The data identified the needs of the state, the LEAs, and the schools that have not met AYP and that do not have 100% of their classes taught by highly qualified teachers.

The readers commend the SEA for the thorough explanation of the steps they will take to assist the LEAs that are high need and for discussing the possibility of redirecting funds to the schools with greatest needs with the high need school districts.

In the equity plan, element 4.1, providing 1/5 retirement credit for teachers who serve "in need of improvement" or "at risk" schools, and element 4.8, allowing high need schools first pick of teachers are noteworthy. 

Nevada's Revised Plan

Nevada's Plan—Reviewer Comments 

Note: schools not making AYP for the first year will be added to this list when CRT results are released in August 2006.

• "High percentage" was calculated based on 20% or greater of classes not taught by highly qualified teachers.
• In Clark County there are 73 schools that have 20% or greater of classes not taught by highly qualified teachers that are in need of improvement.

There are no other schools in Nevada that meet this criteria.  

1. Elementary school classes taught by certified special education teachers who did not pass a subject-knowledge test or have not demonstrated subject-matter competency through HOUSSE = 42.8% of these teachers.
2. Secondary school classes taught by certified special education teachers who have not demonstrated subject-matter competency in those subjects = 40.5% of these middle school 7-8 teachers and 40.33% of these secondary 9-12 teachers.

See APPENDIX C-2 (electronic attachment): Clark Data *
See APPENDIX C-3 (electronic attachment): Washoe Data *

Schools that have significant numbers of non-HQT are available for all 17 districts. 

Highly Qualified Teacher Data—5/1/06
Teachers Meeting HQ

T=Teachers, C=Classes
Italics=designation for not meeting AMOs

• Only hiring teachers who have met the HQT requirements; retaining documentation related to announcing the position, efforts to recruit highly qualified candidates for the position, applications and resumes received, and notes from interviewing and selecting the teacher for employment; including in the contractual agreement, a commitment by the teacher to fulfill requirements of a mutually agreed upon plan to achieve highly qualified status, using the most expedient option and no later than the end of the upcoming or current school year; assurance that the teacher receives support and assistance related to content knowledge and teaching skills needed for the teaching assignment, including teacher mentoring and high-quality professional development as defined in NCLB
• Conducting a meeting with each teacher who has not yet met the HQT requirements and developing an individual action plan with each teacher
• School site administrator scheduling and conducting periodic checks for completion of agreed upon actions in individual plans
• Providing Praxis tapes, study guides and classes to study for the Praxis test

  A major project of the Nevada National Governors Association task force funded by the Title II-A state activities fund was the creation of PRAXIS II examination preparation tapes for teachers. The following tapes are available: Overview, Principles of Learning and Teaching, English, Science, Social Studies, Math, Art, Music, PE/Health, Elementary Education, and Special Education.

  Clark County gave a copy of every appropriate tape to all their schools and made these tapes available at no charge to all Nevada school districts and to the university system. They also broadcast each of the tapes numerous times over their instructional television channel.

• Use of district Title II-A funds for taking the Praxis test or coursework, providing coursework through the district or regional professional development program, and paying for licensing fees associated with attaining HQ status in the core assignment
• Reminding teachers they can take USDE eLearning courses to fulfill professional development requirements
• Clark County has also stated that those teachers who do not meet the deadline will be placed in a subject area for which they are HQ or if they do not meet the criteria in any subject area will be suspended pending termination

• Only hiring teachers who have met the HQT requirements; retaining documentation related to announcing the position, efforts to recruit highly qualified candidates for the position, applications and resumes received, and notes from interviewing and selecting the teacher for employment; including in the contractual agreement, a commitment by the teacher to fulfill requirements of a mutually agreed upon plan to achieve highly qualified status, using the most expedient option and no later than the end of the upcoming or current school year; assurance that the teacher receives support and assistance related to content knowledge and teaching skills needed for the teaching assignment, including teacher mentoring and high-quality professional development as defined in NCLB
• Conducting a meeting with each teacher who has not yet met the HQT requirements and developing an individual action plan with each teacher
• School site administrator scheduling and conducting periodic checks for completion of agreed upon actions in individual plans
• Providing Praxis tapes, study guides and classes to study for the Praxis test

  A major project of the Nevada National Governors Association task force funded by the Title II-A state activities fund was the creation of PRAXIS II examination preparation tapes for teachers. The following tapes are available: Overview, Principles of Learning and Teaching, English, Science, Social Studies, Math, Art, Music, PE/Health, Elementary Education, and Special Education.

