{"response":{"docs":[{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_937","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":["2003/2004"],"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/937"],"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.\n) l J J ] ] NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT RECEIVED SEP 1 2004 OFFIOCFC DESEGREGiAtOTNIOIT ORING ANALYSIS OF DISCIPLINARY ACTIONS District Level FRAN CI CAL J. JACKSON Director of Student Affairs ] ] ] North Little Rock Public Schools ~Analysis of Discipline Actions ~School Year 2003-2004 ~ District Level Elementary ~Middle Schools ~High Schools ~9 Year Comparison I I I J I I l Ref: DIS032 Date: 8/12/04 Time : 11 : 1 7 : 31 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions DISTRICT LEVEL From AUGUST Through JUNE ================================================================---------------- 2 0 0 2 - 0 3 ===============-===========================================-====---------------- -----BM------ # REF PCT/TOT # STU -----BF-----# REF PCT/TOT # STU -----NBM----# REF PCT/TOT # STU -----NBF----# REF PCT/TOT # STU =================================--===-----=================------==---------=== 09 S.A.C. 10 HOME SUSP. 11 BOYS CLUB 12 E.I.C. 17 EXPULSION 1903 632 522 280 244 151 252 130 2 2 52.3% 1050 421 66.0% 193 121 55.7% 86 56 61. 2% 97 52 50.0% 0 0 28.9% 24.4% 19.6% 23.5% .0% 512 232 63 49 83 65 52 36 2 2 14.1% 8.0% 18.9% 12.6% 50.0% 172 109 13 11 25 20 11 10 0 0 4.7% 3637 1394 1.6% 791 461 5.7% 438 292 2.7% 412 228 .0% 4 4 ============--======---------------==============================----------=---- 2 0 0 3 - 0 4 =======-------------------------------------==============-===------------==---- -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NSF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU =============-======---------------======================--=-=====---------=---- 09 S.A.C. 1961 55.2% 980 27.6% 394 11.1% 220 6.2% 3555 680 430 201 137 1448 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 COMPARISON -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # STU # STU # STU # STU --------------==-=-=---------------====================--======================= 09 S.A.C. 58 3.0 % 70- 6.7-% 118- 23.0-% 48 27.9 % 82- 48 9 31- 28 54 10 HOME SUSP. 53- 10.2-% 36- 18.7-% 3 4. 8 % 5 38.5 % 81- 8- 25- 10- 3 40- 11 BOYS CLUB 72 29.5 % 69 80.2 % 32- 38.6-% 9- 36.0-% 100 36 40 26- 9- 41 12 E. I.C. 57- 22.6-% 27- 27.8-% 34- 65. 4-% 0 . 0 % 118- 27- 6- 22- 3- 58- 17 EXPULSION 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ref: DIS032 Date: 8/12/04 Time : 11 : 1 7 : 31 09 S.A.C. 10 HOME SUSP. 11 BOYS CLUB 12 E. I.C. 17 EXPULSION Analysis of Disciplinary Actions ELEMENTARY K-5 From AUGUST Through JUNE 2 0 0 2 - 0 3 -----BM------ # REF PCT/TOT # STU 0 .0% 0 401 74.7% 198 0 .0% 0 252 61. 2% 130 0 .0% 0 -----BF-----# REF PCT/TOT # STU 0 .0% 0 93 17.3% 53 0 .0% 0 97 23.5% 52 0 .0% 0 -----NBM----# REF PCT/TOT # STU 0 .0% 0 41 7.6% 31 0 .0% 0 52 12.6% 36 0 .0% 0 -----NBF----# REF PCT/TOT # STU 0 .0% 0 2 .4% 2 0 .0% 0 11 2. 7% 10 0 .0% 0 0 0 537 284 0 0 412 228 0 0 =-------------------------------------------------==============---------------- 2 0 0 3 - 0 4 -----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. 228 65.1% 83 23.7% 33 9. 4% 6 1. 7% 350 145 51 20 5 221 11 BOYS CLUB 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .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 .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 .o % 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 173- 43.1-% 10- 10.8-% 8- 19.5-% 4 200.0 % 187- 53- 2- 11- 3 63- 11 BOYS CLUB 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C. 58- 23.0-% 27- 27.8-% 34- 65.4-% 0 . 0 % 119- 28- 6- 22- 3- 59- 17 EXPULSION 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .o % 0 0 0 0 0 0 ] ] ] ) 1 ] 1 J ] ] Ref: DIS032 Date: 8/12/04 Time: 11:17:31 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions MIDDLE SCHOOLS From AUGUST Through JUNE 2 0 0 2 - 0 3 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU -----NSF----- # REF PCT/TOT # STU ======---------================-==---------------=================----====-----= 09 S.A.C. 1296 52.4% 742 30.0% 327 13.2% 107 4.3% 2472 369 267 119 63 818 10 HOME SUSP. 33 47.1% 31 44.3% 5 7.1% 1 1. 4% 70 29 25 4 1 59 11 BOYS CLUB 165 55. 7% 60 20.3% 53 17.9% 18 6.1% 296 92 35 37 13 177 12 E. I. C. 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 1 100.0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 1 1 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 3 - 0 4 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NSF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU -------------------------------------=============================-============= 09 S.A.C. 1199 55.6% 614 28.5% 218 10.1% 125 5.8% 2156 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% 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 -----------------------------------======================================----=== COMPARISON -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NSF----- # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # STU # STU # STU # STU 09 S.A.C. 97- 7.5-% 128- 17.3-% 109- 33.3-% 18 16.8 % 316- 28 17- 19- 8 0 10 HOME SUSP. 17 51. 5 % 8- 25.8-% 1 20.0 % 6 600.0 % 16 6 11- 1 5 1 11 BOYS CLUB 81 49.1 % 65 108.3 % 20- 37.7-% 7- 38.9-% 119 39 36 15- 6- 54 12 E. I.C. 1 100.0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 1 1 0 0 0 1 17 EXPULSION 1- 100.0-% 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 1- 1- 0 0 0 1- ] ] ] Ref: DIS032 Date: 8/12/04 Time : 11 : 1 7 : 31 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions HIGH SCHOOLS From AUGUST Through JUNE -=======-----------------========-=--------------------------------------------- 2 0 0 2 - 0 3 ========----------------=============------------------------------------------- -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU ==-=======-=============================-----------==========------------------- 09 S.A.C. 607 52.1% 308 26. 4 % 185 15.9% 65 5.6% 1165 263 154 113 46 576 10 HOME SUSP. 88 47.8% 69 37.5% 17 9.2% 10 5.4% 184 53 43 14 8 118 11 BOYS CLUB 79 55.6% 26 18.3% 30 21.1% 7 4.9% 142 59 21 28 7 115 12 E. I.C. 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 1 33.3% 0 .0% 2 66. 7% 0 .0% 3 1 0 2 0 3 2 0 0 3 - 0 4 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 09 S.A.C. 7 62 54.5% 366 26. 2% 176 12.6% 95 6.8% 1399 283 180 101 66 630 10 HOME SUSP. 191 69.7% 51 18.6% 27 9.9% 5 1.8% 274 92 31 14 3 140 11 BOYS CLUB 70 56.9% 30 24.4% 18 14.6% 5 4.1% 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 2 50.0% 0 .0% 2 50.0% 0 .0% 4 2 0 2 0 4 COMPARISON -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # STU # STU # STU # STU 09 S.A.C. 155 25.5 % 58 18.8 % 9- 4.9-% 30 46.2 % 234 20 26 12- 20 54 10 HOME SUSP. 103 117. 