
<td>3,709</td>
<td>36%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td>SEC SPED</td>
<td>172</td>
<td>161</td>
<td>94%</td>
<td>2,828</td>
<td>2,518</td>
<td>89%</td>
<td>3,000</td>
<td>2,679</td>
<td>89%</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>

**Title I Schools**

In all Title I Schools 17,005 core academic classes were taught. Of
these, 6,936 (41%) were taught by NHQT. Of the 15,227 core academic
classes taught in Title I schools that did not make AYP, 6,403 (42%)
were taught by NHQT.

In all Title I elementary schools 3,167 core academic classes were
taught. Of these, 346 (11%) were taught by NHQT. Of the 2,329 core
academic classes taught in Title I elementary schools that did not make
AYP, 266 (11%) were taught by NHQT.

In all Title I secondary schools 10,272 core academic classes were
taught. Of these, 3,709 (36%) were taught by NHQT. Of the 9,652 core
academic classes taught in Title I secondary schools that did not make
AYP, 3,468 (36%) were taught by NHQT.

In all Title I elementary schools 566 core academic special education
classes were taught. Of these, 202 (36%) were taught by NHQT. Of the 418
core academic elementary special education classes taught in Title I
elementary schools that did not make AYP, 151 (36%) were taught by NHQT.

In all Title I secondary schools 3,000 core academic special education
classes were taught. Of these, 2,679 (89%) were taught by NHQT. Of the
2,828 core academic secondary special education classes taught in Title
I secondary schools that did not make AYP, 2,518 (90%) were taught by
NHQT

Table 1.2.2 SY 2005-06 Non-Title I Schools by AYP Status with SY 2006-07
Number and Percent Of Classes Taught by NHQT

<table style="width:100%;">
<colgroup>
<col style="width: 15%" />
<col style="width: 8%" />
<col style="width: 11%" />
<col style="width: 8%" />
<col style="width: 8%" />
<col style="width: 11%" />
<col style="width: 8%" />
<col style="width: 8%" />
<col style="width: 11%" />
<col style="width: 9%" />
</colgroup>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td rowspan="2"></td>
<td colspan="3"><p>AYP MET</p>
<p>40 Elementary / 5 Secondary</p></td>
<td colspan="3"><p>AYP NOT MET</p>
<p>13 Elementary / 23 Secondary</p></td>
<td colspan="3"><p>ALL NON-TITLE I SCHOOLS</p>
<p>Total Schools = 84</p></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td><p>Total Core</p>
<p>Acad.</p>
<p>Classes</p></td>
<td>Number of Classes Taught by NHQT</td>
<td>Percent of Classes Taught by NHQT</td>
<td><p>Total Core</p>
<p>Acad.</p>
<p>Classes</p></td>
<td>Number of Classes Taught by NHQT</td>
<td>Percent of Classes Taught by NHQT</td>
<td><p>Total Core</p>
<p>Acad.</p>
<p>Classes</p></td>
<td>Number of Classes Taught by NHQT</td>
<td>Percent of Classes Taught by NHQT</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td>TOTAL</td>
<td>2,362</td>
<td>505</td>
<td>21%</td>
<td>10,465</td>
<td>4,437</td>
<td>42%</td>
<td>12,827</td>
<td>4,942</td>
<td>39%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td>ELEMENTARY</td>
<td>1,033</td>
<td>78</td>
<td>8%</td>
<td>404</td>
<td>36</td>
<td>9%</td>
<td>1,437</td>
<td>114</td>
<td>8%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td>ELEM SPED</td>
<td>133</td>
<td>41</td>
<td>31%</td>
<td>66</td>
<td>22</td>
<td>33%</td>
<td>199</td>
<td>63</td>
<td>32%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td>SECONDARY</td>
<td>1,012</td>
<td>227</td>
<td>22%</td>
<td>7,808</td>
<td>2,466</td>
<td>32%</td>
<td>8,820</td>
<td>2,693</td>
<td>31%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td>SEC SPED</td>
<td>184</td>
<td>159</td>
<td>86%</td>
<td>2,187</td>
<td>1,913</td>
<td>87%</td>
<td>2,371</td>
<td>2,072</td>
<td>87%</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>

**Non-Title I Schools**

In all Non-Title I Schools 12,827 core academic classes were taught. Of
these, 4,942 (39%) were taught by NHQT. Of the 10,465 core academic
classes taught in Non-Title I elementary schools that did not make AYP,
4,437 (42%) were taught by NHQT.

In all Non-Title I elementary schools 1,437 core academic classes were
taught. Of these, 114 (8%) were taught by NHQT. Of the 404 core academic
classes taught in Non-Title I elementary schools that did not make AYP,
36 (9%) were taught by NHQT.

In all Non-Title I secondary schools 8,820 core academic classes were
taught. Of these, 2,693 (31%) were taught by Non HQT. Of the 7,808 core
academic classes taught in Non-Title I secondary schools that did not
make AYP, 2,466 (32%) were taught by NHQT.

In all Non-Title I elementary schools 199 core academic special
education classes were taught. Of these, 63 (32%) were taught by NHQT.
Of the 66 core academic elementary special education classes that did
not make AYP, 22 (33%) were taught by Non HQT.

In all Non-Title I secondary schools 2,371 core academic special
education classes were taught. Of these, 2,072 (87%) were taught by
NHQT. Of the 2,187 core academic secondary special education classes
taught in Title I secondary schools that did not make AYP, 1,913 (87%)
were taught by NHQT

Table 1.2.3 SY 2005-06 Title I Elementary Schools in Improvement Status
with Number and Percent of Classes Taught by NHQT

+------------------------------+-------+-------+---------+-----------+
| **Title I Elementary Schools | Total | Total | Number  | Percent   |
| in School Improvement        |       |       | of NHQT | of        |
| Status**                     | Sc    | Cl    | Classes | classes   |
|                              | hools | asses |         | taught by |
|                              |       |       |         | NHQT      |
+------------------------------+-------+-------+---------+-----------+
| Good Standing                | 41    | 1204  | 156     | 13%       |
+------------------------------+-------+-------+---------+-----------+
| Needs Improvement Year 1     | 34    | 1208  | 146     | 12%       |
+------------------------------+-------+-------+---------+-----------+
| Needs Improvement Year 2     | 7     | 160   | 21      | 13%       |
+------------------------------+-------+-------+---------+-----------+
| Corrective Action            | 5     | 232   | 38      | 16%       |
+------------------------------+-------+-------+---------+-----------+
| Planning For Restructuring   | 1     | 19    | 6       | 32%       |
+------------------------------+-------+-------+---------+-----------+
| Restructuring                | 27    | 910   | 181     | 20%       |
+------------------------------+-------+-------+---------+-----------+

In the table above, the numbers of Title I elementary schools, total
number of core academic classes offered at each school, and the number
and percentage of those classes taught by NHQT is displayed for those
elementary schools in the five steps of school improvement. The highest
percentage of NHQT (32%) is in the single school in the "Planning for
Restructuring" step. The highest numbers (181) of NHQT classes are
taught at the 27 schools in the "Restructuring" step.

Table 1.2.4 SY 2005-06 Title I Secondary Schools in Improvement Status
with Number and Percent of Classes Taught by NHQT

+------------------------------+-------+-------+---------+-----------+
| **Title I Secondary Schools  | Total | Total | Number  | Percent   |
| in School Improvement        |       |       | of NHQT | of        |
| Status**                     | Sc    | Cl    | Classes | classes   |
|                              | hools | asses |         | taught by |
|                              |       |       |         | NHQT      |
+------------------------------+-------+-------+---------+-----------+
| Good Standing                | 6     | 622   | 327     | 53%       |
+------------------------------+-------+-------+---------+-----------+
| Needs Improvement Year 1     | 4     | 777   | 392     | 50%       |
+------------------------------+-------+-------+---------+-----------+
| Needs Improvement Year 2     | 1     | 170   | 75      | 44%       |
+------------------------------+-------+-------+---------+-----------+
| Corrective Action            | 22    | 7180  | 3362    | 47%       |
+------------------------------+-------+-------+---------+-----------+
| Planning For Restructuring   | 2     | 515   | 248     | 48%       |
+------------------------------+-------+-------+---------+-----------+
| Restructuring                | 22    | 4008  | 1984    | 50%       |
+------------------------------+-------+-------+---------+-----------+

In the table above, the numbers of Title I secondary schools, total
number of core academic classes offered at each school, and the number
and percentage of those classes taught by NHQT is displayed for those
secondary schools in the five steps of school improvement. The highest
percentages of NHQT are the 4 schools in "Needs Improvement -- Year 2"
and the 22 schools in the "Restructuring" step. The highest numbers of
NHQT classes are those classes taught at the 22 schools in the
"corrective action" step (1984).

Table 1.2.5 SY 2005-06 Non Title I Elementary Schools with Number of
Percent of Classes Taught by NHQT

+------------------------------+-------+-------+---------+-----------+
| **Non-Title I Elementary     | Total | Total | Number  | Percent   |
| Schools**                    |       |       | of NHQT | of        |
|                              | Sc    | Cl    | Classes | classes   |
|                              | hools | asses |         | taught by |
|                              |       |       |         | NHQT      |
+------------------------------+-------+-------+---------+-----------+
| Good Standing                | 46    | 1321  | 131     | 10%       |
+------------------------------+-------+-------+---------+-----------+
| Needs Improvement Year 1     | 3     | 125   | 20      | 16%       |
+------------------------------+-------+-------+---------+-----------+
| Needs Improvement Year 2     | 1     | 34    | 2       | 6%        |
+------------------------------+-------+-------+---------+-----------+
| Corrective Action            | 3     | 148   | 24      | 16%       |
+------------------------------+-------+-------+---------+-----------+

In the table above, the numbers of Non-Title I elementary schools, total
number of core academic classes offered at each school, and the number
and percentage of those classes taught by NHQT is displayed for those
elementary schools in school improvement. The highest percentage of NHQT
(16%) is in the 3 schools in "Needs Improvement Year 1" and the three
schools in "Corrective Action." The highest numbers (24) of NHQT classes
are taught at the 3 schools in the "Corrective Action" step.

