The Achievement Gap Leave No Child Behind School Funding Challenges Reducing the Dropout Rate Limited English Proficiency Learners Recruiting and Retaining Highly Qualified Teachers Teacher Salaries

Although North Carolina has made substantial and laudable progress in public education during the last twenty years, it still faces some serious and ongoing challenges. The most serious of these include the achievement gap between white and minority students, school funding problems, meeting the expectations of the federal government required under Leave No Child Behind, and recruiting and retaining quality teachers.

The Achievement Gap - The achievement of minority and at-risk students is a major issue and priority at the local, state, and national levels. It is one of the issues that has been an ongoing challenge for over a decade for North Carolina policy makers, educational leaders, and PK-12 professional educators. The achievement gap is a persistent, pervasive, and significant disparity in educational achievement and attainment among groups of students as determined by standardized test scores. Based upon student performance on these tests, white students consistently perform better than black, Hispanic, American Indian, and Limited English Proficiency (LEP) students. When analyzed according to race and ethnicity, achievement disparities negatively impact educational outcomes for poor children and children of color on a consistent basis. Like other states that have this problem, North Carolina policy makers and educators have devoted much effort to this vexing issue.

Since 1993, the North Carolina General Assembly, the State Board of Education, and the North Carolina Department of Public Instruction have made closing this achievement gap a major priority and have developed a number of initiatives to reduce achievement disparities between white and minority students. Included among these are modifications of the state's ABCs Accountability model to include a closing the achievement gap component, creating the Closing the Achievement Gap Section within the Division of School Improvement in the North Carolina Department of Public Instruction, providing professional development for school personnel addressing programs and strategies for reducing the gap, and addressing the disproportionate placement of minority students in special education programs. Each year a major "Closing the Gap Conference" is held in Greensboro, NC, which is attended by thousands of educators to learn about the causes, consequences, solutions, and strategies that are related to reducing and eliminating the gap between white and minority student academic achievement.

The Closing the Gap Section in the North Carolina Department of Public Instruction is staffed with professionals who work directly with schools and school districts to identify and develop strategies and programs to close the achievement gap. Beginning in the 2002-2003 school year, the North Carolina General Assembly required the State Board of Education to include a closing the gap component in each public school's annual assessment which measures and compares the performance of each subgroup in a school's population to ensure that all subgroups are meeting state standards. A school's performance is based, in part, on how well subgroups of students perform in comparison with white students. The performance of each of the following subgroups are measured and tracked: whites, blacks, Hispanics, American Indians, and Asians. The performance of Asians students, however, exceeds the performance of all other minority groups. On the End-of-Grade mathematics mean scores in grades 3-8, Asian students outperform white students and, on reading End-of-Grade tests, their performance nearly equals the performance of white students.

The gap between the performance of white students and minority students exists in all the standard measurements of student achievement. These include student performance on the NAEP assessments, SAT scores, and on end-of-grade and end-of-course tests. These latter tests are critical measures of a school's performance on North Carolina's ABCs Accountability Program. Based upon over-all performance, a significant number and percentage of black, Hispanic, and American Indian students are not meeting the standards set by the state of North Carolina. This standard is based upon the percentage of students who score at or above grade level in grades 3 through 8 and who score at specified levels on end-of-course tests in high schools. Nevertheless, especially since 1996-97, when the ABCs Accountability Program was implemented, the performance of all subgroups of students has improved, with American Indians making the most overall improvement of the minority groups.

Given the disparities that exist between the academic performance of white students and minority students, particularly blacks, Hispanics, and American Indians who are poor, in North Carolina efforts must be continued to reduce the achievement gap so that these students will have equal and better opportunities to successfully graduate from high school and pursue post-high school opportunities and career choices. Since many careers require education beyond high school, these students need to be adequately prepared during their elementary and high school years to successfully pursue education and training beyond the high school level. Moreover, to successfully meet the Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) requirement expected under No Child Left Behind, schools must be able to show that no subgroups of students are being left behind academically.

Leave No Child Behind - In early 2002, the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act was signed into law by President George W. Bush. This act, which was the centerpiece of the reauthorization of the 1994 Elementary and Secondary Education Act, was the principal education initiative of the new President's administration. Deemed by many to be the most ambitious federal education initiative in decades, it incorporated many of the components of the various states' educational initiatives over the previous decades. It required that all states have a comprehensive student assessment program to assess the performance of students in grades 3 to 8. The principal broad goal of NCLB is that all states are expected to have all students performing at or above grade level by the 2013-2014 school year.

