Education Commission of the States • 700 Broadway, Suite 810 • Denver, CO 80203-3442 • 303.299.3600 • Fax: 303.296.8332 • www.ecs.org
Kansas' Revised State Plan

On August 16, 2006 the U.S. Department of Education released initial peer review feedback and related information on revised comprehensive state plans for ensuring that all public elementary and secondary school students are taught by highly qualified teachers. The 50 states, the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico submitted plans as required under the No Child Left Behind Act. Scored against protocols containing six requirements provided to states in March, the plans outline the bold new steps that states will take to reach the 100 percent highly qualified teacher goal by the end of the 2006-07 school year.

Nine states developed plans that were recognized by a 31 member team of experts as satisfying all six criteria. These are New Jersey, Ohio, South Carolina, South Dakota, Louisiana, New Mexico, Kansas, Maryland and Nevada. Thirty-nine states submitted plans that partially satisfy the six components and will be required to improve these plans and address the peer concerns by Sept. 29, 2006. However, four states did not address any of the six requirements. For these four states—Hawaii, Missouri, Utah and Wisconsin—revised plans are due November 1, 2006.

ECS collected state plan information and reviewer comments directly from revised state plans and from the peer review response forms. The purpose of this tool is to organize and streamline this extensive content in order to allow states to search, review and reference successful examples of state plans. Although no information has been paraphrased, the order of some plans has been rearranged and some data and specific information has been abbreviated. All abbreviations or informational reorganizations have been given a note with an explanation and a link to the full state plan. This resource will be most useful if used in conjunction with original state plans.

Please feel free to contact Angela Baber, ababer@ecs.org, with questions, comments, or changes to this information.

To access the plans and peer review responses, visit the U.S. Department of Education site at http://www.ed.gov/news/pressreleases/2006/08/08162006a.html and click on state plans.

Kansas : Revised State Plans for Meeting the HQT Goal in NCLB (2006)
State Plans to Meet the HQT Goal Mandated by NCLB
State Plan Introduction and/or Background No background information or introduction included in the plan. 
Revised Plan Status
  • Accepted
  •  
    Comments to Support Determination Overall, we find this to be a well-organized and thoughtful plan. The panel did identify some areas requiring attention, but did not believe the areas were of such significance to warrant a rating less than acceptable. Some recommendations for improvement are provided within some subcategories. 
    Link to Full Revised State Plan for Meeting the HQT Goal in NCLB on the U.S. Department of Education Site The State Department of Education has made the NCLB revised plans, as well as reviewer comments, available online for each state.

    Kansas's Revised Plan

    Kansas's Plan—Reviewer Comments 

    Revised State Plans-Requirement 1
    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 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. 
    Peer Review Finding
  • Requirement 1 has been met.
  •  
    Peer Review Supporting Narrative In general the plan clearly identifies areas of greatest need. Data related to the special education teachers teaching multiple subjects is particularly useful since it is broken down into core subject areas. The biggest drawback is the lack of a clear list of districts and the total percent of courses taught by teachers who are not HQT. The data appear to be available to make that determination. 
    Requirement 1-a 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? 
    Does the revised state plan meet requirement 1-a?
  • Yes
  •  
    Revised State Plan Addressing Requirement 1-a The Kansas Department of Education (KSDE) maintains a highly qualified teacher database on all licensed teachers in the state and collects assignment and class data on each teacher employed in Kansas every year in the Licensed Personnel Report (LPR). After local districts input assignment and class data in the Licensed Personnel Report, KSDE generates a list of core content teachers who are "not highly qualified". Currently, it is the district's responsibility to consult with the teacher who is not a highly qualified teacher and assist him/her in becoming highly qualified for the assignment. KSDE is in the process of requiring more direct district participation in this process.

    2005-2006 HQT Preliminary Data

    Core Academic Subject Total Teachers Number of classes taught by not HQ teachers Percent of classes taught by not HQ teachers
    Elementary 17371 502 2.9
    Fine Arts 14998 946 9.9
    Foreign Language 3857 550 14.3
    Language Arts 16017 2361 14.7
    Mathematics 12974 1704 13.1
    Science 11181 1467 13.1
    History 7979 1903 23.8
    Government 1178 49 4.2
    Geography 584 62 10.6
    Economics 241 41 17.0

    KSDE possesses the ability to review and analyze the teacher quality data in multiple ways and provide technical assistance when needed. Staff from Teacher Education and Licensure ensures the quality of data through comparing and analyzing multiple data points for accuracy. In this manner, KSDE validates the accuracy of all classroom level data. 
     
    Peer Review Response to Requirement 1-a Kansas maintains a highly qualified teacher database on all licensed teachers that includes assignment and class data on each teacher. Data is checked for accuracy. The analysis includes the percent of classes, by core academic subject, taught by teachers who are not HQT. There is a separate breakdown of special education teachers and the assignments taught by those special education teachers who are not HQT. The plan also includes a separate breakdown of highly qualified rural teachers. 
    Requirement 1-b Does the analysis focus on the staffing needs of school that are not making AYP? Do these schools have high percentages of classes taught by teachers who are not highly qualified? 
    Does the revised state plan meet requirement 1-b?
  • Yes
  •  
    Revised State Plan Addressing Requirement 1-b Included in the analysis process is an extensive examination of the staffing needs of schools that are not making AYP. For the 2005 school year, KSDE identified 20 school districts that did not make AYP for in 2005 and 6 districts that did not make AYP in both 2004 and 2005. There are 7 districts on improvement. In addition, at the school level, KSDE identified 121 schools that did not make AYP in 2005 and 15 Title I schools on improvement. Of the 121 schools, 23 are elementary schools, 53 are middle schools, 48 are high schools and 2 are special education centers. Fifteen of the 121 schools that did not meet AYP requirements for at least one of the last two years did meet the requirements of 100% highly qualified core content teachers.

