> ![](media/image1.png){width="4.447916666666667in"
> height="1.3645833333333333in"}
>
> A Report to the

U.S. Department of Education

On Educational Challenges and Technical Assistance Needs

For the Mid-Continent Region

> Prepared by the
>
> Mid-Continent Regional Advisory Committee
>
> Ms. Sandy Aguirre Mayer, Chair
>
> March 31, 2005

Table of Contents

[Preface iii](#__RefHeading___Toc99789386)

[Executive summary 1](#__RefHeading___Toc99789387)

[Introduction 7](#__RefHeading___Toc99789388)

[Legislative background 7](#legislative-background)

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

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

[Regional background 11](#regional-background)

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

[Educational challenges within the region
17](#__RefHeading___Toc99789394)

[Challenge #1: Identifying, evaluating, and using scientifically based
research
17](#challenge-1-identifying-evaluating-and-using-scientifically-based-research)

[Technical assistance 17](#technical-assistance)

[Challenge #2: Teacher effectiveness
18](#challenge-2-teacher-effectiveness)

[Technical assistance 19](#technical-assistance-1)

[Challenge #3: School leadership 20](#challenge-3-school-leadership)

[Technical assistance 21](#technical-assistance-2)

[Challenge #4: Maintaining quality in rural education
21](#challenge-4-maintaining-quality-in-rural-education)

[Technical assistance 22](#technical-assistance-3)

[Challenge #5: Improving the academic achievement of urban children and
youth
23](#challenge-5-improving-the-academic-achievement-of-urban-children-and-youth)

[Technical assistance 23](#technical-assistance-4)

[Challenge #6: Addressing social and cultural issues that impede student
achievement
24](#challenge-6-addressing-social-and-cultural-issues-that-impede-student-achievement)

[Technical assistance 24](#technical-assistance-5)

[Conclusions and recommendations 27](#__RefHeading___Toc99789407)

[Appendix: Biographical information about members of the Mid-Continent
Regional Advisory Committee 29](#__RefHeading___Toc99789408)

[Glossary 35](#__RefHeading___Toc99789409)

[List of tables 41](#__RefHeading___Toc99789410)

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc99789386 .anchor}Preface

This report of the Mid-Continent Regional Advisory Committee for
Educational Needs Assessment was commissioned by the U.S. Department of
Education under contract number ED04CO0043/0001 awarded to The CNA
Corporation (CNAC). Members of the committee, their professional
affiliations, states and stakeholder groups are listed below[^1].

> Ms. Sandy Aguirre Mayer, Hispanic Council of Reform Parent
>
> Chair & Educational Options, MO
>
> Dr. Trent Blankenship Wyoming Department of Education, WY SEA
>
> Mr. Marc Bluestone Edwin Loe Elementary School, Practicing
>
> New Town Public Schools, ND Educator
>
> Ms. Andrea Boden Gering School District, NE LEA
>
> Ms. Irene Devin Parent, WY Parent
>
> Ms. Polly Feis Nebraska Department of Education, NE SEA
>
> Ms. Kim Gillespie Pioneer Trail Junior High School, Practicing
>
> Olathe District Schools KS Educator
>
> Dr. D. Kent King Missouri Department of Elementary SEA and Secondary
> Education, MO
>
> Ms. Cheryl Kulas North Dakota Dept. of Education, ND SEA
>
> Dr. John Lawrence Troy School District, MO LEA
>
> Ms. Karen Lukens Sioux Falls Hawthorne Elem. School, SD Practicing
>
> Educator
>
> Dr. Rick Melmer South Dakota Department of Education, SD SEA
>
> Ms. Jo O'Brien Colorado Department of Education, CO SEA
>
> Dr. Keith Owen Pueblo School District 60, CO LEA
>
> Dr. Alexa Posny Kansas Department of Education, KS SEA
>
> Ms. Vonnie Sanders Agassiz Middle School, Practicing
>
> Fargo Public Schools, ND Educator
>
> Mr. W.L. Sawyer Topeka Public Schools, KS LEA
>
> Dr. Debora Scheffel University of Northern Colorado, CO Higher Ed/
>
> Researcher
>
> Mr. Rick Woodford Lincoln County School District, WY LEA

The Mid-Continent Regional Advisory Committee received support in
preparing this report from its Designated Federal Officials, Carol
Chelemer and Catherine Schmidt of the U.S. Department of Education, and
CNAC and its partners the Institute for Educational Leadership, The
McKenzie Group, IceWEB, InterCall, and KidzOnline. The facilitation team
for this committee included Sharon Brumbaugh and Courtney May from the
Institute for Educational Leadership. Additional support and assistance
on this contract came from Arthur Sheekey, Corbin Fauntleroy, Laura
Wyshynski, and Tara Harrison.

#  

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc99789387 .anchor}Executive summary

The Mid-Continent Regional Advisory Committee (RAC), which includes the
following states: Colorado, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota,
South Dakota, and Wyoming provides an assessment of the technical
assistance needs of educators in the region in response to a directive
from the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Education. This committee
identified the major challenges facing the region in improving student
achievement and implementing the provisions of the No Child Left Behind
(NCLB) Act and recommended the types of technical assistance that might
enable educators in the region to overcome these challenges.

The committee's approach to public outreach and data collection included
both a national and regional component. The goal of the outreach efforts
was to generate public interest and input in the RAC's deliberations.
Outreach was conducted from December through February through a variety
of methods, including, but not limited to, e-mail messages to Listserv
groups, presentations and discussions at meetings, and focus groups. The
RAC Web site (www.rac-ed.org) provided the central point for giving the
public access to the RAC and served as the information center for the
RAC. Web-site enrollment for the region totaled 266 participants.

With the exception of Colorado and Missouri, which are the two largest
systems, schools in the Mid-Continent region are often in rural
settings. Colorado is the most diverse school system in the region, with
minorities representing more than one-third of the public school
population. Hispanics represent 10 percent of students in Kansas,
whereas Blacks constitute 9 percent of the school population. The
largest concentration of Blacks is in Missouri, accounting for 18
percent of enrollment. American Indians are the largest ethnic minority
group in South Dakota and North Dakota, representing 11 percent and 8
percent of students, respectively. However, in both of these states, as
well as in Wyoming, White students account for 85 percent or more of the
school population. Poverty rates, as indicated by free- and
reduced-price lunch eligibility, are fairly consistent across the states
in this region, and are at or below the national average (36 percent).

The number of public school teachers in the Mid-Continent states is
consistent with public school enrollment; Wyoming hired the smallest
number and Missouri the largest. Teacher salaries, one indicator of a
state's ability to recruit and retain teachers, show that Mid-Continent
school districts may face challenges on this issue. All states lagged
behind the national average salary for the 2001-02 school year.

In terms of meeting the requirements of NCLB, five of the seven states
in this region have created standards in science, reading, and
mathematics. Many Mid-Continent states fared well in the number of
teachers highly qualified. Students in all states in the region scored
slightly above the national average in both reading and mathematics on
the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP).

The Mid-Continent RAC identified six major educational challenges
(listed by priority to the region) that were impediments to implementing
NCLB and to improving the academic achievement of all children. After
reaching consensus on the major challenges in the region, the RAC
determined technical assistance strategies that would help states and
school districts address those challenges.