Due to concerns from state officials and educators, some modifications have been made in the initial regulations established for NCLB. As of March, 2004, NCLB had 40 requirements that states had to meet under seven major categories. There are two major accountability components that school districts and schools have to meet. The first one of these is the Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) component. Each school must show that it is meeting this requirement based upon the academic achievement of all subgroups of students served in the school. The second one is the transfer option that must be offered to students in Title I schools that fail to make AYP in two or more consecutive years. Parents must be notified that these schools failed to make AYP and given the option to transfer their children out of these schools. States also must have all "highly qualified teachers" beginning with Title I teachers in 2002-2003 and with all teachers of core academic subject teachers in 2005-2006.

Since North Carolina had implemented the very comprehensive, rigorous ABCs state-wide accountability program in 1996, state officials decided to incorporate it into NCLB. In North Carolina, AYP measures the yearly progress toward achieving grade level performance for each student group in reading and mathematics. The student groups are: 1) the School as a Whole; 2) White; 3) Black; 4) Hispanic; 5) Native America; 6) Asian; 7) Multiracial; 8) Economically Disadvantaged Students; 9) Limited English Proficiency Students; and 10) Students with Disabilities. A student can be in only one group (School as a Whole) if he/she is represented by less than 40 students across the tested grades in a school or a student can be in as many as five groups if there are less than 40 students in a group. A school must test at least 95% of students in each group. If only one student group in one subject at a school does not meet the targeted proficiency goal with a confidence interval applied to account for sampling error, the school does not meet AYP for the year. This is what is called the "All or Northing" Feature of NCLB. According to the requirements in effect in 2004, NCLB's measure of student academic progress is measured at the school and district levels. Based upon student performance during the 2003-2004 school year, only 24 of the state's 117 school districts met 100% of the targets for student achievement under NCLB.

Given the current regulations that govern NCLB, North Carolina's school districts and schools will likely continue to experience great challenges in meeting the standards for Adequate Yearly Progress. The major problem areas of NCLB for North Carolina are deemed to be: 1) the All or Nothing Feature; 2) the 95% Test Participation Rate; 3) Performance of Students in the Disabilities Subgroup; 4) Adequate Funding for NCLB; 5) Meeting the "Highly Qualified Teacher" Requirement; and 6) Turning Around Targeted Assistance Schools. The latter are schools deemed to be low performing. Based upon the demographics of the state, a large percentage of students, primarily those who are poor and disadvantaged, will need sustained, targeted assistance in order to show Adequate Yearly Progress. This, however, is the fundamental intent of NCLB.

School Funding Challenges - Wide differentials in school funding exist in the state, as illustrated in Figure 7. Average per pupil expenditures statewide were $6,696 in 2001-2002 but they ranged from a high of $12,779 in Hyde County to a low of $5,548 in Randolph County. The high level in Hyde and some other small counties reflect an effort by the state to correct the under-funding of small systems. In Hyde and nine other small, rural counties, in order to make up for nominal local contributions, the state contributed over $6,000 per pupil. On the other hand, in the state's more affluent urban counties, the local subsidy was high, exceeding $2,000 per pupil in 12 systems, including Asheville City, Forsyth and Guilford Counties, Charlotte-Mecklenburg and several systems in the Raleigh-Durham area.

Click Here for Larger Image

Despite state efforts to address these inequities, North Carolina has been involved in a protracted, ten-year court case over them that finally reached the State Supreme Court in 2004. This case, Leandro vs. North Carolina (Leandro v. State, No. 94 CVS 520 N.C. Superior Court, 1994), was initiated when a suit was filed in 1994 on behalf of a Hoke County student (for whom the case was named) representing students and parents in five low wealth counties, contending that the method of funding school districts in North Carolina was unfair to students in poor counties that were unable to raise sufficient funding to support schools and that the state was failing to allocate enough money to make up the difference. At issue was whether the state was fulfilling the mandate of the State Constitution to provide equity in funding for students and also some level of adequacy.

After a trial court judge denied the State's motion to dismiss the case, it was heard by the North Carolina Court of Appeals which reversed the trial court, holding that the state constitution only granted equal access to public schools. However, the North Carolina Supreme Court subsequently reversed the appellate court and unanimously concluded that the State Constitution granted children the right to a "sound basic education," but it did affirm that students did not have a right to equal funding.

