{"response":{"docs":[{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1455","title":"Report: ''1991-92 Monitoring Report on the Biracial Committees,'' Office of Desegregation Monitoring, United States District Court, Little Rock, Ark.","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring (Little Rock, Ark.)"],"dc_date":["1992-11-16"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System."],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","Little Rock School District","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","Educational planning","School integration","School management and organization","School administrators","School employees"],"dcterms_title":["Report: ''1991-92 Monitoring Report on the Biracial Committees,'' Office of Desegregation Monitoring, United States District Court, Little Rock, Ark."],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Butler Center for Arkansas Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://arstudies.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/bcmss0837/id/1455"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["Available for use in research, teaching, and private study. Any other use requires permission from the Butler Center."],"dcterms_medium":["reports"],"dcterms_extent":["125 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1574","title":"Court filings concerning educational law and district planning","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":["United States. District Court (Arkansas: Eastern District)"],"dc_date":["1992-11"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System."],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","School districts--Arkansas--Pulaski County","School districts--Arkansas--North Little Rock","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","Education--Finance","Educational law and legislation","Educational planning","Magnet schools"],"dcterms_title":["Court filings concerning educational law and district planning"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Butler Center for Arkansas Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://arstudies.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/bcmss0837/id/1574"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["Available for use in research, teaching, and private study. Any other use requires permission from the Butler Center."],"dcterms_medium":["legal documents"],"dcterms_extent":["103 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1435","title":"Report: ''Status Report: Little Rock School District's McClellan High School, Business/Communications Magnet Program,'' Office of Desegregation Monitoring, United States District Court, Little Rock, Arkansas","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring (Little Rock, Ark.)"],"dc_date":["1992-10-08"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System."],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","Little Rock School District","McClellan Magnet High School (Little Rock, Ark.)","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","Educational innovations","Educational statistics","School management and organization","School enrollment","Magnet schools","Student assistance programs"],"dcterms_title":["Report: ''Status Report: Little Rock School District's McClellan High School, Business/Communications Magnet Program,'' Office of Desegregation Monitoring, United States District Court, Little Rock, Arkansas"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Butler Center for Arkansas Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://arstudies.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/bcmss0837/id/1435"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["Available for use in research, teaching, and private study. Any other use requires permission from the Butler Center."],"dcterms_medium":["reports"],"dcterms_extent":["72 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1524","title":"Court filings: District Court, three orders; District Court, motion (by Pulaski County Special School District (PCSSD)) to amend desegregation plans; District Court, response to September 28, 1992, Magnet Review Committee (MRC) letter","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":["United States. District Court (Arkansas: Eastern District)"],"dc_date":["1992-10"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System."],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","School districts--Arkansas--Pulaski County","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","Educational law and legislation","Educational planning","Education--Finance","Magnet schools","School management and organization","School integration"],"dcterms_title":["Court filings: District Court, three orders; District Court, motion (by Pulaski County Special School District (PCSSD)) to amend desegregation plans; District Court, response to September 28, 1992, Magnet Review Committee (MRC) letter"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Butler Center for Arkansas Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://arstudies.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/bcmss0837/id/1524"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["Available for use in research, teaching, and private study. Any other use requires permission from the Butler Center."],"dcterms_medium":["legal documents"],"dcterms_extent":["22 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_235","title":"Enrollment, Little Rock School District (LRSD), North Little Rock School District (NLRSD) and Pulaski County Special School District (PCSSD), gender and racial count, school capacity, and transfers","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118"],"dcterms_creator":["Arkansas. Department of Education"],"dc_date":["1992-10-01"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System."],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Education--Arkansas","Arkansas. Department of Education","Educational statistics","Education and state","Little Rock School District","School districts--Arkansas--North Little Rock","School districts--Arkansas--Pulaski County","School attendance"],"dcterms_title":["Enrollment, Little Rock School District (LRSD), North Little Rock School District (NLRSD) and Pulaski County Special School District (PCSSD), gender and racial count, school capacity, and transfers"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Butler Center for Arkansas Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://arstudies.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/bcmss0837/id/235"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["documents (object genre)"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\n\\ TO: FROM: SUBJECT: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARY-HAMST REET LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS October 22, 1992 OCT t. B 1992 Melissa Guldin, Office of Desegregation Monitoring Marie Parker, Associate Superintendent for Organizational and Learning Equity Revised October 1, 1992 Enrollment Report Please find enclosed the revised October 1, 1992 Enrollment Report. This report is a revision of the enrollment report sent to you last week. The format of the report has been changed to reflect gender. Should you have questions concerning ~1is report please contact me at 321,i.-2272. I \\ LITTLER OCKS CHOODLI STRICT OCTOBE1R, 1992 ENROLLMENT WHITE BLACK HISPANIC ASIAN/PACI.S LND AMER!. ND/ESK MAL~THEFERM ALE MALlOTA~EMALE SCHOOL/GRADE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FE 1ALE %BU, CENTRAL UNGRADED 10 130 149 221 246 0 0 13 1 1 0 365 396 61.37 11 120 142 181 210 2 1 8 16 0 1 311 370 57.42 12 99 121 109 166 0 0 7 5 0 1 215 293 54.13 SUBTOTAL 349 412 511 622 2 1 28 22 1 2 891 1059 58.10 KIND. 0 0 18 31 0 0 0 0 0 0 18 31 100.00 TOTAL 349 412 529 653 2 1 28 22 1 2 909 1090 59.13 rAIR UNGRADED 6 2 7 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 10 65.22 10 51 46 100 95 3 2 0 0 0 0 154 143 65.66 11 67 45 110 95 3 2 0 0 0 0 180 142 63.66 12 54 39 69 78 2 2 0 0 0 0 125 119 60.25 SUBTOTAL 178 132 286 276 8 6 0 0 0 0 472 414 63.43 KIND. 0 1 5 13 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 14 94.74 TOTAL 178 133 291 289 8 6 0 0 0 0 477 428 64.09 HALL UNGRADED 10 64 46 109 98 2 0 2 2 0 0 177 146 64.09 11 57 69 81 87 1 0 2 4 1 0 142 160 55.63 12 78 76 93 92 2 4 1 5 0 0 174 177 52.71 SUBTOTAL 199 191 283 277 5 4 5 1L 1 0 493 483 57.38 KIND. 6 4 5 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 7 44.44 TOTAL 205 195 288 280 5 4 5 11 1 0 504 490 57.14 MCCLELLAN UNGRADED 10 55 50 122 155 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 3 178 209 71.58 11 48 43 93 90 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 142 135 66.06 12 60 56 79 99 0 0 0 2 0 0 2 4 141 161 58.94 SUBTOTAL 163 149 294 344 0 1 2 3 0 0 2 8 461 505 66.05 KIND. 1 0 9 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 9 94.74 TOTAL 164 149 303 353 0 1 2 3 0 0 2 8 471 514 66.60 WIIIT[ [lLACK HISPANIC ASIAN/PACI.S LND AMERI.N D/ESK MAL~THFEERM ALE MALtOTA~EMALE SCHOOL/GRADE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEnALE q,UL/, PARKVIEW UNGRADED 10 63 65 76 104 0 2 0 1 0 0 139 172 57.88 11 43 70 53 98 0 0 1 2 0 1 97 171 56.34 12 49 68 75 79 1 2 0 1 0 0 125 150 56.00 SUBTOTAL 155 203 204 281 1 4 1 4 0 1 361 493 56.79 KIND. 1 0 9 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 7 94.12 TOTAL 156 203 213 288 1 4 l 4 0 1 371 500 57.52 SUBTOTAL UNGRADED 6 2 7 8 13 1D 65.22 10 363 356 628 698 5 5 16 4 1 3 1013 1066 63.78 11 335 369 518 580 6 3 12 23 1 2 1 872 978 59.35 12 340 360 425 514 5 8 8 13 1 2 4 780 900 55.89 KIND. 8 5 46 63 54 68 89.34 SR. HIGH TOTAL 1052 1092 1624 1863 16 16 36 40 2 3 2 8 2732 3D22 60.60 SR. HIGH TOTAL W/0 KINDERGART1E0N44 1087 1578 1800 16 16 36 40 2 3 2 8 2678 2954 59.98 WHITE IJLACK HIS?AMIC ASIA':/PAC.! Sli:J A:.:::R!. N u/ESK MAL2rnrnF EMALE l.l~LJOTAL::-1.'f..', SCIIOOL/GRADE MALE FE~1ALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MAL:': FEMALE r:tu F~.l'\\ALE 'I '- ~=- \\2~:. CLOVERDALE UNGRADED 7 59 19 98 112 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 159 132 72.16 8 28 30 87 93 2 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 117 127 73. 77 9 20 36 83 98 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 105 135 75.42 TOTAL 107 85 268 303 6 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 381 394 73.68 DUNBAR UNGRADED 7 35 52 64 72 0 0 1 0 1 0 2 0 103 124 59.91 8 52 42 74 71 0 0 0 3 0 0 2 1 128 117 59.18 9 54 48 64 65 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 119 114 55.36 TOTAL 141 142 202 208 0 0 1 3 1 0 5 2 350 355 58.16 FORESTH EIGHTS UNGRADED 1 5 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 6 45.45 7 24 42 92 103 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 118 146 73.86 8 37 41 100 99 1 0 4 1 0 0 0 0 142 141 70.32 9 42 28 72 83 0 1 2 1 0 0 0 0 116 113 67.69 TOTAL 104 116 268 286 1 1 8 3 0 0 0 0 381 406 70.39 HENDERSON UNGRADED 7 51 48 141 87 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 194 137 68.88 8 25 21 122 137 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 149 160 83.82 9 38 32 113 85 2 1 0 3 0 0 0 0 153 121 72.26 TOTAL 114 101 376 309 4 3 2 5 0 0 0 0 496 418 74.95 MABEVLA LE UNGRADED 6 7 3 3 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 10 10 30.00 7 31 49 84 67 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 117 116 64.81 8 39 35 79 72 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 118 107 67.11 9 22 37 63 67 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 85 104 68.78 TOTAL 98 128 229 209 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 330 337 t5.67 WHITE BLACK H!SPANl\\, ASI AN/PAC.I SLND AMERI.t D/ESK ~ THE MALtOTArEMALE SCHOOL/GRADE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FE'1ALE MALE FEr-iALE MALE FU\\ALE MAL FEMALE t!3Lh MANN UNGRADED 7 64 64 70 108 1 2 1 0 0 1 0 0 136 175 57.23 n 53 65 79 81 1 0 4 1 0 0 0 0 137 147 56.34 9 33 48 68 99 1 3 1 0 0 1 0 0 103 151 65.75 TOTAL 150 177 217 288 3 5 6 1 0 2 0 0 376 473 59.48 PULASKHI GTS. UNGRADED 2 1 11 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 2 80.00 7 71 58 76 60 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 148 119 50.94 8 38 58 82 85 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 121 143 63.26 9 33 58 78 59 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 111 117 60.09 TOTAL 144 175 247 205 0 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 393 381 58.40 SOUTHWEST UNGRADED 0 1 11 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 3 92.86 7 27 29 99 98 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 127 128 77 .25 8 23 24 90 79 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 114 106 76.82 9 31 31 70 74 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 101 105 69. 90 TOTAL 81 85 270 253 2 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 353 342 75.25 SUBTOTAL UNGR.ADED 9 14 29 7 1 39 21 60.00 7 362 361 724 707 6 5 7 2 1 2 2 1102 1077 65.67 8 295 316 713 717 6 8 10 6 2 1 1026 1048 68.95 9 273 318 611 630 5 6 3 4 1 1 1 893 960 66.97 JR. HIGHT OTAL 939 1009 2077 2061 17 19 20 12 2 3 5 2 3060 3106 67 .11 WIIITE IJLACK Ill SPA:I:C AS!,\\I /PAC. !SU:\n:\u0026gt; M'.ER. I JD/1::SK ~ ALe.T.: .i\u0026lt; FEF,ALE lOTA' SCIIOOL/GRAOE MALE FEMALE MAL[ FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FE1 ALE MALE FEtlALE '.1\\~\" I'E t'.AI. E - BADGETT UNGRADED 1 0 3 3 0 0 D 0 0 0 0 0 4 3 85.71 1 3 2 11 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 10 79.17 2 4 5 8 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 10 59.09 3 0 3 8 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 13 85. 71 4 5 0 8 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 8 76.19 5 1 3 14 17 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 20 88.57 6 4 3 19 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 23 13 80.56 SUBTOTAL 18 16 71 61 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 89 77 79.52 KIND. 4 3 8 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 7 63.16 FOURY RO LD 3 4 1 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 13 58.82 TOTAL 25 23 80 74 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 105 97 76.24 JfihfMED 5 2 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 3 41.67 1 4 2 20 9 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 25 11 80.56 2 0 4 15 10 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 16 14 83.33 3 4 1 15 14 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 19 16 82.86 4 3 3 8 21 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 24 80.56 5 5 2 25 20 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 31 23 83.33 6 7 1 18 22 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 28 23 78.43 SUBTOTAL 28 15 105 97 2 0 5 2 0 0 0 0 140 114 79.53 KIND. 7 3 17 20 0 i 0 1 D 0 0 0 24 25 75.51 i\"\"OUYRR 0 c.'.l 7 2 6 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 5 50.00 TOTAL 42 20 128 120 2 1 5 3 0 0 0 0 177 144 77 .26 BASELINE UNGRA[)Eu 1 7 5 21 26 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 29 31 75.00 / 8 7 19 21 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 27 29 71.43 3 7 2 15 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 22 18 77 .50 ~ 3 4 26 17 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 29 21 86.00 5 7 1 11 17 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 20 18 73.68 6 3 2 14 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 18 85.71 SJ3TOTAL 35 21 106 113 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 144 135 77. 78 Ki11'.l. 8 7 33 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 41 19 75.00 FOJ~ Y?. OLD TOTAL 43 28 139 125 0 0 0 0 185 154 77 .29 WHITE BLACK HISPANIC ASIAN/PACI.S LND AMER. IND/ESK MAL~THFEERM ALE MALtOTA~EMAI_E SCHOOL/GRADE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE %BU,, -- --- BOOKER UNGRADED 1 20 19 29 18 49 37 54.65 2 13 23 23 27 1 37 50 57.47 3 19 19 26 24 l 45 44 56.18 4 17 23 25 28 1 1 1 43 53 55.21 5 12 27 18 33 30 60 56.67 6 18 25 31 23 1 1 50 49 54.55 SUBTOTAL 99 136 152 153 3 3 1 254 293 55.76 KIND. 17 17 21 19 38 36 54.05 FOURY RO LD TOTAL 116 153 173 172 3 3 1 292 329 55.56 BRADY UNGRADED 0 1 5 0 5 1 83.33 1 12 8 21 13 2 1 35 22 59.65 2 8 9 26 18 1 34 28 70.97 3 8 7 18 26 1 1 27 34 72.13 4 8 2 20 14 28 16 77.27 5 9 7 20 18 1 29 26 69.09 6 5 2 24 22 2 29 26 83.64 SUBTOTAL 50 36 134 111 1 2 4 1 1 187 153 72.06 KIND. 12 13 11 19 2 1 _25 33 51. 72 FOURY R0 ~'.) TOTAL 62 49 145 130 1 2 4 3 2 212 186 69.10 CARVER UNGRAlJEu 1 15 16 16 23 31 39 55.71 I' 21 13 31 19 1 1 53 33 58.14 3 21 20 26 22 47 42 53.93 .\n25 17 22 29 2 1 49 47 53 .13 5 28 16 30 25 58 41 55.56 6 32 11 18 35 2 50 48 54.0b SUBTOTAL 142 93 143 153 3 4 288 250 55.0Z KIND. 16 11 16 17 32 28 55.01 FOURY RO LD TOTAL 158 104 159 170 3 4 320 278 55.0, WHIE llLACK IIISPAMIC AS!Ail/P,\\C. !Slti\n} /1!/\nrR. JN:}/ESK ~ Trc.~ lOTA' SCHOOL/GRADE MALE FEMIILE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE F[ 11\\LE -M- AL -F--El:,\\LE MAL FEMAI.E-CHICOT UNGRADED 4 3 5 5 9 8 58.82 1 13 14 30 29 43 43 68.60 2 18 13 38 19 1 56 33 64.04 3 12 11 19 24 1 1 1 33 36 62.32 4 10 11 14 27 1 1 25 39 64.06 5 10 9 20 20 1 30 30 66.67 6 12 14 25 21 1 38 35 63.01 SUBTOTAL 79 75 151 145 3 4 1 234 224 64.63 KIND. 17 6 31 23 48 29 70.13 FOURY RO LD TOTAL 96 81 182 168 3 4 1 282 253 65.42 CLOVERDALE UNGRADi::D 1 3 4 18 21 21 25 84.78 2 6 3 17 20 2 23 25 77 .08 3 4 5 17 18 21 23 79.55 4 4 3 22 24 1 26 28 85.19 5 5 5 27 17 32 22 81.48 6 3 4 22 21 25 25 86.00 SUBTOTAL 25 24 i23 121 3 148 148 82.43 KIND. 9 6 18 20 27 26 71. 70 FOURY Ru c.J 3 4 5 4 1 8 9 52.94 TOTAL 37 34 146 145 4 183 183 79.51 DODD UNGRAL'Eu 5 0 2 3 7 3 50.00 1 7 11 7 13 14 24 52.63 / 5 9 15 12 20 21 65.85 3 11 7 12 12 23 19 57.14 .\n10 6 12 10 22 16 57.89 5 7 7 15 21 22 28 72.00 6 8 8 12 18 20 26 65.22 SRTOTAL 53 48 75 89 128 137 61.89 ~~I~. J. 12 8 11 8 23 16 48.72 FO~:\u0026lt;Y KO L'.l TOTAL 65 56 86 97 151 153 60.20 WI!IT E llLACK III SPAtlCl ASI Ai,/PAC. ISLr:D /\\!,~R.l i~J/L~K tTIIEJ. :oTA~r~ E SCHOOL/GRADE MALE FE:1ALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE Fi::lALE MALE FE1\\ALE MAL FE:iALE\n.'.f.L. ~ - FAIR PARK UNGRADED 1 8 2 16 18 24 20 77 .27 2 4 3 15 14 19 17 80.56 3 2 4 16 9 1 19 13 78.13 4 1 2 13 16 14 18 90.63 5 6 3 11 15 17 18 74.29 6 3 1 9 14 12 15 85.19 SUBTOTAL 24 15 80 86 1 105 101 80.58 KIND. 6 4 13 13 1 20 17 70.27 FOUR YR OLD TOTAL 30 19 93 99 2 125 118 79.01 FORESTP ARK UNGRADED 1 18 20 21 14 39 34 47.95 2 22 23 13 12 1 36 35 35.21 3 16 19 6 7 1 23 26 26.53 4 17 14 10 11 1 28 25 39.62 5 15 24 21 24 36 48 53.57 6 10 13 16 15 26 28 57.41 SUBTOTAL 98 113 87 83 2 1 188 196 44.27 KIND. 11 20 18 10 1 29 31 46.67 FOUR Y\nl. u!..J TOTAL 109 133 105 93 2 1 1 217 227 44.59 FRANKLIN UNGRAUEu 1 0 7 2 8 2 90.00 1 5 2 32 35 1 37 38 89.33 / 1 4 25 20 26 24 90.00 3 1 1 30 18 31 19 96.00 ~ 3 1 24 21 27 22 91.84 5 0 0 16 10 1 17 10 96.30 6 2 0 22 25 2 1 1 27 26 88.6- S~J10TAL 13 8 156 131 3 l 2 173 141 91.4v :'.I :,:J. 2 3 19 19 21 22 88.37 Fi)Lj\nlY, RO LD 17 7 18 9 1 37 17 so.or ,OTAL 1? 1 R 1Q1 1 SQ 4 2 231 180 85.o,\nWll!T[ !LIICK IIISPMIIC IIS!IIN/PIIC.I SLND 111-'.[f{.r n:.J/lSK MIIL~rnrn FEl-iAL[ 10T1\\~ SCHOOL/GRADE MIILE FEMIILE MIILE FEMIILE MALE FEMALE MIILE FEt-11\\LE MIIL[ Ft!ll\\LE M/1L,_ _l\nli/11.[ - FULBRIGHT UNGRADED 2 3 1 1 3 4 28_ 1 21 14 14 11 1 36 25 40. 2 18 23 16 15 2 34 AO 41. 3 30 18 20 18 2 50 38 43. 4 30 19 15 12 2 47 31 34. 5 14 27 18 21 1 33 48 48. 6 27 15 19 20 1 46 36 47. SUBTOTAL 142 119 103 98 4 5 249 222 42. KIND. 16 19 12 12 28 31 40. FOUR YR OLD TOTAL 158 138 115 llO 4 5 277 253 42. \\ GARLAND UNGRADED 1 2 6 4 7 6 76. 1 2 0 22 15 24 15 94. 2 0 1 16 13 1 17 14 93. 3 1 1 18 11 19 12 93. 4 0 0 16 19 16 19 100. 5 2 0 ll 15 1 1 14 16 B6. 6 0 1 18 14 2 20 15 91. SUBTOTAL 6 5 107 91 4 1 ll7 97 92. KIND. 1 2 12 14 1 14 16 86. FOUR YR u!..J 2 1 6 3 8 4 75. TOTAL 9 8 125 108 5 1 139 117 91. GEYERS PRINGS UNGRADEu 0 0 3 0 3 0 100. l 5 9 19 8 24 17 65. I 9 11 12 13 21 24 55. 3 7 7 16 11 23 18 65. ~ 2 3 8 11 10 14 79. 5 3 6 9 7 12 13 64. 6 8 8 15 15 23 23 65. SU3TOT,\\,L 34 44 82 65 116 109 65. KIND. 11 7 7 14 i8 21 53. FOUR YR OLD 2 7 4 5 6 12 50. TOTAL 47 58 93 84 140 142 62. WHITE ()I.ACK ll!SPAIIIC ASIAN/PACI.S LN::J J\\!l\nER. IND/ESK eTHEK , JCJTA~. SCIIDOGLR/ ADE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALr MALE FEMALE MALE FEr1ALE MAI. ' FU\\AL[ M,,Lt. _lhAI.E - GIBBS UNGRADED 1 10 7 15 10 0 1 25 18 58.lL 2 14 5 12 14 26 19 57. 7t 3 13 7 12 12 0 0 0 1 25 20 53.3. 4 9 11 10 16 0 2 19 29 54.1. 5 11 8 11 17 0 2 0 1 22 28 56.0( 6 13 13 14 25 0 1 1 28 39 58.2. SUBTOTAL 70 51 74 94 0 6 1 2 145 153 56.3( KIND. 8 5 11 12 0 0 1 1 20 18 60.5c FOURY RO LD TOTAL 78 56 85 106 0 6 2 3 165 171 56.8~ !SH UNGRADED 0 0 2 3 2 3 100.0C 1 0 0 8 7 8 7 100. oc 2 0 0 18 13 18 13 100.0C 3 2 0 16 8 18 8 92.31 4 0 0 10 8 10 8 100.0C 5 0 0 7 16 7 16 100.0( 6 0 0 11 21 11 21 100.0C SUBTOTAL 2 0 72 76 74 76 98.6i KIND. 0 0 15 10 15 10 100.0( i\"OURY Ru ~J 1 2 4 5 5 7 75.0( TOTAL 3 2 91 91 94 93 97.3:: JEFFERSON UNGRAt:Eu 2 2 3 0 5 2 42.86 1 19 16 16 10 35 26 42.62 / 23 19 12 20 0 0 1 36 39 42.67 3 18 17 12 19 2 0 1 33 36 44.93 .\n25 11 14 18 0 1 39 30 46.38 5 18 21 9 16 0 0 1 28 37 38.4( 6 22 19 23 13 45 32 46. 7: SJgTQTAL 127 105 89 96 2 3 221 202 43.7~ Kl 'iD. 20 21 12 7 32 28 31,67 FOJR n OLD TOTAL 14 7 1 ?6 101 103 2 3 253 230 42.2~ liHITE ~LACK lllSPMllC ASlMi/PAC. lSU.::l A!,ER. It\n::l/ESK MAL~l'cF?.U ALE lOT!,~ , SCHOOL/GRADE MALE FE'1ALE MALE FEMA~E MALE FEMALE MALE FEIIALE MALE F [tt,\\LE :-'.:,L [hAI_E - MABVELA LE UNGRADED 2 1 4 3 6 4 70.0C 1 19 11 27 14 1 46 26 56.94 2 18 16 23 16 1 41 33 52.7C 3 8 20 18 24 26 44 60.0C 4 22 7 16 19 1 39 26 53.8: 5 18 19 22 17 40 36 51.32 6 21 10 27 15 48 25 57.53 SUBTOTAL 108 84 137 108 1 2 246 194 55.61: KIND. 16 11 19 14 35 25 55.0C FOURY RO LD TOTAL 124 95 156 122 1 2 281 219 55.6( MCDERMOTT UNGRADED 1 16 16 23 16 39 32 54.9:0 2 16 11 18 21 1 1 1 36 33 56.52 3 17 19 18 17 1 1 1 36 38 47 .3( 4 15 21 17 23 1 33 44 51.9: 5 10 16 24 24 2 1 l 38 40 61.Sl 6 16 16 21 25 1 1 38 42 57. SC SUBTOTAL 90 99 121 126 2 1 2 3 5 220 229 55.01 KIND. 13 18 15 13 1 29 31 46.6i FOURY RO ~J TOTAL 103 117 136 139 3 1 2 3 5 249 260 54.0~ MEADOWCLIFF UNGRAuEu 1 14 10 21 26 35 36 66.20 ,I 12 13 20 26 32 39 64. 79 3 15 i2 18 20 33 32 58.46 ~ 10 4 25 22 35 26 77 .05 5 16 8 23 18 39 27 62.L 6 6 8 15 17 21 25 69.57 SJ~TOTAL 73 55 122 129 195 185 66.0S Klti::l. 14 5 23 18 37 23 68.J~ FOURY RO LJ -:-CTAL ?.7 60 145 147 ?1? ?08 6/i. 31 WIIITE GL/\\CK I\\JSPMIIC /\\S1 /\\11/P/\\CI.S UHJ M~rn. Ji\nJ/t.SK e11.::, lu rt' SCIIOOL/GR/\\DE M/\\LE FE:1/\\LE M/\\LE FEl-1/\\LE M/\\LE FEMALE M/\\LE FE:-1/\\LE I /\\I.[ FEl1/\\LE M/\\~  - FEl1/\\LE :-:t.L 'ru:AI.[ - MITCHELL UNGRADED 1 0 5 3 6 3 88.89 1 3 4 17 12 2 20 18 76,32 2 1 1 18 25 1 19 27 93.48 3 1 1 19 14 20 15 94.29 4 2 3 15 14 1 18 17 82.86 5 3 1 22 14 25 15 90.00 6 0 0 11 11 11 11 100.00 SUBTOTAL 11 10 107 93 1 3 119 106 88.89 KIND. 1 1 14 9 15 10 92.00 FOURY RO LD 4 1 4 5 8 6 64.29 TOTAL 16 12 125 107 1 3 142 122 87.88 OTTERC REEK UNGRADED 1 12 13 12 11 1 1 25 25 46.00 2 21 13 9 14 30 27 40.35 3 16 18 5 8 1 22 26 27.08 4 21 11 14 6 1 35 18 37.74 5 15 13 16 7 31 20 45.10 6 12 16 15 11 27 27 48.15 SUBTOTAL 97 84 71 57 2 2 170 143 40.89 KIND. 11 11 9 6 1 1 1 22 1.8 37.50 FOURY :l.u ~J TOTAL 108 95 80 63 3 3 192 161 40.51 PULASKHI EIGHTS UNGRA~Eu 46.94 1 11 15 13 10 24 25 / 17 15 12 19 1 1 29 36 47.69 3 12 13 9 12 1 22 25 44.68 ~ 11 14 17 12 1 29 26 52.73 5 9 7 18 16 1 28 23 66.67 6 10 9 17 17 27 26 64 .15 Sv3TO,N.. 70 73 86 86 2 1 159 161 53.75 ~(I \\J. 17 13 12 14 1 2 30 29 44.07 c-ou~Y RO LD TQTAL 87 86 98 180 3 3 189 190 52.24 WHITE l!LACK ll!SPMl!C /,S l Atl/PAC. lSUiD A~!E\n\u0026lt;. l :\n:)/ESK eThc?. JOTA~ . SCHOOL/GRADE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE M,\\LE FEMALE \\ALE FEIIALE MALE FE \\/\\L~ MAL FEl'.,\\LE Ml,~~ [hf,1.E B~e~ldtbL 1 0 1 19 16 19 17 97. 2\n2 0 0 19 15 19 15 100.01 3 0 0 15 14 15 14 100.0 4 0 0 25 13 1 25 14 97 ,4\u0026lt; 5 0 0 20 13 20 13 100.0 6 0 0 17 21 17 21 100.0 SUBTOTAL 0 1 115 92 1 115 94 99.0, KIND. 1 1 13 10 14 11 92.0f FOUR YR OLD 4 2 7 2 11 4 60.0( TOTAL 5 4 135 104 1 140 109 95. 9, ROCKEFELLER UNGRADED 1 9 14 19 18 1 29 32 60.6 2 3 8 18 21 1 22 29 76.4 3 4 2 13 12 1 1 18 15 75. 71 4 2 6 14 17 16 23 79.4 5 2 2 19 16 21 18 89. 7, 6 1 4 17 13 18 17 85.7 SUBTOTAL 21 36 100 97 3 1 124 134 76.3 KIND. 16 9 14 14 1 30 24 51.8 FOUR n J!..J 10 12 10 15 2 22 27 51.0 TOTAL 47 57 124 126 5 2 176 185 69.2 ROMINE UNGRAlJEi1 2 0 12 1 14 1 86.6' 1 9 4 22 21 31 25 76. 7( I 3 2 20 20 23 22 88.8~ 3 1 1 29 13 2 32 14 91. Jr ~ 4 6 11 29 1 15 36 78.4 5 3 6 13 15 1 16 22 73.6 6 4 6 13 15 18 21 71. 7 SUBT O\n, .\\L 26 25 120 114 2 2 149 141 80.6 KPiD. 8 11 20 14 1 29 25 62. Q, rOUR YR OLD 3 1 3 6 1 3 7 10 52.9 ,OTAL. 37 37 143 134 4 s 185 176 69.2 WHITE [lL/\\Ci( IIISPMllC ASIAN/PAC. l '.\u0026gt;LN::J /1I.'.rn. I ,::J/E'.:.K 07'0:i{ Jul/\\~ SCHOOLG/ RADE MALE FEMALE M/\\LE FE'I/\\LE M/11.E FEM/\\LE t'.ALE FC:t1ALE M/11.E FEl1/\\LE M/\\Lt FEMALE I'./,L,. t,\nAI.E -- --- STEPHENS UNGRADED 0 0 5 l 5 l 100.0( l 2 0 9 21 11 21 93. 7( 2 0 l 16 17 16 18 97.0f 3 0 0 18 16 18 16 100.01 4 0 0 12 8 12 8 100.0( 5 0 0 12 4 12 4 100.0( 6 0 0 14 18 14 18 100.0l SUBTOTAL 2 l 86 85 88 86 98.2t KIND. 1 0 12 11 13 11 95.8: FOUR YR OLD 1 2 4 4 5 6 72.7: TOTAL 4 3 102 100 !:)5 103 96.6' TERRY UNGRADED 1 B 23 15 10 1 1 35 34 36. 2_ 2 25 16 12 18 2 2 39 36 40.0: 3 28 13 11 19 3 1 42 33 40.0: 4 19 24 19 17 38 41 45.S- 5 15 22 22 21 2 1 39 44 51.8- 6 15 22 23 20 2 38 44 52.4 SUBTOTAL 121 120 102 105 8 7 231 232 44. 7. KIND. 28 17 15 16 2 45 33 39. 7, i\"OUR Y~ Oc.:l TOTAL 149 137 117 121 10 7 276 265 43.9 WAKEFIELD U~GRAUEu 1 9 11 25 29 l 34 41 72 .Oi / 10 5 21 34 l 31 40 77 .4t 3 12 11 16 25 l 29 37 62.L ~ 15 15 32 14 47 29 60.5 5 14 10 22 24 36 34 65.7 6 8 10 38 25 l 47 35 76.t S-J3TOTA!... 68 62 154 151 2 3 224 216 69.3 ,' i I~ J  11 6 22 20 34 26 70.0 ::-JL~ YR OLD 7GTAL 79 68 176 171 2 3 258 242 69 _i\nWHITE eLACK IIISPMl!C ASIAN/PACI.S LND 1\\1-:ER1.1\n:J/ESK Pfrci\u0026lt; TCJTI\\~ SCHOOGLR/ ADE MALE FE~,ALE MALE FEMf,LE MALE FEMALE MALE F~l1ALE MALE F::r~r~LE M4Lt FUiALE 1'.f,L~ El\nI\\I_E-WASHINGTON UNGRADED 2 0 1 D 3 0 33.33 1 24 29 43 34 1 67 64 58.78 2 24 23 60 37 1 85 60 66.90 3 29 15 30 32 2 61 47 57.41 4 21 19 27 29 48 48 58.33 5 33 17 34 33 67 so 57.26 6 23 17 28 27 51 44 57.89 SUBTOTAL 156 120 223 192 3 1 382 313 59. 71 KIND. 23 15 31 19 1 2 55 36 54.95 FOURY RO LD 11 7 11 7 22 14 50.00 TOTAL 190 142 265 218 4 3 459 363 58.76 WATSON UNGRADED 1 10 8 27 27 1 38 35 73.97 2 7 8 27 26 34 34 77 .94 3 5 6 18 23 23 29 78.85 4 8 7 20 13 28 20 68.75 5 13 5 21 33 34 38 75.00 6 9 5 24 25 33 30 77.78 -SUBTOTAL 52 39 137 147 1 190 186 75.53 KIND. 12 8 15 22 1 27 31 63.79 FOURY Rv '-J 4 2 5 6 9 8 64.71 TOTAL 68 49 157 175 1 1 226 225 73.Gl WESTERHNIL LS UNGRMEu 1 9 12 11 17 20 29 57.14 / 9 10 14 12 23 22 57.78 3 4 10 15 19 1 19 30 69.39 .\n10 8 13 17 23 25 62.50 5 10 9 13 19 23 29 61. 54 6 11 6 18 17 29 23. 67.31 S:.J3TOTAL 53 55 84 101 137 158 62. 71 ,(j ','.). 7 9 13 11 20 20 60.00 FOt\nYR OLD TOfT,L 60 64 97 112 WHITE ~LACK l\\[SPMJIC ASIAN/PACl. ' .\u0026gt;LN::J At-'.EH. I :,J/ESK OT\"? ICJTf,lc SCHOOL/GRADE MALE FE:1ALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FcJ1ALE 1\\ALE F:' ALE 'l.~L t \" FE i1AEL 1-:t.L,. (1-\nf1..E - WILLIAMS UNGRADED 1 15 14 24 12 1 2 39 29 52.94 2 15 12 18 21 1 1 33 35 57.3: 3 13 16 22 15 1 35 32 55.22 4 14 17 24 17 38 34 56.9l 5 17 15 22 16 1 1 41 31 52.7E 6 16 26 23 29 1 40 55 54.7l SUBTOTAL 90 100 133 110 1 2 2 4 226 216 54.9F KIND. 14 14 20 12 34 26 53.3\nFOURY RO LD TOTAL 104 114 153 122 1 2 2 4 260 242 54. 7E WILSON UNGRADED 3 1 18 1 21 2 82.61 1 9 4 20 14 29 18 72.3l 2 7 4 12 17 19 21 72. 5( 3 6 12 17 18 23 3'.J 66.0l 4 5 2 20 20 25 22 85.L 5 1 4 15 21 16 25 87 .8( 6 5 2 26 14 31 16 85.1. SUBTOTAL 36 29 128 105 164 134 78.1. KIND. 12 5 15 8 27 13 57 .5: ,-ouR n 0~:\u0026gt; 3 5 5 4 8 9 52. 9- TOTAL 51 39 148 117 199 156 74.6' WOODRUFF U,lG~A\nEu l 12 2 12 16 24 18 66.6 / 5 7 6 5 11 12 47.8 3 3 5 8 4 11 9 60.0 ~ 5 4 6 10 11 14 64 .C, 5 4 9 12 12 1 17 21 63 .1 6 8 1 10 10 1 18 12 66.l su~-c,rr.L 37 28 54 57 l 92 86 62 .. I~ I \"' 10 l 15 13 1 25 15 70., '1 ,..,. FOL~ Y\u0026lt; C:..J 2 5 2 6 l 4 12 50.l T07 f,L 4q 14 71 76 2 121 113 62.tl WHITE BLACK HISPANIC ASIAN/PACI.S LND AMERI. tJD/ESK MALeTHEFREM ALE MALtOTA~EMALE SCHOOL/GRADE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE %13[ SUBTOTAL UNGRADED 31 15 B6 31 117 46 71.1 1 374 345 693 612 5 3 4 6 2 1 1078 967 63. t 2 367 340 674 649 3 7 7 10 1 1 1 1053 1007 64., 3 350 323 601 584 '4 4 13 10 2 1 971 921 62.( 4 356 298 604 610 4 8 6 3 1 1 972 919 64., 5 336 329 643 652 6 6 10 5 1 996 992 65. 6 342 298 687 680 3 4 9 7 2 1 1 1044 990 67., K 392 310 582 497 '3 4 7 7 4 1 1 98S 820 61. Four year Old 77 64 95 93 3 1 2 4 1 177 163 55. TOTALE LEM. 2625 2322 4665 4408 3li 37 58 52 12 4 5 2 7396 6825 63. TOTALE LEM. 2633 2327 4711 4471 31 37 58 52 12 4 5 2 7450 6893 64. Ii/HIGH SCHOOL KINDERGARTEN SPECIALS CHOOLS 28 15 15 ff 43 28 39. DISTRICTT OTALS 4644 4438 8381 8345 64 72 114 104 16 10 12 12 13,231 12,981 63. OCT 1 6 b92 Office of 0:i: ,grega ion Munitoring SENIOR HIGH: 10/1/91 10/1/92 INCREASE/DECREASE % ,JUNIOR HIGH\n10/1/91 10/1/92 INCREASE/DECREASE % ELEMENTARY: 10/1/91 10/1/92 INCREASE/DECREASE o, lo ({ Lo SPECIAL .SCHOOLS: ~ o 1,i 10/1/91 JC,? /I l 10/1/92 rP' SE/DECREASE o,\\' ~\n)' % I (1f DISTRICT TOTAL: 10/1/91 10/1/92 INCREASE/DECREASE % I-~I 1,rf!ER\u0026lt;J ART El,J: 10/1/91 10/1/92 INCREASE/DECREASE '% FOUR YEAR OLD: 10/1/91 10/1/92 INCREASE/DECREASE % [JISTF:IC~T TOTAL LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OCTOBER 1 ENROLLMENTC OMPARISON J 9 9 1 - ':1 : / l 9 :: 2 - 9 3 WHITE BLACK OTHER TOTAL %BLACK 2152 3 24 3 lliJ ~ :) ~~ 2131 3378 123 60 ( 21) 135 9 1 ') 'J \u0026lt;., _, (. 98%) 4. 2% 7.9% 2.2.% 1882 4112 68 ~ 68 1948 4138 80 67 6(. 26 12 104 3.5% .6'3% 17.7% 1.7% 4851 166 6 :, I\n819 190 6L.. ( 3 2) 24 (. 66%) 1L... 5% 40 2L1- 0 38 43 28 0 39 3 L.. 0 .5% 25% q,~~ 8925 16,753 3L1-8 26,026 64 8941 16,538 393 25,872 61.,. 1E, (215) I\n. 5 ( 154) .18% ( 1. 3%) 12.9% (. 6%) ',,/,3-3 694 1231 18 1943 E, 3 !)% 715 1188 27 1930 61 21 ( y. 3) 9 ( 13) 3% ( 3. 5%) 50% (. 69%) 120 163 9 292 56 141 /~~ 11 3/d-0 LY :,5 21 25 2 48 17. 5~,\n, 15.3% 22% 16.4% WITH FOUR YEAR OLDS: 10/1/91 901\n.5 16,916 ~, 357 26,318 64 10/1/92 9082 16 I 726,rcJ ,- 401\n. 26 I 212,'f/:\n61.,. INCREASE/DECREP,SE 37 ( 190) 47 (10E~) % .41% ( 1. 1%) r.,1l 13% (. 4%) ~t,rll 1l,  ~)/fl - --- SUMMARY OF OCTOBER 1 ENROLLMENT 1992-93 c\nRJiDE lr,'HITE BLJ\\ CJ~ ()'I'HEf.: TOTl\\L %DLACh K 715 1188 27 1930 6 :. 1 719 1305 21 2 (I lJ :., 63 2 707 1323 30 2060 61\n. r~,  t,73 1185 3/s. 1892 t. ,~, Is. 65/s., 12H 23 1891 6/s. 5 665 1295 28 1988 65 6 E,i,i.O 1367 27 2031,i. 67 \\JN Li 6 117 0 163 72 TOTAL ELEM 4-819 89% 190 11,i.,003 6 I\n. 7 723 11,i.31 2 :, 2179 6, 8 611 1430 ,..,' .) .) 2074- 69 9 591 121,i.1 21 1853 67 UN 23 36 1 60 60 TOTAL LTR HIGH 191\n.g l,i.138 80 6166 67 10 719 1326 31\n. 2079 61,i. 11 701,i. 1098 /,i 8 1850 59 12 700 939 l,i.l 1680 56 UN 8 15 0 ~, ..J. ,., \"' 65 TOTAL SR HIGH 2131 3378 123 5632 60 SPECIAL SCHOOLS l\n.3 28 0 71 39 FOUR YR. OLD Hl 188 11 3/s.O 55 DIS':.'F:ICT TOTAL 9082 16,72f., !\n.01\n. 26,212 61,i *SUMMARYO F STUDENTS LISTED IN \"OTHER\" CATEGORY: SPANISH - 135 E5KIMO/AMER. IND. - 22 ASIAN/PACIFIC ISLANDER - 227 OTHER - 20 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OCTOBER 1 ENROLLMENT 1992-93 SCHOOL/GRADE WHITE BLACK OTHER TOTAL %BLACK CENTRAL UNGRADED 0 0 0 0 ERR 10 279 467 15 761 61. 37% 11 262 391 28 681 57.42% 12 220 275 13 508 54.13% SUBTOTAL 761 1133 56 1950 58.10% KIND. 0 49 0 49 TOTAL 100.00% 761 1182 56 1999 59.13% FAIR UNGRADED 8 15 0 23 65.22% 10 97 195 5 297 65.66% 11 112 205 5 322 63.66% 12 93 147 4 244 60.25% SUBTOTAL 310 562 14 886 63.43% KIND. 1 18 0 19 94.74% TOTAL 311 580 14 905 64.09% HALL UNGRADED 0 0 0 0 ERR 10 110 207 6 323 64.09% 11 126 168 8 302 55.63% 12 154 185 12 351 52.71% SUBTOTAL 390 560 26 976 57.38% KIND. 10 8 0 18 44.44% TOTAL 400 568 26 994 57.14% MCCLELLAN UNGRADED 0 0 0 0 ERR 10 105 277 5 387 71.58% 11 91 183 3 277 66.06% 12 116 178 8 302 58.94% SUBTOTAL 312 638 16 966 66.05% KIND. 1 18 0 19 94.74% TOTAL 313 656 16 985 66.60% PARKVIEW UNGRADED 0 0 0 0 0.00% 1 0 128 180 3 311 57.88% 11 113 151 4 268 56.34% 12 117 154 4 275 56.00% SUBTOTAL 358 485 11 854 56.79% KIND. 1 16 0 17 94.12% TOTAL 359 501 11 871 57.52% /~ /Ot /d).\ni\u0026gt;-' ?//4 Page - 1 -- - - - - - - SCHOOL/GRADE WHITE BLACK CLOVERDALE OTHER TOTAL %BLACK UNGRADED 0 0 0 0 ERR 7 78 210 3 291 72.16% 8 58 180 6 244 73.77% 9 56 181 3 240 75.42% TOTAL 192 571 12 775 73.68% DUNBAR UNGRADED 7 87 136 4 227 59.91% 8 94 145 6 245 59.18% 9 102 129 2 2J3 55.36% TOTAL 283 410 12 705 58.16% FOREST HEIGHTS UNGRADED 6 5 0 11 4 5. 4 5% 7 66 195 3 264 73.86% 8 78 199 6 283 70.32% 9 70 155 4 229 67.69% TOTAL 220 554 13 787 70.39% HENDERSON UNGRADED 0 0 0 0 ERR 7 99 228 4 331 68.88% 8 46 259 4 309 83.82% 9 70 198 6 274 72.26% TOTAL 215 685 14 914 74.95% V.t.ABELVALE UNGRADED 13 6 1 20 30.00% 7 80 151 2 233 64.81% 8 74 151 0 22:\n67.11% 9 59 130 0 189 68.78% TOTAL 226 438 3 667 65.67% MANN UNGRADED 7 128 178 5 311 57.23% 8 118 160 6 284 56.34% 9 81 167 6 254 65.75% TOTAL 327 505 17 849 59.48% PULASKI HEIGHTS UNGRADED 3 12 0 15 80.00% 7 129 136 2 267 50.94% 8 96 167 1 264 63.26% 9 91 137 0 228 60.09% TOTAL 319 452 3 774 58.40% Page - 2 ---------------------- SCHOOL/GRADE WHJTE BLACK OTHER SOUTHWEST TOTAL %BLACK UNGRADED 1 13 0 14 92.86% 7 56 197 2 255 77.25% 8 47 169 4 220 76.82% 9 62 144 0 206 69.90% TOTAL J.56 523 6 695 75.25% BADGETT UNGRADED 1 6 0 7 85.71% 1 5 19 0 24 79.17% 2 9 13 0 22 59.09% 3 3 18 0 21 85.71% 4 5 16 0 21 76.19% 5 4 31 0 35 88.57% 6 7 29 0 36 80.56% SUBTOTAL 34 132 0 166 79.52% KIND. 7 12 0 19 63.16% FOUR YR OLD 7 10 0 17 58.82% TOTAL 48 154 0 202 76.24% BALE UNGRADED 7 5 0 12 41.67% 1 6 29 1 36 80.56% 2 4 25 1 30 83.33% 3 5 29 1 35 82.86% 4 6 29 1 36 80.56% 5 7 45 2 54 83.33% 6 8 40 3 51 78.43% SUBTOTAL 43 202 9 254 79.53% KIND. 10 37 2 49 75.51% FOUR YR OLD 9 9 0 18 50.00% TOTAL 62' 248 11 321 77.26% BASELINE UNGRADED 1 15 45 (' 60 75.00% 2 15 40 1 56 71.43% 3 9 31 0 40 77.50% 4 7 43 0 50 86.00% 5 8 28 2 38 73.68% 6 5 30 0 35 85.71% SUBT0TAL 59 217 3 279 77.78% KIND. 15 45 0 60 75.00% TOTAL 74 262 3 339 77.29% Page - 3 SCHOOL/GRADE WHITE BLACK OTHER TOTAL %BLACK BOOKER UNGRADED 1 39 47 0 86 54.65% 2 36 50 1 87 57.47% 3 38 50 1 89 56.18% 4 40 53 3 96 55.21% 5 39 :\u0026gt; 1 0 90 56.67% 6 43 54 2 99 54.55% SUBTOTAL 235 305 7 547 55.76% KIND. 34 40 0 74 54.05% TOTAL 269 345 7 621 55.56% BRADY UNGRADED 1 5 0 6 83.33% 1 2n 34 3 57 59.65% 2 1/ 44 1 62 70.97% 3 15 44 2 61 72.13% 4 10 34 0 44 77.27% 5 16 38 1 55 69.09% 6 7 46 2 55 83.64% SUBTOTAL 86 245 9 340 72.06% KIND. 25 30 3 58 51. 72% TOTAL 111 275 12 398 69.10% CARVER UNGRADED 1 31 39 0 70 55.71% 2 34 50 2 8 f, 58.14% 3 41 48 0 89 53.93% 4 42 51 3 96 53.13% 5 44 55 0 99 55.56% 6 43 53 2 98 54.08% SUBTOTAL 235 296 7 538 55.02% KIND. 27 33 0 60 55.00% TOTAL 262 329 7 598 55.02% CHICOT UNGRADED 7 10 0 17 58.8~% 1 27 59 0 86 68.60% 2 31 57 1 89 64.04% 3 23 43 3 69 62.32% 4 21 41 2 64 64.06% 5 19 40 1 GO 66.67% 6 26 46 1 73 63.01% SUBTOTAL 154 296 8 4 58 64.63% KIND. 23 54 0 77 70.13% TOTAL 177 350 8 535 65.42% Page - 4 SCHOOL/GRADE WHITE BLACK CLOVERDALE OTHER TOTAL %BLACK UNGRADED 1 7 39 0 46 84.78% 2 9 37 2 48 77. 08% 3 9 35 0 44 79.55% 4 7 46 1 54 85.19% 5 10 44 0 54 81. 48% 6 7 43 0 50 86.00% SUBTOTAL 49 244 3 296 82.43% KIND. 15 38 0 53 71. 7 0% FOUR YR OLD 7 9 1 17 52.94% TOTJi.L 71 291 4 366 79.51% DODD UNGRADED 5 5 0 10 50.00% 1 18 20 0 38 52.63% 2 14 27 0 41 65.85% 3 18 24 0 42 57.14% 4 16 22 0 38 57.89% 5 14 36 0 50 72.00% 6 16 30 0 46 65.22% SUBTOTAL 101 164 0 265 61.89% KIND. 20 19 0 39 48.72% 121 183 0 304 60.20% FAIR PARK UNGRADED 1 10 34 0 44 77.27% 2 7 29 0 36 80.56% 3 6 25 1 32 78.13% 4 3 29 0 32 90.63% 5 9 26 0 35 74.29% 6 4 23 0 27 85.19% SUBTOTAL 39 166 1 206 80.58% KIND. 10 26 1 37 70.27% TOTAL 49 192 2 243 79.01% FOREST PARK UNGRADED 1 38 35 0 73 47.95% 2 45 25 1 71 35.21% 3 35 13 1 4 S' 26.53% 4 31 21 1 53 39.62% 5 39 45 0 84 53.57% 6 23 31 0 54 57.41% SUBTOTAL 211 170 3 384 44.27% KIND. 31 28 1 60 46.67% TOTAL 242 198 4 444 44.59% Page - 5 SCHOOL/GRADE WHITE BLACK FRANKLIN OTHER TOTA\n%BLACK UNGRADED 1 9 0 10 90.00% 1 7 67 1 75 89.33% 2 5 45 0 50 90.00% 3 2 48 0 50 96.00% 4 4 45 0 49 91.84% 5 0 26 1 27 96.30% 6 2 47 4 53 88.68% SUBTOTAL 21 287 6 314 91.40% KIND. 5 38 0 43 88.37% FOUR YR OLD 24 27 3 54 50.00% TOTAL 50 352 9 411 85.64% FULBRIGHT UNGRADED 5 2 0 7 28.57% 1 35 25 1 61 40.98% 2 41 31 2 74 41.89% 3 48 38 2 88 43.18% 4 49 27 2 78 3'1.62% 5 41 39 1 81 48.15% 6 42 39 1 82 47.56% SUBTOTAL 261 201 9 471 42.68% KIND. 35 24 0 59 40.68% TOTAL 296 225 9 530 42.45% GARLAND UNGRADED J 10 0 13 76.92% 1 2 37 0 39 94.87% 2 1 29 1 31 93.55% J 2 29 0 31 93.5:5% 4 0 35 0 35 100.00% 5 2 26 2 JO 86.67% 6 1 32 2 35 91. 43% SUBTOTAL 11 198 5 214 92.52% KIND. J 26 1 JO 86.67% FOUR YR OLD j 9 0 12 75.00% TOTAL 17 233 6 256 91.02% GEYER SPRINGS UNGRADED 0 3 0 3 100.00% 1 14 27 0 41 65.85% 2 20 \"5 0 45 55.56% J 14 27 0 41 65.85% 4 5 19 0 24 79.17% 5 9 16 0 25 64.00% 6 16 30 0 46 65.22% SUBTOTAL 78 147 0 225 65.33% KIND. 18 21 39 53.85% FOUR YR OLD 9 9 0 18 50.00% TOTAL 105 177 0 282 62.77% Page - 6 SCHOOL/GRADE WHITE BLACK OTHER TOTAL GIBBS %BLACK UNGRADED 1 17 25 1 43 58.14% 2 19 26 0 45 57.78% 3 20 24 1 45 53.33% 4 20 26 2 48 54.17% 5 19 28 3 50 56.00% 6 26 39 2 67 58.21% SUBTOTAL 121 168 9 298 56.38% KIND. 13 23 2 38 60.53% TOTAL 134 191 11 336 56.85% ISH UNGRADED 0 5 0 5 100.00% 1 0 15 0 15 100.00% 2 0 31 0 31 100.00% 3 2 24 0 26 92.31% 4 0 18 0 18 100.00% 5 0 23 0 23 100.00% 6 0 32 0 32 100.00% SUBTOTAL 2 148 0 150 98.67% KIND. 0 25 0 25 100.00% FOUR YEAR OL 3 9 0 12 75.00% TOTAL 5 182 0 187 97.33% JEFFERSON UNGRADED 4 3 0 7 42.86% 1 35 26 0 61 42.62% 2 42 32 1 75 42.67% 3 35 31 3 69 44.93% 4 36 32 1 69 46.38% 5 39 25 1 65 38.46% 6 41 36 0 77 46.75% SUBTOTAL 232 185 6 423 43.74% KIND. 41 19 0 60 31. 67% TOTAL 273 204 6 483 42.24% MABELVALE UNGRADED 3 7 0 10 70.00% 1 30 41 1 72 56.94% 2 34 39 1 74 52.70% 3 28 42 0 70 60.00% 4 29 35 1 65 53.85% 5 37 39 0 76 51. 32% 6 31 42 0 73 57.53% SUBTOTAL 192 245 3 440 55.68% KIND. 27 33 0 60 55.00% TOTAL 219 278 3 500 55.60% Page - 7 -------------------------- SCHOOL/GRADE WHITE BLACK MCDERMOTT OTHER TOTAL %BLACK UNGRADED 0 0 0 0 ERR 1 32 39 0 71 54.93% 2 27 39 3 69 56.52% 3 36 35 3 74 47.30% 4 36 40 1 77 51.95% 5 26 48 4 78 61.54% 6 32 46 2 80 57.50% SUBTOTAL 189 247 13 449 55.01% KIND. 31 28 1 60 46.67% TOTAL 220 275 14 509 54.03% MEADOWCLIFF UNGRADED 1 24 47 0 71 66.20% 2 25 46 0 71 64.79% 3 27 38 0 65 58.46% 4 14 47 0 61 77.05% 5 24 41 1 66 62.12% 6 14 32 0 46 69.57% SUBTOTAL 128 251 1 380 66.05% KIND. 19 41 0 60 68.33% TOTAL 147 292 1 440 66.36% MITCHELL UNGRADED 1 8 0 9 88.89% 1 7 29 2 38 76.32% 2 2 l'.3 1 46 93.48% 3 2 33 0 35 94.29% 4 5 29 1 35 82.86% 5 4 36 0 40 90.00% G 0 22 0 22 100.00% SUBTOTAL 21 200 4 225 88.89% KIND. 2 23 0 25 92~ 00% FOUR YEAR OL 5 9 0 14 64.29% TOTAL 28 232 4 264 f':7.88% OTTER CREEK UNGRADED 1 25 23 2 50 46.00% 2 34 23 0 57 40.35% 3 34 13 1 48 27.08% 4 32 20 1 53 37.74% 5 28 23 0 51 45.10% 6 28 26 0 54 48.15% SUBTOTAL 181 128 4 313 40.89% KIND. 22 15 3 40 37.50% TOTAL 203 143 7 353 40.51% Page - 8 SCHOOL/GRADE WHITE BLACK OTHER PULASKI TOTAL %BLACK HEIGHTS UNGRADED 1 26 23 0 49 46.94% 2 32 31 2 65 47.69% 3 25 21 1 47 44.68% 4 25 29 1 55 52.73% .56 16 34 1 51 66.67% I 19 34 0 53 64.15% I SUBTOTAL 143 172 5 320 53.7:,% I KIND. 30 26 3 59 44.07% I TOTAL 173 198 8 379 52.24% I I RIGHTS ELL I UNGRADED I 1 1 35 0 36 97.22% I 2 0 34 0 34 100.00% I 3 0 29 0 29 100.00% I 4 0 38 1 39 97.44% I 5 0 33 0 33 100.00% I 6 0 38 0 38 100.00% I SUBTOTAL 1 207 1 209 99.04% I KIND. 2 23 0 25 92.00% I FOUR YEAR OL 6 9 0 15 60.00% I TOTAL 9 239 1 249 95.98% I ROCKEFELLER I UNGRADED I 1 23 37 1 61 I 2 60.66% I 11 39 1 51 76.47% I 3 6 25 2 33 75.76% I 4 8 31 0 39 79.49% 5 4 35 0 39 89.74% 6 5 30 0 35 85.71% SUBTOTAL 57 197 4 258 76.36% KIND. 25 28 1 54 51.85% FOUR YEAR OL 22 25 2 49 51.02% TOTAL 104 250 7 361 69.25% ROXINE UNGRADED 2 13 0 15 86.67% 1 13 43 0 56 76.79% 2 5 40 0 45 88.89% 3 2 42 2 1.: '.\n91. 