1.  Challenge: Identifying, evaluating, and using scientifically based
    research

    a.  Technical Assistance: Regular review of scientifically based
        research and suggested guidelines for implementing proven
        programs and practices with fidelity

    b.  Technical Assistance: Promote the implementation of
        scientifically research based programs

    c.  Technical Assistance: Provide a database that regularly reviews
        research journals for educational research that is relevant to
        practice

    d.  Technical Assistance: Match expertise with those districts and
        schools that need it; provide onsite, ongoing, and high quality
        professional development

2.  Challenge: Teacher effectiveness

    a.  Technical Assistance: Work with teacher preparation programs

    b.  Technical Assistance: Professional development to enhance the
        effectiveness of current teachers

    c.  Technical Assistance: Help and support with recruitment and
        retention of effective teachers

3.  Challenge: School leadership

    a.  Technical Assistance: For leadership development must include
        setting priorities, building focus, reaching consensus,
        establishing goals, and evaluating progress

    b.  Technical Assistance: Development and implementation of
        effective professional development models

    c.  Technical Assistance: Provide assistance with systemic
        leadership reform that encompasses school board member training

4.  Challenge: Maintaining quality in rural education

    a.  Technical Assistance: Assistance and support to identify and
        link districts and schools in autonomous rural areas through
        more effective use of technology and professional development
        activities

    b.  Technical Assistance: Research needs to be focused on the needs
        of rural schools and the results of this research translated
        into professional development

5.  Challenge: Improving the academic achievement of urban children and
    youth

    a.  Technical Assistance: Addressing systemic reform by helping
        districts reconfigure and redefine the structure of urban
        schools

    b.  Technical Assistance: Provide research, offer examples of
        successful models, and support effective restructuring of urban
        schools

    c.  Technical Assistance: Development of urban leaders and
        establishment of a system for ongoing communication among them;
        development and establishment of networks to identify and share
        effective practices and programs

6.  Challenge: Addressing social and cultural issues that impede student
    achievement

    a.  Technical Assistance: Help states, districts, schools and
        communities address both academic and non-academic factors which
        impact student achievement

    b.  Technical Assistance: Access to research-based programs that
        enhance community, parent, and student engagement

    c.  Technical Assistance: Outreach and information efforts on
        effective practices to facilitate services, improve technology,
        and foster partnerships with educational and social programs

    d.  Technical Assistance: Support to involve parents and communities
        to ensure student success

    e.  Technical Assistance: Creation of a common source of shared,
        available student information for use by schools, districts, and
        states.

States in the Mid-Continent region will benefit most from federally
funded technical assistance centers that are directly responsive to the
needs of the region. Identification of these needs should be
accomplished through continual review of the data and in consultation
with regional stakeholders. The center should develop a plan of
activities to address these priorities. Activities should be
research-based and translated into effective practices and should
include:

-   Building the capacity of the state to provide for school quality and
    improvement and/or restructuring to improve the effectiveness of the
    education system for the 21^st^ century

-   Providing quality professional development or the ability to
    recommend and evaluate professional development practices to raise
    student achievement aligned to the goals and the priorities of the
    region

-   Establishing a clearinghouse (information resource center).

Additionally, the Mid-Continent RAC recommends that: the technical
assistance center has a governing board that includes representatives of
each of the states within the region; the organization awarded the grant
should demonstrate significant success in providing effective technical
assistance; and the technical assistance centers should be required to
report and undergo an independent evaluation on their work and ability
to address the regional challenges.

Finally, the Mid-Continent RAC strongly recommends that individual
technical assistance centers be established to address on a national
basis each specific need that was identified within the region and which
has national implications:

-   A national center for rural education

-   A national center for urban education

-   A national center for the teaching of reading and writing

-   A national center for teaching of science and mathematics

-   A national center for leadership

-   A national center for school reform

-   A national center for multi-lingual/ELL/ESL

-   A national center for social, economic, and cultural issues
    (community schools).

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc99789388 .anchor}Introduction

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

# Legislative background

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

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

-   English language acquisition

-   Education technology

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

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

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

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

In advance of the establishment of these comprehensive centers, the law
directs the Secretary to appoint advisory committees for each of the 10
education regions, corresponding to the boundaries of the Regional
Education Laboratories, across the country. Each advisory committee
consists of members from the following stakeholder groups: state
education agencies, local education agencies, practitioners, both
education and non-education researchers, parents, and the business
community. According to the legislation, individual RAC members were not
regarded as a spokesperson for a particular stakeholder group, but
rather as a lead person in soliciting the views of members of those
stakeholder groups.

# Outreach efforts and data collection procedures

The approach to public outreach and data collection included both a
national and regional component. At the national level, the RAC support
team at CNAC produced a variety of media and documents to inform the
public about the RAC process. CNAC and its partners distributed this
information to national organizations with stakeholder interests. These
organizations were asked to pass this information onto its constituent
members across the country.

At the regional level, during the first meeting in December,
Mid-Continent RAC members organized into state teams and developed
strategies for reaching out to stakeholder groups within their
respective states. Outreach was conducted from December through February
through a variety of methods, including, but not limited to, e-mail
messages to Listserv groups, presentations and discussions at meetings,
and focus groups. Individuals and groups that were reached through these
efforts included state department of education staff, national education
officials, elected officials, local school and district staff, including
superintendents, principals, and teachers, as well as parents, and
business and community leaders. Stakeholders were encouraged by the RAC
members to register and submit their comments in the public forum on the
RAC Web site. Web site comments were reviewed by RAC members and
summarized and discussed at public meetings. (This information is
included in table 1.)

## Public interest and input

The goal of the outreach efforts was to generate public interest and
input in the RAC's deliberations. The RAC Web site (www.rac-ed.org)
provided the central point for giving the public access to the RAC and
served as the information center for the RAC. Table 1 provides a summary
of these interactions. The first line in the table shows the number of
enrollees on the RAC Web site from the Mid-Continent region. The public
was encouraged to provide comments both of a general nature and on
specific RAC ideas in a variety of ways. The next section of the table
shows the amount of input the Mid-Continent RAC received through online
comments and through the RAC Support Office either through e-mail or
surface mail. The general discussion section included comments on topics
relevant to RAC deliberations and of general interest. Another indicator
of public interest is attendance at RAC meetings. Each RAC scheduled
four public meetings. During the meetings held in Washington, DC, and
Houston, Texas, the public was invited to observe the proceedings in
person. The other two meetings were online teleconferences that included
a live audio stream of the RAC conference call and access to an online
presentation. For both the face-to-face meetings and the online
teleconferences, the public was invited to observe via a link through
the RAC Web site. The next section of the table shows the number of
public attendees at RAC meetings either in person or through the Web
site.