The North Carolina Supreme Court then appointed Wake County Superior Court Judge Howard Manning, Jr. to hear the case, which was then named Hoke County Board of Education vs. State and was first argued in 1999. Although the state of North Carolina argued that it was providing an equal opportunity for every child in North Carolina to receive a sound basic education, after hearing the evidence, Judge Manning ruled that many at-risk children in the state were not receiving a sound basic education and the responsibility for providing a sound basic education rested with the State of North Carolina. Over a period of four years, Judge Manning issued four memoranda with decisions in the case. These memoranda addressed virtually every aspect of public schooling in North Carolina including the curriculum, teacher licensure and qualifications, school funding, allocation of resources, student achievement levels, the ABCs Accountability Program, at-risk students, poor students, and pre-school education. Perhaps the most salient ruling by Judge Manning was that a student performing below grade level was not receiving a sound basic education and that a student achieving at or above grade level was receiving a sound basic education. Equally important was his ruling that the State of North Carolina shouldered the burden for assuring that students, particularly those who were at-risk, were provided the opportunity to receive a sound basic education.

On July 30, 2004, the North Carolina Supreme Court unanimously upheld most of Judge Manning's ruling that the state must do more to improve the quality of public schooling in North Carolina's poorest counties. The decision effectively settled the question relative to the locus of ultimate responsibility for public education in North Carolina. The Supreme Court's decision clearly stated that every child in the state, irrespective of geographic area, income status, or circumstance is entitled to receive a sound basic education, defined as achievement at or above grade level and benefit from other educational output measures such as adequate preparation for work and further education. The only component of Judge Manning's ruling that the Supreme Court did not uphold was that the state was not required to provide state-wide pre-kindergarten education for at-risk four year old children. However, the Court concluded that it would be a state constitution violation not to provide some educational opportunities for at-risk children in Hoke County. Nevertheless, the Supreme Court concluded that it was premature to decide that pre-kindergarten is the only remedy for addressing the needs of poor and at-risk children.

Although it is unclear exactly when and how the state of North Carolina will implement the Supreme Court's ruling, it is evident that the state must assume a greater role in funding public education, particularly in counties and school districts that serve poor and at-risk students. Undoubtedly, this will likely cause state expenditures for public education to rise and place a greater burden on the state's general fund. More than likely, some adjustments or modifications may have to be made to the state's school funding formula to allocate larger per pupil expenditures to school districts that serve a higher percentage of poor, at-risk and low performing students. Moreover, since class sizes might have to be further reduced to adequately serve poor and at-risk children, more teachers will be needed. This will obviously place more demands upon institutions of higher education to produce more qualified teachers and increase funding needed for teacher salaries. Given that allocating more dollars per student in poor school districts will be perceived as a re-distributive policy, it will invariably have political implications for state level policy makers who will ultimately decide how to implement the court ruling. Moreover, since this will likely impact the resources devoted to other state government functions, the implementation of the Court's decision will have to be done through the cooperative efforts of the legislative and executive branches of state government.

Modest efforts have already begun, however, to respond to the disparities between poor and more wealthy school districts, although there is still much to be done.   While the Leandro case was being litigated, state policy makers gave some additional funding to low wealth school districts to bring them closer to districts in those counties that are better able to support schools based upon property values.   Also, in July of 2004, Governor Easley decided to reallocate 12 million dollars in the state budget to support the lower court rulings that the state of North Carolina do more to help struggling students in eleven rural school districts--Edgecombe, Halifax, Hertford, Hoke,   Northampton, Warren, and Washington County Schools and Weldon, Lexington, and Thomasville City Schools.   Moreover, subsequent to the Supreme Court's ruling, in early October of 2004 Governor Easley decided to allocate an additional 10 million to enhance educational support for students in five additional low wealth school districts.   These five districts were Elizabeth City/Pasquotank, Franklin, Hyde, Montgomery, and Roberson Counties.   Thus, during the 2004-2005 school year, an additional 22 million dollars has been made available to low wealth school districts primarily to recruit and retain teachers, reduce class size, and support teacher professional development.

Reducing the Dropout Rate - Like the achievement gap, North Carolina has had and continues to have a vexing problem with students dropping out of school before they graduate from high school. While the dropout number consists primarily of students who quit school before they receive a high school diploma, students who are expelled from school are, in reality, dropouts, also.

