hqt trends and developments ospa spring conference newport, oregon may 8, 2007
DESCRIPTION
HQT TRENDS AND DEVELOPMENTS OSPA Spring Conference Newport, Oregon May 8, 2007. Pat Burk, Oregon Department of Education. Race/Ethnic Breakout by Newly Licensed Educators Prepared In Oregon and In Other States, 2005-06. Source: Teacher Standards and Practices Commission. - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
HQT TRENDS AND DEVELOPMENTS
OSPA Spring ConferenceNewport Oregon
May 8 2007
Pat Burk Oregon Department of Education
3rd GRADE MATHEMATICS MULTIPLE CHOICE Percent of Students Meeting Standards1997 through 2006
Native American81
AsianPacif ic Islander90
African American
87
Hispanic74
White90
All Students86
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006From 2002 to 2004 the percent students meeting the mathematics multiple choice standards climbed steadily for all raceethnicities and special education In 2005 all raceethnicities posted increases
Pe
rce
nt
of
Stu
de
nts
Me
eti
ng
Sta
nd
ard
s
1996 through 2001 percents include only students tested under standard conditions at or above grade level2002 through 2004 percents include ALL students tested2005 and 2006 results dif fer from the 2004 results in the follow ing w aysTest scores are aggregated to the school district and state level based on the student resident district as of May 2 2005 In 2004 test scores w ere aggregated based on the resident district at the time the test w as takenRegardless of w here the student took the test the highest score available is reportedAs per NCLB beginning LEP students w ere not included in the results In 2004 beginning LEP students w ere included in the results
79
65
Multi racial
Special Education
5th GRADE MATHEMATICS MULTIPLE CHOICE Percent of Students Meeting Standards1997 through 2006
Native American77
AsianPacific Islander91
African American74
Hispanic72
88 White
All Students85
Special Education58
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
From 2005 to 2006 the percent of 5th grade students meeting the mathematics multiple choice standards climbed steadily for all categories except African American and Multi-Racial Hispanic students posted the largest increase
Pe
rce
nt
of
Stu
de
nts
Me
eti
ng
Sta
nd
ard
s
1996 through 2001 percents include only students tested under standard conditions at or above grade level2002 through 2004 percents include ALL students tested2005 and 2006 results differ from the 2004 results in the following waysTest scores are aggregated to the school district and state level based on the student resident district as of May 2 2005 In 2004 test scores were aggregated based on the resident district at the time the test was takenRegardless of where the student took the test the highest score available is reportedAs per NCLB beginning LEP students were not included in the results In 2004 beginning LEP students were included in the results
Multi-Racial amp
8th GRADE MATHEMATICS MULTIPLE CHOICE Percent of Students Meeting Standards1997 through 2006
Native American53
AsianPacific Islander78
African American45Hispanic43
White70All Students 66
Special Education26
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
From 2005 to 2006 the percent of students meeting the mathematics multiple choice standards increased for all raceethnicities and special education African American and Native American students posted the largest increases
Pe
rce
nt
of
Stu
de
nts
Me
eti
ng
Sta
nd
ard
s
1996 through 2001 percents include only students tested under standard conditions at or above grade level2002 through 2004 percents include ALL students tested2005 and 2006 results differ from the 2004 results in the following waysTest scores are aggregated to the school district and state level based on the student resident district as of May 2 2005 In 2004 test scores were aggregated based on the resident district at the time the test was takenRegardless of where the student took the test the highest score available is reportedAs per NCLB beginning LEP students were not included in the results In 2004 beginning LEP students were included in the results
Multi-Racial65
10th GRADE MATHEMATICS MULTIPLE CHOICE Percent of Students Meeting Standards1997 through 2006
27 Native American
62 AsianPacific Islander
African American
21 Hispanic
49 White
46 Multi-Racial
45 All Students
20
11 Special Education
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
From 2005 to 2006 Asian students posted the largest increase in percent of students meeting or exceeding the mathematics multiple choice standards All other categories decreased or remained the same
Pe
rce
nt
of
Stu
de
nts
Me
etin
g S
tan
da
rds
1996 through 2001 percents include only students tested under standard conditions at or above grade level2002 through 2004 percents include ALL students tested2005 and 2006 results differ from the 2004 results in the following ways
Test scores are aggregated to the school district and state level based on the student resident district as of May 2 2005 In 2004 test scores were aggregated based on the resident district at the time the test was taken
Regardless of where the student took the test the highest score available is reported
As per NCLB beginning LEP students were not included in the results In 2004 beginning LEP students were included in the results
3rd GRADE READING Percent of Students Meeting Standards1997 through 2006
85 Native American82 African American
75 Hispanic
90 White amp AsianPacIslander
87 All Students88 Multi-racial
60 Special Education
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
From 2005 to 2006 the percent of students meeting the reading standards increased for all categories except Special Education and Asian categories which stayed the same Hispanic students posted the biggest increase
Pe
rce
nt
of
Stu
de
nts
Me
eti
ng
Sta
nd
ard
s
1996 through 2001 percents include only students tested under standard conditions at or above grade level2002 through 2004 percents include ALL students tested2005 and 2006 results differ from the 2004 results in the follow ing w ays
Test scores are aggregated to the school district and state level based on the student resident district as of May 2 2005
In 2004 test scores w ere aggregated based on the resident district at the time the test w as taken
Regardless of w here the student took the test the highest score available is reported
As per NCLB beginning LEP students w ere not included in the results In 2004 beginning LEP students w ere included in the results
5th GRADE READING Percent of Students Meeting Standards1997 through 2006
79 Native American
84 Multi-racial
75 African American
66 Hispanic
87 White
83 All Students
51 Special Education
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
From 2005 to 2006 the percent of students meeting the reading standards increased for all categories except Multi-RaceEthnicity which stayed the same Hispanic students posted the largest increase
Pe
rce
nt
of
Stu
de
nts
Me
eti
ng
Sta
nd
ard
s
1996 through 2001 percents include only students tested under standard conditions at or above grade level2002 through 2004 percents include ALL students tested2005 and 2006 results differ from the 2004 results in the follow ing w ays
Test scores are aggregated to the school district and state level based on the student resident district as of May 2 2005 In 2004 test scores w ere aggregated based on the resident district at the time the test w as taken
Regardless of w here the student took the test the highest score available is reported
As per NCLB beginning LEP students w ere not included in the results In 2004 beginning LEP students w ere included in the results
AsianPacif ic 86
8th GRADE READING Percent of Students Meeting Standards1997 through 2006
Native American54
AsianPacif ic Islander71
African American50
Hispanic39
White71
Multi-racial67All Students66
Special Education23
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
From 2005 to 2006 the percent of students meeting the reading standards increased for Native American African American Hispanic White Multi-Racial and All Students categories while percents posted for Asian and Special
Education remained the same
Per
cen
t o
f S
tud
ents
Mee
tin
g S
tan
dar
ds
1996 through 2001 percents include only students tested under standard conditions at or above grade level2002 through 2004 percents include ALL students tested2005 and 2006 results differ from the 2004 results in the follow ing w aysTest scores are aggregated to the school district and state level based on the student resident district as of May 2 2005 In 2004 test scores w ere aggregated based on the resident district at the time the test w as takenRegardless of w here the student took the test the highest score available is reportedAs per NCLB beginning LEP students w ere not included in the results In 2004 beginning LEP students w ere included in the results
10th GRADE READING Percent of Students Meeting the Standards1997 through 2006
Native American42
AsianPacif ic Islander58
African American32
Hispanic27
White60
Multi-racial52All Students55
Special Education15
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
From 2005 to 2006 the percent of students meeting the reading standards increased for all categories except Multi-Racial Native American students posted the biggest increase
Pe
rce
nt
of
Stu
de
nts
Me
eti
ng
Sta
nd
ard
s
1996 through 2001 percents include only students tested under standard conditions at or above grade level2002 through 2004 percents include ALL students tested2005 and 2006 results differ from the 2004 results in the follow ing w ays
Test scores are aggregated to the school district and state level based on the student resident district as of May 2 2005 In 2004 test scores w ere aggregated based on the resident district at the time the test w as taken
Regardless of w here the student took the test the highest score available is reported
As per NCLB beginning LEP students w ere not included in the results In 2004 beginning LEP students w ere included in the results
Student Enrollment amp Teachers1995 - 2020
Actual data 1995-2005 Projected data 2006-2020Growth Rate 05 for both Teachers and Students
Students602656587813
573336559215
551315527914
545680
26680
28099
26731
28051 28759 29485
Teachers30230
0
100000
200000
300000
400000
500000
600000
700000
1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
At a 05 growth rate per year by 2020 Oregon will need 30230 teachers to match the projected increase in student enrollment An estimated 2179 new teachers would be needed
(Solid Lines=Actual Data Dotted Lines=Projected Increases)
Nu
mb
er o
f S
tud
ents
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
35000
40000
45000
50000
Nu
mb
er o
f T
each
ers
(FT
E)
Student Enrollment amp Teachers1995 - 2020
Actual data 1995-2005 Projected data 2006-2020Growth Rate 10 for both Teachers and Students
Students649231617721
587741559215
551315
545680
527914 Teachers32566
309852948128051
26731
28099
26680
0
100000
200000
300000
400000
500000
600000
700000
1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
At a 1 growth rate per year by 2020 Oregon will need 32566 teachers to match the projected increase in student enrollment An estimated 4515 new teachers would be needed
(Solid Lines=Actual Data Dotted Lines=Projected Increases)
Nu
mb
er o
f S
tud
ents
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
35000
40000
45000
50000
Nu
mb
er o
f T
each
ers
(FT
E)
Projected Need for Teachers to Match the Projected Increase in Student Enrollment1995 - 2020
Actual data 1995-2005 Projected data 2006-2020Growth Rate 05 for both Teachers and Students
30230
29485
28759
28051
26731
2812028099
26680
24000
25000
26000
27000
28000
29000
30000
31000
32000
33000
1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
At a 05 growth rate by 2020 Oregon will need 30230 teachers to match the projected increase in student enrollment An estimated 2179 new teachers would be needed
(Solid Lines=Actual Data Dotted Lines=Projected Increases)
Nu
mb
er o
f T
each
ers
(FT
E)
Projected Need for Teachers to Match the Projected Increase in Student Enrollment1995 - 2020
Actual data 1995-2005 Projected data 2006-2020Growth Rate 10 for both Teachers and Students
28120
32566
Teachers (FTE) 30985
29481
28051
26731
28099
26680
24000
25000
26000
27000
28000
29000
30000
31000
32000
33000
1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
At a 1 growth rate by 2020 Oregon will need 32566 teachers to match the projected increase in student enrollment An estimated 4515 new teachers would be needed
(Solid Lines=Actual Data Dotted Lines=Projected Increases)
Nu
mb
er o
f T
each
ers
(FT
E)
School Staffi ng FTE
Percent Changes
1992-93 through 2005-06Teachers and Instructional Aides
Instructional Assistants
+932
Teachers =+51
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
In the last fourteen years student enrollment increased by +96 while the number of teachers increased by +51 and educational assistants increased by +932 In the last year there was an increase of 823 teachers and 293 educational assistants
FTE
of S
choo
l Sta
ff
Why Teachers Quit
1994-2006
Took Position in Another District in Oregon
Took Position in District Out of Oregon
T ook Non-E ducation P osi tion
Continuing EducationNo Employment Plans
Leave of Absence or Sabbatical
Left Due to Pregnancy
Retired
Deceased
Other Known Reason
Other Unknown Reason
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
Total Number of Teachers (NOT FTE) Employed by Oregon Districts 1994-2006
26000
28000
30000
1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
Tea
cher
s
Each year school districts and ESDs are required by Oregon law to report demographic and assignment information for all certifi cated staff (teachers)
employed in their district or ESD as of September 1 One of the items reported on the Certifi cated Staff Report is the quit code which is the reason why a
teacher is no longer employed by the school district or ESD All possible quit codes are reported on this chart
Prepared in Oregon
Prepared in Other States
Total
American IndianAlaskan Native11 4 15
Asian 35 22 57
Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander 2 2
Black or African American 27 15 42
Hispanic 139 51 190
Multi-ethnic 17 3 20
White 2045 1357 3402
Not identified or unavailable 1179 1955 3134
TOTAL 3455 3407 6862
RaceEthnic Breakout by Newly Licensed EducatorsPrepared In Oregon and In Other States 2005-06
Source Teacher Standards and Practices Commission
Percentage Stayers Movers and Leavers 2004-05
Stayers Movers Leavers
Community Type
Central City 798 103 99
Urban Fringelarge town 848 73 79
RuralSmall Town 850 73 77
Poverty
Less than 15 858 64 79
15-49 854 72 74
50 or more 800 103 97
Minority
Less than 10 864 56 81
10-34 855 78 67
35 or more 806 99 95
Source Teacher Attrition and Mobility National Center for Education Statistics January 2007
Percent of Classes Taught by Highly Qualified Teachers2005-06 School Year
Type of Class Percent of All ClassesTaught by
Highly Qualified Teachers
Percent of All ClassesNOT Taught
by Highly Qualified Teachers
Percent ofClasses in
HIGH Poverty Schools
Taught by Highly
Qualified Teachers
Percent ofClasses in
HIGHPoverty Schools
NOT Taught by Highly
Qualified Teachers
Percent ofClasses in
LOW Poverty Schools
Taught by Highly
Qualified Teachers
Percent ofClasses in
LOWPoverty Schools
NOTTaught by
Highly Qualified Teachers
All 914 86 897 103 937 63
Self-Contained 964 36 951 49 964 36
English 901 99 878 122 924 76
Foreign Languages
909 91 866 134 958 42
The Arts 911 89 889 111 924 76
Science 909 91 898 102 937 63
Math 891 109 864 136 944 56
Social Sciences 912 88 894 106 921 79
Source NCLB Staff (Highly Qualified Teachers) Data Collection 2005-2006Calculated by subtraction (100 - Percent of Classes Taught by Highly Qualified Teachers)
The Trends
Achievement Gap Persists Classrooms Becoming More Diverse Demand for New Teachers Steady
Specialists Content Areas
Shortage of Teacher Diversity High Needs Schools Have Highest Turnover High Poverty Schools Have Lower Percentage
of HQT
Oregon Developments
Oregon Highly Qualified Teacher Plan Each District Submits Title IIa HQT Plan This Fall in
Continuous Improvement Plan Budget Narrative Spending Workbooks Monitor Every Three Years Professional Development Technical Assistance
Grants Continue HOUSSE Create an Integrated Data System with TSPC
Oregon Developments
The Equity PlanmdashUSDOE Priority Specific Data on HQT and High Poverty Schools Placement Preparation and Retention Teacher-level Data District Plan to Address the Issue License and Assignment Course Codes Linked New Electronic Budget Narrative in CIP Contains
HQT Data Contact Bev Pratt for Help
Some Good News
Mentoring Bill $5 million Possible Regional Professional
Development Centers $12 million School Improvement Fund of $260 million Distribution via Formula Interim Accountability Linked to CIP ESDs Participate in SIF
Federal Developments
Preparation Underway for Next MonitoringHQT Definitions and ProceduresHQT Data ReportingmdashMore DetailAnnual Report CardsHQT State PlanPlans for Equitable Distribution of Qualified
Experienced TeachersAdministration and Management of Title IIa
Funds
Federal Developments
HQT Plans12 The SEA enters into an agreement on the
use of funds with any LEA that has not made progress toward meeting its annual measurable objectives in meeting the highly qualified teacher challenge for three consecutive years and has also failed to make AYP for three years 2141 (c)
Reauthorization
Spelling Letter of April 23 2007 Building on Results Priorities
1 Close the gap standards accountability2 Assessment Flexibility-Growth3 High School Rigor4 Greater Resources for Teachers5 Turn Around Tools and Improved
Supplemental Education Services
Reauthorization
Greater Resources for TeachersGrants for teachers and principals in high
needs schools National Math Panel Teacher Incentive Fund- $43 million this round Teacher-to-teacher Initiative eLearning web site
Reauthorization
Things to WatchHighly Qualified and Effective TeachersHQT and Student Achievement DataElimination of HOUSSEhellipTimes UpEquity Plans and Teacher Level DataMore Linkage to AYP ResultshellipPossible
Offset to HQTMore Flexibility for Rural Districts
Reauthorization
Council of Chief State School Officers Provide Multiple Pathways And More Incentives Count New Hires As ldquoHQTrdquo In Primary Subject And
Provide 3 Year Ramp Up To Additional Subjects Through HOUSSE
Special Education And ELL Teachers HQT If Closely Linked (Partnered) With Other HQT
Use Achievement Growth As One But Not Only Indicator Of Performance
Provide Incentives For Challenging Schools
Reauthorization
National Association of State Boards of EducationState Board Authorizes LicensurePreservice Articulates to K-12Alternative Pathways Must Have a Teacher
Preparation ProgramLimit Emergency CertificatesState Approves Teacher Education ProgramsBackground Checks
Reauthorization
National Governors AssociationSupport Professional DevelopmentOppose Any Attempt to Link Teacher
Preparation to Student PerformanceProvide More Flexibility for Teachers of
Multiple Subjects in High Need Areas eg Special Education and Rural Districts
THANK YOU TO OSPA
Regular Conversations between OSPA and ODE on HQT Issues
Keep People Informed on Reauthorization Surface Questions and Problems Improving Communication Make the New Data System Work
Meeting on May 31 ODE Contact Jim Buck if Interested in Helping
3rd GRADE MATHEMATICS MULTIPLE CHOICE Percent of Students Meeting Standards1997 through 2006
Native American81
AsianPacif ic Islander90
African American
87
Hispanic74
White90
All Students86
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006From 2002 to 2004 the percent students meeting the mathematics multiple choice standards climbed steadily for all raceethnicities and special education In 2005 all raceethnicities posted increases
Pe
rce
nt
of
Stu
de
nts
Me
eti
ng
Sta
nd
ard
s
1996 through 2001 percents include only students tested under standard conditions at or above grade level2002 through 2004 percents include ALL students tested2005 and 2006 results dif fer from the 2004 results in the follow ing w aysTest scores are aggregated to the school district and state level based on the student resident district as of May 2 2005 In 2004 test scores w ere aggregated based on the resident district at the time the test w as takenRegardless of w here the student took the test the highest score available is reportedAs per NCLB beginning LEP students w ere not included in the results In 2004 beginning LEP students w ere included in the results
79
65
Multi racial
Special Education
5th GRADE MATHEMATICS MULTIPLE CHOICE Percent of Students Meeting Standards1997 through 2006
Native American77
AsianPacific Islander91
African American74
Hispanic72
88 White
All Students85
Special Education58
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
From 2005 to 2006 the percent of 5th grade students meeting the mathematics multiple choice standards climbed steadily for all categories except African American and Multi-Racial Hispanic students posted the largest increase
Pe
rce
nt
of
Stu
de
nts
Me
eti
ng
Sta
nd
ard
s
1996 through 2001 percents include only students tested under standard conditions at or above grade level2002 through 2004 percents include ALL students tested2005 and 2006 results differ from the 2004 results in the following waysTest scores are aggregated to the school district and state level based on the student resident district as of May 2 2005 In 2004 test scores were aggregated based on the resident district at the time the test was takenRegardless of where the student took the test the highest score available is reportedAs per NCLB beginning LEP students were not included in the results In 2004 beginning LEP students were included in the results
Multi-Racial amp
8th GRADE MATHEMATICS MULTIPLE CHOICE Percent of Students Meeting Standards1997 through 2006
Native American53
AsianPacific Islander78
African American45Hispanic43
White70All Students 66
Special Education26
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
From 2005 to 2006 the percent of students meeting the mathematics multiple choice standards increased for all raceethnicities and special education African American and Native American students posted the largest increases
Pe
rce
nt
of
Stu
de
nts
Me
eti
ng
Sta
nd
ard
s
1996 through 2001 percents include only students tested under standard conditions at or above grade level2002 through 2004 percents include ALL students tested2005 and 2006 results differ from the 2004 results in the following waysTest scores are aggregated to the school district and state level based on the student resident district as of May 2 2005 In 2004 test scores were aggregated based on the resident district at the time the test was takenRegardless of where the student took the test the highest score available is reportedAs per NCLB beginning LEP students were not included in the results In 2004 beginning LEP students were included in the results
Multi-Racial65
10th GRADE MATHEMATICS MULTIPLE CHOICE Percent of Students Meeting Standards1997 through 2006
27 Native American
62 AsianPacific Islander
African American
21 Hispanic
49 White
46 Multi-Racial
45 All Students
20
11 Special Education
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
From 2005 to 2006 Asian students posted the largest increase in percent of students meeting or exceeding the mathematics multiple choice standards All other categories decreased or remained the same
Pe
rce
nt
of
Stu
de
nts
Me
etin
g S
tan
da
rds
1996 through 2001 percents include only students tested under standard conditions at or above grade level2002 through 2004 percents include ALL students tested2005 and 2006 results differ from the 2004 results in the following ways
Test scores are aggregated to the school district and state level based on the student resident district as of May 2 2005 In 2004 test scores were aggregated based on the resident district at the time the test was taken
Regardless of where the student took the test the highest score available is reported
As per NCLB beginning LEP students were not included in the results In 2004 beginning LEP students were included in the results
3rd GRADE READING Percent of Students Meeting Standards1997 through 2006
85 Native American82 African American
75 Hispanic
90 White amp AsianPacIslander
87 All Students88 Multi-racial
60 Special Education
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
From 2005 to 2006 the percent of students meeting the reading standards increased for all categories except Special Education and Asian categories which stayed the same Hispanic students posted the biggest increase
Pe
rce
nt
of
Stu
de
nts
Me
eti
ng
Sta
nd
ard
s
1996 through 2001 percents include only students tested under standard conditions at or above grade level2002 through 2004 percents include ALL students tested2005 and 2006 results differ from the 2004 results in the follow ing w ays
Test scores are aggregated to the school district and state level based on the student resident district as of May 2 2005
In 2004 test scores w ere aggregated based on the resident district at the time the test w as taken
Regardless of w here the student took the test the highest score available is reported
As per NCLB beginning LEP students w ere not included in the results In 2004 beginning LEP students w ere included in the results
5th GRADE READING Percent of Students Meeting Standards1997 through 2006
79 Native American
84 Multi-racial
75 African American
66 Hispanic
87 White
83 All Students
51 Special Education
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
From 2005 to 2006 the percent of students meeting the reading standards increased for all categories except Multi-RaceEthnicity which stayed the same Hispanic students posted the largest increase
Pe
rce
nt
of
Stu
de
nts
Me
eti
ng
Sta
nd
ard
s
1996 through 2001 percents include only students tested under standard conditions at or above grade level2002 through 2004 percents include ALL students tested2005 and 2006 results differ from the 2004 results in the follow ing w ays
Test scores are aggregated to the school district and state level based on the student resident district as of May 2 2005 In 2004 test scores w ere aggregated based on the resident district at the time the test w as taken
Regardless of w here the student took the test the highest score available is reported
As per NCLB beginning LEP students w ere not included in the results In 2004 beginning LEP students w ere included in the results
AsianPacif ic 86
8th GRADE READING Percent of Students Meeting Standards1997 through 2006
Native American54
AsianPacif ic Islander71
African American50
Hispanic39
White71
Multi-racial67All Students66
Special Education23
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
From 2005 to 2006 the percent of students meeting the reading standards increased for Native American African American Hispanic White Multi-Racial and All Students categories while percents posted for Asian and Special
Education remained the same
Per
cen
t o
f S
tud
ents
Mee
tin
g S
tan
dar
ds
1996 through 2001 percents include only students tested under standard conditions at or above grade level2002 through 2004 percents include ALL students tested2005 and 2006 results differ from the 2004 results in the follow ing w aysTest scores are aggregated to the school district and state level based on the student resident district as of May 2 2005 In 2004 test scores w ere aggregated based on the resident district at the time the test w as takenRegardless of w here the student took the test the highest score available is reportedAs per NCLB beginning LEP students w ere not included in the results In 2004 beginning LEP students w ere included in the results
10th GRADE READING Percent of Students Meeting the Standards1997 through 2006
Native American42
AsianPacif ic Islander58
African American32
Hispanic27
White60
Multi-racial52All Students55
Special Education15
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