Table 1.2.6 SY 2005-06 Non Title I Secondary Schools with Number of
Percent of Classes Taught by NHQT

+------------------------------+-------+-------+---------+-----------+
| **Non-Title I Secondary      | Total | Total | Number  | Percent   |
| Schools**                    |       |       | of NHQT | of        |
|                              | Sc    | Cl    | Classes | classes   |
|                              | hools | asses |         | taught by |
|                              |       |       |         | NHQT      |
+------------------------------+-------+-------+---------+-----------+
| Good Standing                | 5     | 1196  | 386     | 32%       |
+------------------------------+-------+-------+---------+-----------+
| Needs Improvement Year 1     | 1     | 328   | 133     | 41%       |
+------------------------------+-------+-------+---------+-----------+
| Corrective Action            | 22    | 9667  | 4246    | 44%       |
+------------------------------+-------+-------+---------+-----------+

In the table above, the numbers of Non-Title I secondary schools, total
number of core academic classes offered at each school, and the number
and percentage of those classes taught by NHQT is displayed for those
secondary schools in the five steps of school improvement. The highest
percentage of NHQT (44%) is in the 22 schools in the "Corrective Action"
step. The highest numbers (4,246) of NHQT classes are also taught at the
22 schools in the "Corrective Action" step.

**AYP/HQT Priority Attention**

Based on the data above, the schools in the table below have been
targeted for prioritized assistance. None of these schools made AYP in
2005-2006. These 18 high priority schools are distributed among seven
Complex Areas. They range 57.4% to 80% in their free and reduced lunch
count and none made AYP. All are in the highest poverty quartile and
each has 30% or more NHQT. Five of the eighteen schools are also
included in the rural school list below. Together, these schools have
320 teachers not yet highly qualified to teach one or more core academic
area(s) for which they are assigned.

**Table 1.2.7 SY 2006-07 Priority Attention Elementary Schools and
Associated Complex Areas**

  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Complex Area                     School                  Percent of Number
                                                           classes    of NHQT
                                                           taught by  
                                                           NHQT       
  -------------------------------- ----------------------- ---------- --------
  Campbell-Kapolei-Waianae         Wai\`anae Intermediate  70.30%     36

  Campbell-Kapolei-Waianae         Wai\`anae High          62.90%     47

  Campbell-Kapolei-Waianae         Waianae Elementary      50.00%     23

  Campbell-Kapolei-Waianae         Makaha K-6              32.50%     13

  Farrington-Kaiser                Sanford B. Dole Middle  46.50%     16

  Farrington-Kaiser                King David Kalakaua     36.50%     14
                                   Middle                             

  Hana-Lahainaluna-Lanai-Molokai   Hana High & Elementary  45.10%     9

  Hana-Lahainaluna-Lanai-Molokai   Moloka\`i Intermediate  43.30%     6

  Hana-Lahainaluna-Lanai-Molokai   Moloka\`i High          41.1%      9

  Hana-Lahainaluna-Lanai-Molokai   Maunaloa K-6            40.0%      2

  Kailua-Kalaheo                   Waimanalo Elem/Intermed 36.8%      14

  Kau-Keaau-Pahoa                  Kea\`au Middle          40.3%      15

  Kau-Keaau-Pahoa                  Ka\`u High & Pahala     33.8%      15
                                   Elem                               

  Kau-Keaau-Pahoa                  Kea\`au High            60.9%      24

  Kau-Keaau-Pahoa                  Pahoa High &            60.4%      27
                                   Intermediate                       

  McKinley-Roosevelt               Central Middle          44.8%      11

  Nanakuli-Pearl City-Waipahu      Nanaikapono K-6         31.4%      22

  Nanakuli-Pearl City-Waipahu      Nanakuli Elementary     50.0%      17
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------

*1.3 Does the analysis identify particular groups of teachers to which
the State's plan must pay particular attention, such as special
education teachers, mathematics or science teachers, or multi-subject
teachers in rural schools?*

Hawaii educators at all levels share a commitment to ensuring that all
teachers of core academic subjects in the state are highly qualified. As
seen in Table 1.1.1 above, the data indicates that the subgroup of
special education, and the core content areas of mathematics, foreign
languages and English language arts are being taught by the highest
*percentage* of teachers who are not highly qualified (82%, 45%, 35% and
34% respectively). Special education has the highest *number* (5,016) of
classes taught by teachers who are not highly qualified followed by
mathematics (2,004) and English language arts (1,801). Focusing on
improving the percentage of special education, mathematics, and English
language arts classes taught by highly qualified teachers will provide
the greatest impact on the students of Hawaii and in turn, positively
impact the state's AYP results.

Hawaii has a unique set of circumstances as we address particular groups
of teachers. As a unitary district, the state serves as both a state
educational agency and a local education agency. This offers many
advantages to Hawaii as it works to meet the goals of 100% teachers of
core academic areas HQ. For example, all teachers are directly employed
by the HDE, they are state employees. In addition, all personnel records
are kept at the state level including transcripts and continuing
professional development. This enables the state to more efficiently
provide outreach services and targeted professional development. The
strategies to address the professional development needs of special
education, mathematics, and English language arts teachers who are not
yet highly qualified are described in Section 3.4.

The unitary system provides for distinct disadvantages as well. One
clear disadvantage is Hawaii's inability to qualify it's rural schools
under the federal REAP program. The REAP definition is based on an
LEA/SEA state configuration; requiring the designation of school
districts, thereby eliminating the state of Hawaii from access to REAP
funds and USDE designation of rural schools. However, as a state
comprised of eight small islands, 2,300 miles from the west coast of the
United States, with limited infrastructure, many Hawaii schools
experience the same challenges and difficulties faced by mainland rural
districts and schools. These schools often have teachers teaching
multiple grade levels and subjects and will require unique strategies,
including distance learning and additional time to meet HQT goals. The
following table identifies the 13 schools, and the island on which they
are located that are considered rural by the US Department of
Agriculture according to the 2000 Census Tracts, Rural-Urban Commuting
Area Codes.

**Table 1.3.1 Hawaii Rural Schools as Identified by the US Department of
Agriculture**

  ---- ---------------------------------------- --------------------------
       School                                   Island

  1    Maunaloa Elementary                      Moloka'i.

  2    Moloka\`i High                           Moloka'i.

  3    Moloka\`i Intermediate                   Moloka'i.

  4    Hanalei Elementary                       Kauai

  5    Kilauea Elementary                       Kauai

  6    Hana High & Elementary                   Maui

  7    Ke\`anae                                 Maui

  8    Kualapu\`u Elementary                    Maui

  9    Honaunau Elementary                      Hawaii

  10   Ho\'okeEna Elementary                    Hawaii

  11   Ka\`u High & Pahala Elementary           Hawaii

  12   Na\'alehu Elementary & Intermediate      Hawaii

  13   Pa\`auilo Elementary & Intermediate      Hawaii
  ---- ---------------------------------------- --------------------------

Moloka'I High, Moloka'I Intermediate, Maunaloa Elementary, and Kualapu'u
Public Charter School are on the island of Moloka'i. The total
enrollment is just over 1,000 students K-12 and the total population of
Moloka'i is only about 7,500. It is included as part of Maui County but
is only accessible by air and serviced only by flights from Oahu.
Similarly, Hana High and Elementary and Keanne Elementary schools are
part of Maui County but are isolated from the county population center
by a single two-lane road with frequent one-lane bridges. The commute
time is nearly 3 hours one way. Keanne Elementary School is frequently
closed due to lack of students. The enrollment at Hana High and
Elementary School is 356 students. The Haunanu, Hookena, Ka\`u High &
Pahala Elementary, and Na\'alehu Elementary & Intermediate Schools are
on the southern tip of the Island of Hawaii located along the Volcanoes
National Park. At 58 miles, two (2) hours drive time, Ka'u High and
Pahala Elemenatary School is the closest school to the nearest
population center, Hilo, Hawaii. Many homes in the area are "off the
grid" meaning that they rely on alternative energy sources and rain
catchment systems for water. Finally, Hanalei and Kilauea Elementary
Schools service small communities on the northern tip of the Island of
Kauai. The combined enrollment averages about 500 students.

The table below illustrates the serious challenges faced by Hawaii's
small, remote schools and their teachers in meeting HQ status. This
table reflects the thirteen schools described above.

Table 1.3.2 SY 2006-07 Number of Classes Taught by HQT and NHQT in
Hawaii's Rural Schools

+--------------------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+
| Core Subject Area        | Number of   | Number of   | Total       |
|                          | classes     | classes     | number of   |
|                          | taught by   | taught by   | classes in  |
|                          | HQT         | NHQT        |             |
|                          |             |             | S & R       |
|                          |             |             | schools     |
+--------------------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+
| Elementary               | 88          | 16          | 104         |
+--------------------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+
| Art                      | 40          | 4           | 44          |
+--------------------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+
| English -- Language Arts | 74          | 32          | 106         |
+--------------------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+
| Foreign Language         | 0           | 10          | 10          |
+--------------------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+
| Mathematics              | 42          | 42          | 84          |
+--------------------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+
| Science                  | 45          | 19          | 64          |
+--------------------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+
| Social Studies           | 45          | 14          | 59          |
+--------------------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+
| Special Education\*      | 21          | 65          | 86          |
+--------------------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+
| Grand Total              | 334         | 137         | 471         |
+--------------------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+

\* Special Education is defined as a subgroup

We discuss these schools for two purposes: 1) to paint a picture of
these schools and to express the similarity of these characteristics
with rural schools eligible for REAP in other states; and 2) to provide
the HQT data in the rural schools and consider the unique professional
development strategies necessary to meet HQT goals.

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

*2.1 Does the plan identify LEAs that have not met annual measurable
objectives for HQT?*

There are 15 CAs across the state of Hawaii. No CAs have met the annual
measurable objective of 100% core academic courses taught by HQT.
Therefore, the SEA/LEA has also not met the annual measurable objective
for HQT.