3 0% 4 10 40 1 51 78.43% 5 9 28 1 38 73.68% 6 10 28 1 39 71.79% SUBTOTAL 51 234 5 290 80.69% KIND. 19 34 1 , 1 62.96% FOUR YEAR OL 4 9 4 17 52.94% TOTAL 74 277 10 361 76.73% Page - 9 SCHOOL/GRADE WHITE BLACK OTHER STEPHENS TOTAL %BLACK UNGRADED 0 6 0 6 100.00% 1I 2 30 0 32 93.75% 2 1 33 0 34 97.06% 3 0 34 0 34 100.00% 4 0 20 0 20 100.00% 5 0 16 0 16 100.00% 6 0 32 0 32 100.00% SUBTOTAL 3 171 0 174 98.28% KIND. 1 23 0 24 95.83% FOUR YEAR OL 3 8 0 7.1 72.73% TOTAL 7 202 0 209 96.65% TERRY UNGRADED 1 42 25 2 69 36.23% 2 41 30 4 75 4o.no% 3 41 30 4 75 40.00% 4 43 36 0 79 45.57% 5 37 43 3 83 51.81% 6 37 43 2 82 52.44% SUBTOTAL 241 207 15 4 63 44.71% KIND. 45 31 2 78 39.74% TOTAL 286 238 17 541 43.99% WAKEFIELD UNGRADED 0 0 0 0 0.00% 1 20 54 1 75 72.00% 2 15 55 1 71 77.46% 3 23 41 2 66 62.12% 4 30 46 0 76 60.53% 5 24 46 0 70 65.71% 6 18 63 1 82 76.83% SUBTOTAL 130 305 5 440 69.32% KIND. 17 42 1 60 70.00% TOTl-.L 147 347 6 500 69.40% WASHINGTON UNGRADED 2 1 0 3 33.33% 1 53 77 1 131 58.78% 2 47 97 1 145 66.90% 3 44 62 2 108 57.41% 4 40 56 0 96 58.33% 5 50 67 0 117 57.26% 6 40 55 0 95 57.89% SUBTOTAL 276 415 4 695 59.71% KIND. 38 50 3 91 54.95% FOUR YR OLD 18 18 0 36 50.0 ~ TOTAL 332 483 0 7 822 58.76% Page - 10 SCHOOL/GRADE WHITE BLACK OTHER TOTAL WATSON %BLACK UNGRADED 1 18 54 1 73 73.97% 2 15 53 0 68 77.94% 3 11 41 0 52 78.85% 4 15 :3J 0 48 68.75% 5 18 54 0 72 75.00% 6 14 49 0 63 77.78% SUBTOnL 91 284 1 376 75.53% KIND. 20 37 1 58 63.79% FOUR YR OLD 6 11 0 17 64.71% TOTAL 117 332 2 451 73.61% WESTERN HILLS UNGRADED 1 21 28 0 49 57.14% 2 19 26 0 45 57.78% 3 14 34 1 49 69.39% 4 18 30 0 48 62.50% 5 19 32 1 52 61. 54 % 6 17 35 0 52 67.31% SUBTOTAL 108 155 2 295 62. 71% KIND. 16 24 0 40 60.00% TOTAL 124 209 2 335 62.39% WILLIAMS UNGRADED 1 29 36 3 68 52.94% 2 27 39 2 68 57.35% 3 29 37 1 67 55.22% 4 31 41 0 72 56.94% 5 32 38 2 72 52.78% 6 I'. 2 52 1 95 54.74% SUBTOTAL 190 243 9 442 54.98% KIND. 28 32 0 60 53.33% TOTAL 218 275 9 502 54.78% WILSON UNGRADED 4 19 0 23 82.61% 1 1 ., 34 0 47 72.34% 2 11 29 0 40 72.50% 3 18 35 0 53 66.04% 4 7 40 0 47 85. 11% 5 5 36 0 41 87.80% 6 7 40 0 47 85.11% SUBTOTAL 65 233 0 298 78.19% KIND. 17 23 0 40 57.50% FOUR YR OLD 8 9 0 17 52.94% TOTAL 90 265 0 355 71.65% Page - 11 SCHOOL/C~ADE WHITE BLACK OTHER TOTAL %BLACK WOODRUFF UNGRADED 1- 14 2 0 42 66.67% 2 12 11 0 23 47.83% 3 8 12 0 20 60.00% 4 9 16 0 25 64.00% 5 13 24 1 38 63.16% 6 9 20 1 30 66.67% SUBTOTAL 65 111 2 178 62.36% KIND. 11 28 1 40 70.00% FOUR YR OLD 7 8 1 16 50.00% TOTAL !3 3 14 7 4 234 62.82% EASTER SEALS UNGRADED 9 6 0 15 40.00% TOTAL 9 6 0 15 40.00% ELIZ. MITCHELL UNGRADED 30 16 0 46 34.78% TOTAL 30 16 0 46 34.78% E. MITCHELL(DAY) UNGRADED 4 6 0 10 60.00% TOTAL 4 6 0 10 60.00% Page - 12 1992/93 Approved% Range for Black Enrollment NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT North Little Rock, Arkansas RACIAL COMPOSITION OF SCHOOLS Including Kindergarten October 1, 1992 Elem.: 37.9 - 63.l Middle: 35.9 - 59.b School Enrollment Black Non-Black % Alternative 20 (K - 6) Amboy 390 Baring Cross 14 (K - 6) Belwood 171 Boone Park 480 Central 496 Crestwood 241 Glenview 230 Indian Hills 447 Lakewood 277 Lynch Drive 210 Meadow Park 243 North Heights 403 Park Hill 210 Pike View 429 Redwood 238 Rose City 254 Seventh Street 363 Total Elem. 5,116 Alternative 30 (7 - 11) Baring Cross 31 (7 - 12) Lakewood Md. 545 Ridgeroad Md. 578 Rose City Md. 408 NLRHS-East 1,339 NLRHS-West 1,204 Total Sec. 4,135 Dist. Total: 9,251 14 172 5 71 295 279 105 131 200 141 85 124 193 94 209 142 137 177 2,574 23 22 248 266 207 602 524 1,892 4,466 70. 0 6 44.1 218 35. 7 9 41.5 100 61.5 185 56.3 217 43.6 136 57.0 99 44.7 247 50.9 136 40.5 125 51.0 119 47.9 210 44.8 116 48.7 220 59.7 96 53.9 117 48.8 186 50.3% 2,542 76.7 7 71.0 9 45.5 297 46.0 312 50.7 201 45.0 737 43.5 680 45.8% 2,243 48.3% 4,785 30.0 55.9 64.3 58.5 38.5 43.8 56.4 43.0 55.3 4 9 .1 59.5 49.0 52.1 55.2 51. 3 40.3 46.1 51. 2 49.7% 23.3 29.0 54.5 54.0 49.3 55.0 5 6. 5 ,, 54.2% 51.7% l'C:C-,~,!) ~\nN i(Ul.1,i'lt:l'l'l' (October 1, 1992) \\ill[\"':': BLI\\CK MISPANIC .'\\SIAN1P1\\C ISL- '..i(],r 01 -\" BOYS GTRL~~ nnvc: ,~rm ~ BOYS r iL.S BOYS GIRl,S l\\M. IND 1F.SKTMJ news GIRLS SCHOOL TOTAL ------1-~=-:..:--1__.\n=\"\"\"'\"-+-~......_~.u.u......,+--=- I j Adk\nn\"' 137 125 77 76 , 1 3 l 420 ~ Arnold Ori ve 161 14 9 3 6 3 3 4 1 o__:.::~=~~..:\n.._-+-~::...:::..-1--.:::-.=_\n:\n_+...-.::...,\na_-+-__::\n.\n_-+--,:.._-+-....\n....-+----+-_..:\n5c __--t--=---t----..--~-, .l l 3 9 0 ._ rlk!'\u0026gt;r 115 93 1:...3-----..-_...,\n.4...,\n. 2-f- +---t----,:\n---l--\n:\n--+---~---1---2\n.8\n.3\n..__i Rc.h,:.c:c 202 167 41 2 2 b80 ~ ..P... .._4,,1,~\":.uJ-\u0026amp;\"'--\"\"\"=it-~r.....__.J-__,3~4!-'o\"--~--=2'-'9..!.2\n.._~-I. ,_'J....__. ,_ _ _1_ ~ __ 1,___ ___1 ----+--:---+------+---\"'nc::a, 4-\"R'---1 2 7 1 2 3 9 Hr, f. 2 l l 6 5 0 Cr-\n1 1 .o.na \u0026lt;::t-\" 11 7 9 6 f. 2 2 3 2 6 'rystcll Hill 245 222 l6 1 _ l 1 776 ,_Dt_1_tp__.r___e___e_ _ l'-'8\"-9-\u0026lt;--+--4~.. l . ,,8'--if--...\n5\n...0____ 3 5 9 4 5 8 I Fullec ElP.m. 131 -.. 168 - 524 I H\narri\u0026lt;:o 160 l / 107 . .-i-. 2 l 546 t ,J'ville Rlem. ~l,ZJ 281 10~ 12g 4 2 1 l\nJ. 847 I Landrna ck ' 5 2 12 6 1 ? 1 1 1 q 518 i Lawsrn . J7 13 9 2 7 l 8 3 21 l Oak, -, 191 167 49 62 469 1 .1kb1 261 222 'i3 55 1 592\n_. t  rne ..\n.t=:-\":\":.'\"'. -'--- +--=l\n:-.:9~8=:-il--=::2-\n:1~6:-Jr-\"\"\".5\n:-:2\n::--t-~5:-:'2\n--i~-P--a,\n-\n:---lf----\n---+---:---l---::--+----+---+-~'i:...!1~8~.L~ , Pine\\ -'-~1'----\"-1~--=2:\n..\n\n8\n.\".-,-~+, ---=l..:.9..,\n.0~_ ..9... ..,0_-+ __ 9 8_- +'-l_0 __ +- __ 4_-4- __ 6~--1-___:3:...._-4- ___ +---1---..:..:''c..c_-:e::i~ f'J7a I Robi.n .. ,)n Ekm. 157 153 57 47 l 3 2 4~ 1 +-~\"\"7\"+--c:---+-~-t----+----+-~-+-...::..-1--- - I Scot I 7 4 4 9 ' I J 6 l - I Shen~~,.x.1 193 1- '' 73 l 1 ~----- \"\u0026lt; -::- '3 Cl ii \u0026lt; \u0026lt; a. ::- 0.. 0 - - - V' c:1 ~ ~1'} \u0026lt;[ ,v s:..: 0 gp c~ E .. 0 m ... V E ~ ~ S.HilJs Elem. 327 l. 1 t:,() 2 3 1 1 /..15 E Tdyl.01 l6:i 143 '~ 50 , l J. l 1 420 ~ .:\n_~ Tolle:::.,m ~2_2-\"o-+---'2:C..o:C_.... s , ..1..' ---+--6 .). .,.. .._ Asir,_'----+--.,.:\n1'---+---_-1--+--\"1'---+-\"\"----4-----+----'5-=6'-\"9~ ,.rt ~ \u0026gt;i\nS TOTAL FLfJ.1. 690 4 U4 1 177 1 6 1 2(, 19 13 13 l3 12,410 i\n\u0026lt;O ~ _...- . IJ ---t~ -o \u0026lt; ~-- -- ---+-----+-----.-- I ~ ~ Q_ -~ I .n ~-Al_t. L\n.cnt. ,t 16 q '.BdL ..c.J.. .c _.r_ _ .,_9__2_ _ 2_o_s _ 2_-i__1 _,__1_, ~ J'vil P North 243 215 11 1 101 O:-. J 'vil1e South 200 181 l 1 2 90 v1lle HiQh 356 371 1611 136 ~s l7 5 1 (, 14 6 l 3 3 urt:, Pulaski 34 9 29 L l l ....\n.N...:o.\n:.rt.\nhv\n.\n....\n~'-'-'---,......,..+----\"'3-'--71-.'-.J. -+-_.\n:\n3...o.1-\"-'7 uak Grove Hiqh 373 32,' ~J Rob. ,Tr. Hiqh 161 lt1() rt, Ro b. ~ r_._H_i..._qlh--+----'l..\n6_\n0--+--'l -~ii _d_l:,..._.\u0026lt;..r~ _-:--h---~1 \"\":\n~~\n:~:r::_-_.:...:. ~D..._,-~3~3\"--9+._-,-_L\n,.,k_., +- _,__ L..Z \u0026gt;~fT. - 8 ! 8 - - ' l 1 66 4 6 1 935 l 3 6S4 -'-__\nl,:\n.O.:___..L-~4 -4-----+--\n.\n.l_-+-_--'6\n..\n0\n..\n2:::.._-! 1,023 2 627 3 l 7 837 2 l l 1 1 915 411 408 l 2 932 1 874 }A 4 C,,223 4 l 34 I I 17 21,633\n\u0026lt;s1 I~ .~. . l l  l ')_: u: , * :f, ' :t * **: f. * ii:+:*:n :* ** * **-********** * ., P. 01 * * TRANSACTRIOENP ORT * OCT-29-9T2H U1 1:11 * * *  DATE START SENDER RX TI ME ~?uES TYPE NOTE * ---------------------------------- * OCT-291 1:l J ECl 4900483 1' 2211 1 o::-t I t. OK * ..,xtuJ\n*:u**:t* **:t::ucrn ::..:-.) \" * * :r. :\n: ', :t n *n: u:i *, ,:t rin::n:u:u::n*****************************  f I i I ':u'  ,'\n+'. P. 01 ' * \"'' NR EPR T OCT-20-T92U E1 0:19 E ff E:\nTYrE . OTE T c. I 1 i ~ 1 K. OCT 20 '92 09: 18 F'Lil CO SPL '::,:H DI'3T DATE\nTO: FROM: Pulaski County Special School District 925 E. Dixon Road/P. 0. Box 8601 Little Rock, AR 72216 501-490-2000 FAX 490-0483 October 20, 1992 Danny Shameer and Cynthia Howell, Arkansas Democrat - Gazette North Pulaski Leader Arnold Smith, Arkansas State Press North Uttle Rock Times Jennifer Bethea, The Spectrum Our Neighborhood Judy Gallman  Arkansas Times Maumelle Monitor Jacksonville Patriot KARK-TV - Channel 4 KATV-TV - Channel 7 KTHV-TV - Channel 11 KARN Radio Associated Press Office of Desegregation Monitoring PACT Susie Roberts, Administrator Information/Special Services NUMBER OF PAGES: 3 (including transmittal sheet) P.1/3 - : lS ,.. PULA I CO October 20, 1992 To ,vh,m it m\niy concern: y F'.2 3 OOL DISTRICT , n R 1.J.d\n-'_L) Box 8601 r \"\"' Ar,._ansas 72216 (50') 490-2000 We are providing you with a corrected copy of the a con t\u0026gt;TI'ing enrollment hgures for the Pula:.ki County Special 'k lh,trict a of Oc.tobez 1, 19) 2. I.w information released Friday, C ctober 16, contdtned c:o 1 u1.i-::curacie~,s o plea:.e rt\"ter to this new chart when repurting PCSSD enrollmeut We apolog1Le for ar.y inconvenience. Que tions concE-mmg PCSSD enrollment may be d.ire\u0026lt;..tedto th~ Office of Pvp!l Personnel c:1t 490-2000 .:.iincerely, ~ Ron St,mdridge Information Office er SCI-ICOL I f lk Lr\\S At r,o]d Dri.ve \\11II'\"E flOYS r.rm,::, Pl'SS. EN WI.I ti (Oclob_r ,, 1',,/\\CK UISN,M - ~Al/PN:.. I:'\u0026gt;r~ JIM IND ,r.,,., rM'l SCHOOL I r \u0026gt;rr, _LY)Y.., r:r, _ i l()'{S GIRLS BOYS GIRLS TOTAL ~~~.c.1.-1f.--'-'\"~---+-\"=,e..\n,\n,\n_+.--=.\n._+-===--+-~'-'=--f 137 125 77 1 , l 420 161 149 36 \\ \"i l l 390 ]15 CJ3 33 u 283 202 l67 166 ~41 2 2 680 ~_f ._R._:\n,,~,\"\".u\",._...,'.,..i~r..:...a_'\",'\n_\n.l,1-'- ~3~4..:,6'-+--~2\"-t'-')_2 =_--,..,,.___.._l_ ' 1 f. d R c- ~.. \" 2 7 l 2 J ) 2 1 l 6 5 0 r,-,.IJ.o~ C:t-\" 117 q, ./n ! ]26 r C'rys ta l Hi l1 Q,/.51-9-z\nu\ni. ~ P - rr ----- -::..L ---l---'~---+-----+---~1-----+----r-77~~~-e-\u0026amp;:t_.\n..\n~J/Oic I r .. '--- i r::-- - L,. k .,.-LI, I, Oi.lkhrnoJ. Pine I\u0026lt; , Pine,,,'( ~r, 189 14 a _ J s 9 4 ss ]J, ')\u0026lt;\nt l!O 524 16'1 167 ifl, lt)Q 2 1 .'146 -~J~2~3-+--~2~8~1,._..,_1~,.,_.,,.'~~J ,q'-l-......::.2_ _ ~_:4L....--1, ___ , 1 l 847 152 176 1?1 11q ~.f ___ 1_3__7_ _ 1'\"\"3_9_ 2 l 18 , 3 2. - () 1 __ ~l..::..6....\n7--1l, _4 6 2 4 6 9 222 l 1 592 2 l6 ,\n_ 518 _2_l_ 41_ _ 2\n.\n..3_\n.\n.._6 .\n_.-_,\n~. .. i-- J-:~:--i-....\n2--\n-.i\n-..-.\n::2--+--4~ __ !1----=-'-1----+-....\nl'e--+--!::6..:::8~2'----l hi 153 \"I 47 1 _ 2 420 , 74 4~ 36 191 --i+-,--, ,-, -,1---_ -7-q--1-~ _...,.__7_3-.1-,- ---+---.l--1---l--1-----+----- - _______ 4_9_0--1 L :s Elffl. ' ________ 3 __ 1._---+------~ l 735 5 1- --~ 4 137 l 733 23 ' 2'J2 205 231 I 243 215 8~ O h 200 181 112 ')0 356 371 160 136 ,__ _._ l 1 1 420 l l t 569 17 12 13 14 1,023 --'------1-- 1 ---- +-aa:.3 _4--____\n_.l_ +----+-~6 72-:::7--1 4 L 2 337 ---+-----=L-----+-'-'\"-'------1\"\"\"-----r--q-,-q-t - __ ,:\n__--4 __ _ _ _ __ 4 _1...__+--=l---+-~9:--1~5:'----l 4U - 408 I 2 932 \u0026gt; I 874 .i..-~__...?.c.t-1-~ ..... -~-_\n:4.___l--_.\n,4....._-+-_9_,,__\n2...\n:2.c\n.3--1 -L 18 21,523- ' OCT 16 '92 15: 36 PUL CO SPL SCH DIST DATE: Pulaski County Special School District 925 E. Dixon Road/P. 0. Box 8601 Little Rock, AR 72216 501-4902000 FAX 490-0483 October 16, 1992 P.1/2 TO: Danny Shameer and Cynthia Howell, Arkansas Democrat - Gazette North Pulaski Leader FROM: Arnold Smith, Arkansas State Press North Little Rock Times Jennifer Bethea, The Spectrum Our Neighborhood Judy Gallman - Arkansas Times Maumelle Monitor Jacksonville Patriot KAAK-TV - Channel 4 KATV-TV - Channel 7 KTHV-TV - Channel 11 KARN Radio Associated Press Office of Desegregation Monitoring PACT Susie Roberts, Administrator Information/Special Services NUMBER OF PAGES: 2 (including transmittal sheet) 0.. 1- 01 H 0 I u co _I (,L. ,, 0 u _J ::J 0.. j) ~ 1- u 0 I I t I I 1 ' I I I I I ' ! SG{OOL l\\.dkins Arnold Drive Rrlk,:,r 1'.c,,t-o.-- llrlvn11 ._\"\" t-n r~t-n  rn l l.o.-..o \u0026lt;::l-\n1 i Crvstal Hill Duoree Fuller Elem. u,.~~c, I ,J ville filaTI  Landmark I Lawson Oak Grove El. Oakbrooke Pine Forest I Pinewood I Robinson Elan. Scott Sherwood S.Hllls Elen. Taylor Tolleson TOTAl, ELEM. Alt. Learn.Cnt. Full\u0026amp; Jr. J'ville North J'ville South J. V hl.le Hioh Mills North Pulaski Northwood oak Grove Hiqt Rob. Jr. IHoh Rob. Sr. Hiqh S.Hills Jr. S Hills Hiah '1-nl'Af SPrl\"\"'f\\H) '1UfAL DIST_ ~-lllI \"'E BOYS GIRLS 137 125 161 149 115 93 202 167 346 292 271 23q 117 \u0026lt;)6 192 179 189 148 131 qs 160 167 323 281 152 126 137 139 191 167 261 222 198 216 243 236 157 153 74 49 193 179 327 271 165 143 220 205 4 662 4,137 14 H, 292 205 24 3 215 200 181 356 371 175 .167 349 291 371 319 373 322 161 140 160 134 355 339 ~~~ ~~ 3,363 2,99\n! ~(7\n)- ..ao~ 1--\u0026amp;,--0-z-5 _:\n.,.-0-3 9 kCPY 719.\n)- PCSSD ENROLLMENT (October 1, 1992) l3f.J\\CK HISPJ\\NIC n,w\u0026lt;:: r.T IJL\u0026lt;:: BOYS ~Tor~ 77 76 ,~a l 36 33 l'} 4 5 33 42 7S 166 14.l ~? F. 7 ~  I All c\ni\n/?,l. t:.7 A? 10'1 2 2 117 113 m..o l 1 50 54 Je\u0026gt;J\u0026gt;3/ 168 130 1~8' 107 1oq ',.jl (a 101 , \") q ~~--2 d l? I I 1 Q ~o 27 18 -'/5 49 62 II/ 53 55 ,or l 52 52 ,-OJ/. 91 101 /T~2 2 57 47 1oi/ l 31 36 t,11 43 73 II~ l 70 60 J,'1,0 2 3 58 50 10'6 l l 71 65 13~ 5 l 1.733 1-665 23 24 2~~g q 7 l'1 231 194 t~l l 83 101 18~ 5 3 112 90 :ic~.L 3 160 136 ~~i 146 133 ~~ 112 70 ~4 4 129 107 ::l3i9 l 99 116 ::,.1,S2 65 45 110 68 45 //~ 1 126 103 t~,s l 1//~2--rfl 7~ 11\u0026lt;1.\n,.,.I - ~ .568 -J:-:\n=3,,!1-5 ~ --r,a /#.St:: /\nJ\"\nj~ ~z--ff\n:\n.c\n.JP\u0026gt;/~ ~l j-\n1jl:0 -5-2- ~ g\n:f''j \u0026lt;7' 8-\u0026amp;8' ~D11 .ffd d'l-\n\\SJJ\\N/PN:.- ISL- JIM 1Nn OOYS GIRLS BOYS 3 l 1 2 2 1 2 l 5 2 1 7. l l i 4 2 3 l l 1 l l l 1 17 12 13 4 6 l l 3 10 4 2 1 l 3 l l 2 1 l 1 l 2 ,J,,,,,/ k?? xo -?-'7 -n- --5-- d!)-'/ ~/ 4- 4-- 3-9-- Ht- L.- -'II ~~ 17 /pCVJM'\") SCHOOL GIRLS TOTAL 420 390 283 680 648 1 650 326 603 9 458 524 546 1 847 518 321 469 592 518 1 682 2 420 l91 490 735 420 569 14 12.300 66 935 6S4 1 602 .l,023 627 7. 837 Q1.Q 1 915 411 408 932 (\"\"\\ 'i?\"Pf-~ -it- ..:\n. ,...,.,.._ti vi/ q _::,\n:}~ ?P ,~01 ~ 1\u0026gt; 45- ,. ~I ~. ,,. 'fi~ 3i 1~, 1 p 57 J/0 ~ i 7.,\n~ Jo 7 .. 7o 7o \u0026gt;{~ ,.,/ ~ /i\n,.o\n_'6 '\" '\" ,\n.S1  ?fa 7,.\nrt ,s\n_I., ~ fl) 7-, 70 7D J.,'61 u ,\nJl ~$ 7-\n'i/ 8 .1. 7.\n\u0026gt;,. 7b -.'/-- /7 o\n). 7 ~ .). 57, ~ ~ 7,\n) ~~ ?7, 7a .,#i\\ ~7t\u0026gt; ...'ztib -fr z,84 \nJ. i\n,a / .f\":__q_!_L~J_4 _ -- TO: FROM: SUBJECT: LITTLER OCKS CHOODLI STRICT 810 WESTM ARKHSATMR EET LITTLER OCKA, RKANSAS October 12, 1992 Board of Directors OCT 2 (: i ~, Office of Dese'gc.\u0026lt;g\u0026gt;a1t. o n Mon. ttoring Dr. Mac Bernd, Superintendent of Schools f{(#J Marie Parker, Associate Superintendent for Organizational and Learning Equity October 1 Enrollment - 1992-93 School Year Please find attached the October 1 enrollment statistics for the 1992-93 school year. The total district enrollment reflects a decrease of 106 students. However, it should be noted that 314 LRSDs tudents are enrolled at Crystal Hill Magnet School this year. cc: Cabinet LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OCTOBER 1 ENROLLMENT COMPARISON 1991-92/1992-93 WHITE BLACK OTHER TOTAL %BLACK SENIOR HIGH: 10/1/91 2152 3243 114 5509 59 10/1/92 2131 3378 123 5632 60 INCREASE/DECREASE ( 21) 135 9 123 % (. 98%) y,. 2% 7.9% 2. 2.% JUNIOR HIGH\n10/1/91 1882 4112 68 6062 68 10/1/92 191.,8 l.,138 80 6166 67 INCREASE/DECREASE 66 26 12 104 % 3.5% .63% 17.7% 1. 7% ELEMENTARY: 10/1/91 4851 9374 166 11.,, 391 65 10/1/92 4819 89% 190 11.,, 003 61., INCREASE/DECREASE ( 32) (380) 24 ( 388) % (. 66%) (4.1%) H.5% ( 2. 7%) SPECIAL SCHOOLS: 10/1/91 l,i.O 2/,i. 0 61., 38 10/1/92 1.,3 28 0 71 39 INCREASE/DECREASE 3 y, 0 7 % 7.5% 25% 10.9% DISTRICT TOTAL: 10/1/91 8925 16,753 3/,i.8 26,026 6q. 10/1/92 891.,1 16,538 393 25,872 64 INCREASE/DECREASE 16 (215) i.,5 ( 151.,) % .18% ( 1. 3%) 12.9% (. 6%) KINDERGARTEN: 10/1/91 691., 1231 18 1%3 63 10/1/92 715 1188 27 1930 61 INCREASE/DECREASE 21 ( 1.,3) 9 ( 13) % 3% ( 3. 5%) 50% (. 69%) FOUR YEAR OLD: 10/1/91 . 120 163 9 292 56 10/1/92 lq.1 288 11 31.,0 55 INCREASE/DECREASE 21 25 2 1.,8 % 17.5% 15. 3% 22% 16. 1.,% DISTRICT TOTAL WITH FOUR YEAR OLDS: 10/1/91 90q.5 16,916 357 26,318 61., 10/1/92 9082 16,726 i.,Oq. 26,212 61., INCREASE/DECREASE 37 ( 190) q. 7 (106) % .i.,1% ( 1.1%) 13% ( .!.,%) SUMMARY OF OCTOBER 1 ENROLLMENT 1992-93 GRADE WHITE BLACK OTHER TOTAL %BLACK K 715 1188 27 1930 61 1 719 1305 21 2045 63 2 707 1323 30 2060 6 4 3 673 1185 3 4 1892 62 4 6 54 1214 23 1891 64 5 665 1295 28 1988 65 6 640 1367 27 2034 67 UN 46 117 0 163 72 TOTAL ELEM 4819 8994 190 14,003 64 7 723 1431 25 2179 66 8 611 1430 33 2074 69 9 591 1241 21 1853 67 UN 23 36 1 60 60 TOTAL JR HIGH 1948 4138 80 6166 67 10 719 1326 34 2079 6 I,. 11 704 1098 48 1850 59 12 700 939 41 1680 56 UN 8 15 0 23 65 TOTAL SR HIGH 2131 3378 123 5632 60 SPECIAL SCHOOLS 43 28 0 71 39 FOUR YR. OLD 141 188 11 340 55 DISTRICT TOTAL 9082 16,726 401,. 26,212 64 *SUMMARY OF STUDENTS LISTED IN \"OTHER\" CATEGORY: SPANISH - 135 ESKIMO/AMER . .::ND. - 22 ASIAN/PACIFIC ISLANDER - 227 OTHER - 20 LI'rTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OCTOBER 1 ENROLLMENT 1992-93 SCHOOL/GRADE WHITE BLACK OTHER TOTAL %BLACK CENTRAL UNGRADED 0 0 0 0 ERR 10 279 467 15 761 61. 37% 11 262 391 28 681 57.42% 12 220 275 13 508 54.13% SUBTOTAL 761 1133 56 1950 58.10% KIND. 0 49 0 49 100.00% TOTAL 761 1182 56 1999 59.13% FAIR UNGRADED 8 15 0 23 65.22% 10 97 195 5 297 65.66% 11 112 205 5 322 63.66% 12 93 147 4 244 60.25% SUBTOTAL 310 562 14 886 63.43% KIND. 1 18 0 19 94.74% TOTAL 311 580 14 905 64.09% HALL UNGRADED 0 0 0 0 ERR 10 110 207 6 323 64.09% 11 126 168 8 302 55.63% 12 154 185 12 351 52.71% SUBTOTAL 390 560 26 976 57.38% KIND. 10 8 0 18 44.44% TOTAL 400 568 26 994 57.14% MCCLELLAN UNGRADED 0 0 0 0 ERR 10 105 277 5 387 71.58% 11 91 183 3 277 66.06% 12 116 178 8 302 58.94% SUBTOTAL 312 638 16 966 66.05% KIND. 1 18 0 19 94.74% TOTAL 313 656 16 985 66.60% PARKVIEW UNGRADED 0 0 0 0 0.00% 10 128 180 3 311 57.88% 11 113 151 4 268 56.34% 12 117 154 4 275 56.00% SUBTOTAL 358 485 11 854 56.79% KIND. 1 16 0 17 94.12% TOTAL 359 501 11 871 57.52% Page - 1 SCHOOL/GRADE WHITE BLACK OTHER TOTAL %BLACK CLOVERDALE UNGRADED 0 0 0 0 ERR 7 78 210 3 291 72.16% 8 58 180 6 244 73.77% 9 56 181 3 240 75.42% TOTAL 192 571 12 775 73.68% DUNBAR UNGRADED 7 87 136 4 227 59.91% 8 94 145 6 245 59.18% 9 102 129 2 233 55.36% TOTAL 283 410 12 705 58.16% FOREST HEIGHTS UNGRADED 6 5 0 11 45.45% 7 66 195 3 264 73.86% 8 78 199 6 283 70.32% 9 70 155 4 229 67.69% TOTAL 220 554 13 787 70.39% HENDERSON UNGRADED 0 0 0 0 ERR 7 99 228 4 331 68.88% 8 46 259 4 309 83.82% 9 70 198 6 274 72.26% TOTAL 215 685 14 914 74.95% MABELVALE UNGRADED 13 6 1 20 30.00% 7 80 151 2 233 64.81% 8 74 151 0 225 67.11% 9 59 130 0 189 68.78% TOTAL 226 438 3 667 65.67% MANN UNGRADED 7 128 178 5 311 57.23% 8 118 160 6 284 56.34% 9 81 167 6 254 65.75% TOTAL 327 505 17 849 59.48% PULASKI HEIGHTS UNGRADED 3 12 0 15 80.00% 7 129 136 2 267 50.94% 8 96 167 1 264 63.26% 9 91 137 0 228 60.09% TOTAL 319 452 3 774 \"58.40% Page - 2 SCHOOL/GRADE WHITE BLACK OTHER TOTAL %BLACK SOUTHWEST UNGRADED 1 13 0 14 92.86% 7 56 197 2 255 77.25% 8 47 169 4 220 76.82% 9 62 144 0 206 69.90% TOTAL 166 523 6 695 75.25% BADGETT UNGRADED 1 6 0 7 85.71% 1 5 19 0 24 79.17% 2 9 13 0 22 59.09% 3 3 18 0 21 85.71% 4 5 16 0 21 76.19% 5 4 31 0 35 88.57% 6 7 29 0 36 80.56% SUBTOTAL 34 132 0 166 79.52% KIND. 7 12 0 19 63.16% FOUR YR OLD 7 10 0 17 58.82% TOTAL 48 154 () 202 76.24% BALE UNGRADED 7 5 0 12 41.67% 1 6 29 1 36 80.56% 2 4 25 1 30 83.33% 3 5 29 1 35 82.86% 4 6 29 1 36 80.56% 5 7 45 2 54 83.33% 6 8 40 3 51 78.43% SUBTOTAL 43 202 9 254 79.53% KIND. 10 37 2 49 75.51% FOUR YR OLD 9 9 0 18 50.00% TOTAL 62 248 11 321 77.26% BASELINE UNGRADED 1 15 45 0 60 75.00% 2 15 40 1 56 71.43% 3 9 31 0 40 77.50% 4 7 43 0 50 86.00% 5 8 28 2 38 73.68% 6 5 30 0 35 85.71% SUBTOTAL 59 217 3 279 77.78% KIND. 15 45 0 60 75.00% TOTAL 74 262 3 339 77.29% Page - 3 SCHOOL/GRADE WHITE BLACK OTHER TOTAL %BLACK BOOKER UNGRADED 1 39 47 0 86 54.65% 2 36 50 1 87 57.47% 3 38 50 1 89 56.18% 4 40 53 3 96 55.21% 5 39 51 0 90 56.67% 6 43 54 2 99 54.55% SUBTOTAL 235 305 7 547 55.76% KIND. 34 40 0 74 54.05% TOTAL 269 345 7 621 55.56% BRADY UNGRADED 1 5 0 6 83.33% 1 20 34 3 57 59.65% 2 17 44 1 62 70.97% 3 15 44 2 61 72.13% 4 10 34 0 44 77.27% 5 16 38 1 55 69.09% 6 7 46 2 55 83.64% SUBTOTAL 86 245 9 340 72.06% KIND. 25 30 3 58 51.72% TOTAL 111 275 12 398 69.10% CARVER UNGRADED 1 31 39 0 70 55.71% 2 34 50 2 86 58.14% 3 41 48 0 89 53.93% 4 42 51 3 96 53.13% 5 44 55 0 99 55.56% 6 43 53 2 98 54.08% SUBTOTAL 235 296 7 538 55.02% KIND. 27 33 0 60 55.00% TOTAL 262 329 7 598 55.03% CHICOT UNGRADED 7 10 0 17 58.82% 1 27 59 0 86 68.60% 2 31 57 1 89 64.04% 3 23 43 3 69 62.32% 4 21 41 2 64 64.06% 5 19 40 1 60 66.67% 6 26 46 1 73 63.01% SUBTOTAL 154 296 8 458 64.63% KIND. 23 54 0 77 70.13% TOTAL 177 350 8 535 65.42% Page - 4 SCHOOL/GRADE WHITE BLACK OTHER TOTAL %BLACK CLOVERDALE UNGRADED 1 7 39 0 46 84.78% 2 9 37 2 48 77.08% 3 9 35 0 44 79.55% 4 7 46 1 54 85.19% 5 10 44 0 54 81.48% 6 7 43 0 50 86.00% SUBTOTAL 49 244 3 296 82.43% KIND. 15 38 0 53 71. 70% FOUR YR OLD 7 9 1 17 52.94% TOTAL 71 291 4 366 79.51% DODD UNGRADED 5 5 0 10 50.00% 1 18 20 0 38 52.63% 2 14 27 0 41 65.85% 3 18 24 0 42 57.14% 4 16 22 0 38 57.89% 5 14 36 0 50 72.00% 6 16 30 0 46 65.22% SUBTOTAL 101 164 0 265 61.89% KIND. 20 19 0 39 48.72% 121 183 0 304 60.20% FAIR PARK UNGRADED 1 10 34 0 44 77.27% 2 7 29 0 36 80.56% 3 6 25 1 32 78.13% 4 3 29 0 32 90.63% 5 9 26 0 35 74.29% 6 4 23 0 27 85.19% SUBTOTAL 39 166 1 206 80.58% KIND. 10 26 1 37 70.27% TOTAL 49 192 2 243 79.01% FOREST PARK UNGRADED 1 38 35 0 73 47.95% 2 45 25 1 71 35.21% 3 35 13 1 49 26.53% 4 31 21 1 53 39.62% 5 39 45 0 84 53.57% 6 23 31 0 54 57.41% SUBTOTAL 211 170 3 384 44.27% KIND. 31 28 1 60 46.67% TOTAL 242 198 4 444 44.59% Page - 5 SCHOOL/GRADE WHITE BLACK OTHER TOTAL %BLACK FRANKLIN UNGRADED 1 9 0 10 90.00% 1 7 67 1 75 89.33% 2 5 45 0 50 90.00% 3 2 48 0 50 96.00% 4 4 45 0 49 91.84% 5 0 26 1 27 96.30% 6 2 47 4 53 88.68% SUBTOTAL 21 287 6 314 91. 40% KIND. 5 38 0 43 88.37% FOUR YR OLD 24 27 3 54 50.00% TOTAL 50 352 9 411 85.64% FULBRIGHT UNGRADED 5 2 0 7 28.57% 1 35 25 1 61 40.98% 2 41 31 2 74 41.89% 3 48 38 2 88 43.18% 4 49 27 2 78 34.62% 5 41 39 1 81 48.15% 6 42 39 1 82 47.56% SUBTOTAL 261 201 9 471 42.68% KIND. 35 24 0 59 40.68% TOTAL 296 225 9 530 42.45% GARLAND UNGRADED 3 10 0 13 76.92% 1 2 37 0 39 94.87% 2 1 29 1 31 93.55% 3 2 29 0 31 93.55% 4 0 35 0 35 100.00% 5 2 26 2 30 86.67% 6 1 32 2 35 91.43% SUBTOTAL 11 198 5 214 92.52% KIND. 3 26 1 30 86.67% FOUR YR OLD 3 9 0 12 75.00% TOTAL 17 233 6 256 91.02% GEYER SPRINGS UNGRADED 0 3 0 3 100.00% 1 14 27 0 41 65.85% 2 20 25 0 45 55.56% 3 14 27 0 41 65.85% 4 5 19 0 24 79.17% 5 9 16 0 25 64.00% 6 16 30 0 46 65.22% SUBTOTAL 78 147 0 225 65.33% KIND. 18 21 39 53.85% FOUR YR OLD 9 9 0 18 50.00% TOTAL 105 177 0 282 62.77% Page - 6 SCHOOL/GRADE WHITE BLACK OTHER TOTAL %BLACK GIBBS UNGRADED 1 17 25 1 43 58.14% 2 19 26 0 45 57.78% 3 20 24 1 45 53.33% 4 20 26 2 48 54.17% 5 19 28 3 50 56.00% 6 26 39 2 67 58.21% SUBTOTAL 121 168 9 298 56.38% KIND. 13 23 2 38 60.53% TOTAL 134 191 11 336 56.85% ISH UNGRADED 0 5 0 5 100.00% 1 0 15 0 15 100.00% 2 0 31 0 31 100.00% 3 2 24 0 26 92.31% 4 0 18 0 18 100.00% 5 0 23 0 23 100.00% 6 0 32 0 32 100.00% SUBTOTAL 2 148 0 150 98.67% KIND. 0 25 0 25 100.00% FOUR YEAR OL 3 9 0 12 75.00% TOTAL 5 182 0 187 97.33% JEFFERSON UNGRADED 4 3 0 7 42.86% 1 35 26 0 61 42.62% 2 42 32 1 75 42.67% 3 35 31 3 69 44.93% 4 36 32 1 69 46.38% 5 39 25 1 65 38.46% 6 41 36 0 77 46.75% SUBTOTAL 232 185 6 423 43.74% KIND. 41 19 0 60 31. 67% TOTAL 273 204 6 483 42.24% MABELVALE UNGRADED 3 7 0 10 70.00% 1 30 41 1 72 56.94% 2 34 39 1 74 52.70% 3 28 42 0 70 60.00% 4 29 35 1 65 53.85% 5 37 39 0 76 51.32% 6 31 42 0 73 57.53% SUBTOTAL 192 245 3 440 55.68% KIND. 27 33 0 60 55.00% TOTAL 219 278 3 500 55.60% Page - 7 SCHOOL/GRADE WHITE BLACK OTHER TOTAL %BLACK MCDERMOTT UNGRADED 0 0 0 0 ERR 1 32 39 0 71 54.93% 2 27 39 3 69 56.52% 3 36 35 3 74 47.30% 4 36 40 1 77 51. 95% 5 26 48 4 78 61. 54% 6 32 46 2 80 57.50% SUBTOTAL 189 247 13 449 55.01% KIND. 31 28 1 60 46.67% TOTAL 220 275 14 509 54.03% MEADOWCLIFF UNGRADED 1 24 47 0 71 66.20% 2 25 46 0 71 64.79% 3 27 38 0 65 58.46% 4 14 47 0 61 77.05% 5 24 41 1 66 62.12% 6 14 32 0 46 69.57% SUBTOTAL 128 251 1 380 66.05% KIND. 19 41 0 60 68.33% TOTAL 147 292 1 440 66.36% MITCHELL UNGRADED 1 8 0 9 88.89% 1 7 29 2 38 76.32% 2 2 43 1 46 93.48% 3 2 33 0 35 94.29% 4 5 29 1 35 82.86% 5 4 36 0 40 90.00% 6 0 22 0 22 100.00% SUBTOTAL 21 200 4 225 88.89% KIND. 2 23 0 25 92.00% FOUR YEAR OL 5 9 0 14 64.29% TOTAL 28 232 4 264 87.88% OTTER CREEK UNGRADED 1 25 23 2 50 46.00% 2 34 23 0 57 40.35% 3 34 13 1 48 27.08% 4 32 20 1 53 37.74% 5 28 23 0 51 45.10% 6 28 26 0 54 48.15% SUBTOTAL 181 128 4 313 40.89% KIND. 22 15 3 40 37.50% TOTAL 203 143 7 353 40.51% Page - 8 SCHOOL/GRADE WHITE BLACK OTHER TO'rAL %BLACK PULASKI HEIGHTS UNGRADED 1 26 23 0 49 46.94% 2 32 31 2 65 47.69% 3 25 21 1 47 44.68% 4 25 29 1 55 52.73% 5 16 34 1 51 66.67% 6 19 34 0 53 64.15% SUBTOTAL 143 172 5 320 53.75% KIND. 30 26 3 59 44.07% TOTAL 173 198 8 379 52.24% RIGHTSELL UNGRADED 1 1 35 0 36 97.22% 2 0 34 0 34 100.00% 3 0 29 0 29 100.00% 4 0 38 1 39 97.44% 5 0 33 0 33 100.00% 6 0 38 0 38 100.00% SUBTOTAL 1 -207 1 209 99.04% KIND. 2 23 0 25 92.00% FOUR YEAR OL 6 9 0 15 60.00% TOTAL 9 239 1 249 95.98% ROCKEFELLER UNGRADED 1 23 37 1 61 60.66% 2 11 39 1 51 76.47% 3 6 25 2 33 75.76% 4 8 31 0 39 79.49% 5 4 35 0 39 89.74% 6 5 30 0 35 85.71% SUBTOTAL 57 197 4 258 76.36% KIND. 25 28 1 54 51. 85% FOUR YEAR OL 22 25 2 49 51.02% TOTAL 104 250 7 361 69.25% ROMINE UNGRADED 2 13 0 15 86.67% 1 13 43 0 56 76.79% 2 5 40 0 45 88.89% 3 2 42 2 46 91.30% 4 10 40 1 51 78.43% 5 9 28 1 38 73.68% 6 10 28 1 39 71.79% SUBTOTAL 51 234 5 290 80.69% KIND. 19 34 1 54 62.96% FOUR YEAR OL 4 9 4 17 52.94% TOTAL 74 277 10 361 76.73% Page - 9 SCHOOL/GRADE WHITE BLACK OTHER TOTAL %BLACK STEPHENS UNGRADED 0 6 0 6 100.00% 1 2 30 0 32 93.75% 2 1 33 0 34 97.06% 3 0 34 0 34 100.00% 4 0 20 0 20 100.00% 5 0 16 0 16 100.00% 6 0 32 0 32 100.00% SUBTOTAL 3 171 0 174 98.28% KIND. 1 23 0 24 95.83% FOUR YEAR OL 3 8 0 11 72.73% TOTAL 7 202 0 209 96.65% TERRY UNGRADED 1 42 25 2 69 36.23% 2 41 30 4 75 40.00% 3 41 30 4 75 40.00% 4 43 36 0 79 45.57% 5 37 43 3 83 51.81% 6 37 43 2 82 52.44% SUBTOTAL 241 207 15 463 44.71% KIND. 45 31 2 78 39.74% TOTAL 286 238 17 5.41 43.99% WAKEFIELD UNGRADED 0 0 0 0 0.00% 1 20 54 1 75 72.00% 2 15 55 1 71 77.46% 3 23 41 2 66 62.12% 4 30 46 0 76 60.53% 5 24 46 0 70 65.71% 6 18 63 1 82 76.83% SUBTOTAL 130 305 5 440 69.32% KIND. 17 42 1 60 70.00% TOTAL 147 347 6 500 69.40% WASHINGTON UNGRADED 2 1 0 3 33.33% 1 53 77 1 131 58.78% 2 47 97 1 145 66.90% 3 44 62 2 108 57.41% 4 40 56 0 96 58.33% 5 50 67 0 117 57.26% 6 40 55 0 95 57.89% SUBTOTAL 276 415 4 695 59.71% KIND. 38 50 3 91 54.95% FOUR YR OLD 18 18 0 36 50.00% TOTAL 332 483 7 822 58.76% Page - 10 SCHOOL/GRADE WHITE BLACK OTHER TOTAL %BLACK WATSON UNGRADED 1 18 54 1 73 73.97% 2 15 53 0 68 77.94% 3 11 41 0 52 78.85% 4 15 33 0 48 68.75% 5 18 54 0 72 75.00% 6 14 49 0 63 77.78% SUBTOAL 91 284 1 376 75.53% KIND. 20 37 1 58 63.79% FOUR YR OLD 6 11 0 17 64.71% TOTAL 117 332 2 451 73.61% WESTERN HILLS UNGRADED 1 21 28 0 49 57.14% 2 19 26 0 45 57.78% 3 14 34 1 49 69.39% 4 18 30 0 48 62.50% 5 19 32 1 52 61. 54% 6 17 35 0 52 67.31% SUBTOTAL 108 185 2 295 62.71% KIND. 16 24 0 40 60.00% TOTAL 124 209 2 335 62.39% WILLIAMS UNGRADED 1 29 36 3 68 52.94% 2 27 39 2 68 57.35% 3 29 37 1 67 55.22% 4 31 41 0 72 56.94% 5 32 38 2 72 52.78% 6 42 52 1 95 54.74% SUBTOTAL 190 243 9 442 54.98% KIND. 28 32 0 60 53.33% TOTAL 218 -275 9 502 54.78% WILSON UNGRADED 4 19 0 23 82.61% 1 13 34 0 47 72.34% 2 11 29 0 40 72.50% 3 18 35 0 53 66.04% 4 7 40 0 47 85.11% 5 5 36 0 41 87.80% 6 7 40 0 47 85.11% SUBTOTAL 65 233 0 298 78.19% KIND. 17 23 0 40 57.50% FOUR YR OLD 8 9 0 17 52.94% TOTAL 90 265 0 355 74.65% Page - 11 SCHOOL/GRADE WHITE BLACK OTHER TOTAL %BLACK WOODRUFF UNGRADED 1 14 28 0 42 66.67% 2 12 11 0 23 47.83% 3 8 12 0 20 60.00% 4 9 16 0 25 64.00% 5 13 24 1 38 63.16% 6 9 20 1 30 66.67% SUBTOTAL 65 111 2 178 62.36% KIND. 11 28 1 40 70. \u0026lt;)0% FOUR YR OLD 7 8 1 16 50.00% TOTAL 83 147 4 234 62.82% EASTER SEALS UNGRADED 9 6 0 15 40.00% TOTAL 9 6 0 15 40.00% ELIZ. MITCHELL UNGRADED 30 16 0 46 34.78% TOTAL 30 16 0 46 34.78% E. MITCHELL(DAY) UNGRADED 4 6 0 10 60.00% TOTAL 4 6 0 10 60.00% Page - 12 OCT 2 1 19Y2 OCTOBER 1st REPORTS 1992-93 Office of DesegregatioMn onitoring CONTENTS N.L.R.S.D. Enrollment, Excluding Kindergarten N.L.R.S.D. Enrollment, Including Kindergarten Group School Transfers Magnet Transfers Majority to Minority Transfers to L.R.S.D. Majority to Minority Transfers from L.R.S.D. Oak Grove Transfers to P.C.S.S.D. Oak Grove Transfers from P.C.S.S.D. Scott Student Transfers School Choice Transfers to P.C.S.S.D. School Choice Transfers from P.C.S.S.D. Teachers' Student Transfers Under Act 624 ., .. School Alternative ( 3 - 6) Amboy Baring Cross (K - 6) Belwood Boone Park Central Crestwood Glenview Indian Hills Lakewood Lynch Drive - Meadow Park North Heights Park Hill Pike View Redwood Rose City Seventh Street Total Elem. Alternative (7 - 11) Baring Cross ( 7 - 12) Lakewood Md. Ridgeroad Md. Rose City Md. NLRHS-East NLRHS-West Total Sec. Dist. Total: ! - 1992/93 Approved% Range for Black Enrollment Elem.: 37.9 - 63.1 Middle: 35.9 - 59.8 NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT North Little Rock, Arkansas RACIAL COMPOSITION OF SCHOOLS Excluding Kindergarten October 1, 1992 Enrollment Black % Non-Black % 19 13 68.4 6 31. 6 331 159 48.0 172 52.0 14 5 35.7 9 64.3 150 64 42.7 86 57.3 403 239 59.3 164. 40.7 430 227 52.8 203 47.2 210 91 43.3 119 56.7 201 112 55.7 89 44.3 386 180 46.6 206 53.4 244 126 51. 6 118 48.4 186 76 40.9 110 59.1 218 113 51.8 105 48.2 337 175 51. 9 162 48.1 178 88 49.4 90 50.6 371 191 51.5 180 48.5 202 112 55.4 90 44.6 215 117 54.4 98 45.6 315 141 44.8 174 55.2 4,410 2,229 50.5% 2,181 49. 5~ .. 30 23 76.7 7 23.3 31 22 71.0 9 29.0 545 248 45.5 297 54.5 578 266 46.0 312 54.0 408 207 50.7 201 49.3 1,339 602 45.0 737 55.0 1,204 524 43.5 680 56.5 4,135 1,892 45.8% 2,243 54.2% 8,545 4,121 48.2% 4,424 51.8% 1992/93 Approved% Range for Black Enrollment NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT North Little Rock, Arkansas RACIAL COMPOSITION OF SCHOOLS Including Kindergarten October 1, 1992 Elem.: 37.9 - 63.1 Middle: 35.9 - 59.8 School Alternative Enrollment Black 14 172 % 70.0 44.1 35.7 Non-Black % (K - 6) Amboy Baring Cross (K - 6) Belwood Boone Park Central Crestwood Glenview Indian Hills Lakewood Lynch Drive Meadow Park North Heights Park Hill Pike View Redwood Rose City Seventh Street 20 390 14 171 480 496 241 230 447 277 210 243 403 210 429 238 254 363 Total Elem. 5,116 Alternative 30 (7 - 11) Baring Cross 31 (7 - 12) Lakewood Md. 545 Ridgeroad Md. 578 Rose City Md. 408 NLRHS-East 1,339 NLRHS-West 1,204 Total Sec. 4,135 Dist. Total: 9,251 5 71 295 279 105 131 200 141 85 124 193 94 209 142 137 177 2,574 23 22 248 266 207 602 524 1,892 4,466 41.5 61. 5 56.3 43.6 57.0 44.7 50.9 40.5 51.0 47.9 44.8 48.7 59.7 53.9 48.8 6 218 9 100 185 217 136 99 247 136 125 119 210 116 220 96 117 186 50.3% 2,542 76.7 7 71.0 9 45.5 297 46.0 312 50.7 201 45.0 737 43.5 680 45.8% 2,243 48.3% 4,785 30.0 55.9 64.3 58.5 38.5 43.8 56.4 43.0 55.3 4 9 .1 59.5 49.0 52.1 55.2 51. 3 40.3 46.1 51.2 49.7% 23.3 29.0 54.5 54.0 49.3 55.0 56. 5 ., 54.2% 51.7% NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT Grouped School Transfers 1992-93 Non-black Black AMBOY ELEM. TO SEVENTH STREET ELEM. BELWOOD ELEM. TO CENTRAL ELEM. BOONE PARK ELEM. TO AMBOY ELEM. BOONE PARK ELEM. TO PARK HILL ELEM. CENTRAL ELEM. TO BELWOOD ELEM. CENTRAL ELEM. TO CRESTWOOD ELEM. CENTRAL.ELEM. TO LAKEWOOD ELEM. CENTRAL ELEM. TO PIKE VIEW ELEM. CRESTWOOD ELEM. TO CENTRAL ELEM. INDIAN HILLS ELEM. TO SEVENTH STREET LAKEWOOD ELEM. TO CENTRAL ELEM. PARK HILL ELEM. TO GLENVIEW ELEM. PIKE VIEW ELEM. TO CENTRAL ELEM. REDWOOD ELEM. TO NORTH HEIGHTS ELEM. ROSE CITY ELEM. TO MEADOW PARK ELEM. Total: 10/01/92 48 2 3 ELEM. 93 18 1 4 5 174 5 8 1 1 3 4 1 23 ELEMENTARY SECONDARY NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT MAGNET ENROLLMENT BY SCHOOL October 1, 1992 Non-Black Black Booker 55 48 Carver 60 46 Gibbs 23 30 Williams 41 24 Total: 179 148 Mann Arts 38 50 Mann Science 24 25 Parkview Arts 27 32 Parkview Science 8 14 Total: 97 121 Magnet Total: 276 269 Total 103 106 53 65 327 88 49 59 22 218 545 NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT MAJORITY-TO-MINORITY TRANSFER PROGRAM TO LITTLE ROCK October 1, 1992 ELEMENTARY Brady Chicot Geyer Springs McDermott Rockefeller Stephens Terry Washington Wilson Woodruff Total: SECONDARY 1 2 3 2 5 1 2 64 3 9 92 Cloverdale 1 Dunbar (M to M Magnet) 8 Henderson 1 Pulaski Heights 6 Central Central Hall J. A. Fair McClellan (M to M) (M to M Magnet) Total: Total M to M Transfers: 22 7 2 2 3 52 143 E\nLEMENTARY NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT MAJORITY-TO-MINORITY TRANSFER PROGRAM Black Students from Little Rock School District October 1, 1992 SCHOOLS Alternative Education 1 Amboy 10 Belwood 2 Boone Park 3 Central 7 Crestwood 16 Glenveiw 4 Indian Hills 24 Lakewood 32 Lynch Drive 4 Meadow Park 3 North Heights 9 Park Hill 4 Pike View 6 Redwood 10 Rose City 0 Seventh Street 3 Total: 138 MIDDLE SCHOOLS Alternative Education 0 Baring Cross 0 Lakewood 43 Ridge road 8 Rose City 8 Total: 59 HIGH SCHOOLS Alternative Education 0 Baring Cross 3 East Campus 43 West Campus 52 Total: 98 Total M to M Transfers: 295 - .... . ,, - NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT N.L.R. STUDENTS TO OAK GROVE 1992-93 RACE: Black GRADE NUMBER OF STUDENTS 7 1 8 8 9 10 10 13 11 10 12 15 TOTAL: 57 10-01-92 NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OAK GROVE STUDENTS TO N.L.R.S.D. 1992-93 RACE: White 10/01/92 GRADE 8 9 10 11 12 TOTAL: NUMBER OF STUDENTS 1 0 1 2 3 7 Rose City Middle School North - Total: GRADE 7 8 Little Rock High GRADE 9 10 Total: NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT STUDENT AFFAIRS OFFICE SCOTT STUDENTS October 1, 1992 # OF STUDENTS 6 12 18 School - East Campus # OF STUDENTS 5 3 8 Black Non-Black 2 4 4 8 6 12 Black Non-Black 0 5 1 2 1 7 NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT School Choice to Pulaski County Special School District October 1, 1992 Race: Black GRADE NUMBER OF STUDENTS 11 1 Total: 1 NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT STUDENT AFFAIRS OFFICE SCHOOL CHOICE TRANSFERS 1992-93 October 1, 1992 School Non-Black Amboy Elementary 2 Baring Cross (K-6) 1 Belwood Elementary 0 Boone Park Elementary 0 Central Elementary 3 Crestwood Elementary 4 Glenview Elementary O Indian Hills Elementary 10 Lakewood Elementary O Lynch Drive Elementary 0 Meadow Park Elementary 0 North Heights Elementary 3 Park Hill Elementary 0 Pike View Elementary 3 Redwood Elementary O Rose City Elementary 1 Seventh Street Elementary 3 Alternative Education Baring Cross (7-12) Lakewood Middle Ridgeroad Middle Rose City Middle NLRHS-East Campus NLRHS-West Campus Total: (7-12) 0 .o 13 2 1 20 15 81 Black NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT TEACHER TRANSFER ACT 624 October 1, 1992 STUDENTS OF LITTLE ROCK RESIDENT CERTIFIED EMPLOYEES ATTENDING SCHOOL IN THE NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT Total: 10 Non-Black 5 Black 5 ________________________________ (010) STUDENTS OF PULASKI COUNTY RESIDENT CERTIFIED EMPLOYEES ATTENDING SCHOOL. IN THE NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT Total: 28 Non-Black 21 Black 7 ________________________________ (011) STUDENTS OF BRYANT RESIDENT CERTIFIED EMPLOYEES ATTENDING SCHOOL IN THE NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT Total: 1 Non-Black 1 Black 0 ________________________________ (012) -STUDENTS OF CONWAY RESIDENT CERTIFIED EMPLOYEES ATTENDING SCHOOL IN THE NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT Total: 1 Non-Black 1 Black 0 __________________________________ (013) STUDENTS OF NORTH LITTLE ROCK RESIDENT CERTIFIED EMPLOYEES ATTENDING SCHOOL IN THE NORTH LITTLE ROCK ZONE WHERE THEY TEACH Total: 14 Non-Black 12 Black 2 ________________________________ (014) STUDENTS OF PULASKI COUNTY RESIDENT CLASSIFIED EMPLOYEES ATTENDING SCHOOL IN THE NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT Total: 3 Non-Black 3 Black 0 _______________________________ (021) STUDENTS OF NORTH LITTLE ROCK RESIDENT CLASSIFIED EMPLOYEES ATTENDING SCHOOL IN THE NORTH LITTLE ROCK ZONE WHERE THEY WORK Total: 11 Non-Black 5 Black 6 ~-:~ ____________________________ (024) GRAND TOTAL: 68 Non-Black 48 Black 20 PUPIL ENROLLMENT BY SCHOOL LEA #60-02-050 OCTOBER 1, 1992 CURRENT SCHOOL ASSIGNMENTS COUNTY: PULASKI DISTRICT: NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL: AMBOY ELEMENTARY - GRADE SPAN: K-06 WHITE BLACK HISPANIC ASIAN/PI AM IND/ALS NAT GRADE TOTAL M F M F M F M F M F K 59 21 25 7 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01 58 18 18 15 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 02 60 24 6 16 14 0 o 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 03 61 19 13 11 18 0 .. o 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 04 53 12 12 12 15 0 2 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 05 50 11 10 11 17 1 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 06 49 15 11 12 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  OOL 390 120 95 84 88 1 2 0 0 0 0 ALS 55.1% 44 .1% .8% .0% . 0% CHOICE 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PUPIL ENROLLMENT BY SCHOOL LEA #60-02-053 OCTOBER 1, 1992 CURRENT SCHOOL ASSIGNMENTS COUNTY: PULASKI DISTRICT: NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL: BELWOOD ELEMENTARY - GRADE SPAN: K-06 WHITE BLACK HISPANIC ASIAN/PI AM IND/ALS NAT GRADE TOTAL M F M F M F M F M F K 21 8 6 3 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01 25 6 9 2 7 1 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 02 26 7 5 6 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 03 20 3 11 2 3 0 . .0 0 0 1 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 04 29 7 10 8 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 05 24 7 6 4 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 06 26 4 8 5 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  OOL 171 42 55 30 41 2 0 0 0 1 0 ALS 56.7% 41.5% 1.2% .0% .6% CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PUPIL ENROLLMENT BY SCHOOL LEA #60-02-054 OCTOBER 1, 1992 CURRENT SCHOOL ASSIGNMENTS COUNTY: PULASKI DISTRICT: NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL: BOONE PARK ELEMENTARY - GRADE SPAN: K-06 WHITE BLACK HISPANIC ASIAN/PI AM IND/ALS NAT GRADE TOTAL M F M F M F M F M F J 30 5 4 10 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 K 77 11 9 34 22 0 1 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01 64 15 12 17 20 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 02 71 24 12 17 17 1 . -0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 03 56 9 5 23 17 2 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 04 61 12 10 21 17 1 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 05 58 11 11 11 24 0 1 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 c.\n63 13 16 22 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 SCHOOL 480 100 79 155 140 4 2 0 0 0 0 TOTALS 37.3% 61.5% 1.3% .0% . 0% CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PUPIL ENROLLMENT BY SCHOOL LEA #60-02-059 OCTOBER 1, 1992 CURRENT SCHOOL ASSIGN~..ENTS COUNTY: PULASKI DISTRICT: NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL: CENTRAL ELEMENTARY - GRADE SPAN: K-06 WHITE BLACK HISPANIC ASIAN/PI AM IND/ALS NAT GRADE TOTAL M F M F M F M F M F J 9 0 0 2 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 K 66 7 7 26 26 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PK 19 1 0 10 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01 58 14 11 19 14 0 - -0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 02 68 12 13 22 18 2 1 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 03 68 21 20 14 10 3 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 04 83 21 18 22 22 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 clrci 65 20 9 17 17 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 06 60 17 14 16 9 1 0 1 2 0 0 CHOICE 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 SCHOOL 496 113 92 148 131 6 2 2 2 0 0 TOTALS 41.3% 56.3% 1.6% .8% .0% CHOICE 3 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PUPIL ENROLLMENT BY SCHOOL LEA #60-02-055 OCTOBER 1, 1992 CURRENT SCHOOL ASSIGNMENTS COUNTY: PULASKI DISTRICT: NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL: CRESTWOOD ELEMENTARY - GRADE SPAN: K-06 WHITE BLACK HISPANIC ASIAN/PI AM IND/ALS NAT GRADE TOTAL M F M F M F M F M F K 31 7 10 9 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01 33 15 9 7 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 02 44 15 7 10 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 03 22 5 6 5 6 0 .-0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 04 34 11 5 7 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 05 41 10 14 7 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 06 36 8 13 7 7 0 0 0 0 0 1 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  OOL 241 71 64 52 53 0 0 0 0 0 1 TALS 56.0% 43.6% .0% . 0% .4% CHOICE 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PUPIL ENROLLMENT BY SCHOOL LEA #60-02-056 OCTOBER 1, 1992 CURRENT SCHOOL ASSIGNMENTS COUNTY: PULASKI DISTRICT: NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL: GLENVIEW ELEMENTARY - GRADE SPAN: K-06 WHITE BLACK HISPANIC ASIAN/PI AM IND/ALS NAT GRADE TOTAL M F M F M F M F M F K 29 4 6 9 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01 35 5 10 9 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 02 34 7 8 11 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 03 35 10 7 7 11 0 .