0 % 18- 26.1-% 10 58.8 % 5- 50.0-% 90 39 12- 0 5- 22 11 BOYS CLUB 9- 11. 4-% 4 15.4 % 12- 40.0-% 2- 28.6-% 19- 3- 4 11- 3- 13- 12 E. I.C. 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 1 100.0 % 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 1 1 0 0 0 1 ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] Ref: DIS032S Date: 8/12/04 Time: 11:17:31 School: 012 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions by School From AUGUST Through JUNE NORTH LITTLE ROCK HIGH SCHOOL - 11/12 -======--------------------------------------------=--=-=----------------------- 2 0 0 2 - 0 3 ==--===--------------------=-=-====---------------==========-------------------- -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 09 S.A.C. 190 54.6% 65 18.7% 73 21.0% 20 5. 7% 348 108 51 53 16 228 10 HOME SUSP. 3 27.3% 3 27.3% 4 36. 4% 1 9 .1% 11 3 3 4 1 11 11 BOYS CLUB 16 59.3% 2 7.4% 7 25.9% 2 7.4% 27 14 2 6 2 24 12 E. I.C. 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 1 100.0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 1 1 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 3 - 0 4 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NSF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # 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 COMPARISON -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # STU # STU # STU # STU ==---------------=======-----------==---======================================== 09 S.A.C. 10 5.3 % 1 1.5 % 8- 11.0-% 22 110. 0 % 25 9- 2 7- 11 3- 10 HOME SUSP. 7 233.3 % 3- 100.0-% 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 4 6 3- 0 0 3 11 BOYS CLUB 1- 6.3-% 3 150.0 % 1 14.3 % 1- 50.0-% 2 1 3 2 1- 5 12 E. I.C. 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 1- 100.0-% 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 1- 1- 0 0 0 1- 1 ] ] ] j J ] ] ] ] ] Ref: DIS032S Date: 8/12/04 Time : 11 : 1 7 : 31 School: 013 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions by School From AUGUST Through JUNE NORTH LITTLE ROCK HIGH SCHOOL - 09/10 ========---------------------=-===---------------------------------------------- 2 0 0 2 - 0 3 ==-==============-=========================--===============-------------------- -----BM-----# REF PCT/TOT # STU -----BF------ # REF PCT/TOT # STU -----NBM----# REF PCT/TOT # STU -----NSF----# REF PCT/TOT # STU =-====--------------=-=============-------=------------------------------------- 09 S.A.C. 416 51.1% 242 29.7% 111 13. 6% 45 5.5% 814 156 103 59 30 34 8 10 HOME SUSP. 11 39.3% 13 4 6. 4 % 2 7.1% 2 7.1% 28 10 11 2 2 25 11 BOYS CLUB 63 54.8% 24 20.9% 23 20.0% 5 4.3% 115 45 19 22 5 91 12 E. I.C. 0 .0% 0 .0% 2 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 0 .0% 0 .0% 2 100.0% 0 .0% 2 0 0 2 0 2 =============-=-------------------------=---=-=----=---=====-------------------- 2 0 0 3 - 0 4 ===========-=-=-=-===-------------========================---------------------- 09 S.A.C. 10 HOME SUSP. 11 BOYS CLUB 12 E. I. C 17 EXPULSION -----BM-----# REF PCT/TOT # STU 562 54.8% 184 67 65.0% 37 55 58.5% 41 0 .0% 0 2 50.0% 2 -----BF------ # REF PCT/TOT # STU 300 29.2% 127 26 25.2% 13 25 26.6% 20 0 .0% 0 0 .0% 0 COMPARISON -----BM------ -----BF------ # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # STU # STU -----NBM----# REF PCT/TOT # STU 111 10.8% 55 10 9.7% 6 10 10.6% 9 0 .0% 0 2 50.0% 2 -----NBM----- # REF PCT(+/-) # STU -----NSF----# REF PCT/TOT # STU 53 5.2% 39 0 .0% 0 4 4.3% 3 0 .0% 0 0 .0% 0 -----NSF----- # REF PCT(+/-) # STU 1026 405 103 56 94 73 0 0 4 4 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 09 S.A.C. 146 35.1 % 58 24.0 % 0 . 0 % 8 17.8 % 212 28 24 4- 9 57 10 HOME SUSP. 56 509.1 % 13 100.0 % 8 400.0 % 2- 100.0-% 75 27 2 4 2- 31 11 BOYS CLUB 8- 12.7-% 1 4.2 % 13- 56.5-% 1- 20.0-% 21- 4- 1 13- 2- 18- 12 E. I.C. 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 2 200.0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .o % 2 2 0 0 0 2 Ref: DIS032S Date: 8/12/04 Time: 11:17:31 School: 020 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions by School From AUGUST Through JUNE ARGENTA ACADEMY =============-=======================-------------------------------------====== 2 0 0 2 - 0 3 ==-=========---=====================---------------------------------------==--- -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU ==-==================================-------------------------------------=-=--- 09 S.A.C. 1 33.3% 1 33.3% 1 33.3% 0 .0% 3 1 1 1 0 3 10 HOME SUSP. 76 51.7% 53 36.1% 11 7.5% 7 4.8% 147 42 32 8 5 87 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 3 - 0 4 =======================--======---------=--------------------------------------- -----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. 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 COMPARISON -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # STU # STU # STU # STU ================================================================================ 09 S.A.C. 1- 100.0-% 1- 100.0-% 1- 100.0-% 0 . 0 % 3- 1- 1- 1- 0 3- 10 HOME SUSP. 38 50.0 % 28- 52.8-% 2 18.2 % 3- 42.9-% 9 9 14- 2- 3- 10- 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 .o % 0 .0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 I I I l I l I l I J I I I I I I I I I I I I I Ref: DIS032S Date: 8/12/04 Time: 11:17:32 School: 02 4 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions by School From AUGUST Through JUNE RIDGEROAD MIDDLE CHARTER SCHOOL ---======-=-=------------=========-=====----------=-==-===---------------------- 2 0 0 2 - 0 3 ========----------------====-==========-------------=======--------------------- -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU =======---------------============-=--------------------===--------------------- 09 S.A.C. 764 53.4% 4 65 32.5% 161 11. 3% 40 2.8% 1430 155 116 37 22 330 10 HOME SUSP. 10 27.0% 23 62. 2% 3 8.1% 1 2.7% 37 10 19 2 1 32 11 BOYS CLUB 2 33.3% 1 16. 7% 1 16.7% 2 33.3% 6 2 1 1 2 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% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 3 - 0 4 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # 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 COMPARISON -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # STU # STU # STU # STU =-----------------=====-======================================================== 09 S.A.C. 83- 10.9-% 124- 26.7-% 54- 33.5-% 33 82.5 % 228- 1 10- 3- 12 0 10 HOME SUSP. 28 280.0 % 7- 30.4-% 0 . 