+----------------------------------------------------------+-----------+
| []{#__RefHeading___Toc99525355 .anchor}Table 1: Public   |           |
| inputs for the Mid-Continent RAC                         |           |
+==========================================================+===========+
| **Type of Input**                                        | **        |
|                                                          | Numbers** |
+----------------------------------------------------------+-----------+
| **Enrollment on RAC Web site**                           | **284**   |
+----------------------------------------------------------+-----------+
| > Business Stakeholder Role                              | 3         |
+----------------------------------------------------------+-----------+
| > Institute of Higher Education Stakeholder Role         | 12        |
+----------------------------------------------------------+-----------+
| > Local Education Agency Stakeholder Role                | 55        |
+----------------------------------------------------------+-----------+
| > Parent Stakeholder Role                                | 10        |
+----------------------------------------------------------+-----------+
| > Principal Stakeholder Role                             | 32        |
+----------------------------------------------------------+-----------+
| > Researcher Stakeholder Role                            | 2         |
+----------------------------------------------------------+-----------+
| > School Board Member Stakeholder Role                   | 6         |
+----------------------------------------------------------+-----------+
| > State Education Agency Stakeholder Role                | 69        |
+----------------------------------------------------------+-----------+
| > Teacher Stakeholder Role                               | 51        |
+----------------------------------------------------------+-----------+
| > Other Stakeholder Role                                 | 44        |
+----------------------------------------------------------+-----------+
| **Comments**                                             | **47**    |
+----------------------------------------------------------+-----------+
| On Web site Forums                                       | 44        |
+----------------------------------------------------------+-----------+
| **Number of Topics**                                     | **30**    |
+----------------------------------------------------------+-----------+
| Through e-mail to the RAC Support Office                 | 3         |
+----------------------------------------------------------+-----------+
| Through surface mail to the RAC Support Office           | 0         |
+----------------------------------------------------------+-----------+
| **Views on the RAC Web site**                            |           |
+----------------------------------------------------------+-----------+
| Regional Forums                                          | 1476      |
+----------------------------------------------------------+-----------+
| **Attendance at RAC Public Meetings**                    | **25**    |
+----------------------------------------------------------+-----------+
| Orientation Meeting                                      | 4         |
+----------------------------------------------------------+-----------+
| Public Meeting #1 (29 registrants)                       | 16        |
+----------------------------------------------------------+-----------+
| Public Meeting #2 (18 registrants)                       | 6         |
+----------------------------------------------------------+-----------+
| **Public Input by Outreach Efforts conducted by RAC      | **        |
| Members**                                                | Numbers** |
+----------------------------------------------------------+-----------+
| **Regional Focus Groups**                                |           |
+----------------------------------------------------------+-----------+
| > Charter School Principals, Staff and Board Members     | 25        |
| > (Kansas City, MO)                                      |           |
+----------------------------------------------------------+-----------+
| > Business/Civic Leaders (Kansas City, MO)               | 30        |
+----------------------------------------------------------+-----------+
| > Kansas City Coalition of Hispanic Organizations,       | 25        |
| > Education Committee Leaders (Kansas City, MO)          |           |
+----------------------------------------------------------+-----------+
| > Greater Kansas City Superintendent's Forum (Kansas     | 40        |
| > City, MO)                                              |           |
+----------------------------------------------------------+-----------+
| > Urban League of Greater Kansas City (Kansas City, MO)  | 15        |
+----------------------------------------------------------+-----------+
| > Colorado Department of Education, State Staff (CO)     | 100       |
+----------------------------------------------------------+-----------+
| > Statewide Representatives (CASE, CASE, CASB, CEA, PTA, | 20        |
| > Leg.) (CO)                                             |           |
+----------------------------------------------------------+-----------+
| > Council of Superintendents (KS)                        | 55        |
+----------------------------------------------------------+-----------+
| > Curriculum Leaders Meeting (KS)                        | 125       |
+----------------------------------------------------------+-----------+
| **Presentations at Meetings in the Region**              |           |
+----------------------------------------------------------+-----------+
| > Faculty Meetings (ND)                                  | 500       |
+----------------------------------------------------------+-----------+
| > State Superintendent & Selected Staff Meeting (ND)     | 6         |
+----------------------------------------------------------+-----------+
| > Board Members Meeting (NE)                             | 8         |
+----------------------------------------------------------+-----------+
| > Teachers/Administrators Meeting (NE)                   | 40        |
+----------------------------------------------------------+-----------+
| > Parents/Teachers/Business and Community Leaders        | 35        |
| > Meeting (NE)                                           |           |
+----------------------------------------------------------+-----------+
| > Kansas State Department of Education Program Staff     | 75        |
| > Meeting (KS)                                           |           |
+----------------------------------------------------------+-----------+
| > Curriculum Directors Meeting (NE)                      | 8         |
+----------------------------------------------------------+-----------+
| > Aspiring Administrators (KS)                           | 50        |
+----------------------------------------------------------+-----------+
| **Other Sources of Outreach**                            |           |
+----------------------------------------------------------+-----------+
| > Local District Administrative Staff (KS)               | 150       |
+----------------------------------------------------------+-----------+
| > Educational Leadership E-mail (ND)                     | 600+      |
+----------------------------------------------------------+-----------+
| > E-mail/Listserv to Key Education Groups (PTA,          | 1000+     |
| > SEA,ESPB, etc.) (ND)                                   |           |
+----------------------------------------------------------+-----------+
| > Nebraska Administrators Listserv (NE)                  | 100+      |
+----------------------------------------------------------+-----------+
| > Superintendents/Principals/Curriculum Leaders, Title I | 2212      |
| > Coordinators Listserv (KS)                             |           |
+----------------------------------------------------------+-----------+
| > Education Organizations -- School Board                | 65,972    |
| > Association/PTA/Kansas NEA/United School               |           |
| > Administrators Meeting (KS)                            |           |
+----------------------------------------------------------+-----------+
| > Wyoming Department of Education posting (Supt.,        | 550       |
| > Principals, Dist. Leaders, School Board Members,       |           |
| > Wyoming Education Agency) (WY)                         |           |
+----------------------------------------------------------+-----------+
| > Website Posting of Missouri DESE (MO)                  |           |
+----------------------------------------------------------+-----------+
| > Principal Listserv (CO)                                | 1700      |
+----------------------------------------------------------+-----------+
| > AFT Kansas City, MO Listserv (MO)                      | 625       |
+----------------------------------------------------------+-----------+
| > AFT Kansas City, MO Newsletter (MO)                    | 2500      |
+----------------------------------------------------------+-----------+
| (as of February 28, 2005)                                |           |
+----------------------------------------------------------+-----------+

# Regional background

This section discusses some background information for the Mid-Continent
region that helps provide a context for the remainder of the report.

## School and student demographics

The Mid-Continent Region includes the following states: Colorado,
Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota, and Wyoming.
Most of these states have small-to-medium-sized school systems, with
Missouri as the largest with 2,286 public schools. Three states have
small school systems: South Dakota (738 schools), North Dakota (528
schools), and Wyoming (389 schools). Missouri also has the most students
with 924,455. Wyoming has by far the smallest number of students, with
only 88,116 (see table 2).