Given the large number and percentage of students who drop out, some consider it to be a crisis that needs more attention. Since the vast majority of dropouts are unlikely to get and maintain steady, gainful employment, they cost the State of North Carolina an enormous amount of lost revenue and tremendous social welfare program expenditures. The president of the Communities in Schools Program in North Carolina noted that a dropout is twice as likely to be unemployed, three times more likely to commit a crime and end up in the courts, and six times more likely to become an unwed teenage parent. She also noted that 75 percent of America's (and North Carolina's) prison inmates are high school dropouts, and projects that last year's crop of dropouts in North Carolina will eventually cost the state 1.3 billion dollars when prison, parole and welfare costs are combined over their average adult lifetimes. Communities in Schools officials have noted that 85% of juveniles in North Carolina's courts are dropouts and 82% of prison inmates are dropouts. Thus, in North Carolina there is a high correlation between dropping out of high school and being arrested and placed under the supervision of the criminal justice system. At best, the data indicate that dropping out of high school puts students on a path that is far less likely to lead to success in life.

During the last two decades, in particular, each governor of the state has aggressively promoted the position that the state's economic progress is inextricably related to the quality of education provided in the public schools. Each of them made education a top priority and has worked in concert with the legislature and educational leaders to improve the quality of North Carolina's public schools. While much progress has been made, the troublesome dropout problem has served as a drag upon many of the initiatives implemented and the state's economy vitality. Far too many students are dropping out before they can fully benefit from the initiatives put in place to assist them.

North Carolina uses two methods to measures dropouts. The first method counts the number of students in grades 7 through 12 who quit school before completing high school. The second method counts the number of students who quit school in grades 9 through 12 before they graduate. Table 15 shows dropout rates for selected years using both of these methods.

Fortunately, these data show that the dropout rates have been steadily decreasing over the years. However, in terms of the large number of students that are dropping out, North Carolina's dropout rate places it among the five states where the dropout problem is the most severe. Between 1997 and 2000, 69,715 students dropped out, which averaged about 23,000 each year. Since the median school district in the state enrolled 6,119 students in 2002-2003, the number of students dropping out of school each year in North Carolina exceeds the number of students in three average size school districts. Due to this problem, only approximately 64% of students who enter ninth grade in North Carolina graduate within four years. The vast majority of these students drop out in the ninth grade.

When dropout rates are examined in the State of North Carolina as a whole, the rates tend to average from a high of approximately 8% in some districts to a low of under 2%. Those school districts where the dropout rates are highest tend to be in rural counties where the poverty rate is highest and where a higher percentage of students in high-risk groups are enrolled (Figure 8). One recent study found that lower socioeconomic status students had a dropout rate four times higher than students of higher socioeconomic status. Based upon their percentage of total enrollment, minority students are over-represented in the state's dropout rate. American Indians are the ethnic group most likely to drop out of school followed by Hispanic students, and black students. However, as the population of Hispanic students drastically increases annually in North Carolina, the percentage of Hispanic students dropping out is rising faster than for any other group.

Click Here for Larger Image

The district which reported the lowest dropout rate was the Chapel-Hill-Carrboro City system, which reported a dropout rate of 1.31%. This is likely due, in part, because this is a district that serves a university town where there is much emphasis on education and where many students are drawn from homes where parents are likely to be engaged in professions and careers where college and graduate degrees are frequently required. In these communities, parental and student expectations are often that students will attend and complete college, let alone high school.

Limited English Proficiency Learners - The public schools of North Carolina are serving an increasing number of pupils for whom English is not the home language. At the beginning of the 2003-2004 school year, 101,122 pupils were identified as "national origin minority students" in contrast to 94,124 in 2002-2003. Speakers of more than 150 languages were reported in North Carolina schools. The top ten languages and the number of speakers are indicated in Table 16.

Among this growing group of pupils for whom English is not the home language is a subset of pupils who are classified as "Limited English Proficient" students. These are students whose primary language is not English and who are insufficiently proficient in English to receive instruction exclusively from regular education programs and function on an academic par with their peers. The determination for eligibility for English as a Second Language services is determined by scores on the state's English language proficiency test.

Based on the October 2003 headcount, the school district with the largest population of students with limited English proficiency was Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools, with 10,190; the school districts with the smallest limited English proficiency population were Camden and Cherokee Counties, each with only two identified English language learners. As evidence of the increasing linguistic diversity in North Carolina's schools, the Department of Public Instruction offers the comparative data show in Table 17:

Language instruction programs for English language learners follow a variety of models: "English as a Second Language" pull out (resource) programs; two-way language immersion programs, bilingual education, inclusion, and nation language instruction (e.g., Spanish for Native Speakers.) The Department of Public Instruction has developed and disseminated the Standard Course of Study for English Language Development.

