{"response":{"docs":[{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_983","title":"Discipline: ''Analysis of Disciplinary Actions, District Level,'' 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":["2004/2005"],"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--21st Century","School districts--Arkansas--North Little Rock","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","Educational statistics","School discipline"],"dcterms_title":["Discipline: ''Analysis of Disciplinary Actions, District Level,'' 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/983"],"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\nThe transcript for this item was created using Optical Character Recognition (OCR) and may contain some errors.\nNORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT RECEIVED JAN 2 0 2006 A1VA LYS Is DESEGREG~'~NNi'~ITi ORING OF DISCIPLINARY ACTIONS District Level FRANCICAL J. JACKSO Director of Student Affairs North Little Rock Public Schools Analysis of Discipline Actions I School Year 2004-2005 District Level Elementary Middle Schools High Schools 9 Year Comparison Ref: DIS032 Date: 11/11/05 Time : 6 : 51 : 4 4 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions DISTRICT LEVEL From AUGUST Through MAY 2 0 0 3 - 0 4 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # STU ========================-===---=--=-------=-========-=--======================== 09 S.A.C. 1961 55.2% 979 27.5% 394 11.1% 220 6.2% 3554 681 430 201 137 1449 10 HOME SUSP. 469 66.1% 157 22.1% 66 9.3% 18 2.5% 710 272 96 39 14 421 11 BOYS CLUB 316 58.7% 155 28.8% 51 9.5% 16 3.0% 538 187 96 39 11 333 12 E. I.C. 195 66.3% 70 23.8% 18 6.1% 11 3.7% 294 103 46 14 7 170 17 EXPULSION 2 50.0% 0 .0% 2 50.0% 0 .0% 4 2 0 2 0 4 2 0 0 4 - 0 5 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NSF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU ===============================================-------------------------------== 09 S.A.C. 1560 52.3% 860 28.8% 390 13 .1% 172 5.8% 2982 626 421 211 117 1375 10 HOME SUSP. 753 61. 2% 325 26.4% 110 8.9% 43 3.5% 1231 438 200 72 30 740 11 BOYS CLUB 3 75.0% 1 25.0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 4 3 1 0 0 4 12 E. I.C. 110 72. 4% 30 19.7% 11 7.2% 1 .7% 152 70 17 9 1 97 17 EXPULSION 11 52.4% 0 .0% 9 42.9% 1 4.8% 21 11 0 9 1 21 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------= COMPARISON ====------------------------------------------------------------------------==== -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # STU # STU # STU # STU =-----------------------------------------------------------------------=======- 09 S.A.C. 401- 20.4-% 119- 12.2-% 4- 1.0-% 48- 21.8-% 572- 55- 9- 10 20- 74- 10 HOME SUSP. 284 60.6 % 168 107.0 % 44 66.7 % 25 138. 9 % 521 166 104 33 16 319 11 BOYS CLUB 313- 99.1-% 154- 99.4-% 51- 100.0-% 16- 100.0-% 534- 184- 95- 39- 11- 329- 12 E. I.C. 85- 43.6-% 40- 57.1-% 7- 38.9-% 10- 90.9-% 142- 33- 29- 5- 6- 73- 17 EXPULSION 9 450.0 % 0 .0 % 7 350.0 % 1 100.0 % 17 9 0 7 1 17 l l I I I I I Ref: DIS032 Date: 8/09/05 Time : 7 : 3 4 : 21 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions ELEMENTARY K-5 From AUGUST Through MAY 2 0 0 3 - 0 4 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT /TOT # STU # STU # STU -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # STU -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 09 S.A.C. 0 Og_ 0 0 0 g_ 0 0 0 9- 0 0 0 g_ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 228 65.1% 83 23.7% 33 9.4% 6 1. 7% 350 145 51 20 5 221 11 BOYS CLUB 0 Og_ 0 0 0 g_ 0 0 Og_ 0 0 0 g_ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C. 194 66.2% 70 23.9% 18 6.1% 11 3.8% 293 102 46 14 7 169 17 EXPULSION 0 .0% 0 Og_ 0 0 0 g_ 0 0 Og_ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 4 - 0 5 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 09 S.A.C. 0 0 g_ 0 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 224 69.3% 52 16.1% 34 10.5% 13 4. 0% 323 129 34 20 6 189 11 BOYS CLUB 0 .0% 0 Og_ 0 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C. 110 72.4% 30 19.7% 11 7.2% 1 7 g_ 0 152 70 17 9 1 97 17 EXPULSION 1 100.0% 0 0 g_ 0 0 0 g_ 0 0 Og_ 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 COMPARISON -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # STU # STU # STU # STU ---=============-----------------------------------------------------------==--= 09 S.A.C. 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 4- 1.8-% 31- 37.3-% 1 3.0 % 7 116. 7 % 27- 16- 17- 0 1 32- 11 BOYS CLUB 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C. 84- 43.3-% 40- 57.1-% 7- 38.9-% 10- 90.9-% 141- 32- 29- 5- 6- 72- 17 EXPULSION 1 100.0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 1 1 0 0 0 1 I l J 1 Ref: DIS032 Date: 11/11/05 Time: 6:51:45 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions MIDDLE SCHOOLS From AUGUST Through MAY 2 0 0 3 - 0 4 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # STU -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 09 S.A.C. 1199 55.6% 613 28.4% 218 10.1% 125 5.8% 2155 397 250 100 71 818 10 HOME SUSP. 50 58.1% 23 26. 7% 6 7.0% 7 8.1% 86 35 14 5 6 60 11 BOYS CLUB 246 59.3% 125 30.1% 33 8.0% 11 2.7% 415 131 71 22 7 231 12 E. I. C. 1 100.0% 0 0 g_ 0 0 0 g_ 0 0 0 g_ 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 17 EXPULSION 0 0 g_ 0 0 Og_ 0 0 0 g_ 0 0 0 g_ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 4 - 0 5 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT /TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT /TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU ========================================================-=-------------------=== 09 S.A.C. 839 52.0% 434 26.9% 254 15.8% 85 5.3% 1612 328 224 131 54 737 10 HOME SUSP. 199 53.4% llO 29.5% 52 13. 9% 12 3.2% 373 122 74 29 8 233 ll BOYS CLUB 3 75.0% 1 25.0% 0 0 g_ 0 0 .0% 4 3 1 0 0 4 12 E. I. C. 0 0 g_ 0 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 g_ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 5 55.6% 0 .0% 4 44.4% 0 0 g_ 0 9 5 0 4 0 9 COMPARISON -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # STU # STU # STU # STU ----=====---------------------------------------------------------------------== 09 S.A.C. 360- 30.0-% 179- 29.2-% 36 16.5 % 40- 32.0-% 543- 69- ' 26- 31 17- 81- 10 HOME SUSP. 149 298.0 % 87 378.3 % 46 766.7 % 5 71. 4 % 287 87 60 24 2 173 ll BOYS CLUB 243- 98.8-% 124- 99.2-% 33- 100.0-% ll- 100.0-% 4ll- 128- 70- 22- 7- 227- 12 E. I.C. 1- 100.0-% 0 .0 % 0 . 0 \"% 0 . 0 % 1- 1- 0 0 0 1- 17 EXPULSION 5 500.0 % 0 .0 % 4 400.0 % 0 . 0 % 9 5 0 4 0 9 I I I I I Ref: DIS032 Date: 11/11/05 Time: 6:51:45 09 S.A.C. 10 HOME SUSP. 11 BOYS CLUB 12 E. I.C. 17 EXPULSION Analysis of Disciplinary Actions HIGH SCHOOLS From AUGUST Through MAY 2 0 0 3 - 0 4 -----BM------ # REF PCT /TOT # STU 762 54.5% 284 191 69.7% 92 70 56.9% 56 0 .0% 0 2 50.0% 2 -----BF------ # REF PCT /TOT # STU 366 26.2% 180 51 18.6% 31 30 24.4% 25 0 .0% 0 0 .0% 0 -----NBM----# REF PCT/TOT # STU 17 6 12.6% 101 27 9.9% 14 18 14.6% 17 0 .0% 0 2 50.0% 2 -----NSF----# REF PCT/TOT # STU 95 6.8% 66 5 1.8% 3 5 4.1% 4 0 .0% 0 0 .0% 0 1399 631 274 140 123 102 0 0 4 4 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------==== 2 0 0 4 - 0 5 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU ~ STU # STU # STU -----------------------------------------------------------------------------=== 09 S.A.C. 721 52.6% 426 31. 1% 136 9.9% 87 6.4% 1370 298 197 80 63 638 10 HOME SUSP. 327 61.5% 163 30.6% 24 4.5% 18 3.4% 532 185 92 23 16 316 11 BOYS CLUB 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C. 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 6 50.0% 0 .0% 5 41. 7% 1 8.3% 12 6 0 5 1 12 COMPARISON -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NSF----- # REF PCT(+/-} # REF PCT(+/-} # REF PCT(+/-} # REF PCT(+/-} # STU # STU # STU # STU -------------------------------------------------------------------------------= 09 S.A.C. 41- 5.4-% 60 16.4 % 40- 22.7-% 8- 8.4-% 2 9- 14 17 21- 3- 7 10 HOME SUSP. 136 71. 2 % 112 219.6 % 3- 11. 1-% 13 260.0 % 258 93 61 9 13 17 6 11 BOYS CLUB 70- 100.0-% 30- 100.0-% 18- 100.0-% 5- 100.0-% 123- 56- 25- 17- 4- 102- 12 E. I.C. 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 4 200.0 % 0 .0 % 3 150.0 % 1 100.0 % 8 4 0 3 1 8 I I I I I J Ref: Date: Time: DIS032S 11/11/05 6:51:45 School: 031 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions by School From AUGUST Through MAY AMBOY ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 2 0 0 3 - 0 4 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU -----NSF----- # REF PCT/TOT # STU ------===========-=--=--------------------==-========----====--=--============== 09 S.A.C. 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 20 58.8% 11 32.4% 2 5.9% 1 2.9% 34 16 5 2 1 24 11 BOYS CLUB 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C. 8 66.7% 3 25.0% 0 .0% 0 8.3% 12 6 3 0 1 10 17 EXPULSION 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 4 - 0 5 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NSF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT /TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 09 S.A.C. 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 19 67. 9% 1 3.6% 3 10.7% 5 17.9% 28 7 1 2 2 12 11 BOYS CLUB 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 COMPARISON -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NSF----- # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-} # REF PCT(+/-} # REF PCT(+/-} # STU # STU # STU # STU ------------------------------------------------------------------------------== 09 S.A.C. 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 1- 5.0-% 10- 90.9-% 1 50.0 % 4 400.0 % 6- 9- 4- 0 1 12- 11 BOYS CLUB 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I. C. 8- .0 % 3- . 0 % 0 .0 % 1- . 0 % 12- 1- 1- 0 1- 10- 17 EXPULSION 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ref: DIS032S Date: 11/11/05 Time: 6:51:45 School: 032 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions by School From AUGUST Through MAY LAKEWOOD ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 2 0 0 3 - 0 4 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # STU ==========-==========--=-----------------------------==---------------========== 09 S.A.C. 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 1 100.0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 1 1 0 0 0 1 11 BOYS CLUB 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C. 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 4 - 0 5 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT /TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU ----==============--------------------------------==-==========-------------==== 09 S.A.C. 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 4 57.1% 1 14.3% 2 28.6% 0 .0% 7 3 1 2 0 6 11 BOYS CLUB 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 ---==========--------------------------==================-------------------==== COMPARISON -----======-------------------------================------------------------==== -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # STU # STU # STU # STU -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 09 S.A.C. 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 3 300.0 % 1 100. 0 % 2 200.0 % 0 . 0 % 6 2 1 2 0 5 11 BOYS CLUB 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C. 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 J J J Ref: DIS032S Date: 11/11/05 Time : 6 : 51 : 4 5 School: 033 09 S.A.C. 10 HOME SUSP. 11 BOYS CLUB 12 E. I.C. 17 EXPULSION Analysis of Disciplinary Actions by School From AUGUST Through MAY BOONE PARK ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 2 0 0 3 - 0 4 -----BM-----# REF PCT/TOT # STU 0 0 g_ 0 0 27 79.4% 16 0 0 g_ 0 0 49 84.5% 15 0 09- 0 0 -----BF-----# REF PCT/TOT # STU 0 0 g_ 0 0 7 20.6% 4 0 0 g_ 0 0 9 15.5% 3 0 0 g_ 0 0 2 0 0 4 - 0 5 -----BM------ -----BF------ # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU -----NBM----# REF PCT/TOT # STU 0 0 g_ 0 0 0 0 9- 0 0 0 0 g_ 0 0 0 09- 0 0 0 .0% 0 -----NBM----- # REF PCT/TOT # STU -----NBF----# REF PCT/TOT # STU 0 0 9- 0 0 0 .0% 0 0 0 g_ 0 0 0 Os,. 0 0 0 0 g_ 0 0 -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # STU 0 0 34 20 0 0 58 18 0 0 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 09 S.A.C. 0 Os,. 0 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 7 87.5% 1 12.5% 0 .0% 0 .0% 8 5 1 0 0 6 11 BOYS CLUB 0 Os,. 0 0 .0% 0 Os,. 0 0 Os,. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C 30 76.9% 9 23.1% 0 .0% 0 Os,. 0 39 17 2 0 0 19 17 EXPULSION 0 09- 0 0 Os,. 0 0 .0% 0 0 g_ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 COMPARISON -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # STU # STU # STU # STU 09 S.A.C. 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .o % 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 20- 74.1-% 6- 85.7-% 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 26- 11- 3- 0 0 14- 11 BOYS CLUB 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C. 19- .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 19- 0 0 0 0 1 17 EXPULSION 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ref: DIS032S Date: 11/11/05 Time : 6 : 51 : 4 5 School: 035 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions by School From AUGUST Through MAY SEVENTH STREET ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 2 0 0 3 - 0 4 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # STU -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 09 S.A.C. 0 05!- 0 0 05!- 0 0 0 Se 0 0 05!- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 53 79.1% 14 20.9% 0 0 Se 0 0 05!- 0 67 34 9 0 0 43 11 BOYS CLUB 0 0 Se 0 0 0 Se 0 0 0 Se 0 0 05!- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C. 72 74.2% 25 25.8% 0 .0% 0 05!- 0 97 40 17 0 0 57 17 EXPULSION 0 0 Se 0 0 0 Se 0 0 0 Se 0 0 0 Se 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 4 - 0 5 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU ====================--------=========================-------------------------== 09 S.A.C. 0 0 Se 0 0 05!- 0 0 .0% 0 0 Se 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 67 84.8% 12 15.2% 0 0 Se 0 0 .0% 79 42 10 0 0 52 11 BOYS CLUB 0 .0% 0 0 Se 0 0 0 Se 0 0 0 Se 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C 54 80.6% 13 19.4% 0 .0% 0 0 5l- 0 67 34 9 0 0 43 17 EXPULSION 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 COMPARISON -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # STU # STU # STU # STU =====-==-=--=========--------------=============-----------------------------=== 09 S.A.C. 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .o % 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 14 26.4 % 2- 14.3-% 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 12 8 1 0 0 9 11 BOYS CLUB 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .o % 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C. 18- .0 % 12- .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .o % 30- 0 0 0 0 14- 17 EXPULSION 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 I I Ref: Date: Time: DIS032S 11/11/05 6:51:45 School: 037 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions by School From AUGUST Through MAY LYNCH DRIVE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 2 0 0 3 - 0 4 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # STU -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 09 S.A.C. 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 21 77.8% 5 18.5% 0 .0% 1 3. 7% 27 13 3 0 1 17 11 BOYS CLUB 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C. 23 50.0% 18 39.1% 0 .0% 0 10.9% 46 13 11 0 2 26 17 EXPULSION 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 4 - 0 5 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU ----===========-----------------===========================----------------===== 09 S.A.C. 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 4 40.0% 6 60.0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 10 4 4 0 0 8 11 BOYS CLUB 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C 10 71. 4% 3 21. 4 % 1 7.1% 0 .0% 14 7 2 1 0 10 17 EXPULSION 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 COMPARISON -=============--------------------=================-=-------------------======== -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # STU # STU # STU # STU -----=======----------------------------=======-----------------------------==-- 09 S.A.C. 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 17- 81. 0-% 1 20.0 % 0 .0 % 1- 100.0-% 17- 9- 1 0 1- 9- 11 BOYS CLUB 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C. 13- . 0 % 15- . 0 % 1 .0 % 5- . 0 % 32- 1- 1- 1 5- 16- 17 EXPULSION 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 I I Ref: DIS032S Date: 11/11/05 Time: 6:51:45 School: 040 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions by School From AUGUST Through MAY MEADOW PARK ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 2 0 0 3 - 0 4 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # STU -------=--=------------------------------------=-============================--- 09 S.A.C. 0 0 9- 0 0 09- 0 0 .0% 0 09- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 38 44.7% 26 30.6% 18 21. 2% 3 3.5% 85 23 14 6 2 45 11 BOYS CLUB 0 .0% 0 09- 0 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E.I.C. 1 16.7% 4 66.7% 0 16.7% 0 09- 0 6 1 2 1 0 4 17 EXPULSION 0 09- 0 0 0 9- 0 0 .0% 0 09- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 4 - 0 5 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU -------------------------------------------------------------------------------= 09 S.A.C. 0 09- 0 0 09- 0 0 .0% 0 09- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 55 64.7% 23 27.1% 2 2.4% 5 5.9% 85 23 11 2 1 37 11 BOYS CLUB 0 0 9- 0 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 9- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I. C 0 .0% 0 09- 0 0 0 9- 0 0 0 9- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 0 0 9- 0 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 09- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 COMPARISON -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # STU # STU # STU # STU 09 S.A.C. 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 17 44.7 % 3- 11. 5-% 16- 88.9-% 2 66.7 % 0 0 3- 4- 1- 8- 11 BOYS CLUB 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C. 1- . 0 % 4- .0 % 1- . 0 % 0 . 0 % 6- 1- 1- 1- 0 4- 17 EXPULSION 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 I I I I Ref: OIS032S Date: 11/11/05 Time : 6 : 51 : 4 5 School: 041 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions by School From AUGUST Through MAY NORTH HEIGHTS ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 2 0 0 3 - 0 4 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # STU -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 09 S.A.C. 0 Og. 0 0 .0% 0 Og. 0 0 Og. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 4 50.0% 0 Og. 0 4 50.0% 0 Og. 0 8 2 0 3 0 5 11 BOYS CLUB 0 Og. 0 0 Og. 0 0 Og. 0 0 Og. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C. 18 72.0% 2 8.0% 0 20.0% 0 .0% 25 12 2 5 0 19 17 EXPULSION 0 0 g. 0 0 Og. 0 0 .0% 0 Og. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 4 - 0 5 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU =========================================================--------------------=== 09 S.A.C. 0 0 g. 0 0 Og. 0 0 0 g. 0 0 Og. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 2 20.0% 0 .0% 8 80.0% 0 .0% 10 2 0 3 0 5 11 BOYS CLUB 0 Og. 0 0 0 g. 0 0 .0% 0 0 g. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C 4 30.8% 3 23.1% 5 38.5% 1 7.7% 13 4 3 3 1 11 17 EXPULSION 0 .0% 0 0 g. 0 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 COMPARISON ================---------------------===========-----------------------------=== 09 S.A.C. 10 HOME SUSP. 11 BOYS CLUB 12 E.I.C. 17 EXPULSION -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # STU # STU # STU # STU 0 0 2- 0 0 0 14- 1- 0 0 0 g. 0 50.0-% .0 % .0 % .0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 .0 % .0 % .0 % .0 % .0 % 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .0 % 100.0 % .0 % .0 % .0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 .0 % .0 % .o % .0 % .0 % 0 0 2 0 0 0 12- 8- 0 0 I I I I I J J J J J Ref: DIS032S Date: 11/11/05 Time : 6 : 51 : 4 5 School: 042 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions by School From AUGUST Through MAY CRESTWOOD ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 2 0 0 3 - 0 4 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # STU ---------------------------------------------------------------------------===== 09 S.A.C. 0 0 g. 0 0 0 g. 0 0 0 g. 0 0 Og. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 15 93.8% 0 Og. 0 1 6.3% 0 0 g. 0 16 9 0 1 0 10 11 BOYS CLUB 0 0 g. 0 0 0 9- 0 0 0 g. 0 0 0 g. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C. 0 .0% 0 0 g. 0 0 .0% 0 0 9- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 0 Og. 0 0 Og. 0 0 0 g. 0 0 0 g. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 4 - 0 5 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU ----------------------------------==============-------=====-----------------=== 09 S.A.C. 0 .0% 0 Og. 0 0 0 g. 0 0 Og. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 19 61.3% 1 3.2% 11 35.5% 0 Og. 0 31 15 1 7 0 23 11 BOYS CLUB 0 0 9- 0 0 Og. 0 0 0 g. 0 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 9- 0 0 09- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 0 0 g. 0 0 .0% 0 0 g. 0 0 09- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -----------------------------------=======-=====------------------------------== COMPARISON -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # STU # STU # STU # STU ---------------------------------------------------------------------------===== 09 S.A.C. 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 4 26.7 % 1 100.0 % 10 1000.0 % 0 . 0 % 15 6 1 6 0 13 11 BOYS CLUB 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C. 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 I I I I I I I I ] l Ref: DIS032S Date: 11/11/05 Time : 6 : 51 : 4 5 School: 043 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions by School From AUGUST Through MAY PARK HILL ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 2 0 0 3 - 0 4 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # STU -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 09 S.A.C. 0 0 g_ 0 0 0 g_ 0 0 09- 0 0 09- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 1 10.0% 9 90.0% 0 Og_ 0 0 .0% 10 1 7 0 0 8 11 BOYS CLUB 0 0 g_ 0 0 0 g_ 0 0 0 g_ 0 0 09- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C. 0 0 g_ 0 1 100.0% 0 0 g_ 0 0 0 9- 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 17 EXPULSION 0 09- 0 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 09- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 4 - 0 5 -----BM------ -----Bf------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REf PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU ---------==------------------=-==========================------------------===== 09 S.A.C. 0 09- 0 0 09- 0 0 .0% 0 09- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 20 62.5% 4 12.5% 6 18.8% 2 6.3% 32 11 3 3 2 19 11 BOYS CLUB 0 09- 0 0 .0% 0 0 g_ 0 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C 0 .0% 0 .0% 1 100.0% 0 O!l- 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 17 EXPULSION 0 .0% 0 O!l- 0 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 ------------------------------------====------==----------------------------=-== COMPARISON -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBf----- # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # STU # STU # STU # STU ----------------------------------------------------------------------------==== 09 S.A.C. 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 19 1900.0 % 5- 55.6-% 6 600.0 % 2 200.0 % 22 10 4- 3 2 11 11 BOYS CLUB 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I. C. 0 . 0 % 1- . 0 % 1 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 0 1- 1 0 0 17 EXPULSION 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 I I I I I I Ref: DIS032S Date: 11/11/05 Time : 6 : 51 : 4 5 School: 044 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions by School From AUGUST Through MAY PIKE VIEW ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 2 0 0 3 - 0 4 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # STU -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 09 S.A.C. 0 0 g. 0 0 0 g. 0 0 .0% 0 Og. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 3 75.0% 1 25.0% 0 Og. 0 0 Og. 0 4 2 1 0 0 3 11 BOYS CLUB 0 0 g. 0 0 0 g. 0 0 0 g. 0 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C. 13 59.1% 7 31. 8% 0 9.1% 0 0 9- 0 22 10 6 2 0 18 17 EXPULSION 0 Og. 0 0 Og. 0 0 Og. 0 0 Og. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 4 - 0 5 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU ------------------------------------------------------------------------------=== 09 S.A.C. 0 .0% 0 Og. 0 0 Og. 0 0 Og. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 8 100.0% 0 .0% 0 0 g. 0 0 .0% 8 7 0 0 0 7 11 BOYS CLUB 0 0 g. 0 0 0 9- 0 0 .0% 0 Og. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C 3 75.0% 0 .0% 1 25.0% 0 0 g. 0 4 1 0 1 0 2 17 EXPULSION 0 0 g. 0 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 COMPARISON -----------------------------------------------------------------------------=== -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # STU # STU # STU # STU ----------------------------------------------------------------------------==== 09 S.A.C. 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 5 166.7 % 1- 100.0-% 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 4 5 1- 0 0 4 11 BOYS CLUB 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I. C. 10- . 0 % 7- . 0 % 1- .0 % 0 . 0 % 18- 1- 1- 1- 0 16- 17 EXPULSION 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 I I J ) Ref: DIS032S 11/11/05 6:51:45 045 Date: Time: School: 09 S.A.C. 10 HOME SUSP. 11 BOYS CLUB 12 E. I.C. 17 EXPULSION Analysis of Disciplinary Actions by School From AUGUST Through MAY BELWOOD ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 2 0 0 3 - 0 4 -----BM------ # REF PCT/TOT # STU 0 .0% 0 6 60.0% 3 0 .0% 0 0 .0% 0 0 .0% 0 -----BF------ # REF PCT/TOT # STU 0 .0% 0 4 40.0% 3 0 .0% 0 0 .0% 0 0 .0% 0 -----NBM----# REF PCT/TOT # STU 0 .0% 0 0 .0% 0 0 .0% 0 0 .0% 0 0 .0% 0 -----NBF----# REF PCT/TOT # STU 0 .0% 0 0 .0% 0 0 .0% 0 0 .0% 0 0 .0% 0 0 0 10 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 0 0 4 - 0 5 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU -==================--------==================================-=------------===== 09 S.A.C. 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 7 100.0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 7 5 0 0 0 5 11 BOYS CLUB 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 ======================-=-=-=============================-------------------===== COMPARISON -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # STU # STU # STU # STU -------------------------------------------------------------------------------= 09 S.A.C. 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 1 16.7 % 4- 100.0-% 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 3- 2 3- 0 0 1- 11 BOYS CLUB 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C. 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ref: DIS032S Date: 11/11/05 Time : 6 : 51 : 4 5 School: 046 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions by School From AUGUST Through MAY GLENVIEW ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 2 0 0 3 - 0 4 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # STU ===================================-=-=========--------------------------======= 09 S.A.C. 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 31 75.6% 5 12.2% 5 12.2% 0 .0% 41 23 5 5 0 33 11 BOYS CLUB 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C. 1 100.0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 1 1 0 0 0 1 17 EXPULSION 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 4 - 0 5 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NSF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU =====================================================--------------------------= 09 S.A.C. 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 7 87.5% 1 12.5% 0 .0% 0 .0% 8 5 1 0 0 6 11 BOYS CLUB 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 =====================================================------=-======---------==== COMPARISON =====================================================---------------------====== -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # STU # STU # STU # STU ===================================================--------------------========= 09 S.A.C. 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 24- 77.4-% 4- 80.0-% 5- 100.0-% 0 . 0 % 33- 18- 4- 5- 0 27- 11 BOYS CLUB 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I. C. 1- . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 1- 1- 0 0 0 1- 17 EXPULSION 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 I I Ref: DIS032S Date: 11/11/05 Time : 6 : 51 : 4 5 School: 048 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions by School From AUGUST Through MAY INDIAN HILLS ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 2 0 0 3 - 0 4 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT /TOT # STU # STU # STU -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # STU =======================================================----------------=--====== 09 S.A.C. 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 8 61.5% 1 7.7% 3 23.1% 1 7.7% 13 4 1 3 1 9 11 BOYS CLUB 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C. 9 36.0% 1 4.0% 0 40.0% 0 20.0% 25 6 1 6 4 17 17 EXPULSION 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 4 - 0 5 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU -===================================================--------------------------== 09 S.A.C. 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 7 70.0% 0 .0% 2 20.0% 1 10.0% 10 4 0 1 1 6 11 BOYS CLUB 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E.I.C 9 64.3% 2 14.3% 3 21.4% 0 .0% 14 7 1 3 0 11 17 EXPULSION 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 =====================================--=--==========-----------------------===== COMPARISON =====================================================-------------------======== -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # STU # STU # STU # STU --============================================-----------------------------===== 09 S.A.C. 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 1- 12.5-% 1- 100.0-% 1- 33.3-% 0 . 0 % 3- 0 1- 2- 0 3- 11 BOYS CLUB 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 .o % 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C. 0 . 0 % 1 . 0 % 7- .0 % 5- . 0 % 11- 0 1 7- 5- 6- 17 EXPULSION 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 I I I I I I I I I I I Ref: DIS032S Date: 11/11/05 Time : 6 : 51 : 4 5 School: 024 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions by School From AUGUST Through MAY RIDGEROAD MIDDLE CHARTER SCHOOL 2 0 0 3 - 0 4 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # STU -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 09 S.A.C. 681 56.7% 341 28.4% 107 8.9% 73 6.1% 1202 156 106 34 34 330 10 HOME SUSP. 38 62.3% 16 26.2% 3 4.9% 4 6.6% 61 25 9 3 3 40 11 BOYS CLUB 81 70.4% 24 20.9% 8 7.0% 2 1. 7% 115 38 12 4 1 55 12 E. I.C. 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 . 0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 4 - 0 5 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 09 S.A.C. 337 54.5% 193 31.2% 67 10.8% 21 3.4% 618 124 86 32 15 257 10 HOME SUSP. 52 57.8% 27 30.0% 10 11.1% 1 1.1% 90 37 15 6 1 59 11 BOYS CLUB 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I. C 0 .0% 0 . 0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 5 83.3% 0 .0% 1 16. 7% 0 .0% 6 5 0 1 0 6 COMPARISON -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # STU # STU # STU # STU -----------------------------------------------------------------------------=== 09 S.A.C. 344- 50.5-% 148- 43.4-% 40- 37.4-% 52- 71.2-% 584- 32- 20- 2- 19- 73- 10 HOME SUSP. 14 36.8 % 11 68.8 % 7 233.3 % 3- 75.0-% 29 12 6 3 2- 19 11 BOYS CLUB 81- 100.0-% 24- 100.0-% 8- 100.0-% 2- 100.0-% 115- 38- 12- 4- 1- 55- 12 E. I.C. 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 5 500.0 % 0 .0 % 1 100.0 % 0 .0 % 6 5 0 1 0 6 Ref: DIS032S Date: 11/11/05 Time: 6:51:45 School: 025 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions by School From AUGUST Through MAY LAKEWOOD MIDDLE SCHOOL --------------------------------==============================-----------======= 2 0 0 3 - 0 4 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- If REF PCT/TOT If REF PCT/TOT If REF PCT/TOT If REF PCT/TOT If STU If STU If STU If STU ---------------------------------------------------------------------------=-=== 09 S.A.C. 163 46. 7% 92 26. 4% 60 17.2% 34 9. 7% 349 68 45 38 25 176 10 HOME SUSP. 1 16.7% 1 16.7% 1 16.7% 3 50.0% 6 1 1 1 3 6 11 BOYS CLUB 32 47.8% 18 26.9% 10 14.9% 7 10.4% 67 22 12 8 4 46 12 E. I.C. 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 ------------------------------------------------------------=------------======= 2 0 0 4 - 0 5 -------=------------=-=-=======================-==============-=------========== -----BM-----lf REF PCT/TOT If STU -----BF------ lf REF PCT /TOT If STU -----NBM----lf REF PCT/TOT If STU -----NBF----lf REF PCT/TOT If STU ----------------------------------========-=-------------------------------===== 09 S.A.C. 127 39. 4 % 61 18.9% 103 32.0% 31 9.6% 322 57 35 59 25 176 10 HOME SUSP. 29 35.8% 19 23.5% 31 38.3% 2 2.5% 81 21 14 15 2 52 11 BOYS CLUB 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 0 .0% 0 .0% 3 100.0% 0 .0% 3 0 0 3 0 3 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------=== COMPARISON -----------------------------------============-------------------------====--== -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- lf REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) If REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) If STU If STU If STU If STU -------=------------------------------=--=-----------------------------====--==- 09 S.A.C. 36- 22.1-% 31- 33.7-% 43 71. 7 % 3- 8.8-% 27- 11- 10- 21 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 28 2800.0 % 18 1800.0 % 30 3000.0 % 1- 33.3-% 75 20 13 14 1- 46 11 BOYS CLUB 32- 100.0-% 18- 100.0-% 10- 100.0-% 7- 100.0-% 67- 22- 12- 8- 4- 4 6- 12 E. I.C. 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 3 300.0 % 0 .o % 3 0 0 3 0 3 I I I Ref: DIS032S Date: 11/11/05 Time : 6 : 51 : 4 5 School: 026 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions by School From AUGUST Through MAY ROSE CITY MIDDLE SCHOOL 2 0 0 3 - 0 4 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # STU -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 09 S.A.C. 57 55.9% 41 40.2% 3 2.9% 1 1.0% 102 38 27 2 1 68 10 HOME SUSP. 4 80.0% 1 20.0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 5 4 1 0 0 5 11 BOYS CLUB 23 39.0% 35 59.3% 1 1. 7% 0 .0% 59 16 24 1 0 41 12 E. I. C. 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 4 - 0 5 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NSF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU -===========================================================---------------===== 09 S.A.C. 105 59.7% 35 19.9% 26 14.8% 10 5. 7% 176 44 22 10 4 80 10 HOME SUSP. 42 50.6% 35 42.2% 4 4.8% 2 2.4% 83 25 26 4 2 57 11 BOYS CLUB 3 100.0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 3 3 0 0 0 3 12 E.I.C 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 ===================-----=--=========================-----------------------===== COMPARISON -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # STU # STU # STU # STU -================--------------=================-------------------------======- 09 S.A.C. 48 84.2 % 6- 14.6-% 23 766.7 % 9 900.0 % 74 6 5- 8 3 12 10 HOME SUSP. 38 950.0 % 34 3400.0 % 4 400.0 % 2 200.0 % 78 21 25 4 2 52 11 BOYS CLUB 20- 87.0-% 35- 100.0-% 1- 100.0-% 0 . 0 % 56- 13- 24- 1- 0 38- 12 E. I. C. 0 . 0 % 0 .o % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ref: DIS032S Date: 11/11/05 Time : 6 : 51 : 4 5 School: 027 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions by School From AUGUST Through MAY ROSE CITY MIDDLE LEVEL ACADEMY 2 0 0 3 - 0 4 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # STU -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 09 S.A.C. 22 75.9% 4 13.8% 3 10.3% 0 .0% 29 15 3 1 0 19 10 HOME SUSP. 7 50.0% 5 35. 7% 2 14.3% 0 .0% 14 5 3 1 0 9 11 BOYS CLUB 2 40.0% 3 60.0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 5 2 3 0 0 5 12 E. I.C. 1 100.0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 1 1 0 0 0 1 17 EXPULSION 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 4 - 0 5 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU ===============================================================-----------====== 09 S.A.C. 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 BOYS CLUB 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 . 0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 COMPARISON ======================---==========================---------------------=-====== -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # STU # STU # STU # STU --===============-==-----------================-------------------------=======- 09 S.A.C. 22- 100.0-% 4- 100.0-% 3- 100.0-% 0 . 0 % 29- 15- 3- 1- 0 19- 10 HOME SUSP. 7- 100.0-% 5- 100.0-% 2- 100.0-% 0 . 0 % 14- 5- 3- 1- 0 9- 11 BOYS CLUB 2- 100.0-% 3- 100.0-% 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 5- 2- 3- 0 0 5- 12 E. I.C. 1- . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 1- 1- 0 0 0 1- 17 EXPULSION 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ref: DIS032S Date: 11/11/05 Time : 6 : 51 : 4 5 School: 030 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions by School From AUGUST Through MAY POPLAR STREET MIDDLE SCHOOL 2 0 0 3 - 0 4 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # STU --------------------------------------------------------------------------====== 09 S.A.C. 276 58.4% 135 28.5% 45 9.5% 17 3.6% 473 128 72 25 12 237 10 HOME SUSP. 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 b 0 0 0 11 BOYS CLUB 108 63.9% 45 26.6% 14 8.3% 2 1. 2% 169 54 21 9 2 86 12 E. I.C. 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 4 - 0 5 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU ---------------------============================================-------======== 09 S.A.C. 270 54.3% 146 29. 4 % 58 11. 7% 23 4.6% 4 97 113 84 31 12 240 10 HOME SUSP. 76 65.0% 27 23.1% 7 6.0% 7 6.0% 117 40 18 4 3 65 11 BOYS CLUB 0 .0% 1 100.0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 1 0 1 0 0 1 12 E. I.C 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 COMPARISON ------------------------------------------------------------------------------== -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # STU # STU # STU # STU ----------------------------------------==-------------------------------======= 09 S.A.C. 6- 2.2-% 11 8.1 % 13 28.9 % 6 35.3 % 24 15- 12 6 0 3 10 HOME SUSP. 76 7600.0 % 27 2700.0 % 7 700.0 % 7 700.0 % 117 40 18 4 3 65 11 BOYS CLUB 108- 100.0-% 44- 97.8-% 14- 100.0-% 2- 100.0-% 168- 54- 20- 9- 2- 85- 12 E. I.C. 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 ] Ref: DIS032S Date: 11/11/05 Time: 6:51:45 School: 012 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions by School From AUGUST Through MAY NORTH LITTLE ROCK HIGH SCHOOL - 11/12 2 0 0 3 - 0 4 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # STU -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 09 S.A.C. 200 53.6% 66 17.7% 65 17.4% 42 11. 3% 373 99 53 46 27 225 10 HOME SUSP. 10 66.7% 0 .0% 4 26.7% 1 6. 7% 15 9 0 4 1 14 11 BOYS CLUB 15 51. 7% 5 17.2% 8 27.6% 1 3.4% 29 15 5 8 1 29 12 E. I.C. 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 4 - 0 5 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU -===========================================================-=--------------==== 09 S.A.C. 142 42.5% 101 30.2% 67 20.1% 24 7.2% 334 88 69 41 17 215 10 HOME SUSP. 59 60.8% 21 21. 6% 6 6.2% 11 11. 3% 97 52 18 6 10 86 11 BOYS CLUB 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I. C 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 1 100.0% 1 0 0 0 1 1 ==========================================================---------------======= COMPARISON =====================================================----------------------===== -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # STU # STU # STU # STU ---============------------------=============-----------------------------===== 09 S.A.C. 58- 29.0-% 35 53.0 % 2 3.1 % 18- 42.9-% 39- 11- 16 5- 10- 10- 10 HOME SUSP. 49 490.0 % 21 2100.0 % 2 50.0 % 10 1000.0 % 82 43 18 2 9 72 11 BOYS CLUB 15- 100.0-% 5- 100.0-% 8- 100.0-% 1- 100.0-% 29- 15- 5- 8- 1- 2 9- 12 E. I.C. 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 1 100.0 % 1 0 0 0 1 1 Ref: DIS032S Date: 11/11/05 Time: 6:51:45 School: 013 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions by School From AUGUST Through MAY NORTH LITTLE ROCK HIGH SCHOOL - 09/10 2 0 0 3 - 0 4 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # STU --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 09 S.A.C. 562 54.8% 300 29.2% 111 10.8% 53 5.2% 1026 185 127 55 39 406 10 HOME SUSP. 67 65.0% 26 25.2% 10 9.7% 0 Og_ 0 103 37 13 6 0 56 11 BOYS CLUB 55 58.5% 25 26.6% 10 10.6% 4 4.3% 94 41 20 9 3 73 12 E. I.C. 0 Og_ 0 0 Og. 0 2 0 g_ 0 0 0 g_ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 2 50.0% 0 0 g_ 0 2 50.0% 0 0 g_ 0 4 2 0 2 0 4 2 0 0 4 - 0 5 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU --===================================================-=----------------------=== 09 S.A.C. 579 55.9% 324 31. 3% 69 6. 7% 63 6.1% 1035 210 127 39 46 422 10 HOME SUSP. 167 56.2% 106 35. 7% 17 5.7% 7 2.4% 297 94 57 16 6 173 11 BOYS CLUB 0 0 g_ 0 0 0 g_ 0 0 Og. 0 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C 0 .0% 0 Og_ 0 0 .0% 0 Og_ 0 0 0 0 0 0 (j 17 EXPULSION 6 54.5% 0 Og_ 0 5 45.5% 0 0 g. 0 11 6 0 5 0 11 COMPARISON -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # STU # STU # STU # STU -----------------------------------------------------------------------------=== 09 S.A.C. 17 3.0 % 24 8.0 % 42- 37.8-% 10 18.9 % 9 25 0 16- 7 16 10 HOME SUSP. 100 149.3 % 80 307.7 % 7 70.0 % 7 700.0 % 194 57 44 10 6 117 11 BOYS CLUB 55- 100.0-% 25- 100.0-% 10- 100.0-% 4- 100.0-% 94- 41- 20- 9- 3- 73- 12 E. I. C. 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % o 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 4 200.0 % 0 . 0 % 3 150.0 % 0 . 0 % 7 4 0 3 0 7 I I Ref: DIS032S Date: 11/11/05 Time: 6:51:45 School: 020 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions by School From AUGUST Through MAY ARGENTA ACADEMY 2 0 0 3 - 0 4 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU -----NSF----- # REF PCT/TOT # STU --------------------------------------------=----=-==--====-==================== 09 S.A.C. 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 114 73.1% 25 16.0% 13 8.3% 4 2.6% 156 51 18 6 2 77 11 BOYS CLUB 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C. 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 4 - 0 5 ------------=-=-===-============================================================ -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU -------------------=-============================================-------======== 09 S.A.C. 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 102 71. 3% 40 28.0% 1 .7% 0 .0% 143 46 23 1 0 70 11 BOYS CLUB 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 -------------------------------====================------------------------===== COMPARISON ----=========---------------========-----------=======-=----------------===---== -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # STU # STU # STU # STU ---------------------------------=============--------------------------====---= 09 S.A.C. 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 12- 10.5-% 15 60.0 % 12- 92. 3-% 4- 100.0-% 13- 5- 5 5- 2- 7- 11 BOYS CLUB 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C. 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 0 .o % 0 0 0 0 0 0 North Little Rock Public Schools Analysis of Discipline Actions Schoo1Year2004-2005 I District Level Elementary Middle Schools High Schools I 9 Year Comparison J IJ IJ IJ IJ I J I J I J I I I I I J I North Little Rock Public Schools Analysis of Disciplinary Actions District Level Action 09: SAC 2000 1800 1600 1400 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0 BM BF NBM NBF \"03-04 1961 979 394 220 \"04-05 1560 860 390 172 '03-04 '04-05 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 North Little Rock Public Schools Analysis of Disciplinary Actions District Level Action 10: Home Suspension BM BF NBM NBF 03-04 469 157 66 18 004-05 753 325 111 43 03-04 04-05 I J I I 1 I I I l I J I J I J I I I I I I I I 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 North Little Rock Public Schools Analysis of Disciplinary Actions District Level Action 11: Boys Club BM BF NBM NBF 03-04 316 155 51 16 04-05 3 1 0 0 03-04 04-05 I J IJ I I J I I I J I I 1 I I I I I I I I l I 200 180 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 North Little Rock Public Schools Analysis of Disciplinary Actions District Level Action 12: E. I. C. K-5 BM BF NBM NBF 03-04 195 70 18 11 04-05 110 30 11 1 03-04 04-05 11 I I I I I 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 North Little Rock Public Schools Analysis of Disciplinary Actions District Level Action 17: Expulsion BM BF NBM NBF 03-04 2 0 2 0 004-05 11 0 9 1 03-04 D 04-05 North Little Rock Public Schools Analysis of Disciplinary Actions Elementary K-5 Action 09: SAC 1 _/ 0.9-v 0.8- o. 7 _,, o.\u0026amp;-v 0.5-v 0.4- 0.3 _,, 0.2_v 0.1 _v 0 BM BF NBM NBF 03-04 0 0 0 0 C!I 04-05 0 0 0 0 03-04 04-05 I I North Little Rock Public Schools Analysis of Disciplinary Actions Elementary K-5 Action 10: Home Suspension ___,,....,...~~i\"I--'-\"'.\",\"..-.,_.- .. .. ~=~ - - 250 200 150 100 50 0 BM BF NBM NBF 03-04 228 83 33 6 GJ 04-05 224 52 34 13 03-04 04-05 North Little Rock Public Schools Analysis of Disciplinary Actions Elementary K-5 Action 11: Boys Club ~- ~-~~~ 1 _/ 0.9_v o.a-o. 7 _,, 0.6- o.s-v 0 4-V 0.3-\" 0.2- 0.1 _v 0 03-04 El 04-05 BM BF 0 0 0 0 NBM 0 0 NBF 0 0 03-04 D 04-05 200 180 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 North Little Rock Public Schools Analysis of Disciplinary Actions Elementary K-5 Action 12: E. I. C. K-5 BM BF NBM NBF 03-04 194 70 18 11 04-05 110 30 11 1 03-04 04-05 L I I I North Little Rock Public Schools Analysis of Disciplinary Actions Elementary K-5 Action 17: Expulsion - ~-~-~ 1 _/ 0.9-/ o.a-v 0.7-v 0.6- 0.5_/ 0.4-/ 0.3-v 0.2- 0.1 _/ 0 BM BF NBM NBF 03-04 0 0 0 0 04-05 0 0 0 0 03-04 D 04-05 I - l North Little Rock Public Schools Analysis of Disciplinary Actions Middle Schools Action 09: SAC 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0 BM BF NBM NBF 03-04 1199 614 218 125 04-05 839 434 254 85 03-04 CJ 04-05 J I J I J I J I J 200 180 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 North Little Rock Public Schools Analysis of Disciplinary Actions Middle Schools Action 10: Home Suspension BM BF NBM NBF 03-04 50 23 6 7 04-05 199 110 53 12 03-04 04-05 I I l I l I l I l I J I I I 1 250 200 150 100 50 0 North Little Rock Public Schools Analysis of Disciplinary Actions Middle Schools Action 11: Boys Club BM BF NBM NBF 03-04 246 125 33 11 004-05 3 1 0 0 03-04 D 04-05 1 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 North Little Rock Public Schools Analysis of Disciplinary Actions Middle Schools Action 12: E. I. C. K-5 BM BF NBM NBF 03-04 1 0 0 0 D 04-05 0 0 0 0 03-04 04-05 North Little Rock Public Schools Analysis of Disciplinary Actions Middle Schools Action 17: Expulsion 5-\" - 4.5 _v 4-V - ......... 3.5-\" 3- 2 5 _LI 2-v ~ 1.5 _v . .)\n',.,\n1 - , : '\\ 0.5 _/ - . 0 BM BF NBM NBF 03-04 0 0 0 0 04-05 5 0 4 0 03-04 D 04-05 I J I I I I J I I I I 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 North Little Rock Public Schools Analysis of Disciplinary Actions High Schools Action 09: SAC BM BF NBM NBF 03-04 762 366 176 95 04-05 721 426 136 87 03-04 D 04-05 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 North Little Rock Public Schools Analysis of Disciplinary Actions High Schools Action 10: Home Suspension . . - - ... BM BF NBM NBF 03-04 191 52 27 5 04-05 327 163 24 18 03-04 04-05 ] I J I J I J I J I J I J I J I J I 1 I I I I I I 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 North Little Rock Public Schools Analysis of Disciplinary Actions High Schools Action 11: Boys Club BM BF NBM NBF 03-04 70 30 18 5 004-05 0 0 0 0 03-04 D 04-05 I I North Little Rock Public Schools Analysis of Disciplinary Actions High Schools Action 12: E. I. C. K-5 1 _/ 0.9-v 0.8 _v 0.7 _v 0.6- 0.5 _v 0.4-v 0.3-v 0.2- 0.1-\" 0 BM BF NBM NBF 03-04 0 0 0 0 D 04-05 0 0 0 0 03-04 04-05 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 03-04 04-05 North Little Rock Public Schools Analysis of Disciplinary Actions High Schools Action 17: Expulsion BM BF NBM NBF 2 0 2 0 6 0 5 1 03-04 04-05 North Little Rock Public Schools Analysis of Disciplinary Actions 10 Year Comparison Action 09: SAC 2000 1800 1600 1400 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0 BM BF NBM NBF 95-98 1052 446 410 140 98-97 1264 55 469 142 97-98 1801 862 547 132 98-99 1443 718 458 138 99-00 1468 662 401 139 00-01 1092 556 267 69 01-02 1276 574 354 107 D 02-03 1903 1050 512 172 03-04 1961 980 394 220 '04-05 1560 860 390 172 95-96 96-97 97-98 98-99 99-00 D 00-01 01-02 D 02-03 03-04 '04-05 I .l I -i I -l I l IJ I J I J I IJ I I North Little Rock Public Schools Analysis of Disciplinary Actions 10 Year Comparison Action 10: Home Suspension 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 BM BF NBM NBF 95-96 162 46 47 3 96-97 591 208 125 17 97-98 511 125 104 13 98-99 566 141 125 22 99-00 406 113 102 18 00-01 385 92 64 7 01-02 692 234 92 21 02-03 522 193 63 13 03-04 469 157 66 18 753 325 111 43 95-96 96-97 97-98 98-99 99-00 00-01 01-02 02-03 03-04 '04-05 North Little Rock Public Schools Analysis of Disciplinary Actions 10 Year Comparison Action 11: Boys Club 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 BM BF NBM NBF 95-96 334 82 72 12 96-97 357 146 85 20 97-98 515 148 112 8 98-99 359 148 88 22 99-00 351 129 90 27 00-01 325 136 56 12 01-02 210 83 52 11 D 02-03 244 86 83 25 03-04 316 155 51 16 '04-05 3 1 0 0 95-96 96-97 97-98 98-99 99-00 D 00-01 01-02 D 02-03 03-04 '04-05 North Little Rock Public Schools Analysis of Disciplinary Actions 10 Year Comparison Action 12: E. I. C. K-5 1600- 1400 1200 1000- 800- 600 400 200- \u0026gt;- ol ~ Mi. ~ I ---- BM BF NBM NBF 95-96 1563 492 510 71 96-97 154 30 32 3 97-98 0 0 0 0 98-99 211 106 27 6 99-00 246 63 75 16 El 00-01 162 55 40 21 01-02 342 164 67 29 D 02-03 252 97 52 11 03-04 195 70 18 11 '04-05 110 30 11 1 95-96 96-97 97-98 98-99 99-00 rn 00-01 01-02 D 02-03 03-04 '04-05 I I I North Little Rock Public Schools Analysis of Disciplinary Actions 10 Year Comparison Action 17: Expulsion 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 BM BF NBM NBF 95-96 2 1 0 2 96-97 3 7 0 0 97-98 6 5 0 0 98-99 7 2 1 1 99-00 3 0 2 0 00-01 3 0 5 3 01-02 1 0 2 1 D 02-03 2 0 2 0 03-04 2 0 2 0 95-96 96-97 97-98 98-99 99-00 00-01 01-02 02-03 03-04 '04-05\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_1015","title":"\"Evaluation of SMART/THRIVE in the Little Rock School District, Research Report,\" , 2004-2005","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":["2004/2005"],"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--21st Century","Little Rock School District","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","Educational innovations","Educational statistics","School improvement programs","Student assistance programs"],"dcterms_title":["\"Evaluation of SMART/THRIVE in the Little Rock School District, Research Report,\" , 2004-2005"],"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/1015"],"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\nIncludes attached notice of filing with the United States District Court on December 27, 2005\nThis transcript was created using Optical Character Recognition 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_1086","title":"\"Little Rock School District Board of Directors' Meeting\" agenda","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":["2004-01"],"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":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--21st Century","Little Rock School District","Education--Arkansas","Education--Economic aspects","Education--Evaluation","Education--Finance","Educational law and legislation","Educational planning","Educational statistics","School board members","School boards","School improvement programs","School superintendents"],"dcterms_title":["\"Little Rock School District Board of Directors' Meeting\" agenda"],"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/1086"],"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\n \n\n \n\nThis transcript was created using Optical Character Recognition (OCR) and may contain some errors.\nRECEIVED JAN 2 1 2004 OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING Agenda Little Rock School District Board of Directors' Meeting Thank you, Dr. Martin Luther King January 2004 I. LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM STREET LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS REGULAR MEETING January 22, 2004 5:30 p.m. PRELIMINARY FUNCTIONS A. Call to Order B. Roll Call 11. PROCEDURAL MATTERS A. Welcome to Guests B. Student Performance- M. L. King Elementary School 111. REPORTS/RECOGNITIONS/PUBLIC COMMENTS: A. Superintendent's Citations B. Remarks from Citizens (persons who have signed up to speak) C. Little Rock Classroom Teachers Association D. Joshua lntervenors IV. REPORTS AND COMMUNICATIONS: A. Remarks from Board Members B. Student Assignment Report C. Budget Update D. Construction Report: Proposed Bond Projects E. Internal Auditors Report F. Technology Update G. Update: Division of Exceptional Children V. APPROVAL OF ROUTINE MATTERS: A. Minutes: Special Meeting - 12-11-03 Regular Meeting - 12-18-03 B. Personnel Changes ,... n-.:i ,\na- -,~- r- - -4:I: Oz o el~ m..,\n:a C: -z\n:an o'\"\" F~ (\")\"' ~ Regular Board Meeting January 22, 2004 Page2 VI. CURRICULUM AND INSTRUCTION: A. Second Reading: Revision of Policy IKF - General Education Graduation Requirements VII. SCHOOL SERVICES: A. Magnet Schools Assistance Program Update B. 2004 Magnet Schools Assistance Program Grant Proposal VIII. BUSINESS SERVICES DIVISION: A. Donations of Property B. Financial Report IX. CLOSING REMARKS: Superintendent's Report: 1. Dates to Remember 2. Special Functions X. EMPLOYEE HEARINGS XI. ADJOURNMENT ,... O'\"O ,.\u0026gt;,. ..:...,:m._0.. - ii: Oz o\u0026gt; ~~ ::0 C: -z\non o-\u0026lt; F\nOU\u0026gt; ~ ~\n= mr-:-:oo gg iml:me -c: ~~ ~~ ~::l -mo:m:o ::0 u, i ,0. .. I. PRELIMINARY FUNCTIONS CA.LL TO ORDER/ ROLL CALL 11. PROCEDURAL MATTERS Ill. REPORTS/RECOGNITIONS WELCOME/ STUDENT PERFORMANCL A. SUPT. CITATIONS B. REMARKS FROM CITIZENS C. LR CTA / D. JOSHUA INTEVENORS IV. REPORTS/ COMMUNICATIONS A. BOARD MEMBERS DATE: TO: FROM: '.\n4.n Individual Approach to a World of Knowledge\" January 22, 2004 Board of Directors ~Id M. Stewart, Chief Financial Officer Morris L. Holmes, Interim Superintendent PREPARED BY: ~11 Goodman SUBJECT: January 2004 Construction Report- Bond Projects The move into the new forty-four (44) classroom building at Mann Magnet Middle School was completed on time. Except for a few problems, it went well and classes were held for the first time on January 5th . Pulaski County Special School District has purchased five (5) of the portable classroom trailers. The remainder will be sold through an auction on February 3rd . The buyers will have until February 27th to move the portable classroom trailers from the site. The move into the new administration and media areas at Mabelvale Middle School has been completed. This construction project is almost complete except for the completion of remodeling two (2) classrooms and dealing with some site drainage issues. The planning process continues for projects at schools that have had little or no work done up to now. The development of scopes of work and the selection of architects and engineers will be completed soon. If you have any questions, please call me at 447-1146. 810 W Markham Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 www.lrsd.k12.ar.us 501-324-2000 fax: 501-324-2032 !II \"O m ~ zz rm CONSTRUCTION REPORT TO THE BOARD JANUARY 22, 2004 BOND PROJECTS UNDER CONSTRUCTION I I 1csrComplet1on Facilitv Name Project Description Cost Date .,B,,._ase_li_ne _______ ___,R__eno.:...v...a.c_ti-o-=n-_ _____________ $953,5~ Jul-04 Brady,______ Addition/renovation $973,621 Jun-04 Central Renovation_-_ln_ter~ _-_-_-_-_-___ $10,200,266 Dec-05 _Dun_ba_r _______ ..._R_e_n_o_v_at_io_n_/a_d_d_iti_on____ $6,161,950 , Aug-04 J. A. Fair 6 classroom addition \u0026amp; cafeteria/music room addition $3,155,640 Feb-04 Mabelvale MS ~ R_e_n_o_v-at-io_n _____ ----- $6,851,621 De-c--0-3 I Partial Rep,_lac_e_m_e_n_t ______ ~::_-~-$11,500,000 Dec-03 Classroom Addition $2, 155,62_2__ Jul-04 Mann McClellan Parkvi~ - Addition-- ~ $2,121 ,226 Jun-04 Pulaski Hgts. Elem ____ Renovation _ _ __ _ _ $ ( 193,25fr Aug-04 Pulaski Hgts. MS .Rencivatfon _ ~ $3,755,041 Aug-04 Southwest ---Addition ~ $2,000,000 Aug-04 Tech C- t-r / M_et-ro_R_e-novation 'Addition/Renovation - Phase II $2,7251000 Jun-04 Wa\"kefield ~ ebuild ---- $5,300,000 Jul-04 Williams Renovation - - - - - $2, 106,49_2 _ ---Jun-04 Wilson _____ _._Renovation/expansion - $1,263,876-- Dec-03 BOND PROJECTS CONSTRUCTION - WINTER/ SPRING 2003-04 I I I Est. Comp1et1on Facilitv Name Proiect Descriotion Cost Date Mitchell __ Renovation $750,000 Aug-04 Rightsell Renovation $660,0~ Auq-04 BOND PROJECTS PLANNING STARTED CONST. DATE TO BE DETERMINED I I 1 Est. Completion Facility Name Project Description Cost Date Booker Electrical Upgrade __ ___ Unknown Unk Booker Roof $48,525 Unk Carver Chicot Chicot Cloverdaie Elementary Fair Park Forest Heights Garland Geyer Springs Gibbs Henderson Meadowcliff Pulaski Hgts. MS Western Hills Woodruff - - Media Center Expansion - - Unknown Sound Attenuation \u0026amp; Fire Alarm --- $50,783 - Electrical Upgrade - - Unknown- Addition Unknown~ Addition - Unknown Remodel Unknown Remodel - - Unknown Roof Repair - Unknown - Addition - Unknown Lockers - - $75,000 Addition - Unknown Energy monitoring system installation _ Electrical Upgrade \u0026amp; HVAC ~ Unknown Parkinq addition $193,777 Unknown Unknown Unknown Unknown Unknown Unknown Unknown Unknown Unknown Unknown Unknown Unknown Unknown Unknown BOND PROJECTS THAT HAVE BEEN COMPLETED Facility Name Administration Administration Administration Administration Annex Alternative Learning Ctr. Alternative Learning Ctr. Badgett Badqett I l l csI. --Complet1on Project Description Cost Date Asbestos abatement $380,495 Mar-03 Fresh air system .. $55,000 Aug-03 Fire alarm $32,350- Aug-03 Energy monitoring system installation .,. _ May-02 Energy monitoring system installation $15,160 Oct-01 Energy efficient lighting _ $82,000- Dec-01 Partial asbestos abatement $237,237 Jul-01 Fire alarm - ~ $18,2~ Auq-02 CONSTRUCTION REPORT TO THE BOARD JANUARY 22, 2004 BOND PROJECTS THAT HAVE BEEN COMPLETED Facility Name I Project Description Cost I Est. Completion Date Bale Classroom addition/renovation I $2,244,524 I Dec-02 Bale Energy monitoring system I Mar-02 Bale I Partial roof replacement $269,587 Dec-01 Bale ,HVAC $664,587 Aug-01 Booker Energy efficient lighting $170,295 Apr-01 Booker I Energy monitoring system installation $23,710 Oct-01 Booker Asbestos abatement $10,900 Feb-02 Booker Fire alarm $34,501 I Mar-02 Brady I Energy efficient lighting I $80,593 Sep-02 Brady 1Asbestos abatement $345,072 I Aug-02 Carver I Energy monitoring system installation $14,480 May-01 Carver Parking lot ! $111 ,742 I Aug-03 Central Parking Student parking I $174,000 Aug-03 Central/Quigley Stadium light repair \u0026amp; electrical repair I $265,000 1 Aug-03 Central/Quigley Athletic Field Improvement $38,000 Aug-03 Central/Quigley Irrigation System $14,500 I Aug-03 Central Purchase land for school I Unknown - ~ ec-02 - -- Central Roof \u0026amp; exterior renovations $2,000,000 I Dec-02 Central 1Ceiling and wall repair I $24,ooo I Oct-01 Central Fire Alarm System Design/Installation I - $80,876 Aug-01 Central !Front landing tile repair $22,470 Aug-01 Cloverdale Elem. Energy efficient lighting $132,678 Jul-01 Cloverdale MS -- Energy efficient lighting $189,74~ Jul-01 Cloverdale MS- - -- -- _ Major renovation \u0026amp; addition $1 ,393,822 Nov-02 Dodd Energy efficien!.J.!ghting - + --- -- --- $90,665 Aug-01 Dodd - - Asbestos abatement-ceiling tile - $156,299 --Jul-01 --- - Dodd Replace rciof top HVAC $215,570 ~ g-02 Facilities Servi~ Interior renovation $84,672 Mar-01 Facility Services - - Fire alarm -- - --- 7 1Z:ooo Aug-03 - - --,.- Fair Park HVAC renovation/fire alarm $315,956 Apr-02 -- ~ gy efficient lighting - .. $90,162 - Fair Park Aug-01 ---~ Fair Park Asbestos abatement-ceili~ $59,310 Aug-01 - ... - J. A. Fair EnergL efficient lighting $277,594 Apr-01 -- -- -+- - J. A. Fair Press box $10,784 Nov-00 J. A. Fair - Security cameras -- ' $12,500 Jun-01 J. A. Fair ... $38,000 -- Athletic Field Improvement Jul-03 --+-- J. A. Fair Irrigation System $14,000 Jul-03 J. A. Fair Roof repairs $391 ,871 Aug-03 Forest Park Replace window units w/central HVAC $485,258 Nov-03 Forest Park _piagonal parking $111 ,742 Aug-03 Forest Park Energy efficient lighting - - $119,788 May-01 Fulbright Energy efficient lighting ~ - $134,463 Jun-01 Fulbright - Energy monitoring system installation $1 { 950 +- Aug-01 Fulbright Replace roof top HVAC units $107,835 - Aug-02 Fulbright Parking lot + $140,000 Sep-02 Fulbright Roof repair-s -- -+ $200,000 Oct-02 Franklin R enovation - $2,511 ,736 - Mar-03 Gibbs Energy efficien.!..!!_ghting $76,447 + - -- Apr-01 Gibbs Energy monitoring system installation $11 ,770 Jul-01 2 !II ~ ::0 z~ z ,m.. :n -I Pl % C:\ng ?i m CONSTRUCTION REPORT TO THE BOARD JANUARY 22, 2004 BOND PROJECTS THAT HAVE BEEN COMPLETED Facility Name I Proiect Description I Cost I Est. Completion Date Hall Major renovation \u0026amp; addition $8,637,709 I Sep-03 Hall Asbestos abatement $168,222 Aug-01 Hall Energy efficient lighting $42,931 Jul-01 Hall I Energy efficient lighting I $296,707 Apr-01 Hall Infrastructure improvements $93,657 I Aug-01 Hall !Intercom Feb-01 Hall 1 Security cameras $10,600 Jun-01 Henderson I Energy efficient lighting I $193,679 Jul-01 Henderson 'Roof replacement gym $107,835 I May-01 Henderson Asbestos abatement Phase I I $500,000 Aug-01 Henderson Asbestos abatement Phase 2 I $250,ooo I Aug-02 IRC Energy efficient lighting I $109,136 - I Jul-02 Jefferson - Asbestos abatement ! $43,639 I Oct-01 Jefferson I Renovation \u0026amp; fire alarm I $1 ,630,000 Nov-02 Laidlaw - Parking lot -I $269,588 Jul-01 --- Mabelvale Elem. Energy monitoring system installation I $12,150 Aug-01 Mabelvale E-lem-. - Replace HVAC units I $300,000 Aug-02 Mabelvale Elem. Asbestos Abatement I $107,000 Aug-02 -- - Mabelvale Elem. . Energy efficient lighting I $106,598 Dec-02 Mabelvale MS Renovate bleachers $134,793 I Aug-01 -- Mann -- I Asphalt walks ! Dec-01 The total $1 .8 million Mann Walkway canopies is what has been I - - - -- Dec-01 Mann Boiler replacement used so far on the --Oct-01 - Mann Fencing projects listed _ Sep-01 Mann - . Partial demolition/portable classrooms ~ completed for Mann. Aug-01 - M- cClellan ~ Athletic Field lmprovem~ $38,000 Jul-03 McClellan _J_rrigation Syst~ $14,750 Jul-03 - - ~-- McClellan Security cameras $36,300 Jun-01 McClellan Energy efficient lighting -- $303,614 - May-01 - McClellan Stadium stands repair $235,000 Aug-01 McClellan - -- -- - $4(000 - Intercom Feb-02 McDermott Energy efficient lighting-- -- - $79,411 Feb-01 McDermott - Replace roof top HVAC uni~ - $476,000 Aug-02 ~ Meadowcliff Fire alarm $16, 175-,---- Jul-01 -- --+- Meadowcliff Asbestos abatement - $253,412 Aug-02 T Meadowcliff Engergy efficient lighting $88,297 Dec-02 Metropolitan Replace cooling tower $37,203 Dec-00 ~ - Metropolitan Replace shop vent system $20,000 May-01 Metropolitan Energy monitoring system installation + $17,145 Aug-01 Mitchell Energy efficient lighting - $103,642 Apr-01 Mitchell Energy monitoring system installation $16,695 Jul-01 Mitchell Asbestos abatement - - $13,000 Jul-01 Oakhurst HVAC renovation $237,237 Aug-01 + Otter Creek Energy monitoring system installation $10,695 May-01 Otter Creek Energy efficient lighting +-- -- $81 ,828 Apr-01 Otter Creek Asbestos abatement $10,000 Aug-02 - Parking lot - -- $138,029 - Otter Creek Aug-02 Otter Creek 6 classroom addition -- $888,778 Oct-02 Otter Creek Parking Improvements . - $142,541 . Aug-03 $210,ooo - Parkview HVAC controls Jun-02 Parkvie-w Roof replacement $273,877- Sep-01 ~ Parkview - Exterior lights $10,784 Nov-00 HVAC renovation \u0026amp; 700 area controls -+-- $301 ,938 -- Parkview Aug-01 Parkview Locker replacement $120,000 Aug-01 Parkview Energy efficient lighting I- $315,000 Jun-01 3 Facility Name Procurement Procurement Pulaski Hgts. Elem Rightsell Rockefeller Rockefeller Rockefeller Romine Romine Security/Transportation Southwest Southwest Southwest Southwest CONSTRUCTION REPORT TO THE BOARD JANUARY 22, 2004 BOND PROJECTS THAT HAVE BEEN COMPLETED I Project Description I Cost Est. Completion Date !Energy monitoring system installation $5,290 I Jun-02 I Fire alarm ' $25,000 Aug-03 !Move playground $17,000 Dec-02 I Energy efficient lighting -~$_84,_8_98-+ ____ A~p_r-_0_,1 I Energy efficient lighting $137,004 Mar-01 !Replace rooftop HVAC $539,175 Aug-01 I Parking addition $111,742 Aug-02 !Asbestos abatement $10,000 Apr-02 Major renovation \u0026amp; addition $3,534,675 ____M ar-03... .. . Bus cameras $22,500 Jun-01 I Asbestos abatement I $28, 138 Aug-00 New roof $690,000 ' Oct-03 !Energy efficient lighting ___ ..___ $168,719 Jan-02 I Drainage/ street widenrr,g- 1 $250,000 Aug-03 t:S::-:-t-ud-:-e-n-:t--A:-s-s,ig-_nm_e_n_t ---r.:Ecn--e-rg-y=m- on-ci,t,.o..-ri:n-_g_s-ystem installation $4,830-+----A,...u~g~-.0,.2. ~ Student Assignment I Fire alarm 1 $9,000 Aug-03 Tech Center Phase 1 Renovation $275,000 ' Dec-01 Technology Upgrade 1 upgrade phone system \u0026amp; data ---l--'_ __N ov_-02... .. Terry , Energy efficient lighting $73,850 I Feb-01 Terry Driveway \u0026amp; Parking $83,484 Aug-02 Terry__ __ Media Center addition $704,932_ ___S e~1p. 02... .. Wakefield 1security cameras $8,000 Jun-01 Wakefield _-=_-=_-_-_-_ Energy efficient lighting _ -r- $7-4~, 7- 7-6~ 1 ---Feb-01 Wakefield Demolition/Asbestos Abatement $200,000 Nov-02 Washington - Security cameras -- + --$7,900 - Jun-01 Washington Energy efficient lighting -- + ~65,281~-- Apr-01 Watson ---~E_n_e-rg=y~monitoring system installation $8,530 Jul-01 Watson Asbestos abatement -r- ~82,241 __ ~_:Q!_ Watson Watson Watso_n __ Western Hills Western Hills Western Hills Williams Williams Wilson Woodruff - __ E_n_ergy efficient lighting _ _ ~- _ $106,868 Aug-01 Asbestos abatement $10,000 Aug-02 _ =-~Major renovation \u0026amp; addition --- -l-- ~00,000 Aug-02 Asbestos abatement - $191,946~ Aug-02 Intercom - - _______ - $7,100~- Dec-01 Energy efficient lighting - +- $106,000 - Jul-01 Parking expansions _ $183,717 Dec-03 Energy efficient lighting _ _ ~ $122,719 _ Jun-01 Parking Expansion ~ - $110,000 Aug-03 -Renovation $246,419 Auq-02 4 !\" z... m\n,o\n,o ~~\n10 ... C: 0 ::\n0 ~ .:.n. ~ ::c C: ~ ~ m Date: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS January 22, 2004 To: Board of Directors From:@Sandy Becker, Internal Auditor Re: Audit Report - January This is the fifty-first communication regarding status of the current year projects and reviews. Activity Funds a) Working with two middle school and one elementary school to resolve financial issues in their activity funds. b) Reviewing monthly financial information for all schools and assisting in resolving balance issues. c) Training school staff at schools on financial processes by request. Activities Advisory Board (AAB) a) Working with the new Activities Advisory Board to develop plans for the new school year and beyond. b) Assist the Activities Advisory Board in its mission to strengthen the effectiveness and viability of activities in the District. c) Working with the Activities Advisory Board to provide ways to assist the different Booster groups in our schools. Board Policy and Regulation a) Coordinating development of payroll guidelines with Financial Services as part of Financial Services Section of the District Operations Manual. Technology Training a) Monitoring technology plans to determine how use of technology will improve and streamline the workflow for staff persons. a) Served as a trainer for financial portion of uts \u0026amp; Bolts, Bookkeeper \u0026amp; Secretaries Training, Security Guard Training, individual school in-service meetings, and others as needed. Working to facilitate best means to improve financial processes and increase accountability for resources. Training new bookkeepers on bookkeeping procedures as requested. !II ~ :\no is z z .m- .:.n. ~ :c C:\ng ?. m Audit Report - January 2004 Page 2 of 2 b) Placed training material, smart worksheets, and other helpful items on the Teachers Lounge section of the Little Rock School District web page. c) Coordinated guidelines and aids to inform and assist new activity sponsors of specific tasks relating to each activity. Added new checklist for spirit sponsors and smart spreadsheet for fundraiser reconciliation. This information is now in the Teachers Lounge section of the District web page. d) Developed skills test for financial positions. Implementing in coordination with Human Resources. Audit Area Sampling and Review of Financial Procedures Other a) Pulling samples of district expenditures to test for accuracy, accountability, and compliance with District policies. Reviewing district payroll processes for compliance, economy and efficiency, internal controls, and cost control. Working with Financial Services Payroll on internal control and processing issues. b) c) d) e) f) g) h) a) b) c) d) Working with Financial Services on internal controls and rules for payroll processes and implementation of a new interface system. Monitoring other selected risk areas for efficiency, cost effectiveness, and compliance with District policies. Reviewing grant programs. Working with Child Nutrition on implementation of streamlined information processing system with Information Services and Child Nutrition Staff. Working with Information Services on streamlining of data processes regarding SIS reporting. Monitoring cost reduction efforts in the District. Monitoring payroll for compliance with board direction and internal controls. Reviewing leave accountability system. Provided technical assistance to school staff on grant writing. Served as co-chair of Strategic Team One - Financial Resources. Assisted with ShareFest 2003, Saturday, November 1, 2003. Report online at lrsd.org Participating in planning for Day of Caring (April 17, 2004). Problem Resolution a) I have made myself available to help resolve financial issues, assist in improving processes, and help find solutions to questions that arise. Please let me know if you need further information. My telephone number is 501-447-1115. My e-mail is sandy.becker@lrsd.org. LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201 Date: January 22, 2003 TO: Little Rock School District Board of Directors FROM: Lucy Neal, Director Technology and Media Services John Ruffins, Director Computer Information Services THROUGH: Morris L. Holmes, Interim Superintendent Title/Subject Summary Objectives Expected Outcomes Population/Location Budget Amount Managers Duration Long Range/Continuation Technology Report EETT grant funded online courses begin this week with 134 LRSD teachers, 46 NLRSD teachers, 70 PCSSD teachers, and 34 non-public teachers participating. AETN and ADE have purchased rights to video clips that are correlated to Arkansas Frameworks. These clips are delivered over the Internet to all schools. We are currently testing the product on our network to determine the best way to implement without using too much bandwidth. E-rate applications for 2004-2005 will be filed on or before the deadline of February 4. This year we will file for wide area network, local telephone service, long distance service, cellular phone service, phone system maintenance, LAN electronics, and television systems for schools with a high percentage of students who are eligible for free and reduced lunch. To meet E-rate requirements, the state is requiring that each district revisit the approved technology plan in order to confirm that every project for which e-rate funds have been applied is thoroughly covered in the original technology plan. We are just beginning to evaluate our plan in light of the new requirements. Any addendum that we might submit is due March 5, 2004. To provide an update to the Board of Directors on the status of technology projects To continue to implement the approved technology plan NIA NIA Lucy Neal - Instructional John Ruffins-Technical December 18, 2003 - January 22, 2004 Technology Plan is approved from 2003-2006. DATE: TO: FROM: THROUGH: Re: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS January 22, 2004 Board of Education J Beverly Williams, Director, Human Resources Dr. Morris Holmes, Interim Superintendent of Schools Personnel Changes It is recommended that the following personnel changes be approved at the indicated positions, salaries and classifications. In accordance with A.C.A. 6-17-1502, it is recommended that one additional year of probationary status is provided for all teachers who have been employed in a school district in this state for three (3) years. Teachers with an effective date of employment after August 18, 2003 are considered intern teachers. ~ :S-f!l 1:::i:: ~8 -ore: (/) -om 0\no ?\n?i mm (/) Personnel Changes Page 2 January 22, 2004 NAME POSITION SCHOOL START DATE END DATE SALARY CLASS Resignations/ferminations Certified Employees Hawkins, Matthew Spanish 8-14-95 Reason: Leaving City DUNBAR 1-16-04 Heffern, Susan Kindergarten 10-25-99 Reason: Personal STEPHENS 12-19-03 Nichols, Karisa Alt. Skills 1-3-96 Reason: Returning to School ACC 1-5-04 Nichols, Karita Physical Science 8-19-98 Reason: Returning to School ALC 1-4-03 Walker, Charles NONE New Certified Employees General Science ALC 1-5-04 Certified Promotion Certified Transfer 4-09 TCH925 1-05 K925 4-07 TCH925 4-07 TCH925 4-07 TCH925 ANNUAL SALARY 37700.00 29609.00 35658.00 35658.00 35658.00 annual 18386.16 prorated Chase, Diann from Day Treatment at Romine to Psyc. Specialist in Division of Exceptional Children Personnel Changes Page 3 January 22, 2004 NAME POSITION SCHOOL START DATE END DATE SALARY CLASS Resignationsfferminations Non-Certified Employees Bryant, Byron Custodian 10-24-01 1-02 Reason: Abandonment WILLIAMS 12-3-03 CUS12 Floyd, Stephen Custodian 8-27-03 1-01 Reason: Accepted Another SOUTHWEST 12-9-03 CUS928 Position Griffin, Robert Jr. Instr. Aide 9-2-03 1-10 Reason: Personal STEPHENS 1-4-03 INA925 Hall, Janet Bus Driver 9-10-01 3-05 Reason: Personal TRANS. 1-5-04 BUSDRV Mayweather, Louise Aide 8-26-91 1-10 Reason: Retired BOOKER 1-4-04 INA185 McTyer, Donald Security 8-22-94 30-14 Reason: Deceased HALL 1-10-04 ANl0 Millage, John Custodian 3-7-02 1-02 Reason: Leaving City CLOVERDALE EL. 12-17-03 CUS12 Rudkin, Pamela Secretary 12-12-00 31-20 Reason: Personal PARK.VIEW 1-8-04 CLK925 ANNUAL SALARY 13955.00 10329.00 14067.00 11899.00 14067.00 20712.00 13955.00 22656.00 .!J.,l z \u0026gt;z 0 ~ ti\u0026gt; ~ \u0026gt;o . C: ,~-~o c5c: -\u0026lt;:::\nu~ ~z ti\u0026gt; ti\u0026gt; oil zc: ti\u0026gt; .0.. . 0 z ~ \u0026gt;otn 1:::i:: .~,, 8,- C-,:, mti\u0026gt; ~~ mm ti\u0026gt; !Jl !I: ti\u0026gt; \u0026gt;.,, C) ~ ..z.,. ,.\nu 0 c3 ti\u0026gt; -,::. Personnel Changes Page 4 January 22, 2004 NAME Williams, Sarah Reason: Retired Bryant, Rodney MAglione, Yadina Smittie, Carol POSITION SCHOOL Custodian HALL START DATE END DATE 3-10-80 1-30-04 SALARY CLASS 1-08 CUS925 New Non-Certified Employees Instr. Aide CHICOT 1-5-04 Media Clerk 1-5-04 CLOVERDALE MID Care CARE 12-8-03 on-Certified Promotion 1-10 INA925 31-06 CLK925 1-14 CARE ANNUAL SALARY 13296.00 14067.00 annual 7375.67 prorated 14916.00 annual 7854.70 prorated 7.93 per hr. Carter, John 9.50 month district wide security to 12 month district wide security officer Non-Certified Transfer NONE LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM STREET LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS Date: January 22, 2004 To: Board of Education From: Through: Dennis Glasgow, Interim Associate Superintendent of Instruction Morris L. Holmes, Ed. D. Interim Superintendent Re: Second Reading: Revision of Policy IKF - General Graduation Requirements Arkansas Act 1748 of 2001 required students in grades K- 9 to meet a physical training requirement of no less than 20 minutes of physical activity three (3) times a week for all students who are physically fit and able to participate. Since that time, Act 1729 of 2003 was approved to change the grade grange from K - 9 to K - 8. Since the K - 9 grade span was written into the Board policy and regulations, revisions are required to bring our policy and regulations into compliance with state law. The policy was approved on first reading at the December 2003 meeting of the Board. The regulations were reviewed at that time. Policy IKF is presented at this time for second reading approval. bjg .!.I,' z \u0026gt;z 0 ~ ~ \u0026gt;eon !IC :c ~8 .,, r-e:.,, .,,m ~~ mm.,, LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: IKF GENERAL EDUCATION GRADUATION REQUIREMENTS The Little Rock School District Board of Education believes that students should graduate from high school possessing the skills, knowledge, and attitudes needed for responsible citizenship, life-long learning, and productive employment in our modern economy. Programs for post-secondary preparation will be available to equip students for the advanced training that will be needed for the work of the 21 st century. The Little Rock School District will be responsible for providing the educational opportunities and experiences that will enable our students to take full advantage of post-secondary education and employment opportunities available to them after graduation. Diploma-Earning Options A student may earn a diploma from a Little Rock School District high school in one of four ways. Each has different requirements and different numbers of required units of credit. 1. Diploma from any of the five high schools for completion of the required 24 units for the classes of 2002 and 2003\nor the required 26 units for the class of 2004 and after. 2. Diploma from any of the five high schools for completion of the Little Rock Scholars curriculum of 27 units for the class of 2003\nor 28 units, including at least eight Pre-Advanced Placement or Advanced Placement courses, for the class of 2004 and after. Hall High School students may take University Studies courses as substitutes for Pre-Advanced Placement and/or Advanced Placement courses. 3. Diploma earned at the Accelerated Learning Center for completion of the 21 units required by the State of Arkansas. 4. Diploma with waived or altered requirements established by an Individual Education Program (IEP) team for a student identified with disabilities. Even though the graduation requirements may be changed by the Board of Education during the time a student is enrolled in high school, the requirements established for a student's graduation class (assuming graduation in four years of high school) are those he/she must meet, even though he/she may require more than four years to earn the necessary number of units. Units of credit will generally be earned in grades nine through twelve, except that one unit of Algebra I (or higher-level mathematics) and Level I (or higher level) of foreign language may be earned in grade eight. High school courses taken before grade eight will not satisfy a unit of credit toward graduation. (See policy IKEC for list of creditearning options.) LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: IKF (continued) Transfer Students All transfer students must meet the graduation requirements of the Little Rock School District in order to receive a diploma. The LRSD high school will accept transfer credits and grades for students who previously attended Arkansas .high schools that are accredited by the Arkansas Department of Education or out-of-state high schools that are accredited by their state department of education and/or a regional accreditation organization such as the North Central Association of Schools and Colleges. Additionally, students who transfer into a Little Rock School District high school from a home school must attend at least two semesters in order to receive a high school diploma (see IKED and IKED-R). Former home school students must attend at least four semesters in order to be eligible for rank-in-class (see IKC-R). Foreign Exchange students who complete the senior year in good standing may, at the discretion of the principal, participate in the graduation ceremony. Senior-Year Enrollment Requirements Students participating in dual-credit courses with local colleges/universities during their senior year must be enrolled in high school courses at least half time for their senior year (four units of credit) or full-time during the fall semester in order to receive a diploma from a Little Rock School District high school. This enrollment standard is required regardless of how many credits a student may need to satisfy graduation requirements. (See IKEC-R1 for regulations governing dual-credit enrollments.) Magnet Program Seal Students who participate in the District's high school magnet programs may meet the magnet curriculum requirements through completion of the designated Career Focus courses established for each magnet. In order to receive a Magnet Seal, magnet students must complete fill the requirements of the magnet program. Students transferring into a magnet program after the freshman year may earn a diploma from that high school, but they will not earn the Magnet Seal. Arkansas Scholars Seal A special Arkansas Scholars seal will be affixed to the diploma and transcript of a student who meets the following standards established by the Arkansas Scholars program: 1. Earn a grade of \"C\" or above in all courses. 2. Achieve a 95 percent or better attendance record for each of the four years of high school. 2 lo\u0026lt; n 0 \"z' C) ~ i \"' LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: IKF (continued) 3. Complete high school in eight consecutive semesters. 4. Complete successfully at least three units in science, three units in mathematics, three units of social studies, and four units in English. Honors Diploma Seal A special Honors Seal will be affixed to the diploma and transcript of a student who meets the following standards: 1. Completes the units required for the Little Rock Scholars curriculum, which includes and goes beyond the requirements of the Arkansas Higher Education Coordinating Board for unconditional admission to any public twoyear or four-year institution of higher education in Arkansas and which includes, but goes beyond, the requirements for eligibility for the Arkansas Challenge Scholarship. The Little Rock Scholars curriculum also reflects the admission requirements of the most competitive universities in the United States of America. 2. Successfully completes a minimum of eight Pre-Advanced Placement or Advanced Placement courses over a four-year period. Hall High School students may take University Studies courses as substitutes for PreAdvanced Placement and/or Advanced Placement courses. Other approved dual-credit courses offered to LRSD students in collaboration with area colleges/ universities may also be substituted for the Pre-AP or AP requirement. 3. Earns a grade-point-average of at least 3.5. Students designated for valedictory or salutatory recognition must have completed the Little Rock Scholars curriculum. Recognition of Graduates Each high school may design its own traditions to commend and celebrate the achievements of the following sets of graduates: 1. the valedictorian and salutatorian\n2. students earning an overall average of 3.5 or above\n3. students earning Magnet Program, Arkansas Scholars, Little Rock Scholars, and/or Honors Diploma Seals\n4. members of the National Honor Society or similar honors organization\n5. scholarship recipients\n6. students with perfect attendance throughout high school\nand 7. students whose other achievements are worthy of special recognition. 3 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: IKF (continued) Participation in Graduation Ceremony In order to be a participant in the graduation ceremony, the student must be within one unit of completing the graduation requirements and must have paid the tuition for the one-half or one unit to be taken in summer school (or, alternately, in another approved credit-earning program). All high school students and their parents will be informed in writing of this expectation when course lists and graduation requirements are published for the spring registration process. Principals will make a determination of potential graduates at the end of the junior year and each quarter of the students' senior year and inform students and their parents immediately if it is determined that the student is in danger of not graduating. Such students will be advised of all the appropriate credit-earning options, including, but not limited to, evening high school, summer school, correspondence courses, online courses, credit-by-examination, and placement at the Accelerated Learning Center. Award of Diploma The award of the high school diploma will not be made until all graduation requirements are met. Specific Course Requirements The following table specifies the required courses for graduation for each curriculum area. Revised: Adopted: July 22, 1999 4 High School Graduation Requirements Little Rock School District Required, Classes of 2002 and 2003 English-4 units English I (ESL, Regular, or PreAP)\nand English II (ESL, Regular, or PreAP)\nand English Ill (ESL, Regular, PreAP, or AP)\nand English IV (ESL, Regular, or AP). Oral Communications-1 unit Communications I or Debate I Mathematics-3 units Algebra I (ESL, Regular, or PreAP)\nand Algebra II (ESL, Regular, or PreAP) or Statistics (ESL, Regular, or AP)\nand Concepts of Geometry (ESL or Regular) or Geometry (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP) Science-3 units Physics I (ESL or Regular) or Physics I Pre-AP\nand Biology I (ESL, Regular, or PreAP)\nand Chemistry I (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP) Required, Classes of 2004 and After English-4 units English I (ESL, Regular, or PreAP)\nand English II (ESL, Regular, or PreAP)\nand English Ill (ESL, Regular, PreAP, or AP)\nand English IV (ESL, Regular, or AP). Oral Communications-1/2 unit Communications IA (1/2 unit) English Language Arts-1/2 unit One-half unit from any English, Journalism, or Communications course. Modern Grammar (1/2) is strongly recommended. Mathematics--3 units Algebra I (ESL, Regular, or PreAP)\nand Algebra II (ESL, Regular, or PreAP) or Statistics (ESL, Regular, or AP)\nand Geometry (ESL, Regular, or PreAP) Statistics (ESL, Regular, or AP) will no longer substitute for Algebra II for the Class of 2007. Effective for the Class of 2007, four (4) units of mathematics are required in qrades 9-12. Science--3 units Physics I (ESL or Regular) or Physics I Pre-AP\nand Biology I (ESL, Regular, or PreAP)\nand Chemistry I (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP) 5 Required, ACC Students English-4 units English I (ESL, Regular, or PreAP)\nand English II (ESL, Regular, or PreAP)\nand English Ill (ESL, Regular, PreAP, or AP)\nand English IV (ESL, Regular, or AP). Oral Communications-1/2 unit Communications IA--one-half unit Mathematics-3 units Algebra I (ESL, Regular, or PreAP)\nand Algebra II (ESL, Regular, or PreAP) or Statistics (ESL, Regular, or AP)\nand Concepts of Geometry (ESL or Regular) or Geometry (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP) Science-3 units Physical Science or or Physics I\nand Biology I\nand One additional unit Required, Classes of 2002 and Required, Class of 2004 and Required, ACC Students 2003 After Social Studies-3 units Social Studies--3 units Social Studies-3 units Civics (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP) Civics (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP) Civics (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP) or United States Government or United States Government or United States Government (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP)\nand (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP)\nand (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP)\nand World History (ESL, Regular, World History (ESL, Regular, World History (ESL, Regular, Pre-AP or AP)\nand Pre-AP,or AP)\nand Pre-AP, or AP)\nand United States History (ESL, United States History (ESL, United States History (ESL, Reoular, or AP) Regular, Pre-AP, or AP) Regular, or AP) Physical Education-1/2 unit Physical Education-1/2 unit Physical Education-1/2 unit Physical Education IA Physical Education IA Phvsical Education IA Health and Safety-1/2 unit Health and Safety-1/2 unit Health and Safety-1/2 unit Health and Safety Health and Safety Health and Safety Fine Arts-1 unit Fine Arts-1 unit Fine Arts-1/2 unit One unit from art, dance, drama, One unit from art, dance, drama, or music or music Technology-1 unit Technology--1 unit None One unit from any of the One unit from any of the aooroved technoloov courses. aooroved technolooy courses. Career Focus-3 units Career Focus-3 units Career Focus-3 units Three units from any of the At least three units from any of Three units from any of the approved Career Focus the approved Career Focus approved Career Focus oroorams. oroorams. oroorams. Electives--4 units Electives-6 units (5 units, Electives-3 units effective for Class of 2007) A fourth year of both science and social studies is encouraged, as are at least two units of foreign lanouaoe. Total-24 units Total-26 units Total-21 units Although not required to do so, students graduating m 2004 through 2006 are encouraged to complete the requirements for the Class of 2007, especially the four units of mathematics in grades 9-12. 6 Little Rock Scholars Curriculum The Board of Education recommends that students elect the challenge of a more rigorous graduation plan than the minimum requirements, including at least eight Pre-Advanced Placement or Advanced Placement courses (or University Studies courses at Hall High or approved dual-credit courses). Little Rock Scholars, Class of 2003 Little Rock Scholars, Class of 2004 and After English--4 units English--4 units English I (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP)\nand English I (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP)\nand English II (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP)\nand English II (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP)\nand English Ill (ESL, Regular, Pre-AP, or AP)\nand English Ill (ESL, Regular, Pre-AP, or AP)\nand EnQlish IV (ESL, ReQular, or AP). Encilish IV (ESL, Reciular, or AP). Oral Communications-1 unit Oral Communications-1/2 unit Communications I Communications IA English Language Arts-1/2 unit Any one-half unit from English, Communications, or Journalism. Modern Grammar is strongly encouraQed. Mathematics--4 units Mathematics--4 units (in grades 9-12, class of Algebra I (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP)\nand 20071 Algebra II (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP) or Statistics (ESL, Algebra I (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP)\nand Regular, or AP)\nand Algebra II (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP)\nand Concepts of Geometry (ESL or Regular) or Geometry (ESL, Geometry (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP)\nand Regular, or Pre-AP)\nand One or more additional units of advanced One additional unit of advanced mathematics. mathematics for the completion of four units in grades 9-12. Science--4 units Science--4 units Active Physics (ESL or Regular) or Physics I Pre-AP\nand Active Physics (ESL or Regular) or Physics I Pre-AP\nBiology I (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP)\nand and Chemistry I (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP)\nand Biology I (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP)\nand One additional unit Chemistry I (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP)\nand One additional unit Social Studies--4 units Social Studies--4 units Civics (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP) or United States Civics (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP) or United States Government (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP)\nand Government (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP)\nand World History (ESL, Regular, Pre-AP or AP)\nand World History (ESL, Regular, Pre-AP, or AP)\nand United States History (ESL, Regular, or AP)\nand United States History (ESL, Regular, Pre-AP, or AP)\nOne additional unit and One additional unit Foreign Language-2 units Foreign Language-2 units Two units of any one foreiQn lanQuaQe Two units of any one foreiQn lanQuaQe Physical Education-1/2 unit Physical Education-1/2 unit Physical Education IA Phvsical Education IA Health and Safety-1/2 unit Health and Safety-1/2 unit Health and Safetv Health and Safetv Fine Arts-1 unit Fine Arts-1 unit One unit from art, dance, drama, or music One unit from art, dance, drama, or music Technology-2 units Technology-1 unit* Two units from any of the approved technology courses. One unit from any of the approved technology courses. Career Focus--4 units Career Focus-3 units* Four units from any of the approved Career Focus Three units from any of the approved Career Focus oroarams. proQrams. Electives-0 units Electives-3 units Total-27 units Total-28 units *Students graduating m 2004 through 2006 are encouraged to take four units of mathematics m grades 9-12, although they are not required to do so since their plan only specified three units of mathematics. If they do choose to take the Class of 2007 plan, they may also reduce the requirements in Technology and Career Focus and have three electives instead of one. 7 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM STREET LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS DATE: TO: January 16, 2004 Board of Education FROM: Dr. Morris L. Holmes, Interim Superintendent PREPARED BY: Dr. Debbie Price - Director of MSAP SUBJECT: Magnet Schools Assistance Program Report The Magnet Schools Assistance Program is in Year 3, the final year of the grant. The four schools involved are: Mabelvale Magnet Middle School, Cloverdale Magnet Middle School, J. A. Fair Magnet High School and McClellan Magnet High School. In each of these schools every child is in the magnet program and this grant has enabled these schools to implement programs both to attract new students, but also to provide an innovative program of study for the students in the attendance zone. The magnet programs for each school are: Mabelvale Magnet Middle School Medical Science Environmental Science Technology Technology Cloverdale Magnet Middle School School Engineering Economics Multimedia J. A. Fair Magnet High School Medical Science Environmental Science Systems Engineering and McClellan Magnet High Engineering Business and Finance Multimedia The report will be provided under separate cover. s ~\n= a, Cc: 0 C/1 Zz !:\nm i5 \u0026amp;l ~ i\u0026lt;l ~ m en ~ ?'\u0026lt; \u0026gt;::c ~,\n! 0::,::, C\ni::,Z ZC\u0026gt; :mI: \"' .z.. Date: To: From: Prepared By: Subject: Summary: Objectives: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS January 22, 2004 Board of Education Morris L. Holmes, Interim Superintendent of Schools Linda Austin, Director of Planning and Development Submission of 2004 Magnet Schools Assistance Program Grant (MSAP) proposal The U.S. Department of Education has recently published the draft guidelines for the 2004 application for grants under the Magnet Schools Assistance Program (MSAP). We are currently in the process of preparing for submission of a magnet schools assistance program proposal and seek Board support and approval. Attached are two documents required in the MSAP application process: 1) Voluntary Plan and 2) Board Resolution. The following schools are included in the proposal: J.A. Fair High, McClellan High, Hall High, Mabelvale Middle and Henderson Middle. The anticipated due date is March 5, 2004. 1) To eliminate, reduce or prevent minority group isolation 2) To develop and implement projects that will assist in achieving systemic reforms and providing all students the opportunity to meet challenging State academic content standards an_d student academic achievement 3) To develop and design innovative educational methods and practices that promote diversity and increase choices in public secondary schools and public educational programs 4) To provide courses of instruction that will substantially strengthen the knowledge of academic subjects and the grasp of tangible and marketable vocational, technological and professional skills of students attending the schools 5) To improve the capacity of the district, including through professional development, to continue operating these magnet schools is terminated 6) To ensure high quality education that will enable the students to succeed academically and continue with postsecondary education or productive employment ~?\u0026lt; \u0026gt;:r: E~ g,!!\noz z C) J::U\u0026gt; m .z... . Population: Duration: Total school student population at the targeted secondary schools (Fair, McClellan, Hall, Mabelvale and Henderson) Three-year period: July 2004 - June 2007 Projected Request: $7,500,000 over the three-year period Other Agencies: Participating schools have established numerous community and business partnerships to support their magnet programs. Recommendations: We recommend approval for submission of the 2004 MSAP proposal\nprovide support by adoption of the MSAP resolution. Attachments: Voluntary Plan MSAP Board Resolution LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT VOLUNTARY PLAN January 2004 The Little Rock School District (LRSD) plan meets the statutory requirements of Title VI of the Improving America's Schools Act of 1994, which authorizes the Magnet Schools Assistance Program (MSAP). This plan approved by the Little Rock School District Board of Education in January 2004 will be submitted to the U.S. Department of Education for consideration in conjunction with the District's application for MSAP funding. Under this plan, dependent upon funding from the MSAP, the LRSD will support five magnet schools during the 2004-2007 MSAP funding cycle. One LRSD high school, Hall High School, will be redesigned as a school-wide magnet program. In addition, four existing magnet schools will be significantly revised to promote increased levels of student diversity and maximize students' access to innovative and rigorous coursework and programs: J. A. Fair Magnet High School, McClellan Magnet High School, Mabelvale Magnet Middle School and Henderson Magnet Middle School. These magnet schools will carry out the six objectives of the Magnet Schools Assistance Program. They will: 1) eliminate, reduce, or prevent minority group isolation\n2) develop and implement projects that will assist in achieving systemic reforms and providing all students the opportunity to meet challenging State academic content standards and student academic achievement\n3) develop and design innovative educational methods and practices that promote diversity and increase choices in public secondary schools and public educational programs\n4) provide courses of instruction that will substantially strengthen the knowledge of academic subjects and the grasp of tangible and marketable vocational, technological and professional skills of students attending the schools\n5) improve the capacity of the district, including through professional development, to continue operating these magnet schools at a high performance level after Federal funding for the magnet schools is terminated\n6) and ensure that all students enrolled in the magnet school programs have equitable access to high quality education that will enable the students to succeed academically and continue with postsecondary education or productive employment. Little Rock School District's 2004-2007 Voluntary Plan Strategies The linchpin of the District's voluntary plan strategy is to attract the significant numbers of non-minority students already residing in the Little Rock School District attendance zone -- who are currently attending non-public schools, being home schooled or attending public schools outside the LRSD District -- back into the district's federally funded magnet middle and high schools. All five of the federally funded magnet schools will be attendance zone specialty magnets. The federally funded magnet school programs serve every student enrolled in the school by virtue of their neighborhood attendance zone assignment. These schools are also available to students seeking school options or choices outside of their attendance zone schools: students from the neighboring Pulaski County Special School District (PCSSD) as ~?\u0026lt; \u0026gt;:r:: ~~ g,!! ::oz ZG'l !CU) .zm.. . majority-to-minority (M-to-M) transfer students.1 The PCSSD continues to operate under an active desegregation court ordered plan that stipulates the M-to-M transfer process with the LRSD. The two-pronged strategy that the LRSD plans to use to achieve its ambitious voluntary plan goals and objectives is as follows: Innovative, standards-based curriculum design and implementation, to include the development and school-wide infusion of the instructional themes, supported and complemented by an array of thematically focused high interest magnet courses, related professional development and parent involvement initiatives, and collaborations with outside partners Aggressive and targeted outreach and recruitment campaigns designed to attract a more diverse student body than is currently attending these schools. The LRSD schools are comprised of 73 percent minorities (Black, Hispanics, others (including American Indians and Asians) and 27 percent non-minorities (White). In contrast, the Little Rock community is comprised of a much larger percentage of nonminority residents (65 percent) and a much smaller percentage of minority residents (35 percent) than the LRSD. LRSD Students Attending Non-Public Schools. Research was also conducted on the non-public (private and parochial) schools in the area encompassed by the LRSD. There are 26 non-public schools located within the boundaries of the LRSD (parochial and non-denominational). According to the 2000 census data, these schools enroll a total of 6,405 of the city's 13,223 total white student population. As a whole, Little Rock private schools have added 135 students each year since 1970, according to the Census Bureau.2 The Arkansas Democrat Gazette reported on October 26, 2003, that since the census was taken, the LRSD lost almost 600 more white students. Among the 250 largest U.S. cities, Little Rock now ranks 9th with the largest proportions of their white students in private schools (48%).3 The 2000 Census data reveal that among blacks, 4 percent attend private schools. Substantial numbers of parents are electing not to take advantage of the public education system, and are instead incurring the expense of a private school education for their children. By choosing a private school education for their children, many nonminority families in the Little Rock community have segregated their children from the predominantly minority and relatively poor students attending the public schools. 1 The M-to-M Stipulation dated August 26, 1986 provides agreement between the Little Rock School District and the Pulaski County Special School District for voluntary majority-to-minority interdistrict transfers. 2 Arkansas Democrat Gazette, Tuesday, October 28, 2003 3 Source: 2000 Census Compliance with Civil Rights Requirements The Little Rock School District assures the United States Department of Education and the Office of Civil Rights (OCR) that the District's Voluntary Plan and the accompanying MSAP proposal complies with requirements of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution in that its use of race in the selection of students to attend its five magnet schools is \"narrowly tailored.\" The following section specifies how the Voluntary Plan -- and the Little Rock School District Magnet Schools Assistance Program overall -- is responsive to the five considerations established by the Office for Civil Rights. Whether the district tried or seriously considered race-neutral alternatives and determined that those measures have not been or would not be similarly effective, before resorting to race-conscious action The Little Rock School District MSAP initiative includes zoned attendance specialty magnets (J.A. Fair High, McClellan High, Hall High, Henderson Middle and Mabelvale Middle). The student admissions process for these magnet schools is designed to recognize attendance zone school precedence and to provide educational choice options that maintain student diversity to the extent practicable as stated in the LRSD Board of Education policy, School Choice - NEPN: JCA (see attachment). Zoned attendance magnets have clearly delineated attendance zones from which they draw their student populations, such that race is not used at all as a criterion in admissions. Every student residing within the attendance zone is admitted to the school should they so choose to enroll. The linchpin of the strategy in the case of zoned attendance magnets is to design, conduct, and monitor a targeted and aggressive outreach and recruitment effort to attract the populations of students needed to achieve the school-specific enrollment goals. This outreach and recruitment strategy is described in great depth in the Plan of Operation, and again in the Quality of Project Design section. Providing students with choice is a key component of the plan. School choice is viewed as a healthy method of providing opportunity for students to take advantage of unique curriculum offerings, special emphasis and program activities. The attendance specialty magnet schools are available to students seeking school options or choices outside of their attendance zone schools. Students from the neighboring district of Pulaski County may participate in these specialty magnets as M-to-M transfer students. If the number of out of zone applicants exceeds the number of seats available, a weighted random assignment process will be used to identify those students who will be assigned. Criteria indicators considered in the weighted random process include the student's race, achievement test performance and economic status (free and reduced lunch). A computerized lottery will identify the student population of these specialty magnet schools' attendance zones and then increase the likelihood that students of opposite attributes will be selected thereby diversifying the school's population. The selection process will be random. Academic examinations are not used in the selection of students for the specialty magnet programs. The scope and flexibility of the use of race, including whether it is subject to a waiver There are several aspects of the LRSD student assignment process that demonstrate its flexibility. First, because in our District we believe that from time to time students face situations beyond their control, Appeals Committee transfers are considered for \"Medical Hardship or Extenuating Circumstances.\" An appeals committee composed of five volunteers meet monthly to consider any requests submitted. The members serve staggered 3-year terms. The committee is composed of parents, teachers, or community representatives. Second, staff preference transfers are provided to children of LRSD employees who reside in the LRSD. Children of LRSD employees will be permitted to transfer to the school in which the employee is assigned. These assignments are based on space availability. Third, Act 624/1105 transfers provides students of any person who is a public school employee in one district and a resident of another school district the opportunity to be enrolled in and to attend school in the district in which the parent is an employee. The manner in which race is used, that is, whether race determines eligibility for a program or whether race is just one factor in the decision making process We have established earlier that in the case of our zoned attendance magnets, race is only one criterion for admission in the weighted lottery process. The duration of the use of race and whether it is subject to periodic review The Little Rock School District assures the Office for Civil Rights that it will formally review, on a periodic basis, any steps it may take which involve the use of race to determine whether the use of race is still needed, or should be modified. The degree and type of burden imposed on students of other races As noted above, the LRSD MSAP magnet initiative has designated five sites as federal magnet schools for the 2004 - 2007 program cycle, representing a broad array of program options and educational levels. In the event that a magnet school becomes significantly over-enrolled, parents may exercise the school choice options for other specialty magnet schools, stipulation/original magnet schools, or other attendance zone schools. Procedures are established that enable students to make application to enroll in a school outside of their designated attendance zone. Parents and students are informed of available options. RESOLUTION WHEREAS, improving the academic achievement of all students and maintaining an equitable, nondiscriminatory learning environment will forever be the core of the Little Rock School District's mission\nand WHEREAS, despite past efforts, there remain schools within the District where minority group enrollment exceeds 75%, thus constituting minority group isolation\nand WHEREAS, school choice is viewed as a healthy method of providing opportunity for students to take advantage of unique curriculum offerings, special emphasis and program activities\nand WHEREAS, magnet schools expand educational choices, provide meaningful courses of study to which students can relate and set high expectations for all students for further education and the world of work\nand WHEREAS, magnet schools enhance parental and community involvement and encourage the use of community resources, thus improving the effectiveness of education in our District\nand NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Little Rock School District Board of Education endorses and approves the Voluntary Plan for submission with the LRSD 2004 MSAP proposal to the U. S. Department of Education. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we have hereunto set our hands on behalf of the Little Rock School District Board of Education on this 22nd day of January, 2004. Michael Daugherty, Secretary Tony Rose, President ~?\u0026lt; ::c er\n: g2!! ::oz z Cl 31: (I) zm.. . LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 DATE: TO: January 22, 2004 Board of Education FROM: ~l Paradis, Director of Procurement and Materials Mgmt. THROUGH: Morris L. Holmes, Interim Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Donations of Property Attached are requests to donate property to the Little Rock School District as follows: School/Department Central High School Cloverdale Magnet Middle School Cloverdale Magnet Middle School Wilson Elementary School Woodruff Elementary School Item $500.00 cash to be applied toward the completion of the reflecting pool $240.00 gift card Food coupons in the amount of $200.00 $400.00 cash to be used to purchase supplies for students in need $100.00 cash as a match for volunteer hours from Woodruff parent, Tamela Warren, who is also a Wal-Mart employee. Funds will be used to provide \"good conduct\" incentives for students. Donor Central High School \"Class of 1993\" Wal-Mart Super Center Burger King Elite, Inc. Wal-Mart #126 ~ n 5 \"z' C\u0026gt; i \"' Board of Education January 22, 2004 Page 2 School/Department Little Rock School District Copy of the book \"The Search for the Smell of Christmas\" to each student in 23 of the District's elementary schools. The estimated value of this donation (7,010 books @ $14.95) is $104,800.00. Aromatique, Inc. It is recommended that these donation requests be approved in accordance with the policies of the Board. LittCe 'lwck Centra{ J-fffJli Sclioo{ 1500 Soutfi 'Park Street Litt{e 'Rock, ..'A.rkansas 72202 'Phone 501-447-1400 :fax 501-447-1401 December 5, 2003 To: Darral Paradis, Director of Procurement From: Nancy Rousseau, Principal {'V Re: Donation to Little Rock Central High School The Class of 1993 very graciously donated $500 to Central High School. Their desire is that the donation goes toward the completion of the reflecting pool, with the understanding that the school will have a bench erected along the pool with a plaque stating \"Donated by the Class of 1993.\" It is my recommendation that this donation be accepted in accordance with the policies of the Little Rock School District. 0c. c , -. ,,..,., . . l. 0 _, .... i, Date: To: From: Through: Subject: School/Department December 15, 2003 Darral Paradis, Director of Procurement and Materials Mgmt. Angela Munns, Principal Cloverdale Magnet Middle School Dorothy Davis, Title 1 Liaison Donation of Gift Cards Cloverdale Magnet Middle School Gift Card ($240.00) Wal-Mart Super Center 8801 Baseline Road Little Rock, AR 72209 Jason Mans, Store Manager .... I L\"\" : a- t . -,.,l. ,,, Date: To: From: Through: Subject: School/Department December 15, 2003 Darr al Paradis, Director of Procurement and Materials Mgmt. Angela Munns, Principal Cloverdale Magnet Middle School Dorothy Davis, Title 1 Liaison Donation of Food Coupons Donor Cloverdale Magnet Middle School Food Coupons ($200.00) Burger King Allied Food Industries, Inc. 3300 So. University Ave. Little Rock, AR 72204 Jeffery Williams, District Manager r.. , ,.., , ~ ,n- 0 \"z' c\n, i \"' ~ ?\u0026lt; ::c ~~ O\n:o C:- ::oz zc\n, 3m1: \"' ~ WILSON ELEMENTARY SCHOOL '\"F,zceffence ancl 'Equity in 'Ecfocation\" DATE: November 20, 2003 TO: Darral Paradis, Director, Procurement Dept. FROM: Beverly Jones, Principal of Wilson School SUBJECT: Donation Elite, Inc. of P.O.Box 4922, Little Rock, AR 72204, graciously donated $400.00 to Wilson Elementary to be used to buy supplies for students in need. It is my recommendation that this donation be accepted in accordance with the policies of the Little Rock School District. 4015 Stannus Road Phone (501) 447-7200 Fax (501) 447-7201 Little Rock. Arkansas 72204 WOODRUFF ELEMENTARY SCHOOL (~n 'E?(tenaea :fear 'Eaucation Schoo{' To: Mr. Darral Paradis, Director of Procurement From: Janice M. Wilson, Principal Date: December 8, 2003 Re: Donations Wal-Mart #126 has donated $100.00 to Woodruff Elementary, as a match for volunteer hours to our school from Woodruff parent and Wal-Mart employee Tamela Warren. We sincerely appreciate this donation, which will provide \"good conduct\" incentives for our students We recommend that this donation be accepted in accordance with the policies and procedures of the Little Rock School District. Wal-Mart #126 Renita Thompson, Personnel Manager 700 Chenal Little Rock, AR 72211 Tamela D. Warren 912 Johnson Street Little Rock, AR 7204 - ..\n'.\":- r,:~:. C-..- L 1,-\u0026lt;0'- ~ .. ,f L~ .... . ~.:!\n'\\\n.\n-i:-: .... _~ ... ~~_.\"'~,~,\n,:-a .. _ t (..\nj - ' ~ ~t ... : ... ::,.\n301 0 West 7th Street Phone 671 -6270 Little Rock, Arkansas 72205 ~?\u0026lt; \u0026gt;:c ~~ O\n,o C:\n, oz zc\n, 3: en .zm.. . Little Rock School District Department of Instructional Technology 3001 S. Pulaski Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 December 15, 2003 TO: Darral Paradis, Director, Procurement and Materials Management FROM: Lucy Neal, Director, Technology and Media Services SUBJECT: Donation of Books Aromatique, Inc. of Heber Springs donated a copy of the book The Search for the Smell of Christmas to each student in 23 elementary schools. The value of the donation is $104,800. The contact information is as follows : Patti and Dick Upton Aromatique, Inc. P.O. Box 6000 Heber Springs, AR 72543 It is recommended that this donation be accepted in accordance with the policies and procedures of the Little Rock School District. \\ ::~. :::~ ... , .-::- ~ ........ , .. .. ,...,.. . -_\n~. , ... --.~ ~ . -~~~._. - .... ~ ,: ... : ,\\ ....... i Little Rock School District Financial Services 810 West Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201 Phone: (501) 447-1086 Fax: (501) 447-1158 DATE: January 22, 2004 TO: Little Rock School District Board of Directors THROUGH: Donald M. Stewart, Chief Financial Officer Morris L. Holmes, Interim Superintendent PREPARED BY: ~ark D. Milhollen, Manager, Financial Services Subject Summary Objectives Expected Outcomes Population/Location Budget Amount/Source Manager Duration Financial Reports District funds are reported for the period ending December 31 , 2003. To report the District's financial status monthly to the Board of Directors. The Board members will be informed of the District's current financial condition. NIA NIA Mark Milhollen, Manager of Financial Services NIA Long Range/Continuation Financial reports will be submitted monthly to the Board. Other Agencies Involved one Expectations of District N/ A Needed Staff IA Comments None ------------ ------ Recommendation Approval of the December 2003 financial reports. We recommend that the Board approve the financial reports as submitted. \\ ~?\u0026lt; \u0026gt;::r:: ~~ g2!! ::oz ZC'l\ni:\"' .zm.. . LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT COMBINED STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE FOR THE PERIOD ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2002 AND 2003 APPROVED RECEIPTS % APPROVED RECEIPTS % 2002/03 12/31/02 COLLECTED 2003/04 12/31/03 COLLECTED REVENUE-LOCAL SOURCES CURRENT TAXES 58,550,000 57,147,781 97.61% 57,547,800 55,681,497 96.76% DELINQUENT TAXES 8,000,000 7,108,960 88.86% 10,100,000 8,793,799 87.07% 40% PULLBACK 29,400,000 29,600,000 EXCESS TREASURER'S FEE 187,000 210,000 DEPOSITORY INTEREST 385,000 180,000 REVENUE IN LIEU OF TAXES 135,000 220,757 163.52% 150,000 MISCELLANEOUS AND RENTS 340,000 219,948 64.69% 380,000 225,933 59.46% INTEREST ON INVESTMENTS 275,000 68,627 24.96% 200,000 64,666 32.33% ATHLETIC RECEIPTS 160,000 136,431 85.27% 240,000 142,937 59.56% TOTAL 97,432,000 64,902,502 66.61% 98,607,800 64,908,833 65.83% REVENUE - COUNTY SOURCES COUNTY GENERAL 24,000 11,170 46.54% 21,000 11,594 55.21% TOTAL 24,000 11,170 46.54% 21,000 11,594 55.21% REVENUE-STATE SOURCES EQUALIZATION FUNDING 54,867,630 25,092,813 45.73% 53,226,139 24,193,699 45.45% REIMBURSEMENT STRS/HEAL TH 7,590,000 3,891,937 51 .28% 8,300,000 3,373,820 40.65% VOCATIONAL 1,340,000 512,285 38.23% 1,400,000 521,646 37.26% HANDICAPPED CHILDREN 1,700,000 320 0.02% 1,675,000 271,285 16.20% EARLY CHILDHOOD 273,358 136,486 49.93% 273,358 135,094 49.42% TRANSPORTATION 3,685,226 1,226,542 33.28% 3,875,562 1,243,841 32.09% INCENTIVE FUNDS - M TO M 3,265,000 1,396,152 42.76% 3,900,000 1,473,688 37.79% ADULT EDUCATION 1,006,014 273,287 27.17% 920,337 311 ,832 33.88% POVERTY INDEX FUNDS 658,607 329,297 50.00% 560,545 267,486 47.72% EARLY LITERACY LEARNING 120,000 TAP PROGRAM 285,271 142,636 50.00% 285,245 142,623 50.00% AT RISK FUNDING 650,000 57,386 8.83% 360,000 193,739 53.82% TOTAL 75,441,106 33,059,140 43.82% 74,776,187 32,128,752 42.97% REVENUE - OTHER SOURCES TRANSFER FROM CAP PROJ FUND 620,000 770,000 TRANSFER FROM OTHER FUNDS 1,126,233 13,857 1.23% 1,350,000 18,519 1.37% TRANSFER FROM MAGNET FUND 1,664,438 554,813 1,632,430 544,143 33.33% TOTAL 3,410,671 568,670 16.67% 3,752,430 562,662 14.99% TOTAL REVENUE OPERATING 176,307,m 98,541,483 55.89% 177,157,418 97,611,841 55.10% REVENUE - OTHER FEDERAL GRANTS 25,152,981 6,212,729 24.70% 24,075,790 7,040,060 29.24% DEDICATED M\u0026amp; 0 3,980,000 2,073,471 52.10% 4,000,000 2,368,924 59.22% MAGNET SCHOOLS 25,065,942 9,202,775 36.71% 24,689,351 9,316,330 37.73% TOTAL 54,198,923 17,488,975 32.27% 52,765,141 18,725,314 35.49% TOTAL REVENUE 230,506,700 116,030,457 50.34% 229,922,559 116,337,155 50.60% LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT COMBINED STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE FOR THE PERIOD ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2002 AND 2003 APPROVED EXPENDED % APPROVED EXPENDED 2002/03 12/31/02 EXPENDED 2003/04 12/31/03 EXPENSES SALARIES 100,865,586 38,613,023 38.28% 100,684,982 38,826,959 BENEFITS 24,838,361 9,597,788 38.64% 26,483,772 9,621,831 PURCHASED SERVICES 19,795,774 8,031 ,646 40.57% 19,719,297 8,107,685 MATERIALS \u0026amp; SUPPLIES 8,347,098 3,485,453 41.76% 8,1 85,459 4,165,135 CAPITAL OUTLAY 1,616,991 486,437 30.08% 1,575,580 549,257 OTHER OBJECTS 8,508,680 2,892,930 34.00% 8,384,567 2,957,578 DEBT SERVICE 12,217,048 4,880,555 39.95% 12,098,342 4,699,176 TOTAL EXPENSES OPERATING 176,189,538 67,987,831 38.59% 177,131,999 68,927,621 EXPENSES-OTHER FEDERAL GRANTS 26,148,726 5,908,341 22.60% 26,056,193 7,038,023 DEDICATED M\u0026amp; 0 3,980,000 1,082,832 27.21% 4,000,000 2,157,873 MAGNET SCHOOLS 25,065,942 8,567,693 34.18% 24,689,351 8,613,259 TOTAL 55,194,668 15,558,866 28.19% 54,745,544 17,809,156 TOTAL EXPENSES 231,384,206 83,546,697 36.11% 231,877,543 86,736,777 INCREASE (DECREASE) IN FUND BALANCE (877,506) 32,483,759 (1 ,954,984) 29,600,377 BEGINNING FUND BALANCE FEDERAL, MAGNET \u0026amp; OED M\u0026amp; 0 1,645,440 1,645,440 3,558,580 3,558,580 OPERATING 8,557,652 8,557,652 9,026,855 9,026,855 ENDING FUND BALANCE FEDERAL, MAGNET \u0026amp; OED M\u0026amp; 0 649,695 3,575,548 1,578,177 4,474,738 OPERATING 8,675,891 39,111 ,304 9,052,274 37,711 ,075 TOTAL 9,325,586 42,686,852 10,630,451 42,185,813 - % EXPENDED 38.56% 36.33% 41.12% 50.88% 34.86% 35.27% 38.84% 38.91% 27.01% 53.95% 34.89% 32.53% 37.41% ~?\u0026lt; ,. :c E~ g2:!\noz Z Cl :I: \u0026lt;J\u0026gt; zm ..... LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT BOND ACCOUNT FOR THE PERIOD ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2003 PROJECT BEG BALANCE INCOME TRANSFERS EXPENDITURES ENCUMBRANCES END BALANCE 07-01-03 2003-04 2003-04 2003-04 2003-04 12-31-03 $6,200,000 BOND ISSUE FAIR 33,282.90 33,282.90 MCCLELLAN 77,219.02 77,219.02 CONTINGENCY 0.00 0.00 SUBTOTAL 110,501.92 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 110,501 .92 $136,268,560 BOND ISSUES ADMINISTRATION 32,802.37 87,000.00 62,375.74 57,426.63 NEW WORK PROJECTS 18,614,545.40 190,056.00 9,130,717.54 8,409,848.55 1,264,035.31 SECURITY PROJECTS 42,273.97 2,153.87 511 .33 39,608.77 LIGHTING PROJECTS 29,869.56 7,679.00 22,190.56 MAINTENANCE \u0026amp; REPAIR 2,768,579.81 1,520,796.00 2,199,600.26 532,441 .69 1,557,333.86 RENOVATION PROJECTS 31,306,506.59 166,300.00 10,725,369.02 10,332,104.46 10,415,333.11 TECHNOLOGY UPGRADES 2,335,019.24 939,378.26 9,913.56 1,385,727.42 SUBTOTAL 55,129,596.94 0.00 1,964, 152.00 23,067,273.69 19,284,819.59 14,741,655.66 REVENUES PROCEEDS-PROPERTY SALE 444,618.31 1,000.00 445,618.31 DUNBAR PROJECT 5,266.71 5,266.71 PROCEEDS-BOND SALES 22,074,599.23 (1 ,964,152.00) 20,110,447.23 PROCEEDS-QZAB SALE 1,293,820.97 1,293,820.97 INTEREST 7,288,776.89 590,584.17 7,879,361 .06 SUBTOTAL 31,107,082.11 591 ,584.17 (1 ,964,152.00) 0.00 0.00 29,734,514.28 GRAND TOTAL llli\ni~z lll!l l!Z ~Ill ~~ lZ Q.l2!l i~ !lliZ in fill ll! i~,llll! ~I! :li ~llli liZl llli I Fund j Purchase Date t L Operating 07-19-03 Operating 12-30-03 Operating 12-19-03 Operating 12-19-03 Operating 12-19-03 Operating 12-19-03 Total Food Service 12-22-03 Activity Fund 12-19-03 Total Bond Account 09-08-03 Capital Projects Fund 01-17-03 Capital Projects Fund 01-17-03 Capital Projects Fund 10-15-03 Capital Projects Fund 01 -29-03 Capital Projects Fund 01-17-03 Capital Projects Fund 11 -18-03 Capital Projects Fund 05-15-03 Capital Projects Fund 01-22-03 Capital Projects Fund 05-15-03 Capital Projects Fund 12-01-03 Capital Projects Fund 09-15-03 Capital Projects Fund 12-19-03 Total Deseg Plan Scholarship 12-05-03 Total Rockefeller Scholarship 06-24-03 Total Risk Management loss Fund 12-16-03 lN3WN~morov Ix SONIMV3H x LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT SCHEDULE OF INVESTMENTS BY FUND FOR THE PERIOD ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2003 - - - - - - l - - - -- Maturity Institution Interest Rate Type Principal I - - Date - - - - - -- - -- 01 -19-04 Regions 0.945% Money Market - 20,000.00 I TFN Bank of America 0.820% Repo 17,725,000.00 01-15-04 Twin City Bank 1.350% CD 5,000,000.00 02-02-04 I Twin City Bank 1.350% co 9,500,000.00 I 02-13-04 Twin City Bank 1.350% CD 5,000,000.00 03-01-04 Twin City Bank 1.400% CD 9,600,000.00 __ 46,845,000.00 - i - TFN Bank of America 0.710% Repo 910,000.00 i!._0,000.00 -- TFN Bank of America 0.780% Repo 1,280,000.00 f- - - 1,280,00.Q,00 - - - 03-08-04 Regions 1.094% CD 400,000.00 01-16-04 Metropolitan 1.930% CD 1,000,934.31 01-16-04 Bank of the Ozarks 2.250% CD 5,116,598.09 02-13-04 Bank of the Ozarks 1.250% CD 5,000,000.00 01-29-04 Bancorp South 2.000% CD 2,058,896.90 01-16-04 Superior 2.250% CD 2,500,000.00 04-15-04 Bank of the Ozarks 1.300% CD 6,000,000.00 08-16-04 USBANK 1.420% - CD 11,000,000.00 01-16-04 Bank of America 1.240% Treasury Bills 5,299,646.43 05-14-04 Bank of the Ozarks 1.360% CD 9,000,000.00 05-03-04 Bank of the Ozarks 1.250% CD 3,060,648.33 03-15-04 Bank of the Ozarks 1.430% CD 10,221,001 .82 TFN Bank of America 0.780% Repo 4,840,000.00 - _ 65,497,725.88 - 06-15-04 Bank of America 1.020% Treasury Bills 668,325.28 668,325.28 - -- 01-15-04 Bank of America 0.760% Treasury Bills 250,909.40 I 250,909.40 - - - - TFN f Bank of America 0.780% Repo 500,000.00 500,000.00 S\u0026gt;tMVW3M ONIS01:\u0026gt; \"XI LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT BOND ISSUE PROJECT HISTORY THRU THE PERIOD ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2003 I PROJECT I ENDING ALLOCATIONS EXPENSE EXPENSE EXPENSE EXPENSE ENCUMBERED ALLOCATION PROJECT CATEGORIES THRU 12-31-03 2000-01 2001-02 I 2002-03 THRU 12-31-03 THRU 12-31-03 SUBTOTAL 12-31-03 . I I ADMINISTRATION 673,846.55 889,772.32 I (485,325.77)1 149,597.63 62,375.74 0.00 616,419.92 57,426.63 NEW WORK PROJECTS i 35,509. 116.80 I 443,467.00 4,589,606.29 11,671,442.11 9,130,717.54 8,409,848.55 34,245,081.49 1,264,035.31 SECURITY PROJECTS ' 265,814.17 113,930.47 109,609.73 2,153.87 511.33 226,205.40 39,608.77 LIGHTING PROJECTS ' 4,883,405.13 2,641,482.13 1,832,392.06 379,661 .38 7,679.00 0.00 4,861,214.57 22,190.56 MAINTENANCE \u0026amp; REPAIR 12,754,406.51 791,385.63 4,218,294.40 3,455,350.67 2,199,600.26 532,441 .69 11 ,197,072.65 1,557,333.86 RENOVATION PROJECTS 51,655,707.04 397,615.34 4,119,045.21 15,666,239.90 10,725,369.02 10,332,104.46 41,240,373.93 10,415,333.11 - TECHNOLOGY UPGRADES 11 ,735,611.78 575,016.53 I 4,325,201.40 4,500,374.61 939,378.26 9,913.56 10,349,884.36 1,385,727.42 I - UNALLOCATED PROCEEDS 21,404,268.20 I 21,404,268.20 TOTAL 138,882,116.18 I 5,852.669.42 I 18,708,823.32 35,822,666.30 23,067,273.69 19,284,819.59 102,736,252.32 36,145,923.86 r I . - j I - f 1 - - - - - 1 - .. - -\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_1143","title":"Little Rock School District, personnel directory","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":["Little Rock School District"],"dc_date":["2004/2005"],"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--21st Century","Little Rock School District","Education--Arkansas","School administrators","School board members","School employees","School principals","School superintendents"],"dcterms_title":["Little Rock School District, personnel directory"],"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/1143"],"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\nThe transcript for this item was created using Optical Character Recognition (OCR) and may contain some errors.