  -------------------------------- ------------------- --------------------------
  []{#__RefHeading___Toc99525356                       
  .anchor}Table 2: Number of                           
  schools and students                                 

  **State**                        **Public schools    **Public school students
                                   SY2002-2003**       SY2002-2003**

  Colorado                         1,662               751,862

  Kansas                           1,431               470,957

  Missouri                         2,286               924,455

  Nebraska                         1,250               285,402

  North Dakota                     528                 104,225

  South Dakota                     738                 128,039

  Wyoming                          389                 88,116

  Sources: Common Core of Data                         
  2002-2003; Education Week's                          
  Quality Counts 2005.                                 
  -------------------------------- ------------------- --------------------------

With the exception of Colorado and Missouri, which are the two largest
systems, schools in the Mid-Continent region are often in rural
settings. In Wyoming and South Dakota, rural schools represent 70
percent and 62 percent of all schools, respectively. Rural schools also
account for a majority of the schools in North Dakota (58 percent) and
more than 40 percent of schools in Nebraska and Kansas. Colorado's
system is primarily suburban (53 percent), whereas Nebraska has the
largest concentration of urban schools in the region (36 percent). In
Wyoming, suburban areas have just 1 percent of the state's public
schools.

### Diversity

Colorado is the most diverse school system in the region, with
minorities representing more than one-third of the public school
population. Hispanics are the largest minority group in the state,
accounting for 24 percent of total enrollment. Blacks make up 6 percent
of the Colorado school population, whereas Asians and American Indians
account for 3 percent and 1 percent, respectively. Hispanics represent
10 percent of students in Kansas, whereas Blacks constitute 9 percent of
the school population. The largest concentration of Blacks is in
Missouri, accounting for 18 percent of enrollment.

American Indians are the largest ethnic minority group in South Dakota
and North Dakota, representing 11 percent and 8 percent of students,
respectively. However, in both of these states, as well as in Wyoming,
White students account for 85 percent or more of the school population.

### Poverty

Poverty rates, as indicated by free- and reduced-price lunch
eligibility, are fairly consistent across the states in this region, and
are at or below the national average (36 percent). Kansas has the
largest concentration of poor students, reaching the national average of
36 percent, while Colorado has the smallest at 29 percent.

### Curriculum

*Establishing state curriculum standards.* In terms of meeting the
requirements of NCLB, five of the seven states in this region have
created standards in science, reading, and mathematics. The only
exceptions are Missouri and Nebraska.[^2] Both of these states have
partially met their math standards, and Nebraska has yet to meet the
requirement in reading.

*Test Alignment with State Standards.* In "Quality Counts 2005,"
*Education Week* analyzed whether states have aligned their assessments
with standards across the grade spans and in four core subjects (i.e.,
math, science, English, and social studies/history). South Dakota is one
of only 12 states nationwide to align assessments with standards across
all grades and in all major subjects. Kansas has completed alignment in
all areas except social studies/history at the elementary level. Four
other states---Colorado, Missouri, North Dakota, and Wyoming---have
aligned math and English assessments through all grades but have yet to
do so in science or social studies. *Education Week's* data indicates
that Nebraska has only completed alignment in English.[^3]

### Teacher demographics and qualifications

The number of public school teachers in the Mid-Continent states is
consistent with public school enrollment, with Wyoming hiring the
smallest number and Missouri the largest (see table 3). The smallest
school systems had the lowest student/teacher ratios, such as North
Dakota and Wyoming, each of which had ratios of only 13:1. Missouri,
Kansas, Nebraska, and South Dakota all had 14:1 ratios, whereas Colorado
had the largest ratio at 17:1.[^4]

NCLB also requires each classroom to have a highly qualified teacher in
core academic subjects by the end of the 2005-06 school year. Many
Mid-Continent states fared well in the number of teachers highly
qualified, including Missouri (95 percent), North Dakota (91 percent),
and Nebraska (90 percent). All other states scored in the 80 to 90
percent range, with Kansas posting the lowest share of highly qualified
teachers (80 percent).[^5]

Teacher salaries, one indicator of a state's ability to recruit and
retain teachers, show that Mid-Continent school districts may face
challenges on this issue. All states lagged behind the national average
salary of \$44,604 for the 2001-02 school year. Colorado was the only
state in the region with an average annual salary above \$40,000. North
Dakota and South Dakota had the lowest average salaries at \$31,709 and
\$31,295, respectively.

+------------+----------------+---------------+-----------------------+
| []{#__RefH |                |               |                       |
| eading___T |                |               |                       |
| oc99525357 |                |               |                       |
| .an        |                |               |                       |
| chor}Table |                |               |                       |
| 3: Number  |                |               |                       |
| of         |                |               |                       |
| teachers   |                |               |                       |
| and        |                |               |                       |
| stude      |                |               |                       |
| nt/teacher |                |               |                       |
| ratios     |                |               |                       |
+------------+----------------+---------------+-----------------------+
| **State**  | **No. of       | **St          | **Percent of classes  |
|            | teachers**     | udent/teacher | taught by             |
|            |                | ratio**       | high-quality          |
|            | **at public    |               | teachers**            |
|            | schools**      |               |                       |
+------------+----------------+---------------+-----------------------+
| Colorado   | 45,401         | 17:1          | 86                    |
+------------+----------------+---------------+-----------------------+
| Kansas     | 32,643         | 14:1          | 80                    |
+------------+----------------+---------------+-----------------------+
| Missouri   | 66,717         | 14:1          | 95                    |
+------------+----------------+---------------+-----------------------+
| Nebraska   | 21,043         | 14:1          | 90                    |
+------------+----------------+---------------+-----------------------+
| North      | 8,078          | 13:1          | 96                    |
| Dakota     |                |               |                       |
+------------+----------------+---------------+-----------------------+
| South      | 9,257          | 14:1          | 86                    |
| Dakota     |                |               |                       |
+------------+----------------+---------------+-----------------------+
| Wyoming    | 6,795          | 13:1          | 95                    |
+------------+----------------+---------------+-----------------------+
| Sources:   |                |               |                       |
| *Quality   |                |               |                       |
| Counts*    |                |               |                       |
| 2005,      |                |               |                       |
| *Education |                |               |                       |
| Week*;     |                |               |                       |
| Center on  |                |               |                       |
| Education  |                |               |                       |
| Policy     |                |               |                       |
| Year 2 of  |                |               |                       |
| NCLB       |                |               |                       |
| Report     |                |               |                       |
| (          |                |               |                       |
| 2002-2003) |                |               |                       |
+------------+----------------+---------------+-----------------------+

### Student achievement

The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), also known as
\"the Nation\'s Report Card,\" is the only nationally representative and
continuing assessment of what America\'s students know and can do in
various subject areas. All states in the Mid-Continent region
participated in NAEP in 2003, and in all seven states, the average
scores were slightly above the national average in both mathematics and
reading. See table 4 below for a breakdown of average scores and
achievement levels.