-0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 04 34 7 7 8 10 0 1 0 1 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 05 34 5 9 11 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 06 29 7 5 7 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 eOOL 230 45 52 62 69 0 1 0 1 0 0 TALS 42.2% 57.0% .4% .4% .0% CHOICE 0 0 .0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PUPIL ENROLLMENT BY SCHOOL LEA #60-02-057 OCTOBER 1, 1992 CURRENT SCHOOL ASSIGNMENTS COUNTY: PULASKI DISTRICT: NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL: INDIAN HILLS ELEM. - GRADE SPAN: K-06 WHITE BLACK HISPANIC ASIAN/PI AM IND/ALS NAT GRADE TOTAL M F M F M F M F M F K 61 16 25 14 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01 64 17 14 15 18 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 02 60 9 14 17 20 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 03 62 14 18 13 17 0 . -0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 04 63 21 14 18 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 05 71 26 16 16 12 0 0 0 1 0 0 CHOICE 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 06 66 24 18 10 . 14 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  OOL 447 127 119 103 97 0 0 0 1 0 0 ALS 55.0% 44.7% .0% . 2% .0% CHOICE 9 2 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PUPIL ENROLLMENT BY SCHOOL LEA #60-02-058 OCTOBER 1, 1992 CURRENT SCHOOL ASSIGNMENTS COUNTY: PULASKI DISTRICT: NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL: LAKEWOODE LEMENTARY - GRADE SPAN: K-06 WHITE BLACK HISPANIC ASIAN/PI AM IND/ALS NAT GRADE TOTAL M F M F M F M F M F K 33 11 7 6 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01 44 6 17 12 8 0 0 1 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 02 44 5 15 10 13 1 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 03 45 11 4 13 17 0 .-0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 04 39 13 4 7 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 05 29 7 8 5 8 0 0 0 1 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 06 43 15 10 11 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  OOL 277 68 65 64 77 1 0 1 1 0 0 ALS 48.0% 50.9% .4% .7% .0% CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PUPIL ENROLLMENT BY SCHOOL LEA #60-02-060 OCTOBER 1, 1992 CURRENT SCHOOL ASSIGNMENTS COUNTY: PULASKI DISTRICT: NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL: LYNCH DRIVE ELEMENTARY - GRADE SPAN: K-06 WHITE BLACK HISPANIC ASIAN/PI AM IND/ALS NAT GRADE TOTAL M F M F M F M F M F K 24 7 8 5 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01 34 12 9 7 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 02 33 12 10 7 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 03 24 11 4 3 6 0 .0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 04 31 8 9 5 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 05 35 10 6 8 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 06 29 8 9 4 6 1 0 1 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  .OOL 210 68 55 39 46 1 0 1 0 0 0 ALS 58.6% 40.5% .5% .5% .0% CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PUPIL ENROLLMENT BY SCHOOL LEA #60-02-061 OCTOBER 1, 1992 CURRENT SCHOOL ASSIGNMENTS COUNTY: PULASKI DISTRICT: NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL: MEADOWP ARK ELEMENTARY - GRADE SPAN: K-06 WHITE BLACK HISPANIC ASIAN/PI AM IND/ALS NAT GRADE TOTAL M F M F M F M F M F K 25 11 3 7 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01 32 7 15 4 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 02 45 9 9 9 18 0 o 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 03 32 6 8 11 7 0 .-0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 04 31 11 6 5 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 05 44 11 9 14 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 06 34 8 6 10 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  OOL 243 63 56 60 64 0 0 0 0 0 0 ALS 49.0% 51.0% .0% .0% . 0% CHOICE 0 0 .0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PUPIL ENROLLMENT BY SCHOOL LEA #60-02-063 OCTOBER 1, 1992 CURRENT SCHOOL ASSIGNMENTS COUNTY: PULASKI DISTRICT: NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL: NORTH HEIGHTS ELEM. - GRADE SPAN: K-06 'WHITE BLACK HISPANIC ASIAN/PI AM IND/ALS NAT GRADE TOTAL M F M F M F M F M F K 66 19 27 11 7 0 2 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01 51 16 6 9 17 1 1 1 0 0 0 CHOICE 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 02 65 22 8 17 16 0 2 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 03 63 14 15 20 13 0 - -1 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 04 61 16 12 17 15 1 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 05 50 13 9 13 13 1 1 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 06 47 8 12 10 15 0 1 0 1 0 0 CHOICE 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  OOL 403 108 89 97 96 3 8 1 1 0 0 TALS 48.9% 47.9% 2.7% .5% .0% CHOICE 3 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PUPIL ENROLLMENT BY SCHOOL LEA 160-02-064 OCTOBER 1, 1992 CURRENT SCHOOL ASSIGNMENTS COUNTY: PULASKI DISTRICT: NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL: PARK HILL ELEMENTARY GRADE SPAN: K-06 - WHITE BLACK HISPANIC ASIAN/PI AM IND/ALS NAT GRADE TOTAL M F M F M F M F M F K 32\" 14 12 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01 38 12 12 8 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 02 24 5 4 9 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 03 37 8 7 12 10 0 .0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 04 28 9 6 7 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 05 22 3 5 5 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 06 29 8 11 4 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  OOL 210 59 57 48 46 0 0 0 0 0 0 ALS 55.2% 44.8% . 0% .0% . 0% CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PUPIL ENROLLMENT BY SCHOOL LEA #60-02-065 OCTOBER 1, 1992 CURRENT SCHOOL ASSIGNMENTS COUNTY: PULASKI DISTRICT: NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL: PIKE VIEW ELEMENTARY - GRADE SPAN: K-06 WHITE BLACK HISPANIC ASIAN/PI AM IND/ALS NAT GRADE TOTAL M F M F M F M F M F K 58 17 23 7 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01 71 18 8 19 26 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 02 57 20 14 11 11 1 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 03 68 13 14 14 26 0 -1 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 04 65 13 18 21 12 0 1 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 05 56 17 9 12 17 0 1 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 06 54 17 15 11 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  OOL 429 115 101 95 114 1 3 0 0 0 0 TALS 50.3% 48.7% .9% .0% .0% CHOICE 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PUPIL ENROLLMENT BY SCHOOL LEA #60-02-067 OCTOBER 1, 1992 CURRENT SCHOOL ASSIGNMENTS COUNTY: PULASKI DISTRICT: NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL: REDWOODE LEMENTARY - GRADE SPAN: K-06 WHITE BLACK HISPANIC ASIAN/PI AM IND/ALS NAT GRADE TOTAL M F M F M F M F M F K 36. 4 2 12 18 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01 38 5 9 8 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 02 34 5 15 5 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 03 35 8 3 12 11 0 .1 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 04 30 5 7 9 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 05 32 11 4 9 7 1 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 06 33 7 8 3 14 0 0 0 0 1 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - OOL 238 45 48 58 84 1 1 0 0 1 0 ALS 39.1% 59.7% ~8% .0% .4% CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PUPIL ENROLLMENT BY SCHOOL LEA #60-02-068 OCTOBER 1, 1992 CURRENT SCHOOL ASSIGNMENTS COUNTY: PULASKI DISTRICT: NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL: ROSE CITY ELEMENTARY - GRADE SPAN: K-06 WHITE BLACK HISPANIC ASIAN/PI AM IND/ALS NAT GRADE TOTAL M F M F M F M F M F K 39 8 11 9 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01 33 10 7 7 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 02 38 13 3 13 8 1 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 03 36 6 9 12 9 0 .0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 04 43 12 10 11 9 0 1 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 05 39 7 6 15 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 06 26 9 4 6 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  OOL 254 65 50 73 64 1 1 0 0 0 0 ALS 45.3% 53.9% .8% .0% .0% CHOICE 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PUPIL ENROLLMENT BY SCHOOL LEA #60-02-069 OCTOBER 1, 1992 CURRENT SCHOOL ASSIGNMENTS COUNTY: PULASKI DISTRICT: NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL: SEVENTH STREET ELEM. - GRADE SPAN: K-06 WHITE BLACK HISPANIC ASIAN/PI AM IND/ALS NAT GRADE TOTAL M F M F M F M F M F K 48 5 7 18 18 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 6 2 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01 36 8 5 11 11 0 0 0 1 0 0 CHOICE 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 02 74 12 20 21 21 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 03 44 19 8 9 8 0 . -0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 04 57 21 16 11 9 0 0 .o 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 05 47 12 13 12 9 1 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 06 57 17 21 9 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  OOL 363 94 90 91 86 1 0 0 1 0 0 TALS 50.7% 48.8% . 3% .3% .0% CHOICE 9 3 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ELEMENTARY WHITE BLACK HISPANIC ASIAN/PI AM IND/ALS NAT TOTALS M F M F M F M F M F ELEM 5127 1314 1174 1278 1304 22 20 5 7 2 1 clicE 48.5% 50.4% .8% .2% .1% 33 17 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PUPIL ENROLLMENT BY SCHOOL LEA #60-02-076 OCTOBER 1, 1992 CURRENT SCHOOL ASSIGNMENTS COUNTY: PULASKI DISTRICT: NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL: NLRHS-WEST CAMPUS - GRADE SPAN: 11-12 WHITE BLACK HISPANIC ASIAN/PI AM IND/ALS NAT GRADE TOTAL M F M F M F M F M F 10 19 4 1 9 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 607 185 142 138 135 0 4 0 2 0 1 CHOICE 9 5 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 12 578. 164 169 101 136 2 2 3 1 0 0 CHOICE 7 1 5 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 SCHOOL 1204 353 312 248 276 2 .. 6 3 3 0 1 TOTALS 55.2% 43.5% .7% .5% .1% CHOICE 16 6 8 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 - PUPIL ENROLLMENT BY SCHOOL LEA #60-02-070 OCTOBER 1, 1992 CURRENT SCHOOL ASSIGNMENTS COUNTY: PULASKI DISTRICT: NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL: LAKEWOOD - GRADE SPAN: 07-08 WHITE BLACK HISPANIC ASIAN/PI AM IND/ALS NAT GRADE TOTAL M F M F M F M F M F 07 259 79 60 62 56 1 0 0 0 0 1 CHOICE 7 4 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 08 284 71 83 64 65 0 0 1 0 0 0 CHOICE 6 4 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 09 2 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 SCHOOL 545 151 143 127 121 1 _.o 1 0 0 1 TOTALS 53.9% 45.5% .2% .2% .2% CHOICE 13 8 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - PUPIL ENROLLMENT BY SCHOOL LEA #60-02-075 OCTOBER 1, 1992 CURRENT SCHOOL ASSIGNMENTS COUNTY: PULASKI DISTRICT: NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL: NLRHS-EAST CAMPUS - GRADE SPAN: 09-10 WHITE BLACK HISPANIC ASIAN/PI AM IND/ALS NAT GRADE TOTAL M F M F M F M F M F 09 700 183 179 170 159 2 5 1 1 0 0 CHOICE 9 2 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 639 187 174 137 136 1 0 1 3 0 0 CHOICE 10 5 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 SCHOOL 1339 370 353 307 295 3 5 2 4 0 0 TOTALS 54.0% 45.0% .6% .4% .0% CHOICE 19 7 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - PUPIL ENROLLMENT BY SCHOOL LEA #60-02-072 OCTOBER 1, 1992 CURRENT SCHOOL ASSIGNMENTS COUNTY: PULASKI DISTRICT: NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL: RIDGEROAD - GRADE SPAN: 07-08 WHITE BLACK HISPANIC ASIAN/PI AM IND/ALS NAT GRADE TOTAL M F M F M F M F M F 07 288 79 58 83 65 0 2 0 0 1 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 08 290 94 72 73 45 3 1 1 0 1 0 CHOICE 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 SCHOOL 578 173 130 156 110 3 3 1 0 2 0 TOTALS 52.4% 46.0% 1.0% .2% .3% CHOICE 2 0 2 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 PUPIL ENROLLMENT BY SCHOOL LEA #60-02-077 OCTOBER 1, 1992 CURRENT SCHOOL ASSIGNMENTS COUNTY: PULASKI DISTRICT: NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL: ROSE CITY - GRADE SPAN: 07-08 WHITE BLACK HISPANIC ASIAN/PI AM IND/ALS NAT GRADE TOTAL M F M F M F M F M F 07 201 48 49 60 41 1 2 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 08 205 43 55 51 54 2 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 09 2 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 SCHOOL 408 92 104 112 95 3 - .2 0 0 0 0 TOTALS 48.0% 50. 7% 1.2% .0% .0% CHOICE 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LEA #60-02- COUNTY: PULASKI GRADE TOTAL K CHOICE 01 CHOICE 03 CHOICE 04 CHOICE 05 CHOICE 06 CHOICE 07 CHOICE  OOL ALS CHOICE 1 0 2 0 2 0 4 0 9 0 PUPIL ENROLLMENT BY SCHOOL OCTOBER 1, 1992 CURRENT SCHOOL ASSIGNMENTS DISTRICT: NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL: ALTERNATIVE CENTER GRADE SPAN: K-12 WHITE M F 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 BLACK M F 1 0 1 0 1 0 3 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 6 HISPANIC ASIAN/PI AM IND/ALS NAT M F M F M F 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - -0 0  0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PUPIL ENROLLMENT BY SCHOOL LEA #60-02- OCTOBER 1, 1992 CURRENT SCHOOL ASSIGNMENTS COUNTY: PULASKI DISTRICT: NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL: - GRADE SPAN: K-12 WHITE BLACK HISPANIC ASIAN/PI AM IND/ALS NAT GRADE TOTAL M F M F M F M F M F 07 ..-4-\"S 1 0 1 __..2/. 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 08 11 2 0 7 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 09 5 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 2 2 0 0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 7 2 0 2 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 SCHOOL ~30 7 0 15 ..::,--'? 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTALS 24 .1% .J..S-r9-%'\" .0% .0% .0% CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~.G7~ - PUPIL ENROLLMENT BY SCHOOL LEA #60-02-078 OCTOBER 1, 1992 CURRENT SCHOOL ASSIGNMENTS COUNTY: PULASKI DISTRICT: NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL: BARING CROSS CENTER - GRADE SPAN: K-06 WHITE BLACK HISPANIC ASIAN/PI AM IND/ALS NAT GRADE TOTAL M F M F M F M F M F 01 2 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ,\n'/,r, ) CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O C 02 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 g/\\ 04 5 2 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 g ~~~ 05 4 1 3 0 0 0 _.o 0 0 0 0 ? CHOICE 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 (.,4 1 06 ,~] 2~\ng 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ffi CHOICE ~o JO 0 0 0 0 0 0 07 5 2 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 08 3 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ca! 7 1 0 5 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 2 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~/ CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~d' t'IJ 12 12 1 2 6 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 111t\u0026gt; ? 45 1l-1 ~ SCHOOL 7 19 8 0 o 0 0 0 0 TOTALS 40.0% 60.0% .0% .0% .0% CHOICE 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0. ~ SECONDARY WHITE BLACK HISPANIC ASIAN/PI AM IND/ALS NAT TOTALS M F M F M F M F M F SEC 4124 1152 1042 979 905 12 16 7 7 2 2 - 53.2% 45.7% .7% .3% .1% CHOICE 51 22 27 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 - DISTRICT WHITE BLACK HISPANIC ASIAN/PI AM IND/ALS NAT TOTALS M F M F M F M F M F 9251 2466 2216 2257 2209 34 36 12 14 4 3 C.E 50.6% 48.3% .8% .3% .1% 84 39 43 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 - SCHOOL District 4 YEAR E.OLLM.ENT COMPARISON OCTOBER1 DATA STUDENTASR E IDENTIFIEDA S Bl.A.CIACN DN ON-BLACIC INCLUDINGK INDERGARTEN 1~: EXCLUDINGK INDERGARTEN 1989-90 Black I 4,218 1989-90 I Black I 4,061 White I 5,208 I White I 5,317 I Other I I I I Other I I Total I 9,426 I% Blk I 44.7 I . I Total I 9,378 I% Blk I 43.3 1990-91 I Black I 4 279 I 1990-91 I Black I 3,899 ! White I L,. Ql o:\nI White I I ! 4,507 i ! Other I Total I 9,194 I I I% Blk I 46.5 1991-92 I Black I 4,346 I I White I 4,918 I I Other I I Total I 9.264 l I% Blk I li6 g I i : Other i I ! Total I ! 8,406 I% Blk i I ! 46.4 I 1991-92 ! Black i I 4.022 ! White I l,. o:\nt,.1 I Other I I Total I 8,s6s % Blk I 47.0 1992-93 I Black I 4.466 1992-93 Black I 4,121 I White I ~.Z85 I I I Other I White I 4,424 I Other I I Total g. 2'l 1 I% Blk 48.3 I Total 18,545 I% Blk- I 48.2 5c - - --- -~-- ----- (Used to determine acceptable enrollment ranges) SCHOOL District (Elementary) 4 YEAR EIOLLM.ENT COMPARISON OCTOBERl DATA STUDENTAS RE IDENTIFIEDA S BLACIACN DN ON-BLACIC INCLUDINGIC INDERGARTEN EXCLUDINIGC INDERGARTEN 1989-90 Black I 2,496 1989-90 Black I 2,271 White I 2. 716 I I Other I White I I 2,644 I Other I I Total I s,212 I Total I 4. 915 I% Blk l 47.9 % Blk I I 46.2 1990-91 / Black I 2,s2s I I I 2 604 ! White i I ! Other I Total I s. 129 I I I I% Blk I 49.2 1990-91 I Black I 2,145 ' I I White i 2,196 Other ! I I Total l\n4,341 % Blk i ! 49.4 1991-92 I Black I 2,509 ! White 12.574 I Other I I Total 5,083 I I o/oB lk I 49.4 I 1991-92 ! Black i\n2,185 ! White 12.199 ! Other I I I I Total 14,384 I o/o Blk I 49.8 1992-93 I Black 12,574 I White 12,542 I I I Other I ! Total 5,116 I% Blk 50.3 1992-93 j Black 12,229 j White /2, 181 I Other I Total ~,410 % Blk- I 50.5 Sc (UseJ' to determine acceptable enrollment ranges) SCHOOL District (Secondary) 4 YEAR E.OLLM.ENT COMPARISON OCTOBERl DATA STUDENTAS RE IDENTIFIEDA S BLACKA NDN ON-BLACK INCLUDINGIC INDERGARTEN EXCLUDINKGI NDERGARTEN 1989-90 Black I 1. 722 1989-90 Black I 1,790 White I 2,492 White I I 2,673 Other I I Other I I Total I 4,214 \\ Totai\" I 4,463 I% Blk I 40.9 % Blk I I 40.1 1990-91 I Black I 1,754 I 1990-91 I Black I 1,754 I ! White I 2,311 I ' I l White I ! 2.311 i ! Other I I I I : Other I \\ Total I 4,065 I I ! Total i 4,065 ! I% Blk I I 43.1 I 1 % Blk I' 43.1 ! 1991-92 \\ Black I 1 837 I i 1991-92 ! Black\n1,837 ! White I 2 '),I.I, ! White I 2,344 IO ther I '! Other I Total I 4. 181 I ' I Total I 4. 181 % Blk I 43.9 I% Blk I 43.9 1992-93 I Black 11,892 1992-93 I Black I 1.892 I White ! 2  243 I i White I 2.243 I Other I Other I I Total 14. 135 Total 14.135 % Blk I 45.8 % Blk  I 45.8 5c I (Used to determine acceptable enrollment ranges) SCHOOL Amboy Elementary 4 YEAR .OLLMENT COMPARISON OCTOBER1 DATA STUDENTSA RE IDENTIFIED AS BLACKA NDN ON-BLACK INCLUDINGK INDERGARTEN EXCLUDINGK INDERGARTEN 1989-90 I Black I I 198 I I Black ! . 1989-90 190 ! White ! 234 I : I White ! 224 ! ! i Other I - i Other -- ! Total i 432 ~ I ! 1 Total i 414 \\ % Blk I 45.8 I i \\ % Blk !i 45.9 I I 1990-91 ! Black : 179 I 1990-91 i Black ' 163 ! White ' ! 228 I\nWhite I 174 : Other - I '. Other --\ni i Total !i 407 ! Total i I I 337 ! % Blk I 44.0 : % ~lk ' l 48.4 I 1991-92 : Black '' 189 I\n1991-92 ! Black 166 ! White i 235 I ! White i 186 \\ Other I I -- I ! Other I I - I Total I 424 i i Total i ! 352 I I i o/o Blk I 44.6 I I o/oB lk I 47.2 1992-93 ! Black I 172 j Black ' 1992-93 i 159 I \\ White I 218 I \\ White I 172 I I I l Other - I I ! Other I - ! Total l 390 I I ! ! Total I 331 I% Blk I 44.1 I% Blk I 48.0 I Sc I (Used to determine acceptable enrollment ranges) SCHOOL Belwood Elementary 4 YEAR .ROLLMENT COMPARISON OCTOBERl DATA STUDENTSA RE IDENTIFIEDA S BLACKA NDN ON-BLACIC INCLUDINGK INDERGARTEN EXCLUDINKGI NDERGARTEN 1989-90 Black I 66 I 1989-90 I Black i ! 69 White I 81 I \\ White II 79 I Other I - ! Other -- I Total I 147 I i ! Total i 148 I% Blk I 44.9 'I ! ! % Blk i 46.6 1990-91 I Black I 61 I I 1990-91 i Black l 56 i White I I 107 I : White l' 89 i I I \\ Other - I, : Other :: - l Total I 168 i i Total i \\ 145 I I 36.3 II \\ % Blk I i % ~lk i l 38.6 1991-92 J Black I 55 I\n1991-92 ! Black 49 i White I 96 I ! White i 78 \\ Other I - ! Other I I - I Total I 151 I i Total i! 127 I I I 36.4 i % Blk I ' I% Blk I 38.6 1992-93 1 Black I 71 1992-93 i Black I ! 64 I ! White I 100 I I ! White I 86 \\ Other I - ! Other I I - I Total I 171 I ! Total I 150 I% Blk I 41.5 I% Blk I 42.7 I Sc I I I I I I I I I I I I (Used to determine acceptable enrollment ranges) SCHOOLB oone Park Elementary 4 YEAR \u0026amp;oLLMENT COMPARISON OCTOBER1 DATA STUDENTS ARE IDENTIFIED AS BLACK AND NON-BLACK INCLUDINGK INDERGARTEN EXCLUDINKGI NDERGARTEN 1989-90 I Black I 315 I ! White I 205 I I Black\n1989-90 ?t:.t:. I White 197 i Other I - ! Other -- I ! Total I 520 I i Total M,1 I% Blk I 60.6 I \\ % Blk j 57.5 1990-91 j Black I 294 I I 1990-91 ! Black 235 : White I 195 I 'White 149 : Other II - t \\ Total I 489 I\\ ' I I% Blk Ii I I 60.1 '. Other - i Total 384 ! % Blk ' 61.2 ' I I\\ 1991-92 : Black 319 \\ White \\ 209 I 1991-92 ! Black\n269 : \\'vh ite i 181 \\ Other I - I ! Other I i -- \\ Total I 528 i : i Total i 450 ! I i 'YoB lk I 60.4 1' II S'f,8 I% Blk -46-\nt- 1992-93 \\ Black \\ 295 I i Black ' 1992-93 i 239 I White I 185 II I i White I 164 I I ' I I i Other - I \\ Total I 480 I I I I%Bl k I 61.5 I I \\ Other I I -- I ! Total I 403 I% Blk I 59.3 I Sc I I I I I (Used to determine acceptable enrollment ranges) SCHOOL Central Elementary *First year for this school ------------- ------ 4 YEAR .ROLLMENT COMPARISON OCTOBER1 DATA STUDENTSA RE IDENTIFIED AS BLACKA NDN ON-BLACK INCLUDINGK INDERGARTEN EXCLUDINGK INDERGARTEN 1989-90 \\ Black I \\ Black I 1989-90 I White I I I I I I Other I White I I ! Other \\ Total I I i ! Total i ! I% Blk I I ! % Blk i i i I 1990-91 I Black I ! Black I 1990-91 ' I I ! White 'White : i ! Other I I Other ! i i I I Total I ! i Total \\ I i ! % Blk I\nI ! % l3Ik I 1991-92 \\ Black II 197 I \\ White I ! 185 I ' 1991-92 ! Black 152 ' i ! White 178 \\ Other I - ! Other I i -- I Total 1 'tR? I\ni Total ! 330 I 1 % Blk l 51.6 I I% Blk I 46.1 1992-93 \\ Black I 279 i Black I 1992-93 i 227 ! White I 217 l I ! White I 203 I I I Other I - \\ Other I -- I \\ Total I 496 ! Total I 430 I% Blk l 56.3 I% Blk I 52.8 : 5c I I ! I I I I I I i I i I i I I I I I (Used to determine acceptable enrollment ranges) SCHOOL Crestwood Elementary . - - =--- --~ ..-.\n,,._ 4 YEAR AoLLMENT COMPARISON OCTOBER 1 DATA STUDENTSA RE IDENTIFIED AS BLACKA NDN ON-BLACK INCLUDINGK INDERGARTEN EXCLUDINGK INDERGARTEN 1989-90 \\ Black I 85 I 1989-90 \\ Black I ! 90 I White ! 111 I I ! White !  117 \\ Other I - I Other I -- \\ Total I 196 ! I i  Total I 207 ! I%Bl k I 43.4 i i ! : % Blk i 43.5 I Black I 1990-91 I I 80 I 1990-91 : Black I : 75 \\ White I I 143 I ' White I 122 i I ! Other I I i -  Other - \\ Total i 223 l ! I i  Total i 197 I i I% Blk ! 35.9 ' I : % ~lk i l 38.1 \\ Black I 1991-92 I I i 98 1991-92\nBlack 93 \\ White i 143 I I ! I : White I 122 \\ Other I - : Other I I -- \\ Total I 241 i i i Total ! 215 I I% Blk I 40.7 I I% Btk I 43.3 1992-93 Black I 105 1992-93 \\ Black ! 91 1 White I 136 I j White I 119 Other I - \\ Other I I - 1 Total I 241 I ! Total I 210 % Blk I 43.6 I% Blk I 43.3 I Sc I I I I - (Used to determine acceptable enrollment ranges) SCHOOL Glenview Elementary\n4 YEAR \u0026amp;oLLMENT COMPARISON OCTOBERl DATA STUDENTSA RE IDENTIFIED AS BLACKA NDN ON-BLACK INCLUDINGK INDERGARTEN EXCLUDINGK INDERGARTEN 1989-90 Black I 109 I I Black I 1989-90 ! 100 White I 122 I I White 133 Other I - ! Other - \\ Total I 231 , Total ! 233 I% Blk I 47.2 I ! o/o Blk : 42.9 1990-91 \\ Black I 138 'I 11\n1990-91 : Black 121 ! White I 106 I  White : 98 i I I I Other - I : Other -- I I Total I 244 I I I i j % Blk I 56.6 : Total 219  % Blk i 55.3 I I I 1991-92 Black ! 130\n1991-92 ! Black 111 \\ White I 103 I 'White i 96 \\ Other I - ! Other I i -- \\ Total I 233 I i Total . i 207 ! I I I I% Blk 55.8 i I% Blk I 53.6 1992-93 \\ Black I 131 I I 1992-93 I Black i 112 ! White I 99 I I ! White I 89 \\ Other I -- ! Other I I -- ! Total I 230 i I ! Total I 201 I% Blk I 57.0 I% Blk I 55.7 I Sc I I I I I (Used to determine acceptable enrollment ranges) SCHOOL 4 YEAR .OLLMENT COMPARISON OCTOBER1 DATA STUDENTSA RE IDENTIFIED AS BLACKA ND NON-BLACK Indian Hills Elementary INCLUDINGK INDERGARTEN EXCLUDINGK INDERGARTEN I j Black I ! 1989-90 157 1989-90 ' Black 163 ! ! White ! 318 : White 285 I i Other  Other I ! Total 475 Total 448 I \"-o Blk 33.1 I  % Blk 36.4 ll 1990-91 i Black 158 ii I 1990-91 Black 145 :I \\\".'hite 284 ii !I \\'Vhite II 234 !I i 1!I Other Other 1, :1 ii 11 11\nTotal 442 Total 379 ,I ii ,, I, 11 ., :1 i ':\"c Blk 35.7 j, ~o Blk 38.3 jl 1 I 11 I II :11991-92 '. Slack 190 11 1991-92 ' Black 182 I i ' \\ White 243 1\\ I  White 206 i Other II  Other I I II i Total 433\nTotal 388 I i \u0026lt;:-B~l k I 43.9 I.I' i '7-'o Blk 46.9 i 1992-93 ! Slack I 200 \\I 1992-93 : Black 180 I ,1 ! White 247 ii : White 206 I I I\\ I l Other : Other ! Total I 447 II ! Total 386 I I \\ I I% Blk 44.7 i % Blk 46.6 Sc (Used to determine acceptable enrollment ranges) SCHOOL Lakewood Elementary I I I i I I I I I I i ! i I I I i 4 YEAR .OLLMENT COMPARISON OCTOBER 1 DATA STUDENTSA RE IDENTIFIED AS BLACKA NDN ON-BLACK INCLUDINGK INDERGARTEN EXCLUDINGK INDERGARTEN 1989-90 j Black 98 I I ! White 142 I 1989-90 ! Black 102 ! : White 138 ! j Other - i Other - I Total 240  Total 240 I% Blk \\ 1.0.8 ' I : % Blk 42.5 I 1990-91 ! Black 96 I ' I 1990-91 Black 95 I '. White 146 I White 122  Other - II Other -- j Total 242 i ! Total 217 ! ~c Blk 39.7 I, . ~o Blk 43.8 I ii 1991-92\nBlack 135 I\nWhite i 155 I 1991-92 ' Black 126  White 130 I Other I I - I . Other -- II i Total l 290\nTotal 256 : i I ':'o Blk ! 46.6 i 'Yo Blk 49.2\n1992-93 \\ Black i I i 141 1992-93 : Black 126 i White I i 136 I 1 White 118 ' I : Other I - i Total I I 277 I ! Other ' -- i Total 244 I% Blk I 50.9 I I% Blk 51.6 5c i I ! I I I I I I I I I I I (Used to determine acceptable enrollment ranges) SCHOOL Lynch Drive Elementary I I \\ I I ! 4 YEAR .ROLLMENT COMPARISON OCTOBERl DATA STUDENTSA RE IDENTIFIED AS BLACKA NDN ON-BLACK INCLUDINGK INDERGARTEN EXCLUDINGK INDERGARTEN I I 125 I 1989-90 i Black ! I ! I : White 154 I ! Black I I 1989-90 111 I ! ! ! White 157 I I ' Other i -- I i I  Other i - I ' I I\nTotal I 279 I !\n% Blk Ii 44.8 I I  Total 268 I '!  % Blk 41.4 1990-91 ' Black : 118 i !I 1990-91 Black 109 I I White 143 I I Other - I, i\\ White :1 124 :1 Other -- ,i i I Total ! 261 I i !\ni o.,o Blk ! 45.2\n'I :j :1 Total 233 :1 . ~o Blk 46.8 !I 1991-92  Black 121 II I 1991-92 ' Black llO  White I' I 136 White ll9 ' I 1 Other I -- Other - '. Total j I\\ '! 257 i ':\"'c Blk i 47.1 11 : : Total l 229 i 'Yo Blk i l 48.0 1992-93 : Black i 85 1992-93 Black 76 I\nWhite 'I 125 I : White llO\nOther l ! - I : Other ! -- ! Total I i 210 I i Total 186 I i i % Blk 1 ! 40.5 I i % Blk 40.9 5c I I I ' I i i i I I I I I I I I I I I (Used to determine acceptable enrollment ranges) I SCHOOL Meadow Park Elementary ---  TF 4 YEAR. \u0026amp;oLLMENT COMPARISON OCTOBER1 DATA STUDENTSA RE IDENTIFIED AS BLACKA ND NON-BLACK INCLUDINGK INDERGARTEN EXCLUDINGK INDERGARTEN 1989-90 \\ Black 148 I 1989-90 I Black 136 ! White I. ! 135 ! White 129\nOther II  Other I II ! Total 283 \" Total 265 I \\ % Blk 523 :1 I! - % Blk 51.3 \" 1990-91 i Black 150 I1-1 1990-91 Black 128 \\ . White ii 145 II White 128 '! Other Other j Total jl 295 ii Total 256 i % Blk 50.8 Ii i\n% E\nllk 50.0 I I' 1991-92\nBlack 129 1I 1991-92 Black 114 ' i 1\\ \\ White 125 n White 111 I ! Other \\ II - Other I i Total I 254 I\\ i Total 225 i % Blk I 50.8 \\\\ I o/o Blk 50.7 i I r 1992-93 ! Black 124 11 1992-93\nBlack 113 'I j White I II 119 11  White 105 i : Other I I\\ i 1 Other ! Total I 243 \\\\ ! Total 218 I I% Blk I 51.0 II I% Blk 51.8 Sc ---- (Used to determine acceptable enrollment ranges) i\\ ii ,I ii ii - ----  ?C3FfflC\"?F:Ef:m't:ir - 4 YEAR .OLLMENT COMPARISON OCTOBER1 DATA STUDENTSA RE IDENTIFIEDA S BLACKA ND NON-BLACK SCHOOLN orth Heights Elementary INCLUDINGK INDERGARTEN EXCLUDINKGI NDERGARTEN i 1989-90 Black I 202 I i 1989-90 I Black 195 White i: 210 I I i White 190 \\ Other I i - : Other -- \\ Total i 412 !  Total 385 I%B lk Ii 49.0 I : % Blk 50.6 1990-91 I Black i 217 I 1990-91 Black 196 '\nI \\ White i 226 I VVhite 178 i : ! Other - I Other -- \\ Total i ! 443 I i\nTotal 374 'i i I ~o Blk l 49.0 II . ~o Blk 52.4 I I 1991-92 \\ Black I ' 194 I 1991-92 ' Black 180 ! White i 216 I White 176 \\ Other ' 'I - I Other -- \\ Total i 410 I !\nTotal l 356 i o/o Blk 'l I 47.3 i o/o Blk \\ 50.6 1992-93 \\ slack II 193 1992-93 , Black 175 I ! White I 210 I : White 162 I Other I - II I Total l 403 i I i\n'. Other - ' i Total i 337 ' I% Blk I 47.9 ' ' i % Blk I': 51.9 Sc ------------------------ - I i I ' ' i I I I I i I I I i i i i ' ' I I I (Used to determine acceptable enrolllllent ranges) \\ I -:r:m:m SCHOOL Park Hill Elementary 4 YEAR \u0026amp;oLLMENT COMPARISON OCTOBER 1 DATA STUDENTSA RE IDENTIFIED AS BLACKA NDN ON-BLACK INCLUDINGK INDERGARTEN EXCLUDINGK INDERGARTEN 1989-90 \\ Black 78 1989-90 \\ Black 86 \\ White I 147 i White 135 i Other ! Other ! Total I 225\nTotal 221 ! \":'o Blk 34.7 I ! % Blk 38.9 I 1990-91 ! Black 94 1990-91 Black 88 : : White 116 White 91 I Other I Other II i Total 210 i\\  Total 179 i % Blk 44.8 I!\n, : ~o Slk 49.2 'I I !I 1991-92 '. Black 98 11 1991-92 ' Black 90 ! White 11 115 I,'! i White 82 \\ Other I I ! Other I Total 1 i 213 I i Total 172 I I I i % Blk 46.0 i % Blk 52.3 1992-93 \\ Black I 94 l 1992-93 I Black 88 1 White I 116 I II i White 90 I \\ Other I I ! Other \\ Total I 210 ! ! Total 178 I I% Blk I 44.8 I% Blk 49.4 5c ----- --- Tfit:nrbosi (Used to determine acceptable enrollment ranges) SCHOOL Pike View Elementary 4 YEAR \u0026amp;oLLMENT COMPARISON OCTOBER1 DATA STUDENTSA RE IDENTIFIED AS BLACKA NDN ON-BLACK INCLUDINGK INDERGARTEN EXCLUDINGK INDERGARTEN Ii I I 212 I 1989-90 ! Black i 1989-90 \\ Black 198 \\ ! White I 244 I I I I : Other I i i - I I I i 456 i Total I I ! j I White 226 i Other - , Total 424 I ii I I % Blk I 46.5\n'% Blk 46.7 i 1990-91\nBlack ! 206 i I I ' 1990-91\nBlack 187 i l \\\\'hite ! 230 i White 193 I I Other -- I I  Other -- I I . Total 436 I I l Total 380 : \"'o Blk i i I 47.2 l! I  % f?lk 49.2 I : ' I 1\\ 1991-92 ' Black\nI 190 i '. White i 220 1, I, 1991-92 ! Black 168 : White 174 I Other I I - I : Other : -- ' I I : Total 410 I i Total j 342 i % Blk I 46.3 I \\ % Blk \\ 49.1 1992-93 i Black I 209 ! I\\ White I 220 I 1992-93\nBlack 191 : White : 180 ' I \\ Other - I\\ ! Total I t.29 I I Other i - j Total 371 I l % Blk I 48.7 I I% Blk 51.5 Sc ! I\n! I i I I I i I i i I I I I I I I I (Used to determine acceptable enrollment ranges) I I i :e\nrw-=- 4 A4\n. .. - - - ~-  v-#-ffiitr- }a-\ng..,\n--~:.....: .......- .,.:.\n..  _:. ~.~~r:s~-,-~\"),,,M-+\u0026amp; 4iii7SF+saS=4 25\nS\n#A#c ~ a ttr:i1iifriWiEtiM\u0026amp;\u0026amp;i%iYAinrrvfr:: SCHOOL Redwood Elementary 4 YEAR .ROLLMENT COMPARISON OCTOBERl DATA STUDENTSA RE IDENTIFIED AS BLACKA ND NON-BLACK INCLUDINGK INDERGARTEN EXCLUDINGK INDERGARTEN I i 164 !I 1989-90 I Black 'I 1989-90 i Black 134 ! White ! 114 Ii : Ii I! ! : 1 White 117 ' ! I j Other ' - !: Other - I i 278 :i I Total \" ! !i Total 251 l % Blk I 59.0 i I i !1  % Blk 53.4 1990-91 ! Black ' 162 ii I I 'I 1990-91 Black 114 '' I' :j : White ! 103 I' I White 96 Ii  Other : - I! Other --\ni j1\nTotal ! 265 ,I i H l i ~o Blk\nJ. l 61.1 !: Total 210 . % !3\\k 54.3 I Ii 1991-92 : Black ' 144 Ii ' l White ! 1! 96 ,: I 1991-92 Black 113 White 94 i Other ' Ii i - I\\ ' Other - I I j Total I 240 \\I : I i % Blk 60.0 II : Total i 207 ! : % Blk i ! 54.6 1992-93 i Black I 142 r 1! ' 1992-93 : Black I 112 i White I 96 ll I : White i\n90 '. \\ Other I - Ii I 238 ! ! Total i I I% Blk 159.7 I I i I Other ! - I j Total I I 202 ' I i % Blk I I 55.4 l Sc I I I I I i i I I i I I I I I I I I (Used to determine acceptable enrollment ranges) I I 4 YEAR .OLLMENT COMPARISON OCTOBER 1 DATA STUDENTSA RE IDENTIFIED AS BLACKA ND NON-BLACK SCHOOL Rose City Elementary INCLUDINGK INDERGARTEN 1989-90 \\ Black 93 ! White 126\nOther :, I Total 219 !! ___ ____.\n. ----':! I ii : 'o Blk 42.5 q 1990-91 ! Black 111 -------- ' White 104  Other\nTotal 215 i .,_,o Blk 51.6 ! 1991-92 : Black 119 '-,- -------1\\ \\ \\Vh ite 126 l: i Other \\\\ -----------'' \\ T t I 245 \\\n1 o a \\\\ i ':'o Blk 48.6 'i 1992-9 3 \\'-S. _la_c_k l_3_7_----'\\\\ ! White 117 \\\\ ! \\! I Other 1! \\ Total 254 I\\ --I 0-,~-B-lk_ _ 5__39 ----\n!i Sc (Used to determine =====!========,:acceptable enrollment 1989-90. _B _la_c__k_ 8__6_ :i ranges) EXCLUDINGK INDERGARTEN 1990-91 ! ,I : White 112 :  Other Tota I 198 --------:  % Blk 56.6 Black 97 -------- ' White 83 .,\n--------.\nOther Total 180 . % E\n31k 53.9 1991-92 '_ B_la_c_k ____1 04 , ,, . White 97 :\n Other ' I Total 201 i o/o Blk 51. 7 1992-93 : Black 117 \\'\\ ______ ...:1I \\ : 1 White 98 !\\ : Other 1 __ ------------li ! Total 215 I i % Blk 54.4 SCHOOL --57ii7Z% 4 YEAR .ROLLMENT COMPARISON OCTOBER1 DATA STUDENTSA RE IDENTIFIED AS BLACKA NDN ON-BLACK Seventh Street Elementary INCLUDINGK INDERGARTEN EXCLUDINGK INDERGARTEN I :1 I 1989-90 I Black 177 I. :1 1989-90 '. Black 132 I I !I I White 149 :: White 183 i Other :I\n\\ Other I :I I Total 326 \" Total 315 ij I !I \\ % Blk 54.3 !I  % Blk 58.1 1990-91 Black 194 1990-91 Black 140 i . White 160 i ! White 157 ., Other ,, :, Other : Total :1 354 ii Total 297 i i % Blk 54.8 r l: % f?lk 49.4\n1991-92\nBlack 184 1991-92 ' Black 142 i 1 White 164  White 163 ,. i ,, ! Other I\\ Other i\nTotal 348 Ii : Total 305 i '\n'o Blk 52.9 I! lj : % Blk 46.6 1992-93 i i Black 177 ii l! 1992-93 , Black 141 , ! White I, 186 !j : White 174 ' Ii I j Other I,i, ! Other I Total 363 I\\ ! Total 315 'i I % Blk 48.8 iI!. i % Blk 44.8 Sc (Used to determine acceptable enrollment ranges) i 1\\  4 YEAR ENROLLMENT COMPARISON OCTOBER l DATA STUDENTS ARE IDENTIFIED AS BLACK AND NON-BLACK SCHOOL NLRHS - West Campus INCLUDINGK INDERGARTEN EXCLUDINKGI NDERGARTEN I I :j 1989-90 I Black I, !I ' 1989-90 : Black ! White I Ii ! I! I While : I I\nOther ii J,  Other i I :I ' Total !I !I \\ % Blk I ii II i Total i I I % Blk I 'I 1990-91 ! Black 11 ! I I\n: White ,I ! 11 I II Other i: I ,, ! I I 1990-91 Black 443 I i White 737 I I I Other - I i :j\nTotal I., I :, I i % Blk\n1: ! !: I i I Total 1.180 I I % Blk ' 37.5 I I 1991-92 1 Black II i I ,. : White i 1! 1: I 1991-92 Black 507 White I 760 i Other I I II I ' : Other I i - i l Total I II ! ':'a Blk I II : Total i ! 1-267\n'3/oB lk I 40.0 1992-93 i! Black I I! 1992-93  Black I 524 I White I 1! ,, Ii I\nWhite l 680 ' I ll I l Other i I : Other I - ! Total I : I I I%Bl k I \\ I ! Total I 1.204 I% Blk I 43.5 I ~---------------------- - Sc I I I a r (Used to determine cceptable enrolllllent anges) I* First year as 11th and 12th I Grade School I I I I I SCHOOL NI.RBS - East Campus I I I I \\ 4 YEAR .ROLLMENT COMPARISON OCTOBER1 DATA STUDENTS ARE IDENTIFIED AS BLACKA ND NON-BLACK INCLUDINGK INDERGARTEN EXCLUDINGK INDERGARTEN 1989-90 j Black I I I 1989-90 ! Black I White I I I I Other I ' ' \\ White\ni Other j Total i l ! Total I% Blk I I : % Blk 1990-91 I Black I I 1990-91 . Black 605 '' I I \\ White White 767 i I I \\ Other I Other -- \\ Total I l I I\nI I% Blk ! I  Total j 1,372 . % E\n3Ik ' 44.1 ! Black I 1991-92 I l I 1991-92 : Black 578 ! White I I ' : White i 758 \\ Other I ! Other I - \\ Total I ' i Total \\ 1,336 l I% Blk I i I% Blk \\ ! 43.3 1992-93 \\ Black I 1992-93 \\ Black i 602 I White I I 'i White i 737 I Other I I I ! Other ! -- , Total l I I \\ Total I 1,339 I%Bl k I \\ % Blk I 45.0 l Sc I I ! i I i I I I I i l I I 1!\u0026amp;5 EM+? :S -F (Used to determine acceptable enrollment ranges) I I *First year as 9th and 10th Grade School SCHOOL Lakewood Middle School 4 YEAR .ROLLMENT COMPARISON OCTOBER1 DATA STUDENTSA RE IDENTIFIED AS BLACKA NDN ON-BLACK INCLUDINGK INDERGARTEN EXCLUDINGK INDERGARTEN 1989-90 Black I I I ' I 1989-90 'Black ' White I I ! I  White I Other I Other\nTotal I Total i i % Blk I  % Blk i I Black I I 1990-91 I 1990-91 Black ' 247 ! White I White i 320 \\ Other I Other I -- \\ Total I l i  Total I l 567 I i I% Blk I t . % Blk i ! 43.6 ! 1991-92 I Black I I I White I I 1991-92 Black 262 White I 316 I Other I Other I ! -- Total l\nTotal i! 578 % Blk I I\n% Blk 45.3 1992-93 Black I I 1992-93 Black I 248 White I I ' White I 297 Other I : Other I I -- I Total % Blk I i Total I \"\"-\" I i % Blk I 45.5 I Sc I I (Used to determine acceptable enrollment ranges) *First year as 7th and 8th Grade Middle School ~ YEAR .ROLLMENT COMPARISON OCTOBER1 DATA STUDENTSA RE IDENTIFIED AS BLACKA NDN ON-BLACK SCHOOL Ridgeroad Middle School INCLUDINGK INDERGARTEN EXCLUDINGK INDERGARTEN 1989-90 \\ Black I I 1989-90 ! Black I White I I I ! White\nI i Other I ! Other ! Total \\ : , Total I% Blk I I\n% Blk 1990-91 ! Black I I I 1990-91 : Black 231 ! White I I !1 i Other I I t I White 292 Other -- i I I j Total I !  Total 523 'j i I ~a Blk I 11 . % Blk 44.2 1991-92 ! Black I l I 1991-92 : Black 246 ! White I I : White 305 \\ Other I I \\ Total I I I i % Blk I I ! ' Other : -- i \\ Total i ! 551 I I% Blk \\ 44.6 1992-93 \\ Black I I ! White \\ I. 1992-93 i Black : 266 l White I I 312 \\ Other I I ! Other I i - I Total I I Total I I 578 I I% Blk I I% Blk I 46.0 : Sc I I I \\1 I I I I I I (Used to determine acceptable enrolllllent ranges) I *First year as 7th and 8th Grade Middle School 4 YEAR AoLLMENT COMPARISON OCTOBER l DATA STUDENTS ARE IDENTIFIED AS BLACK AND NON-BLACK SCHOOLR ose City Middle School INCLUDINGK INDERGARTEN EXCLUDINGK INDERGARTEN 1989-90 \\ Black I I ! White I I 1989-90 ! Black i : ! White ! i Other I  Other\n! Total I Total i i I% Blk I : % Blk i i 1990-91 Black I I 1990-91 Black 207 White I White 187 Other I Other -- Total I l I I ~a Blk i ! I I Total 394 . % Blk 52.5 1991-92 Black II I 1991-92 : Black 203 l White I I :  White ' 186 i ! Other I ' : Other I i - \\ Total I i Total i ! 38Q I i % Blk I I% Blk I 52.2 I 1992-93 ! Black I I ' 1992-93 i Black i 207 i White I I l White I I 201 I I I I \\ Other ! Other I I -- ! Total I ! Total I I 408 I I% Blk I I I% Blk I 50.7 I 5c I I I I I (Used to determine acceptable enrollment ranges) *First year as 7th and 8th Grade Middle School 4 YEAR .OLLMENT COMPARISON OCTOBERl DATA STUDENTSA RE IDENTIFIED AS BLACKA ND NON-BLACK SCHOOLA lternative Education Ctr. INCLUDINGK INDERGARTEN EXCLUDINGK INDERGARTEN I 1989-90 \\ Black I \\ ' 1989-90 ! Black \\ White I I I I ! White ! I Other I i I\nOther \\ Total I I I I i\nTotal l I I% Blk I i I ! % Blk i i 1990-91 Black I ii I I ! ' I White\nI i 1990-91  Black White Other I I I I, Other Total i I ii I % Blk i ! ii 'I : Total . % Blk ' I 1991-92 Black i ! I 1991-92 ' Black 26 White I l ' : White 10 \\ Other I I : Other\n' -- I Total I i\nTotal i 36 ! I l % Blk I l % Blk i! 72.17 1992-93 \\ Black I I ' 1992-93 I Black i 37 I I I j White\nWhite I l 13 I I ! Other I I i ! Other ! - I Total I ! Total I 50 I I%Bl k I I% Blk I I 74.O I Sc I I I I I I I I I I I I I l (Used to determine acceptable enrollment ranges) *First year of Program **Enrollment varies throughout the year. 4 YEAR \u0026amp;oLLMENT COMPARISON OCTOBER1 DATA STUDENTSA RE IDENTIFIED AS BLACKA NDN ON-BLACK SCHOOL Baring Cross E]emenrarv INCLUDINGK INDERGARTEN EXCLUDINGK INDERGARTEN 1989-90 Black I 11 I 1989-90 I Black I ' 11 White I 8 I White i I 10 Other I - l Other - \\ Total I 19 i Total iI 21 ! % Blk I 57.9 I I% Blk I i 52.4 1990-91 \\ Black I 8 i I I 1990-91 I i Black ! 7 ! White I I 9 I : White '\n9 \\ Other I I I - I : Other ! I - I \\ Total I 17 I I ! i , Total I l 16 II % i I Blk I 47.1 I i % Blk i ! 43.8 1991-92 \\ stack I 9 I I I White I 5 I\n1991-92 ! Black , 8 I ! White ! 4 \\ Other I - ! Other I - Total I 14 Ii i Total ! 12 % Blk I 64.3 I I I% Blk 66.7 1992-93 Black I 5 1992-93 i Black I 5 White I 9 I i ! White I 9 \\ Other I - \\ Other I I - \\ Total l 14 ! Total I 14 I% Blk I 35.7 I% Blk I 35.7 Sc I I (Used to determine acceptable enrollment ranges) .\n:gtg . 4 YEAR \u0026amp;oLLMENT COMPARISON OCTOBERl DATA STUDENTS ARE IDENTIFIEDA S BLACKA NDN ON-BLACK SCHOOL Baring Cross - Secondary INCLUDING KINDERGARTEN EXCLUDINKGI NDERGARTEN ! I 1989-90 Black ! 1989-90 Black I 3 \\ White I : i I Other i I White\n3 I i Other\n- I \\ Total I i I I i ! I i ! Total ! 6 i I%B lk I I I \\ % Blk i l 50.0 i ! Black I 1990-91 I I 1990-91 \\ Black 21 ! White I I I I \\ White I 8 i I Other I : Other -- I I i I Total ! I ! I j o/o Blk\nl i Total 29 i % ~lk i ! 72.4 I B1ack I 1991-92 I\nI 1991-92 ! Black 23 \\ White i l I' ! White i 8 \\ Other I \\ Other I I ! - I Total I I\nI Total i ! 