0 % 3 300.0 % 24 15 10- 1 2 8 11 BOYS CLUB 79 3950.0 % 23 2300.0 % 7 700.0 % 0 . 0 % 109 36 11 3 1- 49 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 ~ : Ref: DIS032S Date: 8/12/04 Time: 11: 1 7 : 3 2 School: 02 5 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions by School From AUGUST Through JUNE LAKEWOOD MIDDLE SCHOOL ===-------------------------------=======-------------=====--------------------- 2 0 0 2 - 0 3 =====----------===============================--====================----=------= -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU ===------------===================-=========--------==============-----=-=---=== 09 S.A.C. 14 6 42.4% 72 20.9% 94 27.3% 32 9.3% 344 66 41 49 21 177 10 HOME SUSP. 2 66.7% 0 .0% 1 33.3% 0 .0% 3 2 0 1 0 3 11 BOYS CLUB 51 51. 5% 20 20.2% 25 25.3% 3 3.0% 99 25 9 21 2 57 12 E. I.C. 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 1 100.0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 1 1 0 0 0 1 =---------------------------------================-=-=====================-===== 2 0 0 3 - 0 4 =---------------------------------========================================-===== -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU --------------================================================================== 09 S.A.C. 163 4 6. 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 ------=------=----=---=-========--============================================== COMPARISON -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # STU # STU # STU # STU ----------------------------------===========---------=====================--=== 09 S.A.C. 17 11. 6 % 20 27.8 % 34- 36.2-% 2 6.3 % 5 2 4 11- 4 1- 10 HOME SUSP. 1- 50.0-% 1 100.0 % 0 . 0 % 3 300.0 % 3 1- 1 0 3 3 11 BOYS CLUB 19- 37.3-% 2- 10.0-% 15- 60.0-% 4 133 .3 % 32- 3- 3 13- 2 11- 12 E.I.C. 0 . 0 % 0 .o % 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 1- 100.0-% 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 1- 1- 0 0 0 1- Ref: DIS032S Date: 8/12/04 Time: 11:17:32 School: 02 6 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions by School From AUGUST Through JUNE ROSE CITY MIDDLE SCHOOL ===-===============-=-================--------------------------------------==-- 2 0 0 2 - 0 3 ====-========-----------==============-------------------------------------=-=-- -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NSF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU ===---===================--=====--======-----------------==--------------------- 09 S.A.C. 65 60.2% 28 25.9% 6 5.6% 9 8.3% 108 43 23 3 4 73 10 HOME SUSP. 0 .0% 1 100.0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 1 0 1 0 0 1 11 BOYS CLUB 33 68.8% 3 6.3% 7 14.6% 5 10.4% 48 23 2 5 4 34 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 3 - 0 4 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # 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 COMPARISON -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # STU # STU # STU # STU -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 09 S.A.C. 8- 12.3-% 13 46.4 % 3- 50.0-% 8- 88.9-% 6- 5- 4 1- 3- 5- 10 HOME SUSP. 4 400.0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 4 4 0 0 0 4 11 BOYS CLUB 10- 30.3-% 32 1066.7 % 6- 85.7-% 5- 100.0-% 11 7- 22 4- 4- 7 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 I I I I I I I J J I - I I I I I - I I I - Ref: DIS032S Date: 8/12/04 Time : 11 : 1 7 : 3 2 School: 027 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions by School From AUGUST Through JUNE ROSE CITY MIDDLE LEVEL ACADEMY ====---===============================-=----------------------------------=====- 2 0 0 2 - 0 3 ===--=====================================---------=====---------------------=-- -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NSF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU ==-=====================================------------------------------------==-- 09 S.A.C. 10 HOME SUSP. 11 BOYS CLUB 12 E. I.C. 17 EXPULSION 09 S.A.C. 10 HOME SUSP. 11 BOYS CLUB 12 E. I.C 17 EXPULSION 09 S.A.C. 10 HOME SUSP. 11 BOYS CLUB 12 E.I.C. 17 EXPULSION 3 75.0% 0 .0% 3 0 5 41.7% 7 58.3% 3 5 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 2 0 0 3 - 0 4 -----BM------ # REF PCT/TOT # STU 22 75.9% 15 7 50.0% 5 2 40.0% 2 \" 1 100.0% 1 0 .0% 0 -----BF------ # REF PCT/TOT # STU 4 13. 8% 3 5 35. 7% 3 3 60.0% 3 0 .0% 0 0 .0% 0 COMPARISON 1 25.0% 1 0 .0% 0 0 .0% 0 0 .0% 0 0 .0% 0 -----NBM----# REF PCT/TOT # STU 3 10.3% 1 2 14.3% 1 0 .0% 0 0 .0% 0 0 .0% 0 0 .0% 0 0 .0% 0 0 .0% 0 0 .0% 0 0 .0% 0 -----NSF----# REF PCT/TOT # STU 0 .0% 0 0 .0% 0 0 .0% 0 0 .0% 0 0 .0% 0 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NSF----- # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # STU # STU # STU # STU 19 633.3 % 4 400.0 % 2 200.0 % 0 . 0 % 12 3 0 0 2 40.0 % 2- 28.6-% 2 200.0 % 0 . 0 % 2 2- 1 0 2 200.0 % 3 300.0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 2 3 0 0 1 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 1 0 0 0 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 0 0 0 4 4 12 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 29 19 14 9 5 5 1 1 0 0 25 15 2 1 5 5 1 1 0 0 Ref: DIS032S Date: 8/12/04 Time: 11: 1 7 : 3 2 School: 030 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions by School From AUGUST Through JUNE POPLAR STREET MIDDLE SCHOOL 2 0 0 2 - 0 3 =-=====------------=--===============------------------------------------------- 09 S.A.C. 10 HOME SUSP. 11 BOYS CLUB 12 E. I.C. 17 EXPULSION -----BM-----# REF PCT/TOT # STU 318 54.3% 110 14 93.3% 12 79 55.2% 42 0 0 g.  0 0 0 0 g.  0 0 -----BF-----# REF PCT/TOT # STU 177 30.2% 91 0 .0% 0 36 25.2% 23 0 0 9-  0 0 0 0 g.  0 0 -----NBM----# REF PCT/TOT # STU 65 11.1% 30 1 6.7% 1 20 14.0% 11 0 09-  0 0 0 .0% 0 -----NBF----# REF PCT/TOT # STU 26 4.4% 16 0 .0% 0 8 5.6% 5 0 09-  0 0 0 0 g.  0 0 586 247 15 13 143 81 0 0 0 0 -----~--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 0 0 3 - 0 4 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 09 S.A.C. 276 58.2% 136 28.7% 45 9.5% 17 3.6% 474 128 72 25 12 237 10 HOME SUSP. 0 0 g.  0 0 0 g.  0 0 .0% 0 Og.  0 0 0 0 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 g.  0 0 0 g.  0 0 Og.  0 0 0 g.  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 0 0 9-  0 0 0 g.  0 0 0 g.  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. 42- 13. 2-% 41- 23.2-% 20- 30.8-% 9- 34.6-% 112- 18 19- 5- 4- 10- 10 HOME SUSP. 14- 100.0-% 0 . 0 % 1- 100.0-% 0 . 