The growing population of linguistically diverse pupils has brought new challenges to North Carolina's schools. The most obvious challenge centers on the accountability measures of the No Child Left Behind federal legislation. This legislation requires that all schools demonstrate adequate yearly progress in academic achievement for all pupils in the school and for various subgroups of pupils including Hispanic pupils and pupils with Limited English Proficiency.

A broader and more substantial concern focuses on the achievement gaps among various groups of students. The Education Trust reports national data of concern about Latino achievement in America. Nationally the academic proficiency rates and the college-going rates of Latino students have stalled in recent years. In 2001-2002, for example, Latino students in North Carolina made up 7% of the population yet accounted for only 2% of the enrollment in four-year colleges and universities. Capacity-building in providing excellent educational opportunities for linguistically diverse pupils is a major challenge for North Carolina's schools in the next decade.

Recruiting and Retaining Highly Qualified Teachers - The presence of a competent, caring, and qualified teacher in every classroom is a primary goal of North Carolina's school reform efforts. Such teachers have been shown to have a direct, positive impact on student achievement. Unfortunately, such teachers are increasingly difficult to find. A growing teacher shortage in North Carolina threatens the forward momentum of school reform, and systemic efforts to recruit, prepare, and retain excellent teachers are needed.

North Carolina's teacher shortage can be attributed to a number of factors including a growing school-age population and policy changes such as class size reduction. Teacher supply and retention issues are particularly salient. Currently, the 47 public and private teacher education programs in North Carolina's colleges and universities produce about 3,200 new graduates each year, roughly a third of the estimated 8-10,000 teachers needed in a given year.

Teacher shortages in North Carolina vary in severity by geographical location, teaching field, and economic level of the school. Large urban school systems and isolated rural school systems have the most difficulty in filling their classrooms with qualified teachers. The most difficult areas of licensure for which to find licensed teachers, according to the Department of Public Instruction, are the following licensure areas:

• Grades 9-12 Mathematics
• Grades 6-9 Mathematics
• Grades 9-12 Science
• Grades 6-9 Science
• Grades K-12 Special Education

Classes in schools with the largest proportion of economically disadvantaged children are less likely to be taught by a highly qualified teacher than their more economically advantaged peers. Thus, the pupils in most need of excellent teachers may have less access to such teachers. Table 18 shows the percentage of classes taught by highly qualified teachers based upon the latest available data.

Retention challenges contribute heavily to the annual need for new teachers. The average teacher turnover rate in North Carolina is 12.37%. System-level turnover ranges from a high of 25.76% in Bertie County to a low of 2.73% in Graham County. While retirement and resignations to teach elsewhere are the two most frequently reported reasons for leaving, early career teachers in the first five years of service seem to be particularly vulnerable as well.

There are promising practices that are beginning to have a positive impact on North Carolina's goal of a competent, caring, and highly qualified teacher in every classroom:

• Alternative pathways to licensure: Second-career professionals who are college graduates and who are interested in preparing for teaching careers are a great resource for school systems. To assist these candidates in earning their teaching licenses and in acquiring the necessary knowledge and skills for teaching careers, North Carolina has created high quality alternative pathways to the teaching license. NC TEACH is an intensive summer institute, delivered by the University of North Carolina and the Department of Public Instruction at several sites across the state, to prepare second-career professionals for teaching. Many universities have established "fast track" and Master of Arts in Teaching programs to respond to the needs of this population.


• The University Board of Governors Task Force on Teacher Supply and Demand (2004) has set goals and targets for teacher recruitment and preparation for all campuses in the University of North Carolina System.


• Mentoring beginning teachers has been shown to significantly improve the retention of new teachers. Mentoring has been given a high priority in North Carolina which now requires a two-year mentoring program for beginning teachers. Efforts to improve and strengthen mentoring endeavors are underway.


• Working conditions of teachers are receiving attention through Governor Mike Easley's Teacher Working Conditions Initiative , an annual survey of practicing teachers that identifies areas of concern and suggests policy changes.