2.  *Does the plan include specific steps that will be taken by LEAs
    that have not met annual measurable objectives?*

The HDE notified all CAs and schools in writing the names of the
teachers working in their school or CA who were highly qualified based
on 2005-06 HQT data. Every April for the past two years, HDE has
required each school verify HQT status and submit evidence of progress
toward HQT including HOUSSE documentation. Included in that
communication was the assurance that HDE will be working with the
schools and CAs to ensure accurate data collection.

Upon notification of the December submission of the HDE Revised HQT Plan
not meeting federal expectations, HDE suspended the HOUSSE process.
Based on the September 2006 HQT data collection process and the revised
HQT definitions (Appendix B), the HDE has painstakingly reviewed the
qualifications of each teacher and carefully associated every core
content course, elementary classroom and special education classroom to
ensure accuracy of the 2006-07 HQT data collection. In preparation for
the approval of this plan, and because some teachers were mistakenly
identified as HQ in 2005-06, the HDE is currently preparing new HOUSSE
data collection documents and preparing to communicate directly with all
NHQ teachers**.** CA Superintendents have been involved in the design of
this State plan and are aware of the need to immediately address
improving the percentage of HQTs. Time is of the essence and they are
poised to begin the communications and outreach in May before school
adjourns for the six week summer break. Each school will receive an
updated list of the teachers who were not HQ in 2006-07 and the course
assignment for which they are not highly qualified. This data will be
available along with the master schedule and placement information for
the 2008-09 school year.

The HDE technical assistance plans include a five step approach: 1)
reapply the HOUSSE criteria to veteran teachers who are not HQ based on
the 2006/07 data collection; 2) require a succinct Individual
Professional Development Plan(IPDP) for each NHQT to become HQT in the
most expeditious manner possible (each NHQ teacher must work jointly
with the school principal to develop an IPDP within 30 days of hire); 3)
coordinate a variety of PRAXIS prep courses throughout the summer and
next school year; 4) offer monthly PRAXIS administration opportunities
over the next six months; and 5) register all NHQTs in on-line and
classroom-based content driven professional development.

The following protocols have been developed by the HDE to ensure that
all CAs and schools have plans in place to assist all NHQT to become HQ
and meet the statewide objective of 100% highly qualified teachers in
every core academic class by the end of SY2006/07. These guidelines will
more clearly explain the role and responsibilities of the CAs, schools,
and teachers as we work together to ensure the HQT requirements are
understood and implemented. These protocols will be communicated to all
stakeholders upon approval of this plan by USDE.

[Complex Area Responsibilities]{.underline}

-   Using data provided by HDE, analyze CA HQT data including progress
    toward 100% HQT goal, NHQT teaching assignments, equitable
    distribution of NHQT, schools with greatest needs, content areas of
    greatest need, identify effectiveness of current Title II efforts;

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Report analysis to HDE on February 1 for mid-year report and June 1
    for final report to USDE;

    -   Based on comprehensive analysis, incorporate into the CA
        Strategic Plan and Academic and Financial Plans, a CA plan to
        address NCLB HQT Improvement including statement of need,
        strategies to achieve 100% HQT, timelines, and funding sources;

    -   The plan to address HQT improvement will ensure support for all
        NHQT to become HQ in all schools in the CA, including charter
        schools;

    -   The Academic and Financial Plan should reflect the strategic
        actions and enabling activities for the use of Title II-A
        funding. Title II-A funding must be prioritized first to provide
        financial support for teachers who have [not]{.underline} met
        the HQT requirements

-   Submit Complex Area Strategic Plan, and Academic and Financial Plans
    to HDE by October 15 annually

-   Complex Areas will provide evidence of HQT to HDE during on-site
    program monitoring as part of the regular program monitoring as
    required for each of the following programs:

    -   Title I

    -   Title II

    -   Title III

    -   Special Education

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   CAs will be required to develop their plans in coordination with HDE
    (OHR, OSSIS, Superintendent's Office) when significant concerns
    arise over inaccurate HQT data or when percentages of Non-HQT fail
    to decrease; and

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   CAs will be required to comply with all HQT state and federal
    program regulations. Compliance will be monitored by HDE. Failure to
    meet program regulations and/or established deadlines may result in
    sanctions, including an interruption of federal funds.

[School Responsibilities]{.underline}

-   School principals will submit to the HDE, the master schedule,
    course offerings, teacher assignment, and student course assignment.
    These data must be submitted annually by October 1 and within 30
    days of any new course assignment;

-   School principals will confirm the HQT data accuracy via the HDE
    annual data validation process by December 15 each year. The
    validation fields will include ACCN teaching assignment(s) and class
    roster;

-   School principals will oversee the development and implementation of
    an Individual Professional Development Plan (IPDP) for all NHQ
    teachers. The plan must be in place within 30 days of hire or
    assignment to a content area for which the teacher is NHQ. The plan
    must include teaching assignment(s) for which the teacher is NHQ,
    timeline and plans to become HQ, review dates, and support that will
    be provided by the school/CA;

-   Should the school fail to make progress toward meeting its goal of
    100% HQT for two consecutive years, the school must develop and
    include as part of its Academic and Financial Plans, a section that
    describes actions, funding and timelines that together will enable
    it to meet the HQT goal and that directly addresses the issues that
    prevented it from meeting its goal;

-   Title I and Non- Title I schools will send a Parental Notification
    Letter, as required by NCLB notifying parents or guardians that
    their child has been assigned or has been taught for four or more
    consecutive weeks by a teacher/substitute who is NHQ;

-   Title I schools identified as Priority Attention schools, will
    allocate a minimum of 5% of the school's Title I funds for
    professional development activities to ensure that teachers who are
    not currently highly qualified meet that standard;

-   Title I status school or Title I school identified as not making AYP
    will allocate 10% of its Title I, Part A funds for professional
    development;

-   Title II-A funding must be prioritized first to provide financial
    support for teachers who have [not]{.underline} met the HQT
    requirements;

-   School principals will provide school resources and assist NHQ
    teachers in completing IPDPs by September 1 annually; and

-   School principals will be required to comply with all HQT state and
    federal program regulations. Compliance will be monitored by HDE.
    Failure to meet program regulations and/or established deadlines may
    result in loss of hiring and assignment authority and/or an
    interruption of federal funds.

[Teacher Responsibilities]{.underline}

-   Each NHQ teacher must work jointly with the school principal to
    develop an IPDP. The plan must include teaching assignment(s) for
    which the teacher is NHQ, timeline and plans to become HQ, review
    dates, and support provided by the school/district;

-   The Individual Professional Development Plan must document a need in
    licensure or content area qualification based on current assignment
    and serve as a plan of action that leads from NHQ to HQ; and

-   An Individual Professional Development Plan must be completed by
    each NHQ teacher and submitted to the building principal within
    three weeks of employment or new assignment for which the teacher is
    not HQ.

*2.3 Does the plan delineate specific steps the SEA will take to ensure
that all LEAs have plans in place to assist all Non-HQ teachers to
become HQ as quickly as possible?*

The following protocols have been developed by HDE to ensure that all
CAs have plans in place to assist all NHQT to become HQ and meet the
statewide objective of 100% highly qualified teachers in every core
academic class by the beginning of SY2007/08. These guidelines will more
clearly explain the role and responsibilities of the SEA as we work
together to ensure the HQT requirements are understood and implemented.
These protocols will be communicated to all stakeholders upon approval
of this plan by USDE.

[SEA Responsibilities]{.underline}

-   Monitor and approve CA improvement plans for highly qualified
    teachers via the Strategic Plan, and Academic and Financial Plans;

-   Monitor and approve CA applications for Title II funding via the
    Resource Plan;

-   Monitor required Title I-A professional development which includes a
    minimum of 5% of a Priority Attention school's Title I funds for
    professional development activities to ensure that teachers who are
    not currently highly qualified meet that standard;

-   Ensure use of Title I-A and Title II-A includes evidence of
    financial support for teachers who have [not]{.underline} met the
    HQT requirements;

-   Collect statewide web-based data and provide each of the complex
    areas with NHQT status data for each school and each core subject
    area;

-   Provide current year school NHQT data by course, teacher, school and
    Complex Area by December 15 after the annual enrollment count date;

-   Provide CAs with technical assistance through training workshops
    covering data input, data interpretation, strategy and plan
    development, and progress evaluation;

-   Evaluate progress of all CAs and apply sanctions, as necessary, to
    those CAs and their component schools that have failed to make
    progress or meet the 100% HQT goal;

-   Maintain an accurate and current database of NHQTs statewide;

-   Monitor HQT criteria as a component of the on-site program
    monitoring and peer reviews, as required for each of the following
    programs:

    -   Title I,

    -   Title II,

    -   Title III, and

    -   Special Education;

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Arrange for an HQT Improvement Planning Team (comprised of
    Superintendent or designee, OHR lead, OCISS lead and CAS) to design
    and coordinate CA HQT plans when significant concerns arise over
    inaccurate HQT data or when percentages of Non-HQT significantly
    increase; and

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Ensure CA compliance with all HQT state and federal program
    regulations and provide technical assistance and administer
    sanctions if necessary. Failure to meet program regulations and/or
    established deadlines may result in the school's loss of hiring and
    assignment authority and/or an interruption of federal funds to the
    CA and/or school.