From 2005 to 2006 the percent of students meeting the reading standards increased for all categories except Multi-Racial Native American students posted the biggest increase
Pe
rce
nt
of
Stu
de
nts
Me
eti
ng
Sta
nd
ard
s
1996 through 2001 percents include only students tested under standard conditions at or above grade level2002 through 2004 percents include ALL students tested2005 and 2006 results differ from the 2004 results in the follow ing w ays
Test scores are aggregated to the school district and state level based on the student resident district as of May 2 2005 In 2004 test scores w ere aggregated based on the resident district at the time the test w as taken
Regardless of w here the student took the test the highest score available is reported
As per NCLB beginning LEP students w ere not included in the results In 2004 beginning LEP students w ere included in the results
Student Enrollment amp Teachers1995 - 2020
Actual data 1995-2005 Projected data 2006-2020Growth Rate 05 for both Teachers and Students
Students602656587813
573336559215
551315527914
545680
26680
28099
26731
28051 28759 29485
Teachers30230
0
100000
200000
300000
400000
500000
600000
700000
1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
At a 05 growth rate per year by 2020 Oregon will need 30230 teachers to match the projected increase in student enrollment An estimated 2179 new teachers would be needed
(Solid Lines=Actual Data Dotted Lines=Projected Increases)
Nu
mb
er o
f S
tud
ents
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
35000
40000
45000
50000
Nu
mb
er o
f T
each
ers
(FT
E)
Student Enrollment amp Teachers1995 - 2020
Actual data 1995-2005 Projected data 2006-2020Growth Rate 10 for both Teachers and Students
Students649231617721
587741559215
551315
545680
527914 Teachers32566
309852948128051
26731
28099
26680
0
100000
200000
300000
400000
500000
600000
700000
1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
At a 1 growth rate per year by 2020 Oregon will need 32566 teachers to match the projected increase in student enrollment An estimated 4515 new teachers would be needed
(Solid Lines=Actual Data Dotted Lines=Projected Increases)
Nu
mb
er o
f S
tud
ents
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
35000
40000
45000
50000
Nu
mb
er o
f T
each
ers
(FT
E)
Projected Need for Teachers to Match the Projected Increase in Student Enrollment1995 - 2020
Actual data 1995-2005 Projected data 2006-2020Growth Rate 05 for both Teachers and Students
30230
29485
28759
28051
26731
2812028099
26680
24000
25000
26000
27000
28000
29000
30000
31000
32000
33000
1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
At a 05 growth rate by 2020 Oregon will need 30230 teachers to match the projected increase in student enrollment An estimated 2179 new teachers would be needed
(Solid Lines=Actual Data Dotted Lines=Projected Increases)
Nu
mb
er o
f T
each
ers
(FT
E)
Projected Need for Teachers to Match the Projected Increase in Student Enrollment1995 - 2020
Actual data 1995-2005 Projected data 2006-2020Growth Rate 10 for both Teachers and Students
28120
32566
Teachers (FTE) 30985
29481
28051
26731
28099
26680
24000
25000
26000
27000
28000
29000
30000
31000
32000
33000
1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
At a 1 growth rate by 2020 Oregon will need 32566 teachers to match the projected increase in student enrollment An estimated 4515 new teachers would be needed
(Solid Lines=Actual Data Dotted Lines=Projected Increases)
Nu
mb
er o
f T
each
ers
(FT
E)
School Staffi ng FTE
Percent Changes
1992-93 through 2005-06Teachers and Instructional Aides
Instructional Assistants
+932
Teachers =+51
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
In the last fourteen years student enrollment increased by +96 while the number of teachers increased by +51 and educational assistants increased by +932 In the last year there was an increase of 823 teachers and 293 educational assistants
FTE
of S
choo
l Sta
ff
Why Teachers Quit
1994-2006
Took Position in Another District in Oregon
Took Position in District Out of Oregon
T ook Non-E ducation P osi tion
Continuing EducationNo Employment Plans
Leave of Absence or Sabbatical
Left Due to Pregnancy
Retired
Deceased
Other Known Reason
Other Unknown Reason
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
Total Number of Teachers (NOT FTE) Employed by Oregon Districts 1994-2006
26000
28000
30000
1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
Tea
cher
s
Each year school districts and ESDs are required by Oregon law to report demographic and assignment information for all certifi cated staff (teachers)
employed in their district or ESD as of September 1 One of the items reported on the Certifi cated Staff Report is the quit code which is the reason why a
teacher is no longer employed by the school district or ESD All possible quit codes are reported on this chart
Prepared in Oregon
Prepared in Other States
Total
American IndianAlaskan Native11 4 15
Asian 35 22 57
Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander 2 2
Black or African American 27 15 42
Hispanic 139 51 190
Multi-ethnic 17 3 20
White 2045 1357 3402
Not identified or unavailable 1179 1955 3134
TOTAL 3455 3407 6862
RaceEthnic Breakout by Newly Licensed EducatorsPrepared In Oregon and In Other States 2005-06
Source Teacher Standards and Practices Commission
Percentage Stayers Movers and Leavers 2004-05
Stayers Movers Leavers
Community Type
Central City 798 103 99
Urban Fringelarge town 848 73 79
RuralSmall Town 850 73 77
Poverty
Less than 15 858 64 79
15-49 854 72 74
50 or more 800 103 97
Minority
Less than 10 864 56 81
10-34 855 78 67
35 or more 806 99 95
Source Teacher Attrition and Mobility National Center for Education Statistics January 2007
Percent of Classes Taught by Highly Qualified Teachers2005-06 School Year
Type of Class Percent of All ClassesTaught by
Highly Qualified Teachers
Percent of All ClassesNOT Taught
by Highly Qualified Teachers
Percent ofClasses in
HIGH Poverty Schools
Taught by Highly
Qualified Teachers
Percent ofClasses in
HIGHPoverty Schools
NOT Taught by Highly
Qualified Teachers
Percent ofClasses in
LOW Poverty Schools
Taught by Highly
Qualified Teachers
Percent ofClasses in
LOWPoverty Schools
NOTTaught by
Highly Qualified Teachers
All 914 86 897 103 937 63
Self-Contained 964 36 951 49 964 36
English 901 99 878 122 924 76
Foreign Languages
909 91 866 134 958 42
The Arts 911 89 889 111 924 76
Science 909 91 898 102 937 63
Math 891 109 864 136 944 56
Social Sciences 912 88 894 106 921 79
Source NCLB Staff (Highly Qualified Teachers) Data Collection 2005-2006Calculated by subtraction (100 - Percent of Classes Taught by Highly Qualified Teachers)
The Trends
Achievement Gap Persists Classrooms Becoming More Diverse Demand for New Teachers Steady
Specialists Content Areas
Shortage of Teacher Diversity High Needs Schools Have Highest Turnover High Poverty Schools Have Lower Percentage
of HQT
Oregon Developments
Oregon Highly Qualified Teacher Plan Each District Submits Title IIa HQT Plan This Fall in
Continuous Improvement Plan Budget Narrative Spending Workbooks Monitor Every Three Years Professional Development Technical Assistance
Grants Continue HOUSSE Create an Integrated Data System with TSPC
Oregon Developments
The Equity PlanmdashUSDOE Priority Specific Data on HQT and High Poverty Schools Placement Preparation and Retention Teacher-level Data District Plan to Address the Issue License and Assignment Course Codes Linked New Electronic Budget Narrative in CIP Contains
HQT Data Contact Bev Pratt for Help
Some Good News
Mentoring Bill $5 million Possible Regional Professional
Development Centers $12 million School Improvement Fund of $260 million Distribution via Formula Interim Accountability Linked to CIP ESDs Participate in SIF
Federal Developments
Preparation Underway for Next MonitoringHQT Definitions and ProceduresHQT Data ReportingmdashMore DetailAnnual Report CardsHQT State PlanPlans for Equitable Distribution of Qualified
Experienced TeachersAdministration and Management of Title IIa
Funds
Federal Developments
HQT Plans12 The SEA enters into an agreement on the
use of funds with any LEA that has not made progress toward meeting its annual measurable objectives in meeting the highly qualified teacher challenge for three consecutive years and has also failed to make AYP for three years 2141 (c)
Reauthorization
Spelling Letter of April 23 2007 Building on Results Priorities
1 Close the gap standards accountability2 Assessment Flexibility-Growth3 High School Rigor4 Greater Resources for Teachers5 Turn Around Tools and Improved
Supplemental Education Services
Reauthorization
Greater Resources for TeachersGrants for teachers and principals in high
needs schools National Math Panel Teacher Incentive Fund- $43 million this round Teacher-to-teacher Initiative eLearning web site
Reauthorization
Things to WatchHighly Qualified and Effective TeachersHQT and Student Achievement DataElimination of HOUSSEhellipTimes UpEquity Plans and Teacher Level DataMore Linkage to AYP ResultshellipPossible
Offset to HQTMore Flexibility for Rural Districts
Reauthorization
Council of Chief State School Officers Provide Multiple Pathways And More Incentives Count New Hires As ldquoHQTrdquo In Primary Subject And
Provide 3 Year Ramp Up To Additional Subjects Through HOUSSE
Special Education And ELL Teachers HQT If Closely Linked (Partnered) With Other HQT
Use Achievement Growth As One But Not Only Indicator Of Performance
Provide Incentives For Challenging Schools
Reauthorization
National Association of State Boards of EducationState Board Authorizes LicensurePreservice Articulates to K-12Alternative Pathways Must Have a Teacher
Preparation ProgramLimit Emergency CertificatesState Approves Teacher Education ProgramsBackground Checks
Reauthorization
National Governors AssociationSupport Professional DevelopmentOppose Any Attempt to Link Teacher
Preparation to Student PerformanceProvide More Flexibility for Teachers of
Multiple Subjects in High Need Areas eg Special Education and Rural Districts
THANK YOU TO OSPA
Regular Conversations between OSPA and ODE on HQT Issues
Keep People Informed on Reauthorization Surface Questions and Problems Improving Communication Make the New Data System Work
Meeting on May 31 ODE Contact Jim Buck if Interested in Helping
5th GRADE MATHEMATICS MULTIPLE CHOICE Percent of Students Meeting Standards1997 through 2006
Native American77
AsianPacific Islander91
African American74
Hispanic72
88 White
All Students85
Special Education58
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
From 2005 to 2006 the percent of 5th grade students meeting the mathematics multiple choice standards climbed steadily for all categories except African American and Multi-Racial Hispanic students posted the largest increase
Pe
rce
nt
of
Stu
de
nts
Me
eti
ng
Sta
nd
ard
s
1996 through 2001 percents include only students tested under standard conditions at or above grade level2002 through 2004 percents include ALL students tested2005 and 2006 results differ from the 2004 results in the following waysTest scores are aggregated to the school district and state level based on the student resident district as of May 2 2005 In 2004 test scores were aggregated based on the resident district at the time the test was takenRegardless of where the student took the test the highest score available is reportedAs per NCLB beginning LEP students were not included in the results In 2004 beginning LEP students were included in the results
Multi-Racial amp
8th GRADE MATHEMATICS MULTIPLE CHOICE Percent of Students Meeting Standards1997 through 2006
Native American53
AsianPacific Islander78
African American45Hispanic43
White70All Students 66
Special Education26
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
From 2005 to 2006 the percent of students meeting the mathematics multiple choice standards increased for all raceethnicities and special education African American and Native American students posted the largest increases
Pe
rce
nt
of
Stu
de
nts
Me
eti
ng
Sta
nd
ard
s
1996 through 2001 percents include only students tested under standard conditions at or above grade level2002 through 2004 percents include ALL students tested2005 and 2006 results differ from the 2004 results in the following waysTest scores are aggregated to the school district and state level based on the student resident district as of May 2 2005 In 2004 test scores were aggregated based on the resident district at the time the test was takenRegardless of where the student took the test the highest score available is reportedAs per NCLB beginning LEP students were not included in the results In 2004 beginning LEP students were included in the results
Multi-Racial65
10th GRADE MATHEMATICS MULTIPLE CHOICE Percent of Students Meeting Standards1997 through 2006
27 Native American
62 AsianPacific Islander
African American
21 Hispanic
49 White
46 Multi-Racial
45 All Students
20
11 Special Education
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
From 2005 to 2006 Asian students posted the largest increase in percent of students meeting or exceeding the mathematics multiple choice standards All other categories decreased or remained the same
Pe
rce
nt
of
Stu
de
nts
Me
etin
g S
tan
da
rds
1996 through 2001 percents include only students tested under standard conditions at or above grade level2002 through 2004 percents include ALL students tested2005 and 2006 results differ from the 2004 results in the following ways
Test scores are aggregated to the school district and state level based on the student resident district as of May 2 2005 In 2004 test scores were aggregated based on the resident district at the time the test was taken
Regardless of where the student took the test the highest score available is reported
As per NCLB beginning LEP students were not included in the results In 2004 beginning LEP students were included in the results
3rd GRADE READING Percent of Students Meeting Standards1997 through 2006
85 Native American82 African American
75 Hispanic
90 White amp AsianPacIslander
87 All Students88 Multi-racial
60 Special Education
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
From 2005 to 2006 the percent of students meeting the reading standards increased for all categories except Special Education and Asian categories which stayed the same Hispanic students posted the biggest increase
Pe
rce
nt
of
Stu
de
nts
Me
eti
ng
Sta
nd
ard
s
1996 through 2001 percents include only students tested under standard conditions at or above grade level2002 through 2004 percents include ALL students tested2005 and 2006 results differ from the 2004 results in the follow ing w ays
Test scores are aggregated to the school district and state level based on the student resident district as of May 2 2005
In 2004 test scores w ere aggregated based on the resident district at the time the test w as taken
Regardless of w here the student took the test the highest score available is reported
As per NCLB beginning LEP students w ere not included in the results In 2004 beginning LEP students w ere included in the results
5th GRADE READING Percent of Students Meeting Standards1997 through 2006
79 Native American
84 Multi-racial
75 African American
66 Hispanic
87 White
83 All Students
51 Special Education
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
From 2005 to 2006 the percent of students meeting the reading standards increased for all categories except Multi-RaceEthnicity which stayed the same Hispanic students posted the largest increase
Pe
rce
nt
of
Stu
de
nts
Me
eti
ng
Sta
nd
ard
s
1996 through 2001 percents include only students tested under standard conditions at or above grade level2002 through 2004 percents include ALL students tested2005 and 2006 results differ from the 2004 results in the follow ing w ays
Test scores are aggregated to the school district and state level based on the student resident district as of May 2 2005 In 2004 test scores w ere aggregated based on the resident district at the time the test w as taken
Regardless of w here the student took the test the highest score available is reported
As per NCLB beginning LEP students w ere not included in the results In 2004 beginning LEP students w ere included in the results
AsianPacif ic 86
8th GRADE READING Percent of Students Meeting Standards1997 through 2006
Native American54
AsianPacif ic Islander71
African American50
Hispanic39
White71
Multi-racial67All Students66
Special Education23
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
From 2005 to 2006 the percent of students meeting the reading standards increased for Native American African American Hispanic White Multi-Racial and All Students categories while percents posted for Asian and Special
Education remained the same
Per
cen
t o
f S
tud
ents
Mee
tin
g S
tan
dar
ds
1996 through 2001 percents include only students tested under standard conditions at or above grade level2002 through 2004 percents include ALL students tested2005 and 2006 results differ from the 2004 results in the follow ing w aysTest scores are aggregated to the school district and state level based on the student resident district as of May 2 2005 In 2004 test scores w ere aggregated based on the resident district at the time the test w as takenRegardless of w here the student took the test the highest score available is reportedAs per NCLB beginning LEP students w ere not included in the results In 2004 beginning LEP students w ere included in the results
10th GRADE READING Percent of Students Meeting the Standards1997 through 2006
Native American42
AsianPacif ic Islander58
African American32
Hispanic27
White60
Multi-racial52All Students55
Special Education15
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
From 2005 to 2006 the percent of students meeting the reading standards increased for all categories except Multi-Racial Native American students posted the biggest increase
Pe
rce
nt
of
Stu
de
nts
Me
eti
ng
Sta
nd
ard
s
1996 through 2001 percents include only students tested under standard conditions at or above grade level2002 through 2004 percents include ALL students tested2005 and 2006 results differ from the 2004 results in the follow ing w ays
Test scores are aggregated to the school district and state level based on the student resident district as of May 2 2005 In 2004 test scores w ere aggregated based on the resident district at the time the test w as taken
Regardless of w here the student took the test the highest score available is reported
As per NCLB beginning LEP students w ere not included in the results In 2004 beginning LEP students w ere included in the results
Student Enrollment amp Teachers1995 - 2020
Actual data 1995-2005 Projected data 2006-2020Growth Rate 05 for both Teachers and Students
Students602656587813
573336559215
551315527914
545680
26680
28099
26731
28051 28759 29485
Teachers30230
0
100000
200000
300000
400000
500000
600000
700000
1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
At a 05 growth rate per year by 2020 Oregon will need 30230 teachers to match the projected increase in student enrollment An estimated 2179 new teachers would be needed
(Solid Lines=Actual Data Dotted Lines=Projected Increases)
Nu
mb
er o
f S
tud
ents
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
35000
40000
45000
50000
Nu
mb
er o
f T
each
ers
(FT
E)
Student Enrollment amp Teachers1995 - 2020
Actual data 1995-2005 Projected data 2006-2020Growth Rate 10 for both Teachers and Students
Students649231617721
587741559215
551315
545680
527914 Teachers32566
309852948128051
26731
28099
26680
0
100000
200000
300000
400000
500000
600000
700000
1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
At a 1 growth rate per year by 2020 Oregon will need 32566 teachers to match the projected increase in student enrollment An estimated 4515 new teachers would be needed
(Solid Lines=Actual Data Dotted Lines=Projected Increases)
Nu
mb
er o
f S
tud
ents
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
35000
40000
45000
50000
Nu
mb
er o
f T
each
ers
(FT
E)
Projected Need for Teachers to Match the Projected Increase in Student Enrollment1995 - 2020
Actual data 1995-2005 Projected data 2006-2020Growth Rate 05 for both Teachers and Students
30230
29485
28759
28051
26731
2812028099
26680
24000
25000
26000
27000
28000
29000
30000
31000
32000
33000
1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
At a 05 growth rate by 2020 Oregon will need 30230 teachers to match the projected increase in student enrollment An estimated 2179 new teachers would be needed
(Solid Lines=Actual Data Dotted Lines=Projected Increases)
Nu
mb
er o
f T
each
ers
(FT
E)
Projected Need for Teachers to Match the Projected Increase in Student Enrollment1995 - 2020
Actual data 1995-2005 Projected data 2006-2020Growth Rate 10 for both Teachers and Students
28120
32566
Teachers (FTE) 30985
29481
28051
26731
28099
26680
24000
25000
26000
27000
28000
29000
30000
31000
32000
33000
1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
At a 1 growth rate by 2020 Oregon will need 32566 teachers to match the projected increase in student enrollment An estimated 4515 new teachers would be needed
(Solid Lines=Actual Data Dotted Lines=Projected Increases)
Nu
mb
er o
f T
each
ers
(FT
E)
School Staffi ng FTE
Percent Changes
1992-93 through 2005-06Teachers and Instructional Aides
Instructional Assistants
+932
Teachers =+51
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
In the last fourteen years student enrollment increased by +96 while the number of teachers increased by +51 and educational assistants increased by +932 In the last year there was an increase of 823 teachers and 293 educational assistants
FTE
of S
choo
l Sta
ff
Why Teachers Quit
1994-2006
Took Position in Another District in Oregon
Took Position in District Out of Oregon
T ook Non-E ducation P osi tion
Continuing EducationNo Employment Plans
Leave of Absence or Sabbatical
Left Due to Pregnancy
Retired
Deceased
Other Known Reason
Other Unknown Reason
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
Total Number of Teachers (NOT FTE) Employed by Oregon Districts 1994-2006
26000
28000
30000
1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
Tea
cher
s
Each year school districts and ESDs are required by Oregon law to report demographic and assignment information for all certifi cated staff (teachers)
employed in their district or ESD as of September 1 One of the items reported on the Certifi cated Staff Report is the quit code which is the reason why a
teacher is no longer employed by the school district or ESD All possible quit codes are reported on this chart
Prepared in Oregon
Prepared in Other States
Total
American IndianAlaskan Native11 4 15
Asian 35 22 57
Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander 2 2
Black or African American 27 15 42
Hispanic 139 51 190
Multi-ethnic 17 3 20
White 2045 1357 3402
Not identified or unavailable 1179 1955 3134
TOTAL 3455 3407 6862
RaceEthnic Breakout by Newly Licensed EducatorsPrepared In Oregon and In Other States 2005-06
Source Teacher Standards and Practices Commission
Percentage Stayers Movers and Leavers 2004-05
Stayers Movers Leavers
Community Type
Central City 798 103 99
Urban Fringelarge town 848 73 79
RuralSmall Town 850 73 77
Poverty
Less than 15 858 64 79
15-49 854 72 74
50 or more 800 103 97
Minority
Less than 10 864 56 81
10-34 855 78 67
35 or more 806 99 95
Source Teacher Attrition and Mobility National Center for Education Statistics January 2007
Percent of Classes Taught by Highly Qualified Teachers2005-06 School Year
Type of Class Percent of All ClassesTaught by
Highly Qualified Teachers
Percent of All ClassesNOT Taught
by Highly Qualified Teachers
Percent ofClasses in
HIGH Poverty Schools
Taught by Highly
Qualified Teachers
Percent ofClasses in
HIGHPoverty Schools
NOT Taught by Highly
Qualified Teachers
Percent ofClasses in
LOW Poverty Schools
Taught by Highly
Qualified Teachers
Percent ofClasses in
LOWPoverty Schools
NOTTaught by
Highly Qualified Teachers
All 914 86 897 103 937 63
Self-Contained 964 36 951 49 964 36
English 901 99 878 122 924 76
Foreign Languages
909 91 866 134 958 42
The Arts 911 89 889 111 924 76
Science 909 91 898 102 937 63
Math 891 109 864 136 944 56
Social Sciences 912 88 894 106 921 79
Source NCLB Staff (Highly Qualified Teachers) Data Collection 2005-2006Calculated by subtraction (100 - Percent of Classes Taught by Highly Qualified Teachers)
The Trends
Achievement Gap Persists Classrooms Becoming More Diverse Demand for New Teachers Steady
Specialists Content Areas
Shortage of Teacher Diversity High Needs Schools Have Highest Turnover High Poverty Schools Have Lower Percentage
of HQT
Oregon Developments
Oregon Highly Qualified Teacher Plan Each District Submits Title IIa HQT Plan This Fall in
Continuous Improvement Plan Budget Narrative Spending Workbooks Monitor Every Three Years Professional Development Technical Assistance
Grants Continue HOUSSE Create an Integrated Data System with TSPC
Oregon Developments
The Equity PlanmdashUSDOE Priority Specific Data on HQT and High Poverty Schools Placement Preparation and Retention Teacher-level Data District Plan to Address the Issue License and Assignment Course Codes Linked New Electronic Budget Narrative in CIP Contains
HQT Data Contact Bev Pratt for Help
Some Good News
Mentoring Bill $5 million Possible Regional Professional
Development Centers $12 million School Improvement Fund of $260 million Distribution via Formula Interim Accountability Linked to CIP ESDs Participate in SIF
Federal Developments
Preparation Underway for Next MonitoringHQT Definitions and ProceduresHQT Data ReportingmdashMore DetailAnnual Report CardsHQT State PlanPlans for Equitable Distribution of Qualified
Experienced TeachersAdministration and Management of Title IIa
Funds
Federal Developments
HQT Plans12 The SEA enters into an agreement on the
use of funds with any LEA that has not made progress toward meeting its annual measurable objectives in meeting the highly qualified teacher challenge for three consecutive years and has also failed to make AYP for three years 2141 (c)
Reauthorization
Spelling Letter of April 23 2007 Building on Results Priorities
1 Close the gap standards accountability2 Assessment Flexibility-Growth3 High School Rigor4 Greater Resources for Teachers5 Turn Around Tools and Improved
Supplemental Education Services
Reauthorization
Greater Resources for TeachersGrants for teachers and principals in high
needs schools National Math Panel Teacher Incentive Fund- $43 million this round Teacher-to-teacher Initiative eLearning web site
Reauthorization
Things to WatchHighly Qualified and Effective TeachersHQT and Student Achievement DataElimination of HOUSSEhellipTimes UpEquity Plans and Teacher Level DataMore Linkage to AYP ResultshellipPossible
Offset to HQTMore Flexibility for Rural Districts
Reauthorization
Council of Chief State School Officers Provide Multiple Pathways And More Incentives Count New Hires As ldquoHQTrdquo In Primary Subject And
Provide 3 Year Ramp Up To Additional Subjects Through HOUSSE
Special Education And ELL Teachers HQT If Closely Linked (Partnered) With Other HQT
Use Achievement Growth As One But Not Only Indicator Of Performance
Provide Incentives For Challenging Schools
Reauthorization
National Association of State Boards of EducationState Board Authorizes LicensurePreservice Articulates to K-12Alternative Pathways Must Have a Teacher
Preparation ProgramLimit Emergency CertificatesState Approves Teacher Education ProgramsBackground Checks
Reauthorization
National Governors AssociationSupport Professional DevelopmentOppose Any Attempt to Link Teacher
Preparation to Student PerformanceProvide More Flexibility for Teachers of
Multiple Subjects in High Need Areas eg Special Education and Rural Districts
THANK YOU TO OSPA
Regular Conversations between OSPA and ODE on HQT Issues
Keep People Informed on Reauthorization Surface Questions and Problems Improving Communication Make the New Data System Work
Meeting on May 31 ODE Contact Jim Buck if Interested in Helping
8th GRADE MATHEMATICS MULTIPLE CHOICE Percent of Students Meeting Standards1997 through 2006