    2005-2006 HQT Preliminary Data
    For Schools with Less Than 100% ¹HQT Who Did Not Make AYP
    For At Least One of the Last Two Years

    Core Academic Subject Total Teacher Assignments Number of Assignments Taught by Teachers Not ²HQ % of Assignments Taught by Teachers Not HQ
    Elementary 267 39 14.6
    Fine Arts 255 135 52.9
    Foreign Language 102 46 45.1
    Language Arts 1034 304 29.4
    Mathematics 704 208 29.5
    Science 622 217 34.9
    Aggregate History, Government, Geography, Economics 698 169 24.2
    ¹HQT means Highly Qualified Teacher
    ²HQ refers to highly qualified

    Number of Districts (Duplicated Count) Not Making AYP with One or More Schools Not
    Having 100% HQT by Core Academic Subject

    Core Academic Subject # Districts by Subject
    Elementary 13
    Fine Arts 16
    Foreign Language 9
    Language Arts 17
    Mathematics 15
    Science 14
    History, Gov't., Geography, Econ. 12

     
    Peer Review Response to Requirement 1-b The analysis includes preliminary data for schools with less than 100% HQT who did not make AYP for at least one of the last two years. This aggregated data can be compared with the data for all schools to determine if the schools not making AYP have higher relative percentages of non-HQT. Data attached to the plan provides a listing of each school and the HQ percent for each content area. The analysis identifies districts not making AYP with one or more schools not having 100% HQT by core academic subject.  
    Requirement 1-c 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? 
    Does the revised state plan meet requirement 1-c?
  • Yes
  •  
    Revised State Plan Addressing Requirement 1-c Throughout the state, it is apparent that there are issues with special education core content teachers not meeting the highly qualified guidelines. As evident by an analysis of initial data, the state faces an issue with 70% of special education teachers not being highly qualified in mathematics. Of the special education science teachers, 69.3% are not highly qualified. KSDE is addressing this issue in the following manner: in January of 2006, approval was granted from the US Department of Education to use a special education HOUSSE checklist. KSDE is processing Special Education HOUSSE check lists throughout the summer and anticipates beginning the 2007 academic year with more of the special education core content teachers being highly qualified. In addition, KSDE will provide technical assistance to ensure special education teachers become highly qualified in at least one core subject immediately. KSDE will also assist those special education teachers who teach multiple content areas and who are highly qualified in one of those areas develop plans to become highly qualified in the other areas.

    2005-2006 HQT Preliminary Data—HQT Special Education Core Content

    Core Academic SubjectTotal Teacher AssignmentsNumber of Classes Taught by Not HQ TeachersPercent of Classes Taught by Not HQ Teachers
    Elementary91423826.0
    Language Arts40118145.1
    Mathematics20714570.0
    Science1379569.3
    Aggregate History, Government, Geography, Economics1727342.4

    In addition to the need for more highly qualified special education content areas, it became apparent that KSDE also needs to focus its attention on teachers in rural districts. The US Department of Education has identified 165 of 300 unified school districts in Kansas as "rural" under the Rural Education Achievement Program. Fifteen of the 165 rural districts meet the 100% HQT requirement. Ninety-seven of the 150 districts that do not meet the 100% requirement have at least one teacher who is not highly qualified teaching multiple subjects. Further analysis identifies a total of 176 teachers who are eligible to take advantage of the time extension allowed for teachers of multiple subjects in meeting the HQT requirements.

    As indicated in the table below, the largest number (238) of teachers teaching multiple subjects who are not highly qualified in one or more areas is in fine arts. The subject area with the greatest percentage of teachers not being highly qualified is in foreign language with 34.1%.

    2005-2006 HQT Preliminary Data—Highly Qualified Rural Teachers

    Core Academic SubjectTotal Teacher AssignmentsNumber of Assignments Taught by not HQ Teachers% of Assignments Taught by Not HQ Teachers
    Elementary2038552.7
    Fine Arts119223820.0
    Foreign Language1675734.1
    Language Arts90520322.4
    Mathematics57411620.2
    Science91322524.6
    Aggregate History, Government, Geography, Economics102113012.7

    It is important to note that rural schools often only have one teacher per subject. For example, a small rural district may only employ one science teacher to teach all of the high school science classes -physics, chemistry, biology and general science. The teacher would be reported with four different assignments in the core areas and eligible for the rural school exception if the teacher was designated "HQ" in at least one of the science areas. The teacher, however, who only teaches music even though it is in three schools (elementary, middle and high school) would not be eligible for the flexibility.

    The last piece of data critical to the analysis of rural school flexibility would be to look at the number of teachers who are designated not highly qualified but who are on a State approved plan to become highly qualified. This plan was in place before No Child Left Behind was enacted and provided a way for licensed teachers to have access to practice while completing requirements to add additional endorsements to their teaching licenses. The State plan includes the following options:

    1. Waiver—a district may obtain a waiver for an already licensed teacher to teach out-of-field if the following conditions are met:
      1. the teacher must have a signed plan of study from a Kansas institutions of higher learning to complete the approved program for the additional endorsement within a specified time period not to exceed three years,
      2. the teacher must enroll in at least one class per year on the approved plan of study,
      3. the teacher must be provided support by the local district to successfully complete the program. The maximum length of a waiver is three years. The waiver must be renewed annually and a teacher eligible for a provisional endorsement may not have a waiver.
    2. Provisional endorsement—licensed teachers may apply for a provisional endorsement to be added to their teaching license when 50% of an approved program is complete. A provisional endorsement is good for two years and may be renewed once with sufficient progress. The time for completing the entire program and adding the endorsement is limited to four years.
     
    Peer Review Response to Requirement 1-c The plan identifies groups of teachers (or core content areas) classified as statewide, special education and rural. The plan could be enhanced by providing data related grade level bands (such as middle school mathematics) needing special support. 
    Requirement 1-d Does the analysis identify districts and schools around the State where significant numbers of teachers do not meet HQT standards? 
    Does the revised state plan meet requirement 1-d?
  • No
  •  
    Revised State Plan Addressing Requirement 1-d
  • Not addressed.  
  • Peer Review Response to Requirement 1-d The plan attachment provides a listing of each school and the percent of classes taught by teachers who are not highly qualified. It is not arrayed in a fashion to identify particular districts and schools with significant problems but the data seem to be available. The SEA should consider this type of analysis to better target their resources.  
    Requirement 1-e Does the analysis identify particular courses that are often taught by non-highly qualified teachers? 
    Does the revised state plan meet requirement 1-e?
  • Yes
  •  
    Revised State Plan Addressing Requirement 1-e A highly qualified status is noted in the licensure database once the teacher completes the approved program at an institution of higher education, passes the content test and adds the endorsement to a license.

    Preliminary Data—Rural Teachers Not Highly Qualified on a State Approved Plan

    Core Academic Subject Number of Assignments Taught by Teachers Not HQ Number of Assignments Taught by Teachers on State Approved Plans Percent of assignments Taught by Teachers on State Approved Plans
    Foreign Language 57 20 35.1
    Language Arts 203 25 12.3
    Mathematics 116 8 6.9
    Science 225 51 22.7
    Aggregate History, Government, Geography, Economics 130 30 23.1
    Art 38 8 21.1
    Music 138 23 16.7
    Speech/Theatre 62 2 3.2

     
    Peer Review Response to Requirement 1-e The analysis clearly identifies courses that are often taught by non-highly qualified teachers.  
    Revised State Plans-Requirement 2
    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.  
    Peer Review Finding
  • Requirement 2 has been met.
  •  
    Peer Review Supporting Narrative The agency appears to be able to identify by LEA and school the percent of teachers and courses being taught by teachers who are not HQT. They have described a process and have included a District Highly Qualified Teacher template for districts to complete and return by November, 2007. See individual peer review responses for additional comments.  
    Requirement 2-a Does the plan identify LEAs that have not met annual measurable objectives for HQT?  
    Does the revised state plan meet requirement 2-a?
  • Yes
  •  
    Revised State Plan Addressing Requirement 2-a The Kansas Department of Education (KSDE) maintains a highly qualified teacher database on all licensed teachers in the state and collects assignment and class data on each teacher employed in Kansas every year in the Licensed Personnel Report (LPR). After local districts input assignment and class data in the Licensed Personnel Report, KSDE generates a list of core content teachers who are "not highly qualified".