+----------+---------+-----+--------+------+------+--------+--------+
| []{#__   |         |     |        |      |      |        |        |
| RefHeadi |         |     |        |      |      |        |        |
| ng___Toc |         |     |        |      |      |        |        |
| 99525358 |         |     |        |      |      |        |        |
| .anch    |         |     |        |      |      |        |        |
| or}Table |         |     |        |      |      |        |        |
| 4: NAEP  |         |     |        |      |      |        |        |
| per      |         |     |        |      |      |        |        |
| formance |         |     |        |      |      |        |        |
| in 2003  |         |     |        |      |      |        |        |
+----------+---------+-----+--------+------+------+--------+--------+
| *        |         |     | *      |      | *    |        |        |
| *State** |         |     | *Scale |      | *Ach |        |        |
|          |         |     | s      |      | ieve |        |        |
|          |         |     | core** |      | ment |        |        |
|          |         |     |        |      | lev  |        |        |
|          |         |     |        |      | el** |        |        |
|          |         |     |        |      |      |        |        |
|          |         |     |        |      | *    |        |        |
|          |         |     |        |      | *per |        |        |
|          |         |     |        |      | cent |        |        |
|          |         |     |        |      | at   |        |        |
|          |         |     |        |      | or   |        |        |
|          |         |     |        |      | abo  |        |        |
|          |         |     |        |      | ve** |        |        |
+----------+---------+-----+--------+------+------+--------+--------+
|          | **Su    | **G | **Na   | **S  | *    | **     | **Adva |
|          | bject** | rad | tional | tate | *Bas | Profic | nced** |
|          |         | e** | Avg.** | Av   | ic** | ient** |        |
|          |         |     |        | g.** |      |        |        |
+----------+---------+-----+--------+------+------+--------+--------+
| Colorado | Math    | 4   | 234    | 235  | 77   | 34     | 4      |
|          | ematics |     |        |      |      |        |        |
+----------+---------+-----+--------+------+------+--------+--------+
|          |         | 8   | 276    | 283  | 74   | 34     | 8      |
+----------+---------+-----+--------+------+------+--------+--------+
|          | Reading | 4   | 216    | 224  | 69   | 37     | 9      |
+----------+---------+-----+--------+------+------+--------+--------+
|          |         | 8   | 261    | 268  | 78   | 36     | 4      |
+----------+---------+-----+--------+------+------+--------+--------+
| Kansas   | Math    | 4   | 234    | 242  | 85   | 41     | 6      |
|          | ematics |     |        |      |      |        |        |
+----------+---------+-----+--------+------+------+--------+--------+
|          |         | 8   | 276    | 284  | 76   | 34     | 6      |
+----------+---------+-----+--------+------+------+--------+--------+
|          | Reading | 4   | 216    | 220  | 66   | 33     | 7      |
+----------+---------+-----+--------+------+------+--------+--------+
|          |         | 8   | 261    | 266  | 77   | 35     | 3      |
+----------+---------+-----+--------+------+------+--------+--------+
| Missouri | Math    | 4   | 234    | 235  | 79   | 30     | 3      |
|          | ematics |     |        |      |      |        |        |
+----------+---------+-----+--------+------+------+--------+--------+
|          |         | 8   | 276    | 279  | 71   | 28     | 4      |
+----------+---------+-----+--------+------+------+--------+--------+
|          | Reading | 4   | 216    | 222  | 68   | 34     | 8      |
+----------+---------+-----+--------+------+------+--------+--------+
|          |         | 8   | 261    | 267  | 79   | 34     | 3      |
+----------+---------+-----+--------+------+------+--------+--------+
| Nebraska | Math    | 4   | 234    | 236  | 80   | 34     | 3      |
|          | ematics |     |        |      |      |        |        |
+----------+---------+-----+--------+------+------+--------+--------+
|          |         | 8   | 276    | 282  | 74   | 32     | 5      |
+----------+---------+-----+--------+------+------+--------+--------+
|          | Reading | 4   | 216    | 221  | 66   | 32     | 8      |
+----------+---------+-----+--------+------+------+--------+--------+
|          |         | 8   | 261    | 266  | 77   | 35     | 3      |
+----------+---------+-----+--------+------+------+--------+--------+
| North    | Math    | 4   | 234    | 238  | 83   | 34     | 2      |
| Dakota   | ematics |     |        |      |      |        |        |
+----------+---------+-----+--------+------+------+--------+--------+
|          |         | 8   | 276    | 287  | 81   | 36     | 5      |
+----------+---------+-----+--------+------+------+--------+--------+
|          | Reading | 4   | 216    | 222  | 69   | 32     | 6      |
+----------+---------+-----+--------+------+------+--------+--------+
|          |         | 8   | 261    | 270  | 81   | 38     | 3      |
+----------+---------+-----+--------+------+------+--------+--------+
| South    | Math    | 4   | 234    | 237  | 82   | 34     | 3      |
| Dakota   | ematics |     |        |      |      |        |        |
+----------+---------+-----+--------+------+------+--------+--------+
|          |         | 8   | 276    | 285  | 78   | 35     | 5      |
+----------+---------+-----+--------+------+------+--------+--------+
|          | Reading | 4   | 216    | 222  | 69   | 33     | 7      |
+----------+---------+-----+--------+------+------+--------+--------+
|          |         | 8   | 261    | 270  | 82   | 39     | 3      |
+----------+---------+-----+--------+------+------+--------+--------+
| Wyoming  | Math    | 4   | 234    | 241  | 87   | 39     | 4      |
|          | ematics |     |        |      |      |        |        |
+----------+---------+-----+--------+------+------+--------+--------+
|          |         | 8   | 276    | 284  | 77   | 32     | 4      |
+----------+---------+-----+--------+------+------+--------+--------+
|          | Reading | 4   | 216    | 222  | 69   | 34     | 7      |
+----------+---------+-----+--------+------+------+--------+--------+
|          |         | 8   | 261    | 267  | 79   | 34     | 2      |
+----------+---------+-----+--------+------+------+--------+--------+
| Source:  |         |     |        |      |      |        |        |
| National |         |     |        |      |      |        |        |
| Center   |         |     |        |      |      |        |        |
| for      |         |     |        |      |      |        |        |
| E        |         |     |        |      |      |        |        |
| ducation |         |     |        |      |      |        |        |
| Sta      |         |     |        |      |      |        |        |
| tistics, |         |     |        |      |      |        |        |
| http://  |         |     |        |      |      |        |        |
| nces.ed. |         |     |        |      |      |        |        |
| gov/nati |         |     |        |      |      |        |        |
| onsrepor |         |     |        |      |      |        |        |
| tcard/st |         |     |        |      |      |        |        |
| ates/pro |         |     |        |      |      |        |        |
| file.asp |         |     |        |      |      |        |        |
+----------+---------+-----+--------+------+------+--------+--------+

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc99789394 .anchor}Educational challenges within the
region

After much deliberation, the Mid-Continent RAC identified six major
educational challenges that were impediments to implementing NCLB and to
improving the academic achievement of all children. Public feedback
confirmed that the RAC was on target with these priority challenges,
listed in order of importance for the region. After reaching consensus
on the major challenges in the region, the RAC identified some technical
assistance strategies that would help states and school districts
address those challenges.

# Challenge #1: Identifying, evaluating, and using scientifically based research

Committee members believe that incorporating scientifically based
research into classroom instruction is an essential element in helping
*all* children reach higher achievement levels. They also believe that
the ability to evaluate and implement research-based instructional
practices is a major challenge for many teachers and school leaders.

The RAC defined scientifically based research as quantitative research
that meets federal requirements, has been through a rigorous peer review
process for publication in reputable journals, and has empirical data to
back up its theoretical application and effectiveness. Such research
should include examples of proven results (increased achievement) with
students of diverse cultures and socioeconomic backgrounds as well as
implementation guides for schools to be able to adapt the principles to
practice.

## Technical assistance

Technical assistance centers need to regularly review scientifically
based research and suggest guidelines for implementing proven programs
and practices with fidelity. Technical assistance centers need to be the
leaders in promoting the implementation of scientifically research-based
programs. More direct guidance is needed from the technical assistance
centers to help states, districts, and schools use the scientifically
based research that is available.