\nDEC - 2DD~ f ae,u\\t1 and '5taff Diree,t or1 Litt\\e ~l~ '5lhoo\\ Distrilt 2.004-05 JoIN YouR LITTLE RocK TEACHERS FEDERAL CREDIT UNION The Exclusive Credit Union for All Little Rock School District Employees Serving Little Rock's Best For More Information, Call 374--7119 All Accounts Insured to $100,000 by the National Credit Union Administration AYllAdNocacy OY~WY\\I fOY L~ R,Oci\u0026lt;/ Sc.hccil\nV 14itrlct rnploy~ 501.372.3519 Katherine Wright Knight President www.lrcta@sbcglobal.net Fax. 375.1703 Grainger L. Ledbetter Executive Director [II 2004 - 2005 Student Calendar (See Extended Year Calendar At Bottom of Page for Cloverdale Elem., Mabelvale Elem., Mitchell, Stephens and Woodruff) August 5 - 6, 2004 August 11, 2004 August 19, 2004 September 6, 2004 September 30, 2004 October 1, 2004 October 21, 2004 October 22, 2004 November 4 - 5, 2004 November 24 - 26, 2004 December 20, 2004 January 3, 2005 January 13, 2005 January 14, 2005 January 17, 2005 February 21, 2005 March 24, 2005 March 25, 2005 March 28 - April 1, 2005 May 30, 2005 June 3, 2005 June 6, 2005 \"Check-In\" for Parents and Students at Schools First Day for Teachers First Day for Students Labor Day Holiday (Schools Closed) Parent Conferences (Students Out) Staff Development (Students Out) End of First Quarter (43 days) Staff Development (Students Out) Staff DevelopmenUAEA (Students Out) Thanksgiving Holidays (3) (Schools Closed) Winter Vacation Begins (Schools Closed) Classes Resume End of Second Quarter (44 days) Teachers Record Day (Students Out) Martin Luther King, Jr. Holiday (Schools Closed) Parent Conferences (Students Out) End of Third Quarter (47 days) Staff Development (Students Out) Spring Break (Schools Closed) Memorial Day Holiday (Schools Closed) Last Day for Students/End of Fourth Quarter (44 days) Teachers Record Day 2004 - 2005 Extended Year Calendar (Cloverdale Elem., Mitchell, Mabelvale Elem., Stephens \u0026amp; Woodruff) July 28 - 29, 2004 August 2, 2004 August 9, 2004 September 6, 2004 September 23, 2004 September 24, 2004 October 8, 2004 October 11, 2004 October 12 - 15, 2004 October 18 - 22, 2004 November 4 - 5, 2004 November 24 - 26, 2004 December 20, 2004 January 3, 2005 January 13, 2005 January 14, 2005 January 17, 2005 Jan. 31 - Feb. 4, 2005 February 7 -11, 2005 February 21, 2005 March 28 -April 1, 2005 April 14, 2005 April 15, 2005 May 16-20, 2005 May 30, 2005 June 27, 2005 June 28, 2005 June 29, 2005 Check-In for Parents and Students at Schools First Day for Teachers First Day for Students Labor Day Holiday (Schools Closed) Parent Conference Day (Students Out) Staff Development (Students Out) End of First Quarter (42 days) Staff Development Day (Students Out) Intersession (Students Out) Vacation (Students Out) Staff DevelopmenUAEA (Students Out) Thanksgiving Holidays (3) (Schools Closed) Winter Vacation Begins (Schools Closed) Classes Resume End of Second Quarter (44 days) Teachers Record Day (Students Out) Martin Luther King, Jr. Holiday (Schools Closed) Intersession (Students Out) Vacation (Students Out) Parent Conference Day (Students Out) Spring Break (Schools Closed) End of Third Quarter (47 days) Staff Development (Students Out) Intersession (Students Out) Memorial Day Holiday (Schools Closed) Last Day for Students/End of Fourth Quarter (45 days) Teachers Record Day Staff Development Day Ill Administrative Listings Little Rock School Officials Dr. Roy G. Brooks Supe ntendent 810 W. Markham St., 72201 447-1000(W) Dr. Katherine Mitchell Zone 1 Board Secreta!'Y 1605 Welch St., 72206 375,\n695Z (H Term Expires: 2005 R. Micheal Daugherty - Zone 2 Board Vice President 2101 S. Martin St, 72204 664-3143(H) Term Expires: 2007 Bryan Day - Zone 3 337 C stal Court, 72205 664-5776 (H) H. Baker Kurrus - Zone 4 10816 Crestdal Lan , 72212 224-4154 (H) Term Expires: 2006 Larry B rkley - Zone 5 Board President 14005 St. Chart s Blvd, 72211 225-7377 (H) 296-3254 (Vv) Term Expires 2005 Tony Rose -Zone 6 8109 Mel/wood. 72204 568-7587 (H) 569-8122 (W) li rm Expires 2006 Term Expire 2007 Sue H. Strickland - Zone 7 13600 Otter Creek Pkwy #147, 72209 455-1843 (H) Term Expires. 2006 111 LRSD CENTRAL OFFICES 111 LOCATIONS LRSD Administration Building 810 West Markham Street, 72201 District Main Number ... .... ......... .... .. .... ....... ..... 447-1000 Superintendent's Office ........ ..... ..................... 447-1002 Chief Financial Officer ........... ............ .. .. ... ... ..... 447-1011 Communications ....... .. ... ...... ...... .. ......... .......... 447-1025 District Engineer ................. .......... ....... ............ 447-1146 Federal Programs ................. ..... .. ................. .. 447-1070 Financial Services Office .. ........ .. ....... .......... ... 447-1080 Human Resources ..... ................... .......... ......... 447-1100 lntemalAuditor ....................... ....... ..... .............. 447-1115 Ombudsman .... ..... ..... ... ......... ......... ... .......... .... 447-1121 Planning \u0026amp; Development ......... .. ......... ... ........ ... 447-1126 Print Shop ........ .. .... ..... ...... ..... .... .... ... ......... .... 447-1013 School Services Offices Associate Supt., Elementary ................. .... .. 447-1133 Assistant Supt., Elementary ........ ..... .. ...... ... 447-1130 Assistant Supt., Secondary .. ............ ........ ... 447-1136 Dir. - Magnet School Assistance Program .... 447-1132 Accountability Coordinator ... .. ........ .. ......... ... 44 7-1137 Leadership Development .. ..... .. ... .. ............... 447-1016 Substitute Office (SOS) open M-F 'til 3 pm ..... 447-1112 SOS Automated System ...... .. ..... .................. .. 447-1111 Accelerated Learning Center (ACC) ............. 447-1350 7701 Scott Hamilton, 72209 Administration Annex ..................................... 447-1000 100 South Arch Street, 72201 Little Rock Teachers Credit Union .. .......... .... ... 374-7119 CARE .......... ....... .... ... ... ...... ........ .. ....... ........ ... 447-7400 Exceptional Children ..... ........ ... .. ......... ........ .... 447-7420 Gifted Programs ...... ........... ... ... .... ....... ......... .. 447-7470 Health Services .. .... ...... ...... .. ... .................... ... 447-7480 Pupil Services ..... ... ....... ....... .. .... .................. ... 447-7490 Adult Education Center .................................. 447-1850 4800 West 26th Street, 72204 Alternative Learning Center (ALC) .. .......... ... 447-3520 800 Apperson Street, 72202 Career \u0026amp; Technical Education ....................... 447-1390 7701 Scott Hamilton, 72209 Child Nutrition ................................................. 447-2450 1501 Jones Street, 72202 Facility Services/Maintenance ....................... 447-5250 3601 S. Bryant Street, 72204 Garland Building 3615 West 25th Street, 72204 Athletics .... ..... .... .. .. .......... ... .......... ................. 447-2060 GarlandALC ... .. .. ... .... .. ....... .. ...... .................... 447-8102 Parent Involvement Office .... ...... .... ................. 44 7-2065 Safety and Security .. ........ .. ..... ....................... 447-2075 Instructional Resource Center {IRC) 3001 South Pulaski Street, 72206 Curriculum \u0026amp; Instruction ... ... ...... .. ... ................ 447-3320 Early Childhood Education .......................... ... 447-3325 English/Foreign Languages ... ... ............. ......... 447-3335 English-as-a-Second-Language .......... ...... .. .... 447-3340 Fine Arts ..................... ...... .. .... ......... ........... .... 447-3343 HIPPY ................... .... .. ................ ............ .. ..... 447-3366 Mathematics/Science .. ... .... ............................ 447-3361 Planning, Research \u0026amp; Evaluation ............ .... .... 447-3380 Professional Development ... ........ .. ... .... .......... 447-3390 Science Materials Center (@Metro) ........... ... 447-1250 Security Desk ............ ......... ... ... ........ .... .......... 447-7602 Social Studies ....... .. .. .... .. .... ........ ... ......... ..... .. 447-3395 Procurement \u0026amp; Materials Management ........ 447-2260 1800 E. Sixth Street, 72202 Supply Center ...... .. .... .......... .... ....................... 44 7-2280 Warehouse .... .... ... ...... .... ............ .......... ... ....... 447-2283 Student Hearing Office ................................... 447-3580 800 Apperson Street, 72202 Student Registration Office ............................ 447-2950 501 Sherman Street, 72202 Technology Center 7701 Scott Hamilton, 72209 Computer Information Services .. .. ..... ... .... ....... 447-1310 Instructional Technology ..... ....... .... ... ...... .... .... 447-1300 Transportation (Laidlaw) ................................ 447-4130 5400 Murray, 72209 Transportation Department {LRSD) ............... 447-7550 1001 E. 21st Street, 72202 ViPS (Volunteers in Public Schools) ............... 447-2965 501 Sherman Street, 72202 SAFETY \u0026amp; SECURITY HOTLINE OPEN 24 HOURS 447-2091 Call this number for district-related emergencies. TECHLINE 447-HELP or 447-4357 7701 Scott Hamilton, 72209 Call this number for all your computer and phone questions and/or problems. ADULT EDUCATION ........................ 447-1850 COMMUNITY EDUCATION .............. 447-2250 Martin, Paulette, Director ........................................... 447-1852 McDuffie, Clem, Director ........... .. .................... .......... 447-2252 Humphrey, Ella, Secretary ........................................ 447-1853 Johnson (Haygood), Vickie, Secretary ...................... 447-2253 Kindy, Linda, Assistant Director ................................ 447-1854 Williams, Kelly, Registrar ...... .................................... 447-1855 COMPUTER INFO.SVCS White, Anthony, GED Examiner ................................. 44 7-1859 Tech. Center ..................................... 447-1310 ATHLETICS (Garland) ...................... 447-2060 Johnson, Johnny, Director ........................................ 447-2062 Ashley, Tony, Assistant .............................................. 447-2090 Scogin, Annette, Assistant Director .......................... 447-2064 Islam, Arie, Secretary ................................................ 447-2063 Ruffins, John, Director ........ ...................... ...... .. ........ 447-1312 Anderson, Margaret, Network Analyst.. ........... .......... 44 7-1317 Barton, Bill, Network Analyst ....................... .............. 44 7-1314 Bates, Vera, Computer Technician ......................... .. 447-1318 Bruce, Jackey, Computer Technician ....................... 447-1319 Carroll, Fred, Network Computer Specialist ............. 447-1268 CARE PROGRAM (Annex) .............. 447-7400 Crockran, Walter, Computer Technician ................... 447-1320 Haygood, Ruth, Support Specialist ........................... 447-1266 Rogers, Martha, Supervisor ...................................... 447-7402 Freeman, Greta, Support Specialist ......................... 447-1315 Allen, She'ron, Field Assistant .................................. 447-7403 Jackson, Debbie, Support Specialist ....................... 447-1265 Conrad, Wendy, Bookkeeper ........... ......................... 447-7404 Johnson, Alfreda, Network Analyst ............................ 447-1316 Houchin, Veda, Bookkeeper ..................................... 447-7405 Mouton, Velina, Computer/Operations ..................... 447-1264 Moore, Cathine, Coordinator .................................... 447-7406 Neal, Pam, Computer Technician ............................ 447-1321 Odle, Vicki, Bookkeeper ............................................ 447-7407 Payne, Lisa, Computer Technician .......................... 44 7-1322 Westbrook-Walton, Annette, Field Assistant ............. 44 7-7 408 Prowse, Chris, Systems Engineer ........................... 447-1289 Smith, John, Computer Technician ...... .................... 447-1324 CAREER/TECHNICAL EDUCATION ... 447-1390 Smith, Mary, Secretary ................................... ............. 44 7-1311 Green, Carol, Director .. ............................................. 447-1390 Hammett, Linda, Secretary ...................... ................. 447-1393 Putt, Paulette, Bookkeeper ....................................... 447-1394 Swihart, Barbara, Special Needs Evaluator ............. 447-1396 Vickers, Shelley, Evaluation Assistant ...................... 447-1397 Tipton, Mattie Ruth, Training Coordinator ................. 447-1313 White, Julian, Desktop SE ........................................ 447-1325 Help Desk ................................................................. 447-4357 Brown, Kathy, Support Specialist ........... ....... .. .. ..... ... 447-4357 Campbell, Rodney, Support Specialist .................. ... 44 7 -435 7 Administration Bldg. CHILD NUTRITION ........................... 447-2450 Crawford, Kevin, Network Analyst ............................. 44 7-1045 Mccraw, Helen, SIS Liaison ............. ........................ 447-1049 McCoy, Marlin M., Director ......................................... 447-2452 Black, Vann, Driver .................................................... 447-2454 Burlison, Phyllis, Secretary, Free \u0026amp; Reduced ........... 447-2456 Bush-Forte, Alicia, Supervisor ....................... ........... 447-2466 Morgan, Nancy, System Analyst ............ ........ ............ 447-1050 Savage, Ken, Programmer Analyst ........................... 44 7-1055 Stephens, Sharon, System Analyst ........................... 447-1058 DalSanto, Judy, Secretary- Bookkeeper .................. 447-2458 Geisler, Sherry, Bookkeeper ... ............. ..................... 447-2469 Grayson, Mary, Secretary ........................................... 44 7-2459 Hynes, Stephanie Walker, Supervisor .................. .... 447-2468 Knox, John, Warehouse Manager ........................ .. .. 447-2460 Little, Carol, Secretary .... ............ ............................... 447-2465 CURRICULUM \u0026amp; INSTRUCTION (IRC) Roberts, Dr. Olivine, Associate Superintendent ....... 447-3320 Spears, Anita, Administrative Assistant ............ ........ 44 7-3323 Berry, Billy, Head Custodian ....................... .............. 44 7-7600 Smith, Harry, Security/Security Desk ................... .. .... 447-7602 Mays, Dorothy, Warehouse Meal Specialist.. ... ......... 447-2471 Miles-Smith, Lakesha, Reimbursement Coard . ...... 447-2453 DISTRICT ENGINEER ...................... 447-1146 Mullins, Michael, Maintenance Technician ............... 447-2455 Goodman, Bill, District Engineer ................. ............. .447-1146 Phelps, Don, Asst. Warehouse Mgr . ......................... 447-2461 Reed, Roosevelt, Custodian ................. .. ................. 447-2472 Rhodes, Doug, Maintenance Technician ................. 447-2462 Scruggs, Rosalyn, Nutrition Ed. Coordinator ........... 447-2463 EARLY CHILDHOOD/ ELEMENTARY LITERACY (IRC) ............................... 447-3325 Sellers, Richard, Supervisor Maintenance ............... 447-2464 Underwood, Krista, Director ..................................... 447-3326 Walker, Audrey, Supervisor .... .......... ......................... 44 7-2467 Busbea, Pat, Coordinator ......................................... 447-3329 Williams, James, Warehouse Worker ............... ...... 447-2454 Crone, Melinda, Specialist ....... ............................. .... 44 7-3330 Woodruff, Joseph, Warehouse Worker .................... 447-2454 East, Pam, Specialist ................................................ 44 7-3330 Wooten, James P., Driver ............................... ........... 447-2454 Freeman, Ann, Specialist .................. ........................ 447-3328 Word, John, Warehouse Worker/Driver .................... 447-2454 Milam, Judy, Specialist ......................... ..................... 447-3331 Sutton, Donna, Secretary/Bookkeeper ..................... 447-3327 COMMUNICATIONS ......................... 447-1025 Vann, Suellen, Director .................... ......................... 447-1030 ENGLISH/FOREIGN Bonds, Michelle, Secretary .............................. ......... 447-1026 Davis, Julie, Communications Specialist... .............. 447-1027 Justice, Valerie, PBX Operator ..................... ............. 447-1000 Pickett, Larry, Web Design Specialist .. ..................... 447-1029 Walker, Dennis, StudioNideo Technician ....... .......... 44 7-1031 LANGUAGES (IRC) .......................... 447-3335 Davis, Suzi, Director ........... ....................................... 447-3336 Carter, Carolyn, API Lead Teacher ........................... 447-3378 Duerkop, Melanie, Lead Teacher Specialist ..... ........ 447-3338 Summerville, Roz, Secretary ........................ ............. 447-3337 ESL (IRC) .......................................... 447-3340 FEDERAL PROGRAMS ................... 447-1070 Broadnax, Karen, ESL Supervisor ............................ 44 7-3341 Adams, Leon, Director .................. ............................ 44 7-1071 Garcia, Maria, ESL Parent Comm. Liaison ...... ........ 447-3346 Green, Dorothy, Secretary ......................................... 447-1073 Moore, Regina, Secretary ......................................... 447-3342 Hudson, Valerie, Coordinator ................................... 44 7-1072 McIntosh, Felicia, Bookkeeper .................................. 447-1075 EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN (Annex). 447-7420 Ward, Lionel, litle I Administrator .......... ................... 447-1074 Barnes, Barbara, Director ......................................... 447-7423 Bone, Toni, Supervisor ...................................... .... ... 447-7450 FINANCIAL SERVICES .................... 447-1080 Brown, Kathy, Instructor, Visually Impaired ............... 447-7424 Milhollen, Mark, Manager ................ .......... ................ 447-1086 Brown, Paula, Instructor, Visually Impaired ...... .. .. .. .. 447-7425 Bray, Shirley, Bookkeeper ......................................... 44 7-1081 Buckelew, Mackie, Homebound/JJC ................ .. ...... 447-7543 Browning, Benita, Payroll Coordinator/Salary .......... 447-1090 Bullock, Pat, Indirect Teacher ........................ ........... 447-7426 Cleek, Janecia, Bookkeeper .. .. ................................. 44 7-1082 Chase, Diane, Psychological Coordinator ............... 447-7433 Cox, Tanya, Bookkeeper - Insurance ..................... ... 447-1083 Clevenger, Meg, Occupational Therapist.. .. ........ ...... 447-7428 May, Valerie, Bookkeeper .. .. ...................................... 447-1084 Collier, Myra, Secretary .. .. .. ........ ............................... 447-7429 Mayfield, Rhetta, Bookkeeper ................................... 447-1085 Davenport, Loretta, Indirect Teacher ......................... 447-7430 Parker, Charles, Bookkeeper - Payroll Hourly/Sub ... 44 7-108 7 Gilmore, Shirley, Secretary . .. ..................................... 447-7437 Phillips, Penny, Bookkeeper ..................................... 447-1092 Green, Cassandra, Supervisor ...... .......................... 447-7427 Richards, Joel, Bookkeeper/Accountant .................. 44 7-1088 Hasberry, Elna, Supervisor ....................................... 447-7434 Ring, Jean, Asst. Manager ................ ........................ 447-1089 Haygood-Geans, Angelia, Secretary .............. ........... 447-7435 Sanders, Lynette, Bookkeeper ................................. 447-1091 Long, Calvin, Head Custodian ................................. 447-7446 Wallis, Carolyn, Bookkeeper .................................... 447-1093 Jacobs, Joyce, Administrative Assistant ...... .. ........... 447-7436 Jones, Lisa, Secretary .............................................. 447-7438 Joubert, Kathy, Indirect Teacher .......... .................... .. 44 7-7 439 Korte, Paula, Indirect Teacher ............................. ..... 447-7440 FINE ARTS (IRC) .............................. 447-3343 Fletcher, Danny, Director ............ ........................ ....... 44 7-3344 Long, Kelly, Indirect Teacher ..................................... 447-7444 Peek, Peggy, Speech Pathology ........ .. ..................... 447-7441 GIFTED PROGRAMS (Annex) ......... 447-7470 Plant, Marjorie, Indirect Teacher ............................... 447-7431 Donaldson, Mable, Supervisor ......... ..................... ... 447-7472 Poturalski, Ed, Homebound Teacher ....................... 447-7442 Low, Merrily, Secretary ....................................... ........ 447-7473 Regnier, Margaret, Supervisor ............... .. ................. 447-7422 Rynders, Diane, Coordinator .................................... 44 7-7 4 7 4 Smith, Eunice, Supervisor .......... .. .. .......................... 447-7445 Smith, Sharon, Secretary .............. ............................ 447-7432 Steele, Cassandra, Speech Coordinator .. ................ 447-7448 Wyatt-Ross, Janice, 504 Coordinator ....................... 44 7-7 451 Young, Amy, Teacher, Hearing Impaired ................... 447-7452 HEALTH SERVICES (Annex) .......... 447-7480 Bushmiaer, Margo, Coordinator ............................... 447-7482 Dowell, Elizabeth, Secretary ..................................... 447-7483 HIPPY ............................................... 447-3366 FACILITY SERVICES ....................... 447-5250 Freeman, Ann, Coordinator ...................................... 447-3328 Eaton, Doug, Director .............................. .. .. .. ........... 447-5281 May, Barbara, In-Office Aide ............................. ......... 44 7-1876 Adams, Wayne, Facilities Coordinator ..................... 447-5252 Sutton, Donna, Secretary .......................................... 447-3367 Bennett, Tamela, Construction Secretary ................. 447-5258 Blaylock, John, Custodial Manager .. .. .. ...... .............. 447-5259 Burkhalter, Mark, Construction Manager .................. 447-5264 Gillaspy, Cathryn, Secretary ............ .. .. .. .. .. ................ 447-5302 Handrex, Lametric, Custodial Supervisor ................ 447-5288 Hayes, Steve, Maintenance Supervisor .... ................ 447-5287 Holloway, James, Construction Manager ................. 447-5292 Lotis, Regina, Financial Secretary .. .......................... 447-5331 Moore, Gale, Custodial Secretary .......................... ... 447-5314 Percy, Roy, Bookkeeper/Accounting .......................... 447-5363 Prather, Brett, Grounds Manager .......... ..... ............... 447-5320 Phelps, Stephanie, Work Order Secretary ................ 447-5318 HUMAN RESOURCES ..................... 447-1100 Williams, Beverly, Director ......................................... 447-1103 Brown, Denise, Employee Records .......................... 447-1101 Eckolls, Marcy, Personnel Coordinator .. ................... 44 7-1102 Hockersmith, Kimberly, Secretary .............................. 44 7-1103 Jones, Rita, Personnel Coordinator .......................... 447-1105 Robinson, Robert, Human Resources Manager ...... 447-1106 Rodgers, Sue, Substitute Coordinator .. .. .................. 44 7-1107 Williams, Pauline, Personnel Coordinator ...... .. .. .. .. .. 447-1108 SOS Help Desk open until 3 p.m ............................... 44 7-1112 Rail, Avanell, Financial Secretary .............................. 447-5322 Rector, Janet, Budget Assistant ................................ 44 7-5323 INSTRUCTIONAL TECHNOLOGY/ Reeves, Sharon, Parts Clerk .................................... 447-5324 Robinson, Mary, Custodial Supervisor ..................... 447-5326 St. John, Steven, Construction Manager ................... 447-5334 Sanders, Chestine, Custodial Supervisor ............... 447-5276 Seahorn, Lora, Construction Secretary .. .................. 447-5335 Smith, Stuart, Environmental Coordinator ................ 447-5332 Taggert, James, Scheduler/Estimator ...................... 447-5337 LIBRARY MEDIA (Tech Center) ....... 447-1300 Neal, Lucy, Director .. ............................................. .. .. 447-1303 Banks, Rhonda, Administrative Assistant.. ............... 44 7-1304 Crawford, Pam, Instructional Computer Spec . .. .. .. ... 447-1305 Taylor, Travis, Instructional Computer Spec ............. 447-1307 Williams, Barbara, Instructional Computer Spec ....... 44 7-1306 Woods, Lisa, Financial Documents Clerk ............... 447-5290 INTERNAL AUDITOR Becker, Sandy, Internal Auditor .......... ......................... 447-1115 MATH/SCIENCE (IRC) ...................... 447-3361 SAFETY \u0026amp; SECURITY (Garland) .... 447-2075 Glasgow, Dennis, Director .... .................................... 447-3362 Jones, Bobby, Director ........................... .................. 447-2077 Carr, Marcelline, API Math Specialist ...... .. ................. 44 7-3364 Allen, Don, Coard. of Pupil/Personnel Safety .......... 447-2078 Carson, Rene', Lead Teacher .................................. 447-3370 Anderson, John, Supv. of Building Security ............. 447-2079 Cleaver, Vanessa, API Project Coordinator ............... 44 7-3376 Downs, Queens, District-Wide Security ....... ........... 447-2087 Clifford, Beth, Lead Teacher ..................................... 447-3374 Gatlin, Bert, District-Wide Security .............. ............. 447-2086 Marks, Charlotte, Secretary .............................. ....... .. 447-3363 Givens, Willie, Head Custodian ... ................. .......... 447-2092 Paul, Annita, Lead Teacher ............................ ........... 447-3371 Lucas, Chester, District-Wide Security .................... 447-2081 SCIENCE MATERIALS CENTER (METRO) McGee, Dora, Secretary ........................................... 447-2083 7701 Scott Hamilton Dr. McDonald, Benny, Supv. of Security Personnel ....... 447-2082 Hurd, Kellye, Assistant Manager ............................... 447-1251 Perritt, Lola, Elementary Science Specialist.. .. ......... 44 7-1250 McDonald, Paul, District-Wide Security ................... 447-2087 Moore, Robert, District-Wide Security ...................... 447-2088 Saxton, Emma, Secretary/Workmans Comp ........... 447-2085 OMBUDSMAN Safety \u0026amp; Security Hotline (24 Hrs.) ......................... 447-2091 Washington, James, Ombudsman ........................... 447-1121 SCHOOL SERVICES ....................... 447-1130 PARENT INVOLVEMENT (See ViPS) Mitchell, Dr. Sadie, Associate Superintendent ... ....... 44 7-1133 Carter, John, Security ................ ................ ................ 447-1153 PLANNING \u0026amp; DEVELOPMENT ....... 447-1125 Washington, Charlotte, Staff Assistant .... .... ............. 44 7-1133 Jones, Frances, Asst. Supt. - Elementary ................. 447-1130 Austin, Linda, Director ......................................... ...... 447-1125 Gunter, Kay, Staff Assistant... ............. .. ...................... 44 7-1130 Wilson, Blondell, Secretary .............. ..... ..................... 44 7-1126 Lacey, Dr. Marian, Asst. Supt. - Secondary ................ 44 7-1136 Smith, Linda, Administrative Assistant ..................... 44 7-1136 PLANNING RESEARCH \u0026amp; EVALUATION (IRC) ................................................. 447-3380 Huffman, Mac, Accountability Coordinator ... ............. 447-1137 Price, Or. Debbie, Director of MSAP .......................... 44 7-1132 Sain, Dr. Lloyd, Coard. Leadership Development.. .. 447-1016 DeJarnette, Dr. Karen, Director ................................ 447-3387 Allen, Malinda, Testing Assistant ....... ...................... 447-3384 Dillingham, Yvette, Evaluation Specialist ................. 447-3385 Malcolm, Maurecia, Statistical Research Specialist 447-3382 Truett-Shelton, Irma, Secretary ... ................. ............ 447-3383 Williams, Dr. Ed, Evaluation Specialist.. ........ .. ........ 447-3386 SOCIAL STUDIES (IRC) ................... 447-3395 McNeal, Marie A., Director ......................................... 447-3396 Arnold, Laura Beth, Lead Teacher ... ......................... 447-3398 Crosslin, Patricia, Secretary ..................................... 447-3397 Wohlleb, Jim, Statistical Research Specialist ......... 447-3381 STUDENT HEARING (ALC) ............. 447-3580 PROCUREMENT ............................. 447-2260 Watson, Dr. Linda, Assistant Superintendent.. ......... 447-3580 Hurley, Or. Richard, Hearing Officer .. ........................ 447-3586 Paradis, Darral, Director .......................................... 447-2262 Jones, Linda, Staff Assistant .................... ................. 447-3583 Banks, Vertina, Buyer .. ...................... ....................... 447-2267 Lewis, Shirley, Staff Assistant ..................... .............. 447-3590 Caraway, Gwen, Fixed Asset Property Manager ...... 447-2268 Hester, Gail, Purchasing Supervisor ......... .............. 447-2263 Manley, Tisa, P.O. Clerk ............... .. ......................... .. 447-2273 Matthews, Gwen, Buyer ...... .......... ........................... 447-2274 Murray, Fran, Contract Specialist .............. .... ........... 447-2275 Tate, Sharrell, Textbook Coordinator ...... ................. 447-2279 Tucker, Debbie, Supply Center ........................ ........ 447-2280 STUDENT REGISTRATION ............. 447-2950 Babbs, Junious, Associate Superintendent ... .......... 447-2952 Wiedower, Julie, Director ........... ............ ................... 447-2960 Anderson, Brenda, Student Registration Assistant .. 447-2953 Click, Tonya, Student Registration Assistant ... ......... 447-2954 Eggleston, Deana, Executive Assistant ................. ... 447-2955 PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT (IRC) ................................................. 447-3390 Long, Alisha, Student Registration Assistant... ..... .. .. 447-2956 Middleton, Essie, Parent Recruiter ......... ............ ...... 44 7-2957 Rather, Becky, Parent Recruiter Coordinator ... ......... 447-2958 Woods, Marion, Coordinator ............. ....................... 447-3391 Teach, Patty, Secretary .............................................. 447-2959 Kiilsgaard, Sharon, Secretary .......................... ........ 447-3392 Harris, JoAnna, Media Clerk .................................. .. 447-3393 SUPERINTENDENT ........................ 447-2950 Alumni Records ................................................... ... 447-3393 Brooks, Dr. Roy G, Superintendent .. ........................ 44 7-1002 PUPIL SERVICES (Annex) ............. 447-7490 Armstrong, Carol, Executive Assistant ...................... 447-1011 Edwards, Diane, Staff Assistant .......... ............. ........ 447-1004 Elston, Jo Evelyn, Director ....................................... 447-7492 Blanzenski, Becky, Secretary .. .......... ......... ........ ...... 447-7493 Griffin, Beverly, Executive Assistant ............. .............. 447-1005 Chief Financial Officer ...................... .. ...................... 447-1011 Fleming, Mary, Tobacco Coalition Liaison ............... 447-7498 Green, Shelia, Tobacco Prevention Coordinator ..... 447-7501 Cochran, Shea, Admin. Print Shop ........................... 447-1013 Hobbs, Barbara, Head Custodian ........................ .. .. 447-1012 Merritt, Reginald, Safe/Drug Free Coordinator ........ 447-7497 Williams, Jimmy, Custodian ..................................... 447-1012 Newburn, Linda, Secretary ...................................... 447-7499 Robinson, Warrine, Homeless Shelter Liaison ...... 447-7500 Scaife, Nina, Case Manager ........ .... .................. ...... 447-7495 SUPPLY CENTER ............................ 447-2283 Shelton, Tommie, Supply Center Supervisor ........... 447-2265 Bealer, Henry, Driver/Warehouse Assistant.. ............ 447-2277 Griffin, Robert, Driver/Warehouse Assistant ............. 447-2269 Harris, Curtis, Driver/Warehouse Assistant ............. 447-2270 Richardson, Wendell, Driver/Warehouse Asst ......... 447-2276 Sutton, Jim, Property Distribution Specialist ............ 447-2278 Terry, Gifford, Inventory Supv./Central Receiving ....... 44 7-2266 TRANSPORTATION (LRSD) ............ 447-7550 Martello, Michael, Director ........................................ 447-7559 Baier, Keith, Shop Foreman ..................................... 447-7552 Bilal, B.J., Supervisor ................................................ 447-7553 Cooper, Floyd, Supervisor ........................................ 447-7554 Hayes, Lois, Driver Trainer ....................................... 447-7555 Hooks, Shadwon, Mechanic ..................................... 447-7552 Jones, Virgil, Supervisor/Maintenance ..................... 44 7-7557 Jones, Johnny, Mechanic .......................................... 44 7-7556 Patterson, Charles, Custodian ................................. 447-7558 Reddick, J.P., Secretary ............................................. 447-7560 Robinson, Bettye, Coordinator ................................. 447-7561 TRANSPORTATION (Laidlaw) ......... 447-4130 Bus Stops ................................................................. 44 7-4165 Field, Athletic Trips .................................................... 447-4158 Terminal Manager ..................................................... 447-4143 Kirklin, Theresa, Liaison to Laidlaw ......................... 447-4142 DispatchA.M ............................................................. 447-4130 Dispatch P.M ............................................................. 447-4140 Routing ..................................................................... 447-4150 Your Goals Are Our Goals: We're here to provide you with sound, creative solutions to a lifetime of financial concerns. Come join us under the umbrella. Travelers Life \u0026amp; Annui~ A Member of Travelers Group W. R. (Bob) Atkins E. Paul Atkins Dana Floyd W. R. Atkins Insurance 10220 West Markham, Suite 201-B Little Rock, Arkansas 72205 Business: 501 228-0300 Residence: 501 794-1191 wratkins@flash.net Representing The Travelers Companies, Hartford, CT 06183 VOLUNTEERS IN PUBLIC SCHOOLS (ViPS) ................................................ 447-2965 Milam, Debbie, Director of ViPS \u0026amp; PIE ..................... 447-2967 Blaylock, Tammy, Volunteer Coordinator ................. 447-2968 Matson, Lee Ann, Resource Coordinator ................ 447-2969 Withers, Myrtle, Mentor Coordinator. ........................ 447-2971 PARENT INVOLVEMENT (Garland Building): Rainey, Kaye, Parent Involvement Coordinator ....... 447-2067 Wilson, Rose, Secretary ............................ , ............. 447-2069 FREQUENTLY CALLED NUMBERS Arkansas Education Association -AEA 1400 W. Third Street .................................... 375-4611 Arkansas Athletic Association (Triple A) ........ 955-2500 Arkansas PTA .................................................... 753-5247 Arkansas State Department of Education ...... 682-4475 Arkansas Teachers' Credit Union ................... 375-9250 Arkansas Teachers' Retirement System ........ 682-1517 Attorneys ........................................................... 376-2011 Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark - Regions Bank Bldg. Little Rock Classroom Teachers Association 1500 W. Fourth, Suite 305 ........................... 372-3519 Fax .................................................................. 375-1703 President, Katherine Wright-Knight .............. 372-3519 Executive Director, Grainger Ledbetter ......... 372-3519 Adm. Asst., Brenda Walton ......................... 372-3519 Little Rock PTA Council Versie Burgess, President.. .......................... 562-8244 LRSD Insurance Office ..................................... 447-1100 Little Rock Teachers Credit Union .................. 374-7119 Fax .................................................................. 374-1035 Magnet Review Committee Office .................. 758-0156 New Futures for Little Rock Youth .................. 374-1011 Office of Desegregation Monitoring ............... 376-6200 Pfeifer Camp ..................................................... 821-3714 Physician, School District ................................ 364-3605 Dr. Charles Feild -Arkansas Children's Hospital Principals' Roundtable President, Eunice Thrasher .......................... 447-6100 Secretary, Mary Menking ............................. 447-7100 Treasurer, Gwen Zeigler ................................ 447-6700 President-Elect, Dr. Dexter Booth ................ 447-2300 Past Co-President, John Bacon ................... 447-2600 Past Co-President, Dr. Daniel Whitehorn ..... 447-3200 Substitute Office Services To Request Substitute (automated) ............... 447-1111 Help Desk ..................................................... 447-1112 TECHLINE .......................................................... 447-4357 111 OTHER NUMBERS 111 111 Directory of Commonly Used Fax Numbers 111 Schools/Centers Accelerated Learning Center (ACC) .... .. ... 44 7-1351 Mabelvale Elementary ............................... 447-5401 Alternative Learning Center (ALC) ............ 447-3521 Mabelvale Middle ....................................... 447-3001 Bale ......... ................................. .. ............... 447-3601 Mann ......................................................... 447-3101 Baseline .................................................... 447-3701 McClellan ...... ....................... ..................... 447-2101 Booker .. ............ ... ...... ..... ... .. ..... ................. 44 7-3801 McClellan Community Ed ... .. .................... 447-2251 Brady ..... .. ................. .......... .. ............ ......... 447-3901 McDermott ................................................ 447-5501 Carver ..... ......... ............. ............................ 447-4001 Meadowcliff .......... .... .. ....... .......... ...... .. ... ... 447-5601 Central ...................................................... 447-1401 Metropolitan .... .. ......................................... 447-1201 Chicot ... ............ ..... ...... .. ................ .. .......... 447-7001 Mitchell .. .. .......... .................. ... .... ............... 447-5701 Cloverdale Elementary ................... .. .... .. .. 447-4201 Otter Creek ..... ............... ..... ............ .... ...... 447-5801 Cloverdale Middle ...................................... 447-2501 Parkview ................................................... 447-2301 Dodd ......................................................... 447-4301 Pulaski Heights Elementary ...................... 447-5901 Dunbar ..... ........... ...... ... ................ .. .... ... .... 447-2601 Pulaski Heights Middle ........... ... ... .......... ... 447-3201 Fair Park ................ .......... ....... ......... ... ... ... 447-4401 Rightsell .. ...... .. .......... ........... .............. .... ... 447-6101 Forest Heights ............ .... ................ .......... 447-2701 Rockefeller ................................................ 447-6201 Forest Park ............................................... 447-4501 Romine ..................................................... 447-6301 Franklin ..................................................... 447-4601 Southwest ................................................. 447-3401 Fulbright ............. .... ... .......... ... ............... .... 447-4701 Stephens ................................................... 447-6401 Garland ALC .... .. .. ....... .... ... .. .. .. .... ..... ... ...... 447-8101 Terry ...... ................ ........ ... ......... ..... ... ........ 447-6501 Geyer Springs ........ ..... ... .. ........ ........... ...... 447-4801 Wakefield .................................................. 447-6601 Gibbs ........................ ...... ... .......... .. ........ .. .. 447-4901 Washington ... .. ........... .. .... ...... ... ..... ... .. ...... 447-6701 Hall ... ....... .... ..... ....... ....... ........................... 447-1901 Watson ...................................................... 447-6801 Henderson ................................................ 447-2801 Western Hills ............................................ 447-6901 J A Fair .. ...... .. ........... ... ................ .. ........ .. .. 447-1701 Williams ........... ............ .. ....... ... ..... .... ........ 447-7101 Jefferson .......................... .. ....................... 447-5001 Wilson .................................... .. ................. 447-7201 ML King ...... .. ... ...................... ........ .. .... ... .. 447-5101 Woodruff ................................................... 447-7301 Departments/Other Adult Education .................................. ... ..... 447-1851 Parent Involvement .............................. .. .... 447-2066 Athletics ..................................................... 447-2061 Planning and Development.. ... .. ................. 44 7 -1163 CARE .............................................. ........ ... 447-7401 Planning/Research/Evaluation (PRE) ....... 44 7-7609 Career/Technical Education ............ .. ........ 44 7-1391 ProcuremenUSupply Center .......... ............ 447-2261 Child Nutrition .. ............................... .... ........ 447-2451 Professional Development .... .. .................. 44 7-7613 Communications ....................................... 447-1161 Pupil Services ............ ................................ 447-7491 Computer Information Svcs ........ ..... .......... 447-1301 Safety \u0026amp; Security ....................................... 44 7-2076 Curriculum/Instruction ............................... 44 7-3321 School Services ......................................... 44 7-1160 ESL .............................. ............ .. ... ............. 447-7612 Science Materials Center .......................... 44 7-1252 Exceptional Children ........ .. .............. .......... 447-7421 Student Hearing ......................................... 44 7-3581 Facility Services ......................................... 44 7-5251 Student Registration/Enrollment ................ 44 7-2951 Federal Programs ...................................... 447-1164 Superintendent's Office ............................. 447-1159 Financial Services ..................................... 447-1158 Technology Center ............ : ........................ 447-1301 HIPPY ........................................................ 447-7610 Transportation (Laidlaw) ............................ 447-4131 Human Resources .................................... 447-1162 Transportation (LRSD) ............................. 447-1269 IRC Main No ............................................... 447-7610 Volunteers in Public Schools ..................... 44 7-2966 LRSD - Admin. Bldg./Front Desk ............... 447-1001 School/Program Listing School Information ACCELERATED LEARNING CENTER FOREST HEIGHTS PRINCIPAL CAROL GREEN PHONE 447-1350 PRINCIPAL ELOUISE DODSON PHONE 447-2700 7701 SCOTT HAMIL TON FAX 447-1351 5901 EVERGREEN FAX 447-2701 LITTLE ROCK 72209 LITTLE ROCK 72205 ALTERNATIVE LEARNING CENTER FOREST PARK PRINCIPAL JODIE CARTER PHONE 447-3520 PRINCIPAL THERESA KETCHER PHONE 447-4500 800 APPERSON STREET FAX 447-3521 1600 NORTH TYLER FAX 447-4501 LITTLE ROCK 72202 LITTLE ROCK 72207 BALE FRANKLIN PRINCIPAL BARBARA ANDERSON PHONE 447-3600 PRINCIPAL ETHEL DUNBAR PHONE 447-4600 6501 WEST 32ND STREET FAX 447-3601 1701 SOUTH HARRISON FAX 447-4601 LITTLE ROCK 72204 LITTLE ROCK 72204 BASELINE FULBRIGHT PRINCIPAL DR. ELEANOR COX PHONE 447-3700 PRINCIPAL DEBORAH MITCHELL PHONE 447-4700 3623 BASELINE ROAD FAX 447-3701 300 PLEASANT VALLEY DRIVE FAX 447-4701 LITTLE ROCK 72209 LITTLE ROCK 72212 BOOKER GEYER SPRINGS PRINCIPAL DR. CHERYL CARSON PHONE 447-3800 PRINCIPAL DONNA HALL PHONE 447-4800 2016 BARBER STREET FAX 447-3801 5240 MABELVALE PIKE FAX 447-4801 LITTLE ROCK 72206 LITTLE ROCK 72209 BRADY GIBBS PRINCIPAL ADA KEOWN PHONE 447-3900 PRINCIPAL FELICIA HOBBS PHONE 447-4900 7915 WEST MARKHAM FAX 447-3901 1115 WEST 16TH STREET FAX 447-4901 LITTLE ROCK 72205 LITTLE ROCK 72202 CARVER HALL PRINCIPAL DIANE BARKSDALE PHONE 447-4000 PRINCIPAL VERNON SMITH PHONE 447-1900 2100 EAST SIXTH STREET FAX 447-4001 6700 \"H\" STREET FAX 447-1901 LITTLE ROCK 72202 LITTLE ROCK 72205 CENTRAL HENDERSON PRINCIPAL NANCY ROUSSEAU PHONE 447-1400 PRINCIPAL MARVIN L. BURTON PHONE 447-2800 1500 SOUTH PARK STREET FAX 447-1401 401 BARROW ROAD FAX 447-2801 LITTLE ROCK 72202 LITTLE ROCK 72205 CHICOT JA FAIR PRINCIPAL JANE HARKEY PHONE 447-7000 PRINCIPAL CASSANDRA NORMAN PHONE 447-1700 11100 CHICOT ROAD FAX 447-7001 13420 DAVID O DODD ROAD FAX 447-1701 MABELVALE 72103 LITTLE ROCK 72210 CLOVERDALE ELEMENTARY JEFFERSON PRINCIPAL FREDERICK FIELDS PHONE 447-4200 PRINCIPAL ROBERTA MANNON PHONE 447-5000 6500 HINKSON ROAD FAX 447-4201 2600 NORTH MCKINLEY FAX 447-5001 LITTLE ROCK 72209 LITTLE ROCK 72207 CLOVERDALE MIDDLE ML KING PRINCIPAL ANGELA MUNNS PHONE 447-2500 PRINCIPAL TYRONE HARRIS PHONE 447-5100 6300 HINKSON ROAD FAX 447-2501 905 MARTIN L KING, JR. DRIVE FAX 447-5101 LITTLE ROCK 72209 LITTLE ROCK 72202 DODD MABEL VALE ELEMENTARY PRINCIPAL FAITH MCLAUGHLIN PHONE 447-4300 PRINCIPAL TABITHA PHILLIPS PHONE 447-5400 6423 STAGECOACH ROAD FAX 447-4301 9401 MABELVALE CUT-OFF FAX 447-5401 LITTLE ROCK 72204 MABELVALE 72103 DUNBAR MABELVALE MIDDLE PRINCIPAL JOHN BACON PHONE 447-2600 PRINCIPAL ANN BLAYLOCK PHONE 447-3000 1100 WRIGHT AVENUE FAX 447-2601 10811 MABELVALE WEST FAX 447-3001 LITTLE ROCK 72206 MABELVALE 72103 FAIR PARK MANN PRINCIPAL DR SAMUEL BRANCH PHONE 447-4400 PRINCIPAL JIM FULLERTON PHONE 447-3100 616 NORTH HARRISON FAX 447-4401 1000 EAST ROOSEVELT ROAD FAX 447-3101 LITTLE ROCK 72205 LITTLE ROCK 72206 MCCLELLAN WAKEFIELD PRINCIPAL LARRY BUCK PHONE 447-2100 PRINCIPAL LES TAYLOR PHONE 447-6600 9417 GEYER SPRINGS ROAD FAX 447-2101 75 WESTMINISTER DRIVE FAX 447-6601 LITTLE ROCK 72209 LITTLE ROCK 72209 MCDERMOTT WASHINGTON PRINCIPAL VIRGINIA ASHLEY PHONE 447-5500 PRINCIPAL GWEN ZEIGLER PHONE 447-6700 1200 RESERVOIR ROAD FAX 447-5501 2700 SOUTH MAIN STREET FAX 447-6701 LITTLE ROCK 72207 LITTLE ROCK 72206 MEADOWCLIFF WATSON PRINCIPAL KAREN CARTER PHONE 447-5600 PRINCIPAL MICHAEL OLIVER PHONE 447-6800 25 SHERATON DRIVE FAX 447-5601 7000 VALLEY DRIVE FAX 447-6801 LITTLE ROCK 72209 LITTLE ROCK 72209 METROPOLITAN WESTERN HILLS PRINCIPAL MICHAEL PETERSON PHONE 447-1200 PRINCIPAL SCOTT MORGAN PHONE 447-6900 7701 SCOTT HAMIL TON FAX 447-1201 4901 WESTERN HILLS FAX 447-6901 LITTLE ROCK 72209 LITTLE ROCK 72204 MITCHELL WILLIAMS PRINCIPAL DARIAN SMITH PHONE 447-5700 PRINCIPAL MARY MENKING PHONE 447-7100 6900 PECAN ROAD FAX 447-5701 7301 EVERGREEN FAX 447-7101 LITTLE ROCK 72206 LITTLE ROCK 72207 OTTERCREEK WILSON PRINCIPAL JANIS TUCKER PHONE 447-5800 PRINCIPAL BEVERLY JONES PHONE 447-7200 16000 OTTER CREEK PARKWAY FAX 447-5801 4015 STANNUS ROAD FAX 447-7201 LITTLE ROCK 72209 LITTLE ROCK 72204 PARKVIEW WOODRUFF PRINCIPAL DR. LINDA BROWN PHONE 447-2300 PRINCIPAL JANICE WILSON PHONE 447-7300 2501 BARROW ROAD FAX 447-2301 3010 WEST 7TH FAX 447-7301 LITTLE ROCK 72204 LITTLE ROCK 72205 PULASKI HEIGHTS ELEMENTARY PRINCIPAL LILLIE CARTER PHONE 447-5900 319 NORTH PINE FAX 447-5901 LITTLE ROCK 72205 PULASKI HEIGHTS MIDDLE PRINCIPAL DR. DAN WHITEHORN PHONE 447-3200 401 NORTH PINE FAX 447-3201 LITTLE ROCK 72205 RIGHTSELL PRINCIPAL EUNICE THRASHER PHONE 447-6100 911 WEST 19TH FAX 447-6101 LITTLE ROCK 72206 ROCKEFELLER PRINCIPAL ANNE MANGAN PHONE 447-6200 700 EAST 17TH FAX 447-6201 LITTLE ROCK ?2206 ROMINE PRINCIPAL LILLIE SCULL PHONE 447-6300 3400 ROMINE ROAD FAX 447-6301 LITTLE ROCK 72204 SOUTHWEST PRINCIPAL DAVID SMITH PHONE 447-3400 3301 SOUTH BRYANT FAX 447-3401 LITTLE ROCK 72204 STEPHENS PRINCIPAL SHARON BROOKS PHONE 447-6400 3700 WEST 18TH STREET FAX 447-6401 LITTLE ROCK 72204 TERRY PRINCIPAL BECKY RAMSEY PHONE 447-6500 10800 MARA LYNN DRIVE FAX 447-6501 LITTLE ROCK 72211 I I ' ACCELERATED LEARNING CENTER PRINCIPAL: CAROL GREEN ARMSTEAD, VICTORIA M BLACKNALL-HARRIS, STACY J BRIM, ALLEN D SECRETARY - PRINCIPAL CURR. TECH. SPEC. SECURITY OFFICER BROADNAX-THRASHER, BEVERLY JOB COORD./LITERACY BROYLES, BENNIE J BURTON, MARTY W CROSS, KATHRYN L FINCH, DR. ALICIA I GARNER, DEBRA A HILL, PICCOLA L JENKINS, VALARIE A KELLEY, LOIS W MCCOY, JAMES E MCKINNEY, REBECCA A NASH, EVELYN R PARKER, FAYE L SMITH, PAUL J STRAYER.SUSAN JANE TAYLOR, MARY M TERRELL, LEE WU, PAULINE H GENERAL SCIENCE SOCIAL STUDIES ENGLISH SPEC. ED. ALT. TEACHER SOCIAL STUDIES ALT. TEACHER ALT. TEACHER GENERAL SCIENCE GUIDANCE COUNSELOR ALT. TEACHER ADULT EDUCATION COMMUNICATIONS ENGLISH COMMUNICATIONS SECURITY OFFICER MATHEMATICS 7701 SCOTT HAMIL TON LITTLE ROCK 72209 PHONE 447-1350 FAX: 447-1351 ALTERNATIVE LEARNING CENTER PRINCIPAL: JODIE CARTER BENDER,FRANCESJOAN BLACKMON, RONALD K BLUFORD, YOLANDA K BRADEN JR, LEE E BRANDON, ERIC R CAMPBELL JR, MELVIN CARTER 111, ARREL E CARTER, JODIE T CHILLIEST, WANDA J COCKRELL, BRENDA J COLLINS, MAMIE J COX, SHARRONE M DEPRIEST, PATRICIA S EAST, THOMAS E FINNEY, CAROLYN A FLOYD, BETTY F GARDENHIRE, CARROL WAYNE GIBSON, FLORA DENISE GIVENS, WILLIE T GRAY, DAISY L JACKSON, SHAROL T JOHNSON, NELLIE R. JOHNSON, TAWANNA F JONES, BETTY L JONES. HAROLD KELLEY, CLEMENTINE KNIGHT, JONATHAN K LESTER, OSCAR E LEWIS, ALICIA T LEWIS, CATHERINE V LOVE, DOREY LYNN MYROSE, ROBERT F NASH, NIKETA L NESBITT, JEFF RAY NICHOLS, KARITA EVELYN PONDEXTER, BRACK R REINHART, THOMAS T REYNOLDS, RODNEY MICHAEL ROACHELL, RICHARD WILSON SMITH JR, JIMMY L STEWART, LINDA FAYE TARTT, PHYLLIS G THRASHER, MICHAEL LAVELL WALKER, CHARLES ENGLISH SECURITY OFFICER SECURITY OFFICER AIDE ENGLISH ALT. ELEM. SPEC. ED. DIRECTOR AIDE MEAL TECHNICIAN - FOOD CHILD NUTRITION ENGLISH GUIDANCE COUNSELOR AIDE AIDE AIDE SPEC. ED. AIDE CUSTODIAN ENGLISH AIDE ENGLISH SECRETARY - PRINCIPAL CUSTODIAN MEAL TECHNICIAN SOCIAL STUDIES GENERAL SCIENCE CUSTODIAN - HEAD AIDE AIDE MATHEMATICS GENERAL MATH AIDE SECURITY OFFICER GENERAL SCIENCE AIDE MATHEMATICS SPEC. ED. SOCIAL STUDIES AIDE AIDE BIOLOGY IN SCHOOL SUSPENSION LIFE SCIENCE 800 APPERSON STREET LITTLE ROCK 72202 WATSON, CHARLOTTE ANN WATSON, GLEN WATSON, KELAN WILLIAMS, LARRY L WILLIAMS, SHIRLISA R YOUNG, KRISHNA L PHONE 447-3520 FAX: 447-3521 BUSINESS EDUCATION AIDE SOCIAL STUDIES CUSTODIAN AIDE ASSISTANT PRINCIPAL BALE PRINCIPAL: BARBARA ANDERSON ANDERSON, BARBARA A PRINCIPAL ANDREWS, ASHLEY E KINDERGARTEN BROWN, CLARA J ELEMENTARY I BROWN, SUZANNE D AIDE - PRE-K CHILDS, FRANCES C AIDE CLARK, GERALD CUSTODIAN CLARK, JANICE C CHILD NUTRITION MGR. COLE, KIMBERLY L ELEMENTARY IV COLLINS, PEGGY S GENERAL MUSIC CONLEY, FRANCES J ELEMENTARY Ill COURTNEY, JUDITH E SPEECH THERAPY CUNNINGHAM, LISA D ELEMENTARY II DOCKERY, MAE K ELEMENTARY V DOUTT, SHERYLL AIDE FLEMING, LINDA K ELEMENTARY Ill FRANCIS, LYNDA S ELEMENTARY IV GENTRY-HEARD, RENEE READING RECOVERY GEURIN, RAMONA O CONSUL TING TEACHER HENRY, CHRISTOPHER S ELEMENTARY I HUDSON, MARY 8 AIDE JOHNSON, CARTHORIA FOUR YR OLD TEACHER JONES, TANIKA KINDERGARTEN LIGGINS, SHALONDA L AIDE - P. E. LITTELL, TERRI S ELEMENTARY I LYNCH, CHRISTINE CHILD NUTRITION MOLDEN, GLADYS E CHILD NUTRITION MONDY, LISA A SECURITY OFFICER OWENS, ROMUNDA L AIDE - PRE-K ROBINSON, NORA J LITERACY COACH ROSSY, KIMBERLY FOUR YR OLD TEACHER ROUSE, WARREN J GUIDANCE COUNSELOR SATTERFIELD HERRIN, APRIL M UBRARYiMEDIA SPEC. SCARBROUGH, VALARIE LAB ATTENDANT SHENEP, CYNTHIA K SPEECH THERAPY SHUTE, KATHLEEN KINDERGARTEN TALLEY, HELEN J ELEMENTARY II TARKINGTON, RONALD STEVE ELEMENTARY V UNDERWOOD-MORAVEC, LEIGH A RESOURCE WOOD, BARBARA J SPEC. ED. YEARGIN, JULIUS S YOUNG, !USA K CUSTODIAN - HEAD CHILD NUTRITION 6501 WEST 32ND STREET LITTLE ROCK 72204 PHONE 447-3600 FAX: 447-3601 BASELINE PRINCIPAL: DR. ELEANOR COX BENTON, JIMMIE A CUSTODIAN BOWMAN, ROSE H ELEMENTARY V CANNON, SHIRLEY L AIDE CASEY, DOROTHY A AIDE CLEMMONS, JANICE AIDE COLE, BETTY J SPEECH THERAPY CORNICE, CHARLOTTE PUGH CONSUL TING TEACHER COX, DR. ELEANOR V P~INCIPAL DEATON, BETTY K ELEMENTARY V DELONEY, GLORIA M SECRETARY - PRINCIPAL DUNN, WILFRED JULIAN ELEMENTARY Ill FELLS, SHANTELL AIDE FREEMAN, KRISTEN D CHILD NUTRITION GANT-WATSON, WONDA F CHILD NUTRITION MGR. GARNER, BEVERLY B ELEMENTARY Ill GIBSON, ROKINA D AIDE HAMPTON, SHARRA D GUIDANCE COUNSELOR HEADLEY, DEBBIE MARCIA GENERAL MUSIC HUNT, SAMMIE K SPEC. ED. JACKSON, MARLO D SPEC. ED. JAMES, MARILYN K ELEMENTARY I JORDAN, DIANE M ELEMENTARY II KOEHLER, CATHERINE E LIBRARY/MEDIA SPEC. LOVE, BEVERLY ANN FOUR YR OLD TEACHER MARTIN, REBEKAH A FOUR YR OLD TEACHER MCDONALD, MARY J TITLE I MCMANUS, JENNIFER L ELEMENTARY IV MCPHEARSON, KELLI L AIDE- PRE-K MOORE, JOLANDA R AIDE OUTLAW, ASHLEY SUSAN KINDERGARTEN PEASTER, PEARLIE MAE CHILD NUTRITION RENDEL, RAYL CUSTODIAN - HEAD RILEY, TINA A AIDE-PRE-K ROBINSON, DWAYNE E SECURITY OFFICER ROBINSON, KENYA K ELEMENTARY IV ROSS, CHRISTINA MARIE KINDERGARTEN RUDLEY, LEE ANDREW CUSTODIAN SHARP, CONNIE D ELEMENTARY 11 SMITH, RUBY A CHILD NUTRITION TAYLOR, JENNIFER L ELEMENT.A.RY I THOMAS, BRENDA SUE ELEMENTARY IV TUCKER, KELSEY Y MEDIA CLERK WATSON, WANDA CHILD NUTRITION MGR. ZRAICK, AMANDA GUNN SPEECH THERAPY 3623 BASELINE ROAD LITTLE ROCK 72209 PHONE 447-3700 FAX: 447-3701 BOOKER PRINCIPAL: DR. CHERYL CARSON ALLEY, MARYL CURRICULUM SPECIALIST ARMSTRONG, ERMA L READING RECOVERY ARMSTRONG, MARTHA A CREATIVE MOVEMENT SP BLEDSOE, RITA L ORCHESTRA BLUE, SUSAN D ELEMENTARY IV BRADEN, PATRICIA B CHILD NUTRITION BROOKS, DEBRA J ELEMENTARY I BROWN, LAWRENCE CUSTODIAN BROWN, MARTHA C MATH COACH BURROUGH, HOLLY ANN ELEMENTARY Ill BURRUSS, MERILYN P MATH COACH CARSON,DR.CHERYLA PRINCIPAL CHARLESTON, SANTONIA AIDE CLARK, DENISE W ELEMENTARY IV CRIPPS, JOSEPH D ORCHESTRA CURRY, VIRGINIA E AIDE DORER, ROBERT A PHYSICAL ED. ELLINGTON, LORETTA ELEMENTARY Ill FAIR, DIXIE W ELEMENTARY II FLETCHER, RUBY CHILD NUTRITION GRAVES, INGRID M LIBRARY/MEDIA SPEC. HALE, PATSY A LAB ATTENDANT HALLUM.AMY ELEMENTARY Ill HAMPTON, CHARLOTTE A AIDE- IN-SCHOOL SUSPEN HAWK, SUNNY L LITERACY COACH HAYDEN,DARRELLL ELEMENTARY V HIGDON, TAMMY READING RECOVERY HIPPS, DEBORAH S ELEMENTARY V HOOKS, SUSAN EMILY ELEMENTARY II HUIE, CAROLYN K GIFTED \u0026amp; TALENTED IBEKWE, THERESA N ELEMENTARY V JACKSON, KENNETH RAY CUSTODIAN JACKSON, PATRICIA B ELEMENTARY IV JEFFRIES, VEARLON L KINDERGARTEN JOHNSON, MAYREAN S ELEMENTARY V JOHNSON, VIVIAN K GUIDANCE COUNSELOR JONES, ALICIA R ELEMENTARY I LANG, KIMBERLY LAVERNE ELEMENTARY II LOFTON, MARY R GENERAL MUSIC MAHNKEN, SUSAN E READING RECOVERY MARSHALL, JAMES A CUSTODIAN - HEAD MATTHEWS, SHERRY L ELEMENTARY V MCGUIRE, STEPHEN K SPEECH THERAPY MCINTIRE, KELLY R ART 2016 BARBER STREET PHONE 447-3800 LITTLE ROCK 72206 FAX: 447-3801 MCMORRAN, MARYE SPEC. ED. MENEFEE, ALFREDA L CUSTODIAN MIDKIFF, AMANDA C KINDERGARTEN MIL TON, CAROLYN D MEDIA CLERK MIL TON, KENNETH W CURRICULUM SPECIALIST MITCHELL, TIANKA R ELEMENTARY IV MOSS,AMYL READING RECOVERY PITTMAN, HOLCOMB ELEMENT ARY 111 POST, JULIA A KINDERGARTEN QUATTLEBAUM, LAWRENCE H PSYCHOLOGICAL EXAMIN RAMSEY, DEBORAH DRAMA SPECIALIST REESCANO, MARIAH BETH HARDE DRAMA SPECIALIST RHINES, MICO RENEE RINGLER, TAMARA L SARLO, THOMAS C SCOTT, UVITA L SINOR, HARLEY D SMITH, CARRIE M SMITH.SARA SMITH, TAMMY L SPENCER, LYNDA K THOMAS, JONI R THOMAS, SOMMER M THOMPSON, FLORA DEAN WALLS, BOBBIE J ELEMENT ARY II GUIDANCE COUNSELOR ELEMENTARY ART SCHOOL NURSE ELEMENTARY II CHILD NUTRITION CHILD NUTRITION MGR. AIDE INST. TECH. SPEC. KINDERGARTEN ELEMENTARY I ELEMENTARY I KINDERGARTEN WASHINGTON, MACHERYL DENIS ELEMENTARY 111 WILLIAMS, MARCEY M WILLINGHAM, JOYCE D WOLFE, JANICE L WOODS, BRENDA L YOUNG, STEVEN J CHILD NUTRITION ASSISTANT PRINCIPAL ELEMENTARY I AIDE SECRETARY - PRINCIPAL BRADY PRINCIPAL: ADA KEOWN ALLEN, SARAH WILKINSON AUTREY, DEBORA L BEALS, YOLANDA H BUCHANAN, BELINDA M CAPOOT, JEANNE A COOK, BEVERLY A DOOLITTLE, DOROTHY A DOTSON, SHIRLEY EDWARDS, NORMA C EWING, PAVIA EXSON, CALVIN 0 FLANAGAN, VETA GILKEY, EVELYN D GIVENS, LINDA GORDON, JANICE L HARE, VALERIE T HENRY, MELANIE M JAMES, CAROLYN A JEFFERSON, LARRY L JOHNSON, AMOS JOHNSON, DELMA J KEOWN,ADAL KHOURY, CYNTHIA A KIDD, HARRIETTE LITTRELL, AIMEE BADEAUX MARSTON, ROSEMARY E MASSEY, TAMMY L MCLENNAN, ANN E MCMURRAY, EILEEN MEADERDS, CATHERINE R MERCADO, MARIA R MOORE, ALLISON S NICHOLS, SHERRIE L NICHOLS, VALARIE R NUNLEY, GLORIA A OLIVER, SHELLY R POOLE, GREGORY DEMAR REED, MARTHA RENEE ROSE, SHERRY L SHELLS, GENEVA S SMITH, ARBRADELLA TOLBERT, IRMA J TRAMMELL, RICKEY R WALKER, ARDELIA A SPEECH THERAPY ELEMENTARY V ELEMENTARY V AIDE FOUR YR OLD TEACHER SPEC. ED. MATH AIDE-PRE-K CHILD NUTRITION SECRETARY CUSTODIAN - HEAD TITLE I FACILITATOR AIDE - PRE-K AIDE SPEC. ED. FOUR YR OLD TEACHER AIDE AIDE CUSTODIAN SECURITY OFFICER ELEMENTARY II PRINCIPAL ELEMENTARY Ill ELEMENTARY IV SPEECH THERAPY ELEMENTARY II AIDE ELEMENTARY Ill ELEMENTARY V CHILD NUTRITION AIDE GUIDANCE COUNSELOR AIDE LAB ATTENDANT LIBRARY/MEDIA SPEC. ELEMENTARY Ill AIDE-P. E. KINDERGARTEN ELEMENTARY I ELEMENTARY I CONSUL TING TEACHER KINDERGARTEN CUSTODIAN ALT. ELEM. 7915 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK 72205 WALLACE, RODNEY J WHITE, CRYSTAL L WOOD, MARY LOUISE WORKMAN, HELEN J WRIGHT, BRANDI DWAN PHONE 447-3900 FAX: 447-3901 GENERAL MUSIC CHILD NUTRITION KINDERGARTEN CHILD NUTRITION MGR. SPEC. ED. I l I CARVER fl PRINCIPAL: DIANE BARKSDALE ACKER, NATASCH M ELEMENTARY V ACOTT, MARY LEE ELEMENTARY IV ARMSTRONG, HAYLEY KRISTINE ELEMENTARY I BAKER, PATRICIA A LAB ATTENDANT BALL, BETHANY L ELEMENTARY II BARKSDALE, MARY D PRINCIPAL BELOTTI, VIRGINIA M LIBRARY/MEDIA SPEC. BRAGGS, RICKEY CUSTODIAN BROWN, ERIK D ELEMENTARY ART BRYLES, K.Q. EARL CUSTODIAN BUCK, VIRGINIA S ELEMENTARY Ill BURT, JOY LYNETTE ELEMENTARY IV CARPENTER, LOUISE .M KINDERGARTEN CARTWRIGHT, JULIA D GUIDANCE COUNSELOR CONLEY, STANFORD CUSTODIAN CRUM, JANES EARLY INTERVENTION SP DANIEL, SUSAN J KINDERGARTEN DIMASSIMO, SUELLEN H MATH SPECIALIST DOBER, KATHRYN W ELEMENTARY I GLENN, LINDA F EARLY CHILDHOOD HAMIL TON, CLAUDIA J YOUNG ASTRONAUT SPEC HARRIS, TIFFANY M ELEMENTARY I HILL, JERRYLINE M CHILD NUTRITION HOOKER, MELBA J KINDERGARTEN HUGHES, TERI GENERAL MUSIC JACKSON, DONNA F CHILD NUTRITION MGR. JOSEPH, JUNE D SPEC. ED. LANCASTER, RITA KAY ELEMENTARY V LENTZ, MARY E SCHOOL NURSE NOEL, STACEY L CHILD NUTRITION PACE, TEATA D CURRICULUM SPECIALIST REDUS, JUNNIEST ELEMENTARY IV RICHARDSON, TRACY L SECRETARY - PRINCIPAL RODGERS, JUDY C AIDE ROLAND, MIL TON CUSTODIAN - HEAD RUEHR, PAMELA W KINDERGARTEN RUNION, DIANNE C CURRICULUM SPECIALIST SCHEFFER, CASEY SUE ELEMENTARY Ill SCHILLING, PAULA B TECHNOLOGY SPECIALIST scon, EDWARD RAY ELEMENTARY V scon, YANAH ASSISTANT PRINCIPAL SHACKELFORD, SILVEREE MEDIA CLERK SHIELDS, HOLLY E ELEMENTARY II SKUBAL, EUNICE L ELEMENTARY IV 2100 EAST SIXTH STREET LITTLE ROCK 72202 SPANN, MEREDITH J SPRINGER, ROBERT A TAYLOR, DOROTHY THOMAS, JENNIFER L THOMAS, VANNETTA J THOMASON, TRACYE S TRAYLOR, KATHLEEN A VALUE, TERRIL WASHINGTON, KIMBERLY V WILKINS, AL YCEA L WILLIAMS JR, ORVEN \"GENE\" WILLIAMS, RACHELL WILLIAMS, WANDA B WILSON, PRISCILLA J YARBROUGH, LAURIE J PHONE 447-4000 FAX: 447-4001 GIFTED \u0026amp; TALENTED PHYSICAL ED. CHILD NUTRITION ELEMENTARY II ELEMENTARY V GUIDANCE COUNSELOR ELEMENTARY I SPEECH THERAPY SCIENCE SPECIALIST ELEMENTARY Ill ELEMENTARY (DEV) SECRETARY - PRINCIPAL CHILD NUTRITION ELEMENTARY Ill ELEMENTARY 11 CENTRAL 1500 SOUTH PARK STREET PHONE 447-1400 PRINCIPAL: NANCY ROUSSEAU LITTLE ROCK 72202 FAX: 447-1401 ADAIR, GLADYS M SECRETARY-ATTENDANC EASTER, MARION 0 ENGLISH ALLEN, EVELYN DARNELL SOCIAL WORKER ELLENDER-BARKER, SHANNAH HOME ECONOMICS ALLEN, TINA R CHILD NUTRITION ENDERSON, DONALD WAYNE ART ANTHONY, LEE ANDREW ART EVANS, KATHRYN S BUSINESS EDUCATION ARIKAWE, AKIN STEPHHEN BUSINESS EDUCATION EZELL, REGINA Y ASSISTANT PRINCIPAL BAGGETT, CINDY J SPEC. ED. FELLS, JACKIE BUILDING SECURITY SUPV BAGGETT, PAUL SECURITY OFFICER FIELDS, WILLIE J AIR FORCE JUNIOR ROTC BARNEY, NORMAN L CUSTODIAN FINLEY, CLARENCE B PHYSICAL ED. BATEMAN,VADEA CHILD NUTRITION ASST. M FITZPATRICK JR, OLIVER PHYSICAL ED. BEGGS, MELINDA J ENGLISH FOSTER, MATTHEW JOHN ENGLISH BEITH, MELINDA KALB ORAL COMMUNICATIONS FOWLER, RHONDA LEA ENGLISH BELL, JERRY LERONE ASSISTANT PRINCIPAL FRANKLIN, GAYLON J SECRETARY-ATTENDANC BERRY, THYLETHIA M CHILD NUTRITION FUTRELL, BRENDA J MARKETING COORDINATO BIVENS, CAROL MEDIA CLERK GADDY, HELEN B SPEC. ED. BOSTIC, MARILYN RICHARD SOCIAL STUDIES GARNER, SUSAN K JOURNALISM BOYD, ALFRED D CUSTODIAN GATES.KATHY GEOMETRY BOYETT, EDWARD B WORLD HISTORY GAY, AGNOLIA BEATRICE ORAL COMMUNICATIONS BRAINARD, ANNE E ORAL COMMUNICATIONS GILBERT, KIMBERLY A ALGEBRA I BROOKS,SAUNDRAJEAN ENGLISH GORDON, BARBARA ANN ALGEBRA I BROWN, CARLETON H ENGLISH GRAVES, JESSICA A GUIDANCE COUNSELOR BROWN, JAMES A SOCIAL STUDIES GRAY, JOE A SOCIAL STUDIES BROWN, KARYN INFIELD GEOMETRY GRAYSON, LEQUIETA R GUIDANCE COUNSELOR BURNS, LENETTE LOUISE SECRETARY-WELLNESS C GREENE, ANGELINE D CHILD NUTRITION BYNUM, JULIA RENEE CHILD NUTRITION GUY, KIMT SCHOOL NURSE CALLAWAY, NORMAN M BOYS PE HALL-JONES, BETSY SPEC. ED. CLICK, MELEASA R SECURITY OFFICER HAMMONDS, LISA CHILD NUTRITION COLBURN, MELISSA A SOCIAL STUDIES HAMMONS, KAREN A ENGLISH COLE, LAURA CHEMISTRY HARGIS, ALISON C ENGLISH COOPER, VIRGINIA R ART HARRELL, APRIL STRICKLAND ENGLISH CORTINEZ, KATHERINE SOCIAL STUDIES HARRIS, ANNITHA J HOME ECONOMICS COX, BERNIE L SOCIAL STUDIES HARRIS, CHRISTOPHER B ENGLISH COX, SUZETTE LEE MATHI HARRIS, HERBERT E ASSISTANT PRINCIPAL CROCKETT, JEAN J BUSINESS EDUCAtlON HEGGS, URSELLA W SECRETARY-ATTENDANC CROOK, JOHN GUIDANCE COUNSELOR HICKS, BASIL V PHYSICS DADE, KIMBERLY TOY ORAL COMMUNICATIONS HICKS, ROBIN R HOME ECONOMICS DANIEL, BRANTON P PRINCIPLES OF TECHNOL HOLLADAY, KATHLEEN T ORAL COMMUNICATIONS DAVENPORT, EARL CUSTODIAN HOLMES, JOYCE M SECRETARY - PRINCIPAL DAVIDSON, JOSEPH PHILLIPS EXPLOR. IND TECH HUDSON, HAROLD CUSTODIAN DINGES, VICKIE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR HUGHES, TIMOTHY SPANISH DONHAM, MELISSA C BIOLOGY JACKSON, ANGELA ALGEBRA I DORER, CHRISTOPHER A SOCIAL STUDIES JOHNSON, JON M SOCIAL STUDIES DUMAS, ELAINE K 'LIBRARY/MEDIA SPEC. JOHNSON, WONDRUE M GUIDANCE COUNSELOR DUNHOO, KERVIS R CUSTODIAN ASST HEAD JONES-TAYLOR, SHAROLYN M ENGLISH EARLEYWINE, SONYA G ENGLISH KEARNEY, LESLIE A GUIDANCE COUNSELOR CENTRAL PRINCIPAL: NANCY ROUSSEAU KIRBY, ADAM A SOCIAL STUDIES KNOWLES, EARNEST CUSTODIAN KRATZKE, ROBIN R SPANISH LAHTI, TRINITY KRISEN PHYSICS LAMBERT, EVA DIANE SPEC. ED. LANDRY, REBECCA NEWBERRY PHYSICS LEAKS, ALVESTER CUSTODIAN LEE, CANAA MATH I LIGON, MARIANNE WYNNE LATIN MAHOMES, CYNTHIA Y SOCIAL STUDIES MARIS, MARY ELIZABETH CHEMISTRY MARTIN, CATHERINE M FRENCH MAYS, GRACIE C BIOLOGY MCADOO, STACEY ORAL COMMUNICATIONS MCCANN, JASON ART MCCOY-ROBINSON, SANDRA D CHILD NUTRITION MCCUIEN, AMBER C ENGLISH MCDONALD, DOROTHY L ENGLISH MCGEE, EFFIE M CUSTODIAN MCGEE, KEITH MAURICE CIVICS MCLENDON, JOANNE B HEAL TH MCMURRAY, VICTOR C SOCIAL STUDIES MCQUEEN, KAY COLEEN BIOLOGY MEADOWS, MARK E SCIENCE MEDCALF, BARBARA T SPEC. ED. MEREDITH, SAMUEL MAURICE BAND DIRECTOR MILES, VALERIE SECRETARY - GUIDANCE MILLER, BRUCE W ALGEBRA I MOORE, KENT L PRE-ALGEBRA MURRAY, LENORA E ALGEBRA I NASH, LANGEL ENGLISH NEWSAM, HEATHER ENGLISH NICHOLS, SUSAN D ORAL COMMUNICATIONS NIXON, JAN M FRENCH NWANNE, GRACE C MATH I OLIVARES, LIZETE SPANISH OWEN, APRIL H CHEMISTRY PALMER, GLADYS D CUSTODIAN PALMER, JUANA HOPE AIDE PARKER, BARBARA J CHILD NUTRITION PARSON, MARY K BIOLOGY PAnERSON, DAVID H ASSISTANT PRINCIPAL PAXTON, VERONICA J ENGLISH PEACE, PAMELA J FRENCH 1500 SOUTH PARK STREET LITTLE ROCK 72202 PEACH, LAURA W PETERSON, MONTEZ J. PEYTON, EMMA J PIERCE, MAUREEN POLSON, ANN KATHERINE PORTER, LINDA M RANDALL, JOE ANTONY RICHARDSON, KEITH L RIDLEY, RONNIE C RIKE, APRIL VICTORIA ROBERTS, ELSIE L ROBERTS, JOHN A ROBERTSON JR, THOMAS A ROBINSON, CONSTANCE F ROBINSON, JESSIE ROBINSON, MARLENE M ROBINSON, RENEE J ROBISON, BEVERLY A ROSS, SUZANNE 0 ROUSSEAU, NANCY L ROWND, MARY C RUTHERFORD, PHILIP R RUTLEDGE, MARILYN F SANDERS, XERLOTTA L SCHLESINGER, DEBRA S SCHUTTE, SARAH CATHERINE SEWARD, DARRELL L SHARLOW, ALAN W SHERTZER,JERRIANN SHOFNER, KIRBY E SHORTER, LARRY D SIEGEL, LARRY B SIEGEL, TERESA T SMITH, ANDREA SMITH, FLOYD SMITH, LYNN SMITH, MARK A SNODGRASS, AMY L STAFFORD, BARBARA NELL STEADMAN, ANNICE STELL, LINDA M STOGNER, ALICIA H STRICKLAND, HELEN L TERRY, KAREN S PHONE 447-1400 FAX: 447-1401 SECRETARY - PRINCIPAL SECURITY OFFICER BUSINESS EDUCATION HOME ECONOMICS TRIGONOMETRY GUIDANCE COUNSELOR SECURITY OFFICER SOCIAL STUDIES PHYSICAL SCIENCE TECHNOLOGY COOR. CHILD NUTRITION ASST. BUILDING ENGINEE AIR FORCE JUNIOR ROTC BUSINESS EDUCATION CUSTODIAN SPEC. ED. JOURNALISM HEALTH ASSISTANT PRINCIPAL PRINCIPAL ENGLISH ASSISTANT PRINCIPAL ALGEBRA I BUSINESS EDUCATION ALGEBRA I ENGLISH BIOLOGY PHYSICS MATH I BIOLOGY CUSTODIAN SOCIAL STUDIES BOOKKEEPER SECURITY OFFICER SECURITY OFFICER ART CUSTODIAN BIOLOGY SPANISH BIOLOGY SECRETARY - PRINCIPAL GERMAN ORAL COMMUNICATIONS ART i I I! I I CENTRAL PRINCIPAL: NANCY ROUSSEAU TERRY, P. DAWN THOMAS, PENELOPE THOMPSON, CAROL E THOMPSON, JOY SALLEE THOMPSON, VINCENT LAMONT TRAMMELL, BRETT R TUCKER,CARLALYNN TULLOS, JANET RENEE WAGE, MARGERY B WALKER, MATTHEW ENGLISH SPANISH LIBRARY/MEDIA SPEC. BIOLOGY SECURITY OFFICER SPANISH SECRETARY - PRINCIPAL VOCAL MUSIC SPANISH CUSTODIAN WALKER-RICHARDSON, LETHA Tl MATH II WATSON, JANA ELIZABETHH WELCH, JANEK WEST, CHARLES H WEST, GEORGE D WEST, JOELC WHITE, PATRICIA WILDER, BARBARA A WILLIAMS, BETTYE F WILLIAMS, CASSANDRA WILLIAMS, STANLEY WILLIAMS, WANDA L WILLIAMSON, MICHEAL C WILSON, BRENDA M WILSON, DARRYL J WILSON, NANCY L WRIGHT, DEBORAH K BUSINESS EDUCATION REGISTRAR CIVICS WORLD HISTORY ORAL COMMUNICATIONS SCHOOL NURSE ALGEBRA I IN SCHOOL SUSPENSION CHILD NUTRITION SOCIAL STUDIES CHILD NUTRITION INSTRUMENTAL SPEC. ED. BIOLOGY ART CHILD NUTRITION MGR. 1500 SOUTH PARK STREET LITTLE ROCK 72202 PHONE 447-1400 FAX: 447-1401 CHICOT PRINCIPAL: JANE HARKEY - ABERNATHY, PAULA J ALFORD, COREAN M ANDERSON, ALMARIE BAKER,SHANIDEVONNE BAPT A, ANGELICA BATES, EARNESTINE G BLAND, ANTHONY DWAYNE BOCCAROSSA, JENNIFER C BRYANT, GEORGIE H BRYANT, RODNEY K BURKS, VICKI BOLDING BUTLER, MILDRED M CARBO, HAYWOOD C CARTER, NODA Y CHANDLER 111, HILTON C COPES, STEPHANIE CRAWFORD, CYNTHIA L CRISS, PAMELA R DALE, SUSAN MICHELLE DORSEY, MICHELLE R DOVE, WILLETTA L DRANE, WALTER H ESKEW, ANNETTE T FIELDS, LEOLA H GALYEAN, NANETTE R GANGLUFF, TRACEY LEE GLEASON, MELISSA HARDESTY, SHANNON L HARKEY, JANE A HARRISON, DOUGLAS R HOBBS, STEPHANIE Y HOLLINGSWORTH, JUDY A HOLLOWAY, KIMBERLY D HOOD, KAYE HUNTER, MARSHA A ISBELL, PAMELON J ELEMENTARY I AIDE AIDE ELEMENTARY II CHILD NUTRITION CHILD NUTRITION AIDE ELEMENTARY Ill READING RECOVERY AIDE FOUR YR OLD TEACHER ELEMENTARY IV CUSTODIAN AIDE AIDE- P. E. KINDERGARTEN LIBRARY/MEDIA SPEC. SPEC. ED. ELEMENTARY IV READING RECOVERY AIDE CUSTODIAN - HEAD CHILQ NUTRITION MGR. TECHNOLOGY SPECIALIST INST. TECH. SPEC. SPEECH THERAPY AIDE SPEC. ED. PRINCIPAL SCHOOL NURSE CHILD NUTRITION ELEMENTARY II KINDERGARTEN AIDE GIFTED \u0026amp; TALENTED ELEMENTARY V JACKSON, STACEY E TITLE I READING JEFFERSON, NANETTE RACHELLE SPEC. ED. JONES, LUCIA H KERR, PAULA D KINSLOW, NANCY C LOWRY, JOANY M LUCY, BRENDA F MIMS, SANDRA J FOUR YR OLD TEACHER KINDERGARTEN FOUR YR OLD TEACHER ELEMENTARY I MEDIA CLERK ESL 11100 CHICOT ROAD MABELVALE 72103 MIRANDA, CARLA J MONTGOMERY, SITAR MURPH, KATIE F NOONAN, PAMELA BERRIGAN PHILLIPS, ALICE C POTEET, LISA B PRIVETT, REANETTA RANDOLPH, WILBUNETTE RAYNOR, GWENDOLYN L REYES, SILVIA C RICHARDS, CATHY A ROSE, SARAG ROUSE, VALERIE SABO, DEBBIE L SAINE, KENORIS SMITH, CASSANDRA SMITH, DELWIN H SMITH, MELISSA K SPENCER, JOEL R STALEY, NATALIE LYNN TAGGART, KERI L TAYLOR WALLACE, SHANON L TEETER, PAMELA D TREAT, HEATHER E TUCKER, LOUISE WALKER, CONNIE S WARE, KAREN J WELLS, JEANNIE L WHITAKER, CINDY G WILLIAMS, ERMA J WILLIAMS, NERESA LASHAY WILLIAMS, TONIA L ZAPATA, ANGELICA PHONE 44 7-7000 FAX: AIDE-PRE-K ELEMENTARY IV ESL SPEC. ED. 447-7001 THERAPIST - OCCUPATION SPEECH THERAPY AIDE-PRE-K AIDE CHILD NUTRITION CUSTODIAN CHILD NUTRITION ELEMENTARY V SOCIAL WORKER LITERACY COACH AIDE CUSTODIAN ASSISTANT PRINCIPAL GUIDANCE COUNSELOR ELEMENTARY IV SPEC. ED. ELEMENTARY II AIDE- PRE-K ESL ELEMENTARY I SECRETARY - PRINCIPAL SECRETARY-ATTENDANC GENERAL MUSIC ELEMENTARY II KINDERGARTEN ELEMENT ARY V ELEMENTARY Ill ELEMENTARY Ill CHILD NUTRITION CLOVERDALE ELEMENTARY PRINCIPAL: FREDERICK FIELDS ABERNATHY.RAYMOND ARNOLD, TYNESHIA L BAILEY, LB BUETTNER, SALLY G CALVIN, MILDRED LOUISE COKELEY, GWENDOLYN D COOPER, CHARLOTTE D DAILEY, JOYCE A DANESHMANDI, KATHRYN D DEDMON, NANCY A ELLINGTON, TERRIE S EPPERSON, BECKY J EWINGS, STEPHEN E FIELDS, FREDERICK L HARRIS, VIVIAN A Hill, ALLEN DESHUN HINTON, BRIAN L HOUSE,CHERRIG JENSEN, LINDA JOHNSON, DEBRA J KOON, BETTY R LANGSTON, CALVIN LEDBETTER, SANDRA D MCCLAIN, MARION K MCDANIEL, YVONNE M NORMAN, CHERRY G OLIVER, SANDRA K PACE, KATIE L PALMER, KAREN DIANA PENNINGTON, ALLEN EUGENE RICKS, SHAWN D ROBERTSON, LARRY STANLEY ROGERS, CHARLENEI SMITH, ANDRE SNOWDEN, SALLIE R SOLEE, DEBORAH L TALBERT, MONICA L THOMAS, SABONN J VANECKO, ALICE F VINSON, SHELIA E VINSON, WILLIE JAMES WARREN, MARILYN L WILLIAMS, NYREE D CUSTODIAN - HEAD ELEMENTARY IV AIDE-PRE-K FOUR YR OLD TEACHER GUIDANCE COUNSELOR ELEMENTARY I CHILD NUTRITION CHILD NUTRITION TITLE I FACILITATOR CUSTODIAN SCHOOL NURSE KINDERGARTEN ELEMENTARY IV PRINCIPAL CHILD NUTRITION MGR. CUSTODIAN LAB ATTENDANT CHILD NUTRITION GIFTED SPEC. TITLE I TUTOR KINDERGARTEN SECRETARY-ATTENDANC ELEMENTARY V KINDERGARTEN ELEMENTARY 111 LIBRARY/MEDIA SPEC. AIDE- PRE-K SPEC. ED. ELEMENTARY 11 ELEMENTARY V ALT. ELEM. AIDE FOUR YR OLD TEACHER AIDE - P. E. ELEMENTARY II AIDE - ALE ELEMENTARY Ill GENERAL MUSIC ELEMENTARY II ELEMENTARY I CONSUL TING TEACHER ELEMENTARY I SECRETARY - PRINCIPAL 6500 HINKSON ROAD LITTLE ROCK 72209 PHONE 447-4200 FAX: 447-4201 CLOVERDALE MIDDLE PRINCIPAL: ANGELA MUNNS ALLEN, CLARENCE BARNES, ARTHUR W BENNETT, A BROADNAX, DR. WILLIAM E BULLARD, RENITIA L CAPOOT, MICHAEL G COUNTS, CARLA M CROSSLEY, DEMETRIA R CURRY, JOANN DAVIS, CALVIN E DAVIS, DOROTHY J DAVIS, MARCUS D DAVIS, VICKIE S DISHMAN, FREDDIE C DOSS, GAILP DUCKERY, KRYSTAL K EARNEST, ALICE F ENOCH, LYDIA L ERVIN SR, AUBREY R FISHER, KENNETH L FORD, JOY D GERMANY, LISA R GLOVER,MARSHALYNN GOLATT, CRYSTAL N GOLDSBY, LAVERNE G GORDON, MICHAEL GREEN, JONNIE GREENE, GREGORY GRIFFIN, JACQUELINE N GULLETT-BENNETT, TAMARA J HARRIS, LETITIA S HARRIS, SHARON D HENDERSON, ERIC B HILBURN, REBECCA P HUDSON, SUSAN GAIL HUNT, JULIE A JACKSON, BENNIE JACKSON, ERIK TYRONNE JEFFERS, MICHAEL A JONES, EXAPHINE D JONES, JACK A JONES, JAMES L KALLHOFF, TAMMY J KESLER, MARTHA S AMERICAN HISTORY CUSTODIAN - HEAD ASSISTANT PRINCIPAL ASSISTANT PRINCIPAL MUL Tl-MEDIA TEACHER MATH! SECRETARY-ATTENDANC MATH! SCHOOL NURSE CUSTODIAN READING SPECIALIST BOYS \u0026amp; GIRLS PE MATH! CUSTODIAN SPEC. ED. MATHI LIFE SCIENCE REGISTRAR SECURITY OFFICER BUILDING ENGINEER ENGLISH CHILD NUTRITION SPEC. ED. CHILD NUTRITION GUIDANCE COUNSELOR GATEWAY TECH. SECURITY OFFICER CUSTODIAN - ASST HEAD LEAD TEACHER ENGLISH ENGLISH IN SCHOOL SUSPENSION LEAD TEACHER MATH COACH ENGLISH MATHI PHYSICAL SCIENCE CAREER ORIENTATION PHYSICAL SCIENCE ART GUIDANCE COUNSELOR CUSTODIAN SPANISH LIBRARY/MEDIA SPEC. 6300 HINKSON ROAD LITTLE ROCK 72209 KING, ANDRENATTA D LAMB, CAROLYN F PHONE 447-2500 FAX: 447-2501 BOOKKEEPER/SECRET AR ASSISTANT PRINCIPAL LOUDERMILL, CHENELL CHENISE SPEECH PATHOLOGY MAGLIONE, YADHINA C MAYS, ROMONDA K MCADOO, LERON CHARLES MCBRAYER, TERESA A MCFADDEN.CHARLES MEDLOCK, JANET ANN MISTIC, HELEN M MITCHELL, ANITA MARIE MOLDEN, KEITH MOORE, GARRICK FRANCIS NEAL, TINAC NICHOLS, KARISA ELLEN PENNINGTON, JOHN WAYNE POORE', PATRICIA A RALEY, BEVERLY A ROOK, LOUISA E ROY, PORTIA SHONOWO, OWOPELE 0 SMITH, ANGELA M STARLING, LOUISE STEPHENS.PAULETTE MEDIA CLERK HOME ECONOMICS ART CHILD NUTRITION SCIENCE SPEC. ED. ENGLISH BUSINESS EDUCATION CUSTODIAN SOCIAL STUDIES CHILD NUTRITION LIFE SCIENCE HEALTH ENGLISH SPEC. ED. ENGLISH MATH SCIENCE PRINCIPAL ESL COMPUTER LITERACY STEPHENSON JR, EDWARD WALT SOCIAL STUDIES STEWART, PRINCESS A TEELING, MARGARET E THOMPSON, STACIE HARP TIPPEN, LATONYA Y. TURNER, TERRY D URIAS, OSCAR A WALKER.AMY WASHINGTON, JAMIE L WHITTAKER, NONA M WICKLIFFE, ALICE E WILLIAMS, BOBBIE JEAN WILLIAMS, BRUCE B YOUNGBLOOD, KEVIN WALTER ENGLISH BAND DIRECTOR ENGLISH PHYSICAL ED. READ CUSTODIAN ECONOMICS/ENGINEERIN GEOGRAPHY ENGLISH/READ 180 SOCIAL STUDIES ENGLISH LAB ATTENDANT SOCIAL STUDIES DODD PRINCIPAL: FAITH MCLAUGHLIN BRANCH, TINA L BURTON, JENNIFER L CAMPBELL, PAUL E CAVANESS, DWIGHT L CHAMBERS, SHERRY L COLE, NATALIE R CULVERSON, PATRICIA A DAWKINS, CAROLYN DILDAY, JENNIFER E ELEMENTARY Ill AIDE AIDE CUSTODIAN LITERACY COACH ELEMENTARY 111 AIDE AIDE- PRE-K ELEMENTARY IV DOYNE, PAMELA D AIDE EKEANYANWU, JENNIFER NKECHI AIDE FLEMING, BRENDA H ELEMENTARY IV FLEMING, DEODIS D SPEECH THERAPY GOLDMON, YVETTE D ELEMENTARY V GORE, TAMIKA N FOUR YR OLD TEACHER HAYES, LUCILLE CUSTODIAN - HEAD IVORY-COX, LUTUNIA P CHILD NUTRITION MGR. JONES, VANCE M ELEMENTARY V KENNEDY, BARBARA A LIBRARY/MEDIA SPEC. KNAPP, TERESA LYNN CONSUL TING TEACHER LARK, WILDA D MATH COACH LOWE, MARTHA O GUIDANCE COUNSELOR MCCOY, LISA L CHILD NUTRITION MCLAUGHLIN, FAITH R PRINCIPAL MEEKS, JULIE A ELEMENTARY II MITCHELL, BEVERLY S SECRETARY - PRINCIPAL MOORE, MICHELLE LANEE KINDERGARTEN PEARSON, BOYCE GENERAL MUSIC PRICE, CINDY C CHAPTER I READING RAINES, ANNIE M ELEMENTARY I REED, DEMETRIC L SPEC. ED. REMLEY, SARAH A FOUR YR OLD TEACHER SCHOUWEILER, SHAWN DENISE SPEC. ED. SNIDER, BRANDY N ELEMENTARY I SURRATT, BARBARA A CHILD NUTRITION TERRY, LASHAY D ELEMENTARY II THOMAS, TIFFANI A KINDERGARTEN TYLER, MONICA RESOURCE WATSON, STACIE L AIDE- PRE-K 6423 STAGECOACH ROAD LITTLE ROCK 72204 PHONE 447-4300 FAX: 447-4301 DUNBAR PRINCIPAL: JOHN BACON ACRE, GLENDON L ADKINS, CAROLYNE RUTH ALLEN, CHRISTY D ANDRESS, WILLIAM S AUSTIN Ill, ROBERT BACON, JOHN C SLACKSHER, RODERICK L BROWN, JACQUELINE M BROWN, JANICE BROWN, MICHAEL L BROWN, SHARI D CLARK, ALICE Z CLAYBORN, NATHAN L COLE, BETTYE EARNEST COX, TERI DAVIS, CLEASTER MARIE DEAN, OSCAR L DICKERSON, BOBBIE J bORN, EVELYN ELLEDGE, JENNIFER JANE EZELL, CHRISSIE LYNN FINNEY, VICKIE D GAINES, SARA E GLASS,BEVERLYIRENE GRAY, CARRIE AMANDA GREENLEE, KAREN ESTELLE HARPER, SHIRLEY B HARRIS, BEVERLY HARRIS, LARRY A HART, LILLIAN RENITA HIGHT, REBECCA R HIPPOL YTE, ADRIENNE Q HOBBS, LAWRENCE E HONEA, ALICE J HOWARD, MARGARET A IZARD, RHONDA B JACKSON, GERTIE B JAMES, MARTHA M JONES, DOCIA D JONES, KATRINA YVONNE JONES, TINA LYNETTE JORDAN, ERMA J KEARNEY-WEST, MAPLE J KEEF, TYRI ANN GUIDANCE COUNSELOR ASSISTANT PRINCIPAL SPEECH THERAPY AMERICAN HISTORY CUSTODIAN PRINCIPAL SECURITY OFFICER CHILD NUTRITION SPEC. ED. CUSTODIAN - HEAD CHILD NUTRITION REGISTRAR PHYSICAL ED. / HEAL TH PRE-ALGEBRA MATH I ENGLISH EXPLORING IND TECH ED CHILD NUTRITION MGR. CUSTODIAN - ASST HEAD ARKANSAS HISTORY EARTH SCIENCE SECURITY OFFICER MATH I ENGLISH GERMAN ASSISTANT PRINCIPAL CHAPTER I READING SECRETARY - PRINCIPAL MEDIA CLERK BAND DIRECTOR MATHEMATICS EARTH SCIENCE BUILDING ENGINEER SECRETARY-ATTENDANC CUSTODIAN GIFTED \u0026amp; TALENTED SPEC HOME ECONOMICS LIBRARY/MEDIA SPEC. MATH I SCIENCE MATH! CHILD NUTRITION ENGLISH ENGLISH 1100 WRIGHT AVENUE LITTLE ROCK 72206 KIDD, KRISTY ATKINSON LOGAN, ANDREW 0 LONG-HARSHAW, ROSELYN MCDONALD, THOMAS A MCLEROY, CHANDRA RENEE MILLER, LETICIA L MORRISON, ANGELA L MOSBY, ANGELA MOSBY, JUANITA MUNDY,SAMT NEWTON, KENNETH OLDS, ARTHUR C OZBEK, RUTH ANN PERSON, PAMELA I PITTS, JOE S POWELL, DARRYL J RIDDLE, BRENDA J RODGERS, CLAUDIA A SCOTT, MARGARET W SHACKLEFORD, MELODY D SHAVERS, GREGORY B SHOLLMIER, MARY SIMON, THERESA L SIMPSON, REBECCA J SIMS, KATINA F SKOTKO, FRANCINE S SLATER, JOYCE A SLOAN, DEBRA R SLOAN, SUSAN RACHEL SMITH, SUSAN M STUBBLEFIELD, GERTRUDE L STUFF. AMYL VAN NORTON, PAULA D WATKINS, CINDY WATSON, CHARLES E WHITTEN, PEGGY R WILSON, ALVIN WROTNY, GAY W PHONE 447-2600 FAX: 447-2601 ARKANSAS HISTORY PHYSICAL ED. / HEAL TH ENGLISH ORCHESTRA ENGLISH INTERNATIONAL STUDIES ENGLISH DATA PROC/COMP TECH CHILD NUTRITION ENGLISH MATHEMATICS LATIN SPANISH ENGLISH CUSTODIAN ENGLISH SCIENCE PHYSICAL ED. SOCIAL STUDIES CHILD NUTRITION SPEC. ED. VOCAL MUSIC FRENCH SOCIAL STUDIES CHILD NUTRITION ART GUIDANCE COUNSELOR EAST LAB LIFE SCIENCE ENGLISH AMERICAN HISTORY SCHOOL NURSE LIFE SCIENCE SPANISH MATH I ENGLISH CUSTODIAN SOCIAL STUDIES I I I FAIR PARK PRINCIPAL: DR. SAMUEL BRANCH BAILEY, ADA A AIDE BAILEY, CHANDA LATORIA CONSULTING TEACHER BRANCH, DR. SAMUEL PRINCIPAL BROWN, REBECCA A KINDERGARTEN BROWN, VERLYN K CERTIFIED TUTOR CHILCOTE, MARYS ELEMENTARY IV COTHRAN, DEBORAH JANE FOUR YR OLD TEACHER DEAL, ERONDA J MEAL TECHNICIAN DIXON, SARAH AIDE EDWARDS, SANDRA KAY AIDE- PRE-K GANN, KATHY H ELEMENTARY I HOLMES, RICKY H CUSTODIAN ISUM, MARGARET V LIBRARY/MEDIA SPEC. JOHNSON, KEVIN AIDE LEWIS, LEE E KINDERGARTEN MARKS, LAMARCUS J ELEMENTARY II MCGUIRE, LILLIE B CHILD NUTRITION MONTGOMERY, CHRISTOPHER CUSTODIAN - HEAD MONTGOMERY, LUCILLE B NOBLE, BERGAIL RICHMOND, PENNIE D RILEY, LEAH A SHEL TON, YOLANDA E SMITH, RENEE L TURNER, MARILYN E WALTON, EDNA F WEST, TALISHA S AIDE- PRE-K ELEMENTARY I AIDE LITERACY COACH GUIDANCE COUNSELOR ELEMENTARY V ELEMENTARY Ill SECRETARY - PRINCIPAL FOUR YR OLD TEACHER 616 NORTH HARRISON LITTLE ROCK 72205 PHONE 447-4400 FAX: 447-4401 FOREST HEIGHTS PRINCIPAL: ELOUISE DODSON AKINS, JAMES E ALEXANDER, BEN E ALEXANDER, ELIZABETH ALLEN, ANN MARIE ALOR, LAMEKA C ARNOLD, CAROLYN S BAKER, MERRI C BAYLARK, ROBIN N BLACKMAN, MARGIE N BOYKIN, WILLIAM A BRISCOE Ill, JOSEPH W CAFFEY, BARBARA S CALLAWAY FRAZIER, EDITH J CARR, JEFF F CARR, PATRICIA V CASTO, MARY M CHUNYO, JUDITH LINGLE COBBS, MARY J COLLIER, OZELL DOBBINS, MALINDA J DODSON, ELOUISE J DUNCAN, EDWARD A EASLEY,'NICHOLA S EVANS, ERIKA S EVANS, FELICIA L. FLETCHER, JOHN SAMUEL FORE, LISA K FUNDERBURG, CELESTE LEE FUSS, AMYL GREEN II, TROY W GRINAGE, KIMBERLY L GUNNELLS.REBECCA HARRISON, RANDAL YN HASTINGS, BETTY A HAWKINS, TONYA HOLLOWAY, GLENN HOOKS, LOIS D HOWARD, LAHOMA L HUNT, LORIE ANN UACKSON, SHARON UAMES, TERRIE J ~OHNSON, ELLIOTT JERALD JOHNSON, MARILYN F CUSTODIAN CUSTODIAN CHILD NUTRITION SPEECH THERAPY CHILD NUTRITION CHILD NUTRITION MGR. SCHOOL NURSE BUSINESS ED. CHILD NUTRITION SECURITY OFFICER PHYSICAL SCIENCE AIDE ENGLISH ARKANSAS HISTORY FAMILY \u0026amp; CONSUMER SCI ENGLISH SPEC. ED. ENGLISH AIDE AIDE PRINCIPAL BAND DIRECTOR SPEC. ED. CAREER ORIENTATION AIDE CUSTODIAN - HEAD ENGLISH SPEECH PATHOLOGY AMERICAN HISTORY BOYS PE AMERICAN HISTORY CUSTODIAN SPEC. ED. AIDE SECRETARY - PRINCIPAL MATH I CUSTODIAN PHYSICAL ED. AIDE CHILD NUTRITION MEDIA CLERK AMERICAN HISTORY SPEC. ED. 5901 EVERGREEN LITTLE ROCK 72205 JOHNSON, REGINA M JONES.SHARON JONES, TAMARA B JONES, TIFFANI R JORDAN, SHATONJA KEYES, NANCY L KIRBY, AUDREY A KITZMILLER, RACHEL C KNIGHTEN, REGINALD LANG, CURTIS MAGEE, MILDRED MAYS, ALVIN MCCREE, GINA F MCFADDEN, SANDRA L MIGNOT-BUGEYA, CHRISTINE MITCHELL, BRENT S MORRISON, MICHELLE M MUELLER, CATHERINE J NANDURI, VEENA K NICHOLS, SHALON NOLLY, CAROLYN NUNIS, HAROLD S PARKER, TARSHA LAFAVE PIGGEE, JOHNNIE L PITTS, GAIL G POOLE, THOMAS ROBERTS, MELANIE CAIN SHARP, JANE M SHELMAN, SARAH E SHUE.MARYJANE SIMMONS, KELLY C SKINNER, MELVA SUE SMITH, ALMA F SMYLY, TONI M STOLZER, PATSY N SUTTON, KENNETH H TAYLOR, DIANNE F TEAGUE, LILLIE PERRY THOMAS, SHAUNA LYNN THOMASON, MARIAN M THOMPSON, LAWRENCE TODD, LINDA E TODD, TRACYE ANN PHONE 447-2700 FAX: 447-2701 AIDE SPEC. ED. SECURITY OFFICER ENGLISH SECRETARY-ATTENDANC GUIDANCE COUNSELOR BUSINESS ED. SCIENCE ASSISTANT PRINCIPAL GIRLS P.E. ARKANSAS HISTORY MATH ENGLISH BOYS \u0026amp; GIRLS PE FRENCH SCIENCE AIDE SPEC. ED. AIDE SPEC. ED. AIDE AMERICAN HISTORY SCIENCE CUSTODIAN ASSISTANT PRINCIPAL SCIENCE ENGLISH MATH I REGISTRAR ENGLISH SPEC. ED. AIDE GUIDANCE COUNSELOR ENGLISH CHILD NUTRITION LIBRARY/MEDIA SPEC. READ ENGLISH MUSIC FINE ARTS CUSTODIAN - ASST HEAD SPANISH ENGLISH FOREST HEIGHTS PRINCIPAL: ELOUISE DODSON TURNER, ALVIN D MATH I TYLER. LINDA F CHILD NUTRITION WANG, MARGARET SCIENCE WHITE, ETHEL L SPEC. ED. WILLIAMS, KATHY L MATH I WILLIAMS, MINDY LUE ENGLISH WILLIAMSON, WANDA M GEOGRAPHY I WISE, STEVEN ASSISTANT PRINCIPAL ZAKRZEWSKI, MERRY C MATH I 5901 EVERGREEN LITTLE ROCK 72205 PHONE 447-2700 FAX: 447-2701 1 ' FOREST PARK PRINCIPAL: THERESA KETCHER AARON, ADRIADNE L BATTS, KATHY M BAUMAN, SUSAN F BOYCE, MARY L CALDWELL, CATHERINE E COLEMAN, ELEANOR R AIDE AIDE FOUR YR OLD TEACHER LIBRARY/MEDIA SPEC. AIDE- PRE-K GUIDANCE COUNSELOR COURTNEY-KETCHER, THERESA J PRINCIPAL CUNNINGHAM, SHAWNTELL D DILLARD, CAROLYN ANN ELLIS, JENNIFER B GESTAUT, HELEN F GIVENS, VERA C GWIN, LISAK HARBOUR.SUSAN HICKS, FELICIA HOLMES, JENNIFER MILDRED HUNT, MARIETTA S HYDER, GWENDOLYN M ISROFF, KIMBERLY K JANSSEN, MARY J JENKINS, PATRICIA H JOHNSON, BELINDA M JOHNSON, VALERIE LANEHART, FRANS LAUGHLIN, KRISTEN S LINEBERGER.KATHY LUSBY, MARY B MACHEN, JANET A MCBRIDE, BARBARA L MCBRYDE, LESLIE M MCDIARMID, MIRANDA LEANN MOLDEN, HOMER L MOORE, CYNDI PARKER, MICHELLE D PAYNE, CELESTE P SCANLON, LEIGH A SCARVER, RACHEL W SIGNAIGO, CYNTHIA L WALLACE, YULONDA A W!cNGER, CAROLYN J WHITE, GAYLE Y AIDE- PRE-K ELEMENTARY IV ELEMENTARY II ELEMENT ARY Ill AIDE KINDERGARTEN FOUR YR OLD TEACHER LAB ATTENDANT ELEMENT ARY Ill GENERAL MUSIC CUSTODIAN ELEMENTARY I SCHOOL NURSE GIFTED \u0026amp; TALENTED ELEMENT ARY II CHILD NUTRITION MGR. MEDIA CLERK GIFTED \u0026amp; TALENTED ELEMENTARY IV SECRETARY - PRINCIPAL ELEMENTARY 111 SPEECH THERAPY AIDE ELEMENTARY 11 CUSTODIAN - HEAD KINDERGARTEN CHILD NUTRITION AIDE ELEMENTARY I CUSTODIAN KINDERGARTEN ELEMENTARY V ELEMENTARY I ELEMENTARY V 1600 NORTH TYLER LITTLE ROCK 72207 PHONE 447-4500 FAX: 447-4501 I I .....ill FRANKLIN PRINCIPAL: ETHEL DUNBAR ANDERSON, BARRY L ANDERSON, TARI JEAN ASHLEY, ALLAN C BASS, JAMES BEVERLY, TANESSHIA C BURNWORTH, BRANDI M CARROLL, GLORIA CHILDERS, JESSICA G COLLINS, KIMBERLY T COOLEY, TIEFA NETE COTTON, KOTTO A CRENSHAW, ORAL DEBACCO, JENNIFER M DOOLITTLE, HEIDI L DUNBAR, ETHEL B ERWIN, THOMA HELEN FINLEY, CALVIN W FRANKLIN, CHRISTINE GADDY, ELLISTINE GILES, ALMEDA GLASON, DIANNE M GRAY, CAROLYN W GRAY, LOUA HALL, CHARLES K HAMPTON, VALDA D HARRISON, AVONLEA JANE HENRY, SADIE A HIGGINS, MELISSA L HOOD, MARTHA CAROLYN JACKSON, GLORIA J JACKSON, MEKEICHA LENORE JAMES, HENRIETTA KACKLEY, CYNTHIA A MCDOWELL, PAMELA L MCINTOSH, SANDRA G MCNULTY, LEANNE MOIX, SADDI R MORLEY, BARBARA M NEAL, LINDA K PHILLIPS, DOROTHY A RIGGINS, LINDA J ROBBINS, DENISE MACHELLE ROBERTS, CAROLINE D SIMMONS, MILDRED L AIDE LITERACY COACH ELEMENTARY V CUSTODIAN FOUR YR OLD TEACHER ELEMENTARY II AIDE-PRE-K ELEMENTARY ART GENERAL MUSIC ELEMENTARY IV AIDE GUIDANCE COUNSELOR KINDERGARTEN ELEMENTARY II PRINCIPAL ELEMENTARY I PHYSICAL ED. CHILD NUTRITION MGR. ELEMENTARY IV CONSUL TING TEACHER ELEMENTARY V GIFTED \u0026amp; TALENTED ELEMENTARY I SECURITY OFFICER AIDE -TITLE VI B INSTRUC KINDERGARTEN AIDE - FOUR YR OLD PRO AIDE AIDE AIDE ELEMENTARY Ill CHILD NUTRITION AIDE CHILD NUTRITION SECRETARY-ATTENDANC FOUR YR OLD TEACHER ELEMENTARY I KINDERGARTEN LIBRARY/MEDIA SPEC. ACCOUNTABILITY SPECIAL LAB ATTENDANT LITERACY COACH CHILD NUTRITION SECRETARY - PRINCIPAL 1701 SOUTH HARRISON LITTLE ROCK 72204 PHONE 447-4600 FAX: 447-4601 SIMS, MISTI MATTICE READING RECOVERY SLATER, LEROY ELEMENTARY Ill SMITH, BEVERLY A AIDE - PRE-K SMITH, PAULA L READING RECOVERY SOLLER, RHONDA A SPEC. ED. STUCKEY, YINKA O ELEMENTARY II THOMAS, FELICIA D CHILD NUTRITION WHITE, CLARISSA DENISE ELEMENTARY Ill WILLIAMS, SHAWN A SPEC. ED. WILLIAMS-JONES, VENNETTA P CUSTODIAN WINSTON, JANE A FOUR YR OLD TEACHER WITT, KAREN S SPEC. ED. WITTENBURG, AMY O SPEECH THERAPY FULBRIGHT PRINCIPAL: DEBORAH MITCHELL ATKINS, ASHLEY M ELEMENTARY 11 BARRETT, ROHETTIE M AIDE - SPEC ED BELL, SUSAN GIFTED \u0026amp; TALENTED BRADSHAW, SARAH H KINDERGARTEN BUFFORD, SHERRILL A SPEC. ED. CLANTON, WILLIE T CHILD NUTRITION COLE, WOODIE GUIDANCE COUNSELOR COOPER, DOROTHY M KINDERGARTEN DERRYBERRY, LINDA L SCHOOL NURSE DIXON, KENNETH D CHILD NUTRITION MGR. DRANNON, LISA LEIGH SPEC. ED. II DUNAHAY, KIMBERLY R AIDE FARQUHAR, AMANDA W SPEECH THERAPY FRITZ, TERRY K AIDE-P. E. 11 GADDIE, OLIVIA S ELEMENTARY V GASKIN, LAURA A ELEMENTARY II GRAY, PEGGY A ELEMENTARY II GRIFFITH, KEYSHA L ELEMENTARY Ill HARRIS, SHARON R ELEMENTARY Ill HARSHAW, JANIE D CHILD NUTRITION HENTHORNE, MELINDA ELEMENTARY I HIPP, BRENDA J ELEMENTARY I HONORE SMITH, KAREN P ELEMENTARY IV JACKSON, JOHNNY L CUSTODIAN - HEAD JOHNSON, BETH LIBRARY/MEDIA SPEC. JOHNSON, LINDA K CUSTODIAN JOHNSTON.KENNY AIDE - SPEC ED KRIZ, LORI L AIDE- PRE-K MEEK, KIMBERLEY L AIDE MILES, JANET K AIDE MITCHELL, DEBORAH A PRINCIPAL MORROW, LESL YE-ANN SECRETARY - PRINCIPAL NEELEY, RUTH E ELEMENTARY Ill PENN, CARA LYNN ELEMENTARY II PITTMAN, CHARLOTTE M AIDE PRIDE, CHERYL T ASSISTANT PRINCIPAL RAND, ALICE C LAB ATTENDANT ROBERTO, LOIS C AIDE-PRE-K ROBINSON, STEVEN R ELEMENTARY V SCOGIN, ANNA CAROL ELEMENTARY Ill SHAW, ELVAN R CUSTODIAN SHELTON, JULIES KINDERGARTEN SHUFFIELD, KELLY L FOUR YR OLD TEACHER SMITH, JULIA DIANE KINDERGARTEN 300 PLEASANT VALLEY DRIVE LITTLE ROCK 72212 SMITH, MICHELLE D SMITH, RHONDA F SPEARMAN, KARA R SPEARS, LAURENE L SWAGERTY, GAIL R TASCA, KIMBERLY A THOMPSON, AMY DANIELLE WATSON, THELMA P WESTLAKE, BEVERLY A WILLIAMS, IRISH A WILSON, ROBERT L WOOLLY, CAROLJ WORTHEN, COURTNEY M WYATT, MARIAN G PHONE 447-4700 FAX: 447-4701 FOUR YR OLD TEACHER GUIDANCE COUNSELOR SPEECH THERAPY RESOURCE CHILD NUTRITION REGISTRAR ELEMENTARY IV ELEMENTARY IV ELEMENTARY I ELEMENTARY V CUSTODIAN GENERAL MUSIC ELEMENTARY I KINDERGARTEN GEYER SPRINGS PRINCIPAL: DONNA HALL BABB, MISTY GARRETT BARLOW, HEATHER T BOWIE, JACQUELINE BRIGHT, GLADIS BURRALL, STACY CUNNINGHAM, LOIS DOYNE, ANGELA K GILBERT, JEAN H GRANT, CYNTHIA B GRIDER, JENNIFER LEIGH HALL, DONNA R HARDESTY, PATTY J HODGES, BARBARA L HUGHES, SHARONDA MARSHA JACKSON AYERS, LENORA JONES, ERICIA D JONES, MARY J KECK, SHERRY W MCGOWAN, DORIS J MINOR, WENDY Y OLIVER, ORA D PARKER, LINDA F PHILLIPS, ESSIE M PUCKETT, PAIGE C REYNOLDS,BARBARAJ RICH, ANDREA KATHRYN RICHARD, SHONNA D RICHARDSON, ANNIE L ROSS, PATRICIA M SIMPSON, ANGIE M STACEY, ROBERT E SWINDLE, CHRISTINA TERRY, BENITA LAFAVE THAMES, ROSALYN C THOMAS, DEBORAH J WILKINSON, SANDRA L WITHERS, AARRON LITERACY COACH KINDERGARTEN CHILD NUTRITION CUSTODIAN SPEECH THERAPY AIDE-PRE-K FOUR YR OLD TEACHER SPEC. ED. GENERAL MUSIC LIBRARY/MEDIA SPEC. PRINCIPAL ELEMENTARY 11 GIFTED \u0026amp; TALENTED ELEMENTARY Ill PARENT FACILITATOR ELEMENTARY IV LAB ATTENDANT MATH COACH ELEMENTARY I ELEMENTARY IV AIDE GUIDANCE COUNSELOR AIDE- PRE-K KINDERGARTEN SECRETARY - PRINCIPAL READING AIDE CHILD NUTRITION MGR. ELEMENTARY Ill FOUR YR OLD TEACHER CUSTODIAN ELEMENTARY I ELEMENTARY V CHILD NUTRITION ELEMENTARY V ELEMENTARY II AIDE- P. E. 5240 MABELVALE PIKE LITTLE ROCK 72209 PHONE 447-4800 FAX: 447-4801 Ii GIBBS PRINCIPAL: FELICIA HOBBS ADAMS, KATRINA R BAKER. KA YREN G BLOME, CAROLYN H BUTLER, SUSAN D CAMARILLO, DIANA E CASE, SARA ANGELA COURTNEY-NICHOLS, TONYA LYN FELLS, KECIA L GONTERMAN, VICKI L HESTIR, SUSAN J HOBBS, FELICIA L HUGHES, VIOLA JENKINS, HOLLY JOHNSON, JILLANE DEE JONES, JOSEPH LANKFORD, TERRI LASKER, CALA M LAVEY, CATHERINE L LEIBIG, PRISCILLA A MATLOCK, GWENDOLYN MCCUIEN, ANGIE G MILLER, MELANIE P MILLER, RACHELLE G MORGAN, CATHERINE C PASSINI, NANCY A PRIME, STACIE N PURVIS, SUSAN T OAASIM, MUNERRAH HANA RICHARDSON, TERESA L ROBERTSON, ANGELA GRACE ROBINSON, RUBY SHUMATE, CARLE SMITH, CATHY SMITH, JEWEL TALLEY, SHIRLEY A I: II TANKERSLEY, ABBY LYNN II THOMAS, KAY SANDRA TUDOR, SHU CHI WALTERS, ALICE H WELBORN, JENNIFER J YE, VIVIAN ELEMENTARY IV GENERAL MUSIC ELEMENTARY I MATH SPECIALIST ELEMENTARY V GERMAN READING RECOVERY GUIDANCE COUNSELOR INTERNATIONAL STUDIES ELEMENT ARY II PRINCIPAL CHILD NUTRITION ELEMENTARY V ELEMENTARY IV CUSTODIAN AIDE SPEECH THERAPY LIBRARY/MEDIA SPEC. ELEMENTARY IV AIDE CHILD NUTRITION ELEMENTARY II ELEMENTARY V READING RECOVERY PHYSICAL ED. INST. TECH. SPEC. ART SPEC. ED. LITERACY COACH SPANISH CHILD NUTRITION MGR. CUSTODIAN - HEAD LAB ATTENDANT CUSTODIAN KINDERGARTEN ELEMENTARY I SECRETARY - PRINCIPAL ELEMENTARY Ill KINDERGARTEN GIFTED \u0026amp; TALENTED AIDE - FRENCH 1115 WEST 16TH STREET LITTLE ROCK 72202 PHONE 447-4900 FAX: 447-4901 HALL PRINCIPAL: VERNON SMITH ADAMS, JERALDINE T AGEE,MARGARETANN ALLGOOD, EMMA J PHYSICALLY HANDICAPPE SCHOOL NURSE AIDE ANDERS, MARIBETH CHANCELLO ART ARINGTON, JOANN BANKS, WANDA F BARTHOLOMEW, ELIZABETH A BAXLEY, MARY A BELFORD Ill, JOHN H BENTON, LINDA G BEST, JOAN B BIEHSLICH, LISA M BLACKNALL, REVA J BONA, PATRICIA C BOYLE, JULIA L BRACY, SAUNDRA Y BRANCH, KARON LYNN BURKEPILE, WILLIAM L BURNETTE, DENNIS R BURSAC, CONIELL BUSH, YOLANDA J BYNUM, LARRY D CANE, SANDRA K CARTER, FRED CIRKS, GEORGE E CLARK, MICHAEL JAMES CLAY, SHARON COLEMAN, JON E COLLINS, JUDYTHE L COOMBS, LINDA C COOPER, MONICA LYNN CRESS, CAMILLE P CURRIN, EMMITT L DANIELS, JOHN STEVEN DAWSON, JERRY DIGGS, JENNIFER WALKER DODSON, VINCENT R EASTER, ELIZABETH L FALLS, JACQUELINE A FARR, $ELITA B FLOWERS, BETTY M GAGE, MARY J GONTERMAN, CHRIS D GRAVES, DON K HOME ECONOMICS SECRETARY-ATTENDANC PHYSICALLY HANDICAPPE GUIDANCE COUNSELOR MARKETING COOP. CUSTODIAN GEOMETRY ART BUSINESS EDUCATION TRIGONOMETRY GUIDANCE COUNSELOR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ORAL COMMUNICATIONS GEOMETRY ENGLISH GEOMETRY ALGEBRA II BUILDING ENGINEER CUSTODIAN SOCIAL STUDIES DEAN OF STUDENTS CIVICS REGISTRAR IN SCHOOL SUSPENSION MATH II SECRETARY -ATTENDANC HEALTH BIOLOGY CUSTODIAN HEALTH BAND DIRECTOR ENGLISH EAST LAB ENGLISH SCIENCE GEOMETRY CHILD NUTRITION ENGLISH PHYSICAL ED. AMERICAN HISTORY 6700 \"H\" STREET LITTLE ROCK 72205 GREEN, CHRISTINE HALL, RHONDA T PHONE 447-1900 FAX: 447-1901 AMERICAN HISTORY ASSISTANT PRINCIPAL HANSBERRY-HARRISON, BETTY R LIBRARY/MEDIA SPEC. HARPER, JEROME W HARRIS, CARLA DENISE HARRISON, T F KENNETH HAYES, PATRICIA HILL, GENEVA HILL, RENEE HINES, MARY ANN HOBBS, PAMELA A HOLLOWAY, MARYS HOLMES, LAMONT HOOKS, JAMES W HOWARD, CAROLINE D HOWARD, VINCE EDWARD HUDSON, SHELIA A IOCOLANO, SUSAN E JACKSON, MICHELLE DENISE JARMON, MYRA M JAY, CHARLENE V JOHNSON, TONYA N JONES, ANGELA R JONES, LINDA S KELLEYBREW, CAROL M KING, SUSAN L LARRY.BETTY LASKER.ALBERTA LEFEAR. MARILYN LEFFINGWELL, DONALD C LUCKER, ELIZABETH A MALONE, HOSEA D MANTELS, ALITA I MAYS, SHERRIES MCCANN, CONNIE SUZANNE MCKASKLE, SONJA F MCKINNON, LONA G MEADORS, JAMES EDWARD MEADOWS, DR. JANE S MEHYOU, MYRIAM GUIMARAES MILLOWAY, MELINDA B MOORE, MARCUS R MURDOCK, PHYLLIS NOBLE, THOMAS 0 CIVICS ALGEBRA I GEOMETRY AIDE CUSTODIAN ORAL COMMUNICATIONS YOUTH APPRENTICESHIP ENGLISH ENGLISH CUSTODIAN - HEAD CUSTODIAN - ASST HEAD BUSINESS EDUCATION CUSTODIAN MATH I SPEC. ED. GEOMETRY SPEC. ED. CHILD NUTRITION MGR. ENGLISH SECURITY OFFICER GUIDANCE COUNSELOR CHILD NUTRITION ART BUSINESS ED SPEC. ED. TYPING/KEYBOARDING PHYSICS HOME ECONOMICS BIOLOGY SPANISH/ACT PREP/504 COOR. CAREER ED. ART AMERICAN HISTORY ENGLISH PHYSICS CHEMISTRY FRENCH ORAL COMMUNICATIONS SPEC. ED. SECURITY OFFICER BIOLOGY HALL .. PRINCIPAL: VERNON SMITH NORDMAN, ANTJE H OBIAGWU, CHUKWUMA J OSBORNE, LINDA PHILLIPS, AMANDA S PICADO, ELENA PORTER-COLE, GWENDOLYN J PURDY, DR. LESLIE GAYLE RHODES, BERNESTINE ROMAIN, KARL-HENRY ROUBY, DAVID P ROWLAND, KAMELA M RUSH, KELLY SHUMATE RUSH, LAWRENCE R SALERS, MARIA E SANDERS, DEMAR CORTEZ SANDERS, MARY K SCHUSTER, MONICA L SEARS-HARKINS, JO ELLA I SHELTON, PATRICIA SHERRILL, LYNDA LORETT A SHORT, DEBORAH W SLADYEN, MARSHALL SMILEY, BEVERLY J SMITH JR, VERNON STEWART, MARLON L TAPPIN, RANITA C THOMAS, JOHNNY THORNS, ARIA ELISE VAN METER, KIMBERLY SHEA VAN PELT, SHARON E VEST, JACQUELAINE DENISE VIGER, PAIGE ANN WADE, ROY L WALKER-ROLFE, DR. ELLA M WALLS, RUTHIE i WALTON, GEORGIA C I WATSON, PATRICIA A 1 WHALEY, ANDRESS L WHITE, JOA WILLIAMS, IRA L I WILSON, FELICIA R YOUNG, BARBARA J ZINK, JUDY R SPANISH PHYSICS SCHOOL NURSE ENGLISH SPANISH AIDE SCIENCE TECH. BUSINESS EDUCATION MATH I CHEMISTRY SPEECH PATHOLOGY MUSIC US HISTORY CHILD NUTRITION SOCIAL STUDIES SOCIAL STUDIES SPEC. ED. TYPING/KEYBOARDING SECRETARY - GUIDANCE BOOKKEEPER SPANISH SMALL LEARN COMMUN C CHEMISTRY PRINCIPAL CUSTODIAN CHILD NUTRITION CUSTODIAN DRAMA ENGLISH ESL JOURNALISM SOCIAL STUDIES ASSISTANT PRINCIPAL ASSISTANT PRINCIPAL SOCIAL STUDIES ENGLISH GUIDANCE COUNSELOR ENGLISH MEDIA CLERK CUSTODIAN ENGLISH AIDE ASSISTANT PRINCIPAL 6700 \"H\" STREET LITTLE ROCK 72205 PHONE 447-1900 FAX: 447-1901 HENDERSON PRINCIPAL: MARVIN L. BURTON ANDERSON, LINDA W ANDREWS, TRACY BATES, MICKEY L BITELY, SWARD BOLTON, JOYCE M BOONE, DEWAYNE BROWN, MARVIN H BURL, FELICIA J BURNETT, EDITH J BURNETT, TINA D BURTON, MARVIN L CARRUTH.KAREN CARTER, RODERICK V CLARK, JOHN M COLEMAN, NANCY K COLFORD, SUSAN DAUGHERTY, SHERRY E ELLIS, VICKI L FALL, LIBASSE FARMER JR, JEROME FARRIS, CHRISTINE FLANIGAN, WILLIAM FLEMMING, NATALIE FLETCHER, VICKI M GEFFKEN, CAROLYN GRAY, ELIZABETH L GREEN, MICHAEL B HAMMAKER, CRAIG DEWITT HANNAHS, BARBARA I HARDEN, TOM F HENDERSON, BETSY D HILL, RICHARD A HOGUE, PAMELA K HOLCOMB, KIM L HORNE, WANDA L HUMPHREY, JOANN HUNTER, BRENDA JAMES, PHILITA LAJUA JARRETT, ANTOINETTE M JOHNSON, BENNY D JOHNSON, CAROLYN DENISE JONES, KRISTIN M KELLEY, CARLA J KELLY, TERETHA E CAREER ORIENTATION ENGLISH INST. TECH. SPEC. BAND DIRECTOR CUSTODIAN SECURITY OFFICER CUSTODIAN CHILD NUTRITION CHILD NUTRITION CHILD NUTRITION PRINCIPAL REGISTRAR AIDE MATH I GUIDANCE COUNSELOR ARKANSAS HISTORY AIDE TYPING/KEYBOARDING FRENCH ASSISTANT PRINCIPAL CHILD NUTRITION MGR. ARKANSAS HISTORY ENGLISH PHYSICAL SCIENCE SPEC. ED. MEDIA CLERK HEALTH PHYSICAL SCIENCE ENGLISH AMERICAN HISTORY SOCIAL STUDIES CUSTODIAN - HEAD MATH I PHYSICAL SCIENCE SPEC. ED. AIDE AIDE ARKANSAS HISTORY HOME ECONOMICS SECURITY OFFICER DATA PROC/COMP TECH ENGLISH SCHOOL NURSE BUSINESS EDUCATION 401 BARROW ROAD LITTLE ROCK 72205 KEOPPLE, KAREN K KING, DEBORAH A PHONE 447-2800 FAX: 447-2801 BOYS \u0026amp; GIRLS PE BOOKKEEPER KYZER-SCHOENING, KRISTI LOUIS PHYSICAL SCIENCE LEWIS, LOUIE SPEC. ED. LOCK, JOCELYN J LOWE, DEBRA W MACKLIN,BRENDA MADDOX, BEVERLY K MALLETT, ORA D MCFARLAND, BILLY C MITCHELL, JAIME BROOK MOORE, JOYCE A MOORE, LAKESHA L MOSBY, LORRAINE L MOTHERSHED, LUCILLE E NELSON, DAMIEN R NOLL, LISA ANN NOWDEN, EMMA BARNES PATTILLO, CHARLES PERRY, TARSHA R PORCHIA, EDGAR A PRIDE, KIFFANY ROCHELLE REYNOLDS, JAMES RICHARD SECRETARY - PRINCIPAL LIFE SCIENCE CUSTODIAN ENGLISH MATHI SOCIAL STUDIES SPEC. ED. SPEC. ED. SECRETARY-ATTENDANC GUIDANCE COUNSELOR MATH I AMERICAN HISTORY AIDE ASSISTANT PRINCIPAL CUSTODIAN AIDE ART ENGLISH SPEC. ED. SANDERS-ANDERSON, MILLICENT SPANISH SCOTT, SUSAN A SLATER, CAROLYN A SMITH, SHAROL K STOWERS, WANDA S SWANIGAN, BELINDA D TATUM, KATHY R TAYLOR, DAVID SCOTT VALBRACHT,CAROLJ WAKELYN, JOAN WALLACE, ROBERT WEIR, NANCY L WILLIAMS, FRANK TERRELL WILLIAMS, MELANIE FELICE WILLIAMS, VELMA J WILSON, VEKISSA LANISE WOODLEY, WILLIE YOUNG, EVA M ENGLISH PHYSICAL ED. SPEC. ED. ENGLISH CHILD NUTRITION MAGNET COORDINATOR SPEC. ED. MATH I LIBRARY/MEDIA SPEC. BUILDING ENGINEER ENGLISH CHAPTER I MATH ENGLISH MATH I ENGLISH CUSTODIAN - ASST HEAD SOCIAL STUDIES JA FAIR PRINCIPAL: CASSANDRA NORMAN ANDERSON,SHERRID BALL, MONICA DENISE BANKSTON, BRENDA CREDIT BARELA, IDA MAE BLACK, JOSEPH R BOSTIC, KELVIN BROWN, MARY A BRYANT, MICHAEL R BURRIS, KA THY CAGLE, CATHY J CALLAWAY, EVELYN J CAROLINA, DANICA CAULEY,SHARONISBELL CHILDRESS, EFFIE MAE CHOATE, JENNIFER M CLEVELAND, KIMMIE R COLEMAN, MARYL COLLINS, MABEL A COOKUS, JERRY K CUMMINGS, DANYELL C DAVIS, MARIE J DUKES, RAYNARD D EYRES, RUTH M FARNER, RITA D GALLEGOS, DANIEL GOODNIGHT, SHIRLEY M GRIMMETT, JEFFREY WILLIAM GROVES, JENNIFER B GRUMMER, WILLIAM J HALL, LINDA L HARDIN, JUDITH K HARPER, GERALD LAURENCE HARRIS, BILLY J HARRIS, DONALD G HART, JUDITH N HART, RONALD ARTHUR HARTNESS, PAUL J HAYGOOD JR, CHARLES E HEAVIN, CAROLS HIDDLESON, STEVEN ANDREW HOLIMAN, CHARLES W HOLLOWAY, RAMONA LEE HULLUM, BRENDA S JACKSON, ASHIA D ORAL COMMUNICATIONS BIOLOGY LITERACY COACH CUSTODIAN SOCIAL STUDIES ASSISTANT PRINCIPAL AIDE MEDICAL ENV. SCIENCE PHYSICAL SCIENCE CHEMISTRY HOME ECONOMICS SECRETARY-ATTENDANC ASSISTANT PRINCIPAL CHILD NUTRITION ENGLISH HEALTH SOCIAL STUDIES BUSINESS EDUCATION ENGLISH ENGLISH SCHOOL NURSE SECURITY OFFICER SPEC. ED. CHILD NUTRITION MGR. CUSTODIAN - ASST HEAD E/M SCIENCE AIDE SCIENCE COOR. CAREER ED. ENGLISH SECRETARY GUIDANCE BIOLOGY CUSTODIAN PHYSICAL ED. GUIDANCE COUNSELOR GEOMETRY SPEC. ED. CUSTODIAN HEAD MUSIC SCIENCE BUSINESS EDUCATION ALGEBRA I \u0026amp; GEOMETRY GEOMETRY ARKANSAS HISTORY 13420 DAVID O DODD ROAD LITTLE ROCK 72210 JACKSON, CHRISTOPHER JACKSON, MARY E JACKSON, SHARON K JACOBS, MARY V JAMELL, SAMMIE K JAMES, HOSEA E JOHNSON.CHARLIE JOHNSON, CINDY M JOHNSON, KRISTIE ANN JOHNSON, LORNA DARLENE JONES, DENNIS RAY JONES, DOROTHY B JONES, ELIZABETH ANNE JONES, FREDDIE L JONES, MARGARET J JORDAN, CAROLYN FERN KENNEDY, ANNA M KING, CARMELITA D KLAIS, NANCY MATTES LEDOUX, KIM R LEWIS, MARSHA LOUIS, JOE E LOVELL, RICHARD D LOWE, VIRGINIA L MACON, SHANDA YVETTE MAGEE, BETTY A MARSHALL, FLOYD L MARSHALL, VERSER A MCCOY, CHRISTOPHER S MCDONALD, STEVEN T MCRAE, JANE L MOORE, JERRY B MOREY, DONNA I MUELLER, CAROLYN S NAHLEN, MARTHA K NELSON, KAREN Y NELSON, SUE A NESBITT, DENISE A NICHOLS, SHERRY A NOBLE, AMY K NORMAN, CASSANDRA R NORTON, SHAUNA NOUNAMO, CHRISLAIN O'CONNOR, JACQUELINE P PHONE 447-1700 FAX: 447-1701 PARAPROFESSIONAL CHILD NUTRITION ORAL COMMUNICATIONS BUSINESS EDUCATION SPEC. ED. SECURITY OFFICER IN SCHOOL SUSPENSION CHILD NUTRITION ART REGISTRAR BUS. ED. SYSTEMS ENGIN GUIDANCE COUNSELOR BIOLOGY ARKANSAS HISTORY CHILD NUTRITION SPEC. ED. BUSINESS EDUCATION ENGLISH MAGNET SPEC. COOR. MATH I AIDE CUSTODIAN BUILDING ENGINEER BOOKKEEPER MARKETING COORDINATO SPANISH FRENCH CUSTODIAN AIDE CHEMISTRY LIBRARY/MEDIA SPEC. SECURITY OFFICER HEALTH SECRETARY - PRINCIPAL LEAD TEACHER GEOMETRY PHYSICAL SCIENCE SPEECH THERAPY MEDIA CLERK SPEC. ED. PRINCIPAL EAST LAB PARAPROFESSIONAL ENGLISH JA FAIR PRINCIPAL: CASSANDRA NORMAN OLSON, CHRISTOPHER JAMES BUSINESS EDUCATION OURY, AMY BROWNING SPANISH PALMER, ROBERT L SOCIAL STUDIES PETERSON, KATHY P. MATH I PHILLIPS, CATHY C COOR. CAREER ED. RAINS, MARTHA K LEAD TtACHER REGAN, SHAWN BRANDON ENGLISH ROBERTS, VICKIE R AIDE ROWE, CHRISTY MARIE . SECRETARY - PRINCIPAL SCOTT, DERRICK D CUSTODIAN SHERBETT, KATHRYN KRAUSE HOME ECONOMICS SMYTHE, DANIEL BAND DIRECTOR SOBBA, EARLE P CHILD NUTRITION STEELE, MARY M SPEC. ED. STRONG, SONDRA ANN ALGEBRA II TELL, HATEM M BUSINESS EDUCATION THOMAS, BILLY FARRIS SPEC. ED. THOMPSON, BRUCE EDWARD AMERICAN HISTORY TROUTMAN, ALICIA T JOURNALISM TROUTMAN, DENNIS PHYSICS UMERAH, WALTER MATH I WALLACE, DORA J ENGLISH WALTHER, TAMMY SUE ENGLISH WASHINGTON, LAPARA NICOLE ENGLISH WELLS, VERNITA FAYE GUIDANCE COUNSELOR WIEDRICH, SHIRLEY L SOCIAL STUDIES WILLIAMS, MARVELL M SOCIAL STUDIES WILLIAMS, ROBERT W ALGEBRA II WILLIS-WASHINGTON, LUCY E ART 13420 DAVID O DODD ROAD LITTLE ROCK 72210 PHONE 447-1700 FAX: 447-1701 JEFFERSON PRINCIPAL: ROBERTA MANNON ANDERSON, OLLIE JEAN BROTHERTON.KATHLEEN BUFORD, KAMIRAH R CLARK, CATHY COLLINS, CYNTHIA R COMPTON, KRISTIN K COOPER, LEIGH A CRUTCHER.CHERYLL DORMAN, BRENDA M EACKLES, KENYETTA M FEINGOLD, JODI K FINKBEINER, TERRI K HAMMOND, TERRI A HENDRIX, BEVERLY M HOFF, SANDRA L HUMPHREY, LOISTINE ITZKOWITZ, CAROLYN J JANSSEN, MARY J JONES, VALERIE A KIEFER, EUGENE R LANKFORD, MARGARET H LEDBETTER, JOHN S LONG, ALBERT MANNON, ROBERTA A MASSANELLI, NATHALIE A MATTHEWS, AMBER L McATEE, KARINS MCDONALD, KERI H MCDONALD, TINA MOORE, GINA L MUENCH, BETTY C PITTENGER, KRISTIANNA D POOL, THERESA A RHODES, LUCY L ROBERSON.SHANNON Ross, ANNIE H ROSSI, JANET K SAINE, LIL TIUNNA L SITLINGTON, CAROL W SMITH, ELIZABETH ANN STRICKLAND, MARGARET J TALLEY DUNN, LESHUNDA T TENNAL, PRISCILLA N THOMPSON, JEANIE M - ELEMENTARY II KINDERGARTEN AIDE AIDE GIFTED \u0026amp; TALENTED ELEMENTARY V FOUR YR OLD TEACHER ELEMENTARY Ill KINDERGARTEN FOUR YR OLD TEACHER ELEMENTARY Ill SPEC. ED. ELEMENTARY V ELEMENTARY I LIBRARY/MEDIA SPEC. AIDE - FOUR YR OLD PRO ELEMENTARY IV SCHOOL NURSE AIDE CUSTODIAN ELEMENTARY II CUSTODIAN - HEAD CUSTODIAN PRINCIPAL ELEMENTARY I ELEMENTARY I GIFTED \u0026amp; TALENTED AIDE - P. E. CHILD NUTRITION MGR AIDE-PRE-K ELEMENTARY II ELEMENTARY Ill AIDE - TITLE VI B INSTRUC GUIDANCE COUNSELOR AIDE ELEMENTARY IV SPEECH THERAPY AIDE SECRETARY - PRINCIPAL GENERAL MUSIC SPEECH THERAPY ELEMENTARY IV LAB ATTENDANT AIDE 2600 NORTH MCKINLEY LITTLE ROCK 72207 TOLBERT, FAYE E WALKER, CARMEN WILLIAMS, JOANN S WITTMAN, MELISSA CHANEY YOUNG, TENESHIA L PHONE 447-5000 FAX: 447-5001 CHILD NUTRITION KINDERGARTEN ELEMENTARY V SPEC. ED. CHILD NUTRITION n ML KING 905 MARTIN L. KING, JR. DRIVE PHONE 447-5100 PRINCIPAL: TYRONE HARRIS LITTLE ROCK 72202 FAX: 447-5101 BANKS, LORICE AIDE LEWIS, OCIE L SECRETARY-ATTENDANC BERRYMAN, SARA L ELEMENTARY I LLOYD, HOLLY E AIDE-PRE-K BETTON, IRA L CHAPTER I READING LLOYD, JULIA F FOUR YR OLD TEACHER BOHANNON, NITA RACHELLE ELEMENTARY I LOSAK, PATRICIA L AIDE BOLTON, MATTIE CUSTODIAN MACKEY, VANESSA J CHILD NUTRITION MGR BROOKS-TURNER, KIMBERLY K GUIDANCE COUNSELOR MCCLINA, MARY AIDE BRUMFIELD BAILEY, KRYSTIE K ELEMENTARY II MCCONNELL, DONALD R CUSTODIAN - HEAD BUCKLEY, JOANN CUSTODIAN MCCULLOUGH, JOYCE M ELEMENTARY II BURNS, JOSIAH ELEMENTARY Ill MITCHELL, SANDRA A SPEECH THERAPY CAMP, BRIGGETTE L MEDIA CLERK MURDOCK, STEPHEN K ELEMENTARY IV CAMPBELL, TAWANNA F AIDE OCHOA, SOCORA CUSTODIAN - ASST HEAD CAPPS, DEBBIE E ELEMENTARY V ODLE, NANCY K AIDE CHARLES, KATHLEEN M FOUR YR OLD TEACHER PENCE, JEAN A KINDERGARTEN CHEREPSKI, STEVANNA D SCHOOL NURSE PURTLE, SARAH L FOUR YR OLD TEACHER COLEMAN, MELVIN C SECURITY OFFICER REED, URSULA AIDE COOLEY, TAMARA S AIDE ROBINSON, CHARLIE MAE CHILD NUTRITION CRUDUP, VERDA M AIDE-PRE-K ROCHELLE, AMOS T PHYSICAL ED. DICKERSON, TAMARA T CHILD NUTRITION RUTHERFORD, MARJORIE L ELEMENTARY V I DOBBINS, TONYA R AIDE- PRE-K SANDERS, CAROL E ELEMENTARY I I DURHAM, CATHERINE ELEMENT ARY II SHOCKLEY, DIANA L CONSUL TING TEACHER EVANS,LATREESE SPEC. ED. SIMPSON-JONES, SHACUNA L KINDERGARTEN FELTON, WILLIAM R ELEMENTARY Ill SIMS, SHERRY LYNN LIBRARY/MEDIA SPEC. FIELDS, SHEILA R ELEMENTARY Ill SMITH, BETTY L AIDE FINKBEINER, DEBORAH J LANGUAGE ARTS SPEC. SMITH, MARY A GIFTED \u0026amp; TALENTED FLEMING, TAMLA JO ELEMENTARY I SPRADLIN, REBECCA L ELEMENTARY IV 1: FLETCHER, LINDA M ELEMENTARY V SURBER, PAMELA KATE ART FURLOUGH, DELORES'J CHILD NUTRITION THOMAS, RICHELLE L KINDERGARTEN GARLAND, MONIQUE C AIDE VAN PATTER, CANDI A ELEMENTARY IV GILES, LORENZO C AIDE WASHINGTON, MINNIE B AIDE GLASCO, GWENDOLYN J KINDERGARTEN WATERS, DORIS Z SPEC. ED. GOODMAN, TAMORA L ELEMENTARY V WOODS, JYIEMMIA SECRETARY - PRINCIPAL GREGORY, PATRICIA A GUIDANCE COUNSELOR ZIES, MARYE GENERAL MUSIC HARRIS, BRENDA G ELEMENTARY II HARRIS, HENRY T PRINCIPAL HAYES, MARY G CHILD NUTRITION HINES, BEVERLY J FOUR YR OLD TEACHER HODGE, GRACIE L CHILD NUTRITION HOOD, SABRINA F CUSTODIAN JAMES, RITA A MATH SPECIALIST JOSHUA, SHELDON GENERAL MUSIC KAHLER, MARY L ASSISTANT PRINCIPAL KORDSMEIER, LINDA C LIBRARY/MEDIA SPEC. LAWSON, DEBORAH K KINDERGARTEN LEE, ANNETTE M AIDE-PRE-K II MABEL VALE ELEMENTARY PRINCIPAL: TABITHA PHILLIPS ATCHLEY, CARRIE MARISSA FOUR YR OLD TEACHER BENETZ, SHANNON C SPEC. ED. BOOHER, LINDA A CHILD NUTRITION BROWNING, BRENDA J CHILD NUTRITION MGR. CARGILL, KATHLEEN S CONSUL TING TEACHER CARLOCK, PHILLIP AIDE CLARK, DONNA J LIBRARY/MEDIA SPEC. CORLEY, T CAROL FOUR YR OLD TEACHER DEES, CINDY L READING FORD, DAISY D AIDE GRANT, BRIAN L CUSTODIAN GREENLEE, LILLIE JO SECRETARY- PRINCIPAL HANNAH, MELISSA ANNE SPEECH THERAPY HART, ANDREW CUSTODIAN HASTINGS, MARTHA E AIDE-PRE-K HOLLY, ROSETTA CHILD NUTRITION HUDGENS, DONNA F KINDERGARTEN JACUZZI, MARILYN J ELEMENTARY I JOHNSON, BONITA ANN GIFTED \u0026amp; TALENTED JOHNSON, JO M KINDERGARTEN JONES, MARY ALICE MEDIA CLERK KESSLER, SABRINA H LITERACY COACH MACON, BEVERLY L AIDE MORGAN, TREVA L ELEMENTARY IV OLIVER, KAREN K ELEMENTARY IV PHILLIPS, TABITHA L PRINCIPAL PINKERTON, SHANNON R ELEMENTARY I PORTERFIELD, DEBBIE SCHOOL NURSE RANEY, LINDA L ELEMENTARY 111 ROSEBERRY, LINDA L CUSTODIAN - HEAD RUCKER, FRANCES L CUSTODIAN RUCKER, REBECCA D ELEMENTARY V SALAzAR, LORETTA D AIDE- PRE-K scorr, 1OMA y AIDE SIMS, MARVAJ SPEC. ED. SMITH, MICKIE L ELEMENTARY II VAN ENK, LEE A GUIDANCE COUNSELOR WALLACE, SHERRA J ELEMENTARY Ill WARREN, ANDRE L ELEMENTARY V WILLIAMS, FRANK JAMES GENERAL MUSIC WILSON, CHERYL A ELEMENTARY II WYMES, ERSENIA AIDE 9401 MABELVALE CUT-OFF MABELVALE 72103 PHONE 447-5400 FAX: 447-5401 MABELVALE MIDDLE PRINCIPAL: ANN BLAYLOCK AZZUN, VIVAN L BAILEY, JOHNNY BANKS, RICKEY D BARNES, FREDLESHA V BAUER, EVELYN L BEARD-HUNTING, HOLLACE R BETTON, SHERRI L BLAYLOCK, MARCELLA A BOOTH, VIRGINIA C BRYAN, LEONARD DIXON CAMERON, STELLA CAMPBELL, HEIDI C CAMPER, WALTER L CHILDS, SANDRA D CLARK, OUIDA CLEVELAND, ELLEAN D DOSS, JIMMY F EFIRD, GWENDOLYN L ELLINGTON JR, JEFFERY ELLIS, LORENE EMMEL, SHARON KAY EVANS JR, JUDGE N FARLEY, KATHEY D FLOWERS, MARTHA L FOREHAND, SHIRLEY R FUTRELL, CHARITA L GOLSTON, SHAWN R GOODLOE, GRAHAM H GREEN, CONNIE G CHILD NUTRITION SECURITY OFFICER MUSIC SPECIALIST SECRETARY AIDE ENGLISH GUIDANCE COUNSELOR PRINCIPAL SOCIAL STUDIES SOCIAL STUDIES LIBRARY/MEDIA SPEC. SCIENCE IN SCHOOL SUSPENSION MATHI SPANISH ASSISTANT PRINCIPAL AIDE SCHOOL NURSE MATHEMATICS SPEC. ED. ENGLISH ASSISTANT PRINCIPAL SCIENCE MEDIA CLERK MATH Ill/ALGEBRA I SPEC. ED. SECURITY OFFICER SPEC. ED. LEAD TEACHER GREEN-BRASWELL, CRYSTAL DEL ENGLISH GULLETT, RANDY E HARDING, HOLLY HARGRO, DOUGLAS W HARPER, CAROLYN D HILL, KATHY J HOOD, ETHEL ELAINE HOPSON, TIMOTHY J HOYT, HILDA T HUNT, HENRY R JACKSON, GAIL A JONES, MARY R LEWIS, PATSY N LOGAN, JACOB SETH LORING, SHANA W EXPLORING IND TECH ED ENGLISH CUSTODIAN - HEAD CHILD NUTRITION CHILD NUTRITION MGR. ENGLISH TYPING/KEYBOARDING ART SPEC. ED. SPEECH THERAPY READING SPEC. ED. AMERICAN HISTORY ENGLISH 10811 MABELVALE WEST MABELVALE 72103 MAHER, DONNA MASON, TRACY LYNN MCMANUS, CARY B MILLIGAN, JENNIFER H MOORE, MELINDA LEA MORGAN, KEISHA A MOSELEY, FRAN N NICHOLS, ETHEL M OWENS, KIRK PENNINGTON, PATRICIA A PENNY, JACQUELINE F PETRUK, MARILYN H POWELL, AMBER M RICE, CHARLES LEE ROWE, TAMARA A SCHULTZ, BARBARA S SIMPSON, SYLVIA Y SMITH, DAVID W SMITH, JEFFREY D SMITH, PAULA M SNOW, EVELYN STROHBEHN, MYLA SWINNEY, JOYCE J TANNER, GAIL THORSON, KAREN J VIRE, MICHELLE JOSLIN WALDROP, GARY T WALLACE, PAMELA G WALTERS, JEFFREYS WARD, GEORGE GREGG WATSON, YOLANDA MECHELL WEBB, THOMAS C WILEY, DEBRA J WILLIAMS, GINGER L WOOLE, RICKY EDWARD WUNEBURGER, NANCY B WYNNE, CRISTEN LOUISE YOUNG, OSSIE PHONE 447-3000 FAX: 447-3001 BAND DIRECTOR LIFE SCIENCE SECURITY OFFICER EARTH SCIENCE SECRETARY-ATTENDANC SPEC. ED. WORLD GEOGRAPHY CHILD NUTRITION CUSTODIAN - ASST HEAD GUIDANCE COUNSELOR SCIENCE SPEECH THERAPY BUSINESS EDUCATION CUSTODIAN MATHII AIDE CUSTODIAN BOYS \u0026amp; GIRLS PE COMPUTER LITERACY MATH COACH ALT. TEACHER MATH I MAGNET SPEC COOR. REGISTRAR CHILD NUTRITION SCIENCE AMERICAN HISTORY ARKANSAS HISTORY PHYSICAL ED. SCIENCE ENGLISH MATH I CHILD NUTRITION LIFE SCIENCE LEAD TEACHER SECRETARY/BOOKKEEPE ENGLISH CHILD NUTRITION MANN PRINCIPAL: JIM FULLERTON ANDERSON,RUGENAL ATKINSON, ARISTAL BAKER, FRANK BARTON, DIANE BERMAN, LINDA L BOLDEN, YVONNE R BOWDEN, PEARLINE JONES BOYKIN, PATRICIA F BRIGGS, RONALD K ENGLISH CUSTODIAN - ASST HEAD ALGEBRA I \u0026amp; II AIDE LANG LIFE SCIENCE CHILD NUTRITION ASSISTANT PRINCIPAL BOYS \u0026amp; GIRLS PE BROOKS JACKSON, LESLIE DAWN SCIENCE BROOKS, LATONYA R BROOKS, RUBYE V BUMPERS, BONNIE C BYRD, DEBORAH H CERRATO, JOSEPH M CHAMBERS, SUSAN B CLARK, PHYLLIS M COOPER, BRENDA L DANIEL, CHRISTIANN M DANIEL, ROSALIE G DESJARDIN, DEBORAH DODSON, TOMMY L DUNCAN,ELIZABETH FINGERS, ALEX M FINNEY, ANTONETTE P FINNEY, JASON D FULLERTON, JAMES C GILBERT-WISE, M BARBARA GILLIAM, VIRGINIA Goss, CATHY p HAMIL TON, CAROL ANN HANDY, ROSIL YN M HANNAH, ROXIE JANELLA HARDING, CASSANDRA D HARRIS, PAULA R HAYES, STELLA L HAYMAN, TERA LAYOYCE HENRY, REBECCA L HERNANDEZ, ERIN ELIZABETH HOLT, DEE ANN JACKSON, ANDY B JOHNSON JR, IVRIA JOHNSON, LORRAINE 0 JOHNSON, MARCUS C SECRETARY-ATTENDANC TYPING/KEYBOARDING LIFE SCIENCE ENGLISH SPEECH THERAPY ART CHILD NUTRITION CHILD NUTRITION GUIDANCE COUNSELOR LIBRARY/MEDIA SPEC. PRE-ALGEBRA CAREER ORIENTATION FRENCH SOCIAL STUDIES SCIENCE CIVICS PRINCIPAL READ CHILD NUTRITION MATHI AIDE CUSTODIAN DRAMA SPECIALIST MATHI MATHI ENGLISH MEDIA CLERK SCIENCE MATHI AMERICAN HISTORY CUSTODIAN - HEAD LIFE SCIENCE ENGLISH BAND DIRECTOR 1000 EAST ROOSEVELT ROAD LITTLE ROCK 72206 JOHNSON, PATRICK B JONES, STEPHANIE L JONES, TANA G KIDD, CLEORTIUS LAWSON, ELLEN S LIVINGSTON, TIFFANY G MANLEY, ERIC S MARTIN, TANIESA DE SHURN MCKENNEY, JAMIE MARIE MCSWAIN, JOYCE M MERRY, SUSAN A MILLER, KASEY J MILLER, QWYLA FENEAT MILLER-BOOKHOUT, ROBIN C MIMS, RICHARD L MOORE JR, CHARLES A MORRIS, CHERYL J NEWCOMB, DARYL D NORTON, GARY D PARCHMAN, SOPHIA Y PARKER, TAMMY L PEARSON, MARVA D PRESLEY, TRACI A QUALLS, LYNDA A REMLEY, 0 C ROBINSON, JAMES ROBINSON, STEPHEN T ROSS, BETTY N SHINN, BRIDGET ANN SMITH, KELLIE M SMITH, OLYMPIA S SUTTON, WILMA D TANNER, LAURAL THOMAS, RUBY S TOLLETTE, JOAN TRICE, NANCY L VOEGELE, THOMAS H WALKER-WHEELER, LISA T WASHAM, RICHARD R WASHINGTON, RUBY J WEBB, BECKY S YOUNG, TRAYCE RENETTE ZIMMER, ROBIN W PHONE 447-3100 FAX: 447-3101 CUSTODIAN SCIENCE SCHOOL NURSE EXPLORING IND TECH ED GUIDANCE COUNSELOR ENGLISH SECURITY OFFICER AMERICAN HISTORY PHYSICAL SCIENCE MATHI ENGLISH MATH I SPEC. ED. ART SCIENCE MATH ENGLISH SCIENCE AMERICAN HISTORY ASSISTANT PRINCIPAL DATA PROC/COMP TECH SOCIAL STUDIES ALT. TEACHER SECRETARY - PRINCIPAL ARKANSAS HISTORY CUSTODIAN SECURITY OFFICER BOOKKEEPER/SECRET AR ENGLISH SCIENCE DANCE SOCIAL STUDIES CHILD NUTRITION MGR CHILD NUTRITION BOYS \u0026amp; GIRLS PE ENGLISH ASSISTANT PRINCIPAL MUSIC EAST LAB GUIDANCE COUNSELOR PIANO LAB REGISTRAR SOCIAL STUDIES 1 MCCLELLAN 9417 GEYER SPRINGS ROAD PHONE 447-2100 PRINCIPAL: LARRY BUCK LITTLE ROCK 72209 FAX: 447-2101 ABOUL FETTOUH. MAHA Y KASSA FRENCH GRAY, JANICE D ALGEBRA I ALLEN, QUEEN AIDE GREEN, JOE W PHYSICAL ED. ALLMON, TERRY L MATHI HALL, HARRIETT LOUISE SECRETARY - GUIDANCE BAILEY, MICHAEL HOWARD BIOLOGY HARRIS, LORETTA J ENGLISH BAL Tl MORE, JACQUELINE CHILD NUTRITION HARTWICK, NORMA R SECRETARY-ATTENDANC BASKINS, WANDA F COOR. CAREER ED HEARN, TONI LYN ENGLISH BILAL-RAFTER, PAULA H BIOLOGY HENDERSON, FREDDIE L CHEMISTRY BLACKWELL. WILLIE ANDRANETT CHEMISTRY HENSON, ANITA M GEOMETRY BLAKNEY. GLORIA S GUIDANCE COUNSELOR HESTER, SHARON SECURITY OFFICER BLEDSOE, FRED R ART HINES, ANN B CHILD NUTRITION BOONE, BARRYL L AIDE HODGES, SHIRLEY B BUSINESS EDUCATION I BOOTH-TERRY, KAREN SCHOOL NURSE HOFFMAN, DOUGLAS B MUSIC SPECIALIST BRADLEY, DORA ECONOMICS HOOD, SUSIE M LAB ATTENDANT BREWER, CHANDA L ASST MANAGER FOOD SE ISOM, CHRISTAL L GUIDANCE COUNSELOR BROWN, ADRIENNE SPEECH THERAPY JERNIGAN, RITA J EAST LAB BROWN, JUDITH M MEDIA CLERK JONES, GRANVILLE CUSTODIAN - ASST HEAD BROWN, MICHELE BUSINESS EDUCATION JONES, OLIVER J HEALTH BUCK, LAWRENCE J PRINCIPAL KEESEE, SHERRI BUSINESS EDUCATION BUTLER-GREEN, RACHELL BIOLOGY KEITH, WANDA L GUIDANCE COUNSELOR CANTRELL, CHARLES R CIVICS LAWRENCE, RYAN G SPANISH CHAMBERS, ANTHONY D IN SCHOOL SUSPENSION LESLIE, NANCY G DISTRIBUTIVE ED COORD CHEREPSKI, DONALD D TELEVISION LITTLE, DARLENE C SPEC. ED. CLEEK, PfilLLIP E ENGLISH LOFTON, DIANE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR COLEMAN, MARSHIA A CIVICS LOYA. SAMUEL T ASSISTANT PRINCIPAL COTTRELL, DALLIE M SPEC. ED. MARTIN. PEARLIE M CUSTODIAN CUNNINGHAM. KEVIN CUSTODIAN MCADOO II , CHARLIE E BUSINESS EDUCATION CUNNINGHAM, VELMA CUSTODIAN MCCOY, OLEN ART DANIEL, ANITA J MATH II MEADE, BRENDA FAYE SPEC. ED. DUERR, DONNA P ASSISTANT PRINCIPAL MOORE, MARY C CHILD NUTRITION ESSARY. PAMELA G BOOKKEEPER MURPHY, DEMETRIA A CUSTODIAN EVANS, CAROLYN J SECRETARY - PRINCIPAL NALLEY, MARGARET R LIBRARY/MEDIA SPEC. EVANS. TERRIE RENEE SPEC. ED. NEELY, BARBARA A SMALL LEARN COMMUN SI FARRIS, ALICE S SPANISH NELSON, TRACEY A REGISTRAR FERGUSON, SHIRLEY L LITERACY COACH NICHOLS, SANDRA RANEY ENGLISH FERGUSSON. SHARON LYNN SPANISH O'NEAL. ELSA KA TE ART FLOWERS, SUSAN S GUIDANCE COUNSELOR ONEIL, SHARON KAY ORAL COMMUNICATIONS FRANKS, ERMA J AMERICAN HISTORY OVERTON. CAROL COOR. CAREER ED GABLE, GLORIA J SPEC. ED PAIGE JR, WILLIE ASSISTANT PRINCIPAL GEURIN, STEPHEN C CURRICULUM SPECIALIST PAIGE, KARL YNN Y CHILD NUTRITION GIESE. M'LOU B MATH I PEARSON. WILLIAM F ALGEBRA I GODLEY. GLADYS K BUSINESS EDUCATION PERKINS, MICHAEL ADRIAN SCIENCE GORDON. EURA D CHILD NUTRITION PIGGEE, JOYCE CUSTODIAN - HEAD GOSS, CAROLYN SPEC. ED. RICHARD, WALTER BUILDING ENGINEER GRAY, BARBARA D ENGLISH ROBINSON. CHERRY ANN ENGLISH MCCLELLAN PRINCIPAL: LARRY BUCK ROBINSON, DOROTHY A ROBINSON, LUCILLE ROGERS, SHERRY LYNN SANDERS, ZORETTA RAQUEL SETTLE, NANCY A SHOFNER, KAREN KAY SMITH, DOROTHY SMITH, JAMES L SMITHSON, LAURA D STARKS, MT STILES, WILLIAM R STONE, LINDA G STUCKEY, BRENDA J TAYLOR, LEE A TAYLOR, MICHAEL T - THOMAS, ANTHONY M THREATT, CHRISTOPHER ERROL TIDMORE, JEROME K TIMMONS, CALVIN WAGSTER, GREGORY ALLEN WALKER, GWENDOLYN WALKER, MILDRED J WALLS,ANGELA WHITE, BRIAN H WILBON, RENITA WILLIAMS, ADEAL WILLIAMS, GINA D WILLIAMS, RACQUEL R WOOD, LARRY L WRIGHT, CYNTHIA L YOUNG, VALARIE R ZINCK, TAMARA L CHILD NUTRITION MGR CHILD NUTRITION ASSISTANT PRINCIPAL ENGLISH LEAD TEACHER ENGLISH ORAL COMMUNICATIONS SOCIAL STUDIES ENGLISH BUILDING SECURITY SUPV BAND DIRECTOR CUSTODIAN BUSINESS EDUCATION SECURITY OFFICER SOCIAL STUDIES CUSTODIAN ENGLISH MATHI CUSTODIAN SPEC. ED. HEALTH LEAD TEACHER CHILD NUTRITION CUSTODIAN SPEC. ED. MATH II SECRETARY-ATTENDANC SECURITY OFFICER AMERICAN HISTORY SOCIAL STUDIES AIDE ORAL COMMUNICATIONS 9417 GEYER SPRINGS ROAD LITTLE ROCK 72209 PHONE 447-2100 FAX: 447-2101 --- MCDERMOTT PRINCIPAL: VIRGINIA ASHLEY ALEXANDER, CAROLYN A ALLEN, SHIRLEY A ANDERSON, AMY G ASHLEY, VIRGINIA B BELL, JACQUELINE L BLAND, MARGARET C. CANTRELL, KATHRYN R CLARY, ANGELIA COOK, CHARLOTTE M COOPER, LABETHA J CROFT, JENNIFER L CROSBY, ANNE M DAVIS, DORETHEA DEADMON, CAROLYN F DOAN, PAULA M DUKES, MARION F ELLENBURG, ADELE Y (AMY) EPPS, NETTIE E FIELDS, ALICE M GARNER, SHEILA D GERHARD, EDITH MARIE GILL, JUDY GLOVER, BARBARA J GRAYSON, MYRTLE E GREENWALD, MELANIE M HALL, VENITA L HAYES, FELICIA R HERRINGTON-DIFFIE, JANA M JACKSON, MICHELLE D KIMBALL, BEATRIZ M KITCHEN, DON E LANUM, ROBERT E MILLER, JOYCE K MITCHELL, DELISA Y MOUNGER, ANITA J MURPHY, L YNETE C NEUMEIER, CYNTHIA I PACK, JANET E PAIGE, CYNTHIA PARKER, SHIRLEY A SAMUELS, LORI A SANDERS, GALE E SIMONS, REBECCA ANN SWATY, NANCY A SECRETARY-ATTENDANC GENERAL MUSIC PSYCHOLOGICAL EXAMIN PRINCIPAL THERAPIST - OCCUPATION SCHOOL NURSE FOUR YR OLD TEACHER ELEMENTARY II ELEMENTARY IV ELEMENTARY IV KINDERGARTEN SPEECH THERAPY FOUR YR OLD TEACHER CUSTODIAN ELEMENTARY I AIDE- PRE-K SPEC. ED. LITERACY COACH CHILD NUTRITION ELEMENTARY 111 ELEMENTARY V MEDICAL CLERK CHILD NUTRITION MGR. PARAPROFESSIONAL KINDERGARTEN GUIDANCE COUNSELOR ELEMENTARY 111 AIDE AIDE ELEMENTARY IV CUSTODIAN - HEAD CUSTODIAN CHILD NUTRITION AIDE ELEMENTARY 111 PHYSICAL THERAPIST ELEMENTARY V GIFTED \u0026amp; TALENTED AIDE-P. E. AIDE ELEMENTARY I KINDERGARTEN SECRETARY - PRINCIPAL LIBRARY/MEDIA SPEC. 1200 RESERVOIR ROAD LITTLE ROCK 72207 WALDEN, KRISTIN J WASHINGTON, MARY A WHITE, TONI MARIE WILLIS, DARLENE PHONE 447-5500 FAX: ELEMENTARY II ELEMENTARY II COMPUTER LAB ELEMENTARY I 447-5501 MEADOWCLIFF PRINCIPAL: KAREN CARTER ARNOLD, THEESSA J FOUR YR OLD TEACHER BARNEY, VICTORIA SCHOOL NURSE BEAVERS, BARBARA A MATH SPECIALIST BRZEZINSKI, APRIL M ELEMENTARY V BUIE, CLUSTINE B PARAPROFESSIONAL BURL, VALERIA CHILD NUTRITION CARTER, KAREN A PRINCIPAL CRAIG, DEBORAH L ELEMENTARY IV EDINGTON, DEBBIE L CHILD NUTRITION GOODWIN, KATHERINE A GENERAL MUSIC GOSSETT, JANICE G GUIDANCE COUNSELOR HARRIS, KIMARA PETRAE SPEECH THERAPY HAYDEN, LEE M ELEMENTARY Ill HENCE, VERDIA M ELEMENTARY IV JACK, LYNDA S PSYCHOLOGICAL EXAM IN JOHNSTON, MARGARET RACHEL KINDERGARTEN KAVANAUGH, MICHELLE B GIFTED \u0026amp; TALENTED MACK, ROGER E HEAD CUSTODIAN MASON, JOYCE P READING RECOVERY MCDANIEL, VICTORIA R CHILD NUTRITION MODICA, MELINDAJ ELEMENTARY II MOORE, CONSTANCE L CHILD NUTRITION MGR. MORAGNE, DEMETRIA A SPEC. ED. MORGAN, DEE ANN LITERACY COACH NELSON, REBECCA M LIBRARY/MEDIA SPEC. PARISH, PATRICIA (ACKLIN) FOUR YR OLD TEACHER PATRICK, MILDRED L AIDE - PRE-K PATTERSON, KIA K ELEMENTARY I POST, MELINDA LEAH ELEMENTARY V RODRIGUEZ, ANGELA LYNN KINDERGARTEN ROETZEL, MELISSA A SECRETARY - PRINCIPAL SEBOURN, KAREN L ELEMENTARY II THOMAS, KATHRYN D ELEMENTARY I THOMAS, LANINA M AIDE THOMAS, TASHA AIDE WAGE, MARGERY AARON KINDERGARTEN WETZEL, MARY D ELEMENTARY 111 WILLIAMS, JO ANN AIDE WILLIAMS, KEENA LAB ATTENDANT 25 SHERATON DRIVE LITTLE ROCK 72209 PHONE 447-5600 FAX: 447-5601 METROPOLITAN PRINCIPAL: MICHAEL PETERSON ALEXANDER, REBA BERRY, DARRELL W BERRY, TIMOTHY M BLANCHARD, JAMES BRYELS, STERLING LED BYRD, BRENDA J CARTER,NONA COLLIE, STEVEN B EACKLES, VICTOR EVANS, RICKY L FARMER, WANDA F FREEMAN Ill, ALLIE E GRUMMER JR, CARL F HAYMAN, REGINALD DWAIN HOWSE, MARION J JACKSON JR, MIL TON KIRKPATRICK, TERRY G LAND-LANDERS, VICKIE A MARKS, TAMIKA L MILES, BRUCE A MOORE, ROBERT N PERRY, MITCHELL PETERSON, MICHAEL W POWELL, WOODROW LEE ROLAND, RONALD L SMITH, JIMMY L SODERLING, LINDA J STALLINGS, CARLA L WHITE, JERALD L WILLIAMS, DENITA F WILLIAMS, SHIRLEY V COSMETOLOGY COM MERICAL ART CUSTODIAN AUTO PT/BODY SECURITY OFFICER FOOD PRODUCTION CUSTODIAN GRAPHIC COMMUNICATIO AUTOMOTIVE GRAPHIC COMMUNICATIO CUSTODIAN - HEAD YOUTH EMPLOYMENT CO DRAFTING RADIO GUIDANCE COUNSELOR BUILDING ENGINEER GRAPHIC COMMUNICATIO SECRETARY - PRINCIPAL CUSTODIAN TELEVISION CUSTODIAN GRAPHIC COMMUNICATIO VOCATIONALADMIN. FOOD PROD, MGMT \u0026amp; SVC ELECTRONICS SECURITY OFFICER COSMETOLOGY HEALTH OCCUPATIONS METAL FABRICATION SECURITY OFFICER SECRETARY - ATTENDANC 7701 SCOTT HAMIL TON LITTLE ROCK 72209 PHONE 447-1200 FAX: 447-1201 MITCHELL PRINCIPAL: DARIAN SMITH BETTS, ANGEL J AIDE BRADBERRY, ALICE ANN READING RECOVERY BRITTON, DAWN M ELEMENTARY IV CHURCH, KATHLEEN D CONSULTING TEACHER COLEMAN, THELMA LIBRARY/MEDIA SPEC. CUNNINGHAM, MARIAN E ELEMENTARY IV FLOWERS, ELLIS L CUSTODIAN - HEAD GERBER, TERRISS L CHILD NUTRITION MGR HUNTER, SHIRLEY A CHILD NUTRITION IRBY, NETTIE A AIDE - PRE-K IVERSON, DELORIS H AIDE JAWORSKI, SHEA KIMBERLY SPEECH THERAPY JOHNSON, SANDRA A SECRETARY - PRINCIPAL KECK, CHRISTOPHER KELLY GENERAL MUSIC LUCKADUE, ESTER YVONNE LITERACY COACH MARSHALL, GWENDOLYN HALL ELEMENTARY I MARSHALL, ROSE A CHILD NUTRITION MATTHEWS, KELLY MITCHELL, CHERYL Y SPEC. ED. MOBLEY, YEVETTE M AIDE MONTGOMERY, SHAMEKA LYNN INST. TECH SPEC. ROBINSON, TAHESHA NIAKIA ELEMENTARY Ill SCOTT, f,RANK Q CUSTODIAN SCROGGINS, JUANITA D ELEMENTARY V SHELBY, SABRA M PUPIL PERSONNEL SHEPHERD, DEBORAH ANN ELEMENTARY V SHORTER, THELMA P KINDERGARTEN SMITH, DARIAN LYNN PRINCIPAL SMITH, ZACHARY A ELEMENTARY II STANSBERY, ANITA L ELEMENTARY ART SUMMONS, RAYMOND EARL SECURITY OFFICER SWANIGAN, CARRIER ELEMENTARY I VARADY, KATHRYN ELIZABETH GUIDANCE COUNSELOR YARBOUGH, LINDA L SCHOOL NURSE YOUNG, RENDA F CHILD NUTRITION -- 6900 PECAN ROAD LITTLE ROCK 72206 PHONE 447-5700 FAX: 447-5701 OTTERCREEK PRINCIPAL: JANIS TUCKER AUSTIN, SHIRLEY A BAKER, LINDA MARIE BARBER, MAE L BARNEY, VICTORIA G BARRON, TERESA NEAL BEARDEN, MELISSA J BRAZZELL, LAURA C BROOKS, JILL BROYLES, DORIS A BRYANT, CAROLINE J CLARK, ETTATRICIA COLE, THEODOSIA J CORROTHERS, DONNA M COURTOIS, SANDRA K COX, CYNTHIA G COX, VERLEAN DARR, KIMBERLY A FIJO, ANGELA FINCH, FELICIA R FLORES, DEBRA R FLOWERS, JENNIFER L FULLER, KARONDA R GRAFAL~. VERA GRAFALS, WALLY HARDEMAN, DONNA K HARRISON, AMAL D HAWKINS, DAWNA CHERYL HAYES, LAURINE D JACKSON, FRANKLIN D JOHNSON, ROBIN D JOHNSON, STEPHANIE A JORDAN, DEBBIE A KEITH, TRULA C KESSINGER, REBECCA P LEAKS, MARY M MITCHELL, VICKYE Y MOORE, PAMELA MULKEY, MARYS NALL, JUDITH 0 PRINGLE, MARIE F PUTMAN, JESSICA JOY REESE, PATSY J SARDIN, KIMBERLY KAY SILVEY, LESLIE DUKES AIDE KINDERGARTEN CUSTODIAN SCHOOL NURSE THERAPIST - OCCUPATION ELEMENTARY IV SECRETARY-ATTENDANC ASStSTANT PRINCIPAL ELEMENTARY I SPEC. ED. KINDERGARTEN GIFTED \u0026amp; TALENTED ELEMENTARY V FOUR YR OLD TEACHER ELEMENTARY II AIDE ELEMENTARY II MEDIA CLERK CHILD NUTRITION MGR LIBRARY/MEDIA SPEC. ELEMENTARY I ELEMENTARY Ill AIDE AIDE ELEMENTARY IV SPEECH PATHOLOGY AIDE - PRE-K ELEMENTARY II CUSTODIAN - HEAD ELEMENTARY II CHILD NUTRITION CHILD NUTRITION LAB ATTENDANT READING RECOVERY AIDE ELEMENTARY I CHILD NUTRITION GENERAL MUSIC ELEMENTARY V ELEMENTARY Ill FOUR YR OLD TEACHER ELEMENTARY Ill ELEMENT ARY IV ELEMENTARY I 16000 OTTER CREEK PARKWAY LITTLE ROCK 72209 PHONE 447-5800 FAX: 447-5801 SMITH, JASON P ST CLAIR, TRACY D TUCKER, JANIS A VAUGHN, KELLYE WADKINS, TANYA L WASHINGTON, DONNA L AIDE-P. E. AIDE-PRE-K PRINCIPAL KINDERGARTEN SECRETARY - PRINCIPAL KINDERGARTEN WHITTINGTON, SHERKEYER RENA ELEMENTARY V WRIGHT, LONA L AIDE YOUNG, DIANNE M ZAKARIA, TAUHIDA POLLY GUIDANCE COUNSELOR AIDE PARKVIEW PRINCIPAL: DR. LINDA BROWN ABDULLAH, ADIB S AGUILAR, ALICIA ALEXANDER, ALICE C AQUIULAR, ALEISHA BAKER, KEVIN BERJOT, NICOLAS P BIGGS, LAGAIL RELEFORD BILBREY, PATRICIA A BINYON, JOHNATHAN BIRGE.ANNA BLACK, DANNY H BLANN, CAROL M BOONE, MARIE A BOOSEY II, FRED S BOOTH, DR. DEXTER L BOUREIKO, NATALYA V BRADSHER, PATRICIA J BREWSTER, MARILYN J BROWN, DR. LINDA G BROWN, OTIS BROWN, SHIRLEY A BURTON,ANGELAJACOBS CALDWELL, CONNIE E CALLICOTT, MAURI S CARTER, SANDRA Y CASTLEBERRY, JAMES M CHRISTENSEN, KEVIN CLARK, ROBERT L CODY-TAYLOR, SUSAN E COLE, JUDY K COLE, LEIGH COLLINS, REBECCA D CRANE, CHRISTOPHER CRANE, PAMELA RENEA CROY, LEEA CURTIS, SONDRA HAILE DANIEL, MARTHA G DEPIERRE, GENI M ELLIS, EDITH P EUBANKS, TIMOTHY R FARLOW, AMELIA S FLANIGAN, ALFRED W FOOTE, WILLIAM F FOREMAN, CAROLYN A -- CUSTODIAN CHILD NUTRITION SECRETARY - PRINCIPAL CHILD NUTRITION CUSTODIAN FRENCH ORAL COMMUNICATIONS CALCULUS ENGLISH MATH I SOCIAL STUDIES SPEC. ED. ALGEBRA II ORAL COMMUNICATIONS ASSISTANT PRINCIPAL LATIN DATA PROC/COMP TECH ASSISTANT PRINCIPAL PRINCIPAL CUSTODIAN CUSTODIAN CHEMISTRY ALGEBRA I DANCE REGISTRAR NAVY ROTC SOCIAL STUDIES ART ENGLISH BOOKKEEPER GEOMETRY AIDE ORAL COMMUNICATIONS DANCE SECURITY OFFICER GERMAN AMER GOVT/CIVICS AIDE ORCHESTRA BIOLOGY FINE ARTS BOYS \u0026amp; GIRLS PE CUSTODIAN FINE ARTS 2501 BARROW ROAD LITTLE ROCK 72204 FULLER, DANNY A GARDNER, GAYLES GOSS, JUDY B GOYNES JR, LEE S HARDIMAN, WILLIAM L HARVELL, LOLA HEARN, D Del YNN HENDRICKS, RUTH A HENDRICKSON, TINA L HENRY, SARAH C HERRINGTON, LESLIE LYNN HIETT, RUTHIE R HIGGINBOTHAM, MELISSA ANN HILL, VERA HOKES, HENRY HOWELL, DEBBIE D HUNTER-MILLER, MARY E INGRAM, CHERYL T IVERSON, TONJUNA L JENNINGS, CAROL A JOHNSON, TERRY L JONES, CAROLYN D KAMARA, LINDA A KELLEY, JOHN W KILPATRICK, WILLIE J KING, ALISHA KING, BARBARA G KREADY, SARAH F KUHN, JAMIE S LEM, LOUIE H LEWIS, EMILY MATSON LINN, AMANDA C LOGAN, VICKIE B LYLE, LEE A MATHIS, BARBARA S MCCLUNG, TERRELL B MCGEE, EARNEST E MILLER, MILAGROS J MOGSTAD, BONNIE L MOORE, GEORGETTA MOOREHEAD, KENNITH D MURRAY, DEBRA ANN MURRAY, JUDITH LOUISE MYTON, DEBRA DENISE PHONE 447-2300 FAX: CHEMISTRY MEDIA CLERK 447-2301 ORAL COMMUNICATIONS CUSTODIAN - HEAD AMERICAN HISTORY CHILD NUTRI\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\u003eLittle Rock School District\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 "},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_580","title":"Program evaluation","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":["2004-01/2005-12"],"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","Little Rock School District","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","Educational law and legislation"],"dcterms_title":["Program evaluation"],"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/580"],"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\nMemorandum of Understanding This Memorandum of Understanding (hereinafter MOU), effective the seventeenth day of October 2005 (hereinafter the Effective Date ), is entered into by and between James S. Catterall (hereinafter Evaluator), Graduate School of Education \u0026amp; Information Studies, University of California, Los Angeles, CA 90024, and Little Rock School District (hereinafter Sponsor), whose offices are located at 810 West Markham Street, Little Rock, AR 72201. WITNESSETH WHEREAS, Sponsor, to comply with the June 30, 2004 Memorandum Opinion by the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas, Little Rock Division, and Program Evaluation Standards, will hire outside consultants to prepare formal, step-two evaluations\nand W HEREAS, Evaluator possesses unique knowledge and experience relating to such formal step-two evaluations and Program Evaluation Standards\nNOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and the mutual covenants and conditions ' hereinafter recited, the Sponsor and Evaluator do hereby agree as follows: 1. Definitions For purposes of this MOU, the following definitions apply: 1.1 Compliance Remedy shall mean the entire June 30, 2004 Memorandum Opinion by the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas, Little Rock Division in Little Rock School District v. Pulaski County Special School District No. I et al., Mrs. Lorene Joshua et al. and Katherine Knight et al. Intervenors (Exhibit A). 1.2 MOU Period shall mean the period commencing on the Effective Date of this MOU and terminating on October 31, 2006. The tenn of this MOU may be extended by the mutual written consent of the duly authorized representatives of Evaluator and Sponsor. 1.3 Formal step-two evaluation (hereinafter Evaluation) shall mean a summative evaluation of Sponsors A+ Program (hereinafter A+) program conducted by the Evaluator according to the Sponsors Comprehensive Program Assessment Process and described more fully in Exhibit B, which is incorporated herein by reference. Evaluation ascertains particularly performance of African-American students. 1.4 Comprehensive Program Assessment Process (Exhibit B) shall mean the process required by the Compliance Remedy, adopted by Sponsors Board of Directors on December 16, 2004, and incorporated as Appendix B in the first quarterly written update by the Sponsor to the Office of Desegregation Monitoring and Joshua, December 1,2004. 1.5 with this MOU. Evaluation Funds shall mean those funds paid by the Sponsor to the Evaluator in accordance 1.6 Evaluation Team shall mean the Evaluator and any personnel under the Evaluators direction and control who are supported in whole or in part by the Evaluation Funds.1.7 Planning, Research, and Evaluation (hereinafter PRE) shall mean Sponsors department who shall represent the Sponsor and oversee the Evaluation. 1.8 Proprietary Information shall mean any data, information, concepts, routines, artwork, design work, advertising copy, specifications, or improvement that is commercially valuable\nnot generally available to or known in the industry\nand belonging to Evaluator. Proprietary Information shall not include information which: (a) is or becomes a part of the public domain through no act or omission of the receiving party\n(b) was in the receiving party's lawful possession prior to the disclosure and had not been obtained by the receiving party either directly or indirectly from the disclosing party\n(c) is lawfully disclosed to the receiving party by a third party without restriction on disclosure\n(d) is independently developed by the receiving party\nor (e) is disclosed by operation of law. 1.9 Confidential Infonnation shall mean data or information related to the identities of individuals such as Sponsors students, teachers, administrators including PRE, or Board of Directors\nguardians or relatives of such students\ncommunity members\nor any other individuals related to the Evaluation. 