0 % 15- 12- 0 1- 0 13- 11 BOYS CLUB 29 36.7 % 9 25.0 % 6- 30.0-% 6- 75.0-% 26 12 2- 2- 3- 5 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 I l I l I l I l I l I J I I I I I Ref: DIS032S Date: 8/12/04 Time: 11:17:32 School: 031 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions by School From AUGUST Through JUNE AMBOY ELEMENTARY SCHOOL ============----======--============-=------------------------------------------ 2 0 0 2 - 0 3 -======-------------------=--=======-------------------------------------------- -----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. 36 67.9% 7 13.2% 10 18.9% 0 .0% 53 25 4 6 0 35 11 BOYS CLUB 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C. 42 71. 2% 5 8.5% 0 13.6% 0 6.8% 59 23 5 6 4 38 17 EXPULSION 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 3 - 0 4 -----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. 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% 1 8.3% 12 6 3 0 1 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. 16- 44.4-% 4 57.1 % 8- 80.0-% 1 100.0 % 19- 9- 1 4- 1 11- 11 BOYS CLUB 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E.I.C. 34- . 0 % 2- . 0 % 8- . 0 % 3- . 0 % 47- 1- 0 8- 3- 28- 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 J I I I I Ref: DIS032S Date: 8/12/04 Time : 11: 1 7 : 3 2 School: 032 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions by School From AUGUST Through JUNE LAKEWOOD ELEMENTARY SCHOOL --==========---====================--------------------------------------------- 2 0 0 2 - 0 3 ===--=======================-===-=====----------------=====--------------------- -----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. 3 100.0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 3 3 0 0 0 3 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 3 - 0 4 -----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. 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 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. 2- 66.7-% 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 2- 2- 0 0 0 2- 11 BOYS CLUB 0 . 0 % 0 .o % 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 % o- . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 I I I I l I I I I Ref: DIS032S Date: 8/12/04 Time: 11:17:32 School: 033 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions by School From AUGUST Through JUNE BOONE PARK ELEMENTARY SCHOOL -===--------------------------------------------------==------------------------ 2 0 0 2 - 0 3 -===------------------------------=-------------------===--=-------------------- -----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% 0 Og_  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 161 78.9% 38 18.6% 5 2.5% 0 .0% 204 57 17 3 0 77 11 BOYS CLUB 0 .0% 0 Og_  0 0 Og_  0 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C. 0 Og_  0 0 .0% 0 Og_  0 0 Og_  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 0 .0% 0 Og_  0 0 .0% 0 Og_  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 =---------------------------------------------------=-=========------=========== 2 0 0 3 - 0 4 =---------------------------------========--==================================== -----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 Og_  0 0 .0% 0 Og_  0 0 Og_  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 27 79.4% 7 20.6% 0 Og_  0 0 Og_  0 34 16 4 0 0 20 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 49 84.5% 9 15.5% 0 Og_  0 0 0 9-  0 58 15 3 0 0 18 17 EXPULSION 0 0 g_  0 0 09-  0 0 09-  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 . 0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 134- 83.2-% 31- 81.6-% 5- 100.0-% 0 . 0 % 170- 41- 13- 3- 0 57- 11 BOYS CLUB 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E.I.C. 49 . 0 % 9 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 58 49 9 0 0 18 17 EXPULSION 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 I I I I Ref: DIS032S Date: 8/12/04 T irne : 11 : 1 7 : 3 2 School: 035 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions by School From AUGUST Through JUNE SEVENTH STREET ELEMENTARY SCHOOL ==--===-=====------==-=-==========--=--------------===-==----------------------- 2 0 0 2 - 0 3 =------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -----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. 22 91. 7% 2 8.3% 0 .0% 0 .0% 24 16 2 0 0 18 11 BOYS CLUB 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C. 58 75.3% 19 24.7% 0 .0% 0 .0% 77 30 11 0 0 41 17 EXPULSION 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 3 - 0 4 -----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. 53 79.1% 14 20.9% 0 .0% 0 .0% 67 34 9 0 0 43 11 BOYS CLUB 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C 72 74.2% 25 25.8% 0 .0% 0 .0% 97 40 17 0 0 57 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. 31 140.9 % 12 600.0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 43 18 7 0 0 25 11 BOYS CLUB 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E.I.C. 14 . 0 % 6 .0 % 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 20 0 0 0 0 16 17 EXPULSION 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 I I I I I l I I I I J Ref: Date: Time: DIS032S 8/12/04 11:17:32 School: 037 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions by School From AUGUST Through JUNE LYNCH DRIVE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL =--====--=----------------=---===----------------------------------------------- 2 0 0 2 - 0 3 =---=====-------------============---------------------------------------------- -----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. 12 70.6% 4 23.5% 1 5.9% 0 .0% 17 11 3 1 0 15 11 BOYS CLUB 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C. 24 63.2% 12 31. 6% 0 2.6% 0 2.6% 38 15 8 1 1 25 17 EXPULSION 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 3 - 0 4 -----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. 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% 5 10.9% 46 13 11 0 2 26 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. 9 75.0 % 1 25.0 % 1- 100.0-% 1 100.0 % 10 2 0 1- 1 2 11 BOYS CLUB 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E.I.C. 1- . 0 % 6 .0 % 1- . 0 % 4 . 0 % 8 0 1 1- 4 1 17 EXPULSION 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 I I I I I I I J J Ref: DIS032S Date: 8/12/04 Time : 11 : 1 7 : 3 2 School: 040 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions by School From AUGUST Through JUNE MEADOW PARK ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 2 0 0 2 - 0 3 -----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. 28 70.0% 8 20.0% 4 10.0% 0 .0% 40 19 5 3 0 27 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 3 - 0 4 -----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. 38 44.7% 26 30.6% 18 21. 2% 3 3.5% 85 23 14 6 2 45 11 BOYS CLUB 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I. C 1 16. 7% 4 66. 