  Clark County gave a copy of every appropriate tape to all their schools and made these tapes available at no charge to all Nevada school districts and to the university system. They also broadcast each of the tapes numerous times over their instructional television channel.

• Use of district Title II-A funds for taking the Praxis test or coursework, providing coursework through the district or regional professional development program, and paying for licensing fees associated with attaining HQ status in the core assignment
• Reminding teachers they can take USDE eLearning courses to fulfill professional development requirements
• Clark County has also stated that those teachers who do not meet the deadline will be placed in a subject area for which they are HQ or if they do not meet the criteria in any subject area will be suspended pending termination

(This information overlaps with Requirement 2-b.) 

Clarification—Highly Qualified Special Education Teachers
July 2005 the SEA provided a Technical Assistance Document for special education teachers to clarify the HQT requirements articulated in the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEA-04) which was signed into law December 2004, and to provide additional information on Nevada's regulations and policies and procedures regarding teacher licensure and the highly qualified requirements. SEA Special Education consultants met with district personnel to discuss the Nevada guidance. See APPENDIX G: Special Education Technical Assistance Document.*

In addition to reviewing guidance on the HQT requirements for special education teachers at the April 4, 2006 meeting, the following clarification was recently provided:

• In co-teaching models of service delivery the assignation of grades and/or credit is not the determining factor for whether the special education teacher must be highly qualified in the core subject area, but whether the teacher is providing instruction, i.e. delivering new information to the student.
• Additional guidance on how to code "Options" (alternate route to certification) teachers in updated reports as highly qualified if they have met the criteria outlined including demonstration of subject-matter competency.

Teacher-to-Teacher eLearning Course Credit for HOUSSE Credit
Teachers have not taken advantage of the Teacher-to-Teacher eLearning courses for HOUSSE credit, so districts were reminded about this opportunity during monitoring. Teachers can use the NCLB Teacher-to-Teacher eLearning course credit for HOUSSE credit, Department continuing education units (CEU) for recertification and at district option, district credit. Teachers can submit their eLearning Certificate of Completion of the "Video and Assessment" module (approximately 2 contact hours) to their supervising administrator who will also monitor fulfillment of the work to complete the "Implementation" module as decided on with the teacher (13 contact hours). The supervising administrator will complete and submit an attendance sheet to the Nevada Department of Education in order to receive the certificates of credit.

Source: Teacher-to-Teacher Initiative

The Title II-A consultant has recently monitored the districts that have significant numbers of non-highly qualified teachers and discussed the districts' "improvement plan" to get teachers to meet the HQT requirements ensuring issues that prevented the district from meeting the annual measurable objectives are addressed (Section 2141 "Improvement Plan"). The SEA is analyzing the revised HQT plans submitted June 15, 2006 and will contact districts by August 31, 2006 with any questions about the plan or further suggestions for improving the plan.

During monitoring the accountability requirement of entering into an agreement on use of II-A funds to provide PD activities through funding directly to schools served by the district to meet the objective of 100% of HQT by 6/30/06 has been discussed with the three districts that are in jeopardy of not meeting AYP when the AYP results are released in August 2006 (Clark and Washoe). 

See APPENDIX H: II-A FY07 Supplement to the consolidated grant application which contains further information required on staffing and professional development needs.*

State Level Professional Development Targeted To Schools Not Making AYP
See Section 6—Equitable Distribution of Teachers—Professional Development, pp. 29-33. 