Native American53
AsianPacific Islander78
African American45Hispanic43
White70All Students 66
Special Education26
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
From 2005 to 2006 the percent of students meeting the mathematics multiple choice standards increased for all raceethnicities and special education African American and Native American students posted the largest increases
Pe
rce
nt
of
Stu
de
nts
Me
eti
ng
Sta
nd
ard
s
1996 through 2001 percents include only students tested under standard conditions at or above grade level2002 through 2004 percents include ALL students tested2005 and 2006 results differ from the 2004 results in the following waysTest scores are aggregated to the school district and state level based on the student resident district as of May 2 2005 In 2004 test scores were aggregated based on the resident district at the time the test was takenRegardless of where the student took the test the highest score available is reportedAs per NCLB beginning LEP students were not included in the results In 2004 beginning LEP students were included in the results
Multi-Racial65
10th GRADE MATHEMATICS MULTIPLE CHOICE Percent of Students Meeting Standards1997 through 2006
27 Native American
62 AsianPacific Islander
African American
21 Hispanic
49 White
46 Multi-Racial
45 All Students
20
11 Special Education
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
From 2005 to 2006 Asian students posted the largest increase in percent of students meeting or exceeding the mathematics multiple choice standards All other categories decreased or remained the same
Pe
rce
nt
of
Stu
de
nts
Me
etin
g S
tan
da
rds
1996 through 2001 percents include only students tested under standard conditions at or above grade level2002 through 2004 percents include ALL students tested2005 and 2006 results differ from the 2004 results in the following ways
Test scores are aggregated to the school district and state level based on the student resident district as of May 2 2005 In 2004 test scores were aggregated based on the resident district at the time the test was taken
Regardless of where the student took the test the highest score available is reported
As per NCLB beginning LEP students were not included in the results In 2004 beginning LEP students were included in the results
3rd GRADE READING Percent of Students Meeting Standards1997 through 2006
85 Native American82 African American
75 Hispanic
90 White amp AsianPacIslander
87 All Students88 Multi-racial
60 Special Education
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
From 2005 to 2006 the percent of students meeting the reading standards increased for all categories except Special Education and Asian categories which stayed the same Hispanic students posted the biggest increase
Pe
rce
nt
of
Stu
de
nts
Me
eti
ng
Sta
nd
ard
s
1996 through 2001 percents include only students tested under standard conditions at or above grade level2002 through 2004 percents include ALL students tested2005 and 2006 results differ from the 2004 results in the follow ing w ays
Test scores are aggregated to the school district and state level based on the student resident district as of May 2 2005
In 2004 test scores w ere aggregated based on the resident district at the time the test w as taken
Regardless of w here the student took the test the highest score available is reported
As per NCLB beginning LEP students w ere not included in the results In 2004 beginning LEP students w ere included in the results
5th GRADE READING Percent of Students Meeting Standards1997 through 2006
79 Native American
84 Multi-racial
75 African American
66 Hispanic
87 White
83 All Students
51 Special Education
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
From 2005 to 2006 the percent of students meeting the reading standards increased for all categories except Multi-RaceEthnicity which stayed the same Hispanic students posted the largest increase
Pe
rce
nt
of
Stu
de
nts
Me
eti
ng
Sta
nd
ard
s
1996 through 2001 percents include only students tested under standard conditions at or above grade level2002 through 2004 percents include ALL students tested2005 and 2006 results differ from the 2004 results in the follow ing w ays
Test scores are aggregated to the school district and state level based on the student resident district as of May 2 2005 In 2004 test scores w ere aggregated based on the resident district at the time the test w as taken
Regardless of w here the student took the test the highest score available is reported
As per NCLB beginning LEP students w ere not included in the results In 2004 beginning LEP students w ere included in the results
AsianPacif ic 86
8th GRADE READING Percent of Students Meeting Standards1997 through 2006
Native American54
AsianPacif ic Islander71
African American50
Hispanic39
White71
Multi-racial67All Students66
Special Education23
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
From 2005 to 2006 the percent of students meeting the reading standards increased for Native American African American Hispanic White Multi-Racial and All Students categories while percents posted for Asian and Special
Education remained the same
Per
cen
t o
f S
tud
ents
Mee
tin
g S
tan
dar
ds
1996 through 2001 percents include only students tested under standard conditions at or above grade level2002 through 2004 percents include ALL students tested2005 and 2006 results differ from the 2004 results in the follow ing w aysTest scores are aggregated to the school district and state level based on the student resident district as of May 2 2005 In 2004 test scores w ere aggregated based on the resident district at the time the test w as takenRegardless of w here the student took the test the highest score available is reportedAs per NCLB beginning LEP students w ere not included in the results In 2004 beginning LEP students w ere included in the results
10th GRADE READING Percent of Students Meeting the Standards1997 through 2006
Native American42
AsianPacif ic Islander58
African American32
Hispanic27
White60
Multi-racial52All Students55
Special Education15
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
From 2005 to 2006 the percent of students meeting the reading standards increased for all categories except Multi-Racial Native American students posted the biggest increase
Pe
rce
nt
of
Stu
de
nts
Me
eti
ng
Sta
nd
ard
s
1996 through 2001 percents include only students tested under standard conditions at or above grade level2002 through 2004 percents include ALL students tested2005 and 2006 results differ from the 2004 results in the follow ing w ays
Test scores are aggregated to the school district and state level based on the student resident district as of May 2 2005 In 2004 test scores w ere aggregated based on the resident district at the time the test w as taken
Regardless of w here the student took the test the highest score available is reported
As per NCLB beginning LEP students w ere not included in the results In 2004 beginning LEP students w ere included in the results
Student Enrollment amp Teachers1995 - 2020
Actual data 1995-2005 Projected data 2006-2020Growth Rate 05 for both Teachers and Students
Students602656587813
573336559215
551315527914
545680
26680
28099
26731
28051 28759 29485
Teachers30230
0
100000
200000
300000
400000
500000
600000
700000
1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
At a 05 growth rate per year by 2020 Oregon will need 30230 teachers to match the projected increase in student enrollment An estimated 2179 new teachers would be needed
(Solid Lines=Actual Data Dotted Lines=Projected Increases)
Nu
mb
er o
f S
tud
ents
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
35000
40000
45000
50000
Nu
mb
er o
f T
each
ers
(FT
E)
Student Enrollment amp Teachers1995 - 2020
Actual data 1995-2005 Projected data 2006-2020Growth Rate 10 for both Teachers and Students
Students649231617721
587741559215
551315
545680
527914 Teachers32566
309852948128051
26731
28099
26680
0
100000
200000
300000
400000
500000
600000
700000
1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
At a 1 growth rate per year by 2020 Oregon will need 32566 teachers to match the projected increase in student enrollment An estimated 4515 new teachers would be needed
(Solid Lines=Actual Data Dotted Lines=Projected Increases)
Nu
mb
er o
f S
tud
ents
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
35000
40000
45000
50000
Nu
mb
er o
f T
each
ers
(FT
E)
Projected Need for Teachers to Match the Projected Increase in Student Enrollment1995 - 2020
Actual data 1995-2005 Projected data 2006-2020Growth Rate 05 for both Teachers and Students
30230
29485
28759
28051
26731
2812028099
26680
24000
25000
26000
27000
28000
29000
30000
31000
32000
33000
1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
At a 05 growth rate by 2020 Oregon will need 30230 teachers to match the projected increase in student enrollment An estimated 2179 new teachers would be needed
(Solid Lines=Actual Data Dotted Lines=Projected Increases)
Nu
mb
er o
f T
each
ers
(FT
E)
Projected Need for Teachers to Match the Projected Increase in Student Enrollment1995 - 2020
Actual data 1995-2005 Projected data 2006-2020Growth Rate 10 for both Teachers and Students
28120
32566
Teachers (FTE) 30985
29481
28051
26731
28099
26680
24000
25000
26000
27000
28000
29000
30000
31000
32000
33000
1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
At a 1 growth rate by 2020 Oregon will need 32566 teachers to match the projected increase in student enrollment An estimated 4515 new teachers would be needed
(Solid Lines=Actual Data Dotted Lines=Projected Increases)
Nu
mb
er o
f T
each
ers
(FT
E)
School Staffi ng FTE
Percent Changes
1992-93 through 2005-06Teachers and Instructional Aides
Instructional Assistants
+932
Teachers =+51
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
In the last fourteen years student enrollment increased by +96 while the number of teachers increased by +51 and educational assistants increased by +932 In the last year there was an increase of 823 teachers and 293 educational assistants
FTE
of S
choo
l Sta
ff
Why Teachers Quit
1994-2006
Took Position in Another District in Oregon
Took Position in District Out of Oregon
T ook Non-E ducation P osi tion
Continuing EducationNo Employment Plans
Leave of Absence or Sabbatical
Left Due to Pregnancy
Retired
Deceased
Other Known Reason
Other Unknown Reason
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
Total Number of Teachers (NOT FTE) Employed by Oregon Districts 1994-2006
26000
28000
30000
1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
Tea
cher
s
Each year school districts and ESDs are required by Oregon law to report demographic and assignment information for all certifi cated staff (teachers)
employed in their district or ESD as of September 1 One of the items reported on the Certifi cated Staff Report is the quit code which is the reason why a
teacher is no longer employed by the school district or ESD All possible quit codes are reported on this chart
Prepared in Oregon
Prepared in Other States
Total
American IndianAlaskan Native11 4 15
Asian 35 22 57
Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander 2 2
Black or African American 27 15 42
Hispanic 139 51 190
Multi-ethnic 17 3 20
White 2045 1357 3402
Not identified or unavailable 1179 1955 3134
TOTAL 3455 3407 6862
RaceEthnic Breakout by Newly Licensed EducatorsPrepared In Oregon and In Other States 2005-06
Source Teacher Standards and Practices Commission
Percentage Stayers Movers and Leavers 2004-05
Stayers Movers Leavers
Community Type
Central City 798 103 99
Urban Fringelarge town 848 73 79
RuralSmall Town 850 73 77
Poverty
Less than 15 858 64 79
15-49 854 72 74
50 or more 800 103 97
Minority
Less than 10 864 56 81
10-34 855 78 67
35 or more 806 99 95
Source Teacher Attrition and Mobility National Center for Education Statistics January 2007
Percent of Classes Taught by Highly Qualified Teachers2005-06 School Year
Type of Class Percent of All ClassesTaught by
Highly Qualified Teachers
Percent of All ClassesNOT Taught
by Highly Qualified Teachers
Percent ofClasses in
HIGH Poverty Schools
Taught by Highly
Qualified Teachers
Percent ofClasses in
HIGHPoverty Schools
NOT Taught by Highly
Qualified Teachers
Percent ofClasses in
LOW Poverty Schools
Taught by Highly
Qualified Teachers
Percent ofClasses in
LOWPoverty Schools
NOTTaught by
Highly Qualified Teachers
All 914 86 897 103 937 63
Self-Contained 964 36 951 49 964 36
English 901 99 878 122 924 76
Foreign Languages
909 91 866 134 958 42
The Arts 911 89 889 111 924 76
Science 909 91 898 102 937 63
Math 891 109 864 136 944 56
Social Sciences 912 88 894 106 921 79
Source NCLB Staff (Highly Qualified Teachers) Data Collection 2005-2006Calculated by subtraction (100 - Percent of Classes Taught by Highly Qualified Teachers)
The Trends
Achievement Gap Persists Classrooms Becoming More Diverse Demand for New Teachers Steady
Specialists Content Areas
Shortage of Teacher Diversity High Needs Schools Have Highest Turnover High Poverty Schools Have Lower Percentage
of HQT
Oregon Developments
Oregon Highly Qualified Teacher Plan Each District Submits Title IIa HQT Plan This Fall in
Continuous Improvement Plan Budget Narrative Spending Workbooks Monitor Every Three Years Professional Development Technical Assistance
Grants Continue HOUSSE Create an Integrated Data System with TSPC
Oregon Developments
The Equity PlanmdashUSDOE Priority Specific Data on HQT and High Poverty Schools Placement Preparation and Retention Teacher-level Data District Plan to Address the Issue License and Assignment Course Codes Linked New Electronic Budget Narrative in CIP Contains
HQT Data Contact Bev Pratt for Help
Some Good News
Mentoring Bill $5 million Possible Regional Professional
Development Centers $12 million School Improvement Fund of $260 million Distribution via Formula Interim Accountability Linked to CIP ESDs Participate in SIF
Federal Developments
Preparation Underway for Next MonitoringHQT Definitions and ProceduresHQT Data ReportingmdashMore DetailAnnual Report CardsHQT State PlanPlans for Equitable Distribution of Qualified
Experienced TeachersAdministration and Management of Title IIa
Funds
Federal Developments
HQT Plans12 The SEA enters into an agreement on the
use of funds with any LEA that has not made progress toward meeting its annual measurable objectives in meeting the highly qualified teacher challenge for three consecutive years and has also failed to make AYP for three years 2141 (c)
Reauthorization
Spelling Letter of April 23 2007 Building on Results Priorities
1 Close the gap standards accountability2 Assessment Flexibility-Growth3 High School Rigor4 Greater Resources for Teachers5 Turn Around Tools and Improved
Supplemental Education Services
Reauthorization
Greater Resources for TeachersGrants for teachers and principals in high
needs schools National Math Panel Teacher Incentive Fund- $43 million this round Teacher-to-teacher Initiative eLearning web site
Reauthorization
Things to WatchHighly Qualified and Effective TeachersHQT and Student Achievement DataElimination of HOUSSEhellipTimes UpEquity Plans and Teacher Level DataMore Linkage to AYP ResultshellipPossible
Offset to HQTMore Flexibility for Rural Districts
Reauthorization
Council of Chief State School Officers Provide Multiple Pathways And More Incentives Count New Hires As ldquoHQTrdquo In Primary Subject And
Provide 3 Year Ramp Up To Additional Subjects Through HOUSSE
Special Education And ELL Teachers HQT If Closely Linked (Partnered) With Other HQT
Use Achievement Growth As One But Not Only Indicator Of Performance
Provide Incentives For Challenging Schools
Reauthorization
National Association of State Boards of EducationState Board Authorizes LicensurePreservice Articulates to K-12Alternative Pathways Must Have a Teacher
Preparation ProgramLimit Emergency CertificatesState Approves Teacher Education ProgramsBackground Checks
Reauthorization
National Governors AssociationSupport Professional DevelopmentOppose Any Attempt to Link Teacher
Preparation to Student PerformanceProvide More Flexibility for Teachers of
Multiple Subjects in High Need Areas eg Special Education and Rural Districts
THANK YOU TO OSPA
Regular Conversations between OSPA and ODE on HQT Issues
Keep People Informed on Reauthorization Surface Questions and Problems Improving Communication Make the New Data System Work
Meeting on May 31 ODE Contact Jim Buck if Interested in Helping
10th GRADE MATHEMATICS MULTIPLE CHOICE Percent of Students Meeting Standards1997 through 2006
27 Native American
62 AsianPacific Islander
African American
21 Hispanic
49 White
46 Multi-Racial
45 All Students
20
11 Special Education
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
From 2005 to 2006 Asian students posted the largest increase in percent of students meeting or exceeding the mathematics multiple choice standards All other categories decreased or remained the same
Pe
rce
nt
of
Stu
de
nts
Me
etin
g S
tan
da
rds
1996 through 2001 percents include only students tested under standard conditions at or above grade level2002 through 2004 percents include ALL students tested2005 and 2006 results differ from the 2004 results in the following ways
Test scores are aggregated to the school district and state level based on the student resident district as of May 2 2005 In 2004 test scores were aggregated based on the resident district at the time the test was taken
Regardless of where the student took the test the highest score available is reported
As per NCLB beginning LEP students were not included in the results In 2004 beginning LEP students were included in the results
3rd GRADE READING Percent of Students Meeting Standards1997 through 2006
85 Native American82 African American
75 Hispanic
90 White amp AsianPacIslander
87 All Students88 Multi-racial
60 Special Education
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
From 2005 to 2006 the percent of students meeting the reading standards increased for all categories except Special Education and Asian categories which stayed the same Hispanic students posted the biggest increase
Pe
rce
nt
of
Stu
de
nts
Me
eti
ng
Sta
nd
ard
s
1996 through 2001 percents include only students tested under standard conditions at or above grade level2002 through 2004 percents include ALL students tested2005 and 2006 results differ from the 2004 results in the follow ing w ays
Test scores are aggregated to the school district and state level based on the student resident district as of May 2 2005
In 2004 test scores w ere aggregated based on the resident district at the time the test w as taken
Regardless of w here the student took the test the highest score available is reported
As per NCLB beginning LEP students w ere not included in the results In 2004 beginning LEP students w ere included in the results
5th GRADE READING Percent of Students Meeting Standards1997 through 2006
79 Native American
84 Multi-racial
75 African American
66 Hispanic
87 White
83 All Students
51 Special Education
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
From 2005 to 2006 the percent of students meeting the reading standards increased for all categories except Multi-RaceEthnicity which stayed the same Hispanic students posted the largest increase
Pe
rce
nt
of
Stu
de
nts
Me
eti
ng
Sta
nd
ard
s
1996 through 2001 percents include only students tested under standard conditions at or above grade level2002 through 2004 percents include ALL students tested2005 and 2006 results differ from the 2004 results in the follow ing w ays
Test scores are aggregated to the school district and state level based on the student resident district as of May 2 2005 In 2004 test scores w ere aggregated based on the resident district at the time the test w as taken
Regardless of w here the student took the test the highest score available is reported
As per NCLB beginning LEP students w ere not included in the results In 2004 beginning LEP students w ere included in the results
AsianPacif ic 86
8th GRADE READING Percent of Students Meeting Standards1997 through 2006
Native American54
AsianPacif ic Islander71
African American50
Hispanic39
White71
Multi-racial67All Students66
Special Education23
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
From 2005 to 2006 the percent of students meeting the reading standards increased for Native American African American Hispanic White Multi-Racial and All Students categories while percents posted for Asian and Special
Education remained the same
Per
cen
t o
f S
tud
ents
Mee
tin
g S
tan
dar
ds
1996 through 2001 percents include only students tested under standard conditions at or above grade level2002 through 2004 percents include ALL students tested2005 and 2006 results differ from the 2004 results in the follow ing w aysTest scores are aggregated to the school district and state level based on the student resident district as of May 2 2005 In 2004 test scores w ere aggregated based on the resident district at the time the test w as takenRegardless of w here the student took the test the highest score available is reportedAs per NCLB beginning LEP students w ere not included in the results In 2004 beginning LEP students w ere included in the results
10th GRADE READING Percent of Students Meeting the Standards1997 through 2006
Native American42
AsianPacif ic Islander58
African American32
Hispanic27
White60
Multi-racial52All Students55
Special Education15
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
From 2005 to 2006 the percent of students meeting the reading standards increased for all categories except Multi-Racial Native American students posted the biggest increase
Pe
rce
nt
of
Stu
de
nts
Me
eti
ng
Sta
nd
ard
s
1996 through 2001 percents include only students tested under standard conditions at or above grade level2002 through 2004 percents include ALL students tested2005 and 2006 results differ from the 2004 results in the follow ing w ays
Test scores are aggregated to the school district and state level based on the student resident district as of May 2 2005 In 2004 test scores w ere aggregated based on the resident district at the time the test w as taken
Regardless of w here the student took the test the highest score available is reported
As per NCLB beginning LEP students w ere not included in the results In 2004 beginning LEP students w ere included in the results
Student Enrollment amp Teachers1995 - 2020
Actual data 1995-2005 Projected data 2006-2020Growth Rate 05 for both Teachers and Students
Students602656587813
573336559215
551315527914
545680
26680
28099
26731
28051 28759 29485
Teachers30230
0
100000
200000
300000
400000
500000
600000
700000
1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
At a 05 growth rate per year by 2020 Oregon will need 30230 teachers to match the projected increase in student enrollment An estimated 2179 new teachers would be needed
(Solid Lines=Actual Data Dotted Lines=Projected Increases)
Nu
mb
er o
f S
tud
ents
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
35000
40000
45000
50000
Nu
mb
er o
f T
each
ers
(FT
E)
Student Enrollment amp Teachers1995 - 2020
Actual data 1995-2005 Projected data 2006-2020Growth Rate 10 for both Teachers and Students
Students649231617721
587741559215
551315
545680
527914 Teachers32566
309852948128051
26731
28099
26680
0
100000
200000
300000
400000
500000
600000
700000
1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
At a 1 growth rate per year by 2020 Oregon will need 32566 teachers to match the projected increase in student enrollment An estimated 4515 new teachers would be needed
(Solid Lines=Actual Data Dotted Lines=Projected Increases)
Nu
mb
er o
f S
tud
ents
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
35000
40000
45000
50000
Nu
mb
er o
f T
each
ers
(FT
E)
Projected Need for Teachers to Match the Projected Increase in Student Enrollment1995 - 2020
Actual data 1995-2005 Projected data 2006-2020Growth Rate 05 for both Teachers and Students
30230
29485
28759
28051
26731
2812028099
26680
24000
25000
26000
27000
28000
29000
30000
31000
32000
33000
1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
At a 05 growth rate by 2020 Oregon will need 30230 teachers to match the projected increase in student enrollment An estimated 2179 new teachers would be needed
(Solid Lines=Actual Data Dotted Lines=Projected Increases)
Nu
mb
er o
f T
each
ers
(FT
E)
Projected Need for Teachers to Match the Projected Increase in Student Enrollment1995 - 2020
Actual data 1995-2005 Projected data 2006-2020Growth Rate 10 for both Teachers and Students
28120
32566
Teachers (FTE) 30985
29481
28051
26731
28099
26680
24000
25000
26000
27000
28000
29000
30000
31000
32000
33000
1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
At a 1 growth rate by 2020 Oregon will need 32566 teachers to match the projected increase in student enrollment An estimated 4515 new teachers would be needed
(Solid Lines=Actual Data Dotted Lines=Projected Increases)
Nu
mb
er o
f T
each
ers
(FT
E)
School Staffi ng FTE
Percent Changes
1992-93 through 2005-06Teachers and Instructional Aides
Instructional Assistants
+932
Teachers =+51
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
In the last fourteen years student enrollment increased by +96 while the number of teachers increased by +51 and educational assistants increased by +932 In the last year there was an increase of 823 teachers and 293 educational assistants
FTE
of S
choo
l Sta
ff
Why Teachers Quit
1994-2006
Took Position in Another District in Oregon
Took Position in District Out of Oregon
T ook Non-E ducation P osi tion
Continuing EducationNo Employment Plans
Leave of Absence or Sabbatical
Left Due to Pregnancy
Retired
Deceased
Other Known Reason
Other Unknown Reason
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
Total Number of Teachers (NOT FTE) Employed by Oregon Districts 1994-2006
26000
28000
30000
1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
Tea
cher
s
Each year school districts and ESDs are required by Oregon law to report demographic and assignment information for all certifi cated staff (teachers)
employed in their district or ESD as of September 1 One of the items reported on the Certifi cated Staff Report is the quit code which is the reason why a
teacher is no longer employed by the school district or ESD All possible quit codes are reported on this chart
Prepared in Oregon
Prepared in Other States
Total
American IndianAlaskan Native11 4 15
Asian 35 22 57
Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander 2 2
Black or African American 27 15 42
Hispanic 139 51 190
Multi-ethnic 17 3 20
White 2045 1357 3402
Not identified or unavailable 1179 1955 3134
TOTAL 3455 3407 6862
RaceEthnic Breakout by Newly Licensed EducatorsPrepared In Oregon and In Other States 2005-06
Source Teacher Standards and Practices Commission
Percentage Stayers Movers and Leavers 2004-05
Stayers Movers Leavers
Community Type
Central City 798 103 99
Urban Fringelarge town 848 73 79
RuralSmall Town 850 73 77
Poverty
Less than 15 858 64 79
15-49 854 72 74
50 or more 800 103 97
Minority
Less than 10 864 56 81
10-34 855 78 67
35 or more 806 99 95
Source Teacher Attrition and Mobility National Center for Education Statistics January 2007
Percent of Classes Taught by Highly Qualified Teachers2005-06 School Year
Type of Class Percent of All ClassesTaught by
Highly Qualified Teachers
Percent of All ClassesNOT Taught
by Highly Qualified Teachers
Percent ofClasses in
HIGH Poverty Schools
Taught by Highly
Qualified Teachers
Percent ofClasses in
HIGHPoverty Schools
NOT Taught by Highly
Qualified Teachers
Percent ofClasses in
LOW Poverty Schools
Taught by Highly
Qualified Teachers
Percent ofClasses in
LOWPoverty Schools
NOTTaught by
Highly Qualified Teachers
All 914 86 897 103 937 63
Self-Contained 964 36 951 49 964 36
English 901 99 878 122 924 76
Foreign Languages
909 91 866 134 958 42
The Arts 911 89 889 111 924 76
Science 909 91 898 102 937 63
Math 891 109 864 136 944 56
Social Sciences 912 88 894 106 921 79