2. Evaluation 2.1 2.2 During the MOU Period, the Evaluator shall conduct an Evaluation of Sponsors A+ on behalf of Sponsor in accordance with the Compliance Remedy (Exhibit A), within the mutually agreed schedule (Exhibit C), and substantially in accordance with the terms and conditions of this MOU. The Evaluations name is A+. 3. Payments 3.1 3.1.1 3.1.2 3.1.3 Sponsor shall pay Evaluator the Evaluation Funds in the following manner: Amount: Rate: Travel: 3.1.3 3.1.4 To be Paid: Invoices: Not to exceed Forty-five Thousand dollars (US $45,000.00). $1,500 per day for effort, plus travel expenses. Travel expenses for travel between Los Angeles, CA and Little Rock, AR including Little Rock accommodations and meals not to exceed $6,000.00 (economy class airfare only). Upon invoice for effort (days) expended, stated in invoice. Shall state days of effort. 3.2 Payee Taxpayer ID Address: Payments under the terms of this MOU shall be made by check payable to: James S. Catterall 141-38-3478 120 N. Topanga Canyon Blvd., Suite 203 Topanga, CA 90290 3.3 Anything herein to the contrary notwithstanding, should this MOU terminate early pursuant to Article 8 herein, Evaluator and Sponsor shall agree upon the estimate of the percentage of completeness of the Evaluators sendees rendered hereunder as of the date such notice is given. The Sponsor shall pay the Evaluator a pro rata fee based upon the agreed estimated percentage of completion such that payment will at least include all project costs incurred by Evaluator prior to the date of early termination. 10/17/05 24. Non-Exclusivity and Disclosure Nothing in this MOU shall be construed to limit the freedom of the Evaluator to engage in similar research performed independently under other grants, contracts, or agreements with parties other than Sponsor. If the Evaluator undertakes any research or evaluation that uses data from this Evaluation, Evaluator shall disclose such research or evaluation to PRE. 5. Publication and Disclosure The Evaluator shall have the right to present at symposia and national or regional professional meetings, and to publish in scientific or other publications, the results of the Evaluations conducted under this MOU. Evaluator agrees to make such publication(s) conveniently available to PRE. 6. Confidentiality and Non-Disclosure The Sponsor and Evaluator expressly acknowledge that Evaluator may need to provide to Sponsor information that Evaluator considers to be Proprietary Information. Sponsor agrees to hold Proprietary Information in strict confidence during the term of this MOU and for a period of two years after the tennination or expiration of this MOU except as required by law. Similarly, the Evaluator shall protect Confidential Information and prevent its disclosure in any manner, except as required by law. Not later than two years after the termination or expiration of this MOU, Evaluator shall destroy all Confidential Information or return it to Sponsor. 7. Ownership and Patents The Evaluator shall have sole and exclusive ownership rights to any intellectual property, including but not limited to copyrights and/or inventions of a product, device, process, or method, whether patentable or unpatentable (an Invention), deriving from the Evaluators efforts, exclusive of any data or information, arising out of the Evaluation. Data or information furnished to Evaluator by Sponsor shall remain the property of the Sponsor. 8. Termination This MOU shall remain in effect for the MOU Period unless extended in accordance with the terms of this MOU, as set forth in Section 1.2. In the event that either Evaluator or Sponsor shall be in default of any of its obligations under this MOU and shall fail to remedy such default within thirty (30) days after receipt of written notice thereof, the party not in default shall have the option of canceling this MOU by giving thirty (30) days written notice of termination to the other party. Termination of this Agreement shall not affect the rights and obligations of the parties, which shall have accrued prior to termination. No tennination of this MOU, however effectuated, shall release either party from its rights and obligations under Articles 3 through 17 herein. 3 10/17/059. Indemnification Sponsor agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the Evaluator and its officers and employees (all such parties are hereinafter referred to collectively as the Indemnified Parties) from and against any and all liability, claims, lawsuits, losses, demands, damages, costs, and expenses (including reasonable attorneys fees and court costs) arising directly or indirectly out of the Evaluation or the design, manufacture, sale or use of any embodiment or manifestation of the Evaluation, regardless of whether any and all such liability, claims, lawsuits, losses, demands, damages, costs, and expenses (including attorneys fees and court costs) arise in whole or in part from the negligence of any of the Indemnified Parties. Notwithstanding the foregoing. Sponsor will not be responsible for indemnification of Evaluator pursuant to this Article 9 for any liability, claims, lawsuits, losses, demands, damages, costs, and expenses (including attorneys fees and court costs) which arise solely from: (a) the gross negligence or intentional misconduct of Evaluator or (b) actions by Evaluator in violation of applicable laws or regulations (c) violations of this MOU. or The Sponsor agrees to provide a diligent defense against any and all liability, claims, lawsuits, losses, demands, damages, costs, and expenses (including attorneys fees and court costs), brought against the Indemnified Parties with respect to the subject of the indemnity contained in this Article 9, whether such claims or actions are rightfully or wrongfully brought or filed. Evaluator shall be indemnified by Sponsor after Evaluator has completed the following: (a) within a reasonable time after receipt of notice of any and all liability, claims, lawsuits losses, demands, damages, costs, and expenses, or after the commencement of any action, suit, or proceeding giving rise to the right of indemnification, notify Sponsor, in writing, of said liability, claims, lawsuits, losses, demands, damages, costs, and expenses and send to the Sponsor a copy of all papers serv'ed on the Indemnified Party\nand (b) allow Sponsor to retain control of any such liability, claims, lawsuits, losses, demands, damages, costs, and expenses, including the right to make any settlement. 10. Independent Contractors Sponsor and Evaluator shall act as independent parties, and nothing contained in this MOU shall be construed or implied to create an agency or partnership. Neither Sponsor nor Evaluator shall have the authority to contract or incur expenses on behalf of the other except as may be expressly authorized by collateral written agreements. No member of the Evaluation Team shall be deemed to be an employee of Sponsor. 11. Use of Evaluator Name The use by either Sponsor or Evaluator of the others name or any other names, insignia, symbol(s), or logotypes associated with the other party or any variant or variants thereof in advertising, publicity, or other promotional activities is expressly prohibited, unless required by law or the other party provides written consent. 4 10/17/0512. Severability If any one or more of the provisions of this MOU shall be held to be invalid, illegal, or unenforceable, the validity, legality, or enforceability of the remaining provisions of this MOU shall not in any way be affected or impaired thereby. 13. Waiver The failure of any party hereto to insist upon strict perfonnance of any provision of this MOU or to exercise any right hereunder will not constitute a waiver of that provision or right. This MOU shall not be effective until approved by Evaluator s President or his official designee. Whenever the consent or approval of the Evaluator is required or permitted hereunder, such consent or approval must be given by the Evaluators President or his official designee. 14. Notices Any notice or communication required or permitted to be given or made under this MOU by one of the parties hereto to the other shall be in writing and shall be deemed to have been sufficiently given or made for all purposes if mailed by certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, addressed to such other its respective address as follows: party at If to Sponsor: Karen DeJamette, Ph.D. Director, PRE Department Little Rock School District 810 West Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201-1306 Phone (501) 447-3387, Fa.x (501) 447-7609 If to Evaluator: James S. Catterall, Ph.D. Research and Evaluation Office 120 N. Topanga Canyon Blvd. Suite 203 Topanga, CA 90290 15. Assignment Neither Sponsor nor Evaluator shall assign its rights or obligations under this MOU without the prior written consent of the other party. 5 10/17/0516. Entirety This MOU represents the entire agreement of Sponsor and Evaluator, and it expressly supersedes all previous written and oral communications between them. Neither Sponsor nor Evaluator was induced to enter into this Agreement by any statements or representations not contained in this MOU. This MOU may be modified only by written amendment executed by the Sponsor and the Evaluator. 17. Headings The headings of sections and subsections, if any, to the extent used herein are for convenience and reference only and in no way define, limit, or describe the scope or intent of any provision hereof, and therefore shall not be used in construing or interpreting the provisions hereof. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Sponsor and Evaluator have caused this MOU to be executed in duplicate counterpart original by their duly authorized representatives to be effective as of the Effective Date. By: SPONSOR Signature Darral Paradis, Director Procurement Department Little Rock School District By: EVALUATOR Signe lure James S/catterall, Ph. D. Ic' ''/v-o 0 17-^ ao L\u0026gt; Date Date 6 10/17/05 Exhibit A COMPLIANCE REMEDY The Memorandum Opinion by the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas, Little Rock Division in Little Rock School District v. Pulaski County Special School District No. 1 et al., Mrs. Lorene Joshua et al. and Katherine Knight et al. Intervenors, is incorporated here by reference. Evaluator has a copy. 7 10/17/05Exhibit B COMPREHENSIVE PROGRAM ASSESSMENT PROCESS Little Rock School District 8 10/17/05LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPNCODE: IL-R COMPREHENSIVE PROGRAM ASSESSMENT PROCESS Comprehensive Program Assessment Process Purpose The purpose of these regulations is to provide guidance in the appraisal of programs and to comply w'ith requirements of the US District Court for the Eastern District. They do not necessarily apply to grant-funded programs if the funding source requires other procedures and provides resources for a required evaluation. Criteria for Program Evaluations Policy IL specifies that the evaluations of programs approved in its Board-approved Program Evaluation Agenda will be conducted according to the standards developed by the Joint Committee on Standards for Educational Evaluation. (See Joint Committee on Standards for Educational Evaluation, James R. Sanders, Chair (1994). The Program Evaluation Standards, 2^ Edition: How io Assess Evaluations of Educational Programs. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.) There are four attributes of an evaluation: Utility(U) -evaluations are informative, timely, and influential Feasibility (F) -evaluations must be operable in the natural setting and must not consume more resources than necessary Propriety (P) - rights of individuals must be protected Accuracy(A) -evaluations should produce sound information Prospective, controlled, summative evaluations are at one end of a spectrum of activities that review District operations. Other activities m this continuum include formative and less formal and rigorous evaluations, regular and occasional assessments, and fast or brief snapshots . As rigor and formality diminish along the range of reviews, fewcr standards apply. Examples of how the standards apply are found following table, adapted from The Program Evaluaiion Standards, pages 18 and 19: Checklist for Applying the Standards The reader should interpret the information provided in this table with reference both to the Standards (cited above) and the peculiar circumstances of given program reviews. Double plus signs (++) indicate that standards are fully addressed. Single pluses (+) mean that the standard is a concern but not necessarily fully addressed, and zeros (0) point to standards not usually' applicable. Not all summative evaluation will fully satisfy cs'ery standard, and other examples may observe more standards than indicated here. Note, however, that all reviews fully observe human rights and impartial reports 9 10/17/05LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: IL-R Checklist of Evaluation Standards for Examples of Program Reviews Standard____________________ Ul Stakeholder Identification U2 Evaluator Credibility U3 Information Scope \u0026amp; Selection U4 Values Identification U5 Report Clarity U6 Report Timeliness \u0026amp; Dissemination U7 Evaluation Impact Fl Practical Procedures F2 Political Viability F3 Cost Effectiveness Pl Service Orientation P2 Formal Agreements P3 Rights of Human Subjects P4 Human Interaction P5 Complete \u0026amp; Fair Assessment P6 Disclosure of Findings P7 Conflict of Interest P8 Fiscal Responsibility Al Program Documentation A2 Context Analysis A3 Described Purposes and Procedures A4 Defensible Information Sources A5 Valid Information A6 Reliable Information A7 Systematic Information A8 Analysis of Quantitative Data A9 Analysis of Qualitative Data A10 Justified Conclusions AI 1 Impartial Reporting A12 Meta-evaluation Summative evaluations F + -h-F -F-t- F-F -F-F -F+ -F-F -F-F -F-F -F-F -F-F -F-F F-F ++ 10 Informal Assessments 0 -F -F-F -F -F -F T\" + -F + -F -F-F -F ++ + -F -F -F-F -l-t- (j Formative Assessments (School Portfolios) -F -F -F -F -F T -F + \"o' 0 -F + V F + + + F F T\" F F 0 Snapshots 0 0 -F -F -F 0 -F V -F + V -F -F V 0 -F -F -F -F -F -F -F + -F-F + 10/17/05LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPNCODE: IL-R Program Evaluation Procedures The following procedures are established for the evaluation of programs approved by the Board of Education in its annual Program Evaluation Agenda: 1. The Planning, Research, and Evaluation (PRE) Department will recommend to the Superintendent annually, before the budget for the coming year is proposed, the curriculum/instruction programs for comprehensive program evaluation. The recommendation will include d proposed budget, a description of other required resources, and an action plan for the completion of the reports. Criteria for the proposed agenda are as follows: A. Will the results of the evaluation influence decisions about the program? B. Will the evaluation be done in time to be useful? C. Will the program be significant enough to merit evaluation? (See Joseph S. Wholey, Harry P. Hatry\nand Kathryn Newcomer (1994). Handbook of Practical Program Evaluation. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers. 5-7.) 2. The Superintendent will recommend to the Board of Education for approval the proposed Program Evaluation Agendawith anticipated costs and an action plan for completion. 3. For each curriculum/instruction program to be evaluated as per the Program Evaluation Agenda, the Director of PRE will establish a staff team with a designated leader to assume responsibility for the production of the report according to the timelines established in the action plan approved by the Board of Education. 4. Each team will include, at a minimum, one or more specialists in the curriculum/instruction program to be evaluated, a statistician, a programmer to assist in data retrieval and disaggregation, and a technical writer. If additional expertise is required, then other staff may be added as necessary. 5. An external consultant with expertise in program evaluation, the program area being evaluated, statistical analysis, and/or technical writing will be retained as a member of the team. The role of the external consultant may vary, depending upon the expertise required for the production of the program evaluation. 6. The team leader will establish a calendar of regularly scheduled meetings for the production of the program evaluation. The first meetings will be devoted to the following tasks: A. Provide any necessary training on program evaluation that may be required for novice members of the team, including a review of the Boards policy IL and all of the required criteria and procedures in these regulations, IL-R. B. Assess the expertise of each team member and make recommendations to the Director of PRE related to any additional assistance that may be required. C. Write a clear description of the curriculumdnstruction program that is to be evaluated, with information about the schedule of its implementation. 11 10/17/057. 8. 9. LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPNCODE: IL-R D. E. F. G. Agree on any necessary research questions that need to be established in addition to the question, Has this curriculum/instruction program been effective in improving and remediating the academic achievement of African-American students Generate a list of the data required to answer each research question, and assign responsibility for its collection and production. All available and relevant student performance data should be included. (See Judge Wilsons Compliance Remedy.) Decide who will be the chief writer of the program evaluation. Plan ways to provide regular progress reports {e.g., dissemination of meeting minutes, written progress reports, oral reports to the Superintendents Cabinet) to stakeholders. (See Joellen Killion (2002). Assessing Impact: Evaluating Staff Development. Oxford, OH. National Staff Development Council (NSDC)\nRobby Champion (Fall 2002). Map Out Evaluation Goals. Journal of Staff Development. 78-79\nThomas R. Guskey (2000). Evaluating Professional Development. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press\nBlaine R. Worthen, James R. Sanders, and Jody L. Fitzpatrick (1997). Participant-Oriented Evaluated Approaches. Program Evaluation: Alternative Approaches and Practical Guidelines: 153-169\nBeverly A. Parsons (2002). Evaluative Inquiry: Using Evaluation to Promote Student Success. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press\nand Joseph S. Wholey, Harry P. Hatry, and Kathryn E. Newcomer (1994). Handbook of Practical Program Evaluation. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers.) Subsequent meetings of the program evaluation team are required for the following tasks: to monitor the completion of assignments\nto collaborate in the interpretation and analysis of data\nto pose any necessary new questions to be answered\nto review drafts and provide feedback to the writer\nto formulate recommendations, as required, for program improvement, especially to decide if a recommendation is required to modify or abandon the program if the findings reveal that the program is not being successful for the improvement of African-American achievement\nto assist in final proofreading\nand to write a brief executive summary, highlighting the program evaluation findings and recommendations. A near-final copy of the program evaluation must be submitted to the Director of PRE at least one month before the deadline for placing the report on the Boards agenda for review and approval. This time is required for final approval by staff, for final editing to ensure accuracy, and for submission to the Superintendent. When the program evaluation is approved for submission to the Board of Education for review and approval, copies of the Executive Summary and complete report must be made for them, for members of the Cabinet. 12 10/17/0510. 11. 12. 13. LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPNCODE: IL-R The program evaluation team will plan its presentation to the Board of Education on the findings and recommendations. The Director of PRE will prepare the cover memorandum to the Board of Education, including all the required background information: A. B. C. D. If program modifications are suggested, the steps that the staff members have taken or will take to implement those modifications. If abandonment of the program is recommended, the steps that will be taken to replace the program with another with more potential for the improvement and remediation of African-American students. Names of the administrators who were involved in the program evaluation. Name and qualifications of the external expert who served on the evaluation team. Grade-level descriptions of the teachers who were involved in the assessment process (e.g., all fourth-grade math teachers, all eighth grade English teachers, etc.). W hen the program evaluation is approved by the Board of Education, the team must arrange to have the Executive Summary and the full report copied and design a plan for communicating the program evaluation findings and recommendations to other stakeholders. This plan must then be submitted to the Director of PRE for approval. Each program evaluation team will meet with the Director of PRE after the completion of its work to evaluate the processes and product and to make recommendations for future program evaluations. (See Joellen Killion (2002). Evaluate the Evaluation. Assessing Impact: Evaluating Staff Development. Oxford, OH: National Staff Development Council. 46, 123-124.) Approved: December 16, 2004 13 10/17/05LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: IL-R Evaluation Standards Criteria for Program Evaluations Policy IL specifies that the evaluations of programs approved in its Board-approved Program Evaluation Agenda will be conducted according to the standards developed by the Joint Committee on Standards for Educational Evaluation. (See Joint Committee on Standards for Educational Evaluation, James R. Sanders, Chair (1994). The Program Evaluation Standards, 2\"** Edition: How to Assess Evaluations of Educational Programs. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.) They are as follows: Utility Standards The utility standards are intended to ensure that an evaluation will serve the information needs of intended users. These standards are as follows: Stakeholder identification. People involved in or affected by the evaluation should be identified so that their needs can be addressed. Evaluator .credibility. The people conducting the evaluation should be both trustworthy and competent to perform the evaluation so that the evaluation findings achieve maximum credibility and acceptance. Information scope and sequence. Information collected should be broadly selected to address pertinent questions about the program and should be responsive to the needs and interests of clients and other specified stakeholders. Values identification. The perspectives, procedures, and rationale used to interpret the findings should be described carefully so that the bases for value judgments are clear. Report clarity. Evaluation reports should describe clearly the program being evaluated, including its context and the purposes, procedures, and findings of the evaluation, so that essential information is provided and understood easily. Report timeliness and dissemination. Significant interim findings and evaluation reports should be disseminated to intended users so that they can be used in a timely fashion. Evaluation impact. Evaluations should be planned, conducted, and reported in ways that encourage follow-through by stakeholders, so that the likelihood that the evaluation will be used is increased. Feasibility Standards Feasibility standards are intended to ensure that an evaluation will be realistic, prudent, diplomatic, and frugal. Practical procedures. Evaluation procedures should be practical so that the disruption is kept to a minimum while needed information is obtained. Political viability. The evaluation should be planned and conducted with anticipation of the different positions of various interest groups so that their cooperation may be obtained, and so that possible attempts by any of these groups to curtail evaluation operations or to bias or misapply the results can be averted or counteracted. Cost-effectiveness. The evaluation should be efficient and produce information of sufficient value so that the resources expended can be justified. Service orientation. Evaluations should be designed to assist organizations to address and effectively serve the needs of the full range of targeted participants. Formal agreements. Obligations of the formal parties to an evaluation (what is to be done, how, by whom, and when) should be agreed to in writing so that these parties are obligated to adhere to all conditions of the agreement or to formally renegotiate it. 14 10/17/05LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPNCODE: IL-R Rights of human subjects. Evaluation design and conduct should respect and protect human rights and welfare. Human interactions. Evaluators should respect human dignity and worth in their interactions with other people associated with an evaluation so that participants are not threatened or harmed. Complete and fair assessments. The evaluation should be complete and fair in its examination and recording of strengths and weaknesses of the program being evaluated so that strengths can be built upon and problem areas addressed. Disclosure of findings. The formal parties to an evaluation should ensure that the full set of evaluation findings, along with pertinent limitations, are made accessible to the people affected by the evaluation, as well as any others with expressed legal rights to receive the results. Conflict of interest. Conflict of interest should be dealt with openly and honestly so that it does not compromise the evaluation processes and results. Fiscal responsibility. The evaluators allocation and expenditure of resources should reflect sound accountability procedures and be prudent and ethically responsible so that expenditures are accounted for and appropriate. Accuracy Standards Accuracy standards are intended to ensure that an evaluation will reveal and convey technically adequate information about the features that determine the worth of merit of the program being evaluated. Program documentation. The program being evaluated should be described and documented clearly and accurately so that it is identified clearly. Context analysis. The context in which the program exists should be examined in enough detail so that its likely influences on the program can be identified. Described purposes and procedures. The purposes and procedure of the evaluation should be monitored and described in enough detail so that they can be identified and assessed. Defensible information sources. The sources of information used in a program evaluation should be described in enough detail so that the adequacy of the information can be assessed. Valid information. The information-gathering procedures should be chosen or developed and then implemented in a manner that will ensure that the interpretation arrived at is valid for the intended use. Reliable information. The information-gathering procedures should be chosen or developed and then implemented in a manner that will ensure that the information obtained is sufficiently reliable for the intended use. Systematic information. The information collected, processed, and reported in an evaluation should be review systematically so that the evaluation questions are answered effectively. Analysis of quantitative information. Quantitative information in an evaluation should be analyzed appropriately and systematically so that the evaluation questions are answered effectively. Analysis of qualitative information. Qualitative information in an evaluation should be analyzed appropriately and systematically so that the evaluation questions are answered effectively. Justified conclusions. The conclusions reached in an evaluation should be justified explicitly so that stakeholders can assess them. Impartial reporting. Reporting procedures should guard against distortion caused by personal feelings and biases of any party so the evaluation reports reflect the evaluation findings fairly. Meta-evaluation. The evaluation itself should be evaluated formatively and summativcly against these and other pertinent standards so that its conduct is appropriately guided, and on completion, stakeholders can closely examine its strengths and weaknesses. 15 10/17/05Exhibit C SCOPE OF SERVICES Evaluation of A+ Program This states services and products by the Evaluator, who will conduct an Evaluation of the Sponsors A+ Program and produce reports of that Evaluation. Evaluation questions For this Evaluation, the primaiy questions are: I. Has A+ as implemented in the Little Rock School District improved the academic achievement of students identified by the Sponsor as African-American (AA)? II. Has A+ as implemented in the Little Rock School District decreased the differences between AA students and those identified by the Sponsor as white (W)? III. To what extent does A+ account for changes in student performance? Secondary (step-two) questions are 1. What competing events or programs (relative to A+) explain changes in student performance? 2. What traits of each group explain their performance and differences in performance between them? 3. What changes in A+ do these results indicate to improve the effectiveness of the programs? 4. How will these recommendations improve AA student performance? Evaluation design, data, and products Prior to Evaluators commencing the Evaluation, Sponsor will agree with Evaluator regarding A. theoretical model(s), B. Evaluation design(s), to conform with summative evaluations of the Comprehensive Program C. D. E. F. G. Assessment Process, specific variables for the Evaluation, data adjustments and statistical methods, format(s) of data for use in the Evaluation delivered by the Sponsor to the Evaluator, content of deliverable products (written reports) and their formats, and schedule of ser\\'ices and product delivery. The following table is the schedule of services and product delivery. Delivery (200506) November 2005 DecemberJuly 2006 August 1,2006 August 2006_____ September 1, 2006 ___________________________Service and Products__________________________ Evaluator and Sponsor will negotiate MOU and agree on design of the Evaluations, their schedules, and instruments.___________________________________________ Evaluator will observ'e classes, conduct interviews and surveys, and receive test and other data from Sponsor__________________________________________________ Evaluator will submit draft report of results to PRE.___________________________ Evaluator will discuss draft reports with PRE and alter report accordingly.________ Evaluator will submit final report to PRE. For the purpose of invoicing, Evaluator will track his efforts in increments of days or some portion thereof. 16 10/17/05Exhibit D A+ Program Evaluation Primaiy Evaluation Question: 1. Have the A+ Program (A+) been effective in improving and remediating the academic achievement of African-American students? Supplemental (Qualitative/Step 2) Evaluation Questions: 1. What are the quality and level of implementation of intersession instructional strategies? 2. What are the quality and level of implementation of instructional strategies during regular session? 3. What is the level of participation in A+ by African American students relative to other ethnic groups at the school? 4. What are the perceptions of A+ teachers regarding program impacts, strengths, and weaknesses? 5. What are the perceptions of participating students regarding program impacts, strengths, and weaknesses? 6. What are the perceptions of parents/guardians of A+ students regarding program impacts, strengths, and weaknesses? Program Description A+ combines daily arts instruction with academic subjects to boost both self-confidence and achievement. Committed to the Four Beliefs and Eight Essentials as the guiding philosophy for the program, A+ was built on the principle that every child learns better when his/her whole self engages in learning. Thus, A+ lessons stimulate all eight intelligences. Arts enrichment combines with the rich LRSD curriculum. The magic of the A+ program allows light bulbs experiences to illumine students, whether they learn in classroom groups or in movement, music, or visual arts lessons. The magic of the A+ program energizes students with the simple thrill of learning in ways many of them have never experienced before. Included in this scope of A+ is professional development for the faculty. Currently Woodruff Elementary School implements A+. Schools Name Woodruff Number of Teachers Number of Students Percent Africa n- American 21 235 91 Percent Eligible for Free/Reduced Lunch 86 17 10/17/05Proposed Design Primary Evaluation Question 1. Have the A+ lessons been effective in improving and remediating the academic achievement of African- American students? IVhole School. A treatment-control school, pretest-posttest design will be employed. The analysis will control for pretest, gender, ethnicity, and SES. Subsample: Within Woodruff Elementary School, students who participated in A+ will be identified and their achievement gains compared to predicted scores based on school status and student pretest, gender, ethnicity, and SES. Supplemental (Qualitative/Step 2) Evaluation Questions: 1. What are the quality and level of implementation of A+ instructional strategies? 2. What are the quality and level of implementation of A+ instructional strategies? A+ teachers will be interviewed by phone. A+ instruction will be observed. 3. What is the level of participation in A+ lessons by African American students relative to other ethnic groups at the school? Student records/archival data for 2004-05 and 2005-06 will be analyzed. 4. What are the perceptions of A+ teachers regarding program impacts, strengths, and weaknesses? The A+ teacher interviews and the A+ Teacher Survey will address this question via closed-ended and open- ended items. 5. What are the perceptions of participating students regarding program impacts, strengths, and weaknesses? A survey will be administered to program participants. 6. What are the perceptions of parents/guardians of A+ students regarding program impacts, strengths, and weaknesses? A Parent Survey will address this question via a questionnaire including closed- and open-ended items. 18 10/17/05Summary of Data Sources and Participants by Evaluation Question _________Evaluation Question Primary Question: Participants Data Sources 1. What are the effects of participation in A+ on student achievement? All grades at Woodruff Elementary School Benchmark, ITBS, and school records Supplemental Questions: 1. What are the quality and level of implementation of instructional strategies? All A+ teachers Teacher phone interview Classroom observations 2. What are the quality and level of implementation of instructional strategies? 3. What is the level of participation in A+ Programs by African American students relative to other ethnic groups? All A+ classes School records/archival data 4. What are the perceptions of A+ teachers regarding program impacts, strengths, and weaknesses? All A+ teachers A+ teacher interview and survey 5. What are the perceptions of participating students regarding program impacts, strengths, and weaknesses? A+ students A+ student survey 6. What are the perceptions of parents/guardians of A+ students regarding program impacts, strengths, and weaknesses? Parents of A+ students A+ parent survey 19 10/17/05November DecemberMarch MarchApril MayJune July JuneJuly August 1, 2006 August September 1, 2006 Schedule (2005-2006) Planning, refinement, and consultation with PRJ2 and A+ experts\nand instrument development A+ classroom observations and A+ teacher interviews Survey A+ school teachers and complete A+ teacher interviews Records/archival data analyses Evaluator will receive benchmark test results. Evaluator will analyze data of benchmark tests, surx'eys, and interviews. Evaluator will submit draft report to PRE. Evaluator will receive feedback from PRE and finish final draft. Evaluator will submit final report to PRE. received OCT 2 5 2005 desegregation monitoring 20 10/17/05Cfiri^ecfed Memorandum of Understanding This Memorandum of Understanding (hereinafter MOU), effective the first day of February 2005 (hereinafter the Effective Date), is entered into by and between Education Innovations, LLC (hereinafter Evaluator), a Tennessee limited liability company, and Little Rock School District (hereinafter Sponsor), whose offices are located at 810 West Markham Street, Little Rock, AR 72201. WITNESSETH WHERE.AS, Sponsor, to comply with the June 30, 2004 Memorandum Opinion by the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas, Little Rock Division, and Program Evaluation Standards, will hire outside consultants to prepare formal, step-two evaluations\nand WHEREAS, Evaluator possesses unique knowledge and experience relating to such formal step-two evaluations and Program Evaluation Standards\nNOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and the mutual covenants and conditions hereinafter recited, the Sponsor and Evaluator do hereby agree as follows\n1. Definitions For purposes of this MOD, the following definitions apply: 1.1 Compliance Remedy shall mean the entire June 30, 2004 Memorandum Opinion by the United States District Court for the Eastern District of .-Arkansas, Little Rock Division in Little Rock School District v. / iilaski C ounty Special School Districi No. I el al., Mrs. Lorene .Joshua et al. and Katherine Knight et al. Intervenors (Exhibit A), which is incorporated herein by reference. 1.2 MOU Period shall mean the period commencing on the Effective Date of this MOU and terminating on November 1, 2005. The term of this MOU may be extended by the mutual written consent of the duly authorized representatives of Evaluator and Sponsor. 1.3 Plincipal Investigator shall mean Steven M. Ross, Ph D., appointed by Evaluator to conduct the step-two evaluations hereunder 1.4 Formal step-two evaluations (hereinafter Evaluations) shall mean summative evaluations of the three programs conducted by the Evaluator according to the Sponsors Comprehensive Program Assessment Process and described more fully in Exhibit B, which is incorporated herein by reference. 1.5 Comprehensive Program Assessment Process (Exhibit B) shall mean the process required by the Compliance Remedy, adopted by the Sponsors Board of Directors December 16, 2004, and incorporated as Appendix B in the first quarterly written update by the Sponsor to the Office of Desegregation Monitoring and Joshua, December 1, 2004. 1.6 Evaluation Funds shall mean those funds paid by the Sponsor to the Ev-aluator in accordance with this MOU. 1.7 Evaluation Team shall mean the Principal Investigator and the research personnel under the Principal Investigators direction and control who are supported in whole or in part by the Evaluation Funds. 4 8 0.'=: 1BI 1.8 Planning, Research, and Evaluation (hereinafter PRE) shall mean the department of the Sponsor who shall represent the Sponsor and oversee the Evaluations. 1.9 Proprietary Information shall mean any data, information, concepts, routines, artwork, design work, advertising copy, specifications, or improvement that is commercially valuable, not generally available to or known in the industry\nand belonging to Evaluator. Proprietary' Information shall not include information which: (a) is or becomes a part of the public domain through no act or omission of the receiving party\n(b) was in the receiving party's lawful possession prior to the disclosure and had not been obtained by the receiving party either directly or indirectly from the disclosing party\n(c) is lawfully disclosed to the receiving party by a third party without restriction on disclosure\n(d) is independently developed by the receiving party\nor (e) is disclosed by operation of law. 2.0 Confidential Information shall mean data or information related to the identities of individuals such as Sponsors students, teachers, administrators including PRE, or Board of Directors\nguardians or relatives of such students\ncommunity members\nor any other individuals related to the Evaluations. 2. Evaluations 2.1 2.2 During the MOU Period, the Evaluation Team shall conduct three (3) Evaluations on behalf of Sponsor in accordance with the Compliance Remedy (Exhibit A). Evaluator agrees to perform the Evaluations within a mutually agreed schedule (Exhibit C) and further agree,s to complete Evaluations substantially in accordance with the terms and conditions of this MOU. The three Evaluations are named below. 2.2.1 Reading Recovery (Exhibit D) -7 9 9 9 Compass Learning (Exhibit E) Smart/Thrive (Exhibit F) 3. Payments 3.1 3.1.1 Sponsor shall pay Evaluator the Evaluation Funds in the following manner. Amount: 3.1.2 Rate: To be Paid: 3.1.4 Invoices. Not to exceed one hundred eighty thousand (US$180,000.00) plus reimbursable expenses as indicated below. $1,000 per day for effort. Travel cost to be reimbursed at actual cost. Translation cost to be reimbursed at actual cost. Upon invoice for effort (days) expended, stated in invoice, and/or reimbursable expenses, documentation included with invoice. Shall state days of effort for each of the Evaluations. 3.2 Payments under the terms of this MOU shall be made by check payable to: Payee Tax ID #: Address. Educations Innovations, LLC 56-2288391 3161 Campus Postal Station Memphis, Tennessee 38152-3830 2 4/8/053.3 Anything herein to the contrary notwithstanding, should this MOU terminate early pursuant to Article 8 herein, Principal Investigator and Sponsor shall agree upon the estimate of the percentage of completeness of the Evaluator's services rendered hereunder as of the date such notice is given. The Sponsor shall pay the Evaluator 'dpro rata fee based upon the agreed estimated percentage of completion such that payment will at least include all project costs incurred by Evaluator prior to the date of early termination. 4. Non-Exclusivity and Disclosure Nothing in this MOU shall be construed to limit the treedom of the Evaluator to engage in similar research performed independently under other grants, contracts, or agreements with parties other than Sponsor. If the Evaluator undertakes any research or evaluation that uses data from this Evaluation, Evaluator shall disclose such research or evaluation to PRE. 5. Publication and Disclosure The Evaluator shall have the right to present at s^'mposia and national or regional professional meetings, and to publish in scientific or other publications, the results of the Evaluations conducted under this MOU. Evaluator agrees to make such publication(s) conveniently available to PRE 6. Confidentiality and Non-Disclosure rhe Sponsor and Evaluator expressly acknowledge that Evaluator may need to provide to Sponsor information that Evaluator considers to be Proprietary Information. Sponsor agrees to hold Proprietary Information in strict confidence during the term of this MOU and for a period of two years after the termination or expiration of this MOU except as required by law. Similarly, the Evaluator shall protect Confidential Information and prevent its disclosure in any manner, except as required by law. Not later than two years after the termination or expiration of this MOU, Evaluator shall destroy all Confidential Information or return it to Sponsor. 7. Ownership and Patents The Evaluator shall have sole and exclusive ownership rights to any intellectual property, including but not limited to copyrights and/or inventions of a product, device, process, or method, whether patentable or unpatentable (an Invention), deriving from the Evaluators efforts, exclusive of any data or information, arising out of the Evaluations. Data or information furnished to Evaluator by Sponsor shall remain the property of the Sponsor. 8. Termination 1 his MOU shall remain in effect for the MOU Period unless extended in accordance with the terms of this MOU, as set forth in Section 1.2. In the event that either Evaluator or Sponsor shall be in default of any of its obligations under this MOU and shall fail to remedy such default within thirty (30) days after receipt of written notice thereof, the party not in default shall have the option of canceling this MOU by giving thirty (30) days written notice of termination to the other party. Termination of this Agreement shall not affect the rights and obligations of the parties, which shall have accrued prior to termination. No termination of this MOU, however effectuated, shall release either party from its rights and obligations under Articles 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11 and 18 herein. 3 4.8/059. Indeinnincation Sponsor agrees to defend, indemnify and hold harmless the Evaluator and its officers and employees (all such parties are hereinafter referred to collectively as the Indemnified Parties) from and against any and all liability, claims, lawsuits, losses, demands, damages, costs, and expenses (including reasonable attorneys fees and court costs) arising directly or indirectly out of the Evaluation or the design, manufacture, sale or use of any embodiment or manifestation of the Evaluation, regardless of whether any and all such liability, claims, lawsuits, losses, demands, damages, costs, and expenses (including attorneys fees and court costs) arise in whole or in part from the negligence of any of the Indemnified Parties. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Sponsor will not be responsible for indemnification of Evaluator pursuant to this Article 9 for any liability, claims, lawsuits, losses, demands, damages, costs, and expenses (including attorneys fees and court costs) which arise solely from: (a) the gross negligence or intentional misconduct of Evaluator or the Principal Investigator, or (b) actions by Evaluator or the Principal Investigator in violation of applicable laws or regulations, (c) violations of this MOU. or The Sponsor agrees to provide a diligent defense against any and all liability, claims, lawsuits, losses, demands, damages, costs, and expenses (including attorneys fees and court costs), brought against the Indemnified Parties with respect to the subject of the indemnity contained in this Article 9, whether such claims or actions are rightfully or wrongfully brought or filed. Evaluator shall be indemnified by Sponsor after Evaluator has completed the following: (a) within a reasonable time after receipt of notice of any and all liability, claims, lawsuits losses, demands, damages, costs, and expenses, or after the commencement of any action, suit, or proceeding giving rise to the right of indemnification, notify Sponsor, in writing, of said liability, claims, lawsuits, losses, demands, damages, costs, and expenses and send to the Sponsor a copy of all papers served on the Indemnified Party\nand (b) allow Sponsor to retain control of any such liability, claims, lawsuits, losses, demands, damages, costs, and expenses, including the right to make any settlement. 10. Independent Contractors Sponsor and Evaluator shall act as independent parties, and nothing contained in this MOU shall be construed or implied to create an agency or partnership. Neither Sponsor nor Evaluator shall have the authority to contract or incur expenses on behalf of the other except as may be expressly authorized by collateral written agreements. No member of the Evaluation Team shall be deemed to be an employee of Sponsor. 11. Use of Evaluator Name The use by either Sponsor or Evaluator of the others name or any other names, insignia, symbol(s), or logotypes associated with the other party or any variant or variants thereof in advertising, publicity, or other promotional activities is expressly prohibited, unless required by law or the other party provides written consent. 12. Severability It any one or more of the provisions ot this MOU shall be held to be invalid, illegal, or unenforceable, the validity, legality, or enforceability ot the remaining provisions of this MOU shall not in any way be affected or impaired thereby. 4 4/8'0513. Waiver The failure of any party hereto to insist upon strict performance of any provision of this MOU or to exercise any right hereunder will not constitute a waiver of that provision or right. This MOU shall not be effective until approved by Evaluators President or his official designee. Whenever the consent or approval of the Evaluator is required or permitted hereunder, such consent or approval must be given by the Evaluators President or his official designee 14. Notices Any notice or communication required or permitted to be given or made under this MOU by one of the parties hereto to the other shall be in writing and shall be deemed to have been sufficiently given or made for all purposes if mailed by certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, addressed to such other party at its respective address as follows: If to Sponsor. Karen DeJarnette, Ph.D Director, PRE Little Rock School District 810 West Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201-1306 Phone (501) 447-3387/Fax (501) 447-7609 If to Evaluator with respect to all non-technical matters: Cindy Hurst Education Innovations, LLC 3161 Campus Postal Station Memphis, TN 38152-3830 Phone (901) 678-5063/Fax (901) 678-4257 If to Evaluator with respect to technical questions. Steven M. Ross, Ph D. Director, Education Innovations, LLC 3161 Campus Postal Station Memphis, TN 38152-3830 Phone (901) 678-3413/Fax (901) 678-4257 16. Assignment Neither Sponsor nor Evaluator shall assign its rights or obligations under this MOU without the prior written consent of the other party. 17. Entirety This MOU represents the entire agreement ot Sponsor and Evaluator, and it expressly supersedes all previous written and oral communications between them. Neither Sponsor nor Evaluator was induced to enter into this 5 4 (5Agreement by any statements or representations not contained in this MOU. This MOU may be modified only by written amendment executed by the Sponsor and the Evaluator, 18. Headings The headings of sections and subsections, if any, to the extent used herein are for convenience and reference only and in no way define, limit, or describe the scope or intent of any provision hereof, and therefore shall not be used in construing or interpreting the provisions hereof. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Sponsor and Evaluator have caused this MOU to be executed in duplicate counterpart original by their duly authorized representatives to be effective as of the Effective Date SPONSOR EVALUATOR By. Signature By: Signature Superintendent P?*r-e\u0026lt;te., /rie^ct Samuel Hurst Vice PresidentBusiness and Finance Date Date 4/8/05 /5-\u0026lt;^y 6 Exhibit A COMPLIANCE REMEDY The Memorandum Opinion by the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas, Little Rock- Division in Little Rock School District v. Pulaski County Special School District No. 1 et al., Mrs. Lorene .Joshua et al. and Katherine Knight et al. Intervenors, is incorporated here by reference. Evaluator has a copy of this document but may request another copy from Sponsor. 7 4/8/05Exhibit B COMPREHENSIVE PROGRAM ASSESSMENT PROCESS The Comprehensive Program Assessment Process of the Little Rock School District is incorporated here by reference. Evaluator has a copy of this document but may request another copy from Sponsor. 8 4/8/05Exhibit C SCOPE OF SERVICES This states services and products by the Evaluator, who will perform Evaluations of three programs of the Sponsor, viz.^ Reading Recovery, Smart/Thrive, and Compass Learning, and produce reports of the Evaluations. Evaluation questions For each of the three Evaluations, the primary' questions are I. II. 111. Has the program improved the academic achievement of students identified by the Sponsor as African- American (.A.A) as implemented in the Little Rock School District' Elas the program decreased the differences between AA students and those identified by the Sponsor as white (W)' To what extent does each program account for changes in student performance? Secondary (step two) questions are 1. 2. 3. 4. What competing events or programs (relative to each evaluated program) explain changes in student performance? What traits of each group explain their performance and differences in performance between them What changes in the program do these results indicate to improve the effectiveness of the programs' How will these recommendations improve AA student performance? Evaluation design, data, and products Prior to Evaluators commencing the Evaluations, Sponsor will agree with Evaluator regarding A B C D E. F G theoretical model(s), Evaluation design(s), to conform with summative evaluations of the Comprehensive Program Assessment Process, specific variables for the summative evaluations, data adjustments and statistical methods, format) s) of data for use in the Evaluations delivered by the Sponsor to the Evaluator, content of deliverable products (written reports) and their formats, and schedule of services and product delivery. The following table is the schedule of services and product delivery. Delivery (2004-05) OctoberFebruary October 1 October November 1 ___________________________Service and Products________________________ Evaluator and Sponsor will negotiate MOU and agree on design of the Evaluations, their schedules, and instruments.___________________________________________ Evaluator will submit draft report of results to PRE.__________________________ Evaluator will discuss draft reports with PRE and alter report accordingly._______ Evaluator will submit final report to PRE. For the purpose of invoicing. Evaluator will track its efforts in increments of days or some portion there of. 9 4.'8C5Payments Little Rock School District Desegregation Court Mandate Support Project Period October 2004 to November 2005 Costs: Consulting @ $1,000 per day - 180 days maximum Actual Cost - Travel (est. $500) Actual Cost - Translation Seivices (est. $500) $180,000 * Maximum Payment $180,000* Plus actual cost of travel and translation services 10 4/8/05Exhibit D Reading Recovery Proposal for the Evaluation of Reading Recovery in Little Rock School District: Outline Version Evaluation Questions Primary Evaluation (Juestion. 1. Has the Reading Recovery (RR) program been effective in improving and remediating the academic achievement of African-American (AA) students? Supplemental (Qualitative Level 2) Evaluation (Questions: 1. What are the quality and level of implementation of RR at the 18 schools implementing it in 2004-05? 2. What is the level of participation in RR by African American students relative to other ethnic groups at the school? J. What is the progress demonstrated by African American and other student participating in RR in improving achievement, as demonstrated on program-specific measures? What percentage of students are discontinued or not discontinued? 4. What are the perceptions of RR teachers regarding RR program implementation, impacts, strengths, and w'eaknesses'i 5. What are the perceptions of K.-3 classroom teachers in the school regarding RR program implementation, impacts, strengths, and weaknesses'^ 6. What are the perceptions of parents/guardians of first grade RR students regarding program impacts, strengths, and weaknesses' Program Description RR is one of the eight literacy programs, interx entions, and/or models used by various LRSD schools. It is restricted to the first-grade and involves providing systematically designed individual tutoring to students identified as having the highest need for supplemental support. LRSD funds support the RR Program. Currently, RR is implemented by 18 elementary schools (whose .AA student composition follows their names): Bale: 82%, Booker: 53%, Carver: 53%, Chicot: 73%, Dodd: 54%, Franklin: 96%, Geyer Springs: 88?o, Gibbs: 53%, Meadowcliff: 78%, Mitchell: 96%, Otter Creek: 60%, Rightsell: 100%, Stephens: 95%, Terry: 53%, Wakefield: 78%, Watson: 96%, Williams: 52%, and Wilson: 89%. Proposed Design A mixed-methods design will address the research questions as follows: 11 4-'8/O5Printaiy Evaluation Question. 1. Has the RR program been effective in improving and remediating the academic achievement of AA students? A. Whole School'. A treatment-control school, pretest-posttest design will be employed in Grades 1- 3. The analysis will control for pretest, gender, ethnicity, and SES. It may be decided to examine (a) all 18 schools relative to the entire district elementary-school database or (b) a stratified random sample of RR schools relative to matched control schools. Pretests: DRA or DIBELS (whichever has the most usable database) administered in kindergarten. Posttests: 2004-05 Iowa Test of Basic Skills (ITBS) Reading and Math Subtests. B. Reading Recovery Subsample: Within each of the RR schools, first- to third-grade students who participated in RR as first graders will be identified and their achievement gains compared to predicted scores based on school status (RR vs Control), and student pretest, gender, ethnicity, and SES. Supplemental (Qualitative Step 2) Evaluation Questions: I. What is the quality and level of implementation of RR at the 18 schools implementing it in 2004-05'^ RR teachers will be interv-iewed by phone. First grade teachers and other grade-level teachers will be surveyed. Observations of RR tutoring sessions will be made at a sample of schools. A minimum of 12 tutoring classroom observations will be conducted. RR Teachers in-training will not be observed. 2. What is the level of participation in RR by AA students relative to other ethnic groups at the school? Student records/archival data for 2003-04 and 2004-05 will be analyzed. 3. What is the progress demonstrated by AA and other student participants in RR in improving achievement, as demonstrated on program-specific measures? What percentage of students is discontinued or not discontinued'^ RR Teachers will provide Recommendations for Discontinuing and Statement of Progress for Non- Discontinued Student data information on each 2004-05 RR student. 4. What are the perceptions of RR teachers regarding RR program implementation, impacts, strengths, and weaknesses' The RR teacher survey will directly address this question. RR teachers in-training will be interviewed by phone. 5. What are the perceptions of K-3 classroom teachers in the school regarding RR program implementation, impacts, strengths, and weaknesses? 12 4/8/05The K-3 classroom teacher survey will address this question via closed-ended and open-ended items. Only experienced RR schools will be surveyed. Respondents will identify their status by grade and role 6. What are the perceptions of parents/guardians of first grade RR students regarding program impacts, strengths, and weaknesses? A RR Parent Surv'cy will be conducted to address this question via a questionnaire including closed- and open-ended items in experienced RR schools. Suinmary of Data Sources and Participants by Evaluation Question: Reading Recovery Evaluation Question | Participants Data Sources Primary Question: 1. Wliat are the effects of participation in RR on AA student achievement? Supplemental (Step 2) Questions: All grades I -3 students at 18 RR schools and other elemcntaiy schools RR student participants within above samples DRA or DIBELS (pretest in K) 2004-05 ITBS Reading and Math subtests (posttest in grades 1-3) 1 What is the quality and level of implementation of RR at the 18 schools implementing it in 2004-05? 2. What is the level of participation in RR by African American students relative to other ethnic groups at the schixil?____________________ 3. What is the progress demonstrated by RR students in improving achievement, as demonstrated on program- specific measures? What percentage of students are discontinued or not discontinued\"?______________ 4. W hat are the perceptions of RR teachers regarding RR program implementation, impacts, strengths, and weaknesses? All RR teachers Classroom teachers at experienced RR schools Principals at RR schools All RR schools All RR teachers will provide program data for first grade students All RR teachers 13 Random sample of principals and teachers intraining interview K-3 classroom Teacher Surt'ey (faculty meeting) RR student data RR Tutoring Session Observation (min. of 12 observations) School records/archival data RR student program data RR teacher survey RR teacher in-training interview 4\nS 05no 5. Whal are the perceptions of K-3 classroom teachers regarding RR program implementation, impacts, strengths, and weaknesses' All K-3 classroom teachers in experienced RR schools K-3 classroom teacher survc\u0026gt; (disaggregated by 1 grade vs. other grades) 6. What are the perceptions of parents/guardians of first grade RR students regarding program impacts, strengths, and weaknesses' Timelines Februan,' 2005\nMarch: MarchApril: May-June: JulySeptember: October 1\nNovember 1: Parents of RR students in experienced RR schools RR Parent Survee Planning, refinement, and consultation with PRE and RR experts\nInstrument Development Begin observations, RR Teacher In-Training Phone Interviews Complete observations, RR Teacher and K-3 Classroom Teacher Survey, RR Principal Phone Interviews RR Student Data, Records/Archival data analyses Achievement data analyses/complete survey and interview analyses Submit draft report of finding\nto PRE\nReceive feedback from PRE Finalize and submit final repon to PRE 14 4/8/05Exhibit E Compass Learning Proposal for the Evaluation of Compass Learning in Little Rock School District: Outline Version Evaluation Questions Primary Evahialion Question. 1 What are the effects of participation in CL on the achievement of African-American (AA) and other students? Supplemental (Qualitative Step 2) Evaluation Questions: 1. What are the quality, nature, and level of implementation of CL at the 20 elementary schools identified as implementing the program in 2004-05? What is the level of participation in CL by AA students relative to other ethnic groups at the implementing schools J. What are the perceptions of teachers, lab attendants, and Technology Specialists regarding CL program implementation, impacts, strengths, and weaknesses? 4. What are the perceptions of parents/guardians of CL students regarding program impacts, strengths, and weaknesses 5. What are the perceptions of school principals, whose schools no longer use CL, with regard to past use of the CL program and possible adoption of a different program? Program Description Compass Learning is a computer-based program designed to develop students skills in reading, writing, and spelling. Additional purposes are to support teacher management of student performance, personalize instruction, and connect communities of learners. The theme-based lessons and activities provided by CL take a crosscurricular approach and offer a real world context for learning. The Compass Management system assessment is either automatic or customizable. A Technology Specialist assists classroom teachers with any technology question or need. In the 2004-05 school year, 20 LRSD elementary schools utilized CL programs, while 2 middle schools and 1 high school used the program in previous years. The AA student composition follows the individual school names: Elementary Schools Bale. 82%, Booker: 53%, Brady: 78%, Carver: 52%, Chicot: 73%, Fair Park: 75%, Forrest Park: 20%, Franklin: 96%, Fulbright. 26%, Geyer Springs: 88%, Gibbs: 53%, Mabelvale: 80%. McDermott: 62%, Mitchell. 96%, Otter Creek: 60%, Rightsell: 100%, Rockefeller: 67%, Stephens: 95%, Wakefield: 78%, Williams: 52%. 15 4.8/05Middle Schools: Cloverdale: 82%, and Henderson\n82% High School: Accelerated Learning Center (ALC): 92% Proposed Design A mixed-methods design will be employed to address the research questions as follows\nPrimary Evaluation Question. 2. What are the effects of participation in CL on the achievement of African American and other students? A. Quasi-experimental desist: Due to the insufficient sample size and unique nature of the high school (n = 1), the quasi-experimental analysis will be conducted with the elementary (n = 20 schools) and middle (n = 2) school samples only*. A descriptive examination (see below) of test scores for the high school will also be conducted to determine trends and patterns at that site. Specifically, the quasi-experimental design will compare CL elementary and middle schools to other schools in the district, most likely using multiple-regression type analyses in which the dependent variable is posttest (2004-05) scores (Arkansas Benchmarks in grades 3-8, and Iowa Test ot Basic Skills in grades K-8) and covariates are pretest (pre-program) test scores, gender, ethnicity, and SES. Pretests. Iowa Test ot Basic Skills (ITBS) (for grades K-8), Arkansas Benchmarks (for grades 4- 8) Posttests: 2004-05 ITBS Reading and Math Subtests (for grades 1-8)\nArkansas Benchmarks (for grades 3-8). Supplemental (Qualitative Step 2) Evaluation Questions: 1 What are the quality, nature, and level of implementation of CL at the 20 elementary schools identified as implementing the program in 2004-05? Phone interviews will be conducted with (a) the LRSD CL Coordinator and (b) all school Technology- Specialists and (c) the lab attendant at the 7 elementary schools randomly selected for observations. All teachers at the 20 elementary schools will be surveyed so that site-specific data regarding implementation will be available. Observations of CL laboratory sessions will be conducted at a random sample of 7 elementary schools. At four of the observed schools, a brief (20-min.) student focus group {n = 5 to 7 students per school) will be conducted to ascertain students perspectives on their experiences in using CL (nature of activities, usefulness, enjoyment, etc.) 2. U hat is the level of participation in CL by AA students relative to other ethnic groups at the schools involved? Student records/archival data for 2003-04 and 2004-05 and CL observation data will be analyzed. Recent information indicates that the nnddie and high schools are no longer using CL. The principals will be intei^iewcd at these schools regarding CL usage. If the schools are not using CL, CREP will work w ith PRE to modify the achievement analy sis accordingly. 16 4/8'053. What are the perceptions of teachers, lab attendants, and Technology Specialists regarding CL program implementation, impacts, strengths, and weaknesses? This question will be addressed via the teacher survey and Technology Specialist interviews in schools identified as implementing CL and interviews with lab attendants in the 7 schools randomly selected for CL observations. 4. What are the perceptions of parents/guardians of CL students regarding program impacts, strengths, and weaknesses? A CL parent survey consisting of closed- and open-ended items will be administered to parents at 5 randomly selected schools. 5 What arc the perceptions of school principals, w hose schools no longer use CL, w ith regard to past use of the CL program and possible adoption of a different program? This question will be addressed via the Principal Interview. Summary of Instruments and Participants by Evaluation Question: Compass Learning Evaluation Question Primary Question: 1. What are the effects of participation in CompassLearning (CL) on the achievement of African American and other students? Participants Supplemental Questions: 1. Whal are I be qualih. naliire. and level of implementation of CL at the 20 elementaiy schools identified a.s implementing the program in 2004-05? Students al 20 CL elementary and middle schools and comparison schools Whole grade-level means al ihc Compass Learning high school. (T)ic middle schools and high school may not be included in the achievement analysis depending on CL usage)________________ All CL school teachers All Technology Specialists at schools implcinenting CL CL Lab Attendants at the 7 schools randomly selected for observations District CL Program Coordinator Student Focus Groups at 4 randomly selected elementan schools Data Sources ITBS as pretest for Grades K-9 Arkansas Benchmarks as poshest for 3-8) 2004-05 ITBS Reading and Math subtests (as poshest in grades 1- 9)2004-05 Grade 11 Literacy Exam (as poshest) 2004-05 Algebra I and Geometry End- of-Course Exams (as posttest) Teacher Survey (faculty meeting) Technology Specialist Phone Interview District CL Program Coordinator Phone Interview Lab Attendant Phone Inten iew Two-hour CL Laboratory Observations (7 randomly selected elementary schools) 20-min. Student Focus Groups (n = 5-7 students), one each at 4 schools randomly selected from the 7 observation schools 17 4'8'052. What is the level of participation in CL by African American students relative to other ctlmic groups at the schools concerned? .3. What are the perceptions of teachers, lab attendants, and Technology Specialists regarding CL program implementation, impacts, strengths, and weaknesses? 4. What are the perceptions of parents/guardians of CL students regarding program impacts, strengths, and n eaknesses? 5. What are the perceptions of school principals, whose schools no longer use CL. with regard Io past use of the CL program and possible adoption of a different program? All Coinpass schools School rccords/archiv al data Two-hour CL Laboratory Observ ations (J randomly selected elementary schools) Ail CL school teachers All Technology Specialists al schools implementing CL CL Lab Attendants al the 7 schools randomly selected for observations Parents of CL students Teacher Survey (faculty meeting) Technology Specialist Phone Inlcn ie Lab Allendani Phone Inlen ieu CL Parent Suney Distributed to one class at each grade level al 5 elenicnlarv schools Principals at two middle schools, one high school, and possibly one elementary- school Principal Phone Inlen iew 18 4/8/052005 Timeline January. February: March-April: May-June\nJuly-September: October 1: Planning/Refmement, consultation with PRE and CL experts, and instrument development Complete instrument development and begin observations CL Teacher Surx'ey (at faculty meetings), conduct phone interviews with district CL program coordinator, technology specialists, lab attendants, and principals in schools no longer implementing CL\ncomplete obsen'ations\nconduct student focus Groups. Records/Archival data analyses Achievement data analyses/complete survey and interview analyses Submit draft report of findings to PRE\nreceive feedback from PRE November 1: Finalize and submit report to PRE 19 4/8/05Exhibit E Smart/Thrive Proposal for the Evaluation of the Smart/Thrive (S/T) Programs in the Little Rock School District: Outline Version Evaluation Questions Primary Evaluation Question. 1. 1 .Have the Smart/Thrive programs been effective in improving and remediating the academic achievement of African-American students' Supplemental (Qualitative Step 2) Evaluation Questions: 1. What is the level of participation in Sniart and Thrive by African American students'^ 2. What instructional strategies are used during the tutoring sessions' 3. What are the perceptions of Smart/Thrive Tutors regarding program impacts, strengths, and weaknesses? 4. What are the perceptions of Algebra 1 teachers regarding program impacts, strengths, and weaknesses? 5. What are the perceptions of participating students regarding program impacts, strengths, and weaknesses? 6. What arc the perceptions of parents/guardians of Smart/Thrive students regarding program impacts, strengths, and weaknesses' Program Description The S/T program was designed as an intervention for S\"- and 9\"'-grade African-.American students who are lacking the knowledge, skills, and/or confidence required for success in Algebra I. This program currently (2004-2005) engages approximately 10 percent of the total African-American student population enrolled in /Algebra 1 classes. During the 2003-2004 academic year, the program served 264 students. Participants were offered pre-algebra instruction for two weeks during the summer (Smart Program) and 10 Saturdays across the school year Thrive Program). Various local grants have fiinded this program since 1999. In the current school year, S/T serves students from all eight LRSD middle schools (whose AA student composition follows their names): Cloverdale: 82%, Dunbar: 61%, Forest Heights: 77%, Henderson: 82%, Mablevale: 81%, Mann: 52%, Pulaski Heights\n57%, and Southwest: 94% Proposed Design A mixed-methods design will be employed to address the research questions as follows\n20 4 8/05Primary Evaluation Question . 1. Have the S/T programs been effective in improving and remediating the academic achievement of African-American students' A treatment (2 levels)-control student, pretest-posttest design will be employed. The analysis will control for pretest, gender, ethnicity, and SES. Three types of Algebra I students will be compared depending on their program enrollment . i. No program ii. Smart program only iii. Both Smart and Thrive programs Pretests: 2003-2004 Math Benchmark Test Posttests: 2004-05 (ITBS) Math Subtests\nAlgebra I EOC\nMath Benchmark Test. Supplemental CQiialitative/Slep 2) Evaluation Questions: 1. What is the level of participation in Smart and Thrive by African American students' Student records/archival data for 2003-04 and 2004-05 will be analyzed. In addition to descriptive information, the levels of participation will be gathered as a potential variable for the student achievement analyses. 2. What instructional strategies are used during the tutoring sessions? Random observation visits will be conducted during the Saturday Thrive Program sessions. Approximately five visits will be made. Observations of the Summer Smart Program can be conducted in 2005. 3. What are the perceptions of S/T Tutors regarding program impacts, strengths, and weaknesses? A questionnaire will be administered to S/T Tutors. 4. What are the perceptions of Algebra I teachers regarding program impacts, strengths, and weaknesses' A questionnaire will be administered to Algebra I teachers. 5. What are the perceptions of participating students regarding program impacts, strengths, and weaknesses? A questionnaire will be administered to program participants. A sample of program participants will also be selected to participate in student focus groups. Approximately 3-5 focus groups will be conducted, with each comprised of approximately 5 students. 6. What are the perceptions ot parents/guardians of S/T students regarding program impacts, strengths, and weaknesses' An S/T Parent survey will be conducted to address this question via a questionnaire including closed- and open-ended items. 21 4.'g/05Summary' of Data Sources and Participants by Evaluation Question: Smart/Thrive Evaluation Question [ I Primary Question:___________ 1. What are the effects of participation in the Smart and/or Thrive Programs on student achievement? Participants Data Sources Timelines All 8* and 9* grade Algebra I students 2003-2004 Math Benchmark 2004-05 ITBS Math subtests\nMath Benchmark\nAlgebra I EOC Supplemental Questions: I. What is the level of participation in Smart and Thrive by African American students?__________________ 2. What instructional strategics are used during the tutoring sessions?___________ 3. WJiat are the perceptions of S/T Tutors regarding program impacts, strengths, and weaknesses?________________ 4. What are the perceptions of Algebra 1 teachers regarding program impacts, strengths, and weaknesses?____________ 5. What are the perceptions of participating students regarding program impacts, strengths, and weaknesses/ 6. What are the perceptions of parents/guardians of S/T students regarding program impacts, strengths, and weaknesses? January', 2005. Febiuary: March-April: May-June: July-September: October T. October: November 1 All program participants ST teachers and students All S/T Tutors All Algebra I teachers Program participants Parents of ST students School records/archival data Observations of tutoring sessions ST Tutor Questionnaire Algebra 1 Teacher Questionnaire ST Student Questionnaire Focus Groups ST Parent Questionnaire Planning, refinement, and consultation with PRE, Instrument Development Begin observations of Thrive sessions Administer Teacher, Tutor, and Student Questionnaires and begin focus groups. Complete focus groups and observations and analyze records and archival data Analyze achievement data and complete survey and interview analyses. Submit draft report to PRE. Discuss draft report of findings with PRE and write final report. Submit final report to PRE 22 4\n8/05RECEIVED OCT 2 5 2005 OfRCEOF DESEGREGATION MONITORINGi-C\u0026gt; 'rvtc4ecl te Memorandum of Understanding This Memorandum of Understanding (hereinafter MOU), effective the first day of February 2005 (hereinafter the Effective Date), is entered into by and between James S. Catterall (hereinafter Evaluator), Graduate School of Education \u0026amp; Information Studies, University of California, Los Angeles, CA 90024, and Little Rock School District (hereinafter Sponsor), whose offices are located at 810 West Markham Street, Little Rock, AR 72201. WITNESSETH WHEREAS, Sponsor, to comply with the June 30, 2004 Memorandum Opinion by the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas, Little Rock Division, and Program Evaluation Standards, will hire outside consultants to prepare formal, step-two evaluations\nand WHEREAS, Evaluator possesses unique knowledge and experience relating to such formal step-two evaluations and Program Evaluation Standards\nNOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and the mutual covenants and conditions hereinafter recited, the Sponsor and Evaluator do hereby agree as follows: 1. Definitions For purposes of this MOU, the following definitions apply\n1.1 Compliance Remedy shall mean the entire June 30, 2004 Memorandum Opinion by the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas, Little Rock Division in Little Rock School District v. Pulaski County Special School District No. I et al., Mrs. Lorene Joshua et al. and Katherine Knight et al. Intervenors (Exhibit A). 1.2 MOU Period shall mean the period commencing on the Effective Date of this MOU and terminating on November 1, 2005. The term of this MOU may be extended by the mutual written consent of the duly authorized representatives of Evaluator and Sponsor. 1.3 Formal step-two evaluation (hereinafter Evaluation) shall mean a summative evaluation of Sponsors Year-Round Education (hereinafter YRE) program conducted by the Evaluator according to the Sponsors Comprehensive Program Assessment Process and described more fully in Exhibit B, which is incorporated herein by reference. Evaluation ascertains differences among schools as w'ell as for the LRSD. 1.4 Comprehensive Program Assessment Process (Exhibit B) shall mean the process required by the Compliance Remedy, adopted by Sponsors Board of Directors on December 16, 2004, and incorporated as Appendix B in the first quarterly written update by the Sponsor to the Office of Desegregation Monitoring and Joshua, December 1,2004. 1.5 with this MOU. Evaluation Funds shall mean those funds paid by the Sponsor to the Evaluator in accordance 1.6 Evaluation Team shall mean the Evaluator and any personnel under the Evaluators direction and control who are supported in whole or in part by the Evaluation Funds.1.7 Planning, Research, and Evaluation (hereinafter PRE) shall mean Sponsors department who shall represent the Sponsor and oversee the Evaluation. 1.8 Proprietary Information shall mean any data, information, concepts, routines, artwork, design work, advertising copy, specifications, or improvement that is commercially valuable\nnot generally available to or known in the industry\nand belonging to Evaluator. Proprietary Information shall not include information which\n(a) is or becomes a part of the public domain through no act or omission of the receiving party\n(b) was in the receiving party's lawful possession prior to the disclosure and had not been obtained by the receiving party either directly or indirectly from the disclosing party\n(c) is lawfully disclosed to the receiving party by a third party without restriction on disclosure\n(d) is independently developed by the receiving party\nor (e) is disclosed by operation of law. 2.0 Confidential Information shall mean data or information related to the identities of individuals such as Sponsors students, teachers, administrators including PRE, or Board of Directors\nguardians or relatives of such students\ncommunity members\nor any other individuals related to the Evaluation. 2. Evaluation 2.1 2.2 During the MOU Period, the Evaluator shall conduct an Evaluation of Sponsors YRE on behalf of Sponsor in accordance with the Compliance Remedy (Exhibit A), within the mutually agreed schedule (Exhibit C), and substantially in accordance with the terms and conditions of this MOU. The Evaluations name is YRE. 3. Payments 3.1 3.1.1 3.1.2 3.1.3 Sponsor shall pay Evaluator the Evaluation Funds in the following manner: Amount: Rate: Travel\n3.1.3 3.1.4 To be Paid: Invoices\nNot to exceed Forty-five Thousand dollars (US $45,000.00). $1,500 per day for effort, plus travel expenses. Travel expenses for travel between Los Angeles, CA and Little Rock, AK including Little Rock accommodations and meals not to exceed $6,000.00 (economy class airfare only). Upon invoice for effort (days) expended, stated in invoice. Shall state days of effort. 3.2 Payments under the terms of this MOU shall be made by check payable to\nPayee Taxpayer ID Address: James S. Catterall 141-38-3478 120 N. Topanga Canyon Blvd., Suite 203 Topanga, CA 90290 3.3 Anything herein to the contrary notwithstanding, should this MOU terminate early pursuant to Article 8 herein. Evaluator and Sponsor shall agree upon the estimate of the percentage of completeness of the Evaluators services rendered hereunder as of the date such notice is given. The Sponsor shall pay the Evaluator a pro rata fee based upon the agreed estimated percentage of completion such that payment will at least include all project costs incurred by Evaluator prior to the date of early termination. 2 3/22/054. Non-Exclusivity and Disclosure Nothing in this MOU shall be construed to limit the freedom of the Evaluator to engage in similar research performed independently under other grants, contracts, or agreements with parties other than Sponsor. If the Evaluator undertakes any research or evaluation that uses data from this Evaluation, Evaluator shall disclose such research or evaluation to PRE. 5. Publication and Disclosure The Evaluator shall have the right to present at symposia and national or regional professional meetings, and to publish in scientific or other publications,, the results of the Evaluations conducted under this MOU. Evaluator agrees to make such publication(s) conveniently available to PRE. 6. Confidentiality and Non-Disclosure The Sponsor and Evaluator expressly acknowledge that Evaluator may need to provide to Sponsor information that Evaluator considers to be Proprietary Information. Sponsor agrees to hold Proprietary Information in strict confidence during the term of this MOU and for a period of two years after the termination or expiration of this MOU except as required by law. Similarly, the Evaluator shall protect Confidential Information and prevent its disclosure in any manner, except as required by law. Not later than two years after the termination or expiration of this MOU, Evaluator shall destroy all Confidential Information or return it to Sponsor. 7. Ownership and Patents The Evaluator shall have sole and exclusive ownership rights to any intellectual property, including but not limited to copyrights and/or inventions of a product, device, process, or method, whether patentable or unpatentable (an Invention), deriving from the Evaluators efforts, exclusive of any data or information, arising out of the Evaluation. Data or information furnished to Evaluator by Sponsor shall remain the property of the Sponsor. 8. Termination This MOU shall remain in effect for the MOU Period unless extended in accordance with the terms of this MOU, as set forth in Section 1.2. In the event that either Evaluator or Sponsor shall be in default of any of its obligations under this MOU and shall fail to remedy such default within thirty (30) days after receipt of written notice thereof, the party not in default shall have the option of canceling this MOU by giving thirty (30) days written notice of termination to the other party. Termination of this Agreement shall not affect the rights and obligations of the parties, which shall have accrued prior to termination. No termination of this MOU, however effectuated, shall release either party from its rights and obligations under Articles 3 through 17 herein. 3 3/22/059. Indemnification Sponsor agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the Evaluator and its officers and employees (all such parties are hereinafter referred to collectively as the Indemnified Parties) from and against any and all liability, claims, lawsuits, losses, demands, damages, costs, and expenses (including reasonable attorneys fees and court costs) arising directly or indirectly out of the Evaluation or the design, manufacture, sale or use of any embodiment or manifestation of the Evaluation, regardless of whether any and all such liability, claims, lawsuits, losses, demands, damages, costs, and expenses (including attorneys fees and court costs) arise in whole or in part from the negligence of any of the Indemnified Parties. Notwithstanding the foregoing. Sponsor will not be responsible for indemnification of Evaluator pursuant to this Article 9 for any liability, claims, lawsuits, losses, demands, damages, costs, and expenses (including attorneys fees and court costs) which arise solely from: (a) the gross negligence or intentional misconduct of Evaluator or (b) actions by Evaluator in violation of applicable laws or regulations or (c) violations of this MOU. The Sponsor agrees to provide a diligent defense against any and all liability, claims, lawsuits, losses, demands, damages, costs, and expenses (including attorneys fees and court costs), brought against the Indemnified Parties with respect to the subject of the indemnity contained in this Article 9, whether such claims or actions are rightfully or wrongfully brought or filed. Evaluator shall be indemnified by Sponsor after Evaluator has completed the following: (a) within a reasonable time after receipt of notice of any and all liability, claims, lawsuits losses, demands, damages, costs, and expenses, or after the commencement of any action, suit, or proceeding giving rise to the right of indemnification, notify Sponsor, in writing, of said liability, claims, lawsuits, losses, demands, damages, costs, and expenses and send to the Sponsor a copy of all papers served on the Indemnified Party\nand (b) allow Sponsor to retain control of any such liability, claims, lawsuits, losses, demands, damages, costs, and expenses, including the right to make any settlement. 10. Independent Contractors Sponsor and Evaluator shall act as independent parties, and nothing contained in this MOU shall be construed or implied to create an agency or partnership. Neither Sponsor nor Evaluator shall have the authority to contract or incur expenses on behalf of the other except as may be expressly authorized by collateral written agreements. No member of the Evaluation Team shall be deemed to be an employee of Sponsor. 11. Use of Evaluator Name The use by either Sponsor or Evaluator of the others name or any other names, insignia, symbol(s), or logotypes associated with the other party or any variant or variants thereof in advertising, publicity, or other promotional activities is expressly prohibited, unless required by law or the other party provides written consent. 4 3/22/0512. Severability If any one or more of the provisions of this MOU shall be held to be invalid, illegal, or unenforceable, the validity, legality, or enforceability of the remaining provisions of this MOU shall not in any way be affected or impaired thereby. 13. Waiver The failure of any party hereto to insist upon strict performance of any provision of this MOU or to exercise any right hereunder will not constitute a waiver of that provision or right. This MOU shall not be effective until approved by Evaluators President or his official designee. Whenever the consent or approval of the Evaluator is required or permitted hereunder, such consent or approval must be given by the Evaluators President or his official designee. 14. Notices Any notice or communication required or permitted to be given or made under this MOU by one of the parties hereto to the other shall be in writing and shall be deemed to have been sufficiently given or made for all purposes if mailed by certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, addressed to such other party at its respective address as follows: If to Sponsor: Karen DeJamette, Ph.D. Director, PRE Department Little Rock School District 810 West Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201-1306 Phone (501) 447-3387, Fax (501) 447-7609 If to Evaluator: James S. Catterall, Ph.D. Research and Evaluation Office 120 N. Topanga Canyon Blvd. Suite 203 Topanga, CA 90290 15. Assignment Neither Sponsor nor Evaluator shall assign its rights or obligations under this MOU without the prior written consent of the other party. 5 3/22/0516. Entirety This MOU represents the entire agreement of Sponsor and Evaluator, and it expressly supersedes all previous written and oral communications between them. Neither Sponsor nor Evaluator was induced to enter into this Agreement by any statements or representations not contained in this MOU. This MOU may be modified only by written amendment executed by the Sponsor and the Evaluator. 17. Headings The headings of sections and subsections, if any, to the extent used herein are for convenience and reference only and in no way define, limit, or describe the scope or intent of any provision hereof, and therefore shall not be used in construing or interpreting the provisions hereof. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Sponsor and Evaluator have caused this MOU to be executed in duplicate counterpart original by their duly authorized representatives to be effective as of the Effective Date. EVALUATOR By: SPONSOR Signature Darral Paradis, Director Procurement Department Little Rock School District By: Jame: 'ure 'atterall. Ph. D. Date Date 3/22/05 a 6 Exhibit A COMPLIANCE REMEDY The Memorandum Opinion by the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas, Little Rock Division in Little Rock School District v. Pulaski County Special School District No. I et al., Mrs. Lorene Joshua et al. and Katherine Knight et al. Intervenors, is incorporated here by reference. Evaluator has a copy. 7 3/22/05Exhibit B COMPREHENSIVE PROGRAM ASSESSMENT PROCESS Little Rock School District 8 3/22/05LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPNCODE: IL-R COMPREHENSIVE PROGRAM ASSESSMENT PROCESS Comprehensive Program Assessment Process Purpose The purpose of these regulations is to provide guidance in the appraisal of programs and to comply with requirements of the US District Court for the Eastern District. They do not necessarily apply to grant-funded programs if the funding source requires other procedures and provides resources for a required evaluation. Criteria for Program Evaluations Policy IL specifies that the evaluations of programs approved in its Board-approved Program Evaluation Agenda will be conducted according to the standards developed by the Joint Committee on Standards for Educational Evaluation. (See Joint Committee on Standards for Educational Evaluation, James R. Sanders, Chair (1994). The Program Evaluation Standards, 2^ Edition: How to Assess Evaluations of Educational Programs. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.) There are four attributes of an evaluation: Utility(U) -evaluations are informative, timely, and influential Feasibility (F) -evaluations must be operable in the natural setting and must not consume more resources than necessary Propriety (P) - rights of individuals must be protected Accuracy(A) -evaluations should produce sound information Prospective, controlled, summative evaluations are at one end of a spectrum of activities that review District operations. Other activities in this continuum include formative and less formal and rigorous evaluations, regular and occasional assessments, and fast or brief snapshots. As rigor and formality diminish along the range of reviews, fewer standards apply. Examples of how the standards apply are found following table, adapted from The Program Evaluation Standards, pages 18 and 19: Checklist for Applying the Standards The reader should interpret the information provided in this table with reference both to the Standards (cited above) and the peculiar circumstances of given program reviews. Double plus signs (++) indicate that standards are fully addressed. Single pluses (+) mean that the standard is a concern but not necessarily fully addressed, and zeros (0) point to standards not usually applicable. Not all summative evaluation will fully satisfy every standard, and other examples may observe more standards than indicated here. Note, however, that all reviews fully observe human rights and impartial reports. 9 3/22/05LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPNCODE: IL-R Checklist of Evaluation Standards for Examples of Program Reviews Standard____________________ UI Stakeholder Identification U2 Evaluator Credibility U3 Infonnation Scope \u0026amp; Selection U4 Values Identification U5 Report Clarity U6 Report Timeliness \u0026amp; Dissemination U7 Evaluation Impact Fl Practical Procedures F2 Political Viability F3 Cost Effectiveness Pl Service Orientation P2 Formal Agreements P3 Rights of Human Subjects P4 Human Interaction P5 Complete \u0026amp; Fair Assessment P6 Disclosure of Findings P7 Conflict of Interest P8 Fiscal Responsibility Al Program Documentation A2 Context Analysis A3 Described Purposes and Procedures A4 Defensible Information Sources A5 Valid Information A6 Reliable Information A7 Systematic Information A8 Analysis of Quantitative Data______ A9 Analysis of Qualitative Data AIO Justified Conclusions A11 Impartial Reporting A12 Meta-evaluation Summative evaluations Informal Assessments Formative Assessments (School Portfolios) ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ 10 0 4- 4-4- 4- 4- 4- y 4- 4-4- 4- 4- 4-4- 4- T 4- 4- 4- 4- 4-4- 4- V 0 + + + + + + + 0 4- 4- 4- V 4- 4- 4- + 4- 4- y 4- 4- 0 Snapshots 0 0 + + 4- _0 + 2 4- y _0 4- 4- y _0 4- 4- 4- + + + + + + 3/22/05LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: IL-R Program Evaluation Procedures The following procedures are established for the evaluation of programs approved by the Board of Education in its annual Program Evaluation Agenda: 1. The Planning, Research, and Evaluation (PRE) Department will recommend to the Superintendent annually, before the budget for the coming year is proposed, the curriculum/instruction programs for comprehensive program evaluation. The recommendation will include a proposed budget, a description of other required resources, and an action plan for the completion of the reports. Criteria for the proposed agenda are as follows: A. Will the results of the evaluation influence decisions about the program? B. Will the evaluation be done in time to be useful? C. Will the program be significant enough to merit evaluation? (See Joseph S. Wholey, Harry P. Hatry, and Kathryn Newcomer (1994). Handbook of Practical Program Evaluation. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers. 5-7.) 2. The Superintendent will recommend to the Board of Education for approval the proposed Program Evaluation Agendawith anticipated costs and an action plan for completion. 3. For each curriculum/instruction program to be evaluated as per the Program Evaluation Agenda, the Director of PRE will establish a staff team with a designated leader to assume responsibility for the production of the report according to the timelines established in the action plan approved by the Board of Education. 4. Each team will include, at a minimum, one or more specialists in the curriculum/instruction program to be evaluated, a statistician, a programmer to assist in data retrieval and disaggregation, and a technical writer. If additional expertise is required, then other staff may be added as necessary. 5. An external consultant with expertise in program evaluation, the program area being evaluated, statistical analysis, and/or technical writing will be retained as a member of the team. The role of the external consultant may vary, depending upon the expertise required for the production of the program evaluation. 6. The team leader will establish a calendar of regularly scheduled meetings for the production of the program evaluation. The first meetings will be devoted to the following tasks: A. Provide any necessary training on program evaluation that may be required for novice members of the team, including a review of the Boards policy IL and all of the required criteria and procedures in these regulations, IL-R. B. Assess the expertise of each team member and make recommendations to the Director of PRE related to any additional assistance that may be required. C. Write a clear description of the curriculum/instruction program that is to be evaluated, with information about the schedule of its implementation. 11 3/22/057. 8. 9. LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPNCODE\nIL-R D. E. F. G. Agree on any necessary research questions that need to be established in addition to the question, Has this curriculum/instruction program been effective in improving and remediating the academic achievement of African-American students Generate a list of the data required to answer each research question, and assign responsibility for its collection and production. All available and relevant student performance data should be included. (See Judge Wilsons Compliance Remedy.) Decide who will be the chief writer of the program evaluation. Plan ways to provide regular progress reports (e g., dissemination of meeting minutes, written progress reports, oral reports to the Superintendents Cabinet) to stakeholders. (See Joellen Killion (2002). Assessing Impact: Evaluating Staff Development. Oxford, OH. National Staff Development Council (NSDC)\nRobby Champion (Fall 2002). Map Out Evaluation Goals. Journal of Staff Development. 78-79\nThomas R. Guskey (2000). Evaluating Professional Development. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press\nBlaine R. Worthen, James R. Sanders, and Jody L. Fitzpatrick (1997). Participant-Oriented Evaluated Approaches. Program Evaluation: Alternative Approaches and Practical Guidelines\n153-169\nBeverly A. Parsons (2002). Evaluative Inquiry: Using Evaluation to Promote Student Success. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press\nand Joseph S. Wholey, Harry P. Hatry, and Kathryn E. Newcomer (1994). Handbook of Practical Program Evaluation. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers.) Subsequent meetings of the program evaluation team are required for the following tasks: to monitor the completion of assignments\nto collaborate in the interpretation and analysis of data\nto pose any necessary new questions to be answered\nto review drafts and provide feedback to the writer\nto formulate recommendations, as required, for program improvement, especially to decide if a recommendation is required to modify or abandon the program if the findings reveal that the program is not being successful for the improvement of African-American achievement\nto assist in final proofreading\nand to write a brief executive summary, highlighting the program evaluation findings and recommendations. A near-final copy of the program evaluation must be submitted to the Director of PRE at least one month before the deadline for placing the report on the Boards agenda for review and approval. This time is required for final approval by staff, for final editing to ensure accuracy, and for submission to the Superintendent. When the program evaluation is approved for submission to the Board of Education for review and approval, copies of the Executive Summary and complete report must be made for them, for members of the Cabinet. 12 3/22/0510. LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPNCODE\nIL-R 11. The program evaluation team will plan its presentation to the Board of Education on the findings and recommendations. 12. The Director of PRE will prepare the cover memorandum to the Board of Education, including all the required background information: A. If program modifications are suggested, the steps that the staff members have taken or will take to implement those modifications. If abandonment of the program is recommended, the steps that will be taken to replace the program with another with more potential for the improvement and remediation of African-American students. B. Names of the administrators who were involved in the program evaluation. C. Name and qualifications of the external expert who served on the evaluation team. 13. 14. D. Grade-level descriptions of the teachers who were involved in the assessment process (e.g., all fourth-grade math teachers, all eighth grade English teachers, etc.). When the program evaluation is approved by the Board of Education, the team must arrange to have the Executive Summary and the full report copied and design a plan for communicating the program evaluation findings and recommendations to other stakeholders. This plan must then be submitted to the Director of PRE for approval. Each program evaluation team will meet with the Director of PRE after the completion of its work to evaluate the processes and product and to make recommendations for future program evaluations. (See Joellen Killion (2002). Evaluate the Evaluation. Assessing Impact: Evaluating Staff Development. Oxford, OH: National Staff Development Council. 46,123-124.) Approved: December 16, 2004 13 3/22/05LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPNCODE: IL-R Evaluation Standards Criteria for Program Evaluations Policy IL specifies that the evaluations of programs approved in its Board-approved Program Evaluation Agenda will be conducted according to the standards developed by the Joint Committee on Standards for Educational Evaluation. (See Joint Committee on Standards for Educational Evaluation, James R. Sanders, Chair (1994). The Program Evaluation Standards, 2\"** Edition: How to Assess Evaluations of Educational Programs. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.) They are as follows: Utility Standards The utility standards are intended to ensure that an evaluation will serve the information needs of intended users. These standards are as follows: Stakeholder identification. People involved in or affected by the evaluation should be identified so that their needs can be addressed. Evaluator credibility. The people conducting the evaluation should be both trustworthy and competent to perform the evaluation so that the evaluation findings achieve maximum credibility and acceptance. Information scope and sequence. Information collected should be broadly selected to address pertinent questions about the program and should be responsive to the needs and interests of clients and other specified stakeholders. Values identification. The perspectives, procedures, and rationale used to interpret the findings should be described carefully so that the bases for value judgments are clear. Report clarity. Evaluation reports should describe clearly the program being evaluated, including its context and the purposes, procedures, and findings of the evaluation, so that essential information is provided and understood easily. Report timeliness and dissemination. Significant interim findings and evaluation reports should be disseminated to intended users so that they can be used in a timely fashion. Evaluation impact. Evaluations should be planned, conducted, and reported in ways that encourage follow-through by stakeholders, so that the likelihood that the evaluation will be used is increased. Feasibility Standards Feasibility standards are intended to ensure that an evaluation will be realistic, prudent, diplomatic, and frugal. Practical procedures. Evaluation procedures should be practical so that the disruption is kept to a minimum while needed infonnation is obtained. Political viability. The evaluation should be planned and conducted with anticipation of the different positions of various interest groups so that their cooperation may be obtained, and so that possible attempts by any of these groups to curtail evaluation operations or to bias or misapply the results can be averted or counteracted. Cost-effectiveness. The evaluation should be efficient and produce information of sufficient value so that the resources expended can be justified. Service orientation. Evaluations should be designed to assist organizations to address and effectively serve the needs of the full range of targeted participants. Formal agreements. Obligations of the formal parties to an evaluation (what is to be done, how, by whom, and when) should be agreed to in writing so that these parties are obligated to adhere to all conditions of the agreement or to formally renegotiate it. 14 3/22/05LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: IL-R Rights of human subjects. Evaluation design and conduct should respect and protect human rights and welfare. Human interactions. Evaluators should respect human dignity and worth in their interactions with other people associated with an evaluation so that participants are not threatened or harmed. Complete and fair assessments. The evaluation should be complete and fair in its examination and recording of strengths and weaknesses of the program being evaluated so that strengths can be built upon and problem areas addressed. Disclosure of findings. The formal parties to an evaluation should ensure that the full set of evaluation findings, along with pertinent limitations, are made accessible to the people affected by the evaluation, as well as any others with expressed legal rights to receive the results. Conflict of interest. Conflict of interest should be dealt with openly and honestly so that it does not compromise the evaluation processes and results. Fiscal responsibility. The evaluators allocation and expenditure of resources should reflect sound accountability procedures and be prudent and ethically responsible so that expenditures are accounted for and appropriate. Accuracy Standards Accuracy standards are intended to ensure that an evaluation will reveal and convey technically adequate information about the features that determine the worth of merit of the program being evaluated. Program documentation. The program being evaluated should be described and documented clearly and accurately so that it is identified clearly. Context analysis. The context in which the program exists should be examined in enough detail so that its likely influences on the program can be identified. Described purposes and procedures. The purposes and procedure of the evaluation should be monitored and described in enough detail so that they can be identified and assessed. Defensible information sources. The sources of information used in a program evaluation should be described in enough detail so that the adequacy of the information can be assessed. Valid information. The information-gathering procedures should be chosen or developed and then implemented in a manner that will ensure that the interpretation arrived at is valid for the intended use. Reliable information. The information-gathering procedures should be chosen or developed and then implemented in a manner that will ensure that the information obtained is sufficiently reliable for the intended use. Systematic information. The information collected, processed, and reported in an evaluation should be review systematically so that the evaluation questions are answered effectively. Analysis of quantitative information. Quantitative information in an evaluation should be analyzed appropriately and systematically so that the evaluation questions are answered effectively. Analysis of qualitative information. Qualitative information in an evaluation should be analyzed appropriately and systematically so that the evaluation questions are answered effectively. Justified conclusions. The conclusions reached in an evaluation should be justified explicitly so that stakeholders can assess them. Impartial reporting. Reporting procedures should guard against distortion caused by personal feelings and biases of any party so the evaluation reports reflect the evaluation findings fairly. Meta-evaluation. The evaluation itself should be evaluated formatively and summatively against these and other pertinent standards so that its conduct is appropriately guided, and on completion, stakeholders can closely examine its strengths and weaknesses. 15 3/22/05Exhibit C SCOPE OF SERVICES Evaluation of Year-Round Education This states services and products by the Evaluator, who will conduct an Evaluation of the Sponsors YRE Programs and produce reports of that Evaluation. Evaluation questions For this Evaluation, the primary questions are: 1. II. III. Has YRE as implemented in the Little Rock School District improved the academic achievement of students identified by the Sponsor as African-American (AA)? Has YRE as implemented in the Little Rock School District decreased the differences between AA students and those identified by the Sponsor as white (W)? To what extent does YRE account for changes in student performance? Secondary (step-two) questions are 1. What competing events or programs (relative to YRE) explain changes in student performance? 2. What traits of each group explain their performance and differences in performance between them? 3. What changes in YRE do these results indicate to improve the effectiveness of the programs? 4. How will these recommendations improve AA student performance? Evaluation design, data, and products Prior to Evaluators commencing the Evaluation, Sponsor will agree with Evaluator regarding A. B. C. D. E. F. G. theoretical model(s). Evaluation design(s), to conform with summative evaluations of the Comprehensive Program Assessment Process, specific variables for the Evaluation, data adjustments and statistical methods, format(s) of data for use in the Evaluation delivered by the Sponsor to the Evaluator, content of deliverable products (written reports) and their formats, and schedule of services and product delivery. The following table is the schedule of services and product delivery. Delivery (2005-06) FebruaryMarch October 1,2006 October November 1,2006 ____________________________Service and Products_________________________ Evaluator and Sponsor will negotiate MOU and agree on design of the Evaluations, their schedules, and instruments.___________________________________________ Evaluator will submit draft report of results to PRE.___________________________ Evaluator will discuss draft reports with PRE and alter report accordingly.________ Evaluator will submit final report to PRE. For the purpose of invoicing. Evaluator will track his efforts in increments of days or some portion thereof. 16 3/22/05Exhibit D Year-Round Education Programs Primary Evaluation Question: 1. Have the Year-Round Education (YRE) Programs been effective in improving and remediating the academic achievement of African-American students? Supplemental (Qualitative/Step 2) Evaluation Questions: 1. What are the quality and level of implementation of intersession instructional strategies? 2. What are the quality and level of implementation of instructional strategies during regular session? 3. What is the level of participation in YRE Programs by African American students relative to other ethnic groups at the school? '4. What are the perceptions of YRE teachers regarding program impacts, strengths, and weaknesses? 5. What are the perceptions of participating students regarding program impacts, strengths, and weaknesses? 6. What are the perceptions of parents/guardians of YRE students regarding program impacts, strengths, and weaknesses? Program Description Year-Round Education is a concept which reorganizes the school year so that instruction occurs throughout the year with regularly scheduled breaks interspersed. Instruction and vacations are shorter and spaced throughout the year for more continuous learning and more frequent breaks. YRE has emerged nationally as a way to offer all students a better education, regardless of their ethnic background, social status or academic performance. LRSDs design is a single-track, 45-10 calendar where all students and teachers in the school are in class or on vacation at the same time. The 45-10 refers to 45 days in a quarter then 10 days of intersession/vacation. Intersession is a five-day program and attendance is voluntary. Currently there are five elementary schools implementing YRE\nElementary Schools Cloverdale Mablevale Mitchell Stephens Woodruff Number of Teachers 26 25 22 39 21 Number of Students 360 257 156 499 235 Percent of Students African- American 77 80 96 95 91 Percent of Students Free/Reduced Lunch 89 88 92 91 86 17 3/22/05Primary Evaluation Question Proposed Design 1. Have the YRE Programs been effective in improving and remediating the academic achievement of African-American students? fVhole School-. A treatment-control school, pretest-posttest design will be employed. The analysis will control for pretest, gender, ethnicity, and SES. Subsample: Within each YRE school, students who participated in intersession will be identified and their achievement gains compared to predicted scores based on school status and student pretest, gender, ethnicity, and SES. Supplemental (Qualitative/Step 2) Evaluation Questions: 1. What are the quality and level of implementation of intersession instructional strategies? 2. What are the quality and level of implementation of instructional strategies during regular sessions? Year-Round Education teachers will be interviewed by phone. Year-Round Education classrooms, both regular and during intersession, will be observed. 3. What is the level of participation in YRE Programs by African American students relative to other ethnic groups at the school? Student records/archival data for 2003-04 and 2004-05 will be analyzed. 4. What are the perceptions of YRE teachers regarding program impacts, strengths, and weaknesses? The Year-Round Education teacher interview and the Year-Round Education Teacher Survey will address this question via closed-ended and open-ended items. 5. What are the perceptions of participating students regarding program impacts, strengths, and weaknesses? A survey will be administered to program participants. 6. What are the perceptions of parents/guardians of YRE students regarding program impacts, strengths, and weaknesses? A Parent Survey will be conducted to address this question via a questionnaire including closed- and open-ended items. 18 3/22/05Summary of Data Sources and Participants by Evaluation Question Evaluation Question Primary Question: Participants Data Sources 1. What are the effects of participation in YRE on student achievement? All grades at YRE schools and other elementary schools. Year-Round Education intersession student participants within above samples Benchmark, ITBS, and school records Supplemental Questions: 1. What are the quality and level of implementation of intersession instructional strategies? All YRE teachers Teacher phone interview Classroom observations 2. What are the quality and level of implementation of instructional strategies during regular session? 3. What is the level of participation in YRE Programs by African American students relative to other ethnic groups? All YRE schools School records/archival data 4. What are the perceptions of YRE teachers regarding program impacts, strengths, and weaknesses? AH YRE teachers YRE teacher interview and survey 5. What are the perceptions of participating students regarding program impacts, strengths, and weaknesses? YRE students grades 4 and 5 YRE student survey 6. What are the perceptions of parents/guardians of YRE students regarding program impacts, strengths, and weaknesses? Parents of YRE students YRE parent survey 19 3/22/05Timelines February-March: March: March-April: May-June: July-September: October: November 1 Planning, refinement, and consultation with PRE and YRE experts\nand instrument development Begin YRE classroom observations and YRE teacher interviews Survey YRE school teachers and complete YRE teacher interviews Records/Archival data analyses Analyze achievement data/complete survey and interview analyses Submit draft report of findings to PRE and receive feedback from PRE Finalize and submit report to PRE received OCT 2 5 2005 .OFFICE OF DKEGfiEGAnONMONirORING 20 3/22/05Memorandum of Understanding This Memorandum of Understanding (hereinafter MOU), effective the first day of February 2005 (hereinafter the Effective Date), is entered into by and between Janies S. Catterall (hereinafter Evaluator), Graduate School of Education \u0026amp; Information Studies, University of California, Los Angeles, CA 90024, and Little Rock School District (hereinafter Sponsor), whose offices are located at 810 West Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201. WITNESSETH WHEREAS, Sponsor, to comply with the June 30, 2004 Memorandum Opinion by the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas, Little Rock Division, and Program Evaluation Standards, will hire outside consultants to prepare formal, step-two evaluations\nand WHEREAS, Evaluator possesses unique knowledge and experience relating to such formal step-two evaluations and Program Evaluation Standards\nNOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and the mutual covenants and conditions hereinafter recited, the Sponsor and Evaluator do hereby agree as follows: 1. Definitions For purposes of this MOU, the following definitions apply: RECEIVED OCT 2 0 2005 OFFICE OF desegregation monitoring 1.1 Compliance Remedy shall mean the entire June 30, 2004 Memorandum Opinion by the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas, Little Rock Division in Little Rock School District v. Pulaski County Special School District No. 1 et al., Mrs. Lorene Joshua et al. and Katherine Knight et al. Intervenors (Exhibit A). 1.2 MOU Period shall mean the period commencing on the Effective Date of this MOU and terminating on November 1, 2005. The term of this MOU may be extended by the mutual written consent of the duly authorized representatives of Evaluator and Sponsor. 1.3 Formal step-two evaluation (hereinafter Evaluation) shall mean a summative evaluation of Sponsors Year-Round Education (hereinafter YRE) program conducted by the Evaluator according to the Sponsors Comprehensive Program Assessment Process and described more fully in Exhibit B, which is incorporated herein by reference. Evaluation ascertains differences among schools as well as for the LRSD. 1.4 Comprehensive Program Assessment Process (Exhibit B) shall mean the process required by the Compliance Remedy, adopted by Sponsors Board of Directors on December 16, 2004, and incorporated as Appendix B in the first quarterly written update by the Sponsor to the Office of Desegregation Monitoring and Joshua, December 1,2004. 1.5 with this MOU. Evaluation Funds shall mean those funds paid by the Sponsor to the Evaluator in accordance 1.6 Evaluation Team shall mean the Evaluator and any personnel under the Evaluators direction and control who are supported in whole or in part by the Evaluation Funds.1.7 Planning, Research, and Evaluation (hereinafter PRE) shall mean Sponsors department who shall represent the Sponsor and oversee the Evaluation. 1.8 Proprietary Information shall mean any data, information, concepts, routines, artwork, design work, advertising copy, specifications, or improvement that is commercially valuable\nnot generally available to or known in the industry\nand belonging to Evaluator. Proprietaiy Information shall not include information which, (a) is or becomes a part of the public domain through no act or omission of the receiving party\n(b) was in the receiving party's lawful possession prior to the disclosure and had not been obtained by the receiving party either directly or indirectly from the disclosing party\n(c) is lawfully disclosed to the receiving party by a third party without restriction on disclosure\n(d) is independently developed by the receiving party\nor (e) is disclosed by operation of law. 2.0 Confidential Information shall mean data or information related to the identities of ind\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_640","title":"Program evaluation","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":["2004-01/2005-12"],"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","Little Rock School District","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","School improvement programs","Educational law and legislation"],"dcterms_title":["Program evaluation"],"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/640"],"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\nFriday Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark HERSCHEL H. FRIDAY (1932-1994) WILLIAM H. SUTTON. P.A. BYRON M. EISEMAN. JR. F.A. JOE D. BELL, F.A. JAMES A. 8UTTRY, F.A. FREDERICK S. URSERY. P.A. OSCAR E. DAVIS, JR. P.A. JAMES C. CLARK. JR. P.A. THOMAS P. LEGGETT. P.A. JOHN DEWEY WATSON. P.A. PAUL B. BENHAM HI. P.A. LARRY W. BURKS. P.A. A. WYCKLIFF NISBET. JR. F.A. JAMES EDWARD HARRIS. F.A. J. PHILLIP MALCOM. P.A. JAMES M. SIMPSON. P.A. JAMES M. SAXTON. P.A. J. SHEPHERD RUSSELL III. P.A. DONALD H. BACON. F.A. WILLIAM THOMAS BAXTER F.A. JOSEPH B. HURST, JR. F.A. ELIZABETH ROBBEN MURRAY. F.A. CHRISTOPHER HELLER P.A. LAURA HENSLEY SMITH. P.A. ROBERT S. SHAFER P.A. WILLIAM M. GRIFFIN III. F.A. MICHAEL S. MOORE. F.A. DIANE S. MACKEY. F.A. WALTER M. EBEL III. P.A. KEVIN A. CRASS, P.A. WILLIAM A. WADDELL, JR, P.A. SCOTT J. LANCASTER F.A. ROBERT B. BEACH. JR. F.A. J. LEE BROWN. F.A. JAMES C. BAKER JR. F.A, HARRY A. LIGHT. P.A. SCOTT H. TUCKER P.A. GUY ALTON WADE. F.A. PRICE C. GARDNER P.A. TONIA P. JONES. P.A. DAVID D. WILSON. F.A. JEFFREY IJ. MOORE. F.A. DAVID M. GRAF. P.A. CARLA GUNNELS SPAINHOUR P.A. JONANN ELIZABETH CONIGLIO. F.A. R CHRISTOPHER LAWSON, F.A. ATTORNEYS AT LAW A LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP www.fridayfirfn.com 2000 REGIONS CENTER 400 WEST CAPITOL LITTLE ROCK. ARKANSAS 722013493 TELEPHONE 501-376-2011 FAX 501-376-2147 3425 NORTH FUTRALL DRIVE. SUITE 103 FAYETTEVILLE. ARKANSAS 72703-4811 TELEPHONE 479-685-2011 FAX 479-605-2147 FRAN C. HICKMAN. F.A. BETTY J. DEMORY. F.A. LYNDA M. JOHNSON. P.A. JAMES W. SMITH. F.A. CLIFFORD W. PLUNKETT, P.A. DANIEL L HERRINGTON. P.A. MARVIN L. CHILDERS K. COLEMAN WESTBROOK. JR. P.A. ALLISON J. CORNWELL ELLEN M. OWENS. P.A. JASON B. HENDREN BRUCE B. TIDWELL JOSEPH F. MCKAY ALEXANDRA A. IFRAH JAY T. TAYLOR MARTIN A. KASTEN BRYAN W. DUKE JOSEPH G. NICHOLS ROBERT T. SMITH RYAN A. BOWMAN TIMOTHY C. E2:ELL T. MICHELLE ATOR KAREN S. HALBERT SARAH M. COTTON KRISTEN S. ROWLANDS ALAN G. BRYAN LINDSEY MITCHAM KHAYYAM M. EDDINGS JOHN F. PEISERICH AMANDA Caffs rose BRANDON J. HARRISON STEVEN L. BROOKS H. WAYNE YOUNG. JR JAMIE HUFFMAN JONES KIMBERLY DICKERSON OFCOUNSEL B.S. CLARK WILLIAM L. TERRY WILLIAM L. FATTON. JR. H.T. LARZELERE. P.A. JOHN C. ECHOLS. F.A. 208 NORTH FIFTH STREET BLYTHEVILLE. ARKANSAS 72315 TELEPHONE 870-762-2898 FAX 870-762-2918 CHRISTOPHER HELLER LITTLE ROCK TEL 501-370-1506 FAX 501-244-5344 halUrQfec.nac January 12, 2004 Office of Desegregation Monitoring Mr. John Walker JOHN W. WALKER, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72206 Jan 13 2004 Received Re: Little Rock School District Dear John: Two recent evaluations which were done in compliance with Judge Wilsons Order are enclosed. They are: Little Rock School District Literacy Program Evaluation, November 2003 and An Evaluation of Mathematics and Science Programs in the Little Rock School District from 1998 to December 2003. Please call me if you have any questions or concerns about these evaluations. Yours very truly, CJH/bk ist6pher Heller cc w/enc.: Ms. Ann Marshal Desegregation Monitor One Union National Plaza 124 West Capitol, Suite 1895 Little Rock, AR 72201 Dr. Morris HolmesJOHN W. WALKER SHAWN CHILDS John w. Walker, P.A. Attorney At Law 1723 Broadway Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 Telephone (501) 374-3758 FAX (501) 374-4187 received MAR ^1? 2004 Via Facsimile \u0026amp; U.S. Mail OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING OF COUNSEL ROBERT McHENEY. P.A. DONNA J. McHENEY 8210 Hendesson Ro.ad Little Rock, Akkans.as 72210 Phone: (501) 372-3425 F. (501) 372-3428 EiVAIL: mcheiiryd@swbell.net J March 8. 2004 Mr. Cliristopher Heller FRIDAY, ELDREDGE \u0026amp; CLARK 400 W. Capitol, Suite 2000 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Dear Chris\nI have reviewed your evaluations and find that they are grossly inadequate and incomplete. In addition to that I am still awaiting the evaluations of the other remaining programs which were contemplated by our agreement. Because we have already invoked the process required by the court, I am putting ODM on notice of our position. Very truly yours, /\nI I : i/ L b' L John W. Walker '-6- JWW\nlp cc: Ms. Ann Marshal Mr. Sam Jones Mr. Steve Jones Mr. MarK Burnette-fo fa.)C CP received MAR 1 200't OFFICEOF DESEGREGATION MONITORING John W. Walker, P.A. Attorney At Law 1723 Broadway Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 Telephone (501) 374-3758 FAX (501) 374-4187 9NW01IN0WN0llVD3aD3S30 d030HJ0 ^00? J I yvw JOHN W. WALKER SHAWN CHILDS a3A3O3a Via Facsimile - 371-0100 March 10, 2004 OF COUNSEL ROBERT McHenry, P.A. DONNAJ.McHENRY 8210 Henderson Road Little Rock, Arkansas 72210 Phone: (501) 372-3425 Fax (501) 372-3428 Email: mchenryd@swbell.net Ms. Ann S. Marshall, Monitor Office of Desegregation monitoring 124 West Capital, Suite 1895 Little Rock, AR 72201 Re: Little Rock School District Dear Ms. Marshall: Now that we have the 8*** Circuit Court of Appeals decision, it is very clear that the court is concerned, as we are, about improving the academic achievement of African American students. Our belief is that all of the components of the Plan were intended to work hand in glove to that end. When we last met with your office after having invoked the process set forth in the Plan regarding compliance issues, there were numerous areas of disagreement with respect to the Districts obligations. Those areas have not been resolved. Moreover, we did not reach agreements on whether all programs as set forth in the March 15, 2001 Compliance Report were to be evaluated or which ones indeed were to be evaluated. Little Rock took the position that it would only evaluate literacy and math. We resisted that position then and we do so now because such limitation does not address the very purposes of the evaluations in the first place. Dr. Bonnie Lesley and Chris Heller were the Districts representatives at the conference with you. Joy Springer, Bob Pressman and I (for a short while) represented Joshua. Since Dr. Lesley has left the District we have had no further contact with anyone from the District for the purpose of followup discussions regarding the subject. On or about January 15, 2004,1 received two lengthy reports from the District entitled: 1) Little Rock Literacy Program Evaluation\nand 2) An Evaluation of Mathematics \u0026amp; Science Programs in the Little Rock School District from 1998 to 2003. They were sent without explanation or an invitation for discussion. Mr. Heller was aware that we had invoked the process outlined in the Plan and that apparently your office was awaiting more responses from LRSD before having more followup meeting between Joshua and Little Rock. We have received the updates you have sent the parties as you have monitored LRSDs program evaluation. 