7% 1 16.7% 0 .0% 6 1 2 1 0 4 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 .o % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 10 35.7 % 18 225.0 % 14 350.0 % 3 300.0 % 45 4 9 3 2 18 11 BOYS CLUB 0 .o % 0 .o % 0 .o % 0 .0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E.I.C. 1 . 0 % 4 .0 % 1 .0 % 0 . 0 % 6 1 4 1 0 4 17 EXPULSION 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 I I I I I I Ref: DIS032S Date: 8/12/04 Time: 11:17:32 School: 041 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions by School From AUGUST Through JUNE NORTH HEIGHTS ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 2 0 0 2 - 0 3 -----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. 10 52.6% 0 .0% 8 42.1% 1 5.3% 19 8 0 6 1 15 11 BOYS CLUB 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C. 31 60.8% 2 3.9% 0 31. 4% 0 3.9% 51 15 2 11 2 30 17 EXPULSION 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 3 - 0 4 -----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 50.0% 0 .0% 4 50.0% 0 .0% 8 2 0 3 0 5 11 BOYS CLUB 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C 18 72. 0% 2 8.0% 5 20.0% 0 .0% 25 12 2 5 0 19 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. 6- 60.0-% 0 . 0 % 4- 50.0-% 1- 100.0-% 11- 6- 0 3- 1- 10- 11 BOYS CLUB 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E.I.C. 13- . 0 % 0 .0 % 11- . 0 % 2- . 0 % 26- 0 0 11- 2- 11- 17 EXPULSION 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ref: DIS032S Date: 8/12/04 Time: 11:17:32 School: 042 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions by School From AUGUST Through JUNE CRESTWOOD ELEMENTARY SCHOOL ==-=================================-==--------------=--------------------====== 2 0 0 2 - 0 3 ===-=================================---------------====------------------=====- -----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 Og.  0 0 Og.  0 0 Og.  0 0 Og.  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 54 85.7% 7 11.1% 2 3.2% 0 Og.  0 63 17 5 2 0 24 11 BOYS CLUB 0 Og.  0 0 Og.  0 0 .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 0 17 EXPULSION 0 Og.  0 0 Og.  0 0 Og.  0 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 3 - 0 4 ==------------===========------------------------------------------------------- -----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% 0 Og.  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 15 93.8% 0 .0% 1 6.3% 0 Og.  0 16 9 0 1 0 10 11 BOYS CLUB 0 Og.  0 0 Og.  0 0 .0% 0 Og.  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I. C 0 .0% 0 Og.  0 0 0 g.  0 0 Og.  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 0 Og.  0 0 Og.  0 0 0 g.  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. 39- 72. 2-% 7- 100.0-% 1- 50.0-% 0 .0 % 47- 8- 5- 1- 0 14- 11 BOYS CLUB 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E.I.C. 0 . 0 % 0 .o % 0 .o % 0 . 0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .o % 0 0 0 0 0 0 I I Ref: DIS032S Date: 8/12/04 Time: 11:17:32 School: 043 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions by School From AUGUST Through JUNE PARK HILL ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 2 0 0 2 - 0 3 -----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. 11 64.7% 1 5.9% 5 29. 4% 0 .0% 17 8 1 5 0 14 11 BOYS CLUB 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 . 0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C. 3 60.0% 0 .0% 0 20.0% 0 20.0% 5 3 0 1 1 5 17 EXPULSION 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 3 - 0 4 -----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. 1 10.0% 9 90.0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 10 1 7 0 0 8 11 BOYS CLUB 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C 0 .0% 1 100.0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 1 0 1 0 0 1 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. 10- 90.9-% 8 800.0 % 5- 100.0-% 0 .0 % 7- 7- 6 5- 0 6- 11 BOYS CLUB 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C. 3- . 0 % 1 . 0 % 1- . 0 % 1- . 0 % 4- 1- 1 1- 1- 4- 17 EXPULSION 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ref: DIS032S Date: 8/12/04 Time: 11:17:32 School: 044 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions by School From AUGUST Through JUNE PIKE VIEW ELEMENTARY SCHOOL ====-----------------------==--------------------------------------------------- 2 0 0 2 - 0 3 -----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 48. 7% 19 48.7% 1 2.6% 0 .0% 39 12 13 1 0 26 11 BOYS CLUB 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C. 87 51. 8% 59 35.1% 0 11. 3% 0 1.8% 168 40 26 14 2 82 17 EXPULSION 0 .0% 0 . 0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 3 - 0 4 -----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. 3 75.0% 1 25.0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 4 2 1 0 0 3 11 BOYS CLUB 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C 13 59.1% 7 31. 8% 2 9.1% 0 .0% 22 10 6 2 0 18 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. 16- 84.2-% 18- 94.7-% 1- 100.0-% 0 .0 % 35- 10- 12- 1- 0 23- 11 BOYS CLUB 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E.I.C. 74- .o % 52- . 0 % 17- . 0 % 3- .0 % 146- 1- 1- 17- 3- 64- 17 EXPULSION 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 I I I I J J ] Ref: DIS032S Date: 8/12/04 Time : 11 : 1 7 : 3 2 School: 045 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions by School From AUGUST Through JUNE BELWOOD ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 2 0 0 2 - 0 3 -----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 g..  0 0 .0% 0 0 g..  0 0 09-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 7 77.8% 2 22.2% 0 Og..  0 0 .0% 9 2 1 0 0 3 11 BOYS CLUB 0 .0% 0 Og..  0 0 .0% 0 Og..  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C. 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 0 0 9-  0 0 .0% 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 3 - 0 4 -----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 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 6 60.0% 4 40.0% 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 10 3 3 0 0 6 11 BOYS CLUB 0 .0% 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 0 Og..  0 0 09-  0 0 .0% 0 Og..  