    The Kansas State Department of Education (KSDE) determines the highly qualified status of each district and individual schools and publishes on its website the data in the district and building report cards each fall. Of the 299 districts in 2005-2006, 283 districts had at least one teacher who was not highly qualified; therefore, they did not meet the annual measurable objective of 100%. See the accompanying Excel spreadsheet, Kansas HQ Data by LEA, Schools, Content Areas 05-06 for the number and percent of teachers in specific content areas by school who are highly qualified compared to the total number of teachers in that area. *  

    Peer Review Response to Requirement 2-a The plan indicates that 283 of the 299 districts had one or more assignments taught by a teacher who is not highly qualified. No listing provided to the panel specifically provides that data but it seems clear the agency has analyzed the data sufficiently to make the determination and report it in the district and building report cards in the fall. 
    Requirement 2-b Does the plan include specific steps that will be taken by LEAs that have not met annual measurable objectives?  
    Does the revised state plan meet requirement 2-b?
  • Yes
  •  
    Revised State Plan Addressing Requirement 2-b The district is responsible for reviewing its teacher quality data and submitting a highly qualified teacher plan to KSDE. The plans will be collected according to published procedures by the State and Federal Programs Team. The District Plan for Highly Qualified Teachers (referred to as District HQT Plan) will be disseminated to all districts in September of 2006. The District HQT Plan will be due to the KSDE in November 2007. These plans will be reviewed by a cross section team of the agency including members from the Teacher Education and Licensure Team and the State and Federal Programs Team. Plans will be reviewed in a timely manner and feedback to the district will occur prior to the second semester, in order for the district to implement the strategies outlined in the plan at the beginning of the second semester.

    Source: The District Plan for Highly Qualified Teachers, page 17

    Prior to drafting the District HQT Plan, the district will analyze the data as part of its needs assessment to determine the specific issues that have prevented the district and/or schools from meeting the highly qualified teacher goal. The district will also analyze major differences among schools overall, within specific subject areas, and for high and low poverty schools in terms of equitable distribution of highly qualified teachers as well as including an analysis to show how the district will reallocate and recruit the necessary qualified teachers to fill gaps in current staffing of core content areas.  

    Peer Review Response to Requirement 2-b Each district is to submit a highly qualified teacher plan to KSDE. The district highly qualified teacher plan is to be distributed to all districts in September 2006 and returned to KSDE by November 2007. The plan is to include a timeline for getting teachers highly qualified and the support via technical assistance, professional development and financial and other incentives that will be available. The district analysis should identify specific issues that prevented the district and school from making the highly qualified goal.  
    Requirement 2-c 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?  
    Does the revised state plan meet requirement 2-c?
  • Yes
  •  
    Revised State Plan Addressing Requirement 2-c The district will also provide a timeline of how teachers who are not highly qualified will be provided with support via technical assistance, professional development, and financial and/or other incentives.

    The District HQT Plan will provide information on how the district will meet the annual measurable objectives of 100% of their teachers being highly qualified. In addition, the District HQT Plan will include the following:

    1. Analysis of data concerning highly qualified teachers to determine the specific issues that have prevented the district and specific school from meeting the goal.
    2. Timeline of support provided by the district to provide a positive solution for individual teachers
    3. Benchmarks for determining success
    4. Funding sources and amount of funds to be used by the district to assist any teachers not meeting the highly qualified teacher status.
     
    Peer Review Response to Requirement 2-c The plans will be submitted to KSDE and reviewed by a cross section team of the KSDE from the Teacher Education and Licensure Team and the State and Federal Program Team.  
    Revised State Plans-Requirement 3
    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.  
    Peer Review Finding
  • Requirement 3 has been met.
  •  
    Peer Review Comments to Support Determination See individual peer review responses.  
    Requirement 3-a Does the plan include a description of the technical assistance the SEA will provide to assist LEAs in successfully carrying out their HQT plans?  
    Does the revised state plan meet requirement 3-a?
  • Yes
  •  
    Revised State Plan Addressing Requirement 3-a Technical assistance will be provided by the Kansas State Department of Education to districts in writing their new District HQT Plans for having 100% of their teachers become highly qualified. This assistance will be provided by the State and Federal Programs team with input from the Teacher Education and Licensure Team during the fall of 2006. Once the plans are written, technical assistance will be provided to districts as they implement their plans through on-site visits, on-line courses, and other professional development opportunities. Priority for technical assistance will be to those districts with high numbers or percents of teachers who are not highly qualified.  
    Peer Review Response to Requirement 3-a The State and Federal Programs Team will provide training in the fall of 2006. Technical assistance in implementing the plan will be provided through on-site visits, on-line courses, and other professional development opportunities. Priority is to be given to LEAs with high numbers or percents of teachers who are not highly qualified.  
    Requirement 3-b Does the plan indicate that the staffing and professional development needs of schools that are not making AYP will be given high priority?  
    Does the revised state plan meet requirement 3-b?
  • Yes
  •  
    Revised State Plan Addressing Requirement 3-b As first priority, the KSDE will analyze the highly qualified teacher data targeting the schools and districts not making adequate yearly progress (AYP). If any of these schools and districts are not meeting the highly qualified teacher objectives, the KSDE will ensure that districts are giving high priority to staffing and professional development needs of these schools in the district's Title II-A section of the Local Consolidated Plan application for federal funds. In this section, districts identify through the needs assessment how the Title II Part A funds will focus on the schools that have the lowest proportion of highly qualified teachers and are identified for school improvement. Based upon this needs assessment, districts will be required to utilize at least 5% of Title II Part A funds to address the barriers to staff becoming highly qualified. In addition, districts will also need to specifically explain how they will utilize their Title I Part A 5% set aside to ensure all teachers in Title I schools are highly qualified.

