1.) The state plan must establish each  district’s and school’s annual measurable objectives for increasing the  number of teachers meeting qualification requirements and receiving high- quality professional development with the goal of ensuring that all  teachers meet the requirements by the end of the 2005-2006 school year. Selected state and district officials told us that  certain groups of teachers would likely face challenges meeting the  requirements by the 2005-2006 deadline. Most States Reported That the Majority of Teachers Are Qualified, but Some Data Issues Remain

The data reported by 47 states suggest that the majority of core academic  classes were taught by teachers who met NCLBA requirements during the  2003-2004 school year. States have improved in their ability to track and report the percentage of  core academic classes taught by teachers who met NCLBA qualifications. Despite this progress, several issues limit the quality and precision of  state-reported data and make it difficult to determine the exact percentage  of core academic classes taught by teachers meeting NCLBA qualification  requirements. Selected States and Districts Faced Implementation Challenges

Although numerous ways exist for veteran teachers to demonstrate  subject matter competency, officials in site visit states and districts and  national association representatives told us that some teachers providing  instruction in multiple core academic subjects, such as special education  teachers and teachers in rural areas and specialized school settings, may  not meet the requirements by the deadline. Seven of the 11 districts that we visited also continued to  use the funds for class size reduction efforts. All Visited Districts Used Title II Funds for Professional Development, and Many of Them Used These Funds for Class Size Reduction

All districts that we visited used Title II funds to provide professional  development to teachers and focused their efforts on improving the quality  of instruction in core academic subjects such as reading and math. Officials in the majority of the districts that we visited told us that  NCLBA’s emphasis on student achievement and on strategies supported by  research had led to improvements in the kinds of professional  development they funded with Title II funds. Officials in 7 of the 11 districts that we visited told us that they also used  Title II funds to hire additional teachers to reduce class size. District officials indicated that they were now  redirecting funds to support initiatives designed to improve teachers’  subject matter knowledge and instructional skills, such as professional  development. Visited Districts Considered Student Achievement Needs in Identifying Uses of Title II Funds

Officials in the districts that we visited said that in deciding what specific  initiatives should be funded with Title II funds, such as the types of  professional development programs for teachers, they considered student  achievement needs and targeted the funds to programs designed to help  teachers address those needs. The districts  then targeted their Title II funds to programs for teachers to improve  instruction in those subjects in which students were lagging behind. While most districts that we visited targeted Title II funds to subject areas  that presented academic challenges to students, only a few of the Title II  funded initiatives were directed to specific groups of teachers, such as  teachers in high-poverty schools or teachers who had not yet met the  requirements of NCLBA. Education Monitored States’ Implementation of Teacher Qualification Requirements

Education provided written feedback to states on their implementation of  NCLBA’s teacher qualification requirements through the Title II  monitoring process. Education provided technical assistance to state officials from all 50 states  through site visits by the Teacher Assistance Corps (TAC). Some Information on Education’s Web Site Was Not Readily Accessible

According to Education officials, Education’s Web site has been an  important part of their outreach efforts regarding NCLBA’s teacher  qualification requirements. However, officials from most states and  districts that we visited who use Education’s Web site to access  information on teacher programs or requirements told us that they were  unaware of some of Education’s teacher resources or had difficulty  accessing those resources. No Child Left Behind Act: Education Needs to Provide Additional  Technical Assistance and Conduct Implementation Studies for School  Choice Provision.
Why GAO Did This Study

The No Child Left Behind Act (NCLBA) of 2001 established qualification requirements that teachers of core academic subjects must meet by the end of the 2005-2006 school year. Congress has appropriated approximately $3 billion a year through the Title II, Part A (Title II), of NCLBA for teacher improvement programs since the law was passed. With the deadline approaching for all teachers to meet the requirements, GAO was asked to examine (1) the status of state efforts to meet NCLBA's teacher qualification requirements, (2) the use of Title II funds in selected districts, and (3) how the U.S. Department of Education (Education) monitors states and assists them with implementation of the requirements. To obtain this information, GAO reviewed teacher qualifications data submitted to Education by 47 states, conducted site visits to 6 states selected for variance in factors such as teacher requirements and geographic location, visited 11 school districts across these states identified as high-need, and interviewed national experts and Education officials.

What GAO Found

Data reported to Education by 47 states suggest that the majority of core academic classes were taught by teachers who met NCLBA requirements during the 2003-2004 school year. States have improved in their ability to track and report the percentage of core academic classes taught by teachers who met NCLBA qualification requirements, but several limitations on the quality and precision of state-reported data make it difficult to determine the exact percentage of core academic classes taught by teachers meeting the requirements. Five of the 6 states that we visited allowed veteran teachers to demonstrate subject matter competency through a state-developed procedure called High Objective Uniform State Standard of Evaluation (HOUSSE). Officials in states and districts that we visited said that teachers of multiple subjects, such as teachers in rural schools with a small teaching staff, would likely face challenges meeting the requirements by the 2005-2006 deadline. The 11 school districts that we visited all used Title II funds to provide professional development, and most used Title II funds to reduce class size. Officials in the majority of these districts indicated that NCLBA had led to improvements in the kinds of professional development they funded with Title II funds. Although officials in over half of the districts indicated that they continued to use Title II funds to reduce class size, an activity that was supported under a federal program that predated NCLBA, some district officials told us that they had shifted funds away from class size reduction to initiatives designed to improve teachers' subject matter knowledge and instructional skills, such as professional development. All districts that we visited reported considering student achievement data and targeting Title II funds to improve instruction in the academic subjects in which students were lagging behind. In the 11 districts, few efforts funded with Title II targeted specific groups of teachers, such as teachers in high-poverty schools. Title II funds constituted a small proportion of total funds that districts could use for teacher improvement initiatives, and all districts that we visited used several other funding sources to support their teacher programs. Education monitored state efforts to meet the teacher qualification requirements and offered multiple types of assistance to help teachers meet the requirements. In monitoring states, Education has found several areas of concern, such as states not ensuring that certain newly hired teachers met NCLBA's requirements. Education's assistance has included professional development for teachers and site visits to provide technical assistance to state officials. Education officials said that their Web site has been an important tool for disseminating resources about the requirements, but officials from most states and districts that we visited told us that they were unaware of some of these resources or had difficulty locating them, despite frequently using the Web site.