1We have now completed our initial review and discussion regarding those evaluations and find not only do they fail to address all of the programs that we negotiated to be evaluated but, that inter alia, the evaluations are keyed to No Child Left Behind mandates or State accountability mandates. They appear to be less keyed to the explicit outcome objectives of the plan or to the evaluation processes the district adopted in its compliance plan and regulations. While Mr. Heller has contended that there are no outcome requirements of the plan, it was certainly a promised expectation that programs would be altered, modified, and improved upon their inadequacies and then nonworking programs which failed to remediate achievement disparity would be eliminated and replaced. The objective we expect is t hat achievement of black school children will be not less than 90% of the achievement of white school children. I believe that the program evaluations that have been presented miss their mark on many counts, some of which I now bring to your attention as the process facilitator with a notation that these comments are also being delivered to Mr. Heller for the Districts use. These evaluations address only literacy, math and science which certainly are not all the programs that are related to improving and remediating the academic achievement of African American students. I call your attention to the Courts Order of September 13, 2002, page 168. I am also informing Judge Wilson of our serious concerns regarding the deficiencies of the program evaluations. Our list is not comprehensive because we need to 1) thoroughly review the evaluations, 2) have discussions via the process and the study itself and 3) have more information regarding the Districts intentions. 1) Joshua remains concerned about the lack of achievement for African American students at virtually all grade levels. 2) The literacy report does not identify any significant relationship or correlation between the literacy programs implemented by LRSD and the achievement of African American students. 3) Neither the literacy report nor the math/science report addressed African American student achievement by grade level, achievement by school or specific remediation mastery by student, grade level or school. None of the curricular programs in the study had a significant impact on student achievement in 5* grade, for example. 4) The literacy report (page 45) makes the surprising notation that substantial differences exist in the overall achievement of African American students and other students in the Little Rock School District. This conclusion is, in large part, what this action is intended to correct. Joshua interprets that notation to mean that the programs that have been utilized have not successfully addressed Afiican American student achievement nor have they been modified or replaced by others which promise greater success. It surely cannot mean that the objective is impossible to attain. 25) The control groups utilized for the literacy report raise another concern. In this report, a significant number of the students, almost half of them, in the District appear to be eliminated from the study. 6) The literacy report contains formative information through a few teacher focus groups, however, this data is not inclusive of the total teacher population responsible for remediation of African American student achievement. Therefore, Joshua must conclude that such information is skewed at best. 7) Joshua recalls the representations of Dr. Bonnie Lesley during her court testimony that the achievement gap in grades K-2 had been eliminated according to her DRA assessments during the 2001-2002 school year. The 2003 literacy evaluation submitted by the District now contradicts her findings in that approximately half of the Afncan American students during 2002-2003 in 4* grade were performing Below Basic. Those second grade students would appear to be the 4* graders now performing below basic. Surely there are sufficient data to prepare an evaluation of literacy in these grades (K-2) and for the District to be able to track their individual performances through Dr. Lesleys data. I read that the Courts Order, Page 170, paragraph A, contemplates the use of this data, i.e., LRSD now has over three years of testing data. JJ 8) Joshua remains concerned regarding the Districts ability to accurately record, collect, retain and retrieve student achievement data. 9) There is no discussion regarding the participation of Afncan American students in Pre-AP and AP courses which were allegedly instituted to address Afncan American achievement. Nor is there any evaluation of the Districts tutoring programs or other programs aimed at improving Afiican American performance. 10) The report indicates that African American students had substantially lower absolute performance than did other students. The academic gains on literary tests were lower for African American students than for other students. The evaluations do not compare the achievement of Benchmark exams of T* or 8* grade students for 2001 or 2002 scoring Below Basic in successive years. Moreover, the SAT 9 test results for higher grade students reflect a need for more information. 11) The District was inconsistent in providing the necessary support for teachers to attend necessary literacy training (Reading Recovery, Effective Literary and ELLA). 12) The evaluation reports discussed professional development in literacy and mathematics while ignoring the three major professional development commitments in the March 15, 2001 compliance report. 3The foregoing list is merely suggestive\nit is not exhaustive. Because of your designated role, I am requesting that Judge Wilson involve your office in preparing a comprehensive monitoring report of the Districts compliance with its student achievement commitments by use of the evaluation process. That I believe was a role envisioned for ODM by both the Court Of Appeals and by the District Court as well. I will be filing the necessary papers to that end, but in the meantime would you kindly advise me as to the status of our having already invoked the process set forth by the plan. Sincerely, iy John W. Walker ' .\u0026gt;4^^ I 1 / c \\ JWW:js cc: Honorable Judge William R. Wilson Mr. Chris Heller Mr. Robert Pressman All Other Counsel 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS RICHARD SHEPPARD ARNOLD UNITED STATES COURTHOUSE OUU W. CAPI lUL, ROOM 423 i-iTTLc nOCK, Bill WILSON JUDGE Ov4-5i|UU Pscsimiiv (ovi) 604-5 i45 March 10, 2004 Tho Wz^nz^rahlQ Oav/ ( (UI LJ U ICppQI l/UI LI (UUOC 500 West Capiioi, rsucrn i45 Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Judge Ray ECEIVE, MAR 1 0 2004 OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITOR?!: Enclosed iS s copy of Mr, Walker's March 10, 2004 fax iexter to Ms. Marshall. by copy of this letter I remind Mr. Walker and other counsel of record to copy you with correspondence and other matters. ^//// / i/^ /I/1 b't / /A' I Wn\u0026lt; R. Wilson, Jr. Tiginal.' Athor r'O Mr. JaiTiSS W. lerk \u0026amp; 1----------- COURT eastern DISTRICT ARKANSAS IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS LITTLE ROCK DIVISION MAR 1 1 2004 JAMES W McCORMACK, CLERK ____________ LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT DEP. CLERK PLAINTIFF V. No. 4:82CV00866 WRW PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. I, ET AL. RECEIVED DEFENDANTS MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL. MAR 1' 2004 INTERVENORS KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL. OFFICEOF DESEGREGATION MONITORING INTERVENORS GREG BOLLEN, JAMES BOLDEN, MARTHA WHATLEY AND SUE ANN WHISKER INTERVENORS 1. ORDER I have received a copy of Mr. Walkers March 10, 2004 letter to Ms. Ann S. Marshall. A copy of the letter is attached to this Order. The letter appears to be an anticipatory objection to a report that has not been filed\nand a request for facilitation by Ms. Marshall as the Director of the ODM. 2. When the LRSD report is filed, in the next few days, if Joshua perceives deficiencies in it, I would anticipate that, at that time, appropriate objections would be made, which might or might not include the points mentioned in the March 10 letter. J. I note parenthetically that the meeting in Ms. Marshalls office, referenced in the first paragraph of the March 10 letter, does not give a date of the meeting, and does not mention what compliance issues were discussed, nor does it identify the numerous areas of disagreement. Any objections filed after the LRSD report is in existence should be shot through with specificity and precision. 'I8- 4. Any suggestion of facilitating at this point, if there is such a suggestion to be read into the letter, is late far too late. I am going to take the LRSD report, the objections, if any, by Joshua, and decide the issues presented on April 27, or soon thereafter. 5. Consistent with the specific directions given to the ODM, 1 would expect that office to file a report on the progress under 2.7.1. soon, so that the parties will have ample time to study it, and determine whether they want to rely on it at the April 26 - 27 hearing, or want to object to it or parts of it. 6. As I think can be discerned from the above, I expect reports and objections from the parties and the ODM to be timely filed, so that we can wrap the matter up during the April hearing. To this end, I invite your keen attention to my letter dated March 9, 2004. I point out that this letter contains directives, not goals or suggestions. rfH- IT IS SO ORDERED this / /^day of March, 2004. ITED STATES DISTRICT JUDG| UNITED Wm. R. Wilson, Jr.John W. Walker, P.A. Attorney At Law 1723 Broadway Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 Telephone (501) 374-3758 FAX (501) 374-4187 JOHN W. WALKER SHAWN CHILDS Via Facsimile - 371-0100 March 10, 2004 OF COUNSEL ROBERT McHenry, pa. DONNA J. McHENRY 8210 Henderson Road Little Rock, Arkansas 72210 Phone: (501) 372-3425 Fax (501) 372-3428 Email: mchenryd^wbelLnet Ms. Ann S. Marshall, Monitor Office of Desegregation monitoring 124 West Capital, Suite 1895 Little Rock, AR 72201 ^4/? / Re: Little Rock School District nsa\n's Dear Ms. Marshall: Now that we have the 8* Circuit Court of Appeals decision, it is very clear that the court is concerned, as we are, about improving the academic achievement of African American students. Our belief is that all of the components of the Plan were intended to work hand in glove to that end. When we last met -with your office after having invoked the process set forth in the Plan regarding compliance issues, there were numerous areas of disagreement with respect to the Districts obligations. Those areas have not been resolved. Moreover, we did not reach agreements on whether all programs as set forth in the March 15, 2001 Compliance Report were to be evaluated or which ones indeed were to be evaluated. Little Rock took the position that it would only evaluate literacy and math. We resisted that position then and we do so now because such limitation does not address the very purposes of the evaluations in the first place. Dr. Bonnie Lesley and Chris Heller were the Districts representatives at the conference with you. Joy Springer, Bob Pressman and I (for a short while) represented Joshua. Since Dr. Lesley has left the District we have had no further contact with anyone from the District for the purpose of followup discussions regarding the subject. On or about January 15, 2004,1 received two lengthy reports from the District entitled\n1) Little Rock Literacy Program Evaluation\nand 2) An Evaluation of Mathematics \u0026amp; Science Programs in the Little Rock School District from 1998 to 2003. They were sent without explanation or an invitation for discussion. Mr. Heller was aware that we had invoked the process outlined in the Plan and that apparently your office was awaiting more responses from LRSD before having more followup meeting between Joshua and Little Rock. We have received the updates you have sent the parties as you have monitored LRSDs program evaluation. 1 We have now completed our initial review and discussion regarding those evaluations and find not only do they fail to address all of the programs that we negotiated to be evaluated but, that inter aha, the evaluations are keyed to No Child Left Behind mandates or State accountabihty mandates. They appear to be less keyed to the exphcit outcome objectives of the plan or to the evaluation processes the district adopted in its comphance plan and regulations. While Mr. Heller has contended that there are no outcome requirements of the plan, it was certainly a promised expectation that programs would be altered, modified, and improved upon their inadequacies and then nonworking programs which failed to remediate achievement disparity would be eliminated and replaced. The objective we expect is t hat achievement of black school children will be not less than 90% of the achievement of white school children. I believe that the program evaluations that have been presented miss their mark on many counts, some of which I now bring to your attention as the process facilitator with a notation that these comments are also being delivered to Mr. Heller for the Districts use. These evaluations address only literacy, math and science which certainly are not all the programs that are related to improving and remediating the academic achievement of African American students. I call your attention to the Courts Order of September 13, 2002, page 168. I am also informing Judge Wilson of our serious concerns regarding the deficiencies of the program evaluations. Our list is not comprehensive because we need to 1) thoroughly review the evaluations, 2) have discussions via the process and the study itself and 3) have more information regarding the Districts intentions. 1) Joshua remains concerned about the lack of achievement for Afiican American students at virtually all grade levels. 2) The literacy report does not identify any significant relationship or correlation between the literacy programs implemented by LRSD and the achievement of African American students. 3) Neither the literacy report nor the math/science report addressed African American student achievement by grade level, achievement by school or specific remediation mastery by student, grade level or school. None of the curricular programs in the study had a significant impact on student achievement in 5* grade, for example. 4) The literacy report (page 45) makes the surprising notation that substantial difierences exist in the overall achievement of African American students and other students in the Little Rock School District. This conclusion is, in large part, what this action is intended to correct. Joshua interprets that notation to mean that the programs that have been utilized have not successfully addressed Afiican American student achievement nor have they been modified or replaced by others which promise greater success. It surely cannot mean that the objective is impossible to attain. 25) The control groups utilized for the literacy report raise another concern. In this report, a significant number of the students, almost half of them, in the District appear to be eliminated fi-om the study. 6) The literacy report contains formative information through a few teacher focus groups, however, this data is not inclusive of the total teacher population responsible for remediation of African American student achievement. Therefore, Joshua must conclude that such information is skewed at best. 7) Joshua recalls the representations of Dr. Bonnie Lesley during her court testimony that the achievement gap in grades K-2 had been eliminated according to her DRA assessments during the 2001-2002 school year. The 2003 literacy evaluation submitted by the District now contradicts her findings in that approximately half of the Afiican American students during 2002-2003 in 4* grade were performing Below Basic. Those second grade students would appear to be the 4* graders now performing below basic. Surely there are sufficient data to prepare an evaluation of literacy in these grades (K-2) and for the District to be able to track their individual performances through Dr. Lesleys data. I read that the Courts Order, Page 170, paragraph A, contemplates the use of this data, i.e., LRSD now has over three years of testing data. 57 8) Joshua remains concerned regarding the Districts ability to accurately record, collect, retain and retrieve student achievement data. 9) There is no discussion regarding the participation of African American students in Pre-AP and AP courses which were allegedly instituted to address Afiican American achievement. Nor is there any evaluation of the Districts tutoring programs or other programs aimed at improving Afiican American performance. 10) The report indicates that African American students had substantially lower absolute performance than did other students. The academic gains on literary tests were lower for AlBrican American students than for other students. The evaluations do not compare the achievement of Benchmark exams of 4* or S'** grade students for 2001 or 2002 scoring Below Basic in successive years. Moreover, the SAT 9 test results for higher grade students reflect a need for more information. 11) The District was inconsistent in providing the necessary support for teachers to attend necessary literacy training (Reading Recovery, Effective Literary and ELLA). 12) The evaluation reports discussed professional development in literacy and mathematics while ignoring the three major professional development commitments in the March 15, 2001 compliance report. 3The foregoing list is merely suggestive\nit is not exhaustive. Because of your designated role, I am requesting that Judge Wilson involve your office in preparing a comprehensive monitoring report of the Districts compliance with its student achievement commitments by use of the evaluation process. That I believe was a role envisioned for ODM by both the Court Of Appeals and by the District Court as well. I will be filing the necessary papers to that end, but in the meantime would you kindly advise me as to the status of our having already invoked the process set forth by the plan. Sincerely, John W. Walker JWW\njs cc\nHonorable Judge William R. Wilson Mr. Chris Heller Mr. Robert Pressman All Other Counsel 4 CHECK LIST FOR ENGLISH CLASSROOMS r Observed in class Top Ten Things That Should Be Seen Comments 1. Teacher engaged with students. 2. Students' creations on walls. 3. Students often seated in groups or pods._________________ 4. Students who can discuss their work.. 5. Students interacting with peers. 6. Classroom libraries and sustained reading time._________ 7. Students able to relate benchmarks, standards, assessments.__________ 8. Use of rubrics and performance-based assessments. 9. Benchmarks clearly displayed in room. 10.Teacher reading and writing with students. Observed in class Top Ten Things That Should Not _________________Be Seen____________ 1. Teacher sitting behind desk. 2. drab, boring, or \"old\" classroom. 3. Students in rows all the time. 4. Rote skill, drill or busy work. 5. Worksheets and packaged materials. 6. Prolonged silent periods of time. 7. One objective on board. 8. All multiple choice or \"canned\" tests. 9. Students who do not know how they are doing or waiting for overdue papers. 10. Paper grading in class by teacher while students are working. Comments Date Signature\ns c o 1 CQ cS CQ o o o co \"S g 6 o O d Constructive and Effective Evaluation Granimar/Mechanics Taught in Context at Editing Stage Collaboration-------------------------------- Process Writing ------------------------- Scoring Guides\nRubrics --------------- Phase Questions\nWriting Writing before/after reading Teacher Modeling Reading Writing Silent Reading\nDiscussions Independent Reading Active Reading I (P \u0026gt; O (U -H Minilessons ______ Skills Taught in Context of Meaningful Literature Grammar i Spelling/ Vocabulary Mugshots Dates IPrograms on Page 148, -intertm Compliance Report 2001-02 Evaluation Outcome of evaluation Date Completed Author Date of Board Approval Date 2002-03 evaluation completed 2003-04 1* semester evaluation completed PreK-3 Literacy National Science Foundation Project Middle Schools Extended Year Schools Summer School HIPPY Charter School Campus Leadership Teams English as a Second Language Lyceum Scholars Program SEDL Program-Southwest Middle School Onward to Excellence (Watson Elementary) Collaborative Action Team (CAT) Vital LinkPrograms on Page 148, -tntertm Compliance Report 2001-02 Evaluation Outcome of evaluation Date Completed Author Date of Board Approval Date 2002-03 evaluation completed 2003-04 1 st semester evaluation completed PreK-3 Literacy National Science Foundation Project Middle Schools Extended Year Schools Summer School HIPPY Charter School Campus Leadership Teams English as a Second Language Lyceum Scholars Program SEDL Program-Southwest Middle School Onward to Excellence (Watson Elementary) Collaborative Action Team (CAT) Vital LinkPrograms listed in Interim Compliance Report to improve student performance Evaluation Date Completed Author Date of Board Approval Outcome of evaluation Title I Programs PLATO Labs Accelerated Learning Center Alternative Learning Center Summer School Tutoring Programs 21 Century Community Learning Centers Project ACT Tutoring Career Orientation Block Scheduling High School Advisory Program Personalized Education Plan K-12 Science Professional Development for Science Teachers Citizenship and Character EducationPrograms listed in the final Compliance Report to improve student performance Evaluation Date Completed Author Date of Board Approval Outcome of evaluation Achievement Level Tests Criterion-Referenced Tests-Literacy, Grades 3-5 Criterion-Referenced Tests-Literacy, Grades 6-12 Criterion-Referenced Test (End if Unit/Modual Exams) Mathematics and Science State Benchmark Exams, Grades 4, 6, and 8 Stanford Achievement Test, g Edition Professional Development Instructional Standards Language Arts Mathematics Science Social Studies Staffing Curriculum Guides Teachers of Tomorrow AP World History Pilot Progrm in Grade 8 American History Citizenship Assessment Professional Development Social Studies ResourcesFine Arts Summer School Tutoring Programs Extended Year Education Pathwise Badgett Charter School Safe Schools/Healthy Students Grant Project 21 Century Community Learning Carters Grand Project Carnegie Planning Grant for High School Reform Proposal for Magnet School Grant for Cloverdale Middle School, Mabelvale Middle School, Fair High School, and McClellan High School Charter School Planning Grant to Expand the Accelerated Learning CenterRECEIVED First Quarterly Progress Update December 1, 2004 NOV 3 2004 OFFICEOF DESEGREGATION MONITORING LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, PLAINTIFF V. PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO.l ETAL., DEFENDANTS MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ETAL., INTERVENORS KATHERINE KNIGHT, ETAL., INTERVENORS Outline Purpose This update is of actions taken with respect to the new Compliance Remedy: A. LRSD must promptly hire a highly trained team of professionals to reinvigorate PRE. 9? B. The first task PRE must perform is to devise a comprehensive program assessment process. ... the comprehensive program assessment process must be deeply embedded as a permanent part of LRSDs curriculum and instruction C. program. 99 During each of the next two academic school years (2004-05 and 2005-06), LRSD must hire one or more outside consultants to prepare four (4) formal step 2 evaluations. 99 A. Hire a highly trained team of professionals LRSD has hired three new professionals with knowledge and experience in assessment evaluation, and statistical analysis: As of October 1, 2004, the Planning, Research, \u0026amp; Evaluation team consists of: Karen DeJamette, PhD, Director (cite date of hire and bio) Maurecia Malcolm, Statistician (cite date of hire and bio) James C. Wohlleb, Statistician (cite date of hire and bio) Continued employment of Ed Williams, PhD, Statistician (cite bio) Yvette Dillingham, Testing Coordinator (cite bio) Irma Shelton and Malinda administrative assistants (cite years of experience)B. Devise and imbed a comprehensive program assessment process. In late September the reinvigorated PRE began devising the comprehensive program assessment process that will be deeply imbedded in LRSDs educational operations. Dr. Dejamette and staff continued cooperation with Dr. Steve Ross to review the draft Policy IL-R2 and to redefine the policy to include a comprehensive program assessment process that fits the needs of the Little Rock School District: Discussion of Drs. Brooks and Dejamette and Mr. Heller: Telephone conference between Drs. Dejamette \u0026amp; Ross: October 5 conference of Drs. Brooks, DeJamette, \u0026amp; Ross in Memphis: October 7 introductions to Mr. Gene Jones \u0026amp; general discussion. October 26 telephone conference of Drs. DeJamette \u0026amp; Ross \u0026amp; Mr. Wohlleb: Agreement by Dr. Ross: C. Hire outside consultant(s) to prepare four formal step 2 evaluations. LRSD has begun negotiations to hire Drs. Ross \u0026amp; Catterall to perform the following tasks... Drs. Ross and Catterall were contacted late September for preliminary conversations regarding the 4 step 2 evaluations for 2004-2005 [List dates and times of conversations with superintendent, school board, ODM, intervenors] Process of selecting programs for evaluation, including PRE staff efforts to initially review all programs currently operating and then to discuss possibilities with Ross and Catterall to determine selection of 4 programs to formally evaluate Design of Evaluation studies (mini-proposals?) Schedule of evaluations and reportsAppendices Resumes of staff Memo from Ross related to IL-R2 Schedule of tasks \u0026amp; assignmentsLittle Rock School District Planning, Research, \u0026amp; Evaluation Department Evaluation Designs for Programs Greater Second Baptist Church 5615 Geyer Springs Road February 16, 2005 Agenda 7:45 a.m. Dr. Karen DeJarnette \u0026amp; PRE team welcome Drs. Steve Ross, Anna Grehan. Dan Strahl. \u0026amp; Aaron McDonald from U/Memphis \u0026amp; Drs. Gail Weems \u0026amp; Linda Dorn from UALR 8:30 a m. Drs. Lloyd Sain, Roy Brooks \u0026amp; Sadie Mitchell address principals 8:50 a m. Presentation of evaluation designs to principals by Dr. Steve Ross 9:30 Dr. Ross \u0026amp; team meet with directors of programs: 9:3010:15 Reading Recovery\nDr. Linda Dorn from UALR, Pat Busbea, \u0026amp; Krista Underwood 10:1511 Smart/Thrive: Vanessa Cleaver \u0026amp; Marcelline Carr 12:00 Center) Lunch Compass Learning: Lucy Neal \u0026amp; Travis Taylor (Tech 2 p.m. Wrap-up of PRE \u0026amp; Dr. Ross teams8: 00 - 8:25 LEADERSHIP TEAM MEETING Greater Second Baptist Church Wednesday, February 16, 2005 8\n30 A.M. - 3\n00 P.M. Continental Breakfast 8:30 Call to Order Dr. Lloyd Sain 8:30 - 8:50 Organizational Chart Dr. Roy G. Brooks Dr. Sadie Mitchell 8:50-9:20 Evaluation Designs for Programs Dr. Steve Ross 9:20 -10:30 A.M. Constructivist Teaching in the Literacy Classrooms Dr. Olivine Roberts Dennis Glasgow Marie McNeal Suzi Davis Krista Underwood Elementary Principals - Downstairs Secondary Principals - Classroom #8 - Upstairs 10:30 -10:45 Break 10:45 -12:05 Part I: Constructivist Teaching Continued 12:05 -12:40 Lunch (On-site) 12:45 - 2:30 Part II: Constructivist Teaching 2:30 - 2:45 Break Return to Fellowship Hall for a General Meeting 2:45 - 3:05 Maculaitis Assessments Dr. Karen Broadnax 3:05-3:15 Wrap-up/Evaluation Drs. Sain and Mitchell Evaluation of heading Eecovey in the Uttle V^ock School System x=: Conducted by R\u0026amp;' j FEB i . CREP \u0026gt; Center for Research in Educational PolicyPrimaiy YLvaluation Question... a Has the Reading Recovery program been effective in improving and remediating the academic achievements of African-American students? JJSupplemental Pivaluation Questions... What are the quality and level of implementation of Reading Recovery at the participating schools? What is the level of participation in reading Recovery by African-American students? What is the progress demonstrated by African-American and other students in Reading Recovery in improving achievement? What are the perceptions of the Reading Recovery teachers and principals? What are the perceptions of regular first-grade teachers and other teachers regarding Reading Recovery? What are the perceptions of parents of Reading Recovery students?Evaluation Procedures,.. DRA or Dibels 2004-05 Reading and Math Subtests Reading Recovery Teacher Phone Interviews Reading Recovery School Teachers Survey Reading Recovery Principal Interview with Randomly Selected Principals. Reading Recovery Achievement Profiles Tutoring Observations School Records/Archival Data (e.g. Participation) Reading Recovery Parent Survey The Tutoring Observations will consist of Reading Recovery experts observing tutoring sessions.ILvaluation Timeline... February March-April May-June Begin observations Interview Reading Recovery Teachers Survey Reading Recovery teachers and parents Complete Reading Recovery teacher interviews Profile Reading Recovery achievement Analyze records/archival data analyses July-September October November Analyze achievement data, survey and interviews PRE reviews draft reports PRE submits report to Little Rock School District for approval Draft reports for reviewSchoolparticipation guidelines... Promote the importance of the research among faculty and students Administer surveys at faculty meetings Facilitate researcher visits to schools It is important to remember that this study does not evaiuate individuai teachers or schools.Evaluation of the Smart! Thrive Programs in the Tittle Tock School District Conducted by CREP received FEB 1 . 2005 OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION uOHlTOWNG \u0026gt; Center for Research in Educational PolicyPrimary Evaluation Question... (( Have the Smart/Thrive programs been effective in improving and remediating the academic achievement of African/American students? JJSupplementary Questions... What is the level of participation in Smart and Thrive by African-American students? What instructional strategies are used during the tutoring sessions? What are the perceptions of Smart/Thrive tutors regarding the program? What are the perceptions of Algebra I teachers regarding the Smart/Thrive program? What are the perceptions of participating students regarding the Smart/Thrive program? What are the perceptions of parents/guardians of Smart/Thrive students regarding the program?Iivaluation Procedures... Achievement Analysis Quasi Experimental School Records/Archival Data (e.g. Participation) Observations of Tutoring Sessions Smart/Thrive Tutor Questionnaire Algebra I Teacher Questionnaire Smart/Thrive Student Questionnaire Smart/Thrive Parent Questionnaire Observation of tutoring sessions wiii consist of visits to the Saturday Aigebra ci asses.ILvaluation Timeline... February March-April May-June Observe Thrive Sessions Administer Teacher, Tutor and Parent Questionnaire Complete Focus Groups and Observations Begin Focus Groups Analyze records/archival data July-September October November Analyze achievement data, survey and interviews PRE reviews draft report PRE submits report to Little Rock School District for approval Draft reports for reviewSchool Participation Guidelines... Promote the importance of the research among faculty and students Facilitate researcher visits to schools It Is important to remember that this study does not evaiuate individual teachers or schools.Evaluation of Compass Eearning in the Uttle Eock School System Conducted by RECEJVED FEB 1 '1 2005 OFHCEOF DESEGREGATION I.iONlTORlNG CREP Center for Research in Educational Policy \u0026gt;Primary Evaluation Question... \"Has the Compass Learning program been effective in improving and remeditating the academic achievement of African-American students?\" Supplemental Questions... What are the quality, nature, and level of implementation of Compass Learning at the participating schools? What is the level of participation by African-American students? What are the perceptions of teachers and technology specialists? What are the perceptions of parents?Evaluation Procedures... 1^ Student Level Achievement Analysis Quasi Experimental Compass Learning Teacher Survey Technology Specialist Phone Interview District Compass Learning Program Coordinator Phone Interview 10 Two Hour Compass Learning Laboratory Observations 5-Twenty Minute Student Focus Groups Compass Learning Parent Survey School Records and Archival Data (e.g.. Participation) Observations will be conducted by trained observers using CREP observation instruments validated through extensive research.Evaluation Timeline... February March-April May-June Begin observations Survey teachers \u0026amp; Parents Analyze records/data analysis Phone interviews of tech specialists Complete observations, interviews and student focus groups. July-Sep tember October November Analyze achievement data, survey and interviews PRE reviews draft reports PRE submits report to LRSD for approval Draft report for reviewSchool participation guideline... Promote the importance of the research among faculty and students Administer surveys at faculty meetings Facilitate researcher visits to schools 'J- It is important to remember that this study does not evaluate individual teachers or schools.Sent from to p2/ll F, IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF V. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL DEFENDANTS MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL INTERVENORS KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL INTERVENORS RESPONSE TO COURTS OCTOBER 31, 2005 ORDER - LRSDS WITNESS SUMMARIES In response to the Courts Order of October 31, 2005, LRSD submits the following summaries of the expected testimony of its witnesses. LRSD estimates that the direct examination of each witnes.s will take thirty minutes. LRSD does not expect to call Dr. Brooks a,s a witness, a.s the PRE witnesses who report to Dr. Brooks can provide the same information he would provide. 1. Gene Jones Office of Desegregation Monitoring 1 Union National Plaza 124 W. Capitol, Suite 1895 Little Rock. AR 72201 Mr. Jones is expected to testify that he had primary responsibility within the Office of Desegregation Monitoring to monitor LRSDs implementation of the Courts June 30, 2004 Compliance Remedy\nthat LRSDs Department of Planning, Research and Evaluation (PRE) was cooperative and helpful\nthat he had access to all relevant documents and notice of all relevant meetings with the possible exception of a recent visit by Dr, Catterall which took place on October 17,2005\nthat LRSD hired qualified experts to perform the required S tep 2 program evaluations\nthatSent 03/11/2005 at 11:57:15 from to p3/ll PRE worked diligently to support those experts in their work\nthat LRSD also hired experts to perform additional program evaluations not required by the Courts compliance remedy\nthat he provided regular reports to the Court concerning the status of LRSDs compliance\nthat PRE, as far as he knows, provided Joshua access to relevant documents and notice of relevant meetings concerning the Step 2 evaluations with the possible exception of a recent visit by Dr, Catterall which took place on October 17,2005\nthat LRSD changed the subject of one proposed Step 2 evaluation at the request of the Joshua intervenors\nthat the Step 2 evaluations which were due on October 1, 2005 require data from the Arkansas benchmark exams for their completion\nthat such data was not available in a form useful to LRSDs experts before October 1\nthat the reporting of Arkansas benchmark results is entirely within the control of the Arkansas Department of Education\nthat there is nothing LRSD could have done to hasten the reporting of benchmark exam results\nthat in late 2004 and early 2005 LRSD considered seeking and extension of the October 1, 2005 deadline for four Step 2 evaluations\nand that by March, 2005 LRSD had decided to wait to see if the State supplied the test scores from the Spring 2005 testing in time for the District to meet the deadline\nthat LRSD notified him of that decision and that he notified the Court. 2. Dr. Karen DeJarnette Little Rock School District Planning, Research and Evaluation 3ff'' \u0026amp; Pulaski Streets Little Rock, AR 72201 Dr. Karen DeJarnette is expected to testily that she i.s director of PRE and has been since September 17,2004\nthat implementing the compliance remedy has been PREs top priority during the time she has been its director\nthat she and her staff at PRE have worked diligently to implement the compliance remedy\nthat LRSD hired Dr. James S. Catterall. a qualified expert, to evaluate its 2Sent 03/11/2005 at 11:57:43 from to P4/11 Year-Round Education (YRE) prognim\nthat LRSD hired Dr. Steve Ross, a qualified expert, to pertorm the Step 2 evaluations ot SMART/THRTVE, Compass Learning, and Reading Recovery\nthat Drs. Catterall and Ross were provided copies of the compliance remedy and that they each signed a Memorandum of Understanding on February 1, 2005 agreeing to conduct the Step 2 evaluations in accordance with the compliance remedy\nthat they were actively involved in the design and planning of Step 2 evaluations beginning in 2004\nthat PRE worked cooperatively with ODM and Joshua, providing them access to documents and notice of meetings so that they would be constantly aware of LRSDs progress in meeting the requirements of the compliance remedy\nthat. beginning in December 2004 through March 2005, LRSD considered the question of whether to seek an extension of the October 1, 2005 deadline for submission of the Step 2 evaluations so that PRE and the LRSD Board of Directors would have more time to review the evaluations prior to their submission to the Court\nthat those discussions were predicated on the belief that benchmark exam results would be available in July 2005\nthat during February or March, 2005, LRSD raised the question of additional time with the Joshua Intervenors and was told that Joshua would oppose any such request\nthat LRSD decided in March 2005 not to make a request for an extension of time and notified ODM of that decision\nthat the LRSD Superintendent and Board of Directors expected PRE to meet the requirements of the Compliance Remedy\nthat the Step 2 evaluations which were due on October 1, 2005 required data from the Spring 2005 administration of the Arkansas benchmark examinations\nthat in order to be useful to Drs. Catterall and Ross, that data must be in digital form\nthat the benchmark examination results were not available in digital form before October 1, 2005 although PRE had a good faith belief that they would be available in July 2005\nthat the reporting of Arkansas benchmark examination results is entirely within the control of the Arkansas 3Sent 03/11/2005 at 11:58:14 from to p5/ll Department of Education\nthat there was nothing LRSD could have done to hasten the reporting of the necessary benchmark examination results\nand that no one in PRE or anywhere within LRSD did anything for the purpose of avoiding or delaying compliance with the Compliance Remedy\nthat the requested extension of time was made in good faith based on a belief that it is necessary to secure high quality evaluations in accordance with the Compliance Remedy\nand that the delay will not reduce the usefulness of the evaluations to LRSD - they will be used to make any indicated program changes for the 2006-07 school year, just as they would have been used had they been received on October 1, 2005, 3. Dr. James S. Catterall Professor University of California P. O. Box 951521 Lo.s Angeles, CA 90005 Dr. Catterall is expected to testify in accordance with his Affidavit which was previously filed in this case. Dr. Catterall will be available by telephone on November 7, 2005 at 310-455- 2720. 4. Dr. Steven M. Ross Fadree Professor and Director Center for Research in Educational Policy 325 Browning Hall Memphis, TN 38152-3340 Dr. Ross is expected to testify that he was hired to perform three Step 2 evaluations for the 2004-05 school year in accordance with the Courts June 30,2004 Compliance Remedy\nthat he has been hired to conduct three Step 2 evaluations for the 2005-06 school year in accordance with the 4Sent 03/11/2005 at 11:58:36 - from to p6/ll Courts June 30. 2004 Compliance Remedy\nthat PRE has been cooperative and responsive in supporting his work and providing him any requested assistance\nthat 2004-05 final benchmark examination results (not raw data) in a usable digital format are necessary for him to complete the Step 2 evaluations which were due on October 1, 2005\nthat such information is not yet available\nand that LRSD has done nothing to hinder or delay his efforts to perform Step 2 evaluations in accordance with the requirements of the June 30,2004 Order. He will further testify that all of the field work necessary to accomplish the evaluations was completed in a timely manner and that he wax waiting for the benchmark examinations so that the work of integrating these tests scores could complete the evaluations\nthat it was only the receipt of the exam results which prevented him from completing his assignment. 5. Jim Wohlleb Little Rock School District Planning, Research and Evaluation JO\"* \u0026amp; Pulaski Streets Little Rock, AR 72201 Jim Wohlleb is expected to testify that he began work for LRSD on October 1, 2004 as a statistical research specialist within the PRE Department. Beyond that, his testimony is expected to be substantially the same as that of Dr. Karen DeJamette. 6. Dr. Gayle Potter Associate Director Academic Standards and Assessment Arkansas Department of Education #4 State Capitol Mall, Room 106A Little Rock, AR 72201 5Sent 03/11/2005 at 11:58:59 - from to p7/ll Dr. Gayle Potter is expected to testify that she is Associate Director for Academic Standards and Assessment at the Arkansas Department of Education (ADE)\nthat she is the person within ADE primarily responsible for testing in general and the Arkansas benchmark examinations in particular\nthat the benchmark examination results for the 2004-05 school year were originally expected to be released in July 2005\nthat on June 23, 2005 ADE issued an informational memo to Arkansas Superintendents notifying them that committee.s were working to reset the cut score.s for each performance level of the Benchmark Exams and consequently the examination results would be issued in two phases\nthat Phase I would consist of cds containing raw score reports which would be shipped to districts no later than July 1, 2005\nthat assumptions about whether a student is proficient cannot be made based on raw scores\nand that Phase 11 Reports placing students into new performance levels will be issued in the fall of 2005\"\nthat the digital benchmark data necessary for statistical analysis will be released in mid-November\nthat release of the benchmark examination results is entirely within the control of the Arkansas Department of Education and its contractors\nthat LRSD has done nothing to delay the release of the results\nand that there is nothing LRSD could have done to hasten the release of the digital data required by its experts to complete their Step 2 evaluations. 7. Christopher Heller FRIDAY, ELDREDGE \u0026amp; CLARK 400 West Capitol, Suite 2000 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-3493 (501)376-2011 Christopher Heller wilt testify that he filed a Motion to Extend Time on September 29,2005 based on a good faith belief, after reasonable inquiiy, that the matters presented in that Motion were 6Sent 03/11/2005 at 11:59:25 - from to P8/11 true\nthat he filed a response to the Courts September 30,2005 Order on October 4,2005 based on a good faith belief, after reasonable inquiry, that the matters presented in that response were true\nthat, having now had the opportunity to review hundreds of emails and other documents, he believes that the conversation with counsel for Joshua described at page 2 of \"LRSDs Response to Order probably occuned in February or March rather than June or July, The principal reason for not tiling LRSDs Motion to Extend Time sooner than September 29, 2005 was counsels intense involvement on behalf of LRSD in Lake View v. Huckabee-, that matter was scheduled as follows\nMay 5,2005 Arkansas Supreme Court issues Per Curiam Order scheduling oral argument on May 19, 2005\nMay 19, 2005 Oral Argument\nJune 9, 2005 Mandate recalled and Masters reappointed\nJuly 8, 2005 Disclosure of witnesses and exhibits\nJune 28, 2005 Case conference with Masters\nJuly 19, 2005 Multiple daily depositions begin and continued for several weeks\nJuly 26,2005 Date of hearing as originally scheduled is rescheduled to begin on August 29, 2005 because parties cannot complete preparations\nAugust 29 through September 9, 2005 Hearings\nSeptember 20, 2005 Post Hearing Briefs due. Counsel and PRE had anticipated that electronic data from the State of Arkansas would be available 7Sent 03/11/2005 at 11:59:47 from to p9/ll in July and that the October 1,2005 deadline could, therefore, be met. Counsel did receive an e-mail from Dr. DeJamette on June 30, 2005 setting forth that the state benchmark scores could not be available in July. Counsel did not respond or react to that e-mail in a timely fashion because of his involvement in the Lake View case. Counsel did not recognize until September 2005 that the critical information would not be available, and it was then that the Motion to Extend Time was filed. Counsel will testify that it was an inadvertent but important omission on his part for which he accepts responsibility. Respectfully Submitted. Philip E. Kaplan (68026) Kaplan. Brewer, Maxey \u0026amp; Haralson P.A. 415 Main Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501) 372-0400 Pkaplan @kbmlaw.net /sZ Philip E. Kaplan 8Sent 03/11/2005 at 12:00:02 from to plO/11 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I certify that on November 3, 2005,1 have electronically filed the foregoing with the Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF system, which shall send notification of such filing to the following\nClark-hagemeier@ag.state.ar.us sionesft'mwsgw.com siQiies@ili.cotn iohawalkeranv@aol.com and mailed by U.S. regular mail to the following addresses: Gene Jones Office of Desegregation Monitor 1 Union National Plaza 124 W. Capitol, Suite 1895 Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Clayton Blackstock Mr. Mark Burnett 1010 W. Third Sheet Little Rock, AR 72201 Judge J. Thomas Ray U. S. District Courthouse 600 West Capitol Avenue, Suite 149 Little Rock, AR 72201 /s/ Philip E. Kaplan 9VQ/XX/Z.UVO dL ii:uo:oa rom to p2/5 Case 4:82-cv-00866-WRW-JTR Document 3964-1 Filed 11/02/2005 Pagel of4 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF V. CASE NO. 4\n82CV00866 WRW PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. LET AL. DEFENDANTS MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL. INTERVENORS KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL. INTERVENORS THE JOSHUA INTERVENORS REPLY TO THE DIRECTIVE OF THE COURT DATED OCTOBER 31.20GS The Court seeks as explanation for LRSDs failure to promptly inform the Court that it needed an extension of time in which to meet the October 1,2005 requirements of e Courts June 30, 2004 Order. The burden is on the District to explain why delay was not promptly sought The active parties have submitted extensive lists of witnesses through whom the Courts limited concern would be addressed on November?, 2005. Joshua acknowledges its initial witness list to have had a broader agenda than the issue to be addressed at the hearing. Accordingly Joshua reduces its witness list to the persons called by the defendants and to the following other persons with a summary of their anticipated testimony if they are not called by the LRSD\n1) Dr. Roy Brooks: his involvement in the process was minimal, not an agenda item for him or the Board and he did not meet Dr. Steve Ross before the show cause order. Further, that Mr. Heller did impress upon him the significance or importance of the 1X X um CU po/ O Case 4:82-cv-00866-WRW-JTR Document 3964-1 Filed 11/02/2005 Page 2 of 4 2) 3) 4) time requirements of the Order although they met frequently between July 1,2004 and October 6,2005 on other matters. 20 minutes Dr. Hugh Hattabaugh\nhis involvement in the process was also minimal, not an agenda item for him or the Board and he, too, did not meet Dr. Steve Ross before the show cause order. Further, that Mr. Heller did not impress upon him the significance or importance of the time requirements of the Order although they met frequently between July 1,2004 and October 6,2005 on other matters. 15 minutes Dr. Olivine Roberts: (a) the interaction between herself, Dr. DeJamette, the Joshua Intervenors, the State Department of Education, the PRE staff, the expert witnesses. Drs. Brooks and Hattabaugh and Mr. Chris Heller\n(b) her minimal involvement in the process\nand, (c) her failure to ever meet and discuss any evaluation issue including the need for additional time for compliance with Joshua, the ODM or the State Department of Education. 45 minutes Joy Springer\n(a) will address Mr. Hellers contentions in his reply dated October 4, 2005. She will establish that Mr. Heller infonned Joshua in February 2005 that the Benchmark results would not likely be prepared prior to September 2005\n(b) that when Mr. Heller appeared before the Eighth Circuit on April 12,2005, he presented Dr. DeJamette and Dr. Brooks as he indicated that the district was complying with this Court's Order while appealing\n(c) Joshuas efforts to be involvedin the process\n(d) that LRSD and Mr. Heller knew long before September 29, 2005 that LRSD would not likely be able to meet the deadline\nand (f) LRSD did nothing to advance receipt of the data from the processing sources. 30 minutes 2a c XI um ro Case 4:82-cv-00866-WRW-JTR Document 3964-1 Filed 11/02/2005 Page 3 of 4 5) 6) Mr. Dennis Glasgow: he will address his efforts to prevent Dr. Steve Ross further participation in the evaluation process, and his efforts to delay compliance activities. 30 minutes Mr. Gene Jones: will address the knowledge of ODM regarding the process, the advice given by ODM regarding extending the Court ordered time, and the response of the LRSD to that advice. 30 minutes Respectfully submitted, /s/John W. Walker______________ John W. Walker, AR Bar No. 64046 JOHN W. WALKER, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72206 (501) 374-3758 (501) 374-4187 (Facsimile) Robert Pressman, Mass Bar No. 405900 22 Locust Avenue Lexington, MA 02421 (781)862-1955 3UJtill b X/ X.UVU a. L irom to pb/b Case 4:82-cv-00866-WRW-JTR Document 3964-1 Filed 11/02/2005 Page 4 of 4 XX\nlu:uo CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 1 hereby certify that on this 2' day of November, 2005,1 electronically filed the foregoing with the Clerk of Court using the CM/ECF System, which shall send electronic notifications to all counsel associated with this case and by other means to counsel listed below. Clayton R. Blackstock Mitchell, Blackstock, Barnes, Wagoner, Ivers \u0026amp; Sneddon, PLLC 1010 West Third Street Post Office Box 1510 Little Rock, AR 72203-1510 Norman J. Chachkin NA.ACP Legal Defense \u0026amp; Educational fund, Inc. 99 Hudson Street Suite 1600 New York, NY 10013 Timothy Gerard Gauger Arkansas Attorney Generals Office Catlett-Prien Tower Building 323 Center Street Suite 200 Little Rock, AR 72201-2610 James M. Llewellyn, Jr. Thompson \u0026amp; Llewellyn, P.A. 412 South Eighteenth Street Post Office Box 818 Fort Smith, AR 72902-0818 /s/John W, Walker 4John W. Walker, P.A. Attorney At Law 1723 Broadway Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 Telephone (501) 374-3758 FAX (501) 374-4187 JOHN W. WALKER SHAWN CHILDS received MAR 2005 ' OF COUNSEL ROBERT McHENRY, P.A. DONNA J. McHENRY 8210 Henderson Road Little Rock, Arkansas 72210 Phone: (501) 372-3425 Fax (501) 372-3428 Email: mchenryd@swbell.net OFFICEOF DESEGREGATION InONlTORlNG Via Facsimile March 8, 2005 Ms. Margie Powell Office of Desegregation Monitoring 124 West Capitol, Suite 1895 Little Rock, AR 72201 mar o 2C05 RECEiVi 0 Re: LRSD Program Evaluations DESEGREGADON I'.iONlTORING Dear Margie: When we met in my office in November, 2004,1 was left with the understanding that you would prepare notes of our meeting. If I am mistaken, please accept my apologies. Sincerely, W. Walker JWW:jsrm I JOHN W, walker SHAWN CHILDS JOHN W. Walker, PA. Attorney Ar Law 1723 Broadway Little Bock, Arkansas 72206 Telephone (501) 374-376S Fas (501) 374-4187 I I Via Facsimile -447-7609 March 17,2005 OP COUNSEL ROBERT MsKENSy, P.A DONNAJ. McHENKY 8210 HfiNDSRSON ROAD Little mnwn 70010 PbonT\n(501) 372-3425 Fax (501) 372-3428 Email\natcheniydgswbeiiMt Karen DeJamette, PhD. Director PRE Little Rock School District 3001 Pulaski Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Dr. DeJamette: RECEIVED MAR 1 8 2005 S: OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING jESEGhui\n. I am advised by Ms. Springer that you promised to share with us, as you did with all other participants, by email copies of all documents, i.e. data collection instruments, discussed during the meetings on February 16,2005 prior to final print. To date, we have not received any of the final drafts for comments. You will recall that there were discussions regarding the survey forms for parents and teachers and other data collection documents where feedback was given. None of the final documents have been shared with us. I note that you have reported to the Court That counsel for Joshua Intervenors provided feedback and assisted with the final design of data collection instruments.' Would you also provide all documents including agendas, notes and any documents disseminated during the parent and teacher meetings held on or about February 24,2005. Finally, this is to request that you provide to this office any and all documents that you have shared and intend to share in the future with the Office of Desegregation Monitoring. Your cooperation is appreciated. I lincerely, 1 .'Walker I 'b JWWijs cc: Mr. Gene Jones, ODMptg^ Mzz Individual Approach to a World of Knowledge April 21,2005 Mr. Gene Jones \u0026amp; Ms. Marjorie Powell Associate Monitors Office of Desegregation Monitoring US District Court 1 Union National Plaza 124 West Capitol 1895 Little Rock, AR 72201 received APR 2 1 2005 OFFICE OF DBSESRE6M10H MOHnOWHO Dear Mr. Jones \u0026amp; Ms. Powell: On Friday, May 6, at 2 PM we are convening the four teams participating in the Step-2 Evaluations of Little Rock School District programs. This session will occur in room 19 of the Instructional Resource Center at 3001 South Pulaski Street. We expect about an hour and a half duration. In addition to notifying you of this event, we invite you in case you would like to learn our progress evaluating Compass Learning, Reading Recovery, Smart/Thrive, and Year- Round Education. Please do not hesitate to contact us with any questions. Sincerely yours, Karen DeJamette, mette, Ph.D. Director, PRE xc: John W. Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72206-1220 Mr. Chris Heller Friday Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark 2000 Regions Center 400 Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 810 W Markham Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 www.lrsd.kl2.ar.us 501-324-2000 fax: 501-324-2032MAY. 2.2005 2:i3Pn JOHN W WALKER P A NO.459 P.2 JOHN W. walker SHAWN CHILDS JOHN w. Walker, p.a, ATTORNEY AT Law 1723 BaoALiWAy IJTTLS Sees, 72206 Tblrphone CROI) 374.375fi FAX (501) 374-4187 Via Facsimile Mw2,2005 OFCOIJNSEL ROBERT McHENRY PA DONNA J. McHENRY 82X0 RoaD LrmE Rock. Askans-as 72210 Phone\n(SOl) 372-3425 Fax (501) 372-3428 Eil-z.: mdiemyd^wtejlirt K^en DeJamette, Ph.D. Director, PSE Little Reek Sehuul District ^iO West Markham Little Rode, AR 72201 Dear Dr. DeJamette: I am in recent of your letter April 21,2005. This is to fiir\u0026amp;er advise that we have not received the requested iafonnation per our letter to you dated March 17,2005. Sincerely, W. Walker J^W\njs ce\nOffice of Desegregation Monitoring Mr. Gene Jones 124 West Capitxri Avenue, Suite 1S95 Little Rode. AR 72201 Catterall 5/11/2005 Draft Questions for Parent Interviews Target parents. Identify parents of an YRE student or students where at least one of these students spent two or more years in a traditional calendar year school. The main goal is to interview parents who have seen the same student (or students) in both the traditional and YRE school setting. Randomly select 20 of these parents from each of five YRE schools. Conduct a phone interview with each parent. A. Explain the purpose of the inten'iew. We are interested in how Year Round Education sckaobng in Lillie Rock is working, especially when it comes to student leaning. Since you have experience in both YRE and traditional calendar schools, wed like to asK you a few questions X number questions to he exact. Your name will be confidential. It will not appear in any of our reports and only your school name will remain with our notes from this interview. B. Confirm that a child in this family attended both YRE and traditional calendar schools. 1. What was the reason your students change from traditional calendar to YRE education? a. The school changed to YRE./_/ b. My child transferred to a YRE school/_/ c. Multiple children both reasons apply. Capture the essence of responses, but always check\na,, b., or c. You may spark talk of rationales for changing schools here e.g 1 wanted my student to learn more, wanted access to inter-sessions, didnt like previous school, etc. If parent claims to be dissatisfied with prior school, hear parent out here and bring this oack up when asking about differences between YRE and traditional calendar schools faelow. Record worthwhile quotes.2. What are the main differences you see between YRE and traditional calendar year schools? Capture essence of responses. Record worthwhile quotes. Retrospectively group into categories in for reporting. 3. Lets focus particularly on how different schools help kids learn If applicable, solicit elaborations of any school effectiveness differences reported in Question 2. (Remember to focus on comparisons between YRE and traditional calendar year schools.) Or if learning did not come up in response to Question 2, ask parent: Whar do you see as (he main differences in student learning in YRE vs. traditional calendar year schools? Capture essence of responses. Record worthwhile quotes. 4. (If learning-related differences seem not well addressed in responses to Question 2, push harder on ieaming differences through the following question. If learning- differences were well-covered, skip to question 5.) Are there things about the YRE calendar that help kids learn better? (Draw out parent on perceptions of learning differences, YRE to traditional calendar.) You will probably get these sorts of responses, so check-off if you hear any of these\na. Kids are in school more. b. Shorter breaks/vacations. i- Kids forget less academic content iii. Shorter gaps in teaching. iv. Kids remember better how to behave in school. c. Inter-sessions help kids leam more. d. Teachers seem to like YRE better, and are happier in their jobs. e. Others (specify each). Also\nCapture essence of responses. Record worthwhile quotes. Retrospectively group into categories in for reporting.5. In comparing YRE to traditional calendar schools, do you think that children feel differently about school or about themselves in one type versus another? Yes, a lot. Yes, a little. No. Check one that best describes main response. If No, interview is done. If Yes, probe for what kinds of differences and why they might exist. Pay attention to claims that specific aspects of being an YRE school affect how kids feel about school. their motivation for school. their outlook. And other effects mentioned. Capture essence of responses. Record worthwhile quotes. 6. Does your child/children talk about the fact that the they are in an YRE school? If yes, what kinds of things do they say? Capture essence of responses. Record worthwhile quotes.A.n Individual Approach to a World of Knowledge May 26, 2005 Mr. Chris Heller Friday Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark 2000 Regions Center 400 West Capitol Avenue Little Rock, AR 72201-3522 RECEIVED MAY 2 7 2005 OFFICEOF DESEGREGATION MONITORING Dear Chris: This accompanies three copies of the third quarterly update, in compliance with the June 30, 2004 memorandum opinion of the U.S. District Court, due June 1,2005. Tucked inside the front of each is a copy of Dr. DeJamettes letter to Mr. Walker today indicating our interest in evaluating the 2U Century Learning Communities as the Joshua intervenors recommended in his letter of May 24 (previously copied to you). Please let us know if you would like more information. Thank you for your advice in preparing this update. Sincerely yours, James C. Wohlleb, Statistician Planning, Research, \u0026amp; Evaluation (PRE) Enc. xc: John W. Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72206-1220 Mr. Gene Jones \u0026amp; Ms. Marjorie Powell Office of Desegregation Monitoring 1 Union National Plaza 124 West Capitol 1895 Little Rock, AR 72201 810 W. Markham - Lithe Rock. Arkansas 72201 wwrw.irsd.K12.ar.us .501-32200C r\n50- 24-20t Little Rock School District (LRSD) QUARTERLY UPDATE to the Office of Desegregation Monitoring (ODM) and Joshua June 1, 2005 received may 2 7 2005 OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, PLAINTIFF V. PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO.l ETAL., DEFENDANTS MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ETAL., INTERVENORS KATHERINE KNIGHT, ETAL., INTERVENORS Planning, Research, and Evaluation (PRE) Instructional Resource Center (IRC) Little Rock School District 3001 South Pulaski Little Rock, AR 72206An Individual Approach to a World of Knowledge May 27, 2005 John W. Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72206-1220 Dear Mr. Walker: We received your letter of May 24 as a facsimile on the same day acknowledging your receipt of lists of programs from us. Primarily from them, we selected the four programs which Drs. Catterall and Ross are evaluating this year. Your recommendation, in your May 24 letter, to evaluate the 2E Century Community Learning Centers interests us. After discussing it with Dr. Ross and others, we propose to evaluate it rather than PLATO Learning during the coming school year. Because our quarterly update for June 1 has already been printed (which we are delivering to you with this letter), the next update can report this change for next years evaluations. We understand that 2E Century Community Learning Centers will end within a year or so at several of the sites you named. Limiting our evaluation to a few sites where the programs support is secure for at least a couple more years makes sense to us. We will keep you informed of our progress and invite your further ideas. Please do not hesitate to contact us with any further comments or questions. Sincerely yours, Karen DeJarneoe, Ph.D. Director, PRE xc: Mr. Gene Jones \u0026amp; Ms. Marjorie Powell, ODM Mr. Chris Heller, Friday Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark 810 W. Markham Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 vrv.rv.irsd,kl2.ar.up 501-324-200C' fax\n501 -32^-2032C'- An Individual Approach to a World o/Knoivledge May 27, 2005 Mr. Robert Pressman 22 Locust Avenue Lexington, MA 02421 Dear Mr. Pressman\nMr. Walker requested that we furnish you the accompanying quarterly update of June 1 and future updates. You might also like a copy of my recent reply to Mr. Walker regarding evaluation of the 2D' Century Learning Communities. If you did not see the article, you might want to find the article about the program by Sue Shellenbarger in The Wall Street Journal of May 26, 2005. We will keep you informed of our progress and invite your further ideas. Please do not hesitate to contact us with any further comments or questions. Sincerely yours, Director, PRE xc: Mr. John W. Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72206 Mr. Chris Heller Friday Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark 2000 Regions Center 400 Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Gene Jones \u0026amp; Ms. Marjorie Powell Office of Desegregation Monitoring 124 West Capitol Suite 1895 Little Rock, AR 72201 g 810 W MarKham Littie Rock. ^irKansas 72201 * www.ifsd.ki2.ar.us -2000 ra::\n501RECEIVED JUN -6 2005 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION OFHCEOF DESEGREGATION MONITORING LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF V. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. LET AL DEFENDANTS MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL INTERVENORS KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL INTERVENORS LRSDS NOTICE OF FILING QUARTERLY UPDATE Little Rock School District (LRSD) for its Notice of Filing Quarterly Update dated June 1, 2005 states: 1. The attached document is the third quarterly written update by the Little Rock School District and its Planning, Research, and Evaluation Department. It has been provided to the Joshua Intervenors and the Office of Desegregation Monitoring in accordance with the District Courts 2004 Compliance Remedy (Memorandum Opinion of June 30, 2004). 2. LRSD is filing this Quarterly Update so that the Court may be aware of the compliance work done by LRSD to comply with the Courts Memorandum Opinion of June 30, 2004. WHEREFORE, the LRSD submits its Quarterly Update as required by the Court.Respectfully Submitted, LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark Christopher Heller (#81083) 2000 Regions Center 400 West Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201-3493 (501)376-2011 BY\nChristopher Heller CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I certify that a copy of the foregoing has been served on the following people by depositing a copy of same in the United States mail on the 1 day of June, 2005: Mr. John W. Walker JOHN W. WALKER, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72201 Desegregation Monitor 1 Union National Plaza 124 W. Capitol, Suite 1895 Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Sam Jones Wright, Lindsey \u0026amp; Jennings 2200 Nations Bank Bldg. 200 West Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Tim Gauger Mr. Mark A. Hagemeier Office of the Attorney General 323 Center Street 200 Tower Buildin\"o Mr. Steve Jones JACK, LYON \u0026amp; JONES, P.A. 425 W. Capitol, Suite 3400 Little Rock, AR 72201-3472 Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Clayton Blackstock Mr. Mark Burnett 1010 W. Third Street Little Rock, AR 72201 Judge J. Thomas Ray U. S. District Courthouse 600 West Capitol Avenue, Suite 149 Little Rock, AR 72201 Christopher 2 I 'si! DATE: June 23, 2005 TO: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 Board of Directors FROM: SUBJECT: Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools 2005-2006 Evaluation Agenda BACKGROUND: LRSD policy requires an annual Evaluation Agenda proposed to the Board of Directors outlining Li xwUz UUllvy I **- ---- --- -------------- - I I J X. external evaluation activities with projected costs. During 2004-2005 PRE has engaged tvvo outside consultants to evaiuate four District programs. The 2005-2006 Evaluation Agenda consists of five external evaluations: 4 Step-2 program evaluations mandated by Judge Wilson in 2004, and 1 non-mandated evaluation recommended by the PRE department RATIONALE: LRSD is complying with U. S. District Courts 2004 Compliance Remedy (Memorandum Opinion of June 30, 2004, pp. 61-67) to devise a comprehensive program assessment process which must be deeply embedded as a permanent part of LRSDs curriculum and instruction program. In December 2004, the Board of Directors approved this process. It provides for a range of educational program evaluations with respect to their scientific rigor and complexity, and it ___ .\u0026gt; I __I__ .x: requires participation by LRSD stakeholders in the design and execution of evaluations. In the same Opinion, the Court ordered, During each of the next two academic school years (2004-05 and 2005-06), LRSD must hire one or more outside consultants to prepare four (4) formal step 2 evaluations.\" By step 2\" the court meant for evaluations to delve into underlying .... ri. ___ -ruz, rir^or r,,that thp Cmift rfirected ths District to examine is reasons for outcomes. The primary outcome that the Court directed the examine the academic achievement of African-American students. The Opinion also instructs the PRE with the outside consultants and encourages it to evaluate additional Department to cooperate District programs. Court-Mandated Evaluations for 2005-2006: For siep 2 evaluations in 2005-2006, Dr. Ross has identified four 2.7 programs, named on the following page.1. Arkansas A+ Schools Network, at Woodruff Elementary School, incorporates the arts in teaching language and mathematics. Projected Cost: $30,000 2. Knowledgepoints is a Supplemental Educational Service (SES) selected at Bale, Brady, Chicot, Wakefield, and Watson Elementary Schools and offered there as an after-school program. Projected Cost: $30,000 3. 21' Century Learning Centers offer a broad array of out-of-school support services, programs, and activities designed to help students meet academic standards and to increase student achievement. Projected Cost: $30,000 4. Pre-kindergarten (PreK) literacy development will be evaluated in the 31 schools with classes for 4-year-old children. These young students participate in developmentally appropriate and fun lessons and activities intended to nurture essential language skills. Projected Cost: $50,000 Dr. Catterall will evaluate Arkansas A+, while Dr. Ross will evaluate KnowledgePoints, 21 Century Learning Centers, and PreK literacy. st Data for schools where these programs operated this year (2004-2005) are in the tables below. Additional schools may participate next year, particularly schools chosen per the school choice option of No Child Left Behind regulations. Schools in these tables which are on the Arkansas School Improvement List are so noted by an asterisk (*). Proposed Programs Evaluations 2005-2006 2004-2005 School Data Schools Number of Teachers Number of Students Percent of Students African- American Percent of Students Eligible for Free/Reduced Lunch Woodruff* A+ I 235 I 91 86 Bale* Brady* Chicot* Wakefield* Watson* Mabelvale Middle* McClellan* Henderson* Hall* 27 28 44 29 34 Knowledgepoints 319 318 536 451 456 82 78 73 78 96 21*' Century Community Learning Centers 57 75 60 105 634 925 630 1464 81 92 82 75 86 80 86 92 93 75 56 70 52 77^ I These schools are designated for School Improvement.LRSD Schools Offering PreK Classes for Four-Year-Old Students No. of No. of Max. Enroll- No. of Per cent School Bale* Baseline* Brady* Carver Chicot* Cloverdale* Dodd Fair Park* Forest Park Franklin* Fulbright Geyer Springs Jefferson M. L. King* Mabelvale McDermott Meadowcliff Otter Creek Pulaski Heights Rightsell Rockefeller* Romine Stephens* Terry Wakefield* Washington* Watson* Western Hills Wilson* Woodruff* Teachers Aides Students 2 2 2 1 4 2 2 2 2 3 2 2 2 4 2 2 2 2 1 1 2 2 4 2 2 4 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 0 2 1 . 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 0 0 0 40 40 40 20 80 40 40 40 40 60 40 40 40 60 40 40 40 40 20 40 40 40 80 40 40 80 40 20 20 40 ment 38 39 37 20 59 40 36 37 40 55 40 36 40 80 38 40 40 39 20 38 39 39 78 35 39 75 36 37 18 36 AAf 32 32 27 NAt 46 32 22 28 2 52 8 35 5 46 31 27 35 22 6 38 24 31 72 18 29 67 34 20 16 32 AA 84.2 82.1 73.0 NA 78.0 80.0 61.1 75.7 5.0 94.5 20.0 97.2 12.5 57.5 81.6 67.5 87.5 56.4 30.0 100.0 61.5 79.5 92.3 51.4 74.4 89.3 94.4 54.1 88.9 88.9 t AA is African American. NA is not available. * These schools are designated for School Improvement. In the 2005-2006 school year, Fair Park Elementary converts to a preK center with eight or more classes\nwhile the other elementary schools keep their current preK capacity.Non-mandated Evaluations: In addition to four court-mandated studies, PRE recommends a fifth external evaluation that will focus on Magnet Schools and Schools with Specialty Magnet Programs. Projected Cost: $60,000 The proposed Magnet School evaluation includes the study and evaluation of 18 magnet schools and specialty magnet programs within the Little Rock School District - six Stipulated Magnet Schools, four Magnet Schools Assistance Program (MSAP) Schools and eight Specialty Magnet Programs. Stipulated Magnet Schools and Themes - 2004-2005 Schools in this table which are designated for School Improvement are so noted by an asterisk (*). School Magnet School Theme Percent of Students African-American Percent of Eligible Students Free/Reduced 1 Lunch Elementary Schools Booker Carver Gibbs Williams Middle Schools Mann * High Schools Parkview Arts Magnet Basic Skills/Math-Science International Studies/ Foreign Languages Traditional Magnet Arts and Science Arts and Science 53 52 53 52 52 51 63 53 44 34 37 22 Magnet Schools Assistance Program Schools and Themes - 2004-2005^ Schools in this table which are designated for School Improvement are so noted by an asterisk (*). School Middle Schools Cloverdale * Mabelvale * Magnet School Theme Percent of Students African-American Percent of Eligible Students Free/Reduced Lunch^ Engineering, Multimedia \u0026amp; Economics Medical Studies, Environmental Science and 82 86 81 75 Per cent of students who are eligible for the federal free or reduced-price meals program is a crude indicator of family economic circumstances. 2004-2005 was the fourth and last year of MSAP funding for these four schools Per cent of students who are eligible for the federal free or reduced-price meals program is a crude 3 indicator of family economic circumstances.information Technology High Schools J.A. Fair* McClellan * Science and technology Systems Engineering, Multimedia and Business Finance 85 92 Special Magnet Program* Themes - 2004-2005 54 56 Schools in this table which are designated for School Improvement are so noted by an asterisk (*). School Elementary Schools King Rockefeller Romine Washington * Middle Schools Dunbar * Henderson * High Schools Central Hall* 4 5 Magnet School Theme Percent of Students African-American Percent of Eligible Students Free/Reduced Lunch International, High Intensity Learning Early Childhood Computer Science and Basic Skills (Interdistrict) Basic Skills Math-Science Magnet (Interdistrict) Gifted and Talented, International Studies Health Science International Studies University Studies 60 67 76 76 61 82 51 75 55 66 76 80 57 70 28 52 These Specialty Programs are special programs which these schools offer. Per cent of students who are eligible for the federal free or reduced-price meals program is a crude indicator of family economic circumstances.All five external evaluations will seek to answer the following Primary Evaluation Question: Have the Programs been effective in improving students academic achievement? How effective have they been among African-American students? To ensure that a full range of quantitative and qualitative data is collected, the evaluators will use a variety of data collection tools and activities. They are: classroom observations and protocols surveys of parents, teachers, and students interviews of students, administrators, parents, teachers focus groups student work portfolios district data, e.g., demographic data, standardized test scores site- and district-generated program documents The evaluators will be required to adhere to Professional Standards for Program Evaluation and to provide a complete list of standards used. FUNDING: Total projected costs for five studies: $200,000 RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Board will approve the 2005-2006 Evaluation Agenda. i ! IJuly 22, 2005 RECEIVED JUL 2 9 2005 OFFICEOF DESEGREGATION MONITORING John W. Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72206-1220 Dear Mr. Walker: Thank you for your request for ACTAAP \u0026amp; ITBS disaggregated test results by school, race and gender from last school year. We have received such data related to the ITBS, however, ACTAAP data received by LRSD consists only of raw scores for individual students and is not yet normalized by the Department of Education. Our PRE Department will prepare a set of ITBS data for you in the format you requested and furnish it to you within two weeks. Please let us know whether this satisfies your request. Si^erely yours. Director, PRE Department xc: Mr. Gene Jones, Associate Monitor Office of Desegregation Monitoring US District Court 1 Union National Plaza 124 West Capitol 1895 Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Chris Heller Friday Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark 2000 Regions Center 400 Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 10/03/2005 08:51 5016045149 WILSON PAGE 02/02 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT eastern district of ARKANSAS RICHARD SHEPPARD ARNOLD UNITED STATES COURTHOUSE 800 W. CAPITOL, ROOM 423 LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201-3326 (501)604-5140 Facaimila (501) 604-5149 October 3,2005 FAX LETTER Mr. John W. Walker John W. Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72024 Mr. Robert Peter Pressman Attorney at Law 22 Locust Avenue Lexington, MA 02421 Re: LRSD v. PCSSD. et al, 4:82-cv-866-wrw Dear Counsel: I realize that this is short notice, but if possible, I would like to get the Joshua Intervenors response to LRSDs Motion for Extension of Time by 5 p.m. tomorrow, Tuesday, October 4,2005. If tomorrow afternoon is not enough timely, please file your response as soon as practicable at the latest, by the deadline set by the rules. Cordially, Original to the Clerk of the Court cc: Other Counsel of Recordreceived IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION OCT 3 2005 I,.- OFFICE Of desegregation MONITORJNG LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF V. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1,ET AL DEFENDANTS MOTION TO EXTEND TIME For its Motion, Plaintiff Little Rock School District (LRSD) states\n1. In accordance with the June 30, 2004 Compliance Remedy in this case, LRSD has engaged experts to prepare four Step 2 program evaluations for the 2004-05 school year. The progress of those evaluations has been reported to the Court and the parties in quarterly updates filed by LRSD, the most recent of which was filed on August 31, 2005. The evaluations are due to the Court on October 1, 2005. 2. The four Step 2 program evaluations cannot be completed without the results of the benchmark examinations administered by the State of Arkansas for the 2004-05 school year. The benchmark examination results are not yet available and will not be available until October 1 or later. Dr. Steve Ross and Dr. James Catterall, the experts hired by LRSD to conduct the four Step 2 program evaluations, estimate that if they receive the benchmark exam results in early October that they would be able to deliver completed program evaluations by early January 2006. Letters from Dr. Ross and Dr. Catterall explaining the need for more time are attached to this Motion. 3. The requested extension of time is necessary to ensure the delivery of useful programevaluations which will fulfill the purposes of the compliance remedy. The requested extension of time will not delay any decisions about whether to continue, expand, modify or discontinue programs. Those decisions will be made in the Spring and will be effective for the 2006-07 school year. 4. LRSD has attempted to contact the Joshua Intervenors to secure their agreement to the requested extension of time, but has not yet received a response. WHEREFORE, for the reasons set forth above and in the attached letters from Dr. Ross and Dr. Catterall, Plaintiff Little Rock School District requests an extension of the time within which it must file four Step 2 program evaluations for the 2004-05 school year to and including Monday, January 16, 2006. Respectfully submitted. LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT FRIDAY, ELDREDGE \u0026amp; CLARK 2000 Regions Bank Bldg. 400 West Capitol Avenue Little Rock, AR 72201 501/376-2011 Zs/ Christopher Heller 2CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I certify that on September 29,2005,1 have electronically filed the foregoing with the Clerk of the Court using the CMZECF system, which shall send notification of such filing to the following: mark.hagemeier@aK.state.ar.us siones@mwsgw-com siones@ili.com iohnwalkerattv@aol.com and I hereby certify that on September 29,2005,1 mailed the document and a copy of the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) by United States Postal Service to the following non CMZECF participants: Judge J. Thomas Ray U. S. District Courthouse 600 West Capitol Avenue, Suite 149 Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Gene Jones Office of Desegregation Monitoring 1 Union National Plaza 124 W. Capitol, Suite 1895 Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Clayton Blackstock Mr. Mark Burnett 1010 W. Third Street Little Rock, AR 72201 ZsZ Christopher Heller 3UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, LOS ANGELES BERKELEY* DAVIS IRVINE LOSANCELES RIVERSIDE SAN DIEGO SAN FRANCISCO SANTA BARBARA SANTA CRUZ UCLA Graduate School of Education \u0026amp; Information Studies P.O. Box 951521 Los Angeles. CA 90095-1521 September 26,2005 Karen DeJarnette, Ph.D. Director, PRE Department Little Rock School District 3001 S. Pulaski Little Rock, AR 77206-2873 Dear Karen: According to Dr. Julian, Assistant Commissioner for the state Department of Education, her agency will receive results of the Benchmark test scores \"around the first of October\", and your experience with release of digitally formatted data indicates that you may not receive data to pass on to me and my research staff until several weeks after the state receives it. At any rate, we do not have data in hand necessary to complete our report on Year-Round Education, certainly not by the present due date of October 1, 2005. Assuming you can deliver correctly formatted data by early November, I can furnish a draft in early December and the final report by early January 2006. This schedule should permit analyzing the data, composing a complete draft, and producing the final report. Anything you can do to confirm the date of data delivery will help our team plan the balance of the work. Sincerely, (e-mailed September 26, 2005 - Signed original sent express) jsc James S. Catterall, Ph.D. Professor Voice: (310) 825-5572 Fax: (310)206-6293 E-mail: jamesc@gseis.ucla.edu THE UNIVERSITY OF MEMPHIS Center for Research in Educational Policy A Tennessee Center of Excellence 325 Browning Hall Memphis, TN 38152-3340 Office: 901.678.2310 Toll Free: 866.670.6147 Fax: 901.678.4257 September 23,2005 www.memphis.edu/crep Dr. Karen DeJamette Director, PRE Department Little Rock School District 3001 S. Pulaski Little Rock, AR 77206-2873 Dear Dr. Dejamette: I have been informed that the State of Arkansas will receive student-level Benchmark test scores at the beginning of October this year and release them to the school districts some time after that. I further understand that the digital version, which we need for computer analysis, will be available after the State sends printed versions to the districts. Thus, the data may not be available to my research staff until perhaps late fall. Whatever the actual delivery date, it typically takes us about six to eight weeks to run, verify, and interpret the analyses and then produce the draft report. I am asking you to take this time requirement into account in projecting when our final report could be ready following the release to us of Benchmark data. Given the dates above, we believe a reasonable date for delivery of the final report is early January 2006. Sincerely, Steven M. Ross, Ph.D. Fadree Professor and Director Center for Research in Educational Policy A Tennessee Board of Regents Institution An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action UniversityRECEIVED OCT 3 2005 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF V. No. 4:82CV00866-WRW/JTR PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, et al.. DEFENDANTS MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, et al. INTERVENORS KATHERINE KNIGHT, et al. INTERVENORS ORDER Pending is Little Rock School Districts Motion to Extend Time (Doc. No. 3938), the first paragraph of which, reads as follows: In accordance with the June30, 2004 Compliance Remedy in this case, LRSD has engaged experts to prepare four Step 2 program evaluations for the 2004-05 school year. The progress of those evaluations has been reported to the Court and the parties in quarterly updates filed by LRSD, the most recent of which was filed on August 31, 2005. The evaluations are due to the Court on October 1, 2005. For emphasis I note that the above quoted paragraph correctly reflects that the June 30, 2004 order directed (not suggested) that the subject evaluations were to be filed on October 1, 2005 (actually, the Order directed that the evaluations were to be filed no later than October 1, 2005, but this is a small point). Late yesterday (at 4:34 p.m., to be specific), September 29, 2005, with one working day left before the October 1 deadline, LRSD filed this Motion to Extend Time. It appears from the other matters set forth in the motion, that LRSD cannot meet the October 1 deadline because of uncompleted tasks. 1Before writing anything else I feel compelled to quote my complete order of July 26, 2004: Regardless of an appeal, LRSD is required to continue full speed ahead, on all points, with respect to the compliance remedy set forth in the Memorandum Opinion of June 30,2004 (Doc. No. 3875). As was noted in the June 30 Memo, LRSD is required to do only what it volunteered to do. I assume that I am stating the obvious, but, as folks are wont to say nowadays, I wanted to make sure that we are all on the same page. LRSDs Motion to Extend Time also contains this paragraph: LRSD has attempted to contact the Joshua Intervenors to secure their agreement to the requested extension of time, but has not yet received a response. Since the current motion by LRSD presents a weighty matter (at least my view), it seems that it would be important to have a response from Joshuas lawyers before the deadline passes. Is it possible that both lawyers of record for Joshua are traveling out of the country sans omnipresent cell phones? If what I have said above has not made it clear, I will now state it plainly - I am not happy with the Johnny-come-lately motion. These things, among others, are on my mind: 1. How long has LRSD known that they were not going to comply with the Courts direct, specific order? 2. Why was the motion not filed until the 11th hour? 3. Does this last minute filing demonstrate that LRSD is treating the Courts directives with studied neglect? 'Doc. No. 3890 (emphasis in original). 24. 5. Is LRSD playing for time in the hope that the Circuit Court of Appeals will reverse, thereby relieving LRSD of what it was plainly obliged to do, regardless of the appeal? Why should a last minute motion like this be granted? LRSD is directed to file a plenary response to each of the above questions by 5 p.m. next Tuesday, October 4, 2005. I note that sixty-nine page Order entered on June 30, 2004 was so long and detailed because LRSD pled that it did not understand exactly what its obligations were under earlier orders. It seems that this detailed order of June 30, 2004 did head off pleas of misunderstanding. but not a last minute motion to avoid its plain obligations, at least until a much later date. A hearing on LRSDs Motion to Extend Time will be set forthwith. The exact nature of that hearing will be determined after I receive LRSDs document in response to this Order (due next Tuesday, October 4, 2005, by 5 p.m.). IT IS SO ORDERED this 30th day of September, 2005. Zs/ Wm. R.Wilson,Jr._____________ UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 3Case 4:82-cv-00866-WRW-JTR Document 3943 C,' Filed 10/04/2005 Paget of4 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT RECEIVED PLAINTIFF V. LR-C-82-866 OCT 5 2005 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL OFRCEOF DESEGREGATION MONITORING DEFENDANTS LRSDS RESPONSE TO ORDER For its response to the Courts September 30, 2005 Order directing the Little Rock School District (LRSD) to file a plenary response to each of five questions, LRSD states: Question No. 1: How long has LRSD known that they were not going to comply with the Courts direct, specific order? Response: LRSD, Joshua and ODM have known for months that benchmark examination results had not yet been reported. LRSD has known since September 19, 2005 that the Arkansas Department of Education would receive the results of the benchmark examinations from its contractor around the first of October. LRSD has now received hard copies of the reports, but the electronic data necessary for the evaluations is not likely to be available for two or three weeks. Question No. 2: Why was the motion not filed until the 11* hour? Response: The Motion was not filed earlier for at least three reasons, all of which were influenced by the fact that both Joshua and ODM were aware that benchmark examination results had not yet been reported and that the experts could not complete the Step 2 evaluations without them. First, LRSD did not know until September 19 when the 2004-05 benchmark scores would be released, and consequently would have had to request an indefinite extension of time. Second,Case 4:82-cv-00866-WRW-JTR Document 3943 Filed 10/04/2005 Page 2 of 4 LRSD discussed the situation with Joshua in June or July and was told by Joshuas counsel that Joshua not only would oppose any motion to extend time but would also seek to litigate other issues upon LRSDs filing of such amotion. LRSD decided that there was no point in provoking additional litigation during the pendency of its appeal. Finally, the need for the extension of time was dictated by matters beyond LRSDs control. The timing of the motion would not alter the facts that the experts need the benchmark results and that LRSD could do nothing to hasten the delivery of those results. Question No. 3: Does this last minute filing demonstrate that LRSD is treating the Courts directives with studied neglect? Response: No. Question No. 4: Is LRSD playing for time in the hope that the Circuit Court of Appeals will reverse, thereby relieving LRSD of what it was plainly obliged to do, regardless of the appeal? Response: No. LRSD believes in the merits of its appeal or it would not have filed it, but LRSD is not playing for time. The requested extension of time is not based on anything LRSD did or failed to do or anything that LRSD has any control over. LRSD hired outside experts to complete four Step 2 program evaluations in accordance with the Courts Order. Those evaluations cannot be completed in any useful form without the benchmark examination results from the 2004-05 school year. Those results are only now becoming available. LRSD has no authority over the grading or reporting of benchmark examination scores. Those things are entirely within the control of the Arkansas Department of Education. 2Case 4:82-cv-00866-WRW-JTR Document 3943 Filed 10/04/2005 Page 3 of 4 Finally, whether or not the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals relieves LRSD of its future obligations under the compliance order, LRSD has contracted for four Step 2 evaluations which have been substantially completed. LRSD intends to receive completed evaluations in accordance with its contracts with Drs. Ross and Catterall and to use the evaluations to help judge the effectiveness of the academic programs which are the subjects of the evaluations. Question No. 5: Why should a last minute motion like this be granted? Response: The motion should be granted for the reasons set forth in response to question four above, and for the reasons set forth in the motion, including the letters from Dr. Ross and Dr. Catterall. If the motion is denied, LRSD would be compelled to file the evaluations immediately. even though they would contain no analysis of the benchmark results and consequently would not be of much use in evaluating the effectiveness of academic programs. Drs. Ross and Catterall would be extremely reluctant to have their work publicized before they had the chance to complete the evaluations by incorporating and analyzing the results of the benchmark exams. Respectfully submitted. LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT FRIDAY, ELDREDGE \u0026amp; CLARK 2000 Regions Bank Bldg. 400 West Capitol Avenue Little Rock, AR 72201 501/376-2011 /s/ Christopher Heller 3Case 4:82-cv-00866-WRW-JTR Document 3943 Filed 10/04/2005 Page 4 of 4 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I certify that on October 4, 2005,1 have electronically filed the foregoing with the Clerk of the Court using the CM/EC. system, which will send notification of such filing to the following: mark.hagemeier@ag.state.ar.us siones@mwsgw.com siones@ili.com iohnwalkerattv@aol.com and mailed by U.S. regular mail to the following addresses: Gene Jones Office of Desegregation Monitoring 1 Union National Plaza 124 W. Capitols, Suite 1895 Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Clayton Black stock Mr. Mark Burnett 1010 W. Third Street Little Rock, AR 72201 Judge J. Thomas Ray U. S. District Courthouse 600 West Capitol Avenue, Suite 149 Little Rock, AR 72201 Zs/ Christopher Heller 4Case 4\n82-cv-00866-WRW-JTR Document 3945 Filed 10/05/2005 Page 1 of 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS RICHARD SHEPPARD ARNOLD UNITED STATES COURTHOUSE 600 W. CAPITOL, ROOM 423 LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201-3325 (501)604-5140 Facsimile (501) 604-5149 RECEIVED October 5, 2005 OCT 6 2005 Mr. Christopher J. Heller Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark, LLP - Little Rock Regions Center 400 West Capitol Avenue Suite 2000 Little Rock, AR 72201-3493 OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING Re: LRSD v. PCSSD, et al, Motion for Extension of Time Dear Counsel\nA hearing will be held on your Motion to Extend Time (which was filed Thursday, September 29, 2005) on Monday, November 7,2005, commencing at 8:30 a.m. It is very likely that other questions will be addressed at this hearing. An order setting forth the exact nature of the hearing will be entered forthwith. It is likely that I will want to hear testimony from the persons mentioned in your last two filings\nso please arrange to have them available, as well as other witnesses you may want to call. Cordially, /s/ Wm. R.Wilson.Jr. Original to the Clerk of the Court cc: the Honorable J. Thomas Ray, other lawyers of record, ODM.RECEIVED OCT 11 20115 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION OmCEOF DESEGREGATION MONITORING LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF V. No. 4:82CV00866-WRW/JTR PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, et al.. DEFENDANTS MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, et al. INTERVENORS KATHERINE KNIGHT, et al. INTERVENORS ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE In the June 30, 2004 Order, I held that the LRSD had again failed to comply the desegregation obligations in 2.7.1 of the January 16, 1998 Revised Desegregation and Education Plan.' This Order, in part, reads: The four step 2 program evaluations for the 2004-05 school year must be filed with the Court no later than October 1, 2004.^ At the risk of being redundant, I entered a July 26, 2004 Order which read: Regardless of an appeal, LRSD is required to continue full speed ahead, on all points, with respect to the compliance remedy set forth in the Memorandum Opinion of June 30,2004 (Doc. No. 3875). As was noted in the June 30 Memo, LRSD is required to do only what it volunteered to do.^ Late on September 29, 2005, with one working day left before the October 1 deadline. LRSD filed a Motion to Extend Time to submit the four step 2 evaluations for the 2004-05 'A September 13, 2002 Order held that LRSD had substantially complied with all of its desegregation obligations except those contained in 2.7.1. ^Doc. No. 3875. Doc. No. 3890 (emphasis in original). 1school year. Because of uncompleted tasks, LRSD requested an extension until January 2006 to submit the evaluations. To date, the motion has not been granted and no evaluations have been fded. Accordingly, LRSD and its counsel are directed to appear at 8:30 a.m. on Monday, November 7, 2005 and show cause, if any there be, why they should not be held in contempt of court (civil) for violating the June 30, 2004 Order ~ specifically, the directive to file the four step 2 program evaluations for the 2004-05 school year no later than October 1, 2004. With respect to LRSDs Motion to Extend Time, filed on September 29, 2005, and with respect to LRSDs Response to Order filed on October 4, 2005, LRSD and its counsel are directed to also show cause, if any there be, why they should not be sanctioned, under Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, for the representations and omissions contained in these two documents. Among others, I would like for the following to appear, some of them to give testimony: A representative from the ODM\nDr. Karen DeJamette\nDr. James S. Catterall\nDr. Steven M. Ross\nDr. Jim Wohleb\nEach member of the Little Rock School District School Board\nDr. Roy G. Brooks, Superintendent of the Little Rock School District\nThe persons at the Arkansas Department of Education who oversee benchmark examinations\nSuch other person as any party may want to call as a witness. By 5 p.m., Wednesday, October 12, 2005, the LRSD is directed to file a list of the witnesses who it will call at the hearing (these persons will be expected to appear unless excused 2by the Court). Within ten (10) days after the LRSD provides its witness list, Joshua must file its witness list (these persons will be expected to appear unless excused by the Court). IT IS SO ORDERED this 6th day of October, 2005. /s/ Wm. R.Wilson.Jr._____________ UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 31010 West Third Street Post Office Box 1510 Little Rock, AR 72203-1510 Norman J. Chachkin NAACP Legal Defense \u0026amp; Educational Fund, Inc. 99 Hudson Street Suite 1600 New York, NY 10013 Timothy Gerard Gauger Arkansas Attorney General's Office Catlett-Prien Tower Building 323 Center Street Suite 200 Little Rock, AR 72201-2610 James M. Llewellyn , Jr Thompson \u0026amp; Llewellyn, P.A. 412 South Eighteenth Street Post Office Box 818 Fort Smith, AR 72902-0818 Office of Desegregation Monitor One Union National Plaza 124 West Capitol Suite 1895 Little Rock, AR 72201 William P. Thompson Thompson \u0026amp; Llewellyn, P.A. 412 South Eighteenth Street Post Office Box 818 Fort Smith, AR 72902-0818Case: 4:82cv866 Office of Desegregation Monitor 124 West Capitol Suite 1895 Little Rock, AR 72201MIME-Version:1.0 From:ecf_support@ared.uscourts.gov To:ared_ecf@ared.uscourts.gov Message-Id:\u0026lt;494232@ared.uscourts.gov\u0026gt; Bcc: Subject:Activity in Case 4:82-cv-00866-WRW-JTR Little Rock School, et al v. Pulaski Cty School, et al \"Order to Show Cause\" Content-Type: text/plain***NOTE TO PUBLIC ACCESS USERS*** You may view the filed documents once without charge. To avoid later charges, download a copy of each document during this first viewing.\u0026lt;!- rcsid='\\$Header: /ecf/district/html/TextHead,V 3.1 2003-04-25 07:56:43-04 loy Exp \\$' U.S. District Court Eastern District of Arkansas Notice of Electronic Filing The following transaction was entered on 10/6/2005 at 4:23 PM CDT and filed on 10/6/2005 #ident 'rcsid=\\$Header: /ecf/district/server/TextBody,v 3.1 2003-04-25 07:52:35-04 loy Exp \\$' Case Name: Little Rock School, et al v. Pulaski Cty School, et al Case Number: 4:82-cv-866 http://ecf.ared.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl726052 WARNING: CASE CLOSED on 01/26/1998 Document Number: 3948 Copy the URL address from the line below into the location bar of your Web browser to view the document: http://ecf.ared.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/show_case_doc?394 8, 2 6052,,MAGIC, Docket Text: ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE Show Cause Hearing set for 11/7/2005 08:30 AM in Little Rock Courtroom #431 before Judge William R. Wilson Jr. LRSDs Witness List Due by 5 P.M. 10/12/05\nJoshua witness list due 10 days after. Signed by Judge William R. Wilson Jr. on 10/6/05. (dac ) The following document(s) are associated with this transaction: Document description: Main Document Original filename: n/a Electronic document Stamp: [STAMP dcecfStamp_ID=1095794525 [Date=10/6/2005] [FileNumber=494231-0] [4646454cc4bl35abdb59d2a8725c86222adf016dafacc9cl63al7c4660244fe41e95a3f7826fca4 10e22clf65bbdab9c82f54fe63aa303249d72d80de59f8d3a]] \u0026lt;! rcsid='\\$Header: /ecfZdistrict/server/TextAtyList,v 3.2 2003-06-02 17:37:56-04 bibeau Exp \\$' \u0026gt; 4:82-cv-866 Notice will be electronically mailed to: Mark Terry Burnette mburnette@inbbwi.com. John Clayburn Fendley , Jr fendleyl@alltel.net, Mark Arnold Hagemeier mark.hagemeier@ag.state.ar.us, Christopher J. Heller heller@fec.net, brendak@fee.net\ntmiller@fec.net M. Samuel Jones , III sjones@mwsgw.com, aoverton@mwsgw.com Stephen W. Jones sjones@jlj.com. kate.jonesS jlj.com Sharon Carden Streett scstreett@comcast.net, scstreett@yahoo.com John W. Walker johnwalkeratty@aol.com, lorap72297@aol.com\njspringer@gabrielmail.com 4:82-cv-866 Notice will be delivered by other means to: Clayton R. Blackstock Mitchell, Blackstock, Barnes, Wagoner, Ivers S Sneddon, PLLCCase 4:82-cv-00866-WRW-JTR Document 3950 Filed 10/12/2005 Pagel of3 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF V. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL DEFENDANTS MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL INTERVENORS KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL INTERVENORS LRSDS WITNESS LIST For its witness list for the hearing scheduled for November 7,2005, the Little Rock School District provides the following: 1. Gene Jones Office of Desegregation Monitoring 1 Union National Plaza 124 W. Capitol, Suite 1895 Little Rock, AR 72201 RECEIVED OCT 1 3 2005 2. Dr. Karen DeJamette Little Rock School District Planning, Research and Evaluation 30 \u0026amp; Pulaski Streets Little Rock, AR 72201 OFFICEOF DESEGREGATION MONITORING 3. Dr. James S. Catterall Professor University of California P. O. Box 951521 Los Angeles, CA 90005 4. Dr. Steven M. Ross Fadree Professor and Director Center for Research in Educational Policy 325 Browning Hall Memphis, TN 38152-3340Case 4:82-cv-00866-WRW-JTR Document 3950 Filed 10/12/2005 Page 2 of 3 5. Jim Wohlleb Planning, Research and Evaluation 30 \u0026amp; Pulaski Streets Little Rock, AR 72201 6. Dr. Roy Brooks Superintendent Little Rock School District 810 West Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 7. Dr. Gayle Potter Associate Director Academic Standards and Assessment Arkansas Department of Education #4 State Capitol Mall, Room 106A Little Rock, AR 72201 8. All witnesses listed by other parties and witnesses who may be necessary to provide rebuttal testimony Respectfully Submitted, LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark Christopher Heller (#81083) 2000 Regions Center 400 West Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201-3493 (501)376-2011 /s/ Christopher Heller 2Case 4:82-cv-00866-WRW-JTR Document 3950 Filed 10/12/2005 Page 3 of 3 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I certify that on October 12, 2005,1 have electronically filed the foregoing with the Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF system, which shall send notification of such filing to the following: mark.hagemeier@ag.state.ar.us siones@mwsgw.com siones@ili.com iohnwalkerattv@aol.com and mailed by U.S. regular mail to the following addresses: Gene Jones Office of Desegregation Monitor 1 Union National Plaza 124 W. Capitol, Suite 1895 Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Clayton Blackstock Mr. Mark Burnett 1010 W. Third Street Little Rock, AR 72201 Judge J. Thomas Ray U. S. District Courthouse 600 West Capitol Avenue, Suite 149 Little Rock, AR 72201 /s/ Christopher Heller 3RECEIVED OCT 2 4 2005 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION OFHCEOF DESEGREGATION MONITORING LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF V. No. 4:82CV00866-WRW/JTR PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, et al.. DEFENDANTS MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, et al. INTERVENORS KATHERINE KNIGHT, et al. INTERVENORS ORDER i Pending is LRSDs Motion to Excuse Dr. James Caterall (Doc. No. 3951) from the November 7,2005 Hearing. For good cause shown, the motion is GRANTED. However, Dr. Caterall must provide Mr. Heller with a phone number where he can be reached, if necessary, the day of the hearing. IT IS SO ORDERED this 20th day of October, 2005. /s/ Wm. R.Wilson,Jr. UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE fl- 1Case: 4:82cv866 Office of Desegregation Monitor 124 West Capitol Suite 1895 Little Rock, AR 72201MIME-Version:1.0 From:ecf_supportgared.uscourts.gov To:ared_ecf@ared.uscourts.gov Message-Id:\u0026lt;504296@ared.uscourts.gov\u0026gt; Bcc: Subject:Activity in Case 4:82-cv-00866-WRW-JTR Little Rock School, et al v. Pulaski Cty School, et al \"Order on Motion for Order\" Content-Type: text/plain***NOTE TO PUBLIC ACCESS USERS*** You may view the filed documents once without charge. To avoid later charges, download a copy of each document during this first viewing.U.S. District Court Eastern District of Arkansas Notice of Electronic Filing The following transaction was entered on 10/20/2005 at 4:01 PM CDT and filed on 10/20/2005 Case Name: Little Rock School, et al v. Pulaski Cty School, et al Case Number: 4:82-cv-866 http://ecf.ared.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl726052 WARNING: CASE CLOSED on 01/26/1998 Document Number: 3953 Copy the URL address from the line below into the location bar of your Web browser to view the document: http://ecf.ared.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/show_case_doc?3953,26052,,MAGIC,,,2005214 Docket Text: ORDER granting [3951] Motion for Order to excuse Dr James Caterall from 11/7/05 hearing. Signed by Judge William R. Wilson Jr. on 10/20/05. (dac, ) The following document(s) are associated with this transaction: Document description: Main Document Original filename: n/a Electronic document Stamp: [STAMP dcecfStamp_ID=1095794525 [Date=10/20/2005] [FileNumber=504295-0] [4b2f98b5ddl9c8ac9280f4eaf8bb25dc3f01ed0ec0146298ffebef5b9ee992dl8df64af85b5cc32 dce34e54ebb7f6e2f592c6d7bf2628da7d0c5605el7f75c42] ] 4:82-cv-866 Notice will be electronically mailed to: Mark Terry Burnette mburnette@mbbwi.com. John Clayburn Fendley , Jr fendleyl@alltel.net, Mark Arnold Hagemeier mark.hagemeier@arkansasag.gov, beleda.bledsoe@arkansasag.gov Christopher J. Heller heller@fec.net, brendak@fec.net\nttniller@fec.net M. Samuel Jones , III sjones@mwsgw.com, aoverton@mwsgw.com Stephen W. Jones sjones@jlj.com, kate.jones@jlj.com Sharon Carden Streett scstreett@comcast.net, scstreett@yahoo.com John W. Walker johnwalkeratty@aol.com, lorap72297@aol.com\njspringerggabrielmail.com 4:82-cv-866 Notice will be delivered by other means to: Clayton R. Blackstock Mitchell, Blackstock, Barnes, Wagoner, Ivers \u0026amp; Sneddon, PLLC 1010 West Third Street Post Office Box 1510 Little Rock, AR 72203-1510 Norman J. Chachkin NAACP Legal Defense S Educational Fund, Inc. 99 Hudson StreetSuite 1600 New York, NY 10013 Timothy Gerard Gauger Arkansas Attorney General's Office Catlett-Prien Tower Building 323 Center Street Suite 200 Little Rock, AR 72201-2610 James M. Llewellyn , Jr Thompson \u0026amp; Llewellyn, P.A. 412 South Eighteenth Street Post Office Box 818 Fort Smith, AR 72902-0818 Office of Desegregation Monitor One Union National Plaza 124 West Capitol Suite 1895 Little Rock, AR 72201 William P. Thompson Thompson \u0026amp; Llewellyn, P.A. 412 South Eighteenth Street Post Office Box 818 Fort Smith, AR 72902-0818\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_1440","title":"\"2003-04 Enrollment and Racial Balance in the Little Rock School District and Pulaski County Special School District,\" Office of Desegregation and Monitoring","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":["2003-12-16"],"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--21st Century","Little Rock School District","School districts--Arkansas--Pulaski County","Office of Desegregation Monitoring (Little Rock, Ark.)","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","Educational law and legislation","Educational statistics","School enrollment","School improvement programs","School integration","School management and organization","Magnet schools"],"dcterms_title":["\"2003-04 Enrollment and Racial Balance in the Little Rock School District and Pulaski County Special School District,\" Office of Desegregation and Monitoring"],"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/1440"],"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":["24 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_136","title":"Arkansas Department of Education's (ADE's) Project Management Tool","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":["2003-12"],"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":["Education--Arkansas","Little Rock (Ark.). Office of Desegregation Monitoring","School integration--Arkansas","Arkansas. Department of Education","Project managers--Implements"],"dcterms_title":["Arkansas Department of Education's (ADE's) Project Management Tool"],"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/136"],"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\nLittle Rock School District, plaintiff vs. Pulaski County Special School District, defendant.\nTOM COURTWAY Interim Director Stale Board of Education JoNell Caldwell, Chair Little Rock Shelby Hillman, Vice Chair Carlisle Sherry Burrow Jonesboro Luke Gordy Van Buren Calvin King Marianna R~awson Be.Ile MaryJane Rebick Pine Bluff Jeanna Westmoreland Arkadelphia Arkansas Department of Education #4 Capitol Mall, Little Rock, AR 72201-1071 501-682-4475 December 30, 2003 Mr. M. Samuel Jones, III Wright, Lindsey \u0026amp; Jennings 200 West Capitol, Suite 2000 Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. John W. Walker John Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Mark Burnette Mitchell, Blackstock, Barnes, Wagoner, Ivers \u0026amp; Sneddon P. 0. Box 1510 Little Rock, AR 72203-1510 Mr. Christopher Heller Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark 400 West Capitol, Suite 2000 Little Rock, AR 72201-3493 Mr. Stephen W. Jones Jack, Lyon \u0026amp; Jones 425 West Capitol, Suite 3400 Little Rock, AR 72201 Ms. Ann Marshall One Union National Plaza 124 West Capitol, Suite 1895 Little Rock, AR 72201 http:/ /arktdu.slale.ar.us RECEIVED\ntt\"' J OFFICEOF DESEGREGATION MONITORING RECEIVED JA\n~ 0 2 2004 OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING RE: Little Rock School District v. Pulaski County Special School District, et al. U.S. District Court No. 4:82-CV-866 Dear Gentlemen and Ms. Marshall: Per an agreement with the Attorney General's Office, I am filing the Arkansas Department of Education's Project Management Tool for the month of December 2003 in the above-referenced case. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at your convenience. Sipely, ~~m..1. ... ~ General Counsel Arkansas Department of Education SS:law cc: Mark Hagemeier UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF V. No. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, et al DEFENDANTS NOTICE OF FILING In accordance with the Court's Order of December 10, 1993, the Arkansas Department of Education hereby gives notice of the filing of the AD E's Project Management Tool for December 2003. Respectfully Submitted, ~$~ Scmith, #922 Attorney, Arkansas Department of Education #4 Capitol Mall, Room 404-A Little Rock, AR 72201 501-682-4227 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Scott Smith, certify that on December 30, 2003, I caused the foregoing document to be served by depositing a copy in the United States mail, postage prepaid, addressed to each of the following: Mr. M. Samuel Jones, III Wright, Lindsey \u0026amp; Jennings 200 West Capitol, Suite 2000 Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. John W. Walker John Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Mark Burnette Mitchell, Blackstock, Barnes Wagoner, Ivers \u0026amp; Sneddon P. 0. Box 1510 Little Rock, AR 72203-1510 Mr. Christopher Heller Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark 400 West Capitol, Suite 2000 Little Rock, AR 72201-3493 Mr. Stephen W. Jones Jack, Lyon \u0026amp; Jones 425 West Capitol, Suite 3400 Little Rock, AR 72201 Ms. Ann Marshall One Union National Plaza 124 West Capitol, Suite 1895 Little Rock, 2201 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, ET AL PLAINTIFFS V. NO. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT, ET AL DEFENDANTS MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL INTERVENOR$ KATHERINE W. KNIGHT, ET AL INTERVENOR$ ADE'S PROJECT MANAGEMENT TOOL In compliance with the Court's Order of December 10, 1993, the Arkansas Department of Education (ADE) submits the following Project Management Tool to the parties and the Court. This document describes the progress the ADE has made since March 15, 1994, in complying with provisions of the Implementation Plan and itemizes the ADE's progress against timelines presented in the Plan. IMPLEMENTATION PHASE ACTIVITY I. FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS A. Use the previous year's three quarter average daily membership to calculate MFPA (State Equalization) for the current school year. 1. Projected Ending Date Last day of each month, August - June. 2. Actual as of December 31, 2003 Based on the information available at November 30, 2003, the ADE calculated the .Equalization Funding for FY:03/04, s.ubject to periodic adjustments: B. Include all Magnet students in the resident District's average daily membership for calculation. 1. Projected Ending Date Last day of each month, August - June. I. FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS (Continued) B. Include all Magnet students in the resident District's average daily membership for calculation. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 Based on the information available at November 30, 2003, the ADE calculated for FY 03/04, subject to periodic adjustments. C. Process and distribute State MFPA. 1. Projected Ending Date Last day of each month, August - June. 2. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 On November 30, 2003, distributions of State Equalization Funding for FY 03/04 were as follows: LRSD - $19,354,959 NLRSD- $10,209,120 PCSSD-$18,533,748 The allotments of State Equalization Funding calculated for FY 03/04 at November 30, 2003, subject to periodic adjustments, were as follows: LRSD - $53,226, 139 NLRSD - $28,075,080 PCSSD - $50,967,808 D. Determine the number of Magnet students resid ing in each District and attending a Magnet School. 1. Projected Ending Date Last day of each month, August - June. 2. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 Based on the information available, the ADE calculated at November 30, 2003 for FY 03/04, subject to periodic adjustments. E. Desegregation Staff Attorney reports the Magnet Operational Charge to the Fiscal Services Office. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing, as ordered by the Court. 2 I. FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS (Continued) E. Desegregation Staff Attorney reports the Magnet Operational Charge to the Fiscal Services Office. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31, 2003 Based on]he 1nforrnatjon available, the ADE calculated at November 30, 26()3 forfY 03704.: s(IbjJt(to perio'cl/c:~djustmerjts\nIt should be noted that currently the Magnet Review Committee is reporting this information instead of the staff attorney as indicated in the Implementation Plan. F. Calculate state aid due the LRSD based upon the Magnet Operational Charge. 1. Projected Ending Date Last day of each month, August - June. 2. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 Based on the inform'ation available, the ADE calculated at November 30, 2003 for FY 03/04, subject to periodic adjustments. G. Process and distribute state aid for Magnet Operational Charge. 1. Projected Ending Date Last day of each month, August - June. 2. Actual as of December 31, 2003 Distributions for FY 03/04 at November 30, 2003, totaled $4,534,018. Allotment calculated for FY 03/04 was $12,343,806 subject to periodic adjustments. H. Calculate the amount of M-to-M incentive money to which each school district is entitled. 1. Projected Ending Date Last day of each month, August - June. 2. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 Calculated for FY 02/03, subject to periodic adjustments. I. Process and distribute M-to-M incentive checks. 1. Projected Ending Date Last day of each month, September - June. 3 I. FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS (Continued) I. Process and distribute M-to-M incentive checks. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31, 2003 Distributions for FY 03/04 at November 30, 2003 were: i.RSD : $1 '.0 105,266 NLRSD - $777,0?4 pcsso - $2,7.92,91~ The allotments calc4iated for FY 03/04 at November 30, 2003, subject to periocfic adjustments, were: LRSD - $3,684,217 NLRSD - $2,590,278 PCSSD - $9,309,708 J. Districts submit an estimated Magnet and M-to-M transportation budget to ADE. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing, December of each year. 2. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 In September 2002, the Magnet and M-to-M transportation budgets for FY 02/03 were submitted to the ADE by the Districts. K. The Coordinator of School Transportation notifies General Finance to pay districts for the Districts' proposed budget. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing, annually. 2. Actual as of December 31, 2003 In January 2003, General Finance was notified to pay the second one-third payment for FY 02/03 to the Districts. It should be noted that the Transportation Coordinator is currently performing this function instead of Reginald Wilson as indicated in the Implementation Plan. L. ADE pays districts three equal installments of their proposed budget. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing, annually. 4 I. FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS (Continued) L. ADE pays districts three equal installments of their proposed budget. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 In September 2003, General Finance made the last one-third payment to the Districts for their FY 02/03 transportation budget. The budget is now paid out in three equal installments. At September 2003, the following had been paid for FY 02/03: LRSD - $3,835,562.00 NLRSD - $742,399.62 PCSSD - $2,252,050.92 In September 2003, General Finance made the first one-third payment to the Districts for their FY 03/04 transportation budget. The budget is now paid out in three equal installments. At September 2003, the following had been paid for FY 03/04: LRSD - $1 ,243,841 .33 NLRSD - $263,000.00 PCSSD - $727,406.63 M. ADE verifies actual expenditures submitted by Districts and reviews each bill with each District's transportation coordinator. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing, annually. 2. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 In August 1997, the ADE transportation coordinator reviewed each district's Magnet and M-to-M transportation costs for FY 96/97. In July 1998, each district was asked to submit an estimated budget for the 98/99 school year. In September 1998, paperwork was generated for the first payment in the 98/99 school year for the Magnet and M-to-M transportation program. School districts should receive payment by October 1, 1998 In July 1999, each district submitted an estimated budget for the 99/00 school year. In September 1999, paperwork was generated for the first payment in the 99/00 school year for the Magnet and M-to-M transportation program. 5 I. FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS (Continued) M. ADE verifies actual expenditures submitted by Districts and reviews each bill with each District's transportation coordinator. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31, 2003 (Continued) In September 2000, paperwork was generated for the first payment in the 00/01 school year for the Magnet and M-to-M transportation program. In September 2001 , paperwork was generated for the first payment in the 01/02 school year for the Magnet and M-to-M transportation program. In September 2002, paperwork was generated for the first payment in the 02/03 school year for the Magnet and M-to-M transportation program. In September 2003, paperwork was generated for the first payment in the 03/04 school year for the Magnet and M-to-M transportation program. N. Purchase buses for the Districts to replace existing Magnet and M-to-M fleets and to provide a larger fleet for the Districts' Magnet and M-to-M Transportation needs. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing, as stated in Exhibit A of the Implementation Plan. 2. Actual as of December 31, 2003 In FY 94/95, the State purchased 52 buses at a cost of $1 ,799,431 which were added to or replaced existing Magnet and M-to-M buses in the Districts. The buses were distributed to the Districts as follows: LRSD - 32\nNLRSD - 6\nand PCSSD - 14. The ADE purchased 64 Magnet and M-to-M buses at a cost of $2,334,800 in FY 95/96. The buses were distributed accordingly: LRSD - 45\nNLRSD - 7\nand PCSSD - 12. In May 1997, the ADE purchased 16 Magnet and M-to-M buses at a cost of $646,400. In July 1997, the ADE purchased 16 Magnet and M-to-M buses at a cost of $624,879. In July 1998, the ADE purchased 16 new Magnet and M-to-M buses at a cost of $695,235. The buses were distributed accordingly: LRSD - 8\nNLRSD - 2\nand PCSSD- 6. Specifications for 16 school buses have been forwarded to state purchasing for bidding in January, 1999 for delivery in July, 1999. 6 I. FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS (Continued) N. Purchase buses for the Districts to replace existing Magnet and M-to-M fleets and to provide a larger fleet for the Districts' Magnet and M-to-M Transportation needs. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 (Continued) The ADE accepted a bid on 16 buses for the Magnet and M/M transportation program. The buses will be delivered after July 1, 1999 and before August 1, 1999. The buses will be distributed accordingly: LRSD - 8\nNLRSD - 2\nPCSSD - 6. In July 1999, the ADE purchased 16 new Magnet and M-to-M buses at a cost of $718,355. The buses were distributed accordingly: LRSD - 8\nNLRSD - 2\nand PCSSD-6. In July 2000, the ADE purchased 16 new Magnet and M-to-M buses at a cost of $724,165. The buses were distributed accordingly: LRSD - 8\nNLRSD - 2\nand PCSSD- 6. The bid for 16 new Magnet and M-to-M buses was let by State Purchasing on February 22, 2001 . The contract was awarded to Ward Transportation Services, Inc. The buses to be purchased include two type C 47 passenger buses and fourteen type C 65 passenger buses. Prices on these units are $43,426.00 each on the 47 passenger buses, and $44,289.00 each on the 65 passenger buses. The buses will be distributed accordingly: LRSD - 8 of the 65 passenger\nNLRSD - 2 of the 65 passenger\nPCSSD - 2 of the 47 passenger and 4 of the 65 passenger buses. On August 2, 2001 , the ADE took possession of 16 new Magnet and M-to-M buses. The total amount paid was $706,898. In June 2002, a bid for 16 new Magnet and M-to-M buses was awarded to Ward Transportation Services, Inc. The buses to be purchased include five 47 passenger buses for $42,155.00 each, ten 65 passenger buses for $43,850.00 each, and one 47 passenger bus with a wheelchair lift for $46,952.00. The total amount was $696,227. In August of 2002, the ADE purchased 16 new Magnet and M-to-M buses. The total amount paid was $696,227. Specifications for 16 new Magnet and M-to-M school buses have been forwarded to State Purchasing for bidding. Bids will be opened on May 12, 2003. The buses will have a required delivery date after July 1, 2003 and before August 8, 2003. 7 I. FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS (Continued) N. Purchase buses for the Districts to replace existing Magnet and M-to-M fleets and to provide a larger fleet for the Districts' Magnet and M-to-M Transportation needs. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 (Continued) In June 2003, a bid for 16 new Magnet and M-to-M buses was awarded to Ward Transportation Services, Inc. The buses to be purchased include 5 - 47 passenger buses for $47,052.00 each, and 11 - 65 passenger buses for $48,895.00 each. The total amount was $773,105. The buses will be distributed accordingly: LRSD - 8 of the 65 passenger\nNLRSD - 2 of the 65 passenger\nPCSSD - 5 of the 47 passenger and 1 of the 65 passenger buses. 0. Process and distribute compensatory education payments to LRSD as required by page 23 of the Settlement Agreement. P. 1. Projected Ending Date July 1 and January 1, of each school year through January 1, 1999. 2. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 Obligation fulfilled in FY 96/97. Process and distribute additional payments in lieu of formula to LRSD as required by page 24 of the Settlement Agreement. 1. Projected Ending Date Payment due date and ending July 1, 1995. 2. Actual as of December 31, 2003 Obligation fulfilled in FY 95/96. Q. Process and distribute payments to PCSSD as required by Page 28 of the Settlement Agreement. 1. Projected Ending Date Payment due date and ending July 1, 1994. 2. Actual as of December 31, 2003 Final payment was distributed July 1994. 8 I. FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS (Continued) R. Upon loan request by LRSD accompanied by a promissory note, the ADE makes loans to LRSD. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing through July 1, 1999. See Settlement Agreement page 24. 2. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 The LRSD received $3,000,000 on September 10, 1998. As of this reporting date, the LRSD has received $20,000,000 in loan proceeds. S. Process and distribute payments in lieu of formula to PCSSD required by page 29 of the Settlement Agreement. T. 1. Projected Ending Date Payment due date and ending July 1, 1995. 2. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 Obligation fulfilled in FY 95/96. Process and distribute compensatory education payments to NLRSD as required by page 31 of the Settlement Agreement. 