    The districts with a significant number of teachers who are not highly qualified will be monitored for Title II Part A compliance. The KSDE is also examining more effective ways to utilize Title II Part A dollars to support teachers in schools not meeting AYP. In this manner, issues preventing the district from meeting their measurable goals will be discussed and strategies will be selected for implementation. Some of the strategies that will be examined include:

    • Reallocation of resources to include financial and non-financial incentives
    • Targeted professional development
    • Support and mentoring of teachers who are not highly qualified.
     
    Peer Review Response to Requirement 3-b As a first priority, KSDE will analyze the HQT data from districts and schools not making AYP. To ensure the LEA provides priority to the schools not making AYP, KSDE will review the Title II-A portion of the Local Consolidated Plan. They will require districts with non-highly qualified teachers to expend at least 5% of their Title II-A funds to address the barriers to staff becoming highly qualified. LEAs will also need to explain the use of the 5% of Title I, Part A funds that are to be used to support helping teachers become highly qualified.  
    Requirement 3-c Does the plan include a description of programs and services the SEA will provide to assist teachers and LEAs in successfully meeting HQT goals?  
    Does the revised state plan meet requirement 3-c?
  • Yes
  •  
    Revised State Plan Addressing Requirement 3-c Currently, KSDE provides the following professional development opportunities to assist teachers in becoming highly qualified:
    • Middle-level Mathematics and Science online courses/program for assisting teachers in obtaining endorsements including partial tuition reimbursement
    • Reimbursement for teachers successfully completing ninth grade mathematics courses at universities and colleges
    • Scientifically Based Reading Research (SBRR) professional development series for non Reading First schools
    • SBRR professional development series for Title I teachers
    • SBRR professional development series for Special Education teachers
    • Reimbursement program for teachers completing required courses leading to an ESOL endorsement.
    These opportunities are funded primarily with Title II-A funds. IDEA funds assist with the professional development for the special education teachers.

    In addition to providing professional development opportunities to assist teachers in becoming highly qualified, the Kansas State Department of Education is also addressing the shortage of foreign language teachers through the Visiting Teachers from Spain program. The KSDE staff interview and recruits teachers from Spain who are then placed in districts as foreign language teachers or ESOL teachers. Their records are reviewed to ensure they are highly qualified in the areas assigned.

    Kansas continues to examine innovative ways to address the issue of high quality teachers in the state with several programs and services. Under the leadership of the governor, Kansas schools will begin addressing the issue of special education core content teachers becoming highly qualified. In the 2006 legislative session, funds were appropriated to provide special education teachers with focused professional development to assist these teachers in achieving highly qualified status. This program will be implemented in 2006-2007.  

    Peer Review Response to Requirement 3-c The plan indicates that professional development will be made available to teachers needing help getting highly qualified and lists several professional development initiatives such as the middle-level mathematics and science on-line courses, reimbursements for teachers completing ninth grade mathematics courses at colleges and universities, SBRR PD series for non-Reading First schools, SBRR for Title I teachers, SBRR for special education teachers and reimbursement for teachers completing courses leading to an ESOL endorsement. The plan also describes the Visiting Teachers from Spain program. KSDE is examining some strategies around reallocation of resources, targeted professional development and support and mentoring of teachers who are not highly qualified, but no details are available. The state legislature did appropriate funds to provide special education teachers with focused professional development in 2006-07 to help them get highly qualified. The SEA has clearly used their data to guide important decisions related to resources and priority support.  
    Requirement 3-d Does the plan specifically address the needs of any subgroups of teachers identified in Requirement 1?  
    Does the revised state plan meet requirement 3-d?
  • Yes
  •  
    Revised State Plan Addressing Requirement 3-d Currently, KSDE provides the following professional development opportunities to assist teachers in becoming highly qualified:
    • Middle-level Mathematics and Science online courses/program for assisting teachers in obtaining endorsements including partial tuition reimbursement
    • Reimbursement for teachers successfully completing ninth grade mathematics courses at universities and colleges
    • Scientifically Based Reading Research (SBRR) professional development series for non Reading First schools
    • SBRR professional development series for Title I teachers
    • SBRR professional development series for Special Education teachers
    • Reimbursement program for teachers completing required courses leading to an ESOL endorsement.
    These opportunities are funded primarily with Title II-A funds. IDEA funds assist with the professional development for the special education teachers.

    In addition to providing professional development opportunities to assist teachers in becoming highly qualified, the Kansas State Department of Education is also addressing the shortage of foreign language teachers through the Visiting Teachers from Spain program. The KSDE staff interview and recruits teachers from Spain who are then placed in districts as foreign language teachers or ESOL teachers. Their records are reviewed to ensure they are highly qualified in the areas assigned.

    (This information overlaps with Requirement 3-c) 

    Peer Review Response to Requirement 3-d The plan describes efforts on behalf of foreign language teachers through the Visiting Teachers from Spain program and also special education teachers with special PD funding, reading in the elementary school, courses for middle-level math and science teachers, and reimbursement for ESOL and ninth grade mathematics teachers.  
    Requirement 3-e 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?  
    Does the revised state plan meet requirement 3-e?
  • Yes
  •  
    Revised State Plan Addressing Requirement 3-e Both the Title II Part A Subpart 3 Subgrants to Eligible Partnerships and the Title II Part B Mathematics and Science Partnership (MSP) grants provide opportunities for elementary and middle school teachers to become highly qualified in the areas of mathematics and science. The Kansas Board of Regents in collaboration with institutions of higher learning focus the Title II Part A funds on increasing the number of highly qualified teachers at the middle school level in primarily science. To address the shortage of highly qualified teachers in middle schools in mathematics, the KSDE Mathematics and Science Partnership grants are focusing on the following:

    Washburn University in collaboration with districts:

  • Professional Development for 5th-8th grade Mathematics teachers
  • Professional Development for Building District Administrators

    Sterling College in collaboration with 15 rural districts:

  • Professional Development to increase the number of Highly Qualified Mathematics teachers in grades 5th-8th

    Ft. Hays State University in collaboration with rural Western Kansas districts:

  • Professional Development for 4th -8th grade teachers in Scientifically Based Research strategies

    Baker University in collaboration with an urban district:

  • Professional Development to increase Mathematics content knowledge for K-8th grade teachers

    Tabor College in collaboration with rural Central Kansas districts:

  • Professional Development to increase the number of Highly Qualified Mathematics teachers in grades 5th-8th

     