Middle School License
In response to the unique circumstances at the middle school level, the Commission on Professional Standards adopted a new endorsement and qualifications. The recognized field of teaching of the license is based on an applicant's field of specialization or concentration, usually designated as a major or minor or area of concentration. This endorsement authorizes the teacher to teach in grades 7, 8, and 9 in the following subject areas: art, English/language arts, foreign language, mathematics, music, science, or social studies.

Regional Professional Development Programs
The regional professional development programs support teachers and LEAs in meeting the HQT goals through a variety of objectives and action steps including providing credits for many PD courses. A priority is to provide services to schools in need of improvement.

The Northwest Nevada Regional Professional Development Program serving Pershing, Storey and Washoe Counties—
Collaborates with the University of Nevada-Reno, Truckee Meadows Community College, Sierra Nevada College, and other institutes of higher education for providing expertise in content specific trainings to deepen teachers' content knowledge supported with scholarships for teachers to attend content specific institutes. In addition NWRPDP collaborates in offering PRAXIS study groups and individual tutorials for teachers in the region to help them meet the NCLB highly qualified teacher requirements.

The Northeast Nevada Regional Professional Development Program serving Elko, Eureka, Humboldt, Lander, and White Pine Counties—
Collaborates with Great Basin College and provides professional development in the areas of literacy, mathematics, science, instructional strategies, and assessment.

The Southern Nevada Regional Professional Development Program serving Clark, Esmeralda, Lincoln and Nye Counties—
Collaborates with the University of Nevada - Las Vegas and Southern Utah University and provides credit offering in mathematics, science, reading, technology and social studies. The SNRPDP created and implemented certificate programs in middle school and high school mathematics and science to address the teacher shortage and need for teachers to meet NCLB highly qualified teacher requirements. These are 16 credit programs of study that focus on content that teachers teach at their particular grade cluster while addressing instructional and assessment practices, the needs of special populations, and embedding standards based lessons and teacher expectations into each course. The SNRPDP in partnership with the Southern Nevada Writing Project has developed programs to incorporate writing strategies into classroom instruction. The Governor's Reading Improvement Program has provided a program of study and a support system for K-3 teachers with a special emphasis on Kindergarten to have students reading at the earliest possible levels.

The Western Nevada Regional Professional Development Program serving Carson City, Churchill, Douglas, Lyon, and Mineral Counties—
Collaborates with the University of Nevada-Reno and Sierra Nevada College and provides a professional development training series with the priority of supporting teachers in need of becoming highly qualified. The training series includes: classroom management, instructional strategies, questioning skills, content standards, assessments, coaching and data analysis.

Title II-A—Improving Teacher Quality State Grant—State Agency for Higher Education "Nevada Collaborative Teaching Improvement Program" (NeCoTIP)

For 2005-2006 subgrants in the amount of $374,624 were provided to the following partners to support teachers in the following areas for which credit was available as noted:

• Expanding the Focus on Mathematical Understanding Through Assessment
  Clark County School District/University of Nevada, Las Vegas
  25 K-6 teachers/5 administrators
• Distance Education for Special Education Rural Teachers
  Clark, Douglas, Esmeralda, Nye, Pershing and Washoe Districts/University of Nevada, Reno
  29 participants—received graduate credit
• Transforming Middle School Science Achievement using Instructional Technology
  Clark County School District/University of Nevada, Las Vegas
  18 participants—received inservice credit
• The Nebula Teaching and Learning Community
  Focus on under-prepared teachers assigned to science in pre K-12
  University of Nevada, Reno
  32 teachers

Title II-B - Math/Science Partnerships

For 2005-2006 subgrants in the amount of $963,436 were provided to the following partners to support teachers in the following areas for which credit was available as noted:

• CCSD Middle School Math Project—Developing Mathematical Thinking
  Clark County School District/University of Nevada, Las Vegas
  150 teachers—credit available
• Integrated Science Content Enhancement Project
  to increase science content knowledge and instructional sills, use of technology in teaching, understanding of state and local science standards, and forming learning communities)
  Washoe County School District and other northern Nevada school districts/ University of Nevada, Reno
  30 teachers—credit available
• Northeastern Nevada Math Project
  3 rural school districts—White Pine, Elko, Humboldt/University Nevada, Reno/Northeastern RPDP
  37 teachers K-8 - credit available
• Nevada Educators Really Doing Science
  Science content aligned with Nevada state standards and scientific inquiry
  6 Nevada school districts/University of Nevada, Reno
  22 teachers K-8—credit available
• Clark County School District/University of Nevada, Las Vegas
  Proficiency and Success in Science—to improve quality of instruction for high school science students
  No data currently available on year 1 participation levels (2005)
• Great Explorations in Math & Science (GEMS) materials aligned with Nevada and National science standards
  Carson City School District & other districts/Western Nevada Community College
  60 K-6 teachers

Alternate Route to Licensure
Obviously teachers enrolled in ARL programs will not have met the HQ requirements if they have not yet met all provisional requirements for Nevada licensure such as passing the Principles of Learning and Teaching Examination required of all teachers. However they are working towards becoming HQ through these ARL programs.

Options Program
The state provides for teachers with a teaching license to work in an alternate route to certification program to obtain their special education license.

Nevada faces an acute shortage of special education teachers. As Nevada has grown, so too has the problem. During the 2005-2006 school year Nevada had 421 special education teachers teaching under the "Options Program".

Conditional Endorsement
This alternate route to certification program is for those participants who do not have an existing license. During the 2005-2006 school year Nevada had 251 teachers enrolled in this program all of whom are teaching in Clark County.

Project DESERT (Distance Education for Special Education)
The Title II-A Improving Teacher Quality State Grant—State Agency for Higher Education (NeCoTIP) provided funding in the amount of $79,367 for 2005-2006 and 2006-2007 to the project "Distance Education for Special Education Rural Teachers" (Project DESERT) University of Nevada, Reno.

Project DESERT is designed to target licensed elementary and secondary teachers across Nevada in rural areas who are currently Options teachers since there is a lack of available teacher education courses for rural teachers. It provides additional training in content areas specific to state standards for currently licensed special education teachers in order to meet the need for highly qualified teachers. Courses are provided for teachers working with high-incidence disabilities, such as learning disabilities, as well as continuing education for special education teachers to address the content areas of English, Science, and Math to ensure that special education teachers can be considered highly qualified.

The goal for Project DESERT is to decrease the number of special education teachers without appropriate teaching licenses, as well as increase the number of highly qualified special education teachers providing research-based services to children with disabilities in rural Nevada. It will also ensure they are effective co-teachers and collaborators with specialists in content-area instruction.

The goals of DESERT are:

• Ensure Options teachers, especially in rural areas, become fully licensed with the Generalist endorsement
• Provide training in content areas to increase the number of highly qualified special education teachers
• Provide tuition support
• Offer continuing professional development opportunities.

Other Support
Special education teachers have the opportunity to receive the same kind of district support as other teachers:

• attend Praxis classes, use Praxis study guides, use tapes for studying for the Praxis test
• have fees paid by district Title II-A funds - Praxis examination fees, coursework fees, and licensing fees associated with attaining HQ status in the core assignment
• participation in USDE eLearning courses to fulfill professional development requirements.

Title II
Title II-A Improving Teacher Quality State Grant—State Agency for Higher Education and Title II-B Math/Science Partnership funding was described on pp. 12-13.

Regional Professional Development Program
See pp. 11-12.

Mentoring Funds
The Legislature appropriated $5 million per year of the biennium for grants to school districts to adopt a program which, in addition to using for a program of performance pay and enhanced compensation for recruitment and retention, can be used for mentoring of licensed personnel at at-risk schools—which would include use for those teachers who have not yet met the HQ requirements.

The SEA ensures that districts are giving high priority to staffing and professional development needs of schools that are not making AYP by asking districts to list schools in the Title II-A section of the consolidated application for federal funds that have the lowest proportion of highly qualified teachers and are identified for school improvement. 