Source NCLB Staff (Highly Qualified Teachers) Data Collection 2005-2006Calculated by subtraction (100 - Percent of Classes Taught by Highly Qualified Teachers)
The Trends
Achievement Gap Persists Classrooms Becoming More Diverse Demand for New Teachers Steady
Specialists Content Areas
Shortage of Teacher Diversity High Needs Schools Have Highest Turnover High Poverty Schools Have Lower Percentage
of HQT
Oregon Developments
Oregon Highly Qualified Teacher Plan Each District Submits Title IIa HQT Plan This Fall in
Continuous Improvement Plan Budget Narrative Spending Workbooks Monitor Every Three Years Professional Development Technical Assistance
Grants Continue HOUSSE Create an Integrated Data System with TSPC
Oregon Developments
The Equity PlanmdashUSDOE Priority Specific Data on HQT and High Poverty Schools Placement Preparation and Retention Teacher-level Data District Plan to Address the Issue License and Assignment Course Codes Linked New Electronic Budget Narrative in CIP Contains
HQT Data Contact Bev Pratt for Help
Some Good News
Mentoring Bill $5 million Possible Regional Professional
Development Centers $12 million School Improvement Fund of $260 million Distribution via Formula Interim Accountability Linked to CIP ESDs Participate in SIF
Federal Developments
Preparation Underway for Next MonitoringHQT Definitions and ProceduresHQT Data ReportingmdashMore DetailAnnual Report CardsHQT State PlanPlans for Equitable Distribution of Qualified
Experienced TeachersAdministration and Management of Title IIa
Funds
Federal Developments
HQT Plans12 The SEA enters into an agreement on the
use of funds with any LEA that has not made progress toward meeting its annual measurable objectives in meeting the highly qualified teacher challenge for three consecutive years and has also failed to make AYP for three years 2141 (c)
Reauthorization
Spelling Letter of April 23 2007 Building on Results Priorities
1 Close the gap standards accountability2 Assessment Flexibility-Growth3 High School Rigor4 Greater Resources for Teachers5 Turn Around Tools and Improved
Supplemental Education Services
Reauthorization
Greater Resources for TeachersGrants for teachers and principals in high
needs schools National Math Panel Teacher Incentive Fund- $43 million this round Teacher-to-teacher Initiative eLearning web site
Reauthorization
Things to WatchHighly Qualified and Effective TeachersHQT and Student Achievement DataElimination of HOUSSEhellipTimes UpEquity Plans and Teacher Level DataMore Linkage to AYP ResultshellipPossible
Offset to HQTMore Flexibility for Rural Districts
Reauthorization
Council of Chief State School Officers Provide Multiple Pathways And More Incentives Count New Hires As ldquoHQTrdquo In Primary Subject And
Provide 3 Year Ramp Up To Additional Subjects Through HOUSSE
Special Education And ELL Teachers HQT If Closely Linked (Partnered) With Other HQT
Use Achievement Growth As One But Not Only Indicator Of Performance
Provide Incentives For Challenging Schools
Reauthorization
National Association of State Boards of EducationState Board Authorizes LicensurePreservice Articulates to K-12Alternative Pathways Must Have a Teacher
Preparation ProgramLimit Emergency CertificatesState Approves Teacher Education ProgramsBackground Checks
Reauthorization
National Governors AssociationSupport Professional DevelopmentOppose Any Attempt to Link Teacher
Preparation to Student PerformanceProvide More Flexibility for Teachers of
Multiple Subjects in High Need Areas eg Special Education and Rural Districts
THANK YOU TO OSPA
Regular Conversations between OSPA and ODE on HQT Issues
Keep People Informed on Reauthorization Surface Questions and Problems Improving Communication Make the New Data System Work
Meeting on May 31 ODE Contact Jim Buck if Interested in Helping
3rd GRADE READING Percent of Students Meeting Standards1997 through 2006
85 Native American82 African American
75 Hispanic
90 White amp AsianPacIslander
87 All Students88 Multi-racial
60 Special Education
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
From 2005 to 2006 the percent of students meeting the reading standards increased for all categories except Special Education and Asian categories which stayed the same Hispanic students posted the biggest increase
Pe
rce
nt
of
Stu
de
nts
Me
eti
ng
Sta
nd
ard
s
1996 through 2001 percents include only students tested under standard conditions at or above grade level2002 through 2004 percents include ALL students tested2005 and 2006 results differ from the 2004 results in the follow ing w ays
Test scores are aggregated to the school district and state level based on the student resident district as of May 2 2005
In 2004 test scores w ere aggregated based on the resident district at the time the test w as taken
Regardless of w here the student took the test the highest score available is reported
As per NCLB beginning LEP students w ere not included in the results In 2004 beginning LEP students w ere included in the results
5th GRADE READING Percent of Students Meeting Standards1997 through 2006
79 Native American
84 Multi-racial
75 African American
66 Hispanic
87 White
83 All Students
51 Special Education
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
From 2005 to 2006 the percent of students meeting the reading standards increased for all categories except Multi-RaceEthnicity which stayed the same Hispanic students posted the largest increase
Pe
rce
nt
of
Stu
de
nts
Me
eti
ng
Sta
nd
ard
s
1996 through 2001 percents include only students tested under standard conditions at or above grade level2002 through 2004 percents include ALL students tested2005 and 2006 results differ from the 2004 results in the follow ing w ays
Test scores are aggregated to the school district and state level based on the student resident district as of May 2 2005 In 2004 test scores w ere aggregated based on the resident district at the time the test w as taken
Regardless of w here the student took the test the highest score available is reported
As per NCLB beginning LEP students w ere not included in the results In 2004 beginning LEP students w ere included in the results
AsianPacif ic 86
8th GRADE READING Percent of Students Meeting Standards1997 through 2006
Native American54
AsianPacif ic Islander71
African American50
Hispanic39
White71
Multi-racial67All Students66
Special Education23
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
From 2005 to 2006 the percent of students meeting the reading standards increased for Native American African American Hispanic White Multi-Racial and All Students categories while percents posted for Asian and Special
Education remained the same
Per
cen
t o
f S
tud
ents
Mee
tin
g S
tan
dar
ds
1996 through 2001 percents include only students tested under standard conditions at or above grade level2002 through 2004 percents include ALL students tested2005 and 2006 results differ from the 2004 results in the follow ing w aysTest scores are aggregated to the school district and state level based on the student resident district as of May 2 2005 In 2004 test scores w ere aggregated based on the resident district at the time the test w as takenRegardless of w here the student took the test the highest score available is reportedAs per NCLB beginning LEP students w ere not included in the results In 2004 beginning LEP students w ere included in the results
10th GRADE READING Percent of Students Meeting the Standards1997 through 2006
Native American42
AsianPacif ic Islander58
African American32
Hispanic27
White60
Multi-racial52All Students55
Special Education15
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
From 2005 to 2006 the percent of students meeting the reading standards increased for all categories except Multi-Racial Native American students posted the biggest increase
Pe
rce
nt
of
Stu
de
nts
Me
eti
ng
Sta
nd
ard
s
1996 through 2001 percents include only students tested under standard conditions at or above grade level2002 through 2004 percents include ALL students tested2005 and 2006 results differ from the 2004 results in the follow ing w ays
Test scores are aggregated to the school district and state level based on the student resident district as of May 2 2005 In 2004 test scores w ere aggregated based on the resident district at the time the test w as taken
Regardless of w here the student took the test the highest score available is reported
As per NCLB beginning LEP students w ere not included in the results In 2004 beginning LEP students w ere included in the results
Student Enrollment amp Teachers1995 - 2020
Actual data 1995-2005 Projected data 2006-2020Growth Rate 05 for both Teachers and Students
Students602656587813
573336559215
551315527914
545680
26680
28099
26731
28051 28759 29485
Teachers30230
0
100000
200000
300000
400000
500000
600000
700000
1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
At a 05 growth rate per year by 2020 Oregon will need 30230 teachers to match the projected increase in student enrollment An estimated 2179 new teachers would be needed
(Solid Lines=Actual Data Dotted Lines=Projected Increases)
Nu
mb
er o
f S
tud
ents
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
35000
40000
45000
50000
Nu
mb
er o
f T
each
ers
(FT
E)
Student Enrollment amp Teachers1995 - 2020
Actual data 1995-2005 Projected data 2006-2020Growth Rate 10 for both Teachers and Students
Students649231617721
587741559215
551315
545680
527914 Teachers32566
309852948128051
26731
28099
26680
0
100000
200000
300000
400000
500000
600000
700000
1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
At a 1 growth rate per year by 2020 Oregon will need 32566 teachers to match the projected increase in student enrollment An estimated 4515 new teachers would be needed
(Solid Lines=Actual Data Dotted Lines=Projected Increases)
Nu
mb
er o
f S
tud
ents
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
35000
40000
45000
50000
Nu
mb
er o
f T
each
ers
(FT
E)
Projected Need for Teachers to Match the Projected Increase in Student Enrollment1995 - 2020
Actual data 1995-2005 Projected data 2006-2020Growth Rate 05 for both Teachers and Students
30230
29485
28759
28051
26731
2812028099
26680
24000
25000
26000
27000
28000
29000
30000
31000
32000
33000
1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
At a 05 growth rate by 2020 Oregon will need 30230 teachers to match the projected increase in student enrollment An estimated 2179 new teachers would be needed
(Solid Lines=Actual Data Dotted Lines=Projected Increases)
Nu
mb
er o
f T
each
ers
(FT
E)
Projected Need for Teachers to Match the Projected Increase in Student Enrollment1995 - 2020
Actual data 1995-2005 Projected data 2006-2020Growth Rate 10 for both Teachers and Students
28120
32566
Teachers (FTE) 30985
29481
28051
26731
28099
26680
24000
25000
26000
27000
28000
29000
30000
31000
32000
33000
1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
At a 1 growth rate by 2020 Oregon will need 32566 teachers to match the projected increase in student enrollment An estimated 4515 new teachers would be needed
(Solid Lines=Actual Data Dotted Lines=Projected Increases)
Nu
mb
er o
f T
each
ers
(FT
E)
School Staffi ng FTE
Percent Changes
1992-93 through 2005-06Teachers and Instructional Aides
Instructional Assistants
+932
Teachers =+51
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
In the last fourteen years student enrollment increased by +96 while the number of teachers increased by +51 and educational assistants increased by +932 In the last year there was an increase of 823 teachers and 293 educational assistants
FTE
of S
choo
l Sta
ff
Why Teachers Quit
1994-2006
Took Position in Another District in Oregon
Took Position in District Out of Oregon
T ook Non-E ducation P osi tion
Continuing EducationNo Employment Plans
Leave of Absence or Sabbatical
Left Due to Pregnancy
Retired
Deceased
Other Known Reason
Other Unknown Reason
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
Total Number of Teachers (NOT FTE) Employed by Oregon Districts 1994-2006
26000
28000
30000
1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
Tea
cher
s
Each year school districts and ESDs are required by Oregon law to report demographic and assignment information for all certifi cated staff (teachers)
employed in their district or ESD as of September 1 One of the items reported on the Certifi cated Staff Report is the quit code which is the reason why a
teacher is no longer employed by the school district or ESD All possible quit codes are reported on this chart
Prepared in Oregon
Prepared in Other States
Total
American IndianAlaskan Native11 4 15
Asian 35 22 57
Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander 2 2
Black or African American 27 15 42
Hispanic 139 51 190
Multi-ethnic 17 3 20
White 2045 1357 3402
Not identified or unavailable 1179 1955 3134
TOTAL 3455 3407 6862
RaceEthnic Breakout by Newly Licensed EducatorsPrepared In Oregon and In Other States 2005-06
Source Teacher Standards and Practices Commission
Percentage Stayers Movers and Leavers 2004-05
Stayers Movers Leavers
Community Type
Central City 798 103 99
Urban Fringelarge town 848 73 79
RuralSmall Town 850 73 77
Poverty
Less than 15 858 64 79
15-49 854 72 74
50 or more 800 103 97
Minority
Less than 10 864 56 81
10-34 855 78 67
35 or more 806 99 95
Source Teacher Attrition and Mobility National Center for Education Statistics January 2007
Percent of Classes Taught by Highly Qualified Teachers2005-06 School Year
Type of Class Percent of All ClassesTaught by
Highly Qualified Teachers
Percent of All ClassesNOT Taught
by Highly Qualified Teachers
Percent ofClasses in
HIGH Poverty Schools
Taught by Highly
Qualified Teachers
Percent ofClasses in
HIGHPoverty Schools
NOT Taught by Highly
Qualified Teachers
Percent ofClasses in
LOW Poverty Schools
Taught by Highly
Qualified Teachers
Percent ofClasses in
LOWPoverty Schools
NOTTaught by
Highly Qualified Teachers
All 914 86 897 103 937 63
Self-Contained 964 36 951 49 964 36
English 901 99 878 122 924 76
Foreign Languages
909 91 866 134 958 42
The Arts 911 89 889 111 924 76
Science 909 91 898 102 937 63
Math 891 109 864 136 944 56
Social Sciences 912 88 894 106 921 79
Source NCLB Staff (Highly Qualified Teachers) Data Collection 2005-2006Calculated by subtraction (100 - Percent of Classes Taught by Highly Qualified Teachers)
The Trends
Achievement Gap Persists Classrooms Becoming More Diverse Demand for New Teachers Steady
Specialists Content Areas
Shortage of Teacher Diversity High Needs Schools Have Highest Turnover High Poverty Schools Have Lower Percentage
of HQT
Oregon Developments
Oregon Highly Qualified Teacher Plan Each District Submits Title IIa HQT Plan This Fall in
Continuous Improvement Plan Budget Narrative Spending Workbooks Monitor Every Three Years Professional Development Technical Assistance
Grants Continue HOUSSE Create an Integrated Data System with TSPC
Oregon Developments
The Equity PlanmdashUSDOE Priority Specific Data on HQT and High Poverty Schools Placement Preparation and Retention Teacher-level Data District Plan to Address the Issue License and Assignment Course Codes Linked New Electronic Budget Narrative in CIP Contains
HQT Data Contact Bev Pratt for Help
Some Good News
Mentoring Bill $5 million Possible Regional Professional
Development Centers $12 million School Improvement Fund of $260 million Distribution via Formula Interim Accountability Linked to CIP ESDs Participate in SIF
Federal Developments
Preparation Underway for Next MonitoringHQT Definitions and ProceduresHQT Data ReportingmdashMore DetailAnnual Report CardsHQT State PlanPlans for Equitable Distribution of Qualified
Experienced TeachersAdministration and Management of Title IIa
Funds
Federal Developments
HQT Plans12 The SEA enters into an agreement on the
use of funds with any LEA that has not made progress toward meeting its annual measurable objectives in meeting the highly qualified teacher challenge for three consecutive years and has also failed to make AYP for three years 2141 (c)
Reauthorization
Spelling Letter of April 23 2007 Building on Results Priorities
1 Close the gap standards accountability2 Assessment Flexibility-Growth3 High School Rigor4 Greater Resources for Teachers5 Turn Around Tools and Improved
Supplemental Education Services
Reauthorization
Greater Resources for TeachersGrants for teachers and principals in high
needs schools National Math Panel Teacher Incentive Fund- $43 million this round Teacher-to-teacher Initiative eLearning web site
Reauthorization
Things to WatchHighly Qualified and Effective TeachersHQT and Student Achievement DataElimination of HOUSSEhellipTimes UpEquity Plans and Teacher Level DataMore Linkage to AYP ResultshellipPossible
Offset to HQTMore Flexibility for Rural Districts
Reauthorization
Council of Chief State School Officers Provide Multiple Pathways And More Incentives Count New Hires As ldquoHQTrdquo In Primary Subject And
Provide 3 Year Ramp Up To Additional Subjects Through HOUSSE
Special Education And ELL Teachers HQT If Closely Linked (Partnered) With Other HQT
Use Achievement Growth As One But Not Only Indicator Of Performance
Provide Incentives For Challenging Schools
Reauthorization
National Association of State Boards of EducationState Board Authorizes LicensurePreservice Articulates to K-12Alternative Pathways Must Have a Teacher
Preparation ProgramLimit Emergency CertificatesState Approves Teacher Education ProgramsBackground Checks
Reauthorization
National Governors AssociationSupport Professional DevelopmentOppose Any Attempt to Link Teacher
Preparation to Student PerformanceProvide More Flexibility for Teachers of
Multiple Subjects in High Need Areas eg Special Education and Rural Districts
THANK YOU TO OSPA
Regular Conversations between OSPA and ODE on HQT Issues
Keep People Informed on Reauthorization Surface Questions and Problems Improving Communication Make the New Data System Work
Meeting on May 31 ODE Contact Jim Buck if Interested in Helping
5th GRADE READING Percent of Students Meeting Standards1997 through 2006
79 Native American
84 Multi-racial
75 African American
66 Hispanic
87 White
83 All Students
51 Special Education
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
From 2005 to 2006 the percent of students meeting the reading standards increased for all categories except Multi-RaceEthnicity which stayed the same Hispanic students posted the largest increase
Pe
rce
nt
of
Stu
de
nts
Me
eti
ng
Sta
nd
ard
s
1996 through 2001 percents include only students tested under standard conditions at or above grade level2002 through 2004 percents include ALL students tested2005 and 2006 results differ from the 2004 results in the follow ing w ays
Test scores are aggregated to the school district and state level based on the student resident district as of May 2 2005 In 2004 test scores w ere aggregated based on the resident district at the time the test w as taken
Regardless of w here the student took the test the highest score available is reported
As per NCLB beginning LEP students w ere not included in the results In 2004 beginning LEP students w ere included in the results
AsianPacif ic 86
8th GRADE READING Percent of Students Meeting Standards1997 through 2006
Native American54
AsianPacif ic Islander71
African American50
Hispanic39
White71
Multi-racial67All Students66
Special Education23
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
From 2005 to 2006 the percent of students meeting the reading standards increased for Native American African American Hispanic White Multi-Racial and All Students categories while percents posted for Asian and Special
Education remained the same
Per
cen
t o
f S
tud
ents
Mee
tin
g S
tan
dar
ds
1996 through 2001 percents include only students tested under standard conditions at or above grade level2002 through 2004 percents include ALL students tested2005 and 2006 results differ from the 2004 results in the follow ing w aysTest scores are aggregated to the school district and state level based on the student resident district as of May 2 2005 In 2004 test scores w ere aggregated based on the resident district at the time the test w as takenRegardless of w here the student took the test the highest score available is reportedAs per NCLB beginning LEP students w ere not included in the results In 2004 beginning LEP students w ere included in the results
10th GRADE READING Percent of Students Meeting the Standards1997 through 2006
Native American42
AsianPacif ic Islander58
African American32
Hispanic27
White60
Multi-racial52All Students55
Special Education15
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
From 2005 to 2006 the percent of students meeting the reading standards increased for all categories except Multi-Racial Native American students posted the biggest increase
Pe
rce
nt
of
Stu
de
nts
Me
eti
ng
Sta
nd
ard
s
1996 through 2001 percents include only students tested under standard conditions at or above grade level2002 through 2004 percents include ALL students tested2005 and 2006 results differ from the 2004 results in the follow ing w ays
Test scores are aggregated to the school district and state level based on the student resident district as of May 2 2005 In 2004 test scores w ere aggregated based on the resident district at the time the test w as taken
Regardless of w here the student took the test the highest score available is reported
As per NCLB beginning LEP students w ere not included in the results In 2004 beginning LEP students w ere included in the results
Student Enrollment amp Teachers1995 - 2020
Actual data 1995-2005 Projected data 2006-2020Growth Rate 05 for both Teachers and Students
Students602656587813
573336559215
551315527914
545680
26680
28099
26731
28051 28759 29485
Teachers30230
0
100000
200000
300000
400000
500000
600000
700000
1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
At a 05 growth rate per year by 2020 Oregon will need 30230 teachers to match the projected increase in student enrollment An estimated 2179 new teachers would be needed
(Solid Lines=Actual Data Dotted Lines=Projected Increases)
Nu
mb
er o
f S
tud
ents
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
35000
40000
45000
50000
Nu
mb
er o
f T
each
ers
(FT
E)
Student Enrollment amp Teachers1995 - 2020
Actual data 1995-2005 Projected data 2006-2020Growth Rate 10 for both Teachers and Students
Students649231617721
587741559215
551315
545680
527914 Teachers32566
309852948128051
26731
28099
26680
0
100000
200000
300000
400000
500000
600000
700000
1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
At a 1 growth rate per year by 2020 Oregon will need 32566 teachers to match the projected increase in student enrollment An estimated 4515 new teachers would be needed
(Solid Lines=Actual Data Dotted Lines=Projected Increases)
Nu
mb
er o
f S
tud
ents
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
35000
40000
45000
50000
Nu
mb
er o
f T
each
ers
(FT
E)
Projected Need for Teachers to Match the Projected Increase in Student Enrollment1995 - 2020
Actual data 1995-2005 Projected data 2006-2020Growth Rate 05 for both Teachers and Students
30230
29485
28759
28051
26731
2812028099
26680
24000
25000
26000
27000
28000
29000
30000
31000
32000
33000
1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
At a 05 growth rate by 2020 Oregon will need 30230 teachers to match the projected increase in student enrollment An estimated 2179 new teachers would be needed
(Solid Lines=Actual Data Dotted Lines=Projected Increases)
Nu
mb
er o
f T
each
ers
(FT
E)
Projected Need for Teachers to Match the Projected Increase in Student Enrollment1995 - 2020
Actual data 1995-2005 Projected data 2006-2020Growth Rate 10 for both Teachers and Students
28120
32566
Teachers (FTE) 30985
29481
28051
26731
28099
26680
24000
25000
26000
27000
28000
29000
30000
31000
32000
33000
1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
At a 1 growth rate by 2020 Oregon will need 32566 teachers to match the projected increase in student enrollment An estimated 4515 new teachers would be needed
(Solid Lines=Actual Data Dotted Lines=Projected Increases)
Nu
mb
er o
f T
each
ers
(FT
E)
School Staffi ng FTE
Percent Changes
1992-93 through 2005-06Teachers and Instructional Aides
Instructional Assistants
+932
Teachers =+51
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
In the last fourteen years student enrollment increased by +96 while the number of teachers increased by +51 and educational assistants increased by +932 In the last year there was an increase of 823 teachers and 293 educational assistants
FTE
of S
choo
l Sta
ff
Why Teachers Quit
1994-2006
Took Position in Another District in Oregon
Took Position in District Out of Oregon
T ook Non-E ducation P osi tion
Continuing EducationNo Employment Plans
Leave of Absence or Sabbatical
Left Due to Pregnancy
Retired
Deceased
Other Known Reason
Other Unknown Reason
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
Total Number of Teachers (NOT FTE) Employed by Oregon Districts 1994-2006
26000
28000
30000
1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
Tea
cher
s
Each year school districts and ESDs are required by Oregon law to report demographic and assignment information for all certifi cated staff (teachers)
employed in their district or ESD as of September 1 One of the items reported on the Certifi cated Staff Report is the quit code which is the reason why a
teacher is no longer employed by the school district or ESD All possible quit codes are reported on this chart
Prepared in Oregon
Prepared in Other States
Total
American IndianAlaskan Native11 4 15
Asian 35 22 57
Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander 2 2
Black or African American 27 15 42
Hispanic 139 51 190
Multi-ethnic 17 3 20
White 2045 1357 3402
Not identified or unavailable 1179 1955 3134
TOTAL 3455 3407 6862
RaceEthnic Breakout by Newly Licensed EducatorsPrepared In Oregon and In Other States 2005-06
Source Teacher Standards and Practices Commission
Percentage Stayers Movers and Leavers 2004-05
Stayers Movers Leavers
Community Type
Central City 798 103 99
Urban Fringelarge town 848 73 79
RuralSmall Town 850 73 77
Poverty
Less than 15 858 64 79
15-49 854 72 74
50 or more 800 103 97
Minority
Less than 10 864 56 81
10-34 855 78 67
35 or more 806 99 95
Source Teacher Attrition and Mobility National Center for Education Statistics January 2007
Percent of Classes Taught by Highly Qualified Teachers2005-06 School Year
Type of Class Percent of All ClassesTaught by
Highly Qualified Teachers
Percent of All ClassesNOT Taught
by Highly Qualified Teachers
Percent ofClasses in
HIGH Poverty Schools
Taught by Highly
Qualified Teachers
Percent ofClasses in
HIGHPoverty Schools
NOT Taught by Highly
Qualified Teachers
Percent ofClasses in
LOW Poverty Schools
Taught by Highly
Qualified Teachers
Percent ofClasses in
LOWPoverty Schools
NOTTaught by
Highly Qualified Teachers
All 914 86 897 103 937 63
Self-Contained 964 36 951 49 964 36
English 901 99 878 122 924 76
Foreign Languages
909 91 866 134 958 42
The Arts 911 89 889 111 924 76
Science 909 91 898 102 937 63
Math 891 109 864 136 944 56
Social Sciences 912 88 894 106 921 79
Source NCLB Staff (Highly Qualified Teachers) Data Collection 2005-2006Calculated by subtraction (100 - Percent of Classes Taught by Highly Qualified Teachers)
The Trends
Achievement Gap Persists Classrooms Becoming More Diverse Demand for New Teachers Steady
Specialists Content Areas
Shortage of Teacher Diversity High Needs Schools Have Highest Turnover High Poverty Schools Have Lower Percentage
of HQT
Oregon Developments
Oregon Highly Qualified Teacher Plan Each District Submits Title IIa HQT Plan This Fall in
Continuous Improvement Plan Budget Narrative Spending Workbooks Monitor Every Three Years Professional Development Technical Assistance
Grants Continue HOUSSE Create an Integrated Data System with TSPC
Oregon Developments
The Equity PlanmdashUSDOE Priority Specific Data on HQT and High Poverty Schools Placement Preparation and Retention Teacher-level Data District Plan to Address the Issue License and Assignment Course Codes Linked New Electronic Budget Narrative in CIP Contains
HQT Data Contact Bev Pratt for Help
Some Good News
Mentoring Bill $5 million Possible Regional Professional