Teacher Salaries - Beginning in the early 1990s, the Governor and the state legislature began an ambitious effort to increase salaries of public school teachers in North Carolina to bring them closer to the national average. State officials believed that better salaries would serve to enhance teacher recruitment as well as retention. Moreover, they believed that increased salaries would attract more individuals to enter and/or return to the teaching profession. Table 19 shows salary increase trends from 1997-1998 through 2002-2003 along with annual percentage salary increases.

These data show that during this timeframe tremendous strides were made to decrease the differential that existed between national average and North Carolina average salaries from over $6,300 that existed in 1997-1998 to within approximately $1,800 by 2000-2001. Beginning in 2000-2001, due to tight state budgetary constraints brought on by expenditures to address the ravages of Hurricane Floyd in 1999, coupled with a downturn in the state's economy for several reasons, the state's efforts to increase teacher salaries were substantially scaled back. Therefore, as the table shows, the gap, which had been steadily closing, began to widen again. Given other competing demands on the state's coffers, North Carolina policy makers are greatly challenged as they seek to maintain competitive teacher salaries while simultaneously responding to other state functions supported by scarce tax dollars.

Summary

On the basis of most indicators of academic success, North Carolina has made tremendous progress during the last 20 years. Specifically, student academic achievement has steadily risen on end-of-grade tests, end-of-course tests, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) scores, SAT scores, and, most recently, on the federal No Child Left Behind assessments. Nevertheless, when compared with the nation as a whole, substantial improvement is still needed. Given the current status of public education in North Carolina, there are a number of issues that need to be addressed to effect continued school improvement.

First, the dropout rates needs to be substantially reduced, as North Carolina is one of the five states with the highest dropout rates in the country. Far too many students in North Carolina are leaving school prior to receiving a high school diploma. This severely limits these students' ability to obtain and maintain regular employment since it has been noted that fourteen years of education is now needed in the state to be competitive in the labor force. Only an average of 64% of students who enter ninth grade graduate after four years. The economic conditions and quality of the workforce in the state will be appreciably enhanced if the dropout rate is substantially reduced.

A second challenge facing public education is exacerbated by the dropout problem. It is the relative low percentage of students who pursue education beyond high school. As of 2003, approximately 67% of high school graduates were pursuing further education within one year of completing high school. Given the relative low ranking of college graduates in the adult population of the state, a higher percentage of high school students need to be attending and completing college if North Carolina is to be competitive in the global economy and maintain a well educated workforce. Specifically, greater efforts should be undertaken to increase the number of minority students who pursue higher education after high school.

A third challenge facing the state is the financing of public education. As a result of a 2004 Supreme Court ruling, the state has been mandated to see that all students are provided a sound basic education. To achieve this, the state's school funding formula will likely have to be adjusted to increase per pupil funding in poor and low wealth school districts. Given the tight budget conditions that already exist in the state, finding additional money for public education will be an ongoing legislative challenge for the foreseeable future.

A fourth challenge is the increasing number of Limited English Proficiency (LEP) students that are enrolling in North Carolina's public schools. Obtaining and maintaining the resources to assist these students to develop English proficiency is an increasing burden for school districts. However, since the number of these students, particularly those who are Hispanic, are substantially increasing on an annual basis, more focused attention needs to be devoted to this issue. This challenge is closely linked to the financial challenge since more resources per student are needed to fully assimilate these students into the schools and help them succeed academically.

A fifth challenge facing North Carolina is how to increase the quantity and quality of teachers needed to replace those who are retiring and to accommodate student enrollment growth that is expected over the next decade. Currently, North Carolina needs to annually employ approximately 6,800 more teachers than graduate from the states' teacher education programs. Currently, approximately 3,200 teachers graduate from the 47 colleges and universities with teacher education programs, and all of them do not elect to teach in North Carolina. Continuing crucial shortages exist in the state for math, science, special education, foreign language, and English as a Second Language teachers.

Sixth, the state needs to continue and enhance its efforts to reduce the achievement gap between white and minority students. Although progress is being made state-wide, there is still a wide disparity. This disparity manifests itself in virtually every measure of student academic achievement. In particular, the performance of poor and at-risk African-American and Hispanic students needs to continue to improve.

Seventh, and lastly, state education officials need to continue to improve the state's performance on the federal No Child Left Behind (NCLB) accountability program. Since this program invariably will be used to compare and contrast student achievement between the states, North Carolina will need to demonstrate that its public education system is effective and competitive. Moreover, given the consequences for states, school districts, and schools that fail to make Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP), the vitality and effectiveness of each of these will be judged by the public on the basis of how they measure up to NCLB standards.

Back To Top