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

*3.1 Does the plan include a description of the technical assistance the
SEA will provide to assist LEAs in successfully carrying out their HQT
plans?*

HDE will provide to the CAs and composite schools the following
technical assistance on the timelines shown below:

Table 2.3.1 Timetable of SEA Activities through June 2008

+-----------+--------------------------------------+------------------+
| Date      | Activity                             | Assigned To      |
+===========+======================================+==================+
| May 2007  | -   Identify and designate an HQT    | Superintendent & |
|           |     Implementation Team              | Project Director |
|           |                                      |                  |
|           | -   Train CAs Personnel Resource     | Principals       |
|           |     Officers (PRO) and Principals in |                  |
|           |     HQT requirements, roles and      | CAS & OHR        |
|           |     responsibilities                 |                  |
|           |                                      | HTSB             |
|           | -   Arrange for additional PRAXIS    |                  |
|           |     administration dates             | HQT Team         |
|           |                                      |                  |
|           | -   Train all principals and CAS on  | HQT Team         |
|           |     implementation of Title II       |                  |
|           |     program                          | HQT Team         |
|           |                                      |                  |
|           | -   Analyze HQT data by school and   | OHR & HTSB       |
|           |     complex area                     |                  |
|           |                                      | OHR & OCISS      |
|           | -   Contact all schools with roster  |                  |
|           |     of NHQ teachers                  |                  |
|           |                                      |                  |
|           | -   Begin contacting all NHQ         |                  |
|           |     teachers and provide detailed    |                  |
|           |     analysis of HQT status           |                  |
|           |                                      |                  |
|           | -   Work with PROs, principals and   |                  |
|           |     individual teachers to design    |                  |
|           |     and implement IPDP               |                  |
+-----------+--------------------------------------+------------------+
| June 2007 | -   Work with UH and CCs to offer    | Highe Ed, OHR &  |
|           |     core content area professional   | HTSB             |
|           |     development courses via          |                  |
|           |     technology                       | OHR, OCISS &     |
|           |                                      | HTSB             |
|           | -   Assist with PRAXIS preparation   |                  |
|           |     workshops                        | OHR & OCISS      |
|           |                                      |                  |
|           | -   Assist NHQ teachers in accessing |                  |
|           |     professional development tied to |                  |
|           |     IPDP                             |                  |
+-----------+--------------------------------------+------------------+
| July --   | -   Update personnel changes via     | Principals & CAS |
| August    |     school personnel database        |                  |
| 2007      |                                      | Technology       |
|           | -   Integrate classroom data to HR   | Section          |
|           |     Data System                      |                  |
|           |                                      | Technology       |
|           | -   Integrate HQT Data with HR Data  | Section          |
|           |     System                           |                  |
|           |                                      | OHR              |
|           | -   Provide NHQT CA data summary to  |                  |
|           |     principals and CAs               | CAS and          |
|           |                                      | principals       |
|           | -   Review NHQT data for updating    |                  |
|           |     IPDP                             |                  |
+-----------+--------------------------------------+------------------+
| September | -   Provide technical assistance to  | OHR & OCISS      |
| 2007      |     NHQT to access professional      |                  |
|           |     development                      | HQT Team         |
|           |                                      |                  |
|           | -   Provide technical assistance to  | SEA AcFin Team   |
|           |     CAs and principals to ensure     |                  |
|           |     complete and accurate            | HQT Team         |
|           |     professional development         |                  |
|           |     strategic action(s) and          |                  |
|           |     activities are included in the   |                  |
|           |     Academic and Financial Plans     |                  |
|           |                                      |                  |
|           | -   Provide technical assistance to  |                  |
|           |     CAs to assist with Title II      |                  |
|           |     funding applications             |                  |
+-----------+--------------------------------------+------------------+
| October   | -   Review and analyze statewide HQT | HQT Team         |
| 2007 -    |     data                             |                  |
| May 2008  |                                      | OHR & OCISS      |
|           | -   Plan and implement professional  |                  |
|           |     development opportunities to     | OHR & OCISS      |
|           |     address areas of identified need |                  |
|           |                                      | HQT Team         |
|           | -   Disseminate professional         |                  |
|           |     development information to CAs,  | HQT Team         |
|           |     principals and all NHQ teachers  |                  |
|           |                                      | HQT Team         |
|           | -   Submit annual report to USDE     |                  |
|           |                                      | HQT Team         |
|           | > (December 2007)                    |                  |
|           |                                      |                  |
|           | -   Submit Semester Progress Report  |                  |
|           |     (January 2008) to Superintendent |                  |
|           |                                      |                  |
|           | -   Audit CAs and schools for        |                  |
|           |     compliance                       |                  |
|           |                                      |                  |
|           | -   Determine and deliver SEA        |                  |
|           |     response to audit findings       |                  |
+-----------+--------------------------------------+------------------+
| June 2008 | -   Submit Annual Progress Report to | CAS              |
|           |     Superintendent                   |                  |
|           |                                      | Superintendent\\ |
|           | -   Review Complex Area Results      |                  |
|           |                                      | HQT Team and     |
|           | -   Determine and deliver level of   | Superintendent   |
|           |     technical assistance and/or      |                  |
|           |     sanctions necessary              |                  |
+-----------+--------------------------------------+------------------+

Based on approval of Strategic Plan, and Academic and Financial Plans
which incorporate the plans to address the needs of NHQTs, the HDE will
provide to the CAs and composite schools the following technical
assistance:

-   Research, develop and implement new alternatives to HQT. This work
    will include a new coordinated outreach between HDE and Hawaii's
    IHEs. The research phase began in January 2007 with implementation
    to follow in the summer of 2007;

-   IPDP Training for all PROs, CASs and principals. This training will
    begin in May 2007 following USDE approval;

-   Identification of routes to HQT. In order for principals and NHQTs
    to successfully chart a course to HQ status, they need current
    information regarding programs and resources that will help satisfy
    HQT objectives. This training will begin in June 2007 in tandem with
    IPDP training;

-   Data Interpretation Training. The SEA will conduct workshops for
    those CAs and schools that require training in data analysis and
    interpretation. SEA program evaluators experienced in data
    collection, analysis and report preparation will conduct this
    training;

-   Strategy, statement of need, and financial and academic plan
    training. Beginning in August 2007 the SEA will provide workshops in
    school improvement plan development. This training will be conducted
    in a series of workshops wherein CAs and schools can choose to
    attend all or only selected sessions. These sessions will be
    designed for CAs and school stakeholders to learn SEA expectations
    of school improvement plan development that will lead to resources
    and strategies most conducive to success in meeting HQT goals; and

-   Monitoring and Evaluation Training. To ensure that CAs and schools
    are equipped to measure progress and determine success in meeting
    HQT measurable objectives, the SEA will provide workshops in program
    management and evaluation beginning June 2007.

*3.2 Does the plan indicate that the staffing and professional
development needs of schools that are not making AYP will be given high
priority?*

Each school and CA annually develops an Academic and Financial Plan for
the following school year based upon the most current Trend Report and
NCLB School Report. These school plans are developed collaboratively
with School Community Councils representing all stakeholders in the
school community and approved by the CAS. The Academic and Financial
Plan accounts for all funds, including federal funds, available to the
school. Beginning in 2007-08 the CAS will use the Hawaii Teacher Quality
and Distribution Report (HTQDR), trend report, and other HQT data to
develop a plan of action that allocates funds to target high need
schools and CAs. Annually all schools and complex areas receive Trend
Reports on a wide array of school and student performance indicators.
The Trend Report: Educational and Fiscal Accountability, serves as a key
accountability component and, when combined with the annual NCLB School
Report, provides the requisite school and complex performance data
necessary to prioritize staffing and professional development needs of
schools not meeting AYP.

While schools and CAs are held to the same set of expectations for
school improvement and financial accountability, schools not making AYP
have been prioritized based on percentage of classes taught by NHQT (See
Appendix B). Collaborative efforts between the Office of Curriculum,
Instruction and Student Support and the Office of Human Resources have
resulted in priority attention to those 18 schools listed in Table 2.2.5
that are within the high poverty quartile and whose percentage of NHQT
is above 30 percent. The AYP/HQT Priority Attention schools will receive
technical assistance and additional resources from HDE to support the
school's efforts for school improvement and developing and maintaining a
HQ teaching staff. These schools will be assigned an HQT technical
assistance provider through HDE who will personally contact the
principal and work with him or her to address the specific HQT needs of
their staff. Each school will collect and monitor an IPDP for each
teacher who is not yet highly qualified. The technical assistance will
include assistance with school-wide and individual professional
development planning for teachers not yet HQ.

In addition, all Title I Schools that are in School Improvement Status
must set aside 10% of their Title I funds for professional development.
Title I schools who are identified as Priority Attention,
[must]{.underline} use 5% of Title I funds for professional development
targeted to maintain a highly qualified teaching staff.

> *Note: ESEA, Title II, Part A, Non-Regulatory Guidance, Oct 5, 2006
> Title I, Part A, requires that "LEAs use at least 5 percent of their
> Title I funds for professional development activities to ensure that
> teachers who are not currently highly qualified meet that standard
> \[Section 1119(l)\]. In addition, any school identified as in need of
> improvement for failing to make adequate yearly progress must spend 10
> percent of its Title I, Part A funds on professional development,
> including teacher mentoring programs \[Section 1116(c)(7)(A)(iii)\]"*

Schools may either directly receive Title IIA funds or access CA area
supports and services funded by Title IIA. CAs and schools must plan for
the use of Title IIA funds through the submission of Strategic Plan, and
Academic and Financial Plans which address the use of Title II A funds
to implement Highly Qualified Teacher improvement strategic actions and
activities, and the annual CA Financial Plan. Title II funding must be
prioritized to provide financial support for teachers who have
[not]{.underline} met the HQT requirements. These plans are
monitored/peer reviewed via the regular state program monitoring process
and the Academic and Financial Planning process.

Aside from the 18 Priority Attention schools, HDE will provide
prioritized technical assistance to schools based on the following
process:

**Priority One**: HDE will provide technical assistance to high poverty
schools not making AYP that are located in hard-to-fill geographic areas
with high a percentage of NHQ teachers.

> Priority 1 assistance includes:

-   Review of transcripts to identify routes to HQT

-   Individualized information on how to attain HQ status

-   PROs will work directly with teachers and principals to design
    Individual Professional Development Plans

-   PROs will work with principals on teacher assignments to assure
    highest percentage of HQT possible

**Priority 2:** HDE will provide technical assistance to schools not
making AYP with high percentage of NHQ teachers and are low poverty.

