This report presents findings about teacher quality from two longitudinal studies, the National Longitudinal Study of "No Child Left Behind" (NLS-"NCLB"), and the Study of State Implementation of Accountability and Teacher Quality Under "No Child Left Behind" (SSI-"NCLB"). The research teams for these two studies have collaborated to provide an integrated evaluation of the implementation of key "NCLB" provisions at the state level (SSI-"NCLB") and at the district and school levels (NLS-"NCLB"). Together the two studies are the basis for a series of reports on the topics of accountability, teacher quality, Title I school choice and supplemental educational services, and targeting and resource allocation. This report describes the progress that states, districts, and schools have made implementing the teacher and paraprofessional qualification provisions of the "No Child Left Behind Act" through 2004-05. The studies found that: (1) Most teachers met their states' requirements to be considered highly qualified under "NCLB." However, state policies concerning highly qualified teachers varied greatly, both in the passing scores that new teachers must meet to demonstrate content knowledge on assessments and in the extent to which state "HOUSSE" policies give existing teachers credit for years of prior teaching experience versus emphasizing more direct measures of content knowledge and teaching performance. (2) The percentage of teachers who are not highly qualified under "NCLB" is higher for special education teachers, teachers of LEP (limited English proficiency) students and middle school teachers, as well as for teachers in high-poverty and high-minority schools. Moreover, even among teachers who were considered highly qualified, teachers in high-poverty schools had less experience and were less likely to have a degree in the subject they taught. (3) Although nearly all teachers reported taking part in content-focused professional development related to teaching reading or mathematics, a relatively small proportion participated in such learning opportunities for an extended period of time. (4) About two-thirds of instructional paraprofessionals were considered qualified under "NCLB," but nearly a third (28 percent) did not know their status or did not provide a response to the study questions. Most paraprofessionals reported working under the direct supervision of a teacher, but some Title I instructional paraprofessionals indicated that they worked with students on their own without close supervision from a teacher. In general, the SSI-"NCLB" and NLS-"NCLB" studies indicate that states and districts are working to implement and comply with the "NCLB" requirements for teacher and paraprofessional qualifications. This is the second volume in this report series. The following are appended: (1) Description of NLS-"NCLB" and SSI-"NCLB" Methodologies; (2) Supplemental NLS-"NCLB" Exhibits and Standard Error Reports; and (3) Supplemental State Exhibits. (Contains 125 exhibits.) [This report was prepared for the Policy and Program Studies Services, Office of Planning, Evaluation and Policy Development, U.S. Department of Education. For "Volume I: Title I School Choice, Supplemental Educational Services, and Student Achievement, see ED497259.]