  • Peer Review Response to Requirement 3-e The plan provides good detail about the use of Title II Part A Subpart 3 subgrants to Eligible Partnerships and the Title II Part B Mathematics and Science Partnerships grants. Most of the effort is targeted toward middle school mathematics and science.  
    Requirement 3-f 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? 
    Does the revised state plan meet requirement 3-f?
  • Yes
  •  
    Revised State Plan Addressing Requirement 3-f In addition, the KSDE continues to analyze the highly qualified teacher data to determine what other core academic areas have significantly high numbers of teachers who are not highly qualified and who might benefit from professional development opportunities funded through the use of Title II Part A funds. 
    Peer Review Response to Requirement 3-f KSDE is examining ways to more effectively use Title II, Part A funds to support teachers in schools not meeting AYP. KSDE is examining some strategies around reallocation of resources, targeted professional development and support and mentoring of teachers who are not highly qualified, but no details are available. Providing a few more details related to funding priorities would improve a very good state plan. 
    Revised State Plans-Requirement 4
    Requirement 4 The revised plan must describe how the SEA will work with LEAs that fail to reach the 100% HQT goal by the end of the 2006-07 school year. 
    Peer Review Finding
  • Requirement 4 has been partially met.
  •  
    Peer Review Supporting Narrative See individual peer responses. 
    Requirement 4-a 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? 
    Does the revised state plan meet requirement 4-a?
  • Yes
  •  
    Revised State Plan Addressing Requirement 4-a The goal is to have 100% of teachers highly qualified by the end of 2006-07. If a district fails to meet the 100% highly qualified teacher (HQT) goal, KSDE will provide the following:
    • Technical assistance to ensure the districts are accurately reporting the HQT data;
    • A review of the issues contributing to the situation, i.e. multi-subject teachers in rural areas who have additional time to meet the highly qualified requirements in every subject taught or teacher shortages in particular areas
    • A cross team review of specific strategies within the District HQT Plan;
    • On site monitoring of the Title II Part A program; and
    • Annual review of the District HQT Plan to determine if progress is being made.
    The KSDE will provide technical assistance in two distinct ways: ensuring that all data is accurate and that the district is utilizing appropriate strategies to provide support for 100% of its teachers achieving highly qualified teacher status. In addition, the District HQT Plans will be reviewed on an annual basis to ensure that all goals are being met and to provide additional assistance as needed. 
    Peer Review Response to Requirement 4-a KSDE will monitor data integrity, determine whether the LEA meets/does not meet the 100% HQT requirement or if progress is being made. KSDE will annually review the plans of LEAs not meeting the 100% requirement. KSDE will provide technical assistance in the areas of data accuracy and appropriateness of strategies. 
    Requirement 4-b Does the plan show how technical assistance from the SEA to help LEAs meet the 100 percent HQT goal will be targeted toward LEAs and schools that are not making AYP? 
    Does the revised state plan meet requirement 4-b?
  • No
  •  
    Revised State Plan Addressing Requirement 4-b
  • Not addressed. 
  • Peer Review Response to Requirement 4-b The initial focus is on all districts/schools not meeting the HQT objectives. There is no targeting of LEAs and schools not making AYP except those that get into corrective action. KSDE then follows the requirements of the law. KSDE should consider targeting their HQT technical assistance to schools not making AYP. 
    Requirement 4-c Does the plan describe how the SEA will monitor whether LEAs attain 100 percent HQT in each LEA and school:
    • in the percentage of highly qualified teachers at each LEA and school; and
    • in the percentage of teachers who are receiving high-quality professional development to enable such teachers to become highly qualified and successful classroom teachers?
     
    Does the revised state plan meet requirement 4-c?
  • No
  •  
    Revised State Plan Addressing Requirement 4-c Title II Part A is also part of the Local Consolidated Plan monitoring process. The KSDE is revising the monitoring instrument to include an increased focus on ensuring that districts meet the 100% goal. The revision will be completed during the summer of 2006 for implementation in the fall of 2006. The monitoring instrument will also include an increased emphasis on high quality professional development. Districts will be required to ensure that all professional development is scientifically based research. Districts will be expected to use the High Quality Professional Development Criteria checklist developed by KSDE to determine if the professional development meets the definition in No Child Left Behind. (See attachment.) * 
    Peer Review Response to Requirement 4-c The data described in requirement 1 will be reviewed annually to determine which districts did not meet 100% HQT. The plan does not indicate that a similar process will be replicated for schools not meeting 100% HQT. However, the equity plan describes a process to review the % of teachers in high poverty buildings that are inexperienced, unqualified or teaching out-of-field. KSDE has developed a High Quality Professional Development checklist for LEAs to determine if the PD meets the requirements of NCLB. KSDE is revising the monitoring checklist to increase the emphasis on PD that meets the federal definition of scientifically based research. There is no indication of what the state intends to do to monitor the percent of teachers who are receiving HQPD in order to become highly qualified. KSDE should ensure that professional development is available for teachers needing to meet HQT requirements.  
    Requirement 4-d 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? 
    Does the revised state plan meet requirement 4-d?
  • Yes
  •  
    Revised State Plan Addressing Requirement 4-d If a district fails to meet the conditions set forth in its District HQT Plan after one year (2006-2007), the district will be required to enter into an agreement with KSDE. This agreement will ensure that the LEA will meet all NCLB teacher requirements and conditions by the end of the school year (2007-2008).

    If the KSDE determines that a district continues to fail to meet the requirements set-forth in the District HQT Plan and has also not made adequate yearly progress (AYP) for three consecutive years, the district will be required to develop and implement a Teacher Quality Corrective Action Plan (TQCAP) in collaboration with KSDE and submit it for approval.

    The TQCAP will include the following:

    • A detailed description of all staffing, recruitment, and retention strategies the district will use to meet their goals.
    • Funding sources and projected budgets specific to each participating school and/or staff. (The KSDE will work with the district to determine how it may use its Title II Part A funds.)
    • Assurances that the district will not use Title I, Part A funds to hire new paraprofessionals.
    • Evidence that the Title II Part A funds are directed to specific schools that have not met their goals. (The KSDE may provide the district's allocated funding directly to the schools for high quality professional development.)
    • Other actions as determined by the Kansas State Board of Education.
    The Teacher Quality Corrective Action Plan must be reviewed and approved by:
    1. The Superintendent
    2. All relevant site administrators and
    3. The Kansas State Department of Education
    The TQCAP will be reviewed by a cross section team of the Kansas State Department of Education including members from the Teacher Education and Licensure Team and the State and Federal Programs Team. Plans will be reviewed in a timely manner and feedback will be provided to the district.

    In addition to the previously mentioned technical assistance, districts that are in need of corrective action will be assigned a District Support Team (DST). The DST provides support and technical assistance to districts not making AYP. The DSTs will ensure that teacher quality issues are addressed.  