Development Centers $12 million School Improvement Fund of $260 million Distribution via Formula Interim Accountability Linked to CIP ESDs Participate in SIF
Federal Developments
Preparation Underway for Next MonitoringHQT Definitions and ProceduresHQT Data ReportingmdashMore DetailAnnual Report CardsHQT State PlanPlans for Equitable Distribution of Qualified
Experienced TeachersAdministration and Management of Title IIa
Funds
Federal Developments
HQT Plans12 The SEA enters into an agreement on the
use of funds with any LEA that has not made progress toward meeting its annual measurable objectives in meeting the highly qualified teacher challenge for three consecutive years and has also failed to make AYP for three years 2141 (c)
Reauthorization
Spelling Letter of April 23 2007 Building on Results Priorities
1 Close the gap standards accountability2 Assessment Flexibility-Growth3 High School Rigor4 Greater Resources for Teachers5 Turn Around Tools and Improved
Supplemental Education Services
Reauthorization
Greater Resources for TeachersGrants for teachers and principals in high
needs schools National Math Panel Teacher Incentive Fund- $43 million this round Teacher-to-teacher Initiative eLearning web site
Reauthorization
Things to WatchHighly Qualified and Effective TeachersHQT and Student Achievement DataElimination of HOUSSEhellipTimes UpEquity Plans and Teacher Level DataMore Linkage to AYP ResultshellipPossible
Offset to HQTMore Flexibility for Rural Districts
Reauthorization
Council of Chief State School Officers Provide Multiple Pathways And More Incentives Count New Hires As ldquoHQTrdquo In Primary Subject And
Provide 3 Year Ramp Up To Additional Subjects Through HOUSSE
Special Education And ELL Teachers HQT If Closely Linked (Partnered) With Other HQT
Use Achievement Growth As One But Not Only Indicator Of Performance
Provide Incentives For Challenging Schools
Reauthorization
National Association of State Boards of EducationState Board Authorizes LicensurePreservice Articulates to K-12Alternative Pathways Must Have a Teacher
Preparation ProgramLimit Emergency CertificatesState Approves Teacher Education ProgramsBackground Checks
Reauthorization
National Governors AssociationSupport Professional DevelopmentOppose Any Attempt to Link Teacher
Preparation to Student PerformanceProvide More Flexibility for Teachers of
Multiple Subjects in High Need Areas eg Special Education and Rural Districts
THANK YOU TO OSPA
Regular Conversations between OSPA and ODE on HQT Issues
Keep People Informed on Reauthorization Surface Questions and Problems Improving Communication Make the New Data System Work
Meeting on May 31 ODE Contact Jim Buck if Interested in Helping
8th GRADE READING Percent of Students Meeting Standards1997 through 2006
Native American54
AsianPacif ic Islander71
African American50
Hispanic39
White71
Multi-racial67All Students66
Special Education23
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
From 2005 to 2006 the percent of students meeting the reading standards increased for Native American African American Hispanic White Multi-Racial and All Students categories while percents posted for Asian and Special
Education remained the same
Per
cen
t o
f S
tud
ents
Mee
tin
g S
tan
dar
ds
1996 through 2001 percents include only students tested under standard conditions at or above grade level2002 through 2004 percents include ALL students tested2005 and 2006 results differ from the 2004 results in the follow ing w aysTest scores are aggregated to the school district and state level based on the student resident district as of May 2 2005 In 2004 test scores w ere aggregated based on the resident district at the time the test w as takenRegardless of w here the student took the test the highest score available is reportedAs per NCLB beginning LEP students w ere not included in the results In 2004 beginning LEP students w ere included in the results
10th GRADE READING Percent of Students Meeting the Standards1997 through 2006
Native American42
AsianPacif ic Islander58
African American32
Hispanic27
White60
Multi-racial52All Students55
Special Education15
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
From 2005 to 2006 the percent of students meeting the reading standards increased for all categories except Multi-Racial Native American students posted the biggest increase
Pe
rce
nt
of
Stu
de
nts
Me
eti
ng
Sta
nd
ard
s
1996 through 2001 percents include only students tested under standard conditions at or above grade level2002 through 2004 percents include ALL students tested2005 and 2006 results differ from the 2004 results in the follow ing w ays
Test scores are aggregated to the school district and state level based on the student resident district as of May 2 2005 In 2004 test scores w ere aggregated based on the resident district at the time the test w as taken
Regardless of w here the student took the test the highest score available is reported
As per NCLB beginning LEP students w ere not included in the results In 2004 beginning LEP students w ere included in the results
Student Enrollment amp Teachers1995 - 2020
Actual data 1995-2005 Projected data 2006-2020Growth Rate 05 for both Teachers and Students
Students602656587813
573336559215
551315527914
545680
26680
28099
26731
28051 28759 29485
Teachers30230
0
100000
200000
300000
400000
500000
600000
700000
1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
At a 05 growth rate per year by 2020 Oregon will need 30230 teachers to match the projected increase in student enrollment An estimated 2179 new teachers would be needed
(Solid Lines=Actual Data Dotted Lines=Projected Increases)
Nu
mb
er o
f S
tud
ents
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
35000
40000
45000
50000
Nu
mb
er o
f T
each
ers
(FT
E)
Student Enrollment amp Teachers1995 - 2020
Actual data 1995-2005 Projected data 2006-2020Growth Rate 10 for both Teachers and Students
Students649231617721
587741559215
551315
545680
527914 Teachers32566
309852948128051
26731
28099
26680
0
100000
200000
300000
400000
500000
600000
700000
1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
At a 1 growth rate per year by 2020 Oregon will need 32566 teachers to match the projected increase in student enrollment An estimated 4515 new teachers would be needed
(Solid Lines=Actual Data Dotted Lines=Projected Increases)
Nu
mb
er o
f S
tud
ents
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
35000
40000
45000
50000
Nu
mb
er o
f T
each
ers
(FT
E)
Projected Need for Teachers to Match the Projected Increase in Student Enrollment1995 - 2020
Actual data 1995-2005 Projected data 2006-2020Growth Rate 05 for both Teachers and Students
30230
29485
28759
28051
26731
2812028099
26680
24000
25000
26000
27000
28000
29000
30000
31000
32000
33000
1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
At a 05 growth rate by 2020 Oregon will need 30230 teachers to match the projected increase in student enrollment An estimated 2179 new teachers would be needed
(Solid Lines=Actual Data Dotted Lines=Projected Increases)
Nu
mb
er o
f T
each
ers
(FT
E)
Projected Need for Teachers to Match the Projected Increase in Student Enrollment1995 - 2020
Actual data 1995-2005 Projected data 2006-2020Growth Rate 10 for both Teachers and Students
28120
32566
Teachers (FTE) 30985
29481
28051
26731
28099
26680
24000
25000
26000
27000
28000
29000
30000
31000
32000
33000
1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
At a 1 growth rate by 2020 Oregon will need 32566 teachers to match the projected increase in student enrollment An estimated 4515 new teachers would be needed
(Solid Lines=Actual Data Dotted Lines=Projected Increases)
Nu
mb
er o
f T
each
ers
(FT
E)
School Staffi ng FTE
Percent Changes
1992-93 through 2005-06Teachers and Instructional Aides
Instructional Assistants
+932
Teachers =+51
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
In the last fourteen years student enrollment increased by +96 while the number of teachers increased by +51 and educational assistants increased by +932 In the last year there was an increase of 823 teachers and 293 educational assistants
FTE
of S
choo
l Sta
ff
Why Teachers Quit
1994-2006
Took Position in Another District in Oregon
Took Position in District Out of Oregon
T ook Non-E ducation P osi tion
Continuing EducationNo Employment Plans
Leave of Absence or Sabbatical
Left Due to Pregnancy
Retired
Deceased
Other Known Reason
Other Unknown Reason
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
Total Number of Teachers (NOT FTE) Employed by Oregon Districts 1994-2006
26000
28000
30000
1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
Tea
cher
s
Each year school districts and ESDs are required by Oregon law to report demographic and assignment information for all certifi cated staff (teachers)
employed in their district or ESD as of September 1 One of the items reported on the Certifi cated Staff Report is the quit code which is the reason why a
teacher is no longer employed by the school district or ESD All possible quit codes are reported on this chart
Prepared in Oregon
Prepared in Other States
Total
American IndianAlaskan Native11 4 15
Asian 35 22 57
Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander 2 2
Black or African American 27 15 42
Hispanic 139 51 190
Multi-ethnic 17 3 20
White 2045 1357 3402
Not identified or unavailable 1179 1955 3134
TOTAL 3455 3407 6862
RaceEthnic Breakout by Newly Licensed EducatorsPrepared In Oregon and In Other States 2005-06
Source Teacher Standards and Practices Commission
Percentage Stayers Movers and Leavers 2004-05
Stayers Movers Leavers
Community Type
Central City 798 103 99
Urban Fringelarge town 848 73 79
RuralSmall Town 850 73 77
Poverty
Less than 15 858 64 79
15-49 854 72 74
50 or more 800 103 97
Minority
Less than 10 864 56 81
10-34 855 78 67
35 or more 806 99 95
Source Teacher Attrition and Mobility National Center for Education Statistics January 2007
Percent of Classes Taught by Highly Qualified Teachers2005-06 School Year
Type of Class Percent of All ClassesTaught by
Highly Qualified Teachers
Percent of All ClassesNOT Taught
by Highly Qualified Teachers
Percent ofClasses in
HIGH Poverty Schools
Taught by Highly
Qualified Teachers
Percent ofClasses in
HIGHPoverty Schools
NOT Taught by Highly
Qualified Teachers
Percent ofClasses in
LOW Poverty Schools
Taught by Highly
Qualified Teachers
Percent ofClasses in
LOWPoverty Schools
NOTTaught by
Highly Qualified Teachers
All 914 86 897 103 937 63
Self-Contained 964 36 951 49 964 36
English 901 99 878 122 924 76
Foreign Languages
909 91 866 134 958 42
The Arts 911 89 889 111 924 76
Science 909 91 898 102 937 63
Math 891 109 864 136 944 56
Social Sciences 912 88 894 106 921 79
Source NCLB Staff (Highly Qualified Teachers) Data Collection 2005-2006Calculated by subtraction (100 - Percent of Classes Taught by Highly Qualified Teachers)
The Trends
Achievement Gap Persists Classrooms Becoming More Diverse Demand for New Teachers Steady
Specialists Content Areas
Shortage of Teacher Diversity High Needs Schools Have Highest Turnover High Poverty Schools Have Lower Percentage
of HQT
Oregon Developments
Oregon Highly Qualified Teacher Plan Each District Submits Title IIa HQT Plan This Fall in
Continuous Improvement Plan Budget Narrative Spending Workbooks Monitor Every Three Years Professional Development Technical Assistance
Grants Continue HOUSSE Create an Integrated Data System with TSPC
Oregon Developments
The Equity PlanmdashUSDOE Priority Specific Data on HQT and High Poverty Schools Placement Preparation and Retention Teacher-level Data District Plan to Address the Issue License and Assignment Course Codes Linked New Electronic Budget Narrative in CIP Contains
HQT Data Contact Bev Pratt for Help
Some Good News
Mentoring Bill $5 million Possible Regional Professional
Development Centers $12 million School Improvement Fund of $260 million Distribution via Formula Interim Accountability Linked to CIP ESDs Participate in SIF
Federal Developments
Preparation Underway for Next MonitoringHQT Definitions and ProceduresHQT Data ReportingmdashMore DetailAnnual Report CardsHQT State PlanPlans for Equitable Distribution of Qualified
Experienced TeachersAdministration and Management of Title IIa
Funds
Federal Developments
HQT Plans12 The SEA enters into an agreement on the
use of funds with any LEA that has not made progress toward meeting its annual measurable objectives in meeting the highly qualified teacher challenge for three consecutive years and has also failed to make AYP for three years 2141 (c)
Reauthorization
Spelling Letter of April 23 2007 Building on Results Priorities
1 Close the gap standards accountability2 Assessment Flexibility-Growth3 High School Rigor4 Greater Resources for Teachers5 Turn Around Tools and Improved
Supplemental Education Services
Reauthorization
Greater Resources for TeachersGrants for teachers and principals in high
needs schools National Math Panel Teacher Incentive Fund- $43 million this round Teacher-to-teacher Initiative eLearning web site
Reauthorization
Things to WatchHighly Qualified and Effective TeachersHQT and Student Achievement DataElimination of HOUSSEhellipTimes UpEquity Plans and Teacher Level DataMore Linkage to AYP ResultshellipPossible
Offset to HQTMore Flexibility for Rural Districts
Reauthorization
Council of Chief State School Officers Provide Multiple Pathways And More Incentives Count New Hires As ldquoHQTrdquo In Primary Subject And
Provide 3 Year Ramp Up To Additional Subjects Through HOUSSE
Special Education And ELL Teachers HQT If Closely Linked (Partnered) With Other HQT
Use Achievement Growth As One But Not Only Indicator Of Performance
Provide Incentives For Challenging Schools
Reauthorization
National Association of State Boards of EducationState Board Authorizes LicensurePreservice Articulates to K-12Alternative Pathways Must Have a Teacher
Preparation ProgramLimit Emergency CertificatesState Approves Teacher Education ProgramsBackground Checks
Reauthorization
National Governors AssociationSupport Professional DevelopmentOppose Any Attempt to Link Teacher
Preparation to Student PerformanceProvide More Flexibility for Teachers of
Multiple Subjects in High Need Areas eg Special Education and Rural Districts
THANK YOU TO OSPA
Regular Conversations between OSPA and ODE on HQT Issues
Keep People Informed on Reauthorization Surface Questions and Problems Improving Communication Make the New Data System Work
Meeting on May 31 ODE Contact Jim Buck if Interested in Helping
10th GRADE READING Percent of Students Meeting the Standards1997 through 2006
Native American42
AsianPacif ic Islander58
African American32
Hispanic27
White60
Multi-racial52All Students55
Special Education15
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
From 2005 to 2006 the percent of students meeting the reading standards increased for all categories except Multi-Racial Native American students posted the biggest increase
Pe
rce
nt
of
Stu
de
nts
Me
eti
ng
Sta
nd
ard
s
1996 through 2001 percents include only students tested under standard conditions at or above grade level2002 through 2004 percents include ALL students tested2005 and 2006 results differ from the 2004 results in the follow ing w ays
Test scores are aggregated to the school district and state level based on the student resident district as of May 2 2005 In 2004 test scores w ere aggregated based on the resident district at the time the test w as taken
Regardless of w here the student took the test the highest score available is reported
As per NCLB beginning LEP students w ere not included in the results In 2004 beginning LEP students w ere included in the results
Student Enrollment amp Teachers1995 - 2020
Actual data 1995-2005 Projected data 2006-2020Growth Rate 05 for both Teachers and Students
Students602656587813
573336559215
551315527914
545680
26680
28099
26731
28051 28759 29485
Teachers30230
0
100000
200000
300000
400000
500000
600000
700000
1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
At a 05 growth rate per year by 2020 Oregon will need 30230 teachers to match the projected increase in student enrollment An estimated 2179 new teachers would be needed
(Solid Lines=Actual Data Dotted Lines=Projected Increases)
Nu
mb
er o
f S
tud
ents
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
35000
40000
45000
50000
Nu
mb
er o
f T
each
ers
(FT
E)
Student Enrollment amp Teachers1995 - 2020
Actual data 1995-2005 Projected data 2006-2020Growth Rate 10 for both Teachers and Students
Students649231617721
587741559215
551315
545680
527914 Teachers32566
309852948128051
26731
28099
26680
0
100000
200000
300000
400000
500000
600000
700000
1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
At a 1 growth rate per year by 2020 Oregon will need 32566 teachers to match the projected increase in student enrollment An estimated 4515 new teachers would be needed
(Solid Lines=Actual Data Dotted Lines=Projected Increases)
Nu
mb
er o
f S
tud
ents
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
35000
40000
45000
50000
Nu
mb
er o
f T
each
ers
(FT
E)
Projected Need for Teachers to Match the Projected Increase in Student Enrollment1995 - 2020
Actual data 1995-2005 Projected data 2006-2020Growth Rate 05 for both Teachers and Students
30230
29485
28759
28051
26731
2812028099
26680
24000
25000
26000
27000
28000
29000
30000
31000
32000
33000
1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
At a 05 growth rate by 2020 Oregon will need 30230 teachers to match the projected increase in student enrollment An estimated 2179 new teachers would be needed
(Solid Lines=Actual Data Dotted Lines=Projected Increases)
Nu
mb
er o
f T
each
ers
(FT
E)
Projected Need for Teachers to Match the Projected Increase in Student Enrollment1995 - 2020
Actual data 1995-2005 Projected data 2006-2020Growth Rate 10 for both Teachers and Students
28120
32566
Teachers (FTE) 30985
29481
28051
26731
28099
26680
24000
25000
26000
27000
28000
29000
30000
31000
32000
33000
1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
At a 1 growth rate by 2020 Oregon will need 32566 teachers to match the projected increase in student enrollment An estimated 4515 new teachers would be needed
(Solid Lines=Actual Data Dotted Lines=Projected Increases)
Nu
mb
er o
f T
each
ers
(FT
E)
School Staffi ng FTE
Percent Changes
1992-93 through 2005-06Teachers and Instructional Aides
Instructional Assistants
+932
Teachers =+51
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
In the last fourteen years student enrollment increased by +96 while the number of teachers increased by +51 and educational assistants increased by +932 In the last year there was an increase of 823 teachers and 293 educational assistants
FTE
of S
choo
l Sta
ff
Why Teachers Quit
1994-2006
Took Position in Another District in Oregon
Took Position in District Out of Oregon
T ook Non-E ducation P osi tion
Continuing EducationNo Employment Plans
Leave of Absence or Sabbatical
Left Due to Pregnancy
Retired
Deceased
Other Known Reason
Other Unknown Reason
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
Total Number of Teachers (NOT FTE) Employed by Oregon Districts 1994-2006
26000
28000
30000
1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
Tea
cher
s
Each year school districts and ESDs are required by Oregon law to report demographic and assignment information for all certifi cated staff (teachers)
employed in their district or ESD as of September 1 One of the items reported on the Certifi cated Staff Report is the quit code which is the reason why a
teacher is no longer employed by the school district or ESD All possible quit codes are reported on this chart
Prepared in Oregon
Prepared in Other States
Total
American IndianAlaskan Native11 4 15
Asian 35 22 57
Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander 2 2
Black or African American 27 15 42
Hispanic 139 51 190
Multi-ethnic 17 3 20
White 2045 1357 3402
Not identified or unavailable 1179 1955 3134
TOTAL 3455 3407 6862
RaceEthnic Breakout by Newly Licensed EducatorsPrepared In Oregon and In Other States 2005-06
Source Teacher Standards and Practices Commission
Percentage Stayers Movers and Leavers 2004-05
Stayers Movers Leavers
Community Type
Central City 798 103 99
Urban Fringelarge town 848 73 79
RuralSmall Town 850 73 77
Poverty
Less than 15 858 64 79
15-49 854 72 74
50 or more 800 103 97
Minority
Less than 10 864 56 81
10-34 855 78 67
35 or more 806 99 95
Source Teacher Attrition and Mobility National Center for Education Statistics January 2007
Percent of Classes Taught by Highly Qualified Teachers2005-06 School Year
Type of Class Percent of All ClassesTaught by
Highly Qualified Teachers
Percent of All ClassesNOT Taught
by Highly Qualified Teachers
Percent ofClasses in
HIGH Poverty Schools
Taught by Highly
Qualified Teachers
Percent ofClasses in
HIGHPoverty Schools
NOT Taught by Highly
Qualified Teachers
Percent ofClasses in
LOW Poverty Schools
Taught by Highly
Qualified Teachers
Percent ofClasses in
LOWPoverty Schools
NOTTaught by
Highly Qualified Teachers
All 914 86 897 103 937 63
Self-Contained 964 36 951 49 964 36
English 901 99 878 122 924 76
Foreign Languages
909 91 866 134 958 42
The Arts 911 89 889 111 924 76
Science 909 91 898 102 937 63
Math 891 109 864 136 944 56
Social Sciences 912 88 894 106 921 79
Source NCLB Staff (Highly Qualified Teachers) Data Collection 2005-2006Calculated by subtraction (100 - Percent of Classes Taught by Highly Qualified Teachers)
The Trends
Achievement Gap Persists Classrooms Becoming More Diverse Demand for New Teachers Steady
Specialists Content Areas
Shortage of Teacher Diversity High Needs Schools Have Highest Turnover High Poverty Schools Have Lower Percentage
of HQT
Oregon Developments
Oregon Highly Qualified Teacher Plan Each District Submits Title IIa HQT Plan This Fall in
Continuous Improvement Plan Budget Narrative Spending Workbooks Monitor Every Three Years Professional Development Technical Assistance
Grants Continue HOUSSE Create an Integrated Data System with TSPC
Oregon Developments
The Equity PlanmdashUSDOE Priority Specific Data on HQT and High Poverty Schools Placement Preparation and Retention Teacher-level Data District Plan to Address the Issue License and Assignment Course Codes Linked New Electronic Budget Narrative in CIP Contains
HQT Data Contact Bev Pratt for Help
Some Good News
Mentoring Bill $5 million Possible Regional Professional
Development Centers $12 million School Improvement Fund of $260 million Distribution via Formula Interim Accountability Linked to CIP ESDs Participate in SIF
Federal Developments
Preparation Underway for Next MonitoringHQT Definitions and ProceduresHQT Data ReportingmdashMore DetailAnnual Report CardsHQT State PlanPlans for Equitable Distribution of Qualified
Experienced TeachersAdministration and Management of Title IIa
Funds
Federal Developments
HQT Plans12 The SEA enters into an agreement on the
use of funds with any LEA that has not made progress toward meeting its annual measurable objectives in meeting the highly qualified teacher challenge for three consecutive years and has also failed to make AYP for three years 2141 (c)
Reauthorization
Spelling Letter of April 23 2007 Building on Results Priorities
1 Close the gap standards accountability2 Assessment Flexibility-Growth3 High School Rigor4 Greater Resources for Teachers5 Turn Around Tools and Improved
Supplemental Education Services
Reauthorization
Greater Resources for TeachersGrants for teachers and principals in high
needs schools National Math Panel Teacher Incentive Fund- $43 million this round Teacher-to-teacher Initiative eLearning web site
Reauthorization
Things to WatchHighly Qualified and Effective TeachersHQT and Student Achievement DataElimination of HOUSSEhellipTimes UpEquity Plans and Teacher Level DataMore Linkage to AYP ResultshellipPossible
Offset to HQTMore Flexibility for Rural Districts
Reauthorization
Council of Chief State School Officers Provide Multiple Pathways And More Incentives Count New Hires As ldquoHQTrdquo In Primary Subject And
Provide 3 Year Ramp Up To Additional Subjects Through HOUSSE
Special Education And ELL Teachers HQT If Closely Linked (Partnered) With Other HQT
Use Achievement Growth As One But Not Only Indicator Of Performance
Provide Incentives For Challenging Schools
Reauthorization
National Association of State Boards of EducationState Board Authorizes LicensurePreservice Articulates to K-12Alternative Pathways Must Have a Teacher
Preparation ProgramLimit Emergency CertificatesState Approves Teacher Education ProgramsBackground Checks
Reauthorization
National Governors AssociationSupport Professional DevelopmentOppose Any Attempt to Link Teacher
Preparation to Student PerformanceProvide More Flexibility for Teachers of
Multiple Subjects in High Need Areas eg Special Education and Rural Districts
THANK YOU TO OSPA
Regular Conversations between OSPA and ODE on HQT Issues
Keep People Informed on Reauthorization Surface Questions and Problems Improving Communication Make the New Data System Work
Meeting on May 31 ODE Contact Jim Buck if Interested in Helping
Student Enrollment amp Teachers1995 - 2020
Actual data 1995-2005 Projected data 2006-2020Growth Rate 05 for both Teachers and Students
Students602656587813
573336559215
551315527914
545680
26680
28099
26731
28051 28759 29485
Teachers30230
0
100000
200000
300000
400000
500000
600000
700000
1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
At a 05 growth rate per year by 2020 Oregon will need 30230 teachers to match the projected increase in student enrollment An estimated 2179 new teachers would be needed
(Solid Lines=Actual Data Dotted Lines=Projected Increases)
Nu
mb
er o
f S
tud
ents
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
35000
40000
45000
50000
Nu
mb
er o
f T
each
ers
(FT
E)
Student Enrollment amp Teachers1995 - 2020
Actual data 1995-2005 Projected data 2006-2020Growth Rate 10 for both Teachers and Students
Students649231617721
587741559215
551315
545680
527914 Teachers32566
309852948128051
26731
28099
26680
0
100000
200000
300000
400000
500000
600000
700000
1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
At a 1 growth rate per year by 2020 Oregon will need 32566 teachers to match the projected increase in student enrollment An estimated 4515 new teachers would be needed
(Solid Lines=Actual Data Dotted Lines=Projected Increases)
Nu
mb
er o
f S
tud
ents
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
35000
40000
45000
50000
Nu
mb
er o
f T
each
ers
(FT
E)
Projected Need for Teachers to Match the Projected Increase in Student Enrollment1995 - 2020
Actual data 1995-2005 Projected data 2006-2020Growth Rate 05 for both Teachers and Students
30230
29485
28759
28051
26731
2812028099
26680
24000
25000
26000
27000
28000
29000
30000
31000
32000
33000
1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
At a 05 growth rate by 2020 Oregon will need 30230 teachers to match the projected increase in student enrollment An estimated 2179 new teachers would be needed
(Solid Lines=Actual Data Dotted Lines=Projected Increases)
Nu
mb
er o
f T
each
ers
(FT
E)
Projected Need for Teachers to Match the Projected Increase in Student Enrollment1995 - 2020
Actual data 1995-2005 Projected data 2006-2020Growth Rate 10 for both Teachers and Students
28120
32566
Teachers (FTE) 30985
29481
28051
26731
28099
26680
24000
25000
26000
27000
28000
29000
30000
31000
32000
33000
1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
At a 1 growth rate by 2020 Oregon will need 32566 teachers to match the projected increase in student enrollment An estimated 4515 new teachers would be needed
(Solid Lines=Actual Data Dotted Lines=Projected Increases)
Nu
mb
er o
f T
each
ers
(FT
E)
School Staffi ng FTE
Percent Changes
1992-93 through 2005-06Teachers and Instructional Aides
Instructional Assistants
+932
Teachers =+51
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
In the last fourteen years student enrollment increased by +96 while the number of teachers increased by +51 and educational assistants increased by +932 In the last year there was an increase of 823 teachers and 293 educational assistants