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- 14.3-% 2 100.0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 1 1 2 0 0 3 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 .o % 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 0 .o % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 I Ref: DIS032S Date: 8/12/04 Time : 11 : 1 7 : 3 2 School: 04 6 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions by School From AUGUST Through JUNE GLENVIEW ELEMENTARY SCHOOL =------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 0 0 2 - 0 3 =-=-------------------==-====--------------------------------------------------- -----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 !l-  0 0 .0% 0 0 !l-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 31 81.6% 4 10.5% 3 7.9% 0 O!l-  0 38 23 2 2 0 27 11 BOYS CLUB 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 !l-  0 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C. 0 0 !l-  0 0 .0% 0 0 !l-  0 0 0 !l-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 0 0 !l-  0 0 .0% 0 0 !l-  0 0 09-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 3 - 0 4 -----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 .0% 0 .0% 0 O!l-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 31 75.6% 5 12.2% 5 12.2% 0 O!l-  0 41 23 5 5 0 33 11 BOYS CLUB 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 9-  0 0 O!l-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C 1 100.0% 0 .0% 0 0 9-  0 0 O!l-  0 1 1 0 0 0 1 17 EXPULSION 0 0 9-  0 0 .0% 0 0 9-  0 0 0 9-  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. 0 . 0 % 1 25.0 % 2 66.7 % 0 . 0 % 3 0 3 3 0 6 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 J J ] Ref: DIS032S Date: 8/12/04 Time: 11:17:32 School: 048 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions by School From AUGUST Through JUNE INDIAN HILLS ELEMENTARY SCHOOL ========================================================--=----=---------------- 09 S.A.C. 10 HOME SUSP. 11 BOYS CLUB 12 E. I.C. 17 EXPULSION 2 0 0 2 - 0 3 -----BM-----# REF PCT/TOT # STU 0 .0% 0 7 63.6% 3 0 .0% 0 7 50.0% 4 0 .0% 0 -----BF-----# REF PCT/TOT # STU 0 .0% 0 1 9 .1% 1 0 .0% 0 0 .0% 0 0 .0% 0 2 0 0 3 - 0 4 -----BM------ -----BF------ # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU -----NBM----# REF PCT/TOT # STU 0 .0% 0 2 18.2% 2 0 .0% 0 0 50.0% 3 0 .0% 0 -----NBM----- # REF PCT/TOT # STU -----NSF----# REF PCT/TOT # STU 0 .0% 0 1 9.1% 1 0 .0% 0 0 .0% 0 0 .0% 0 -----NSF----- # REF PCT/TOT # STU 0 0 11 7 0 0 14 7 0 0 ==============================================================---============-=- 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% 10 40.0% 5 20.0% 25 6 1 6 4 17 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 14.3 % 0 . 0 % 1 50.0 % 0 . 0 % 2 1 0 1 0 2 11 BOYS CLUB 0 .o % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E.I.C. 2 . 0 % 1 . 0 % 3 . 0 % 5 . 0 % 11 0 1 3 5 10 17 EXPULSION 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .o % 0 0 0 0 0 0 I I J 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  '02-03 1903 1050 512 172  '03-04 1961 980 394 220 Ill '02-03  '03-04 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 North Little Rock Public Schools Analysis of Disciplinary Actions District Level Action 10: Home Suspension BM BF NBM NBF  02-03 522 193 63 13  03-04 469 157 66 18 02-03  03-04 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 North Little Rock Public Schools Analysis of Disciplinary Actions District Level Action 11: Boys Club BM BF NBM NBF  02-03 244 86 83 25  03-04 316 155 51 16 02-03  03-04 I J I J 1:] I J I 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 North Little Rock Public Schools Analysis of Disciplinary Actions District Level Action 12: E. I. C. K-5 BM BF NBM NBF  01-02 342 164 67 29  02-03 253 97 52 11 02- 03 1 02 ()?\n-() y I J I I J I J I J I J I J I J 2 1.8 1.6 1.4 1.2 1 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 North Little Rock Public Schools Analysis of Disciplinary Actions District Level Action 17: Expulsion BM BF NBM NBF  02-03 2 0 2 0  03-04 2 0 2 0 02-03  03-04 North Little Rock Public Schools Analysis of Disciplinary Actions Elementary K-5 Action 09: SAC 1-  0.9-v 0 8-V 0.7-v O.\u0026amp;-v o.s-v 0.4-V 0.3-v 0.2-\" 0.1-\"' 0 BM BF NBM NBF  02-03 0 0 0 0 13 03-04 0 0 0 0 II 02-03 D 03-04 I J I I I I I I J I l I l 450 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 North Little Rock Public Schools Analysis of Disciplinary Actions Elementary K-5 Action 10: Home Suspension BM BF NBM NBF 02-03 401 93 41 2  03-04 228 83 33 6  02-03  03-04 North Little Rock Public Schools Analysis of Disciplinary Actions Elementary K-5 Action 11: Boys Club 1 _/ 0.9-v 0.8- 0.7-/ 0.6-v 0.5_/ 0.4-V 0.3-/ 0.2- 0.1 y 0 BM BF NBM NBF  02-03 0 0 0 0  03-04 0 0 0 0 02-03  03-04 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 North Little Rock Public Schools Analysis of Disciplinary Actions Elementary K-5 Action 12: E. I. C. K-5 BM BF NBM NBF  02-03 252 97 52 11  03-04 194 70 18 11 \\ 02-03  03-04 North Little Rock Public Schools Analysis of Disciplinary Actions Elementary K-5 Action 17: Expulsion 1 - 0.9_/ 0.8-\" 0.7-v 0.6-V o.s-  0.4-  0.3-v 0.2-v 0.1- 0 BM BF NBM NBF II 02-03 0 0 0 0 D 03-04 0 0 0 0 02-03 D 03-04 North Little Rock Public Schools Analysis of Disciplinary Actions Middle Schools Action 09: SAC 1400 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0 BM BF NBM NBF  02-03 1296 742 327 107  03-04 1199 614 218 125 02-03  03-04 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 North Little Rock Public Schools Analysis of Disciplinary Actions Middle Schools Action 10: Home Suspension BM BF NBM NBF  02-03 33 31 5 1 B 03-04 50 23 6 7 02-03  03-04 250 200 150 50 0 North Little Rock Public Schools Analysis of Disciplinary Actions Middle Schools Action 11: Boys Club BM BF NBM NBF  02-03 165 60 53 18  03-04 246 125 33 11 North Little Rock Public Schools Analysis of Disciplinary Actions Middle Schools Action 12: E. I. C. K-5 1-\" \"\"'---'-\" 0.9- 0.8- 0.7-/ ' 0.6-v ' 1, 0.5_/ 0.4- 0.3-  0.2-  0.1 _v 0 \" BM BF NBM NBF  02-03 0 0 0 0 0 03-04 1 0 0 0 02-03 D 03-04 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 17: Expulsion BM BF NBM NBF  02-03 1 0 0 0  03-04 0 0 0 0 02-03 D 03-04 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 North Little Rock Public Schools Analysis of Disciplinary Actions High Schools Action 09: SAC BM BF NBM NBF 02-03 607 308 185 65 D 03-04 762 366 176 95 02-03  03-04 IJ I I I J ] J I I J I J I J [J [J I 1 I - J 200 180 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 North Little Rock Public Schools Analysis of Disciplinary Actions High Schools Action 10: Home Suspension BM BF NBM NBF  02-03 88 69 17 10  03-04 191 52 27 5 02-03 D 03-04 ] I I I l I 1 I i-1 IJ I J I 'l IJ I IJ 80 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  02-03 79 26 30 7 Gl 03-04 70 30 18 5 02-03  03-04 I l 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-\"' 0.7-L, 0.6- o.s_v 0.4-v 0.3- 0.2-\" 0.1 _v 0 BM BF NBM NBF  02-03 0 0 0 0  03-04 0 0 0 0 02-03 D 03-04 2 1.8 1.6 1.4 1.2 1 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 