Priority 2 assistance includes:

-   PRAXIS prep content tutorials

-   Data analysis and interpretation

**Priority 3:** HDE will provide technical assistance to schools making
AYP with a high percentage of NHQ teachers.

Priority 3 assistance includes

-   Professional development options

-   Review of available resources

-   Mentoring support

*3.3 Does the plan include a description of programs and services the
SEA will provide to assist teachers and LEAs in successfully meeting HQT
goals?*

Programs and services the HDE will provide teachers, schools, PROs and
CASs to successfully meet HQT goals include: 1) partnerships with
institutions of higher education; and 2) sponsored professional
development courses. In addition, we have described recruitment and
retention programs and induction and mentoring programs in the
accompanying HQT Equity Plan.

The Department has developed and fostered partnerships and programs with
various IHEs in developing and maintaining programs for teachers to
become highly qualified. Many of the services/classes that are offered
by the HDE utilize technologies such as video-conferencing and/or
on-line courses. Some of these programs offer stipends for coursework in
exchange for teaching for at least 3 years.

> **1. University of Hawaii Bachelor of Education (B. Ed.) Degree in
> Secondary Education and Special Education**
>
> The Bachelor of Education in secondary education and special education
> is a multi-year non-cohort undergraduate program. It is designed for
> students who wish to become eligible for an initial dual license both
> in a secondary content area and special education. Upon completion of
> the general and special education coursework and passing the PRAXIS
> exams, graduates are eligible for a teaching license in a specific
> secondary education content area (7-12) and special education. This
> program specifically addresses the need for HQ content teachers in the
> secondary schools. The Department is asking the University to actively
> recruit in mathematics and English language arts. This partnership
> with the University of Hawaii started in 1998. As part of this program
> students have the option to receive a stipend. Of those accepting a
> stipend, a total of 189 teachers have graduated and are currently
> working in Hawaii.
>
> **2. University of Hawaii Master of Education in Teaching (MEdT)
> Program**
>
> This program, started in 1995 the MEdT program currently assists the
> Department of Education in filling vacancies with HQT teachers through
> a two-year cohort program. The MET program addresses the following
> areas: English, math, science, elementary and social studies. Students
> are assigned to a specific public school and are assigned to a mentor
> throughout their two-year experience. MET provides a maximum of 26
> teaching interns per year who fill appropriate vacancies in schools
> during the second semester. They are supervised throughout their
> internship by College of Education faculty who meet and collaborate
> with them on a weekly basis to provide on-going support. The college
> faculty works closely with the principals and intern mentors to
> provide interim and final evaluations of the intern experience. After
> completing all course requirements and passing the appropriate PRAXIS
> exams, graduates are eligible for teaching licensure. This year the
> program has been expanded to include interested Teach for America
> teachers. MET has graduated a total of 290 teachers.
>
> **3. Partnership with City University**
>
> The HDE has formed a partnership with City University to offer a
> Bachelor of Arts in Special Education K-12 (BASE) program. The goal of
> the BASE program is to increase the number of highly qualified Special
> Education teachers by offering a statewide alternative route to
> certification program, culminating in a Bachelor of Arts Degree with
> Certification in Special Education K-12. The candidates are selected
> from current educational assistants who have an interest in pursuing a
> teaching degree in special education. Upon successful completion of
> program requirements and the PRAXIS, BASE Candidates are provided with
> a career path to certification, licensure, and employment as teachers.
> The BASE Program uses the Video Conference Center sites in schools to
> broadcast classes to educational assistants in remote areas.
> Forty-eight (48) students have been or are enrolled and 24 have
> completed the program. HDE offsets tuition for BASE by 60%.
>
> **4. Chaminade University Educational Assistant (EA) Program**
>
> The EA program is a dual certification program in elementary education
> and special education which offers educational assistants the
> opportunity to earn a Bachelor's degree and become teachers in the
> Hawaii public schools. This program assists the HDE in recruiting
> educational assistants who are interested in pursuing and meeting the
> HQT requirements for licensure in elementary education and special
> education. The EA program runs on an accelerated track. Classes are
> offered in the evenings so educational assistants can continue
> employment during the school day. It is a cohort program which relies
> heavily upon team support, collaboration and cooperation from the
> start of the program until completion. Classes are also held on a
> centralized DOE facility so that all participants can participate and
> which takes into account rush hour traffic and travel equity for all
> participants. Upon program completion, graduates are required to teach
> five years in a Hawaii special education classroom. The program offers
> the following incentives:

-   Tuition assistance covering two-thirds of tuition;

-   Support through a cohort program; and

-   Courses held during evenings, weekends and intercessions.

> **5. HDE's Alternative Route to Licensure in Special Education**
>
> The alternative route special education program serves two populations
> of teachers. The two year program is conducted in a partnership
> between HDE and Chaminade University of Honolulu. Individuals who have
> completed a SATEP, in areas other than special education, are eligible
> to apply for the one-year strand of the program. Individuals who have
> not completed a SATEP and hold at least a baccalaureate degree from an
> accredited university are eligible to apply for the two-year strand of
> the program. Upon completion of the program, teacher candidates will
> have completed a SATEP and may pursue licensure through the Hawaii
> Teacher Standards Board. For students on the Neighbor Islands, courses
> are offered via WebCT. Courses are offered at Chaminade University\'s
> main campus for students on the island of Oahu.
>
> **6. State Agency for Higher Education (SAHE) - Title II Part A
> Project**
>
> HDE has met with the representatives of the University of Hawaii and
> current SAHE Principal Investigators to discuss collaboration between
> the SEA and the SAHE Title IIA programs. The SAHE makes competitive
> grants to eligible partnerships comprised of at least one institution
> of higher education (IHE) and at least one high need school. The
> partnerships use the funds to conduct professional development
> activities in core academic subjects to ensure that highly qualified
> teachers, paraprofessionals, and (if appropriate) principals have
> subject-matter knowledge in the academic subjects they teach. The
> SAHEs program targets scientifically based professional development
> that is effective in increasing student academic achievement.

A variety of targeted professional development options are available to
assist NHQ teachers to become HQ. Many of the classes/workshops that are
offered utilize technologies such as video-conferencing and/or on-line
courses. The following opportunities are currently available:

> **1. Tutorial/Coaching for PRAXIS**
>
> The Department currently offers a tutorial for PRAXIS I -- Reading,
> Writing and Mathematics PRAXIS II -- principles of learning and
> teaching. From 2003 to 2006 there were 105 participants for the math
> section and in 2005-06 there were 55 participants for the reading and
> writing sections.
>
> **2. The University of Hawaii On-line PRAXIS Prep**
>
> The University of Hawaii-Manoa (UHM) College of Education offers an
> online PRAXIS I PPST Online Preparation Program developed and
> supported by the UHM with funding from the US Department of Labor.
> This self-directed web-based program begins with an online simulated
> test, followed by customized instruction to prepare for the actual
> PPST exam. Courses include additional simulated tests and working
> through a customized study program designed for the areas for
> improvement indicated by scores on the initial exam. Courses of study
> include mathematics, reading, writing, and science. This program
> supports those who needs assistance in preparing for the Praxis I for
> admission to colleges of education. The interactive software was
> developed by PLATO Learning Corporation and refined to meet local
> needs.
>
> **3. Professional Development (PD) Coursework**
>
> All professional development courses offered throughout the year are
> linked to the State Strategic Plan. They are also offered based on
> school/teacher specialized content knowledge needs and interests. In
> addition, many of the courses include the following required
> components to assist all teachers: observation of teaching, modeling
> lessons, developing effective strategies for students who need
> targeted assistance or special services, and coaching specific need
> areas of teachers.
>
> PD courses are offered to support teachers in meeting the state
> requirements to become highly qualified and thereby support students
> to meet and exceed the Hawaii Content and Performance Standards. PD
> courses are an integral part of the school level, complex area and
> state educational improvement initiatives. Institutes of higher
> learning and private providers may offer their coursework through this
> unit. In the on-line listings/classes, teachers can find an array of
> courses to include in their individual professional development plans.
> PD website can be found at: <http://fms-web2.k12.hi.us/pderi>
>
> **4. Restructured Schools Professional Development**
>
> Professional development for restructuring schools not meeting AYP,
> with six or more years of failing to meet AYP, is customized to focus
> on building the capacity of instructional personnel to deliver
> standards-based instruction and curriculum to meet the needs of all
> students. Examples include:

1.  Hawaii Content and Performance Standards III to increase student
    achievement on the Hawaii State Assessment;

2.  Standards-based teaching strategies in reading and math that support
    student achievement;

3.  Analysis of assessment results and development of assessment-driven
    instruction; and

4.  Curriculum mapping and pacing in core content areas across the grade
    levels.

> **5. Kellog Foundation --Capturing the Momentum**
>
> The W.K. Kellogg Foundation recently awarded the Hawaii P-20
> Initiative \$10 million to support the goal of having every third
> grader in Hawaii reading at grade level by 2015. This P-3 project will
> provide a critical mass of coordinated efforts at community and state
> levels. The collaborative partners are local community organizations
> and three statewide education entities: the University of Hawaii, the
> Hawaii Department of Education, and the Good Beginnings Alliance. The
> Initiative is focused on increasing the number of learners who
> successfully navigate the education pipeline, which begins with early
> learning, continues through formal schooling from pre-kindergarten to
> postsecondary coursework, and lasts throughout one's life.

Future programs and services in the planning stages to assist teachers
and LEAs in successfully meeting HQT goals:

> **1. HDE On-line PRAXIS Tutorial**
>
> The Department is working to support teachers taking the PRAXIS II by
> creating on-line tutorials/coaching as well as advertising for
> additional vendors (e.g., Princeton Review, Kaplan, etc.) to expand
> the preparation course offerings for all PRAXIS II subject
> assessments.