1. Projected Ending Date July 1 of each school year through June 30, 1996. 2. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 Obligation fulfilled in FY 95/96. U. Process and distribute check to Magnet Review Committee. 1. Projected Ending Date Payment due date and ending July 1, 1995. 2. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 Distribution in July 1997 for FY 97/98 was $75,000. This was the total amount due to the Magnet Review Committee for FY 97/98. Distribution in July 1998 for FY 98/99 was $75,000. This was the total amount due to the Magnet Review Committee for FY 98/99. 9 I. FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS (Continued) U. Process and distribute check to Magnet Review Committee. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31, 2003 (Continued) Distribution in July 1999 for FY 99/00 was $92,500. This was the total amount due to the Magnet Review Committee for FY 99/00. Distribution in July 2000 for FY 00/01 was $92,500. This was the total amount due to the Magnet Review Committee for FY 00/01 . Distribution in August 2001 for FY 01/02 was $92,500. This was the total amount due to the Magnet Review Committee for FY 01/02. Distribution in July 2002 for FY 02/03 was $92,500. This was the total amount due to the Magnet Review Committee for FY 02/03. Distribution in July 2003 for FY 03/04 was $92,500. This was the total amount due to the Magnet Review Committee for FY 03/04. V. Process and distribute payments for Office of Desegregation Monitoring. 1. 2. Projected Ending Date Not applicable. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 Distribution in July 1997 for FY 97/98 was $200,000. This was the total amount due to the ODM for FY 97/98. Distribution in July 1998 for FY 98/99 was $200,000. This was the total amount due to the ODM for FY 98/99. Distribution in July 1999 for FY 99/00 was $200,000. This was the total amount due to the ODM for FY 99/00. Distribution in July 2000 for FY 00/01 was $200,000. This was the total amount due to the ODM for FY 00/01 . Distribution in August 2001 for FY 01/02 was $200,000. This was the total amount due to the ODM for FY 01/02. Distribution in July 2002 for FY 02/03 was $200,000. This was the total amount due to the ODM for FY 02/03. Distribution in July 2003 for FY 03/04 was $200,000. This was the total amount due to the ODM for FY 03/04. 10 II. MONITORING COMPENSATORY EDUCATION A. Begin testing and evaluating the monitoring instrument and monitoring system to assure that data is appropriate and useful in monitoring the impacts of compensatory education programs on disparities in academic achievement for black students and white students. 1. Projected Ending Date January 15, 1995 2. Actual as of December 31, 2003 In May 1995, monitors completed the unannounced visits of schools in Pulaski County. The monitoring process involved a qualitative process of document reviews, interviews, and observations. The monitoring focused on progress made since the announced monitoring visits. In June 1995, monitoring data from unannounced visits was included in the July Semiannual Report. Twenty-five per cent of all classrooms were visited, and all of the schools in Pulaski County were monitored. All principals were interviewed to determine any additional progress since the announced visits. The July 1995 Monitoring Report was reviewed by the ADE administrative team, the Arkansas State Board of Education, and the Districts and filed with the Court. The report was formatted in accordance with the Allen Letter. In October 1995, a common terminology was developed by principals from the Districts and the Lead Planning and Desegregation staff to facilitate the monitoring process. The announced monitoring visits began on November 14, 1995 and were completed on January 26, 1996. Copies of the preliminary Semiannual Monitoring Report and its executive summary were provided to the ADE administrative team and the State Board of Education in January 1996. A report on the current status of the Cycle 5 schools in the ECOE process and their school improvement plans was filed with the Court on February 1, 1996. The unannounced monitoring visits began in February 1996 and ended on May 10, 1996. In June 1996, all announced and unannounced monitoring visits were completed, and the data was analyzed using descriptive statistics. The Districts provided data on enrollment in compensatory education programs. The Districts and the ADE Desegregation Monitoring staff developed a definition for instructional programs. 11 II. MONITORING COMPENSATORY EDUCATION (Continued) A. Begin testing and evaluating the monitoring instrument and monitoring system to assure that data is appropriate and useful in monitoring the impacts of compensatory education programs on disparities in academic achievement for black students and white students. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 (Continued) The Semiannual Monitoring Report was completed and filed with the Court on July 15, 1996 with copies distributed to the parties. Announced monitoring visits of the Cycle 1 schools began on October 28, 1996 and concluded in December 1996. In January 1997, presentations were made to the State Board of Education, the Desegregation Litigation Oversight Subcommittee, and the parties to review the draft Semiannual Monitoring Report. The monitoring instrument and process were evaluated for their usefulness in monitoring the impacts of compensatory education programs on achievement disparities. In February 1997, the Semiannual Monitoring Report was filed . Unannounced monitoring visits began on February 3, 1997 and concluded in May 1997. In March 1997, letters were sent to the Districts regarding data requirements for the July 1997 Semiannual Monitoring Report and the additional discipline data element that was requested by the Desegregation Litigation Oversight Subcommittee. Desegregation data collection workshops were conducted in the Districts from March 28, 1997 to April 7, 1997. A meeting was conducted on April 3, 1997 to finalize plans for the July 15, 1997 Semiannual Monitoring Report. Onsite visits were made to Cycle 1 schools who did not submit accurate and timely data on discipline, M-to-M transfers, and policy. The July 15, 1997 Semiannual Monitoring Report and its executive summary were finalized in June 1997. In July 1997, the Semiannual Monitoring Report and its executive summary were filed with the court, and the ADE sponsored a School Improvement Conference. On July 10, 1997, copies of the Semiannual Monitoring Report and its executive summary were made available to the Districts for their review prior to filing it with the Court. In August 1997, procedures and schedules were organized for the monitoring of the Cycle 2 schools in FY 97 /98. 12 II. MONITORING COMPENSATORY EDUCATION (Continued) A. Begin testing and evaluating the monitoring instrument and monitoring system to assure that data is appropriate and useful in monitoring the impacts of compensatory education programs on disparities in academic achievement for black students and white students. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 (Continued) A Desegregation Monitoring and School Improvement Workshop for the Districts was held on September 10, 1997 to discuss monitoring expectations, instruments, data collection and school improvement visits. On October 9, 1997, a planning meeting was held with the desegregation monitoring staff to discuss deadlines, responsibilities, and strategic planning issues regarding the Semiannual Monitoring Report. Reminder letters were sent to the Cycle 2 principals outlining the data collection deadlines and availability of technical assistance. In October and November 1997, technical assistance visits were conducted, and announced monitoring visits of the Cycle 2 schools were completed. In December 1997 and January 1998, technical assistance visits were conducted regarding team visits, technical review recommendations, and consensus building. Copies of the infusion document and perceptual surveys were provided to schools in the ECOE process. The February 1998 Semiannual Monitoring Report was submitted for review and approval to the State Board of Education, the Director, the Administrative Team, the Attorney General's Office, and the Desegregation Litigation Oversight Subcommittee. Unannounced monitoring visits began in February 1998, and technical assistance was provided on the school improvement process, external team visits and finalizing school improvement plans. On February 18, 1998, the representatives of all parties met to discuss possible revisions to the ADE's monitoring plan and monitoring reports. Additional meetings will be scheduled. Unannounced monitoring visits were conducted in March 1998, and technical assistance was provided on the school improvement process and external team visits. In April 1998, unannounced monitoring visits were conducted , and technical assistance was provided on the school improvement process. 13 II. MONITORING COMPENSATORY EDUCATION (Continued) A. Begin testing and evaluating the monitoring instrument and monitoring system to assure that data is appropriate and useful in monitoring the impacts of compensatory education programs on disparities in academic achievement for black students and white students. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 (Continued) In May 1998, unannounced monitoring visits were completed, and technical assistance was provided on the school improvement process. On May 18, 1998, the Court granted the ADE relief from its obligation to file the July 1998 Semiannual Monitoring Report to develop proposed modifications to ADE's monitoring and reporting obligations. In June 1998, monitoring information previously submitted by the districts in the Spring of 1998 was reviewed and prepared for historical files and presentation to the Arkansas State Board. Also, in June the following occurred: a) The Extended COE Team Visit Reports were completed, b) the Semiannual Monitoring COE Data Report was completed, c) progress reports were submitted from previous cycles, and d.) staff development on assessment (SAT-9) and curriculum alignment was conducted with three supervisors. In July, the Lead Planner provided the Desegregation Litigation Oversight Committee with (1) a review of the court Order relieving ADE of its obligation to file a July Semiannual Monitoring Report, and (2) an update of ADE's progress toward work with the parties and ODM to develop proposed revisions to ADE's monitoring and reporting obligations. The Committee encouraged ODM, the parties and the ADE to continue to work toward revision of the monitoring and reporting process. In August 1998, the ADE Implementation Phase Working group met to review the Implementation Phase activities for the previous quarter. The Assistant Attorney General, the Assistant Director for Accountability and the Education Lead Planner updated the group on all relevant desegregation legal issues and proposed revisions to monitoring and reporting activities during the quarter. In September 1998, tentative monitoring dates were established and they will be finalized once proposed revisions to the Desegregation Monitoring Plan are finalized and approved. In September/October 1998, progress was being made on the proposed revisions to the monitoring process by committee representatives of all the Parties in the Pulaski County Settlement Agreement. While the revised monitoring plan is finalized and approved, the ADE monitoring staff will continue to provide technical assistance to schools upon request. 14 II. MONITORING COMPENSATORY EDUCATION (Continued) A. Begin testing and evaluating the monitoring instrument and monitoring system to assure that data is appropriate and useful in monitoring the impacts of compensatory education programs on disparities in academic achievement for black students and white students. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 (Continued) In December 1998, requests were received from schools in PCSSD regarding test score analysis and staff Development. Oak Grove is scheduled for January 21 , 1999 and Lawson Elementary is also tentatively scheduled in January. Staff development regarding test score analysis for Oak Grove and Lawson Elementary in the PCSSD has been rescheduled for April 2000. Staff development regarding test score analysis for Oak Grove and Lawson Elementary in the PCSSD was conducted on May 5, 2000 and May 9, 2000 respectively. Staff development regarding classroom management was provided to the Franklin Elementary School in LRSD on November 8, 2000. Staff development regarding ways to improve academic achievement was presented to College Station Elementary in PCSSD on November 22, 2000. On November 1, 2000, the ADE Implementation Phase Working group met to review the Implementation Phase activities for the previous quarter. The Assistant Director for Accountability updated the group on all relevant desegregation legal issues and discussed revisions to monitoring and reporting activities during the quarter. The next Implementation Phase Working Group Meeting is scheduled for February 27, 2001 in room 201-A at the ADE. The Implementation Phase Working Group meeting that was scheduled for February 27 had to be postponed. It will be rescheduled as soon as possible. The quarterly Implementation Phase Working Group meeting is scheduled for June 27, 2001 . The quarterly Implementation Phase Working Group meeting was rescheduled from June 27. It will take place on July 26, 2001 in room 201-A at 1 :30 p.m. at the ADE. 15 II. MONITORING COMPENSATORY EDUCATION (Continued) A. Begin testing and evaluating the monitoring instrument and monitoring system to assure that data is appropriate and useful in monitoring the impacts of compensatory education programs on disparities in academic achievement for black students and white students. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 (Continued) On July 26, 2001 , the ADE Implementation Phase Working group met to review the Implementation Phase activities for the previous quarter. Mr. Willie Morris, ADE Lead Planner for Desegregation, updated the group on all relevant desegregation issues. Mr. Mark Hagemeier, Assistant Attorney General, and Mr. Scott Smith, ADE Staff Attorney, discussed the court case involving the LRSD seeking unitary status. The next Implementation Phase Working Group Meeting is scheduled for October 11 , 2001 in room 201-A at the ADE. On October 11 , 2001, the ADE Implementation Phase Working group met to review the Implementation Phase activities for the previous quarter. Mr. Willie Morris, ADE Lead Planner for Desegregation, updated the group on all relevant desegregation issues. Mr. Scott Smith, ADE Staff Attorney, discussed the ADE's intent to take a proactive role in Desegregation Monitoring. The next Implementation Phase Working Group Meeting is scheduled for January 10, 2002 in room 201-A at the ADE. The Implementation Phase Working Group Meeting that was scheduled for January 10 was postponed. It has been rescheduled for February 14, 2002 in room 201-A at the ADE. On February 12, 2002, the ADE Implementation Phase Working group met to review the Implementation Phase activities for the previous quarter. Mr. Willie Morris, ADE Lead Planner for Desegregation, updated the group on all relevant desegregation issues. Mr. Mark Hagemeier, Assistant Attorney General, discussed the court case involving the LRSD seeking unitary status. The next Implementation Phase Working Group Meeting is scheduled for April 11 , 2002 in room 201-A at the ADE. On April 11 , 2002, the ADE Implementation Phase Working group met to review the Implementation Phase activities for the previous quarter. Mr. Willie Morris, ADE Lead Planner for Desegregation, updated the group on all relevant desegregation issues. Mr. Mark Hagemeier, Assistant Attorney General, discussed the court case involving the LRSD seeking unitary status. The next Implementation Phase Working Group Meeting is scheduled for July 11 , 2002 in room 201-A at the ADE. 16 II. MONITORING COMPENSATORY EDUCATION (Continued) A. Begin testing and evaluating the monitoring instrument and monitoring system to assure that data is appropriate and useful in monitoring the impacts of compensatory education programs on disparities in academic achievement for black students and white students. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 (Continued) On July 18, 2002, the ADE Implementation Phase Working group met to review the Implementation Phase activities for the previous quarter. Mr. Willie Morris, ADE Lead Planner for Desegregation, updated the group on all relevant desegregation issues. Dr. Charity Smith, Assistant Director for Accountability, talked about section XV in the Project Management Tool (PMT) on Standardized Test Selection to Determine Loan Forgiveness. She said that the goal has been completed, and no additional reporting is required for section XV. Mr. Morris discussed the court case involving the LRSD seeking unitary status. He handed out a Court Order from May 9, 2002, which contained comments from U.S. District Judge Bill Wilson Jr., about hearings on the LRSD request for unitary status. Mr. Morris also handed out a document from the Secretary of Education about the No Child Left Behind Act. There was discussion about how this could have an affect on Desegregation issues. The next Implementation Phase Working Group Meeting is scheduled for October 10, 2002 at 1 :30 p.m. in room 201-A at the ADE. The quarterly Implementation Phase Working Group meeting was rescheduled from October 10. It will take place on October 29, 2002 in room 201-A at 1:30 p.m. at the ADE. On October 29, 2002, the ADE Implementation Phase Working Group met to review the Implementation Phase activities for the previous quarter. Mr. Willie Morris, ADE Lead Planner for Desegregation, updated the group on all relevant desegregation issues. Meetings with the parties to discuss possible revisions to the AD E's monitoring plan will be postponed by request of the school districts in Pulaski County. Additional meetings could be scheduled after the Desegregation ruling is finalized. The next Implementation Phase Working Group Meeting is scheduled for January 9, 2003 at 1 :30 p.m. in room 201-A at the ADE. On January 9, 2003, the ADE Implementation Phase Working Group met to review the Implementation Phase activities for the previous quarter. Mr. Willie Morris, ADE Lead Planner for Desegregation, updated the group on all relevant desegregation issues. No Child Left Behind and the Desegregation ruling on unitary status for LRSD were discussed. The next Implementation Phase Working Group Meeting is scheduled for April 10, 2003 at 1 :30 p.m. in room 201- A at the ADE. The quarterly Implementation Phase Working Group meeting was rescheduled from April 10. It will take place on April 24, 2003 in room 201-A at 1 :30 p.m. at the ADE. 17 II. MONITORING COMPENSATORY EDUCATION (Continued) A. Begin testing and evaluating the monitoring instrument and monitoring system to assure that data is appropriate and useful in monitoring the impacts of compensatory education programs on disparities in academic achievement for black students and white students. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31, 2003 (Continued) On April 24, 2003, the ADE Implementation Phase Working Group met to review the Implementation Phase activities for the previous quarter. Mr. Willie Morris, ADE Lead Planner for Desegregation, updated the group on all relevant desegregation issues. Laws passed by the legislature need to be checked to make sure none of them impede desegregation. Ray Lumpkin was chairman of the last committee to check legislation. Since he left, we will discuss the legislation with Clearence Lovell. The Desegregation ruling on unitary status for LRSD was discussed. The next Implementation Phase Working Group Meeting is scheduled for July 10, 2003 at 1 :30 p.m. in room 201-A at the ADE. On August 28, 2003, the ADE Implementation Phase Working Group met to review the Implementation Phase activities for the previous quarter. Mr. Willie Morris, ADE Lead Planner for Desegregation, updated the group on all relevant desegregation issues. The Desegregation ruling on unitary status for LRSD was discussed. The LRSD has been instructed to submit evidence showing progress in reducing disparities in academic achievement for black students and white students. This is supposed to be done by March of 2004, so that the LRSD can achieve unitary status. The next Implementation Phase Working Group Meeting is scheduled for October 9, 2003 at the ADE. On October 9, 2003, the ADE Implementation Phase Working Group met to review the Implementation Phase activities for the previous quarter. Mr. Willie Morris, ADE Lead Planner for Desegregation, updated the group on all relevant desegregation issues. Mark Hagemeier, Assistant Attorney General, discussed the Desegregation ruling on unitary status for LRSD. The next Implementation Phase Working Group Meeting is scheduled for January 8, 2004 at the ADE. On October 16, 2003, ADE staff met with the Desegregation Litigation Oversight Subcommittee at the State Capitol. Mr. Willie Morris, ADE Lead Planner for Desegregation, and Dr. Charity Smith, Assistant Director for Accountability, presented the Chronology of activity by the ADE in complying with provisions of the Implementation Plan for the Desegregation Settlement Agreement. They also discussed the role of the ADE Desegregation Monitoring Section. Mr. Mark Hagemeier, Assistant Attorney General, and Scott Smith, ADE Staff Attorney, reported on legal issues relating to the Pulaski County Desegregation Case. Ann Marshall shared a history of activities by ODM, and their view of the activity of the school districts in Pulaski County. John Kunkel discussed Desegregation funding by the ADE. 18 Ill. A PETITION FOR ELECTION FOR LRSD WILL BE SUPPORTED SHOULD A MILLAGE BE REQUIRED A. Monitor court pleadings to determine if LRSD has petitioned the Court for a special election. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing. 2. Actual as of December 31, 2003 Ongoing. All Court pleadings are monitored monthly. B. Draft and file appropriate pleadings if LRSD petitions the Court for a special election. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 To date, no action has been taken by the LRSD. 19 IV. REPEAL STATUTES AND REGULATIONS THAT IMPEDE DESEGREGATION A. Using a collaborative approach, immediately identify those laws and regulations that appear to impede desegregation. 1. Projected Ending Date December, 1994 2. Actual as of December 31, 2003 The information for this item is detailed under Section IV.E. of this report. 8 . Conduct a review within ADE of existing legislation and regulations that appear to impede desegregation. 1. Projected Ending Date November, 1994 2. Actual as of December 31, 2003 The information for this item is detailed under Section IV.E. of this report. C. Request of the other parties to the Settlement Agreement that they identify laws and regulations that appear to impede desegregation. 1. Projected Ending Date November, 1994 2. Actual as of December 31, 2003 The information for this item is detailed under Section IV.E. of this report. D. Submit proposals to the State Board of Education for repeal of those regulations that are confirmed to be impediments to desegregation. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of December 31, 2003 The information for this item is detailed under Section IV.E. of this report. 20 IV. REPEAL STATUTES AND REGULATIONS THAT IMPEDE DESEGREGATION (Continued) E. Submit proposals to the Legislature for repeal of those laws that appear to be impediments to desegregation. 2. Actual as of December 31, 2003 A committee within the ADE was formed in May 1995 to review and collect data on existing legislation and regulations identified by the parties as impediments to desegregation. The committee researched the Districts' concerns to determine if any of the rules, regulations, or legislation cited impede desegregation. The legislation cited by the Districts regarding loss funding and worker's compensation were not reviewed because they had already been litigated. In September 1995, the committee reviewed the following statutes, acts, and regulations: Act 113 of 1993\nADE Director's Communication 93-205\nAct 145 of 1989\nADE Director's Memo 91-67\nADE Program Standards Eligibility Criteria for Special Education\nArkansas Codes 6-18-206, 6-20-307, 6-20-319, and 6-17- 1506. In October 1995, the individual reports prepared by committee members in their areas of expertise and the data used to support their conclusions were submitted to the ADE administrative team for their review. A report was prepared and submitted to the State Board of Education in July 1996. The report concluded that none of the items reviewed impeded desegregation. As of February 3, 1997, no laws or regulations have been determined to impede desegregation efforts. Any new education laws enacted during the Arkansas 81 st Legislative Session will be reviewed at the close of the legislative session to ensure that they do not impede desegregation. In April 1997, copies of all laws passed during the 1997 Regular Session of the 81 st General Assembly were requested from the office of the ADE Liaison to the Legislature for distribution to the Districts for their input and review of possible impediments to their desegregation efforts. In August 1997, a meeting to review the statutes passed in the prior legislative session was scheduled for September 9, 1997. 21 IV. REPEAL STATUTES AND REGULATIONS THAT IMPEDE DESEGREGATION (Continued) E. Submit proposals to the Legislature for repeal of those laws that appear to be impediments to desegregation. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 (Continued) On September 9, 1997, a meeting was held to discuss the review of the statutes passed in the prior legislative session and new ADE regulations. The Districts will be contacted in writing for their input regarding any new laws or regulations that they feel may impede desegregation. Additionally, the Districts will be asked to review their regulations to ensure that they do not impede their desegregation efforts. The committee will convene on December 1, 1997 to review their findings and finalize their report to the Administrative Team and the State Board of Education. In October 1997, the Districts were asked to review new regulations and statutes for impediments to their desegregation efforts, and advise the ADE, in writing, if they feel a regulation or statute may impede their desegregation efforts. In October 1997, the Districts were requested to advise the ADE, in writing, no later than November 1, 1997 of any new law that might impede their desegregation efforts. As of November 12, 1997, no written responses were received from the Districts. The ADE concludes that the Districts do not feel that any new law negatively impacts their desegregation efforts. The committee met on December 1, 1997 to discuss their findings regarding statutes and regulations that may impede the desegregation efforts of the Districts. The committee concluded that there were no laws or regulations that impede the desegregation efforts of the Districts. It was decided that the committee chair would prepare a report of the committee's findings for the Administrative Team and the State Board of Education. The committee to review statutes and regulations that impede desegregation is now reviewing proposed bills and regulations, as well as laws that are being signed in, for the current 1999 legislative session. They will continue to do so until the session is over. The committee to review statutes and regulations that impede desegregation will meet on April 26, 1999 at the ADE. The committee met on April 26, 1999 at the ADE. The purpose of the meeting was to identify rules and regulations that might impede desegregation, and review within the existing legislation any regulations that might result in an impediment to desegregation. This is a standing committee that is ongoing and a report will be submitted to the State Board of Education once the process is completed. 22 IV. REPEAL STATUTES AND REGULATIONS THAT IMPEDE DESEGREGATION (Continued) E. Submit proposals to the Legislature for repeal of those laws that appear to be impediments to desegregation. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 (Continued) The committee met on May 24, 1999 at the ADE. The committee was asked to review within the existing legislation any regulations that might result in an impediment to desegregation. The committee determined that Mr. Ray Lumpkin would contact the Pulaski County districts to request written response to any rules, regulations or laws that might impede desegregation. The committee would also collect information and data to prepare a report for the State Board. This will be a standing committee. This data gathering will be ongoing until the final report is given to the State Board. On July 26, 1999, the committee met at the ADE. The committee did not report any laws or regulations that they currently thought would impede desegregation, and are still waiting for a response from the three districts in Pulaski County. The committee met on August 30, 1999 at the ADE to review rules and regulations that might impede desegregation. At that time, there were no laws under review that appeared to impede desegregation. In November, the three districts sent letters to the ADE stating that they have reviewed the laws passed by the 82nd legislative session as well as current rules \u0026amp; regulations and district policies to ensure that they have no ill effect on desegregation efforts. There was some concern from PCSSD concerning a charter school proposal in the Maumelle area. The work of the committee is on-going each month depending on the information that comes before the committee. Any rules, laws or regulations that would impede desegregation will be discussed and reported to the State Board of Education. On October 4, 2000, the ADE presented staff development for assistant superintendents in LRSD, NLRSD and PCSSD regarding school laws of Arkansas. The ADE is in the process of forming a committee to review all Rules and Regulations from the ADE and State Laws that might impede desegregation. The ADE Committee on Statutes and Regulations will review all new laws that might impede desegregation once the 83rd General Assembly has completed this session. The ADE Committee on Statutes and Regulations will meet for the first time on June 11 , 2001 at 9:00 a.m. in room 204-A at the ADE. The committee will review all new laws that might impede desegregation that were passed during the 2001 Legislative Session. 23 IV. REPEAL STATUTES AND REGULATIONS THAT IMPEDE DESEGREGATION (Continued) E. Submit proposals to the Legislature for repeal of those laws that appear to be impediments to desegregation. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 (Continued) The ADE Committee on Statutes and Regulations rescheduled the meeting that was planned for June 11 , in order to review new regulations proposed to the State Board of Education. The meeting will take place on July 16, 2001 at 9:00 a.m. at the ADE. The ADE Committee to Repeal Statutes and Regulations that Impede Desegregation met on July 16, 2001 at the ADE. The following Items were discussed: (1) Review of 2001 state laws which appear to impede desegregation. (2) Review of existing ADE regulations which appear to impede desegregation. (3) Report any laws or regulations found to impede desegregation to the Arkansas State Legislature, the ADE and the Pulaski County school districts. The next meeting will take place on August 27, 2001 at 9:00 a.m. at the ADE. The ADE Committee to Repeal Statutes and Regulations that Impede Desegregation met on August 27, 2001 at the ADE. The Committee is reviewing all relevant laws or regulations produced by the Arkansas State Legislature, the ADE and the Pulaski County school districts in FY 2000/2001 to determine if they may impede desegregation. The next meeting will take place on September 10, 2001 in Conference Room 204-B at 2:00 p.m. at the ADE. The ADE Committee to Repeal Statutes and Regulations that Impede Desegregation met on September 10, 2001 at the ADE. The Committee is reviewing all relevant laws or regulations produced by the Arkansas State Legislature, the ADE and the Pulaski County school districts in FY 2000/2001 to determine if they may impede desegregation. The next meeting will take place on October 24, 2001 in Conference Room 204-B at 2:00 p.m. at the ADE. The ADE Committee to Repeal Statutes and Regulations that Impede Desegregation met on October 24, 2001 at the ADE. The Committee is reviewing all relevant laws or regulations produced by the Arkansas State Legislature, the ADE and the Pulaski County school districts in FY 2000/2001 to determine if they may impede desegregation. On December 17, 2001, the ADE Committee to Repeal Statutes and Regulations that Impede Desegregation composed letters that will be sent to the school districts in Pulaski County. The letters ask for input regarding any new laws or regulations that may impede desegregation. Laws to review include those of the 83rd General Assembly, ADE regulations, and regulations of the Districts. 24 IV. REPEAL STATUTES AND REGULATIONS THAT IMPEDE DESEGREGATION (Continued) E. Submit proposals to the Legislature for repeal of those laws that appear to be impediments to desegregation. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 (Continued) On January 10, 2002, the ADE Committee to Repeal Statutes and Regulations that Impede Desegregation sent letters to the school districts in Pulaski County. The letters ask for input regarding any new laws or regulations that may impede desegregation. The districts were asked to respond by March 8, 2002. On March 5, 2002, A letter was sent from the LRSD which mentioned Act 17 48 and Act 1667 passed during the 83rd Legislative Session which may impede desegregation. These laws will be researched to determine if changes need to be made. A letter was sent from the NLRSD on March 19, noting that the district did not find any laws which impede desegregation. On April 26, 2002, A letter was sent for the PCSSD to the ADE, noting that the district did not find any laws which impede desegregation except the \"deannexation\" legislation which the District opposed before the Senate committee. On October 27, 2003, the ADE sent letters to the school districts in Pulaski County asking if there were any new laws or regulations that may impede desegregation. The districts were asked to review laws passed during the 84th Legislative Session, any new ADE rules or regulations, and district policies. 25 V. COMMITMENT TO PRINCIPLES A. Through a preamble to the Implementation Plan, the Board of Education will reaffirm its commitment to the principles of the Settlement Agreement and outcomes of programs intended to apply those principles. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of December 31, 2003 The preamble was contained in the Implementation Plan filed with the Court on March 15, 1994. B. Through execution of the Implementation Plan, the Board of Education will continue to reaffirm its commitment to the principles of the Settlement Agreement and outcomes of programs intended to apply those principles. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of December 31, 2003 Ongoing C. Through execution of the Implementation Plan, the Board of Education will continue to reaffirm its commitment to the principles of the Settlement Agreement by actions taken by ADE in response to monitoring results. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of December 31, 2003 Ongoing D. Through regular oversight of the Implementation Phase's Project Management Tool, and scrutiny of results of ADE's actions, the Board of Education will act on its commitment to the principles of the Settlement Agreement. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 26 V. COMMITMENT TO PRINCIPLES (Continued) D. Through regular oversight of the Implementation Phase's Project Management Tool, and scrutiny of results of ADE's actions, the Board of Education will act on its commitment to the principles of the Settlement Agreement. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31, 2003 At each regular monthly meeting of the State Board of Education, the Board is provided copies of the most recent Project Management Tool (PMT) and an executive summary of the PMT for their review and approval. Only activities that are in addition to the Board's monthly review of the PMT are detailed below. In May 1995, the State Board of Education was informed of the total number of schools visited during the monitoring phase and the data collection process. Suggestions were presented to the State Board of Education on how recommendations could be presented in the monitoring reports. In June 1995, an update on the status of the pending Semiannual Monitoring Report was provided to the State Board of Education. In July 1995, the July Semiannual Monitoring Report was reviewed by the State Board of Education. On August 14, 1995, the State Board of Education was informed of the need to increase minority participation in the teacher scholarship program and provided tentative monitoring dates to facilitate reporting requests by the ADE administrative team and the Desegregation Litigation Oversight Subcommittee. In September 1995, the State Board of Education was advised of a change in the PMT from a table format to a narrative format. The Board was also briefed about a meeting with the Office of Desegregation Monitoring regarding the PMT. In October 1995, the State Board of Education was updated on monitoring timelines. The Board was also informed of a meeting with the parties regarding a review of the Semiannual Monitoring Report and the monitoring process, and the progress of the test validation study. In November 1995, a report was made to the State Board of Education regarding the monitoring schedule and a meeting with the parties concerning the development of a common terminology for monitoring purposes. In December 1995, the State Board of Education was updated regarding announced monitoring visits. In January 1996, copies of the draft February Semiannual Monitoring Report and its executive summary were provided to the State Board of Education. 27 V. COMMITMENT TO PRINCIPLES (Continued) D. Through regular oversight of the Implementation Phase's Project Management Tool, and scrutiny of results of ADE's actions, the Board of Education will act on its commitment to the principles of the Settlement Agreement. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31, 2003 (Continued) During the months of February 1996 through May 1996, the PMT report was the only item on the agenda regarding the status of the implementation of the Monitoring Plan. In June 1996, the State Board of Education was updated on the status of the bias review study. In July 1996, the Semiannual Monitoring Report was provided to the Court, the parties, ODM, the State Board of Education, and the Desegregation Litigation Oversight Subcommittee. In August 1996, the State Board of Education and the ADE administrative team were provided with copies of the test validation study prepared by Dr. Paul Williams. During the months of September 1996 through December 1996, the PMT was the only item on the agenda regarding the status of the implementation of the Monitoring Plan. On January 13, 1997, a presentation was made to the State Board of Education regarding the February 1997 Semiannual Monitoring Report, and copies of the report and its executive summary were distributed to all Board members. The Project Management Tool and its executive summary were addressed at the February 10, 1997 State Board of Education meeting regarding the ADE's progress in fulfilling their obligations as set forth in the Implementation Plan. In March 1997, the State Board of Education was notified that historical information in the PMT had been summarized at the direction of the Assistant Attorney General in order to reduce the size and increase the clarity of the report. The Board was updated on the Pulaski County Desegregation Case and reviewed the Memorandum Opinion and Order issued by the Court on February 18, 1997 in response to the Districts' motion for summary judgment on the issue of state funding for teacher retirement matching contributions. During the months of April 1997 through June 1997, the PMTwas the only item on the agenda regarding the status of the implementation of the Monitoring Plan. The State Board of Education received copies of the July 15, 1997 Semiannual Monitoring Report and executive summary at the July Board meeting. 28 V. COMMITMENT TO PRINCIPLES (Continued) D. Through regular oversight of the Implementation Phase's Project Management Tool, and scrutiny of results of ADE's actions, the Board of Education will act on its commitment to the principles of the Settlement Agreement. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31, 2003 (Continued) The Implementation Phase Working Group held its quarterly meeting on August 4, 1997 to discuss the progress made in attaining the goals set forth in the Implementation Plan and the critical areas for the current quarter. A special report regarding a historical review of the Pulaski County Settlement Agreement and the ADE's role and monitoring obligations were presented to the State Board of Education on September 8, 1997. Additionally, the July 15, 1997 Semiannual Monitoring Report was presented to the Board for their review. In October 1997, a special draft report regarding disparity in achievement was submitted to the State Board Chairman and the Desegregation Litigation Oversight Subcommittee. In November 1997, the State Board of Education was provided copies of the monthly PMT and its executive summary. The Implementation Phase Working Group held its quarterly meeting on November 3, 1997 to discuss the progress made in attaining the goals set forth in the Implementation Plan and the critical areas for the current quarter. In December 1997, the State Board of Education was provided copies of the monthly PMT and its executive summary. In January 1998, the State Board of Education reviewed and discussed ODM's report on the ADE's monitoring activities and instructed the Director to meet with the parties to discuss revisions to the ADE's monitoring plan and monitoring reports. In February 1998, the State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and discussed the February 1998 Semiannual Monitoring Report. In March 1998, the State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary and was provided an update regarding proposed revisions to the monitoring process. In April 1998, the State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary. In May 1998, the State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary. 29 V. COMMITMENT TO PRINCIPLES (Continued) D. Through regular oversight of the Implementation Phase's Project Management Tool, and scrutiny of results of ADE's actions, the Board of Education will act on its commitment to the principles of the Settlement Agreement. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 (Continued) In June 1998, the State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary. The State Board of Education also reviewed how the ADE would report progress in the PMT concerning revisions in ADE's Monitoring Plan. In July 1998, the State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary. The State Board of Education also received an update on Test Validation, the Desegregation Litigation Oversight Committee Meeting, and revisions in ADE's Monitoring Plan. In August 1998, the State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary. The Board also received an update on the five discussion points regarding the proposed revisions to the monitoring and reporting process. The Board also reviewed the basic goal of the Minority Recruitment Committee. In September 1998, the State Board of Education reviewed the proposed modifications to the Monitoring plans by reviewing the common core of written response received from the districts. The primary commonalities were (1) Staff Development, (2) Achievement Disparity and (3) Disciplinary Disparity. A meeting of the parties is scheduled to be conducted on Thursday, September 17, 1998. The Board encouraged the Department to identify a deadline for Standardized Test Validation and Test Selection. In October 1998, the Board received the progress report on Proposed Revisions to the Desegregation Monitoring and Reporting Process (see XVIII). The Board also reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary. In November, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed the PMT and its executive summary. The Board also received an update on the proposed revisions in the Desegregation monitoring Process and the update on Test validation and Test Selection provisions of the Settlement Agreement. The Board was also notified that the Implementation Plan Working Committee held its quarterly meeting to review progress and identify quarterly priorities. In December, the State Board of Education reviewed the PMT and its executive summary. The Board also received an update on the joint motion by the ADE, the LRSD, NLRSD, and the PCSSD, to relieve the Department of its obligation to file a February Semiannual Monitoring Report. The Board was also notified that the Joshua lntervenors filed a motion opposing the joint motion. The Board was informed that the ADE was waiting on a response from Court. 30 V. COMMITMENT TO PRINCIPLES (Continued) D. Through regular oversight of the Implementation Phase's Project Management Tool , and scrutiny of results of ADE's actions, the Board of Education will act on its commitment to the principles of the Settlement Agreement. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 (Continued) In January, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed the PMT and its executive summary. The Board also received an update on the joint motion of the ADE, LRSD, PCSSD, and NLRSD for an order relieving the ADE of filing a February 1999 Monitoring Report. The motion was granted subject to the following three conditions: (1) notify the Joshua intervenors of all meetings between the parties to discuss proposed changes, (2) file with the Court on or before February 1, 1999, a report detailing the progress made in developing proposed changes and (3) identify ways in which ADE might assist districts in their efforts to improve academic achievement. In February, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed the PMT and its executive summary. The Board was informed that the three conditions: (1) notify the Joshua lntervenors of all meetings between the parties to discuss proposed changes, (2) file with the Court on or before February 1, 1999, a report detailing the progress made in developing proposed changes and (3) identify ways in which ADE might assist districts in their efforts to improve academic achievement had been satisfied. The Joshua lntervenors were invited again to attend the meeting of the parties and they attended on January 13, and January 28, 1999. They are also scheduled to attend on February 17, 1998. The report of progress, a collaborative effort from all parties was presented to court on February 1, 1999. The Board was also informed that additional items were received for inclusion in the revised report, after the deadline for the submission of the progress report and the ADE would: (1) check them for feasibility, and fiscal impact if any, and (2) include the items in future drafts of the report. In March, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed the PMT and its executive summary. The Board also received and reviewed the Desegregation Monitoring and Assistance Progress Report submitted to Court on February 1, 1999. On April 12, and May 10, 1999, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed the PMT and its executive summary. The Board also was notified that once the financial section of the proposed plan was completed, the revised plan would be submitted to the board for approval. On June 14, 1999, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed the PMT and its executive summary. The Board also was notified that once the financial section of the proposed plan was completed, the revised plan would be submitted to the board for approval. 31 V. COMMITMENT TO PRINCIPLES (Continued) D. Through regular oversight of the Implementation Phase's Project Management Tool, and scrutiny of results of ADE's actions, the Board of Education will act on its commitment to the principles of the Settlement Agreement. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 (Continued) On July 12, 1999, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed the PMT and its executive summary. The Board also was notified that once the financial section of the proposed plan was completed, the revised plan would be submitted to the board for approval. On August 9, 1999, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed the PMT and its executive summary. The Board was also notified that the new Desegregation Monitoring and Assistance Plan would be ready to submit to the Board for their review \u0026amp; approval as soon as plans were finalized. On September 13, 1999, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed the PMT and its executive summary. The Board was also notified that the new Desegregation Monitoring and Assistance Plan would be ready to submit to the Board for their review \u0026amp; approval as soon as plans were finalized. On October 12, 1999, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed the PMT and its executive summary. The Board was notified that on September 21 , 1999 that the Office of Education Lead Planning and Desegregation Monitoring meet before the Desegregation Litigation Oversight Subcommittee and presented them with the draft version of the new Desegregation Monitoring and Assistance Plan. The State Board was notified that the plan would be submitted for Board review and approval when finalized. On November 8, 1999, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of October. On December 13, 1999, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of November. On January 10, 2000, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of December. On February 14, 2000, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of January. On March 13, 2000, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of February. On April 10, 2000, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of March. 32 V. COMMITMENT TO PRINCIPLES (Continued) D. Through regular oversight of the Implementation Phase's Project Management Tool, and scrutiny of results of ADE's actions, the Board of Education will act on its commitment to the principles of the Settlement Agreement. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 (Continued) On May 8, 2000, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of April. On June 12, 2000, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of May. On July 10, 2000, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of June. On August 14, 2000, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of July. On September 11 , 2000, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of August. On October 9, 2000, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of September. On November 13, 2000, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of October. On December 11 , 2000, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of November. On January 8, 2001, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of December. On February 12, 2001 , the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of January. On March 12, 2001 , the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of February. On April 9, 2001 , the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of March. On May 14, 2001 , the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of April. On June 11, 2001 , the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of May. 33 V. COMMITMENT TO PRINCIPLES (Continued) D. Through regular oversight of the Implementation Phase's Project Management Tool, and scrutiny of results of ADE's actions, the Board of Education will act on its commitment to the principles of the Settlement Agreement. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31, 2003 (Continued) On July 9, 2001, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of June. On August 13, 2001, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of July. On September 10, 2001, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of August. On October 8, 2001 , the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of September. On November 19, 2001 , the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of October. On December 10, 2001 , the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of November. On January 14, 2002, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of December. On February 11 , 2002, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of January. On March 11 , 2002, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of February. On April 8, 2002, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of March. On May 13, 2002, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of April. On June 10, 2002, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of May. On July 8, 2002, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of June. On August 12, 2002, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of July. 34 V. COMMITMENT TO PRINCIPLES (Continued) D. Through regular oversight of the Implementation Phase's Project Management Tool, and scrutiny of results of ADE's actions, the Board of Education will act on its commitment to the principles of the Settlement Agreement. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31, 2003 (Continued) On September 9, 2002, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of August. On October 14, 2002, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of September. On November 18, 2002, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of October. On December 9, 2002, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of November. On January 13, 2003, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of December. On February 10, 2003, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of January. On March 10, 2003, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of February. On April 14, 2003, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of March. On May 12, 2003, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of April. On June 9, 2003, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of May. On August 11, 2003, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the months of June and July. On September 8, 2003, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of August. On October 13, 2003, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of September. On November 10, 2003, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of October. 35 V. COMMITMENT TO PRINCIPLES (Continued) D. Through regular oversight of the Implementation Phase's Project Management Tool, and scrutiny of results of ADE's actions, the Board of Education will act on its commitment to the principles of the Settlement Agreement. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 (Continued) On December 8, 2003, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of November. 36 VI. REMEDIATION A. Through the Extended COE process, the needs for technical assistance by District, by School, and by desegregation compensatory education programs will be identified. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 During May 1995, team visits to Cycle 4 schools were conducted, and plans were developed for reviewing the Cycle 5 schools. In June 1995, the current Extended COE packet was reviewed , and enhancements to the Extended COE packet were prepared. In July 1995, year end reports were finalized by the Pulaski County field service specialists, and plans were finalized for reviewing the draft improvement plans of the Cycle 5 schools. In August 1995, Phase I - Cycle 5 school improvement plans were reviewed. Plans were developed for meeting with the Districts to discuss plans for Phase 11 - Cycle 1 schools of Extended COE, and a school improvement conference was conducted in Hot Springs. The technical review visits for the FY 95/96 year and the documentation process were also discussed. In October 1995, two computer programs, the Effective Schools Planner and the Effective Schools Research Assistant, were ordered for review, and the first draft of a monitoring checklist for Extended COE was developed. Through the Extended COE process, the field service representatives provided technical assistance based on the needs identified with in the Districts from the data gathered. In November 1995, ADE personnel discussed and planned for the FY 95/96 monitoring, and onsite visits were conducted to prepare schools for the FY 95/96 team visits. Technical review visits continued in the Districts. In December 1995, announced monitoring and technical assistance visits were conducted in the Districts. At December 31 , 1995, approximately 59% of the schools in the Districts had been monitored. Technical review visits were conducted during January 1996. In February 1996, announced monitoring visits and midyear monitoring reports were completed, and the field service specialists prepared for the spring NCA/COE peer team visits. 37 VI. REMEDIATION (Continued) A. Through the Extended COE process, the needs for technical assistance by District, by School, and by desegregation compensatory education programs will be identified. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31, 2003 (Continued) In March 1996, unannounced monitoring visits of Cycle 5 schools commenced, and two-day peer team visits of Cycle 5 schools were conducted. Two-day team visit materials, team lists and reports were prepared. Technical assistance was provided to schools in final preparation for team visits and to schools needing any school improvement information. In April and May 1996, the unannounced monitoring visits were completed. The unannounced monitoring forms were reviewed and included in the July monitoring report. The two-day peer team visits were completed, and annual COE monitoring reports were prepared. In June 1996, all announced and unannounced monitoring visits of the Cycle 5 schools were completed, and the data was analyzed. The Districts identified enrollment in compensatory education programs. The Semiannual Monitoring Report was completed and filed with the Court on July 15, 1996, and copies were distributed to the parties. During August 1996, meetings were held with the Districts to discuss the monitoring requirements. Technical assistance meetings with Cycle 1 schools were planned for 96/97. The Districts were requested to record discipline data in accordance with the Allen Letter. In September 1996, recommendations regarding the ADE monitoring schedule for Cycle 1 schools and content layouts of the semiannual report were submitted to the ADE administrative team for their review. Training materials were developed and schedules outlined for Cycle 1 schools. In October 1996, technical assistance needs were identified and addressed to prepare each school for their team visits. Announced monitoring visits of the Cycle 1 schools began on October 28, 1996. In December 1996, the announced monitoring visits of the Cycle 1 schools were completed, and technical assistance needs were identified from school site visits. In January 1997, the ECOE monitoring section identified technical assistance needs of the Cycle 1 schools, and the data was reviewed when the draft February Semiannual Monitoring Report was presented to the Desegregation Litigation Oversight Subcommittee, the State Board of Education, and the parties. 38 VI. REMEDIATION (Continued) A. Through the Extended COE process, the needs for technical assistance by District, by School, and by desegregation compensatory education programs will be identified. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 (Continued) In February 1997, field service specialists prepared for the peer team visits of the Cycle 1 schools. NCA accreditation reports were presented to the NCA Committee, and NCA reports were prepared for presentation at the April NCA meeting in Chicago. From March to May 1997, 111 visits were made to schools or central offices to work with principals, ECOE steering committees, and designated district personnel concerning school improvement planning. A workshop was conducted on Learning Styles for Geyer Springs Elementary School. A School Improvement Conference was held in Hot Springs on July 15-17, 1997. The conference included information on the process of continuous school improvement, results of the first five years of COE, connecting the mission with the school improvement plan, and improving academic performance. Technical assistance needs were evaluated for the FY 97/98 school year in August 1997. From October 1997 to February 1998, technical reviews of the ECOE process were conducted by the field service representatives. Technical assistance was provided to the Districts through meetings with the ECOE steering committees, assistance in analyzing perceptual surveys, and by providing samples of school improvement plans, Gold File catalogs, and web site addresses to schools visited. Additional technical assistance was provided to the Districts through discussions with the ECOE committees and chairs about the process. In November 1997, technical reviews of the ECOE process were conducted by the field service representatives in conjunction with the announced monitoring visits. Workshops on brainstorming and consensus building and asking strategic questions were held in January and February 1998. In March 1998, the field service representatives conducted ECOE team visits and prepared materials for the NCA workshop. Technical assistance was provided in workshops on the ECOE process and team visits. In April 1998, technical assistance was provided on the ECOE process and academically distressed schools. In May 1998, technical assistance was provided on the ECOE process, and team visits were conducted. 39 VI. REMEDIATION (Continued) A. Through the Extended COE process, the needs for technical assistance by District, by School, and by desegregation compensatory education programs will be identified. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 (Continued) In June 1998, the Extended COE Team Visit Reports were completed. A School Improvement Conference was held in Hot Springs on July 13-15, 1998. Major conference topics included information on the process of continuous school improvement, curriculum alignment, \"Smart Start,\" Distance Learning, using data to improve academic performance, educational technology, and multicultural education. All school districts in Arkansas were invited and representatives from Pulaski County attended. In September 1998, requests for technical assistance were received, visitation schedules were established, and assistance teams began visiting the Districts. Assistance was provided by telephone and on-site visits. The ADE provided inservice training on \"Using Data to Sharpen the Focus on Student Achievement\" at Gibbs Magnet Elementary school on October 5, 1998 at their request. The staff was taught how to increase test scores through data disaggregation, analysis, alignment, longitudinal achievement review, and use of individualized test data by student, teacher, class and content area. Information was also provided regarding the \"Smart Start\" and the \"Academic Distress\" initiatives. On October 20, 1998, ECOE technical assistance was provided to Southwest Jr. High School. B. Identify available resources for providing technical assistance for the specific condition, or circumstances of need, considering resources within ADE and the Districts, and also resources available from outside sources and experts. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 The information for this item is detailed under Section VI.F. of this report. C. Through the ERIC system, conduct a literature search for research evaluating compensatory education programs. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 40 VI. REMEDIATION (Continued) C. Through the ERIC system, conduct a literature search for research evaluating compensatory education programs. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 An updated ERIC Search was conducted on May 15, 1995 to locate research on evaluating compensatory education programs. The ADE received the updated ERIC disc that covered material through March 1995. An ERIC search was conducted in September 30, 1996 to identify current research dealing with the evaluation of compensatory education programs, and the articles were reviewed . An ERIC search was conducted in April 1997 to identify current research on compensatory education programs and sent to the Cycle 1 principals and the field service specialists for their use. An Eric search was conducted in October 1998 on the topic of Compensatory Education and related descriptors. The search included articles with publication dates from 1997 through July 1998. D. Identify and research technical resources available to ADE and the Districts through programs and organizations such as the Desegregation Assistance Center in S.an Antonio, Texas. 1. Projected Ending Date Summer 1994 2. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 The information for this item is detailed under Section VI.F. of this report. E. Solicit, obtain, and use available resources for technical assistance. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 The information for this item is detailed under Section VI.F. of this report. 41 VI. REMEDIATION (Continued) F. Evaluate the impact of the use of resources for technical assistance. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of December 31, 2003 From March 1995 through July 1995, technical assistance and resources were obtained from the following sources: the Southwest Regional Cooperative\nUALR regarding training for monitors\nODM on a project management software\nADHE regarding data review and display\nand Phi Delta Kappa, the Desegregation Assistance Center and the Dawson Cooperative regarding perceptual surveys. Technical assistance was received on the Microsoft Project software in November 1995, and a draft of the PMT report using the new software package was presented to the ADE administrative team for review. In December 1995, a data manager was hired permanently to provide technical assistance with computer software and hardware. In October 1996, the field service specialists conducted workshops in the Districts to address their technical assistance needs and provided assistance for upcoming team visits. In November and December 1996, the field service specialists addressed technical assistance needs of the schools in the Districts as they were identified and continued to provide technical assistance for the upcoming team visits. In January 1997, a draft of the February 1997 Semiannual Monitoring Report was presented to the State Board of Education, the Desegregation Litigation Oversight Subcommittee, and the parties. The ECOE monitoring section of the report included information that identified technical assistance needs and resources available to the Cycle 1 schools. Technical assistance was provided during the January 29-31, 1997 Title I MidWinter Conference. The conference emphasized creating a learning community by building capacity schools to better serve all children and empowering parents to acquire additional skills and knowledge to better support the education of their children. In February 1997, three ADE employees attended the Southeast Regional Conference on Educating Black Children. Participants received training from national experts who outlined specific steps that promote and improve the education of black children. 42 VI. REMEDIATION (Continued) F. Evaluate the impact of the use of resources for technical assistance. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31, 2003 (Continued) On March 6-9, 1997, three members of the ADE's Technical Assistance Section attended the National Committee for School Desegregation Conference. The participants received training in strategies for Excellence and Equity: Empowerment and Training for the Future. Specific information was received regarding the current status of court-ordered desegregation, unitary status, and resegregation and distributed to the Districts and ADE personnel. The field service specialists attended workshops in March on ACT testing and school improvement to identify technical assistance resources available to the Districts and the ADE that will facilitate desegregation efforts. ADE personnel attended the Eighth Annual Conference on Middle Level Education in Arkansas presented by the Arkansas Association of Middle Level Education on April 6-8, 1997. The theme of the conference was Sailing Toward New Horizons. In May 1997, the field service specialists attended the NCA annual conference and an inservice session with Mutiu Fagbayi. An Implementation Oversight Committee member participated in the Consolidated COE Plan in service training. In June and July 1997, field service staff attended an SAT-9 testing workshop and participated in the three-day School Improvement Conference held in Hot Springs. The conference provided the Districts with information on the COE school improvement process, technical assistance on monitoring and assessing achievement, availability of technology for the classroom teacher, and teaching strategies for successful student achievement. In August 1997, field service personnel attended the ASCD Statewide Conference and the AAEA Administrators Conference. On August 18, 1997, the bi-monthly Team V meeting was held and presentations were made on the Early Literacy Learning in Arkansas (ELLA) program and the Schools of the 21st Century program. In September 1997, technical assistance was provided to the Cycle 2 principals on data collection for onsite and offsite monitoring. ADE personnel attended the Region VI Desegregation Conference in October 1997. Current desegregation and educational equity cases and unitary status issues were the primary focus of the conference. On October 14, 1997, the bi-monthly Team V meeting was held in Paragould to enable members to observe a 21st Century school and a school that incorporates traditional and multi-age classes in its curriculum. 43 VI. REMEDIATION (Continued) F. Evaluate the impact of the use of resources for technical assistance. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31, 2003 (Continued) In November 1997, the field service representatives attended the Governor's Partnership Workshop to discuss how to tie the committee's activities with the ECOE process. In March 1998, the field service representatives attended a school improvement conference and conducted workshops on team building and ECOE team visits. Staff development seminars on Using Data to Sharpen the Focus on Student Achievement are scheduled for March 23, 1998 and March 27, 1998 for the Districts. In April 1998, the Districts participated in an ADE seminar to aid them in evaluating and improving student achievement. In August 1998, the Field Service Staff attended inservice to provide further assistance to schools, i.e., Title I Summer Planning Session, ADE session on Smart Start, and the School Improvement Workshops. All schools and districts in Pulaski County were invited to attend the \"Smart Start\" Summit November 9, 10, and 11 to learn more about strategies to increase student performance. \"Smart Start\" is a standards-driven educational initiative which emphasizes the articulation of clear standards for student achievement and accurate measures of progress against those standards through assessments, staff development and individual school accountability. The Smart Start Initiative focused on improving reading and mathematics achievement for all students in Grades K-4. Representatives from all three districts attended. On January 21 , 1998, the ADE provided staff development for the staff at Oak Grove Elementary School designed to assist them with their efforts to improve student achievement. Using achievement data from Oak Grove, educators reviewed trends in achievement data, identified areas of greatest need, and reviewed seven steps for improving student performance. On February 24, 1999, the ADE provided staff development for the administrative staff at Clinton Elementary School regarding analysis of achievement data. On February 15, 1999, staff development was rescheduled for Lawson Elementary School. The staff development program was designed to assist them with their efforts to improve student achievement using achievement data from Lawson, educators reviewed the components of the Arkansas Smart Initiative, trends in achievement data, identified areas of greatest need, and reviewed seven steps for improving student performance. Student Achievement Workshops were rescheduled for Southwest Jr. High in the Little Rock School District, and the Oak Grove Elementary School in the Pulaski County School District. 44 VI. REMEDIATION (Continued) F. Evaluate the impact of the use of resources for technical assistance. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31, 2003 (Continued) On April 30, 1999, a Student Achievement Workshop was conducted for Oak Grove Elementary School in PCSSD. The Student Achievement Workshop for Southwest Jr. High in LRSD has been rescheduled. On June 8, 1999, a workshop was presented to representatives from each of the Arkansas Education Service Cooperatives and representatives from each of the three districts in Pulaski County. The workshop detailed the Arkansas Comprehensive Testing, Assessment and Accountability Program (ACTAAP). On June 18, 1999, a workshop was presented to administrators of the NLRSD. The workshop detailed the Arkansas Comprehensive Testing, Assessment and Accountability Program (ACTAAP) . On August 16, 1999, professional development on ways to increase student achievement and the components of the new ACTAAP program was presented during the preschool staff development activities for teaching assistant in the LRSD. On August 20, 1999, professional development on ways to increase student achievement and the components of the new ACTAAP program was presented during the preschool staff development activities for the Accelerated Learning Center in the LRSD. On September 13, 1999, professional development on ways to increase student achievement and the components of the new ACTAAP program were presented to the staff at Booker T. Washington Magnet Elementary School. On September 27, 1999, professional development on ways to increase student achievement was presented to the Middle and High School staffs of the NLRSD. The workshop also covered the components of the new ACTAAP program, and ACT 999 of 1999. On October 26, 1999, professional development on ways to increase student achievement was presented to LRSD personnel through a staff development training class. The workshop also covered the components of the new ACTAAP program, and ACT 999 of 1999. On December 7, 1999, professional development on ways to increase student achievement was scheduled for Southwest Middle School in the LRSD. The workshop was also set to cover the components of the new ACTAAP program, and ACT 999 of 1999. However, Southwest Middle School administrators had a need to reschedule, therefore the workshop will be rescheduled. 45 VI. REMEDIATION (Continued) F. Evaluate the impact of the use of resources for technical assistance. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 (Continued) On January 10, 2000, professional development on ways to increase student achievement was conducted for both Dr. Martin Luther King Magnet Elementary School \u0026amp; Little Rock Central High School. The workshops also covered the components of the new ACTAAP program, and ACT 999 of 1999. On March 1, 2000, professional development on ways to increase student achievement was conducted for all principals and district level administrators in the PCSSD. The workshop also covered the components of the new ACTAAP program, and ACT 999 of 1999. On April 12, 2000, professional development on ways to increase student achievement was conducted for the LRSD. The workshop also covered the components of the new ACTAAP program, and ACT 999 of 1999. Targeted staffs from the middle and junior high schools in the three districts in Pulaski County attended the Smart Step Summit on May 1 and May 2. Training was provided regarding the overview of the \"Smart Step\" initiative, \"Standard and Accountability in Action ,\" and \"Creating Learning Environments Through Leadership Teams.\" The ADE provided training on the development of alternative assessment September 12-13, 2000. Information was provided regarding the assessment of Special Education and LEP students. Representatives from each district were provided the opportunity to select a team of educators from each school within the district to participate in professional development regarding Integrating Curriculum and Assessment K-12. The professional development activity was directed by the national consultant, Dr. Heidi Hays Jacobs, on September 14 and 15, 2000 The ADE provided professional development workshops from October 2 through October 13, 2000 regarding, \"The Write Stuff: Curriculum Frameworks, Content Standards and Item Development.\" Experts from the Data Recognition Corporation provided the training. Representatives from each district were provided the opportunity to select a team of educators from each school within the district to participate. The ADE provided training on Alternative Assessment Portfolio Systems by video conference for Special Education and LEP Teachers on November 17, 2000. Also, Alternative Assessment Portfolio System Training was provided for testing coordinators through teleconference broadcast on November 27, 2000. 46 VI. REMEDIATION (Continued) F. Evaluate the impact of the use of resources for technical assistance. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 (Continued) On December 12, 2000, the ADE provided training for Test Coordinators on end of course assessments in Geometry and Algebra I Pilot examination. Experts from the Data Recognition Corporation conducted the professional development at the Arkansas Teacher Retirement Building. The ADE presented a one-day training session with Dr. Cecil Reynolds on the Behavior Assessment for Children (BASC). This took place on December 7, 2000 at the NLRSD Administrative Annex. Dr. Reynolds is a practicing clinical psychologist. He is also a professor at Texas A \u0026amp; M University and a nationally known author. In the training, Dr. Reynolds addressed the following: 1) how to use and interpret information obtained on the direct observation form , 2) how to use this information for programming, 3) when to use the BASC, 4) when to refer for more or additional testing or evaluation, 5) who should complete the forms and when, (i.e. , parents, teachers, students), 6) how to correctly interpret scores. This training was intended to especially benefit School Psychology Specialists, psychologists, psychological examiners, educational examiners and counselors. During January 22-26, 2001 the ADE presented the ACTAAP Intermediate (Grade 6) Benchmark Professional Development Workshop on Item Writing. Experts from the Data Recognition Corporation provided the training. Representatives from each district were invited to attend. On January 12, 2001 the ADE presented test administrators training for mid-year End of Course (Pilot) Algebra I and Geometry exams. This was provided for schools with block scheduling. On January 13, 2001 the ADE presented SmartScience Lessons and worked with teachers to produce curriculum. This was shared with eight Master Teachers. The SmartScience Lessons were developed by the Arkansas Science Teachers Association in conjunction with the Wilbur Mills Educational Cooperative under an Eisenhower grant provided by the ADE. The purpose of SmartScience is to provide K-6 teachers with activity-oriented science lessons that incorporate reading , writing, and mathematics skills. The following training has been provided for educators in the three districts in Pulaski County by the Division of Special Education at the ADE since January 2000: On January 6, 2000, training was conducted for the Shannon Hills Pre-school Program, entitled \"Things you can do at home to support your child's learning.\" This was presented by Don Boyd - ASERC and Shelley Weir. The school's director and seven parents attended . 47 VI. REMEDIATION (Continued) F. Evaluate the impact of the use of resources for technical assistance. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 (Continued) On March 8, 2000, training was conducted for the Southwest Middle School in Little Rock, on ADD. Six people attended the training. There was follow-up tra ining on Learning and Reading Styles on March 26. This was presented by Don Boyd - ASERC and Shelley Weir. On September 7, 2000, Autism and Classroom Accommodations for the LRSD at Chicot Elementary School was presented. Bryan Ayres and Shelley Weir were presenters. The participants were: Karen Sabo, Kindergarten Teacher\nMelissa Gleason, Paraprofessional\nCurtis Mayfield, P.E. Teacher\nLisa Poteet, Speech Language Pathologist\nJane Harkey, Principal\nKathy Penn-Norman, Special Education Coordinator\nAlice Phillips, Occupational Therapist. On September 15, 2000, the Governor's Developmental Disability Coalition Conference presented Assistive Technology Devices \u0026amp; Services. This was held at the Arlington Hotel in Hot Springs. Bryan Ayres was the presenter. On September 19, 2000, Autism and Classroom Accommodations for the LRSD at Jefferson Elementary School was presented. Bryan Ayres and Shelley Weir were presenters. The participants were: Melissa Chaney, Special Education Teacher\nBarbara Barnes, Special Education Coordinator\na Principal, a Counselor, a Librarian, and a Paraprofessional. On October 6, 2000, Integrating Assistive Technology Into Curriculum was presented at a conference in the Hot Springs Convention Center. Presenters were: Bryan Ayers and Aleecia Starkey. Speech Language Pathologists from LRSD and NLRSD attended. On October 24, 2000, Consideration and Assessment of Assistive Technology was presented through Compressed Video-Teleconference at the ADE facility in West Little Rock. Bryan Ayres was the presenter. On October 25 and 26, 2000, Alternate Assessment for Students with Severe Disabilities for the LRSD at J. A. Fair High School was presented. Bryan Ayres was the presenter. The participants were: Susan Chapman, Special Education Coordinator\nMary Steele, Special Education Teacher\nDenise Nesbit, Speech Language Pathologist\nand three Paraprofessionals. On November 14, 2000, Consideration and Assessment of Assistive Technology was presented through Compressed Video-Teleconference at the ADE facility in West Little Rock. Bryan Ayres was the presenter. On November 17, 2000, training was conducted on Autism for the LRSD at the Instructional Resource Center. Bryan Ayres and Shelley Weir were presenters. 48 VI. REMEDIATION (Continued) F. Evaluate the impact of the use of resources for technical assistance. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 (Continued) On December 5, 2000, Access to the Curriculum Via the use of Assistive Technology Computer Lab was presented. Bryan Ayres was the presenter of this teleconference. The participants were: Tim Fisk, Speech Language Pathologist from Arch Ford Education Service Cooperative at Plumerville and Patsy Lewis, Special Education Teacher from Mabelvale Middle School in the LRSD. On January 9, 2001 , Consideration and Assessment of Assistive Technology was presented through Compressed Video-Teleconference at the ADE facility in West Little Rock. Bryan Ayres was the presenter. Kathy Brown, a vision consultant from the LRSD, was a participant. On January 23, 2001 , Autism and Classroom Modifications for the LRSD at Brady Elementary School was presented . Bryan Ayres and Shelley Weir were presenters. The participants were: Beverly Cook, Special Education Teacher\nAmy Littrell , Speech Language Pathologist\nJan Feurig, Occupational Therapist\nCarolyn James, Paraprofessional\nCindy Kackly, Paraprofessional\nand Rita Deloney, Paraprofessional. The ADE provided training on Alternative Assessment Portfolio Systems for Special Education and Limited English Proficient students through teleconference broadcast on February 5, 2001 . Presenters were: Charlotte Marvel, ADE\nDr. Gayle Potter, ADE\nMarcia Harding, ADE\nLynn Springfield, ASE RC\nMary Steele, J. A. Fair High School, LRSD\nBryan Ayres, Easter Seals Outreach. This was provided for Special Education teachers and supervisors in the morning, and Limited English Proficient teachers and supervisors in the afternoon. The Special Education session was attended by 29 teachers/administrators and provided answers to specific questions about the alternate assessment portfolio system and the scoring rubric and points on the rubric to be used to score the portfolios. The LEP session was attended by 16 teachers/administrators and disseminated the common tasks to be included in the portfolios: one each in mathematics, writing and reading. On February 12-23, 2001, the ADE and Data Recognition Corporation personnel trained Test Coordinators in the administration of the spring Criterion-Referenced Test. This was provided in 20 sessions at 10 regional sites. Testing protocol, released items, and other testing materials were presented and discussed. The sessions provided training for Primary, Intermediate, and Middle Level Benchmark Exams as well as End of Course Literacy, Algebra and Geometry Pilot Tests. The LRSD had 2 in attendance for the End of Course session and 2 for the Benchmark session. The NLRSD had 1 in attendance for the End of Course session and 1 for the Benchmark session. The PCSSD had 1 in attendance for the End of Course session and 1 for the Benchmark session. 49 VI. REMEDIATION (Continued) F. Evaluate the impact of the use of resources for technical assistance. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 (Continued) On March 15, 2001 , there was a meeting at the ADE to plan professional development for staff who work with Limited English Proficiency (LEP) students. A $30,000 grant has been created to provide LEP training at Chicot Elementary for a year, starting in April 2001. A $40,000 grant was created to provide a Summer English as Second Language (ESL) Academy for the LRSD from June 18 through 29, 2001 . Andre Guerrero from the ADE Accountability section met with Karen Broadnax, ESL Coordinator at LRSD, Pat Price, Early Childhood Curriculum Supervisor at LRSD, and Jane Harkey, Principal of Chicot Elementary. On March 1-2 and 8-29, 2001 , ADE staff performed the following activities: processed registration for April 2 and 3 Alternate Portfolio Assessment video conference quarterly meeting\nanswered questions about Individualized Educational Plan (IEP) and LEP Alternate Portfolio Assessment by phone from schools and Education Service Cooperatives\nand signed up students for alternate portfolio assessment from school districts. On March 6, 2001, ADE staff attended a Smart Step Technology Leadership Conference at the State House Convention Center. On March 7, 2001 , ADE staff attended a National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) Regional Math Framework Meeting about the Consensus Project 2004. On March 8, 2001 , there was a one-on-one conference with Carole Villarreal from Pulaski County at the ADE about the LEP students with portfolios. She was given pertinent data, including all the materials that have been given out at the video conferences. The conference lasted for at least an hour. On March 14, 2001 , a Test Administrator's Training Session was presented specifically to LRSD Test Coordinators and Principals. About 60 LRSD personnel attended. The following meetings have been conducted with educators in the three districts in Pulaski County since July 2000. On July 10-13, 2000 the ADE provided Smart Step training. The sessions covered Standards-based classroom practices. 50 VI. REMEDIATION (Continued) F. Evaluate the impact of the use of resources for technical assistance. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31, 2003 (Continued) On July 19-21, 2000 the ADE held the Math/Science Leadership Conference at UCA. This provided services for Arkansas math and science teachers to support systemic reform in math/science and training for 8th grade Benchmark. There were 200 teachers from across the state in attendance. On August 14-31 , 2000 the ADE presented Science Smart Start Lessons and worked with teachers to produce curriculum. This will provide K-6 teachers with activity-oriented science lessons that incorporate reading, writing, and mathematics skills. On September 5, 2000 the ADE held an Eisenhower Informational meeting with Teacher Center Coordinators. The purpose of the Eisenhower Professional Development Program is to prepare teachers, school staff, and administrators to help all students meet challenging standards in the core academic subjects. A summary of the program was presented at the meeting. On November 2-3, 2000 the ADE held the Arkansas Conference on Teaching. This presented curriculum and activity workshops. More than 1200 attended the conference. On November 6, 2000 there was a review of Science Benchmarks and sample model curriculum. A committee of 6 reviewed and revised a drafted document. The committee was made up of ADE and K-8 teachers. On November 7-10, 2000 the ADE held a meeting of the Benchmark and End of Course Mathematics Content Area Committee. Classroom teachers reviewed items for grades 4, 6, 8 and EOC mathematics assessment. There were 60 participants. On December 4-8, 2000 the ADE conducted grades 4 and 8 Benchmark Scoring for Writing Assessment. This professional development was attended by approximately 750 teachers. On December 8, 2000 the ADE conducted Rubric development for Special Education Portfolio scoring. This was a meeting with special education supervisors to revise rubric and plan for scoring in June. On December 8, 2000 the ADE presented the Transition Mathematics Pilot Training Workshop. This provided follow-up training and activities for fourth-year mathematics professional development. On December 12, 2000 the ADE presented test administrators training for midyear End of Course (Pilot) Algebra I and Geometry exams. This was provided for schools with block scheduling. 51 VI. REMEDIATION (Continued) F. Evaluate the impact of the use of resources for technical assistance. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 (Continued) The ADE provided training on Alternative Assessment Portfolio Systems for Special Education and Limited English Proficient students through teleconference broadcasts on April 2-3, 2001 . Administration of the Primary, Intermediate, and Middle Level Benchmark Exams as well as End of Course Literacy took place on April 23-27, 2001 . Administration of the End of Course Algebra and Geometry Exams took place on May 2-3, 2001 . Over 1,100 Arkansas educators attended the Smart Step Growing Smarter Conference on July 10 and 11 , 2001 , at the Little Rock Statehouse Convention Center. Smart Step focuses on improving student achievement for Grades 5-8. The Smart Step effort seeks to provide intense professional development for teachers and administrators at the middle school level, as well as additional materials and assistance to the state's middle school teachers. The event began with opening remarks by Ray Simon, Director of the ADE. Carl Boyd, a longtime educator and staff consultant for Learning 24-7, presented the first keynote address on \"The Character-Centered Teacher\". Debra Pickering, an education consultant from Denver, Colorado, presented the second keynote address on \"Characteristics of Middle Level Education\". Throughout the Smart Step conference, educators attended breakout sessions that were grade-specific and curriculum area-specific. Pat Davenport, an education consultant from Houston, Texas, delivered two addresses. She spoke on \"A Blueprint for Raising Student Achievement\". Representatives from all three districts in Pulaski County attended. Over 1,200 Arkansas teachers and administrators attended the Smart Start Conference on July 12, 2001 , at the Little Rock Statehouse Convention Center. Smart Start is a standards-driven educational initiative which emphasizes the articulation of clear standards for student achievement and accurate measures of progress against those standards through assessments, staff development and individual school accountability. The Smart Start Initiative focused on improving reading and mathematics achievement for all students in Grades K-4. The event began with opening remarks by Ray Simon, Director of the ADE. Carl Boyd, a longtime educator and staff consultant for Learning 24-7, presented the keynote address. The day featured a series of 15 breakout sessions on best classroom practices. Representatives from all three districts in Pulaski County attended. On July 18-20, 2001 , the ADE held the Math/Science Leadership Conference at UCA. This provided services for Arkansas math and science teachers to support systemic reform in math/science and training for 8th grade Benchmark. There were approximately 300 teachers from across the state in attendance. 52 VI. REMEDIATION (Continued) F. Evaluate the impact of the use of resources for technical assistance. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31, 2003 (Continued) The ADE and Harcourt Educational Measurement conducted Stanford 9 test administrator training from August 1-9, 2001. The training was held at Little Rock, Jonesboro, Fort Smith, Forrest City, Springdale, Mountain Home, Prescott, and Monticello. Another session was held at the ADE on August 30, for those who were unable to attend August 1-9. The ADE conducted the Smart Start quarterly meeting by video conference at the Education Service Cooperatives and at the ADE from 9:00 a.m. until 11 :30 a.m. on September 5, 2001 . The ADE released the performance of all schools on the Primary and Middle Level Benchmark Exams on September 5, 2001 . The ADE conducted Transition Core Teacher In-Service training for Central in the LRSD on September 6, 2001 . The ADE conducted Transition Checklist training for Hall in the LRSD on September 7, 2001 . The ADE conducted Transition Checklist training for McClellan in the LRSD on September 13, 2001 . The ADE conducted Basic Co-teaching train ing for the LRSD on October 9, 2001 . The ADE conducted training on autism spectrum disorder for the PCSSD on October 15, 2001 . Professional Development workshops (1 day in length) in scoring End of Course assessments in algebra, geometry and reading were provided for all districts in the state. Each school was invited to send three representatives (one for each of the sessions). LRSD, NLRSD, and PCSSD participated. Information and training materials pertaining to the Alternate Portfolio Assessment were provided to all districts in the state and were supplied as requested to LRSD, PCSSD and David 0 . Dodd Elementary. On November 1-2, 2001 the ADE held the Arkansas Conference on Teaching at the Excelsior Hotel \u0026amp; Statehouse Convention Center. This presented sessions, workshops and short courses to promote exceptional teaching and learning. Educators could become involved in integrated math, science, English \u0026amp; language arts and social studies learning. The ADE received from the schools selected to participate in the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), a list of students who will take the test. 53 VI. REMEDIATION (Continued) F. Evaluate the impact of the use of resources for technical assistance. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31, 2003 (Continued) On December 3-7, 2001 the ADE conducted grade 6 Benchmark scoring training for reading and math. Each school district was invited to send a math and a reading specialist. The training was held at the Holiday Inn Airport in Little Rock. On December 4 and 6, 2001 the ADE conducted Mid-Year Test Administrator Training for Algebra and Geometry. This was held at the Arkansas Activities Association's conference room in North Little Rock. On January 24, 2002, the ADE conducted the Smart Start quarterly meeting by ADE compressed video with Fred Jones presenting. On January 31, 2002, the ADE conducted the Smart Step quarterly meeting by NSCI satellite with Fred Jones presenting. On February 7, 2002, the ADE Smart Step co-sponsored the AR Association of Middle Level Principal's/ADE curriculum, assessment and instruction workshop with Bena Kallick presenting. On February 11-21, 2002, the ADE provided training for Test Administrators on the Primary, Intermediate, and Middle Level Benchmark Exams as well as End of Course Literacy, Algebra and Geometry Exams. The sessions took place at Forrest City, Jonesboro, Mountain Home, Springdale, Fort Smith, Monticello, Prescott, Arkadelphia and Little Rock. A make-up training broadcast was given at 15 Educational Cooperative Video sites on February 22. During February 2002, the LRSD had two attendees for the Benchmark Exam training and one attendee for the End of Course Exam training. The N LRSD and PCSSD each had one attendee at the Benchmark Exam training and one attendee for the End of Course Exam training. The ADE conducted the Smart Start quarterly meeting by compressed interactive video at the South Central Education Service Cooperative from 9:30 a.m. until 11 :30 a.m. on May 2, 2002. Telecast topics included creating a standards-based classroom and a seven-step implementation plan. The principal's role in the process was explained. The ADE conducted the Smart Step quarterly meeting by compressed interactive video at the South Central Education Service Cooperative from 9:30 a.m. until 11 :30 a.m. on May 9, 2002. Telecast topics included creating a standards-based classroom and a seven-step implementation plan. The principal's role in the process was explained. 54 VI. REMEDIATION (Continued) F. Evaluate the impact of the use of resources for technical assistance. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 (Continued) The Twenty-First Annual Curriculum and Instruction Conference, cosponsored by the Arkansas Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development and the Arkansas Department of Education, will be held June 24-26, 2002, at the Arlington Hotel in Hot Springs, Arkansas. \"Ignite Your Enthusiasm for Learning\" is the theme for this year's conference, which will feature educational consultant, Dr. Debbie Silver, as well as other very knowledgeable presenters. Additionally, there will be small group sessions on Curriculum Alignment, North Central Accreditation, Section 504, Building Level Assessment, Administrator Standards, Data Disaggregation, and National Board. The Educational Accountability Unit of the ADE hosted a workshop entitled \"Strategies for Increasing Achievement on the ACT AAP Benchmark Examination\" on June 13-14, 2002 at the Agora Center in Conway. The workshop was presented for schools in which 100% of students scored below the proficient level on one or more parts of the most recent Benchmark Examination. The agenda included presentations on \"The Plan-Do-Check-Act Instructional Cycle\" by the nationally known speaker Pat Davenport. ADE personnel provided an explanation of the MPH point program. Presentations were made by Math and Literacy Specialists. Dr. Charity Smith, Assistant Director for Accountability, gave a presentation about ACTAAP. Break out sessions were held, in which school districts with high scores on the MPH point program offered strategies and insights into increasing student achievement. The NLRSD, LRSD, and PCSSD were invited to attend. The NLRSD attended the workshop. The Smart Start Summer Conference took place on July 8-9, 2002, at the Little Rock Statehouse Convention Center and Peabody Hotel. The Smart Start Initiative focuses on improving reading and mathematics achievement for all students in Grades K-4. The event included remarks by Ray Simon, Director of the ADE. After comments by the Director, Bena Kallick presented the keynote address \"Beyond Mapping: Essential Questions, Assessment, Higher Order Thinking\". This was followed by a series of breakout sessions on best classroom practices. On the second day, Vivian Moore gave the keynote address \"Overcoming Obstacles: Avenues for Student Success\". Krista Underwood gave the presentation \"Put Reading First in Arkansas\". This was followed by a series of breakout sessions on best classroom practices. 55 VI. REMEDIATION (Continued) F. Evaluate the impact of the use of resources for technical assistance. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 (Continued) The Smart Step Summer Conference took place on July 10-11 , 2002, at the Little Rock Statehouse Convention Center and Peabody Hotel. Smart Step focuses on improving student achievement for Grades 5-8. The event included remarks by Ray Simon, Director of the ADE. After comments by the Director, Vivian Moore presented the keynote address \"Overcoming Obstacles: Avenues for Student Success\". This was followed by a series of breakout sessions on best classroom practices. On the second day, Bena Kallick presented \"Beyond Mapping: Essential Questions, Assessment, Higher Order Thinking\". Ken Stamatis presented \"Smart Steps to Creating a School Culture That Supports Adolescent Comprehension\". This was followed by a series of breakout sessions on best classroom practices. On August 8, 2002, Steven Weber held a workshop at Booker T. Washington Elementary on \"Best Practices in Social Studies\". It was presented to the 4th grade teachers in the Little Rock School District. The workshop focused around the five themes of geography and the social studies (fourth grade) framework/standards. Several Internet web sites were shared with the teachers, and the teachers were shown methods for incorporating writing into fourth grade social studies. One of the topics was using primary source photos and technology to stimulate the students to write about diverse regions. A theme of the workshop included identifying web sites which apply to fourth grade social studies teachers and interactive web sites for fourth grade students. This was a Back-to-School In-service workshop. The teachers were actively involved in the workshop. On August 13 Steven Weber conducted a workshop at Parkview High School in the LRSD. Topics of the workshop included: 1. Incorporating Writing in the Social Studies Classroom 2. Document Based (open-ended) Questioning Techniques 3. How to practice writing on a weekly basis without assigning a lengthy research report 4. Developing Higher Level Thinking Skills in order to produce active citizens, rather than passive, uninformed citizens 5. Using the Social Studies Framework 6. Identifying state and national Web Sites which contain Primary Sources for use in the classroom The 8:30 - 11 :30 session was for the 6 - 8 grade social studies teachers. The 12:30 - 3:00 session was for the 9 - 12 grade social studies teachers. Several handouts were used, also PowerPoint, primary source photos and documents, and Internet web sites (i.e., Library of Congress, Butler Center for Arkansas Studies, National Archives, etc.). This was a Back-to-School In-service workshop. The teachers were actively involved in the workshop. Marie McNeal is the Social Studies Specialist for the Little Rock School District. She invited Steven Weber to present at the workshop, and was in attendance. 56 VI. REMEDIATION (Continued) F. Evaluate the impact of the use of resources for technical assistance. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 (Continued) On September 30 through October 11, 2002, the ADE provided Professional Development for Test Administrators on the End of Course Literacy, Algebra and Geometry Exams. The training was held at the Holiday Inn Airport. All three districts in Pulaski County sent representatives to the training. On October 3, 2002, Charlotte Marvel provided in-service training for LEP teachers in the Little Rock School District. On December 6, 2002, the Community and Parent Empowerment Summit was held for parents of children attending the LRSD. It took place at the Saint Mark Baptist Church in Little Rock. Dr. Charity Smith, Assistant Director for Accountability, presented information on No Child Left Behind, Supplemental Services, after school tutoring, how parents can help, and the Refrigerator Curriculum. Mr. Reginald Wilson, Senior Coordinator for Accountability, presented information on ACTAAP, including how to find information on the AS-IS Website and what is included in the school report cards. Donna Elam spoke on the topic \"From the School House to the Jail House\". On December 10 - 12, 2002, the Math Workshop \"Investigations in Number, Data and Space\" was held at the Clinton Elementary Magnet School in Sherwood. Training for Kindergarten and First Grade Teachers was held on December 10, and included Making Shapes and Building Blocks, Quilts, Squares and Block Towns. Training for Second and Third Grade Teachers was held on December 11 , and included Shapes, Halves, Symmetry and Turtle Paths. Training for Fourth and Fifth Grade Teachers was held on December 12. Fourth grade covered Seeing Solids and Silhouettes. Fifth Grade was about Containers and Cubes. The sessions provided quality time for teachers to discuss the curriculum, reflect on implications, provide mutual support, and continue planning. The ADE provided professional development for all school districts on Alternative Assessment Portfolio Systems on January 7-9, 2003 at the Holiday Inn Airport. The LRSD had two in attendance, NLRSD had one in attendance, and the PCSSD had two in attendance. The ADE conducted the Smart Start Statewide Professional Staff Development Video Conference at the ADE/AETN Studio and at participating Education Service Cooperatives from 9:30 a.m. until 11 :30 a.m. on February 12, 2003. The ADE conducted the Smart Step Statewide Professi\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_459","title":"An Evaluation of Mathematics and Science Programs in the Little Rock School District from 1998-2003","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":["Cleaver, Vanessa E.","Wold, Donald C.","Glasgow, Dennis","Little Rock School District"],"dc_date":["2003-12"],"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--21st Century","Little Rock School District","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","Educational statistics"],"dcterms_title":["An Evaluation of Mathematics and Science Programs in the Little Rock School District from 1998-2003"],"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/459"],"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\nV z i RECEIVED JAN 1 3 2004 OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING An Evaluation of Mathematics and Science Programs in the Little Rock School District from 1998 to 2003 December 2003 Donald C. Wold, Ph.D. Vanessa E. Cleaver Dennis Glasgow Division of Instruction Little Rock School District 3001 S. Pulaski Street Little Rock, AR 72206 501 447-3320 www.lrsd.orgAn Evaluation of Mathematics and Science Programs in the Little Rock School District from 1998 to 2003 December 2003 Donald C. Wold, Ph.D. Vanessa E. Cleaver Deimis Glasgow Division of Instruction Little Rock School District 3001 S. Pulaski Street Little Rock, AR 72206 501 447-3320 www.lrsd.orgii Executive Summary This report examines student assessments over a five-year period in the Little Rock School District (LRSD) from 1998 to 2003. The report also looks at course taking and completion trends over the five years in mathematics and science courses, along with policy issues and curriculum changes. The five year period was selected because LRSD had a grant from the National Science Foundation (NSF) over that period of time to create systemic change in mathematics and science programs that would lead to increased student achievement and preparation of more students to pursue undergraduate programs of study in mathematics, science, and engineering. The LRSD program, funded by NSF, was Comprehensive Partnerships for Mathematics and Science Achievement (CPMSA). The effective date of the CPMSA program was September 1, 1998, and the expiration date for this program was August 31, 2003. The program evaluation was oriented around the following questions concerning all students and African American students in particular: Was the CPMSA program effective in improving the achievement of Afncan American students? Have levels of achievement changed for all students and for Afncan American students who perform at or above basic, at or above proficient, and at or above the advanced achievement level? Have enrollments and completion trends changed for all students and for Afncan American students in S* grade Algebra 1? Have the enrollments and completion trends changed for all students and Afncan American students in G 9-12 mathematics gate-keeping courses (Algebra I, Geometry, Trig/Pre-Calc., \u0026amp; Calculus)? Have enrollments and completion trends changed for all students and for Afncan American students in G 9-12 science gate-keeping courses (Biology 1, Chemistry 1, and Physics I)? Has the number of students with SEM proficiency changed? How has the number of Afncan American students with SEM proficiency changed? (SEM proficiency is defined as students who have completed a minimum of pre-calculus, biology, and chemistry and/or physics courses). What policy changes have promoted equal access by all students, including Afiican American students to high quality education? What policy changes were made to support student success in mathematics and science during CPMSA implementation? What curriculum and instruction changes were made to support student success in mathematics and science during CPMSA implementation? What professional development policy and program changes were made to support teachers during CPMSA implementation? What standards-based assessment system changes were made during CPMSA implementation? Method The evaluation design was based on quantitative student achievement data from over 100 examinations in twenty-four different assessment groups, which took place in LRSD from 1998 to 2003. The cooperative agreement with the NSF (Amendment No. 3) states that assessment data for the CPMSA Program for Years 3,4, and 5 will be used to determine annual increases in performance\nconsequently, the primary focus was on achievement data for SY 2000-2001,2001-2002, and 2002-2003. Literacy assessments were included along with mathematics and science assessments since literacy is a criticaliv achievement level or above the Proficient achievement level or both above Basic achievement level and above Proficient achievement level occurred for all students, for Caucasian students, and for African American students. The assessment groups are summarized below: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 English G8 EXPLORE English GIO PLAN Literacy G4 Benchmark Literacy G8 Benchmark Mathematics G4 Benchmark Mathematics G5 SAT-9 Mathematics G6 Benchmark Mathematics G7 SAT-9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Mathematics G8 Benchmark Mathematics G8 EXPLORE Mathematics GIO SAT-9 Mathematics GIO PLAN Algebra I G7-10 Benchmark Geometry G9-11 Benchmark Reading G5 SAT-9 Reading G7 SAT-9 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Reading G8 EXPLORE Reading GIO SAT-9 Reading GIO PLAN Science G5 SAT-9 Science G7 SAT-9 Science G8 EXPLORE Science GIO SAT-9 Science GIO PLAN 9 The Annual Change in Percentage Points of Students Who Performed at or Above the Basic Achievement Level Table 32 shows only the change in percentage points of students who performed at or above the Basic achievement level for all students in the District, for Caucasian students, and for African American students. Here we see that in 16 out of 24 assessments, the change in percentage points of African American students who performed at or above the Basic achievement level was greater than the change in percentage points of Caucasian students who performed at or above the Basic achievement level. These results may be seen in Figure IS below. The Annual Change in Percentage Points of Students Who Performed at or Above the Proficient Achievement Level Table 33 shows only the change in percentage points of students who performed at or above the Proficient achievement level for all students in the District, for Caucasian students, and for African American students. Here we see that in 18 out of 24 assessments, the change in percentage points of African American students who performed at or above the Proficient achievement level was less than the change in percentage points of Caucasian students who performed at or above the Proficient achievement level. These results may be seen in Figure 2S below. From the assessments in Tables 32 and 33, we conclude that, although there are increasing numbers of African American students at or above the Proficient achievement level, the greatest movement in African American student performance is upward from below the Basic achievement level into the region between the Basic achievement level and the Proficient achievement level. If the current momentum is maintained, student performance of African American students will continue to move upward to or above the Proficient achievement level. In the SMART/THRIVE 2002-2003 program, we found 52 percent of those students performing above the Basic achievement level but below the Proficient achievement level. With such a large number of students performing just below the Proficient achievement level, many more students could reach the Proficient achievement level with reasonable additional effort on the part of the students and teachers. From these data we conclude that the performance of African American students on district assessments improved substantially and consistently between 200land 2003.V Figure IS: Annual Change in Percentage Points Relative to the Basic Achievement Level Annual Change in Percentage Points of Students Who Performed at or Above the Basic Achievement Level on 24 Different Assessments from SY 2000-2001 to SY 2002-2003 25 20 15 10 Caucasian Students A African American 5 0 , 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 12 13 14 15 16 20 21 23 24 -5 Figure 2S: Annual Change in Percentage Points Relative to the Proficient Achievement Level Annual Change in Percentage Points of Students Who Performed at or Above the Proficient Achievement Level on 24 Different Assessments from SY 2000-2001 to SY 2002-2003 25 20 15 10 Caucasian Students African American 5 0 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 -5 12 13 14 15 16\\17 19 20 21 '23 24 0vi Course Enrollment and Completion from SY 1997-1998 to SY 2002-2003 1. The enrollment of African American students in Algebra I in the eighth grade increased by 29% and the successful completion rate (grade of A, B, or C) increased by 8% (Figure 51). The corresponding percentages for all students were a 17% increase in enrollment and 15% increase in successful completion rate (Figure 50). 2. The enrollment of African American students in mathematics gate-keeping courses (Alg I and II, Geo, Trig/Pre-Calc, and Cal) increased by 33% and the successful completion rate increased by 22% (Figure 49). The corresponding percentages for all students were a 28% increase in enrollment and 31% increase in successful completion rate (Figure 48). 3. The enrollment of African American students in science gate-keeping courses (Biology, Chemistry, and Physics) increased by 92% and the successful completion rate increased by 73% (Figure 53). The corresponding percentages for all students were an 84% increase in enrollment and an 85% increase in successful completion rate (Figure 52). 4. The percentage of African American students who were SEM proficient (completed physics, biology, chemistry and pre-calculus) increased by 50% Figure 61). The corresponding percentage for all students was a 31% increase in enrollment (Figure 60). From these data we conclude that the percentage increase of African American students in gatekeeping and higher-level mathematics and science courses is greater than that for students as a whole but that the successful completion rate (grade A, B, or C) for African American students is lower than that for students as a whole. Policy, Curriculum, and Professional Development Systemic improvement of mathematics and science in LRSD resulted from several factors. First, LRSD has adopted a number of Board Policies that promote the development of a coherent, consistent set of policies that supports: provision of high quality mathematics and science education for each student\nexcellent preparation, continuing education, and support for each mathematics and science teacher\nand administrative support for all persons who work to improve achievement among all students served by the system. Second, the alignment of written curriculum standards and benchmarks, nationally developed and validated curriculum materials, professional development, and assessment created a high quality mathematics and science curriculum. This alignment improved each year as data were used to check for strengths and weaknesses in the system. Another key factor was the coordination of resources, professional development, and technical assistance provided by Lead Teachers. Finally, the convergence of resources, both financial and human, fueled the change process that led to a higher- performing system. Student Support and Community Partners A variety of student support programs were implemented during the project period, including afterschool tutoring, the summer SMART program for rising eighth and ninth grade students preparing for Algebra I, the Saturday THRIVE program to provide follow-up support for SMART graduates, a preengineering program (SECME) that is in about half our schools, and after-school clubs sponsored by the Museum of Discovery. All of these programs focused on the needs of students who need support to improve their achievement. In addition community partners such as the University of Arkansas at Little Rock, Philander Smith College, and the Museum of Discovery provided leadership and support to the LRSD mathematics and science programs. Parent Institutes, PTA meetings, and other avenues were used to involve parents and to try to keep them informed about changes in the LRSD math and science program. Curriculum packets designed to share the goals of each mathematics module, major classroom activities used to support those goals, and strategies for parents to utilize with their children at home were developed for each mathematics module for grades K-8. These packets were available for checkout through school libraries.vii Table of Contents Executive Summary........................................................................... Method................................................................................................................... Results.................................................................................................................... Achievement....................................................................................................... Course Emollment and Completion from SY 1997-1998 to SY 2002-2003 Policy, Curriculum, and Professional Development...................................... Student Support and Community Partners...................................................... 11 .ii iii hi vi vi vi 1 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 Introduction...................................................................................................................................................1 Evaluation Goals:....................................................................................................................................................................3 Research Questions................................................................................................................................................................4 Current Status..........................................................................................................................................................................5 Major Milestones in the In^lementation of Educational System Reform through CPMSA by the Little Rock School District 6 2 Standards-Based Curriculum, Instruction, and Assessment 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.4.1 2.4.2 Mathematics and Science Curriculum Resources Evidence of Standards-based Instruction............. Professional Development..................................... Assessment System................................................ Benchmark Examinations Achievement Level Tests 2.5 2.5.1 2.5.2 2.5.3 2.5.4 Student Support SMART (Summer Mathematics Advanced Readiness Training) THRIVE........................................................................................... SECME............................................................................................. After School Discovery Clubs....................................................... .9 10 11 11 17 17 18 18 18 18 18 19 3 Policy Support for High Quality Learning and Teaching 19 4 Convergence of Educational Resources 4.1 Personnel 4.1.1 4.1.2 4.1.3 Professional Development Special Population............ ESL............................. 4.2 4.3 Student Academic Support Programs Curricula Materials/Supplies............. 4.4 Integration of Technology 20 .20 .20 .20 .21 .21 .21 .21 5 Partnerships of Leadership\nBroad-Based Support 5.1 Parent/Family/Community Involvement.......................... 5.2 Primary Partners................................................................. 5.2.1 5.2.2 5.2.3 University of Arkansas at Little Rock Philander Smith College..................... Arkansas Museum of Discovery......... 21 .22 .22 .22 .22 .22viii 6 Measures of Effectiveness Focused on Student Outcomes 6.1 National Trends in Mathematics and Science Achievement 6.2 Determining Improvement from Changes in Percentages of Students Who Performed At or Above Different Achievement Levels............................................................................................................................................................. 23 .23 6.3 6.4 6.5 6.6 6.7 6.8 6.9 6.10 6.11 6.11.1 6.11.2 Mathematics Assessment in Grade 6 with the Arkansas Benchmark................................................................... Mathematics Assessment in Grade 4 and Grade 8 with the Arkansas Benchmark............................................ Literacy Assessments in Grade 4 and Grade 8 with the Arkansas Benchmark................................................... End-of-Course Assessments for Algebra I and Geometry.................................................................................... Mathematics Assessment in Grades 5,1, and 10 with the Stanford Achievement Test, 9\" Edition (SAT-9).. Science Assessment in Grades 5, 7, and 10 with the Stanford Achievement Test, 9* Edition (SAT-9).......... Total Reading Assessment in Grades 5, 7, and 10 with the Stanford Achievement Test, O* Edition (SAT-9) Discussion of the Assessment Summarized in Tables 1-16.............................................................................. EXPLORE Academic Assessment from ACT, Inc........................................................................................... English, Mathematics, Reading, and Science Reasoning Assessments in Grade 8 with EXPLORE........... Discussion of the S*\" Grade Assessments in English, Mathematics, Reading, and Science Reasoning with 25 26 30 34 38 43 48 52 57 58 59 EXPLORE Summarized in Tables 16-20 6.12 6.12.1 6.12.2 PLAN Academic Assessment from ACT, Inc............................................................................................................ English, Mathematics, Reading, and Science Reasoning Assessments in Grade 10 with PLAN.................... Discussion of the IO'*' Grade Assessments in English, Mathematics, Reading, and Science Reasoning with 61 63 63 6.13 PLAN Summarized in Tables 21-24. Advanced Placement Program. 66 67 7 Enrollment in Mathematics and Science Courses \u0026amp; Completion Trends 7.1 7.2 7.3 7.4 7.4.1 7.4.2 Enrollment and Completion in Mathematics Gate-Keeping Courses.... Enrollment and Completion in Science Gate-Keeping Courses............ Enrollment and Completion in All Mathematics and Science Courses Proficiency in Science, Engineering, and Mathematic (SEM).............. Enrollment and Completion in Pre-Calculus Enrollment and Completion in Biology........ 73 .73 .76 .78 .81 .81 .84 8 Summer Mathematics Advanced Readiness Training (SMART)/Project Thrive 8.1 Population Configuration 8.2 Participant Selection. 8.3 Student Performance 86 .86 .86 .86 9 Improvement in the Achievement of All Students, Including those Historically Underserved. 90 Was the CPMSA program effective in improving the achievement of Afi-ican American students in the Little Rock School District?...............................................................................................................................................................................90 9.2 Have levels of achievement changed for all students and for Afncan American students from 1997-1998 to 2002- 2003?102 Have S\"\" grade enrollments in Algebra I and completion of that mathematics course with a grade of A, B, or C changed for all students and for Afncan American students from 1997-1998 to 2002-2003?.......................................... 9.3 9.4 Have enrollments in mathematics gate-keeping courses (Algebra I, Geometry, Trig/Pre-Calc., \u0026amp; Calculus) and conqrletion of those mathematics courses with a grade of A, B, or C changed for all students and Afncan American students in G 9-12?................................... ........ 103 9.5 104 Have enrollments in science gate-keeping courses (Biology 1, Chemistry 1, and Physics 1) and completion of those science courses with a grade of A, B, or C changed for all students and for African American students in G 9-12? 104 9.6 Has the number of students with SEM proficiency changed? Has the number of Afncan American students with SEM proficiency changed? (SEM proficiency refers to students who have completed a minimum of pre-calculus, biology, and chemistry and /or physics courses with a grade of A, B, or C)....................................................................................... 9.7 What policy changes have promoted equal access by all students, including Afncan American students to high quality education?..................................................................................................................................................................... 9.8 What policy changes were made to support student success in mathematics and science during CPMSA implementation?....................................................................................................................................................................... 104 105 1059.9 What curriculum and instruction changes were made to support student success in mathematics and science during CPMSA implementation? 