    Peer Review Response to Requirement 4-d The plan includes the requirements consistent with section 2141. Districts failing to meet the conditions set forth in the LEA HQT plan after one year (2006-07) will be required to enter into an agreement with KSDE. This agreement is to ensure the LEA meets the conditions by the end of the 2008-09 school year. If the KSDE determines that the LEA continues to fail to meet the requirements set for in the LEA HQT plan and has also not made AYP for three consecutive years, the LEA will be required to develop and implement a Teacher Quality Corrective Action Plan (TQCAP) in collaboration and submit it to KSDE for approval. LEAs in corrective action are assigned a District Support Team (DST) that provides technical assistance. The DST will ensure that teacher quality issues are addressed. 
    Revised State Plans-Requirement 5
    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. 
    Peer Review Finding
  • Requirement 5 has been partially met.
  •  
    Peer Review Supporting Narrative See individual peer responses. 
    Requirement 5-a 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? 
    Does the revised state plan meet requirement 5-a?
  • Yes
  •  
    Revised State Plan Addressing Requirement 5-a Since the Kansas State Department of Education maintains the official highly qualified teacher database identifying which teachers are highly qualified for assignments based on licensure endorsement requirements, monitoring the acceptable use of the HOUSSE documents is relatively easy. Kansas has always limited the situations in which the HOUSSE could be used.

    In addition, the KSDE already discontinued the 9th grade HOUSSE rubric at the beginning of the 2005-2006 school year. In September 2007, all general education teachers will be sent a final letter inviting them to become highly qualified for any content endorsements on their teaching licenses regardless of their current teaching assignment. After the 2007 school year ends, the HOUSSE rubric will be deleted from the KSDE Teacher Education and Licensure website and KSDE will monitor requests for use of the HOUSSE rubric. Any general education teacher wanting to use the HOUSSE rubric after June 2007 to achieve highly qualified status for an assignment will be required to send past employment documentation to the state along with the rubric to verify they are a veteran teacher in the specific assignment area of the request.

    The exception to this policy will be for teachers who can document they had an approved plan of study from their building or district administrator and have been working toward the highly qualified designation. For the last two years, Kansas has asked districts and schools who find it necessary to employ a teacher who is not highly qualified to act in good faith and provide the professional development necessary for their teacher to become highly qualified as soon as possible. Teachers were asked to develop a plan of study to meet the highly qualified requirements. They were told that when they completed their plan and could meet the HOUSSE rubric requirements, the KSDE would honor the document. The KSDE intends to honor its promise and will continue to accept HOUSSE rubrics from teachers who have been working in good faith to become highly qualified. 

    Peer Review Response to Requirement 5-a KSDE discontinued the 9th grade HOUSSE at the beginning of the 2005-06 school year. In September 2007(?) all general education teachers will be invited to become highly qualified for any content endorsement on their teaching licenses regardless of current teaching assignment. Any general education teacher wanting to use the HOUSSE after June 2007 to achieve highly qualified status for an assignment will be required to send past employment documentation along with the rubric to verify they are a veteran teacher in the specific assignment area of the request. However, KSDE will continue to honor requests from teachers with currently approved plans of study to get highly qualified.

    KSDE might review their plan to determine if they intend to send a final letter in September 2007 or September 2006. 

    Requirement 5-b Does the plan describe how the State will limit the use of HOUSSE after the end of the 2005-06 school year to the following situations:
    • Multi-subject secondary teachers in rural schools who, if HQ in one subject at the time of hire, may use HOUSSE to demonstrate competence in additional subjects within three years of the date of hire; or
    • Multi-subject special education teachers who are new to the profession, if HQ in language arts, mathematics, or science at the time of hire, may use HOUSSE to demonstrate competence in additional subjects within two years of the date of hire.
     
    Does the revised state plan meet requirement 5-b?
  • No
  •  
    Revised State Plan Addressing Requirement 5-b The HOUSSE Checklist for special education content teachers was not approved by the US Department of Education until January of 2006. Therefore, the KSDE is almost two years behind in the special education data collection by content areas. There will be continued focus on the current assignments for the 2006-2007 special education content teachers to determine their highly qualified status. If the data collection is successful, then the KSDE will send the same letter to special education teachers in 2008 that is sent to general education teachers in 2007, giving them the opportunity where appropriate to achieve highly qualified status in any additional content areas for which they are not currently teaching. A new special education teacher in Kansas is not a "new to the profession" teacher. Special education is an added endorsement and the teacher will usually meet the definition of veteran teacher. Until the KSDE is able to slow the turnover rate of special education teachers and find an acceptable multiple- subject test, there is a need to continue the use of the special education HOUSSE checklist.

    The HOUSSE for multi-subject secondary teachers in rural areas is not used extensively as Kansas requires an endorsement in each subject to be considered appropriately licensed. The HOUSSE will be available, however, on a case by case basis for veteran teachers in this situation.

    At the same time as the KSDE is attempting to phase out the use of HOUSSE for determining the highly qualify status of teachers, it is seeking additional ways in which teachers can add endorsements to their teaching licenses. Currently, Kansas does not allow teachers to be highly qualified in a secondary content area unless they have completed a teacher preparation program in the content area and added the endorsement to their license. In many ways the Kansas licensure requirement is more stringent than the highly qualified requirement of No Child Left Behind and often creates barriers difficult for teachers to overcome. One proposal being discussed by the Kansas State Board of Education is to allow secondary teachers to add similar endorsements by passing the state approved content test. Another proposal is to pay for the development of additional on-line programs similar to the on-line middle level mathematics program.

    Another issue about which Kansas is concerned is the middle level licensure structure. With the new licensure system, elementary licenses teachers are no longer allowed to teach in middle schools. There are very few students in the middle school preparation programs; therefore, the data indicates that Kansas will soon be facing a shortage of middle school teachers. The Professional Standards Board is currently reviewing teacher preparation regulations and data to find a way to head off this predicted shortage. 

    Peer Review Response to Requirement 5-b The plan does not indicate an intent to end the use of the HOUSSE for rural teachers after three years even though it is not used extensively. The HOUSSE will be made available on a case by case basis for veteran teachers.

    Special education is an endorsement in Kansas so all special education teachers usually will meet the definition of veteran teacher. KSDE will continue to use the special education HOUSSE checklist until they find an acceptable multiple- subject test or slow the turnover rate of special education teachers. The plan does not state an intent to limit the use of the HOUSSE to two years after date of hire. 

    Revised State Plans-Requirement 6
    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. 
    Peer Review Finding
  • Requirement 6 has been met.
  •  
    Peer Review Supporting Narrative See individual peer responses. 
    Requirement 6-a Does the revised plan include a written equity plan? 
    Does the revised state plan meet requirement 6-a?
  • Yes
  •  
    Revised State Plan Addressing Requirement 6-a The intent of the Kansas Equity Plan is to ensure that poor and minority students are not taught by inexperienced, unqualified, or out-of-field teachers at higher rates than other children. In order to have Kansas students reach universal proficiency by 2013-2014, it is imperative that every student has highly qualified teachers. This is supported by the Kansas State Board of Education's goal to have a caring and competent teacher in every classroom.