The schedule for the upcoming Online Content Area Courses:

Strategies That Work For Secondary English Teachers Fall 2007

Strategies That Work For Secondary Mathematics Teachers Fall 2007

Strategies That Work For Secondary Science Teachers Fall 2007

Strategies That Work For Secondary Social Studies Teachers Fall 2007

> The schedule for upcoming classroom-based Praxis Preparation Courses:

Mathematics: Content Knowledge & Pedagogy Fall 2007

English: Content Knowledge & Pedagogy Fall 2007

Middle Level Mathematics 5-9 Spr 2008

Biology & Life Science Pedagogy Spr 2008

General Science Fall 2008

Physical Science Spr 2008

Social Studies: Content Knowledge & Pedagogy Spr 2008

Middle Level English Language Arts 5-9 Spr 2008

Special Education Spr 2008

Teaching English as a Second Language Spr 2008

> **2. Partnerships in a Post Baccalaureate or Masters program in
> science, math or English** HDE's plan includes expansion of services
> through requests for proposal from internal and private vendors. The
> HDE is currently pursuing opportunities for teachers to participate in
> academically approved courses offered courses through other sources
> such as City University, Teach Scape, Teach Stream, University of
> Hawaii and BYU Hawaii. The request for proposal is in the public
> application process.

*3.4 Does the plan specifically address the needs of any subgroups of
teachers identified in Requirement 1?*

Table 3.4.1 SY 2006-07. Number and Percentage of Highest Need Subgroup
Area Classes Taught by HQ and NHQT.

+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+-------+
| Subgroup Area         | Total  | HQT    | HQT    | NHQT   | NHQT  |
|                       |        | C      | P      |        |       |
|                       | C      | lasses | ercent | C      | Pe    |
|                       | lasses |        |        | lasses | rcent |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+-------+
| Special Education     | 6,136  | 1120   | 18%    | 5,016  | 82%   |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+-------+
| Mathematics           | 4,444  | 2,440  | 55%    | 2,004  | 45%   |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+-------+
| English Language Arts | 5,321  | 3520   | 66%    | 1,801  | 34%   |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+-------+

As discussed in Requirement I, the highest percent of classes taught by
NHQT (82%) is in the area of special education. The three subgroup areas
with the greatest numbers of classes taught by NHQT are: 1) special
education (5,016); 2) mathematics (2,004); and 3) English language arts
(1,801).

An analysis of the reasons special educators at the secondary level are
NHQT reveals that of the 5,371 secondary special education classes
taught, 4,200 are taught by NHQT not because they are not licensed in
special education, but rather that they are NHQT in the academic content
area in which they are teaching; the bulk of which are English/language
arts and mathematics. Therefore, the programs listed below address the
highest need core content areas of 1) mathematics, and 2) English
Language Arts.

Mathematics:

1.  **On-line Mathematics Courses**

> Two on-line mathematics options will be available for NHQT. PBS
> courses provide teachers with the latest research-based teaching
> methods in a flexible, community-based format designed to fit a
> teacher's schedule. The courses are six weeks in duration and allow
> for classroom implementation and portfolio creation. In addition, HDE
> is considering accessing Carnegie Learning mathematics courses based
> on cognitive science research at Carnegie Mellon University.

2.  **Summer Mathematics Institute**

> A variety of courses will be offered at the HDE Summer Mathematics
> Institute. The courses will provide training for first-time
> implementers of mathematics curricula. The courses will focus on
> current issues in mathematics education, ways the new curricula
> support standards-based instruction and assessment, and training in
> essential mathematics content. Courses will be available for
> elementary, middle and high school programs. NHQ teachers who will be
> implementing the new curricula in the upcoming year will be given
> priority and will be provided tuition reimbursement through Title II.

3.  **Math Teacher Endorsement Program**

> In response to the need to have teacher-leaders in mathematics
> education in the elementary and middle school, the Mathematics Teacher
> Endorsement Program (K-8) was developed and was launched in June 2002.
> The intent of the program is to develop teacher leaders in math
> education at each school. Priority is given to teachers not yet highly
> qualified in mathematics, from schools not already represented in a
> cohort, committed to the two-year program, and willing to assume a
> leadership role at their school.

4.  **The Transition to Teaching Grant**

> This five year federal grant specifically addresses the teaching
> shortage in math and science. It is a Post-Baccalaureate program for
> NHQT teachers teaching in these content areas. The grant has served 93
> students to date, approximately two thirds pursuing math certification
> and one third pursuing science certification. These teachers were and
> continue to be mentored by either a science or math mentor. This
> program is another means to address the math and science shortage
> areas in Hawaii as well as a strategy to assist NHQT to become HQT.

5.  **NCLB Math & Science Partnership**

> This is a federally-funded program in which Hawaii was awarded
> \$906,246 to encourage institutions of higher education and local
> elementary and secondary schools to partner together in the
> professional development of teachers. The purpose of the Hawaii MSP
> program is to improve the content knowledge of math and science
> teachers. Partnerships must use a portion of the MSP funds for the
> development of HQ mathematics/science teachers. Application
> requirements include:
>
> \(1\) Creating opportunities for enhanced and ongoing professional
> development of mathematics and science teachers that improves the
> subject matter knowledge of such teachers;
>
> \(2\) Establishing and operating mathematics and science summer
> workshops or institutes, including follow-up training, for K-12
> mathematics and science teachers that:
>
> \(a\) Directly relate to the curriculum and academic areas in which
> the teacher provides instruction;
>
> \(b\) Enhances the ability of teachers to understand and use the
> challenging State academic content standards for mathematics and
> science; and
>
> \(c\) Train teachers to use curricula that are based on scientific
> research, aligned with challenging State academic content standards,
> and are experiment-oriented, and concept- and content-based.

6.  **E-mentoring Programs**

> The concept of the eScience Mentoring Program will be replicated for
> math and English/language arts. Funded by the National Science
> Foundation, Electronic Mentoring for Student Success (eMSS) was
> developed by the National Science Teachers Association in partnership
> with the New Teacher Center and Montana State University. It is
> designed to empower the next generation of science teachers by
> providing content-focused mentoring through a national, online
> technology network. Through eMSS, new and veteran teachers -- as well
> as working scientists -- collaborate in an interactive community to
> facilitate the exchange of information, ideas, and experiences to
> advance high-quality science instruction for all students. More
> specifically, this program includes:

-   Online mentoring for beginning science teachers by trained mentors
    who are highly qualified and teach the same discipline;

-   Facilitated online curriculum that focuses on content and pedagogy
    that directly applies to the new teacher's classroom and is focused
    on becoming highly qualified;

-   Access to practitioners to deepen the content knowledge of both
    mentors and mentees; and

-   Leadership training to enhance the professional skills of mentors
    and facilitators.

English/Language Arts:

1.  **English Language Arts Endorsement Program**

> The University of Hawaii, College of Education in partnership with the
> HDE offers a graduate level English Language Arts Endorsement Program.
> This two year program is open to 40 middle and high school teachers
> identified by the HDE. The course is available via six video
> conferencing sites throughout the islands. Priority for this course is
> given to NHQ teachers currently teaching English Language Arts. The
> \$540 tuition for each course is paid through an HDE subsidy of \$316
> and participant cost of \$224. Title I and Title II school-based funds
> can be used to offset participant costs. HDE pays the cost of the
> video conferencing site

2.  **Literacy Project**

> This blended Response to Intervention program strives to strengthen
> the delivery of rigorous integrated educational and support services
> to all students (ESLL, SpEd, and native Hawaiian) within the context
> of the general education classroom. Pilot sites will include several
> AYP/HQT Priority Attention schools. Special Education funds are being
> used for the pilot sites and Title II funds will be used to pay for
> PRAXIS prep courses and assessments for teachers in the pilot sites.
> Ten to twelve pilot schools will be selected or the 2007-08 school
> year.

3.  **Tri-State Grant**

> The goal of this grant is to integrate the delivery of educational
> services and relevant support services to all students within the
> context of the regular education class. The strategies focus on
> differentiated instruction to support struggling readers and are
> provided to targeted teacher populations (SPED, Literacy, ELL
> teachers) by specialists (Behavioral Specialists, Speech-Language
> Pathologists). Projects are designed to identify best practices --
> with the intent that those practices will be institutionalized.

4.  **The Adolescent Literature and Literacy project**

> This is a joint venture with the University of Hawaii College of
> Education and the HDE. These courses target middle and high school
> teachers in developing Reading/Language Art and English content.

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

Title IIA SEA/LEA funds are allocated among three areas: 1) Complex
Areas (CA), 2) HDE Office of Human Resources (OHR) and 3) HDE Office of
Curriculum, Instruction and Student Support (OCISS). **The state does
not use any of its Title II funds for class size reduction -- all Title
II funds are targeted toward professional development.**

1.  **Title II: Complex Area/School**

> Each of the 15 CAs received between \$418,000 and \$432,000 in Title
> IIA funds in SY 2006-07 for mentoring and professional development
> activities at the local level. To ensure accountability of these
> funds, the HDE monitors the expenditure of funds through required
> submittals of quarterly progress/status reports. These reports note
> the goals to be achieved, summary of activities, and performance
> indicators. Together the 15 CAs received \$6,380,850 in SY 2006-07.
> Additionally, nine Improving Teacher Quality grant awards were made to
> CAs or consortium of CAs as seen in Table 3.5 below.
>
> Table 3.5 SY 2006-07 Improving Teacher Quality Grant Awards

+------------------------------+----------------------------+---------+
| Project                      | CA/Consortium              |         |
+------------------------------+----------------------------+---------+
| 3 R's for TomRRRow           | Central Kauai Complex      | > \$    |
|                              |                            | 100,912 |
+------------------------------+----------------------------+---------+
| Inquiry Based GT Program     | Farrington/Kaiser CA       | > \$    |
|                              |                            | >       |
|                              |                            |  41,360 |
+------------------------------+----------------------------+---------+
| Enhancing Student            | Haaheo, Hilo High,         | > \$    |
| Achievement Through Math,    | Kalanianaole, Kapiolani,   | 199,518 |
| Science & Technology         | Kaumana, Laupahoehoe       |         |
+------------------------------+----------------------------+---------+
| Rendezvous w/ Investigation  | Kapolei Complex            | > \$    |
| & Inquiry                    |                            | >       |
|                              |                            |  12,564 |
+------------------------------+----------------------------+---------+
| Math Academy                 | King Kekaulike Complex     | > \$    |
|                              |                            | >       |
|                              |                            |  39,211 |
+------------------------------+----------------------------+---------+
| Lrning w/ Everyone Involved  | Leilehua and Waialua       | > \$    |
|                              | Complexes                  | 133,419 |
+------------------------------+----------------------------+---------+
| Bridging the Math Continuum  | Nanakuli/Pearl             | > \$    |
|                              | City/Waipahu Consortium    | >       |
|                              |                            |  41,855 |
+------------------------------+----------------------------+---------+
| Literary Math & Sc           | North Kohala Complex       | > \$    |
| Integration                  |                            | 199,518 |
+------------------------------+----------------------------+---------+
| Math Masters                 | West Kauai Complex         | > \$    |
|                              |                            | >       |
|                              |                            |  68,640 |
+------------------------------+----------------------------+---------+

2.  **Title II: HDE Office of Human Resources (OHR)**

> OHR received \$3,700,000 in Title IIA funds in SY 2006-07 to support
> program administration, professional development, teacher incentives
> and alternative training programs.