FTE
of S
choo
l Sta
ff
Why Teachers Quit
1994-2006
Took Position in Another District in Oregon
Took Position in District Out of Oregon
T ook Non-E ducation P osi tion
Continuing EducationNo Employment Plans
Leave of Absence or Sabbatical
Left Due to Pregnancy
Retired
Deceased
Other Known Reason
Other Unknown Reason
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
Total Number of Teachers (NOT FTE) Employed by Oregon Districts 1994-2006
26000
28000
30000
1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
Tea
cher
s
Each year school districts and ESDs are required by Oregon law to report demographic and assignment information for all certifi cated staff (teachers)
employed in their district or ESD as of September 1 One of the items reported on the Certifi cated Staff Report is the quit code which is the reason why a
teacher is no longer employed by the school district or ESD All possible quit codes are reported on this chart
Prepared in Oregon
Prepared in Other States
Total
American IndianAlaskan Native11 4 15
Asian 35 22 57
Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander 2 2
Black or African American 27 15 42
Hispanic 139 51 190
Multi-ethnic 17 3 20
White 2045 1357 3402
Not identified or unavailable 1179 1955 3134
TOTAL 3455 3407 6862
RaceEthnic Breakout by Newly Licensed EducatorsPrepared In Oregon and In Other States 2005-06
Source Teacher Standards and Practices Commission
Percentage Stayers Movers and Leavers 2004-05
Stayers Movers Leavers
Community Type
Central City 798 103 99
Urban Fringelarge town 848 73 79
RuralSmall Town 850 73 77
Poverty
Less than 15 858 64 79
15-49 854 72 74
50 or more 800 103 97
Minority
Less than 10 864 56 81
10-34 855 78 67
35 or more 806 99 95
Source Teacher Attrition and Mobility National Center for Education Statistics January 2007
Percent of Classes Taught by Highly Qualified Teachers2005-06 School Year
Type of Class Percent of All ClassesTaught by
Highly Qualified Teachers
Percent of All ClassesNOT Taught
by Highly Qualified Teachers
Percent ofClasses in
HIGH Poverty Schools
Taught by Highly
Qualified Teachers
Percent ofClasses in
HIGHPoverty Schools
NOT Taught by Highly
Qualified Teachers
Percent ofClasses in
LOW Poverty Schools
Taught by Highly
Qualified Teachers
Percent ofClasses in
LOWPoverty Schools
NOTTaught by
Highly Qualified Teachers
All 914 86 897 103 937 63
Self-Contained 964 36 951 49 964 36
English 901 99 878 122 924 76
Foreign Languages
909 91 866 134 958 42
The Arts 911 89 889 111 924 76
Science 909 91 898 102 937 63
Math 891 109 864 136 944 56
Social Sciences 912 88 894 106 921 79
Source NCLB Staff (Highly Qualified Teachers) Data Collection 2005-2006Calculated by subtraction (100 - Percent of Classes Taught by Highly Qualified Teachers)
The Trends
Achievement Gap Persists Classrooms Becoming More Diverse Demand for New Teachers Steady
Specialists Content Areas
Shortage of Teacher Diversity High Needs Schools Have Highest Turnover High Poverty Schools Have Lower Percentage
of HQT
Oregon Developments
Oregon Highly Qualified Teacher Plan Each District Submits Title IIa HQT Plan This Fall in
Continuous Improvement Plan Budget Narrative Spending Workbooks Monitor Every Three Years Professional Development Technical Assistance
Grants Continue HOUSSE Create an Integrated Data System with TSPC
Oregon Developments
The Equity PlanmdashUSDOE Priority Specific Data on HQT and High Poverty Schools Placement Preparation and Retention Teacher-level Data District Plan to Address the Issue License and Assignment Course Codes Linked New Electronic Budget Narrative in CIP Contains
HQT Data Contact Bev Pratt for Help
Some Good News
Mentoring Bill $5 million Possible Regional Professional
Development Centers $12 million School Improvement Fund of $260 million Distribution via Formula Interim Accountability Linked to CIP ESDs Participate in SIF
Federal Developments
Preparation Underway for Next MonitoringHQT Definitions and ProceduresHQT Data ReportingmdashMore DetailAnnual Report CardsHQT State PlanPlans for Equitable Distribution of Qualified
Experienced TeachersAdministration and Management of Title IIa
Funds
Federal Developments
HQT Plans12 The SEA enters into an agreement on the
use of funds with any LEA that has not made progress toward meeting its annual measurable objectives in meeting the highly qualified teacher challenge for three consecutive years and has also failed to make AYP for three years 2141 (c)
Reauthorization
Spelling Letter of April 23 2007 Building on Results Priorities
1 Close the gap standards accountability2 Assessment Flexibility-Growth3 High School Rigor4 Greater Resources for Teachers5 Turn Around Tools and Improved
Supplemental Education Services
Reauthorization
Greater Resources for TeachersGrants for teachers and principals in high
needs schools National Math Panel Teacher Incentive Fund- $43 million this round Teacher-to-teacher Initiative eLearning web site
Reauthorization
Things to WatchHighly Qualified and Effective TeachersHQT and Student Achievement DataElimination of HOUSSEhellipTimes UpEquity Plans and Teacher Level DataMore Linkage to AYP ResultshellipPossible
Offset to HQTMore Flexibility for Rural Districts
Reauthorization
Council of Chief State School Officers Provide Multiple Pathways And More Incentives Count New Hires As ldquoHQTrdquo In Primary Subject And
Provide 3 Year Ramp Up To Additional Subjects Through HOUSSE
Special Education And ELL Teachers HQT If Closely Linked (Partnered) With Other HQT
Use Achievement Growth As One But Not Only Indicator Of Performance
Provide Incentives For Challenging Schools
Reauthorization
National Association of State Boards of EducationState Board Authorizes LicensurePreservice Articulates to K-12Alternative Pathways Must Have a Teacher
Preparation ProgramLimit Emergency CertificatesState Approves Teacher Education ProgramsBackground Checks
Reauthorization
National Governors AssociationSupport Professional DevelopmentOppose Any Attempt to Link Teacher
Preparation to Student PerformanceProvide More Flexibility for Teachers of
Multiple Subjects in High Need Areas eg Special Education and Rural Districts
THANK YOU TO OSPA
Regular Conversations between OSPA and ODE on HQT Issues
Keep People Informed on Reauthorization Surface Questions and Problems Improving Communication Make the New Data System Work
Meeting on May 31 ODE Contact Jim Buck if Interested in Helping
Student Enrollment amp Teachers1995 - 2020
Actual data 1995-2005 Projected data 2006-2020Growth Rate 10 for both Teachers and Students
Students649231617721
587741559215
551315
545680
527914 Teachers32566
309852948128051
26731
28099
26680
0
100000
200000
300000
400000
500000
600000
700000
1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
At a 1 growth rate per year by 2020 Oregon will need 32566 teachers to match the projected increase in student enrollment An estimated 4515 new teachers would be needed
(Solid Lines=Actual Data Dotted Lines=Projected Increases)
Nu
mb
er o
f S
tud
ents
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
35000
40000
45000
50000
Nu
mb
er o
f T
each
ers
(FT
E)
Projected Need for Teachers to Match the Projected Increase in Student Enrollment1995 - 2020
Actual data 1995-2005 Projected data 2006-2020Growth Rate 05 for both Teachers and Students
30230
29485
28759
28051
26731
2812028099
26680
24000
25000
26000
27000
28000
29000
30000
31000
32000
33000
1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
At a 05 growth rate by 2020 Oregon will need 30230 teachers to match the projected increase in student enrollment An estimated 2179 new teachers would be needed
(Solid Lines=Actual Data Dotted Lines=Projected Increases)
Nu
mb
er o
f T
each
ers
(FT
E)
Projected Need for Teachers to Match the Projected Increase in Student Enrollment1995 - 2020
Actual data 1995-2005 Projected data 2006-2020Growth Rate 10 for both Teachers and Students
28120
32566
Teachers (FTE) 30985
29481
28051
26731
28099
26680
24000
25000
26000
27000
28000
29000
30000
31000
32000
33000
1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
At a 1 growth rate by 2020 Oregon will need 32566 teachers to match the projected increase in student enrollment An estimated 4515 new teachers would be needed
(Solid Lines=Actual Data Dotted Lines=Projected Increases)
Nu
mb
er o
f T
each
ers
(FT
E)
School Staffi ng FTE
Percent Changes
1992-93 through 2005-06Teachers and Instructional Aides
Instructional Assistants
+932
Teachers =+51
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
In the last fourteen years student enrollment increased by +96 while the number of teachers increased by +51 and educational assistants increased by +932 In the last year there was an increase of 823 teachers and 293 educational assistants
FTE
of S
choo
l Sta
ff
Why Teachers Quit
1994-2006
Took Position in Another District in Oregon
Took Position in District Out of Oregon
T ook Non-E ducation P osi tion
Continuing EducationNo Employment Plans
Leave of Absence or Sabbatical
Left Due to Pregnancy
Retired
Deceased
Other Known Reason
Other Unknown Reason
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
Total Number of Teachers (NOT FTE) Employed by Oregon Districts 1994-2006
26000
28000
30000
1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
Tea
cher
s
Each year school districts and ESDs are required by Oregon law to report demographic and assignment information for all certifi cated staff (teachers)
employed in their district or ESD as of September 1 One of the items reported on the Certifi cated Staff Report is the quit code which is the reason why a
teacher is no longer employed by the school district or ESD All possible quit codes are reported on this chart
Prepared in Oregon
Prepared in Other States
Total
American IndianAlaskan Native11 4 15
Asian 35 22 57
Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander 2 2
Black or African American 27 15 42
Hispanic 139 51 190
Multi-ethnic 17 3 20
White 2045 1357 3402
Not identified or unavailable 1179 1955 3134
TOTAL 3455 3407 6862
RaceEthnic Breakout by Newly Licensed EducatorsPrepared In Oregon and In Other States 2005-06
Source Teacher Standards and Practices Commission
Percentage Stayers Movers and Leavers 2004-05
Stayers Movers Leavers
Community Type
Central City 798 103 99
Urban Fringelarge town 848 73 79
RuralSmall Town 850 73 77
Poverty
Less than 15 858 64 79
15-49 854 72 74
50 or more 800 103 97
Minority
Less than 10 864 56 81
10-34 855 78 67
35 or more 806 99 95
Source Teacher Attrition and Mobility National Center for Education Statistics January 2007
Percent of Classes Taught by Highly Qualified Teachers2005-06 School Year
Type of Class Percent of All ClassesTaught by
Highly Qualified Teachers
Percent of All ClassesNOT Taught
by Highly Qualified Teachers
Percent ofClasses in
HIGH Poverty Schools
Taught by Highly
Qualified Teachers
Percent ofClasses in
HIGHPoverty Schools
NOT Taught by Highly
Qualified Teachers
Percent ofClasses in
LOW Poverty Schools
Taught by Highly
Qualified Teachers
Percent ofClasses in
LOWPoverty Schools
NOTTaught by
Highly Qualified Teachers
All 914 86 897 103 937 63
Self-Contained 964 36 951 49 964 36
English 901 99 878 122 924 76
Foreign Languages
909 91 866 134 958 42
The Arts 911 89 889 111 924 76
Science 909 91 898 102 937 63
Math 891 109 864 136 944 56
Social Sciences 912 88 894 106 921 79
Source NCLB Staff (Highly Qualified Teachers) Data Collection 2005-2006Calculated by subtraction (100 - Percent of Classes Taught by Highly Qualified Teachers)
The Trends
Achievement Gap Persists Classrooms Becoming More Diverse Demand for New Teachers Steady
Specialists Content Areas
Shortage of Teacher Diversity High Needs Schools Have Highest Turnover High Poverty Schools Have Lower Percentage
of HQT
Oregon Developments
Oregon Highly Qualified Teacher Plan Each District Submits Title IIa HQT Plan This Fall in
Continuous Improvement Plan Budget Narrative Spending Workbooks Monitor Every Three Years Professional Development Technical Assistance
Grants Continue HOUSSE Create an Integrated Data System with TSPC
Oregon Developments
The Equity PlanmdashUSDOE Priority Specific Data on HQT and High Poverty Schools Placement Preparation and Retention Teacher-level Data District Plan to Address the Issue License and Assignment Course Codes Linked New Electronic Budget Narrative in CIP Contains
HQT Data Contact Bev Pratt for Help
Some Good News
Mentoring Bill $5 million Possible Regional Professional
Development Centers $12 million School Improvement Fund of $260 million Distribution via Formula Interim Accountability Linked to CIP ESDs Participate in SIF
Federal Developments
Preparation Underway for Next MonitoringHQT Definitions and ProceduresHQT Data ReportingmdashMore DetailAnnual Report CardsHQT State PlanPlans for Equitable Distribution of Qualified
Experienced TeachersAdministration and Management of Title IIa
Funds
Federal Developments
HQT Plans12 The SEA enters into an agreement on the
use of funds with any LEA that has not made progress toward meeting its annual measurable objectives in meeting the highly qualified teacher challenge for three consecutive years and has also failed to make AYP for three years 2141 (c)
Reauthorization
Spelling Letter of April 23 2007 Building on Results Priorities
1 Close the gap standards accountability2 Assessment Flexibility-Growth3 High School Rigor4 Greater Resources for Teachers5 Turn Around Tools and Improved
Supplemental Education Services
Reauthorization
Greater Resources for TeachersGrants for teachers and principals in high
needs schools National Math Panel Teacher Incentive Fund- $43 million this round Teacher-to-teacher Initiative eLearning web site
Reauthorization
Things to WatchHighly Qualified and Effective TeachersHQT and Student Achievement DataElimination of HOUSSEhellipTimes UpEquity Plans and Teacher Level DataMore Linkage to AYP ResultshellipPossible
Offset to HQTMore Flexibility for Rural Districts
Reauthorization
Council of Chief State School Officers Provide Multiple Pathways And More Incentives Count New Hires As ldquoHQTrdquo In Primary Subject And
Provide 3 Year Ramp Up To Additional Subjects Through HOUSSE
Special Education And ELL Teachers HQT If Closely Linked (Partnered) With Other HQT
Use Achievement Growth As One But Not Only Indicator Of Performance
Provide Incentives For Challenging Schools
Reauthorization
National Association of State Boards of EducationState Board Authorizes LicensurePreservice Articulates to K-12Alternative Pathways Must Have a Teacher
Preparation ProgramLimit Emergency CertificatesState Approves Teacher Education ProgramsBackground Checks
Reauthorization
National Governors AssociationSupport Professional DevelopmentOppose Any Attempt to Link Teacher
Preparation to Student PerformanceProvide More Flexibility for Teachers of
Multiple Subjects in High Need Areas eg Special Education and Rural Districts
THANK YOU TO OSPA
Regular Conversations between OSPA and ODE on HQT Issues
Keep People Informed on Reauthorization Surface Questions and Problems Improving Communication Make the New Data System Work
Meeting on May 31 ODE Contact Jim Buck if Interested in Helping
Projected Need for Teachers to Match the Projected Increase in Student Enrollment1995 - 2020
Actual data 1995-2005 Projected data 2006-2020Growth Rate 05 for both Teachers and Students
30230
29485
28759
28051
26731
2812028099
26680
24000
25000
26000
27000
28000
29000
30000
31000
32000
33000
1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
At a 05 growth rate by 2020 Oregon will need 30230 teachers to match the projected increase in student enrollment An estimated 2179 new teachers would be needed
(Solid Lines=Actual Data Dotted Lines=Projected Increases)
Nu
mb
er o
f T
each
ers
(FT
E)
Projected Need for Teachers to Match the Projected Increase in Student Enrollment1995 - 2020
Actual data 1995-2005 Projected data 2006-2020Growth Rate 10 for both Teachers and Students
28120
32566
Teachers (FTE) 30985
29481
28051
26731
28099
26680
24000
25000
26000
27000
28000
29000
30000
31000
32000
33000
1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
At a 1 growth rate by 2020 Oregon will need 32566 teachers to match the projected increase in student enrollment An estimated 4515 new teachers would be needed
(Solid Lines=Actual Data Dotted Lines=Projected Increases)
Nu
mb
er o
f T
each
ers
(FT
E)
School Staffi ng FTE
Percent Changes
1992-93 through 2005-06Teachers and Instructional Aides
Instructional Assistants
+932
Teachers =+51
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
In the last fourteen years student enrollment increased by +96 while the number of teachers increased by +51 and educational assistants increased by +932 In the last year there was an increase of 823 teachers and 293 educational assistants
FTE
of S
choo
l Sta
ff
Why Teachers Quit
1994-2006
Took Position in Another District in Oregon
Took Position in District Out of Oregon
T ook Non-E ducation P osi tion
Continuing EducationNo Employment Plans
Leave of Absence or Sabbatical
Left Due to Pregnancy
Retired
Deceased
Other Known Reason
Other Unknown Reason
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
Total Number of Teachers (NOT FTE) Employed by Oregon Districts 1994-2006
26000
28000
30000
1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
Tea
cher
s
Each year school districts and ESDs are required by Oregon law to report demographic and assignment information for all certifi cated staff (teachers)
employed in their district or ESD as of September 1 One of the items reported on the Certifi cated Staff Report is the quit code which is the reason why a
teacher is no longer employed by the school district or ESD All possible quit codes are reported on this chart
Prepared in Oregon
Prepared in Other States
Total
American IndianAlaskan Native11 4 15
Asian 35 22 57
Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander 2 2
Black or African American 27 15 42
Hispanic 139 51 190
Multi-ethnic 17 3 20
White 2045 1357 3402
Not identified or unavailable 1179 1955 3134
TOTAL 3455 3407 6862
RaceEthnic Breakout by Newly Licensed EducatorsPrepared In Oregon and In Other States 2005-06
Source Teacher Standards and Practices Commission
Percentage Stayers Movers and Leavers 2004-05
Stayers Movers Leavers
Community Type
Central City 798 103 99
Urban Fringelarge town 848 73 79
RuralSmall Town 850 73 77
Poverty
Less than 15 858 64 79
15-49 854 72 74
50 or more 800 103 97
Minority
Less than 10 864 56 81
10-34 855 78 67
35 or more 806 99 95
Source Teacher Attrition and Mobility National Center for Education Statistics January 2007
Percent of Classes Taught by Highly Qualified Teachers2005-06 School Year
Type of Class Percent of All ClassesTaught by
Highly Qualified Teachers
Percent of All ClassesNOT Taught
by Highly Qualified Teachers
Percent ofClasses in
HIGH Poverty Schools
Taught by Highly
Qualified Teachers
Percent ofClasses in
HIGHPoverty Schools
NOT Taught by Highly
Qualified Teachers
Percent ofClasses in
LOW Poverty Schools
Taught by Highly
Qualified Teachers
Percent ofClasses in
LOWPoverty Schools
NOTTaught by
Highly Qualified Teachers
All 914 86 897 103 937 63
Self-Contained 964 36 951 49 964 36
English 901 99 878 122 924 76
Foreign Languages
909 91 866 134 958 42
The Arts 911 89 889 111 924 76
Science 909 91 898 102 937 63
Math 891 109 864 136 944 56
Social Sciences 912 88 894 106 921 79
Source NCLB Staff (Highly Qualified Teachers) Data Collection 2005-2006Calculated by subtraction (100 - Percent of Classes Taught by Highly Qualified Teachers)
The Trends
Achievement Gap Persists Classrooms Becoming More Diverse Demand for New Teachers Steady
Specialists Content Areas
Shortage of Teacher Diversity High Needs Schools Have Highest Turnover High Poverty Schools Have Lower Percentage
of HQT
Oregon Developments
Oregon Highly Qualified Teacher Plan Each District Submits Title IIa HQT Plan This Fall in
Continuous Improvement Plan Budget Narrative Spending Workbooks Monitor Every Three Years Professional Development Technical Assistance
Grants Continue HOUSSE Create an Integrated Data System with TSPC
Oregon Developments
The Equity PlanmdashUSDOE Priority Specific Data on HQT and High Poverty Schools Placement Preparation and Retention Teacher-level Data District Plan to Address the Issue License and Assignment Course Codes Linked New Electronic Budget Narrative in CIP Contains
HQT Data Contact Bev Pratt for Help
Some Good News
Mentoring Bill $5 million Possible Regional Professional
Development Centers $12 million School Improvement Fund of $260 million Distribution via Formula Interim Accountability Linked to CIP ESDs Participate in SIF
Federal Developments
Preparation Underway for Next MonitoringHQT Definitions and ProceduresHQT Data ReportingmdashMore DetailAnnual Report CardsHQT State PlanPlans for Equitable Distribution of Qualified
Experienced TeachersAdministration and Management of Title IIa
Funds
Federal Developments
HQT Plans12 The SEA enters into an agreement on the
use of funds with any LEA that has not made progress toward meeting its annual measurable objectives in meeting the highly qualified teacher challenge for three consecutive years and has also failed to make AYP for three years 2141 (c)
Reauthorization
Spelling Letter of April 23 2007 Building on Results Priorities
1 Close the gap standards accountability2 Assessment Flexibility-Growth3 High School Rigor4 Greater Resources for Teachers5 Turn Around Tools and Improved
Supplemental Education Services
Reauthorization
Greater Resources for TeachersGrants for teachers and principals in high
needs schools National Math Panel Teacher Incentive Fund- $43 million this round Teacher-to-teacher Initiative eLearning web site
Reauthorization
Things to WatchHighly Qualified and Effective TeachersHQT and Student Achievement DataElimination of HOUSSEhellipTimes UpEquity Plans and Teacher Level DataMore Linkage to AYP ResultshellipPossible
Offset to HQTMore Flexibility for Rural Districts
Reauthorization
Council of Chief State School Officers Provide Multiple Pathways And More Incentives Count New Hires As ldquoHQTrdquo In Primary Subject And
Provide 3 Year Ramp Up To Additional Subjects Through HOUSSE
Special Education And ELL Teachers HQT If Closely Linked (Partnered) With Other HQT
Use Achievement Growth As One But Not Only Indicator Of Performance
Provide Incentives For Challenging Schools
Reauthorization
National Association of State Boards of EducationState Board Authorizes LicensurePreservice Articulates to K-12Alternative Pathways Must Have a Teacher
Preparation ProgramLimit Emergency CertificatesState Approves Teacher Education ProgramsBackground Checks
Reauthorization
National Governors AssociationSupport Professional DevelopmentOppose Any Attempt to Link Teacher
Preparation to Student PerformanceProvide More Flexibility for Teachers of
Multiple Subjects in High Need Areas eg Special Education and Rural Districts
THANK YOU TO OSPA
Regular Conversations between OSPA and ODE on HQT Issues
Keep People Informed on Reauthorization Surface Questions and Problems Improving Communication Make the New Data System Work
Meeting on May 31 ODE Contact Jim Buck if Interested in Helping
Projected Need for Teachers to Match the Projected Increase in Student Enrollment1995 - 2020
Actual data 1995-2005 Projected data 2006-2020Growth Rate 10 for both Teachers and Students
28120
32566
Teachers (FTE) 30985
29481
28051
26731
28099
26680
24000
25000
26000
27000
28000
29000
30000
31000
32000
33000
1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
At a 1 growth rate by 2020 Oregon will need 32566 teachers to match the projected increase in student enrollment An estimated 4515 new teachers would be needed
(Solid Lines=Actual Data Dotted Lines=Projected Increases)
Nu
mb
er o
f T
each
ers
(FT
E)
School Staffi ng FTE
Percent Changes
1992-93 through 2005-06Teachers and Instructional Aides
Instructional Assistants
+932
Teachers =+51
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
In the last fourteen years student enrollment increased by +96 while the number of teachers increased by +51 and educational assistants increased by +932 In the last year there was an increase of 823 teachers and 293 educational assistants
FTE
of S
choo
l Sta
ff
Why Teachers Quit
1994-2006
Took Position in Another District in Oregon
Took Position in District Out of Oregon
T ook Non-E ducation P osi tion
Continuing EducationNo Employment Plans
Leave of Absence or Sabbatical
Left Due to Pregnancy
Retired
Deceased
Other Known Reason
Other Unknown Reason
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
Total Number of Teachers (NOT FTE) Employed by Oregon Districts 1994-2006
26000
28000
30000
1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
Tea
cher
s
Each year school districts and ESDs are required by Oregon law to report demographic and assignment information for all certifi cated staff (teachers)
employed in their district or ESD as of September 1 One of the items reported on the Certifi cated Staff Report is the quit code which is the reason why a
teacher is no longer employed by the school district or ESD All possible quit codes are reported on this chart
Prepared in Oregon
Prepared in Other States
Total
American IndianAlaskan Native11 4 15
Asian 35 22 57
Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander 2 2
Black or African American 27 15 42
Hispanic 139 51 190
Multi-ethnic 17 3 20
White 2045 1357 3402
Not identified or unavailable 1179 1955 3134
TOTAL 3455 3407 6862
RaceEthnic Breakout by Newly Licensed EducatorsPrepared In Oregon and In Other States 2005-06
Source Teacher Standards and Practices Commission
Percentage Stayers Movers and Leavers 2004-05
Stayers Movers Leavers
Community Type
Central City 798 103 99
Urban Fringelarge town 848 73 79
RuralSmall Town 850 73 77
Poverty
Less than 15 858 64 79
15-49 854 72 74
50 or more 800 103 97
Minority
Less than 10 864 56 81
10-34 855 78 67
35 or more 806 99 95
Source Teacher Attrition and Mobility National Center for Education Statistics January 2007
Percent of Classes Taught by Highly Qualified Teachers2005-06 School Year
Type of Class Percent of All ClassesTaught by
Highly Qualified Teachers
Percent of All ClassesNOT Taught
by Highly Qualified Teachers
Percent ofClasses in
HIGH Poverty Schools
Taught by Highly
Qualified Teachers
Percent ofClasses in
HIGHPoverty Schools
NOT Taught by Highly
Qualified Teachers
Percent ofClasses in
LOW Poverty Schools
Taught by Highly
Qualified Teachers
Percent ofClasses in
LOWPoverty Schools
NOTTaught by
Highly Qualified Teachers
All 914 86 897 103 937 63
Self-Contained 964 36 951 49 964 36
English 901 99 878 122 924 76
Foreign Languages
909 91 866 134 958 42
The Arts 911 89 889 111 924 76
Science 909 91 898 102 937 63
Math 891 109 864 136 944 56
Social Sciences 912 88 894 106 921 79
Source NCLB Staff (Highly Qualified Teachers) Data Collection 2005-2006Calculated by subtraction (100 - Percent of Classes Taught by Highly Qualified Teachers)
The Trends
Achievement Gap Persists Classrooms Becoming More Diverse Demand for New Teachers Steady
Specialists Content Areas
Shortage of Teacher Diversity High Needs Schools Have Highest Turnover High Poverty Schools Have Lower Percentage
of HQT
Oregon Developments
Oregon Highly Qualified Teacher Plan Each District Submits Title IIa HQT Plan This Fall in
Continuous Improvement Plan Budget Narrative Spending Workbooks Monitor Every Three Years Professional Development Technical Assistance
Grants Continue HOUSSE Create an Integrated Data System with TSPC
Oregon Developments
The Equity PlanmdashUSDOE Priority Specific Data on HQT and High Poverty Schools Placement Preparation and Retention Teacher-level Data District Plan to Address the Issue License and Assignment Course Codes Linked New Electronic Budget Narrative in CIP Contains
HQT Data Contact Bev Pratt for Help
Some Good News
Mentoring Bill $5 million Possible Regional Professional
Development Centers $12 million School Improvement Fund of $260 million Distribution via Formula Interim Accountability Linked to CIP ESDs Participate in SIF
Federal Developments