31 \\ I% Blk I \\ % Blk I 74.2 1992-93 I Black I 1992-93 \\ Black I I 22 I White I \\ White I i 9 I Other I \\ Other I I ! - \\ Total I I ! Total I 31 I%Bl k I [ % Blk I 71.0 I Sc I I I I I I l (Used to determine acceptable enrollment ranges) Prepared by ODM 4/22/93 1992-93 PCSSD JUNIOR HIGH CAPACITIES Jr. High 1992-93 Enrollment 1992-93 % Available School Capacity Filled Seats B w Total %Blk Fuller 425 510 935 45% 1,037 90% 102 Jax. North 184 470 654 28% 722 91% 68 Jax. South 202 400 602 34% 764 79% 162 Northwood 236 703 939 25% 928 101% 0 Robinson 110 301 411 27% 530 78% 119 Sylvan Hills 229 703 932 25% 1,050 89% 118 Total 1,386 3,087 4,473 31% 5,031 89% 569\nThis project was supported in part by a Digitizing Hidden Special Collections and Archives project grant from The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation and Council on Library and Information Resoources.\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\u003cdcterms_creator\u003eArkansas. Department of Education\u003c/dcterms_creator\u003e\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n\n "},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1543","title":"Court filings concerning Joshua Intervenors legal fees, Stephens Elementary School plan, and court orders","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":["United States. District Court (Arkansas: Eastern District)"],"dc_date":["1992-09"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System."],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","School districts--Arkansas--Pulaski County","Little Rock School District","Stephens Elementary School (Little Rock, Ark.)","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","Education--Economic aspects","Educational law and legislation","Educational planning","School management and organization","School improvement programs","School employees","School facilities","Student assistance programs"],"dcterms_title":["Court filings concerning Joshua Intervenors legal fees, Stephens Elementary School plan, and court orders"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Butler Center for Arkansas Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://arstudies.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/bcmss0837/id/1543"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["Available for use in research, teaching, and private study. Any other use requires permission from the Butler Center."],"dcterms_medium":["legal documents"],"dcterms_extent":["53 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_913","title":"''Status Report,'' North Little Rock School District","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":null,"dc_date":["1992-09/1992-12"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System."],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","School districts--Arkansas--North Little Rock","Education--Arkansas","Educational law and legislation","Education--Evaluation","Educational statistics","School discipline","School employees","School enrollment","School facilities","School improvement programs","Student assistance programs","Gifted persons","Student activities"],"dcterms_title":["''Status Report,'' North Little Rock School District"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Butler Center for Arkansas Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://arstudies.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/bcmss0837/id/913"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["reports"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\nThe transcript for this item was created using Optical Character Recognition (OCR) and may contain some errors.\nThis project was supported in part by a Digitizing Hidden Special Collections and Archives project grant from The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation and Council on Library and Information Resoources.\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n\n "},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1384","title":"Proceedings: ''Transcript of Evidentiary Hearing,'' Volume XII","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":["United States. District Court (Arkansas: Eastern District)"],"dc_date":["1992-08-03"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System."],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","Little Rock School District","School districts--Arkansas--Pulaski County","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","Education--Finance","Educational law and legislation","Educational planning","School management and organization","School superintendents","Court records"],"dcterms_title":["Proceedings: ''Transcript of Evidentiary Hearing,'' Volume XII"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Butler Center for Arkansas Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://arstudies.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/bcmss0837/id/1384"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["Available for use in research, teaching, and private study. Any other use requires permission from the Butler Center."],"dcterms_medium":["legal documents"],"dcterms_extent":["217 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1004","title":"Aerospace Technology Magnet School, updates","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":null,"dc_date":["1992-08/1994-07"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System."],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","Little Rock School District","Education--Arkansas","Educational planning","Education--Finance","Aviation Education Programs (U.S.)","Magnet schools"],"dcterms_title":["Aerospace Technology Magnet School, updates"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Butler Center for Arkansas Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://arstudies.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/bcmss0837/id/1004"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["documents (object genre)"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\nArkansas Aviation Historical Society banquet programs (1992), Legal documents, correspondence, newspaper clippings, notes\nThis transcript was created using Optical Character Recognition (OCR) and may contain some errors.\nrrerns  N llIB!Il!.M. {BJ!UIPV Al3IJOS 1VJIBOlSIH NOilVIAV SVSNVmJV l311bNVH 3WV~ ~o 11VJI 1V11NNV Hl1 Aerospace Education Center :\\P)l::JOJJ '_M_ MOJpoo_M_ {JUOfOJ In this election year, during which so much attention has been focused on Arkansas, it is fitting that the Arkansas Aviation Historical Society has selected/or enshrinement in its Hall of Fame two individuals who, each in their own way, symbolize so much that is right about the United States. These two native Arkansans, each a major contributor both to aviation and to our nation's welfare, are perfect role models/or the graduates of that exciting new phenomenon on the Little Rock scene, the vitally needed Aerospace Education Center. The goal of the Historical Society, in concert with the Little Rock School District, has been to create in the AEC a unique new education method, one which spices the rigorous curriculum of an aerospace magnet high school with the rich history of air and space-a history that is still being made here by Arkansas' burgeoning aerospace industry. This aerospace industry is based on high standards of intellect and education, and it is to these standards that the students of the Aerospace Education Center will be held, amply qualifying them/or any career in any industry they choose. Stated simply, the Aerospace Education Center will raise the level of student achievement in science and mathematics, while at the same time raising the level of student ambition to new heights. This combination of new skills and new goals will inspire the students to seek more challenging work and to set higher standards for themselves. And this is the secret of the success of the individuals we honor tonight-they set high standards for themselves, secured the training to meet those standards, and then carved out careers that used the training to a maximum advantage. Our two honorees did it under the stress of the great depression and the second World War. As we honor them, we can be pleased to know that the Aerospace Education Center's innovative new training methods will inspire whole generations of students to achieve successful futures under any conditions that may arise. W1WAM NEWEU. SMAU.. was born in Little Rock on February 22, 1927. His family later moved to Malvern, and he graduated from Malvern High School in 1943. He attended the Admiral Farragut Academy in New Jersey prior to entering the United States Naval Academy at Annapolis, Maryland, where he graduated in 1948. Ensign Small entered the Naval Flight Program at Pensacola, Florida, where he was designated a Naval Aviator in November of 1949. He was assigned to a Night Attack Squadron, flying Grumman TBM Avengers, and later Grumman AF-2 Guardians, from escort carriers during the Korean Conflict, and later served in the first Navy squadron to deploy the new Douglas A4D Skyhawk. Promoted to Lieutenant Commander, Small served as a Navy exchange officer in command of a Cadet squadron at the new United States Air Force Academy at Colorado Springs. During the Vietnam War, Small commanded an attack squadron flying the new Grumman A6A Intruder from the USS Constellation, and later commanded the first training wing for A6- crews. He was promoted to Captain, and served as commanding officer of the USS Neosho, a fleet oiler, and the carrier USS Independence prior to promotion to Rear Admiral. Following service as the Battle Group Commander on the USS Midway, Small was promoted to Vice Admiral and assigned as Commander of the U. S. Sixth Fleet at Gaeta, Italy. Promoted to full Admiral in 1981, Small became the Vice Chief of Naval Operations, and a member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Later, he served as the Commander-in-Chief of NATO forces in Southern Europe, and as Commander-in-Chief of U. S. Naval Forces in Europe. Retiring from the Navy in 1985, Admiral Small now serves as a consultant to industry. He resides in Annapolis, Maryland. WOODROW W. CROCKETT was born in Texarkana, Arkansas and attended Dunbar High School and Junior College in Little Rock. He joined the U.S. Army as a private in August, 1940. During competition within his unit, the 349th Field Artillery, the first black artillery unit in the Regular Army, then-Sergeant Crockett was selected the Model Soldier of the Regiment, and subsequently assigned in August of 1942 to Tuskegee Army Air Field, Tuskegee, Alabama as an aviation cadet - becoming one of the legendary \"Tuskegee Airmen a and serving with the 332nd Fighter Group and/lying 149 combat missions during a 15 month tour of duty in Italy during World War II - a time when 50 missions normally constituted a tour of duty. Colonel Crockett was Radiological Safety Officer with the atomic bomb test teams in the Pacific in the early 1950s, and was airborne in a B-17 during each atomic blast. During the Korean Conflict, Crockett flew F-80 and F-86 jet fighters, and later became involved in the test program for the F-106 Delta Dart. Colonel Crockett is the holder of a \"Mach 2 Card, a having flown the F-106 at twice the speed of sound on June 2, 1959. A graduate of the U.S. Air Force Command and Staff College, Colonel Crockett was the recipient of the Distinguished Flying Cross, two Soldier's Medals (for his bravery in extricating pilots from burning aircraft), the Air Medal with four oak leaf clusters, the Meritorious Service Medal, the Army Commendation Medal, and the Air Force Commendation Medal. He attained the highest aeronautical rating in the military - Command Pilot - in March of 1958. In 1970, having attained the rank of Lieutenant Colonel, he retired from the Air Force after 28 years on flight status, 20 years in jets, approximately 5,000 hours of flying time, and 520 hours in combat. The Arkansas Aviation Historical Society and R.S.V.P. Card Enclosed Aerospace Education Center Committee cordially invite you to join them for the Arkansas Aviation Hall of Fame Banquet inducting Admiral William N. Small, United States Navy (Retired) and Colonel Woodrow W. Crockett United States Air Force (Retired) Thursday, the 15th of October Nineteen Hundred Ninety-Two at Six-Thirty in the Evening Central Flying Service Hangar8 Little Rock, Arkansas Business Attire Memo-Telephone TO: Date and time: YOU RECEIVED A TELEPHONE CALL   A VISIT FROM: OF: Telephone No. Please call D O Will call again { From the desk of MEMO --- l/L.-\\ 7)o Form SO Memo-Telephone TO: . D t and tim : - j. YOU RECEIVED A TELEPHONE CALL ~ 0 A VISI FROM: OF: elephone No. 7/ Please call D D Will call again MEMO  /4-Mt r1/2k:L,/ r LI! /.uA.. (~1) ~1 ~,~.A-.J @ _,,.__,._/hi,, From the ( ) Form 50 /4\u0026amp;-liuv~ 1\n(\n:, /Y'ld\nz\n:_, J\n- d . tf7\nJ /4~ ~- I r fflemoranJum Date ____ . - ~~ ~4 10:61) fr1 l)\"vvvrvt tit1~f~ s~ ft l D  0 ) ~)A, ~ {7~ ~ ,et} ~~~ FORM 48 From To ~ Date ~~~ V u ~~J ~ (Jak~ 5/5 FORM 48 Arkansas Aviation _ ____,, Histo~ical Society __ ____, Hall of Fame Banquet _ ______, Arkansas Aviation Historical Society Thirteenth Annual Hall of Fame Banquet At the Dais: Ho11orees Lt. Col. Woodrow W. Crockett (USAF, Ret.)  Adm. William Newell Small (USN. Ret.) Ho11orary Chairmen Ruth Rebsamen Remmel  Winthrop Paul Rockefeller Master of Ceremonies Lt. Gov. Jim Guy Tucker lnductio11 of Colonel Crockett Lt. Gen. William E. Brown foduction of Admiral Small William H. Bowen Chairman, Arkansas Aviatio11 Historical Society Richard N. Holbert President, Little Rock School Board 0. G. Jacovelli Preside11t Pro Tem, Arkansas Se11ate Sen. Jerry Jewell l11vocatio11 Rev. Geroy Osborne. Pastor, Mt. Zion Baptist Church Chairma11, Little Rock Airport Commissio11 Les Hollingsworth Former Director, Natio11al Air a11d Space Museum Col. Walter J. Boyne Be11edictio11 Msgr. James E. O'Connell, Director, St. John's Seminary Endowment Fund Lieutenant Colonel Woodrow W. Crockett (USAF, Ret.) A native of Texarkana, Arkansas who attended Dunbar High School and Junior College in Little Rock, Woodrow W. Crockett made aviation history as a pioneering member of World War II's famed Tuskegee Airmen. Enlisting as an Army private in August 1940, Crockett was later selected in competition to be Model Soldier of his regiment, and was subsequently assigned as an aviation cadet to Tuskegee Army Air Field, an isolated post near the town of Tuskegee, Alabama. In all, 966 black aviators were trained at Tuskegee. Crockett received his pilot's wings and commission as a second lieutenant in the Army Air Corps on March 25, 1943. Perhaps Crockett's greatest contribution to history was the part he and the other Tuskegee Airmen played in breaking the rigid pattern of racial segregation that prevailed in the U.S. military prior to and during World War II. While assigned to the 100th Fighter Squadron, 332nd Fighter Group, also known as the Red Tails, Crockett flew 149 combat missions in Italy during World War II. The men of the 332nd distinguished themselves by destroying enemy rail traffic, coast watching surveillance stations and hundreds of vehicles on air-toground strafing missions. Sixty-six of the group's pilots were killed in aerial combat, while another 32 were shot down and captured as prisoners of war. Crockett and many other black men and women remained in the military service to spearhead integration of the armed forces of the U.S. during the postwar years. In 1952 and 1953 he flew 45 combat missions in jet fighters in Korea. A graduate of the U.S. Air Force Command and Staff College, Crockett received the Distinguished Flying Cross, the Air Medal with four Oak Leaf Clusters, the Meritorious Service Medal, the Army Commendation Medal, and the Air Force Commendation Medal with one Oak Leaf Cluster. He was twice awarded the Soldier's Medal for bravery in extricating pilots from burning fighter aircraft. He held various command and staff positions, including those of squadron and group operations officer, flying safety officer, squadron commander and radiological safety officer on atomic bomb tests in the Southwest Pacific in 1951. He was the assistant test director for the F-106 Interceptor Category II and Category III Test Programs in 1959 and 1960. Colonel Crockett retired from the Air Force in 1970 following 28 years on flying status, with over 5,000 hours of flying time and 520 combat flying hours. Crockett and his wife, the former Daisy J. McMurray of Little Rock, reside in Annandale, Virginia. Admiral William Newell Slllall (USN, Ret.) William Newell Small, born in Little Rock on February 22, 1927, distinguished himself and his native state through 41 years of duty with the United States Navy, achieving the rank of admiral and culminating his career as Commander-in-Chief, Allied Forces in Southern Europe and of U.S. Naval Forces in Europe. A graduate of Malvern High School, Small attended Admiral Farragut Academy in New Jersey before entering the U.S. Naval Academy at Annapolis, Maryland. Upon his graduation in 1948, Ensign Small entered the Naval Flight Program at Pensacola NAS, Florida and was designated a Naval Aviator in November 1949. He was assigned to a night attack squadron flying Grumman TBM Avengers, and later Grumman AF-2 Guardians, from escort carriers during the Korean conflict, and later served in the first Navy squadron to deploy the new Douglas A4D Skyhawk. Promoted to lieutenant commander, Small served as a Navy exchange officer in command of a cadet squadron at the new United States Air Force Academy at Colorado Springs, Colorado. During the Vietnam War, Small commanded an attack squadron flying the new Grumman A6A Intruder from the USS Constellation and later commanded the first training wing for A6 crews. After promotion to captain, he commanded the USS Neosho, a fleet oiler, and the carrier USS Independence prior to his promotion to rear admiral. Following service as battle group commander on the USS Midway, Small was promoted to vice admiral and assigned as commander of the U.S. Sixth Fleet at Gaeta, Italy. Promoted to full admiral in 1981, Small became vice chief of naval operations and a member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Later, he served as commander-in-chief of NATO forces in Southern Europe and commanderin- chief of U.S. Naval Forces in Europe. Admiral Small received the Defense Department Distinguished Service Medal, the Navy Distinguished Service Medal (four awards), the Legion of Merit (three awards), the Navy Commendation Medal (two awards), the Air Medal, the Republic of Vietnam Order of Gallantry and variou theater and campaign service medals. Retiring from the Navy in 1985, Admiral Small now serves as a con ultant to industry. He resides in Annapolis, Maryland. J. Carroll Cone A native of Ashley County, Cone was a WWI flight instructor, the first pilot from Ari e the first Arkansan to shoot down an en y t ganized Arkansas Aircraft Company, ch lat , d-Aire, Inc. Cone joined Pan-American or d Airways in I 7, retiring as a vice president of Pan-Am in 1969. Nathan Gordon The only native Arkansan to win the Congressional Medal of Honor for his role in aerial combat, Gordon rescued 15 downed American flyers in the Pacific as pilot of a PBY Catalina, landing and taking off four times under enemy fire. He served as lieutenant governor of Arkansas from 1947 to I 967. James S. McDonnell, Jr. An Altheimer native, McDonnell staned McDonnell Aircraft at Lamben Field in St. Louis in 1939. His company built the world' first carrier-ba ed jet fighter, the Phantom. McDonnell Aircraft merged with Douglas Aircraft to create McDonnell-Douglas Corporation, one of the world's largest aerospace firms, in 1967. Charles M. Taylor A member of the original 154th Observation Squadron of the Ark. National Guard, Taylor was involved with Arkansas Aircraft Co., builders of the Command-Aire. A stunt pilot, he flew with Arkansas Air Tours staning in 1928. Won the Amateur Pilots Race from ew York to Cleveland during ational Air Races in 1932. Louise McPhetridge Thaden A native ofBentonville, Thaden won the first Woman's Air Derby from Santa Monica, California to Columbus, Ohio. After setting many altitude and endurance records, she entered and won the 1936 Bendix Transcontinental Air Race, the first year women were allowed to compete. Leighton Collins Operator of a flying school in El Dorado, Collins worked in aircraft factories and read u a t aircraft accidents. Moving to New Yo in n p lishing the monthly pocket- ize magazi Air ted analyzing aircraft accidents to promote sa ety. Air acts grew to an eventual circulation of over 20,000. Cass Hough Formerly of Rogers, Hough served a a colonel in the Army Air Force during WWII. He developed an auxiliary gas tank which effectively doubled the P-47' range. His idea led to the development of the \"Droop Snoot,\" a modified P-38 Lighming which carried two 2,000-lb. bombs at over 350 mph and 30,000 feet. Robert Snowden, Jr. A native of Memphis, Snowden moved to Little Rock in 1928 when he bought controlling interest in Arkansas Aircraft Co., renaming it Command-Aire, Inc. The company's popular biplane won second place in the Guggenheim International Safe Airplane Comest, and over 300 were sold. Command-Aire's \"Little Rocket\" won the Cirrus International Derby. Admiral John S. Thach Born in Pine Bluff and reared in Ford ce, Thach became one of the Navy's top pilots, J 1 n d  gh at Squadron.\" He developed exercise bat which proved invaluable in World ve o 'Thach Weave,\" a other later adopted by the Field E. Kindley Born near Pea Ridge and graduated from Gravette High School, Kindley was one of the first volunteer pilot in the Army's aviation branch. Assigned to the Royal Flying Corps, he went into action as a first lieutenant flying the Sopwith Camel. He ended WWI with 12 kill and a higher victories-to-missions ratio than Captain Rickenbacker's. Died during a crash in practice maneuvers at Kelly Field, Texas. Raymond J. Ellis Born in Perry County, Ellis founded Fayetteville Flying Service in 1940. Training aviation cadets during WWU, he provided flight training to ROTC students in postwar years. In 1953, Ellis founded Scheduled Skyways, which became one of the nation's outstanding commuter airlines. Claud L. Holbert Born in Texas in 1910, Holben moved to Little Rock as a young boy, where he soloed a Command-Aire in 1926. An early member of the 154th Observation Squadron of the Arkansas National Guard, he was active in the Air Tours of Arkansas in the late 1920s and early 1930s. He founded Central Flying Service, which became Arkan as' largest fixed-base operator, in 1939. Major General Earl T. Ricks Born in 1908, Ri   in East St. Louis i arks Air College r Arkansas' first rvation Squadron ba ed in Little R rst commanding general of the Air n, D.C. J. Lynn Helms Taking flight training in the Navy during WWII, Helms later served 14 years in the Marine Corps. Afterwards, Helms was with Nonh American Aviation, Bendix Corporation and the Norden Division of United Aircraft. He was president, chairman, and CEO of Piper Aircraft from 1974 until 1981, when he was appointed administrator of the FAA. Albert A. Vollmecke A native of Germany, Vollmecke came to the U.S. in 1927 representing Heinke! Aircraft. He soon joined Arkansas Aircraft, designing and supervising manufacture of Command-Aire biplanes. His \"Little Rocket\" design won the 1930 All-American Air Derby. He later served with the CAA and FAA, retiring in 1965. Brig. Gen. John D. Howe A Pine Bluff native, Howe flew Delta Air Lines' first passenger flight as its chief pi rkansas ANG in 1930, becoming A nt commander in 1940. Howe forme 1941 at Wright- Patterson Field an west Pacific Air Depot for wanime operation in Australia. After serving as commander of Wright-Patterson AFB, he retired in 1960. Maj. Gen. Winston P. Wilson Born in Arkadelphia and reared in Little Rock, Wilson enlisted in the National Guard in 1929 as an airplane mechanic, completing pilot training in 1940. Serving as special assistant to the Chief of the Air Force Division of the National Guard Bureau, he was appointed by the President in 1963 as Chief of the National Guard Bureau in Washington, D.C. Eddie Holland Born at Warren and reared at Rison, Holland flew 37 combat missions as a B-17 crew member before going to pilot training. He graduated as a fighter pilot at the top of his class of 22 cadets. He was appointed director of the state Depanment of Aeronautics by the late Gov. Winthrop Rockefeller and served through the subsequent administrations of Governors Bumpers, Pryor, White and Clinton. Brig. Gen. William T. Seawell A Pine Bluff native, Seawell commanded the Air Corps 401st Bomb Gp in Engla mmandant of the Air Force Academ y in 1963, he was v-p operations for . and American Airlines. He head o Rolls-Royce Aero Engines, then capped his career as president, CEO and later chairman of Pan-American World Airways. Gen. John Paul McConnell A Booneville native, McConnell graduated from West Point in 1932 as First Captain of Cadets. He later became chief of staff of the China-Bunna-lndia Air Force Training Command, and in 1944 became deputy commander of the Third Tactical Air Force. McConnell was named Air Force vice chief of staff in 1947. He was named chief of staff, the Air Force's top position, in 1965. Pierce W. McKennon Born in Clarksville and raised in Fort Smith, McKennon washed out of the Anny Air Corps flight school. He joined the Royal Canadian Air Force, winning his pilot wings in 1941 . After flying briefly with the RAF, he was transferred to the USAAF's Fourth Fighter Gp, where he logged over 500 combat hours, was twice shot down over enemy territory, escaping both times, and destroyed 20 Gern1an air,raft. Maj. Gen. Frank A. Bailey Little Rock native Bailey entered aviation cadet training after graduating from th nivetsity o .rl(ans in 1941. He spent WWII as a flight instructor. first a Turner Id, Georgia and later at Blytheville Ann ir r d ere c anded the Pilot Training Squadron. Joinin the rkalT as A after the war, he became deputy chief of staff in 1954, chief of staff in 1960 and commander of the Arkansas ANG in 1969. M. T. \"Cy\" Bond Bond learned to fly in 1928 while working as an engineer for the Arkansas Highway Dept. Later he ferried bombers until he was assigned to the 2nd Air Transport Squadron and sent to fly the Bunna Hump. After the war, he returned to Arkansas, becoming a flight instructor and airport engineer and building airports at Clarksville, Batesville and Petit Jean Mountain. Bond organized the Jacksonville Squadron of the CAP. Earl Rowland A Harrison native, Rowland learned flying at Kelly Field, Texas during WWI. He barnstonned after the war, becoming a test pilot for Swallow Aircraft in Wichita. Rowland later worked for Lloyd Stearman, then joined Clyde Cessna's fledgling company. With Rowland as his pilot, Cessna entered the 1928 \"On to Los Angeles\" race. Rowland won every lap, bringing Cessna great prestige and finances to help weather the depression. Maj. John H. White Kensett native White was one of the Arkansas' first WWII aces. Flying older Spitfir . he o cto during the Allied invasion of North Afnca, \"' nni g the istinguished Flying Cross with Oak Leaf Clu e for s1 glehandedly attacking lO Gennan fighters and downin uring1he AIIJed attack on the island of Pantelleria, White shot down four enemy fighters in two days. Lucien M. Taillac Flying B-l 7s in Italy during WWII, Taillac joined Delta Airlines after the war. Later, he sold Aero Commanders for Trans Air Corp., which brought him to Little Rock in 1964 as president of Little Rock Ainnotive. There he began customizing business aircraft. In 1973, Federal Express purchased Little Rock Ainnotive, moving it to Memphis. Taillac and his partners stayed, creating Arkansas Modification Center. Richard Collins Little Rock native Collins flew as a charter and corporate pilot following his Anny stint. In 1958, he oined his father at Air Facts magazine, where he 1ayed o 0 . or oining the staff of Flying magazine. Re in to 11 R kin 70,Collinsbecame senior editor while h erved Ar a eronautical Com-mission. He became e ,tor m chie o ying m 1977, then moved on to become senior vp of the AOPA publications division and editor in chief of AOPA Pilot magazine in 1988. Wendel A. Robertson Fon Smith native Robenson enlisted in the Anny Infantry Officer Candidate School at Fon Roots in North Little Rock in 1917. He was soon reassigned to the Signal Corps as an aviation cadet. He trained in lllinois before going to lssoudun, France for fighter pilot training. He saw his first combat in a Spad Jes than two months before the Annistice, but ended the war with seven victories. Capt. E. Scott McCuskey Born in Little Rock and raised near Stuttgart, McCuskey joined the Naval Reserve in 19 oil I issioned in 1939, ing. He won the est decoration, on two occasions. H r, down 14 Japanese aircraft and participated in the Baules of Midway, Coral Sea and the Philippine Sea. Sanford N. McDonnell Born in Liule Rock, McDonnell served a a stress engineer, aerodynamicist, design engineer and group leader of fighter plane projects for McDonnell Aircraft in the 1950s before moving into top management. He was chainnan and CEO of McDonnellDouglas Corp. for seven years before retiring in 1988 after 40 years of service. He is past national president of the Boy Scouts of America and is a director of the Ethics Resources Center, Inc. in Washington, D.C. Hon. John Paul Hammerschmidt A decorated pilot of WWII, Rep. Hammerschmidt flew missions for the 3rd Combat Cargo Group over the Hump in the China- Bunna-lndia Thea g  Flying Cross with three Oak Leaf Cl e four Oak Leaf Clusters, three Batt! orial Medal of the Republic of Chin , e  nous ice Award. As a congressman, he served on the House Comminee on Public Works and Transport and its Subcomminee on Aviation. Rear Adm. George M.\" kip\" Furlong, Jr. (USN, Rel.) Raised in Pine Bluff, Furlong graduated from the .S. aval Academy in 1956 and earned his avy Wings in 1957. He served as a carrier fighter pilot, test pilot. squadron commander, commander of the Carrier Air Group on the USS Enterprise and commanding officer -if the USS Independence. He has been chief of staff of the U.S. Sixth Fleet and deputy chiefof aval Education and Training. He few over 200 combat missions in Vietnam, and has over 4,500 hours and 930 carrier landings in avy tactical aircraft. Rear Adm. F. Taylor Bro,1n (USN, Rel.) During 36 years in the avy, Brown served in capacities as a carrier fighter pilot, test pilot, fighter squadron and air wing commander. He won the Bendix ph nff11111iNa1\ndl,al Air Races in 1948 and led fighters in t fi t onh Vietnamese forces in 1964. own became Vice President and prog gero alcon rp. in Linle Rock. managing modification and assembly of Falcon 20 aircraft acquired by the U.S. Coast Guard for maritime surveillance missions. Frederick W. Smith A graduate of Yale University, Smith was a Marine fighter pilot in Vietnam, winning the Siver Star. Smnh founded Federal Express, now the world's largest express transportation company. in Little Rock in 1973. He is chainnan, president and CEO of Federal Express and serves on the boards of the Air Transport Association, St. Jude Children's Research Hospital and the E. W. Scripps Company. With Appreciation to: The Alan Rothman Company Storer Cable Communications Central High School Jazz Band, Duane Barbour, Director Central High School Junior ROTC Delta Air Lines, Inc. Col. Walter J. Boyne In Recognition of Table Sponsors: First Commercial Bank J. Dan Baker/Avis Rent A Car Arkansas Aerospace, lnc. Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark, Attorney Rebsarnen Insurance Garver \u0026amp; Garver, P.A., Engineers Arkansas Aeronautics Commis ion Civil Air Patrol Arkansas Power and Light Company Nathaniel Curtis-Riddick-Heiple Falcon Jet City of Little Rock Central Flying Service Little Rock Airport Commission Arkansas National Guard Arkansas 99s Stephens, Inc. Vratsinas Construction Company Mr. and Mrs. Lucien Taillac Marion Burton Rollie and Ruth Remmel .J OIIN IV. WAI.K EH RALPH WASIII NGTON MAHI( HUR 1,\nrn-\n\"WILEY A. HHANTON, .JI(. Al lSTIN l'OHTEH. ,Jll .  Als,, 1d111 illd tu l'radwi m 1\nf~ir~1a \u0026amp; th\u0026lt;' l)i stric-l nf C'11l11rnh1a Mr. Dick Holbert JOIIN W. W ALKEll, P.A. ATI'OH Nl:Y Ar LA IV 172:~ BllOJ\\l l\\VAY L!Tl'LE !{O('I(. J\\l{l(ANSAS 72~11(i Tl~LEl'IIONI~ (fiOJ) :37,1-:37!'\"\u0026gt;\u0026lt;~ FAX (GO]) :n-1-,11 87 August 25, 1992 Little Rock Aerospace School and Museum Board of Directors Central Flying Service 1501 Bond Avenue Little Rock, AR 72202 Mr. David Harrington, AIDC One Capitol Mall Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. James Smith, Superintendent North Little Rock School District 27th \u0026amp; Poplar North Little Rock, AR 72114 Mr. Bobby Lester, Superintendent Pulaski County Special School District 924 Dixon Road Little Rock, AR 72206 Ms. Ann Brown Office of De8egregation Monitoring 201 E. Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 Dr. Mac Bernd, Superintendent of LRSD 810 West Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Sirs and Madam: AUG 2 8 1992 Oil ce of Dvsv\n:ireg:-if ,.1 M r .to ,ng I am enclosing for your information and as a reminder, the Stipulation and Consent Order Regarding Little Rock School District Aerospace Technology Magnet School. l am sending this to you because many of the terms of this stipulation and order obviously have not been met and because black children and parents and patrons, continually get excluded from information Page Two Mr. Dick Holbert Mr. David Harrington Mr. James Smith Mr. Bobby Lester Ms. Ann Brown Dr. Mac Bernd August 25, 1992 and participation regarding the development of these facilities. To Ms. Brown, I am requesting that her office inquire into these matters as a part of her monitoring responsibility so that the court will have appropriate information regarding the current status of the court approved plans. I am also specifically requesting the conference that has been planned by AIDC and the Arkansas Aviation Historical Society be rescheduled to a time after which assurances can be provided that the participation by invitees shall extend thoroughly into the black community including the low income echelons. I am also sending a copy of this letter for her information to Judge Wright. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Sincerely,  ~ ORIO!fiAL StONEO ~ BY UNOERSIGNEO caMSE'L John W. Walker JWW:lp Enclosure cc: Honorable Susan Webber Wright 08 / 28 / 1992 15:32 FROM JOHN W.WALKER P.A. TO 3710100 .1011.N W. WALKER R:\\LPH WASHINGTON MARK El\nRNETTf. w1u:v A. BRANTON. JR. AUSTIN PORTER. ,JR  .',I:., \"'lmit~ t,, l'1\"\"ti(-r in f\n, ot,i-,.i :t ,\u0026lt;\n: lht. llr'II IWL c,f ~ niu111lti11 Ms. Ann Brown Federal Monitor Office of Desegregation 201 E. Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Ann: JOHN W. WALKER, P.A. A11'URNf.Y AT LAW 1723 BKOADW A Y Ll'fl'LE RUCK. ARKANSAS 72206 TELEPHONE (501) 374-3758 FAX (501) 374-1187 August 28, 1992 P.02 AUG 2 8 19~2 Olfice of Desegregation Monitoring It is our belief that the Little Rock School District has failed to act in good faith regarding the Stipulation and Consent on the Little Rock School -District Aerospace Technology Magnet School. I say this because it is apparent that Mr. Holbert and his organization have taken a leadership role in the planning and development of this school. Again, I must most urgently request that your office inquire into this matter to ensure that black children, parents and patrons of this community are included in this process as agreed to by the court approved plans.  I hope that by Monday the Pulaski County districts will be able to provide this office with an accounting of the participants in the September 4th conference by race. At that time, I will definitely know whether the conference needs to be rescheduled. Thank you for your cooperation. JWW:lp cc: Mr. Dick Holbert Mr. David Harrington Mr. James Smith Mr. Bobby Lester Dr. Mac Bernd All Counsel of Record Sincerely, \u0026amp; -~ I _ti'Z. \u0026lt;R-- ,r~ri1. uMI ~t4/ 5/L 1-. - {? G $\u0026lt;11n, t':, ~~ l.. ,M....( (,,1 JOHN W. WALKER RALPH WASHINGTON MARK BURNETTE 'WILEY A. BRANTON, JR. AUSTIN PORTER, JR.  Also admitted to Practice in Georgia \u0026amp; the District of Columbia. Ms. Ann Brown Federal Monitor Office of Desegregation 201 E. Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Ann: JOHN W. WALKER, P.A. ATTORNEY AT LAW 1723 BROADWAY LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72206 TELEPHONE (501) 374-3758 FAX (501) 374-4187 August 28, 1992 IIUVERa\u0026gt;BY,AX\u0026amp;USMAl It is our belief that the Little Rock ' School District has failed to act in good faith regarding the Stipulation and Consent on the Little Rock School District Aerospace Technology Magnet School. I say this because it is apparent that Mr. Holbert and his organization have taken a leadership role in the planning and development of this school. Again, I must most urgently request that your office inquire into this matter to ensure that black children, parents and patrons of this community are included in this process as agreed to by the court approved plans. I hope that by Monday the Pulaski County districts will be able to provide this office with an accounting of the participants in the September 4th conference by race. At that time, I will definitely know whether the conference needs to be rescheduled. Thank you for your cooperation. JWW: lp cc: Mr. Dick Holbert Mr. David Harrington Mr. James Smith Mr. Bobby Lester Dr. Mac Bernd All Counsel of Record Sincerely, \\ CENTRAL ~LYING SERVICE TEL: 501-375-7274 Aug 31,92 7 :40 No .001 P.01 C CEtrl'KAL FL YING SEAVICE 1501 SONDSl'REET LITTLE ROCK Afll(AHSAS 72202 !SOI) JTS-3245 F,-,X (51137$-727  -- -.,  lfl\u0026gt;I.-J'\\ ,1'1i'\\. 01\\TE: cmrAAL FLYING SERVICE, nc\n15019-'.:tiD~ LITI'LE R:O\u0026lt;, MlWlSM 72202 (501) 375-3245 ~ (800) 888-5387 WA1'TS (501) 375-7274 FJ\\X TO: /4n 6rot..v\"- mc tmBER: 3 '71- D I QO TOrAL NDl3ER \u0026lt;R P}.GES DOU\u0026gt;Im a:NER SHEET: ~ ~= PERS:N SEN\u0026gt;ING ME.55.AGEt . . ' CENTR AL fL YING SERV ICE TEL: 501-375-7 274 Aug 31, 92 7 :40 No .001 P. 02 31 August 1992 Mr. John w. Walker Attorney At Law 1723 Broadway fERSONAL ~ CQNFIDENTIAI. Little Rock, AR 72206 Dear John: Thank you for the opportunity to meet with Mrs. Joshua and all the other fine people last Friday. Joy was a most gracious hostess. I thought it was an excellent meeting. I especially appreciate everyone's patience with my oftentimes tedious, long-winded explanations and stories. I left Friday afternoon feeling the vision for the Aerospace Education Center was enthusiastically shared by all. For that, I am grateful. John, I do have a couple of major concerns one of which I shared with the group, namely, that associating controversy with this project, however well meaning, would have a deleterious effect on the fund raising effort and, therefore, put the very future of the project in jeopardy. I received a mixed reaction to that. I could not convey my full reasoning to the group, however, because it concerns a legal interpretation of the Stipulation and Order (my other concern) which if I had shared with your clients without your presence would, I believe, have constituted a severe breach, if not of ethics, at least, of manners. Let me explain  further. Firstly, please consider the following opinion and analysis as one shared as a professional courtesy by one attorney to another. Insofar as I know, the following opinion is shared only by me and does not represent the views of anyone but me. It is offered in the full knowledge and appreciation of the fact that you will represent your clients in the manner which you deem best serves their interests. I believe the Stipulation and Order regarding the Aerospace Magnet School has lapsed because one of the essential contingencies, namely, that the LRSD receive a four million dollar magnet school assistance grant~did not occur. The grant application was turned down by the US Department of Education in August 1991. The order is clear in that \"If either of these contingencies does not happen, the LRSD will have no obligation (emphasis added) to build the school or implement the Aerospace Technology program described in Exhibit A.