The Title II-A consultant has recently monitored the districts that have significant numbers of non-highly qualified teachers and discussed the districts' "improvement plan" to get teachers to meet the HQT requirements ensuring issues that prevented the district from meeting the annual measurable objectives are addressed (Section 2141 "Improvement Plan"). The SEA is analyzing the revised HQT plans submitted June 15, 2006 and will contact districts by August 31, 2006 with any questions about the plan or further suggestions for improving the plan.

During monitoring the accountability requirement of entering into an agreement on use of II-A funds to provide PD activities through funding directly to schools served by the district to meet the objective of 100% of HQT by 6/30/06 has been discussed with the three districts that are in jeopardy of not meeting AYP when the AYP results are released in August 2006 (Clark, Washoe, Carson City). Ways to target schools with a large number of non-HQ teachers as well as schools not making AYP have been discussed.

How districts are accomplishing this will be shared with all districts. 

The Title II-A consultant has recently monitored the districts that have significant numbers of non-highly qualified teachers and discussed the districts' "improvement plan" to get teachers to meet the HQT requirements ensuring issues that prevented the district from meeting the annual measurable objectives are addressed (Section 2141 "Improvement Plan"). The SEA is analyzing the revised HQT plans submitted June 15, 2006 and will contact districts by August 31, 2006 with any questions about the plan or further suggestions for improving the plan.

During monitoring the accountability requirement of entering into an agreement on use of II-A funds to provide PD activities through funding directly to schools served by the district to meet the objective of 100% of HQT by 6/30/06 has been discussed with the three districts that are in jeopardy of not meeting AYP when the AYP results are released in August 2006 (Clark, Washoe, Carson City). Ways to target schools with a large number of non-HQ teachers as well as schools not making AYP have been discussed.

How districts are accomplishing this will be shared with all districts.

(This information overlaps with Requirement 4-a.) 

The Title II-A consultant will do periodic sampling of teachers to check on whether they are receiving high qualify professional development to meet HQT requirements and be effective. This performance indicator is addressed by LEAs in the Title II-A section of the consolidated application. 

3. ACCOUNTABILITY—After the third year of the plan described in section 1119(a)(2), if the State educational agency determines, based on the reports described in section 1119(b)(1), that the local educational agency has failed to make progress toward meeting the annual measurable objectives described in section 1119(a)(2), and has failed to make adequate yearly progress as described under section 1111(b)(2)(B), for 3 consecutive years, the State educational agency shall enter into an agreement with such local educational agency on the use of that agency's funds under this part. As part of this agreement, the State educational agency—

1. shall develop, in conjunction with the local educational agency, teachers, and principals, professional development strategies and activities, based on scientifically based research, that the local educational agency will use to meet the annual measurable objectives described in section 1119(a)(2) and require such agency to utilize such strategies and activities; and
2. (A) Except as provided in subparagraphs (B) and (C), shall prohibit the use of funds received under part A of title I to fund any paraprofessional hired after the date such determination is made;

   (B) Shall allow the use of such funds to fund a paraprofessional hired after that date if the local educational agency can demonstrate that the hiring is to fill a vacancy created by the departure of another paraprofessional funded under title I and such new paraprofessional satisfies the requirements of section 1119(c); and

   (C) May allow the use of such funds to fund a paraprofessional hired after that date if the local educational agency can demonstrate—

   1. that a significant influx of population has substantially increased student enrollment; or
   2. that there is an increased need for translators or assistance with parental involvement activities.

   (D)SPECIAL RULE—During the development of the strategies and activities described in subsection (c)(1), the State educational agency shall, in conjunction with the local educational agency, provide from funds allocated to such local educational agency under subpart 2 directly to one or more schools served by such local educational agency, to enable teachers at the schools to choose, with continuing consultation with the principal involved, professional development activities that—
   1. meet the requirements for professional development activities described in section 9101; and
   2. that there is an increased need for translators or assistance with parental involvement activities.