    Step 1—Dissemination of Information

    Information will be disseminated to districts this summer and fall reminding them of the importance of having highly qualified and experienced teachers in schools with higher numbers of poor and minority students. Districts will be encouraged to consider this issue as they make teaching assignments. They will also be reminded of the requirements of No Child Left Behind and also Kansas statute which states that it is unlawful for a district to pay a teacher a salary if they do not hold a license which is valid for their particular teaching assignment.

    Kansas is attempting to bolster its recruitment efforts as well as developing mechanisms for teacher support. In order to provide more quality support to new teachers in schools with large numbers of poor or minority children, Kansas is investigating implementation of a comprehensive mentoring program to keep quality teachers in the profession. The Kansas legislature currently provides funds for mentoring of beginning teachers.

    The KSDE also supports the implementation of districts signing bonuses with highly qualified teachers who teach in schools with large numbers of poor or minority children. Districts will be encouraged to utilize their Title II Part A funds to ensure that highly qualified teachers are placed in schools with larger numbers of poor or minority children.

    Kansas law specifies that teachers are to be paid only when they are appropriately licensed for the teaching assignment. There has been no enforcement of this; however, the Kansas State Board of Education is scheduled to discuss this issue at its July meeting and adopt possible sanctions for districts that violate this provision. Otherwise, the KSDE has no authority regarding teaching assignments; this is the option of the district as Kansas is a local control state. In addition, there is no statewide salary plan for teachers.

    Kansas equity plan focuses on four major areas: increasing the supply of teachers, redistributing existing teachers, improving the knowledge and skills of teachers, and improving working conditions of teachers. In each of these areas, the state will identify and disseminate appropriate strategies to all districts.

    Component One
    In order to increase the supply of highly qualified teachers, KSDE will recommend the following strategies:

    • Scholarships, loans, loan forgiveness programs to recruit and prepare a pool of teachers specifically for high-poverty, low-performing, and hard-to-staff schools
    • Alternative routes to teaching
    • International teachers
    • Targeted teacher preparation programs to prepare teachers specifically to work in high-need schools.
    Component Two
    Redistributing existing teachers, KSDE will recommend the following strategies:
    • Offer additional compensation as a way to attract experienced teachers to high-needs, high poverty schools
    • Financial incentives including use of Title II Part A funds
    • Non-monetary incentives
    • Increase the number of National Board Certified Teachers in high-need schools
    • Hire retired teachers
    • Improve safety and discipline in high-needs school
    Component Three
    Improve the knowledge, skills, and training of teachers already working in high-need schools to improve their skills, KSDE will recommend the following strategies:
    • Provide targeted professional development
    • Fund Mentoring Programs for more than one year
    • Use master teachers and coaches
    • Transition to Teaching program
    Component Four
    Improve working conditions that case teachers to avoid or leave high-needs schools, KSDE will recommend the following strategies:
    • Develop policies and programs to attract effective principals and teachers
    • Reallocate resources to high-needs schools
    • Improve working conditions
    • Improve safety and discipline in high-needs school
    Step 2—Data Collection and Analysis

    The Kansas State Department of Education annually collects from districts information on teaching assignments through the Licensed Personnel Report. The data will be analyzed to determine which schools have teachers who are not highly qualified. In addition, the data will be analyzed according to poverty levels to determine if higher poverty schools have greater numbers of teachers who are unqualified or out-of-field. Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) data will also be reviewed to determine whether or not students are succeeding.

    Step 3—Communicate with Identified Districts

    Once districts are identified as having higher numbers of inexperienced, unqualified or out-of-field teachers in higher poverty schools, the Kansas State Department of Education will review the district's highly qualified teacher plan to determine what strategies are being implemented to address this issue. The KSDE will communicate with the districts to determine what the contributing factors are that cause this situation to exist.

    Step 4—Modifying Plan

    Districts may need to modify their Teacher Quality Plan if there are insufficient strategies or changes for addressing equity issues. An updated timeline may be needed.

    Step 5—Monitoring Equitable Distribution of Highly Qualified Teachers

    The Kansas State Department of Education will monitor the issue of equitable teacher assignments in two ways. The first is to annually review the data on teaching assignments through the Licensed Personnel Report. The second way is through the Local Consolidated Plan monitoring process. In monitoring Title II Part A, the KSDE staff will address the distribution of highly qualified teachers.  

    Peer Review Response to Requirement 6-a The revised plan includes a written equity plan. 
    Requirement 6-b Does the plan identify where inequities in teacher assignment exist? 
    Does the revised state plan meet requirement 6-b?
  • Yes
  •  
    Revised State Plan Addressing Requirement 6-b As stated in the Kansas 2003 highly qualified teacher plan, Kansas first began reviewing teacher recruitment and retention data with a special task force appointed by the Commissioner of Education during the spring of 2001. The Title II Teacher Quality Enhancement Grant advisory board expanded the work of the task force and held a summit on teacher recruitment December 2003. The conclusions from all groups studying the problem remained the same. When examining district level data, Kansas does not have a problem providing equal access to highly qualified teachers. One could continue to draw the same conclusion from the 2003-2004 data.

    District Level Distribution of Highly Qualified Teachers

    Assignments Taught by HQT High-Poverty
    (Districts with 46.36% or greater free and reduced lunch)
    Low-Poverty
    (Districts with less than 27.18% free and reduced lunch)
    2004 Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent
    All Classrooms 35990 94.5 11071 95.6 12836 94.5
    Elementary 13258 97.9
    Secondary 22732 92.6

    However, when the data were aggregated by building level instead of district level, the results are different. The next table shows the distribution of classes taught by highly qualified teachers by building level and poverty. The total percent of highly qualified teachers changed and poverty differences emerged. The difference in total number is attributed to class verses assignment counts.