Technical assistance centers need to provide a database that regularly
reviews research journals for educational research that is relevant to
practice. The database should summarize the research, link to the full
text article, give specific characteristics of the article (i.e., number
of subjects, type of design, statistical analysis), and include a rating
of the extent of confidence (i.e., statistical significance) one can
have in the research and its ability to be generalized.

Technical assistance centers should be able to match expertise with
those districts and schools that need it, provide onsite, ongoing, and
high quality professional development to build capacity and provide a
reliable place to get programs and knowledge of the best professional
development, not just what is the most readily available, cheapest, or
easiest. Technical assistance centers need to reach out to each state,
groups of states, and collaborate regionally with stakeholders to
provide customized onsite professional development activities supported
by sound scientifically based research. Technical assistance centers
need to be responsive to professional development needs that are aligned
with the student achievement needs of the states.

# Challenge #2: Teacher effectiveness

The Mid-Continent RAC recognizes that improving the ability of all
teachers to reach all students is key to raising student achievement.
Teacher preparation, professional development, and the recruitment and
retention of high quality, effective teachers were cited as major
challenges in this region. Teachers entering the field frequently lack
basic and specific skills needed to effectively teach all students.
Higher education institutions need to respond to the current skill needs
of teachers entering into the workforce. Additionally, professional
development opportunities for teachers need to be based on scientific
research. The current professional development activities often include
one-time sessions that are entertainment, fragmented, or vendor based.
This type of professional development needs to be replaced with high
quality and ongoing professional development plans that are aligned to
district programs and goals. Finally, schools in this region have
difficulty recruiting and retaining teachers, diminishing the capacity
of the schools to engage in continuous reform and sustain the increase
in student achievement. Specifically, the characteristics of the
Mid-Continent's primarily rural nature with some urban centers and low
salaries are contributing factors to teacher loss. Rural areas have a
lack of social, cultural, and educational opportunities that also impact
retention of teachers.

## Technical assistance

Technical assistance is needed in three primary areas to ensure teacher
effectiveness. These areas are: working with teacher preparation
programs, professional development to enhance the effectiveness of
current teachers and support with recruitment and retention of effective
teachers.

Teacher preparation programs need to be guided by scientifically based
research focused on specific instructional delivery skills to
effectively improve student achievement. Technical assistance should
provide the structure to establish continuous coaching and mentoring
relationships between teacher preparation programs and their graduates.
In addition, a structure to provide feedback between these entities
needs to be established. Finally, centers should assist teacher
preparation programs to ensure that alternate certification programs are
producing effective teachers.

The technical assistance provided should create a structure for teachers
to evaluate the effectiveness of their instruction. Support is needed
for states and districts to establish a system to evaluate teacher
performance based on the longitudinal progress of student achievement.
Technical assistance centers will need to support states, districts, and
schools as they create a vision and a plan that will result in increased
student achievement. The center should also provide focused, research
based professional development tailored to meet the needs of teachers in
advancing student achievement. Additionally, centers should support and
advise states, districts and schools as they implement and develop their
own results-based staff development. Specifically, the technical
assistance center must evaluate regional needs, provide professional
development to meet those needs, and increase the awareness of its
services.

Finally, technical assistance should be provided to states and school
districts on the recruitment and retention of high quality teachers. The
center should assist the states in facilitating, exploring, and
developing alternative pathways to teacher licensing programs such as
"teacher-in-residence" programs. It must review best practices that
support the retention of high-quality teachers, such as mentoring and
induction opportunities. The center should also facilitate teacher
recruitment by regions, area, need, or by state that are based on
research of what works and what new teachers are looking for in an
employer.

# Challenge #3: School leadership

In light of the NCLB Act and the increased focus on student achievement,
shifting from a management orientation to an instructional leadership
model was seen by the RAC as a critical area of need. Leaders need to be
able to clarify their roles and responsibilities to enhance the
achievement of students. This shift in focus has been a difficult
transition for many school principals, district superintendents, and
teacher leaders. Finally, the overall quantity and quality of leadership
is not at the level essential to serve every child in the region.

Today's school leaders need to be focused on the following key points:

-   Creating and ensuring a culture of learning in the schools and the
    community

-   Developing and implementing effective research-based instruction

-   Making decisions focused on student achievement and instruction
    (such as curriculum selection and professional development)

-   Creatively and strategically using resources to produce results for
    students.

## Technical assistance

The most essential work of leadership is to define the critical focus
around which leaders will or must direct their efforts. Technical
assistance in leadership development must include setting priorities,
building focus, reaching consensus, establishing goals, and evaluating
progress.

This requires the development and implementation of effective
professional development models. For example, states need assistance
with mentoring and coaching their instructional leaders. The state
leadership should also have the skills to assist each level of
management and leadership including a sound understanding of research
and effective teaching practices. Additionally, states need assistance
in ensuring assessment practices and procedures, informing instruction
and guiding policy-making decisions. Finally, states need assistance in
leading systemic reform, such as possible structures for rewarding
leaders for performance. While these technical assistance strategies
will build strong leadership at the state level, they must be
transmitted and disseminated into the district, school, and ultimately
classroom and student levels. Leadership development could be provided
through a lab or professional development center. Systemic leadership
should also be built through board member training such as policy, role
clarification, and strategic vision.

# Challenge #4: Maintaining quality in rural education

The rural nature of the region creates some unique challenges for
schools and districts. Remote schools in sparsely populated areas are
often not able to provide a range of curricular offerings, programs, and
activities such as those offered in suburban and urban settings. A lack
of resources and personnel also makes it difficult for these schools to
attract and retain quality teachers and administrators. Rural teachers
often need to teach more than one subject area and, as a consequence,
reaching the goal of ensuring highly qualified staff in several content
areas is difficult.

The cultural and economic differences among diverse student and family
populations in rural areas in the region are challenges for school
communities. Some teachers and administrators do not have the knowledge
and skills to understand and connect with students who are impacted by
different cultural values and/or poverty. Developing teachers and
leaders with a greater understanding and skill sets surrounding these
issues is important in order for them to improve student achievement.

## Technical assistance

States need assistance and support to identify and link districts and
schools in autonomous rural areas. The assistance should include the use
of technology to acquire and provide onsite professional development
across districts, regions, and states to decrease the problems of
isolation. States should link schools and districts across regions by
knowing which ones are addressing similar challenges and, therefore,
could be pulled together and connected for help with instructional
leadership training and professional development. For example, rural
schools need assistance in recruiting, training, and retaining more
highly qualified teachers who possess high standards. The states need
assistance to set up an infrastructure that connects rural schools to
their district, other districts, and to or with the state. Additionally,
teachers and staff need to learn how to use linked resources for
support.

Research should be focused on the needs of rural schools and the results
of this research translated into professional development. Areas to
research may include: the best type of teacher for a rural area, the
qualities to look for in a teacher, possible causes behind teacher
turnover, and effective retention strategies. Additionally,
differentiated pre-service education at the college and university level
needs to be researched. Finally, technical assistance should provide
research focused on effective curriculum, ensuring variety and adequate
quality.