\" It would seem, therefore, that any effort to force the LRSD to do anything based upon the argument that the Order requires it would tail. The Arkansas Aviation Historical Society's efforts for the last year have been designed to keep the dream alive. We CENTRAL FLYING SERVICE TEL: 501 - 375- 7274 Aug 31,92 7 :40 No. 001 P.03 have offered, repeatedly, to use our best efforts to assist the LRSD in solving their very legitimate financial concerns about implementing this project. Quite frankly, notwithstanding Dr. Ruth Steele's public comments to the contrary, we saw little or no effort by the District to move forward. I believe Dr. Bernd is different. He must persuade the Board, however, that it is in the District's best interests to proceed with this project. The Board, as you know, has three new members since they endorsed the project in August 1990. If the February 4, 1991 Order is null and void and the LRSD has \"no obligation to build the school\" for the aforementioned reason, then it follows that the School Board will have to endorse any new effort to move forward, for example, a new Magnet School Grant Application. My question and my concern is: are we hindering the effort by attaching controversy to this project? Are we presenting Dr. Bernd a problem he can do without? Will the School Board be more or less likely to further embrace this project if given the opportunity, if it appears that it may be the target of controversy? Will potential donors to the museum be as receptive to the vision if they see the project cloaked in continuous conflict? I think the answer is certainly that in each case the project is less well served. The following scenario is the order in which, I believe, events will transpii\n:._e under ideal circumstances. Dr. Bernd willQ)e persuaded t o) recommend that a new Magnet School Assistance Grant be submitted by the December 15, 1992 deadline, The School Board will endorse the effort. The application will be submitted. Between May-July 1993, The us Department of Education will announce the awarding of a  grant. Ground will be broken immediately to assure the new facility will be open for classes the fall of 1994. I submit the following strategy to you for your consideration as the most likely to successfully implement the Aerospace Education Center: 1. Place the Aerospace Education Center off limits to any activity that would call negative attention to the project during the critical fund raising phase, 2. Express in a manner deemed appropriate the Joshua Intervenors enthusiastic support for the project, 3. Resolve any concerns about the implementation of the project through quiet diplomacy and avoid negative publicity wherever possible. We share the same vision. The Aerospace Education Center has the potential to be the benchmark educational achievement not only for Little Rock but also for the Nation. Through our shared vision, we can finally see a future that is different from the past. It is a future that places Little Rock squarely on the leading edge of the delivery of relevant education in this Country. I appreciate your CENTRAL .FLYING SERVICE TEL : 501-375 - 7274 Aug 31,92 7 :40 No .001 P.04 support and the support of the Joshua Intervenors in this magnificent endeavor. Respectfully submitted, ARKANSAS AVIATION HISTORICAL SOCIETY Richard N. Holbert Chairman of the Board JOI! W. W i\\LKE:R HALPH WASHINGTON MARK BURNET'Tt ' IVILE:Y i\\. BRANTON. ,JR. AUSTIN PORTER, .JH.  :\\lsn mhnilh'f'l ln Pr:wti,, 111 1\n._,,r-Ria \u0026amp; lht llistnrl or Cnlumh,a JOHN W. WALKER, P.A. J\\'ri'ORNEY AT LAW 1723 BROADWAY Lrrru~ ROCK, ARKANSAS 722llli TELEl'IIONE (501) 37 l-:l7\n), FAX (501) 37'1-'1 187 August 31, 1992 HAND DELIVERED The Honorable Susan Webber Wright U.S. District Court 600 West Capitol P.O. Box 3316 Little Rock, AR 72203 Dear Judge Wright: AUG 3 1 1992 Office o Doseg' gJ on M n,torm I am writing to request a prompt meeting with the Court and other interested parties regarding Little Rock School District's failure to proceed with the development of the Aerospace Technology Magnet School in good faith. We have brought these concerns to the attention of Ms. Ann Brown and her office. It is our feeling that court intervention will help bring these concerns to a more amicable resolution. Thank you for your attention to this matter. JWW: lp cc: Ms. Ann Brown Mr. Dick Holbert Mr. James Smith Mr. Bobby Lester Dr. Mac Bernd All Counsel of Record Office of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor August 31 , 1992 Mr. John Walker 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72206 Dear John: 201 East Markham, Suite 51 o Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501) 376-6200 Fax (501) 371-0100 Within the last few days, I have talked with you and several others who are involved with the new Aerospace Magnet School. It is apparent that there is some confusion about the role and relationship of the community and the parties regarding the school's development. 1 believe it will be helpful to meet informally with school district and aerospace representatives to discuss any concerns about plans for the aerospace school. The new facility promises to serve our community in bold and innovative ways\nit is in the best interest of the children that we resolve any questions about the planning process now so we can move foIWard to make the school's promise a reality. A member of my staff will contact you and our school district and aerospace colleagues to arrange a mutually convenient time for us to meet at my office. Very truly yours, ~ Ann B. Brown Federal Monitor cc: judge Susan Webber Wright Mac Bernd Bobby Lester James Smith Bill Bowen Dick Holbert All Counsel * P.01 * ** TRANSACTION REPORT * SEP- 8-92 TUE 13:30 * ** DATF START SENDER RX TIME PAGES TYPE NOTE ** * ---------------------------------- * * SEP- 8 11 372 4826 2' 3011 4 RECEIVE OK * *** ********ll*** '************************************************************************************* C/\\THERl:--:F. JOHNSON AND  ASSOCIATF FROM: Catherine Johnson r' Pages, including this cover Special Instructions: ~//_,/4 c\n,\n7 ~ \u0026amp;~~- PLEASE CALL 501-.'.}71-0331 IP A PROBLEM OCCURS DUR1NG TRA SMISSION. Aerospace Education Center Aerospace Technology M~gnet Program Plan\"lng Agenda September 21-24 s.p. .... 21 Partjdpants Iin.11 l)j ss,,i s.,lgn t Dr, Semd and 0811 Q,winn 8:30-9\n45 11m  Grant Requirements ~mlnlstr\n:itlon  Program/ ~1rse Sequenca B1.llldlng  Technolosy LAb 2000 Integrated ColTlp\\ltC!l\" fTadllt)' 2. Dr. Bemd, Dick Hdbe!i, 10:0012:U0 noa1  T)e.18n d Tochnolngy Lab 2000: CO'\\c::ept Gan Quinn, J11inas Durkin, Ad mint strati at for lntegr11tinS Appllod Mathen'lahcs and Almt Gambell d Cr9t1Vt B\\lllding Sdenc:1?, Cannl\\.ml cattoo Skills\nand Loarnitt8 Systerm, San Degq Ilng1ncc:rlng Technology al Junior High Apple ~uter Inst.ittng Lc:'Vel. [ Ncte-. Pticr to thts meettn\u0026amp; the ONler, l..RSP Fadlitlas the SlX j\\lnla- h1g1, srnods thould Manapr, Ciaylc.-d Nml'lrop ldentHy 4,000 - 5,000 89 dAIIQl\"CDT'() (ULAR), Jeen McBnllre (ADE} spa~ fcx- ttl'IOVatlm naar t'l'lodla cmitc.T.] 12:00-1:30 Lund, Dlsc1.1ssi~ TTUl)' oontlnl.lt 3. LR.SP Fadlltles Managtr, 2:00-3:15 pm  Junlcr- 1-itgh Schm 'J'our d Pr(F09ed Gall Quinn, James Durktn, Pulaski Hatghts Oassn.~'1ms to plan Tecl1nclogy Lab 2000 AJax GambOI. Apple 3:304:45 ln:ita11M!m Need~ and CCl'lt (Gt.mt Compul9t' Rapr~~t.ttives Jlo-Mt Helghb lJ\\aaget) (f)evek1pm01,t) (SN #2) 4. Or. Bemd, Ttm Hotplc, Ed 5:00-8,00 pm  Tcdmdogy Ulb 2000 .\\t the High Sc:hcd\nroddtc:k1 Ock Hdbert, Gall Admh,lslrillicn PlaMing the Pre-Engineering Lab for Q!Jinn1 Jamcg 0Jrk1n. Alex Ard'\\ited PlaM Gambao\nApple Comp1.1ter Repre1entat1ve (2) 9, A.(lllpac:e Eti\\1cation Center campaign Lca~ershtp S1ifai..t:wa24 10, Dr, Domd, IIstelle Matthl,, Chmne WCJOd, Dennis GIUSCMI, Bn,n.ti IAn\u0026amp;u-a lVtl Conaultm1t.s1 Program Jlvaluatlon Manager U , O,uck Stevens (UALR), Gaylcrd Ncrthrcp, (UALR), Jerry Rot:inscn (Henderaai State U), c UAl'B) 12. Dr. Bemd, Ed ruddlck, Tim Hcilple, Call Quinn 3:00-5:00 pm location? 8:30-11:30 iun AdmintstratlCll'I ih111dlng 1,00-2:30 pm 3:00-5:00 pm  Prcsentatla'\\ 01 Prq'\\~ Magnet 0-. Rernd and Gail Quinn  0.1rric-..11\\1m and Program Evaluatloo ~tsn - Revlaw Cour-ewtr\\(  Tedindogy !..ab 2000 lhtgr111tm! Facility Ccmputer U.S. r'\u0026gt;epl. of LAbor SCANS Knc,r,.y-How h,tegratim Into Acadr..mlc C.Q'e , - ~i5ning Program O'qectlves based oo Acadomic Achievemant, Job/Work Skill Comp\"tency Attalnmt:l\\t - Progrt11rn Retention and Competicn   Placomcnt into I!nLryLcvcl Ilmployment cr- HigC!' Educ:atioo - l'l't\"'JCBSS fer ma,ttcrlns tmpt ementatlon (f.crmattve ev~luatic.~ and usa d TQM Measure,)  De!li81'1ng the Arliclllalio, Agreement (2~ 2~2)  rtannlng a Ne\\AI High School (er 2,000 students based on Magnot Co.mies c:I ~udy :.1,d Htgh SdHxi Course, and R~9u1ran~.. , ts for Graduation, T~hno1o6)' Ltsb 2000 and oth\u0026lt;Jr oomp\\.tter faclliU~ 5, o. LRSD Fadlttles Manager, Gail Quinn, James Il.trk1n, Alex Gamboai Apple Canp~ter Rdpresentattves 0-. 131rnd Md aroup U:,\\ed tn #5 8cfllB i, 8:309\n30 all\\ So.Ith We:\nt 9:4/i-10:4!\nam, Fair 11 :00-12: oo nOOl'I, Mabelvale t:3O-2:3O pm Cloverdale 3:U0-5:00 pm S\n00-4\n00 pm Ad mini strati al Building 7. lndustry Repre:sent11t1ves: S\naO-10,)O mn Central F1Y,t\\8 Service  [lclc Lc:Qtlon? H01bart\nMldoout  Oary ou5g.rS\nFalcx,n Jet - E. '\\Ml uam Orr\nArkan~ Aarospaco  L. Omtcr Dl.lrwelt trt Rmr Jndulltri~  ? McO:lnnell Dou gt as  PAA  Byron Meltus (Plc:eso add to this list - thCMi pecpte reprent buatnNS cards I h1%Ve) 8. Dr. Bemd, Ann \u0026amp;a.vn, Gall Quinn, On1\u0026amp;  (Dr. Barnd a- Pat to schecMe meeting) 11:0012:00 no.Tl Ann Brem n's Offla,? t002:0Upn, Planning and Preparalim  Junior High School TOllr cf Prcpe60d C11'11srcc:m1.'i h') Plan Technology lab 2000 J1ulallotiCl1 Nc:cds a1'Cl Cost (Grant Budegt OoYckipment)  Cost DiSCUlllllOlt (1) Tedmdngy Lab 2000 (2) !1n51ne1tting Technol~y Canputer Facilities  Identifying Q1t1cal Occupatlooal Areas In Manufacturing Iin~nMrlng and Aviation for Training Swdents  Jcb Descrlpti011!1 ar1d Job Anfl1ysls  U.S. 08'j:.al1ment cl La'rxir SCANS Workplace Car,petcmcies\nRelevance to Job Analysis  Occ\"'f'.:\\tlonal Ccrtlflcation (HIii ollh  -.::...4~ Ncie: Regarding firsl lwo Items above, wlll nroct to have o:cup,1llalill areas where l'llr!ne and tralninS la eritlcal. Ploaso h\niv~ n-prosontatlvc.w: l:rlne in{onnalicn for lhese iwo Items. NCO I I .Cl a J .ie ut1mf!hl fill 1t1hM .i.e Lw9 liiHII. pecg::ail lbpih Mi.  Amendtnenl lo lnlerdislricl MASI'\\~ Desegregolion l\"lsn to Include six junior high SGhools, new high s~hoot as Am~ace Ma5net Program School, Aerospace Education Center Aerospace Technology Magnet Program Planning Agenda septembar 21-24 s..:---21 PN11dpants linll l)lww,1100 1. Dr. S..md and Galt Quinn 8\n309\n45 lln'I  Gra\"I Ro:.:iulrernes~ts Aumtnlstrati(ll,  l'rogriAm/ p,,.1rn Sequenea Butldlllg  'rechn\\-.itoay L,ib 2000 lnLegrated Cninp\\1t P11dllty ~' Dr, ~md, Dick Hdbert, 10: 00-12:UO TIOCI\"\\  r-is1\\ ci Toclmology Lab 2000: C0n01iflt G1U Quinn, Jiu,._ Durkin, Admlnl strat\\a) for lntegrfll\\t\\S Applied )vWhen'\\at1C:S and Alex Garnbo6 cJ Cteattve Bu\\ldini Selene.a_ Ca11municattoo Skills\nand toarnlng Systems, Safi Deg~ t:nslnecrlng Technology at Junior High ApPI eomputer tn,i-1\\ing L~~l. { Ncite: Prt~ to this meettng, the Dealer, LRSD Factlit!M the ~1:\u0026lt; Junlc.1' high sd'\\ocb shoutd }\\,,1ana8 Gayla-d Ncrthrop identity 4,000  5,000 1141 d,-_,.oc:m(II)  ('ULAR), Jean McRl'IUre (/\\DE) 1pace tix renovatlm near l\"ftadh1 contcr.l 12:00-t:30 Lunch DI scuSS1lXl may oonu1,ue 3, LP-SD J\nadUtl~ Manager, 2:00-3\n1! pm  Jimlcr High Sc.hen Tnur r:I PrCFOSCd Gall Quint\\, Jam~ Ourkln, rulukl Height:, Of!ssroom.11 to plan Techndogy Lab 2000 Alex Gan'l'lx:e. Apple 3:31H:4~ lnistall11\\ic-r, Need~ and Cast (G1ant Computer R.oprc:scntatl ves r,cres.t Haght!I liudget) ( l\"X'Vck~')l'l'\\enL) (S.- #'l) 4. Dr, Bumd, Tim Hllple, Ed 5:00-8:00 pin Todmolo3y I.ab 2000 at the Jilgh Schoel\nRiddt~, DI~ Hciberl, Gall Adinlnislrallcri Planning the Pr\u0026amp;-Eng1nNring Lab for QJlnn, )an\\CS Durkin. /'JetX Architect Pl.in$ Camt,ca, Apple O-Y11puter Rbpresentatl ve (2)  ----------- .. ----- --- -- .... ---- -- - M     11 I ,,,, 6. ,. LRSC FadUttes Manager, Gatl Qult'\\n, James O.trktn, Alex G..mbca, Apple Canputer P.espresentatt ves U'. 5-tlcj Md gra.tp Ust~ in #5 lnCSUttry RepreSentatlve: Central F1\u0026gt;'1\"S Service - Dck Holbert\nMldcout  Gary Ougpra\nP.llcion Jet  B. 'Mtltam Orr\nArkansas l\\et-ospace - L. Canter D.Jrwell ui Rmr Jndo11trli!!i - 7 McUYtnell Douglas - J?M  8yrcn MeH\\tll (l'lc.:te add to this list the,ie pcq,la repr-,t b\\.lsines:1 carr\nts I have) 8. Ur. Bernd, Ann BrCMm, Gail Quinn, Ouie  (Dr. Bernd a- Pit to :,chedult rncettng) 8:30-9:30 WT\\ Su.Ith West 9:45-10:45 am, f-alr 11:00-12:00 noon, Mabelvllle 1:30-2:30 pm Cloverdale :3:00-5:00 pm S.00-6:00 pm Mmlnistrattoo Bulldtng 8:l0-10\n~ ~ Lcattl on? 11:00-12:00 T1CC'r'I Ann BrCM1n1s Offlce? 1:002:00pm Flannins and PraparaUc,1  Juni1' High SchocJ Tour d Prq,aiet1 Oassr01.,m.~ to Plan Tech1u:fo8}' Lab 2000 lnslallal1m Needs and Cost (Grant Bud \u0026amp;el I)avalq,ment)  C.cst Discussion: (1) Technology I.ab 2000 , (iJ IlnslnNrtng Technology Canputer fadlitles  IdentHytng a-iucat Oreupauonal Areas In Man\\lf acturlng Ungineerl\"'S and Av!Mlc:,n lot Training St1.1dtt\\tt  Job De:,crtptlons and Job Arlelysts  U.S. Dep1utrnent cJ Labcf SCANS Wa-k place C'.a\"l,pete1'1cles\nRelevince to Job Analysts  OccupaUo,al CerUfieatlc.TI (.M .... ..,_ .-......4~ Note: Regarding fir:.l iwo Items above, wlll nood to hlilvc occupaticnal Meas wht1re htrini and training 1J tr!Uc.al. Plea~ h.ivo ruprusuntetivr.i~ !'.ring in(onn.:1lia, (or \\h~ two H~,ns. MA I l 3 .a eaMpla fill wh_. he L~g Bn:el: pt se\n, m:: :op: ueb.  Amend1na,l to It'llerdls:Lrict MA8nat Oc,e6regallon t'lan lo Include six\nunior hlSh school~ nc.W.' high school as A~{~pa~ Mag1,et Pro8l'am Sc.hods 9, Aertpaoe Educ.atton Center 3:00-S\n00 pin  Prcsent.\\tlcn m Pr~~ Magnet - 0-. campaign Leadership L~tton? Bernd and Gail Qutt,n 5ep1t..aar a 10. Dr. lamd, ustelle Matthts, 8:30 11 :30 ftl'n  Currl~1\\um and Progra1n EvaluattO'\\ Dianne Wct\nsJ., Denni I Cluso.v I Ad1\"'1ni1tratl0'\\ Design in11Ulh Ulni\\1A8 Art \u0026amp;Yildlt'lg  Revlaw Cour~awd'k C-.. cnultt~~. Program - Tad'\\naogy t...t\u0026gt; 2000 lt\\tegr11tcd Jivaluatlon Manager P.11cility Ccmputat ll,S, Depl. or Laoot' SCANS Kna.v-He7N ll'ltegratia, Into Ar.adlffl\\lC Cae  f)eslgntng Program Objectlv based en Acadcmtc Achievemant, Job/Werk Sktll C..omp11tency Attainment - Prsr11m Reteonttor, and competim - 1'laC01nc1,t into ~nlry-Level Iiniployment a- Hig\u0026lt;\n,- Educallm - 1'n1ems fa- ma11tcring tmptementatlcn (I7amat1Ve avaluatim and use cJ TQM Me,uure1) ll, Onad( ~~ens (UALR), 1:00-2:30 pm  Peslg1,ing the Arlin.ii alien Agreement G.yla-d Ng-thtcp, (UAL!l.), (2-+ 2+-2) Jerry Rol:anaa\\ (Ha,dar-\"2' Slala U), UAPB) 12, Dr, Bernd, Ed ruc1dtck, nm 3:00-5:00 pm  r1.:\\nntng a New High SChoo1 fer 2,.000 Jietple, Gall QUtnn t\\1dliWltS based on Magnet CoorM11 d stucty and H1Sh Sd1cxi Cwrse, and ReK]uirmwnt9 fer Graduation, Technology L~b 2000 and nth~ r1niputer fadlllles JOHN W. WALKER, P.A. JOHN W. WALKER RALPH WASHINGTON MARK BURNETTE wILEY A. BRANTON, JR AUSTIN PORTER, JR  Also admitted to Practice in Georgia \u0026amp; the District of C.olumbia. Ms. Ann Brown Federal Monitor Office of Desegregation 201 East Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 A'ITORNEY AT LAW 1723 BROADWAY LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72206 TELEPHONE (501) 374-3758 FAX (501) 374-4187 September 10, 1992 Monitoring Re: Aerospace School Dear Ms. Brown: SEP 1 4 \\992 O!l.ic e i D cc\u0026gt;gegatici1 Monitoring O evv I Mr. Walker asked that I provide you and the other persons attending our meeting on Tuesday, September 8, 1992 a copy of the notes that I took. By copy of this letter to the other attendees, I am requesting that they along with yourself review my notes and advise me of any corrections thereof. Thank you again for hosting the meeting. JCS: lm cc: Dr. Mac Bernd Chris Heller, Esq. Mr. James Smith Ms. Mabel Bynum Stephen Jones, Esq. Mr. Bobby Lester Mr. Billy Bowles Sam Jones, Esq. Richard Roachell, Esq . Mr. Dick Holbert Mr. Bill Bowen John W. Walker, Esq. Ms. Debbie Parker Mr. Kirke Herman Re: Proposed Aerospace Magnet School and Museum Date: September 8, 1992 Persons Present: Ann Brown, Monitor Dr. Mac Bernd, LRSD Supt. Chris Heller, Esq. Mr. James Smith, NLRSD Supt. Ms. Mabel Bynum, Asst. Supt. Stephen Jones, Esq. Mr. Bobby Lester, PCSSD Supt. Mr. Billy Bowles, Asst. Supt. Sam Jones, Esq. Richard Roachell, Esq. (Representative) Mr. Dick Holbert, AR Aviation Historical Society Mr. Bill Bowen, Governor's Office John w. Walker, Esq. Ms. Debbie Parker, Joshua Mr. Kirke Herman, Joshua Ms. Joy C. Springer Purpose of Meeting as stated by Ann Brown: to communicate openly regarding the proposed Aerospace School. Ann Brown opened the meeting by stating she had talked at length with the Court regarding the stipulation dated February, 1991. It was the opinion of the Court that the stipulation was no longer binding because the contingencies had not been met. But, the Court also felt that the parties should continue with the spirit of the stipulation. The district attorneys (Jones, Jones and Heller) agreed with the Court that the stipulation was no longer binding because the contingencies had not been met. John Walker, Joshua's attorney disagreed that the stipulation was no longer binding because all parties were aware that LRSD would have to make several grant applications prior to receiving the funds. (He suggested that counsel, monitor and other parties review the transcript on the hearing regarding the Aerospace school) John Walker also commented that he felt the LRSD had not acted in \"good faith\" since their initial grant application because it had not actively pursued the idea of the Aerospace school. He also suggested that the District was not pursuing this endeavor due to lack of funds. A site has been selected for the school, yet a site selection committee was not formulated as required by the Court on other new school construction. Through Holbert's group, they had . . left the impression in the community that the school was strictly intended for gifted students, those of higher economic status. When in fact, the purpose of the agreement was to identify the children of lower economic backgrounds and provide them with greater educational opportunities. Walker also suggested that someone in the District be designated as the contact person regarding the school. Dr. Bernd voiced concerns regarding operating costs, There was some discuss~on regarding students who would attend the school. Stephen Jones suggested that if the student body would also consist of NLRSD, PCS SD and students from outside the Pulaski county districts, then requests for M to M money could be used to help offset the costs. Ann Brown stated that she felt comfortable with the parties meeting and developing plans of action for the school without her having to do so. There was no objection voiced by anyone present that the following should be done immediately: 1) LRSD take a leadership role in the planning and development of the school. 2) The parties need to meet promptly and determine the status of the grant application. 3) The parties need to meet with Ms. Gail Quinn, the grant writer to determine the status of the within the next couple of weeks. 4) The parties need to prepare a new stipulation with timelines included as necessary. The stipulation should not be much different from the original. 5) Joshua, NLRSD and PCSSD should be involved in the planning and development of the school and all related activities. 6) There should be open lines of communications to Joshua, NLRSD, and PCSSD regarding any new developments about the school about. 7) The grant proposal and new stipulation should be submitted to the Court well in advance of December 15th for her approval and other possible recommendations. I / . ~ 0,,tr(1 ~-m 11-/fJtC ~1~clb~~ . # MhhSl~~ ~~~ S' ~ lf9 :/~-p Mltf~~fl ~ 9:wf(U,1i l~ ~ ' I/,' Ob w 1-/ u uu. Sir W-nJ ~( '- jk-t 't/A4 r'v0,/c \u0026lt;ftu-rl /~ - .fifu1t~ ~ N~ ~ - l~ ti l(L -/2 /4- 1w1 tf/,r__, w\nuU,UA- /t::t!. ..e_ - t/lJln\u0026lt;(}u\u0026lt;.\n- (J-/ 5~ gz\nJ ~,.,._,{,!),- - ~--,,l~t\n(t_.r j,!- It~ -- ~ : ajifr\u0026gt;1-'1?\nffrf - ~-rFrPW/ 6] - 11fii.lv1 1s~i~W~J0v- 0$ ft?~ Su ~- ~~ ~ ~ o~~ ')D 7 /J i/4/ fV\\ ~do~~ Ctvt /~/\nt~\nF- s1~ l,t,~ o! ~~ ?17-~~ .____L\nI 7 :i- - Mr. Dick Holbert JOHN A. IUCGS. IV P,0 BOX 1388 LITTLE AOCK, ARKANSA~ 72203 November 25, 1992 Aerospace Education Center P.O. Box 7332 Little Rock, AR 72217 Dear Dick, I appreciate your comments, concerns, and dialog last night at our board meeting. ~ou and the members of the Aerospace Committee should be commended for your dedication to seeking ways to improve our pu~lic schools a.nd community, If only half oft.he parents of our students were as interested in their children's education as your group i~. we would have mo~e resources, fewer problem~, ~nd much better educated kids graduating from our schools. So that there is no rni~tinderstanding on my position on the vote taken last night, I feel it is appropriate this morning to reiterate my feelings on the Aerospace Magnet. Please realize that I speak as John Riggs, patron of the Little Rock Public School District and individual board mnmber and certainly do not speak foi the board a5 a whole. I believe that as I stated last night that the wholP. ided of business and education partnerships are inherently qood for a community. I believe this par Lnership is particularly good for our community because it does meet a business need for qualified employees to fill existing and future jobs, it fills the n~~d of our community for higher paid jobe, and la.::n:ly it al Lt:!1npts to meet the needs of a ~thnically balanced school system. I ~m concerned though abuut the neeJ for additional bri~k and mortar for our school sysL~n1. In my opinion that need ls simply not there. I also will absolutely not support any program no matleL how well intended Lhat will dr~ln resources from our area school~. So where do W8 go from here? I do not bcliHve our school supcrint~ndent 4,~ staff need to spend cxotl.J.i.tant amounts ot time trying to find money to justify this school. I fully expect thern to present to the board whaL reasonable means there are within the school distri~t's bag or tricks that will make this project vi~ble. Our supeL.i.ntendent and staff do not ~r. Dick Holbert ~ovember 25, 1992 E\u0026gt;age 2 have the resources or time to explore other avenues of financing such as lobbying the state legislature or the federal governm~nt for fund~ in ~upport of this endeavor. In my hwnble opinion, we as a school board have put the responsibility for finding innovative sources of funds squarely on your group's back. I believe our school administration will submit two scenarios for funding of this school~ (1) raising the milage rate by a healthy amount\nor (2) closing an cKisting school and draining some resourc9s from area schools. In my opinion nBither of this options is doable. So I ask again, where do we go from here? I would suggest that Mrs. Quinn ask the federal officials what would happen if we slightly changed our grant application and deleted adding a high school and resorted to using for the short term our existing plants. If it would bo possible to mako that slight (in my opinion sinee it has nothing to do with thg quality of aducation) correction after having received this grant, I believe that this proj8ct has more of a chance to be implemented after June 1st. Otherwise, I fear that when all the dust seLtle5 and we see what it will cost to administrate a new high school, the dre~ms of any aerospace program will fade for the foreseeable future. Dick, again I want to thank you for your efforts on behalf of our cchoolc, our community, and especially our kids. A lesser man would have given up long ago, called the dogs, and gone to the house. Let's not lose the dream of tha Aerospace ~ducation Center over issue of brick and mortar~the building and actual locat:.ion wht!rt: these kids are taught means so much less than the concept. Little Rock jr4 cc Dr. Bernd Sincerelr I . I /I // / I ' I _,/\"' ,.,,.-~-i...--- (J ohn\\ A. Riggs, lV P~liq School Doard PO'\u0026amp;! tion 4 Member Little Rock Public Schools Board of Directors \\ . ' , D G 111 S. Bedford St Suite 101 I Burlington, MA 01803 (817) 273-151\u0026amp;4 Fax: (817) 273-0390 901 N. Sttat1 S, Suite 801 Mington, VA 22203 (703) 276-TTO2 Fu: (703) 527-0823 City Naoonal Bank Plaza 606 Wilshire BNd Suite 706 Santa Monica, CA 90401 {310) 394-8599 Fax (310) 394-0034 DEFENSE GROUP INC. Corporate Office: 307 Annandale Road, Falls Church, VA 22042-2400, (703) 532-0802/Fax: (703) 5320806 Mr. Thomas F. McLarty 3 Greenbriar Rd Little Rock Arkansas 72207 Dear Mack\nAnnapolis, Maryland 23 December 1992 This letter has two purposes\nthe first is to thank you for the enormous task you have undertaken for the good of our Country as Chief of Staff to President Clinton. We have recently had several vivid examples of how critical this position is to both the wellbeing of the President and the routine functions of governance. Bill is to be congratulated for his acumen in making this outstanding selection, and you have our very best wishes for the coming years. The second purpose is to follow up on our brief conversation at the National Advisory Board meeting about the Arkansas Aerospace Education Center (AEC). I asked if you felt comfortable that this important project is on track, and you said that you were, given its current support by all involved. We have worked this project very hard here in Washington and have a significant degree of support within the Departments of Education, Transportation (FAA) and Defense (Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency(DARPA)) and at NASA. The AEC is seen as a pilot program that can be used by technology innovators to bring educational techniques and standards up to the requirements of the evolving workplace. These sponsors are, I believe, poised to bring interactive simulation systems, earth terminals for remote aerospace systems and new concepts of learning to Little Rock as the AEC concept develops. While I am certainly less attuned to the commitment of key players there in Little Rock than members of the leadership committee, I have an uncomfortable feeling that this entire project ultimately depends upon the enthusiasm and determined support of the Little Rock School Board and the educational system in Arkansas it represents. In my own discussions with several members of the board, I did not find the commitment necessary to make this program work\nthe issue is not whether or not Little Rock has enough high schools or whether the operating budget five years hence can support an \"An Equal Opportunity Employer\" . ' .. .. ' additional facility, the reality is that the present school system does not provide the education and training young people need to enter the workforce and survive in an increasingly changeable environment. The beauty of the magnet school program at the AEC is that it is not designed for geniuses, who will always find their way, but for a wide spectrum of motivated students, including the disadvantaged, which constitutes the basic resource of the Arkansas aerospace industry. Some of the discussions about the AEC in Washington may have been premature, but they were undertaken at appropriate levels within the Bush administration to avoid any connotation of a porkbarrel project brought here by the transition. The new team thus has a foundation on which to build and important continuity at the \"action officer\" level. The continued help of the Arkansas Congressional delegation should assure that the AEC concept will flourish and can perhaps be extended to meet similar needs elsewhere in our nation. None of this will happen, however, if the Little Rock School Board does not vigorously support the grant application in February to the Department of Education and the approval next June of the building plan. Strong support for the AEC by Dr. Mac Bernd, the School District Superintendent, is particularly critical and it appears, based upon the minutes of a recent meeting, lacking. I know I am catching you on this vital subject at the moment of your departure, but I also know that your stature and deep involvement in a variety of public matters there in Little Rock give your views weight that few others enjoy. Anything you can do to build consensus within the Board for the AEC will be greatly appreciated. Again, best wishes in your new responsibility. William N. Small 2878 Riva Road Annapolis, Maryland 21401 Most sincerely, \\ _-:, \\ \\) , L L W.N. Small LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 W. MARKHAM STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 FAX (501) 324 - 2032 DATE TO FROM ~i::::::c SENDER'S PHONE # 5, c/- di/()\nJ__ SUBJECT  ~~SU s~ SixmJnstructins Faz PhD N-,,,, _____ Spud Diat_L--_ FOR DATA PROCESSING OFFICE USE ONLY Transmitted By --------Date _____ Time __ _ R 03191 Fortune favors the P. O.Box 7332  Llctll! Roclc.Atkansu72217 501.371.0331 December 2, 1992 NadonaJ Advisory Board Or. Eddie Anderso~ Col. Walter J. Boyne LL Gen. Benjamin 0 . Davis Geo. Affi-ed G. Hansen Phillip S. Woodruff Hononuy Chairmen Herschel H. Frid.iy MayorSharonM. Priest As you probably know, last Tuesday the Little Rock\n\"'\":'o~P/~kefeller School Board passed a resolution to pursue a $8 million ac   rep eos Federal Magnet School Assistance Grant to fund a  new Litt1eRock5cboolDi tri ctaerospace magnet high school at Adams Field and programs at D,. ci1~:\n\"~~\n,'~B rnd three junior high feeder schools. Campaign Leadership Wllliam H. \u0026amp;wen Or.airman Richard N. Holbert Viu . Chairman Marion B. Burton Prtsidtnt J, Dan Baker J. W. Buddy\" Benafield 0. W:iyne Bennett W'tlllim C. Br.icas Henry A. Broach Rep. !rm.a Hunter Brown F. Taylor Bro\\Vl\"l David M. Clark F~ K. Darngh, Jr. Dennis 0. Davi:s Lee Frazier Charles I!. Harper Sen. Jrry Jw.U E.RayKemp John Lewellen Donn, K. Mel.arty \u0026gt;alldyS. McMath F'reduickJ. Menz ,dwvu M. Penick. Sr. b1lh Remmel ,dgar K. Riddick. Jr. a.mes R. Rodgers .ucicnM.Taillac :harles M. Taylor im Guy Tucker itace Acfvfsory Board Ir. G\u0026lt;raid P. Carr lathan Gordon :Obert A Gordon 'oLAibert Hart tr. William R Pogue ou~ L Ramsay lajor General James A Ryan I. M. ~ wia- Sanerfield,Jr. ol Charles ) . Wax evelopment Counsel On the surface, this resolution brings the concept of the Aerospace Education Center full circle, restoring the original plan for the museum to be built in conjunction with a high school serving grades 10 through 12. We are pleased that the resolution brought the high school facility back to the Adams Field location, and confirmed the commitment of up to $10 million in funds for construction of the school. However, we must also recognize that the project, and our work, is far from over. The Board made clear that there are many unanswered questions, and ut the burden on f nding most o _the answe.rs-OlL.U.S who have worked so hard and so long bringing this project from an ambitious idea to a point _.., where it is one step away from reality. Let us not b misle -- this last step is a long and difficult one.  -To k:eep. the progress toward construction of the Aerospace Education Center moving forward, we had compromised with the school administration to place the aerospace high school programs in an existing school and to change the plans for the on-site facility from a high school to a junior high. This was done to address one of the primary obstacles to moving the grant application (and thus the entire project) forward, namely the shortage of space in junior high schools in the District . However, the Board failed to accept the recommendation of the administration, and as an alternative voted four to two to pursue the Federal Grant application for the on-site facility as a senior high school. While we are pleased with the ultimate vote to restore the visionary concept of the Aerospace Education Center, many facts became clear during Tuesday's meeting. First and foremost, the Superintendent and a majority of Board members feel that they are under no obligation to follow through with the commitment to fund the $6 million . _construction cost of the aerospace high school facility, as passed by the voters in the 1990 millage election. While the Board members are unquestionably supportive of the concept of the Aerospace Education Center, they do not feel, as we do, that the voters mandated the construction of the aerospace high school. This is fundamental to understanding the perspective which the Board members and Dr. Bernd have toward this project. Much of our effort to date, including the assistance we have provided toward the Federal Magnet School Grant process, has been based on our resumption of this commitment. 'Ihe Board's actions last week made it clear tha e aerospace sc ool, in whatever form, must again prove its viability. Secondly, it is clear that some Board members fail to see the broader vision of excellence in education that the Aerospace Education Center represents, and see it as a competing interest which will only siphon resources away from what they see as higher priorities. This view of the community as \"competing interests\" is one of the major obstacles to creating any broad-based endeavor such as the AEC. Fortunately, we are confident that a majority of Board members do not fall in~o this category. However, ] we must be vigilant about this attitude, which could manifest in such actions as playing one school or one group (e.g~, teachers, parents from other schools) against another during budget deliberations. The Board and Administration is properly concerned about pending budget deficits, and is frightened by any activity which could adversely affect this problem. While they can clearly see (and identify) any potential cost associated with the aerospace magnet, they fail to fully realize its potential for obtaining new revenues which would positively affect the District's financial picture, including the Federal Magnet School Grant. Finally, the Board acknowledged that another millage election would soon be necessary. Previously, we were asked to support a millage because the construction funds for the aerospace magnet were included, and we worked tirelessly for its successful passage. We are now in a situation whereby the administration and the Board could require that we support yet another millage increase to fund the operations of the aerospace magnet. Although, requiring that we support an additional increase in order for the District to pursue the aerospace magnet is tantamount to asking for us to pay for something twice, it is a possibility that we must consider. Following the successful 1990 millage campaign, we were told that the funds were available for construction of the aerospace school. We set forth to meet our goal of $6.5 million for construction of the museum, and we are now within about $1 million of completing that campaign. As we drew near meeting our obligation, the District pointed out that they did not have operational funds for the school. Following the disastrous application f or _u4 J(J ct,.. rk(.I.H ~ I I 'l c I I u the Federal Magnet School Grant in 1991, we agreed to pay (through the g~nerosity of the Winthrop Rockefeller Foundation) for a qualified outside consultant (Gail Quinn) to write the 1992 grant application. The plan that Ms. Quinn developed in conjunction with the District's professional staff would provide for Federal funds to completely equip the aerospace high school and three junior highs with computers and other needs, and pay for the -training and salaries of the teachers for two years. Now, the District has charged us with the additional burden of either3,1 providing or identifying the source of funding for five years following the school's opening. Obviously, this is a serious obstacle to our efforts, an makes it clear that unless we make every effort to convince or compel them, pthaer tnDeirssthriipc.t can't, or won't, live up to their financial obligations to this In the past, you have given great assistance in bringing the Aerospace Education Center to existence. Now, we must c~ll er. you again not only fo~ advice as to how we should proceed, but to ask you to become more personally involved in whatever course we may take. ~ Your dedication to this project of your time and financial resources is deeply appreciated. Now we are moving into the final phase of the Center's dinevvoellvoepmmeenntt.. Critical decisions mu~ be made, and we want  and need your We have scheduled a meeting of \u0026lt;11ir Campaign Leadership for Friday, Di\nzember 11th at 10:30 a.m.in tn,z 4th floor board room of the First \u0026lt;tommercial Bank Building, C~ol and Broadway Streets in Little Rock. Your kttendence at this impo~t meeting can be confirmed by calling Catherine Johnson at 371-03,J- 1\\t the meeting, we will discuss our options, and the ~~~$- -we 11\\US.t--take to ensure that this vital project continues to move For mucb 'of our campaign, we have been patient with the Little Rock School Distrii(:t' s Qa.Ssiye role in these e\"grts~ Now, we must -t..a.ke. a ~\"!_uch .\ni\nere actl.Jl~.le to ensure that our dream of excellence in education i1, Arkansas wil.ll. t\nvthta co 'pass. forwaPrdl etaos es heeakineg eyvoeur yt heefnf.o rt to attend the meeting on December ilth, I look RNH/IJlj Sincerely, Richard N. Holbert Vice Chairman Aerospace Education Center 7 r MEMO TO: FROM: DATE: RE: Aerospace Education Campaign Leadership Catherine Johnson December 14, 1992 AEC December 11, 1992 Meeting Minutes Attending: Guests: Wayne Bennett F. Taylor Brown Marion Burton Nathaniel Curtis - Nathaniel Curtis Riddick \u0026amp; Heiple Jim Dailey -LR Vice Mayor Seth Ward LR Airport Commission Dr. Joe Calhoun Rev. Hero Donovan Bob Gordon Dennis Glasgow -LR School District Science Supervisor Willie Hamilton - LRSD Board Charles Harper Richard N. Holbert E.RayKemp John Lewellen Fred Menz Ed Penick, Sr. Ruth Remmel -~ . - , Ed Riddick -Twig Satterfield Charles M. Taylor II. Update on Recent Developments with Little Rock School District Robert Wilson LR Airport Commission Richard N. Holbert AEC Vice-Chairman _ ____________ ... - Mr. Holbert opened the meeting by stressing that the purpose of this and subsequent meetings was intense feedback. Beginning with the LRSD Resolution he outlined the points contained therein, noting the conditional terms for District commitment and support: 1. The $10 million allocated for construction, 2. Approval by the US District Court of the plan, and - 3. The AEC generate operating funds for the school for 5 years. Holbert defined operating funds as those costs incremental to running a high school, noting that a similar school would cost $4.5 million annually, but because this is a magnet school the costs would be off-set by \"M to M\" rransfer funds, grant monies and st.ate rurnback funds available for students outside the LRSD. Holbert also noted that according to the resolution, funding for the first year would be covered by the grant since the only grade would be the 10th. In 1995, funding should still not present a problem as only the 10th and 11th grades would be operational. By 1996, the full pipeline however, would require funding as grades 10-12 would be operational. The resolution, he noted, does not address the larger issue of what the district's \"needs\" are as verbally expressed in the November 24 LRSD Board meeting . Holbert said that between now and next June it is critical to instill in the LRSD Board members' minds exactly what the AE school vision TiiVmVes, it's goals and specific detm.itions of e motivating programs ffiat will be offered. \"If the program is successful,\" he said\" it will be the fore-runner for more public and private partnerships in the community, creating new sources of revenue and support for the District. Howev~r, if it is successful, it may require more \"Brick and Morta( after all.\" He further noted that if the District does not proceed with the AEC plans, even though District officials may operate the district properly, they will still be left with the same old district, one that shows gradual, inevitable deterioration. Holbert noted that over the last five years the LRSD lost over 1,000 students, while surrounding schools, both public and private, gained in attendance. In order to increase commitment and enthusiasm among the LRSD Board, Holbert suggested the AEC Leadership develop a strategy, and he proposed the following options: 1. Change the message to the LRSD Board: There is a certain probability that litigattt]on may force all members of the LRSD Board to sit in a special election between now and June of 93. Sourcing five years of funding may not become that big of an issue with the Board if new Board members are elected. 