• teachers currently eligible for HOUSSE who were not able to be documented as HQ through HOUSSE on the basis of district records and who have not yet submitted their documentation to the district regarding meeting the HOUSSE requirements. In Nevada eligibility for HOUSSE is defined as NOT NEW to the profession meaning they were hired before July 1, 2003.
• teachers not new to the profession who met the HQT requirements through HOUSSE for their assignment prior to June 30, 2006 but are changing assignments and still meet the HOUSSE criteria for their new assignment.
• 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.

• teachers currently eligible for HOUSSE who were not able to be documented as HQ through HOUSSE on the basis of district records and who have not yet submitted their documentation to the district regarding meeting the HOUSSE requirements. In Nevada eligibility for HOUSSE is defined as NOT NEW to the profession meaning they were hired before July 1, 2003.
• teachers not new to the profession who met the HQT requirements through HOUSSE for their assignment prior to June 30, 2006 but are changing assignments and still meet the HOUSSE criteria for their new assignment.
• 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.

(This info overlaps with Requirement 5-a.)  

Nevada Policy Agenda for Teacher Quality

A broad range of national research demonstrates the importance of prepared, experienced and well-supported teachers and administrators to promote long-term school improvement and to close the achievement gap, both goals of NCLB and Nevada Senate Bill 1 of the 19th Special Session of the 2003 Nevada Legislature. Nevada Revised Statute 391.100 mirrors the requirements of NCLB regarding all core teachers meeting the highly qualified teacher requirements by June 30, 2006. Nevada made a significant increase in regard to teachers meeting the NCLB highly qualified teachers requirement - from 68.1% as of the October 1, 2005 district "Contracted Educators Report" to 80.38% as of May 1, 2006. All districts have had a plan to get their teachers to meet the HQT requirements since 2003 which have been updated annually as part of the Title II-A application for funds.

In 1999 the Nevada State Legislature created a statewide network of Regional Professional Development Programs. The RPDP created Nevada Professional Development Standards. Several task forces have been created to work on the issue of teacher quality including the Nevada National Governors Task Force on the Recruitment and Retention of Teachers and the Teacher Quality Task Force to align teacher preparation, licensing and relicensing.

The 2005 State Improvement Plan supports teacher quality with the following goals:

• To improve the performance of all students through the implementation of proven practices that enhance instruction in core academic subjects and reduce achievement gaps.
• To implement effective statewide professional development activities and educator preservice preparation focused on data-driven needs and proven practices that will increase student achievement as identified in school, district, and state improvement plans.

Nevada has completed Phase I of the Equity Plan as outlined on p. 29 and is in the process of beginning Phase II as outlined on pp. 29, 30. Phase II will ensure the Nevada Equity Plan is successful in correcting staffing inequities by working with the Southwest Comprehensive Center as a Nevada Committee on Equitable Distribution of Teachers, to include task forces and representatives from Clark County School District and Washoe County School District, as outlined in the goal and objectives listed.

Nevada's Growth Rate Challenges

Nevada is the fastest growing state in the nation. We have an influx each year of more than 13,000 students. For the 05-06 school year 76.2% of the 3047 newly hired teachers were hired from outside Nevada. Nevada is unique with 68% of the teachers positioned in Clark County School District (Las Vegas) - 14,854 teachers out of the 05-06 school year State total of 21,686. Clark County as the fifth largest school district in the United States has significant teacher recruitment and retention challenges with the need to recruit a majority of its teachers each year from outside Nevada. In Clark County 80% of the teachers come from outside of Nevada, 35% of these teachers leave within 3 years, and 50% leave within 5 years. For the 06-07 school year CCSD is projecting to hire 1,000 new teachers. The diversity-minority students make up 50% of the school age population, yet minority teachers make up only 16% of teaching staff. Because Clark County School District accounts for 68% of the Nevada teachers and because of the district's challenges - their strategies are highlighted throughout this plan and their Equity Plan is included in APPENDIX A (and electronic APPENDIX D)*. Washoe County School District is the second largest school district in Nevada with 3,556 teachers out of the 05-06 school year State total of 21, 686. Their EQUITY PLAN is included in APPENDIX B (and electronic APPENDIX E). 