# Challenge #5: Improving the academic achievement of urban children and youth

Although the Mid-Continent is primarily rural, there are some large
urban school districts that face special challenges. A primary concern
is the concentration of students living in poverty and attending urban
schools. Research has shown that children from impoverished backgrounds
start school behind their peers from middle- and upper middle-class
households, and they are unlikely to catch up without appropriate
interventions. Many urban schools lack the resources essential to
provide those interventions.

Another issue of concern for urban schools is the perception that
teachers hold of urban youth. The educational community often has low
expectations for students, contributing to low student achievement. It
is especially difficult for urban schools to attract and retain quality
teachers and administrators. The educational community in urban schools
needs staff development based on effective research targeted to teaching
urban students and for learning about students who are from backgrounds
different from their own. Finally, creating safe environments in urban
schools for students who frequently reside in violent settings is
another challenge for the educational community.

## Technical assistance

States need assistance in addressing systemic reform by helping
districts reconfigure and redefine the structure of urban schools. The
committee envisions schools that would provide a holistic approach to
educating urban youth, moving away from a content-focused approach and
into a student-focused approach. Student support teams, wrap-around
services, pay for performance, accountability, and autonomy from
unnecessary bureaucratic procedures in order to gain academic
performance are examples of characteristics of a redesigned system.

The technical assistance center will provide research, offer examples of
successful models, and support effective restructuring of urban schools.
Additional technical assistance is essential in the development of urban
leaders and the establishment of a system for ongoing communication
among them, and of networks to identify and share effective practices
and programs.

# Challenge #6: Addressing social and cultural issues that impede student achievement

Schools in the region serve a diverse student population, and many
students live in a family and community setting that does not value
achievement. Additionally, the family and community may lack the
resources or understanding required to ensure academic and social
success for their children. Often the social and cultural environment of
children is an impediment to learning.

Children's readiness for learning at all grade levels (K-12) can be
enhanced by partnering with parents and community social service
providers. The partnerships should address issues of child health,
cultural attitudes toward achievement, special needs, and racial,
ethnic, and socioeconomic diversity in order to overcome the challenges
posed by the social and cultural conditions.

## Technical assistance

Technical assistance should be provided to help states, districts,
communities, and schools address both academic and non-academic factors
that impact student achievement. Outreach and information efforts on
effective practices are essential. Additionally, assistance is needed to
facilitate services, improve technology, and foster partnerships with
educational and social programs (e.g., information systems and
involvement). Finally, there should be access to research-based programs
that enhance community, parent, and student engagement.

Technical assistance should be provided to ensure student success by
effectively involving parents and communities in the educational
process. The assistance for educational communities should include
wrap-around services, technology, and building partnerships. Technical
assistance should provide help to create a common source of shared,
available student information (e.g., services, credit for graduation)
for use by schools, districts, and states.

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc99789407 .anchor}Conclusions and recommendations

States in the Mid-Continent region will benefit most from federally
funded technical assistance centers that are responsive to the needs of
the region. A primary responsibility of the regional center is to meet
the needs and priorities within the region that will lead to improved
student achievement. Identification of these needs should be
accomplished through continual review of the data and through
consultation with regional stakeholders. Centers should develop a plan
of activities to address these priorities. Activities should be research
based, translated into effective practices, and should include:

-   Building the capacity of the state to provide for school quality and
    improvement

-   Restructuring to improve the effectiveness of the education system
    for the 21^st^ century

-   Providing quality professional development

-   Recommending and evaluating professional development practices to
    raise student achievement aligned to the goals and the priorities of
    the region

-   Establishing a clearinghouse (information resource center).

In addition, the Mid-Continent RAC recommends:

-   The technical assistance center has a governing board that includes
    representatives of each of the states within the region to ensure
    that technical assistance is responsive to the changing needs of
    every state in the region

-   The organization awarded the grant should demonstrate significant
    success in providing effective technical assistance.

-   The technical assistance centers should be required to report and
    undergo an independent evaluation on their work and ability to
    address the regional challenges.

Finally, the Mid-Continent RAC strongly recommends that individual
technical assistance centers be established to address on a national
basis each specific need listed below:[^6]

-   A national center for rural education

-   A national center for urban education

-   A national center for the teaching of reading and writing

-   A national center for teaching of science and mathematics

-   A national center for leadership

-   A national center for school reform

-   A national center for multi-lingual/ESL

-   A national center for social, economic, and cultural issues
    (community schools).

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc99789408 .anchor}Appendix: Biographical
information about members of the Mid-Continent Regional Advisory
Committee

*Ms. Sandy Aguirre Mayer* has been active in urban education for many
years. As a parent, she was appointed to the Desegregation Monitoring
Committee and then served as a board member for the Kansas City,
Missouri, School District. She currently volunteers on education issues
locally affecting Latino students. Ms. Mayer has an M.B.A. and works as
the Assistant Director of Purchasing for the Jackson County, Missouri
Courthouse.

*Dr. Trent Blankenship* was elected to his first term as Wyoming's
Superintendent of Public Instruction in November 2002. He earned his
bachelor, master's, and doctorate degrees at the University of Wyoming.
Dr. Blankenship has taught at the University of Wyoming, served as a
school principal, served as district superintendent in two Wyoming
districts, and served as a teacher and coach for the Department of
Defense Schools.

*Mr. Marc Bluestone* is the assistant principal at the Edwin Loe
Elementary School in New Town, North Dakota. He is an enrolled member of
the Three Affiliated Tribes---Mandan, Hidatsa, and Arikara. He is
married with six children. Mr. Bluestone has a master's degree and is a
doctoral candidate in Educational Leadership.

*Ms. Andrea Boden, Ed.S., NCSP* is a Nationally Certified School
Psychologist and was named Nebraska\'s School Psychologist of the year
in 2004, and has worked for Gering Public Schools in Nebraska, for seven
years. Ms. Boden's role at Gering has been a very nontraditional for a
school psychologist as she has worked a great deal with district-wide
assessment and curriculum issues. She wrote the district\'s Reading
First grant and serves as the District Coordinator for the Reading First
(Direct Instruction) program. Her current role includes assisting the
district in making decisions based on Scientific Research in an effort
to increase achievement for all students.

*Ms. Irene Devin* is the parent of three children and a Wyoming State
Senator. Senator Devin chaired the Senate Education Committee and the
Select Committee on School Facilities. Senator Devin also co-chaired the
committee to develop the first state-wide assessment in reading,
writing, and mathematics.

*Ms. Polly Feis* has been the Deputy Commissioner for the Nebraska
Department of Education since January of 1995. She obtained her juris
doctorate, bachelors, and master's degrees from the University of
Nebraska. She has had a long time commitment to and passion for quality
education for all children in Nebraska.

*Ms. Kim Gillespie* has been an educator for 29 years, most recently as
Principal of Pioneer Trail Junior High School in Olathe, Kansas.
Additionally, she has served as a member of the Department of
Education's Teacher Assistance Corps.

*Dr. D. Kent King*, appointed Missouri Commissioner of Education in
2000, came to the position after serving as a Missouri superintendent
for 25 years, a middle-level principal, and an English teacher. He also
served as the director of Missouri's school accreditation, which focused
on student achievement and improved test scores; therefore, the emphasis
on improving student performance has been a long time goal.