9.10 implementation? What professional development policy and program changes were made to support teachers during CPMSA 105 ix 9.11 What standards-based assessment system changes were made during CPMSA implementation? 105 105 10 Summary of Findings and Conclusion Conclusion............................................................. 106 .108 11 Index of Figures 109 12 Index of Tables 1111 An Evaluation of Mathematics and Science Programs in the Little Rock School District from 1998 to 2003 1 Introduction On September 13, 2002, Judge William Wilson, Sr., declared, after decades of litigation, the Little Rock School District to be Unitary (except in one area). The District Court issued its Memorandum Opinion (hereinafter Opinion) finding that the Little Rock School District (LRSD) had substantially complied with all areas of the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan (Revised Plan), with the exception of Revised Plan 2.7.1. Section 2.7.1 provided: LRSD shall assess the academic programs implemented pursuant to Section 2.7' after each year in order to determine the effectiveness of the academic programs in improving African-American achievement. If this assessment reveals that a program has not and likely will not improve Afiican-American achievement, LRSD shall take appropriate action in the form of either modifying how the program is implemented or replacing the program. The LRSD has participated in Comprehensive Partnerships for Mathematics and Science Achievement (CPMSA), a National Science Program (NSF) since September 1, 1998. CPMSA was designed to improve the mathematics and science education of urban students in medium sized cities. NSF organized its systemic initiative program around six drivers that were found to be central to successful school reform. NSFs six drivers^ of systemic reform are: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Standards-based curriculum, instruction, and assessment Policy support for high quality learning and teaching Convergence of educational resources Partnerships of leadership: broad-based support Measures of effectiveness focused on student outcomes Achievement of ALL students, including those historically underserved Thus, the Little Rock School District must provide evidence^ that clearly demonstrates that, to a significant degree, changes in student achievement and performance can be attributable to the catalytic impact of the systemic initiatives. The overall mission of the CPMSA program'* is to develop systemic approaches that will substantially increase the number of students enrolling in and successfully completing pre-college science, engineering and math (SEM) courses. This increased enrollment should have resulted in a quantifiable and long-term increase in the number of participating students who complete the \"college preparatory sequence of courses\" in secondary school, and then graduate to pursue undergraduate majors in science, engineering or mathematics. The national agenda^ is to produce more well-prepared high school graduates, both men and women, and to increase the number of students receiving B.S. degrees^ in natural sciences, engineering and 1 Revised Plan 2.7 provided, LRSD shall implement programs, policies and/or procedures designed to improve and remediate the academic achievement of African-American students, including but not limited to Section 5 of this Revised Plan. 2 NSF, Directorate of Education and Human Resources, Division of Educational System Reform, Six Critical Drivers, ( http://www.ehr.nsf gov/esr/drivcrs ') 3 Raising Standards and Achievement in Urban Schools: Case Stories from CPMSAs in Hamilton County/Chattanooga and Newport News Public Schools, Systemic Research, Inc., ( http://www.svstemic.com/). 4 CPMSA Fact Book 2002, May 2003 ( http://www.svstemic.com/), Systemic Research, Inc. 5 Report of the Congressional Commission on the Advancement of Women and Minorities in Science, Engineering and Technology Development, Land of Plenty: Diversity as America's Competitive Edge in Science, Engineering and Technology, Washington, D.C., September 2000.2 academic disciplines. Significant science proficiency by the nation^ will not be achieved unless all under-represented minorities, including Atncan Americans, are brought into the science and technology loop. In order to contribute to this national goal, the Little Rock School District proposed in the cooperative agreement with NSF that the graduation rate of well-prepared SEM high school graduates be substantially increased. As illustrated in Figurel and Figure 2, African American enrollment increases in both mathematics and science gate-keeping courses were achieved between the baseline year (in SY 1997-98, the year before the project was implemented) and Year 5 (SY 2002-2003). By the fifth year, 4,300 African American students (72% of total African American grade 8-12 enrollment) were enrolled in gate-keeping mathematics courses. In Figure 2, enrollments in science courses increased from 1,804 to 3,468 Afncan American students (51% of the total Afncan American grade 9-12 enrollment). Gate-keeping mathematics courses include Algebra I in 8* and 9* grades and higher. Algebra II, Geometry, Trigonometry/Pre-Calculus, and Calculus. The gate-keeping courses for science are Biology, Chemistry, and Physics. Figure 1: Enrollment in Mathematics Gate-Keeping and Higher Level Courses and Number of African American Students Who Completed Those Courses with a Grade of A, B, or C in the Little Rock School District Mathematics Gate-Keeping and Successful Completion Trends for African American Students (relative to total grades 8-12 African American population) 4,500 4,000 - Enrollment: 33% Increase 4,300 (72%) 0 c o S Vi c 3 c I 3,500 3,000 - 2,500 - ^\n52+ 1548 -3528 (55%) 8 I o o E 3 z 2,000 - 1,500- 1,000- 500 - (32%} r5 i,9gr Completion: 21% Increase 2,293 (38%) 97-98 98-99 99-00 00-01 01-02 02-03 c 0 T School Year Figure 1 and Figure 2 illustrate that course completion rates increased for African American students. Successful completion is defined as a student completing a course with a grade of C or better. Afncan 6 National Science Board, Science and Engineering lndicators-2002 and Data Brief, Division of Science Resource Statistics, National Science Foundation, April 2002. 7 Jackson, Shirley Ann,, The Quiet Crisis: Falling Short in Producing American Scientific and Technical Talent, BEST (Building Engineering \u0026amp; Science Talent), 40IB Street, Suite 2200, San Diego, CA 92101, 2003.3 American students completing mathematics courses increased 21% from 1,888 in SY 1997-98 to 2,293 in SY 2002-2003. As shown in Figure 2, science completion increased at a much higher 73% from 1,103 to 1,905. Figure 2: Enrollment in Science Gate-Keeping and Higher Level Courses and Number of African American Students Who Completed Those Courses with a Grade of A, B, or C in the Little Rock School District Science Gate-Keeping and Course Enrollment and Successful Completion Trends for African American Students (relative to total grades 9-12 African American population) 4,500 4,000 - Enrollment: 92% Increase 13 c o g c 8 c o E \u0026lt; c 3 \u0026lt; o .o 3 Z 3,500 3,000 2,500 2,000 - 1,500 (26%) e?m 3\n464 ^40t - 3468 (51%) 1,989 1,252 1,000 - (16%) 500 97-98 98-99 99-00 00-01 01-02 Completion: 73% Increase 1,905 (28%) 02-03 0 School Year u Evaluation Goals: 1. To demonstrate that a program assessment procedure is in place that can accurately measure the effectiveness of mathematics and science programs implemented in improving the academic achievement of African-American students. 2, To present achievement levels for the following student assessment data and years: Grade 4 Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 5 Grade 5 Grade 6 Grade 7 Grade 7 Grade 7 Grade 8 Grade 8 Grade 8 Arkansas Benchmark Mathematics (5 years) Arkansas Benchmark Literacy (5 years) SAT-9 Mathematics (6 years) SAT-9 Science (6 years) SAT-9 Total Reading (6 years) Arkansas Benchmark Mathematics (3 years) SAT-9 Mathematics (6 years) SAT-9 Science (6 years) SAT-9 Total Reading (6 years) Arkansas Benchmark Mathematics (5 years) Arkansas Benchmark Literacy (4 years) EXPLORE English (2 years)4 Grade 8 Grade 8 Grade 8 Grades 7-10 Grades 9-11 Grade 10 Grade 10 Grade 10 Grade 10 Grade 10 Grade 10 Grade 10 Grades 10-12 EXPLORE Mathematics (2 years) EXPLORE Reading (2 years) EXPLORE Science (2 years) End-of Course Algebra I (3 years) End-of Course Geometry (3 years) SAT-9 Mathematics (6 years) SAT-9 Science (6 years) SAT-9 Reading (6 years) PLAN English (2 years) PLAN Mathematics (2 years) PLAN Reading (2 years) PLAN Science (2 years) Advanced Placement (AP) examinations (6 years) In order to better understand these results, we will present enrollment and completion trends for all students and African American students from 1998 to 2003 using five (5) years of assessment data: G 9-12 All students in mathematics gate-keeping courses: Algebra I \u0026amp; II, Geometry, Trig/Pre- Calc., \u0026amp; Calculus (relative to total students in G 9-12) G 9-12 Afiican American students in mathematics gate-keeping courses: Algebra I \u0026amp; II, Geometry, Trig/Pre-Calc., \u0026amp; Calculus (relative to total Afncan American students in G 9-12) G8 All students enrollment and completion in 8** grade Algebra I (relative to total students in G8) G8 Afncan American students enrollment and completion in 8* grade Algebra I (relative to total Afncan American students in G8) G 9-12 All students enrollment and completion in Pre-Calculus G 9-12 Afncan American students enrollment and completion in Pre-Calculus G 9-12 Enrollment and completion trends for all students in gate-keeping science courses\nBiology 1, Chemistry 1, and Physics 1 (relative to total students in G 9-12) G 9-12 Enrollment and completion trends for Afncan American students in science gate-keeping courses: Biology 1, Chemistry 1, and Physics 1 (relative to total Afncan American students in G 9-12) G 8-12 Enrollment and completion trends for Afncan American students in mathematics gatekeeping courses: Algebra I \u0026amp; II, Geometry, Trig/Pre-Calc., \u0026amp; Calculus (relative to total Afncan American students in G 8-12) G 9-12 Enrollment and completion trends for Caucasian students in Biology G 9-12 Enrollment and completion trends for Afncan American students in Biology G 9-12 All students enrollment in all mathematics courses G 9-12 All students completion in all mathematics courses G 9-12 All students enrollment in all science courses G 9-12 All students completion in all science courses 1.2 Research Questions In this study of mathematics and science programs, we will analyze assessment data from 1998 to 2003. We would like to answer the following questions for all students, and for Afncan American students in particular: Was the CPMSA program effective in improving the achievement of Afncan American students?5 Have levels of achievement changed for all students and for African American students who perform at or above basic, at or above proficient, and at or above the advanced achievement level? Have S* grade enrollments in Algebra 1 and completion trends changed for all students and for African American students? Have the enrollments and completion trends changed for all students and Afncan American students in G 9-12 mathematics gate-keeping courses (Algebra I, Geometry, Trig/Pre-Calc., \u0026amp; Calculus)? Have enrollments and completion trends changed for all students and for African American students in G 9-12 science gate-keeping courses (Biology 1, Chemistry 1, and Physics 1)? Has the number of students with SEM proficiency changed? How has the number of African American students with SEM proficiency changed? (SEM proficiency is defined as students who have completed a minimum of pre-calculus, biology, and chemistry and /or physics courses). What policy changes have promoted equal access by all students, including Afncan American students to high quality education? What policy changes were made to support student success in mathematics and science during CPMSA implementation? What curriculum and instruction changes were made to support student success in mathematics and science during CPMSA implementation? What professional development policy and program changes were made to support teachers during CPMSA implementation? What standards-based assessment system changes were made during CPMSA implementation? In this report, we looked at assessments which took place during the LRSD program\nComprehensive Partnerships for Mathematics and Science Achievement (CPMSA). The effective date of the CPMSA program was September 1, 1998, and the expiration date for this program was August 31, 2003. Additional information for the LRSD and individual schools is available from the Arkansas Department of Education website: httr)://www.as-is/reportcard/. 1.3 Current Status^ In the last Core Data Elements collection for the 2001-2002 school year, the Little Rock School District reported approximately 25,000 students, 35 elementary schools, eight middle schools, five high schools, one career and technical center, and one accelerated learning center (high school). The last strategic plan for the Little Rock School District (LRSD) overlapped with the CPMSA program. The mission statement of the LRSD was as follows: The mission of the LRSD is to equip all students with the skills and knowledge to realize their aspirations, to think critically and independently, to learn continuously and to face the future as productive, contributing citizens. This mission is accomplished through open access to a diverse, innovative and challenging curriculum in a secure environment with a staff dedicated to excellence and empowered with the trust and support of our community. The Little Rock CPMSA continues to be a catalyst for large-scale systemic change directed toward improving the science and mathematics achievement of all students. Major progress has been made in the development of an infrastructure to sustain achievement gains. The most visible change can be seen 8 Division of Instruction, Little Rock School District, Little Rock, Arkansas, Program Evaluations for the Comprehensive Partnerships for Mathematics and Science Achievement (CPMSA). 1998-99, 1999-2000, 2000-01. and 2001-02. Funded by the National Science Foundation, Presented to the Board of Education for Approval, December 19, 2002. 9 Little Rock School District, A Vision for the Future Strategic Plan. 1998-2003.6 n the implementation of high quality standards-based curricula in mathematics and science for all K-12 itudents. ^ead Teachers continue to serve as the critical link between professional development and the mplementation of high quality standards-based curricula. They work to ensure that content and jedagogy obtained through professional development is apparent in daily classroom practice. Lead eachers provide evidence that is needed to make decisions regarding professional development. rior to 1999, the Districts assessment program consisted of the administration of the SAT-9 to grades i, 5, 7, 8, and 10, and the state Benchmark exam for mathematics and literacy to grades 4 and 8. In iddition, the PLAN and Explore, ACT, SAT, and AP exams were also administered. This system was lot meeting the needs of the District. Therefore, a revised assessment system was designed to monitor individual student growth in a single year and longitudinally, was developed and enacted beginning with the 1999-2000 school year. Results from data obtained from these tests have guided decisions regarding professional development and curriculum adjustments. Further impact of the CPMSA is evident in increased enrollment and success of students in upper level mathematics and science courses. Prior to 1999, high school seniors largely occupied physics classes in the Little Rock School Districts five high schools. One reason for this was the level and amount of mathematics required for students to learn traditional high school physics. As a result of a 1999 policy enacted by the Board of Directors of the Little Rock School District, all freshmen (ninth grade) students are required to enroll in a more conceptual physics course. Collaborations between the Little Rock School District and the University of Arkansas at Little Rock led to the development of graduate level courses for teachers desiring to receive physics endorsement required to teach the course. In the 1999- 2000 school year, enrollment in physics courses increased by more than ten times the previous year. In addition, the number of teachers qualified to teach physics increased from five (approximately one per high school) to an additional nineteen who completed the coursework required for a physics endorsement. The District experienced major increases in the enrollment and success of seventh and eighth grade students in Algebra I from 1999-2000 to 2001-2002 school year. One reason for this was the implementation of the Summer Mathematics Advanced Readiness Training (SMART) Program. Critical skills for Algebra I were reinforced and enhanced during the two-week session through a variety of instructional strategies. Rising eighth and ninth grade students were invited to participate to improve their readiness for Algebra I and increase the overall enrollment. Much progress has been made toward the achievement of a single, standards-based, inquiry-centered, K- 12 mathematics and science education system as driven by the Little Rock CPMSA. The following report briefly describes the standards-based implementation organized around the four critical drivers and their impact on improved student achievement (drivers five and six). All fifty schools in the Little Rock School District have participated in and received direct initiative- supported services of the Little Rock CPMSA since its inception. More specifically, all teachers in all schools at identified grade levels participated in professional development programs aimed at the implementation of high quality curriculum in mathematics and science. All teachers in all classrooms at all fifty schools implemented revisions in the mathematics and science curricula. Therefore, all students were impacted directly by the CPMSA-sponsored services. J.4 Major Milestones in the Implementation of Educational System Reform through CPMSA by the Little Rock School District^ Table 1: Milestones in Comprehensive Partnerships for Mathematics and Science Achievement I Baseline Year | Little usage of standards-based instructional methods/materials\n10 Vanessa E. Cleaver, Project Director for the Little Rock School Districts NSF program: Comprehensive Partnerships for Mathematics and Science Achievement (CPMSA), November 3,2003.7 1997-1998 Year 1 1998-1999 Year 2 1999-2000 Low numbers of students in advanced mathematics and science courses\n Graduation requirements allowed students to graduate without taking rigorous math and science courses\n District policies/practices were not standards-based\n District programs and resources were operated in isolation\n Professional development unfocused and inadequate_____________ Provided professional development for teachers in preparation for implementation of standards-based curricula for all students in the o o o o o following grade and subject levels: - 4\" and S' grade mathematics teachers 6' grade mathematics teachers 6*' grade science teachers 9' grade science teachers 1' - 5\" grade science teachers (1 module) Small scale implementation of high-quality standards-based curricula Major revisions made to the Districts policies and practices including the following: o o o o o o Enacted policy that established academic content standards/benchmarks for high school graduates\nPolicy requiring all curricula to be standards-based\nAll special curricula /programs must be aligned with Districts Strategic Plan\nRequirement to provide appropriate and equitable programs and services for ESL students to ensure achievement of standards and benchmarks\nProvided Pre-AP and AP courses in grades 6-12 ensuring no barriers to participate in programs\nEstablished graduation requirements that include 3 units of math to include algebra I. algebra II, and geometry and 3 units of science to include physics, biology and chemistry\n Leveraged four major funding sources in support of improving mathematics and science education\n Developed and disseminated a brochure describing the goals and objectives of the LR CPMSA\n Collaborated with the existing Arkansas Statewide Systemic Initiative (ASSI) to implement Family Math and Science programs in additional elementary and middle schools\n Established a partnership with University of Arkansas at Little Rock (UALR) to provide training for pre-service and inservice teachers one week prior to a two-week institute for rising 5* and 6* grade students to improve their mathematics and science skills\n Partnership with Philander Smith College (PSC) to provide a summer institute for rising 9*^ grade students for success in Algebra I\n Partnership with UALR to provide college credit for 18 LRSD teachers to complete coursework required for them to receive an endorsement in Physics Fully implemented high-quality standards-based instruction in math for all students in grades 4, 5, and 6\n Fully implemented high quality standards-based instruction in science for all students in grades 6 and 9\nPartial implementation of high quality standards-based instruction/materials for all students in grades 1-5\n Provided more than 31,890 teacher-hours of professional development for K-12 mathematics and science teachers focused primarily on the use of hands-on, inquiry-based approach to teaching math and/or science\n Lead teachers made more than 2,551 technical assistance contacts with classroom teachers\n District adopted an Assessment Plan that involved multiple norm- and 8 criterion-referenced measures across grade levels that provided corroborative evidence necessary to accurately document outcomes of CPMSA initiatives\n Implemented SMART Program (Summer Mathematics Advanced Readiness Training), a two-week summer program, to rising S** and 9'*' grade students preparing for enrollment in Algebra I\n Provided Project THRIVE, a Saturday academy, in collaboration with Philander Smith College as a follow-up component of SMART. Students participated in eight Saturday sessions on the campus of PSC\n Provided additional student support programs in collaboration with the Arkansas Museum of Discovery, University of Arkansas at Little Rock (UALR), and University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences (UAMS)\n Enacted policies requiring the following\no o o Preparation of an individual student academic improvement plan for students not performing at the proficient level in English language arts and mathematics\nAddition of two more credit requirements for graduation class of 2003 and beyond including Recommended Curriculum which includes four years of mathematics and science and two years of technology courses\nAddition of dual-credit courses with UALR in Physics II and Pre-calculus to the University Studies program at Hall High School for the 2000-2001 school year\nYear 3 2000-2001 Approximately 30% of the Districts Title I funds were allocated for mathematics and science in the areas of professional development, instructional materials, student academic support, and salary\n SMART continued to provide support for students entering Algebra I\n Project THRIVE, a Saturday academy, offered for students enrolled in Algebra I________________________________________________ Full implementation of high quality standards-based instruction/materials in math for all students in grades 2-8\n Continued partial implementation of high quality standards-based instruction/materials in science for all students in grades 1-5\nfull implementation of standards-based instruction/materials in science for all students in grades 6, 7 and 9\n High quality standards-based instruction/materials fully implemented in high school math for all students in Algebra I, Geometry, Algebra II, and Pre-calculus\n Continued full implementation of high quality standards-based instruction/materials for all students in high school Active Physics, and Chemistry in the Community (CHEMCOM)\n Lead teachers continued to provide technical assistance to teachers in the classrooms\n Professional development shifted towards a focus on specific needs such as content knowledge, a variety of instructional strategies, and alternative assessment practices\n SMART /Project THRIVE served more than 200 students in Algebra I\n Implementation of Riverdeep Interactive Software in all high schools for students in Algebra I\n Enacted policy and guidelines for all certified employees to obtain the required 30 hours of professional development annually - including 6 in instructional technology\n Voters in Little Rock approved an annual $4,000,000 dedicated maintenance fund for technology and infrastructure\n District leveraged resources to purchase laptop computers for each math/science lead teacher to help them maintain accurate records of classroom visits and observations\n Increased the availability and use of technology including graphing calculators\n Collaborated with University of Arkansas at Little Rock (UALR) to 9 develop and offer college courses based on the needs of the District\nYear 4 2001-2002 Year 5 2002-2003 Full implementation of high quality standards-based instruction/materials in math and science for all students in grades K- 9\n High school mathematics courses (Algebra I - Pre-calculus) were revised to reflect a closer alignment with the national and state standards and frameworks\n Professional development continued to be paramount to successful implementation of standards-based instruction\n District leveraged support of professional development for all math and science teachers by providing funds to pay substitute teachers and stipends for teachers receiving trainings\n Lead teachers continued to provide technical assistance inside and outside the classroom by conducting professional development workshops and classroom observations\n Revised and enacted procedures for ensuring that students who are Limited English Proficient (LEP) achieve the curriculum content standards and benchmarks established by the State of Arkansas and LRSD\nSt Leveraged support of three major funding sources, LRSD, 21 Century Community LEADERS2 grant, and the City of Little Rock Education Commission, to expand the SMART Program\n Project THRIVE offered as a followup for students enrolled in Algebra 1\n Continued partnership with University of Arkansas at Little Rock (UALR) to develop and offer graduate courses based on the needs of the District\n Developed and distributed pacing guides for secondary mathematics and science courses to address the issue of student mobility within the District\n Full implementation of high quality standards-based curricula for all students, grades K-12, in mathematics and science\n Common labs developed for physics, biology, and chemistry\n Lead teachers continued to provide professional development and monitor implementation of standards-based curricula\n Professional development more focused and data-driven for all K-12 math and science teachers\no o Horizontal and vertical teams continued to meet\nPilot lesson study group began with 16 teachers representing four elementary schools - Two cycles competed\n SMART and Project THRIVE continue to provide support for students enrolled in Algebra I\n Continued to leverage District, Title I and 21 Century Grant resources to support and improve mathematics and science\n____ 2 Standards-Based Curriculum, Instruction, and Assessment 11 The Little Rock School District implemented a high quality, standards-based curriculum in grades K-12 in both mathematics and science. The curriculum was described in the districts Curriculum Standards and Benchmarks and was aligned with the Arkansas Mathematics and Science Frameworks, which in turn based on the NCTM and NSES standards. The mathematics and science standards were were correlated to the major assessments used by the district and were supported by intensive and prolonged 11 Little Rock School District, Little Rock Comprehensive Partnerships for Mathematics and Science Achievement, Annual Progress Report, 2001-2002.10 irofessional development. The curriculum support materials included many nationally recognized esources that were specifically developed to address national standards in mathematics and science. ^ead Teachers provided support in the form of classroom-based technical assistance, professional ievelopment, joint planning, demonstration teaching and team teaching for all schools. Lead Teachers ierved as the link between professional development and classroom practice to help ensure that the content and pedagogy included as professional development became actualized in the classroom. Classroom teachers developed a K-12 alignment that adhered to the philosophy that fewer topics addressed in greater depth should be targeted for each grade level. The teachers, working with Lead Teachers and the Mathematics and Science Department developed pacing guides to promote more uniformity in curriculum and instruction across schools. This same group developed criterion- referenced tests (CRTs) for administration at the end of each math and science module to provide a formative measure of how well students learned the content and skills in the curriculum. The CRTs had embedded items that were patterned after the high-stakes Arkansas Benchmark Exams, the Achievement Level Tests, and the Stanford-9 Achievement Test. Systemic improvement of mathematics and science in the district resulted from several factors. First, the alignment of the written standards and benchmarks, nationally developed and validated curriculum materials, professional development, and assessment created high quality math and science curricula. This alignment improved each year as data were used to check for strengths and weaknesses in the system. Another key factor was the coordination of resources, professional development, and technical assistance provided by the Lead Teachers. Finally, the convergence of resources, both financial and human, fueled the change process that led to a higher-performing system. 2.1 Mathematics and Science Curriculum Resources Nationally developed and validated curriculum resources were utilized at most grade levels/courses. Locally developed materials also supported the curriculum. Major revisions of the high school mathematics and science curriculum occurred in SY 2001-02. Curricula were developed for each high school course (Algebra I - Pre-Calculus) reflecting the alignment with national and state standards and frameworks. In addition, high-quality activities were integrated to encourage teachers to use more hands-on, minds-on strategies to bring real-world experiences to the classroom. The following table contains a list of resource materials which were used at each grade level in mathematics and science. Table 2: Curriculum Resources for Mathematics and Science GradeLeveVSubject Kindergarten First Second Third Fourth Fifth Sixth Seventh Eighth Algebra 1, regular and Mathematics Resources______________ Investigations in Number, Data and Space Investigations in Number, Data and Space Investigations in Number, Data and Space Investigations in Number, Data and Space Investigations in Number, Data and Space Investigations in Number, Data and Space Connected Mathematics Connected Mathematics Connected Mathematics (The College Boards Pre-AP training) and Science Resources Integrated Thematic Units developed by each teacher Science and Technology for Children_________________ Science and Technology for Children_________________ Science and Technology for Children_________________ Science and Technology for Children_________________ Science and Technology for Children__________ Science and Technology for Children_________________ Science and Life Issues (S ALI) Science Interactions\n* Issues, Evidence and You (lEY)_____11 Pre-AP Geometry, regular and Pre-AP Algebra 2, regular and Pre-AP Pre-Calculus, regular and Pre-AP Statistics, regular and AP Calculus, AP Physics, regular and Pre- AP Biology, regular and Pre- AP Chemistry, regular and Pre-AP AP Biology AP Environmental Science AP Chemistry AP Physics Pacesetter Mathematics with Meaning', Algebra 1 - An Integrated Approach (The College Boards Pre-AP training) and Pacesetter Mathematics with Meaning', Geometry - An Integrated Approach__________________ (The College Boards Pre-AP training) Algebra 2 - An Integrated Approach__________________ The College Boards Pacesetter Pre-Calculus', Pre-Calculus____________________________ The College Boards AP Materials\nThe Practice of Statistics_____________________________ The College Boards AP Materials\nCalculus Active Physics', Conceptual Physics Holt Biology- Principles and Explorations\nHolt Modem Biology____________________ Chemistry in the Community (ChemCom)\nMerrill Chemistry The College Boards AP Materials\nCampbells Biology The College Boards AP Materials\nLiving in the Environment_______________ The College Boards AP Materials\nChemistry - The Central Science_____________ The College Boards AP Materials\nPhysics: Principles with Applications ( 1' 2.2 Evidence of Standards-based Instruction Much of the professional development provided for teachers focused on those teaching strategies and techniques that support teaching the standards. The use of standards-based pedagogy in the mathematics and science classrooms is an important factor in improving student achievement in mathematics and science. Several data gathering tools are used to follow-up to determine if standards-based pedagogy included in professional development are taking root in the classroom. First, Lead Teachers assigned to all the districts schools visit classrooms and report their observations. These observations are recorded on a classroom observation checklist. Second, teachers were surveyed after the 2001-02 school year to self-report how well prepared they were to implement strategies consistent with standards-based instruction. Third, at selected middle schools and all high schools, students were asked to report on the strategies used by their teachers in mathematics and science classes. 2.3 Professional Development * rofessional development is a major strategy used by all NSF Urban Systemic Initiative (USI) Sites and supported by a variety of district policies. The primary aims of professional development activities are to improve teachers content knowledge, pedagogic skills for inquiry-based teaching, and methods of ^sessing student learning. For example, basic classroom management skills are an essential part of teaching and should be mastered. Courses to improve teachers content knowledge of both mathematics12 and science are important. Thus mathematics and science teachers benefit from calculus-based physics courses. According to the Board of Education of the Little Rock School District policy professional development means a coordinated set of planned learning activities for teachers and administrators which are standards-based and continuous. Professional development will result in individual, schoolwide, and system-wide improvement designed to insure that all students demonstrate proficiency on the state academic standards. Approved professional development will be linked to the schools improvement plan, demonstrate research-based best practice, and be subject-specific and site-specific as often as possible. As per Arkansas State Board of Education regulations, all certified employees of the Little Rock School District will complete a minimum of 30 required approved hours of professional development annually, six of which must be in instructional technology^. Additional statements concerning professional development are available from the Arkansas Department of Education and the Arkansas Professional Development Council'. Information about licensure for public school teachers and administrators is available from the Arkansas Department of Education' . Figure 3 illustrates the certification trends of grades 6 to 12 mathematics and science teachers. In this figure, the percentage of teachers certified for the subject, that she or he teaches, is shown. Figure 4 below illustrates the number of teachers that have been designated: Job Not Certified. They may be certified to teach some subject, but it is not in the subject which she or he teaches. These certification data were obtained from the Little Rock School District Annual Accreditation Reports, which are released by the Arkansas Department of Education. They confirm the need for more efforts to obtain qualified middle school mathematics teachers and qualified high school science teachers for the subjects which they are teaching. Figure 3: Certification Trends for Grade 6-12 Mathematics and Science Teachers ij' 'i V! tiiil I Ij i: I 1 ? iW ,1 I' fl 112 J r i' Rock School District, Professional Development, NEPN Code: lAA. . Arkansas Department of Education, Regulations Governing Professional Development. Arkansas Professional Development Council, Arkansas Professional Development Standards, May 2002. Arkansas Department of Education, Office of Professional Quality Enhancement and Office of Professional Licensure, fnifucrion for Public School Teachers and Administrators: A Reference Handbook, August 2003. Web address for Office of Professional Licensure: http:/7arkedu.state.ar.us/teachers/index.htmltf traditional. JI 100% T 93% 96% 93% 90% 90% - 96% ^1% 13 80% - 91% !6% i4% 82% .C S 70% - 60% - 50% - Math f 4\nu yO 40% - 30% - 20% - 10% -- 0% 97-98 98-99 99-00 00-01 00-02 Science 00-03 I: 11 % I + + + + + Figure 4: Number of Grade 6-12 Mathematics and Science Teachers: Job Not Certified 99 Number of Mathematics and Science Teachers \"Job Not Certified\" 25\n25 li 20 I I 16 15 10 6 I 4 4 nil lJijI III 11 .11 Middle School Math High School Math Middle School Science High School Science i] i i 1 6 ) r I 5 0 1997-98 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 I I I I Figures 5, 6, and 1, illustrate the degree to which professional development participation has grown since 1997-1998. In 2002-2003, 21 teachers had less than 60 hours, whereas in 2000-2001, 70 teachers had less than 60 hours. In 2000-2001, 39 teachers had between 60 and 120 hours, but in 2002-2003, 54 teachers had between 60 and 120 hours. In 2000-2001, 3 teachers had between 120 and 200 hours, but in 2002-2003,29 teachers had between 120 and 200 hours. In 2000-2001, one teacher had over 200 ours, but in 2002-2003, 9 teachers had over 200 hours. 1114 Figure 5: Professional Development Participation Trends for Grade 6-12 Mathematics Teachers PD Participation 120-r 100- .s o V .o S 3 z 80- 60- 40- 20- PO200 120\u0026lt;FD\u0026lt;200 0 60\u0026lt;PD\u0026lt;120 Ptxeo I 0 97-98 98-99 99-00 00-01 01-02 02-03 School Year Figure 6: Professional Development Participation Trends for Grade 6-12 Science Teachers P.D. Participation 120t 100- H e 80 FO200 S o u .s E 60- 40- 20- k,-\nl 120\u0026lt;PD\u0026lt;200 0 60\u0026lt;FD\u0026lt;120 PD\u0026lt;60 3 z 0 11 97-98 98-99 99-00 00-01 01-02 02-03 School Year Figure 1'. Professional Development Participation Trends for Grade K-5 Mathematics and Science Teachers700 T 600-- P.D. Participation 15 A' i\",- 12 V S * b E 3 Z 500 - 400-- 300 - PO200 120\u0026lt;PD\u0026lt;200 a 60\u0026lt;PD\u0026lt;120 pcxeo 200 - 100-- ol 97-98 98-99 99-00 00-01 01-02 02-03 I I I ba-Bl School Year In SY 2001-2002, professional development was a key component of the districts efforts to improve the mathematics and science programs^. Additional funds to support professional development were provided from three major sources: 1) Dwight D. Eisenhower Program, 2) Safe Schools/Healthy Students Grant, and 3) Little Rock School District Substitute Teacher Budget. Most notable among these was the districts willingness to transfer the funds included in the substitute teacher budget to the Mathematics and Science Department for use in paying stipends to teachers for training during the summer. Professional development for teachers in years one and two of the CPMSA Project was initially directed ^ward module-specific content and pedagogy (e.g., training on how to teach the CMP module Bits and leces). During years three and four, module-specific training was provided for new curriculum modules that were added\nhowever, training began to shift toward a focus on specific needs that were ' entified in years one and two. Content-based university courses were offered, various teaching strategies were studied in greater depth, high-level implementers were utilized as leaders of professional evelopment, and alternative assessment practices were examined. Study groups, vertical teams, and onzontal teams met to focus on strategies for improving student learning. For example, the average number of hours of professional development during year four and the primary topics of professional evelopment are listed in the chart below. Table 3: Professional Development for Mathematics and Science Teachers Grade Level/ Course Number of Teachers Hours 2000-2001 Professional Development Topics 105 32 hrs Grade 1 Grade? 100 56 hrs 131 53 hrs Specific training on each Investigations module (content and pedagogy) Arkansas Pathwise Mentoring Program for new teachers. University of Arkansas at Little Rock graduate courses: Investigations in Geometry and Investigations in Rational Numbers K Little Rock School District, Little Rock Comprehensive Partnerships for Mathematics and Science Achievement, Annual ---------- UVIIUUI rogress Report, 2001-2002.1 16 Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 6 Science Grade 7 Science Grade 8 Science Grade 6 Mathematics Grade 7 Mathematics Grade 8 Mathematics Physics Biology Chemistry Algebra 1 Algebra 2 Geometry Trigonometry \u0026amp; Pre- Calculus_____ Calculus and Statistics Total Training hours from 124 82 84 21 17 17 20 18 20 20 19 14 22 24 24 15 12 889 56 hrs 40 hrs 46 hrs 24 hrs 42 hrs 42 hrs 25 hrs 6 hrs 24 hrs 24 hrs 24 hrs 24 hrs 86 hrs 23 hrs 86 hrs 23 hrs 23 hrs August 2001 to June 2002. Specific training on each Science and Technology for Children module (content and pedagogy) Operation Primary Physical Science (OPPS) is a physical science content-based training through Louisiana State University Training on Science and Life Issues (SALI) (content and pedagogy) Training on Issues, Evidence and You (lEY) (content and pedagogy) Content and pedagogy training on Oceans and Weather from Its About Time Publishers Arkansas Pathwise Mentoring Program for new teachers Alternative Assessment Training Using Rubrics The College Board Pre-AP workshop training_______________ Specific training on each Connected Mathematics Project (CMP) module (content and pedagogy) Arkansas Pathwise Mentoring Program for new teachers CMP Users Conference in East Lansing, MI The College Board Pre-AP workshop training Graduate level physics courses offered through UALR Week-long training in ChemCom offered through the American Chemical Society and W. H. Freeman Collaborative Learning Student Research Seminar The College Board Pre-AP and AP workshop training Arkansas Pathwise Mentoring Program for new teachers______ The College Board Pacesetter Mathematics with Meaning training for Algebra 1 and geometry The College Board Pacesetter Pre-Calculus Through Modeling training TI Online training for Algebra 1 The College Board Pre-AP workshop training Arkansas Pathwise Mentoring Program for new teachers Specific training on the curriculum resources (standards, benchmarks, pacing guide, assessment, activities) for each course 'it 1 h'.' ji if- * I I 1* ' I'' 1 I '5 I 'tUi Special populations of people who received training during project year four included\nprincipals and other administrators, new teachers, parents, and the lead teachers. Following is a brief description of the professional development provided for each of these groups. Ci\nt, I -rincipals and other Administrators - Principals and other administrators received training in several Ways. First of all, a curriculum day sponsored by the Division of Curriculum and Instruction was an annual event that focused on curriculum issues. This event over the past several years had been used to talk about systemic change in math and science. Principals and administrators attended concurrent sessions related to the new math and science programs before the programs were implemented in the district. Second, principals participated in PIP (Priority Intervention Procedures) cluster meetings with curriculum staff. The staff and principals discussed how to foster school improvement in literacy, math, ^d science. These meetings preceded the submission of the annual school improvement plans from every school. Third, principals met regularly during the school year in cluster groups for professional II J17 development. Fourth, principals learned about the math and science modules by attending professional development sessions for teachers or through training-on-the-spot by the Lead Teacher assigned to their buildings. These efforts helped to provide extended professional development for principals in the systemic change that their schools were experiencing. _ ew Teachers New teachers participated in an intensive professional development program over the course of their first year of teaching. Module-specific training in mathematics and/or science was provided to quickly prepare new teachers to teach the curriculum. In addition, each new teacher was assigned a mentor teacher. The mentor teacher was equipped through the Arkansas Pathwise Mentoring Program training to assist the new teachers in a variety of ways. Parents - Parents had opportunities to attend training at school-based Parent Teacher Association meetings that would give them an overview of the math and science programs and answer their questions and concerns and to participate with their children in Family Math and Science nights where they would get a more in-depth look at the math and science programs by actually participating in standards-based math and science activities. For example, two Parent Institutes were held during the 200L2002 school year. Parents had an opportunity to participate in a variety of sessions including sessions about the math and science curriculum and District testing. The District cable channel also broadcast programs that pertained to the math and science programs. Lead Teachers - Lead teachers and other members of the CPMSA staff participated in an average of 68 ours of professional development during year four. The professional development of lead teachers can be grouped into several categories: Content training Program-specific training (Investigations, Science and Technology for Children, Connected Mathematics, SEPUP, ChemCom, etc.) Pedagogy Workshop Leader Mentoring Systemic Change in Math and Science Assessment Technology ESL (English as a second language) Classroom Management Each Lead Teacher completed the Arkansas Pathwise Mentoring Program training that trained them to OnCprVA llAW ____________ o o o observe new teachers, recognize performance on 19 criteria, provide written summaries of a teachers J . ~ waix/v/ \u0026gt; VlilVllA) Wllllvll oUIlUllc rmance an provide suggestions for the continued development of the teacher. 2.4 Assessment System LRSD School Board in August 1999 continued to guide r ion 0 outcomes. Corroborative evidence across multiple norm and criterion referenced measures included the familiar SAT-9 and EXPLORE TLAN cnchmark Exam and Achievement Level Tests (ALT), increased the accuracy and p siveness of documentation. Features of the Benchmark, SAT-9, EXPLORE, and PLAN assessments are summarized for better understanding in this report. and PLAN assessments. Less familiar 2.4.1 Benchmark Examinations f f grades 4, 6, and 8, they provide percentages of students in each of r per ormance eve s. advanced, proficient, basic, and below basic. Test items include multiple- c oice an open response questions on grade level standards and benchmarks from The Arkansas Test items include multiple- I18 Mathematics, Reading, and English/Language Arts Curriculum Frameworks. Grade appropriate items are developed with the assistance and approval of the Arkansas Department of Mathematics Content Advisory Committee composed of active Arkansas educators with expertise in mathematics. Percentile scores allow comparison by grade level to test takers statewide. 2.4.2 Achievement Level Tests These assessments are administered in May in grades 2-8, and they provide RIT (Rasch Unit) scale scores for both mathematics and science. Test items, also aligned with standards and benchmarks in the aforementioned Arkansas Curriculum Frameworks, are selected from a pool of items from the test development company by a balance (race, gender, grade level) of District math and science teachers and curriculum specialists. RIT scale scores show a students current achievement level along the curriculum scale and allow comparison by grade level to ALT test takers nationwide - currently a group of 104 school districts with 500,000 students that grows four to thirteen points annually. Locally developed Criterion-Referenced Tests (CRTs) were administered quarterly for Algebra I and II, Geometry and Trigonometry. End-of-module CRTs were administered across the elementary and middle school grade levels. Results were used locally to define additional professional development and instructional strategies. 2.5 Student Support Daily teaching and learning experiences in the classroom must be oriented toward high content standards, must convey high learning expectations for diverse groups of students, and must promote a connection among schools, homes, and communities. Learning must be reinforced and supplemented with appropriate out-of-school activities. The following is a list of services provided for the students in the Little Rock School District at various times throughout the school year. Students who participated in the following programs were closely monitored to measure impact. 2.5.1 SMART (Summer Mathematics Advanced Readiness Training) SMART is a two-week summer program for rising eighth and ninth grade students preparing for enrollment in Algebra I. In 2001-2002, a total of 278 students completed the program. SMART is designed to prepare students for success in Algebra I, and to motivate them to continue their education in the areas of mathematics and science. One hundred (100) Afiican American and Hispanic rising 8* grade students were identified based on their spring ALT score and grades in mathematics as having the potential to be successful in Algebra I as 8* graders. These students were invited to participate in SMART and the follow-up program. An added feature of SMART 2002 was the integration of the Riverdeep Interactive software. Students who participated in SMART 2002 were invited to participate in Project THRIVE during the 2002-2003 school year. Project THRIVE is a Saturday academy for students currently enrolled in Algebra I. (See additional information about SMART in Outputs and Outcomes Section) 2.5.2 THRIVE Project THRIVE is a Saturday academy provided in collaboration between Philander Smith College (PSC) and the Little Rock School District. Students who participated in SMART 2001 and enrolled in Algebra I participated in 12 Saturday sessions facilitated by LRSD teachers and PSC undergraduate mentors. In 2001-2002, the program served 141 students. 2.5.3 SECME SECME is a pre-engineering program that is currently active in nearly half of the schools in the Little Rock School District. Students compete locally in various events, such as mousetrap car design, essay, banner design, and bridge building, to win the opportunity to compete on the national level. The University of Arkansas at Little Rock (UALR) College of Information Science and Systems Engineering19 served as the primary partner for SECME. They hosted local events as well as provided technical assistance to school coordinators. 2.5.4 After School Discovery Clubs After School Discovery Clubs, a partnership between the Little Rock School District and the Arkansas Museum of Discovery, was designed to increase students interest and knowledge in science. During the 2001-2002 school year. After School Discovery Clubs were established in each middle school as a part of the extended day program that provided structured activities for students. Students participated in hands-on activities facilitated by a Museum of Discovery educator. Each semester culminated with a visit to the Museum of Discovery. The program served 329 students during the 2001-2002 school year. The Districts Safe Schools/Healthy Students grant provided funding for the 2001-2002 After School Discovery Clubs. 3 Policy Support for High Quality Learning and Teaching This driver for educational system reform promotes the development of a coherent, consistent set of policies that supports: provision of high quality mathematics and science education for each student\nexcellent preparation, continuing education, and support for each mathematics and science teacher (including all elementary teachers)\nand administrative support for all persons who work to dramatically improve achievement among all students served by the system. Since the LRSD conducted an intensive review and revision of its policies and regulations during 1998-99, few changes have been necessary. The following is a summary of policy revisions that have occurred since fall 2001: Table 4: Little Rock School District Policy Revisions Effective Fall 2001 NEPN Code lAA lAA-R IBA ID-R IHBEA, IHBEA- R IHCDA-R IKC-R IKEC-Rl IKEC-R3 Title__________________ Professional Development Professional Development Waivers Student Schedules English As A Second Language Concurrent Enrollment Class Rankings/Grade-Point Averages Credit for College Dual-Credit Courses and College Summer Enrichment Programs Credit By Examination Purpose___________________________________________ Established formal policy linking professional development to expectations for improved student achievement.________ Established procedures for various professional development programs.______________________________ Established a policy to consider waivers from certain waivers to improve student achievement.________________ Established minimum time required for instruction of each subject area grades PreK-8.___________________________ Revised procedures and guidelines for ensuring that students who are limited-English- proficient (LEP) achieve the curriculum content standards and benchmarks established by the State of Arkansas and the Little Rock District.___________________________________________ Revised procedures for students to enroll concurrently in high school and in an area college or university for college credit only.________________________________________ Revised procedures and guidelines for calculating gradepoint average and rank in class. Regulations for determining grade-point average and rank in class for students who transfer to the Little Rock District are defined in this policy.______________________________________ Revised procedures that allow students to receive high school credit for courses taken at the college level contingent upon obtaining prior approval from the Associate Superintendent for Instruction\ndocumentation of successful completion of the college program is presented to the school registrar._______________________________ Revised guidelines for high school students to recover credit lost due to failure by participating in the credit by20 KF IMH-AD General Education Graduation Requirements Class Interruptions examination program______________________________ Establishes revised graduation requirements including requirements for transfer students and procedures for earning specialty seals or diplomas.__________________ Established guidelines to limit interruptions to classroom instruction. 4 Convergence of Educational Resources Systemic reform demands realignment of resources to support the instructional goals as expressed by high-quality mathematics and science standards adopted by the Little Rock School District. Funding provided by the Little Rock CPMSA is intended to be a catalyst for the mathematics and science education reform effort. Using 2001-2002 as representative school year, local, state and federal funds and resources supporting mathematics and science efforts were leveraged and allocated to reinforce an articulated, coherent, and unitary program of high-quality mathematics and science for all students. Approximately 30% of the Districts Title I funds ($1,229,336) were used to enhance mathematics and science instruction in elementary and middle schools in the areas of professional development, purchase of instructional materials, and salaries for personnel. The following is an illustration of how leveraged resources were used to support the activities outlined in the LR CPMSA strategic plan: 4.1 Personnel Mathematics and science Lead Teachers for elementary, middle and high school help facilitate the implementation of high quality standards-based mathematics and science curricula in the classroom. Local and federal funds were leveraged to support this effort. Funding for the mathematics and science project support staff (not supported by NSF funds) along with one-half of the NSF evaluator totaled $467,828. This amount was obtained from the Class-Size Reduction Allocation, Title VI Funds, Local District funds, Dwight D. Eisenhower Fund, and Safe Schools/Healthy Students grant. In addition, the principal investigator and two co-principal investigators provided in-kind contributions to oversee the management and implementation of the plan. Services of three state math specialists were donated as in-kind contributions to provide technical support to teachers as well as to conduct professional development activities for LRSD teachers. 4.1.1 Professional Development District funds were leveraged to release a mathematics teacher for one-half day (2-3 days per week) to serve as district coordinator for the mathematics vertical team. As a result of this addition to the project staff, a newsletter is published quarterly and meetings are held monthly after school to facilitate coherence within the 6-12 mathematics curriculum. Local, state, and federal funds are necessary to provide ongoing professional development that is critical for systemic reform in mathematics and science. The Dwight D. Eisenhower funds were used to provide opportunities for mathematics and science teachers to participate in professional development activities and to offset expenses for training materials. A major portion of District funds were also leveraged to provide substitutes, stipends, or release time for mathematics and science teachers who participate in the ongoing training required for effective implementation of the mathematics and/or science curriculum. Graduate level content-based courses were offered through the University of Arkansas at Little Rock (UALR) for elementary, middle, and high school mathematics teachers. Tuition support was provided by LRSD, a UALR grant, and LR CPMSA. 4.1.2 Special Population The basic premise of the Little Rock CPMSA is that all students Pre-K - 12 should be afforded intellectually challenging and appropriate curricula, supported by adequate educational resources, and taught by appropriately trained teachers. The Division of Instruction, which encompasses the Division for Exceptional Children along with the mathematics and science department, has been the driving force for creating a unitary program to improve mathematics and science for all students. All mathematics21 and science training sessions, along with all other core content area training, have included modifications for students classified in the following areas: 504, Special Education, Gifted and Talented Education, Limited English Proficiency, and Title 1. Self-contained special education teachers participated in mathematics and science training sessions that provided an overview of the curriculum and implementation strategies for self-contained students. In addition, collaborative efforts between the Mathematics/Science Department and the Special Education Department resulted in the acquisition of instructional materials/equipment for self-contained classrooms. 4.1.3 ESL An ongoing comprehensive professional development program was offered for all teachers who work with Limited-English Proficient students. The program was composed of two distinct parts. The first part was the ESL endorsement program that was organized in conjunction with the University of Arkansas at Little Rock. The second part of the professional development program maintained the same focus as the first part but was designed to accommodate larger numbers of teachers. For example, during the 2001-02 school year, 47 elementary and secondary teachers completed coursework required for an ESL endorsement. Of those, 68 percent (32) taught mathematics and/or science. Title I, class size reduction, state grant, and District resources were used to fund these activities. 4.2 Student Academic Support Programs In SY 2001-2002, more than $115,267 was leveraged by local, federal, and private funding agencies for Student Academic Support Programs. The following table describes the resources leveraged in support of each activity: Activity___________ After School Discovery Clubs SMART 2002 Cost $15,240 Funding Sonrce(s)_____________ Safe Schools/Healthy Students grant $100,027 21 Century Community LEADERS2 LR CPMSA Riverdeep Interactive Software (provided site license for use of mathematics software) 4.3 Curricula Materials/Supplies The Little Rock School District is committed to providing high quality standards based mathematics and science instruction for all students. More than $ 180,000 was allotted for the purchase of instructional and refurbishment materials for mathematics and science classrooms. 4.4 Integration of Technology All certified personnel in the Little Rock School District are required to complete thirty hours of professional development per year. Six of those hours must be in instructional technology. Technology was integrated throughout most of the professional development activities for mathematics and science teachers. Requirements for graduation include at least all students. one unit of credit in technological applications for 5 Partnerships of Leadership: Broad-Based Support An infrastructure of partnerships that strongly supports systemic change in mathematics and science education is a critical piece of the Little Rock CPMSA. For example, a comprehensive effort was made during the 2001-2002 school year to maximize the broad-based support of key stakeholders. The LR CPMSA Governing Board met to oversee the development of the goals, the implementation of the activities, and the assessment of outcomes. J22 Systemic change continues to be an ongoing cycle of collaborations between the learning communities of the Little Rock School District to improve student achievement in mathematics and science. Lead teachers, for example, help lead systemic reform by providing on-going technical assistance and support to teachers in their individual schools. Change, as directed by the LR CPMSA project staff, supports school improvement and district improvement efforts. The cycle is complete with the support of senior District persormel, principals, parents and community, institutions of higher learning, and of course, all K-12 mathematics and science teachers. 5.1 Parent/Family/Community Involvement For example, two Parent Institutes were held during the 2001-2002 school year. More than 150 people attended each institute that featured sessions on curriculum, assessment, graduation requirements, and how to help students at home. Local elementary school PTA meetings and special called parent/family meetings served as a means for keeping parents and family members apprised of the Districts mathematics and science program. Lead teachers, in collaborations with principals and teachers, provided a rationale for the mathematics and science programs and shared hands-on activities showing connections to the standards and higher-level thinking. Parents/families had an opportunity to ask questions and participate in activities with their children. Curriculum packets designed to share the goals of each mathematics module, major classroom activities used to support those goals, and strategies for parents to utilize with their children at home were developed for each mathematics module for grades K-8. These packets were available for checkout through school libraries. 5.2 Primary Partners The LR CPMSA is fortunate to have ongoing partnerships with three major institutions that are committed to improving mathematics and science education for all students in the Little Rock School District. The University of Arkansas at Little Rock (UALR), Philander Smith College (PSC), and the Arkansas Museum of Discovery (AMOD) have provided opportunities for students and teachers in mathematics and science. 5.2.1 University of Arkansas at Little Rock The University of Arkansas at Little Rock, through the College of Education, College of Information Science and Systems Engineering, and the College of Mathematics and Science, provided professional development opportunities for teachers and participated on the Little Rock CPMSA Governing Board. In 2001-2002, for example, two mathematics content-based courses on the topics of geometry and rational numbers were developed for K-5 teachers. Activities, aligned with the Investigations curriculum, emphasized the mathematics content aimed at deepening the content knowledge of teachers in mathematics. A new course was developed and offered to high school geometry teachers. Strategies for Teaching Geometry was developed based on the Arkansas geometry goals and results of the end-of- course geometry Benchmark. Over 27 teachers participated in the three-hour graduate level course. Each course was team-taught by a UALR instructor and an instructor(s) from the Little Rock School District. 5.2.2 Philander Smith College In 2001-2002, for example. Philander Smith College provided the site of the Project THRIVE session for students taking Algebra I. Undergraduate students serving as mentors contributed to the Little Rock CPMSA in an advisory capacity during SY 2001-2002 by serving on the governing board. Plans were developed to offer a Saturday academy. Project THRIVE, as a follow-up activity for students who participated in SMART 2001 {See Student Support). 5.2.3 Arkansas Museum of Discovery23 The Arkansas Museum of Discovery (AMOD) provided opportunities that engaged diverse audiences in an interdisciplinary and humanistic discovery of the sciences, social sciences, and technology. AMOD served the LR CPMSA in an advisory capacity and provided support for students in science. The activities of the After School Discovery Clubs (see Student Support) were aligned with the Little Rock School District content standards and benchmarks for science. 6 Measures of Effectiveness Focused on Student Outcomes Outcomes are presented in this section to provide evidence that the CPMSA is enhancing student achievement. Key indicators for successfill CPMSA implementation include enrollment in upper level mathematics and science courses, results of student performance on state-mandated norm-referenced and criterion-referenced tests, and participation and scores on college entrance examinations. 6.1 National Trends in Mathematics and Science Achievement The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) is a project of the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) in the U.S. Department of Education and is overseen by the National Assessment Governing Board (NAGB). Since 1969, the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) has been the sole ongoing national indicator of what American students know and can do in major academic subjects. Detailed reports on NAEP assessments, such as The Nations Report Card: Mathematics 2000 and The Nation's Report Card: Science 2000, are available on the Web at: http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard. Over the years, NAEP has measured students achievement in many subjects, including reading, mathematics, science, writing, history, civics, geography, and the arts. In 2000 and 2002, NAEP conducted assessments in reading at grade 4 and in 2000 in mathematics and science at grades 4, 8, and 12. In addition, NAEP conducted state-by-state assessments in mathematics and science at grades 4 and 8. Results^for the 2000 NAEP mathematics assessment show overall gains in fourth-, eighth-, and twelfth graders average scores since 1990, the first year in which the current mathematics assessment was administered. Twelfth-graders performance, however, has declined since 1996. National scores in 2000 were higher than in 1996, 1992, or 1990 for fourth- and eighth-graders. This was not the case for twelfth-graders.. The average score for high school seniors was lower in 2000 than in 1996. However, twelfth-graders average score was higher in 2000 than in 1990. Results for the 2000 NAEP science assessment show no significant change in grades 4 and 8, and a ec me in performance at grade 12 since 1996. This science assessment was first administered to nationally representative samples of fourth-, eighth-, and twelfth-grade students in 1996. In 2000, the average scores of fourth- and eighth-graders were essentially unchanged from 1996. The only significant change in average score results occurred at grade 12, where there was a statistically significant decline in students average score. It should be noted that every test has a standard error of measurement. Achievement levels provide a context for interpreting students performance on NAEP. These performance standards, set by the National Assessment Governing Board (NAGB), are based on recommendations from broadly representative panels and educators and members of the public and determine what students should know and be able to do for the Basic, Proficient, and Advanced levels of performance in each subject area and grade level assessed. As provided by law, the Acting Commissioner of Education Statistics, upon review of a congressionally- mandated evaluation of NAEP, has determined that the achievement levels are to be considered developmental and should be interpreted and used with caution. t I I J24 However, both the Acting Commissioner and NAGB believe that these performance standards are useful for understanding trends in student achievement. NAEP achievement levels have been widely used by national and state officials, including the National Education Goals Panel. The achievement level policy definitions are as follows: Basic. This level denotes partial mastery of prerequisite knowledge and skills that are fundamental for proficient work at each grade. Proficient'. This level represents solid academic performance for each grade assessed. Students reaching this level have demonstrated competency over challenging subject matter, including subject-matter knowledge, application of such knowledge to real-world situations, and analytical skills appropriate to the subject matter. Advanced'. This level signifies superior performance. In mathematics, according to the NAEP, the percentages of fourth-graders and eighth-graders at or above Basic and at or above Proficient have increased across the decade, reaching their highest levels in 2000. At grade 12, the results are mixed. From 1996 to 2000 there was decrease in the percentage at or above the Basic achievement level. However, the percentage of twelfth-graders at or above both the Basic and Proficient achievement levels was higher in 2000 than in 1990. In science, according to the NAEP, the 2000 science assessment results show few changes since 1996 in the percentages of students at or above any of the NAEP achievement levels. At grade 4, there was no change between 1996 and 2000 in the percentage of students attaining any of the achievement levels. At grade 8, however, between 1996 and 2000 there was an increase in the percentage of students reaching the Proficient achievement level or above. At grade 12, the percentage of students at or above the Basic achievement level declined between 1996 and 2000. In order to display assessment information about schools in the Little Rock School District, we use stacked bars in the graphs. The length of each bar is proportional to the number of student scores which fell within that range. Basic range. Proficient range, and Advanced range may be described as follows: All scores which lie below the Basic achievement level are characterized by the color aqua. All scores which lie above the Basic achievement level and below the Proficient achievement level fall in the Basic range and are characterized by the color lime. All scores which lie above the Proficient achievement level and below the Advanced achievement level fall in the Proficient range and are characterized by the color plum or dark red. All scores which lie above the Advanced achievement level fall in the Advanced range are characterized by the color blue or ocean blue. If a set of data is arranged in order of magnitude, the values, which divide the data into four equal parts, are called quartiles and denoted by gi, Q2, and 04. Thus the percentage of scores within each quartlie is 25 percent. The percentages shown in the graph are relative to those quartiles obtained from ^e national distribution of data (scores). In this report, the achievement level description was used instead. The actual percentage of LRSD student scores within a national quartile, 0i, data range was reported as percentage within Below Basic range, the actual percentage within a national quartile, Qz, as within Basic range, and the actual percentage within a national quartile as number of scores within Proficient range. The top quartile, Qu, was reported as Advanced range. The following chart illustrates performance on assessments relative to achievement levels.25 (100) Advanced Range (75-99) Advanced Achievement Level (75) Proficient Range (50-74) Proficient Achievement Level (50) Basic Range 25-49) Basic Achievement Level (25) Below Basic Range (0-24) Performance at or above Basic achievement level (25-99) Performance at or above Proficient achievement level (50-99) Performance at or above Advanced achievement level (75-99 The bars in the following figures represent the proportion of students in each of three achievement level ranges: Basic, Proficient, and Advanced as well as students below Basic. The horizontal line that intersects the vertical axis at 0% divides the proportion of student scores which were above the Proficient or Advanced achievement level from those student scores which fell in the Below Basic range or in the Basic range. 6.2 Determining Improvement from Changes in Percentages of Students Who Performed At or Above Different Achievement Levels The cooperative agreement with NSF (Amendment No. 3) states that assessment data from the CPMSA pro^am for Years 3,4, and 5 will be used to determine an annual increase in achievement levels. To minimize the inherent volatility associated with the natural variation in annual performance, the trend was determined by computing the change in percentage points per year for each achievement level: Basic, Proficient, and Advanced. For this purpose, the slope of a regression line was computed from the data for SY 2000-2001, SY 2001-2002, and SY 2002-2003. The first NSF driver focuses on sustainable success in changing the systems approach to the teaching and learning of mathematics and science in K-12. Implementation of a comprehensive, standards-based curriculum and/or instructional materials that are aliped with instruction and assessment really began in the first year (SY 1998-99) of the NSF award. With the convergence of resources that reasonably could be used to support science and mathematics education, this systemic program was more fully implemented in SY 2000-2001. By this date, the general education graduation requirements for the Little Rock School District were three (3) units of mathematics: Algebra I, Geometry, and Algebra II or Statistics\nand three (3) units of science: Physics, Biology, and Chemistry. Also, the transition to middle schools had taken place by SY 2000-2001. Therefore, assessment data from previous years will be shown, but improvement will be determined from the last three years of data: 2000-2001,2001-2002, and 2002-2003. State-Mandated Assessments The results of state-mandated assessments are shown below. These criterion-referenced tests are administered to establish the level of student achievement relative to the Arkansas academic standards and to compare the level of student achievement with performance levels set by the State Board of Education.26 6.3 Mathematics Assessment in Grade 6 with the Arkansas Benchmark In Figure 8, the intermediate Benchmark assessment for mathematics assessment in grade 6 is shown as quartiles for SY 2000-2001, SY 2001-2002, and SY 2002-2003. SY 2001-2001 was a pilot year for that benchmark assessment. Thus no Benchmark data for grade 6 exists prior to SY 2000-2001. For the Arkansas Benchmark Assessment in grade 6 mathematics, the percentage of students below the basic achievement level decreased from 66 percent to 55 percent from SY 2000-2001 to SY 2002-2003. Figure 9 shows the achievement levels corresponding to these quartiles for each of the three years. Figure 8: Mathematics Quartiles for the Arkansas Benchmark Assessment in Grade 6 20% 4 4 9 12 16 0% 2(jBV2002e^! 6 2cB-2003eaai6 ! 1 -24 -25 -25 -20% -40% J Below Basic Level Basic Range Advanced Range Proficient Range -60% -66 -59 -55 -80% -100%27 Figure 9: Achievement Levels Corresponding to the Mathematics Quartiles for Grade 6 Number ef LRSD Students in Percent Who Performed at or above the Basic Achievement Levei in Grade 6 Math Number of LRSD Students in Percent Who Performed at or above the Proficient Achievement Levei in Grade 6 Math Number of LRSD Students in Percent Who Performed at or above the Advanced Achievement Levei in Grade 6 Math 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 45 41 30 34 20 10 10 1 2000-2001 Grade 6 2001-2002 Grade 6 2002-2003 Grade 6 0 The percentage of LRSD students who performed at or above the Basic achievement level was changed as follows In grade 6, this percentage increased approximately 5.3 points per year. The percentage of LRSD students who performed at or above the Proficient achievement level was changed as follows In grade 6, this percentage increased approximately 4.7 points per year. The percentage of students who performed at or above the Advanced achievement level was changed as follows In grade 6, this percentage increased approximately 1.2 points per year. 28 Figure 10\nAchievement Levels Corresponding to the Mathematics Quartiles for Caucasian Students in Grade 6 Number of Caucasian Students in Percent Who Performed at or above the Basic Achievement Level in Grade 6 Math Number of Caucasian Students in Percent Who Performed at or above the Proficient Achievement Level in Grade 6 Math Number of Caucasian Students in Percent Who Performed at or above the Advanced Achievement Level in Grade 6 Math 100 90 I 80 79 82 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 71 31 2000-2001 Grade 6 2001-2002 Grade 6 2002-2003 Grade 6 0 5 1 T The percentage of LRSD students who performed at or above the Basic achievement level was changed as follows In grade 6, this percentage increased approximately 5.6 points per year. The percentage of LRSD students who performed at was changed as follows or above the Proficient achievement level In grade 6, this percentage increased approximately 11.8 points per year. The percentage of students who performed at or above the Advanced achievement level was changed as follows In grade 6, this percentage increased approximately 4.0 points per year. 29 Figure 11: Achievement Levels Corresponding to the Mathematics Quartiles for African American Students in Grade 6 Number of African American Students in Percent Who Performed at or above the Basic Achievement Level in Grade 6 Math Number of African American Students in Percent Who Performed at or above the Proficient Achievement Level in Grade 6 Math Number of African American Students in Percent Who Performed at or above the Advanced Achievement Level in Grade 6 Math 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 32 28 20 21 10 0 L 2 1 2000-2001 Grade 6 2001-2002 Grade 6 2002-2003 Grade 6 The percentage of LRSD students who performed at or above the Basic achievement level was changed as follows In grade 6, this percentage increased approximately 5.3 points per year. The percentage of LRSD students who performed at or above the Proficient achievement level was changed as follows In grade 6, this percentage increased approximately 2.8 points per year. The percentage of students who performed at or above the Advanced achievement level was changed as follows In grade 6, this percentage increased approximately 0.5 points per year. In order to better understand these annual rates of change in achievement level, two additional numbers were computed. On the Basic Level line in the table, an annual rate of reduction in the number of students below the Basic achievement level was determined by dividing the total percent of students below the Basic achievement level by 10. On the Proficient Level line in the table, an annual rate of reduction in the number of students below the Proficient achievement level was determined by dividing the total percent of students below the Proficient achievement level by 10. These rates answer the question: What rate of change would be necessary to reduce the number of students below Basic achievement level or Proficient achievement level by ten percent? For a reference, the changes in achievement levels in the table may be compared with these two numbers, which are shown in the following tables. The quartile data for computing these two numbers came from the most recent assessments in SY 2002-2003.30 Table 5: Grade 6 Improvement in Achievement Levels on Benchmark Assessment in Mathematics 77 Grade 6 Change in Achievement Levels in Percentage Points per Year Compared to Other Rates All Students in District Caucasian Students African American Students Basic Level Proficient Level Advanced Level Change 5.3 4.7 1.2 Rate 5.5 8.0 Change 5.6 11.8 4.0 Rate 1.8 4.6 Change 5.3 2.8 0.5 Rate 6.8 9.2 6.4 Mathematics Assessment in Grade 4 and Grade 8 with the Arkansas Benchmark In the following figure, the primary benchmark assessment for mathematics in grade 4 and the middle level benchmark assessment for mathematics in grade 8 mathematics are shown as quartiles from 1998 to 2003. The next figure shows the achievement levels corresponding to the quartile data. Figure 12: Mathematics Quartiles for the Arkansas Benchmark Assessment in Grade 4 and Grade 8 60% 40% 31 19 20% 16 17 0% -20% -40% -60% 13 -19 -59 21 14 a 13 19 19 J4 -55 2CI1IM 2CG4 2(004 fl 1(11158 4 13 21 158 *19 20 H9 -24 :-32 2tjBli 58 I -28 fi 2CW58 I 2Cni58 -51 -42 -31 LJ -65 -55 -58 -35 -41 Advanced Range Proficient Range Below Basic Level Basic Range for Math -51 -44 9 U -80% -100% For the Arkansas Benchmark Assessment in grade 4 mathematics, the percentage of students below the basic achievement level decreased from 59 percent to 31 percent from SY 1998-1999 to SY 2002-2003. In grade 8 mathematics, the percentage of students below the basic achievement level decreased from 65 percent to 44 percent from SY 1998-1999 to SY 2002-2003. 18 On the Basic Level line in the table, an annual rate of reduction in the number of students below the Basic achievement level was determined by dividing the total percent of students below the Basic achievement level by 10. On the Proficient Level line in the table, an annual rate of reduction in the number of students below the Proficient achievement level was determined by dividing the total percent of students below the Proficient achievement level by 10. These rates answer the question: What rate of change would be necessary to reduce the number of students below Basic achievement level or Proficient achievement level by ten percent? For a point of reference, the changes in achievement levels in the table may be compared with these two numbers. A31 Figure 13: Achievement Levels Corresponding to the Mathematics Quartiles for Grade 4 and Grade 8 Number of LRSD Students in Percent Who Performed at or above the Basic Achievement Levei in Mathematics Number of LRSD Students in Percent Who Performed at or above the Proficient Achievement Levei in Mathematics Number of LRSD Students in Percent Who Performed at or above the Advanced Achievement Level in Mathematics 100 90 80 70 69 60 58 56 50 40 30 20 10 45 41 49 UI 50 31 42 45 35 11 10 1 49 14 16 0 2 I I 3 I 3 I 1998-1999 Grade 4 1999-2000 Grade 4 2000-2001 Grade 4 2001-2002 Grade 4 2002-2003 Grade 4 1998-1999 Grade 8 1999-2000 Grade 8 2000-2001 Grade 8 2001-2002 Grade 8 2002-2003 Grade 8 The percentage of LRSD students who performed at or above the Basic achievement level was changed as follows In grade 4, this percentage increased approximately 10.0 points per year. In grade 8, this percentage increased approximately 5.9 points per year. The percentage of LRSD students who performed at or above the Proficient achievement level was changed as follows In grade 4, this percentage increased approximately 10.2 points per year. In grade 8, this percentage increased approximately -0.5 points per year. The percentage of students who performed at or above the Advanced achievement level was changed as follows In grade 4, this percentage increased approximately 7.1 points per year. In grade 8, this percentage increased approximately -0.2 points per year.32 Figure 14: Achievement Levels Corresponding to the Mathematics Quartiles for Caucasian Students in Grade 4 and Grade 8 Number of Caucasian Students in Percent Who Performed at or above the Basic Achievement Level in Mathematics Number of Caucasian Students in Percent Who Performed at or above the Proficient Achievement Level in Mathematics Number of Caucasian Students in Percent Who Performed at or above the Advanced Achievement Level in Mathematics 100 90 SO 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 81 91 93 82 89 76 53 25 JM- 1998-1999 Grade 4 76 60 40 1999-2000 Grade 4 62 40 2000-2001 Grade 4 75 48 2001-2002 Grade 4 74 78 80 82 63 2002-2003 Grade 4 lllll 1998-1999 Grade 8 1999-2000 Grade 8 2000-2001 Grade 8 2001-2002 Grade 8 2002-2003 Grade 8 0 The percentage of LRSD students who performed at or above the Basic achievement level was changed as follows In grade 4, this percentage increased approximately 6.2 points per year. In grade 8, this percentage increased approximately 4.2 points per year. The percentage of LRSD students who performed at or above the Proficient achievement level was changed as follows In grade 4, this percentage increased approximately 10.1 points per year. In grade 8, this percentage increased approximately 3.1 points per year. The percentage of students who performed at changed follows or above the Advanced achievement level was as In grade 4, this percentage increased approximately 11.6 points per year. In grade 8, this percentage increased approximately 0.5 points per year.33 Figure 15: Achievement Levels Corresponding to the Mathematics Quartiles for African American Students in Grade 4 and Grade 8 Number of African American Students in Percent Who Performed at or above the Basic Achievement Levei in Mathematics Number of African American Students in Percent Who Performed at or above the Proficient Achievement Levei in Mathematics Number of African American Students in Percent Who Performed at or above the Advanced Achievement Levei in Mathematics 100 90 80 70 60 58 50 40 30 35 31 45 36 45 20 10 26 I III 28 28 19 2, 3, 0 8 2 I 5 4 4 1998-1999 Grade 4 1999-2000 Grade 4 2000-2001 Grade 4 2001-2002 Grade 4 2002-2003 Grade 4 1998-1999 Grade 8 1999-2000 Grade 8 2000-2001 Grade 8 2001-2002 Grade 8 2002-2003 Grade 8 The percentage of LRSD students who performed at or above the Basic achievement level was changed as follows In grade 4, this percentage increased approximately 11.4 points per year. In grade 8, this percentage increased approximately 8.6 points per year. The percentage of LRSD students who performed at or above the Proficient achievement level was changed as follows In grade 4, this percentage increased approximately 9.6 points per year. In grade 8, this percentage increased approximately -0.3 points per year. The percentage of students who performed at changed as follows or above the Advanced achievement level was In grade 4, this percentage increased approximately 4.5 points per year. In grade 8, this percentage increased approximately -0.1 points per year. L34 6.5 Literacy Assessments in Grade 4 and Grade 8 with the Arkansas Benchmark Figure 16: Literacy Quartiles for the Arkansas Benchmark Assessments: in Grade 4 and Grade 8 80% 60% 8 5 40% 56 B 7 20% 45 31 35 15 24 -20% -40%. -60% 9G\u0026gt;e9G4 9G4 OC|I34 01G4 oA il34 9GB8 -26 -31 -33 -31 -27 -10 -41 -28 -32 -19 -39 )CW1I -36 O( H 138 -33 01 HI -29 -46 0241138 -38 -23 Advanced Range Proficient Range Below Basic Level Basic Range for Literacy 0% , __i l 38 -80% -100%, On the grade 4 literacy assessment, the percentage of students who performed at or below basic declined om 41 percent to 10 percent. The first assessment was in SY 1998-1999. On the grade 8 literacy assessment, the percentage of students who performed at percent. The first assessment was in SY 1999-2000. or below basic declined from 46 percent to 2335 Figure 17\nAchievement Levels Corresponding to the Literacy Quartiles for All Students Who Took the Arkansas Benchmark Assessments in Grade 4 and Grade 8 Number of Students in Percent Who Performed at or above the Basic Achievement Levei in Literacy Number of Students in Percent Who Performed at or above the Proficient Achievement Levei in Literacy Number of Students in Percent Who Performed at or above the Advanced Achievement Levei in Literacy 100 90 90 80 70 60 59 81 77 50 40 30 20 10 72 68 63 54 67 71 1111 h 111 0 98-99 G4 99-00 G4 00-01 G4 01-02 G4 02-03 G4 99-00 G8 00-01 G8 01-02 G8 02-03 G8 The percentage of LRSD students who performed at or changed as follows above the Basic achievement level was Relative to SY 2000-2001, this percentage for grade 4 increased approximately 10.9 points per year. For grade 8, this percentage increased approximately 5.1 points per year. The percentage of LRSD students who performed at or was as follows above the Proficient achievement level For grade 4, this percentage increased approximately 14.2 points per year. For grade 8, this percentage increased approximately 3.8 points per year. The percentage of students who performed at follows or above the Advanced achievement level was as * For grade 4, this percentage increased approximately 2.9 points per year. * For grade 8, this percentage increased approximately -1.5 points per year.36 Figure 18: Achievement Levels Corresponding to the Literacy Quartiles for Caucasian Students in Grade 4 and Grade 8 Number of Caucasian Students in Percent Who Performed at or above the Basic Achievement Level in Literacy Number of Caucasian Students in Percent Who Performed at or above the Proficient Achievement Level in Literacy Number of Caucasian Students in Percent Who Performed at or above the Advanced Achievement Level in Literacy 100 99 90 96 90 90 90 89 91 92 80 70 83 78 79 60 62 66 63 61 69 50 40 30 20 10 IS 20 20 10 0 4 6 6 98-99 G4 99-00 G4 00-01 G4 01-02 G4 02-03 G4 99-00 G8 00-01 G8 01-02 G8 02-03 G8 The percentage of LRSD students who performed at or above the Basic achievement level was as follows For grade 4, this percentage increased approximately 4.6 points per year. For grade 8, this percentage increased approximately 1.7 points per year. The percentage of LRSD students who performed at or above the Proficient achievement level was as follows For grade 4, this percentage increased approximately 13.2 points per year. For grade 8, this percentage increased approximately 3.8 points per year. The percentage of students who performed at follows or above the Advanced achievement level was as For grade 4, this percentage increased approximately 7.0 points per year. For grade 8, this percentage increased approximately -5.0 points per year.37 T Figure 19: Achievement Levels Corresponding to the Literacy Quartiles for African American Students in Grade 4 and Grade 8 Number of African American Students in Percent Who Performed at or above the Basic Achievement Level in Literacy Number of African American Students in Percent Who Performed at or above the Proficient Achievement Level in Literacy Number of African American Students in Percent Who Performed at or above the Advanced Achievement Level in Literacy 100 90 80 86 70 60 64 59 75 64 57 72 50 48 40 30 20 20 23 10 44 18 21 28 0 0 0 9 0 1 1 1 98-99 G4 99-00 G4 00-01 G4 01-02 G4 02-03 G4 99-00 G8 00-01 G8 01-02 G8 02-03 G8 The percentage of African American students who performed at or above the Basic achievement level was changed as follows In grade 4, this percentage increased approximately 13.9 points per year. In grade 8, this percentage increased approximately 7.4 points per year. The percentage of African American students who performed at or above the Proficient achievement level was changed as follows In grade 4, this percentage increased approximately 15.2 points per year. In grade 8, this percentage increased approximately 5.0 points per year. The percentage of African American students who performed at or achievement level was changed as follows above the Advanced * In grade 4, this percentage increased approximately 1.4 points per year. In grade 8, this percentage increased approximately 0.1 points per year.38 Table 6: Grade 4 Improvement in Achievement Levels on Benchmark Assessment in Mathematics 7^ Grade 4 Change in Achievement Levels in Percentage Points per Year Compared to Other Rates All Students in District Caucasian Students African American Students Basic Level Proficient Level Advanced Level Change 10.0 10.2 7.1 Rate 3.1 5.0 Change 6.2 10.1 11.6 Rate 0.7 1.8 Change 11.4 9.6 4.5 Rate 4.2 6.5 Table 7: Grade 4 Improvement in Achievement Levels on Benchmark Assessment in Literacy ______Change in Achievement Levels in Percentage Points per Year Compared to Other Rates Grade 4 Basic Level Proficient Level Advanced Level All Students in District Caucasian Students African American Students Change 10.9 14.2 2.9 Rate 1.0 3.7 Change 4.6 13.2 7.0 Rate 0.1 1.0 Change 13.9 15.2 1.4 Rate 1.4 4.7 Table 8: Grade 8 Improvement in Achievement Levels on Benchmark Assessment in Mathematics Grade 8 Change in Achievement Levels in Percentage Points per Year Compared to Other Rates Ail Students in District Caucasian Students African American Students Basic Level Proficient Level Advanced Level Change 5.9 -0.5 -0.2 Rate 4.4 8.4 Change 4.2 3.1 0.5 Rate 1.1 4.9 Change 8.6 -0.3 -0.1 Rate 5.5 9.6 Table 9: Grade 8 Improvement in Achievement Levels on Benchmark Assessment in Literacy Grade 8 Change in Achievement Levels in Percentage Points per Year Compared to Other Rates All Students in District Caucasian Students African American Students Basic Level firoficient Level Advanced Level Change 5.1 3.8 -1.5 Rate 2.3 6.1 Change 1.7 3.8 -5.0 Rate 0.8 3.1 Change 7.4 5.0 0.1 Rate 2.8 7.2 6 End-of-Course Assessments for Algebra I and Geometry following figure, the end-of-course assessments for Algebra I and Geometry are shown quartiles from 2000 to 2003. The next figure shows the achievement levels corresponding to the quarttie Uta. Here SY 2000-2001 was the baseline year for computing increases in achievement level. level 1 I Basic Level line in the table, an annual rate of reduction in the number of students below tlw ac I determined by dividing the total percent of students below the Basic achievement level by 10. n e det* table, an annual rate of reduction in the number of students below the Proficient acWevemen auccf^^^ dividing the total percent of students below the Proficient achievement level by 10. These ra es p- fl**?\"' ''^bat rate of change would be necessary to reduce the number of students below Basic ac eyemen level by ten percent? For a point of reference, the changes in achievement levels m the Y \u0026lt;=nipared with these two numbers.39 Figure 20: Algebra I and Geometry Quartiles at End-of-Course 80% 60% 40% 5 6 20% 34 11 17 24 11 13 0% 2901-SB 2 24.203 -20% -32 i -39 -32 2Ve2 - -31 , -44 Advanced Range Proficient Range Beiow Basic Level Basic Range -40% I____j -60% -55 -40 -29 -55 -52 -17 -41 : I I I J I -80% -100% For the Algebra I Arkansas Benchmark Assessment in grades 7-10 (middle and high school), the percentage of students below the basic achievement level decreased from 55 percent to 29 percent from SY 2000-2001 to SY 2002-2003. For the Geometry Arkansas Benchmark Assessment in grades 9-11 (high school only), the percentage of students below the basic achievement level decreased from 55 percent to 17 percent from SY 2000-2001 to SY 2002-2003.40 Figure 21: Achievement Levels Corresponding to the Quartiles for Algebra I and Geometry Number of LRSD Students In Percent Who Performed at or above the Basic Achievement Level Number of LRSD Students in Percent Who Performed at or above the Proficient Achievement Level Number of LRSD Students in Percent Who Performed at or above the Advanced Achievement Level 100 90 80 83 70 71 60 60 50 40 30 20 10 45 13 11 45 13 48 2000-2001 Algebra 2001-2002 Algebra 2002-2003 Algebra 2000-2001 Geometry 2001-2002 Geometry 2002-2003 Geometry 0 3 2 1 From 2000-2001, the percentage of LRSD students who performed at or above the Basic achievement level was changed as follows For middle and high school students combined in Algebra I, this percentage increased approximately 12.9 points per year. For high school students in Geometry, this percentage increased approximately 19.2 points per year. The percentage of LRSD students who performed at or was changed as follows above the Proficient achievement level For middle and high school students combined in Algebra I, this percentage increased approximately 8.4 points per year. For high school students in Geometry, this percentage increased approximately 13.1 points per year. The percentage of LRSD students who performed at or was as follows above the Advanced achievement level For middle and high school students combined in Algebra I, this percentage increased approximately 1.6 points per year. For high school students in Geometry, this percentage increased approximately 1.7 points per year.41 Figure 22\nAchievement Levels for LRSD Caucasian Students Who Took the Algebra I and Geometry Tests Number of Caucasian Students in Percent Who Performed at or above the Basic Achievement Level Number of Caucasian Students in Percent Who Performed at or above the Proficient Achievement Level Number of Caucasian Students in Percent Who Performed at or above the Advanced Achievement Level 100 90 80 84 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 76 34 2001-2002 Algebra 92 60 15 82 80 43 I 10 I 96 2000-2001 Algebra 2002-2003 Algebra 2000-2001 Geometry 2001-2002 Geometry 2002-2003 Geometry 0 7 I From 2000-2001, the percentage of students who performed at or above the Basic achievement level was changed as follows For middle and high school students combined in Algebra I, this percentage increased approximately 8.0 per year. For high school students in Geometry, this percentage increased approximately 6.9 points per year. The percentage of Caucasian students who performed at or above the Proficient achievement level was changed as follows For middle and high school students combined in Algebra I, this percentage increased approximately 12.8 points per year. For high school students in Geometry, this percentage increased approximately 14.8 points per year. The percentage of Caucasian students who performed at level was changed as follows or above the Advanced achievement For middle and high school students combined in Algebra I, this percentage increased approximately 4.0 points per year. For high school students in Geometry, this percentage increased approximately 2.9 points per year. 41 Figure 22: Achievement Levels for LRSD Caucasian Students Who Took the Algebra I and Geometry Tests Number of Caucasian Students In Percent Who Performed at or above the Basic Achievement Level Number of Caucasian Students In Percent Who Performed at or above the Proficient Achievement Level Number of Caucasian Students in Percent Who Performed at or above the Advanced Achievement Level 100 96 90 80 84 92 82 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 76 34 2000-2001 Algebra 2001-2002 Algebra 43 I 10 2002-2003 Algebra 2000-2001 Geometry 2001-2002 Geometry 2002-2003 Geometry 7 0 I From 2000-2001, the percentage of students who performed at or above the Basic achievement level was changed as follows For middle and high school students combined in Algebra 1, this percentage increased approximately 8.0 per year. For high school students in Geometry, this percentage increased approximately 6.9 points per year. The percentage of Caucasian students who performed at or above the Proficient achievement level was changed as follows For middle and high school students combined in Algebra I, this percentage increased approximately 12.8 points per year. For high school students in Geometry, this percentage increased approximately 14.8 points per year. The percentage of Caucasian students who performed at or above the Advanced achievement level was changed as follows For middle and high school students combined in Algebra 1, this percentage increased approximately 4.0 points per year. For high school students in Geometry, this percentage increased approximately 2.9 points per year.42 Figure 23: Achievement Levels for LRSD African American Students Who Took the Algebra I and Geometry Tests Number of African American Students in Percent Who Performed at or above the Basic Achievement Level Number of African American Students in Percent Who Performed at or above the Proficient Achievement Level Number of African American Students in Percent Who Performed at or above the Advanced Achievement Level 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 28 51 72 61 34 28 20 16 17 11 10 2, 2000-2001 Algebra 2001-2002 Algebra 2002-2003 Algebra 2000-2001 Geometry 2001-2002 Geometry 2002-2003 Geometry 0 : 1 1 3 6 1 1 From 2000-2001, the percentage of students who performed at or above the Basic achievement level was changed as follows For middle and high school students combined in Algebra I, this percentage increased approximately 16.8 points per year. For high school students in Geometry, this percentage increased approximately 22.0 points per year. The percentage of students who performed at or above the Proficient achievement level was changed as follows For middle and high school students combined in Algebra 1, this percentage increased approximately 6.7 points per year. For high school students in Geometry, this percentage increased approximately 7.1 percentage points per year. The percentage of students who performed at or above the Advanced achievement level was changed as follows For middle and high school students combined in Algebra 1, this percentage increased approximately 0.3 points per year. For high school students in Geometry, this percentage increased approximately 0.3 points per year.43 Table 10: Grades 7-10 Improvement in Achievement Levels on Benchmark Assessment in Algebra Grades 7-10 Change in Achievement Levels in Percentage Points per Year Compared to Other Rates' All Students in D\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\u003eCleaver, Vanessa E.\u003c/dcterms_creator\u003e\n\u003cdcterms_creator\u003eWold, Donald C.\u003c/dcterms_creator\u003e\n\u003cdcterms_creator\u003eGlasgow, Dennis\u003c/dcterms_creator\u003e\n\u003cdcterms_creator\u003eLittle Rock School District\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 "},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1059","title":"\"Little Rock School District Board of Directors' Meeting\" agenda","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":["2003-12"],"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--21st Century","Little Rock School District","Education--Arkansas","Education--Economic aspects","Education--Evaluation","Education--Finance","Educational law and legislation","Educational planning","Educational statistics","School board members","School boards","School improvement programs","School superintendents"],"dcterms_title":["\"Little Rock School District Board of Directors' Meeting\" agenda"],"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/1059"],"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\n \n\n \n\nThis transcript was created using Optical Character Recognition (OCR) and may contain some errors.\nAgenda RECEIVED DEC l ~- 2003 OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING Little Rock School District Board of Directors' Meeting HAVE A SAFE \u0026amp; HAPPY WINTER HOLIDA YI DECEMBER 2003 ,.. n-., \u0026gt;::o ,i.-..~_ cil o\u0026gt; :,,::o C-\u0026lt; m-., ::0 C: -:ozn ,o...- i\u0026lt;5 r-z ~ en I. 11. LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM STREET LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS PRELIMINARY FUNCTIONS A. Call to Order B. Roll Call PROCEDURAL MATTERS A. Welcome to Guests REGULAR MEETING December 18, 2003 5:30 p.m. Ill. REPORTS/RECOGNITIONS/PUBLIC COMMENTS: A. Superintendent's Citations B. Partners in Education - New Partnerships Booker Arts Magnet School - Cheryl Carson \u0026amp; Vivian Johnson Wonder State Odd Fellow Lodge #1 - Eddie \u0026amp; Carolyn Ward Dodd Elementary School - Faith McLaughlin \u0026amp; Teresa Knapp Greater Friendship, Inc. - Pat Williams, Rev. B. E. Bennett \u0026amp; Dr. M. Dee Bennett Gibbs Magnet School - Felicia Hobbs Heifer International - Ann Owen Mann Magnet Middle School - Jim Fullerton Heifer International - Ann Owen Jefferson Elementary School - Roberta Mannon Twin City Bank, Kavanaugh Branch - Pris Skarda Otter Creek Elementary - Janis Tucker \u0026amp; Michelle Young Bank of the Ozarks - Lisa Smith C. Remarks from Citizens (persons who have signed up to speak) D. Little Rock Classroom Teachers Association E. Joshua lntervenors 0 \"D \u0026gt;.r.-.X p_:I! cii o\u0026gt; XI XI mc--\u0026lt;., XI C: -z XI 0 o--\u0026lt; ... i5 r-z gen Board of Directors Meeting December 18, 2003 Page2 IV. REPORTS AND COMMUNICATIONS: A. Remarks from Board Members B. Student Assignment Report C. Budget Update D. Construction Report: Proposed Bond Projects E. Internal Auditors Report F. Technology Update V. APPROVAL OF ROUTINE MATTERS: A. Minutes B. Personnel Changes VI. CURRICULUM AND INSTRUCTION: A. Revision of Policy IKF: General Education Graduation Requirements Revision of Regulations ID-R: Student Schedules Revision of Regulations IMP-R: Physical Education and Training B. Revision of Regulation IKC-R: Class Rankings \u0026amp; Grade Point Averages C. Program Evaluation for Mathematics and Science VII. BUSINESS SERVICES DIVISION: A. Employee Request to Conduct Business with the District B. Donations of Property C. Financial Report VIII. CLOSING REMARKS: Superintendent's Report: 1. Dates to Remember 2. Special Functions IX. EMPLOYEE HEARINGS X. ADJOURNMENT I. PRELIMINARY FUNCTIONS CA.LL TO ORDER I ROLL CALL II. PROCEDURAL MATTERS WELCOME TO GUESTS 111. REPORTS/RECOGNITIONS A. SUPT. CITATIONS B. PARTNERSHIPS C. REMARKS FROM CITIZENS D. LR.CTA E.JOSHUA To: From: Through: Subject: Little Rock School District 810 West Markham Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 December 18, 2003 Board of Education Debbie Milam, Director, ViPS/Partners in Education~ Morris L. Holmes, Interim Superintendent Partners in Education Program: New partnerships The Little Rock School District Partners in Education program is designed to develop strong relationships between the community and our schools. The partnership process encourages businesses, community agencies and private organizations to join with individual schools to enhance and support educational programs. Each partnership utilizes the resources of both the school and the business for their mutual benefit. The following schools and businesses have completed the requirements necessary to establish a partnership and are actively working together to accomplish their objectives. We recommend that the Board approve the following partnerships: Booker Arts Magnet School and Wonder State Odd Fellow Lodge #1 David 0. Dodd Elementary School and Greater Friendship, Inc. Gibbs Magnet School and Heifer International Horace Mann Arts \u0026amp; Science Magnet School and Heifer International Jefferson Elementary School and Twin City Bank-Kavanaugh Branch Otter Creek Elementary School and Bank of the Ozarks !.z.\". m ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ Booker Arts Magnet 2016 Barber Street Little Rock, AR 72206 Principal: Dr. Cheryl Carson Counselors: Vivian Johnson \u0026amp; Tammy Ringler Booker Arts Magnet School offers students an environment of spontaneity, freedom of expression, individuality and creativity. The goals of Booker Arts Magnet School are: - To nurture the students' learning To encourage personal expression To use the arts to motivate student achievement To foster self-discipline inherent in artistic achievement To instill within students an understanding of the relationship of the arts in their daily lives. We the Booker Arts Magnet Team would like to develop a partnership with the Wonder State Odd Fellow Lodge # 1. The purpose of this partnership is to enhance the educational programs of our school. Booker Arts Magnet Team plans to contribute the following in return for your partnership: a) Enhanced public image and the opportunity to be recognized for making a significant contribution to the community. b) Gain insight into our public school system and the contemporary education process. Wonder State Odd Fellow Lodge # 1 The Independent Order of Odd Fellows And Rebekahs Odd Fellowship is a Fraternal Organization, based on the Fatherhood of God and the Brotherhood of Man. It does charitable work on various projects in the community. Through its teachings and ceremonies, it seeks to elevate the character of man, and thereby make this world a better place in which to live. The Odd Fellowship Fraternal Organization would like to enhance the educational experiences of the students and staff of Booker Arts Magnet. We would like to enter into a partnership with Booker Arts Magnet. Listed below are some of the partnership activities we plan to assist in: a) Provide school supplies for needy students. b) Support the students and staff in school events. c) Members will volunteer their time for school events. d) Meet regularly with the School Team to assess progress. e) Promote ongoing recognition and appreciation of the staff at Booker Arts Magnet. !\"!=' lesn .! ii :en ~ David 0. Dodd Elementary School and Greater Friendship, Inc. Partnership Proposal Greater Friendship, Inc. will contribute the following to the partnership: Encourage employees to volunteer as readers on VIPS Reading Day Provide resources for the after-school tutoring program Provide resources for parent workshops Provide resources for student workshops Oversee and direct the 21 st CCLC-Dodd David 0. Dodd Elementary will contribute the following to the partnership: Acknowledge GFI, Inc. as a Partner in Education Provide resources for grant proposals as needed Implement and Organize the 21 st CCLC-Dodd Gibbs Magnet Elementary School and Heifer International Partnership Proposal Heifer International will contribute the following to the partnership: Participate in ViPS Reading Day at Gibbs by providing readers and donating books to the library Look for opportunities to bring together students from Heifer's three partner schools--Gibbs, Mann and Central-in projects to benefit and/or promote Heifer and its work Look for ways to connect Gibbs students with children in orphanages that Heifer works with around the world Gibbs will contribute the following to the partnership: Serve as the kick-off school for the Read to Feed challenge Provide a delegation for Heifer celebrations, such as the groundbreaking, 60th anniversary, grand opening, public service announcements, etc. Provide student artwork Encourage Gibbs students to buy an animal for a family as a community service project Look for ways to invite Heifer's international staff and visitors to the school !.z.'\". m !l! 'f! \u0026gt; C: C a\no Partnership Outline Heifer International and Horace Mann Arts \u0026amp; Science Magnet Horace Mann students have experienced many educational opportunities while working with Heifer International. Our school has raised funds as service projects to benefit others through Heifer International. Many students have visited the Ranch at Perryville while on field trips and the children always return excited about what they have learned. We would like to continue to work in these areas with our students and provide an outline of additional suggestions and recommendations that will strengthen our relationship and partnership with Heifer Internationa I. Suggested opportunities for Horace Mann Arts \u0026amp; Science Magnet and Heifer International: Science related activities that would expose our students to the implications of lacking sciences in developing countries Opportunities to gain practical experience of how others live as well as specific cultural experiences Support and assistance with our annual Multicultural Celebration Heifer International fundraising advisement opportunities for our school Assistance in developing a writing/pen pal program with a foreign country Development of a long-term project with the selected country/region. The school will display items specific to the country/region and provide instructional activities that will include all academic disciplines The school will dedicate a display case in our new building to showcase our partnership with Heifer International Partnership Proposal Twin City Bank - Kavanaugh Branch and Jefferson Elementary School Twin City Bank - Kavanaugh Branch commits to the following partnership activities: Sponsor Red Ribbon Week Count change collected through fundraisers Arrange for Penny, Nick and Buck to make appearances at school functions Recruit employees to read to students and listen to students read Job Shadowing Provide speakers for topics such as economics, saving money, etc. Sponsor Special Olympics Team T-shirts Provide refreshments for staff functions Jefferson Elementary School commits to the following activities: Provide artwork for display in bank lobby Provide choir to perform on holidays and special occasions Acknowledge Twin City Bank - Kavanaugh Branch as a Partner in Education Invite the Bank to school events Work together with the bank for community service projects !II (.\"..)..,., ID C:: c::c 8~ !!l\n: c::\u0026lt;n ~~ \u0026gt;z ril ~ .z.. . !'I .z... m I c\u0026gt;:: C i ~ BANKof the OZARKS 13415 Otter Creek Parkway Little Rock, AR 72210 (501) 978-3545 (501) 978-3546 (fax) Partners in Education Proposal with Otter Creek Elementary School Bank of the Ozarks commits to the following partnership activities: Breakfast for teachers for the first day of school. Reading for ViPS Assistance with Book Fair (Deborah Pike works with Lisa Booth to prepare for the book fair in the fall and spring) Christmas donation for teacher recognition Morning Muffins - help serve periodically Volunteers to assist in the year-end field day activities Roll the pennies from the \"Pennies for Pasta\" drive Ask peer helpers to make Christmas cards for a local retirement center as a joint community service project Otter Creek Elementary School commits to the following partnership activities: Provide artwork for bank Acknowledge bank as partner in education Assist bank with community service projects Provide opportunities for bank employees to become involved in public education '.\n4n Individual Approach to a World of Knowledge\" DATE: TO: FROM: PREPARED BY: SUBJECT: December 18, 2003 Board of Directors Donald M. Stewart, Chief Financial Officer Morris L. Holmes, Interim Superintendent Bill Goodman~~ December 2003 Construction Report - Bond Projects On December 20th, the move from the portable classrooms to the new classrooms will begin at Mann Magnet Middle School. Generally, those students and teachers that were displaced to the portable classrooms will move into the new forty-four [ 44] classroom building. The move will take place during the holidays and will be completed by the start of school on January 5, 2004. This will be an exciting time for all of the Mann students and staff. I hope you have an opportunity to visit the new building soon. I know you will be proud and impressed. The last construction phase at Mabelvale Middle School is complete except for two [2] classrooms. The move to the new office area and media center is in progress. Please note in my report that the planning process has started for schools that have had little or no work done up until now. The list is not complete but should be in January. The drawings and cost estimates for remodeling Mitchell and Rightsell will be complete this month. I hope you have a wonderful holiday season. Please call me at 447-1146 if you have any questions. 810 W Markham Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 www.lrsd.k12.ar.us 501-324-2000 fax: 501-324-2032 !ll ~ is zz rm- !\" .z.. m ~ ~ \u0026gt; C: 0 i :..,., nm ::c C: ~ m Facility Name Baseline CONSTRUCTION REPORT TO THE BOARD DECEMBER 18, 2003 BOND PROJECTS UNDER CONSTRUCTION Project Description Cost Renovation $953,520 -- ~ady --- Addition/renovation - .. $973,621 Central Renovation - Interior $10,200,266 Dunbar Renovation/additi~ $6,161,950 J. A. Fair 6 classroom addition \u0026amp; cafeteria/mus~ room addition $3,155,640 Est. Completion Date Jul-04 Jun-04 Dec-05 Aug~ ---- Feb-04 Renovation --- M-ab-elv-al-e M-S -- - $6,851,6~ Dec-03 -- Mann - - _J'artial Replacement $11,500_,_0QQ___ Dec-03 - - -McC-lellan -~Cl assroom Addition $2,155,622 Jul-04 -- - - --$2,121,226 Parkview Addition Jun-04 -- - -- Pulaski Hgts. Elem Renovation $1,193,259 Aug-04 Pulaski Hgts. MS Renovation - -----,- $3,755,041 Aug-04 Southwest Addition $2,000,000 . Aug-04 Tech Ctr/ Metro Renovation Addition/Renovation - Phase II $2,725,000 Jun-04 -Wa-kefie~ --- --R- ebuild -~I- $5,300,000 I Jul-04 Williams 'Renovation I $2,106,492 Jun-04 Wi-lliams -- Parking expansions $183,717 Jun-04 --- Wilson Renovation/expansion $1 ,263,876 Dec-03 BOND PROJECTS CONSTRUCTION - WINTER/ SPRING 2003-04 t:st. 1_\nompIeuon Facility Name Project Description Cost Date Mitchell Renovation $750,000 Aug-04 -- Rightsell Renovation $660,000 Aug-04 BOND PROJECTS PLANNING STARTED CONST. DATE TO BE DETERMINED t:si. 1..,ompIeuon Facility Name Project Description Cost Date B-ooke-r -- Electrical Upgrade Unknown Unknown Carver Media Center Expansion ' Unknown Unknown Chicot Electrical Upgrade Unknown Unknown Cloverdale Elementary Addition I Unknown Unknown Fair Park Addition Unknown Unknown Forest Heights Remodel Unknown Unknown Garland IRemodel I Unknown Unknown Geyer Springs Roof Repair I Unknown Unknown Gibbs Addition Unknown Unknown Meadowcliff ,Addition Unknown Unknown Pulaski Hgts. MS 1 Energy monitoring system installation I Unknown Western Hills Electrical Upgrade \u0026amp; HVAC Unknown ' Unknown Woodruff Parking addition $193,777 Unknown BOND PROJECTS THAT HAVE BEEN COMPLETED t:st. 1_\nompIet10n Facility Name Project Description Cost Date Administration Asbestos abatement $380,495 Mar-03 Administration Fresh air system $55,000 Aug-03 Administration Fire alarm $32,350 Aug-03 Administration Annex Energy monitoring system installation May-02 Alternative Learning Ctr. Energy monitoring system installation $15,160 Oct-01 Alternative Learning Ctr. Energy efficient lighting $82,000 Dec-01 Badgett Partial asbestos abatement $237,237 Jul-01 Badgett Fire alarm $18,250 Aug-02 Bale Classroom addition/renovation $2,244,524 Dec-02 Bale Energy monitoring system Mar-02 Bale Partial roof replacement $269,587 Dec-01 Bale HVAC $664,587 Aug-01 CONSTRUCTION REPORT TO THE BOARD DECEMBER 18, 2003 BOND PROJECTS THAT HAVE BEEN COMPLETED Est. Completion Facility Name Project Description Cost Date Booker Energy efficient lighting ~ $170,295 Apr-01 Boo_ker_______ Energy monitoring system installation 1 $23,710 Oct-01 Booker Asbestos ab_a_te_m_en_t __ _ ______ $_1_0~,9_00 Feb-02 Booker Fire alarm I $34,501 ~ 02 Brady I Energy efficient lighting $80,593 Sep-02 Brady Asbestos abatement -------c--,------,------$-3=--4-,-5-,-,-0-c7-c-2 __ Aug-02 Carver 'Energy monitoring system installation 1 $14,480 1 May-01 1--=-----------i-=--c-~ -,---~ Carver Parking lot I $111 ,742 ' Aug-03 Central Parking - ---Student parking i $174,000 Aug-03 Central/Quigley Stadium light repair \u0026amp; electrical repair 1 ___ $265,000 Aug-03 Central/Quigley - ~ hletic Field Improvement $38,000 Aug-03 Central/Quigley Irrigation System --- I $14,500 --=-=-- Aug-03 Central -- -i=\u0026gt;urchaseland for school Unknown I Dec-02 Central --- Roof \u0026amp; exterior renov~ -~ I $2,000,000 Dec-02 Central Ceiling and wall repair $24,000 Oct-01 C_e_n_tra_l -- Fire Alarm System Design/Installation _ _,_ __ $80,876 Aug-01 Central 'Front landing tile repair ' $22,470 Aug-01 C_lo_v_e_rd_ale Ele_m_. ____ E_n_ergy efficient lighting $132,678 Jul-01 _C_lo_v_erdale MS_ _______En e_r=g,y__effi_cie_nt l_i,g,'-h-_tin_g,\"----------- $189,743 1 Jul-01 Cloverdale MS Major renovation \u0026amp; addition $1 ,393,822 Nov-02 Dodd -----,--,,E~n~e-rg_y_e~ff~i,c-ie_n_t-li-gh- t-in_g_ ______ ,_ --$90,665 Aug-01 Dodd Dodd Facilities Service Facility Services Fair Park ~stos abatement-ceiling tile-- 1 $156,299 i Jul-01 Replace roof top HVAC- $215,570 Aug-0~ Interior renovation $84,672 Mar-01 I Fire alarm 1 $12,000 I Aug-03 HVAC renovation/fire alarm $315,956 Apr-02 Fair Park ---~Ene_r=gy~effi_ci_ent_l~ig~h_tin~g~ _________ $90,162 ~ -Q!_ - --+Asb-es-tos- a-ba-tem-en-t-c-eil-ing $59,310 , Aug-01 '-----+----,---'----\"---,------\"---l Fair Park --- J. A. Fair Energy efficient lighting $277,594 Apr-01 ------+-~ '----\"'--'\u0026lt;--------l-------'--,---\"--.,___ ___ _,__-l J. A. Fair Press box $10,784 Nov-00 J. A. Fair J. A. Fair J. A. Fair J. A. Fair Forest Park Forest Park Is ecurity cameras ____ ,_ _____ __$\n__12_,,'5-_00-'_ ___J_ u_n_-0--11 Athletic Field Improvement $38,000 Jul-03 Irrigation System $14,000 Jul-03 Roof repairs $391,871 Aug-03 Replace window units w/central HVAC $485,258 I Nov-03 Diagonal parking $111 ,742 Aug-03 ----~ --'---~ ---------+-------+----~ --. Forest Park I Energy efficient lighting $119,788 May-01 Fulbrig_!,t ---+E_n_ergy efficient lighting I $134,463 Jun-01 Fulbright Energy monitoring system installation $11,950 1 Aug-01 Fulbright _ Replace rooftop HVAC units $107,835 Aug-02 Fulbright ____ ---+P_a_r_ki_n=g_lo_t _________- +---~$14_0_,00_0_ ____S_ ep-_0-2-. Fulbright _ -----+-R_o_o_f_re...,p_a_ir_s __________ ,__ _ ~$-'-2_0_0-'-,0_0_0-+-____ O_c_t-_02-1 Franklin Renovation $2,511,736 Mar-03 --- Gibbs 1Energy efficient lighting $76,447 Apr-01 Gibbs Energy monitoring system installation $11,770 Jul-01 Hall -- Major renovation \u0026amp; addition $8,637,709 Sep-03 - Hall 'Asbestos abatement $168,222 Aug-01 Hall Energy efficient lighting $42,931 Jul-01 Hall Energy efficient lighting $296,707 Apr-01 Hall Infrastructure improvements $93,657 ' Aug-01 Hall Intercom Feb-01 Hall Security cameras $10,600 Jun-01 2 !II\nll\no ~ z z ,m... !\" -z, m s! ~ \u0026gt; C: 0 ~\no :-n, m 0 ::r:: C: ~ m CONSTRUCTION REPORT TO THE BOARD DECEMBER 18, 2003 BOND PROJECTS THAT HAVE BEEN COMPLETED Facility Name I Project Descriotion Cost Henderson Energy efficient lighting $193,679 Henderson Roof replacement gym $107,835 Henderson Asbestos abatement Phase I $500,000 Henderson Asbestos abatement Phase 2 $250,000 IRC Energy efficient lighting I $109,136 --- - Jefferson Asbestos abatement $43,639 Jefferson Renovation \u0026amp; fire alarm $1,630,000 I Laidlaw Parking lot $269,588 Mabelvale Elem. -- ~ ergy monitoring~ystem installation $12,150 Mabelvale Elem. _ Replace HVAC units $300,000 I --- Mabelvale Elem. Asbestos Abatement $107,000 Mabelvale Elem. Energy efficient lighting -1---$106,598 Mabelvale MS , Renovate bleachers $134,793 Mann - Asphalt walks The total $1 .8 million Mann walkway canopies is what has been Mann Boiler replacement used so far on the Mann .Fencing ___J projects listed Mann . Partial demolition/portable classrooms completed for Mann. I McClellan Athletic Field Improvement $38,000 McClellan ---- Irrigation System I $14)50 McClellan Security cameras I $36,300 I McClellan Energy efficient lighting I $303,614 McClellan 1 Stadium stands repair I $235,000 McClellan 'Intercom $46,000 McDermott Energy efficient lighting $79,411 I McDermott --- - 1 Replace roof top HVAC units $476,000 I Meadowcliff Fire alarm $16,175 I Meadowcliff Asbestos abatement $253,412 Meadowcliff Engergy efficient lighting I $88,297 I Metropolitan 1 Replace cooling tower $37,203 Metropolitan Replace shop vent system $20,000 Metropolitan I Energy monitoring system installation $17,145 Mitchell I Energy efficient lighting $103,642 Mitchell Energy monitoring system installation $16,695 Mitchell .Asbestos abatement I $13,000 Oakhurst I HVAC renovation $237,237 Otter Creek , Energy monitoring system installation $10,695 Otter Creek Energy efficient lighting I $81,828 Otter Creek 'Asbestos abatement I $10,000 Otter Creek I Parking lot $138,029 I Otter Creek 16 classroom addition $888,778 I Otter Creek I Parking Improvements $142,541 Parkview HVAC controls $210,000 I Parkview I Roof replacement $273,877 Parkview I Exterior lights $10,784 Parkview I HVAC renovation \u0026amp; 700 area controls $301,938 ' Parkview I Locker replacement $120,000 Parkview Energy efficient lighting $315,000 Procurement Energy monitoring system installation $5,290 Procurement !Fire alarm $25,000 Pulaski Hqts. Elem Move playground $17,000 Est. Completion Date Jul-01 May-01 Aug-01 Aug-02 Jul-02 Oct-01 Nov-02 Jul-01 Aug-01 Aug-02 Aug-02 Dec-02 Aug-01 Dec-01 Dec-01 Oct-01 Sep-01 Aug-01 Jul-03 - Jul-03 Jun-01 May-01 Aug-01 Feb-02 Feb-01 Aug-02 Jul-01 Aug-02 Dec-02 Dec-00 May-01 Aug-01 Apr-01 Jul-01 Jul-01 Aug-01 May-01 Apr-01 Aug-02 Aug-02 Oct-02 Aug-03 Jun-02 Sep-01 Nov-00 Aug-01 Aug-01 Jun-01 Jun-02 Aug-03 Dec-02 3 Facility Name Rightsell Rockefeller Rockefeller Rockefeller Romine Romine Security/Transportation Southwest Southwest Southwest Southwest Student Assignment CONSTRUCTION REPORT TO THE BOARD DECEMBER 18, 2003 BOND PROJECTS THAT HAVE BEEN COMPLETED I Project Description I Cost I Est. Completion Date , Energy efficient lighting $84,898 Apr-01 Energy efficient lighting $137,004 Mar-01 Replace roof top HVAC $539,175 Aug-01 'Parking addition $111,742 Aug-02 Asbestos abatement $10,QQQ 1 Apr-02 Major renovation \u0026amp; addition $3,534,675 I Mar-03 Bus cameras $22,500 Jun-01 Asbestos abatement $28,138 Aug-00 New roof I $690,QQQ 1 Oct-03 Energy efficient lighting $168,719 Jan-02 Drainage I street widening ---1- $250,000 Aug-03 Energy monitoring system installation $4,830 Aug-02 -- Student Assignment Fire alarm $9,000 Aug-03 Tech Center Phase 1 Renovation $275,000 Dec-01 Technology Upgrade 1Upgrade phone system \u0026amp; data I Nov-02 Terry Energy efficient lighting $73,850 Feb-01 Terry Driveway \u0026amp; Parking I $83,484 Aug-02 Terry Media Center addition $704,932 Sep-02 Wakefield Security cameras I $8,000 Jun-01 Wakefield Energy efficient lighting I $74,776 I Feb-01 Wakefield - Demolition/Asbestos Abatement I $200,0001 Nov-02 Washington Security cameras I $7,900 Jun-01 Washington Energy efficient lighting I $165,281 I Apr-01 Watson Energy monitoring system installation ! $8,530 Jul-01 Watson - IAsbestos abatement I $182,241 Aug-01 Watson Energy efficient lighting I $106,868 I Aug-01 Watson !Asbestos abatement I $10,000 Aug-02 Watson Major renovation \u0026amp; addition $800,000 I Aug-02 Western Hills !Asbestos abatement I $191,946 Aug-02 Western Hills .Intercom $7,100 Dec-01 Western Hills 1 Energy efficient lighting $106,000 I Jul-01 Williams Energy efficient lighting I $122,119 I Jun-01 Wilson I Parking Expansion I $110,0001 Aug-03 Woodruff Renovation $246,419 I Auq-02 4 !I' ~\no ~z z m r- !'