Preparation Underway for Next MonitoringHQT Definitions and ProceduresHQT Data ReportingmdashMore DetailAnnual Report CardsHQT State PlanPlans for Equitable Distribution of Qualified
Experienced TeachersAdministration and Management of Title IIa
Funds
Federal Developments
HQT Plans12 The SEA enters into an agreement on the
use of funds with any LEA that has not made progress toward meeting its annual measurable objectives in meeting the highly qualified teacher challenge for three consecutive years and has also failed to make AYP for three years 2141 (c)
Reauthorization
Spelling Letter of April 23 2007 Building on Results Priorities
1 Close the gap standards accountability2 Assessment Flexibility-Growth3 High School Rigor4 Greater Resources for Teachers5 Turn Around Tools and Improved
Supplemental Education Services
Reauthorization
Greater Resources for TeachersGrants for teachers and principals in high
needs schools National Math Panel Teacher Incentive Fund- $43 million this round Teacher-to-teacher Initiative eLearning web site
Reauthorization
Things to WatchHighly Qualified and Effective TeachersHQT and Student Achievement DataElimination of HOUSSEhellipTimes UpEquity Plans and Teacher Level DataMore Linkage to AYP ResultshellipPossible
Offset to HQTMore Flexibility for Rural Districts
Reauthorization
Council of Chief State School Officers Provide Multiple Pathways And More Incentives Count New Hires As ldquoHQTrdquo In Primary Subject And
Provide 3 Year Ramp Up To Additional Subjects Through HOUSSE
Special Education And ELL Teachers HQT If Closely Linked (Partnered) With Other HQT
Use Achievement Growth As One But Not Only Indicator Of Performance
Provide Incentives For Challenging Schools
Reauthorization
National Association of State Boards of EducationState Board Authorizes LicensurePreservice Articulates to K-12Alternative Pathways Must Have a Teacher
Preparation ProgramLimit Emergency CertificatesState Approves Teacher Education ProgramsBackground Checks
Reauthorization
National Governors AssociationSupport Professional DevelopmentOppose Any Attempt to Link Teacher
Preparation to Student PerformanceProvide More Flexibility for Teachers of
Multiple Subjects in High Need Areas eg Special Education and Rural Districts
THANK YOU TO OSPA
Regular Conversations between OSPA and ODE on HQT Issues
Keep People Informed on Reauthorization Surface Questions and Problems Improving Communication Make the New Data System Work
Meeting on May 31 ODE Contact Jim Buck if Interested in Helping
School Staffi ng FTE
Percent Changes
1992-93 through 2005-06Teachers and Instructional Aides
Instructional Assistants
+932
Teachers =+51
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
In the last fourteen years student enrollment increased by +96 while the number of teachers increased by +51 and educational assistants increased by +932 In the last year there was an increase of 823 teachers and 293 educational assistants
FTE
of S
choo
l Sta
ff
Why Teachers Quit
1994-2006
Took Position in Another District in Oregon
Took Position in District Out of Oregon
T ook Non-E ducation P osi tion
Continuing EducationNo Employment Plans
Leave of Absence or Sabbatical
Left Due to Pregnancy
Retired
Deceased
Other Known Reason
Other Unknown Reason
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
Total Number of Teachers (NOT FTE) Employed by Oregon Districts 1994-2006
26000
28000
30000
1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
Tea
cher
s
Each year school districts and ESDs are required by Oregon law to report demographic and assignment information for all certifi cated staff (teachers)
employed in their district or ESD as of September 1 One of the items reported on the Certifi cated Staff Report is the quit code which is the reason why a
teacher is no longer employed by the school district or ESD All possible quit codes are reported on this chart
Prepared in Oregon
Prepared in Other States
Total
American IndianAlaskan Native11 4 15
Asian 35 22 57
Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander 2 2
Black or African American 27 15 42
Hispanic 139 51 190
Multi-ethnic 17 3 20
White 2045 1357 3402
Not identified or unavailable 1179 1955 3134
TOTAL 3455 3407 6862
RaceEthnic Breakout by Newly Licensed EducatorsPrepared In Oregon and In Other States 2005-06
Source Teacher Standards and Practices Commission
Percentage Stayers Movers and Leavers 2004-05
Stayers Movers Leavers
Community Type
Central City 798 103 99
Urban Fringelarge town 848 73 79
RuralSmall Town 850 73 77
Poverty
Less than 15 858 64 79
15-49 854 72 74
50 or more 800 103 97
Minority
Less than 10 864 56 81
10-34 855 78 67
35 or more 806 99 95
Source Teacher Attrition and Mobility National Center for Education Statistics January 2007
Percent of Classes Taught by Highly Qualified Teachers2005-06 School Year
Type of Class Percent of All ClassesTaught by
Highly Qualified Teachers
Percent of All ClassesNOT Taught
by Highly Qualified Teachers
Percent ofClasses in
HIGH Poverty Schools
Taught by Highly
Qualified Teachers
Percent ofClasses in
HIGHPoverty Schools
NOT Taught by Highly
Qualified Teachers
Percent ofClasses in
LOW Poverty Schools
Taught by Highly
Qualified Teachers
Percent ofClasses in
LOWPoverty Schools
NOTTaught by
Highly Qualified Teachers
All 914 86 897 103 937 63
Self-Contained 964 36 951 49 964 36
English 901 99 878 122 924 76
Foreign Languages
909 91 866 134 958 42
The Arts 911 89 889 111 924 76
Science 909 91 898 102 937 63
Math 891 109 864 136 944 56
Social Sciences 912 88 894 106 921 79
Source NCLB Staff (Highly Qualified Teachers) Data Collection 2005-2006Calculated by subtraction (100 - Percent of Classes Taught by Highly Qualified Teachers)
The Trends
Achievement Gap Persists Classrooms Becoming More Diverse Demand for New Teachers Steady
Specialists Content Areas
Shortage of Teacher Diversity High Needs Schools Have Highest Turnover High Poverty Schools Have Lower Percentage
of HQT
Oregon Developments
Oregon Highly Qualified Teacher Plan Each District Submits Title IIa HQT Plan This Fall in
Continuous Improvement Plan Budget Narrative Spending Workbooks Monitor Every Three Years Professional Development Technical Assistance
Grants Continue HOUSSE Create an Integrated Data System with TSPC
Oregon Developments
The Equity PlanmdashUSDOE Priority Specific Data on HQT and High Poverty Schools Placement Preparation and Retention Teacher-level Data District Plan to Address the Issue License and Assignment Course Codes Linked New Electronic Budget Narrative in CIP Contains
HQT Data Contact Bev Pratt for Help
Some Good News
Mentoring Bill $5 million Possible Regional Professional
Development Centers $12 million School Improvement Fund of $260 million Distribution via Formula Interim Accountability Linked to CIP ESDs Participate in SIF
Federal Developments
Preparation Underway for Next MonitoringHQT Definitions and ProceduresHQT Data ReportingmdashMore DetailAnnual Report CardsHQT State PlanPlans for Equitable Distribution of Qualified
Experienced TeachersAdministration and Management of Title IIa
Funds
Federal Developments
HQT Plans12 The SEA enters into an agreement on the
use of funds with any LEA that has not made progress toward meeting its annual measurable objectives in meeting the highly qualified teacher challenge for three consecutive years and has also failed to make AYP for three years 2141 (c)
Reauthorization
Spelling Letter of April 23 2007 Building on Results Priorities
1 Close the gap standards accountability2 Assessment Flexibility-Growth3 High School Rigor4 Greater Resources for Teachers5 Turn Around Tools and Improved
Supplemental Education Services
Reauthorization
Greater Resources for TeachersGrants for teachers and principals in high
needs schools National Math Panel Teacher Incentive Fund- $43 million this round Teacher-to-teacher Initiative eLearning web site
Reauthorization
Things to WatchHighly Qualified and Effective TeachersHQT and Student Achievement DataElimination of HOUSSEhellipTimes UpEquity Plans and Teacher Level DataMore Linkage to AYP ResultshellipPossible
Offset to HQTMore Flexibility for Rural Districts
Reauthorization
Council of Chief State School Officers Provide Multiple Pathways And More Incentives Count New Hires As ldquoHQTrdquo In Primary Subject And
Provide 3 Year Ramp Up To Additional Subjects Through HOUSSE
Special Education And ELL Teachers HQT If Closely Linked (Partnered) With Other HQT
Use Achievement Growth As One But Not Only Indicator Of Performance
Provide Incentives For Challenging Schools
Reauthorization
National Association of State Boards of EducationState Board Authorizes LicensurePreservice Articulates to K-12Alternative Pathways Must Have a Teacher
Preparation ProgramLimit Emergency CertificatesState Approves Teacher Education ProgramsBackground Checks
Reauthorization
National Governors AssociationSupport Professional DevelopmentOppose Any Attempt to Link Teacher
Preparation to Student PerformanceProvide More Flexibility for Teachers of
Multiple Subjects in High Need Areas eg Special Education and Rural Districts
THANK YOU TO OSPA
Regular Conversations between OSPA and ODE on HQT Issues
Keep People Informed on Reauthorization Surface Questions and Problems Improving Communication Make the New Data System Work
Meeting on May 31 ODE Contact Jim Buck if Interested in Helping
Why Teachers Quit
1994-2006
Took Position in Another District in Oregon
Took Position in District Out of Oregon
T ook Non-E ducation P osi tion
Continuing EducationNo Employment Plans
Leave of Absence or Sabbatical
Left Due to Pregnancy
Retired
Deceased
Other Known Reason
Other Unknown Reason
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
Total Number of Teachers (NOT FTE) Employed by Oregon Districts 1994-2006
26000
28000
30000
1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
Tea
cher
s
Each year school districts and ESDs are required by Oregon law to report demographic and assignment information for all certifi cated staff (teachers)
employed in their district or ESD as of September 1 One of the items reported on the Certifi cated Staff Report is the quit code which is the reason why a
teacher is no longer employed by the school district or ESD All possible quit codes are reported on this chart
Prepared in Oregon
Prepared in Other States
Total
American IndianAlaskan Native11 4 15
Asian 35 22 57
Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander 2 2
Black or African American 27 15 42
Hispanic 139 51 190
Multi-ethnic 17 3 20
White 2045 1357 3402
Not identified or unavailable 1179 1955 3134
TOTAL 3455 3407 6862
RaceEthnic Breakout by Newly Licensed EducatorsPrepared In Oregon and In Other States 2005-06
Source Teacher Standards and Practices Commission
Percentage Stayers Movers and Leavers 2004-05
Stayers Movers Leavers
Community Type
Central City 798 103 99
Urban Fringelarge town 848 73 79
RuralSmall Town 850 73 77
Poverty
Less than 15 858 64 79
15-49 854 72 74
50 or more 800 103 97
Minority
Less than 10 864 56 81
10-34 855 78 67
35 or more 806 99 95
Source Teacher Attrition and Mobility National Center for Education Statistics January 2007
Percent of Classes Taught by Highly Qualified Teachers2005-06 School Year
Type of Class Percent of All ClassesTaught by
Highly Qualified Teachers
Percent of All ClassesNOT Taught
by Highly Qualified Teachers
Percent ofClasses in
HIGH Poverty Schools
Taught by Highly
Qualified Teachers
Percent ofClasses in
HIGHPoverty Schools
NOT Taught by Highly
Qualified Teachers
Percent ofClasses in
LOW Poverty Schools
Taught by Highly
Qualified Teachers
Percent ofClasses in
LOWPoverty Schools
NOTTaught by
Highly Qualified Teachers
All 914 86 897 103 937 63
Self-Contained 964 36 951 49 964 36
English 901 99 878 122 924 76
Foreign Languages
909 91 866 134 958 42
The Arts 911 89 889 111 924 76
Science 909 91 898 102 937 63
Math 891 109 864 136 944 56
Social Sciences 912 88 894 106 921 79
Source NCLB Staff (Highly Qualified Teachers) Data Collection 2005-2006Calculated by subtraction (100 - Percent of Classes Taught by Highly Qualified Teachers)
The Trends
Achievement Gap Persists Classrooms Becoming More Diverse Demand for New Teachers Steady
Specialists Content Areas
Shortage of Teacher Diversity High Needs Schools Have Highest Turnover High Poverty Schools Have Lower Percentage
of HQT
Oregon Developments
Oregon Highly Qualified Teacher Plan Each District Submits Title IIa HQT Plan This Fall in
Continuous Improvement Plan Budget Narrative Spending Workbooks Monitor Every Three Years Professional Development Technical Assistance
Grants Continue HOUSSE Create an Integrated Data System with TSPC
Oregon Developments
The Equity PlanmdashUSDOE Priority Specific Data on HQT and High Poverty Schools Placement Preparation and Retention Teacher-level Data District Plan to Address the Issue License and Assignment Course Codes Linked New Electronic Budget Narrative in CIP Contains
HQT Data Contact Bev Pratt for Help
Some Good News
Mentoring Bill $5 million Possible Regional Professional
Development Centers $12 million School Improvement Fund of $260 million Distribution via Formula Interim Accountability Linked to CIP ESDs Participate in SIF
Federal Developments
Preparation Underway for Next MonitoringHQT Definitions and ProceduresHQT Data ReportingmdashMore DetailAnnual Report CardsHQT State PlanPlans for Equitable Distribution of Qualified
Experienced TeachersAdministration and Management of Title IIa
Funds
Federal Developments
HQT Plans12 The SEA enters into an agreement on the
use of funds with any LEA that has not made progress toward meeting its annual measurable objectives in meeting the highly qualified teacher challenge for three consecutive years and has also failed to make AYP for three years 2141 (c)
Reauthorization
Spelling Letter of April 23 2007 Building on Results Priorities
1 Close the gap standards accountability2 Assessment Flexibility-Growth3 High School Rigor4 Greater Resources for Teachers5 Turn Around Tools and Improved
Supplemental Education Services
Reauthorization
Greater Resources for TeachersGrants for teachers and principals in high
needs schools National Math Panel Teacher Incentive Fund- $43 million this round Teacher-to-teacher Initiative eLearning web site
Reauthorization
Things to WatchHighly Qualified and Effective TeachersHQT and Student Achievement DataElimination of HOUSSEhellipTimes UpEquity Plans and Teacher Level DataMore Linkage to AYP ResultshellipPossible
Offset to HQTMore Flexibility for Rural Districts
Reauthorization
Council of Chief State School Officers Provide Multiple Pathways And More Incentives Count New Hires As ldquoHQTrdquo In Primary Subject And
Provide 3 Year Ramp Up To Additional Subjects Through HOUSSE
Special Education And ELL Teachers HQT If Closely Linked (Partnered) With Other HQT
Use Achievement Growth As One But Not Only Indicator Of Performance
Provide Incentives For Challenging Schools
Reauthorization
National Association of State Boards of EducationState Board Authorizes LicensurePreservice Articulates to K-12Alternative Pathways Must Have a Teacher
Preparation ProgramLimit Emergency CertificatesState Approves Teacher Education ProgramsBackground Checks
Reauthorization
National Governors AssociationSupport Professional DevelopmentOppose Any Attempt to Link Teacher
Preparation to Student PerformanceProvide More Flexibility for Teachers of
Multiple Subjects in High Need Areas eg Special Education and Rural Districts
THANK YOU TO OSPA
Regular Conversations between OSPA and ODE on HQT Issues
Keep People Informed on Reauthorization Surface Questions and Problems Improving Communication Make the New Data System Work
Meeting on May 31 ODE Contact Jim Buck if Interested in Helping
Prepared in Oregon
Prepared in Other States
Total
American IndianAlaskan Native11 4 15
Asian 35 22 57
Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander 2 2
Black or African American 27 15 42
Hispanic 139 51 190
Multi-ethnic 17 3 20
White 2045 1357 3402
Not identified or unavailable 1179 1955 3134
TOTAL 3455 3407 6862
RaceEthnic Breakout by Newly Licensed EducatorsPrepared In Oregon and In Other States 2005-06
Source Teacher Standards and Practices Commission
Percentage Stayers Movers and Leavers 2004-05
Stayers Movers Leavers
Community Type
Central City 798 103 99
Urban Fringelarge town 848 73 79
RuralSmall Town 850 73 77
Poverty
Less than 15 858 64 79
15-49 854 72 74
50 or more 800 103 97
Minority
Less than 10 864 56 81
10-34 855 78 67
35 or more 806 99 95
Source Teacher Attrition and Mobility National Center for Education Statistics January 2007
Percent of Classes Taught by Highly Qualified Teachers2005-06 School Year
Type of Class Percent of All ClassesTaught by
Highly Qualified Teachers
Percent of All ClassesNOT Taught
by Highly Qualified Teachers
Percent ofClasses in
HIGH Poverty Schools
Taught by Highly
Qualified Teachers
Percent ofClasses in
HIGHPoverty Schools
NOT Taught by Highly
Qualified Teachers
Percent ofClasses in
LOW Poverty Schools
Taught by Highly
Qualified Teachers
Percent ofClasses in
LOWPoverty Schools
NOTTaught by
Highly Qualified Teachers
All 914 86 897 103 937 63
Self-Contained 964 36 951 49 964 36
English 901 99 878 122 924 76
Foreign Languages
909 91 866 134 958 42
The Arts 911 89 889 111 924 76
Science 909 91 898 102 937 63
Math 891 109 864 136 944 56
Social Sciences 912 88 894 106 921 79
Source NCLB Staff (Highly Qualified Teachers) Data Collection 2005-2006Calculated by subtraction (100 - Percent of Classes Taught by Highly Qualified Teachers)
The Trends
Achievement Gap Persists Classrooms Becoming More Diverse Demand for New Teachers Steady
Specialists Content Areas
Shortage of Teacher Diversity High Needs Schools Have Highest Turnover High Poverty Schools Have Lower Percentage
of HQT
Oregon Developments
Oregon Highly Qualified Teacher Plan Each District Submits Title IIa HQT Plan This Fall in
Continuous Improvement Plan Budget Narrative Spending Workbooks Monitor Every Three Years Professional Development Technical Assistance
Grants Continue HOUSSE Create an Integrated Data System with TSPC
Oregon Developments
The Equity PlanmdashUSDOE Priority Specific Data on HQT and High Poverty Schools Placement Preparation and Retention Teacher-level Data District Plan to Address the Issue License and Assignment Course Codes Linked New Electronic Budget Narrative in CIP Contains
HQT Data Contact Bev Pratt for Help
Some Good News
Mentoring Bill $5 million Possible Regional Professional
Development Centers $12 million School Improvement Fund of $260 million Distribution via Formula Interim Accountability Linked to CIP ESDs Participate in SIF
Federal Developments
Preparation Underway for Next MonitoringHQT Definitions and ProceduresHQT Data ReportingmdashMore DetailAnnual Report CardsHQT State PlanPlans for Equitable Distribution of Qualified
Experienced TeachersAdministration and Management of Title IIa
Funds
Federal Developments
HQT Plans12 The SEA enters into an agreement on the
use of funds with any LEA that has not made progress toward meeting its annual measurable objectives in meeting the highly qualified teacher challenge for three consecutive years and has also failed to make AYP for three years 2141 (c)
Reauthorization
Spelling Letter of April 23 2007 Building on Results Priorities
1 Close the gap standards accountability2 Assessment Flexibility-Growth3 High School Rigor4 Greater Resources for Teachers5 Turn Around Tools and Improved
Supplemental Education Services
Reauthorization
Greater Resources for TeachersGrants for teachers and principals in high
needs schools National Math Panel Teacher Incentive Fund- $43 million this round Teacher-to-teacher Initiative eLearning web site
Reauthorization
Things to WatchHighly Qualified and Effective TeachersHQT and Student Achievement DataElimination of HOUSSEhellipTimes UpEquity Plans and Teacher Level DataMore Linkage to AYP ResultshellipPossible
Offset to HQTMore Flexibility for Rural Districts
Reauthorization
Council of Chief State School Officers Provide Multiple Pathways And More Incentives Count New Hires As ldquoHQTrdquo In Primary Subject And
Provide 3 Year Ramp Up To Additional Subjects Through HOUSSE
Special Education And ELL Teachers HQT If Closely Linked (Partnered) With Other HQT
Use Achievement Growth As One But Not Only Indicator Of Performance
Provide Incentives For Challenging Schools
Reauthorization
National Association of State Boards of EducationState Board Authorizes LicensurePreservice Articulates to K-12Alternative Pathways Must Have a Teacher
Preparation ProgramLimit Emergency CertificatesState Approves Teacher Education ProgramsBackground Checks
Reauthorization
National Governors AssociationSupport Professional DevelopmentOppose Any Attempt to Link Teacher
Preparation to Student PerformanceProvide More Flexibility for Teachers of
Multiple Subjects in High Need Areas eg Special Education and Rural Districts
THANK YOU TO OSPA
Regular Conversations between OSPA and ODE on HQT Issues
Keep People Informed on Reauthorization Surface Questions and Problems Improving Communication Make the New Data System Work
Meeting on May 31 ODE Contact Jim Buck if Interested in Helping
Percentage Stayers Movers and Leavers 2004-05
Stayers Movers Leavers
Community Type
Central City 798 103 99
Urban Fringelarge town 848 73 79
RuralSmall Town 850 73 77
Poverty
Less than 15 858 64 79
15-49 854 72 74
50 or more 800 103 97
Minority
Less than 10 864 56 81
10-34 855 78 67
35 or more 806 99 95
Source Teacher Attrition and Mobility National Center for Education Statistics January 2007
Percent of Classes Taught by Highly Qualified Teachers2005-06 School Year
Type of Class Percent of All ClassesTaught by
Highly Qualified Teachers
Percent of All ClassesNOT Taught
by Highly Qualified Teachers
Percent ofClasses in
HIGH Poverty Schools
Taught by Highly
Qualified Teachers
Percent ofClasses in
HIGHPoverty Schools
NOT Taught by Highly
Qualified Teachers
Percent ofClasses in
LOW Poverty Schools
Taught by Highly
Qualified Teachers
Percent ofClasses in
LOWPoverty Schools
NOTTaught by
Highly Qualified Teachers
All 914 86 897 103 937 63
Self-Contained 964 36 951 49 964 36
English 901 99 878 122 924 76
Foreign Languages
909 91 866 134 958 42
The Arts 911 89 889 111 924 76
Science 909 91 898 102 937 63
Math 891 109 864 136 944 56
Social Sciences 912 88 894 106 921 79
Source NCLB Staff (Highly Qualified Teachers) Data Collection 2005-2006Calculated by subtraction (100 - Percent of Classes Taught by Highly Qualified Teachers)
The Trends
Achievement Gap Persists Classrooms Becoming More Diverse Demand for New Teachers Steady
Specialists Content Areas
Shortage of Teacher Diversity High Needs Schools Have Highest Turnover High Poverty Schools Have Lower Percentage
of HQT
Oregon Developments
Oregon Highly Qualified Teacher Plan Each District Submits Title IIa HQT Plan This Fall in
Continuous Improvement Plan Budget Narrative Spending Workbooks Monitor Every Three Years Professional Development Technical Assistance
Grants Continue HOUSSE Create an Integrated Data System with TSPC
Oregon Developments
The Equity PlanmdashUSDOE Priority Specific Data on HQT and High Poverty Schools Placement Preparation and Retention Teacher-level Data District Plan to Address the Issue License and Assignment Course Codes Linked New Electronic Budget Narrative in CIP Contains
HQT Data Contact Bev Pratt for Help
Some Good News
Mentoring Bill $5 million Possible Regional Professional
Development Centers $12 million School Improvement Fund of $260 million Distribution via Formula Interim Accountability Linked to CIP ESDs Participate in SIF
Federal Developments
Preparation Underway for Next MonitoringHQT Definitions and ProceduresHQT Data ReportingmdashMore DetailAnnual Report CardsHQT State PlanPlans for Equitable Distribution of Qualified
Experienced TeachersAdministration and Management of Title IIa
Funds
Federal Developments
HQT Plans12 The SEA enters into an agreement on the
use of funds with any LEA that has not made progress toward meeting its annual measurable objectives in meeting the highly qualified teacher challenge for three consecutive years and has also failed to make AYP for three years 2141 (c)
Reauthorization
Spelling Letter of April 23 2007 Building on Results Priorities
1 Close the gap standards accountability2 Assessment Flexibility-Growth3 High School Rigor4 Greater Resources for Teachers5 Turn Around Tools and Improved
Supplemental Education Services
Reauthorization
Greater Resources for TeachersGrants for teachers and principals in high
needs schools National Math Panel Teacher Incentive Fund- $43 million this round Teacher-to-teacher Initiative eLearning web site
Reauthorization
Things to WatchHighly Qualified and Effective TeachersHQT and Student Achievement DataElimination of HOUSSEhellipTimes UpEquity Plans and Teacher Level DataMore Linkage to AYP ResultshellipPossible
Offset to HQTMore Flexibility for Rural Districts
Reauthorization
Council of Chief State School Officers Provide Multiple Pathways And More Incentives Count New Hires As ldquoHQTrdquo In Primary Subject And
Provide 3 Year Ramp Up To Additional Subjects Through HOUSSE
Special Education And ELL Teachers HQT If Closely Linked (Partnered) With Other HQT
Use Achievement Growth As One But Not Only Indicator Of Performance
Provide Incentives For Challenging Schools
Reauthorization
National Association of State Boards of EducationState Board Authorizes LicensurePreservice Articulates to K-12Alternative Pathways Must Have a Teacher
Preparation ProgramLimit Emergency CertificatesState Approves Teacher Education ProgramsBackground Checks
Reauthorization
National Governors AssociationSupport Professional DevelopmentOppose Any Attempt to Link Teacher
Preparation to Student PerformanceProvide More Flexibility for Teachers of
Multiple Subjects in High Need Areas eg Special Education and Rural Districts
THANK YOU TO OSPA
Regular Conversations between OSPA and ODE on HQT Issues
Keep People Informed on Reauthorization Surface Questions and Problems Improving Communication Make the New Data System Work
Meeting on May 31 ODE Contact Jim Buck if Interested in Helping
Percent of Classes Taught by Highly Qualified Teachers2005-06 School Year
Type of Class Percent of All ClassesTaught by
Highly Qualified Teachers
Percent of All ClassesNOT Taught
by Highly Qualified Teachers
Percent ofClasses in
HIGH Poverty Schools
Taught by Highly
Qualified Teachers
Percent ofClasses in
HIGHPoverty Schools
NOT Taught by Highly
Qualified Teachers
Percent ofClasses in
LOW Poverty Schools
Taught by Highly
Qualified Teachers
Percent ofClasses in
LOWPoverty Schools
NOTTaught by
Highly Qualified Teachers
All 914 86 897 103 937 63
Self-Contained 964 36 951 49 964 36
English 901 99 878 122 924 76
Foreign Languages
909 91 866 134 958 42
The Arts 911 89 889 111 924 76
Science 909 91 898 102 937 63
Math 891 109 864 136 944 56
Social Sciences 912 88 894 106 921 79
Source NCLB Staff (Highly Qualified Teachers) Data Collection 2005-2006Calculated by subtraction (100 - Percent of Classes Taught by Highly Qualified Teachers)
The Trends
Achievement Gap Persists Classrooms Becoming More Diverse Demand for New Teachers Steady
Specialists Content Areas
Shortage of Teacher Diversity High Needs Schools Have Highest Turnover High Poverty Schools Have Lower Percentage
of HQT
Oregon Developments
Oregon Highly Qualified Teacher Plan Each District Submits Title IIa HQT Plan This Fall in
Continuous Improvement Plan Budget Narrative Spending Workbooks Monitor Every Three Years Professional Development Technical Assistance
Grants Continue HOUSSE Create an Integrated Data System with TSPC
Oregon Developments
The Equity PlanmdashUSDOE Priority Specific Data on HQT and High Poverty Schools Placement Preparation and Retention Teacher-level Data District Plan to Address the Issue License and Assignment Course Codes Linked New Electronic Budget Narrative in CIP Contains
HQT Data Contact Bev Pratt for Help
Some Good News
Mentoring Bill $5 million Possible Regional Professional
Development Centers $12 million School Improvement Fund of $260 million Distribution via Formula Interim Accountability Linked to CIP ESDs Participate in SIF
Federal Developments