	HQT by Classes% Difference between High poverty/Low poverty	Experience% Difference between High poverty/Low poverty	HQT by Classes% Difference between High minority/Low minority	Experience% Difference between High minority/Low minority
Clark	- 6.42%	- 14.98%	- 6.62%	- 11.48%
Elko (rural)	- 2.75%	- 19.91%	- 5.57%	- 12.54%
Humboldt (rural)		- 26.35%	- 9.33%	- 18.56%
Washoe		- 2.69%		- 4.86%
STATEWIDE			- 1.08	- 2.71%

The greatest inequity in teacher distribution is in Clark County School District, the largest school district in Nevada. Clark County School District has a large number of high-poverty/high-minority schools that have teachers that have not met the NCLB highly qualified requirements and have less than 3 years of teaching experience. The percent difference between high/low minority for experience data is relatively low in Washoe County School District, which is the second largest school district in Nevada. There is not inequity in teacher distribution in this district between high/low poverty for HQT. Elko County School District and Humboldt County School District are small rural districts that have some remote schools where it is difficult to attract and retain highly qualified teachers with experience. However, no "high-need schools" were identified in these rural districts.

There were 85 "high-need schools" identified in Nevada according to the criteria of a school having 20% or more non-HQT or teachers with less than three years of experience at high-poverty (62.2% or greater) or high-minority schools (> 50%) that were in need of improvement. There are 81 "high-need schools" identified in Clark County School District and there are 4 "high-need schools identified in Washoe County School District. 

1. Continuously monitor, through data collection on teacher distribution and analyses of identified patterns, that Nevada poor and minority students are not being taught at higher rates than other children by inexperienced, unqualified and out-of-field teachers so they have equitable access to effective teachers who are able to teach students to needed levels of achievement.

• Measure: Percentage of highly qualified teachers and/or experienced teachers in high need schools (high poverty/high minority schools in need of improvement) versus schools with low poverty/low minority and not in need of improvement.
• Publicly Report Progress: Teacher Quality Report

2. Increase the percentage of Nevada's teachers meeting the NCLB highly qualified requirements to 100%.

• Measure: Percentage of highly qualified teachers in Nevada's districts/schools.
• Publicly Report Progress: State Accountability Report

1. Increase the relative attractiveness of hard-to-staff schools so they can compete for their fair share of good teachers.
2. Make these schools personally and professionally rewarding places to work to retain high quality teachers.

1. Collect and publicly report data on the distribution of teacher quality.
2. 1.1 Program data for data reports on equitable distribution of teachers. (p. 38)

1. Explore the expansion of college and university teacher preparation initiatives to prepare, place, and support new teachers in schools with high percentages of at risk students. (p. 42)

1. No longer approve out-of-field teacher assignments in core subjects. (p. 43)
2. After June 30, 2008 no longer issue out-of-field licenses in core subjects. (p. 43)
3. Work with the next legislative session to further address the hard-to-staff subject areas of mathematics, science and teaching positions in special education and English as a second language in high-poverty, high-minority, and low-performing schools. (p. 44)

1. Provide 1/5 retirement credit for teachers at " In Need of Improvement" or "At Risk" schools. (p. 46)
2. Provide grant to LEAs to adopt a program of performance pay and enhanced compensation for recruitment, retention and mentoring of licensed personnel at at-risk schools. (p. 47)
3. Allow retired staff in hard to fill positions to be rehired (p. 48) [In CCSD "at high-need schools" - p. 50).
4. Investigate the possibility of proposing a change to the Nevada Revised Statutes to allow teachers at high need schools the choice of 1/5 of a year's retirement credit (currently in place) or a $3,000-$5,000 stipend. (p. 55)
5. Investigate how teachers are assigned to schools in high need districts to ensure Title I comparability and eliminate any unfair budgeting practices. (p. 56)
6. List state and federal incentives on the SEA website to ensure better communication of this information to teachers and encourage districts to do the same on their website. (p. 56)
7. Develop a strategic state plan for retaining highly qualified teachers. (pp. 49, 50)
8. CCSD—Allow high need school first pick of teachers. (p. 52)
9. CCSD—Continue pay for performance pilot. (p. 52)
10. CCSD—Continue principal salary schedule based on a point factor system. (p. 53)