\" -z, m s! ~ \u0026gt; C: 0 ~ Date: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS December 18, 2003 To: Board of Directors @ From: Sandy Becker, Internal Auditor Re: Audit Report - December This is the fiftieth communication regarding status of the current year projects and reviews. Activity Funds a) Working with two middle school and one elementary school to resolve financial issues in their activity funds. b) Reviewing monthly financial information for all schools and assisting in resolving balance issues. c) Training school staff at schools on financial processes by request. Activities Advisory Board (AAB) a) Working with the new Activities Advisory Board to develop plans for the new school year and beyond. b) Assist the Activities Advisory Board in its mission to strengthen the effectiveness and viability of activities in the District. c) Working with the Activities Advisory Board to provide ways to assist the different Booster groups in our schools. Board Policy and Regulation a) Coordinating development of payroll guidelines with Financial Services as part of Financial Services Section of the District Operations Manual. Technology Training a) Monitoring technology plans to determine how use of technology will improve and streamline the workflow for staff persons. a) Served as a trainer for financial portion of Nuts \u0026amp; Bolts, Bookkeeper \u0026amp; Secretaries Training, Security Guard Training, individual school in-service meetings, and others as needed. Working to facilitate best means to improve financial processes and increase accountability for resources. Training new bookkeepers on bookkeeping procedures as requested. !Z'\nll\na:, is z z,m.. . Audit Report - December 2003 Page 2 of 2 b) Placed training material, smart worksheets, and other helpful items on the Teachers Lounge section of the Little Rock School District web page. c) Coordinated guidelines and aids to inform and assist new activity sponsors of specific tasks relating to each activity. Added new checklist for spirit sponsors and smart spreadsheet for fundraiser reconciliation. This information is now in the Teachers Lounge section of the District web page. d) Developed skills test for financial positions. Implementing in coordination with Human Resources. Audit Area Sampling and Review of Financial Procedures Other a) Pulling samples of district expenditures to test for accuracy, accountability, and compliance with District policies. Reviewing district payroll processes for compliance, economy and efficiency, internal controls, and cost control. Working with Financial Services Payroll on internal control and processing issues. b) c) d) e) f) g) h) a) b) c) d) Working with Financial Services on internal controls and rules for payroll processes and implementation of a new interface system. Monitoring other selected risk areas for efficiency, cost effectiveness, and compliance with District policies. Reviewing grant programs. Working with Child Nutrition on implementation of streamlined information processing system with Information Services and Child Nutrition Staff. Working with Information Services on streamlining of data processes regarding SIS reporting. Monitoring cost reduction efforts in the District. Monitoring payroll for compliance with board direction and internal controls. Reviewing leave accountability system. Provided technical assistance to school staff on grant writing. Served as co-chair of Strategic Team One - Financial Resources. Assisted with ShareFest 2003, Saturday, November 1, 2003. Report online at lrsd.org Participating in planning for Day of Caring (April 17, 2004). Problem Resolution a) I have made myself available to help resolve financial issues, assist in improving processes, and help find solutions to questions that arise. Please let me know if you need further information. My telephone number is 501-44 7-1115. My e-mail is sandy.becker@lrsd.org. LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201 Date: December 18, 2003 TO: Little Rock School District Board of Directors FROM: Lucy Neal, Director Technology and Media Services John Ruffins, Director Computer Information Services THROUGH: Morris L. Holmes, Interim Superintendent Title/Subject Summary Objectives Expected Outcomes Population/Location Budget Amount Managers Duration Long Range/Continuation Technology Report Read180 software by Scholastic has been implemented at 5 secondary schools: Central, Hall, McClellan, Southwest and Mabelvale Middle. This software supports the Arkansas curriculum frameworks and is designed for students whose reading achievement is below the proficient level. It is integrated into classroom instruction in a way that allows plenty of time for literature and writing. The eleven teachers who are using the Read180 intervention strategies are participating in continuing professional development activities. Technology issues related to construction projects continue to keep both departments busy. This month we have been working on Mann, Central, and the Technology Center. The Safari Media Retrieval System will be installed in the new Mann building and teachers will receive training in January and February on the use of the system in instruction. This month we applied for E-rate funding for the 2004-2005 school year for the wide area network, telephone service (including local, long distance, cellular and paging), network electronics and video distribution systems. To provide an update to the Board of Directors on the status of technology projects To continue to implement the approved technology plan NIA NIA Lucy Neal - Instructional John Ruffins-Technical November 21, 2003 - December 18, 2003 Technology Plan is approved from 2003-2006. !II ~ z~ z m r- !II ,0 m C) C s 0z ,0 m !!:, U) \u0026lt;z5 DATE: TO: FROM: THROUGH: Re: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, ARKA SAS December 18, 2003 Board of Education w Beverly Williams, Director, Human Resources Dr. Morris Holmes, Interim Superintendent of Schools Personnel Changes lt is recommended that the following personnel changes be approved at the indicated positions, salaries and classifications. In accordance with A.C.A. 6-17-1502, it is recommended that one additional year of probationary status is provided for all teachers who have been employed in a school district in this state for three (3) years. Teachers with an effecti ve date of employment after August 18, 2003 are considered intern teachers. s :. a, me:\ni:: (/)\nE z om -\u0026lt; (/) m\"' mv, :,om omS\"' C: (\") mm (/) (/) - Personnel Changes Page 2 December 18, 2003 NAME Ammons, Janice Reason: Leaving City Griffin, Laurie Reason: Leaving City Fall, Libasse Hemphill, James 0 E NONE POSITION SCHOOL START DATE END DATE SALARY CLASS Resignations/Terminations Certified Employees Special Ed 8-13-01 6-14 WOODRUFF 11-15-03 SPE925 Elem I 8-9-00 5-08 CHICOT 12-1-03 TCH925 New Certified Employees Spanish 10-28-03 1-02 CENTRAL TCH925 Spanish 11-20-03 1-05 MCCLELLAN TCH925 Certified Promotion Certified Transfer ANNUAL SALARY 45587.00 38057.00 27056.00 29609.00 ammal 18197.20 prorated Personnel Changes Page 3 December 18, 2003 NAME POSITION SCHOOL START DATE END DATE SALARY CLASS Resignations/Terminations on-Certified Employees Blythe, Edith Child utntlon 6-11-87 3-16 Reason: Retired CHICOT 12-31-03 FSMGRS Colbert, Harriette Child utrition 12-5-01 3-03 Reason: Personal BALE 12-5-03 FSH550 Davis, Lee Occupational Ther. 8-12-99 60-18 Reason: Health Reasons SPECIAL ED 12-5-03 AN925 Farn1er, Gilbet1 Custodian 9-19-02 3-05 Reason: Personal FAIR 12-11-03 CUS12 Ha1Tis, Paula Child Nutrition 9-1-99 1-05 Reason: one Given HENDERSON 11-11-03 FSH5 Hill, Jerryline Care 1-7-02 1-05 Reason: None Given CARE 10-31-03 CARE Jones, Everett Custodian 1-20-99 1-06 Reason: Tem1inated FRANKLJN 11-17-03 CUS928 Matts, Glenda Instr. Aide 9-26-94 1-10 Reason: Returning To School CHICOT 12-19-03 lNA925 Palmer, Jerry Custodian 1-1-01 1-04 Reason: Personal WOODRUFF 11-13-03 CUS12 Shaw, Al Instr. Aide 2-12-01 1-03 Reason: Personal FAIR 12-15-03 lNA925 ANNUAL SALARY 15030.00 8188.00 50712.00 18381.00 7504.00 6.68 per hr. 12481.00 14067.00 15092.00 11635.00 \u0026gt;,.s.. . a, m c: :I:(/) ,\"-llzo-\u0026lt; m (/) m\"' :mx,\"m' m\n:r:, oS c:O mm \"...' \"' !D 8 z .\u0026gt;.. iz5 (/)\ns \u0026gt;o . C: ~~ ,-0 n c: -\u0026lt; ~\n:r:,i!\n~z \"i5' \"\ni'l z C: (/).0.. 0z !D\n:r:, m Cl C: \u0026gt;... 0z\n:r:, m e\u0026lt;n iz5 0 \"ll\" 8~ ~~ :I:~ i~ r- ~ Personnel Changes Page 4 December 18, 2003 NAME Smith, John Reason: one Given Staggers, Marjorie Reason: Deceased Stokes, Tamara Reason: None Given Taylor, Tannie Reason: None Given Warner, Charlotte Reason: None Given Wight, Linda Reason: Personal Woodus, Sherri Reason: Personal Wyatt, Joyce Reason: Retired Anderson, Leamon POSITION SCHOOL Custodian FOREST HGTS. Child utrition MCCLELLAN Child utrition MCDERMOTT Care CARE Child Nutrition DUNBAR Instr. Aide FRANKLIN Child Nutrition CHILDNUTR. Clerical WILSON START DATE END DATE 4-2-03 12-31-03 9-27-99 11-15-03 8-14-03 11-3-03 11-3-03 11-10-03 9-2-97 10-6-03 8-28-78 11-19-03 8-15-03 10-31-03 8-2-99 1-24-04 SALARY CLASS 1-01 CUS928 3-12 FSH550 3-01 FHS550 3-03 CARE 3-07 FSH550 1-10 INA925 2-01 FSMEAL 39-20 CLKl0 New Non-Certified Emplovees Child Nutrition CHILDNUTR. 11-13-03 1-01 FSH4 ANNUAL SALARY 10329.00 8471.00 8130.00 7.12 per hr. 8316.00 14067.00 11593.00 28764.00 7121.00 annual 4760.67 prorated Personnel Changes Page 5 December 18, 2003 NAME Carpenter, Michael Denham, Nickila Garcia, Martha Hall, Michelle Hervey, Stephanie Jones, Amy Jones, Mary POSITION SCHOOL Care CARE Custodian WILSON Custodian CHICOT Child Nutrition CHICOT Child Nutrition BALE Nurse NURSES Instr. Aide FOREST HGTS. START DATE END DATE 11-17-03 I 0-29-03 10-29-03 10-31-03 10-31-03 11-10-03 11-21-03 SALARY CLASS 4-01 CARE 1-01 CUS12 1-01 CUS928 3-01 FSH550 3-01 FSH550 1-08 NURSES 1-10 INA925 ANNUAL SALARY 6.25 per hr 13399.00 annual 8723.60 prorated 10329.00 annual 7241.53 prorated 8130.00 annual 5775.41 prorated 8130.00 annual 5775.41 prorated 32672.00 annual 21441.00 prorated 14067.00 annual 8744.35 prorated s \u0026gt;: a:, m c: 3:(1) ,\"D- z- om -\u0026lt; (/) m\"' m\"'\nom m::O oc:Sn mm \"...' \"' !Zl 8 z .\u0026gt;.. 0z (/) ~ \u0026gt; (\") . C: ~~ r- (\") oc: -\u0026lt;:: ::o~ ~z \"c5'\"\n' z C: (/)(.\".). 0z !Zl ::0 m C\u0026gt; C: \u0026gt;... 0z ::0 m s (/) cz5 (\") \"D. e: ~ C\u0026gt; ... ~~ !I: 14 i~ r- ~ Personnel Changes Page 6 December 18, 2003 NAME Jordan, Enna Ke1medy, Jarvis Parker, Raushanah Sistrunk, Daplme Smith, Mickie Todd, Freeman Walker, Matthew POSITION SCHOOL Child Nutrition DUNBAR Custodian CENTRAL Child Nutrition GEYER SPRINGS Child Nutrition MCCLELLAN Instr. Aide MABEL VALE EL. Care CARE Custodian CENTRAL START DATE END DATE 10-31-03 10-6-03 11-3-03 11-10-03 11-10-03 11-17-03 10-6-03 SALARY CLASS 3-01 FSH550 1-01 CUS928 3-01 FSH4 3-01 FSH550 1-10 INA925 1-03 CARE 1-01 CUS928 ANNUAL SALARY 8130.00 annual 5775.41 prorated 10329.00 annual 8088.57 prorated 5751.00 annual 4038.62 prorated 8130.00 annual 5597.70 prorated 14067.00 annual 10036.99 prorated 6.43 per hr 10329.00 annual 8083.57 prorated Personnel Changes Page 7 December 18, 2003 NAME Woods, Teresa POSITION SCHOOL Child utrition HALL START DATE END DATE 11-3-03 Non-Certified Promotion SALARY CLASS 3-01 FSH550 Downs, Queen From School Based Security To District Wide Security Non-Certified Transfer Phillips, Penny From Child Nutrition To Financial Services NONE ANNUAL SALARY 8130.00 annual 5730.98 prorated :s ,... . a, m c: il::(I)\nEZ om -\u0026lt; (I) m\u0026lt;n m\u0026lt;n ~m o:S C: (\") mm .(.l.) CI\u0026gt; Personnel Changes Page 8 December 18, 2003 NAME POSITION SCHOOL START DATE END DATE SALARY CLASS ANNUAL SALARY Personnel Changes Page 9 December 18, 2003 NAME POSITION SCHOOL START DATE END DATE SALARY CLASS ANNUAL SALARY :s \u0026gt;,' mIX c!: :I: en ,\"0- -z om -m\u0026lt; eenn men\nom m\no o:S C: C') mm .e.n.. en 8 ! ~ ezn TO: FROM: THROUGH: SUBJECT: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCE CENTER 3001 SOUTH PULASKI STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72206 December 18, 2003 Board of Directors ~nnis Glasgow, Interim Associate Superintendent of Instruction Dr. Morris Holmes, Interim Superintendent Revision of Policy IKF and Regulations ID-Rand IMP-R to Reflect Change in Arkansas Law Short Summary-Arkansas Act 1748 0f2001 required students in grades K-9 to meet a physical training requirement ofno less than 20 minutes of physical activity three (3) times a week for every student who is physically fit and able to participate. Since that time, Act 1729 of 2003 was approved to change the grade range from K-9 to K-8. Since the K-9 grade span was written in one Board Policy and two (2) Regulations, those three documents are being corrected to reflect the revised requirement of Act 1729. Objectives-To adjust Board Policies and Regulations to reflect changes in State Law Expected Outcomes-Board Policy IKF and Regulations ID-Rand IMP-R will conform with State Law Population-K-8 Student Population ofLRSD Manager-NI A Duration-NI A Long Range/Continuation- NI A Other Agencies Involved-NI A Expectations of Staff-The K-8 staff will continue with current expectations\nhowever, the high schools will no longer have the physical training requirement for grade 9 students. ,.,.s.. . a, m c: -i:.c,,, ,- z om -m\u0026lt;\"\"'' me,,\nom m\n,o 0~ c:m m.... \"' 8 z ~ iz5 \"' !D\n,o 2l C: s iz5\n,o m s \"i5' z Needed Staff- NI A Comments- NI A Recommendations- we recommend approval of these changes in Board Policy and Regulations on first reading to reflect changes in Arkansas Law. Copies of the revised Policy IKF and Regulations ID-Rand IMP-Rare attached. The changes in the policy and regulations were submitted through Linda Austin, who serves as the clearinghouse for Board policy issues. LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: IKF GENERAL EDUCATION GRADUATION REQUIREMENTS The Little Rock School District Board of Education believes that students should graduate from high school possessing the skills, knowledge, and attitudes needed for responsible citizenship, life-long learning, and productive employment in our modern economy. Programs for post-secondary preparation will be available to equip students for the advanced training that will be needed for the work of the 21 st century. The Little Rock School District will be responsible for providing the educational opportunities and experiences that will enable our students to take full advantage of post-secondary education and employment opportunities available to them after graduation. Diploma-Earning Options A student may earn a diploma from a Little Rock School District high school in one of four ways. Each has different requirements and different numbers of required units of credit. 1. Diploma from any of the five high schools for completion of the required 24 units for the classes of 2002 and 2003\nor the required 26 units for the class of 2004 and after. 2. Diploma from any of the five high schools for completion of the Little Rock Scholars curriculum of 27 units for the class of 2003\nor 28 units, including at least eight Pre-Advanced Placement or Advanced Placement courses, for the class of 2004 and after. Hall High School students may take University Studies courses as substitutes for Pre-Advanced Placement and/or Advanced Placement courses. 3. Diploma earned at the Accelerated Learning Center for completion of the 21 units required by the State of Arkansas. 4. Diploma with waived or altered requirements established by an Individual Education Program (IEP) team for a student identified with disabilities. Even though the graduation requirements may be changed by the Board of Education during the time a student is enrolled in high school, the requirements established for a student's graduation class (assuming graduation in four years of high school) are those he/she must meet, even though he/she may require more than four years to earn the necessary number of units. Units of credit will generally be earned in grades nine through twelve, except that one unit of Algebra I (or higher-level mathematics) and Level I (or higher level) of foreign language may be earned in grade eight. High school courses taken before grade eight will not satisfy a unit of credit toward graduation. (See policy IKEC for list of creditearning options.) s : CD m c: !-I:, ,en ,-z om -m\u0026lt; eenn men\nom m\no oS c:0 mm e..n. en !II !II ill C) C: ~ 0z\no m \u0026lt; en 0z LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: IKF ( continued) Transfer Students All transfer students must meet the graduation requirements of the Little Rock School District in order to receive a diploma. The LRSD high school will accept transfer credits and grades for students who previously attended Arkansas high schools that are accredited by the Arkansas Department of Education or out-of-state high schools that are accredited by their state department of education and/or a regional accreditation organization such as the North Central Association of Schools and Colleges. Additionally, students who transfer into a Little Rock School District high school from a home school must attend at least two semesters in order to receive a high school diploma (see IKED and IKED-R). Former home school students must attend at least four semesters in order to be eligible for rank-in-class (see IKC-R). Foreign Exchange students who complete the senior year in good standing may, at the discretion of the principal, participate in the graduation ceremony. Senior-Year Enrollment Requirements Students participating in dual-credit courses with local colleges/universities during their senior year must be enrolled in high school courses at least half time for their senior year (four units of credit) or full-time during the fall semester in order to receive a diploma from a Little Rock School District high school. This enrollment standard is required regardless of how many credits a student may need to satisfy graduation requirements. (See IKEC-R1 for regulations governing dual-credit enrollments.) Magnet Program Seal Students who participate in the District's high school magnet programs may meet the magnet curriculum requirements through completion of the designated Career Focus courses established for each magnet. In order to receive a Magnet Seal, magnet students must complete fill the requirements of the magnet program. Students transferring into a magnet program after the freshman year may earn a diploma from that high school, but they will not earn the Magnet Seal. Arkansas Scholars Seal A special Arkansas Scholars seal will be affixed to the diploma and transcript of a student who meets the following standards established by the Arkansas Scholars program: 1. Earn a grade of \"C\" or above in all courses. 2. Achieve a 95 percent or better attendance record for each of the four years of high school. 2 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: IKF (continued) 3. Complete high school in eight consecutive semesters. 4. Complete successfully at least three units in science, three units in mathematics, three units of social studies, and four units in English. Honors Diploma Seal A special Honors Seal will be affixed to the diploma and transcript of a student who meets the following standards: 1. Completes the units required for the Little Rock Scholars curriculum, which includes and goes beyond the requirements of the Arkansas Higher Education Coordinating Board for unconditional admission to any public twoyear or four-year institution of higher education in Arkansas and which includes, but goes beyond, the requirements for eligibility for the Arkansas Challenge Scholarship. The Little Rock Scholars curriculum also reflects the admission requirements of the most competitive universities in the United States of America. 2. Successfully completes a minimum of eight Pre-Advanced Placement or Advanced Placement courses over a four-year period. Hall High School students may take University Studies courses as substitutes for PreAdvanced Placement and/or Advanced Placement courses. Other approved dual-credit courses offered to LRSD students in collaboration with area colleges/ universities may also be substituted for the Pre-AP or AP requirement. 3. Earns a grade-point-average of at least 3.5. Students designated for valedictory or salutatory recognition must have completed the Little Rock Scholars curriculum. Recognition of Graduates Each high school may design its own traditions to commend and celebrate the achievements of the following sets of graduates: 1. the valedictorian and salutatorian\n2. students earning an overall average of 3.5 or above\n3. students earning Magnet Program, Arkansas Scholars, Little Rock Scholars, and/or Honors Diploma Seals\n4. members of the National Honor Society or similar honors organization\n5. scholarship recipients\n6. students with perfect attendance throughout high school\nand 7. students whose other achievements are worthy of special recognition. 3 s ,... . a, me -:l.:,u-, ,..z o-\u0026lt; m (J) mU\u0026gt; m\u0026lt;J\u0026gt;\n:om om:S\"' cO mm u...,.U \u0026gt; !\"' ~ C s 6z\n:o ~ (J) 6z LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: IKF (continued) Participation in Graduation Ceremony In order to be a participant in the graduation ceremony, the student must be within one unit of completing the graduation requirements and must have paid the tuition for the one-half or one unit to be taken in summer school (or, alternately, in another approved credit-earning program). All high school students and their parents will be informed in writing of this expectation when course lists and graduation requirements are published for the spring registration process. Principals will make a determination of potential graduates at the end of the junior year and each quarter of the students' senior year and inform students and their parents immediately if it is determined that the student is in danger of not graduating. Such students will be advised of all the appropriate credit-earning options, including, but not limited to, evening high school, summer school, correspondence courses, online courses, credit-by-examination, and placement at the Accelerated Learning Center. Award of Diploma The award of the high school diploma will not be made until all graduation requirements are met. Specific Course Requirements The following table specifies the required courses for graduation for each curriculum area. Revised: Adopted: July 22, 1999 4 High School Graduation Requirements Little Rock School District Required, Classes of 2002 and 2003 English-4 units English I (ESL, Regular, or PreAP)\nand English II (ESL, Regular, or PreAP)\nand English Ill (ESL, Regular, PreAP, or AP)\nand English IV (ESL, Regular, or AP). Oral Communications-1 unit Communications I or Debate I Mathematics-3 units Algebra I (ESL, Regular, or PreAP)\nand Algebra II (ESL, Regular, or PreAP) or Statistics (ESL, Regular, or AP)\nand Concepts of Geometry (ESL or Regular) or Geometry (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP) Science-3 units Physics I (ESL or Regular) or Physics I Pre-AP\nand Biology I (ESL, Regular, or PreAP)\nand Chemistry I (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP) Required, Classes of 2004 and After English-4 units English I (ESL, Regular, or PreAP)\nand English II (ESL, Regular, or PreAP)\nand English Ill (ESL, Regular, PreAP, or AP)\nand English IV (ESL, Regular, or AP). Oral Communications-1/2 unit Communications IA (1/2 unit) English Language Arts-1/2 unit One-half unit from any English, Journalism, or Communications course. Modern Grammar (1/2) is stronQIY recommended. Mathematics--3 units Algebra I (ESL, Regular, or PreAP)\nand Algebra II (ESL, Regular, or PreAP) or Statistics (ESL, Regular, or AP)\nand Geometry (ESL, Regular, or PreAP) Statistics (ESL, Regular, or AP) will no longer substitute for Algebra II for the Class of 2007. Effective for the Class of 2007, four (4) units of mathematics are required in Qrades 9-12. Science--3 units Physics I (ESL or Regular) or Physics I Pre-AP\nand Biology I (ESL, Regular, or PreAP)\nand Chemistry I (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP) 5 Required, ACC Students English-4 units English I (ESL, Regular, or PreAP)\nand English II (ESL, Regular, or PreAP)\nand English Ill (ESL, Regular, PreAP, or AP)\nand English IV (ESL, Regular, or AP). Oral Communications-1/2 unit Communications IA--one-half unit Mathematics-3 units Algebra I (ESL, Regular, or PreAP)\nand Algebra II (ESL, Regular, or PreAP) or Statistics (ESL, Regular, or AP)\nand Concepts of Geometry (ESL or Regular) or Geometry (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP) Science-3 units Physical Science or or Physics I\nand Biology I\nand One additional unit :s ,.. . a, me i:c,, ,-,-:z,om -\u0026lt;\"' m\"' me,, ,:,m m\"' 0~ cm m\"' -\u0026lt; 8 ~ cz5 \"' Required, Classes of 2002 and Required, Class of 2004 and Required, ACC Students 2003 After Social Studies-3 units Social Studies--3 units Social Studies-3 units Civics (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP) Civics (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP) Civics (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP) or United States Government or United States Government or United States Government (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP)\nand (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP)\nand (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP)\nand World History (ESL, Regular, World History (ESL, Regular, World History (ESL, Regular, Pre-AP or AP)\nand Pre-AP,or AP)\nand Pre-AP, or AP)\nand United States History (ESL, United States History (ESL, United States History (ESL, Regular, or AP) ReQular, Pre-AP, or AP) ReQular, or AP) Physical Education-1/2 unit Physical Education-1/2 unit Physical Education-1/2 unit Physical Education IA Physical Education IA Physical Education IA Health and Safety-1/2 unit Health and Safety-1/2 unit Health and Safety-1/2 unit Health and Safety Health and Safety Health and Safety Fine Arts-1 unit Fine Arts-1 unit Fine Arts-1/2 unit One unit from art, dance, drama, One unit from art, dance, drama, or music or music Technology-1 unit Technology--1 unit None One unit from any of the One unit from any of the aooroved technoloqy courses. approved technoloqy courses. Career Focus-3 units Career Focus-3 units Career Focus-3 units Three units from any of the At least three units from any of Three units from any of the approved Career Focus the approved Career Focus approved Career Focus proQrams. proqrams. proqrams. Electives-4 units Electives-6 units (5 units, Electives-3 units effective for Class of 2007) A fourth year of both science and social studies is encouraged, as are at least two units of foreiQn language. Total-24 units Total-26 units Total-21 units Although not required to do so, students graduating in 2004 through 2006 are encouraged to complete the requirements for the Class of 2007, especially the four units of mathematics in grades 9-12. 6 Little Rock Scholars Curriculum The Board of Education recommends that students elect the challenge of a more rigorous graduation plan than the minimum requirements, including at least eight Pre-Advanced Placement or Advanced Placement courses (or University Studies courses at Hall High or approved dual-credit courses). Little Rock Scholars, Class of 2003 Little Rock Scholars, Class of 2004 and After English-4 units English-4 units English I (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP)\nand English I (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP)\nand English II (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP)\nand English II (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP)\nand English Ill (ESL, Regular, Pre-AP, or AP)\nand English Ill (ESL, Regular, Pre-AP, or AP)\nand English IV /ESL, Reaular, or AP). English IV (ESL, Regular, or AP). Oral Communications-1 unit Oral Communications-1/2 unit Communications I Communications IA English Language Arts-1/2 unit Any one-half unit from English, Communications, or Journalism. Modern Grammar is strongly encouraged. Mathematics-4 units Mathematics-4 units (in grades 9-12, class of Algebra I (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP)\nand 20071 Algebra II (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP) or Statistics (ESL, Algebra I (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP)\nand Regular, or AP)\nand Algebra II (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP)\nand Concepts of Geometry (ESL or Regular) or Geometry (ESL, Geometry (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP)\nand Regular, or Pre-AP)\nand One or more additional units of advanced One additional unit of advanced mathematics. mathematics for the completion of four units in grades 9-12. Science-4 units Science-4 units Active Physics (ESL or Regular) or Physics I Pre-AP\nand Active Physics (ESL or Regular) or Physics I Pre-AP\nBiology I (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP)\nand and Chemistry I (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP)\nand Biology I (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP)\nand One additional unit Chemistry I (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP)\nand One additional unit Social Studies-4 units Social Studies-4 units Civics (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP) or United States Civics (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP) or United States Government (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP)\nand Government (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP)\nand World History (ESL, Regular, Pre-AP or AP)\nand World History (ESL, Regular, Pre-AP, or AP)\nand United States History (ESL, Regular, or AP)\nand United States History (ESL, Regular, Pre-AP, or AP)\nOne additional unit and One additional unit Foreign Language-2 units Foreign Language-2 units Two units of any one foreign language Two units of any one foreign language Physical Education-1/2 unit Physical Education-1/2 unit Physical Education IA Phvsical Education IA Health and Safety-1/2 unit Health and Safety-1/2 unit Health and Safety Health and Safety Fine Arts-1 unit Fine Arts-1 unit One unit from art, dance, drama, or music One unit from art, dance, drama, or music Technology-2 units Technology-1 unit* Two units from any of the approved technology courses. One unit from any of the approved technology courses. Career Focus-4 units Career Focus-3 units* Four units from any of the approved Career Focus Three units from any of the approved Career Focus proarams. oroarams. Electives-0 units Electives-3 units Total-27 units Total-28 units *Students graduating m 2004 through 2006 are encouraged to take four units of mathematics m grades 9-12, although they are not required to do so since their plan only specified three units of mathematics. If they do choose to take the Class of 2007 plan, they may also reduce the requirements in Technology and Career Focus and have three electives instead of one. 7 :s ~ IXI m c: :-I:c en ,...z om m-\u0026lt; eenn men\nom m\no o:S c:O mm en en -t 8 ~ cz5 en .f.\u0026gt;, z \u0026gt;z n ~ \"' !l0\no m Cl C: s 0z\no m s en cz5 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: ID-R STUDENT SCHEDULES Grades 9-12 Students in grades 9-12 must be enrolled for four units (eight courses) each semester in a school with an NB block schedule or three and one-half units (seven courses) in a school with a seven-period daily schedule. One unit may be placement in a study hall or enrollment as a student assistant/monitor. The principal is authorized to modify this requirement if there are extenuating circumstances. Extenuating circumstances include the following: 1. The student is enrolled in a concurrent program at a college or university. 2. The student is enrolled in a school-sponsored work program. 3. The student has an illness that precludes full-time enrollment. 4. The student demonstrates a hardship of needing to support self and/or family. 5. The student demonstrates other reasons acceptable to the district inclusive of legal matters. Dropping/Adding Courses, Grades 9-12 According to Arkansas Accreditation Standards, a student must be enrolled in a course for at least 60 clock hours in order to receive one-half unit of credit. Students, therefore, are not permitted to change their class schedules after the tenth class day of each semester to ensure that the school is in compliance. The following exceptions to the ten-day rule are permitted, but only with the high school principal's permission: 1. The student is changing from one teacher's class to another teaching the same course. 2. The student is changing from one level of a course to another, such as from the regular level to the Pre-AP level or from Pre-AP to the regular level. 3. The student is exiting an ESL adapted course in order to move into a mainstreamed equivalent course. 4. The student is dropping a course in order to enroll in a study hall or other non-credit period (only one such period is allowed in any one semester). Grades 6-8 Students must take all courses, including a double period of the Reading/Writing Workshop at each grade level, 6-8, approved by the Board of Education for the required middle school curriculum. Principals may waive the second period of Reading/Writing Workshop at the Pre-AP level at parent request, if it is determined to be in the best interest of the student and without question if the student is performing at the Proficient/ Advanced level on the state Benchmark literacy examination. Courses not required by the State of Arkansas may be waived through the waiver process. (See Policy IBA, IBA-R, and IBA-R Exhibit.) LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: ID-R (continued) Additionally, all grades 6-8 students must participate in at least one hour per week of physical training, including at least three sessions of 20 minutes each. (See IMP-R.) Middle schools may schedule classes seven periods a day, or they may elect to use the A/B block schedule, enabling students to take eight courses every two days. Grades 3-5 All students in grades 3-5 must have instruction in all the areas specified in the Arkansas Accreditation Standards. LRSD time requirements are as follows: English Language Arts/Reading 2 hours daily at grade 3\nMathematics Science Social Studies Music or Visual Art Physical Education At least 2 hours daily at grades 4-5 At least one hour daily Daily instruction\nmay be interdisciplinary Daily instruction\nmay be interdisciplinary At least one hour per week At least one hour per week, including no less than 20 minutes three times per week Time requirements that go beyond the Arkansas Accreditation Standards must be observed unless the school applies for and receives a waiver. (See IBA, IBA-R, and IBA-R Exhibit.) Grades PreK-2 All students in grades 3-5 must have instruction in all the areas specified in the Arkansas Accreditation Standards. LRSD time requirements are as follows: English Language Arts/Reading 2 hours daily Mathematics At least one hour daily Science Instruction may be interdisciplinary\nat least Social Studies Music or Visual Art Physical Education every other day, if not every day Instruction may be interdisciplinary\nat least every other day, if not every day At least one hour per week at least one hour per week, including no less than 20 minutes three times per week 2 \u0026gt;,.s.. co m c: !-I.:,(/-) ro-mz -\u0026lt; (/) m\"' m\"' :,om m:,o oS C: 0 mm \"-\u0026lt;' \"' !IJ :,0 m C) C: ~ 0z ~ \u0026lt; 1ii iz5 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: ID-R ( continued) Time requirements that go beyond the Arkansas Accreditation Standards must be observed unless the school applies for and receives a waiver. (See IBA, IBA-R, and IBA-R Exhibit.) A sample pre-kindergarten daily schedule is attached that meets all licensing and LRSD requirements. Revised: Date: October 21, 1999 Cross References: Board of Education Policies and Regulations, IBA, IBA-R, ID and IMP-R 3 ID-R: Attachment 1 Request for Waiver of School Day Scheduling Requirements Administrative Regulations ID-R Little Rock School District Name of Student- --------------ID Number- ----- Classification I request a waiver from the scheduling requirements in Administrative Regulations ID-R. I understand that in order to be eligible for such a waiver, I must provide proof of one or more of the following extenuating circumstances: need to take fewer courses due to poor health (verification by a licensed physician is required)\n need to take fewer courses in order to go to work\n need to take fewer courses due to responsibilities to care for a child or other family member\n need to take fewer courses in order to free a period for remedial instruction or for study hall (verification required by an assistant principal, a counselor, and/or a teacher)\n need to take fewer courses in order to enroll in a post-secondary course (verification required of application to enroll and admission). Therefore, I request that during the next semester/school year (circle one) I be permitted to enroll in only ___ courses rather than the four units of credit required each semester or eight units of credit required for the year. My proof of extenuating circumstances is either attached through signed statements or follows below: Signature of Student Signature of Parent/Guardian Date Approved/Disapproved (circle one) Signature of Principal Date 4 s : CD m c: :-I:, ,en ro-mz -m\u0026lt; eenn men :am m :a o:S C: 0 mm .e.n. en 8 ~ z en ?' ~ C\u0026gt; C: ~ 6z :0 ~ en \u0026lt;z5 Sample Pre-K Schedule ID-R: Attachment 2 Time Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday 7:30- Arrival/Centers Arrival/Centers Arrival/Centers Arrival/Centers Arrival/Centers 8:00 Choice of Centers: Choice of Centers: Choice of Centers: Choice of Centers: Choice of Centers: Including Math, Including Math, Including Math, Including Math, Including Math, Science Social Science Social Science Social Science Social Science Social Studies, Art Studies, Art Studies, Art Studies, Art Studies, Art 8:00- Circle Time Circle Time Circle Time Circle Time Circle Time 8:15 Explanation and Explanation and Explanation and Explanation and Explanation and Directions for today's Directions for Directions for Directions for Directions for activities today's activities today's activities today's activities today's activities 8:15- P.E Music Library/Guidance P.E Music 8:45 8:45- Snack Time Snack Time Snack Time Snack Time Snack Time 9:30 Small Group Inst. Small Group Inst. Small Group Inst. Small Group Inst. Small Group Inst. Literacy/Language Literacy/Language Literacy/Language Literacy/Language Literacy/Language Arts Arts Arts Arts Arts Choice of Centers Choice of Centers Choice of Centers Choice of Centers Choice of Centers Math, Science Social Math, Science Math, Science Math, Science Math, Science Studies, Art Social Studies, Art Social Studies, Art Social Studies, Art Social Studies, Art 9:30- Outside Play: Outside Play: Outside Play: Outside Play: Outside Play: 10:00 Including Including Including Including Including Gross Motor, Art, and Gross Motor, Art, Gross Motor, Art, Gross Motor, Art, Gross Motor, Art, Dramatic Play and Dramatic Play and Dramatic Play and Dramatic Play and Dramatic Play Activities Activities Activities Activities Activities 10:00- Circle Time Circle Time Circle Time Circle Time Circle Time 10:45 Shared Reading Shared Reading Shared Reading Shared Reading Shared Reading Transition Activities Transition Activities Transition Activities Transition Activities Transition Activities Bathroom/Wash Bathroom/Wash Bathroom/Wash Bathroom/Wash Bathroom/Wash Hands Hands Hands Hands Hands 10:45- Lunch Lunch Lunch Lunch Lunch 11 :15 Social Skills Social Skills Social Skills Social Skills Social Skills Language Language Language Language Language Development Development Develooment Develooment Develooment 11 :15- Outside Play Outside Play Outside Play Outside Play Outside Play 11 :45 Gross Motor Gross Motor Gross Motor Gross Motor Gross Motor Art Art Art Art Art Dramatic Play Dramatic Play Dramatic Play Dramatic Play Dramatic Play 11 :45- Language Arts/ Language Arts/ Language Arts/ Language Arts/ Language Arts/ 12:15 Shared Reading Shared Reading Shared Reading Shared Reading Shared Reading Transition Activities Transition Activities Transition Activities Transition Activities Transition Activities Bathroom/Wash Bathroom/Wash Bathroom/Wash Bathroom/Wash Bathroom/Wash Hands Hands Hands Hands Hands 12:15- Story Time/Rest Story Time/Rest Story Time/Rest Story Time/Rest Story Time/Rest 1 :15 Period Period Period Period Period 1 :15- Snack Time Snack Time Snack Time Snack Time Snack Time 2:15 Small Group Inst. Small Group Inst. Small Group Inst. Small Group Inst. Small Group Inst. Literacy/Language Literacy/Language Literacy/Language Literacy/Language Literacy/Language Arts Arts Arts Arts Arts Choice of Centers: Choice of Centers: Choice of Centers: Choice of Centers: Choice of Centers: Including Math, Including Math, Including Math, Including Math, Including Math, Science, Social Science, Social Science, Social Science, Social Science, Social Studies, and Art Studies, and Art Studies, and Art Studies, and Art Studies, and Art 2:15- Circle Time Circle Time Circle Time Circle Time Circle Time 2:35 Story Story Story Story Story Review of Review of Review of Review of Review of Activities/Closure Activities/Closure Activities/Closure Activities/Closure Activities/Closure Dismissal Dismissal Dismissal Dismissal Dismissal 5 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: IMP-R PHYSICAL EDUCATION AND TRAINING Purpose The purpose of these regulations is to provide guidance to principals and school-level staff on the implementation of Act 17 48 (2001) and Act 1729 (2003). The legislation specifies that: Goals Every kindergarten through grade eight (K-8) public educational institution in this state shall require no less than one hour per week of physical training and instruction which includes no less than twenty minutes of physical activity three times a week for every student who is physically fit and able to participate. The State's goals for this program are as follows: Improve the health of the state's school children. Increase knowledge about the health benefits of physical activity and exercise. Develop behavioral and motor skills that promote a lifelong commitment to healthy physical activity. Promote health-focused physical activity among children and adolescents\nand Encourage physical activity outside of physical education. Required Plan for Implementation Each LRSD school must submit a plan to the Associate Superintendent for School Services during check-out in June of each school year for the implementation of this requirement. The plan should be submitted on the attached form. Schools are advised that their compliance with this law will be monitored both by the District and the Standards Review team from ADE. The law requires that \"each school will develop a physical education program which fits effectively and efficiently into the school's existing organization while incorporating the goals of this act.\" Staffing The law does not require that any school or district hire staff who are certified in physical education to supervise students' participation in these activities. Guidelines for Schools According to the ADE Director's memorandum of August 21, 2001 , the following activities are acceptable in complying with the law: general calisthenics during a home-room period\ns a=, m c: .ii.l,:C -J\u0026gt; or-mz -\u0026lt; Cl) m\"' mCJ\u0026gt;\nom m::O oS c:O mm \"-I' \"' 8 z g z Cl) .f.l, z nz ! !:D ::0 !!l c:: s 0z ::0 m \u0026lt; cii cz5 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: IMP-R ( continued) organized activities during recess periods or lunch periods (if scheduled for at least 20 minutes)\n organized school athletics\n organized play that engages all students in ways to meet legal requirements\n walking nature trails. Elementary School Elementary schools will design their master schedules to ensure that all K-5 students participate in physical training according to the requirements of Act 17 48. Middle School Middle schools may meet the requirements of Act 17 48 in one of the following ways: A. All grade 6 students will continue to be required to take a full year of physical education/health. Students in grades 7-8 who are not eligible for a waiver from the list below will be enrolled in a physical education course. B. One semester equivalent of physical education (taught on alternating days throughout the school year) and paired with Keyboarding in grade 6, Arkansas History in grade 7, and Career Orientation in grade 8 will be required of all students in grades 6-8. Schools with block schedules will split one 90-minute class on alternating days between the physical education course and the appropriate one-semester required course. C. One semester equivalent of physical education (taught on alternating days throughout the school year and paired with Keyboarding in grade 6, Arkansas History in grade 7, and Career Orientation in grade 8 will be required of all students in grades 6-8 who are not eligible for one of the waivers listed below. D. All students in grades 6-8 will participate in a school-organized physical training program for a minimum of twenty minutes three times per week or a total of one hour per week. The following categories of students may be waived from participation in the scheduled activities in either Plan A or Plan C above, provided that the identified activities for the waiver involve a minimum of one hour per week of physical activity, not an average of one hour per week. The waiver is in effect only for the duration of the students' participation in the identified activities. 1. Students participating in marching band during the fall semester. 2. Students enrolled in dance courses at Mann Magnet Middle School. 3. Students who are participants in organized cheerleading activities. 4. Students who are participants in a drill team during the fall semester. 5. Students engaged in an in-school or after-school athletic program. 2 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: IMP-R (continued) 6. Students who walk to and/or from school, if the walk requires at least one hour per week and provided that the parent/guardian documents each week that the student walked to and/or from school. 7. Students who are engaged in an after-school recreational program sponsored by the school or other organization, if physical activities are scheduled for at least one hour per week. 8. Students who provide written documentation from the provider of at least one hour per week of physical activity or training in a private or community-based program. Students with Disabilities The law requires that \"suitable modified courses shall be provided for students physically or mentally unable or unfit to take the course or courses prescribed for other students.\" Adapted activities must be included in the students' IEP or 504 plans. Revised: Date: February 28, 2002 3 s ,.... 'Ill me: .31,: ,en ,-z om -m\u0026lt; eenn men\nom m:O oS c::O mm e-n. en f\u0026gt; 'Tl z ~ (\") ~ \"' !J' ~ c:: ~ 0z\no m \u0026lt; en cz5 School Plan for Implementation of Act 1748 Physical Education Training and Instruction Name of School School Year ----------------- ---- Signature of Principal _______________ Date ____ _ 1. Describe below, by grade level (K-5 or 6-8), how your school will provide the mandated physical education training and instruction each week for all students who do not have waivers. 2. State, by grade level, who the staff members are who will supervise the activities at the elementary or middle school level. 3. What is your school's plan for documenting the following? A. Students with waivers (middle and high schools) B. Students requiring adapted activities ________________ _ Approved, Assoc. Supt. for School Services Date Approved, Assoc. Supt. for Instruction Date 4 Application for Waiver of Act 1748 Physical Training Requirements Middle School, 2002-2003 Student- ------------------ID Number- ------ Grade Level- --------- Team Name- ----------- In 2001 the Arkansas General Assembly passed and the Governor signed legislation (Act 1748) which specifies that \"Every kindergarten through grade 8 public educational institution in this state shall require no less than one hour per week of physical training and instruction which includes no less than twenty minutes of physical activity three times a week for every student who is physically fit and able to participate.\" I request that my child be allowed to waive required participation in a physical education course/activity designed to meet Act 1748 requirements. I have checked below the activity in which my child participates that would make him/her eligible for this waiver: 1. Students participating in marching band during the fall semester. 2. Students enrolled in dance courses at Mann Magnet Middle School. 3. Students who are participants in organized cheerleading activities. 4. Students who are participants in a drill team during the fall semester. 5. Students engaged in an in-school or after-school athletic program. 6. Students who walk to and/or from school, if the walk requires at least one hour per week and provided that the parent/guardian documents each week that the student walked to and/or from school. 7. Students who are engaged in an after-school recreational program sponsored by the school or other organization, if physical activities are scheduled for at least one hour per week. 8. Students who provide written documentation from the provider of at least one hour per week of physical activity or training in a private or community-based program. I agree to notify the school immediately ifmy child ceases to participate in the activity (which I checked above) to make him/her eligible for this waiver. Parent/Guardian Signature ____________________ _ Date ________________ _ 5 \u0026gt;~ a, me: ~~\"z' om -m\u0026lt;\"\"'' men\n,om m\n,o 0~ c::m r...n. \"' !:D ill Cl C: ~ 0z\n,o ~ \"cz5 ' TO: FROM: THROUGH: SUBJECT: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCE CENTER 3001 SOUTH PULASKI STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72206 December 18, 2003 Board of Directors Wenrus Glasgow, Interim Associate Superintendent of Instruction Dr. Morris Holmes, Interim Superintendent Revision of Regulation IKC-R to Clarify Section on Re-taking a Course that was Originally Passed and to Add a Section on Translating Grades of Transfer Students Short Summary-the proposed revision will clarify Regulation IKC-R for Policy IKC on Class Rankings/Grade-Point Averages. Previously, Regulation IKC-R stated that students who make a \"C\" or \"D\" may retake a course to strengthen understanding and skills needed for advanced study and that \"the second grade will replace the first grade in the calculation of the grade-point average and rank-in-class.\" The proposed revision will change that language to, \"the higher grade will be used in the calculation of the grade-point average and rank-in-class.\" Rarely, but occasionally, a student will retake a class and make a lower grade or even fail the class the second time. The regulation, as currently written, would disallow the first grade and would record the lower grade or failed grade on the transcript and use it in calculating GP A. If the class is failed the second time, the current regulation would require the student to retake the course a third time to gain a passing grade even though the original grade was passing. The proposed revision will give more encouragement to students to improve their understanding and skills in a course without fear of losing credit for the passed course or having the GP A lowered. The second part of the revision will add a section to clarify how transfer grades are to be recorded if they are not reported to us in the same format used by LRSD. Some schools report grades in percentages rather than in letter grades\nconsequently, those percentage grades must be translated for calculating grade point average and class rank. The percentage grades will be translated using the LRSD grading scale. Objectives-!) to allow students to count the higher grade for a course re-taken to strengthen understanding and skills\n2) to provide a procedure for translating grades reported to LRSD in a format different from the one used in the district. s ,..... . a, m c: 31: en ,\"-Dz- om -m\u0026lt; eenn men\n,om m:io oS C: C') mm en en -\n.r.\u0026gt;, z z C') ~ en Expected Outcomes- 1) to be more \"user friendly\" to students who are willing to retake a course passed with a grade of\"C\" or \"D\"\n2) to give schools direction on translating transfer grades reported in a different format from that used by LRSD. Population-Grades 8-12 Student Population of LRSD Manager-NI A Duration-NI A Long Range/Continuation- NI A Other Agencies Involved-NI A Expectations of Staff- N/ A Needed Staff-NIA Comments-NI A Recommendations-we recommend approval of these changes in Board Regulation IK.CR A copy of the revised Regulation IKC-R is attached. The changes in the regulation were submitted through Linda Austin, who serves as the clearinghouse for Board policy issues. LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: IKC-R CLASS RANKINGS/GRADE-POINT AVERAGES All grades, except those noted in the \"exceptions\" below, earned for high school courses, including excess elective units, will be used in calculating the grade-point average and rank-in-class. Grades included in the computation are as follows: 1. Grades earned for high school courses, whether taken in the regular day, evening school, or summer school program. 2. Grades earned in alternative education programs, including those in LRSD, administered by school districts or other organizations which are accredited through their state department of education or a regional accreditation organization, such as North Central Association of Schools and Colleges (NCA). 3. Transfer grades from accredited schools outside the Little Rock School District. 4. Algebra I (or higher-level mathematics course) and Level I foreign language (or higher-level foreign language course) taken in eighth grade. 5. Only one (1) unit of physical education. (One-half unit is required\none-half unit may count as an elective. Therefore, only the grades for one unit of physical education will be computed in the grade-point average.) 6. Grades earned in approved concurrent credit college courses offered in cooperation with institutions of higher education {see IKEC-R1 ). 7. Grades earned in summer enrichment programs conducted by institutions of higher education, if the course and credit were approved by the District (see IKEC-R1). 8. Failing grades, unless the courses was retaken and passed (see Exceptions, #1 ). 9. Grade earned for one semester of Driver Education taken from an accredited high school. 10. Grades earned on credit-by-examination to make up failed courses (see IKEC-R3). 11. Passing grade earned on advancement-by-credit for Keyboarding (see IKEC-R6). 12. Grades earned in the District's home-bound programs. 13. Grades earned in approved correspondence courses (see IKEC-R2). 14. Grades earned in approved on-line or distance-learning courses (see IKECR5). 15. Courses in which a student earns an NC (no credit due to excessive absences), unless a course was retaken and passed (see Exceptions, s . a=, m c:\nl:CI) ,-...,.z- om -\u0026lt;\"' m\"' m\n,om\"' omS\"' c:n mm .\"..' \"' 8 z ~ i5 z \"' .~., z nz ~ \"' LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: IKC-R (continued) #1 ). (Regardless of the student's grade in a course for which he/she earns an NC, the NC, which equals O points, replaces the grade and is used in the calculation of the grade-point average. Exceptions The following grades will not be included in the computation of the grade-point average or rank-in-class: 1. Failing grades (or courses in which students earned an NC for nonattendance) for those courses retaken and passed ( effective for all grades 9- 12 students in fall 2001 ), regardless of when the student failed the course). 2. The lower grade of courses retaken to improve understanding and skills ( effective for all students re-taking courses previously passed from fall 2004 onward). 3. Grades in courses taken through home schools or in unaccredited schools. 4. Grades on district-administered examinations to determine credit for transfer students from home schools or unaccredited schools. 5. Grades earned in external rehabilitation programs and correctional programs that are not accredited by a state department of education or a regional accreditation organization such as North Central Association or Schools and Colleges (NCA). 6. Courses with grades of \"pass\" or \"fail\" or \"satisfactory\" or \"unsatisfactory.\" 7. Grades in courses that are officially \"dropped\" with the permission of the principal. 8. Grades or credits in below-level or remedial courses. 9. Grades for religion courses taken in non-public schools that are in excess of one-semester equivalent of the LRSD course in Bible as/in Literature. 10. A failing grade earned in Keyboarding in the advancement-by-credit program. 11. Non-credit courses such as Athletics, Office Monitor, Student Council, etc. Re-Enrollment in Courses Effective fall 2004, in order to strengthen understanding and skills needed for advanced study, students may retake a course in which they have previously earned a passing grade of \"D\" or \"C,\" including mathematics and foreign language courses taken for high school credit in grade 8. The grade will be recorded on the transcript, and the higher grade will be used in the calculation of the grade-point average and rank-in-class. A student may make up a failed course, as well as a course in which a student earned an NC, in several ways-retake the course during the regular day, evening high school, or summer school\nearn credit for a failed course through credit-by-examination\nand/or retake the failed course through correspondence, on-line, or distance learning. In any 2 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: IKC-R (continued) case, both the grade for the failed course and the grade for the retaken course or creditby- examination will be recorded on the transcript, but only the higher grade will be used in calculating the grade-point average and rank-in-class. A student retaking a course he/she failed due to excessive absences does not have the option of credit-by-examination. A student retaking a course which he/she previously passed does not have the option of summer school or credit-by-examination. Assessment of Transcripts for Transfer Students Transcripts are official records of the culmination of each student's educational experience on the secondary level. Therefore, it is vital that all final grades earned in grades 6-12 be shown in the transcript history, regardless of where they were earned. This is absolutely essential in grades 9-12 in order for cumulative GPA's, credits, and rankings to be accurate. It is the responsibility of the transferring student and his/her parent/guardian to provide the necessary releases, clearances, and information required to obtain an official transcript from the previous school. Upon the receipt of the official transcript, all final grades indicated on that transcript should be transferred exactly as shown to the Little Rock School District's transcript history. The course descriptions shown for each final grade should also be entered as shown. When possible the name of the school should be shown above the grades. Only final grades are entered in the transcript history. Transfer or interim grades or withdrawal grades from other schools should not be entered unless they are final grades. The LRSD uses letter grades, not percentages on transcripts. If the official transcript received from another school shows only percentages, the percentage should be converted to a letter grade using the key provided by the previous school. If no conversion key is provided or obtainable, the percentages shown will be converted to the letter grade indicated on the Arkansas State Grading Scale. Transfers from Home Schools and/or Unaccredited Schools Students who transfer into a Little Rock School District from home schools or schools that are not accredited through a state department of education or a regional accreditation organization such as North Central Association of Schools and Colleges (NCA) must attend the accredited high school for a minimum of four semesters in order to be eligible for rank-in-class calculations. Only the courses taken at the accredited high school will be used in calculating the grade-point average. 3 s ,... . a, m c: :-1a1:c-n ,-z o-\u0026lt; m Cl) mme\"n'\nam m\n:a o:S c:O mm .\"..' \"' !II LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: IKC-R (continued) Transfer Students' Weighted Grades Weights assigned to grades from other districts or schools for courses that are not Advanced Placement courses, or \"honors\" courses approved for that school district by the Arkansas Department of Education, or dual high school and college credit courses approved by the Arkansas Department of Education for weighted-grade status will not be honored by any LRSD high school in the calculation of the grade-point average or rank-in-class. (See Arkansas Rules and Regulations on \"Uniform Grading Scales for Public Secondary Schools.) Transfer Students from Foreign Schools Foreign exchange students not seeking a diploma from an LRSD high school will not be eligible for rank-in-class. Computing the Grade-Point Average and Rank-in-Class In determining the grade-point average and rank-in-class, the following scale will be used. Also, grades earned in concurrent credit college courses, unless they have been approved for weighted-grade or honors status by the Arkansas Department of Education, will be assigned the following numeric values when such courses are used to compute a student's grade-point average. A= B= C= D= F= NC= 90-100 = 80-89 = 70-79 = 60-69 = 59 and below = 4 points 3 points 2 points 1 point O points 0 points The following scale will be used for Advanced Placement courses, as well as for dual credit courses approved by the Arkansas Department of Education for weighted-grade status, whether taken in LRSD or other districts. It will also be used for \"honors\" courses approved by the Arkansas Department of Education for students who have transferred in from other districts. (See \"Transfer Students' Weighted Grades\" above.) A= B= C= D= F= NC= 90-100 = 80-89 = 70-79 = 60-69 = 59 and below = 5 points 4 points 3 points 2 points O points O points 4 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: IKC-R (continued) Rank-in-Class The student's rank-in-class will be computed each year in grades 9 and 10 and each semester in grades 11 and 12 and will be available upon request for information to the students and to his/her parent(s)/guardian(s). Although tentative ranking of seniors is done at the end of the seventh semester for college admission, scholarship applications, and/or recognition programs conducted before graduation, the final ranking of seniors will be computed at the end of the eighth semester when semester grades are reported. When a seventh-semester rank-in-class is provided by a Little Rock School District high school official, the high school must include the information that the final rank in class is established at the end of the eighth semester. Release of Information Rank-in-class information will be released to appropriate school, college, or university personnel or to others only at the request or consent of the student, or the parent if the student is a minor, or in response to a judicial order or pursuant to any lawfully issued subpoena. Senior Honors Ties in Rank-in-Class (Effective for the Classes of 2000, 2001, and 2002) In the event two or more students tie for valedictory or salutatory honors, both (or more) students will receive equal recognition. For purposes of award of any valedictory scholarship following the eighth-semester calculations of rank-inclass, the student with the highest total number of grade points will be declared the valedictorian. If a valedictory scholarship is awarded prior to the end of the eighth semester, then the seventh semester calculations will be used to make the determination. Class of 2003 and Beyond Effective for the Class of 2003, in order to be eligible for honors recognition at graduation, the graduating student must have completed the \"Recommended Curriculum,\" successfully completed at least eight advanced courses (PreAdvanced Placement, Advanced Placement, and/or University Studies courses)\nand achieved a grade-point average of at least 3.5 (see IKF.). Each high school will establish its own traditions for recognizing and awarding honors graduates and their parents. 5 s :,,.:. a, m c: :-l.:.u-, or-mz m-\u0026lt; \"\"'' mu,\nom m::O oS c:O mm \"-\u0026lt;' \"' 8 ! iz5 \"' .f\u0026gt;., z z\u0026gt; 0 ~ u, LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: IKC-R (continued) Definition: Unaccredited School An unaccredited school is a school that has not earned accreditation status by a state department of education or through a regional accreditation organization, such as North Central Association of Schools and Colleges. Credits from home schools and/or unaccredited schools are generally not transferable to accredited schools except through credit-by-examination programs. Definition: Concurrent Credit College Courses Concurrent credit college courses are courses that are offered and taught under the direction of an accredited institution of higher education. Students receive both high school and college credit for successful completion. Implementation Date The provisions of these regulations are effective for the class of 2000, except that the regulations on Senior Honors are effective for the class of 2003. (See also IKF.) Notification These regulations will be published annually in the High School Course Selections publication. Revised: Date: October 21, 1999 Cross References: Board of Education Policy IKC, Administrative Regulations IKEC-R1 through IKEC-R6, Board of Education Policy IKF and Arkansas Uniform Grading Scales for Public Secondary Schools 6 TO: FROM: THROUGH: SUBJECT: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCE CENTER 3001 SOUTH PULASKI STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72206 December 18, 2003 Board of Directors --::6ennis Glasgow, Interim Associate Superintendent Dr. Morris Holmes, Interim Superintendent Program Evaluation for Mathematics and Science Short Summary-The Board is asked to review and approve the Program Evaluation for Mathematics and Science. Objectives-1) to improve the education for all students by evaluating selected programs each year to determine their impact on student achievement, 2) to comply with the requirement of section 2. 7 .1 of the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan to submit for District Court Approval the program evaluations listed. Expected Outcomes-Programs will be maintained, adjusted, or eliminated based on the recommendations of these long-term program evaluations. Population-The Mathematics and Science Program Evaluation Team consisted of Dr. Don Wold, Vanessa Cleaver, Dennis Glasgow, and Dr. Ed Williams. Dr. Steve Ross, external program evaluation consultant, reviewed the Program Evaluation and provided feedback. Staff and teachers will use this evaluation as a benchmark for future program decisions. Budget Amount/Source of Budget-Staff members' time and materials are included as a part of the regular operating budget for the Math/Science Department. Dr. Ross' consultant contract is included in the PRE budget. Managers-Dennis Glasgow, Interim Associate Superintendent for Instruction, and Dr. Ed Williams, Statistician Duration-Formal end-of-year evaluative reports have been submitted to the National Science Foundation for the past five years. The Program Evaluations for the four years, 1998-99 through 2001-02, were submitted to the Board and approved in December, 2002. The evaluation process has continued through the first semester of SY 2003-04, and this s ~ o:, m c: -:I:,: ,en ,-z om -m\u0026lt; eenn men\nom m\no oS C: C') mm en en -\u0026lt; report reflects 5-6 years of data, although the past three years were used to measure student achievement goals for the CPMSA Project per guidance from NSF. Analysis of and response to the program evaluations will continue through the spring semester of 2004 and for the next few years as additional data is gathered. Long Range/Continuation-all program evaluations are used as a benchmark for program planning in future years. The current formal Mathematics and Science Program Evaluation will conclude with the approval of the Board and the District Court. Other Agencies Involved-The Office of Desegregation Monitoring has monitored the program evaluation process. Expectations of Staff-Staff members from the Mathematics and Science Departments, the CPMSA Office, and PRE served on the evaluation teams for this program evaluation. Program evaluation is embedded in the job expectations of staff\nconsequently, this is an ongoing commitment for our staff. An important job of the mathematics/science evaluation team is to read the evaluation report, analyze it, and use that information to help decide our future direction in the areas of mathematics and science. Needed Staff-Dr. Wold was employed as the CPMSA Program Evaluator using funds from the NSF grant. Dr. Ross' review of the evaluation was part of his consultant contract. Mathematics and science staff members participated in the evaluation as part of their day to day job duties. Comments-the two literacy evaluations approved by the Board in November and the math/science program evaluation currently under consideration are the three remaining evaluations from section 2. 7 .1 of the LRSD Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. Dr. Steve Ross was contracted as a program evaluation specialist to develop the program evaluations of the two literacy program and to review the mathematics and science program evaluation. All three program evaluations provide useful information for staff as we chart our future course in these curricular areas. Recommendation-we recommend approval of program evaluation for Mathematics and Science. The Executive Summary is attached. The full report will be provided for Board Members at the Agenda Meeting. Dr. Don Wold, Program Evaluator, will be available for a presentation to the Board and to answer questions. Executive Summary This report examines student assessments over a five-year period in the Little Rock School District (LRSD) from 1998 to 2003. The report also looks at course taking and completion trends over the five years in mathematics and science courses, along with policy issues and curriculum changes. The five year period was selected because LRSD had a grant from the National Science Foundation (NSF) over that period of time to create systemic change in mathematics and science programs that would lead to increased student achievement and preparation of more students to pursue undergraduate programs of study in mathematics, science, and engineering. The LRSD program, funded by NSF, was Comprehensive Partnerships for Mathematics and Science Achievement (CPMSA). The effective date of the CPMSA program was September l, 1998, and the expiration date for this program was August 31, 2003 . The program evaluation was oriented around the following questions concerning all students and African-American students in particular: Was the CPMSA program effective in improving the achievement of African American students? Have levels of achievement changed for all students and for African American students who perform at or above basic, at or above proficient, and at or above the advanced achievement level? Have enrollments and completion trends changed for all students and for African American students in 8th grade Algebra 1? Have the enrollments and completion trends changed for all students and African American students in G 9-12 mathematics gate-keeping courses (Algebra I, Geometry, Trig/Pre-Cale., \u0026amp; Calculus)? Have enrollments and completion trends changed for all students and for African American students in G 9-12 science gate-keeping courses (Biology 1, Chemistry 1, and Physics I)? Has the number of students with SEM proficiency changed? How has the number of African American students with SEM proficiency changed? (SEM proficiency is defined as students who have completed a minimum of pre-calculus, biology, and chemistry and/or physics courses). What policy changes have promoted equal access by all students, including African American students to high quality education? What policy changes were made to support student success in mathematics and science during CPMSA implementation? What curriculum and instruction changes were made to support student success in mathematics and science during CPMSA implementation? What professional development policy and program changes were made to support teachers during CPMSA implementation? What standards-based assessment system changes were made during CPMSA implementation? Method The evaluation design was based on quantitative student achievement data from over 100 examinations in twenty-four different assessment groups, which took place in LRSD from 1998 to 2003. The cooperative agreement with the NSF (Amendment No. 3) states that assessment data for the CPMSA Program for Years 3, 4, and 5 will be used to determine annual increases in performance\nconsequently, the primary focus was on achievement data for SY 2000-2001, 2001-2002, and 2002-2003. Literacy \u0026gt;,..s.. a:, m c: :I: CJ) \"rD- -z om -\u0026lt; CJ) men men :om m :o oS C: 0 mm u,CJ\u0026gt; -I 8 ! lz5 CJ) ~ 0 5 CJ) z C) ~ I CJ) ?\u0026lt; o\u0026gt;\u0026gt;\u0026lt; ._::c 0~ C: :0 ~z :I: C) men :!i assessments were included along with mathematics and science assessments since literacy is a critical component to achievement in mathematics and science. The analysis follows procedures used in evaluative studies by Systemic Research, Inc., which has been funded by the NSF. Systemic Research has identified and tabulated indicators of systemic change for use in program evaluations. Following terminology of the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), student performance on the assessments was described in terms of achievement levels. The NAEP described student performance in terms of percentage at or above one of three achievement levels: Basic, Proficient, or Advanced. These achievement levels are shown below. 100 Advanced Range (75-99) Advanced Achievement Level (75) Proficient Range (50-74) Proficient Achievement Level (50) Basic Range 25-49) Basic Achievement Level (25) Below Basic Range {0-24) 0 Performance at or above Basic achievement level (25-99) Performance at or above Proficient achievement level (50-99) Performance at or above Advanced achievement level (75-99 For each assessment each year, the percentage of students who performed at or above the Basic achievement level, and the percentage of students who performed at or above the Proficient level were computed. In subsequent years two additional quantities were computed: (1) the CHANGE in percentage of students who performed at or above the Basic achievement level and (2) the CHANGE in the percentage of students who performed at or above the Proficient achievement level. In terms of student performance, a positive change in (1) indicates movement from below the Basic achievement level to or above the Basic achievement level, the Proficient achievement level, or the Advanced achievement level. A positive change in (2) indicates movement from below the Proficient achievement level to or above the Proficient achievement level or above the Advanced achievement level. In addition, enrollment in mathematics and science courses and completion trends were examined for the five years. Completion as defined in the CPMSA Cooperative Agreement is the number of students who completed the course with a grade of A, B, or C. Special attention was given to \"gate-keeping\" and higher-level mathematics and science courses. \"Gate-keeping\" courses are those that students must successfully complete as pre-requisites to higher-level, more rigorous courses. Finally, the adoption of policies, curricula, and assessments necessary to foster the implementation of standards-based mathematics and science programs was examined. Standards-based programs are those that are very closely aligned with local, state, and national standards. High-stakes mathematics and science assessments, such those that are part of the Arkansas Comprehensive Testing, Assessment, and Accountability Program are aligned with state and national standards\ntherefore, program alignment with standards is a powerful means of improving student achievement. Results Achievement Student data from over 100 examinations were used in the study of twenty-four assessment groups to determine whether a percentage increase in the number of students who performed at or above the Basic achievement level or above the Proficient achievement level or both above Basic achievement level and above Proficient achievement level occurred for all students, for Caucasian students, and for AfricanAmerican students. The assessment groups are summarized below: 1 English G8 EXPLORE 9 Mathematics G8 Benchmark 17 Reading G8 EXPLORE 2 English G 10 PLAN 10 Mathematics G8 EXPLORE 18 Reading G 10 SA T-9 3 Literacy G4 Benchmark 11 Mathematics G 10 SAT-9 19 Reading Gl0 PLAN 4 Literacy G8 Benchmark 12 Mathematics G 10 PLAN 20 Science G5 SA T-9 5 Mathematics G4 Benchmark 13 Algebra I G7-10 Benchmark 21 Science G7 SA T-9 6 Mathematics G5 SA T-9 14 Geometry G9-11 Benchmark 22 Science G8 EXPLORE 7 Mathematics G6 Benchmark 15 Reading G5 SA T-9 23 Science Gl0 SAT-9 8 Mathematics G7 SAT-9 16 Reading G7 SAT-9 24 Science G 10 PLAN The Annual Change in Percentage Points of Students Who Performed at or Above the Basic Achievement Level Table 32 shows only the change in percentage points of students who performed at or above the Basic achievement level for all students in the District, for Caucasian students, and for African American students. Here we see that in 16 out of 24 assessments. the change in percentage points of African American students who performed at or above the Basic achievement level was greater than the change in percentage points of Caucasian students who performed at or above the Basic achievement level. These results may be seen in Figure lS below. The Annual Change in Percentage Points of Students Who Performed at or Above the Proficient Achievement Level Table 33 shows only the change in percentage points of students who performed at or above the Proficient achievement level for all students in the District, for Caucasian students, and for African American students. Here we see that in 18 out of 24 assessments. the change in percentage points of African American students who performed at or above the Proficient achievement level was less than the change in percentage points of Caucasian students who performed at or above the Proficient achievement level. These results may be seen in Figure 2S below. From the assessments in Tables 32 and 33, we conclude that, although there are increasing numbers of African American students at or above the Proficient achievement level, the greatest movement in African American student performance is upward from below the Basic achievement level into the region between the Basic achievement level and the Proficient achievement level. If the current momentum is maintained, student performance of African American students will continue to move upward to or above the Proficient achievement level. In the SMART/THRIVE 2002-2003 program, we found 52 percent of those students performing above the Basic achievement level but below the Proficient achievement level. With such a large number of students performing just below the Proficient achievement level, many more students could reach the Proficient achievement level with reasonable additional effort on the part of the students and teachers. From these data we conclude that the performance of African-American students on district assessments improved substantially and consistently between 2001and 2003. s ,.... a, m c: 31:(1) \",D.. .-z o-\u0026lt; m(/) m(I) m(I)\nom m::O o:S C: (\") mm (..I.) (/) !D .f.\u0026gt;, z z (\") ~ ~ (\") 0 (/) z C\u0026gt; Rl I u, Memorandum Date: To: From: Through: December 18, 2003 Little Rock School District Board of Directors Morris L. Holmes, Interim Superintendent of Schools ~art, Chief Financial Officer Prepared By: Darral Paradis, Director of Procurement \u0026amp; Materials Management Subject: Employee Request to Conduct Business with the District Subject Employee Request to Conduct Business with the District in compliance with AR Statute 6-24-101:119 (Act 1599 of2001)-Ms. Jennie Cooper, Central High School. Summary: The statute above precludes a school district employee from contracting with the public educational entity employing him or her if the employee has knowledge that he or she is directly interested in the contract. \"Directly Interested\" means: receiving compensation or other benefits personally or to a business or other entity in which the individual has a financial interest. \"Financial Interest\" means: 1. Ownership of more than a five percent (5%) interest\n2. Holding a position as an officer, director, trustee, partner, or other top level management\nor 3. Being an employee, agent, independent contractor, or other arrangement where the individual's compensation is based in whole or in part on transactions with the public educational entity. Ms. Cooper has completed a disclosure form notifying the District that she is owner of Soccer Plus. Objective: Ms. Cooper wishes to sell to the District and is requesting an exception to the law above. See her letter attached. .r.\u0026gt;, z \u0026gt;z n ~ U\u0026gt; Board of Directors December 18, 2003 Page 2 Expected Outcomes: NIA Population/Location: Little Rock School District and specifically Central High School Budget Amount/Source of Budget: NIA Manager: Darral Paradis, Director, Procurement and Materials Management Duration: NIA Long Range: NIA Other Agencies Involved: NIA Expectations of District: NIA Needed Staff: NIA Comments: None Recommendation We request the Board of Education review and make a decision regarding Ms. Cooper's attached request. 2 Paradis, Darral From: Jennie Cooper Uennie@soccerpluslr.com] Sent: Sunday, December 07, 2003 6:1 0 PM To: Paradis, Darral Fred Cooper and I , Jennie Cooper , own Soccer Plus, one of two soccer stores in Central Arkansas and one of the few soccer specific stores in the State. I am an Art History teacher at Little Rock Central High as well as head of the soccer program and coach of the men's soccer team. Soccer Plus requests the Board's approval to allow Soccer Plus to be an approved bidder of soccer supplies and equipment to the Little Rock School District. It also requests that it be allowed to sell soccer uniforms and equipment to the Central High Soccer program. The Athletic Department provides the Men's and Women's soccer teams a budget of $500.00 each per year for supplies and equipment. The balance of the needs of the teams is covered by the Booster Club which raises funds through parental contributions and sponsorships, and other fundraising activities like the Black and Gold game. Booster Club funds are often tight. We don't want to spend any more for needed items than necessary and would like those funds to buy as much equipment as possible. Soccer Plus is able to sell to the Central soccer program at cost plus 10%. The Central Soccer program can not get these prices anywhere else, but can get them from Soccer Plus with a resolution from the Board . What I am requesting at this time is Board approval tor Soccer Plus to supply the Central High Soccer program with equipment and to be able to bid on soccer supplies for the Little Rock School District. Thank you, Jennie Cooper 12/8/2003 ?\u0026lt; \u0026gt;o\u0026gt;\u0026lt; c.. :c 0~ C::\no ~z ii: C) men :!'j LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 DATE: TO: December 18, 2003 Board of Education FROM: ~al Paradis, Director of Procurement and Materials Mgmt. THROUGH: Morris L. Holmes, Interim Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Donations of Property Attached are requests to donate property to the Little Rock School District as follows: School/DeQartment Item Donor Central High School TV, DVD player, 5 videos Paul and Corky Schroeder and 5 DVDs, valued at approximately $400.00, to Central's 504 Program Central High School Corky's Barbeque, valued Kevin and Cathy Crass at $574.36, catered to the Central Tiger Football Team Central High School $250.00 cash to Central's Deborah Brooks baseball boosters Central High School Hewlett Packard Laserjet Dr. Randal Hundley IV printer valued at $300.00 Forest Park Elementary Antique french bench Dr. Reid and Susan Henry School valued at $1,915.00 of Cobblestone and Vine f.\u0026gt;., z \u0026gt;z (\") ~ Cl) ~ ,(\"-) 0 Cl) z C) ~ '\n=:o\n,,\nCl) Board of Education December 18, 2003 Page 2 School/Department Parkview Arts/Science Magnet High School Shirts, valued at approximately $350.00, and 50 hours volunteer service to Parkview's Golf Team Steve and Debbie Woosley It is recommended that these donation requests be approved in accordance with the policies of the Board. [.ittCe 'Rock Centra{ J-f113f,, Schoo{ 1500 Soutli Park Street Litt[e 'Rock, .'A.rkansas 72202 Pfione 501-447-1400 :fax 501-447-1401 DATE: 11/24/2003 TO: FROM: DARRAL PARADIS, DIRECTOR OF PROCUREMENT A CY ROUSSEAU PRINCIPAL '1\\CtutJ/1.. x lUI_) ' SUBJECT: DO ATIO Paul and Corky Schroeder of 11706 Pleasant Ridge Drive Little Rock, AR 72223, very graciously donated a T.V., DVD player, 5 videos and 5 DVD's to our 504 Program. The estimated value is $400.00. It is my recommendation that this donation be accepted in accordance with the policies of the Little Rock School District. NOV 2 5 t Gn3 ~ n 5 \"z' C\u0026gt; RI ~ 9l \"' Litt{e 'Rock Centra{ 3lfeli Sclioo{ 1500 Soutfi 'Park Street Litt{e 'Rock, .Jl..rkansas 72202 Phone 501-447-1400 ]'ax 501-447-1401 DATE: 11/5/2003 TO: DARRAL PARADIS, DIRECTOR OF PROCUREMENT FROM: A CY ROUSSEAU, PRINCIPAL ~ SUBJECT: DONATION l(evin \u0026amp; Cathy Crass of 4521 Country Club Blvd. Little Rock, AR 72207, had Corky's Barbeque catered for the Central Tiger Football Team. The cost was $574.36. It is my recommendation that this donation be accepted in accordance with the policies of the Little Rock School District. Litt{e 'Roci Centra{ J-figli Sclioo{ 1500 Soutfi 'Park Street Litt[e 'Rock, .'A.rkansas 72202 'Phone 501 -447-1400 :Fax 501-447-1401 DATE: 11/13/2003 TO: DARRAL PARADIS, DIRECTOR OF PROCUREME T FROM: NANCY ROUSSEAU, PRI CIPAL _,,n : 6-A,,i~l,V\"--' SUBJECT: DO ATIO - - --------- Deborah Brooks of 8809 ancy Place Little Rock, AR 72204, graciously donated $250.00 to the baseball boosters. It is my recommendation that this donation be accepted in accordance with the policies of the Little Rock School District. f.\u0026gt;., z ~ n ~ UI Litt{e 1Wck Centra{ 1ffali Sclioo{ 1500 Soutli 'Park Street Litt[e 'Rock, ..'Arkansas 72202 'Phone 501-447-1400 ]\"ax 501-447-1401 DATE: 11/17/2003 TO: FROM: DARRAL PARADIS, DIRECTOR OF PROCUREMENT A CY ROUSSEAU, PRI CIPAL itu~ SUBJECT: DO ATION Dr. Randal Hundley of 5515 Country Club Blvd. Little Rock, AR 72207, graciously donated a Hewlett Packard Laser Jet 4 printer valued at $300 to Central High School. It is my recommendation that this donation be accepted in accordance with the policies of the Little Rock School District. MOV 1 3 2GD3 TO: ~\\(_\nROM: vr~ATE: SUBJECT: Darral Paradis, Director, Procurement Deptartment Theresa Ketcher, Principal of Forest Park School November 10, 2003 Donation An antique frenchbench valued at $1,915.00 has been donated to Forest Park School from Dr. Reid and Susan Henry, c/o Cobblestone and Vine, 5100 Kavanaugh Blvd., Little Rock, AR 72207. It is recommended that these donations be approved in accordance with the policies of the Little Rock School District. /pl Parkview Arts/Science Magnet High School LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 2501 BARROW ROAD Date: To: From: Subject: PHONE 228-3000 December 4, 2003 Darral Paradis, Director LRSD Procurement Department J ()._ll-,1J'V Dr. Linda Brown, Principal 'f/' fl~ Parkview Arts/Science Magnet High School Golf Team Donation LI'ITLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72204 Steve and Debbie Woosley recently donated approximately $350.00 in shirts for our Parkview Golf Team, along with a combined fifty (50) hours plus of their time this fall . We, at Parkview, would like to say a very hearty Thank You to Mr. and Mrs. Woosley! Your support is appreciated more than we can express. It is recommended that this donation be approved in accordance with the policies of the Little Rock School District. DATE: TO: THROUGH: Little Rock School District Financial Services 810 West Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201 Phone: (501) 447-1086 Fax: (501) 447-1158 December 18, 2003 Little Rock School District Board of Directors Donald M. Stewart, Chief Financial Officer Morris L. Holmes, Interim Superintendent PREPARED BY: Mark D. Milhollen, Manager, Financial Services Subject Summary Objectives Expected Outcomes Population/Location Budget Amount/Source Manager Duration Financial Reports District funds are reported for the period ending November 30, 2003. To report the District's financial status monthly to the Board of Directors. The Board members will be informed of the District's current financial condition. NIA NIA Mark Milhollen, Manager of Financial Services NIA Long Range/Continuation Financial reports will be submitted monthly to the Board. Other Agencies Involved None Expectations of District N/ A Needed Staff NIA Comments None Recommendation Approval of the November 2003 financial reports. We recommend that the Board approve the financial reports as submitted. LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT COMBINED STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE FOR THE PERIOD ENDED NOVEMBER 30, 2002 AND 2003 APPROVED RECEIPTS % APPROVED RECEIPTS % 2002/03 11/30/02 COLLECTED 2003/04 11/30/03 COLLECTED REVENUE-LOCAL SOURCES CURRENT TAXES 58,550,000 18,392,072 31.41% 57,547,800 20,927,350 36.37% DELINQUENT TAXES 8,000,000 4,534,278 56.68% 10,100,000 6,939,208 68.71% 40% PULLBACK 29,400,000 29,600,000 EXCESS TREASURER'S FEE 187,000 210,000 DEPOSITORY INTEREST 385,000 180,000 REVENUE IN LIEU OF TAXES 135,000 220,757 163.52% 150,000 MISCELLANEOUS AND RENTS 340,000 213,209 62.71% 380,000 220,826 58.11% INTEREST ON INVESTMENTS 275,000 63,364 23.04% 200,000 56,591 28.30% ATHLETIC RECEIPTS 160,000 117,131 73.21% 240,000 118,641 49.43% TOTAL 97,432,000 23,540,812 24.16% 98,607,800 28,262,617 28.66% REVENUE - COUNTY SOURCES COUNTY GENERAL 24,000 11,170 46.54% 21 ,000 11,594 55.21% TOTAL 24,000 11,170 46.54% 21,000 11,594 55.21% REVENUE - STATE SOURCES EQUALIZATION FUNDING 54,867,630 20,075,275 36.59% 53,226,139 19,354,959 36.36% REIMBURSEMENT STRS/HEAL TH 7,590,000 3,217,173 42.39% 8,300,000 2,024,292 24.39% VOCATIONAL 1,340,000 400,368 29.88% 1,400,000 430,364 30.74% HANDICAPPED CHILDREN 1,700,000 320 0.02% 1,675,000 93,470 5.58% EARLY CHILDHOOD 273,358 136,486 49.93% 273,358 135,094 49.42% TRANSPORTATION 3,685,226 1,226,542 33.28% 3,875,562 1,243,841 32.09% INCENTIVE FUNDS - M TO M 3,265,000 1,047,114 32.07% 3,900,000 736,844 18.89% ADULT EDUCATION 1,006,014 273,287 27.17% 920,337 152,263 16.54% POVERTY INDEX FUNDS 658,607 329,297 50.00% 560,545 267,486 47.72% EARLY LITERACY LEARNING 120,000 TAP PROGRAM 285,271 142,636 50.00% 285,245 142,623 50.00% AT RISK FUNDING 650,000 57,386 8.83% 360,000 TOTAL 75,441,106 26,905,883 35.66% 74,776,187 24,581,235 32.87% REVENUE - OTHER SOURCES TRANSFER FROM CAP PROJ FUND 620,000 770,000 TRANSFER FROM OTHER FUNDS 1,126,233 13,857 1.23% 1,350,000 18,519 1.37% TRANSFER FROM MAGNET FUND 1,664,438 1,632,430 TOTAL 3,410,671 13,857 0.41% 3,752,430 18,519 0.49% TOTAL REVENUE OPERATING 176,307,777 50,471,723 28.63% 177,157,418 52,873,965 29.85% REVENUE - OTHER FEDERAL GRANTS 25,152,981 3,917,708 15.58% 24,075,790 4,554,092 18.92% DEDICATED M\u0026amp; 0 3,980,000 327,865 8.24% 4,000,000 725,821 18.15% MAGNET SCHOOLS 25,065,942 4,330,697 17.28% 24,689,351 3,440,020 13.93% TOTAL 54,198,923 8,576,270 15.82% 52,765,141 8,719,933 16.53% TOTAL REVENUE 230,506,700 59,047,992 25.62% 229,922,559 61,593,898 26.79% ~ LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT COMBINED STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE FOR THE PERIOD ENDED NOVEMBER 30, 2002 AND 2003 ~ APPROVED EXPENDED % APPROVED EXPENDED % 2002/03 11 /30/02 EXPENDED 2003/04 11 /30/03 EXPENDED EXPENSES SALARIES 100,865,586 30,076,634 29.82% 100,684,982 29,777,981 29.58% BENEFITS 24,838,361 7,544,342 30.37% 26,483,772 7,729,21 1 29.18% PURCHASED SERVICES 19,795,774 6,875,951 34.73% 19,719,297 6,769,882 34.33% -MATERIALS \u0026amp; SUPPLIES 8,347,098 3,149,062 37.73% 8,185,459 4,033,046 49.27% CAPITAL OUTLAY 1,616,991 351 ,335 21 .73% 1,575,580 195,999 12.44% OTHER OBJECTS 8,508,680 176,244 2.07% 8,384,567 331 ,506 3.95% DEBT SERVICE 12,217,048 4,880,555 39.95% 12,098,342 4,699,176 38.84% TOTAL EXPENSES OPERATING 176,189,538 53,054,122 30.11% 177,131,999 53,536,801 30.22% EXPENSES-OTHER FEDERAL GRANTS 26,148,726 4,732,431 18.10% 26,056,193 5,641 ,014 21.65% DEDICATED M\u0026amp; 0 3,980,000 911 ,697 22.91% 4,000,000 1,869,745 46.74% MAGNET SCHOOLS 25,065,942 6,267,463 25.00% 24,689,351 6,278,304 25.43% TOTAL 55,194,668 11,911,591 21.58% 54,745,544 13,789,063 25.19% TOTAL EXPENSES 231,384,206 64,965,713 28.08% 231,877,543 67,325,865 29.04% INCREASE (DECREASE) IN FUND BALANCE (877,506) (5,917,722) (1 ,954,984) (5,731,968) BEGINNING FUND BALANCE FEDERAL, MAGNET \u0026amp; OED M\u0026amp; 0 1,645,440 1,645,440 3,558,580 3,558,580 OPERATING 8,557,652 8,557,652 9,026,855 9,026,855 ENDING FUND BALANCE FEDERAL, MAGNET \u0026amp; OED M\u0026amp; 0 649,695 (1,689,882) 1,578,177 (1 ,510,550) OPERATING 8,675,891 5,975,253 9,052,274 8,364,018 TOTAL 9,325,586 4,285,371 10,630,451 6,853,468 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT BOND ACCOUNT FOR THE PERIOD ENDED NOVEMBER 30, 2003 PROJECT BEG BALANCE INCOME TRANSFERS EXPENDITURES ENCUMBRANCES END BALANCE 07-01-03 2003-04 2003-04 2003-04 2003-04 11-30-03 $6,200,000 BOND ISSUE FAIR 33,282.90 33,282.90 MCCLELLAN 77,219.02 77,219.02 CONTINGENCY 0.00 0.00 SUBTOTAL 110,501.92 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 110,501 .92 $136,268,560 BOND ISSUES ADMINISTRATION 32,802.37 50,000.00 49,671.00 5,921 .07 27,210.30 NEW WORK PROJECTS 18,614,545.40 190,056.00 7,275,957.86 9,194,811.49 2,333,832.05 SECURITY PROJECTS 42,273.97 2,153.87 40,120.10 LIGHTING PROJECTS 29,869.56 7,679.00 22,190.56 MAINTENANCE \u0026amp; REPAIR 2,768,579.81 1,517,001 .00 1,915,041.38 717,774.23 1,652,765.20 RENOVATION PROJECTS 31,306,506.59 166,300.00 9,350,164.35 10,189,870.05 11,932,772.19 TECHNOLOGY UPGRADES 2,335,019.24 671 ,668.18 26,236.35 1,637,114.71 SUBTOTAL 55,129,596.94 0.00 1,923,357.00 19,272,335.64 20,134,613.19 17,646,005.11 REVENUES PROCEEDS-PROPERTY SALE 444,618.31 1,000.00 445,618.31 DUNBAR PROJECT 5,266.71 5,266.71 PROCEEDS-BOND SALES 22,074,599.23 (1,923,357.00) 20,151 ,242.23 PROCEEDS-QZAB SALE 1,293,820.97 1,293,820.97 INTEREST 7,288,776.89 574,191 .79 7,862,968.68 SUBTOTAL 31 ,107,082.11 575,191.79 (1,923,357.00) 0.00 0.00 29,758,916.90 GRAND TOTAL D ~~z lDQ iZ :iZ:illllZll l2.W! la 2Z2 ~~~ ~ ~!l U~ fil\ni lll ~z :il:i ~~\ni l!\ni LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT - BOND ISSUE PROJECT HISTORY - THRU THE PERIODENDED NOVEMBER 30, 2003 - - - - ~-----~----~---- -- - - ~---- ----------+- -PR- O- JEC_T_ - - - - -------- --- ALLOCAT=l~O~N~S---t--~E~x=p=EN~S~E~---1-~EX~P~E=N~s=E~+ - EXP_E_N-SE - EXPENSE ENCUMBERED PROJECT CATEGORIES THRU1-f-30-03 - -20-00-01 - - - 2-0-0-f.0_2_ --2002--03- T HRU 11-30-03 THRU 11-30-03 ~ UBTOTAL 1------------l------+---- -- ADM-1-NI_S_T_R-AT-I_O_N_ _________- ,_-___6_ 36_,84_6_.5_5 - 889,~72.32 _(485,325.77) -14-9,597.63 - 49,671 .00 - 5,921 .07 609,636.25 NEW WORK PROJECTS 35,509, 116.80-~ 443,467.00 4,589,606.29 ----:,T,671 ,442.11 7,275,957.86 9,194,81 1.49 33,175,284.75 ENDING ALLOCATION 11-30-0-3 - 27,210.30 2 ,333,832J'l5 SECURITY PROJECTS 265,814.17 113,930.47 - - 109,609.73 - 2,153.87 - --- - 225,694.07 - --- 40,120.10 -- - - -- -- LIGHTING PROJECTS 4,883,405.13 2,641 ,482.13 1,832,392.06 379,661 .38 7,679.00 0.00 4,861,214.57 MAINTENANCE \u0026amp; REPAIR 12,750,611.51 791,385.63 4,218,294.40 3,455,350.67 1,915,041 .38 - ~ 7,774.23 11 ,09 7,846.31 RENOVATION PROJECTS 51,655,707.04 397,615.34 ~ 045.21 15,666,239.90 9,350,164.35 10,189,870.05 - 39,722,934.85 TECHNOLOGY UPGRADES -----.,1,735,611 .78 575,016.53 ~ 4,325,20Ll0 - 4,S0~ !W 671 ,668.18 26,236.35 10,098,497.07 - -- - --+----- - UNALLOCATED PROCEEDS 21,445,063.20 - ------ +----- - - 22,190.56 1,652,765.20 11,932,772.19 1,63i\nTT4.71 21,445,063.20 TOTAL 138,882, 17678 e--- 5,852,669.42 18,708,823.32 35,822,666.30 19,272,335.64 20,134,613.19 9 9,791 ,107.87 ~.091 ,068.31 ------,1----- -- - ----------+-------1-----+-------t- -- -- -i-- -- 1-----------+------ +-------+--- - ------------- ----+------+---- - - -----------+--------+---- 1-----------+-- .lN3WN'!lnorov x S9Nl'!IV3H 'Xl S\u0026gt;l'!IVW3'!1 9NIS01:l 'Ill/\\ ------- - - -----+------- -- ---- - - -- LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT SCHEDULE OF INVESTMENTS BY FUND FOR THE PERIOD ENDED NOVEMBER 30, 2003 Fund Purchase Maturity Institution Interest Rate Type 1 Principal Date Date i I Operating I 06-09-03 12-08-03 Regions 1.090% Money Market 20,000.00 Operating 07-19-03 01-19-04 Regions 0.945% Money Market 20,000.00 Operating 04-08-03 12-05-03 Pulaski 1.290% Money Market 10,000.00 Operating 11-28-03 TFN Bank of America 0.880% Repo 10,785,000.00 Total I 10,835,000.00 I I I Activity Fund I 11-17-03 TFN Bank of America 0.850% Repo 1,250,000.00 Total I 1,250,000.00 i I I Bond Account 09-08-03 03-08-04 Regions 1.094% CD 400,000.00 Capital Projects Fund 01-17-03 01-16-04 I Metropolitan 1.930% CD I 1,000,934.31 Capital Projects Fund 01-17-03 01-16-04 Bank of the Ozarks 2.250% CD 5,116,598.09 Capital Projects Fund 10-15-03 02-13-04 Bank of the Ozarks 1.250% CD ' 5,000,000.00 Capital Projects Fund 01-29-03 01-29-04 Bancorp South 2.000% CD 2,058,896.90 Capital Projects Fund 01-17-03 01-16-04 I Superior 2.250% CD j 2,500,000.00 Capital Projects Fund 11-18-03 04-15-04 Bank of the Ozarks 1.300% CD 6,000,000.00 t ~ Capital Projects Fund 05-15-03 08-16-04 USBANK 1.420% CD 11,000,000.00 I + I Capital Projects Fund 01-22-03 01-16-04 Bank of America 1.240% Treasury Bills 5,299,646.43 Capital Projects Fund 05-15-03 05-14-04 Bank of the Ozarks 1.360% CD 9,000,000.00 Capital Projects Fund 08-01-03 12-01-03 Bank of the Ozarks I 1.220% CD 3,048,218.28 Capital Projects Fund 09-15-03 03-15-04 I Bank of the Ozarks 1.430% I CD t 10,221,001 .82 I I I Capital Projects Fund 11-25-03 TFN Bank of America 0.800% Repo 7,500,000.00 Total I 68,145,295.83 Deseg Plan Scholarship 06-11-03 12-04-03 Bank of America 0.920% Treasury Bills 664,995.48 Total I 664,995.48 I Rockefeller Scholarship 06-24-03 01-15-04 Bank of America 0.760% Treasury Bills 250,909.40 Total I I I 250,909.40 Risk Management Loss Fund j i . 11-17-03 TFN Bank of America 0.700% I Repo 500,000.00 t 500,000.00\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_1746","title":"Includes corrected order, notice of filings, brief of appellant and appendix, Pulaski County Special School District's (PCSSD's) motion for enlargement of time to file appellee's brief, ADE project management tool, report by Office of Desegregation Management, and PCSSD motion for two temporary portable buildings at Sylvan Hills School.","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":["2003-11/2003-12"],"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--21st century","Education--Arkansas","School districts","Arkansas. Department of Education","Project management","High schools","Sylvan Hills High School (Little Rock, Ark.)","Magnet schools","Education--Finance","School enrollment","School integration","Office of Desegregation Monitoring (Little Rock, Ark.)"],"dcterms_title":["Includes corrected order, notice of filings, brief of appellant and appendix, Pulaski County Special School District's (PCSSD's) motion for enlargement of time to file appellee's brief, ADE project management tool, report by Office of Desegregation Management, and PCSSD motion for two temporary portable buildings at Sylvan Hills School."],"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/1746"],"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":["judicial records"],"dcterms_extent":["176 page scan, typed"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"\u003c?xml version=\"1.0\" encoding=\"utf-8\"?\u003e\n\u003citems type=\"array\"\u003e \u003citem\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\n \n\n \n\n\n \n\n \n\n\u003cdcterms_description type=\"array\"\u003e \n\n\u003cdcterms_description\u003eDistrict Court, corrected order; Court of Appeals, notice of filing, brief of appellant and appendix; District Court, order; Court of Appeals, Pulaski County Special School District (PCSSD) motion for enlargement of time to file appellee's brief; District Court, notice of filing, Arkansas Department of Education (ADE) project management tool; District Court, notice of filing, Office of Desegregation Management report, ''2003-04 Enrollment and Racial Balance in the Pulaski County Special School District (PCSSD)''; District Court, Pulaski County Special School District (PCSSD) motion for two temporary portable buildings at Sylvan Hills School; Court of Appeals, notice of filing, joint brief of appellee/cross-appellant and separate appendix; District Court, notice of filing, Arkansas Department of Education (ADE) project management tool This transcript was create using Optical Character Recognition (OCR) and may contain some errors. FILED IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT co~rtNg',if~1ifil~~SAS EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS LITTLE ROCK DIVISION NOV 3 2003 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT V. No. 4:82CV00866 WRW/JTR - PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL. MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL. KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL. CORRECTED ORDER JAMES W. McCORMACK, CLERK By:_, ____ -=--~== PLAfN'fml( DEFENDANTS INTERVENORS lNTERVENORS Before the Court is the request of the Magnet Review Committee (\"MRC\") for approval of the interdistrict magnet schools ' final budget for rhe 2002-2003 school year and proposed - budget for the 2003-2004 school year. The MRC communicated the budget to the Court in a letter dated July 31 , 2003 (attached). I have attached a copy of the budget to this order, and if there are any objections, parties must respond withi~ five days; otherwise, the MR.C's final budget for the 2002-2003 school year and proposed 2003-2004 budget will be accepted as presented and become effective immediately. IT IS SO ORDERED this 3rd day ofNovember, 2003. -w1,.... oocu1v1c:.1\" i r::.,'I' c:.,--.c ... ~ ,,;~ I n,;, p ~'C - E~T 1 -.; COiv1 ... :,-.,~ '- 00CKET SH c:. 1 ' . - - .NIT~ULE 58 AND/0~- 0NJJ--?j., BY UNITED ST A TES DISTRICT JUDGE WM. R. WILSON, JR. WILL BOND NEIL CHAMBERLIN VIA FEDERAL EXPRESS BOND \u0026amp; CHAMBERLIN TRIAL LAWYERS 602 W. MAIN JACKSONVILLE, ARKANSAS 72076 November 5, 2003 Michael E. Gans, Clerk Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals 24.329 Thomas F . Eagleton U.S. Courthouse lll S. 10~ Street St. Louis, MO 63101 (314) 244-2400 RECEIVED NOV 1 0 2003 OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING TELEPHONE: (501 ) 982-9081 FAX: (501 ) 982-9414 RE: United States Court of Appeals for the 8t h Circuit, Little Rock School District v. Pulaski County Special School District No. l, et al. , Mrs. Lorene Joshua, et al., Katherine Knight, et al., Greg Bollen, James Bolden, Martha Whatley and Sue Ann Whisker, Case No. 03-3088 - Brief and Appendix Dear Mr. Gans: Enclosed is an original and eleven copies of Appellants' Brief and an original and three copies of Appellants' Appendix for filing in the above-referenced case. The Addendum on Appellants' Brief is in excess of 15 pages. This is a unique case in which the Judge essentially made his ruling from the bench. I have included the transcript of the Judge's ruling in the Addendum as instructed by your office. After the Brief and Appendix is filed, please forward filemarked copies back to me . I have included a large envelope with postage for your convenience. If you have any questions or concerns , please do not hesitate to contact me. By copy of this letter I have forwarded counsel for all parties involved in the litigation at the lower court copies of the Brief and Appendix. I have also forwarded a copy to the local district judge. Regards, TWB:tt Michael E. Gans November 5, 2003 Page Two cc: Greg Bollen Sam Jones Scott Smith Christopher Heller John W. Walker P.A. Mark Burnette Stephen Jones Ann Marshall Tim Gauger Judge William Wilson I i le I I I I I I I 1 I 1 I I I I le I I RECEIVED IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT NO. 03-3088 GREG BOLLEN, et al. Appellants v. PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT Appellee . Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Arkansas Honorable William R. Wilson, Jr., District Judge BRIEF OF APPELLANT Will Bond Bond \u0026amp; Chamberlin 602 W. Main Street Jacksonville, AR 72076 (501) 982-9411 AR Bar #95145 Attorney for Appellants NOV 1 O 2003 OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING I - I I I -I I 1e I I I I I I - II RECEIVED NOV 1 0 2003 OFFICE OF IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS DESEGREGATION MONITORING FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT NO. 03-3088 GREG BOLLEN, et al. Appellants V. PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT Appellee Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Arkansas Honorable William R. Wilson, J.r., District Judge APPENDIX Will Bond Bond \u0026amp; Chamberlin 602 W. Main Street Jacksonville, AR 72076 (501) 982-9411 AR Bar #95145 Attorney for Appellants u.fl~~l?RT EASTEAN CIS'fA!Oi ARKANSAS IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT CO1URT NOV 1 0 2003 EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS LfITLE ROCK DIVISION JAMES W McCOAMACK, CL.ERK By: -------,=E=P.\"\"\"C..,...,LE\"\"R-K LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT V. No. 4:82CV0086.6 WRW/JTR PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL. MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL. KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL. ORDER PLAINTIFF DEFENDANTS INTERVENORS INTERVENORS Pending is Pulaski County Special School District's fee petiti,c\u0026gt;n (Doc. No. 3804). The Arkansas Department of Education has responded (Doc. No. 3814) ai1d the PCS SD has replied (Doc. No. 3816). In its fee petition PCS SD seeks a total fee award of $78,32650, an amount which includes attorney time expended both in this action and a related state court action. Additionally, the attorney time is billed at counsel's standard hourly rate, rather than the lower hourly rate counsel charges its client, the PCSSD; therefore ~e PCSSD's fee petition will be reduced for the following reasons: 1) C.ounsel for PCS SD seeks compensation from the ADE at $215 per hour, his standard hourly rate. However, counsel nonnally bills PCSSD at an hourly rate of $150. Therefore, $150 an hour is the rate which will be used to detennine compensation owed by the ADE in the current action. 2) Total compensation will include only time spent on the federal issues. Time spent on matters related to the state court proceeding is not closely enough related to this award of attorney's fee. 3) Because work performed by counsel in March 2001 and AJpril 2002, were not necessary to present the PCSSD's Motion to Enforce, and was work that would have nonnally been perfoIIDed for PCSSD, counsel is not entitled to compensation from the ADE for those hours. 4) PCS SD requests payment for time spent addressing appellate issues following the August 18, 2003 hearing. This request is premature and will not be i;(lcluded in the total compensation. 5) A total of five hours will be allowed for preparation of PCSSD's fee petition . . With the limitations established above, the award here breaks down as follows: 'lli,te Perfonned May 2003 June 2003 July 2003 August2003 September 2003 Total Total Amoynt 5,715 .00 10,667.50 18,835.50 9,152.50 750.00 $44,820.50 Upon review of both PCSSD's fee petition and the ADE's response, and based on my findings of fact and conclusions of law, counsel for the PCSSD is entitled to compensation from the ADE in the amount of $44,820.50 . .IT IS SO ORDERED this 10th day of November, 2003 u)'! ,~./l.llhA1, f'r UNITED STA TES DISTRICT JUDGE WM. R. WILSON, JR. TO: DATE: FAX COVER SHEET UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS Chris Heller Sam Jones Steve Jones John Walker Timothy Gauger Mark Hagemeier Ann Marshall Mark Burnette //- /O,D3 Telephone: 501-604-5140 Fax Number: 501-604 5149 376-2147 376-9442 375-1027 374-4187 682-2591 682-2591 371-0100 375-1940 There are .3 pages, including this Cover Sheet, being sent by this facsimile transmission. MESSAGE SENT BY: ~ U.S. District Court 600 Wes1 Capitol, Room 423 Little Ro,;k, Arkansas 72201 Matt Morgan, LRSD Law Clerk 501-604-5141 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGIITH cmcUIT GREG BOLLEN, JAMES BOLDEN, MARTHA WHATLEY and SUE ANN WHISKER V. CASE NO. 03-3088 CASE NO. 03-3404 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT PCSSD MOTION FOR ENLARGEMENT OF TIME TO FILE APPELLEE'S BRIEF RECEIVED DEC -1 2003 OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING APPELLANTS APPELLEE Appellant's opening brief was originally due on October 15, 2003 . Appellants obtained an enlargement of time until and including November 6, 2003, to file their opening brief. The PCS SD requests an equivalent period of time until and including December 23, 2003, within which to file its opening Appellee's brief. The PCSSD brief is currently due on or about December 6, 2003. WHEREFORE, the PCSSD prays for an enlargement of time until and including December 23, 2003, within which to file its appellee 's brief. 463029-v1 Respectfully submitted WRIGHT, LINDSEY \u0026amp; JENNINGS LLP 200 West Capitol Avenue, Suite 2300 Little Rock, AR 72201 (501) 371-0808 FAX: (501) 376-9442 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE On November 26, 2003, a copy of the foregoing was served by U.S. mail on the following : Mr. Will Bond Bond \u0026amp; Chamberlin 602 West Main Street Jacksonville, AR 72076 Mr. Scott Smith State Department of Education #4 Capitol Mall Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Christopher Heller Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark, LLP 2000 Regions Center 400 W. Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 Ms. Ann Marshall Office of Desegregation Monitoring 1 Union National Plaza 124 W. Capitol, Suite 1895 Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Tim Gauger Senior Assistant Attorney General 323 Center Street, Suite 200 Little Rock, AR 72201-2610 442823-v1 2 Mr. John W. Walker John W. Walker P.A. 1723 S. Broadway Little Rock, AR 72206 Mr. Mark Burnette Mitchell, Blackstock, Barnes, Wagoner, Ivers \u0026amp; Sneddon 1010 W. Third Street Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Stephen Jones Jack, Lyon \u0026amp; Jones, P.A. 3400 TCBY Tower 425 West Capitol A venue Little Rock, AR 72201 TOM COURTWAY Interim Director State Board of Education JoNell Caldwell, Chair Little Rock Shelby Hillman, Vice Chair Carlisle Sherry Burrow Jonesboro Luke Gordy Van Buren Calvin King Marianna Randy Lawson B- ville MaryJane Rebick Pine Bluff Jeanna Westmoreland Arkadelphia Arkansas Department of Education #4 Capito/Mall, Little Rock, AR 72201-1071 501-682-4475 December 2, 2003 Mr. M. Samuel Jones, III Wright, Lindsey \u0026amp; Jennings 200 West Capitol, Suite 2000 Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. John W. Walker John Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Mark Burnette Mitchell, Blackstock, Barnes, Wagoner, Ivers \u0026amp; Sneddon P. 0. Box 1510 Little Rock, AR 72203-1510 Mr. Christopher Heller Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark 400 West Capitol, Suite 2000 Little Rock, AR 72201-3493 Mr. Stephen W. Jones Jack, Lyon \u0026amp; Jones 425 West Capitol, Suite 3400 Little Rock, AR 72201 Ms. Ann Marshall One Union National Plaza 124 West Capitol, Suite 1895 Little Rock, AR 72201 http:/ /arkedu.state.ar.us ~1ECEIVED DEC - :1 2003 OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING RE: Little Rock School District v. Pulaski County Special School District, et al. US. District Court No. 4:82-CV-866 Dear Gentlemen and Ms. Marshall: Per an agreement with the Attorney General's Office, I am filing the Arkansas Department of Education's Project Management Tool for the month of November 2003 in the above-referenced case. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at your convenience. s~; o.JA ~smt? General Counsel Arkansas Department of Education SS:law cc: Mark Hagemeier UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT V. No. LR-C-82-866 PLAINTIFF PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, et al DEFENDANTS NOTICE OF FILING In accordance with the Court's Order of December 10, 1993, the Arkansas Department of Education hereby gives notice of the filing of the ADE's Project Management Tool for November 2003. Respectfully Submitted, cott Smith, # Attorney, Arkansas Department of Education #4 Capitol Mall, Room 404-A Little Rock, AR 72201 501-682-4227 ..... CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE - I, Scott Smith, certify that on December 2, 2003, I caused the foregoing document to be served by depositing a copy in the United States mail, postage prepaid, addressed to each of the following: Mr. M. Samuel Jones, III Wright, Lindsey \u0026amp; Jennings 200 West Capitol, Suite 2000 Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. John W. Walker John Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Mark Burnette Mitchell, Blackstock, Barnes Wagoner, Ivers \u0026amp; Sneddon P. 0. Box 1510 Little Rock, AR 72203-1510 Mr. Christopher Heller Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark 400 West Capitol, Suite 2000 Little Rock, AR 72201-3493 Mr. Stephen W. Jones Jack, Lyon \u0026amp; Jones 425 West Capitol, Suite 3400 Little Rock, AR 72201 Ms. Ann Marshall One Union National Plaza 124 West Capitol, Suite 1895 Little Rock, AR 72201 .. IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, ET AL PLAINTIFFS V. NO. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT, ET AL DEFENDANTS MRS. LORENEJOSHUA, ETAL INTERVENOR$ KA THERINE W. KNIGHT, ET AL INTERVENOR$ ADE'S PROJECT MANAGEMENT TOOL In compliance with the Court's Order of December 10, 1993, the Arkansas Department of Education (ADE) submits the following Project Management Tool to the parties and the Court. This document describes the progress the ADE has made since March 15, 1994, in complying with provisions of the Implementation Plan and itemizes the ADE's progress against timelines presented in the Plan. - IMPLEMENTATION PHASE ACTIVITY I. FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS A. Use the previous year's three quarter average daily membership to calculate MFPA (State Equalization) for the current school year. 1. Projected Ending Date Last day of each month, August - June. 2. Actual as of November 30, 2003 Based on the information available at October 31, 2003, the ADE calculated the Equalization Funding for FY 03/04, subject to periodic adjustments. B. Include all Magnet students in the resident District's average daily membership for calculation. 1. Projected Ending Date Last day of each month, August - June. I II ~ ~ --- -- ' - ' ' I I I r I 01- ..:;;__, 1 G \"'3 L ,._ ...; 2003-04 ENROLLMENT AND RACIAL BALANdf:~~cc, ,, . ., . ~:-~ cu~::;, ,. PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DIST~-~-~ .r. Ann S. Marshall Federal Monitor December 16, 2003 Office of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court Little Rock, Arkansas Polly Ramer Office Manager L.~ ,-' C.:lL. ~ RECEIVED RECEIVED OEC 2 6 2003 DEC 2 6 2003 OESEGREGr{iW~ ~~1mORIHG IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT OFFICE OF EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS DESEGREGATION MONITORING WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT V. NO. 4:82CV00866WRW PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL. MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL. KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL. PCSSD MOTION FOR TWO TEMPORARY PORTABLE BUILDINGS AT SYLVAN HILLS SCHOOL PLAINTIFF DEFENDANTS INTERVENORS INTERVENORS 1. On December 16, 2003, the ODM issued its annual report concerning enrollment and racial balance in the PCSSD. At pages 5 and 16 of the report, the ODM concludes that Sylvan Hills High School is currently operating at 103% capacity. It should be noted that this capacity reflects the District's recalculation of building capacities for the 2003-2004 school year. (ODM Report, p. 5). 2. The ODM report simply confirms a problem with which the PCSSD has struggled with thus far during the first semester. It is short at least two classrooms at Sylvan Hills High School. 3. The purpose of this motion is to seek an order of this Court approving the acquisition and use of two portable buildings for the second semester at Sylvan Hills High School. As a practical matter, the PCSSD must seek approval to utilize those _ ___ ,p. ortable buildings for the 2004-2005 schoo ear since it is highly unlikel.J-----\"-'-th...a,,,..._,,,_,_.__ _____ 468157-v1 - informed judgment can be made regarding permanent additions at the Sylvan Hills campus this year. 4. The use of these portable buildings will not have negative racial balance consequences. As the ODM report notes at page 9: \"Sylvan Hills High, which once had an enrollment less than 20% African-American, has been within the target range for the last 14 years.\" 5. The Sylvan Hills High School enrollment over time is depicted at page C-9 of the current ODM report. WHEREFORE, the PCSSD prays for an Order of this Court authorizing it to install and utilize two portable buildings for classroom instruction at Sylvan Hills High School beginning with the second semester and continuing through the 2004-2005 - school year, and for all proper relief. 468157-v1 Respectfully submitted, WRIGHT, LINDSEY \u0026amp; JENNINGS LLP 200 West Capitol Avenue, Suite 2300 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-3699 (501) 371-0808 FAX: (501) 376-9442 By __ ....::._---l1----......,..-t--::-;__ ______ _ 2 0) nty Special ct CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE On December 23, 2003, a copy of the foregoing was served via facsimile and U.S. mail on each of the following: Mr. John W. Walker John W. Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Mr. Christopher Heller Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark 2000 Regions Center 400 West Capitol Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Ms. Ann Brown Marshall ODM One Union National Plaza 124 West Capitol, Suite 1895 Little Rock, AR 72201 Judge J. Thomas Ray U.S. District Courthouse 600 West Capitol Avenue, Suite 149 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 468157-v1 Mr. Mark A. Hagemeier Assistant Attorney General Arkansas Attorney General's Office 323 Center Street, Suite 200 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Mr. Stephen W. Jones 3400 TCBY Tower 425 West Capitol Avenue Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 3 Mr. Clayton Blackstock Mr. Mark Burnett 1010 W. Third Street Little Rock, AR 72201 EDWARD L. WRIGHT ( 1903-197'7 ) ROBERT S . LINDSEY ( 191 3- 1991 ) ISAAC A . SCOTT, JR . JOHN G. LILE GORDON S . RATHER , JR. ROGER A. GLASGOW C. DOUGLAS BUFORD . JR . PATRICK J. GOSS ALSTON JENNINGS , JR . JOHN R. TISDALE KATHLYN GRAVES M. SAMUEL JONES Ill JOHN WILLIAM SPIVEY Ill LEE J. MULDROW N.M. NORTON CHARLES C. PRICE CHARLEST . COLEMAN JAMES J. GLOVER EDWIN L. LOWTHER, JR . WALTER E. MAY GREGORY T. JON ES BETTINA E. BROWNSTEIN WALTER McSPAOOEN JOHN D. DAVIS JUDY SIMMONS HENRY \\VRIGHT, LINDSEY \u0026amp; JENNINGS LLP ATTORNEYS AT LAW 200 WEST CAPITOL AVENUE SUITE 2300 LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201 -3699 (501) 371 -0808 FAX (501) 376-9442 www . wlj .com OF COUNSEL ALSTON JENNINGS RONALD A. MAY BRUCE R . LINDSEY JAMES R . VAN DOVER Wri ter 's Direct Dial No . 501-212-1273 mjoncs@wlj .com . December 23, 2003 KIMBERLY WOOD TUCKER RAY F. CO X. JR . TROY A. PRICE PATRICIA SIEVERS HARRIS KATHRYN A. PRYOR J. MARK DAVIS CLAIRE SHOWS HANCOCK KEVIN W. KENNEDY JERRY J. SALLINGS WILLIAM STUART JACKSON MICHAEL D. BARNES STEPHEN R. LANCASTER JUDY ROBINSON WILBER KYLE R. WILSON C. TAD BOHANNON KRISTI M. MOODY J. CHARLES DOUGHERTY M. SEAN HATCH J. ANDREW VINES JUSTIN T. ALLEN MICHELLE M. KAEMMERLING SCOTT ANDREW IRBY PATRICK 0 . WILSON REGINA A. SPAULDING MARY ELIZABETH ELDRIDGE BLAKE S. RUTHERFORD PAUL D. MORRIS Lk~ w pnctio:: bdff I Uaitoi Suter PMl1:DI ~nd Tndt:twrk Ollie,: RECEIVED VIA FEDERAL EXPRESS OVERNIGHT DEC 2 R 2003 OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORlNG Mr. Michael Gans, Clerk of the Court U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit Thomas F. Eagleton Court House Room 24.329 111 S. 10th Street St. Louis, Missouri 63102 RE: 03-3088/03-3404 Greg Bollen, et al. v. Pulaski County Special School District Dear Michael: I have enclosed the original and 11 copies of the Joint Brief of Appellee/Cross-Appellant and Joshua Intervenors together with the original and four copies of Separate.Appendix in this matter. Please file the brief and appendix and return file-stamped copies to me in the enclosed envelope. I have also enclosed a diskette containing the brief in Acrobat format. By copy of this letter, I am serving two copies of the brief and appendix, along with a diskette, on counsel for appellants. If you have questions or comments, please contact me. MSJ:ao Enclosures 459324-vl Cordially yours, WRIGHT, LINDSEY \u0026amp; JENNINGS LLP Cf- WRIGHT , LINDSEY \u0026amp; JENNINGS LLP December 22, 2003 - Page2 cc/w/encls.: Mr. Will Bond (2 copies with diskette) Mr. Scott Smith (1 copy w/o diskette) 459324-vl Mr. Christopher Heller (1 copy w/o diskette) Mr. John W. Walker ( 1 copy w / o diskette) Mr. Mark Burnette (1 copy w/o diskette) Mr. Stephen Jones ( 1 copy w / o diskette) Ms. Ann Marshall (1 copy w/o diskette) Mr. Tim Gauger (1 copy w/o diskette) Honorable Wm. R. Wilson, Jr.(1 copy w/o diskette) NO. 03-3088/03-3404 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS -, FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT GREG BOLLEN, et al. V, PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT APPELLANTS APPELLEE/CROSS-APPELLANT On Appeal From The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas Honorable William R. Wilson, Jr. Presiding Judge JOINT BRIEF OF APPELLEE/CROSS-APPELLANT AND JOSHUAJNTERVENORS John Walker John \\Valker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 (501) 374-3758 Attorney for Joshua Intervenors 4593',4 VI M. Samuel Jones, III WRIGHT, LINDSEY \u0026amp; JENNINGS LLP 200 West Capitol A venue, Suite 2300 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-3699 (501) 371-0808 Attorneys for Pulaski County Special School District -... I I I NO. 03-3088/03-3404 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT GREG BOLLEN, et al. APPELLANTS I V. I I I I I I I I I I ' I PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT APPELLEE/CROSS-APPELLANT John Walker John Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway On Appeal From The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas Honorable William R. Wilson, Jr. Presiding Judge SEPARATE APPENDIX OF APPELLEE/CROSS-APPELLANT AND JOSHUAINTERVENORS M. Samuel Jones, III Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 (501) 374-3758 WRIGHT, LINDSEY \u0026amp; JENNINGS LLP 200 West Capitol Avenue, Suite 2300 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-3699 (501) 371-0808 Attorney for Joshua Intervenors 467883-vl Attorneys for Pulaski County Special SchoolDistrict fOM COURTWAY [nterim Director ;;tale Board of Education loNell Caldwell, Chair ~ittle Rock :ihclby Hillman, Vice Chair '.:arlisle Sherry Burrow Tonesboro Luke Gordy Van Buren '.:alvin King 14arian11a ~andy Lawson 3en ue vfary e Rebick 'ine Bluff eanna Westmoreland lrkadelphia Arkansas Department of Education #4 Capitol Mall, Liitle Rock, AR 72201-1071 501-682-4475 December 30, 2003 Mr.M. SaniuelJones,III Wright, Lindsey \u0026amp; Jennings 200 West Capitol, Suite 2000 Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. John W. Walker John Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Mark Burnette Mitchell, Blackstock, Barnes, Wagoner, Ivers \u0026amp; Sneddon P. 0. Box 1510 Little Rock, AR 72203-1510 Mr. Christopher Heller Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark 400 West Capitol, Suite 2000 Little Rock, AR 72201-3493 Mr. Stephen W. Jones Jack, Lyon \u0026amp; Jones 425 West Capitol, Suite 3400 Little Rock, AR 72201 Ms. Ann Marshall One Union National Plaza 124 West Capitol, Suite 1895 Little Rock, AR 72201 http:/ /arkedu.state.ar.us RECEIVED ~ OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORJNG RECEIVED Jt\\i~ 0 2 2004 OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING RE: Little Rock School District v. Pulaski County Special School District, et al. US. District Court No. 4:82-CV-866 Dear Gentlemen and Ms. Marshall: Per an agreement with the Attorney General's Office, I ani filing the Arkansas Department of Education's Project Management Tool for the month of December 2003 in the above-referenced case. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at your convenience. -\u0026amp;::~~/.~ ~ Gener:;tl Counsel Arkansas Department of Education SS:law cc: Mark Hagemeier UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF V. No. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, et al DEFENDANTS NOTICE OF FILING In accordance with the Court's Order of December 10, 1993, the Arkansas Department of Education hereby gives notice of the filing of the ADE's Project Management Tool for December 2003. Respectfully Submitted, ~A~ sCIIlith, #922 Attorney, Arkansas Department of Education #4 Capitol Mall, Room 404-A Little Rock, AR 72201 501-682-4227 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Scott Smith, certify that on December 30, 2003, I caused the foregoing document to be served by depositing a copy in the United States mail, postage prepaid, addressed to each of the following: Mr. M. Samuel Jones, III Wright, Lindsey \u0026amp; Jennings 200 West Capitol, Suite 2000 Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. John W. Walker John Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Mark Burnette Mitchell, Blackstock, Barnes Wagoner, Ivers \u0026amp; Sneddon P. 0. Box 1510 Little Rock, AR 72203-1510 Mr. Christopher Heller Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark 400 West Capitol, Suite 2000 Little Rock, AR 72201-3493 Mr. Stephen W. Jones Jack, Lyon \u0026amp; Jones 425 West Capitol, Suite 3400 Little Rock, AR 72201 Ms. Ann Marshall One Union National Plaza 124 West Capitol, Suite 1895 Little Rock, 2201 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, ET AL PLAINTIFFS V. NO. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT, ET AL DEFENDANTS MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL INTERVENORS KATHERINE W. KNIGHT, ET AL INTERVENORS ADE'S PROJECT MANAGEMENT TOOL In compliance with the Court's Order of December 10, 1993, the Arkansas Department of Education (ADE) submits the following Project Management Tool to the parties and the Court. This document describes the progress the ADE has made since March 15, 1994, in complying with provisions of the Implementation Plan and itemizes the AD E's progress against timelines presented in the Plan. - IMPLEMENTATION PHASE ACTIVITY I. FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS A. Use the previous year's three quarter average daily membership to calculate MFPA (State Equalization) for the current school year. 1. Projected Ending Date Last day of each month, August - June. 2. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 Based on the information available at November 30, 2003, the ADE calculated ihetqualization Funding for FY,03/04,' subject to penodic adjustments: B. Include all Magnet students in the resident District's average daily membership for calculation. 1. Projected Ending Date Last day of each month, August - June. This 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.\u003c/dcterms_description\u003e\n \n\n\u003c/dcterms_description\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\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n\n\n\n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n\u003c/item\u003e\n\u003c/items\u003e"},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1035","title":"\"Little Rock School District Board of Directors' Meeting\" agenda","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":["2003-11"],"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--21st Century","Little Rock School District","Education--Arkansas","Education--Economic aspects","Education--Evaluation","Education--Finance","Educational law and legislation","Educational planning","Educational statistics","School board members","School boards","School improvement programs","School superintendents"],"dcterms_title":["\"Little Rock School District Board of Directors' Meeting\" agenda"],"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/1035"],"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\n \n\n \n\nThis transcript was created using Optical Character Recognition (OCR) and may contain some errors.\nAgenda RECEIVED NOV 1 q 2003 OFACEOF DESEGREGATION MONITORING Little Rock School District Board of Directors' Meeting Happy Thanksgiving! November 2003 (\") \"0 ::O i=~ bl o :\no::O om--\u0026lt;., ::0 C: -z :\non o--\u0026lt; rr--cz5 ~Cl) F ~\n::: m -o r- ::0 8g l::m mo -c: ~~ 0~ ::0:::::1 ~m z\no (\")Cl) m I. 11. 111. IV. LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM STREET LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS PRELIMINARY FUNCTIONS A. Call to Order B. Roll Call PROCEDURAL MATTERS A. Welcome to Guests REGULAR MEETING November 20, 2003 5:30 p.m. B. Performance - Rockefeller Elementary School Choir REPORTS/RECOGNITIONS/PUBLIC COMMENTS: A. Superintendent's Citations B. Partners in Education - New Partnerships Mann Magnet Middle School - Jim Fullerton \u0026amp; Becky Webb Colaianni Piano \u0026amp; Organ Company, Inc. - Gil \u0026amp; Teri Colaianni Metropolitan Career \u0026amp; Technical Center - Mike Peterson \u0026amp; Allie Freeman Maverick Transportation - Ms. Sam Carr \u0026amp; Mike Jeffress C. Remarks from Citizens (persons who have signed up to speak) D. Little Rock Classroom Teachers Association E. Joshua lntervenors REPORTS AND COMMUNICATIONS: A. Remarks from Board Members B. Student Assignment Report C. Budget Update D. Construction Report: Proposed Bond Projects E. Internal Auditors Report F. Technology Update (\")~ )\u0026gt;\nIC . m J= C -tll: Oz o\u0026gt;\nIC\nIC C-\u0026lt; m-n\nIC C: -z\nIC(\") o-t ~~ (\")\"' \u0026gt; ~\n= Proposed Agenda for November 20, 2003 Page2 V. APPROVAL OF ROUTINE MATTERS: A. Minutes B. Personnel Changes C. Attendance Report VI. ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DIVISION: A First Reading: Policy Revisions ACBB - Equitable Student Assignment JC - School Attendance Zones JCA - School Choice B. Student Assignment Plan, 2004-05 VII. SCHOOL SERVICES DIVISION A. Safety and Security Plan for Central Office VIII. CURRICULUM AND INSTRUCTION: A Waiver Providing Incentive for Students Taking AP Exams B. Program Evaluations for Elementary and Secondary Literacy C. Program Evaluation Agenda, 2003-04 D. Proposed Changes to Middle and High School Curriculum IX. BUSINESS SERVICES DIVISION: A Second Reading: Policy DGA- - Authorized Signatures B. Donations of Property C. Financial Report X. CLOSING REMARKS: Superintendent's Report: 1. Dates to Remember 2. Special Functions XI. EMPLOYEE HEARINGS XII. ADJOURNMENT c-,-., ) \u0026gt;Aml .r..-. r_.... !C Oz o\u0026gt; Al Al o-\u0026lt; m.,, Al C: -z AIC\"\u0026gt; o-\u0026lt; r- c5 r-z C\")UI ~ PRELIMINARY FUNCTIONS CA.LL TO ORDER/ ROLL CALL II. PROCEDURAL MATTERS WELCOME/PERFORMANCE Ill. REPORTS/RECOGNITIONS A. SUPT. CITATIONS B. PARTNERSHIPS C. REMARKS FROM CITIZENS D. LR.CTA E. JOSHUA To: From: Through: Subject: Little Rock School District 810 West Markham Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 November 20, 2003 Board of Education Debbie Milam, Director, ViPS/Partners in Education Morris L. Holmes, Interim Superintendent Partners in Education Program: New partnerships The Little Rock School District Partners in Education program is designed to develop strong relationships between the community and our schools. The partnership process encourages businesses, community agencies and private organizations to join with individual schools to enhance and support educational programs. Each partnership utilizes the resources of both the school and the business for their mutual benefit. The following schools and businesses have completed the requirements necessary to establish a partnership and are actively working together to accomplish their objectives. We recommend that the Board approve the following partnerships: Horace Mann Magnet Middle School and Colaianni Piano \u0026amp; Organ Company, Inc. Metropolitan Career and Technical Center and Maverick Transportation :x,::c mm !E c3 !li!~ (/)(/) -\n::\nCllo 031: ?\n~ CZ ffio 31: CD::::! mo :X,Z (I)(/) !'\" .z.... m !.... C C a :x, MANN MAGNET MIDDLE SCHOOL and COLAIANNI PIANO \u0026amp; ORGAN CO. PARTNERSHIP PROPOSAL Colaianni Piano \u0026amp; Organ Co. will contribute the following to the partnership: \u0026gt; Instructional enrichment for students through sponsored visits by performing artists, piano tuners, company representatives, etc.\nmotivational materials for students and instructors \u0026gt; Performance opportunities for students by hosting piano recitals \u0026gt; Discounts on music accessories, equipment purchases, and rental of instruments\nLending equipment (non instrument) and assisting with \"set-up\" for special events Mann Magnet School will contribute the following: \u0026gt; Prepared future pianists and customers \u0026gt; Recognition for your contribution \u0026gt; Personal satisfaction from contributing to the community Partnership Between Maverick Transportation and Metropolitan Career and Technical Center Metropolitan Career and Technical Center will: 1. Recognize Maverick Transportation Incorporated as a Partner-in Education on the Schools website under the Metropolitan sub link and in the monthly newsletter distributed to parents and students throughout the district. 2. Recognize Maverick Transportation Incorporated as a Partner In Education at the next Little Rock School Board meeting. 3. Display the plaque received at the Little Rock School Board meeting recognizing the partnership with Maverick Transportation Incorporated in the Central office at Metropolitan Career and Technical Center. 4. Metropolitan Career and Technical Center will identify qualified students for employment possibilities as training apprentices with Maverick Transportation, Incorporated. S. Arrange field trips for diesel technician/ automotive service technician students and/or parents to tour Maverick Transportation, Incorporated facility as a part of a group learning experience. 6. Provide a display area for your company to market and recruit potential students and for parents to review during Open House, Parent Day, or Job Fair. Maverick Transportation, Incorporated will: 1. Provide a representative to serve on the Advisory Council to the Diesel Technology/ Automotive Technology Program in order to provide guidance regarding the enhancement of the school's diesel curriculum, and provide support where possible. 2. Provide mentoring/apprenticeship opportunities for high school students recommended by the school. 3. Sponsor one or more of the students for a paid summer internship or apprenticeship as early as the summer after junior year and to be continued at a minimum of part- time internship during their senior year which will provide a variable work experience with an emphasis on skill development . 4. Assign a mentor to each student and agree to allow for each mentor to receive training prior to the summer internship period. 5: -Provide guest speakers to share new and innovative ideas about Maverick Transportation in the diesel technology classroom. 6. _ Provide an opportunity for field trips and visiting the facility at Maverick Transportation. 7, Provide assistance with the annual Arkansas Skills USA Competition in Hot Springs. 8. Provide assistance with \"Open House\" at Metropolitan !I' .n\"...'. me: C::0 8~ m-\u0026lt; -\u0026lt;\u0026gt; c::tn .., (I) Ci:') ~z m~ z... . !=' n 0 z ~ :0 m ~ ::!l rn .z... m ~ \"f! c\u0026gt;:: 0 =I 0 :0 .r_'1,..P.. 0 :0 c,, :en ~\n: DATE: TO: Little Rock School District 810 West Markham Street Little Rock, AR 7220 l November 20, 2003 Board irectors FROM: --~P'\\'onald M. Stewart, Chief Financial Officer orris L. Holmes, Interim Superintendent of Schools PREPARED BY: Bill Goodman ~6 SUBJECT: November 2003 Construction Report - Bond Projects I reported in September a financial update on the bond construction projects. The September report was based on data from Financial Services through July 2003. It showed that approximately $86,000,000 had been obligated and/or spent from the $132,000,000 Bond Fund, representing two-thirds (2/3) of the total. As of the end of September 2003, we have spent and/or obligated approximately $98,000,000, which equals 75% of the Bond Fund. This data explains the reason for the long list of completed projects and the decline of the number of projects under construction. The construction contract for the five-classroom addition to Brady Elementary has been awarded. Construction will start soon. The construction of the additions to Parkview Arts/Science Magnet High School has begun. The renovation of projects at Mann Magnet Middle and Mabel vale Middle schools will be completed in December. The move from the portable classrooms into the new and renovated classrooms will take place during the holidays. Please call me at 447-1146 if you have questions. !JI\nl:l\no lS zz .m.. =...\". m C') ::c C: \"C ~ m Facility Name Baseline rady~--Central Dunbar CONSTRUCTION REPORT TO THE BOARD NOVEMBER 20, 2003 BOND PROJECTS UNDER CONSTRUCTION I I I t:st. c.\nompletlon Project Description Cost Date Renovation --A-d-dition/renovation -- --------::-~---~---\n-,~:~~~ JJuu~:~: -----~-,--, Renovation - Interior $10,200,266 Dec-05 Renovation/addition --- -=:=-_$6,161,~ -- Aug-04 ----16 classroom addition \u0026amp; cafeteria/music i-:-J...,. . A..,._ .F.,...a_i.r,....--=---------..,,_room addition $3,155,640 Feb-04 Mabelvale MS Renovation _____ ~ $6,851 ,621- Dec-03 Ma~ -- Partial Replacement - -- $11 ,500,000 Dec-03 MCCieiian Classroom Addition - - $2,155,622 Jul-04 Parkview -- Addition -- - - -\n- --$~226 Jun-04 --- Pulaski Hgts. Elem Renovation ___ _ $1 ,193,259 Aug-04 Pulaski Hgts. MS Renovatron- ----$3,755,0~ Aug-04 Southwest ____ Addition - - $2,000,000 _-_-_-_Aug-04 Tech Ctr/ Metro Renovatfon Addition/Renovation - Phase II -- $2 ,725.000 Jun-04 Wakefield --- Rebuild i. ~5,300,00~ Jul-04 Williams Renovation - --$2, 106~-- Jun-=64 Williams __ Parking expansions $183,717 Jun-04 Wilson I Renovation/expansion $1,263,876 Nov-03 BOND PROJECTS CONSTRUCTION - WINTER 2004 I I I t:st. c.\nompIet1on Facility Name Project Description Cost Date Mitchell Renovation $750,000 Aug-04 BOND PROJECTS PLANNING STARTED CONST. DATE TO BE DETERMINED I I I t=st. l\nOmpIeuon Facility Name Project Description Cost Date Pulaski t!._gts. MS Energy monitoring system installation Unknown Rightsell !Renovation $660,000 Unknown Wilson Energy monitoring system installation I Unknown Woodruff Parkinq addition -- $193,777 Unknown BOND PROJECTS THAT HAVE BEEN COMPLETED Facility Name I I I Est. Completion Project Description Cost Date Administration Asbestos abatement ____ $380,495 ! Mar-03 A_d_minist_ra_ti_on ____+ -F[_ r_es_h air system ________$_ 5_5,000 I Aug-03 Administration Fire alarm $32,350 Aug-03 Administration Annex I Energy monitoring system installati~ ' May-02 Alternative Learning Ctr. Energy monitoring system installation ' $15,160 : Oct-01 ~lternati.':_e Learnin'g\"'\"_C_tr_. __,_E~n_e__ r_g y efficient lighting __ $82,000 Dec-01 Badgett__ I Partial asbestos abatement $237,237 Jul-01 Badgett Fire alarm $18,250 Aug-02 Bale !classroom addition/renovation , $2,244,524 Dec-02 Bale I Energy monitoring system I I Mar-02 Bale !Partial roof replacement __ $269,587 Dec-01 1-----------~IHVA-C ---------- $664,587 Aug-01 ,Energy efficient lighting $170,295 Apr-01 Bale Booker Booker Booker I Energy monitoring system ins~lat_io_n_~'----$_2_3_,7_1_0-+I ____ O_ct_-0_1 Asbestos abatement $10,900 . Feb-02 Booker I Fire alarm $34,501 Mar-02 CONSTRUCTION REPORT TO THE BOARD NOVEMBER 20, 2003 BOND PROJECTS THAT HAVE BEEN COMPLETED Facility Name I Project Description I Cost I Est. Completion Date Brady ~ ergy efficient lighting $80,593 Sep-02 Brady Asbestos abatement $345,072 Aug-02 - --- Carver Energy monitoring system installation $14,480 May-01 - -- Carver Parking lot --$111 ,742 Aug-03 --- Central Parking Student parking - $174,000 Aug-03 Central/Quigley Stadium light repair \u0026amp; electrical repair $265,00-0 - --Aug-03 Central/Quigley__ Athletic Field Improvement -------r $38,000 Aug-03 Central/Quigley Irrigation System ~ 4.500 -----\nijj g-03 -- Central Purchase land for school Unknown Dec-02 ------- ~ of \u0026amp; exterior renovations - Central $2,000,000 Dec-02 Central Ceiling andwall repair-- - -- ~ 4,000 I Oct-01 -- Central Fire Alarm System Design/Installation . $80,876 Aug-01 - Central Front landing tile repair - $22,4~ Aug-01 -- Cloverdale Elem_. ____ Energy efficient lighting __ $132,678 Jul-01 Cloverdale MS Energy efficient lighting ____ --- $189,743- Jul-01 Cloverdale MS -- - Major renovation \u0026amp; addition $1,393,822 I Nov-02 -- -- Dodd Energy efficient lighting $90,665 Aug-01 - - -- - $156,299 --- Dodd Asbestos abatement-ceiling tile Jul-01 Dodd I Replace roof top HVAC - __$2 15,570 Aug-02 - I interior renovation -- Facilities Service $84,672 Mar-01 Facility Services Fire alarm I $12,000 Aug-03 Fair Park HVAC renovation/fire alarm ! $315,956 __ Apr-02 -- - - -Fair Park Energy efficient lighting - --r $90,162 ~ g-01 Fair Park Asbestos abatement-ceiling $59,310 Aug-01 -- J. A. Fair - E nergy efficient lighting __$2 77,594 Apr-01 J. A. Fair Press box $10,784 I Nov-00 -- - -- J. A. Fair security cameras __ I $12,500-- Jun-01 -- -- -- J. A. Fair Athletic Field Improvement ' $38,000 Jul-03 -- - J. A. Fair Irrigation S~stem I $14,000 Jul-03 ---- J. A. Fair , Roof repairs $391,871 I Aug-03 -- Forest Park 1 Replace window units w/central HVAC ' $485,258 Nov-03 Forest Park I Diagonal parking -- - $111,742 Aug-03 Forest Park Energy efficient lighting I $119,788 May-01 Fulbright 1 Energy efficient lighting I $134,463 Jun-01 Fulbright I Energy monitoring system installation $11 ,950 Aug-01 Fu!!?right Replace roof top HVAC units I $107,835 Aug-02 Fulbright Parking lot i $140,000 Sep-02 Fulbright I Roof repairs I $200,000 Oct-02 Franklin Renovation I $2,511 ,736 I Mar-03 Gibbs Energy efficient lighting I $76,447 I Apr-01 Gibbs !Energy monitoring system installation I $11,770 Jul-01 Hall I Major renovation \u0026amp; addition $8,637,709 I Sep-03 Hall Asbestos abatement $168,222 Aug-01 Hall I Energy efficient lighting $42,931 Jul-01 Hall l Energy efficient lighting I $296,707 Apr-01 Hall I Infrastructure improvements I $93,657 I Aug-01 Hall Ilntercom I I Feb-01 Hall Security cameras I $10,600 : Jun-01 2 :\u0026lt; ::0 \u0026gt;0 C: 3-1:z:::! Zm ~i en :::l m ~ !ll ril ::0 ~ z z m r- ~ \u0026gt; :::l m z ~z n m ill c3 ::!l !\" .z... m ~ ,\u0026gt;- \u0026gt; C: C a ::0 :..n.. m n % C: -c ~ m Facility Name Henderson CONSTRUCTION REPORT TO THE BOARD NOVEMBER 20, 2003 BOND PROJECTS THAT HAVE BEEN COMPLETED I I I Est. Completion Project Description Cost Date Henderson --- Energy efficient lighting__ ____ $193,679 Jul-01 Roof replacement gym $107,835 May-01 Heriderson ---- Asbestos abatement Phase I - ---+- - $500,000 Aug=oT Henderson IRC -=--=----=-_-__ A_s_b_e_st_o_s abatemen!Phase 2 ___ -:- ~ 50,000 _ Aug-02 Jefferson Jefferson-- - --- Laidlaw Mabelvale Elem. ~aleE~ Mabelvale Elem. Mabelvale Elem. Energy efficient lighting $109,136 Jul-02 - Asbestos abatem~ - -- ~ 3,639 ____ Oct-01 1Renovation \u0026amp; fire a'iarm - - $1 ,630,000 Nov-02 - - Parking lot ___ ~ $269,588--,..-__ Jul-01 -:_ Energy monitoring syste~ nstallation ---rt 2,150 Aug-01 Replace HVAC units - $300,000- Aug-02 Asbestos Abatemen-t -- $107,000 Aug-02 Energy efficient lighting - - - $106,598 Dec-02 Mabelvale MS _ Renovate bleachers _ -~ $13 4,793-= Aug-01 Mann Mann Mann Asphalt walks - - The total $1 .8 million Dec-01 -Walkway canopies _ __ is what has been Dec-01 -- - M-ann ___ Boiler replacement used so far on the Oct-01 ______ F encing ~_ =--- projects listed Sep-01 Mann Partial demolition/portable classrooms completed for Mann. Aug-01 McClellan Athletic Field Improvement ___ -_-_ --$38,000 Jul-03 McClellan McClellan Irrigation System $14,750 Jul-03 'Security cameras _ ~ 6,300---~ 01 McClellan -Mc-Clell-an- Energy efficient lighting $303,614 May-01 ____ ~um stands repair - ____ $235,000 Aug-01 McClellan -- - McDermott -- -Mc-De-rmott Meadowcliff Intercom ________ $46,000 Feb-02 Energy efficient lighting $79,411 Feb-01 - - !Replace roof top HVAC units $476,000 Aug-02 ----- ~-- Fire alarm $16,175 Jul-01 -- -- Meadowcliff Asbestos abatement _ __ _ $253,412~ ___ A_ug_-02 Meadowcliff . Engergy efficient lighting _ _ $88,297 Dec-02 Metropolita_n_ _____ _,_IR__e,p_l_ace_ co_o_li~ng tower _ $37,2_0~3-,---__,,..D.,..e.._c-\"0\"\"0\"7 Metropolitan Replace shop vent system $20,000 I May-01 Metrop_o_lit_an ______IE ne_r=g,y__m_o_n_ito_r_in_g,,'-s..,y__st_e_m_i_nst_alla_tio_n_ _l __- =-$-.1,...7~,-1c-4..,...5c--t-____A~ ug-01 Mitchell Energy efficient lighting $103,642 I Apr-01 Mitchell Energy monitoring system installation $16,695 Jul-01 Mitchell Asbestos abatement $13,000 , Jul-01 Oakhurst 'HVAC renovation ' $237,237 I Aug-01 --------+=--------..,.....,...--c--,---_..,-----=--=-+---.,...,---=-::c-:-1 Otter Creek !Energy monitoring system installation $10,695 1 May-01 Otter Creek Energy efficient lighting $81,828 Apr-01 Otter Creek Asbestos abatement $10,000 ' Aug-02 Otter Creek Parking lot $138,029 Aug-02 ------ Otter Creek !6 classroom addition $888,778 Oct-02 Otter Creek 'Parking Improvements $142,541 , Aug-03 Parkview I HVAC controls I $210,000 Jun-02 Parkview !Roof replacement I $273,877 1 Sep-01 Parkview 'Exterior lights $10,784 ____N_ o_v-_0_0, HVAC renovation \u0026amp; 700 area controls $301,938 Aug-01 1~P-a-rk_v..i,.e.._w_ _______. ,.,L,- o-c.,k...er_r_e-pl,a-ce_m_en_t___ $120,000 Aug-01 Parkview Parkview i Energy efficient lighting $315,000 Jun-01 Procurement [Energy monitoring system installation , $5,290 ' Jun-02 Procurement 1 Fire alarm $25,000 I Aug-03 Pulaski Hqts. Elem Move playground $17,000 Dec-02 3 CONSTRUCTION REPORT TO THE BOARD NOVEMBER 20, 2003 BOND PROJECTS THAT HAVE BEEN COMPLETED I I I Est. Completion Facility Name Project Description Cost Date Rightsell Energy efficient lighting $84,898 Apr-01 Rockefeller Energy efficient lighting 1 $137,004 Mar-01 Rockefeller - ~ lacerooftopHVAC-- I --$539,175 Aug-01 Rockefeller - Parking addition I $11D~ Aug-02 Romine --- --Asbestos abatement ___ ---_____ 1 $10,000 Apr-02 Romine - ~ jor renovation \u0026amp; addition $3,534,675 M\"ar-03 Security/Transportation Bus earner~ -- - $22,500 Jun-01 Southwest --- ~ bestos abatement - - ---- $28, 1~ - Aug-00 Southwest - --New roof - - -- --,- - $690,000 - - Oct-03 Southwest ----- Energy efficient lighting - =- , $168,719 Jan-02 Southwest Drainage/ street widening~-- I $250,000 Aug-03 Student Assignment ~ Energy monitoring system installation $4,830 - Aug-02 Student Assignment Fire alarm-- --==-~------_-_-_-_-- $9,000 --~ ug-03 Tech Center Phase 1 ~ Renovati~ ~- - $275,000 - Dec-01 TechnologtQpgrade - ~ P!I'\"ade phone system \u0026amp;data ___ -,-- Nov-02 Terry Energy efficient lighting _ I $73,850 _ _ Feb-01 I.~ry~---- Driveway \u0026amp; Parking i $83,484 Aug-02 Terry Media Center addition , $704,932 Sep-02 Wakefield - - Security cameras I $8,000 Jun-01 Wakefield -rfnergyetticient lighting $74,776 Feb-01 Wakefield - --fi5ernolition/Asbestos Abatement 1 $200,000 Nov-02 Washington Security cameras $7,900 Jun-01 Washington 'Energy efficient lighting $165,281 Apr-01 Watson -=- - --Energy monitoring system installation $8,530 Jul-01 Watson Asbestos abatement $182,241 Aug-01 Watson I Energy efficient lighting $106,868 Aug-01 Watson - -- Asbestos abatement ______ $10,000 ~ g-02 Watson_ ______ ~ jor renovation \u0026amp; addition $800,000-- ~g-02 Western Hills !Asbestos abatement $191,946 Aug-02 Western Hills ilntercom $7,100 Dec-01 Western Hills Energy efficient lighting ' $106,000 Jul-01 Williams Energy efficient lighting $122,719 I Jun-01 Wilson Parking Expansion 1 $110,000 Aug-03 Woodruff I Renovation 1 $246,419 Aug-02 4 :c: ::0 )1,0 C: !!\niE Zm ~i u, ........ m :,0 u, ?' ril :,0 ~ z z ,m- !'\" .z... m ! ,- )I, C: 0 ~ :,0 :..n.. m n ::c C:\n:g .).I.,. m Date: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS November 20, 2003 To: Board of Directors From: ~andy Becker, Internal Auditor Re: Audit Report - November This is the forty-ninth communication regarding status of the current year projects and reviews. Activity Funds a) Working with two middle school and one elementary school to resolve financial issues in their activity funds. b) Reviewing monthly financial information for all schools and assisting in resolving balance issues. c) Training school staff at schools on financial processes by request. Activities Advisory Board (AAB) a) Working with the new Activities Advisory Board to develop plans for the new school year and beyond. b) Assist the Activities Advisory Board in its mission to strengthen the effectiveness and viability of activities in the District. c) Working with the Activities Advisory Board to provide ways to assist the different Booster groups in our schools. Board Policy and Regulation a) Coordinating development of payroll guidelines with Financial Services as part of Financial Services Section of the District Operations Manual. Technology a) Monitoring technology plans to determine how use of technology will improve and streamline the workflow for staff persons. Training a) Served as a trainer for financial portion of Nuts \u0026amp; Bolts, Bookkeeper \u0026amp; Secretaries Training, Security Guard Training, individual school in-service meetings, and others as needed. Working to facilitate best means to improve financial processes and increase accountability for resources. Training new bookkeepers on bookkeeping procedures as requested. !D \"D m ~ z z ,m... f\u0026gt; ~ mz g z C') m Fil c8 ~ :n m--\u0026lt; C') :c C: \"D ~ m Audit Report - November 2003 Page 2 of 2 b) Placed training material, smart worksheets, and other helpful items on the Teachers Lounge section of the Little Rock School District web page. c) Coordinated guidelines and aids to inform and assist new activity sponsors of specific tasks relating to each activity. Added new checklist for spirit sponsors and smart spreadsheet for fundraiser reconciliation. This information is now in the Teachers Lounge section of the District web page. d) Developed skills test for financial positions. Implementing in coordination with Human Resources. Audit Area Sampling and Review of Financial Procedures Other a) Pulling samples of district expenditures to test for accuracy, accountability, and compliance with District policies. Reviewing district payroll processes for compliance, economy and efficiency, internal controls, and cost control. Working with Financial Services Payroll on internal control and processing issues. b) c) d) e) f) g) h) a) b) c) Working with Financial Services on internal controls and rules for payroll processes and implementation of a new interface system. Monitoring other selected risk areas for efficiency, cost effectiveness, and compliance with District policies. Reviewing grant programs. Working with Child Nutrition on implementation of streamlined information processing system with Information Services and Child Nutrition Staff. Working with Information Services on streamlining of data processes regarding SIS reporting. Monitoring cost reduction efforts in the District. Monitoring payroll for compliance with board direction and internal controls. Reviewing leave accountability system. (New). Provided technical assistance to school staff on grant writing. Served as co-chair of Strategic Team One - Financial Resources. Assisted with ShareFest 2003, Saturday, November 1, 2003. Report attached. Problem Resolution a) I have made myself available to help resolve financial issues, assist in improving processes, and help find solutions to questions that arise. Please let me know if you need further information. My telephone number is 501-447-1115. My e-mail is sandy.becker@lrsd.org. LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201 Date: November 20, 2003 TO: Little Rock School District Board of Directors FROM: Lucy Neal, Director Technology and Media Services John Ruffins, Director Computer Information Services THROUGH: Morris L. Holmes, Interim Superintendent Title/Subject Summary Objectives Expected Outcomes Population/Location Budget Amount Managers Duration Long Range/Continuation Technology Report The District has been notified that E-rate funds up to $1.2 million have been approved for telephone services for the 2002-2003 school year. Those services include the wide area network, local, long distance, cellular and paging services. Additional forms must be filed before we receive the money, and we are in the process of filing those forms now. Although we have not received notification of funding for applications for 2003-2004, we are now in the application window for applying for the 2004-2005 school year. Plans continue for the completion of the Technology Center next spring. The RFP for cabling has been issued and will open before Christmas. Jay Stanley Company in North Little Rock was awarded the contract for audiovisual and distance learning equipment. 131 LRSD teachers have applied to participate in the online technology courses funded by EETT (Enhancing Education Through Technology) funds. Teachers from North Little Rock and Pulaski County will also participate. To provide an update to the Board of Directors on the status of technology projects To continue to implement the approved technology plan NIA NIA Lucy Neal - Instructional John Ruffins - Technical October 24, 2003 - November 20, 2003 Technology Plan is approved from 2003-2006. !ZI \"ti m ~ zz ,m.... !ZI ~ C: \"t!O S:!:11 z-\u0026lt; - \u0026gt; \"'U) ~Cl) 6 G5 \"'~ .zm.. . DATE: TO: FROM: THROUGH: Re: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS November 20, 2003 rBo ard of Education Beverly Williams, Director, Human Resources Dr. Morris Holmes, Interim Superintendent of Schools Personnel Changes It is recommended that the following personnel changes be approved at the indicated positions, salaries and classifications. In accordance with A.C.A. 6-17-1502, it is recommended that one additional year of probationary status is provided for all teachers who have been employed in a school district in this state for three (3) years. Teachers with an effective date of employment after August 18, 2003 are considered intern teachers. Personnel Changes Page 2 September 25, 2003 NAME Dockett-Wilson, Tammi Reason: Personal Downing, Nancy Reason: Accepted Another Ganahl, Christopher Reason: Personal Fall, Libasse Reason: Cert. Expired Hunnicutt, Susan Reason: Personal Pletcher, Carmen Reason: Leaving City May, Hazel Reason: Retired Moreland, Hillary Reason: Personal Mueller, Melanie Reason: Accepted Another Position POSITION SCHOOL START DATE END DATE SALARY CLASS Resignationsff erminations Certified Employees Lang. Arts 8-24-87 6-17 CLOVERDALE EL. 9-29-03 TCHl0 Elem. II 8-21-89 3-18 MCDERMOTT 11-3-03 TCH925 Gen. Math 8-14-03 1-12 ALC 10-31-03 TCH925 Spanish I 8-7-02 1-02 CENTRAL 10-9-03 TCH925 Germani 1-3-99 6-05 CENTRAL 10-21-03 TCH925 Elem. III 8-7-03 1-06 WASHINGTON 12-19-03 TCH925 Counselor 8-23-82 6-21 PARK.VIEW I 0-14-03 CNLl0 Elem. III 8-7-03 1-01 STEPHENS 9-19-03 TCH925 Speech Path. 8-9-00 62-09 TERRY 10-30-03 SPE925 ANNUAL SALARY 48650.00 46015.00 36756.00 27056.00 36398.00 30630.00 53213.00 26546.00 41148.00 Personnel Changes Page 3 September 25, 2003 POSITION NAME SCHOOL START DATE END DATE Rolax, Shirley Kindergarten 8-21-73 Reason: Retired CLOVERDALE EL. 1-5-03 Tucker-Redam, Holly Elem I 8-14-00 Reason: Accepted Another WILSON 10-1-03 Position New Certified Eml!lol'.ees Alexander, Reba Cosmo 9-29-03 METRO Anders, Mika English 9-29-03 CENTRAL Bartholomew, Roseleta Social Studies 10-8-03 ACC Birtcher, James Law Enforcement 10-13-03 ALC SALARY CLASS 6-21 K925 1-04 TCH925 1-04 TCH950 3-06 TCH925 1-01 TCH925 1-02 TCH925 ANNUAL SALARY 53213.00 28588.00 28588.00 annual 23376.65 prorated 16642.00 annual 13521.63 prorated 26546.00 annual 20600.80 prorated 28597.40 annual 21745.94 prorated s\n= n \u0026gt;c:: - ~ ~o ~c:: \u0026gt;:: ~~ :oz \"\n-' f\u0026gt; \u0026gt; ~ m z 0 \u0026gt; z n m :0 m ~ ~ ~~ !l\u0026gt; :0 0 ~ !\no\nz: ~ Kl ,~..~.n 0 ~\n\"' !\"' ~c:: ~~ z-\u0026lt; - \u0026gt; i\u0026amp;l 0~ UI~ m .z.. . Personnel Changes Page 4 September 25, 2003 NAME Howse, Marion Logan, Jacob Lee, Canaa Prime, Stacie Robinson, Preston Scott, John Smith, Jeffrey POSITION SCHOOL English ALC American History START DATE END DATE 10-13-03 9-8-03 MABELV ALE MID. Math 10-20-03 CENTRAL Technology Spec. 8-15-03 GIBBS Civics 10-6-03 HALL Instrumental 8-7-03 PARK.VIEW Career Orien. 8-7-03 MABELV ALE MID. SALARY CLASS 6-20 TCH925 1-01 TCH925 2-03 TCH925 4-01 TCHl0 6-09 TCH925 1-03 TCH925 1-01 TCH925 ANNUAL SALARY 51713.00 annual 39323.43 prorated 26546.00 annual 23642.53 prorated 28894.00 annual 21219.03 prorated 30553.00 annual 30871.26 prorated 40482.00 annual 31837.41 prorated 31574.00 26546.00 annual 16591.25 prorated Personnel Changes Page 5 September 25, 2003 POSITION NAME SCHOOL START DATE END DATE Sutton, Wilma Social Studies MANN 10-13-03 Thom, Ellen Elem IV 10-20-03 RIGHTSELL Thomas, Shauna Music 10-15-03 FOREST HGTS. White, Susan Social Studies 9-26-03 FAIR West, Angela Elem I 10-20-03 WILSON Certified Promotion NONE Certified Transfer NONE SALARY CLASS 1-02 TCH925 1-01 TCH925 1-10 TCH925 4-04 TCH925 5-11 TCH925 ANNUAL SALARY 27056.00 annual 20573.83 prorated 26546.00 annual 19494.72 prorated 34714.00 annual 26035.50 prorated 32595.00 annual 26653.20 prorated 41120.00 annual 30197.50 prorated ~ n .\n\u0026lt;a= \u0026gt;-. .\nna ::e\u0026lt;= ::: ~ !:\na z U\u0026gt; :-' ~ \u0026gt; =I mz C \u0026gt;z n m\na m ~ ~ '.'.:~ !l\u0026gt;\na C ~ !\nc:Z z~ G')\na ~s ,....n n~ in U\u0026gt; !D .U..\u0026gt;. C -.,c ~ z-\u0026lt;\n_,1\n~U\u0026gt; c!:,c:\n.,,z i: m .z.. . Personnel Changes Page 6 September 25, 2003 NAME POSITION SCHOOL START DATE END DATE SALARY CLASS Resignationsfferminations Non-Certified Employees Adams, Sam Instr. Aide 4-2-01 1-09 Reason: Health WASHINGTON 12-1-03 INA925 Brandon, Mark Custodian 8-8-03 1-01 Reason: None Given HALL 10-13-03 CUS925 Brown, Johnny Custodian 9-14-03 1-01 Reason: None Given KING 10-13-03 CUS928 Bunting, Devona Custodian 9-8-03 1-01 Reason: Personal FULBRIGHT 10-23-03 CUS925 Coleman, Devin Custodian 4-14-02 1-02 Reason: Abandonment CLOVERDALE MID. 10-8-03 CUS12 Doerpinghaus, Sherri Nurse 9-21-98 1-09 Reason: None Given RIGHTSELL 10-10-03 NURSES Dickerson, Mary Child Nutrition 2-1-02 3-02 Reason: Accepted Another BALE 10-28-03 FSH550 Position Flowers, Martha Care 8-15-03 1-06 Reason: None Given CARE ~ 10-31-03 CARE Iverson, Marcus Custodian 9-27-01 1-03 Reason: None Given MCCLELLAN 10-3-03 CUS928 ANNUAL SALARY 13750.00 10329.00 10329.00 10329.00 13955.00 33693.00 8161.00 6.84 11201.00 Personnel Changes Page 7 September 25, 2003 POSITION NAME SCHOOL START DATE END DATE 9-23-02 Johnson,Shameka Care Reason: None Given CARE 10-31-03 Kendrick, Gloria Instr. Aide 8-9-00 Reason: Health TERRY 11-3-03 Pace, Martha Secretary 8-25-67 Reason: Health CLOVERDALE MID. 12-2-03 Reyes, Norma Care 8-18-03 Reason: None Given CARE 10-31-03 Shiflett, Linda Secretary 8-19-87 Reason: Retired FINANCIAL SERV. 12-31-03 Sterley, Pamela Child Nutrition 8-12-03 Reason: Accepted Another WESTERN HILLS 10-27-03 Position Tyler, Earnest Child Nutrition 4-7-03 Reason: None Given OTTERCREEK l 0-16-03 Usry, Yolanda Clerical 1-30-95 Reason: Terminated HALL 10-24-03 Walker, Edith Child Nutrition 8-20-98 Reason: Retired CHICOT 11-1-03 Warner, Charlotte Care 8-15-03 Reason: None Given CARE 10-31-03 SALARY CLASS 3-05 CARE 1-10 INA925 31-20 CLK925 4-01 CARE 51-20 AN12 3-01 FSH550 3-01 FSH550 39-08 CLKl0 1-06 FSH5 1-03 CARE ANNUAL SALARY 7.40 14067.00 22656.00 6.25 41148.00 8130.00 8130.00 20100.00 7532.00 6.43 s\n= n .\nC:o: \no -an ~c:: ~ ~~ ::oz en :- ~ =l mz C nz m Rl ~ ~ ~~ !l \no C ~ !\nc\nz: z~ C\u0026gt;\no ~s ,....n \u0026lt;\"i~\nen !JI ~c:: -a C s\n:m z~ !I ..,,z ii: .zm.. Personnel Changes Page 8 September 25, 2003 NAME Baltimore, Jacqueline Barnes, Connie Beny, Roshawn Bracy, Saundra Burl, Felicia Brewer, Chanda POSITION SCHOOL START DATE END DATE SALARY CLASS New Non-Certified Employees Child Nutrition 10-21-03 3-01 MCCLELLAN FSH550 Child Nutrition 9-29-03 3-01 FULBRIGHT FSH550 Bus Driver 10-13-03 3-02 TRANS. BUSDRV Clerical 10-23-03 39-01 HALL CLKl0 Child Nutrition 10-3-03 3-01 HENDERSON FSH550 Child Nutrition 10-14-03 3-01 PARK.VIEW FSH550 ANNUAL SALARY 8130.00 annual 6130.82 prorated 8130.00 annual 6752.79 prorated 10118.00 annual 7787.45 prorated 16308.00 annual 11407.57 prorated 8130.00 annual 6575.08 prorated 8130.00 annual 6264.10 prorated Personnel Changes Page 9 September 25, 2003 POSITION NAME SCHOOL Cane, Sandra Custodian HALL Clark, Gerald Custodian BALE Dixon, Sarah Instr. Aides FAIR PARK Dukes, Marion Instr. Aides FAIR PARK Fisher, Lisa Bookkeeper SOUTHWEST Goodman, Phyllis Care CARE Gordon, Eura Child Nutrition MCCLELLAN START DATE END DATE 9-16-03 9-29-03 9-22-03 10-13-03 9-29-03 10-25-03 10-13-03 SALARY CLASS 1-01 CUS925 1-01 CUS12 1-10 INA925 1-10 INA925 39-12 CLKl0 1-07 CARE 3-14 FSH550 ANNUAL SALARY 5164.50 annual 4406.67 prorated 13399.00 annual 10035.00 prorated 14067.00 annual 11861.90 prorated 14067.00 annual 10721.34 prorated 22656.00 annual 17856.95 prorated 6.97 8533.00 annual 6621.23 prorated\ni,,s ~,... .,,~ m::c 3g Cl)rm(/) nm C:\n:o\n:o~ :\n!m -0 Cl) ~ s\n= (\") \u0026gt; C: - ~ ~o ~c: \u0026gt;:: ~~ ::oz ~ r, \u0026gt; ~ mz 0 \u0026gt;z (\") m\n:o m ~ .\n.:.o. ~\nS !l\u0026gt;\n,:,O ~ !I\no?= z~ C\u0026gt;\n:o ~~ rm ~(/) m Cl) !II ~ C: -oo z ~.... Nl\ni\"' oG'i UI~ .mz.. . Personnel Changes Page 10 September 25, 2003 NAME Harris, Fayette Hubbard, Myia Jacob, Lanina Jackson-Ayers, Lenora Jackson, Michelle J arnes, Henrietta Johnson, Tammy POSITION SCHOOL Child Nutrition CENTRAL Instr. Aide WILSON Instr. Aide WOODRUFF Instr. Aide GEYER SPRINGS Instr. Aide MCDERMOTT Child Nutrition FRANKLIN Child Nutrition STEPHENS START DATE END DATE 10-24-03 10-20-03 10-6-03 10-13-03 9-12-03 9-29-03 10-30-03 SALARY CLASS 3-01 FSH550 1-05 INA925 1-10 INA925 1-10 INA925 1-10 INA925 3-01 FSH550 3-01 FSH550 ANNUAL SALARY 8130.00 annual 5997.54 prorated 12481.00 annual 9175.22 prorated 14067.00 annual 11101.52 prorated 14067.00 annual 10821.34 prorated 14067.00 annual 12242.09 prorated 8130.00 annual 6752.79 prorated 8130.00 annual 5819.84 prorated Personnel Changes Page 11 September 25, 2003 POSITION NAME SCHOOL Johnson, Tammy Child Nutrition STEPHENS Jordan, Christene Care CARE Lucas, Chester Security Officer HALL McClendon, Marcus Care CARE McDonald, Keri Instr. Aide JEFFERSON Moragne, Lola Custodian FAIR Overton, Lawrence Security Officer RIGHTSELL START DATE END DATE 10-30-03 11-3-03 10-15-03 10-25-03 10-13-03 9-18-03 10-2-03 SALARY CLASS 3-01 FSH550 2-02 CARE 36-16 SOFR9 2-02 CARE 1-10 INA925 1-01 CUS925 36-10 SOFR9 ANNUAL SALARY 8130.00 annual 5819.84 prorated 6.80 16336.00 annual 12207.12 prorated 6.80 14067.00 annual 10721.34 prorated 5164.50 annual 4350.53 prorated 13657.00 annual 10880.58 prorated :s\n= 0 \u0026gt;c: ::0 \u0026gt;\na -an ~ C: \u0026gt;~ ~~ ::oz ~ !\"\u0026gt; \u0026gt; =I m z 0 \u0026gt;z 0 m ~ c3 ~ ~\ns !l \n,::,O ~ ~ 0\nz z~ C) ::0 c3 ~ r-m \u0026lt;'IC/) iii Cl) !II C...l.) C: -ao ~ z-\u0026lt; -..., 1n ~Cl) c!,c:\n.,, I m .z.. . Personnel Changes Page 12 September 25, 2003 NAME Porter, Dorothy Neal, ShelJie Randall, Joe Raynor, Gwendolyn Reed, Audrey Scott, Ronnie Smith, Tunza POSITION SCHOOL Nurse METRO Child Nutrition WILSON Security Officer CENTRAL Child Nutrition CHICOT Bus Driver TRANS. Instr. Aide KING Instr. Aide GIBBS START DATE END DATE 9-29-03 10-6-03 9-3-03 10-15-03 10-13-03 10-1-03 10-13-03 SALARY CLASS 1-07 NURSES 3-17 FSH4 36-13 SOFR9 3-01 FSH550 3-02 BUSDRV 1-05 INA925 1-03 INA925 ANNUAL SALARY 31651.00 annual 25716.44 prorated 6037.00 annual 4849.95 prorated 14939.00 annual 13625.68 prorated 8130.00 annual 6219.67 prorated 10,118.00 annual 7787.45 prorated 12481.00 annual 10052.26 prorated 2908.75 annual 2216.94 prorated Personnel Changes Page 13 September 25, 2003 POSITION NAME SCHOOL START DATE END DATE Summons, Raymond Security Officer 9-4-03 MITCHELL Stewart, Jacqueline Parent Coor. BASELINE 10-14-03 Taylor, Tanne Instr. Aide 10-2-03 WASHINGTON Taylor, Tanne Care 11-3-03 CARE Taylor, Wallace Instr. Aide 10-21-03 CHICOT White, Gloria Child Nut. Trainee 10-13-03 CHILD NUTRITION Williams, Charlotte Child Nutrition 9-22-03 HALL SALARY CLASS 36-10 SOFR9 1-06 INA925 1-10 INA925 3-01 CARE 1-10 INA925 2-01 FSMEAL 3-01 FSH550 ANNUAL SALARY 13657.00 annual 12231.27 prorated 6399.00 annual 4842.49 prorated 14067.00 annual 11253.00 7.12 14067.00 annual 10341.15 prorated 11593.00 annual 8912.90 prorated 8130.00 annual 6974.92 prorated ~ n \u0026gt; C: \"' \"' \"D c5 ~ C: ::: ~~ \"'z \":-\u0026lt;' !\"' \u0026gt; =l m z C \u0026gt;z n m \"m' c3 \"...'. ~\ns !l \n,\n,C ~!\nc\nz: z~ C)\"' c3 ~ ~m !:i\u0026lt;n m \"' !D \"...'. C: \"DC \u0026gt;~ Z-1 Nt ~\"' oi:'i u,Z ii: m z... . Personnel Changes Page 14 September 25, 2003 NAME Williams, Angela Williams, Racquel NONE NONE POSITION SCHOOL Instr. Aide ROMINE Security Officer MCCLELLAN START DATE END DATE 11-4-03 10-14-03 Non-Certified Promotions Non-Certified Transfer SALARY CLASS 1-10 INA925 36-11 SOFR9 ANNUAL SALARY 14067.00 annual 9580.77 prorated 14065.00 annual 10587.39 prorated Date: To: From: Through: Re: bjg LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM STREET LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS November 20, 2003 Board of Education Beverly Williams, Director Human Resources Morris L. Holmes, Ed. D. Interim Superintendent Attendance Report Oral Presentation / Update ~ n C: ::0 2!! -an ~ C: ::\nji~ ::0 z u, :- LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 501 SHERMAN STREET OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES Junious C. Babbs, Associate Superintendent LITTLE ROCK, AR 72202 TO: FROM: THROUGH: SUBJECT: DATE: Background Phone: (501) 447-2950 E-Mail: j cba bbs(l1)s t uasn.lrsd.kl 2.ar .us Board of Directors Junious Babbs Compliance Committee Dr. Morris Holmes, Interim Superintendent First Reading - Revisions to Policy ACBB\nJC\nJCA November 20, 2003 On September 13, 2002, the District Court granted LRSD partial unitary status finding that the District had substantially complied with the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan (\"Revised Plan\") in all areas except 2.7.1. The Revised Education Plan is referenced in existing policy and incorporates a number of student I school assignments that are race-based. Since LRSD has been declared unitary with regard to student assignment, revision is being recommended. Attached are copies of the proposed revised policy. Recommendation The Board tabled action on policies ACBB, JC, and JCA at the November 6 special meeting. It is recommended that approval on these revisions to policies ACBB: Equitable Student Assignment, JC: School Attendance Zones and JCA: Student Assignment I School Choice be granted at this time. (Attachment)\ni,,s ~:..,~ m:z: ::\n!o -o \u0026lt;nrmnm.,, C:\n:c\n:c~ :.\n,!,.m,, \u0026gt; z s\n= LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPH: ACBB EQUITABLE STUDENT ASSIGNMENT The Board of Education is committed to the implementation of student assignment programs and procedures designed to maintain diversity in Little Rock School District schools to the extent practicable, recognizing that there is no requirement that every Little Rock School District school be racially balanced. Revised: Adopted: April 22, 1999 Cross References: Board of Education Policies AC, ACB, ACBD, JC, JCA LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPH: JC SCHOOL ATTENDANCE ZONES School Attendance zones will be established by the Board of Education and all modifications or alterations in zone boundaries will be approved by the Little Rock School Board. The basis for LRSD student assignments is the geographic attendance zone which ties each residential street address within district boundaries to a specific elementary, middle and high school. Student assignment priority will be given to the Attendance Zone student. Recommendations to establish, modify or alter attendance zone boundaries will include consideration of the operational needs of the school system. Any recommendation for establishment or alteration of boundaries will include an analysis and justification based on these factors. Revised: Adopted: May 25, 2000 s\n= f LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPH: JCA SCHOOL CHOICE It is the policy of the Board of Education to implement student assignment programs and procedures designed to ensure that students may benefit from attending a school other than the one serving their neighborhood attendance zone. The Student Assignment Plan includes attendance zone school precedence and educational choice options that maintain student diversity to the extent practicable. Providing students and their families with school choice is a key component of the assignment plan. School Choice is viewed as a healthy method of providing opportunity for students to take advantage of unique curriculum offerings, special emphasis and program activities. Procedures will be established that enable students to make application to enroll in a school outside of their designated attendance zone. Initial registration begins during a two-week open enrollment period scheduled the first two months of the calendar year. Parents and students will be informed of available options. ATTENDANCE ZONE SCHOOLS-Students are assigned to the designated attendance zone school by their recorded residence. During the open enrollment period, priority will be provided to attend the attendance zone school site. STIPULATION/ ORIGINAL MAGNET SCHOOLS were created in 1987. Seats are reserved for students in the Little Rock School District, North Little Rock School District (NLRSD) and Pulaski County Special School District (PCSSD). Each district conducts an application process and assigns students to these schools. SPECIAL TY MAGNET SCHOOLS with \"themed\" or \"specialty\" programs have coursework that supplements the regular curriculum. They are available to students seeking school options or choices outside of their attendance zone schools. These specialty programs are sited at schools that also serve as attendance zone schools. Students from PCSSD may participate in these specialty programs as M-to-M transfer students. If the number of out of zone applicants exceed the number of program seats available, a weighted random assignment process will be used to identify those students who will be assigned. M-to-M Transfer program is a collaborative effort between the LRSD and PCSSD, which allows students school choice across district boundaries if certain criteria are met. NCLB Transfers available to students in schools identified by the Arkansas Department of Education as \"low-performing\". Staff Preference Transfers allow students who live in the LRSD to attend the schools in which their parents are employed. Act 624, Act 762 and Act 609/School Choice Transfers are Arkansas statues which are available to students who wish to transfer across school district boundaries. Transfer No Transportation (TNT) Transfers permit students to attend a school other than their attendance zone school if space is available after a certain number of seats are set aside or \"reserved\" for attendance zone students and if the parent / guardian assumes responsibility for the student's transportation. If demand exceeds available space, the priority will be to promote diversity. Revised: Adopted: May 25, 2000 Cross References: Board of Education Policy AC, ACB, ACBB, ACBD, JC LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 501 SHERMAN STREET OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES Junious C. Babbs, Associate Superintendent LITTLE ROCK, AR 72202 TO: FROM: THROUGH: SUBJECT: DATE: Background Phone: (501) 447-2950 E-Mail: j unious.babbs@lrsd.org Board of Directors Junious Babbs Compliance Committee Dr. Morris Holmes, Interim Superintendent 2004-05 Student Assignment Plan November 20, 2003 On September 13, 2002, the District Court granted LRSD partial unitary status finding that the District had substantially complied with the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan (\"Revised Plan\") in all areas except 2. 7 .1. The Revised Plan incorporated a number of race-based student assignment policies as a part of the District's effort to eliminate the vestiges of its past discrimination. LRSD's being declared unitary changes the analysis with regard to the constitutionality of the LRSD's intradistrict race-based student assignment policies and requires a change in the student assignment plan. LRSD being declared unitary should not at this time affect the constitutionality of interdistrict race-based student assignment policies related to the stipulation magnet schools, interdistrict schools and M-to-M transfers. Those policies remain necessary to eliminate the vestiges of past discrimination by the Pulaski County Special School District and the State of Arkansas. Recommendation It is recommended that the Board of Education approve one of the attached Student Assignment Plans for 2004-05. (Attachment) :s\n= 2004-2005 LRSD STUDENT ASSIGNMENT PLAN (Plan A) The proposed 2004-05 Little Rock School District (LRSD) Student Assignment Plan recognizes attendance zone school precedence\nhowever, additional attention and focus have been developed with the intent to provide both educational choice options and maintain student diversity (to the extent practicable). The basis for LRSD student assignments are the geographic attendance zones which ties each residential street address in the district to a specific elementary, middle and high school. First priority of student assignment is in the Attendance Zone School. The Board of Directors on recommendation by the Superintendent must approve any modification or alteration to attendance zones. Providing students and their families with school choice is a key component of the current student assignment plan. School Choice is viewed as a healthy method of encouraging students to take advantage of unique curriculum offerings, special emphasis and program activities. In light of the success of current choice options (27% of LRSD students attend a school via school choice option) it allows all LRSD students regardless of where they reside an opportunity. Recognizing the importance of student diversity and evidence that supports improved academic achievement, social connection and life preparations in a multicultural society, LRSD is committed to offering assignment opportunities or choices that might promote further diversity. A recent survey indicated the following: School assignment options outside the Neighborhood School Attendance Zone are important. Parent - 85.4% Agree I Strongly Agree Staff - 82.9% Agree I Strongly Agree Community - 77. 7% Agree I Strongly Agree It important that schools reflect a diverse student population Parent- 90.0% Agree I Strongly Agree Staff- 92.2% Agree I Strongly Agree Community- 61.1 % Agree I Strongly Agree Attendance Zone Schools - Each child is assigned to a designated attendance zone school by their recorded residence. During the open enrollment period, priority will be provided to attend the attendance zone school site. Although the majority of students in LRSD attend their attendance zone school (70%), school choice or assignment options are available. 2004-05 TRANSFER CHOICE OPTIONS Stipulation I Original Magnet schools and M-to M transfer options will continue to utilize racebased placement decisions. [Judge Wilson indicated in the September 2002 partial unitary ruling that \"the Court's decision in this case does not affect interdistrict transfers between the LRSD, PCSSD and NLRSD.\"] Stipulation /Original Magnet Schools were created in 1987. Seats are reserved for students in the Little Rock School District, North Little Rock School District (NLRSD) and Pulaski County Special School District (PCSSD). Each district conducts an application process and assigns students to these schools: Parkview Arts/Science Magnet High School Mann Art/Science Magnet Middle School Booker Arts Magnet Elementary School Carver Math and Science Magnet Elementary School Gibbs International Magnet Elementary School Williams Basic Skills Magnet Elementary School Specialty Magnet Schools with \"themed\" or \"specialty\" programs have coursework that supplements the regular curriculum. They are available to students seeking school options or choices outside of their attendance zone schools. These specialty programs are sited at schools that also serve as attendance zone schools, therefore, part of the schools' population is zone students and part is specialty magnet students. Students from PCSSD may participate in these specialty programs as M-toM transfer students. Central International Studies Magnet High School Hall University Studies High School Fair Environmental Sciences/Systems Engineering/Medical Studies Magnet High School McClellan Business-Finance/Multimedia-Graphic Design/Engineering Magnet High School Dunbar International Studies/Gifted and Talented Interdistrict Magnet Middle School Henderson Health Sciences Interdistrict Magnet Middle School Cloverdale Economics/Multimedia/Engineering Magnet Middle School Mabelvale Environmental Sciences/Medical Sciences/Information Communications Technology Magnet Middle School Martin Luther King High Intensity Learning Interdistrict Elementary School Romine Computer Science/Basic Skills Elementary School Rockefeller Early Childhood (Pl - P4). Washington Basic Skills / Math Sciences Interdistrict Magnet Elementary School If the number of out of zone applicants exceed the number of program seats available, a weighted random assignment process will be used to identify those students who will be assigned. Criteria indicators considered in the weighted random process include the student's race, achievement test performance and economic status (free and reduced lunch). Weighted Random Assignment Process Step 1. Define a SCHOOL ATTRIBUTE for each school based on three separate characteristics of its Attendance Zone (AZ) students. The three characteristics are race, achievement test performance and economic status (free and reduced lunch). Step 2. Define a STUDENT ATTRIBUTE for each student requesting a transfer to Specialty Magnet Program School based on the same three characteristics as the school attribute. (A default weight will be added for students with missing data - i.e. achievement test performance and economic status). In addition the following weighted value will be added: Sibling (Provide a weight for students with a sibling at the requested school site) AZ Student Weight (Provide a weight for AZ students who enter the zone after the open enrollment period and seats are not available) Step 3. Compare the Student Attribute to the School Attribute and assign a weight for each student requesting a transfer. Weights are allocated by comparing the characteristics of the school to the characteristics of the student in an inverse relationship. For example, a low-performing student requesting to go to a school with a larger proportion of high-performing students might receive a greater weight in academic proficiency\nwhereas, a high-performing student applying to the same school would receive a reduced weight factor. Step 4. The computerized lottery will identify the student population of these specialty schools' attendance zones and then increase the likelihood that students of opposite attributes will be selected thereby diversifying the schools population. The selection process will be random. \"Applicant Pool\" - Students who do not get their 1st choice will remain in a \"pool\" for a seat in their first choice school. Each time a seat becomes available in a school that has an applicant pool, the random number of applicants and the student's respective place in the pool determine which student(s) will obtain the available seat. (Numbered Waiting Lists will no longer exist for these Specialty Magnet Schools.) ADDITIONAL SCHOOL CHOICE OPTIONS OUTSIDE OF STIPULATION MAGNET AND SPECIALTY MAGNET SCHOOLS M-to-M Transfer program is a collaborative effort between the LRSD and PCSSD, which allows students school choice across district boundaries if certain criteria are met. NCLB Transfers available to students in schools identified by the Arkansas Department of Education as \"low-performing\". Staff Preference Transfers allow students who live in the LRSD to attend the schools in which their parents are employed. Act 624, Act 762 and Act 609/School Choice Transfers are Arkansas statues which are available to students who wish to transfer across school district boundaries. Transfer No Transportation (TNT) Transfers permit students to attend a school other than their attendance zone school if space is available (after a certain number of seats are set aside or \"reserved\" for attendance zone students) and if the parent assumes responsibility for the student's transportation. If demand exceeds available space, priority will be provided to promote diversity. 2004-2005 LRSD STUDENT ASSIGNMENT PLAN (Plan B) The proposed 2004-05 Little Rock School District (LRSD) Student Assignment Plan recognizes attendance zone school precedence\nhowever, additional attention and focus have been developed with the intent to provide both educational choice options and maintain student diversity (to the extent practicable). The basis for LRSD student assignments are the geographic attendance zones which ties each residential street address in the district to a specific elementary, middle and high school. First priority of student assignment is in the Attendance Zone School. The Board of Directors on recommendation by the Superintendent must approve any modification or alteration to attendance zones. Providing students and their families with school choice is a key component of the current student assignment plan. School Choice is viewed as a healthy method of encouraging students to take advantage of unique curriculum offerings, special emphasis and program activities. In light of the success of current choice options (27% of LRSD students attend a school via school choice option) it allows all LRSD students regardless of where they reside an opportunity. Recognizing the importance of student diversity and evidence that supports improved academic achievement, social connection and life preparations in a multicultural society, LRSD is committed to offering assignment opportunities or choices that might promote further diversity. A recent survey indicated the following: School assignment options outside the Neighborhood School Attendance Zone are important. Parent - 85.4% Agree I Strongly Agree Staff- 82.9% Agree I Strongly Agree Community - 77. 7% Agree I Strongly Agree It important that schools reflect a diverse student population Parent- 90.0% Agree I Strongly Agree Staff- 92.2% Agree I Strongly Agree Community- 61.1% Agree I Strongly Agree Attendance Zone Schools - Each child is assigned to a designated attendance zone school by their recorded residence. During the open enrollment period, priority will be provided to attend the attendance zone school site. Although the majority of students in LRSD attend their attendance zone school (70%), school choice or assignment options are available. 2004-05 TRANSFER CHOICE OPTIONS Stipulation I Original Magnet schools and M-to M transfer options will continue to utilize racebased placement decisions. [Judge Wilson indicated in the September 2002 partial unitary ruling that \"the Court's decision in this case does not affect interdistrict transfers between the LRSD, PCSSD and NLRSD.\"] Stipulation /Original Magnet Schools were created in 1987. Seats are reserved for students in the Little Rock School District, North Little Rock School District (NLRSD) and Pulaski County Special School District (PCSSD). Each district conducts an application process and assigns students to these schools: Parkview Arts/Science Magnet High School Mann Art/Science Magnet Middle School Booker Arts Magnet Elementary School Carver Math and Science Magnet Elementary School Gibbs International Magnet Elementary School Williams Basic Skills Magnet Elementary School Specialty Magnet Schools with \"themed\" or \"specialty\" programs have coursework that supplements the regular curriculum. They are available to students seeking school options or choices outside of their attendance zone schools. These specialty programs are sited at schools that also serve as attendance zone schools, therefore, part of the schools' population is zone students and part is specialty magnet students. Students from PCSSD may participate in these specialty programs as M-toM transfer students. Central International Studies Magnet High School Hall University Studies High School Fair Environmental Sciences/Systems Engineering/Medical Studies Magnet High School McClellan Business-Finance/Multimedia-Graphic Design/Engineering Magnet High School Dunbar International Studies/Gifted and Talented Interdistrict Magnet Middle School Henderson Health Sciences Interdistrict Magnet Middle School Cloverdale Economics/Multimedia/Engineering Magnet Middle School Mabelvale Environmental Sciences/Medical Sciences/Information Communications Technology Magnet Middle School Martin Luther King High Intensity Leaming Interdistrict Elementary School Romine Computer Science/Basic Skills Elementary School Rockefeller Early Childhood (Pl - P4). Washington Basic Skills / Math Sciences Interdistrict Magnet Elementary School If the number of out of zone applicants exceed the number of program seats available, a weighted random assignment process will be used to identify those students who will be assigned. Criteria indicators considered in the weighted random process include student achievement test performance and economic status (free and reduced lunch). Weighted Random Assignment Process Step 1. Define a SCHOOL ATTRIBUTE for each school based on two separate characteristics of its Attendance Zone (AZ) students. The two characteristics are achievement test performance and economic status (free and reduced lunch). Step 2. Define a STUDENT ATTRIBUTE for each student requesting a transfer to Specialty Magnet Program School based on the same two characteristics as the school attribute. (A default weight will be added for students with missing data - i.e. achievement test performance and economic status). In addition the following weighted value will be added: Sibling (Provide a weight for students with a sibling at the requested school site) AZ Student Weight (Provide a weight for AZ students who enter the zone after the open enrollment period and seats are not available) Step 3. Compare the Student Attribute to the School Attribute and assign a weight for each student requesting a transfer. Weights are allocated by comparing the characteristics of the school to the characteristics of the student in an inverse relationship. For example, a low-performing student requesting to go to a school with a larger proportion of high-performing students might receive a greater weight in academic proficiency\nwhereas, a high-performing student applying to the same school would receive a reduced weight factor. Step 4. The computerized lottery will identify the student population of these specialty schools' attendance zones and then increase the likelihood that students of opposite attributes will be selected thereby diversifying the school population. The selection process will be random. \"Applicant Pool\" - Students who do not get their 1st choice will remain in a \"pool\" for a seat in their first choice school. Each time a seat becomes available in a school that has an applicant pool, the random number of applicants and the student's respective place in the pool determine which student(s) will obtain the available seat. (Numbered Waiting Lists will no longer exist for these Specialty Magnet Schools.) ADDITIONAL SCHOOL CHOICE OPTIONS OUTSIDE OF STIPULATION MAGNET AND SPECIALTY MAGNET SCHOOLS M-to-M Transfer program is a collaborative effort between the LRSD and PCSSD, which allows students school choice across district boundaries if certain criteria are met. NCLB Transfers available to students in schools identified by the Arkansas Department of Education as \"low-performing\". Staff Preference Transfers allow students who live in the LRSD to attend the schools in which their parents are employed. Act 624, Act 762 and Act 609/School Choice Transfers are Arkansas statues which are available to students who wish to transfer across school district boundaries. Transfer No Transportation (TNT) Transfers permit students to attend a school other than their attendance zone school if space is available (after a certain number of seats are set aside or \"reserved\" for attendance zone students) and if the parent assumes responsibility for the student's transportation. If demand exceeds available space, priority will be provided to promote diversity. f) m ~ r C: N)\u0026gt; o-, oc5 6z .... )\u0026gt; C) m z C )\u0026gt; ~ :l:o a~ :=,!\no ml') go C: :r.r - C: C) :I: :r.\n,o iil~ :r. u, .8...1 \"\" DATE: TO: FROM: Prepared by: Title/Subject: Summary: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 November 20, 2003 Little Rock School District Board of Directors Dr. Morris L. Holmes, Interim Superintendent Sadie Mitchell, Associate Superintendent School Services Division Robert Jones, Director Safety and Security Department Officer John D. Thompson Little Rock Police Department Crime Prevention Coordinator Security and Security Plan for Central Office In consultation with the Little Rock Police Department Crime Prevention Office, the School Service Division and the LRSD Safety and Security Department have surveyed the Administration Building for security improvements and have identied 11 safety measures that would significantly enhance and improve the safety and security layout of this building. Enclosed you will find a plan that outlines the procedures to be followed for the Administration Building at 810 West Markham. The plan includes procedures for specific emergency situations, as well as identifies key personnel who will assist with certain notification tasks in alerting other personnel during a building emergency or crisis. Other recommended measures are listed below: 1. Tint the windows in the employee lounge downstairs on the first floor and in the main lobby on the second floor to prevent individuals from observing the interior of the administrative office. (Estimated cost is $400.00) s\n= ~ i c:: N o..,. C, c5 ~z ~ mz ~ 2. Add four CCTV cameras, two on the west side of the building, one on the east side of the building, and one to view the front parking lot. (Estimated cost is $2,000.00) 3. Add a combination code lock on the door between the superintendent's office and the boardroom to prevent easy access into the superintendent's office. (Estimated cost is $400.00) 4. Add dutch doors in the Business and Human Resources offices so that individuals can view who is approaching the door. The door can remain locked in both the Human Resources and Business Office. (Estimated cost is $1200.00) 5. Secure the glass sliding door in the lounge. (Estimated cost is $25.00) 6. Add door contacts on the exit door in the Business Office on the west side of the building so entrance into the building can be monitored. (Estimated cost is $200.00) 7. Add a warning device system such as a bell or a horn to be used in the event of an emergency. (Estimated cost is $500.00) 8. Add a full-time security person and necessary office equipment. The security office desk would be stationed in the reception area. The security person would monitor all activities and cameras during the day and for all board meetings. (Estimated cost is $30,000.00) 9. Establish a visitor's logbook. (Estimated cost is $25.00) 10. Encourage all employees to wear an employee nametag and all visitors to wear a visitor's nametag. (Estimated cost is $75.00) 11. Request additional training from the Little Rock Police Department and the Safety and Security Department for all personnel at 810 West Markham. (No cost) Objectives: Continue to maintain a safe and secure environment for all staff members in the Little Rock School District. Expected Outcomes: Budget: Implementing the changes recommended by the Little Rock Police Crime Prevention Office will help to provide a safe and secure environment for all staff, patrons and board members working and entering the building at 810 West Markham. The cost to implement all recommendations is approximately $34,825.00. Recommendation: It is recommended that the Little Rock School District Board of Directors approve the implementation of, and authorize expenditure of funds for the Safety and Security Plan for the Administration Building. s\n= Central Office Security Plan The following Administrative Directives should be reviewed by each employee housed in the Administration Building and adhered to in the case of an emergency: EBAB - ACTION TO BE TAKEN IN THE EVENT OF A HAZARDOUS CHEMICAL SPILL ECAA - ARMED INTRUSION PROCEDURES EBCC - BOMB THREAT PROCEDURES EBCG - GUIDEUNES FOR 911 AMBULANCE USE In addition, the following measures are to be taken: Evacuation Routes In case of fire or other emergency, evaluation routes are posted in all rooms and are to be followed in case of emergency. Emergency Mass Care Shelter Procedures The American Red Cross has designated fifteen (15) Little Rock schools as mass shelters. The closest designated school to the Administration Building is Dunbar Magnet Middle School. At the direction of the Office of the Superintendent, proceed to Dunbar. Threatening Weather Kim Hochstetler will have a NOAA (National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration) weather radio at the front desk. When an alert is given, she will notify Diane Edwards, Beverly Griffin, and carol Armstrong who will then notify by phone a key person in each department (see phone tree). The designated person in each department will then notify all members of that department. Everyone is to remain alert for the emergency sirens for the city. Communications will keep in contact with radio and TV for further information. In the event of a tornado, everyone will proceed to the Business Office, Print Shop, or the first floor restrooms for safety. Fire or Fire Drill In the event of a fire or a fire drill, evacuation should take place according to the procedures posted in each room. At no time should the elevator be used. All employees are to assemble across the street in the LRSD parking lot. Each Department Head will determine if all of their employees have safely evacuated the building and will report this to the Director of Communications. Bomb Threat In the event of a bomb threat, the person taking the call witl notify Diane Edwards, Beverly Griffin, or Carol Armstrong. At this time, notification of the evacuation will take place by following these measures: The emergency horn/siren will be activated by the superintendent's office staff to initiate a building evacuation. All employees will evacuate the building and report the LRSD parking lot directly across from the building. In the event that Homeland Security issues a code red advisory, the school district will take the following additional security steps: Assign security to outside building security. Immediately issue a locked-door policy, only allowing entrance to the building through the front door, and If possible, have the front door observed at all times. Anyone entering the building through the front door must sign in and must give proof of identification. Be alert to any suspicious person such as: 1. Unseasonable dress or conspicuous or bulky clothing 2. Nervous handling of parts of clothing 3. Profuse sweating and slow paced walk while focusing on people around 4. Attempting to avoid security personnel 5. Heavily perfumed or recently shaved 6. Cannot give a good reason for being at the building Administrative Staff Certified in CPR Name Michelle Bonds Frances Jones Marian Lacey Beverly Griffin Mark Milhollen Sadie Mitchell Don Stewart Charlotte Washington James Washington Beverly Williams Suellen Vann Expires in January, 04 January, 04 January, 04 January, 04 January, 04 January, 04 January, 04 January, 04 November, 03 January, 04 Emergency Phone Tree The person receiving the emergency information will notify Beverly Griffin, Diane Edwards, or carol Armstrong who will then notify the persons listed below their name in bold. The person whose name is in bold will notify the people below him/her. In he event that the contact person cannot be reached, the next person will be contacted and will assume responsibility for contacting others in their department. Beverly Griffin Dr. Holmes Sandy Becker Lloyd Sain Bill Goodman John Ruffins Mary Smith Margaret Anderson Vera Bates Jackey Bruce Rodney campbell Walter Crockran Greta Freeman Alfreda Hall Helen McGraw Nancy Morgan Pam Neal John Smith Sharon Stephens Mattie Ruth Tipton Linda Shiflett Julian White Beverly Williams Kim Hockersmith Pauline Williams Denise Brown Marcy Eckolls Rita Jones Robert Robinson Sue Rodgers Diane Edwards Suellen Vann Michelle Bonds Julie Davis Larry Pickett Dennis Walker Kim Hochstetler Leon Adams Dorothy Green Valerie Hudson Lionel Ward Ken Savage Kevin Crawford Bill Barton James Washington Linda Austin Blondell Lee Shea Cochran Barbara Hobbs Carol Armstrong Don Stewart Sadie Mitchell Charlotte Washington Kay Gunter Frances Jones Debbie Price Linda Smith Marian Lacey Mark Milhollen Jean Ring Kathy Davidson Janecia Cleek Tanya Cox Rhetta Mayfield Joel Richards Shirley Bray Benita Browning Lynette Sanders carolyn Wallis LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT ADMINISTRATIVE DIRECTIVE: EBAB (2) Effective: May 1, 2000 ACTION TO BE TAKEN IN THE EVENT OF A HAZARDOUS CHEMICAL SPILL In the event of a major hazardous chemical spill the following plan will be initiated: 1. Immediately call 911 emergency number. 2. Give 911 operator all pertinent information on the chemical spill. 3. If possible make contact with the driver of the chemical truck and obtain the truck bill of lading information. 4. Keep the 911 phone line open unless requested to clear by the. 911 operator. 5. On a secondary line immediately contact the administration reference to the chemical spill. 6. When emergency personnel arrive, all instructions from emergency personnel will be immediately acted on. 7. The Superintendent, or his designee, will implement the District's crisis management plan. After you call 911 for assistance there will be a 3-5 minute period before emergency agencies respond to your building. This time period will be critical for the safety of your staff and students. If building evacuation is necessary: A. Advise 911 operator and school administration. B. Instruct teachers to bring class rott book. C. Determine direction of prevailing wind. D. Always have students go upwind to avoid fumes. E. Move at least 500 ft. (2 blocks) from hazardous substance spill. F. Immediately on reaching safe area have teachers do roll call. G. The District will provide transportation to a safe location. H. Release children only to custodial parent (check ID). LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT ADMINISTRATIVE DIRECTIVE: EBAB (2) Effective: May 1, 2000 Continued If a hazardous chemical spill occurs so close to a school that the best decision is to stay inside the school building for protection: A. Advise 911 operator. B. Shut down main electrical power sources to all ventilation systems. C. Turn off main gas supply D. Close all exterior doors and windows. E. Instruct teachers to take roll F. Require all persons (especially students with special needs) to go to the opposite end of the building from major chemical spill. G. Have custodial staff place material around doors and windows to prevent fumes from entering the building. H. Release children only to custodial parent (check ID). Cross reference: Board Policy EBAB :s\n= LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT ADMINISTRATIVE DIRECTIVE: ECM Effective: January 21, 2000 ARMED INTRUSION PROCEDURES If an armed intruder enters your school, the first three to five minutes of the emergency may determine whether or not injuries may occur. Staying calm is critical. Administrative Action: 1. Access the situation. 2. Principal/main office should be immediately contacted. 3. Advise staff by prearranged code so that a locked door policy can be immediately initiated and all students removed from the hallways. a. The prearranged code should be known only by the faculty or staff to keep the students from panicking and inadvertently escalating the situation. 4. Call 911 and advise the operator of all pertinent information, such as: a. Suspect race b. Approximate age c. Dress d. Number of individuals e. Injuries or shots that have been fired f. Location of subject in the building 5. All bells and alarms should be cut off to avoid startling the intruder or inadvertently escalating the situation. 6. Unless advised b'y the 911 operator, the phone line should be kept open and the 911 operator advised of the movements of the intruder. 7. After teachers have been alerted through the code system that an intruder is in the building, the teachers should instruct the students to stay away from the door, go to a solid wall if possible, staying low on the floor below window level. 8. Teachers and staff will observe, if possible, the movements of the suspect without leaving their rooms and report intruder movement to the principal's office. 9. No teacher is to be a hero. Their first thought is for the safety of the students in their care. 10. No student or teacher will leave the room until being advised by the principal or law enforcement officers. 11 . When the first law enforcement officers arrive, the principal will immediately advise them of the situation and have a map or blueprint of LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT ADMINISTRATIVE DIRECTIVE: ECAA Effective: January 21, 2000 continued the school available. Remember that when the law enforcement office arrives, they are in charge of the situation. 12. If building evacuation is necessary, the principal or designee will do the following: a. Advise 911 operator. b. Instruct the teachers to be sure to have roll books. c. Ensure that evacuation is orderly and that students stay with the teachers. d. Notify teachers and staff of the route to take to leave the building. e. Instruct teachers, students, and staff not to carry any items with them. As a safety factor for law enforcement officers, purses, book bags, coats, etc. will be left in the room. f. If time allows, close and lock all windows and doors when exiting the building. 13. When law enforcement personnel arrive, cooperate with and assist them-they are in charge. 14. As soon as practical, notify the Superintendent's office and the Safety and Security Department. 15. Activate the Crisis Building Plan. Cross reference: Board Policy EGA \u0026amp; EBC LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT ADMINISTRATIVE DIRECTIVE: EBCC Effective: September 30, 2002 BOMB THREAT PROCEDURES Whenever a bomb threat is received in a building, the principal/building manager must contact the police. The principal will decide if evacuation of the building is necessary and, if so, to what extent the building should be evacuated. The evacuation will be accomplished by a standard fire drill. Unless the principal is reasonably certain that the bomb threat is a prank or hoax, the building should be evacuated. Each principal/building manager shall work with staff to devise a search plan for the building. This search plan should be placed into effect in all instances of bomb threats. The Little Rock Police Department must always be notified of any bomb threat. LRPD will dispatch an officer to the scene and will notify the Fire Department if additional help is needed. Notification by telephone shall be made to the following: 1. Little Rock Police Department 2. Safety and Security Department 3. Principal's/Manager's Immediate Supervisor Principals/building managers should call the Department of Safety and Security if they believe that their telephone should be monitored for bomb threats. This directive is effective immediately and replaces Administrative Directive EBCC. Cross reference: Board Policy EBCC Attachment BOMB THREAT ACTION PLAN In the event of a bomb threat: 1. The person receiving the threat should try to obtain as much information as possible about the bomb and its location. Try to ascertain the exact location of the bomb, the time for detonation, what it looks like, the type of explosive, why it was placed, and any other information possible. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. If the threat is made by telephone, the exact time should be noted. Immediately inform the school principal and assistant superintendent. Immediately call the police department (911) and inform them of the bomb threat and all the details that were obtained when the threat was received. The police will notify the fire department and bomb squad. All threats should be reported even if the building is not evacuated. In the event of an evacuation, the following should take place: a. Everyone should be at least 100 feet from the building. b. Staff members should make visual checks of their work area and report anything unusual. DO NOT TOUCH ANYTHING SUSPICIOUS. c. Teachers are responsible for the students under their supervision and should take attendance at the evacuation-holding site to account for each child. Children who are unaccounted for are to be reported to the principal immediately. d. Teachers-will make sure all windows and doors are shut during the evacuation procedure and that they have possession of the class roster and grade book(s). School personnel shall not conduct a search or disturb anything without permission from the police department. Wait for law enforcement personnel to arrive. The police will coordinate the search with assistance from designated building staff. 7. After law enforcement personnel and fire department authorities have conducted a thorough search, the principal, upon the recommendation of the police and/or superintendent, will permit re-entry into the building. !=' :il:n 6li5 ~\na me') Qo C: ::c,.. - C: C) :ii: ::c\na iq ~ ::c rn 8('C ..... 8. Decisions regarding school dismissal or other further actions are the prerogative of the superintendent. 9. CAUTION: Never tune to an FM radio frequency during bomb threat conditions, as some bombs are programmed to detonate by an FM radio signal. LRSD BOMB THREAT REPORT SCHOOL NAME.: SCHOOL ADDRE.55: TIME RECEIVED: DA TE RECEIVED: TIME REPORTED TO POLICE: DATE REPORTED TO POLICE: EXACT WORDS OP CALLER: QUESTIONS TO ASK: 1. Where is the bo1J1b to explode? 2. Where is the bomb right now? 3. What kind of bomb is it? 4. What does the bomb look like? 5. Why did you place the bomb? 6. Where are you calling from? DESCRll'TION OF CALLERs VOICE: Male D Female D Young D Middle-aged D Old D TONE OF VOICE: Serious D Joking D Giggling/Laughing D Tense 0 Very Sure D Unsure D Accent: 0 Yes 0 No If yes, what kind? FAMILIAR VOICE: D Yes D No If yes, whose? OTHER VOICE CHARACTERISTICS: WERE THERE A~ BACKGROUND NOISES'? D Yes No If yes, what kind? I TIME CALLER HUNG UP: I ACTION TAKEN: I NAME OF RECIPIENT: TITLE: .. ADDRESS: PHONE.I ACTION TAKEN BY RECIPIENT: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT ADMINISTRATIVE DIRECTIVE: EBCF Effective: March 1, 2001 GUIDELINES FOR 911 AMBULANCE USE The following guidelines are included in the \"LRSD Standing Orders for Accidents and Illnesses\" for students and should be followed in emergency situations for any person at an LRSD facility or function. After determining that a person is having a life-threatening emergency, you should call 911 and then start CPR if appropriate. You must call an ambulance for anyone who: 1. is choking, unable to breathe, and/or loses consciousness\n2. is having difficulty breathing and seems very distressed (the signs of breathing difficulty may be cyanosis (bluish coloration around mouth), severe wheezing or asthma attack, and/or retractions (all the chest muscles are used to breathe)\n3. has no pulse, a very slow pulse, and loses consciousness (start CPR)\n4. has severe pulsating bleeding uncontrolled with pressure (try to control bleeding with direct pressure over the wound)\n5. has had a penetrating stab wound (control bleeding first and cover any chest wound)\n6. has had a penetrating gun shot wound\n7. has suffered an accident and has a possible broken neck, back, pelvis, hip, or upper leg (do not attempt to move\nlet the Emergency Medical Technician stabilize the fracture)\n8. is in the final stages of labor with contractions every 5 minutes or delivery is imminent\n9. is unconscious and cannot be aroused for any reason (start CPR if there is no breathing or pulse)\nLITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT Continued ADMINISTRATIVE DIRECTIVE: EBCF Effective: March 1, 2001 10. has a seizure that lasts longer than 1 O minutes\n11 . is involved in an automobile accident or is hit by a vehicle and has multiple injuries and/or altered or loss of consciousness\nor 12. has suffered a severe burn from a fire, chemicals, or electricity (remove all clothing from the burn). When calling 911: 1. remember to give the following information: Your name Site name and location Name of person requiring emergency care Brief description of the problem Location of person at the site\n2. follow any phone instructions given by the dispatcher\n3. do not hang up until told to do so by the dispatcher\nand 4. write down specifically your observation and response. This directive is effective immediately and remains effective until changed in writing. I i :\n:r,. fa Satvi'c.e..s $-\\oro.1~ Date of Drawing cJ i .. \\l2S_ ~~~\n1\n...., .,..'! JJ\\l ............. Jm=ll lOOH:\u0026gt;S H!\u0026gt;IH Y 3100IW \"llSIA3lJ wn1n:\u0026gt;11J1Jn:\u0026gt; o 2\\5A -- -- s u!:i:=====i1==1-ii '\u0026lt;:_ _ 2.\\ ~ EOAY.D Roc:\u0026gt;l--1 to-tOOl I/ON3!ll/ NOlll/nll/i\\3 :, 2 n-d-lJ3\" 11/M di/ 'I/ SNOlll/011/1\\3 A:\u0026gt;VH3lll e 'lSNI / WOlO:\u0026gt;tlJlJO:\u0026gt; 'IIIA 1/00 !lNIOl/3lJ C..Z :A:\u0026gt;flOd y S3:\u0026gt;IAlJ3S SS3N1Sne ')() \\ \ni I .CL) ~ \\J (Y) 0- r() ?f)8C -yj]J) . ~ t . j t===~==-== -Al --L--~-~ (.)J W . ITl I ,, \\-\\ALL I I ! t I l 'r.===::\n:==::::rr Vh\\\" s: ~H,1'2 vJ o- I f\\J I, l . . ... ,.-=. :ItJ'n:,,. St:.llll1c:.e.s :5-\\-c:,,,.. c,.. \u0026lt;/ (.._ ?..0 100H:\u0026gt;S HOIH Y 310011/l ,,sl/\\3M wn1n:\u0026gt;1MMn:\u0026gt; o \\ - u ....:. .,,,,.. -~ ''' -~ Date of Drawing lL/3_\n_8_0 '30 ~TO, ~~I '2.'3 24 B~EEPtfJ61 [A~Cl l -'---......... \"-d--\"f\\ ,--~--:~~--- .. ~=Ii I fb B~~'e..PIN6, [6'371 mooz VON30V NOUVnWA3 :, SNOtlVOlVAH:\u0026gt;VM311l a -~ j: l l:I Jl\\rJ, -.. J. - I ::,::~. -- .: - j \" -7'.' \u0026gt;'l- \\7 LoUN\u0026amp;t EJD_ 7:i ~r .:,,/t '( i fl-,_, . ......,,....,i_,ur-111 phone.. ~ f~ l r1 ELEC. .. c i 117 ,. M3/JVMdV \"V VOO ONIOV3M C..Z :A:\u0026gt;flOd y S3:\u0026gt;!AM3S SS3NISna \"XI \"lSNI/ wn1n:\u0026gt;1MMn:\u0026gt; \"Ill,\\ r\n~UPTr OPF, ~rfl Ehert:( 3 OFFIC,P- ]G--, '2 9 I 100H:\u0026gt;S HOIH 'B 310011/l ,1slA3M wn,n:itMMn:\u0026gt; a 40 OFF, 1.,'l 53 OFF J I 1211 t\u0026lt;KOOZ VON30V NOUVOlVl\\3 :i 4'5 HALL ~Fi, (\\\u0026amp;oj . SNOllVOlV/13 A:lVM3lll 'B J M3/JVMdV 'V '!SNI / wn,n:\u0026gt;IMMn:\u0026gt; 111A OFF . Ji 9_\u0026lt;.c] VOO ONIOV3M ONZ =A:\u0026gt;t10d y S3:\u0026gt;IAM3S SS3NISne 'XI TO: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCE CENTER 3001 SOUTH PULASKI STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72206 November 20, 2003 Board of Directors FROM: Dennis Glasgow, Interim Associate Superintendent THROUGH: ~ Morris Holmes, Interim Superintendent SUBJECT: Waiver providing incentive for students to take AP Exams Summary-a proposal is described to give eligible AP students the option to waive the second semester exam requirement if they take the AP Exam. Objective-to encourage students in AP courses to take the corresponding AP exams in those courses. Expected Outcomes-the number of students in AP courses who take the corresponding AP Exams will increase. For 2002-2003 only 10.3% of the 3,287 students enrolled in AP course took the AP Exam. Population-students enrolled in AP courses Budget Amount-No budget is proposed. Students who are identified for free and reduced lunch have almost all the cost of their AP Exams covered by the College Board and participating schools. Students who take more than two AP Exams receive a discount on any additional exams they take. The cost of an AP Exam is $80 each for the first two and $30 each for the third and above exams. Manager-high school principals will manage the program in their own buildings. Mable Donaldson will oversee the program for the district. Duration-the beginning date is the second semester of the 2003-04 school year. The program will be assessed after AP Exams are taken in spring, 2004. Any needed adjustments will be considered at that time. Long Range-the program will be maintained as long as it is deemed successful. Other Agencies Involved-none g z ~ cz5 u, r\u0026gt; i C: N)\u0026gt; C) ... C) c5 .~.. z,.. C, mz ~ Expectations of District-Principals and their staff will work with students on a \"need\" basis to assist them obtain financial aid. If funding is found to be an acute problem, the district will seek ways to ameliorate the problem. Needed staff-none Comments-the legitimacy of our AP Program can be questioned at schools where very few students take AP Exams. Recommendations-we recommend that a waiver be granted to students in AP courses to allow the option of taking the corresponding AP Exam in lieu of the second semester final exam. Tyler Fuller, Central High student, brought a proposal before the Board that would allow students the option of taking the AP Exam in lieu of the second semester exam in the AP course(s) they are taking. High school principals, curriculum staff, and AP teachers were given an opportunity to reflect on and respond to the proposal. With that input an incentive is proposed to increase the number of students who take AP Exams. Problem: Only 338 out of3,287 students (duplicate count) took an AP Exam (See attached 2002-03 AP enrollment chart.). Proposed Solution: 1. Students in AP courses should be encouraged to take the corresponding AP exams in those courses to: Engage students in preparing for and taking challenging exams Give students an opportunity to earn college credit, thus saving tuition money for families Assist the schools and district to evaluate the efficacy of the AP Program 2. Students in AP courses who meet certain criteria will be granted a waiver that will allow them the option of not taking the second semester final exam in the course if they take the AP Exam. Students may, however, elect to take the final exam in addition to the AP Exam. Criteria that students must meet to gain the waiver are: 70% average for both the third and fourth nine-weeks grading periods in the AP course Attendance, tardies, citizenship, and disciplinary requirements shall be the same as the Semester Exam Exemption for Senior Students: 1) The student shall not accumulate more than three (3) excused absences and shall have no unexcused absences in the class. 2) The student shall not accumulate more than one (1) tardy in the class. 3) The student shall not receive a citizenship mark of two (2) or higher in the class. 4) The student shall receive no out-of-school suspensions or expulsions in the said semester. 3. Students' scores on the AP Exam will not be used as part of their semester grade. 4. The final exam score will be part of the semester grade for students who elect to take both the AP Exam and the final exam\nhowever, the resulting semester grade cannot be lower than the average of the two nine-week grades. 5. Students' second semester grades that elect the option of taking the AP Exam in lieu of the second semester final exam will be based on an average of the percentage grade for the third and fourth nine-weeks. Schools will provide assistance to students to obtain financial aid for which they might be eligible. ~ g z ?\ncz5 (/) !='\ni::c-, 6lij i,2\n,o mo QO c:: :,:I\"\" -C:: C') !C ::C\n,o ~~ :Cu, 8r ,-- School Central High McClellan J.A. Fair Hall High Parkview Total Little Rock School District AP Enrollment for 2002-03 Enrollment Took AP Test Percent that took test 1387** 193 14% 345** 12 3.5% 233** 14 6% 452** 8 1.8% 870** 111 13% 3287** 338 10.3% ** Some students are enrolled in more than one course. #of AP Exams taken 410 19 21 9 191 650 TO: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCE CENTER 3001 SOUTH PULASKI STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72206 November 20, 2003 Board of Directors FROM: Dennis Glasgow, Interim Associate Superintendent THROUGH: if/(' Dr. Morris Hohnes, Interim Superintendent SUBJECT: Program Evaluations for Elementary and Secondary Literacy Short Summary-The Board is asked to review and approve the program evaluations for Elementary Literacy (PreK-5) and Secondary Literacy (6-12). Objectives-I) to improve the education for all students by evaluating selected programs each year to determine their impact on student achievement, 2) to comply with the requirement of section 2. 7 .1 of the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan to submit for District Court Approval the program evaluations listed. Expected Outcomes-Programs will be maintained, adjusted, or eliminated based on the recommendations of these long-term program evaluations. Population-Dr. Steve Ross, external program evaluation consultant, district staff and teachers were involved in the evaluations. Staff and teachers will use these evaluations as a benchmark for future program decisions. Budget Amount/Source ofBudget-Staff members' time and materials are included as a part of the regular operating budget for the Math/Science and Literacy Departments. Dr. Ross' consultant contract is included in budget. Manager-Dennis Glasgow, Interim Associate Superintendent for Instruction, and Dr. Ed Williams, Statistician Duration-The formal program evaluations of the elementary literacy program and secondary literacy program began during the 2002-03 school year and continued through the first semester of the 2003-04 school year. Analysis of and response to the program evaluations will continue through the spring semester of 2004 and for the next few years as additional data is gathered. 8 \u0026gt; !D g z ~ cz3 U\u0026gt; Long Range/Continuation-all program evaluations are used as a benchmark for program planning in future years. The two formal literacy evaluations will conclude with the approval of the Board and the District Court. Other Agencies Involved-The Office of Desegregation Monitoring has monitored the program evaluation process. Expectations of Staff-Staff members from literacy and other curriculum staff served on the evaluation teams for these program evaluations. Program evaluation is embedded in the job expectations of staff\nconsequently, this is an ongoing commitment for our staff. An important job of the literacy evaluation teams is to read the evaluation reports, analyze them, and use that information to help decide our future direction in literacy. Needed Staff-No additional staff were needed since Dr. Ross prepared the formal evaluation reports. Comments-Dr. Ross is a noted expert in program evaluation. We appreciate his involvement in producing these program evaluation reports. The two literacy evaluations and the math/science evaluation that will come before the Board in December are the three remaining evaluations from section 2. 7 .1 of the LRSD Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. Dr. Steve Ross has been contracted as a program evaluation specialist to develop the program evaluations of the two literacy program and to review the mathematics and science program evaluation, which is being developed by the program evaluation team for Comprehensive Partnerships in Mathematics and Science Achievement (our NSF grant). Recommendations-we recommend approval of program evaluations for Elementary Literacy and Secondary Literacy as submitted. Dr. Ross will provide the completed program evaluations for you review prior to the November Board meeting. TO: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCE CENTER 3001 SOUTH PULASKI STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72206 November 20, 2003 Board of Directors FROM: Dennis Glasgow, Interim Associate Superintendent TffROUG~r. Morris Holmes, Interim Superintendent SUBJECT: Program Evaluation Agenda for 2003-04 Short Summary-The Board is asked to approve the continued program evaluations for Elementary Literacy (PreK-5), Secondary Literacy (6-12), and Mathematics and Science (K-12) as well as a new program evaluation of the LRSD Reading First Project (K-3) as the Program Evaluation Agenda for 2003-04. Objectives-to improve the education for all students by evaluating selected programs each year to determine their impact on student achievement. Expected Outcomes-Programs will be maintained, adjusted, or eliminated based on the findings of program evaluations over a sufficient period of time to determine the effectiveness of the program. Population-District staff and teachers will be involved in the evaluations, in addition to external evaluators. Budget Amount/Source of Budget-Staff members' time and materials are included as a part of the regular operating budget for the Math/Science and Literacy Departments. Dr. Ross' consultant contract is included in budget. LRSD Reading First Project evaluation will be provided by the Arkansas Department of Education as part of the overall Arkansas Reading First project. Manager-Dennis Glasgow, Interim Associate Superintendent for Instruction Duration-The formal program evaluations of the elementary literacy program, secondary literacy program, and mathematics and science program began during the 2002-03 school year and will continue through the first semester of the 2003-04 school year. Analysis of and response to the program evaluations will continue through the spring semester of 2004 and for the next few years as additional data is gathered. The 8 z ?\nzi5 \"' f) \"T'I ~ z 0 \u0026gt; I'\"' ~ c8 ~ \"' ?\u0026lt; 0 I'\"' 0 \"z' C) ill ~ ~ \"' LRSD Reading First Project will receive its first annual evaluation at the end of the 2003- 04 school term, another annual evaluation at the end of2004-05, and a three year summative evaluation at the end of 2005-06. Long Range/Continuation-all program evaluations are used as a benchmark for program planning in future years. The two formal literacy evaluations and the math/science evaluation will conclude at the end of the current school term\nthe LRSD Reading First Project will continue, at a minimum, for the three years of the grant period. Other Agencies Involved-The National Science Foundation is involved in the math/science program evaluation, and the Arkansas Department of Education is involved in the LRSD Reading First Project. Expectations of Staff-Staff members from literacy, math, and science are serving on the evaluation teams for these program evaluations. Program evaluation is embedded in the job expectations of staff\nconsequently, this is an ongoing commitment for our staff. Needed Staff-No additional staff are needed since Dr. Ross and ADE consultants are preparing the formal evaluation reports. Future program evaluations will require the continued assistance of external consultants or the employment of an additional staff member with program evaluation expertise. Comments-the program evaluation agenda as proposed includes the core curricular areas of literacy, math, and science. Literacy and math are currently part of the high stakes testing programs required by NCLB. Science will be added to that testing program by the Arkansas Department of Education in the near future. Recommendations-we recommend approval of the four programs for program evaluation during the 2003-04 school year. The two literacy evaluations and the math/science evaluation are the three remaining evaluations from section 2. 7 .1 of the LRSD Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. Arkansas Reading First (LRSD Reading First is LRSD's part of Arkansas Reading First) is a project of the Arkansas Department of Education (ADE) for which the District will receive $4.3 million over a three-year period (FY 2003-06). The purpose of the grant is to improve the reading achievement of students in Grades K-3. The project was initiated at the beginning of the current school year. Dr. Steve Ross has been contracted as a program evaluation specialist to develop the program evaluations of the two literacy program and to review the mathematics and science program evaluation, which is being developed by the program evaluation team for Comprehensive Partnerships in Mathematics and Science Achievement (our NSF grant). MGT of America, based in Tallahassee, Florida, is the agency contracted by the ADE to collect and analyze the data and provide periodic reports of progress for the Arkansas Reading First project. The schools included in the Arkansas Reading First grant to LRSD are Bale, Baseline, Chicot, Dodd, Fair Park, Mabelvale, Mitchell, Rightsell, Romine, Stephens, Wakefield, and Wilson. All LRSD Reading First schools will participate in the national and state project evaluation as well as administer the standard district assessments administered annually. The project requires administration of the Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS, Kaminsky and Good, 1996) assessment to monitor growth in the acquisition of critical early literacy skills to (a) identify children in need of intervention and (b) evaluate the effectiveness of intervention strategies. DIBELS are standardized, individually administered tests that provide a measure of risk in letter naming fluency, phoneme segmentation and oral reading fluency. In addition, the schools are required to administer the Developmental Spelling Analysis (DSA: Ganske, 1999) to students in grades 1-3. The DSA makes it easy for teachers to identify each child's stage of development in spelling and to provide appropriate instruction that impacts not only spelling achievement, but also reading achievement. The first evaluative report that LRSD will receive on Reading First will be the annual evaluation report after the first year of implementation. The funds for the program evaluation are included in the Arkansas Reading First project. Dr. Ross' contract was included in this year's LRSD budget, and a program evaluator is on staff for the mathematics and science program evaluation, funded by the National Science Foundation grant. We ask that you approve the four programs identified as the Program Evaluation Agenda for the 2003-04 school year. 8 z ?\nz~ en TO: FROM: THROUGH: SUBJECT: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCE CENTER 3001 SOUTH PULASKI STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72206 November 20, 2003 Board of Directors Dennis Glasgow, Interim Associate Superintendent Dr. Morris Holmes, Interim Superintendent Proposed Changes in the Middle School and High School Curriculum Short Summary-the Board is asked to approve the proposed course changes in the middle school and high school curriculum. Objectives-to approve changes in the curriculum as mandated by Board Policy IG. Expected Outcomes-additions, deletions, and modifications will be made in the middle school and high school curriculum based upon input by the schools, the curriculum staff, and others. Population-the curriculum serves students, teachers, parents, and the community. Budget Amount/Source of Budget- there is a reasonable assurance that funding exists to develop the curriculum for new courses and submit them to the Arkansas Department of Education for approval, provide the necessary professional development, and purchase the required instructional materials. Manager-Dennis Glasgow, Interim Associate Superintendent for Instruction Duration-the curriculum changes are proposed for the 2004-05 school term. Long Range/Continuation-curriculum changes are submitted to the Board annually for its consideration. Other Agencies Involved-some of the curriculum changes are in response to grant funded initiatives, such as the Magnet School Assistance Program and Small Learning Communities Grant. ?\u0026lt; ,n... 0 \"z' G) ~ ~ ~ \"' Expectations of Staff-staff members from the curriculum department and from the schools will be expected to prepare new course proposals for submission to ADE. Needed Staff-the course changes are expected to be handled within existing budgetary resources. Comments-the curriculum changes for the middle schools and high schools are submitted to the Board each year and are part of an evolving process to give our students the best programs possible. Recommendations-we recommend approval of the proposed course changes for middle school and high school. Policy IG: Curriculum Development, Adoption, and Review requires that the Board of Education approve all new courses to the curriculum. The Division of Instruction, therefore, annually surveys the schools, the curriculum staff, and others to determine whether there should be courses added to the curriculum, courses deleted, or courses modified in any way. Those proposals are reviewed by the curriculum directors, they make recommendations, and then the proposals are reviewed and approved/rejected by the Associate Superintendent for Instruction. The courses recommended to the Board of Education are those that have been through the process. There is a reasonable assurance that funding exists to develop the curriculum for new courses and submit them to the Arkansas Department of Education for approval, provide the necessary professional development, and purchase the required instructional materials. Another factor in determining a recommendation is whether a school has adequate staffing to teach new courses and whether there is adequate student interest. All proposed changes to middle and high school courses are listed below: PROPOSED HIGH SCHOOL COURSE CHANGES FOR 2004-2005 Business Education 1. Change the title of Entrepreneurship to Enterprise Management (McClellan Only) Career and Technical Education 2. Change the title of Advertising Design/Computer Animation Advertising Design/Computer I to 3. Change the title of Advertising Design/Computer Animation II to Advertising Design/Computer II 4. Change the title of Advertising Design/Computer Animation Ill to Advertising Design/Computer Ill 5. Delete Engineering (Project Lead the Way) - this course does not exist 6. Delete Fashion Merchandising, one of McClellan High School's old magnet courses 7. Delete Advertising, one of McClellan High School's old magnet courses 8. Delete Carpentry Exploration, this course has not been taught in four years 9 Delete Retailing, one of McClellan High School's old magnet courses 10. Delete Industrial Cooperative Training I - Related, course is no longer offered 11. Delete Industrial Cooperative Training I - OJT, course is no longer offered 12. Delete Industrial Cooperative Training II - Related, course is no longer 13. Delete 14. Delete 15. Delete 16. Delete 17. Delete 18. Add 19. Add 20. Add offered Industrial Cooperative Training II, course is no longer offered Engineering Drafting, course is no longer offered Basic Mechanical Drawing, course is no longer offered Advanced Mechanical Drawing, course is no longer offered Architectural Drafting, course is no longer offered Computer Integrated Manufacturing, a new course at McClellan High Only (See description on page 8) GIS Spatial Technology and Remote Sensing (STARS) at Metro (See description on page 8) Furniture Manufacturing I at Metro (See description on page 8) Family and Consumer Science 21 . Change Family and Consumer Science course description to clarify content Metropolitan 22. Change Culinary Arts I course description to clarify course content 23. Change Culinary Arts Ill course description to clarify course content g z ?\nzi5 \"' 24. Change Medical Professions Education I course description to clarify content 25. Change Radio Broadcasting I course description to reflect state curriculum frameworks and description 26. Change Radio Broadcasting II course description to reflect state curriculum frameworks and description 27. Change Radio Broadcasting Ill course description to reflect state curriculum frameworks and description 28. Change Visual Production II course description to more accurately reflect course content 29. Change Visual Production Ill course description to more accurately reflect course content Art 30. Add English 31 . Change 32. Delete 33. Delete 34. Delete 35. Delete 36. Delete 37. Delete 38. Delete 39. Delete 40. Delete 41. Delete 42. Delete 43. Delete 44. Delete 45. Delete Media Production, a new course at McClellan High Only (See description on page 9) Contemporary Literature (1/2 unit) to Contemporary Literature (1 unit). This course will include contemporary literature and science fiction at Hall High only. English 1A R./W Workshop (051006), all 9 grade workshops will use 051014 English 18 R./W Workshop (051008), all 9 grade workshops will use 051014 English 1A PAP (051010), all 9 grade PAP workshops will use 051016 English 18 PAP (051012), all 9 grade PAP workshops will use 051016. Communications/Grammar, each course should use its own number listed elsewhere Debate 1 A, debate is no longer offered as 1 semester Debate 1 B, debate is no longer offered as 1 semester ESL Language Arts Plus I, no longer used ESL English 1A Workshop (051504), use double block R./W 051508 ESL English 1 B Workshop (051506), use double block R./W 051508 Language Arts Plus II, no longer offered English 2A Workshop (052006), all 10 grade workshops use 052014 English 28 Workshop (052008), all 10 grade workshops use 052014 English 2A P AP (052010), all 10 grade P AP 2 periods workshops use 052016 46. Delete 47. Delete 48. Delete 49. Delete 50. Delete 51 . Delete 52. Delete 53. Delete 54. Delete 55. Delete 56. Delete 57. Delete 58. Delete 59. Delete 60. Delete 61. Delete 62. Delete 63. Delete 64. Delete 65. Delete 66. Add English 2B P AP (052012), all 10 grade P AP 2 periods workshops use 052016 Public Speaking (1/2 unit), students now take debate Public Speaking (1 unit), students now take debate Group Dynamics (1/2 unit), no enrollment Group Dynamics (1 unit), no enrollment Leadership (052110), all students will now take Leadership Skills for Student Council (052112) Interpersonal Communication, no enrollment ESL Language Arts Plus II, no enrollment ESL English 2A Workshop (052504 ), all ESL workshops use 052508 ESL English 2B Workshop (052506), all ESL workshops use 052508 Language Arts Plus 111, no requests Technical Writing, paired with statistic - moved to math Research for 21 st Century, no longer offered Introduction to Creative Writing (053010), all creative writing use 054008 Communications 3, no more communication classes above level II Mass Media A, no longer offered ESL Language Arts Plus 111, no longer offered Language Arts Plus IV, no longer offered Mass Media B, no longer offered ESL Language Arts Plus IV, no longer offered Digital Imaging, new course at Hall High only (See description on page 9) 67. Change the title of Photography A (1/2 unit) to Photography IA (1/2 unit) 68. Change the title of Photography (1 unit) to Photography I (1 unit) Foreign Languages 69. Delete Latin Ill, no regular Latin above Latin II, only AP classes 70. Delete Latin IV, no regular Latin above Latin II, only AP classes 71. Change Latin Ill AP course description to clarify content 72. Change Latin IV AP course description to clarify content 73. Add Spanish II for Native Speakers (1 unit), a new course at Hall High only (See description on page 9) 74. Change the title of Spanish for Native Speakers I to Spanish I for Native Speakers 75. Change Spanish I for Native Speakers course description to clarify content 76. Add Latin V AP (See description on page 10) 77. Delete German IV, no regular German above German Ill, only AP classes !D 8 z ?. cz5 \"' 78. Delete 79. Delete 80. Delete 81. Delete 82. Delete German V, no regular German above German 111, only AP classes French IV, no regular French above French Ill, only AP classes French V, no regular French above French Ill, only AP classes Spanish IV, no regular Spanish above Spanish Ill, only AP classes Spanish V, no regular Spanish above Spanish Ill, only AP classes Physical Education 83. Add Principles of Strength and Conditioning I, a new course at Central High only (See description on page 10) 84. Add Principles of Strength and Conditioning 11, a new course at Central High only (See description on page 10) 85. Add Introduction to Exercise Physiology, a new course at Central High only (See description on page 10) Science 86. Add 87. Add Criminalistics, new course at Hall High only (See description on page 10) Veterinary Science, new course at Hall High only (See description on page 10) Social Studies 88. Delete World History Pre-AP, ADE does not recommend a PreAP and an AP course at the same level 89. Delete U.S. History Pre-AP, ADE does not recommend a PreAP and an AP course at the same level 90. Add Campaigns \u0026amp; Elections, new course at Hall High only (See description on page 11) 91. Add Media in Politics, new course at Hall High only (See description on page 11) PROPOSED MIDDLE SCHOOL COURSE CHANGES FOR 2004-2005 English 1. Delete Expressions! 6, no longer offered 2. Delete Expressions! 6-8, no longer offered 3. Delete Reading/Writing 6A P AP (056004 ), all P AP 6 grade 2 periods will use 056008 4. Delete ESL Expression!, no longer offered 5. Delete R/W Workshop 6B P AP (056010), all P AP 6 grade 2 periods will use 056008 6. Delete Research 6 GT (Dunbar), (056014) included in double block 7. Delete Global Expressions 6-7 (Dunbar) (056015), no longer offered 8. Delete Global Expressions 6-7 (Dunbar) (056016), no longer offered 9. Delete Global Communications 6 (Dunbar) (056019), no longer offered 10. Delete Global Communications 6 (Dunbar) (056020), no longer offered 11. Delete R/W Workshop 6B GT (Dunbar) (056022), all 6 R/W GT 2 periods will use 056012 12. Delete Read/Write 6A (056100), all R/W 6 grade 2 periods will use 056002 13. Delete Read/Write 6B (056102), all R/W 6 grade 2 periods will use 056002 14. Delete Language Arts Plus 6, no longer offered 15. Delete ESL R/W Workshop 6A (056220), all ESL R/W 6 grade 2 periods will use 056202 16. Delete ESL R/W Workshop 6B (056222), all ESL R/W 6 grade 2 periods will use 056202 17. Delete Write On! 7A, no longer offered 18. Delete Write On! 7B, no longer offered 19. Delete Write On! 7-8, no longer offered 20. Delete Research 7 GT (Dunbar) (057014), included in double block 21. Delete Read/Write Workshop 7B P AP (057108), all R/W 7 P AP 2 periods will use 057020 22. Delete Read/Write 7B GT (Dunbar) (057022), all R/W 7 GT 2 periods will use 057012 23. Delete Read/Write Workshop 7 A (057100), all R/W 7 2 periods will use 057002 24. Delete Read/Write Workshop 7B (057102), all RW 7 2 periods will use 057002 25. Delete Language Arts Plus 7, no longer offered 26. Delete ESL Read/Write 7 A (057220), all ESL R/W 7 2 periods will use 057202 27. Delete ESL Read/Write 7B (057222), all ESL R/W 7 2 periods will use 057202 28. Delete Reading 7, no longer offered 29. Delete Expression! 8, no longer offered 8 z ~ iz5 \"' 30. Delete 31. Delete 32. Delete 33. Delete 34. Delete 35. Delete 36. Delete 37. Delete 38. Delete 39. Delete 40. Delete 41. Delete 42. Delete 43. Add Science 44. Add Read/Write 8A P AP (058004 ), all R/W 8 P AP 2 periods will use 058020 Write On! 8A, no longer offered Write On! 88, no longer offered TV Writing/Production 8, no longer offered Research 8 GT (Dunbar) (058014), included in double block Read/Write Workshop 88 P AP (058016), all R/W 8 P AP 2 periods will use 058020 Read/Write 88 GT (Dunbar) (058022), all R/W 8 GT 2 periods will use 058012 Read/Write Workshop 8A (058100), all R/W 8 (2 periods) will use 058002 Read/Write Workshop 88 (058102), all R/W 8 (2 periods) will use 058002 Language Arts Plus 8, no longer offered ESL Read/Write Workshop 8A (058220), all ESL R/W 8 2 periods will use 058202 ESL Read/Write Workshop 88 (058222), all ESL R/W 8 2 periods will use 058202 Reading 8, no longer offered Technical Theatre, (Mann Magnet Only) (See description on page 7) Active Community Research (Mann Magnet Only} (See description on page 7) En2lish Proposed New Middle School Courses Little Rock School District, 2004-2005 Technical Theatre (Mann Magnet Only) This course is designed to aquaint the students with all aspects of the technical theatre: set design, management, construction, setting the stage, operating the equipment, and safety. Grade: 7-8 Prerequisite: No required prerequisites, theatre students are strongly encouraged to take this course as a part of there area of concentration. Credit: 1 unit Science Active Community Research (Mann Magnet Only) This course would include community based research and data collection of ecological, environmental, biological, geological, chemical, and economic issues concerning the development of the Fouche Creek area near Horace Mann Arts \u0026amp; Science Magnet Middle School. This course would serve as a resource for the Audubon Society and the community in the development and the maintenance of a nature center in the community. The course would require some independent research and developed writing skills for presentation of the information. The research would require proficiency in complex mathematical computation and analysis of data. Students would need to possess adequate communication skills in order to communicate findings and progress to the community. Grade: 7-8 Prerequisite: The student would need to show an interest in science by being enrolled as a Horace Mann Science Magnet student. They must also have taken, or be currently enrolled in, Algebra I. Credit: I unit 8 z ?\ncz5 Cl) Proposed New High School Courses Little Rock School District, 2004-2005 Career and Technical Education Computer Integrated Manufacturing (McClellan High Only) This course applies principles of robotics and automation and builds on computer solid modeling skills developed in Introduction to Engineering Design. Students use CNC equipment to produce actual models of their three-dimensional design. Fundamental concepts ofrobotics used in automated manufacturing, and design analysis are included. Grade: 11-12 Prerequisite: Concurrent enrollment in college preparatory mathematics, Introduction to Engineering Design, Digital Electronics, and Principles of Engineering. Credit: 1 unit GIS Spatial Technology and Remote Sensing (STARS) This course will allow students to learn how to solve locally based problems. Each project/application has an emphasis on a career cluster and the unique way problems are solved using a GIS (Geographic Information System). Problem solving is the key to success in the classroom-based projects. The students will plan, conduct, and present solutions for applications in the areas of environmental studies, business, transportation, disaster management, and government. Grade: 11-12 Prerequisite: Credit: Introduction to Geographic Information Systems (GIS) Remote Sensing 1 unit Furniture Manufacturing I This course is designed to introduce the basic principles of assembling and finishing wooden furniture. Instruction includes awareness of careers related to furniture making, basic design principles, safety procedures, sketching, layout, and preparing stock. Each student will be able to assemble and finish a useful furniture piece as a required individual project. Grade: 10-12 Prerequisite: Credit: Exploring Industrial Technology is preferred 1 unit Media Production (McClellan High Only) In this course the student will explore all phases of video production from pre-production setup to post-production editing. They will develop skills and proficiency in the operation of video production equipment. Camera operation, lighting, basic audio, and recording equipment will be covered. This course will introduce the student to the process of evaluating client needs and preparing written production documents. The student will explore the varied sources of rental and purchased services, material, and equipment as well as copyright laws as they apply to personal work and the work of others. Students will learn script-writing techniques for all types of media. Grade: 11-12 Prerequisite: Credit: English Visual Design I, Visual Design II, and Web Design and Animation 1 unit Spanish II for Native Speakers (Hall High Only) This course is for heritage speakers who have developed reading and writing skills, but need more help with vocabulary, spelling, grammar, editing, and development of critical thinking skills. Students will continue reading and writing in Spanish and the study of Spanish language literature. Grade: 11-12 Prerequisite: Credit: Spanish I for Native Speakers 1 unit Digital Imaging (Hall High Only) This course will establish a foundation in digital imaging. Students will learn and apply computer hardware components. Emphasis will be on aesthetics and content as well as computer hardware and software applications. This course will address issues pertaining to art, culture, and technology. No previous experience with computers is required. This is not a programmmg course. This course will include projects demonstrations, lectures, lab, and critiques. Grade: 10-12 Prerequisite: Credit: Keyboarding, Word Processing 1 unit Latin V AP (Central High Only) This course will allow those students who begin their study of the Latin language in middle school to continue their Latin through Level V, like those who study Spanish or French. Grade: 10-12 Prerequisite: Credit: Latin IV AP or the equivalent 1 unit 8 z ?\niz5 u, Physical Education Principles of Strength and Conditioning I (Central High only) Students will be taught correct exercise technique using body weight and free weight exercises. Prime movers in each exercise are identified and exercise vocabulary used through out the course. Students will learn the meaning of aerobic and anaerobic exercise, agonist and antagonist muscles, eccentric and concentric contraction, 1 RM max, etc. NOTE: This course satisfies the physical education requirement for graduation. Grade: 9-12 Prerequisite: None. Students will have to pass a physical examination to participate in the class. Credit: unit Principles of Strength and Conditioning II (Central High only) Students will continue to develop correct exercise technique using body weight and free weight exercises. Prime movers in each exercise are identified and exercise vocabulary used throughout the course. Students will learn the meaning of aerobic and anaerobic exercise, agonist and antagonist muscles, eccentric and concentric contraction, 1 RM max, etc. Advanced exercise techniques and conditioning will be taught in this class. Exercise of a vigorous nature will be included in this class. Grade: 9-12 Prerequisite: Principles of Strength and Conditioning I, be a varsity member of an athletic team at Central High School, or provide proof of a continuing program of personal fitness. The student must be at least seventeen years of age. Students will have to pass a physical examination to participate in the class and have parental consent. Credit: unit Introduction to Exercise Physiology (Central High only) This course will provide basic concepts and relevant scientific information as the foundation for understanding nutrition, energy transfer, and exercise and training. The contribution of and adaptation of the body's systems to exercise is the basis of the course. Grade: 11-12 Prerequisite: Biology, Chemistry, and Physical Education Credit: unit Science Criminalistics (Hall High Only) This course will be a lab-based course and involve the application of scientific methods to solve legal problems. This course will focus on crime scene evidence, lab analysis techniques, (such as chromatography, DNA, analysis, fingerprinting, and fiber analysis), and recording and presenting data. Mock crime scenes will be investigated and real case studies analyzed. Guest speakers in the field will also be utilized to supplement the classroom activities. Grade: Prerequisite: Credit: 11-12 Physics, Biology, and Chemistry (An 11 th grade student may take this course at the same time they are taking Chemistry if they have the other two prerequisites.) 1 unit Veterinary Science (Hall High Only) This course covers animal anatomy and physiology, animal handling skills, proper nutrition, animal genetics, animal diseases, and animal related career options. This course provides an opportunity for students to explore and gain experience in the field of veterinary medicine. Grade: 11-12 Prerequisite: Physics, Biology, and Chemistry. (An 11 th grade student may take this course at the same time they are taking Chemistry if they have the other two prerequisites.) Credit: 1 unit Social Studies Campaigns \u0026amp; Elections (Hall High Only) While following the progress of the 2004 presidential election, students will explore techniques of campaigning. The platforms of the participating parties will be contrasted and the issues researched. Students will learn how to become informed voters with an impact upon the political process. Grade: 10-12 Prerequisite: Civics Credit: unit 8 z ~ ~ z \"' .~ :\u0026gt;\u0026lt;- Media in Politics (Hall High Only) This course will examine how the mass media both responds to and helps shape public opinion, political outcomes, and public policy. The nature and impact of propaganda and the role of the media in campaigns will be explored. There will be an emphasis throughout on the importance of journalistic ethics and responsibility in a free society. Students will learn how to critically interpret mass media news reporting and political advertising. Grade: 10-12 Prerequisite: Civics Credit: unit '.\n4.n Individual Approach to a World of Knowledge\" November 20, 2003 TO: Board of Directors FROM: Morris L. Holmes, Interim Superintendent of Schools PREPARED BY~ld M. Stewart, Chief Financial Officer SUBJECT: Second Reading of Revision to Board Policy DGA: Authorized Signatures Act 671 of 2003 amended Arkansas Code 6-13-618 requmng the signatures of the Superintendent as Ex Officio Financial Secretary and the primary, or alternate, Board disbursing officer of the District on all checks. It is recommended that the Board of Directors approve Policy DGA as revised and attached to comply with State law. 810 W Markham Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 www.lrsd.k12.ar.us 501-324-2000 fax: 501-324-2032 8 z ?\ncz5 \"' ?\u0026lt; 0 6 \"z' C) ill I \"' LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: DGA AUTHORIZED SIGNATURES The facsimile signatures of the Superintendent of Schools, in his/her capacity of Ex Officio Financial Secretary, and the President of the Board, as the primary board disbursing officer of the District, are required on all District checks. The facsimile signature of the Vice President of the Board, as the alternate board disbursing officer of the District, will be required in the event that the President of the Board's signature cannot be used. Revised: Adopted: March 24, 2000 Legal References: Arkansas Code 6-13-618, as amended Act 671 of 2003 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 DATE: November 20, 2003 TO: Board of Education FROM: ~~arral Paradis, Director of Procurement and Materials Mgmt. ~ THROUGH: Morris L. Holmes, Interim Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Donations of Property Attached are requests to donate property to the Little Rock School District as follows: School/De2artment Item Donor Central High School $250.00 cash to be Merry Golds Garden applied toward Club members completion of the Reflecting Pool Central High School 1991 Yamaha golf cart valued at $2,000.00 John Lewellen Forest Heights 56 American flags, Mardell' s Christian Middle School valued at $83.44, to Family Bookstore be used in classrooms for citing the Pledge of Allegiance Forest Heights Kelvinator water Mr. Dennis Todd Middle School fountain, valued at $100.00, for use in Ms. Sneed's classroom .f.l, z \u0026gt;z n \u0026gt;,...\n,o m\ng ~ \"' ?\u0026lt; ,n... 0 \"z' C) Rl ~\n,o\n,,: \"' Board of Education November 20, 2003 Page 2 School/Department Fulbright Elementary School Fulbright Elementary School Fulbright Elementary School Geyer Springs Elementary School $3,000.00 cash to be used for student incentives, classroom and instructional materials, and technology supplies and maintenance Initial brand DVD player, valued at $57.95, for use in Ms. Amy Thompson's 4th grade classroom Sony brand CD/Cassette/ Radio boom box, valued at $60.00, for use in Ms. Amy Thompson's 4th grade\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 "}],"pages":{"current_page":31,"next_page":32,"prev_page":30,"total_pages":155,"limit_value":12,"offset_value":360,"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}}]}}