    Building Level Distribution of Highly Qualified Teachers by High and Low Poverty

    Assignments Taught by HQT High-Poverty Low-Poverty
    2005 Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent
    All Classrooms 77465 89.26
    Elementary 25688 94.79 5739 94.77 8115 96.23
    Secondary 51777 86.74 12090 77.68 18591 92.03

    The same poverty metric of free and reduced meals was used but the quartile breaks were different:
    • Elementary Schools—
      • High-Poverty schools have more than 58.62% poverty
      • Low-Poverty schools have less than 29.79% poverty
    • Secondary Schools—
      • High-Poverty schools have more than 44.67% poverty
      • Low-Poverty schools have less than 23.04% poverty
    Needless to say it was a surprise to see the shift in data particularly at the secondary level with only 77.68 % of the high poverty schools having teachers who are highly qualified. The low poverty secondary schools have 92.03% of their teachers highly qualified. There had been a false presumption that districts were ensuring that highly qualified teachers were distributed equitably among the schools in their districts. Low poverty schools have a higher percent of teachers meeting the highly qualified requirements than do high poverty schools. Once the problem was identified in March of 2006, KSDE began to work aggressively on the development of an equity plan.  
    Peer Review Response to Requirement 6-b Preface statements to the plan indicate that the greatest disparity is between high poverty (greater than 44%) and low poverty secondary buildings (less than 23%). 
    Requirement 6-c Does the plan delineate specific strategies for addressing inequities in teacher assignment? 
    Does the revised state plan meet requirement 6-c?
  • Yes
  •  
    Revised State Plan Addressing Requirement 6-c Kansas equity plan focuses on four major areas: increasing the supply of teachers, redistributing existing teachers, improving the knowledge and skills of teachers, and improving working conditions of teachers. In each of these areas, the state will identify and disseminate appropriate strategies to all districts.

    Component One
    In order to increase the supply of highly qualified teachers, KSDE will recommend the following strategies:

    • Scholarships, loans, loan forgiveness programs to recruit and prepare a pool of teachers specifically for high-poverty, low-performing, and hard-to-staff schools
    • Alternative routes to teaching
    • International teachers
    • Targeted teacher preparation programs to prepare teachers specifically to work in high-need schools.
    Component Two
    Redistributing existing teachers, KSDE will recommend the following strategies:
    • Offer additional compensation as a way to attract experienced teachers to high-needs, high poverty schools
    • Financial incentives including use of Title II Part A funds
    • Non-monetary incentives
    • Increase the number of National Board Certified Teachers in high-need schools
    • Hire retired teachers
    • Improve safety and discipline in high-needs school
    Component Three
    Improve the knowledge, skills, and training of teachers already working in high-need schools to improve their skills, KSDE will recommend the following strategies:
    • Provide targeted professional development
    • Fund Mentoring Programs for more than one year
    • Use master teachers and coaches
    • Transition to Teaching program
    Component Four
    Improve working conditions that case teachers to avoid or leave high-needs schools, KSDE will recommend the following strategies:
    • Develop policies and programs to attract effective principals and teachers
    • Reallocate resources to high-needs schools
    • Improve working conditions
    • Improve safety and discipline in high-needs school
    (This information overlaps with Requirement 6-a) 
    Peer Review Response to Requirement 6-c KSDE feels it has little authority to impact teaching assignments. The Kansas State Board of Education will discuss possible sanctions for LEAs that violate a state law prohibiting paying teachers who are not appropriately licensed for the teaching assignment. Overarching strategies are intended to do one of the following:
    • Increase the supply of highly qualified teachers through scholarships and targeting teacher preparation programs for high-need schools
    • Redistribute existing teachers through incentives
    • Improve the knowledge, skills, and training of teachers already working high-need schools through mentoring, coaching and professional development
    • Improve working conditions that cause teachers to avoid or leave high-need schools by improving safety, working conditions, and discipline; reallocating resources; and developing policies to attract effective principals and teachers.
    • Reviewing building level data re: % highly qualified teachers in buildings and AYP status
    • Communicating with LEAs having higher numbers of inexperienced, unqualified, or out-of-field teachers in higher poverty schools
    • Requiring LEAs to modify their LEA HQT plans to address inequity issues
    • Monitoring equitable distribution through reports and on-site monitoring.
     
    Requirement 6-d Does the plan provide evidence for the probable success of the strategies it includes? 
    Does the revised state plan meet requirement 6-d?
  • Yes
  •  
    Revised State Plan Addressing Requirement 6-d Information will be disseminated to districts this summer and fall reminding them of the importance of having highly qualified and experienced teachers in schools with higher numbers of poor and minority students. Districts will be encouraged to consider this issue as they make teaching assignments. They will also be reminded of the requirements of No Child Left Behind and also Kansas statute which states that it is unlawful for a district to pay a teacher a salary if they do not hold a license which is valid for their particular teaching assignment.

    Kansas is attempting to bolster its recruitment efforts as well as developing mechanisms for teacher support. In order to provide more quality support to new teachers in schools with large numbers of poor or minority children, Kansas is investigating implementation of a comprehensive mentoring program to keep quality teachers in the profession. The Kansas legislature currently provides funds for mentoring of beginning teachers.

    The KSDE also supports the implementation of districts signing bonuses with highly qualified teachers who teach in schools with large numbers of poor or minority children. Districts will be encouraged to utilize their Title II Part A funds to ensure that highly qualified teachers are placed in schools with larger numbers of poor or minority children.

    Kansas law specifies that teachers are to be paid only when they are appropriately licensed for the teaching assignment. There has been no enforcement of this; however, the Kansas State Board of Education is scheduled to discuss this issue at its July meeting and adopt possible sanctions for districts that violate this provision. Otherwise, the KSDE has no authority regarding teaching assignments; this is the option of the district as Kansas is a local control state. In addition, there is no statewide salary plan for teachers.

    (This information overlaps with Requirement 6-a) 

    Peer Review Response to Requirement 6-d None of the strategies alone will likely solve the inequity issues; however, LEAs should be able to implement one or more of the strategies over time to diminish or eliminate gross inequities. Additional funds will be essential for the incentives to have much impact. No research is quoted to support the strategies. The KSDE intends to approach their State Board of Education related to disallowing paying teachers who are not appropriately licensed. If the State Board of Education pursues that remedy, many of the equity issues will likely be resolved. 
    Requirement 6-e Does the plan indicate that the SEA will examine the issue of equitable teacher assignment when it monitors LEAs, and how this will be done? 
    Does the revised state plan meet requirement 6-e?
  • Yes
  •  
    Revised State Plan Addressing Requirement 6-e The Kansas State Department of Education will monitor the issue of equitable teacher assignments in two ways. The first is to annually review the data on teaching assignments through the Licensed Personnel Report. The second way is through the Local Consolidated Plan monitoring process. In monitoring Title II Part A, the KSDE staff will address the distribution of highly qualified teachers.

    (This information overlaps with Requirement 6-a) 

    Peer Review Response to Requirement 6-e The plan clearly indicates that equitable teacher assignments will be made part of the desk auditing and on-site monitoring processes. 


    © 2013 by the Education Commission of the States (ECS). All rights reserved. ECS is the only nationwide, nonpartisan interstate compact devoted to education.
    To request permission to excerpt part of this publication, either in print or electronically, please fax a request to the attention of the ECS Communications Department, 303.296.8332 or e-mail ecs@ecs.org.
    Helping State Leaders Shape Education Policy