*Ms. Cheryl Kulas* is the Executive Director of the North Dakota Indian
Affairs Commission and a member of the Midwest Regional Task Force for
Drug Free Schools---Native American Initiative for the North Central
Regional Education Laboratory. Previously, she was the Director of
Native Education for the North Dakota Department of Public Instruction.
Ms. Kulas has her master's degree in American Indian Studies from the
University of Arizona and has graduate credits from the University of
North Dakota, North Dakota State University, and Western Washington
University.

*Dr. John Lawrence* has been a superintendent since he was 23 years old
and is in his twenty-first year as Superintendent of the Troy Missouri
Public schools. He was also the president of the 14,000-member American
Association of School Administrators (AASA) for the 2002-04 term.

*Ms. Karen Lukens* is a 22-year veteran of education, and has been
teaching at Hawthorne Elementary School in Sioux Falls since 1997. Ms.
Lukens is a member of the Sioux Falls School District Language Arts
Committee and the South Dakota Language Arts Standard Writing committee
and is the of the Milken Educator Award. She has also been the
building\'s literacy trainer and has provided many in-services on
reading recipient.

*Dr. Rick Melmer* is the Secretary of Education for the State of South
Dakota. He has served in that capacity for the past 18 months. Dr.
Melmer was recently elected to the Executive Board of the Council of
Chief State School Officers (CCSSO). Previous to his work with the state
of South Dakota, he served as a school superintendent in South Dakota
for eight years.

*Ms. Jo O'Brien* is Assistant to the Commissioner for Learning and
Results, at the Colorado Department of Education. Previously, Ms.
O'Brien worked for the Chicago Tribune, the Public Broadcasting Service
(PBS) and was a director for the Kentucky Department of Education. She
was on faculty at Michigan State University and has worked extensively
with low-income schools to guide higher student achievement performance.

*Dr. Keith Owen* is currently the Director of Reading/Lindamood-Bell
programs for Pueblo School District No. 60 in Colorado.  He was the
principal at Beulah Heights Elementary, a National Distinguished Title I
school that was recognized by President Bush and the U.S. Department of
Education for closing the achievement gap and high achievement in
reading.  Dr. Owen was also the 2003 Colorado Elementary Principal of
the Year.

*Dr. Alexa Posny* was appointed Kansas Assistant Commissioner of
Education in June 2001. She previously served as the state director of
special education, as the director of special education with the Shawnee
Mission School District and in cooperative educational service agencies
in both Wisconsin and Illinois, and taught special education at the
elementary, middle school and high school levels. For nine years, Dr.
Posny worked as a researcher, consultant and technical assistance
provider under multiple U.S. Department of Education Title I contracts.

*Ms. Vonnie Sanders* teaches English as a Second Language to middle
school refugee students. She has a bachelor\'s degree in Elementary
Education and ESL, a middle level licensure, and a master's degree in
Reading. Ms. Sanders mentors teachers working toward their middle level
licensure, serves on the North Dakota state assessment and after-school
activities committees, and is a mother and grandmother.

*Mr. W.L. Sawyer* was appointed Superintendent of Topeka Public Schools
in July of 2003. His focus on instructional improvement and professional
development has resulted in remarkable student achievement gains in TPS.
He is a career educator spending his years prior to Topeka in the New
York City public schools as a teacher, principal, and superintendent.
Mr. Sawyer has dedicated his life to ensuring that children are prepared
academically and emotionally with the skills that are required for
success in the world of tomorrow.

*Dr. Debora Scheffel* has worked in the field of education for 15 years
and is Director of University Assessment and Professor at the University
of Northern Colorado, School of Special Education, Greeley, Colorado.
She also works with the Colorado Department of Education on Colorado
Reading First and charter school issues, and participated recently in
the Teacher Assistance Corps Initiative, Department of Education, toward
putting a highly qualified teacher in every classroom.

*Mr. Rick Woodford* is the Director of Special Education in Lincoln
County School District #2, in Afton, Wyoming. Throughout his career in
special education, he has worked to develop effective systems to
facilitate the inclusion of students with disabilities into the general
curriculum and classroom. In addition to his responsibilities as a
special education director, Mr. Woodford is the principal of a small
alternative school that serves many rural communities in Star Valley.

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc99789409 .anchor}Glossary

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

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

**COMPREHENSIVE TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE CENTERS**---Centers authorized by
Section 203 of the Education Sciences Reform Act of 2002 (P.L. 107-279).
Appropriations for the centers in FY05 would enable the U.S. Department
of Education to support 20 centers, 10 of which must be in current
regions.

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

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

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

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

**ELL---**English Language Learners

**ESL**--English as a Second Language

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

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

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

**IEP---**Individualized educational plan required by Individuals with
Disabilities Education Act

**IES**---Institute of Education Sciences, the research arm of the U.S.
Department of Education that was established by the Education Sciences
Reform Act of 2002

**LEA---** Local Education Agency

**NCLB**---The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001

**OESE**---Office of Elementary and Secondary Education in the U.S.
Department of Education

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

**RAC QUORUM**---Is a majority of appointed members. A RAC must have a
quorum to meet or hold an official meeting.

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

**SCIENTIFICALLY BASED RESEARCH**---Section 9101(37) of ESEA, as amended
by NCLB, defines scientifically based research as "research that
involves the application of rigorous, systematic, and objective
procedures to obtain reliable and valid knowledge relevant to education
activities and programs." (P.L. 107-279)

**SEA---**State Education Agency

**STATE**---References to "states" include the 50 states, the District
of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the freely associated
states, and the outlying areas

**SUPPLEMENTAL EDUCATIONAL SERVICES**---Additional academic instruction
designed to increase the academic achievement of students in schools
that have not met state targets for increasing student achievement (AYP)
for three or more years. Services may include tutoring and after-school
services by public or private providers approved by the state.

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

**WHAT WORKS CLEARINGHOUSE (WWC)**---Clearinghouse established in 2002
by the U.S. Department of Education's Institute of Education Sciences to
provide educators, policymakers, researchers, and the public with a
central and trusted source of scientific evidence of what works in
education.

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc99789410 .anchor}List of tables

[Table 1: Public inputs for the Mid-Continent RAC
10](#__RefHeading___Toc99525355)

[Table 2: Number of schools and students
12](#__RefHeading___Toc99525356)

[Table 3: Number of teachers and student/teacher ratios
14](#__RefHeading___Toc99525357)

[Table 4: NAEP performance in 2003 15](#__RefHeading___Toc99525358)

[^1]: SEA is a Secondary Education Agency, LEA is a Local Education
    Agency

[^2]: According to an official in the Nebraska State Education Agency,
    Nebraska has aligned its benchmark standards in reading and
    mathematics in grades 4, 8, and 11 and has developed grade-level
    expectations in reading and mathematics for grades 3, 5, 6, and 7.

[^3]: According to an official in the Nebraska State Education Agency,
    Nebraska has completed the standards alignment in reading and
    mathematics and has established science standards to be reported for
    NCLB.

[^4]: Numbers are calculated using teachers as well as instructional
    support staff, and are a state average without differentiation
    between urban, suburban, and rural districts.

[^5]: Final data from the 2003-2004 school year in Kansas reports that
    the percentage of core academic classes taught by highly qualified
    teachers was 94.5 percent.

[^6]: The list is not prioritized by need.