Preparation Underway for Next MonitoringHQT Definitions and ProceduresHQT Data ReportingmdashMore DetailAnnual Report CardsHQT State PlanPlans for Equitable Distribution of Qualified
Experienced TeachersAdministration and Management of Title IIa
Funds
Federal Developments
HQT Plans12 The SEA enters into an agreement on the
use of funds with any LEA that has not made progress toward meeting its annual measurable objectives in meeting the highly qualified teacher challenge for three consecutive years and has also failed to make AYP for three years 2141 (c)
Reauthorization
Spelling Letter of April 23 2007 Building on Results Priorities
1 Close the gap standards accountability2 Assessment Flexibility-Growth3 High School Rigor4 Greater Resources for Teachers5 Turn Around Tools and Improved
Supplemental Education Services
Reauthorization
Greater Resources for TeachersGrants for teachers and principals in high
needs schools National Math Panel Teacher Incentive Fund- $43 million this round Teacher-to-teacher Initiative eLearning web site
Reauthorization
Things to WatchHighly Qualified and Effective TeachersHQT and Student Achievement DataElimination of HOUSSEhellipTimes UpEquity Plans and Teacher Level DataMore Linkage to AYP ResultshellipPossible
Offset to HQTMore Flexibility for Rural Districts
Reauthorization
Council of Chief State School Officers Provide Multiple Pathways And More Incentives Count New Hires As ldquoHQTrdquo In Primary Subject And
Provide 3 Year Ramp Up To Additional Subjects Through HOUSSE
Special Education And ELL Teachers HQT If Closely Linked (Partnered) With Other HQT
Use Achievement Growth As One But Not Only Indicator Of Performance
Provide Incentives For Challenging Schools
Reauthorization
National Association of State Boards of EducationState Board Authorizes LicensurePreservice Articulates to K-12Alternative Pathways Must Have a Teacher
Preparation ProgramLimit Emergency CertificatesState Approves Teacher Education ProgramsBackground Checks
Reauthorization
National Governors AssociationSupport Professional DevelopmentOppose Any Attempt to Link Teacher
Preparation to Student PerformanceProvide More Flexibility for Teachers of
Multiple Subjects in High Need Areas eg Special Education and Rural Districts
THANK YOU TO OSPA
Regular Conversations between OSPA and ODE on HQT Issues
Keep People Informed on Reauthorization Surface Questions and Problems Improving Communication Make the New Data System Work
Meeting on May 31 ODE Contact Jim Buck if Interested in Helping
The Trends
Achievement Gap Persists Classrooms Becoming More Diverse Demand for New Teachers Steady
Specialists Content Areas
Shortage of Teacher Diversity High Needs Schools Have Highest Turnover High Poverty Schools Have Lower Percentage
of HQT
Oregon Developments
Oregon Highly Qualified Teacher Plan Each District Submits Title IIa HQT Plan This Fall in
Continuous Improvement Plan Budget Narrative Spending Workbooks Monitor Every Three Years Professional Development Technical Assistance
Grants Continue HOUSSE Create an Integrated Data System with TSPC
Oregon Developments
The Equity PlanmdashUSDOE Priority Specific Data on HQT and High Poverty Schools Placement Preparation and Retention Teacher-level Data District Plan to Address the Issue License and Assignment Course Codes Linked New Electronic Budget Narrative in CIP Contains
HQT Data Contact Bev Pratt for Help
Some Good News
Mentoring Bill $5 million Possible Regional Professional
Development Centers $12 million School Improvement Fund of $260 million Distribution via Formula Interim Accountability Linked to CIP ESDs Participate in SIF
Federal Developments
Preparation Underway for Next MonitoringHQT Definitions and ProceduresHQT Data ReportingmdashMore DetailAnnual Report CardsHQT State PlanPlans for Equitable Distribution of Qualified
Experienced TeachersAdministration and Management of Title IIa
Funds
Federal Developments
HQT Plans12 The SEA enters into an agreement on the
use of funds with any LEA that has not made progress toward meeting its annual measurable objectives in meeting the highly qualified teacher challenge for three consecutive years and has also failed to make AYP for three years 2141 (c)
Reauthorization
Spelling Letter of April 23 2007 Building on Results Priorities
1 Close the gap standards accountability2 Assessment Flexibility-Growth3 High School Rigor4 Greater Resources for Teachers5 Turn Around Tools and Improved
Supplemental Education Services
Reauthorization
Greater Resources for TeachersGrants for teachers and principals in high
needs schools National Math Panel Teacher Incentive Fund- $43 million this round Teacher-to-teacher Initiative eLearning web site
Reauthorization
Things to WatchHighly Qualified and Effective TeachersHQT and Student Achievement DataElimination of HOUSSEhellipTimes UpEquity Plans and Teacher Level DataMore Linkage to AYP ResultshellipPossible
Offset to HQTMore Flexibility for Rural Districts
Reauthorization
Council of Chief State School Officers Provide Multiple Pathways And More Incentives Count New Hires As ldquoHQTrdquo In Primary Subject And
Provide 3 Year Ramp Up To Additional Subjects Through HOUSSE
Special Education And ELL Teachers HQT If Closely Linked (Partnered) With Other HQT
Use Achievement Growth As One But Not Only Indicator Of Performance
Provide Incentives For Challenging Schools
Reauthorization
National Association of State Boards of EducationState Board Authorizes LicensurePreservice Articulates to K-12Alternative Pathways Must Have a Teacher
Preparation ProgramLimit Emergency CertificatesState Approves Teacher Education ProgramsBackground Checks
Reauthorization
National Governors AssociationSupport Professional DevelopmentOppose Any Attempt to Link Teacher
Preparation to Student PerformanceProvide More Flexibility for Teachers of
Multiple Subjects in High Need Areas eg Special Education and Rural Districts
THANK YOU TO OSPA
Regular Conversations between OSPA and ODE on HQT Issues
Keep People Informed on Reauthorization Surface Questions and Problems Improving Communication Make the New Data System Work
Meeting on May 31 ODE Contact Jim Buck if Interested in Helping
Oregon Developments
Oregon Highly Qualified Teacher Plan Each District Submits Title IIa HQT Plan This Fall in
Continuous Improvement Plan Budget Narrative Spending Workbooks Monitor Every Three Years Professional Development Technical Assistance
Grants Continue HOUSSE Create an Integrated Data System with TSPC
Oregon Developments
The Equity PlanmdashUSDOE Priority Specific Data on HQT and High Poverty Schools Placement Preparation and Retention Teacher-level Data District Plan to Address the Issue License and Assignment Course Codes Linked New Electronic Budget Narrative in CIP Contains
HQT Data Contact Bev Pratt for Help
Some Good News
Mentoring Bill $5 million Possible Regional Professional
Development Centers $12 million School Improvement Fund of $260 million Distribution via Formula Interim Accountability Linked to CIP ESDs Participate in SIF
Federal Developments
Preparation Underway for Next MonitoringHQT Definitions and ProceduresHQT Data ReportingmdashMore DetailAnnual Report CardsHQT State PlanPlans for Equitable Distribution of Qualified
Experienced TeachersAdministration and Management of Title IIa
Funds
Federal Developments
HQT Plans12 The SEA enters into an agreement on the
use of funds with any LEA that has not made progress toward meeting its annual measurable objectives in meeting the highly qualified teacher challenge for three consecutive years and has also failed to make AYP for three years 2141 (c)
Reauthorization
Spelling Letter of April 23 2007 Building on Results Priorities
1 Close the gap standards accountability2 Assessment Flexibility-Growth3 High School Rigor4 Greater Resources for Teachers5 Turn Around Tools and Improved
Supplemental Education Services
Reauthorization
Greater Resources for TeachersGrants for teachers and principals in high
needs schools National Math Panel Teacher Incentive Fund- $43 million this round Teacher-to-teacher Initiative eLearning web site
Reauthorization
Things to WatchHighly Qualified and Effective TeachersHQT and Student Achievement DataElimination of HOUSSEhellipTimes UpEquity Plans and Teacher Level DataMore Linkage to AYP ResultshellipPossible
Offset to HQTMore Flexibility for Rural Districts
Reauthorization
Council of Chief State School Officers Provide Multiple Pathways And More Incentives Count New Hires As ldquoHQTrdquo In Primary Subject And
Provide 3 Year Ramp Up To Additional Subjects Through HOUSSE
Special Education And ELL Teachers HQT If Closely Linked (Partnered) With Other HQT
Use Achievement Growth As One But Not Only Indicator Of Performance
Provide Incentives For Challenging Schools
Reauthorization
National Association of State Boards of EducationState Board Authorizes LicensurePreservice Articulates to K-12Alternative Pathways Must Have a Teacher
Preparation ProgramLimit Emergency CertificatesState Approves Teacher Education ProgramsBackground Checks
Reauthorization
National Governors AssociationSupport Professional DevelopmentOppose Any Attempt to Link Teacher
Preparation to Student PerformanceProvide More Flexibility for Teachers of
Multiple Subjects in High Need Areas eg Special Education and Rural Districts
THANK YOU TO OSPA
Regular Conversations between OSPA and ODE on HQT Issues
Keep People Informed on Reauthorization Surface Questions and Problems Improving Communication Make the New Data System Work
Meeting on May 31 ODE Contact Jim Buck if Interested in Helping
Oregon Developments
The Equity PlanmdashUSDOE Priority Specific Data on HQT and High Poverty Schools Placement Preparation and Retention Teacher-level Data District Plan to Address the Issue License and Assignment Course Codes Linked New Electronic Budget Narrative in CIP Contains
HQT Data Contact Bev Pratt for Help
Some Good News
Mentoring Bill $5 million Possible Regional Professional
Development Centers $12 million School Improvement Fund of $260 million Distribution via Formula Interim Accountability Linked to CIP ESDs Participate in SIF
Federal Developments
Preparation Underway for Next MonitoringHQT Definitions and ProceduresHQT Data ReportingmdashMore DetailAnnual Report CardsHQT State PlanPlans for Equitable Distribution of Qualified
Experienced TeachersAdministration and Management of Title IIa
Funds
Federal Developments
HQT Plans12 The SEA enters into an agreement on the
use of funds with any LEA that has not made progress toward meeting its annual measurable objectives in meeting the highly qualified teacher challenge for three consecutive years and has also failed to make AYP for three years 2141 (c)
Reauthorization
Spelling Letter of April 23 2007 Building on Results Priorities
1 Close the gap standards accountability2 Assessment Flexibility-Growth3 High School Rigor4 Greater Resources for Teachers5 Turn Around Tools and Improved
Supplemental Education Services
Reauthorization
Greater Resources for TeachersGrants for teachers and principals in high
needs schools National Math Panel Teacher Incentive Fund- $43 million this round Teacher-to-teacher Initiative eLearning web site
Reauthorization
Things to WatchHighly Qualified and Effective TeachersHQT and Student Achievement DataElimination of HOUSSEhellipTimes UpEquity Plans and Teacher Level DataMore Linkage to AYP ResultshellipPossible
Offset to HQTMore Flexibility for Rural Districts
Reauthorization
Council of Chief State School Officers Provide Multiple Pathways And More Incentives Count New Hires As ldquoHQTrdquo In Primary Subject And
Provide 3 Year Ramp Up To Additional Subjects Through HOUSSE
Special Education And ELL Teachers HQT If Closely Linked (Partnered) With Other HQT
Use Achievement Growth As One But Not Only Indicator Of Performance
Provide Incentives For Challenging Schools
Reauthorization
National Association of State Boards of EducationState Board Authorizes LicensurePreservice Articulates to K-12Alternative Pathways Must Have a Teacher
Preparation ProgramLimit Emergency CertificatesState Approves Teacher Education ProgramsBackground Checks
Reauthorization
National Governors AssociationSupport Professional DevelopmentOppose Any Attempt to Link Teacher
Preparation to Student PerformanceProvide More Flexibility for Teachers of
Multiple Subjects in High Need Areas eg Special Education and Rural Districts
THANK YOU TO OSPA
Regular Conversations between OSPA and ODE on HQT Issues
Keep People Informed on Reauthorization Surface Questions and Problems Improving Communication Make the New Data System Work
Meeting on May 31 ODE Contact Jim Buck if Interested in Helping
Some Good News
Mentoring Bill $5 million Possible Regional Professional
Development Centers $12 million School Improvement Fund of $260 million Distribution via Formula Interim Accountability Linked to CIP ESDs Participate in SIF
Federal Developments
Preparation Underway for Next MonitoringHQT Definitions and ProceduresHQT Data ReportingmdashMore DetailAnnual Report CardsHQT State PlanPlans for Equitable Distribution of Qualified
Experienced TeachersAdministration and Management of Title IIa
Funds
Federal Developments
HQT Plans12 The SEA enters into an agreement on the
use of funds with any LEA that has not made progress toward meeting its annual measurable objectives in meeting the highly qualified teacher challenge for three consecutive years and has also failed to make AYP for three years 2141 (c)
Reauthorization
Spelling Letter of April 23 2007 Building on Results Priorities
1 Close the gap standards accountability2 Assessment Flexibility-Growth3 High School Rigor4 Greater Resources for Teachers5 Turn Around Tools and Improved
Supplemental Education Services
Reauthorization
Greater Resources for TeachersGrants for teachers and principals in high
needs schools National Math Panel Teacher Incentive Fund- $43 million this round Teacher-to-teacher Initiative eLearning web site
Reauthorization
Things to WatchHighly Qualified and Effective TeachersHQT and Student Achievement DataElimination of HOUSSEhellipTimes UpEquity Plans and Teacher Level DataMore Linkage to AYP ResultshellipPossible
Offset to HQTMore Flexibility for Rural Districts
Reauthorization
Council of Chief State School Officers Provide Multiple Pathways And More Incentives Count New Hires As ldquoHQTrdquo In Primary Subject And
Provide 3 Year Ramp Up To Additional Subjects Through HOUSSE
Special Education And ELL Teachers HQT If Closely Linked (Partnered) With Other HQT
Use Achievement Growth As One But Not Only Indicator Of Performance
Provide Incentives For Challenging Schools
Reauthorization
National Association of State Boards of EducationState Board Authorizes LicensurePreservice Articulates to K-12Alternative Pathways Must Have a Teacher
Preparation ProgramLimit Emergency CertificatesState Approves Teacher Education ProgramsBackground Checks
Reauthorization
National Governors AssociationSupport Professional DevelopmentOppose Any Attempt to Link Teacher
Preparation to Student PerformanceProvide More Flexibility for Teachers of
Multiple Subjects in High Need Areas eg Special Education and Rural Districts
THANK YOU TO OSPA
Regular Conversations between OSPA and ODE on HQT Issues
Keep People Informed on Reauthorization Surface Questions and Problems Improving Communication Make the New Data System Work
Meeting on May 31 ODE Contact Jim Buck if Interested in Helping
Federal Developments
Preparation Underway for Next MonitoringHQT Definitions and ProceduresHQT Data ReportingmdashMore DetailAnnual Report CardsHQT State PlanPlans for Equitable Distribution of Qualified
Experienced TeachersAdministration and Management of Title IIa
Funds
Federal Developments
HQT Plans12 The SEA enters into an agreement on the
use of funds with any LEA that has not made progress toward meeting its annual measurable objectives in meeting the highly qualified teacher challenge for three consecutive years and has also failed to make AYP for three years 2141 (c)
Reauthorization
Spelling Letter of April 23 2007 Building on Results Priorities
1 Close the gap standards accountability2 Assessment Flexibility-Growth3 High School Rigor4 Greater Resources for Teachers5 Turn Around Tools and Improved
Supplemental Education Services
Reauthorization
Greater Resources for TeachersGrants for teachers and principals in high
needs schools National Math Panel Teacher Incentive Fund- $43 million this round Teacher-to-teacher Initiative eLearning web site
Reauthorization
Things to WatchHighly Qualified and Effective TeachersHQT and Student Achievement DataElimination of HOUSSEhellipTimes UpEquity Plans and Teacher Level DataMore Linkage to AYP ResultshellipPossible
Offset to HQTMore Flexibility for Rural Districts
Reauthorization
Council of Chief State School Officers Provide Multiple Pathways And More Incentives Count New Hires As ldquoHQTrdquo In Primary Subject And
Provide 3 Year Ramp Up To Additional Subjects Through HOUSSE
Special Education And ELL Teachers HQT If Closely Linked (Partnered) With Other HQT
Use Achievement Growth As One But Not Only Indicator Of Performance
Provide Incentives For Challenging Schools
Reauthorization
National Association of State Boards of EducationState Board Authorizes LicensurePreservice Articulates to K-12Alternative Pathways Must Have a Teacher
Preparation ProgramLimit Emergency CertificatesState Approves Teacher Education ProgramsBackground Checks
Reauthorization
National Governors AssociationSupport Professional DevelopmentOppose Any Attempt to Link Teacher
Preparation to Student PerformanceProvide More Flexibility for Teachers of
Multiple Subjects in High Need Areas eg Special Education and Rural Districts
THANK YOU TO OSPA
Regular Conversations between OSPA and ODE on HQT Issues
Keep People Informed on Reauthorization Surface Questions and Problems Improving Communication Make the New Data System Work
Meeting on May 31 ODE Contact Jim Buck if Interested in Helping
Federal Developments
HQT Plans12 The SEA enters into an agreement on the
use of funds with any LEA that has not made progress toward meeting its annual measurable objectives in meeting the highly qualified teacher challenge for three consecutive years and has also failed to make AYP for three years 2141 (c)
Reauthorization
Spelling Letter of April 23 2007 Building on Results Priorities
1 Close the gap standards accountability2 Assessment Flexibility-Growth3 High School Rigor4 Greater Resources for Teachers5 Turn Around Tools and Improved
Supplemental Education Services
Reauthorization
Greater Resources for TeachersGrants for teachers and principals in high
needs schools National Math Panel Teacher Incentive Fund- $43 million this round Teacher-to-teacher Initiative eLearning web site
Reauthorization
Things to WatchHighly Qualified and Effective TeachersHQT and Student Achievement DataElimination of HOUSSEhellipTimes UpEquity Plans and Teacher Level DataMore Linkage to AYP ResultshellipPossible
Offset to HQTMore Flexibility for Rural Districts
Reauthorization
Council of Chief State School Officers Provide Multiple Pathways And More Incentives Count New Hires As ldquoHQTrdquo In Primary Subject And
Provide 3 Year Ramp Up To Additional Subjects Through HOUSSE
Special Education And ELL Teachers HQT If Closely Linked (Partnered) With Other HQT
Use Achievement Growth As One But Not Only Indicator Of Performance
Provide Incentives For Challenging Schools
Reauthorization
National Association of State Boards of EducationState Board Authorizes LicensurePreservice Articulates to K-12Alternative Pathways Must Have a Teacher
Preparation ProgramLimit Emergency CertificatesState Approves Teacher Education ProgramsBackground Checks
Reauthorization
National Governors AssociationSupport Professional DevelopmentOppose Any Attempt to Link Teacher
Preparation to Student PerformanceProvide More Flexibility for Teachers of
Multiple Subjects in High Need Areas eg Special Education and Rural Districts
THANK YOU TO OSPA
Regular Conversations between OSPA and ODE on HQT Issues
Keep People Informed on Reauthorization Surface Questions and Problems Improving Communication Make the New Data System Work
Meeting on May 31 ODE Contact Jim Buck if Interested in Helping
Reauthorization
Spelling Letter of April 23 2007 Building on Results Priorities
1 Close the gap standards accountability2 Assessment Flexibility-Growth3 High School Rigor4 Greater Resources for Teachers5 Turn Around Tools and Improved
Supplemental Education Services
Reauthorization
Greater Resources for TeachersGrants for teachers and principals in high
needs schools National Math Panel Teacher Incentive Fund- $43 million this round Teacher-to-teacher Initiative eLearning web site
Reauthorization
Things to WatchHighly Qualified and Effective TeachersHQT and Student Achievement DataElimination of HOUSSEhellipTimes UpEquity Plans and Teacher Level DataMore Linkage to AYP ResultshellipPossible
Offset to HQTMore Flexibility for Rural Districts
Reauthorization
Council of Chief State School Officers Provide Multiple Pathways And More Incentives Count New Hires As ldquoHQTrdquo In Primary Subject And
Provide 3 Year Ramp Up To Additional Subjects Through HOUSSE
Special Education And ELL Teachers HQT If Closely Linked (Partnered) With Other HQT
Use Achievement Growth As One But Not Only Indicator Of Performance
Provide Incentives For Challenging Schools
Reauthorization
National Association of State Boards of EducationState Board Authorizes LicensurePreservice Articulates to K-12Alternative Pathways Must Have a Teacher
Preparation ProgramLimit Emergency CertificatesState Approves Teacher Education ProgramsBackground Checks
Reauthorization
National Governors AssociationSupport Professional DevelopmentOppose Any Attempt to Link Teacher
Preparation to Student PerformanceProvide More Flexibility for Teachers of
Multiple Subjects in High Need Areas eg Special Education and Rural Districts
THANK YOU TO OSPA
Regular Conversations between OSPA and ODE on HQT Issues
Keep People Informed on Reauthorization Surface Questions and Problems Improving Communication Make the New Data System Work
Meeting on May 31 ODE Contact Jim Buck if Interested in Helping
Reauthorization
Greater Resources for TeachersGrants for teachers and principals in high
needs schools National Math Panel Teacher Incentive Fund- $43 million this round Teacher-to-teacher Initiative eLearning web site
Reauthorization
Things to WatchHighly Qualified and Effective TeachersHQT and Student Achievement DataElimination of HOUSSEhellipTimes UpEquity Plans and Teacher Level DataMore Linkage to AYP ResultshellipPossible
Offset to HQTMore Flexibility for Rural Districts
Reauthorization
Council of Chief State School Officers Provide Multiple Pathways And More Incentives Count New Hires As ldquoHQTrdquo In Primary Subject And
Provide 3 Year Ramp Up To Additional Subjects Through HOUSSE
Special Education And ELL Teachers HQT If Closely Linked (Partnered) With Other HQT
Use Achievement Growth As One But Not Only Indicator Of Performance
Provide Incentives For Challenging Schools
Reauthorization
National Association of State Boards of EducationState Board Authorizes LicensurePreservice Articulates to K-12Alternative Pathways Must Have a Teacher
Preparation ProgramLimit Emergency CertificatesState Approves Teacher Education ProgramsBackground Checks
Reauthorization
National Governors AssociationSupport Professional DevelopmentOppose Any Attempt to Link Teacher
Preparation to Student PerformanceProvide More Flexibility for Teachers of
Multiple Subjects in High Need Areas eg Special Education and Rural Districts
THANK YOU TO OSPA
Regular Conversations between OSPA and ODE on HQT Issues
Keep People Informed on Reauthorization Surface Questions and Problems Improving Communication Make the New Data System Work
Meeting on May 31 ODE Contact Jim Buck if Interested in Helping
Reauthorization
Things to WatchHighly Qualified and Effective TeachersHQT and Student Achievement DataElimination of HOUSSEhellipTimes UpEquity Plans and Teacher Level DataMore Linkage to AYP ResultshellipPossible
Offset to HQTMore Flexibility for Rural Districts
Reauthorization
Council of Chief State School Officers Provide Multiple Pathways And More Incentives Count New Hires As ldquoHQTrdquo In Primary Subject And
Provide 3 Year Ramp Up To Additional Subjects Through HOUSSE
Special Education And ELL Teachers HQT If Closely Linked (Partnered) With Other HQT
Use Achievement Growth As One But Not Only Indicator Of Performance
Provide Incentives For Challenging Schools
Reauthorization
National Association of State Boards of EducationState Board Authorizes LicensurePreservice Articulates to K-12Alternative Pathways Must Have a Teacher
Preparation ProgramLimit Emergency CertificatesState Approves Teacher Education ProgramsBackground Checks
Reauthorization
National Governors AssociationSupport Professional DevelopmentOppose Any Attempt to Link Teacher
Preparation to Student PerformanceProvide More Flexibility for Teachers of
Multiple Subjects in High Need Areas eg Special Education and Rural Districts
THANK YOU TO OSPA
Regular Conversations between OSPA and ODE on HQT Issues
Keep People Informed on Reauthorization Surface Questions and Problems Improving Communication Make the New Data System Work
Meeting on May 31 ODE Contact Jim Buck if Interested in Helping
Reauthorization
Council of Chief State School Officers Provide Multiple Pathways And More Incentives Count New Hires As ldquoHQTrdquo In Primary Subject And
Provide 3 Year Ramp Up To Additional Subjects Through HOUSSE
Special Education And ELL Teachers HQT If Closely Linked (Partnered) With Other HQT
Use Achievement Growth As One But Not Only Indicator Of Performance
Provide Incentives For Challenging Schools
Reauthorization
National Association of State Boards of EducationState Board Authorizes LicensurePreservice Articulates to K-12Alternative Pathways Must Have a Teacher
Preparation ProgramLimit Emergency CertificatesState Approves Teacher Education ProgramsBackground Checks
Reauthorization
National Governors AssociationSupport Professional DevelopmentOppose Any Attempt to Link Teacher
Preparation to Student PerformanceProvide More Flexibility for Teachers of
Multiple Subjects in High Need Areas eg Special Education and Rural Districts
THANK YOU TO OSPA
Regular Conversations between OSPA and ODE on HQT Issues
Keep People Informed on Reauthorization Surface Questions and Problems Improving Communication Make the New Data System Work
Meeting on May 31 ODE Contact Jim Buck if Interested in Helping
Reauthorization
National Association of State Boards of EducationState Board Authorizes LicensurePreservice Articulates to K-12Alternative Pathways Must Have a Teacher
Preparation ProgramLimit Emergency CertificatesState Approves Teacher Education ProgramsBackground Checks
Reauthorization
National Governors AssociationSupport Professional DevelopmentOppose Any Attempt to Link Teacher
Preparation to Student PerformanceProvide More Flexibility for Teachers of
Multiple Subjects in High Need Areas eg Special Education and Rural Districts
THANK YOU TO OSPA
Regular Conversations between OSPA and ODE on HQT Issues
Keep People Informed on Reauthorization Surface Questions and Problems Improving Communication Make the New Data System Work
Meeting on May 31 ODE Contact Jim Buck if Interested in Helping
Reauthorization
National Governors AssociationSupport Professional DevelopmentOppose Any Attempt to Link Teacher
Preparation to Student PerformanceProvide More Flexibility for Teachers of
Multiple Subjects in High Need Areas eg Special Education and Rural Districts
THANK YOU TO OSPA
Regular Conversations between OSPA and ODE on HQT Issues
Keep People Informed on Reauthorization Surface Questions and Problems Improving Communication Make the New Data System Work
Meeting on May 31 ODE Contact Jim Buck if Interested in Helping
THANK YOU TO OSPA
Regular Conversations between OSPA and ODE on HQT Issues
Keep People Informed on Reauthorization Surface Questions and Problems Improving Communication Make the New Data System Work
Meeting on May 31 ODE Contact Jim Buck if Interested in Helping