2. Find the Money: With Bill Clinton - an advocate of the AEC School/Museum - in the White House, there is greater probablility than ever before that the facility can be designated as a National Aerospace Education Center or Demonstration Project If that occurs, not only could the facility be eligible for operating expenses, but cost of equipment, construction costs and museum operating expenses. Congress could approve appropriations for the project, but likely not before October 1993. Keep in mind that our project timeline is June of 1993. Having Congress approve such appropriations is not unusual, Holbert explained, noting that a similar 16:06 '0'501 324 2032 I. R School Dist  DOM i4J 006 / 009 $20 million request was before FAA Director of Aviation Phil Woodruff last week, and that Senator Dale Bumpers just last year procured $2.5 million for an Aviation Science Building at Henderson State University in Arkadelphia, Arkansas. 3. Charter School concept: Minnesota recently passed a statute funding charter schools - hybrids between public and private schools with classes and criteria to meet public education standards and operations managed by private sectors. Holbert said there is hope that legislation will be drafted for presentation to the State Legislature in January that wil allow the AEC to operate the school itself. This holds particular appeal if the LRSD Board does not show enthusiasm and commitment to the project, provided that the AEC can raise the money. He urged the AEC to consider enacting some sort of mechanism to put this concept of a charter school into effect - if the School District won't embrace the project John Lewellen pointed out that the scope of the desegregation impact should be broadened to a statewide level Marion Burton echoed that thought, saying that what has not yet occurred to the LRSD is the impact this school would have on desegregation. Burton also emphasized that while the AEC Leadership believes the concept of aviation courses is advantageous, there is a larger reaon he and every other member is all involved in the project. That is to correct the number one obstacle to continued economic development in the community - the reputation of the Little Rock School District. Lewellen responded by urging all present to make it clear to the LRSD Board that this school~a mechanism that will greatly impact desegregation. LRSD Board , member .W.illie. Hamilton_agreed.thal.the_primary .value of this project.is..the impactit...will.hal'.e __ _ on desegregation and he believes it is important to push that point  Ill. Status Report Richard N. Holbert Requirements for LRSD Grant Application to US Dept of Education Holbert explained that because the Federal Guidelines were received late, the deadlinefor the grant application was extended to February 1, 1993, which gives the AEC and LRSD time to finetune the grant request He stated that Catherine Johnson and Gail Quinn are traveling to Washington DC this week to meet with the Department of Education in the first of several reviews on the grant Holbert reminded the AEC that the US District Court must also approve the application, as well as all parties involved the the lawsuit Ann Brown of the Office of Desegregation Monitoring has kept Judge Webber Wright abreast of the progress and all looks positive. Holbert noted one concern he has addressed with Mac Bernd, LRSD Superintendent - that if and when the US Department of Education calls the District offices seeking clarification on a particular passage in the grant application, an unimpressed, uninformed representative answers the call, the entire project could go down the drain. Holbert has encouraged Bernd to make certain that any such call is channeled to an advocate of the project - someone who shows enthusiasm and has a working knowledge of the project Holbert reiterated that a real champion for the school must be found within the District He said it is as though the District invited the AEC Leadership and AAHS to participate in...thfilgame, to plan to include a school with the planned museum. Then, when the AEC' s friend within the District (Reville) was unfortunately killed, the District began to change it's tune - acting as though the AEC was pushing the concept~ forgetting that it was the District who had reached out to the AEC and AAHS.  IV. Formation of LRSD Task Force Richard N. Holbert Holbert informed the AEC that he had sent out a letter to Bernd and the LRSD Board informing them that a Task Force is being formed to focus on the common issues relative to the creation of the Aerospace Magnet high school. The Task Force will be comprised of members of the following: V. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Office of Desegregation Mouitor Litigants to the Pulaski County Desegregation Case Representatives of the City of Little Rock, State of Arkansas, and LR Airport Commission Arkansas Aviation Historical Society Museum Committee Little Rock School District Superintendent Fundraising Report Ed Penick, Sr. Chairman  Capital Campaign Committee Penick noted that funds raised to date total $5,443,756.00 against the $6.5 million needed. However, he reminded the Board, that money must be raised that the April 13, 1993 in order to receive $500,000 challenge grant from the Mabee Foundation. Although that deadline may be extended, he noted that this leaves little time to complete the fundraising. He urged the  12 / 28 / 92 16:08 '5'501 324 2032 LR School Dist  ODM ~ 007 / 009 AEC members to sign up for the Capital Campaign committee to raise the funds, or to forward names of foundations not yet solicited. He asked that any such suggestions be forwarded quickly as many foundations meet on a quarterly basis, and we need to get a request in before the first quarter of 1993 passes. Penick said he favors the solicitation of major gifts rather than the timeconsuming task of randomly seeking $1,000 gifts- although if some such requests are in the works, don't tum them down! Penick reported that the Kresge Foundation had declined the AEC request, but added that Catherine plans to meet in Washington DC with contacts for foundations applicable to the AEC project. He further suggested that many local requests for major gifts remain at a \"no response\" stage. He said those contacts will be approached again soon. VI. Architecture Marion Burton Program Building Design Chairman - Architecture Committee Mr. Furton reported that the Architecture Committee had already had a number of meetings and discussions incorporating ideas into the ultimate design. Thankfully, he noted, now.that the LRSD has decided on a high school facility, the roadblock has been opened and the architects can focus on an appropriate design. Mr. Nathaniel Curtis of Nathaniel Curtis, Riddick and Heiple reported that a December 10th meeting on architecture resulted in d.\"awings that will allow for very reasonable cost estimates. Mr. Riddick expressed, however, a strong need to . receive input from LRSD on building-classroom use so as to detail the design plans. \"Right now,\".hCsSaid~'-our.knowl.ajge.,af. what n~_t9.be there consists_Q( ~tio_n fro~.!..._,__-- ___ _ schools and Gail Quinn, but every school's architecture needs spccializea input, and we need an  opportunity to meet with school district people on detail and design - not just on philosophy.\" He noted that the museum portion of the design has received a wealth of input and very exciting plans are developing, however, the architects must have the plans for the school done, bids in and pricing by June of 1993 in order to make the 1994 deadline. Board Member Hamilton said even though the School Board suffers from lack of enthusiasm , the recent job descriptions handed out at the District should alleviate the some of that. These job descriptions related to concerns of District staff, and Hamilton said he now believes the AEC will see improved results due to these definitions. Dennis Glasgow, Supervisor of Sciences at the district offered this explanation\nthat a lack of enthusiasm on the part of LRSD personnel may be due to lack of knowledge and involvement, saying that the information regarding AEC has not filtered down past the superintendent. He noted that he, too, attended the December 10 architecture meeting and retu.-ned to his staff with ideas on what needs are, and what courses could be offered in specific technology and arts\ni.e. if no competitive sports will be offered at the school, an alternative physical education program can be devised. Glasgow reported that Doug Eaton, the main contact inside the District for the architects, is most anxious to become involved in building design. He stated now that the high school bas been identified as the focus project, the LRSD staff will increase their production and input. Holbert noted that in the past the AEC Leadership bad offered to meet with various school district personnel to bring them up to speed and instill enthusiasm, however those offers were rebuffed. He said that maybe now is the time to try again, particularly since Bernd told Holbert after the November 24th Board meeting that he (Bernd) now felt as though he had his \"marching orders\" from the Board members. Riddick followed this thought by offering to Glasgow and Hamilton to host meetings for LRSD staff to discuss ideas, review presentations, and to notify the LRSD in general of meetings open for their attendance. Holbert underscored this idea of amplified input by saying the full AEC Leadership and appropriate LRSD parties will be given notice regarding Col. Walter Boyne's meeting on December 18, 1992 with the architects on exhibit structure and design (see irem X on Page 4 ). Further, he told Hamilton and Glasgow, when the LRSD holds meetings on other topics relating to the AEC project, i.e. curriculum discussions, the AEC would gladly send a representative so as to arrive at decision via a collaborative process. Mr. Curtis advised the AEC that recent conversations had been conducted with Dr. Bobby Roberts of the Central Arkansas Library System regarding the library construction. Glasgow noted that the library and its capabilities were of particular interest as the proposed curriculum called for a number of classes to meet in the library. Riddick reported that particularly with possible millage elections for the library system in the near future, a very real possibility existed that the city could operate the library, paying for it's costs. He warned that there would be considerable obstacles to cross before this occurred, but that it was doable. Marion Burton echoed that belief, adding that as the AEC library would serve three aspects - school library, public library and an archival library - the entire facility could be a great asset to the library system. Additionally for the library, Holbert reported plans are being laid to acquire artifacts and archives from Bell Aircraft, an exciting supplement to the already impressive collection being VIL Public Relations Effort Marion Burton Marion Bunon noted a vast blank exists under the Public Relations Committee on the Organization Chan for Committee Assignments. He urged anyone interested to volunteer for this imponant aspect of the campaign. He explained that this committee must bring professional educators (LRSD) and the general public up to speed on the Aerospace. school and museum. He offered that should anyone know of someone to chair this committee, to forward the name quickly as this committee's work will be imperative. vm. F. Taylor Brown, Chairman Procurement/Exhibit Design Museum of Aviation History Taylor Brown announced that he had volunteered to chair the committee to review the IMAX proposal and exhibit acquisitions. He said that Col. Walter Boyne and his vast knowledge of the Smithsonian exhibits and Admiral William Small's Naval museum knowledge would allow for great input, but Taylor also desires other contacts to be identified as sources for procurement. He further asked for volunteers and names of people locally who aren't afraid to get their hands dirty to work with him on this assignment Reg~g the!MAX~ Br~~-\naidth--\ni itsh~uldbe -a major pan of the Ac~space ficllliy'asTt'-\"---\u0026gt; ~,-----will be a big attraction, and the charge for viewing of the IMAX presentation will provide operating funds. He announced that a letter of intent will soon be signed with the IMAX manufacturers to lock in 1992 costs, yet it will not prohibit the AEC to back out of the deal should something go wrong. IX. Committee Structures Richard N. Holbert Holbert closed by noting that there are a lot of blanks on the Committee Assignment chart, and that tremendous work must be done between now and June. He urged everyone to identify an area in which they could assist and notify either the committee chairman or him, and then - roll up their sleeves. X. Mark Your Calendar5 The Architecture Committee meeting with Col. Walter Boyne on Exhibit Design is open to all interested parties. It is scheduled for Friday, December 18th at 1:30 p.m. in the offices of Nathaniel Curtis, Riddick and Heiple, 1600 First Commercial Bank Building at Capitol and Broadway Streets in Little Rock. Campaign Leadership Committee Assignments Aerospace Education Center r .., .., / National \"'I Honorary Chairmen Chairman Advisory Board 1 Herschel Friday William H. Bowen Dr. Eddie Anden\no~ Jack Stephens Col. Walter J. Boyn'e Win Rockefeller Lt. Gen. Benjamin 0. Davis '- Mayor Sharon Priest Gen. Alfred G. Hanr.en / \"'I Admiral William N. Small r State Advisory Board \"\" Vice Chairman Phillip S. Woodrutlf Richard N. Holben '-. Dr. Gerald P. Carr Hon. Nathan Gordon \\..\nRoben A. Gordon r '\\ 'I Dr. William R. Pogue Campaign Louis L. Ramsay Counsel \\ Ma~ -Gen. James A.:Piean Catherine Johnson i '- M. . \"Twig\" Sane 1eld \\.. ~ ,I.----'--- ., ' I ' I I I I ' / r \" 1 Capital .., r \"' r \" r .., r \"'I LRSD Little Rock Government Public Architecture Procurement Administration School Board ,campaign Funding Relations Chairman Chairman Chairman Chairman Chairman Chairman chairman Richard N. Holben Richard N. Holben Ed Penick, Sr. Catherine Johnson (interim) Marion Burton F. Taylor Brown Charles Harper Sen. Jerry Jewell Marion Burton RuthR..\"llllllel Rep. Irma Brown F.dRiddick Adm. Bill Small Carter Burwell Henry Broach Lucien Taillac Win Rockefeller Ge. Wm. Smith Rep. Irma Brown Caner Burwell Wayne Benneu Buddy Benafield Bobby Roberts Sid Wilson Herb Donovan Louis Ramsay Donna McLany Ruth Remmel Fr'ed Menz Sen. Jerry Jewell Frank White Jim Dailey Herschel Friday Bob Gordon Twilg J. Dan Baker sa1terfielc E.RayKemp i\n\\.. \\.. \\.. '-. '-. \\.. \\.. 1, I r \" Exhibit Design Chainnan F. Taylor Brown Bill Bracas Walter J. Boyne Bob Diffee Fred Menz Twig Satterfielc Dr. Joe Calhoun \\.. .... \"' \" \"0\"0 \"' ' \"\" a, ~ \"0 ' .\"0. \", \"\" r \"' \"Cl' :,- 0 .0.. . .0. . \"r't 0 0 \"' I] 0 0 \"'-' 0 0 \"' DEC-30-92 WED 11:58 US Disl Cl Lillie Rock FAX NO. 5013246096 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, VS, LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT KO. 1, ET AL., MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL,, MRS, KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL,, 0 R.D E_R P. 02 PLAINTIFF, DEFKNDA~\"I'S , INTERVENORS , INTERVENORS. Following telephone notice to counsel, a heartng is hereby scheduled for 9:30 a.m. on Monday, January 25, 1993, One issue to be addressed at the hearing is the Little Rock School District's ,----aerospace magn~ t~ppl ication. This Court's Order of May 1, 1992 rejected an earlier proposal to modify the settlement plan to eliminate language concerning the possible construction of a new junior high in the district, The Court, it that order, directed that the \"parties conduct a careful review of j1.mior high capacity and its immediate and long term impact on programmatic needs and/or intradistrict and M-to-M needs,\" Because of its interrelatedness to the aerospace magnet application, the second issue to be addressed at the hearing is the results of the study conducted pursuant to that Order. The parties are directed to provide the Court and the Federal ~ Honi tor with copies of the propos~appl ica.tion and the results of the junior high school study, together with copies of other DEC-30-92 WED 11:59 US Dist Ct Little Rock FAX NO. 5013246096 P. 03 proposed exhibits for the hearing and any briefs they feel are necessary, on or before 12:00 noon on Friday, January 15, 1993. It is so ordered this ____ _ day of December, 1992, United States District Judg= From : QUALITY CON ECTiml =ERVICES PHOl!E No. : 310 598 6773 FAX# Gail Quinn Quality Connection Services 5171 Lampson Ave. Los Alrunitos, CA 90720 Phone \u0026amp; FAX (310) 598-6773 Signed: ... ~ Jan.22 1993 6:25AM P0l From : QUALITY CONNECTIOl'-1 SERVICES PHOl'-IE No. 310 598 6773 Jan.22 1993 6:26AM P02 I. Background Information A. Greater Metropolitan Little Rock Gre.ater Little Rock')\nfuur 1.,\nounty Metropolitan Statistical area (MSA) is the center of the second fastest growing rei\niun ln the United States. Today with a metropolitan area spanning a seventy-mile radius, Greater Little Rock MSA is home to over 513,000 people. Jn the last quarter century, the Greater Little Rock MSA has almost doubled its population - approaching 1,200,000. North Little Rock, lhe third largest community with a population of 62,000, nnd Little Rock are separated by the Arkansas River in Pulaski County. Twenty-seven percent of the MSA 's population is under 18 years of age. Forty-four percent of the population is within the 18-44 ag~ range. According to the 1990 Census, the population was cent black, percent white. Little Rock's central location places it within 550 miles of forty percent of the United States buying JX)Wer and population. The $1.3 billion dollar Arkansas Navigation System, one of the nation's largest water development projects, is a 445 mile waterway providing year-round access to ports on the Arkansas River from the Mississippi River to Tulsa, Oklahoma. The 1,500 acre port with its industrial harbor Foreign Trade Zone - 14. and the United States Customs Port of Entry are indication of the increasing importance of Little Rock's linkage to ports worldwide. All are in close proximity to Adams Field, Little Rock's airport. The city's rich mixture of historic architecture and new development is attracting new residents. Little Rock is seeing growth and revitalization unparalleled in the city's history. Little Rock is on the move. Fueling this revitalization are the aerospace industries, the Arkansas Aviation Historical Society, the Governor's Aerospace Task Force, and institutions of higher education. Some of the world's most successful aerospace companies are located here: McDonnell Douglas, Rohr Inc., Arkansas Aerospace (a subsidiary of British Aerospace), Falcon Jet owned by French-based Avions Dassault Brequet Aviation, MidCoast, and Central Flying Service. Numerous private and corporate aircraft dealers such as Aero-Commander, Piper, Beechcraft, and Cessna have facilities at 01e Little Rock Regional Airport. Little Rock Airforce Base is home to the largest C-130 aircraft training facility in the world. A number of major educational institutions serve Little Rock's MSA, By far, the largest of U1csc is the University of Arkansas at Little Rock (UALR), enrolling more than 11,000 students in seventy-five undergraduate and forty-two graduate degree programs including Associate, Bachelor and Ma)\nters of Science Degrees in Engineering Technology. The Graduate Institute of Technology (GIT) housed in the new Engineering Technology Center offers course~ in mechanical, computer science, electrical and manufacturing engineering. Industries utilize GIT facilities for advanced research and graduate study. In 1991, the Arkansas Space Grant Consortium, under the leadership of GIT al UALR, received a four-year tl\"'d.ining grant From : QUALI TY CClt EC T IO~I '3ERl.) I CES PHONE No. 310 598 6773 Jan. 22 1993 6 :32AM PHJ from the NASA National Space Grant College and Fellowship program. The primary purpose of the progrnm is to educate and familiaru.e faculty and undergraduate and graduate srudent.s with aero~pacc fundamentals and NASA's research programs and opportunities. A secotldary objective is to motivate K-12 students to excel in math and science courses necessary for entrance into aerospace prognum\nat the universities and high tech positions in industry. Henderson University, in coordination with Ceut.rn.l Flying Service, conducts one of the few aviation degree programs in the nation. The University's Department of Aviation provides four-year programs in Airway Science.Management, Airway Computer Science, I\u0026gt;rofessiona1 Pilot, and Aircraft Systems Management The Arkansas Aviation Historical Society serves the entire state as the focal for the involvement of Arkansas' aerospace industries in community affairs, education, and economic development. In 1989, the Society, executives of aerospace companies, the Little Rock School District, and UALR came together to form the Aerospace Education Center (',ampaign Leadership and plan an Aerospace Education Center. As the architect's drawing illustrates, the Center combines a museum of aviation history with an Aerospace Technology Magnet High School on a 19.8 acre tract at the Little Rock Regional Airport adjacent to the main terminal, Falcon Jet. and Arkansas Aerospace. The facility will cover 200,000 square feet, including common areas used by both the museum and high school such as the library, cafeteria, and the auditorium. Part of the upper level of the museum will function as an educational resource for adult programs, and outreach for schools, state and nationwide through a satellite television uplink provided by the Arkansas Electric Cooperatives. The most comprehensive and largest technical and historical aviation and aerospace library collection outside of the Smithsonian's National Air and Space Museum was acquired for the Arkansas Museum of Aviation History. Virtually every civil and military aircraft, rotocraft, and spaceship designed and constructed throughout the world is represented in the collection by teclmical specifications, photographs, and historical descriptive information. There are well over 5,000 books, 50,000 journals, 200,000 photographs and transparencies, hundreds ofrare collectable items signed by famous pilots and aviation personalities, original paintings, scale aircraft models, and unique aircraft parts. The Society has raised over 5.4 million dollars in gifts and pledges for construction of the aviation history museum. 111e Little Rock School District has budgeted six million dollars for the construction of the Aerospace Technology Magnet High School from funds approved by voters at a property tax election in 1990. The Aerospace Education Center Campaign Leadership believes that Greater 1.ittle Rock's future rests on the vit.tlity of its public education system. At all levels of the public education system, educators and industry must develop programs which give students the k-nowledgc and skills that enable them to reach their full potential. While the Center will prepare students for aerospace careers, it will also focus the Central Arkansas community on commitment to excellence in e.ducation. 2 From: QUALITY CONNECTIOH SERVICES PHOHE No. 310 598 6773 Jar, . 22 1993 6: 31AM P0'3 @ ~15/185 @\n.la114 I @0/Y\\if @ ?--? B. School Districts in Pulaski County There are three school districts in Pulaski County - Little Rock, Pulaski County and North P ,, Little Rock- all of which are o~ti11g court-ordered desegregation plans. Because stttdent.s from these districts will be allowed to partlcipate in U1e Aerospace Technology Magnet Program, each of these districts will be describe\u0026lt;l below. The map on the opposite page shows the three school clistrict.11. l. I .ittle Rock School District The Little Rock School District, which wm opetate the lnterdistrict Aerospace Tech,1olosy Program, encompasses an area in excess of 100 square miles and is the largest. school district in the state in termA. of enrollment. Enrollment in the s~ools has increased frorfP2.5,856 pupils in October 1990 t~6.212 pupils in October of 1992. rhis increase has occurred at the junior and senior high levels and with the black student enrollment. The percent of black student population exceeds the District 64% average in grades 5 - 9. The highest percent black student enrollment is 69% in grade 8. Of the District's 50 schools, 36 enroll pre-kindergarten or kindergarten through grade 6 students, eight enroll grades 7 through 9 students, and five enroll grade 10 through 12 students.* Educational program/ school choices include Incentive Schools, intcrdistrict magnet schools for students in grades K-12, and elementary area schools. Chart A outlines the number and type of school programs. The text below Chart A defines each type of school and the rationale for selecting certain schools in this project Chart A - The Oraanlzatlonal Plan for Little Rock School Type School and/or Elementary, Junior High, High Sc:hool, Edusa1tfQ0 Pr~gram gr.ades@~~K\n~ K-6 SHiHjH 7 ~-9 . g[l:!~H lOlZ a) Area Schools 5 2 b) Incentive SchOols 7 NIA N/A c) lnterdistrict Magnet Schools @6 3 3 d) lnterdlstrlct Nonmagnet Schools 1 NIA N/A Total 36 8 5 a) Area Schools - Elementary schools which have a defined attendance zone arc called Area Schools. Dach Area School feeds into a panicular junior high and senior high school. The instructional program focuses on language arts, mathematics, science, and ~!~JiU~~iri~~~so~l~i!t We1[h1!}[!Jflml1 nnmr nf mnn mm ~n~nnl~ ~m \"'The unaccounted for school is the Metropolitan Vo-Tech Centec @s 3 M\"' ~,\nt l }r ,) I From : QUAL! TY COi 1NECTI mi SERIJ ICES PHCll'-1E No. 310 5'38 67-:'3 Jan. 22 1993 6 :30AM P08 b) In~ntiye Schools - Incentive Schools are Pre-K-Gmde 6 elementary schools locate.d ~thin the imme\u0026lt;Uate downtown area. The pcrccnl Black student enrollment for Jncentiw Schools ranges from 69% to 97%. These schools re\u0026lt;:eivc a\u0026lt;l\u0026lt;litional financial resources to provide te.acher-student ratio 1 :20, adililional instructional aides, permanent substitute teachers, and extended day-week-year learning oppurlunilies. An individual ICM1ing plan is developed for each student based on disU-ict K-6 core curriculum. Computetassisted instruction, a student homework hotline, a parenting skills center, and a program for tour-year olds are additional features that distinguish incentive from area elementary schools. c) Interdisajct MMoet Schools - As Chart A illustrates, interdistrict magnet schools have been established at all three school levels - elementary, junior high, and senior high. Although operated by the Little Rock School District, students from North Little Rock School District and Pulaski County Special Sch9Al District (PCSSJ)are eligible for enrollment in accordance with the desegregation pJ_a.W,f,A.11 interdistrict magnet schools are raciall~ balanced within the acceptable range o/635-~9 percent black to 41-45 percent white. )As Chart A illustrates, there are twelve interdistrict magnet schools. These schools provide, in addition to the regular core program, coursework based on a special curricular theme. The desegregation section found on page 8 further describes the purpose and thematic focus for these schools. d) Interdistrict Nonma~net Schools - This is an elementary school open to students who live in the attendance zone for Romine and PCSSD students who are eligible for a majority to minority (M to M) transfer. The school offers a special emphasis on computer science and the basic skills. 2. Pulaski County Spedal School District (PCSSD) PCSSD is comprised of24 elementary schools:7 junior high schools, and 6 high schools. In October 1992, these schools reported a total enrollment of 21,633 pupils and a racial composition of 28% black and 72% white which exceeds the court approved 60-40 range of either race. Three of the district's 24 elementary schools were established by the court order to aid desegregation. PCSSD recruits LRSD black students tor its magnet schools and promotes other voluntary majority to minority interdistrict transfers. Enrollment data indicates a one percent black increase each year since October 1990. '\u0026gt;f:' I 3. North Little Rock School District (NLRSD) In contrast to the Little Rock and Pulaski County School Districts, North Little Rock's studt!nt enrollment is composed of 8,545 pupils in If elementary schools and DJ secondary scho~ls. The percent black figures indicate a five percent increase over the past five years and a 48% black, 52% white ratio in October 1992. The NLRSD black/white ratio is approaching the i goal of 50% black / white. From QUALi TY CC r- -::CT I IJH SERVICES PHIJHE Ho. 310 598 6773 C . Interdistrict Aerospace Technology Magnet. Program Jan.22 1993 6:30AM P07 (. The project will establish o. new grade 7 through grade 12 interdistrict magnet program in four , schools of the LRSD. Three schools are junior high schools which exceed the 64 percent districtv..ide average for black students. These schools will begin program implementation in the first project year. The otJ1er school is the new Aerospace Magnet High School which will open the second project year. Because the Federal Magnet Schools Assistance Program funds a two-year project period, this magnet will operate in grades 7 through 9 of the three junior high schools both project years and in grade 10 of the new Aerospace Magnet High School the second project year. In subsequent non-federal project years, the LRSD will operate the program in grades 7 -10 as well as add the grade 11 portion of the program in 1995-96, and the grade 12 portion of the program in 1996-97. Full program implementation will therefore be achieved in 1996-97. In 1996-97 the Aerospace Magnet High School grade 10 - 12 enrollment will be at capacity which is 1321 pupils. The magnet enrollment will be composed of 1) white students recn1ited from North Little Rock School District, Pulaski County Special School District, and private schools in Pulaski County, 2) black students enrolled in the LRSD aerospace magnet junior high schools 3) white students enrolled in the aerospace magnet junior high schools\nand a limited number of white students from other LRSD junior high schools provided the school's racial balance is betweea'6o percent and 40 percent of either race and the withdrawal of these students does not negatively effect the range of balance. 5 !) From QUALITY CONNECTION 3ERIJICES PHONE No. 310 598 6773 Jan.22 1993 6:29AM P06 The breakdown in enrollment is illustrated below. Recruitr.11 prlnnuil) from NLRSD nnd PCSSD  520 e\u0026lt;ade 7-9 white StlldCOL\u0026lt;\n1NC0~1ING R1ir.r11lted prinu1rily from Within LRSl.l  ?A I grade 7-9 bl11ck ~t11dMt1\nin Cloverdale, Forc~t H\\:i.11hts, Southw\n,f\u0026lt;t  20 gl'!lde 7-9 LRSD white Rh1dent11 Suhtotxl: ................ ........... ............ .. .................. .............. .......... .................... ..... 1321 maiinet sn1dents CONTINUING to grade JO  264 hleck sn1dent11  176 white 1,ti1dent1\nSubtotal: ........................................ , .... ....................... .................... .................... 440 mttgnlf 1\u0026lt;tndent1. Total for Aerosp1t\u0026lt;(, M11gnct in 1994-9:-: , ........................................... 176] students D . lnterdistrict Measures and Intradistrict. Desegregation The only ima~ that some people have of Little Rock is based on Governor Orval Faubus' defiance in 1951 of a federal mandate to desegregate Central High School. In Cooper v. Aaron the Supreme Court stated that \"public opposition in the Little Rock School District to desegregation of the races, no matter how deeply entrenched, could not be allowed to interfere with the full realiwtion of the constitutional rights of black citizens.\" In 1982, twenty-four years after LRSD had been ordered to desegregate, the Little Rock School District bought suit against the other two school districts in Pulasl\u0026lt;l County (NLRSJ) and PCSSD) claiming that these districts had committed intcrdistr.ict constitutional violations. The suit sought consolidation of the three districts. The courtc\nheld that int.crdistrict constitutional violations had occurred and must be remedied, but refused to order consolidation. Eventually, the parties, including the other two school districts in Pulaski ('.ounty and the State of Arkansas, agreed to settle the case. TI1ey submitted to the District Court four comprehensive agreements covering both interdistrict desegregation measures - agreements referred to by the parties as the \"settlement plans.\" TI1ey also submitted a separate, but related document in which the State of Arkansas is to provide funding for various aspects of the desegregation remedy. 6 From QUALi TY CONNECT I ON SERV ICES PHONE No. 310 5'38 6773 Jan. 22 1993 6 :28AM P05 ,, ' ' 1. Tht= LRSD DescJ?\nre~ntion Settlement) Plain (1989) The LRSD intradistrict plan prom for the Jnccnlive Schools dcscrlbcd below Chait A on page . Specifically, it designated the schools will receive compensatory-education programs and two times the level of funding for six years. The plan includes \u0026lt;ldailed and volumous de.scription of the kinds of programs that would take place at the Jncent1ve Schook A salient feature of these schools is a maximum effective st:udent-tc.achcr ratio of twenty to one. ~., Twenty-two of th~ twenty-three remaining elementary schools \\'{,ere projec to have student ratios of between 50 and 62 percent black. The other elementary schoo1, Romine, , oul be an interdistrict school. Any white student ~ elect to attend an Incentive School, and a black student living in an Incentive School attendance area cotM pt to attend one of the other 22 elementary schools. 2. lntcrdistrict Dtisegregation Plan The lnterdistrict Desegregation Plan is designed to achieve racial balance in the schools and districts of Little Rock, North Little Rock, and Pulaski County Special School District through voluntary movement primarily to magnet programs. To accomplish this goal LRSD currently operates twelve interdistrict magnet programs: six at the elementary level, three at the junior high level, and three at the high school level. Interdistrict schools are \"to obtain a ratio of between 60 percen nd 40 percent of either race with the ideal goal of these schools to be 50 percent black/ w 1tl~e Plan does not limit the number of interdistrict magnets that may be created. The Aero!\u0026gt;-pacc Technology Magnet will advance the voluntary desegregation efforts of the Settlement Plans. The district commits that it will \"maintain the facilities on a racially integrated basis into perpetuity.\" (Refer to 2/4/91 Amendment in Appendix.) Magnets enhance U1e district's core curriculum. The specially designed curricula is the \"hook\" for attracting students across district lines. Individual interdistrict magnet school brochures provide a program description. Chart B summarizes the twelve interdistrict magnets in the LRSD by theme and number of schools participating at each school level, 7 Fram QUAL I TY CONNECT I ml '.3EP.V I CES PHi'lE No. 310 598 6773 Jan. 22 1993 6 :28AM P04 Chart B - LRSD lnterdlstrlct Magnet Programs Theme School Level\nin(I ff of Schools ___ _.e.. .1. ..._em=~otary Junior l:f l.gb High Schoof 1 . Early Education 2. Basic Skills 3. Basic Skills/ Math-Science 4. Arts 6. Arts and Sclanr.Rs 6. Madlr.al Health 7. International Stl1dies 8, eu~inoss Communications .S.ubtotal Total Maanets - 12 1 1 2 , 1 1 _ ____::,6c..__ _____ 3_ ____3  This Is a Prc-K ma9ne1 housed In an lncontlvo School. k1'\\ 'f-' Tht' n~of LRSD Interdistrict Programs have been in operation since the 1986-87 school year. In 1986-87, magnet enrollment was 3,647 pupils and has increased to 8,981 pupils in 1992-93. Nine i.nterdistrict magnet programs have obtained a ratio of between 60 percent and 40 percent of either race. Of the three schools whose racial balance lies outside of the approved court range, two began implementation in August 1992 and the third is an Early ~hildhood Magnet provided in an Incentive School, The lnterdistrict Desegregation Plan is more than just magnets. It also allows for majority to minority transfers between districts. Specifically, a student may transfer from a district and school where his/her race is in the majority to a district and school where his/her race is in the minority. This means that black students in the LRSD may transfer to schools1ir~oith Little Rock and the Pulaski County Special School Districts, and white students in NLRSD and PCSSD may transfer to a Little Rock School District school. The Little Rock School District Desegregation Plan, the Pulaski County Special School District Desegregation Plan, the North Little Rock School District Desegregation Plan, and the Interdistrict Desegregation Plan hold excellent promise for achieving unitary school systems in these three districts. 3. Monitoring of the Desegregat.ion Plans The Circuit Court mandated the creation of the Office of Descgregati011 Monitoring staffed by a Monitor to supervise compliance with the desegregation orders of the LRSD, PCSSD and NLRSD. 8 From : QUALi TY COt~NECT ICIH '.::,ERU I CES PHrnE Ho. 310 59:3 6773 Jan. 22 1993 6:27AM F\"03 II. Needs Assessment The Little Rock School District, in conjunction with North Little Rock School District and Pulaski County S~ial School District, is implementing a court-ordered desegregation plan of which magnet programs and M-to-M transfers are voluntary options to integrate the three individual school districts. Although Little Rock has achieved mcial balance through the creation of interdistrict magnet programs in a number of its racially isolated schools, there are still schools in LRSD that are not racially balanced. According to the October 1992 LRSD Enrollment Summary, there are five junior high schools - Cloverdale, Porcst Heights, Henderson, Mabelvale, and Southwest that meet this criteria. Accordingly pursuant to this proposal, Cloverdale, Forest Heights, and Southwest will be designated as int.erdistrict magnet programs with the goal of attracting white students from NLRSD, PCSSD, and Pulaski County private schools. The \"hook\" to attain this project's desegregation goals and objectives is the Aerospace Technology curriculum. Since 1900, the United States has become wealthy and powerful by exploiting the rapid changes taking place in technology, world trade, and the intcmational political order. New developments in technology, international competition, demography, and other factors have altered the nation's economic and social landscape. There wlll be few jobs for those who lack adequate science / technical knowledge and who cannot read, follow directions, or use mathematics. Higher skill requirements of the economy require that schools must improve the preparation of the nation's youth in order to economically compete in the global marketplace. This can only be accomplished if the schools have excellence in technology education, communications, problem-solving, and scientific and technological literacy. LRSD believes it is absolutely necessary to help students understand their technological future if they are to function as responsible, productive members of a competitive society. LRSD also believes this endeavor must be a cooperative and concentrative effort with this area's prime employers, the aerospace / aviation industry, the State Department of Education, the Universities of Arkansas, Henderson State University, and Southern Arkansas University - Tech. TI1e aerospace technology education magnet has long range potential for ass1stmg in desegregation in the Little Rock School District. First, it involves the potential for further voluntary movement of non-district white students to prevent the increasing isolation of Cloverdale, Porest Heights, and Southwest which are predominantly black junior high schools. Second, this project has carefully planned for a new racially balanced high school to prevent racial isolation in the existing high schools. Between October, 1987 and October, 1992, the black enrollment increased by 9%, from 51 % black to ro% black. This increase is expected to continue at the senior high level because the junior high schools in October, 1992 were 67% black. Finally, this district is confident that the aerospace magnet will attract and retain a new enrollment of grade 7-10 white students while maintaining the current enrollment 9 From : .QUALITY CON ECTIOl'-1 3ERVICES PHOHE Ho. 310 5'38 6773 Jan. 22 1993 6 :38HM P01 These are the reasons: l . \"Aerospace Technology\" is a statewide public education and economic development effort in accordance with the Arkansas Aerospace Task Force and its creation of the Arkansas Aviation and Aerospace Commission through passage of State Senate Bill 35. Their mission is to provide \"the knowledge and skills that will allow students to reach their full economic potential.\" 2. The public and private contributions of funds for up to 6.5 million dollars to construct the aviation history museum which will implement curricular activities during and after magnet school hours in coordination with the magnet's specialized curriculum. 