1. Continue professional development provided by the Regional Professional Development Programs to improve the quality of teaching at schools designated as "in need of improvement". (pp. 57-63)
   
2. Continue the professional development provided by the Nevada Association of School Administrators. (p. 63)
   
3. Continue to partner with the International Center for Leadership in Education to study what model schools do to get student achievement results. (p. 65)
   
4. Continue LEA grants to adopt a program of performance pay and enhanced compensation for recruitment, retention and mentoring of licensed personnel at at-risk schools. (p. 65)
   
5. Continue state initiatives - Professional Learning Communities; Assessment for Learning; Response to Intervention; Curriculum Self Analysis for Districts and Schools Identified for Corrective Action. (pp. 65-67)
   
6. CCSD—Continue Urban Academy at 22 low performing schools. (p. 67)
7. CCSD—Continue new teacher induction program. (p. 68)
8. CCSD—Continue coaches assigned to low-performing schools in the Northeast
   Region of the district. (p. 68)

1. Continue the work of the Teacher Quality Task Force in writing a plan to align preservice, licensure, and re-licensure systems around the knowledge, skills, and dispositions needed by teachers working with diverse and at-risk students. (p. 69)
2. Review research that has been done on ensuring teachers have the specialized knowledge and skills they need to be effective with students at risk and closing the achievement gap to enhance professional development impact on diverse learners. (p. 70)

1. Continue the Working Conditions Survey in Clark County and Washoe County School Districts and increase teacher retention by improving working conditions. (p. 72)
2. Continue State class size reduction funding. (p. 73)
3. Strengthen school leadership by continuing to provide professional development through the Regional Professional Development Program as outlined in the Administrative Strand, through the Nevada Association of School Administrators, and through the Professional Learning Community (p. 73)

1. Reduce time required to process teacher certification applications. (p. 75)
2. CCSD—Reduce time required to process teacher applications. (p. 75)

1. Reward teachers for taking on more challenging assignments
2. Provide the specialized preparation and training teachers need to be successful in challenging classrooms
3. Improve working conditions that contribute to high teacher turnover
4. Revise state policies or improve internal processes that may inadvertently contribute to local staffing inequities

The SEA prioritizes support to public school districts and schools that have failed to make adequate yearly progress (AYP). When a school fails to make AYP in any of the specified categories for the first time, it is placed on "watch" status. If a school fails to make AYP in that same category the next year, the school is designated as In Need of Improvement Year One. Subsequent failures result in continued In Need of Improvement designations. Designated schools are faced with specific consequences, and as the number of successive years of designation increases so does the significance of the consequences. Schools and school districts that are designated as In Need of Improvement are entitled to technical assistance and support from the state. The SEA provides a graduated level of support to public school districts and schools that fall into an "in need of improvement" status. For the In Need of Improvement Year One and Year Two schools, the state requires that a Technical Assistance Partnership be established that consists of site level and district level representation. The Technical Assistance Partnership teams review each school improvement plan to assist in refocusing the improvement efforts. The SEA also provides training to potential external facilitators who can work one-on-one with Year One and Year Two schools as these sites undergo revision and implementation of their improvement plans. For Title I schools, a portion of Title I funds are provided to hire an external facilitator in this capacity.

Guided by Nevada Revised Statute 385, the state establishes a School Support Team for each In Need of Improvement Year Three, Year Four, and beyond public school. This team analyzes the school's data and assists the school in targeting its efforts to the most critical areas of need. For Title I schools, a portion of the Title I funds are provided to hire a qualified educator to lead the School Support Team.