\$2.7 million funds the following activities:

-   Program administration

    -   HQT data collection and verification

    -   Monitoring HQ status of all teachers through course enrollment
        and personnel database

    -   Assisting CAs in completing annual Highly Qualified Teacher
        Improvement plans

    -   Assisting CAs in completing Title II Academic and Financial
        Plans

    -   Providing communication and identification of services for NHQ
        teachers to become HQ based on individual need

    -   Providing statewide professional development coordination
        aligned with high quality PD criteria

    -   Principal Performance Contract design and implementation

    -   CHAPS data integration system

    -   In and out-of-state recruiting

    ```{=html}
    <!-- -->
    ```
    -   HQT Teacher Incentives

        -   Relocation bonuses for math/ science teachers

        -   Geographically hard to fill and hard to staff incentives

    -   Professional Development activities including:

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Aspiring Administrator Program

-   Teacher Career Ladder Tuition (high school graduate to doctorate)

-   Teacher Induction and Mentoring

-   Instructional Leadership Academy

-   New Principal Mentor Program

-   On line courses (City University, Teachscape)

-   Paraprofessional Training Program

-   Teacher PRAXIS Preparation

-   Teacher PRAXIS Tutoring

-   Principals' Academy

-   Vice-Principals' Academy

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Alternative Certification Programs including

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Bachelor of Arts in Special Education (City University)

-   Bachelor of Arts in Special Education and Elementary Education
    (Chaminade University)

-   Associate of Arts in Teaching (Leeward Community College)

-   Alternative Teacher Certification Program (City University)

-   DOE Alternative Certification Program

-   Chaminade Post Baccalaureate Program

-   Master of Education in Teaching (University of Hawaii)

> \$1 million funds the Professional Development and Educational
> Research Institute
>
> (PEDRI) Administrator Certification for Excellence (ACE) program. The
> ACE is required for all beginning school administrators. This
> research-based program is built on a foundation of job embedded
> professional development which occurs in the context of
> problem-solving and acting as a school leader. The program is based on
> clear descriptions of the dispositions and demonstrated skills of
> potential candidates; a rigorous screening process; field experience;
> coursework, training and application, mentoring; incentives that help
> the candidate pursue his/her certificate; performance based
> certification; and career long professional growth. The new principal
> program enrolled 53 principals last year 53 and this year 28. All
> veteran principals have come through the Hawaii Principal's Academy
> over the past two years.

3.  **Title II: HDE Office of Curriculum, Instruction and Student
    Support (OCISS)**

> OCISS received \$2,841,229 in SY 2006-07. OCISS professional
> development opportunities included the following:

-   Required K-12 Department Heads' Training -- Biannual content
    specific training in all core content areas.

-   Standards-Based Education Training (curriculum mapping, standards
    based lesson planning). During the spring session teacher teams may
    join department heads.

-   Funding for Non-Title School Improvement Status schools for
    professional development. Provides at least \$25,000 and up to
    \$60,000 per school.

-   Coaches Academy for mathematics, English

-   Teacher Leader Academy

-   Coordinate course work through IHEs to addresses the identified
    needs of NHQ teachers. HDE purchases courses exclusively for NHQTs

-   On-line courses for NHQTs such as PBS Mathematics and Carnegie
    Learning

-   Improving Teacher Quality Grants (Title I, Title IIA, Title V)

-   Secondary School Redesign Planning Grants -- including
    standards-based report cards.

-   Professional development funding for Title I schools (to ensure
    minimum of \$50,000 per school)

**4. Title I: HDE and Complex Area/Schools**

Ten percent of both SEA and local level Title I funds must be targeted
for professional development. In addition, all School Improvement Status
schools are required to set aside and use 10% of their Title I funds for
professional development. These funds can be used for IHE course work,
PRAXIS fees, tutors/coaches etc.

**5. Title II B: Math & Science Partnership**

This federally-funded program awarded the state \$906,246 to encourage
institutions of higher education and local elementary and secondary
schools to partner together in the professional development of teachers.

**6. IDEA: HDE Office of Special Education**

The Office of Special Education provides technical assistance through
fiscal planning with schools to ensure all SPED teachers become HQ in
all core content areas. While there is no specific set-aside for
professional development, this year's SPED financial planning process
will encourage the use of local level IDEA funds to implement NHQ SPED
teachers' Individual Professional Development Plans.

**7. State Agency for Higher Education (SAHE) - Title II Part A
Project**

The higher education component of Title II A provides \$357,742 (2006)
to conduct professional development activities in core academic
subjects. The SAHEs sub-grants target scientifically based professional
development that is effective in increasing student academic
achievement.

3.6 *Does the plan for the use of available funds indicate that priority
will be given to the staffing and professional development needs of
schools that are not making AYP?*

As described in Section 3.2, schools not making AYP have been
prioritized based on percentage of classes taught by NHQT (See Appendix
B). Collaborative efforts between the OCISS and OHR have resulted in
priority attention to the 18 schools listed in Table 2.2.5 that are
within the high poverty quartile and whose percentage of NHQT is above
30 percent. The AYP/HQT Priority Attention schools will receive
technical assistance and additional resources from HDE to support the
school's efforts for school improvement and developing and maintaining a
HQ teaching staff. These schools will be assigned an HQT technical
assistance provider through HDE who will personally contact the
principal and work with him or her to address the specific HQT needs of
the staff. Each school will collect and monitor an Individual
Professional Development Plan for each teacher who is not yet highly
qualified. The technical assistance will include assistance with
school-wide and individual professional development planning for
teachers not yet HQ.

Along with prioritized technical assistance HDE will reimburse the
PRAXIS examination fee for teachers in AYP/HQT Priority Attention
schools who take this test in any content area to which they have been
assigned in the 2007-08 school year and for which they do not meet the
HQT requirements. Reimbursement will be made upon receipt of evidence of
a passing score. HDE will review this policy annually to determine need
and feasibility for its continuation in subsequent years.

In addition, teams from schools not making AYP wishing to attend any of
the HDE Spring 2008 Mathematics, English language arts, science training
sessions or teacher leader academies will be granted priority status in
the form of guaranteed registration and substitute pay. (Elementary
teams must include an administrator or department chair, SPED teacher,
ELL teacher and 2 classroom teachers. Secondary teams must include an
administrator or department chair, SPED teacher, ELL teacher and one
content specific teacher at each grade level)

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

*4.1 Does the plan indicate how the SEA will monitor LEA compliance with
the LEAs' HQT plans described in Requirement 2 and hold LEAs accountable
for fulfilling their plans?*

Upon approval of this plan, the HDE will conduct informational meetings
with CASs, PROs, principals and teachers in each complex area to review
the requirements of NCLB with the focus on the development and
implementation of schools' Strategic Plan and Academic and Financial
Plans and Individual Teacher Professional Development Plans to move all
NHQT to HQT.

HDE will monitor the CA HQT status by conducting the following
activities:

-   Beginning in SY 2007-08 require the submittal of CA Strategic and
    Academic and Financial Plans incorporating the plans for HQT
    strategic actions and activities aligned with School Improvement
    Plans/Schoolwide Plans and the State HQT Plan. Plans will be due
    September 1^st^ of each year;

-   Require the submission of bi-annual status reports on January 30^th^
    and June 9^th^. The status reports will include the following
    information:

-   Number and percent of Title I (both NCLB Status and Non-Status
    schools) and non Title I schools not meeting 100% HQT;

-   Number, percent, and core content course taught by NHQT in each
    school;

-   Number and percent of teachers in each school who have attained HQT
    status; and

-   Specific plans, including timelines to move remaining NHQT to HQT.

-   Review adequacy of the CA Strategic Plan, and Academic and Financial
    Plans beginning September 2007; and

-   Provide AYP Response Team and Title II Technical Assistance Team to
    provide on-site technical assistance and monitoring.

The SEA Title II Technical Assistance Team will provide biannual status
reports to the Superintendent on the status of complex area and school
plans. Following the HQT Plan approval, the Director of Program Support
will meet with each CA superintendent to review the status of HQT in
each CA.

*4.2 Does the plan show how technical assistance from the SEA to help
LEAs meet the 100 percent HQT goal will be targeted toward SEAs and
schools that are not making AYP?*

See section 3.2 for this response.

*4.3a Does the plan describe how the SEA will monitor whether LEAs
attain 100 percent HQT in each LEA and school in the percentage of
highly qualified teachers at each LEA and school?*

The HDE will monitor each school's attainment of 100% HQT in each CA
through the centralized HR Data System and the bi-annual NHQT Report.

As a SEA/LEA, HDE has the unique ability to interact directly with CA
superintendents, principals and teachers via personnel planning and
fiscal accountability. The Title II Technical Assistance teams will work
with all high priority schools beginning May 2007 and meet with the
individual NHQTs to review their HQT status and to develop Individual
Professional Development Plans.

