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 the HQT standards, and examine whether or not there are particular hard-to-staff courses frequently taught by non-highly qualified teachers.
Does the revised plan include an analysis of classes taught by teachers who are not highly qualified? Is the analysis based on accurate classroom level data?
In the 2002-03 during the early phase of NCLB Title II, Part A, the PSC developed a software program referred to as HiQ (see www.gapsc.org) that compares the PSC teacher and paraprofessional state certification data with the Department of Education’s teacher employment data to determine the highly qualified status of every teacher, in every school, in every school district in the state. Local school district personnel can review the highly qualified status of their teachers, act on this information to inform parents and the community, as well as work with the PSC to upgrade and make changes and corrections to the status of the teachers. Highly qualified paraprofessional data are also reported through HiQ as is the number of long-term substitute teachers. These data reports are used as a basis for informing parents that their children’s teachers may not be highly qualified, and provides the reasons for those decisions.
Table 01 and Table 02 show the statewide summary data reported for 2003-04 and 2004-05. For these data, a teacher is defined as an individual who provides instruction in the core academic content areas who teaches in kindergarten, grades 1 through 12, or un-graded classes, or individuals who teach in an environment other than a classroom setting (and who maintain daily student attendance records). These 2003-04 data were used as a baseline and reported by school and school district for them to use to set their yearly objectives to achieve 100% highly qualified teacher work force by 2005-06. The tables included here are aggregated statewide.
Table 01: State-wide HiQ Data 2003-2004
State-wide
School Year 2003-2004
|
Highly Qualified Teachers (FTE) by Subject Area
|
The following summary data was calculated for the entire school system, for Title I schools (if any), and for Charter schools (if any). Title I schools are schools that received Title I funding under a School-wide Program or a Targeted Assistance Program.
|
NCLB Subject Area
|
Group
|
Considered
|
% Highly
Qualified FTE
|
Total FTE
% Highly
Qualified FTE
|
All subjects
|
All schools
|
71444.7
|
69448.7
|
97.2
|
All subjects
|
Charter schools
|
671.7
|
585.8
|
87.2
|
All subjects
|
Title I schools
|
35511.9
|
34497.8
|
97.1
|
Arts
|
All schools
|
4274.6
|
4103.1
|
96.0
|
Arts
|
Charter schools
|
46.2
|
36.8
|
79.5
|
Arts
|
Title I schools
|
1832.9
|
1721.8
|
93.9
|
Civics and Government
|
All schools
|
27.2
|
23.0
|
84.6
|
Civics and Government
|
Title I schools
|
7.2
|
7.2
|
100.0
|
Economics
|
All schools
|
17.3
|
11.4
|
65.8
|
Economics
|
Title I schools
|
0.7
|
0.5
|
67.6
|
Elementary Instruction
|
All schools
|
39252.4
|
38538.3
|
98.2
|
Elementary Instruction
|
Charter schools
|
360.3
|
305.1
|
84.7
|
Elementary Instruction
|
Title I schools
|
24986.3
|
24482.8
|
98.0
|
English Language Arts
|
All schools
|
6668.8
|
6510.5
|
97.6
|
English Language Arts
|
Charter schools
|
55.2
|
50.9
|
92.2
|
English Language Arts
|
Title I schools
|
2136.7
|
2076.8
|
97.2
|
Foreign Languages
|
All schools
|
1859.5
|
1785.0
|
96.0
|
Foreign Languages
|
Charter schools
|
33.6
|
31.0
|
92.3
|
Foreign Languages
|
Title I schools
|
376.7
|
348.9
|
92.6
|
Geography
|
All schools
|
28.1
|
16.9
|
60.0
|
Geography
|
Title I schools
|
15.1
|
9.1
|
60.1
|
History
|
All schools
|
5752.4
|
5507.3
|
95.7
|
History
|
Charter schools
|
49.3
|
45.1
|
91.5
|
History
|
Title I schools
|
1653.8
|
1568.7
|
94.9
|
Mathematics
|
All schools
|
6949.1
|
6701.1
|
96.4
|
Mathematics
|
Charter schools
|
59.6
|
57.3
|
96.2
|
Mathematics
|
Title I schools
|
2277.0
|
2196.9
|
96.5
|
Reading
|
All schools
|
1011.9
|
897.8
|
88.7
|
Reading
|
Charter schools
|
14.4
|
11.1
|
76.9
|
Reading
|
Title I schools
|
571.4
|
515.2
|
90.2
|
Science
|
All schools
|
5603.4
|
5354.3
|
95.5
|
Science
|
Charter schools
|
53.0
|
48.5
|
91.5
|
Science
|
Title I schools
|
1654.1
|
1570.0
|
94.9
|
The data are disaggregated by school system level, by school, by type of school and by subject area, by classes taught and by each AYP status. The analysis includes the schools that are not making adequate yearly progress. The analysis also identifies the districts and schools in which teachers do not meet HQ requirements and examines the subject areas taught by teachers.
Share with your friends: |