3. A successful millage campaign approved by voters for six million dollars to construct the Aerospace Magnet High School. 4. The Aerospace employment need for a skilled workforce is well known in Arkansas. Specially-trained employees are required to meet new contracts for aircraft and the employment vacancies listed by the Little Rock Airport Commission. Technology education is addressed in conjunction with the study of applied mathematics and physical science. More science and mathematics have been built into the existing curriculum. The academic and technology-integrated curriculum begins in grade seven to better prepare the minority student for future employment, college, and success in finding his/her niche in a technological society. Because of the strong aerospace industry and university linkage, and the hands-on problem solving approach used to learn the curricula, the district foresees the inclusion of some Little Rock elementary schools in the near future. Need 1: '.111e Reduction and Prevention of Minority GI'OUJ) Isolation There is a need to establish a new interdistrict magnet program at the junior high level to racially balance Cloverdale, Forest Heights, and Southwest. An end-of-project enrollment of 1761 will enable each of the aerospace magnet schools and total magnet enrollment to reflect a ratio of between 60 percent and 40 percent of either race. ~ The goal reflected by the % black figure in Table 1 is to reduce racial isolation by increasing the number of white pupils in three Little Rock junior high schools. This will bring the junior high schools % black student enrollment in line with the Interdistrict Desegregation Plan goal of 50% black/ white for interdistrict schools. 10 From : QUALITY CONNECT IIJN SERlJ ICES TABLE 1 Receiving Schools Cloverdale JH Forest Heights JH Southwest JH PHONE t--lo. 310 598 6773 Reduce Racial Isolation October 1, 1992 % Black 73.7 70.4 75.3 Jan.22 1993 6 : 49AM P02 End of Project % Bleck 50.0*) ~ 01o 50.0* 50.0*  Maximum variation Is+ or - 10% of either race The goal reflected by the percent black figure in Table 2 is to prevent black group isolation in the new high school. This will be accomplished through voluntary movement of grade nine pupils from the throe aerospace magnet junior high schools. The projected gmde nine enrollment will include M-to-M transfers from NLRSD, PCSSD, and private schools in Pulaski County. In addition, LRSD pupils will be allowed to participate provided such movement does not negatively impact the racial balance of the sending junior high schools. This will racially balance the new high school in accordance with the Interclistrict Desegregation Plan. TABLE 2 Receiving School New High School Reduce Racial Isolation October 1, 1992 0/o Black 80.0 (a) End of Project % Black q'/ ~010 50.0 '--J (a) This is based on October 1, 1988 and 1989 % black figures for Dunbar which is located in the attendance area of the new high school. Program Goal 1: To reduce Q! pr~t racial isolation in the Little Rock School District Objective 1.a: Magnet School Cloverdale JH Forest Heights JH Southwest JH By September, 1993, the district will reduce racial isolation through recruitment of white students from out-of-district to aerospace magnet programs. The aerospace magnet program will be balanced when the percent black / white ratio is 50% or between 60% and 40% of either race. Reduce % Minority Before 73.7 70.4 75.3 % Minority After 50.0 ) fpt/fo 50.0 50.0 11 From : QUALITY CONNECT IIJN '3ERlJ ICES Objective 1.b: Magnet School New High School PHONE No . 310 598 6773 Jan. 22 1993 6 :49AM P03 By September, 1994 the district will racially balance the new high school throush voluntary transfers from the grade 9 continuing magnet enrollment. The new high school will reflect a 50% black/ white ratio. Reduce 0/o Minority Before 80.0(a) % Minority After 50.o 7 lt0111 (a) October 1, 1900 and 1909 % black flgurc,s for Dunbar which Is located In the attendance area of the new high school. Need 2a.l: Strenethenine the Knowledee of Academic Content For the past two decades in America, the low level of academic achievement in our secondary school has spelled disaster for our youth and for our economy. The statistics are alarming: a. Ninety-three percent of 17-year olds do not have the capacity to apply mathematical operations in a variety of problem-solving settings. An increasing number of the nation's studentc\nare ill-prepared for college courses or jobs that require technical skills. (National Assessment of Educational Progress 1988, p. #2) b. For generations traditional prejudices have encouraged mathematics achievement in only a portion of the student population - middle class white males. Females and minoritie~with the exception of Asian-American~ were perceived as both \"less capable\" of leaming mathematics, and \"needing\" it less. (Mathematics Education - Wellspring of U.S. Industrial Strength, December 1988.) c. In both participation and achievement, American students in science and mathematics are lagging behind previous years and other countries. (Science and Engineering Indicators, National Science Board, 1990.) d. Only about twenty percent of 10th graders believe that biology, chemistry, physics, or geometry are needed to qualify for their first choice occupation. Only twenty-eight percent believe they need algebra. (Longitudinal Survey of American Youth, 1988.) e. \"Schools must improve their science instruction to allow the nation to base its economy on high technology. New programs must be developed and strategies reexamined to achieve the sharp focus required.\" (The Triangle Coalition for Science and Technology Education, 1988.) According to the results of the National Science Foundation's nationwide study, students are not receiving enough hands-on laboratory experience. 12 From : QUALITY CO~lNECT I Ot--l SERVICES PHONE No. 310 598 6773 Jan.22 1993 6:50AM P04 f. The 1.25 gra_dclcvcl equivalent decline in the academic achievement of high school seniors lowered the nation's productivity by $86 billion in 1987 and will lower it by more than $200 billion annually by the year 2010 (Journal of Curriculum Studies, 1989). Studies demonstrate that competence in reading, writing, mathematics, science, and problem solving are strongly related to productivity in almost all jobs, At the historic \"education summit,\" September 1989, Ptaeeiide.!t A-ueh and the nation's governors agreed to six national performance goals in education to be achieved by the year 2000. These two important goals were among those adopted: BY THE YEAR 2000: U.S. students will he first in the world in science and mathematics achievement. The poor standing of U.S. students on international assessments of mathematics and science achievement is no accident, says a new ASCD task force report* It results from systemic problems in the quality of curriculum and instruction in the United States, the unequal opportunities afforded different students, and pervasive cultural beliefs that do little to support high mathematics and science achievement The ASCD task force report cites four major factors contributing to low U.S. student achievement in mathematics and science. These are: 1) Relatively few students take courses that include high-level content in mathematics and science. Fewer than half of students take a chemistry or algebra II course and fewer than one in five ever talce a course in physics, trigonometry. analysis / precalculus, or calculus. Moreover, the widespread tracking of students means many pupils - particularly minorities - are never required to learn high-level cont.enL 2) Mathematics and science curriculums, as well as the textbooks ftnd assessments linked to them, fail to reflect the \"frontiers of knowled~e\" about how children learn best. U.S. mathematics and science curriculums \"sacrifice depth for coverage, don't talce advantage of technologies ... fail to make connections among the disciplines, and generally ignore the real-life experiences and cognitive development of students.\" In general, students assume a passive role, with teacher talk, textbooks, and worksheets predominating. The National Center for Education Statistics study recently documented the percentage of 8th graders whose science teachers conducted scientific experiments. Science teachers in both Catholic and private schools surpassed public school science teachers on frequency\" On\nThis project was supported in part by a Digitizing Hidden Special Collections and Archives project grant from The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation and Council on Library and Information Resoources.\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n\n "},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1564","title":"Court filings concerning Little Rock School District integration and finance, and North Little Rock School District educational law","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":["United States. District Court (Arkansas: Eastern District)"],"dc_date":["1992-08"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System."],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","Little Rock School District","Education--Arkansas","School districts--Arkansas--North Little Rock","Office of Desegregation Monitoring (Little Rock, Ark.)","Education--Finance","Education--Evaluation","Educational law and legislation","Educational planning","School management and organization","Student assistance programs","School improvement programs"],"dcterms_title":["Court filings concerning Little Rock School District integration and finance, and North Little Rock School District educational law"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Butler Center for Arkansas Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://arstudies.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/bcmss0837/id/1564"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["Available for use in research, teaching, and private study. Any other use requires permission from the Butler Center."],"dcterms_medium":["legal documents"],"dcterms_extent":["275 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1394","title":"Report: ''Monitoring Report on the 1991-92 Little Rock School District Four-Year-Old Program,'' Office of Desegregation Monitoring, United States District Court, Little Rock, Ark.","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring (Little Rock, Ark.)"],"dc_date":["1992-07-31"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System."],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","Little Rock School District","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","Educational statistics","School improvement programs","School management and organization","Student assistance programs"],"dcterms_title":["Report: ''Monitoring Report on the 1991-92 Little Rock School District Four-Year-Old Program,'' Office of Desegregation Monitoring, United States District Court, Little Rock, Ark."],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Butler Center for Arkansas Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://arstudies.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/bcmss0837/id/1394"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["Available for use in research, teaching, and private study. Any other use requires permission from the Butler Center."],"dcterms_medium":["reports"],"dcterms_extent":["38 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1227","title":"Oral deposition of Jim Burgett","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":["Bushman Court Reporting"],"dc_date":["1992-07-25"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System."],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","Little Rock School District","Education--Arkansas","Education--Finance","Educational law and legislation","Court records","School board members","School management and organization"],"dcterms_title":["Oral deposition of Jim Burgett"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Butler Center for Arkansas Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://arstudies.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/bcmss0837/id/1227"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["documents (object genre)"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\nDeposition taken at Wright, Lindsey and Jennings, Little Rock, Arkansas\nLittle Rock School District, plaintiff vs. Pulaski County Special School District, defendant\nThis transcript was created using Optical Character Recognition and may contain some errors.\n Ll'I'lLE Ct {-1  vs. OCK SCHCOL D1S'!flC~, PltdntlffE LR-c-e~-66 * PULASKI CCtlNJ. SPECIAL SC COL DISTBICT 0. l, ct  * UNITED S'IATES DIS'IRICT COUF 1t * EAS1ER DISTPICT CF AFRANSAS D f ncantc WESTEF OIVlSlO MFS. LCP-ENE JCSHUI,, ct ~l. * nt tVEnorr\n* Y..A'IHHU E KNIGHT, t t tl. lnt:1:venorE, * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *  * * TUE OAAL DEPOSITlC' OF JlM BUFGETT APPEARANCES: Z..B. SAMUEL JONES, III, E .... c._., Wn t.t, Lincl ... ey 6 Jcnningc, 20CD Wcrthen Bank Buildjng, ~co west Ccpitol Avenue, L1ttl ~eek, AtkBnE\u0026amp;C 7~2Cl Z..ESSRS. JO NW. WALKER \u0026amp; NARI\u0026lt; DUFNf/l.'TE, Et\nE., 1723 Bt:0.dwc.y, Littl!' lxCick, Atk,,ntu: 7,\nc6 ALSO PFiESEN'I': rm. BOBBY LES'JER, Supu intt.nclc.r,t * * * * * * * BUSfW.AN CCUF.T FEPOf'IING, INC. 201 Etst Sixth Stieet Little Beck, Atkc.nr\u0026amp;\u0026amp; 7,~c2 ( ! 01\u0026gt; zn-~11s 'IHE C~AL DEPOSlTlCN CF JU. BUFGE'lT, , wj tnU, pru:tUCEC c:t the re~uiet cf the Int rvenort, t~kcn in the ~bcvc-Ltylca ,no nu~berca c~use on the ~!th a~y cf June, lS2, bcfort Jeff Bennett, CC, LS tl9, a Nct,ry Public in tnd fer White County, Arkt:nsu\n, t Wright, Lindsey \u0026amp; JEnn nst, aco Wottl'ien Btnk Bujl61n9, Litll~ Beck, AtkEnStE, rt !:20 p.fu. pur~u~nt tc the S'Il PULJ\\'I IC't'S IT IS S'IIPULATED AND AGREED by Hid bet EErl the p~rtic:t thtough their reEpectiv~ c~uns~l thtt the 6 pcsiticn cf JlM BUF.GETT mt.y be tiken Lt the tlnic ~nd pl E.Ce !er the purpu\ncE. of di~ccvc1y, pure ~nt to the Fea1r1l toles ~f Civil Pr~ccdurc, and thc:.t .11 forir.~lHiu with reg,ac to the t.iking of st.id depccition ire r,u.Eby \\v~ivcil including ptu:er.t,ticn, tt!t,ding, subscription by thE: witneu,, nctic~ of filing, tHing, C:lc.\nu.a tht ~ll objecticn st le rEl V6ncy, mct~,lelity, ,ne competency so of!tted ,t the trlCl ot thjr C~S(. the \\t.ilnccs heieinbEfc,re n,meci, being first cluly ci.uticnE:\u0026lt;l cr,d swotn, er eftirKed, to tell tte truth, tle wt~lc truth, ~na nothing but the truth, teEt1f1ed \u0026amp;s fellow: BUSIW:.AN COUR'I f.EPCF('J n:G, INC. 201 East Sixth Str~ct Little Fock, r~rk~r.~es 7ViC2 (!.01) ~72-~115  1 2 .., .:\u0026gt; 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 - 3 MR. JONES: I woula ~ake the some nototicn that I aid 1n Mr. Matthews' deposition. irn. WALKER: That'E fine . EXAMINAT::iCN BY MR. WALKER: Q. What i your n~rne, please? A. Jim Burgett. Q. Are you a member of the Board of Pulaski County? A. Yes, I am. Q. Mr. Bursett, ar you f~mjl1~r with the proposed budget cuts? A. Which ones? Q. Tht.t were c.ooptea on March 17? A. I recollect, list of those, yes, sir. Q. You're \u0026amp;lso familiEr with the reorgtnization plan that goes with it? A. Yee. Q. It has been suggested by einother Boc:.10 member that you m6y have been one of the persons to propose budget cuts and the reorganjzation, that you rooy have been one of the persons on the Board that arguea strongest for the budget cuts and the proposed reorgonization\nwould that be a fair statement? A. I dont know about any other Board members. Q. I see. A. If you want to ask me directly about tbet I ctin answer you. BUSH~!AN COURT REPORTING, INC. (501) 372-5115  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 4 Q. Did you hvve a rnejcr role in proposing the budget cuts? A. I don't know if I had a major role, but I did argue strongly for them, yes. Q. Do you know any Board member who in your presence a1guea rnor strongly than you for them? A. All I can say is that on different items there was st1ong feelings about one ~na not so strong feeljng~ on another. Fer example, I would say when it came to athletics and extre curricular activities I argued very strongly a91nst those, whereas I djdn't argue as strong against others. Q. I'm asking you now about the concept of budget cuts to begin with. Were you the pe1Son saying before the budget cuts were undertaken in March of 1S92, were you the person who argued for what you may call fiscal responsibility in the form of the budget cuts before the millage was submitted? A. Yeah, I think th~t would be a fajr Et~tement. Q. Now, what was jt that you were trying to accompliEh by the budget cuts? A. Whet WGE it I was trying tc accomplish? Q. What did you ~rgue that you would accomplish by reducing thE budget from one year to the next, what was it you were accomplishing? A. It was my impression from our business mGn\u0026amp;9er that we didn't have enough money to operate for the next school yEsr, and thst without r~ducing the budget and saving some money thet BUSHMAN COURT FEPOR'lING, INC. ( 501) 372-5115  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 li 16 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 we wouldn 1 t be able to operate. It's as simple as that. Q. I see. Dia he tell you th6t that would be amelioretEd at all in the event that the millage passed? A. He didn't put it that way. He said that, as far as I can recell, thGt just because we passed the millage didn't mean that we'd be out of the woodE entirely. That we had a greGt deal more work to do in the long run. Q. Did he tell you how far out of the woods you would come by the millage prssing? A. I don't recall right off-band how far. Q. Did he give you a written ststerncnt of how far you would come with the millage passing before you undertook to cut the budget? A. No, I don't believe we did that. I believe we looked ~t budget cuts before we oiscussea it. Q. Since the millage has pas~ed, do you know wh~t the irnp~ct the rnill~ge passing will have upon the projected buaget cuts? A. I can't say thtt in any detail, because I have been unQble to ettend the ltst two Boarc meeting. Q. Is there~ reoon you cculan't attend the l~st two meetings? A. Q. A. Q. Yes, sir, of cours the1e's been a re~son. What 1s the re~son? The f1rst reason w,s I had my sall bladder cut. So you were ill? BUSW:AN COURT REPORTING, INC. (5Cl) 372-5115  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 1E lS 20 21 22 22 25 6 A. Yes. Q. Whet w,s the second reason? A. The second I w~s out-of-state. Q. I didn't mean to offena you ana meke you upset. A. You didn 1 t. I would heve a reason. I've ettended evry other Board meeting since I wos elected. Q. I just wante.d to know what the re,son was. You voted on each one of these items one-by-one th,t wre recommended by Mr. Lester? A. Yes, WE did. Q. Diel you also make some. recommended buciget cuts of your own, did you mak some p1oposea cuts yourself? A. As part of the workshop thot we did over a year ego, I submitted a list of things, yes. Q. Did ,ny of those things that you suggested coree within thSs list cf 27? A. May I see that? (Witness viewing document.) Yes, I believe some of these were on my list. Q. A. Which one.s were on your list? I hate to say exactly which onN: were on my list without n,y list being here. Q. A. Q. A. Do you hEve your list? Do I h~V 0 list? YS. I'm sure jt's in my records ~thorn~. BUSfil:AN COURT REPORTING, INC. (501) 372.-51]5  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 - 7 Q. Did you ever make that a part of the aistrict's records? A. Yes, I did. It was a tot,l th0l we all submitted. So I know they bad a copy of it, because it was in a packet, I'm sure. Q. Did you recommend that the desegregc,tion office be reorganized? A. I didn't recommend that, sir. I believe thc.1t my recommendation that I suppo1.te:d was to reorgt.niz1: the central administration staff, and that WE employ a professional to do that and put that off on him to do. Q. Did you employ a professional to de that? A. Yes, we have employed a professional. And th~t's Mr. Lester. Q. Did you u:commend the reduction in the number of alpha pos1tions which is item lC before you? A. I believe I supported that, yes. Q. Did you recommend it? A. Recommend it, no, sir, I didn't. Q. Did you reconm.end B reduction in the number of coordinators? A. I dont believe that was one of mine, no. Q. Did you reccmffiend a reduction in all out of district tr~vel? A. Let roe cl~rify scn,ething here. Are wt tolking about c.S of the BoQrd meeting where we did these cuts, or ere you talking BUSHMAN COURT REPORTING, INC. (501) 372-::115  1 2 2 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 10 19 20 21 23 24 25 8 obout my or1ginal list? Q. I'm saying as of the time preceding Merch 17, 1992, in thet intense period when you all were trying to reorganize in order to decide to submit a mill\u0026amp;ge to the people. A. Q. A. Q. A. Q. I understond. Which one did you ask ~e about? Out of district travel. Yes, I supported that. Is that one of your recommendations? That's one that I supported, yes. Why would you recommend cutting out all out of distrjct trc::vel? A. Because I felt that out of district trevel was something that we could sEve money on. It wes not a necessary expnse. Q. Did you h~ve an idea of what the out of distr1ct travel was in the past used for? A. Q, for? A. Q. A. I think so. What is your understand1ng of what that travel wes used You mean for Board rr.embers? Thit says all out of district trovel. Most of the out of district trovel that I am awere of 1s done for professionol reascn6. Q. I understand. You wanted it all cut out. So what w~s the reason that you wanted out of 6istrict trevel for staff members cut out? BUSHr.AN CCURT REPORTING, INC. (501) 372-E.llE  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 H 15 16 17 ]6 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Q. That's the only reeson? A. I would rather have tht cut out then have the reeding program cut. Q. Let me ask you this. Dia you perceive thot the out of district travel w~s for the purpose of obteining further trajning for the steff development? A. I'm sure thel everyone who trevels toe professionzl meeting c,n gt.thet -- you come c.Wi.Y with something. Q. Do you knew whether the desegregation plan commits the district to st,ff development? A. I'm sure the desegregation plan does commit the district to staff development. Q. Befot e you voted upon this particular 1 tem, a 1d you esk Mr. Lester what effect this cutting out all out of district travel would have upon the desegregation plan? A. Mr. Welker, I don't believe I c:sktd Mr. Lester any spec1fic item that way. I believe that whet I did ask w~s th,t how would all these things go together. How could they be taken care of in relation to the desegregation plan. Q. Did you do that in a public meeting or in executive sessjon? A. I don't remember whether I've done it in a public meeting or not. I haven't discussed it in executive sersion with him. I have discussed it one-on-one in his office. BUSHMAN COUR'I REPORTING, INC. (501) 372-5115  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 1.S 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 n 10 Q. Wes e.ny other Board men,ber preEent when you a iscussec it with hlm in hlE office? Q. Now, have you reao the des gregation plan? A. Well, I've tried to get through the whole thing, yes, sir. I heve over the years. Q. Over the years? A. Yes. Q. H\u0026amp;ve you read the desegregetJon plan since it WES fine.lly approved by Judge Wright? A. Yes, I h~ve gotten through that. Q. Do you knew whot the district's ccmmitment is tc staff development in that plan? A. Specifically? Q. Yes. A. No, I cannot recoll that right off-hena. Q. Do you have a staff development officer here on your staff? A. Yes, we ao, A. Mr. Jim Herring, I believe. Q. Mr. Jim Herring has a staff of how rr.any people? A. Two or three, I woulo think. I don't know. Q. And how many staff members do you ell have in the district? A. How many stdf members do we have in the district? Q. Yes, sir. BUSHMAN COURT REPORTING, INC. (501) 372-~115  1 3 4 5 7 8 9 10 11 12 12 14 15 16 17 1E 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 A. Q. A. Q. We're telking about teachers and Yes. Whoever you call st~ff. Somewhere between 13 ana 1,500. 11 So Mr. Herring ana his two staff member ~re responsible for the staff development for a whole year for these 1,500 people? A. I guess he js, Q. Now, are they supposed to -- tell me what his office does? Just tell me what he does in steff dEvelcprnent to your knowlEdge? A. Well, to rr.y knowledge he has developed plans for cl,sses that ore held and are taught, thet teachers ana administrators cen take to upgrade their skills and be higher on the pay scale. we have varjous people who -- teachers and coordinators who teach those, administrators who teach those. Coordinates the well, I know I was involved with him this year on the Site-Based Sh~re Decision Making Commjttee amongst othe1 things. Q. Well, now, ao you find any incongruity in him conducting staff development for those purposes and his not de.veloping or heving staff development fer aesegregatj.on purposeE? MR. JONES: He never said he didn't have staff development for desegregation. Q. All right. Well, let me ask you this. You're sayJng th,t one of the reasons that he conducts sttff development is to afford people an opportunity to get pay raises by, cf course, BUSr~lAN COURT REPORTING, INC. ( 501) 372-5115  1 2 3 4 6 7 e 9 10 11 12 13 14. 15 16 17 16 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 A. Q. 12 That's: dght. Do you fine any congruity 1n trying to find ways to get ycur st\u0026amp;ff rnerebers highet up en the pay reiwe at a tirn when you're trying to cut cos:tE? A. No, I acn't. Q. I see. So you're trying to give these teachers s many raises as poEsible while you're trying to have budget cuts? A. No, sir. I didn't s\u0026amp;y tht. Is id tht people are trying to raise their skills profeEEionally as well as be on th pay scale. I me,m Q. Tell me, ao you knew Mt. Don Stewart? A. Yes, sir. Q. Can you tell me why Mr. Den Stewart would be in one of these classes? A. Q. A. To be in one of them? Yes. I didn't know he was in one of them. I know he teaches one, or maybe more than one. I hcven't read the curriculum. Q. I see. All right. Is it your position that Mt. Stewart is not trying to -- is not in one cf these classes as~ student trying to obtain higher pay himself? A. I wouldn't know about that. I don't know if it applies to him at that level. Q. okay. I'm trying to find out just e little bit about thiE BUSHMAN COURT REPORTIKG, INC. (501) 372-5115  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 6 9 10 11 12 J 3 14 15 J6 17 18 lS 20 21 22 23 24 25 st~ff devlopmnt. Do you have anybody who is primarily responsible for desegregation staff development? A. I would presume that would come und~r his office. Q. Have you ever asked Mr. Lester whether it did? A. No, I did not. 13 Q. Do you know what the rc:.ce of the pE:rsons who work with him, the other two perscns, is? A. I think they' le one iE blEck and one is white. Q. What's the name of the black person that works with him? A. Is that Brenda. I don't know. Q. You don't know? A. I don't know. Q. You thought it was Brenda Spriggs? A. Yes. Q. I thought she was in multicultural educ6t1on, and there was a special position, somewhat over my objection, cre~ted for her as a directive of thot? MR. LESTER: I've been trying to stay out of this. But Mary Mcclendon 1s a black lady i~ under him, coordinator, and Brenda Spriggs is multicultur~l. MF. JONES: And you didn't object to it. Q. And Ms. Mcclendon h~s no expertise in oescgregetion st~ff development, h~s she? A. 1 don't know. Q. Okay. Is Ms. McClenaon the ltdy who used tc be a BUSIW.J\\N COURT FEPOR~ING, INC. \u0026lt;!i0l) 3n-s115  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1 'i 1 19 20 21 22 vice-principal out at -I don't know. Q. A. Q. -- the Air BaEe Elementary School? I don't know. Okay. 14 MR. JONES: I thought you wanted to ~sk about budget cuts. MR. WALKER: I em. I'm just trying to find out what this man knows about what he was acing. Q. (BY MR. WALKER) You did rEcommEnd that some teacher positions be eliminated, didn't you? A. Q. A. Q. A. Q. In the lest budget cuts? Yes. Yes. How many d1a you recomrnena be el jminE.tea? Oh, gosh. I'm esking about your recommendation now, not whet action you took. But hew rn~ny did you recommend be cut? A. Q. A. Q. I don't know exactly. Did you reco1r.me:na thet \" number of cooraint.tors be cut? I supportecl thst recommendcit :ion. Woula this have a tendency -- well, first of ~11, were the ccordin~tors necesssry in the first place? A. Are you asking me pexscnelly wh6t I think about ccordinE.tors? BUSHMAN COURT REPORTING, INC. (501) 272-fll:  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ll 1~ 13 14 1~ 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 ~4 25 I - 15 Q. Yes. A. Yeah, I think personally th\u0026amp;t coordinators are necessary. I sure ao. Q. Now, by cutting them out, does that diminish the quality of the course offerings? A. I would say th\u0026amp;t the -- Q. Listen to my question. Does th\u0026amp;t diminish the quality of the course offerings in the programs which they c0ordinttea ana participated in? A. If the teachers themselves took up the sl6ck, I don't think it would diminish the quality of the course offerings. I don't know why the course offerings would be dependent on the coordinators being there. Q. I see. So ifi the teachers took up the slack. How would the teachers take up the sl~ck? How could the teachers take up the slack? A. Well, basically to keep on doing the same thing thet they're alr ady doing. Q. I see. So they would be ooing the sarre things that they were doing without 6irection and ccoperation and Eupporl of the ,dministt\u0026amp;tive staff of the centr\u0026amp;l office to the same extent as A. To the same extent, th6t's correct. Q. so this re6lly will dim1niEh the qu\u0026amp;lity of the progrms and evaluation and other things r.ext year -- BUSHMAN COUR'I REPORTING, INC. (501) 372-5115  l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 22 24 16 A. I can't say that for sure, Mr. Welker, whEther it would diminish it or not. Q. A. Q. A. Q. I see. Are you a former educotor? Yes. Whet is your field? I was a band director, sir. Now, you dJd understand as a teacher that one reason for getting speci~l treining, or having coordinators, or directors was to strenghten the quality of thE progrsms that those persons supervised or coordinated? A. Yes, I co. Q. So would it not be logic~l that jf you intend to strenghten the progr~rns by adding specialty persons to them, that you would correspondingly weaken programs by taking people oway from those programs\nisn't that lcgicel? A. Well, I would disagree with that somewhat. Because, whilE not maybe progressing os much and having that ability to take from the coordinators those things which they can do, that dcetn't necessarily mean that what you 1ve tlready eccoropljshed is going to dimlniEh. I woula say it wouldn't grow. Q. I see. Aren't you ccmroitted to having a program, ot l~ast e desegregation prcgrare, which 1s at least as eff~ctive in the future ~sit has been 1n the psst? A. Q. I would hope so, yes, sir. And if you cut out statf, don't you diminish the ability cf BUSHMAN COURT REPORTING, INC. (501) 372-5115  1 2 3 4 -C: 6 7 e 9 10 ll 12 13 14 l~ 16 17 1 19 20 21 22 23 24 2-5 - 17 the d1strict to m~int,in at least grcwth in the continuum cf educational progress from year to yer thit you hao prcmiEed the ccUJ: t tbot you would be implen,enting? A. My problEm as a Boara member lE making a chcice. I was net the one who decided to put the ccordinators on the blcck. Q. No, listen to my question. A. I unoerstana your question. Q. I'm asking just about the effect. I'm not asking about you as a Board merob~r in charge. In terms of the effect, you understand that you've indicatea to the court that these programs sre working, and that they will work, and that they will work in part because you have these staff members in place. Now, when you say that you h~ve them in place, de ycu not thereby represent to the court th,t yo~1c going to keep thefu in place? A. Not necessarily. Q. All right. Now, you ao recall that there has been some problm with the court, and you're saying that you Ell put things in your plan that you dian't necessarily rne~n or need. I mean, bow are you going to go -- and I'm being very explicit. How ere you gojng to -- and I'm surE that that is th case, don't misunderste.na me. This is a deposition, so I can say that. But how are you going to let your lawyer get in a position where he hes to defend that position one more time? A. Which position are you talking about? BUSHMAN COURT REPORTING, INC. (501) 372-5115  l 2 -:, ~ 4 ~ 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 16 19 2C 21 22 23 24 25 H, Q. Which is that you put things in \u0026amp; program, in other words, you presented things to the court that you didn't necess\u0026amp;rjly need? A. Th\u0026amp;t we necesssrily didn't need? Q. That you didn't necess\u0026amp;rily need and, therefore, you coulo re.duce them without sny impi.ct upon the dee:egregation plan? MR. JONES: I object to the form of the question. I don't think we've ever Eaia that we put things in the plan that we didn't need as a district. I have said there were things in the. plan that weren't directly relate.a to desegregation, th\u0026amp;t certain jobs were described fut re~sons I never fully understood. If tliet helps any. I don't think I ever said these people weren't needed, John. MR. JONES: And, of course., this w1tne.ss h0sn't indicated he relished making any of these cuts. A. To the contrary. (Off-the-record.) Q. were any of these coordinators th~t were cut jnvolvea in either gifted and talented educ~t1on, or guidance and counseling Eervices, or the Division of Instruction? A. I thought ,11 of them were patt of the divlsion of instruction. instruction. MR. JONES: Everybody you just named falls under BUSH.MAN COURT REPORTING, INC. (50]) 372-5115  1 2 3 4 C 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 16 17 1 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 19 ~R. WALKER: I thought so. Q. (BY MR. WALKER) Now, there were -- in the pl~n there's \u0026amp;n ind1c\u0026amp;tion that s\u0026amp;id, \"CCffipleting the stEff of the Division of Instruction are six secondBry curriculum coordinators representing the verious disciplines.\" Have these persons been cut by this pl\u0026amp;n? A. Would y-0u re\u0026amp;d that st-tement agaJn, please? Q. \"Completing the st\u0026amp;ff of the Division of Instruction ere six secondary curriculum coordln\u0026amp;tors representing the var3ous disciplines.\" Have those persons been cut or will those persons b cut? A. I think some of those persons have been cut, probably not all cf them. I know we retained mvth and science. Q. This is on p\u0026amp;ge 22 cf the pl\u0026amp;n. \"It 1s not enough to be concerned only the pupil assignment plans that in~ure segreg\u0026amp;ted schools. To be effective, the instructional progr\u0026amp;m must respond to the educution\u0026amp;l and sociQl needs of all students.\" Now, it goes on to say, \"Elementc.ry teachers are ai\nsisted by assistant principal/instructionel specialist and $condcry teachers receive aid from jnstructional curriculum coordinators. The presence of these resource people help the clesErcoffi teacher to meet the diverse needE of students in desegregcted clu\nsrooms.\" Now, why would you, after just put ting something in and having the court approve it right before this happ~ned, why BUSHMAN COURT REPORTING, INC. (5Cl) 272-!,115  l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 s 10 11 12 1::, 14 15 16 17 )6 19 20 a 22 23 24 25 ,e 20 woula you cut them out? A. Well, actually I just followed the recommenaat ons thtt we get from our professionil. Q. But now, you all were pressuring the profesEionels to come up with the budget cuts of the. Boc:.ro, weren't you? I mean, they weren't operating in a vacuum? A. I don't think it was just the fact that we were pressuting anybcdy. we were all under ptessure to get something done. The end of the schocl year was rBpidly approaching. Many things were happening. We were trying to get our mHl,ge through. My point is that only very reluctantly, Mr. Walker, did I support these. Q. All right. Now, in this it is cltar that you represented to the court that you would have these coorc11n~tors. At least, that's the way I read it on pages 23 and 24. Did you reaa -did you all consioer this plan, and especjally pages 23 ana ~4, before you made the decision lo cut these ccorc1inotots? A. I think that that was probebly mentioned, yes, s1r. Q. All right. A. But we didn't know whether it would work or not. Q. You knew, if you mention something, just to mention it doesn't mean anything. Did you aEEEES it? Did you \u0026amp;SSCEE th impact of it in the light of the ccmrnitme.nts that you hid mz.de to the court? A. I think that we left that up to the superintendent to BUSHMAN COURT REPORTING, INC. (501) 372-511~  1 ,\"t, 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 lO 11 ]2 13 14 ]5 16 17 1 19 20 n 22 23 24 25 recommend to us. Q. So you're putting this bee bock on the bock of the superintendent? A. Right. 21 Q. All right. Well, I want you to know th~t I'm going to be not UEing -- relying so much on the superintendent this time es I am on you Boara members to justify these things. A. Well, fine. Q. And 1 woula like for you tc tell me whether you have any other rEEEon, other than prcjectea ccst savings, for knocking out something that had be.en included in the aesegregatlon pl,n, other than the cost sc:.vings? A. Other than the cost savings? Q. Yes, sir. A. I don't think there was any. Q. All right. Now, you were ,wtre thEt. the court hc:.s t 1a you repeetedly that. financial considerationc c~nnot be uEed to oirr.inist. the 6e.