Monitoring protocols are based on the following documents:

-   Title I Handbook;

-   Framework for School Improvement;

-   Tools for Determining School Level of Needs;

-   AYP Response Team Procedures; and

-   Charter School Federal Peer Review Protocol Handbook.

*4.3.b Does the plan describe how the SEA will monitor whether LEAs
attain 100 percent HQT in the percentage of teachers who are receiving
HQ professional development to enable such teachers to become HQ and
successful classroom teachers?*

The HDE professional development goal is to increase teachers' knowledge
and enable all teachers to become highly qualified so that all students
meet the Hawaii Content and Performance Standards. The term
"high-quality professional development" means professional development
that includes, but is not limited to, activities that:

-   Improve and increase teachers' knowledge of academic subjects and
    enable teachers to become highly qualified;

-   Are an integral part of broad schoolwide and districtwide
    educational improvement plans;

-   Give teachers and principals the knowledge and skills to help
    students meet challenging state academic standards;

-   Improve classroom management skills;

-   Are sustained, intensive, classroom-focused, and are not generally
    one-day or short-term workshops;

-   Advance teacher understanding of effective instruction strategies
    that are based on scientifically based research; and

-   Are developed with extensive participation of teachers, principals,
    parents, and administrators.

To ensure that courses offered for credit meet the standards of quality,
all professional development offered through the HDE must be consistent
with the requirements and expectations of the following:

> 1\. Professional Development requirements of the *No Child Left Behind
> (NCLB) Act*;
>
> 2\. The revised 2001 *National Staff Development Council Standards for
> Staff Development; and*
>
> 3\. The *2002 Revised DOE Guidelines and Procedures for Quality
> Professional Development Credit Program (PD Credit)* which expanded
> the concept of quality professional development to emphasize the
> application of new knowledge and skills in the classroom, evidence of
> impact on student learning, and professional reflection leading to
> instructional improvement.

*4.4 Consistent with ESEA 2141, does the plan include technical
assistance or corrective actions that the SEA will apply if LEAs fail to
meet HQT and AYP goals?*

HDE provides technical assistance and corrective action consistent with
ESEA Section 2141 which describes what states and districts must do if a
school fails to make AYP or meet its annual measurable objectives for
teacher quality.

If a school in status makes its school improvement AYP for one year, it
is "on hold**/**maintenance" and will continue to maintain its NCLB
status and to receive State assistance until the school's AYP status is
determined in the following year. A school must make AYP for two
consecutive years to attain an unconditional ("In Good Standing")
status.

For schools that fail to make AYP for two consecutive years, the HDE has
developed accountability levels with a progression of expectations and
consequences as illustrated in the *Framework for School Improvement:
Chronology for School Improvement* (Appendix C).

Continued failure to make AYP will result in consequences that become
more stringent over time. As a school moves through the accountability
levels (levels of status and expectations), its management authority
gradually decreases. The flowchart shows that a "Needs Improvement Year
1" school has high autonomy compared to a school in "Restructuring" that
has a low level of autonomy. A Restructuring school (a school that has
not made AYP for five years), must initiate major restructuring of the
school's governance arrangements and create fundamental reforms in
curriculum and instruction to improve student academic achievement. For
example, restructuring may result in a state takeover or conversion to a
charter school.

The assistance component provides complex areas and schools with a
process to access resources and supports targeted to the needs of each
school. Assistance can be both internal and external to the HDE and
acquired through the CAS in collaboration with the State Superintendent
and various branches of the HDE. Assistance, in varying degrees, depends
on the NCLB accountability level of the school.

The number of status schools are identified in the table below according
to Title I categories:

Table 4.4.1 SY 2006-07 NCLB Status of Schools

  ------------------------- --------------- --------------- ---------------
  Category                  Total Schools   Title I         Non-Title I

  Good Standing             98              47              51

  Needs Improvement, Year 1 42              38              4

  Needs Improvement, Year 2 9               8               1

  Corrective Action         52              27              25

  Planning for              3               3               0
  Restructuring                                             

  Restructuring             49              49              0

  Total                     253             172             81
  ------------------------- --------------- --------------- ---------------

If the HDE determines that a school has failed to make AYP for three
consecutive years and has failed for three years to make progress toward
meeting its annual measurable HQT objectives, the HDE will enter into an
agreement with the school and the CAS on its use of Title II, Part A
funds under which the HDE will:

> 1\. Develop (in conjunction with the school, teachers, and principals)
> professional development strategies and activities based on
> scientifically based research that the HDE will use to meet the
> state's annual measurable objectives for improving teacher quality;
>
> 2\. Require the school to use these professional development
> strategies and activities; and
>
> 3\. Prohibit the school from using Title I, Part A funds to fund any
> new paraprofessionals, except under certain limited instances.

For Restructured Schools, the SEA or Complex Area must, by the beginning
of the next school year, implement alternative governance arrangements
consistent with state laws. These may include:

-   Reopen the school as a public charter school;

-   Replace all or most staff, including the principal;

-   Enter into a contract with an entity, such as a private management
    company, with a demonstrated record of effectiveness to manage the
    school; or

-   Initiate any other school restructuring governance arrangement,
    e.g., state takeover.

Of the 49 restructured schools and the 3 planning for restructuring
schools, 27 have entered into contracts with the following
organizations:

a)  ETS -- 8 schools (\$4,048,192)

b)  Edison Alliance -- 11 schools (\$8,830,000)

c)  America's Choice -- 8 schools (6,597,070)

If the HDE determines that the LEA/SEA has failed to make AYP for three
consecutive years under Section 1111(b)(2)(B) of Title I, Part A, and
has failed for three years to make progress toward meeting its annual
measurable objectives established under Section 1119(b)(1), the HDE will

1.  develop professional development strategies and activities based on
    scientifically based research that the LEA/SEA will use to meet the
    state's annual measurable objectives for improving teacher quality;

2.  Require use of these professional development strategies and
    activities; and

3.  Prohibit Title I, Part A funds to fund any new paraprofessionals,
    except under certain limited instances.

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

*5.1 Does the plan describe how and when the SEA will complete the
HOUSSE process for all teachers not new to the profession who were hired
before the end of the 2005-06 school year?*

As part of the feedback to the December submission of the Revised State
HQT Plan, HDE was informed by USDE that the HOUSSE process used to
qualify teachers was unacceptable. In response, HDE has carefully
reviewed each teacher's college course transcripts to determine who was
deemed highly qualified through HOUSSE. HDE has identified every teacher
mistakenly identified as HQ. This misidentification resulted from a
miscommunication between USDE and HDE and was both unintentional and
unfortunate. It has resulted in approximately 20% of the 2005-06
teachers mistakenly identified as HQ. However, HDE is committed to
rectifying the situation.

Upon acceptance of this plan and new HOUSSE procedures (Attachment B),
teachers who are not new to the profession and who were hired prior to
the end of the 2006-07 school year will be given the opportunity to
complete the HOUSSE process on a limited basis (as described in 5.2
below) or until Federal statutes require discontinuance of HOUSSE.

*5.2 Does the plan describe how the State will limit the use of HOUSSE
after the end of the 2005-06 school year to the following situations:*

Upon acceptance of this plan and new HOUSSE definitions (Attachment B),
HDE will communicate with all misidentified HQ teachers and their
principals and will work with each NHQ teacher and each of their
principals to:

> 1\) Apply the new HOUSSE procedures;
>
> 2\) Perform individual transcript reviews;
>
> 3\) Identify the gap between NHQ and HQ; and
>
> 4\) Assist with individual professional development plans including:
>
> i\) If PRAXIS deficient, schedule for PRAXIS prep class and test
> administration;
>
> ii\) If credit deficient, identify coursework necessary to meet HQ.

This concerted effort to reach out to all teachers who were mistakenly
identified as HQ in 2005-06 will be completed by November 30, 2007. It
is conceivable that some of these teachers will need through the school
year to complete requirements to become HQ.

Hawaii will limit its use of HOUSSE procedures to the situations
described below:

-   Apply new HOUSSE procedures for all NHQ teachers, not new to the
    profession hired prior to the end of SY 2006-07 through November 30,
    2007

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Multi-subject rural (see definition of rural in section 1.2)
    secondary teachers if HQ in one subject at the time of hire, may use
    HOUSSE to demonstrate competence in additional subjects within three
    years of the date of hire;

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

-   International visiting teachers hired after SY 2006-07 may use
    HOUSSE to demonstrate competence. International visiting teachers
    will have will have 12 months from the date of initial employment to
    complete the HOUSSE process; and

-   For those veteran teachers who are returning to the profession after
    an extended absence (i.e. maternity, military duty, lengthy illness,
    etc.), a process is being established where they may apply to HDE to
    use HOUSSE to demonstrate competence. This extension will be granted
    on a case-by-case basis and the returning teacher will have 12
    months to complete the process.

All new teachers hired after SY 2006-07, except for the exception
categories above, must meet the federal definition for a highly
qualified teacher. All teachers who do not qualify through the HOUSSE
process by November 30, 2007 must complete an IPDP to become HQ.

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

*6.1 Does the revised plan include a written equity plan?*

For the response to this question, please see attached Equity Plan.

*6.2 Does the plan identify where inequities in teacher assignment
exist?*

For the response to this question, please see pages 7 to 13 in the
attached Equity Plan.

*6.3 Does the plan delineate specific strategies for addressing
inequities in teacher assignment?*

For the response to this question, please see pages 13 to 26 in the
attached Equity Plan.

*6.4 Does the plan provide evidence for the probable success of the
strategies it includes?*

For the response to this question, please see pages 29 to 32 in the
attached Equity Plan.

5.  *Does the plan indicate that the SEA will examine the issue of
    equitable teacher assignment when it monitors Complex Areas, and how
    this will be done?*

For the response to this question, please see pages 27 to 29 in the
attached Equity Plan.