~ gresc:.tion ccrr.mitme.nt~ rn this dHtuct? Q. I see. Well, why would you do something thot was contrary to your cesegre9c:t1on p1osrarr, or comrr.itroc.nt. .. ? A. Well, at this point in time I'n. not sure that it wos. Q. Well, you say -- you understond how the ccurt ch~st1sed us obout being lDte in the proposals, ~nd bow she insisted on us getting things in, ~nd then how she took tim to study BUSHMAN COURT :REPORTING, INC. (5Cl) 27Z-5ll5  1 3 4 5 6 7 s 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 23 24 25 22 everything, ana then bow she approvea thiE, I think, the early port of thiE year. Do you think that she would go through all of this, ano we would go through ell of this, if these wordE meant nothing? A. Q. Well, I don't th1nk tb~t we think th~t they megn nothing. Well, why is it that you're going to cut out these coord1noto1s if you've ccmroitteo to the. ccurt to ht.ve them? A. Q. Well, whet elEe were we going tc cut cut. well, th~ts not for rr.e to say. rm just saying now why did you -- . JONES: Well, I mean, I know 1ttE not your deposition, but it's \u0026amp; question we all wonder ebcut. You know, what elEe would we do? Q. Well A. I mean, I'm faced with a cho1ce. I either vote for this or don't vote for it. Q. Well, you -- let me ask you this. Did you vote to give were you preeent when the vote weE taken tc give Mr. GoEE' wjfe A. Q. A. Q. A. Q. No, I Wc.S not. Did you ,ppr ove that? Do you eppr eve of it? I was not thre. Did you apprcve it? I don't know wht the circumstnces on tht rais ~r. Wll, you h d 11 the backup a,ta from the Bo~rd -- from BUSHMAN COURT REPOR'l'ING, INC. (5.Cl) 272-5115  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ll 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 23 Mr. Lester, djdn't you? He gave you the backup datt, didn't he? A. Q. A. Q. A. Q. A. Q. A. Q. It 'E probably in my p\"cket. You haven't read it? I haven't read that portion of it, because 1 Wc.En't there. You and Mr. Gess \u0026amp;re friends, tren't you? Friends? Perscnel friends? No. You tren't? We're just acguaintanceE. Okc.y. You ana he have not hc.d E discussjon tbout that subject st all? A. Q. A. No, Slt. Okay. Absolutely not. As E rec.ttet of fact, when it firEt come up he recused hims~lt, he wasn't even tround the Board. Q. A. Q. Why would he vote on it when it came up the lc:.st tiree? Well, I don't knew. I wtsn't here. Do ya'll have e policy that matterE affecting a family member are acteo upon, thc.t the person in the fan:Hy who's on the Beare should recuse themself? A. one. Q. A. I don't recall reading thtt specific policy, if there is Do you hc:.ve a nepotiEm policy? I believe there 1s one, yes, sir. BUSHrl.AN COUtT REPORTING, INC. (~Cl) 372-~115  1 2 3 4 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 1 19 20 21 22 2-:- 24 24 Q. What's difference in what I just asked the first time and what I asked in te1ms of the nepotism policy? A. I think it w~s a place where there wcs employment involvea, two teacherE, or one teacher w~snt to be eroplcyed at a schcol where another one wE.s mployea or e1E a supervisor. Where one would have supervisory consideration over the other. Q. Have you seen any document thjs yEar shewing the progress that the oit.tlict hes mace toward meeting the district 1 s desegregation go~ls and objectives? A. Any? Q. Have you seen a document which is an \u0026amp;nalysis of the progress being made toward achieving the ditrict's desegregaticn -- A. Q. A. Q. We received one from Mr. Bowles, I believe. When did you get that? I think it wis tometin.e t.fter Janu\"ry. Now, ao you con1der it to be, change in the pl~n to combine the Office cf Pupil Personnel a~6 the Office of Desegregat1cn? A. Do I consider it a change in the plan? Q. Yes. A. Ne. Q. would you m1na looking et this organiz~tion chart that you presented to th~ court? A. (Witness viewing document.) BUS!Wi.AN COURT REPORTING, INC. (~CJ) 372-5115  1 2 3 4 r: ~ 6 7 6 9 10 11 12 13 14 lS 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 ~-i:: \"-~ 25 MR. JONES: We'll stipulete the chirt chnges. MR. WALKER: That's what I 'n. showing you. Q. (BY MR. WALKER) Leck at that, plecse? Now, on this chart that was presentea to the court the desegreg~ticn projection was off to the Eide and directly related to the superintendent. And the only section that related to every department wes the desegregation cffjce, other than the superjntendcnt's office, of course. And new you've put desegregation and pupjl personnel together. Does that represent a functional change? A. Well, I'm not sure -- I understand whEt you're driving at. I see htre a direct line between the superintendent and pupil personnel and desegregation, and I see ljnes of consultation and cooperation between the schools ano personnel and instruction and business affajrs and support services. Now -- Q. Well, you're saying here that it's pretty eviaent that the Pupil Personnel Department had no direct supervis1on over anybody in the first place. So by combining those two departments, nothing w~s changed\nis that right? A. You mean, we're talking about sol1a lines new of airect authority? Q. Yes, solio lines. A. Well, no, they don't. Q. Okay. Now, tell me, why was it neceE-sary to reduce the number of asE.ist superintendents\nwas that for financial retsons or what other reason? BUSH~AN COURT REPORTING, INC. (501) 372-Ell!:  1 3 4 6 i e 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 2(\nA. I think it wo~ tin~nciel re~scns. Q. How much money did you seve -- well, let n.e get some understanaing of that. W know that you h\u0026amp;ve bss1c\u0026amp;lly net cut anybody out of Mr. Collins' department\nisn't thet correct? All the people are still there? A. A fr as I know. Q. All are still there. So thst means they're all there with the SQroe sal~ry except for the 8 percent rcducticn in the raise propcrt1on of Mr. Collins' s~lary? A. Right. Q. All right. And we know that sll the people in Mr. Bow lei:' office ere still there. And the only thing that's htppened is that Mr. Bowles has suffered er had a reauction of 8 percent of the raise that he got. So are we to believe th\u0026amp;t the only sav1n9s to be effectuated is 8 percent of two 13 percent raises? ~R. JONES: I object to th6 form ct the question. It ignores the elimination of, I think, two directors' positions, at l~ost one, Director of Athletic\u0026amp; \"na Director of Activities . MR. WALKER: Are those under the Pupil Personnel Dep\"rtment? MR. JONES: I think both of them were. Q. (BY MR. WALKER) All right. Now, those persont who -- the Directer of Athletics and the Director of what else, whatever it is, those people dia not suffer p~y decreases, though, did they? BUSHMAN COURT REPORTING, INC, ( 501) 372-51J 5  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Jl 12 13 14 15 16 17 16 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 A. I don't know whre they would fall. Q. Who were those people? 27 A. The Director of Athletics was Ron Higgins, Whet the other director? MR. JONES: That's all. Q. All right. Is Mr. Higgins still working for the district? A. As far .as I know he is going to be. Q. Has he had a p~y reauction for this ye~r, for this next ye~r over last year? A. I aon't know what his pay is going to be. It depends on what his job is, I would presume. Q. Well, so we have e pay reduction for Mr. Higgins, possibly, and Mr. Collins has a pay reductJon of approximately $4,500, and Mr. Bowles has~ pay reduction of approximately $2,9C0. MR. JONES: If the newspapEr article is accurate, and I'm not going to stipulate that a newspape1 article is accurate. Q. Do you h~ve any reason to believe thmt Mr. Bowles is well, let roe say something. If Mr. Lestr says that it's 8 percent, the aifference is S percent of a pay raice MR. JONES: 8 percentage points. Q. percentoge points of the pay rajse of 13 percent -- MR. JONES: Right. Q. -- that roeQns then that if Mr. Collins wa~ making $64,500 l~st year, I'll figure that out. B percent of the ra1se that he BUSHMAN COURT REPORTING, INC. ( 501) '.:72-5115  ] 2 4 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 le 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 28 got -- MR. JONES: Not 8 percent, about 70 percent. Q. 70 percent cf the roise th~t he got would be appro~imotely $4,000. So I E.ssume thc.t he h~o a reduction of $4,00C, and Mr. Bowles had c: reduction of $3,000, and let's E.Ssume thcit r. Higgins h~d one Else cf $3,000. Th1s is $10,000 reduction or sevings. And ere you oll s~ying thE.t E.t least for the Desegregation Deportment c.nd the Pupil Personnel Dep,rtment, thal sc.vings is significant? A. Q. Well, I think c.nything that we can save was significant. But you're going to reduce the status of the desegregation office in the process, are yoti not? A, I don't know what your definition of st~tus is. Q. Well, you comffiitted to the court that there woulo be an assistant superintendent for desegregation. MR. JONES: There still is. Q. You said that there was an assistant superjntendent for desegregation, and you said that there will be ,n assistant superintendent for pupil personnel. MR, JONES: There still is. It happens to be teh same person. Q. If you're going to ao those things, why don't you tell the court th1t you're going to combine -- or propoEe to combine the positions and put ~11 the responsibility in one person? A, Why don't -- BUSHMAN COURT REPORTING, INC, (501) 372-511=  1 .... ~ 3 4 5 6 7 e 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 ~4 25 29 Q. Why didn't you tell the court you were going to do this before you actually did it? A. I think all of the cuts thQt were mace end all the changes that were made and approved by our School Board were made with the idea that all of them would be meae as far as the court would allow. And at the time thQt we were making decisions, wc didn't know which tbjngs that the court would allow and would not ~llow. Q. Have you voted as a Board to ask the court to allow these cuts in a formal rEsolution? A. In a formal resolution? Q. Yes, sir. A. Not th~t I recall. Q. This was done in M rch? A. These were, yes. Q. Why haven't you for~ed why haven't you t~ken up the matter by resolution or motion since March to submit it to the court? A. I don 1 t know that it hasn't been proposed. I haven't been there. Q. I see. Now, is there any particular reason that you all did not -- well, first of all, did you 11 diECUES these budget cuts before you made them with the Joshua Intervcnors? A. I personally didn't discuss it with the -- Q. Dia the Board do so? BUSHMAN COURT REPORTING, INC. (:Cl) 372-511~  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 lE 19 21 22 23 24 30 A. Not es i Bo~ra. But I think we hed rngny opportunities for anybody to come\nworkshops, and budget meetings, and -- Q. So you ere putting us in the position of eny member of the public when it comes to participeting in decisions and deliberations of the Board\nis th\u0026amp;t correct? A. Q. A. As any member of the public? Yes. Well, I don't know what I'm -- I'm not trying to put you in any position. Q. Are you aware that the Joshua Intervenors have special status as a result of this Settlement Agreement? A. Oh, yes. Q. Have you all ever sought to involve us, you as a Board, ever sought to involve us in any decision meking cf th school district before the decisions were mode? A. As fer as I know th t we rely on our profeEsionol staff to tell us when nd if that's needed. I don't have direct crder, that I know of, to do that. MR. JONES: I mean, John, I cen't imogine your going to court next Thursday and representing thEt thiE was all a secret to you. MR. WALKER: We're not talking about secret. I would certainly fe~l that if they're tElking about doing somethjng, befcrc they do 1t, o sit down, cs we ,gr ea, and go ever the desegregEt1on tE~ifications cf it End try to reach En BUSHliAN COURT REPORTING, INC. (~Cl) 272-~115  1 2 2 4 .\"..', 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 l!: 16 17 1 19 20 21 22 23 :24 2!.: - 31 agreement, and then make a joint recornrnndaticn to the court fer approval instead of putting us in an aover~etial situation. Q. (BY MR. WALKER) Now, did you conEider the desegregation impact formelly in a public Board :meeting of c\n:ny e,f these particular items in Exhibit Number 1? A. As far as any one of these 27 things, I don't believe any of them were ever taken up in a public Board meeting specifically with the quection of the desegregation impact in mind for each one of them. A. I do know that in my own mind th0t all of the :impacts were there. Q. Well, what is the desegregation impact of item number 10, \"The alpha positions, fivfc-day stude\nnt load,\" whctever that meanc, in your own mind? A. Well, that means that there was less lime for the alphg teachers to teech, and they had to teach regular clEEses. Q. Does not this say th6t five alpha -- no, that ~lpha positions, , number of alpha positions Qre being cut out? A. I dcn 1 t know that thic says that they're being cut out. I think those teachers re being reassigned to regular classes rather than be tEken away. Q. Well, how did you save onything by re ssigning these teachers tc regular cl~sses\nwhere is the savings? A. In teach rs needed over,11. BUSHMAN COURT REPORTING, INC. (!:Cl) 37:2-~11~  l 2 3 4 6 7 8 s 10 11 12 13 14 16 17 1 19 20 21 22 23 24 32 Q. So you won't neea as many teachers? A. That's the same thing, if I might add, about Mr. Higgins being removed from the directorship that he was remcvea of and being placed somewhe~e el~e and that position not be1n9 ref illea. MR. WALKER: While I 1m at it, Ssm, would you asking -- bringing Mr. Higgins to court? Do I need E\u0026lt; subpoena for that purpose? Q. MR. JONES: I don't have e clue. MR. WALKER: Okay. (BY MR. WALKER) Now, are you saying that you didn't elimjnLte these positions and\ntherefore, nothing has changed from last year to this next year? A. Well, obviously, jf we're going to have a $90,000 savings, something has changed. Mr. Lester, perhaps you could -- Q. Well, no. You're going to have to take thE stand yourself, not Mr. Lester. Mr. Lester will have his turn. I wsnt you to tell me A. Well, I can't at thiE time. Q. All right. Well, tell me, what is the dsegregst1 n 1mpc.ct of having -- let me b~ck up. Isn't it true that the Boera b,s sought to relate to desegreg~ting th schools in the southe~st quaaront in p~rt by having TAG type clQsseE concentr~ted there more sc than other parts of the district? A. H~ve we sought to do what? BUSHMAN COURT REPORTING, INC. (501) 372-115  l 2 ...,, 4 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 .2 0 21 22 23 24 .33 Q. To desegreg\"te s.ome of the so-celled ht.rd to dcegregete schools in the southeast quadrant of the district by having TAG type programs in those schools? A. Q. A. Q. TAG type programs? Yes. I'm sure that there's been an enrichment in those, yes. All right. Now, if you take away the enrichment, does net this hav a tendency to impact desegregation? MR. JONES: He didn't sE.y cny enrichment wes taken awey. Q. All right. Well, if you have -- you've sajd that at least something happened, if you don't have E.S much money devoted to it next year E.S you had this yeLr? A. That's true. MR. JONES: He's talking e.bout the totc\nil .\nmount of money, John, ana not all of that has to do with TAG. Q. Well, number 10 is the ten \"lphe positions, what does that mean to you, Mr. Burgett? A. I presumed that it meant thet there would be alpha teachers that were teaching regular clesses . Q. In ether words, those alpha teachers would no longer be teaching alpha classes? A. Q. Not as many of them. And if you had used -- relied upon alpha teachers to teach students who were being ttractea into aesegregatea -- into BUSHMAN COURT BEPORTING, INC. (.=Cl) 372-~ll 5  l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 J 2 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 34 schools for desegregetion purposes, ana they were going to be teaching special classes. By putting them beck into regular clsses, that would mean that you woula heve fewer people to tetch those specialty classes, acesn't jt? A. Thet might mean thet. But I also, in th positioning where they might be, sey, on the north side of the river, be taken out of cl~sses there ana not b taken out of ones over on the south side of the river. Q. So yo dcn't know where these positions were? A. No, sir, I don't. Q. Did you ask Mr. Lester where they bed been taken from? A. No, I have not. Q. All right. New, how ro,ny secondary TAG positions were being removed? A. I don't know. Q. Did you esk Mr. Lester? That's in number 11. Did you ask Mr. Lei::ter? A. No, I don't believe I askea him personelly. Q. Did you ask him whether or not this would have adverse aesegregati ve impact? A. I think that we, as I indicated before, that we talked ,bout ell of this as having ~ny kind of impact. Q. Where did this discussion take place? A. In his office. Q. I see. Dio you ever have thjs discussion in a public Board BUSHMAN COUFT FEPORTING, INC. (501) 372-5115  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 19 20 21 22 23 24 meeting? A. I don't recall if we did or not. 1 1a have to check the minutes. Q. Did Mr. Lester specifically tell you that none of this would have any adverse desegregotive impact? A. No, he's never sai6 that. Q. Did he .ever s~y that it would h,ve adverse desegregctive imp\"ct? A. He said that it was possible that some of it would. Q. And you went ehead, after he told ycu that it was po-sible that it would? A. Well, we didn't know whether it might be or not and so, therefore, we were g~ing to see. Q. All right. But you knew from Mr. Lester -- how were you going to see if it had desegregative impact? A. We would have to have it analyzed ,fter it was done and put in place. Q. Oh. So, ~fter it was done, you would have the analysis. Why djdn't you have the analysis rnede before it was done? A. As I stated before, we relied on our professional staff to recommend this. Q. But Mr. Lester told you tht it may have ~averse desegreg~tive effect and, nonetheless, ya'll went bhead and votea for it? A. That's possible. BUSHMAN COURT REPORTING, INC. (EOl) 372-511~ l 2 4 6 7 e 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 24 Q. A. Q. A. Q. A. All right. Well, now, why would you ac th~t? Becau~e of financial crunch. Without having the analysis rncae first? I acnt have an answer. Thsts wonderful. You'll be my first witness. Fine. 36 MR. JONES: Now, this i~ the third person you've said js going to be your first witness. MR. WALKER: Each time it get better. I cou dn't imagine Mr. Goss being 50 gooa. But I think this 1s my witness. Q. (BY ~.iR. WALKER) Tell me, did you vote to freeze: sll sslaries, no steps? A. Yes, I did. Q. Well, now, tell me, why sre you going to Mr. Herring out here giving these pecple in-service training for purposes of getting salary increases and ~tep increases A. Q. That'~ not the only reason I sajd that he aid that. That's one reason. When these people get this training, end they go through these workshop, they're going to expect their money. so why would you cut -- vote to cut out step increases it the same time you 1re encouraging peopl~ to qualify to get step incresses? Why would you ao thot? A. Well, hopefully some day those will be able to be reinstatea. BUSHMAN COURT REPORTING, INC. (E0l) 372-5115  l 2 3 4 5 6 7 e 9 10 Jl 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 22 24 37 Q. A. I mean, if you're going to shut the doer on people's profession~l growth period, why that's -- I didn't see that as D possibility at all. Q. they? A. Q. A. Q. But, now, they're entitled to their step increases, aren't Under normal circumstances, I would s~y yes. What makes the circumstanceE here abnormal? Money problems. Well, now, you did give a number of people this last year step increases, didn't you? A. Q. A. Q. A. we? Q. Yesh, we did. How can you give it to some end not to ~,11? Now, wait a minute. Let's go backtrack. Okay. We did not deny step increases to anybody last year, did All right. Do you propose to deny step incieases this year to inybody? A. I think that I voted to freeze all salaries and deny any step increase this ye,r. Q. So whatever training people receive during this surrroer or during the fall, they will be den1ed step increases? A. I don't know. I don't know how the Pcisonnel Dep~rtment handles that, if you are eljgible to be on~ higher because of BUSHMAN COURT REPORTING, INC. (501) 272-:JJ5  l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ll 12 13 14 15 16 17 16 19 20 21 22 23 24 ~~ ~v 38 mote increaseo educational things, whether or not -- I'm talkjng about step increases in a person who is here from yea1 to year and is eligible to be moved down from an experience increment. Q. So you're cutting out step increases that are experience related? A. Right. Q. But not education related? A. I'm not sure that we maae that distinction. Q. Okay. A. Well, I mean Q. That's fine. Now, what's the desegregation jropact of that? A. I don't know. Q. Did you ask that question of Mr. Lester? A. No. Q. Tell me, look down at the exhibit, tell me what is meant by the \"Specialty Fuller Junior High Program\" er th \"Futures Program at Fuller Junior High\" and those savings estimated tc be a totcl of $72,7~0? Are you going to save some ~oney by cutting those programs out? MR. JONES: They didn't cut it. MR. WALKER: Sam, this is my deposition. MR. JONES: Well, if you're just trying to trick the witness -- ~R. WALKER: No, I w nt to know what he thinks he rney hove sorr~ other opinion, beceuse thre ,re d'ff~r~nces of BUSHMAN COURT FEPORTING, INC. (5Cl) ~72-~115  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 24 39 opinion. Q. A. (BY MR. WALKER) Did you all -- Frankly, I didn't know what I was coming down hEre for to begin with, so I -- Q. Ok~y. Well, do you want to terminate the deposition so you can go home and get prepared? A. Well, I don't -- no, I don't want to terminate it, sir. I'm glad -- I'm here freely and cooperstively tc do my best fer you. That'$ all. Q. All right. Did you -- what do you unden:tand these items down at the bottom to mean, under periods 9, and JS, and 15? Does that mean that you're gcing to affect a savings of some kind? A. Well, it looks to me, looking at this at this point in time, that this says thst there will be 9 priods seved at Fuller for secondary instructional coordinelors. Or does thet come from number 9 up above? I don't know. Q. You don't know. That's fine. I want th~t on the record, too. Now, number 15, the period 15, Futures Prograrr - Fuller Junior High School, what does that mean? Hew do you read th,t? A. Q. A. Well, this just says th~t it costs $~5,4EO for 15 petiods. So you're 901n9 to save th~t much? The same thing up there, th~t Specialty Fuller, ~t 9 periocls, it costs $27,270. Q. So that's going to be an estirn6ted savings? BUSHMAN COURT REPORTING, INC. (ECl) 372-Ell5  1 2 3 4 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 16 l9 20 21 22 23 24 25 4C A. I don't know if that's a sevings or whether thE.t ju\u0026amp;t says this is a breakdown by category. Q. Is it a fair statement to say that you don't know wh6t these items mean in the: bottorr. of the pt:ge cf Exhibit l beginning at \"Breakdown by CEtegory?\" A. This shows apparently what it costs. I don't know what the total of these items i~ here now. Q. No. I'm asking what these items mean? What doeE it mean when you say \"Futures Program - Fuller Junior High Scheel, $45,000 and 15 periods,\" what does th\u0026amp;t mean? A. Q. A. Q. Well, 1 hesitate to s,y right now. You don't know what it me6ns, do you? I don't remember what it means. All right. You don't know wh t any of these things mean, do you? A. Q. I wouldn't say that. Well, t 11 me -- lf you wculdn't say thEt, tell me what they rrean? What do any of them mean? What do they mean? A. Q. Well, I don't know what the periods mean. That's fine. N w, did you ever know what th periods mei!nt? A. Q. A. App rently not. All right. Now, what doe~ \"breEkdown by category\" mean? I think thE.t, c.s I recdl this now, wb-t it n,eans js thE.t, for inst~nce, like we had a coach who was given on extr~ per1oa BUSHMAN COUFT F.EPCFTING, INC. (!:01) 372-5115  1 2 3 4 C ~ 6 7 s 9 10 11 1\n12 14 15 16 l7 1e 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 - 41 off to coordinate athletics, that he was going to have to go back into the classroom, and thEt he wcula be utilized as a teacher. And that when ell those variouE things were done like that, that rother thon having to employ more personnel, as we have right now, they could do it with less personnel, to that would be a gvings. Under where jt says, \"Athl~tic coordinEtors at various schools,\" that by placing them back in the cl~ssrccrn, that this is the type of savings that woulo be with the others. the saroe wey Q. I see. Well, let's look at the special ed coordinators in various $Chools. Don't those coordinators have a respon$ibility for working with parents? A. I'm sure they do. Q. Haven't you all represented to the ccurt that you all have a strong parent contact program, and that you will seek to promote parental cont~ct? A. Yes, ir. Q. Why wou1a you cut back on special ea coordinators at the various schools, cooraination of that function at the vtrious schools? A. I don't know exactly how that WQS going to be efiected. Q. I see. But you're cutting jt back, aren't you, after you say to the court that's a major thjng and it has desegregative impact, doesn't it? A. I tell you what, when we're hunting around trying to find BUSHMAN COURT REPORTING, INC. (501) 372-5115  l 2 3 4 5 6 7 e g 10 ll 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 ~2 23 24 25 42 w~ys to s\u0026amp;ve money, everything is jrnportant, Mr. Walker. Q. Wh\"t's the rr.\"jority race of the persons in special ea in the district? A. I don't know. Q. You h0ve not resa the A. Well, I tell you what now, I didn't come down here to be tested over every specific item. I don't know. I can't give you ~n idea. I'm sure thet they're mixed. Q. Aren't you tware thot blacks are in speci1 ed Jn disproport1onat numbers? A. You're talking ebout students now? Q. Yes, sir. A. Yes. Q. All right. And does not this mean that if you cut out th coordin~tors 01 the coordjnation at the various schools, thot thiE m Ens that you'll h\u0026amp;ve  disproportiontte effect upon bltck A. I don't know. Q. You've never thought about that before now? A. Well, actually I've thought obout it~ lot. Q. Well, did you think about the adverse effect tht it would have A. I mean, not necessorily Q. Did you think that this would have ~n adverse effect upon the black chjldren, their eoucation? BUSHMAN COURT REPO~TING, INC. ( 501) 3 72-5115  1 2 3 4 6 7 8 9 10 Jl 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 23 24 25 43 A. PerEonally speaking, Mr. Walker, that cutting back on any of these people has an cdverse effect on the entire education~l program of the district, which is very distB$teful to me. Q. Did you feel that cutting back en the coordin~tors, the secondary instructional coordinators will have an B~verse effect upon the qualjty of education that those persons supervise and coordinste? MR. JCNES: You've\n.lret.dy asked hrn1 that. MR. WALKER: I understand tht..t. But now he's making a statement that he didn't make before. He SE.id it wouldn't have an effect before. So now you're saying it does. I'm saying to get him to say which posit1on he's going to take ultimately. Q. (BY MR. WALKER) Does it or doesn't it have an effect? You say now that all of it will have an effect, and earlier you said it wouldn't have an effect. Which is correct? A. I don't know. When did I say earlier -- what did I say earlier? Q. You said that you're shifting the responsibility and the function to the teachers by cutting out the second6ry instructional coordin~tors and the other coordinators, and you'll be able to have as good a program if the teachers pick up the sleek next year as you had last year, do you recall that? Q. I said I hoped that we would, that's correct. But it's not logical that you would, is it? BUSH~!AN COURT REPORTING, INC. (501) 372-5115  1 2 3 4 6 7 8 9 10 ll 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 23 24 25 44 I sticl that I -- I believe I said that ~s far as growth w,s concernea, it wouldn't be as good. Q. All right. Do you net comrni t to the dish :ict eono to the court that there will be continual grcwth\nand, thus, remediation of ach1evement disp~rit1es between black and white youngsters? A. Q. Sc.y thet again? All right. Let me put it this way. Ya'll have said thet one of your goals is to rerneditte achievement d1fferences between black and white students, right? A. Q. That means that there ha~ to be a growth factor for minority achievement, doesn't it? A. I would think so. Q. All r1ght. Now, growth is going to be st~gnited, how is the gap going to be rerneoiated or eliminated? A. I don't know. Q. All right. Just a few more questions. Did you seek legal counsel before rraking the budget cuts? A. Q. Did I seek legal counsel? Did you or the Board? We weren't involved. So, I rneen, I'm now asking if Mr. JoneE ~na his office to your re.collection were involved? A. Q. I don't remember discussing thc.t, no. BUSHMAN COURT REPORTING, INC. (5Cl) 372-~ll.5  1 2 3 4 s 6 7 8 9 10 Jl 12 13 14 1~ )6 J7 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 2!\n- 45 A. As far as requesting legal counsel. Q. Did you ask legal counsel to give you on opinion as to hew this would impact upon the desegregation plan? A. Net in a formal resolution, no. Q. In any way? A. Not that I recall. Q. Who ran with this the most on the Boardi wos it the President of the Bo~rd, ot A. Who ran with what? Q. The idea to go and ao these things without getting the advice of counsel, or the approvel of court, or the participation of the Joshua Intervenors, 01 the other parties to this lc.wsuit? A. I don't know that any one specific person did. Q. All right. Do you know how rr,uch was actut1lly saved with the budget cuts and the rEorganizaticn? D you have a document which you can point us to? A. Do I have one? Q. Yes, sir, that we ccn present to the court. If the court asked you how much was actually s~vea, wb~t can you tell her? A. I don't know the exact figure, no. Q. All right. If she says, do you hav a document which h~s which demonst1ateE the exact figure, hat would you say? A. I'd say I'd have to go ask for one. Q. Have you ever seen one? BUSHMAN COURT REPORTING, INC. (EOl) 272-ElE  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 16 17 16 19 20 21 25 46 A. I've seen so many documents, that I don't know -- rec\u0026amp;ll which one it would be. Q. A. Q. A. Have you ever seen a document which does that? I don't recall st this particulor time. All right. There have been also very many revisions to all cf the cost estirn\u0026amp;tes costing out, savings involved, meny, m\u0026amp;ny times. Q. I see. So you were forced jnto these budget cuts. Did you all consider any othtr \u0026amp;lternotives besides budget cuts? A. Q. A. Q. I think we had voted to reduce the school year. That's a budget cut, isn't it? But that's not reducing staff er any other kind of a I see. Well, you could have reduced the school year by two or three days anc1 not hod any stsff cuts, couldn't you? A. Q. Q. A. MR. JONES: They did reduce the school year. We reduced it five days. Yeah, but you reinsteted that, didn't you? MF. JONES: When the millage passed. Now, you could h~ve -- I have not been -- I heard that it was, rec:.d that it wai\n. But I was not present. Q. You could still close school Early by one cay and keep all the staff memb rs, couldn't you? Let me put it another way. If the savings for five days is $1,500,000, my arthritic sc:.ys that BUSHMAN COUFT FEPOFiING, INC. (501) 372-5]1!:  l 2 3 4 .s.\n,: 6 7 8 9 10 Jl 12 13 14 15 16 17 lE 19 20 21 22 23 24 2~ - 4.7 that's $300,0C0 a day. For $300,C0O you cen keep froffi reducing anybody for the next year, can't you? A. It would seem th~t that might be a w~y. Q. One aay, and ye'll never considered that option? A. Well, Eis a matter of fact, I think I discussed the option of, since there was some other things involved in cutting back on five days, I th ink it wes a FICA p~yment that we would be saving that we could not have tc cut five, but we could only cut four, save the same amount of money. Q. Are you all trying to, as far as you know, put more money into your contJngency fund for operating costs during 1SS2-93? A. More money than what? Q. Than you had last year. Is that one of the aim~ that you Eought to accompljsh by the budget cut? A. I don't believe the,t tbe contingency funds was what we were worrJed ebout. I believe it was having enough money to complete this year and fund the next year. Q. Was the contingency fund~ consideraticn ot all 1n the planning with respect to the budget cut -- budget reduction consideration, ~es that a factor atoll? A. As I recall, it would -- the discussion on the contingency funds were that it would not be a good idea to h~ve o neg~tlve one, be in the hole. Q. I ~ee. That's the only discussion you recall obout it? A. I'm net sure. I'm thinking of sorre other numbers, and I'm BUSHMAN COURT REPORTING, INC. (~Cl) 372-:11   1 2 3 4 .IC., 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14. 15 16 17 1 19 21 22 23 25 not sure the context in which they came up, whether it was contingency fund or not. Q. Do you know anything ~bout having a deo1re to h~ve a contingency fund of 2 1/2 milllon collo1s? A  Q. A. Q. A. A specific oreount like that, no, sir, I dontt. Hove you ever heard any discussion like th,t? No. You were at all Board meet1ngs until l\\!arch 17th? That's correct. 48 Q. Did you ev r oiscuss this budget in executive sessions, a proposed budget dilemma cf the -- the budget dilemma of the district? A. Q. A. Q. The budget dilemma of the district? Yes. In regard to personnel, I think we did. Well, any particular perscnc reg,rding -- were any particul0r persons, personnel ccnsiderations under discussion in those meetings? A. Q. A. Particular ones? Yes, sir. I don't think so. I think that it wos stated that since the district's finances were driv n 70 or ED percent by s~l r1 s, that that eeroed to be the only plac where we could go and get money, is by saving positions. MR. JONES: John, I repreEentea to each of these BUSHMAN COURT EEPOP.TING, INC. (501) 372-5115  l 2 3 4 6 7 C 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 1e 19 21 22 23 24 49 witnesses, is you had told roe, thet these depositions would be approximately 30 minutes. MR. WALKER: All r1ght. You're right. And I think I've gotten -- I'm fine. I think th~t you 1re tight, and I ~pologize. We can go off the record now. (WHEREUPON, it 6~30 p.m., the tiking of the above-entitled deposition wcs concluded.) * * * * * * * * * BUSHMAN COURT REPORTING, INC. (:01) 372-511~ S'I1,'IE OF AFKANS S} }t:. COUNTY OF WHI 'IE } C E F I F ! C A 'l E E: 'l'IlE OPAL D POSl'!.iCN OF Jll-1 BUFG TT: 1, JFFF BE1'Nt'IT, CC11, LS us, iJ 'e:ti:ry Publjc lfl t.r) f~I While County, Arkon~~ tru\nnd th~t th forc_oin epcsiti~n w~E tr~nEcribcc by ne, or un ~r ThY supet ition, en thE Cirrtrcn lil Cc~p tczi~cd Tt enscr ipticn SyE tern tron. n.y 1u:_chin \"horth~na nctee. tc:k n ~t th~ tiae tnd p ~ct cet out en th ctpt1cn heretc, the WJtneEe bern'\" fHt duly C:Ut:ic.ned i,.nd rworn, er tffnn:eo, to t 11 the truth, the wh le truth, tn nothing but the truth. I FtJI:'nlER CERTIFY U-,\"t I lm n i tl tr c\u0026lt;.,uru ..  l for, rclEted tc, nor employed by \u0026amp;ny oi tbc prtiEE tc tte ,ctjon in which this depcEitlcn west ken\ntna fu1ther, th~t l ,n net t relc t1v o.i: empltycE cf cny ,ttcnncy er cC\nunetl cniployeo by tl:e pi.trticE, beutc, ncr flnt-nci lly intertctec., or otherwie, in tht outcC\nn,e of thi t.cticn. GIVEN UNDER MY ey of June, 1S!2. JEFF Bttrn ,J 9, tote Cc.unty, A My coromiscjon X~jrE JJ-\n~-\ncc BUSHMA~' COURT REPORTING, lNC. ~Cl Ettl Sixth Street LittlE Rock, Ark n~,e 7~202 (!Cl) :27~-DH\nThis project was supported in part by a Digitizing Hidden Special Collections and Archives project grant from The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation and Council on Library and Information Resources.\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\u003cdcterms_creator\u003eBushman Court Reporting\u003c/dcterms_creator\u003e\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n\n "}],"pages":{"current_page":112,"next_page":113,"prev_page":111,"total_pages":155,"limit_value":12,"offset_value":1332,"total_count":1850,"first_page?":false,"last_page?":false},"facets":[{"name":"type_facet","items":[{"value":"Text","hits":1843},{"value":"Sound","hits":4},{"value":"MovingImage","hits":3}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":16,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"creator_facet","items":[{"value":"United States. District Court (Arkansas: Eastern District)","hits":289},{"value":"Arkansas. Department of Education","hits":220},{"value":"Little Rock School District","hits":179},{"value":"Office of Desegregation Monitoring (Little Rock, Ark.)","hits":69},{"value":"United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit","hits":30},{"value":"North Little Rock School District","hits":12},{"value":"Bushman Court Reporting","hits":11},{"value":"Walker, John W.","hits":6},{"value":"Joshua Intervenors","hits":5},{"value":"Arkanasas State University. Office of Educational Research and Services","hits":4},{"value":"Arkansas Association of Educational Administrators","hits":4}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"subject_facet","items":[{"value":"Education--Arkansas","hits":1745},{"value":"Little Rock School District","hits":1244},{"value":"Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","hits":1207},{"value":"Education--Evaluation","hits":886},{"value":"Educational law and legislation","hits":721},{"value":"Educational planning","hits":690},{"value":"School integration","hits":604},{"value":"School management and organization","hits":601},{"value":"Educational statistics","hits":560},{"value":"Education--Finance","hits":474},{"value":"School improvement programs","hits":417}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"subject_personal_facet","items":[{"value":"Springer, Joy C.","hits":6},{"value":"Walker, John W.","hits":3},{"value":"Heller, Christopher","hits":2},{"value":"Wright, Susan Webber, 1948-","hits":2},{"value":"Armor, David","hits":1},{"value":"Eddington, Ramsey","hits":1},{"value":"Intervenors, Joshua","hits":1},{"value":"Intervenors, Knight","hits":1},{"value":"Jones, Sam","hits":1},{"value":"Jones, Stephen W.","hits":1},{"value":"Joshua, Lorene","hits":1}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"event_title_sms","items":[{"value":"Little Rock Central High School Integration","hits":6},{"value":"Housing Act of 1961","hits":2}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"location_facet","items":[{"value":"United States, 39.76, -98.5","hits":1849},{"value":"United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","hits":1836},{"value":"United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","hits":1799},{"value":"United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959","hits":1539},{"value":"United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, North Little Rock, 34.76954, -92.26709","hits":10},{"value":"United States, Missouri, 38.25031, -92.50046","hits":5},{"value":"United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Maumelle, 34.86676, -92.40432","hits":4},{"value":"United States, Missouri, Saint Louis City County, Saint Louis, 38.65588, -90.30928","hits":3},{"value":"United States, Kansas, 38.50029, -98.50063","hits":2},{"value":"United States, New York, 43.00035, -75.4999","hits":2},{"value":"United States, Arkansas, Chicot County, 33.26725, -91.29397","hits":1}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"us_states_facet","items":[{"value":"Arkansas","hits":1836},{"value":"Missouri","hits":5},{"value":"Kansas","hits":2},{"value":"Massachusetts","hits":2},{"value":"New York","hits":2},{"value":"Connecticut","hits":1},{"value":"Illinois","hits":1},{"value":"Maryland","hits":1},{"value":"Michigan","hits":1},{"value":"Ohio","hits":1},{"value":"Oklahoma","hits":1}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"year_facet","items":[{"value":"1994","hits":385},{"value":"1995","hits":376},{"value":"1996","hits":334},{"value":"1993","hits":312},{"value":"1992","hits":292},{"value":"1999","hits":273},{"value":"1997","hits":268},{"value":"1991","hits":255},{"value":"2001","hits":252},{"value":"2000","hits":251},{"value":"1998","hits":245},{"value":"2002","hits":182},{"value":"1990","hits":173},{"value":"2003","hits":164},{"value":"2004","hits":148},{"value":"1989","hits":134},{"value":"2005","hits":119},{"value":"2006","hits":86},{"value":"2011","hits":62},{"value":"2010","hits":60},{"value":"2007","hits":57},{"value":"1988","hits":51},{"value":"2008","hits":47},{"value":"2009","hits":47},{"value":"1987","hits":35},{"value":"1986","hits":30},{"value":"2012","hits":30},{"value":"1984","hits":27},{"value":"1985","hits":23},{"value":"2013","hits":19},{"value":"1983","hits":16},{"value":"1982","hits":15},{"value":"1980","hits":13},{"value":"1981","hits":13},{"value":"1974","hits":12},{"value":"1975","hits":12},{"value":"1976","hits":12},{"value":"1977","hits":12},{"value":"1978","hits":12},{"value":"1979","hits":12},{"value":"1973","hits":11},{"value":"2014","hits":11},{"value":"1967","hits":9},{"value":"1968","hits":9},{"value":"1969","hits":9},{"value":"1970","hits":9},{"value":"1971","hits":9},{"value":"1972","hits":9},{"value":"1954","hits":8},{"value":"1966","hits":8},{"value":"1950","hits":7},{"value":"1951","hits":7},{"value":"1952","hits":7},{"value":"1953","hits":7},{"value":"1955","hits":7},{"value":"1956","hits":7},{"value":"1957","hits":7},{"value":"1958","hits":7},{"value":"1959","hits":7},{"value":"1960","hits":7},{"value":"1961","hits":7},{"value":"1962","hits":7},{"value":"1963","hits":7},{"value":"1964","hits":7},{"value":"1965","hits":7},{"value":"2017","hits":6},{"value":"2015","hits":5},{"value":"2016","hits":5},{"value":"2018","hits":5},{"value":"2019","hits":5},{"value":"2020","hits":5},{"value":"2021","hits":5},{"value":"2022","hits":5},{"value":"2023","hits":5},{"value":"2024","hits":5}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":100,"offset":0,"prefix":null},"min":"1950","max":"2024","count":5114,"missing":0},{"name":"medium_facet","items":[{"value":"documents (object genre)","hits":904},{"value":"reports","hits":255},{"value":"judicial records","hits":232},{"value":"legal documents","hits":207},{"value":"exhibition (associated concept)","hits":67},{"value":"project management","hits":62},{"value":"budgets","hits":38},{"value":"correspondence","hits":23},{"value":"handbooks","hits":20},{"value":"agendas (administrative records)","hits":17},{"value":"handbills","hits":16}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"rights_facet","items":[{"value":"http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/","hits":1850}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"collection_titles_sms","items":[{"value":"Office of Desegregation Management","hits":1850}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"provenance_facet","items":[{"value":"Butler Center for Arkansas Studies","hits":1850}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"class_name","items":[{"value":"Item","hits":1850}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":100,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"educator_resource_b","items":[{"value":"false","hits":1850}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":100,"offset":0,"prefix":null}}]}}