North Little Rock Public Schools Analysis of Disciplinary Actions High Schools Action 17: Expulsion BM BF NBM NBF  02-03 1 0 2 0  03-04 2 0 2 0  02-03  03-04 .. \"' u 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 D 94-95 869 460 411 126  95-96 1052 446 410 140  96-97 1264 55 469 142  97-98 1801 862 547 132  98-99 1443 718 458 138  99-00 1468 662 401 139 D 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 D 94-95 1195-96 96-97  97-98  98-99  99-00 D 00-01  01-02 D 02-03 03-04 North Little Rock Public Schools Analysis of Disciplinary Actions 10 Year Comparison Action 10: Home Suspension 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 BM BF NBM NBF D 94-95 236 106 103 20  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 D 00-01 385 92 64 7  01-02 692 234 92 21 D 02-03 522 193 63 13 469 157 66 18  94-95  95-96 96-97  97-98  98-99  99-00  00-01  01-02  02-03 03-04 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  94-95 133 44 31 8  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 III 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 D 94-95  95-96  96-97  97-98  98-99  99-00 D 00-01  01-02 D 02-03 03-04 I I I I I I I I I I I I I l I 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- ~ i Ir .lrfrb 0- --~ g ~ BM BF NBM NBF D 94-95 178 68 58 5  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 D 00-01 162 55 40 21  01-02 342 164 67 29  02-03 252 97 52 11 le 03-04 195 70 18 11  94-95  95-96 96-97  97-98  98-99  99-00 D 00-01  01-02 D 02-03 03-04 ] ] J J IJ I I  I I I I I I I I I I I North Little Rock Public Schools Analysis of Disciplinary Actions 10 Year Comparison Action 17: Expulsion 7...........-----r-----------------, 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 BM BF NBM NBF  94-95 7 0 1 0  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 D 94-95  95-96 96-97  97-98  98-99  99-00  00-01  01-02 D 02-03 03-04\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_1069","title":"\"Little Rock School District, A Fun Place to Learn!\" calendar","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":["2003/2004"],"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","Educational planning","School administrators","School superintendents","Calendars"],"dcterms_title":["\"Little Rock School District, A Fun Place to Learn!\" calendar"],"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/1069"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["calendars (documents)"],"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\ncalender\nThis transcript was created using Optical Character Recognition (OCR) and may contain some errors.\nThe Little Rock School District ... . .. a fun place to learn! 2003-2004 Calendar Lit:t:le Rock School District: 810 West M a rkham, Little Rock, AR 72201 501-447-1000 www.LRSD.org To Our Patrons: You will notice a definite change in the size and quality of your calendar this year. Due to severe budget cutbacks, we had to reduce our printing costs. We apologize for any inconvenience this may cause, and we hope to return to producing our higher quality, more informative calendars in the future. LRSD Board of Directors Dr. Katherine Mitchell - Zone 1 1605 Welch St., 72206 375-6957 (H) Term Expires: 2005 H. Baker Kurrus - Zone 4 10816 Crestdale Lane, 72212 224-4154 (H) 376-3300 (W) Term Expires: 2004 Tony Rose - Zone 6 Board Yke President 8109 Mellwood, 72204 568-7587 (H) Term Expires: 2003 Mike Daugherty - Zone Z 2101 S. Martin St., 72204 664-3143 (H) Term Expires: 2004 Larry Berkley - Zone 5 Board Setretary 14005 St. Charles Blvd., 72211 225-7377 (H) Term Expires: 2005 Sue H. Strickland - Zone 7 19 Peartree Place, 72209 455-1843 (H) Term Expires: 2003 Board President's Message: Thank you for choosing to be a part of the Little Rock School District. The mission of the Little Rock School District, an educational partnership of the entire community, is to prepare and inspire all Judy Magness - Zone 3 Board President 708 Hall Dr., 72205 666-0923 (H) Term Expires: 2003 students to achieve academic excellence and personal fulfillment while becoming contributing citizens by offering open access to an innovative, challenging curriculum in a nurturing, disciplined environment that embraces diversity. During this school year, the Board of Directors and the entire LRSD staff will continue to work to fulfill our mission. Some of the exciting things happening this year include increasing student academic achievement, selecting a new superintendent, beginning the implementation of the next five-year strategic plan and opening new and renovated facilities. We want to partner with the parents and families of our students to provide excellent educational opportunities for all of our students. Please take an active role in the education of your student by communicating regularly with teachers and principals by phone or in person, attending school functions, encouraging your child and providing a time and place to study at home. Let us be the \"Little Rock Village\" that raises all of our children to be the best they can be. Judy Magness Helpful Contact Information Director of Student Registration ...................................... Julie Wiedower Interim Dir., Exceptional Children (Special Ed.) .......... Barbara Barnes Director of Pupil Services .............................................. Jo Evelyn Elston Director of Volunteers in Public Schools ......................... Debbie Milam Coordinator of Health Services .................................. Margo Bushmiaer Director of Early Childhood/Elementary Literacy .... Krista Underwood Supervisor of HIPPY Program ............................................................... .. Supervisor of CARE Program .......................................... Martha Rogers Director of Human Resources ...................................... Beverly Williams Director of Safety and Security .......................................... Robert Jones Transportation (Laidlaw Transit) ........................................... Mike Jones Transportation (Exceptional Children) ........................ Michael Martello Director of Adult Education ............................................ Paulette Martin Director of Career-Technical Education .............................. Carol Green Director of Federal Programs ............................................ Leon Adams Director of Facility Services .................................................. Doug Eaton Director of Computer Information Services ........................ John Ruffins Director of Procurement ................................................. Darral Paradis Director of Child Nutrition .................................................. Morlin McCoy Manager of Financial Services ........................................ Mark Milhollen Director of Communications .............................................. Suellen Vann Ombudsman ............................................................... James Washington Associate Superintendent for School Services ............... Sadie Mitchell Asst. Superintendent for Elementary Schools ............... Frances Jones Asst. Superintendent for Secondary Schools ............. Dr. Marian Lacey Assistant Superintendent for Student Discipline ........ Dr. Linda Watson Assoc. Superintendent for Administrative Services ....... Junious Babbs Interim Assoc. Superintendent for Instruction .................. Dennis Glasgow Chief Financial Officer ......................................................... Dr. Don Stewart Interim Superintendent of Schools ................................... Dr. Don Stewart 447-2950 447-7420 447-7490 447-2965 447-7480 447-3325 447-1870 447-7400 447-1100 447-2075 447-4130 447-7550 447-1850 447-1390 447-1070 447-5250 447-1040 447-2260 447-2450 447-1086 447-1030 447-1121 447-1133 447-1130 447-1136 447-3580 447-2955 447-3320 447-1011 447-1005 Superintendent's Welcome As I write this calendar message, most of our students and teachers are enjoying the summer break. Many teachers use the summer months to further their own education by taking graduate courses while others participate in other professional development opportunities, update lesson plans or find time for some relaxation. During the 2003-04 school year, teachers, principals and other staff members will continue their important work: educating students to the best of their abilities. Academic preparation of all students is our top priority. Schools will continue to implement the individual School Improvement Plans that are designed to address the specific needs of students in each of our schools. Administrators and district support staff make use of the summer months to prepare for the coming school year. Our construction program continues at a rapid pace. The Hall High expansion and renovation project is almost complete. Major projects are currently under way at Central, J. A. Fair and McClellan high schools\nDunbar, Mabelvale and Pulaski Heights middle schools\nand Williams and Pulaski Heights elementary schools. We expect the rebuilding of Wakefield Elementary to be complete by the beginning of the 2004-05 school year, and the new building at Mann Middle School should be ready for students and staff by January 2004. With the continuing support of parents and the community, this district can, and will, meet the needs of the students of Little Rock-they deserve no less. Donald M. Stewart, Ed.D. Interim Superintendent Registration \u0026amp; School Selection We invite you to enroll your child in the LRSD at our Student Registration Office at 501 Sherman Street (at the intersection of E. Capitol and Sherman streets, near 1-30) or at your neighborhood school. To register, parents must provide proof of address such as a current utility bill, tax statement or lease agreement. A student enrolling in the LRSD for the first time must present a birth certificate, immunization record and Social Security number. Arkansas state law requires that children must be five years old by September 15, 2003, to be eligible to attend kindergarten in the 2003-04 school year. Students new to the district and students who have changed addresses during the summer should contact the Student Registration Office at 447-2950. Registration will be held January 26- February 6, 2004, for school assignments for the 2004-05 school year. Parent recruiters, whose goal is to assist parents in exploring school choice options, are based in the Student Registration Office. Call Essie Middleton at 447-2957 or Becky Rather at 447-2958. School Choice Neighborhood Schools Most students choose to attend their neighborhood school if space is available. To find out which is your neighborhood school, please contact the Student Registration Office. Magnet Schools/Programs Students may register for a \"themed\" magnet school. In Little Rock, the magnet school requests are filled by a random lottery selection if the demand exceeds available seats. See the list of LRSD schools on the back cover for magnet schools/programs. Since students may apply for these programs/schools from all three school districts in Pulaski County, they must apply through their \"home\" or resident district. For further information, call your \"home\" district: Little Rock (447-2950), North Little Rock (771-8000) or Pulaski County (490-2000). lnterdistrict Elementary Schools Students whose race is in the majority in their home district may transfer to another district and school where their race is in the minority (Majority-to-Minority, or M-to-M, transfers). African-American students from the LRSD may transfer to schools in the Pulaski County Special School District (PCSSD), and white students from the PCSSD may transfer to schools in the LRSD. The PCSSD interdistrict elementary schools are: Baker (Economics), William Jefferson Clinton Magnet (Technology \u0026amp; Speech) and Crystal Hill Magnet (Written, Oral \u0026amp; Visual Communications). The LRSD interdistrict elementary schools are: Martin Luther King, Jr. High-Intensity Learning lnterdistrict Magnet, Romine Computer Science \u0026amp; Basic Skills lnterdistrict and Washington Basic Skills/Math-Science lnterdistrict. Attendance Attendance Requirements State law requires school attendance for children age five through 17 whose birthdays fall on or before September 15 of each school year. State law also provides that excessive absences may be used as a basis for denial of course credit, promotion or graduation. Parents and students should be aware of a City of Little Rock curfew that requires a child to be in school during his or her school's normal hours of operation. Any student caught As parent or legal .r1uardia11, it is JJour responsihilitJJ to make sure that JJOur child attends school each da.zJ. \"Snow Days\" breaking this curfew may be subject to police charges. Excused Absences The parent or guardian is to notify the school attendance office by noon on the day when a student must be absent. Failure to do so will result in an unexcused absence, and the student will not be allowed to make up missed work. See the Student Handbook and check with your child's school for attendance/absence policies. Decisions on closing school due to severe weather or other conditions may be made the evening prior to the school day or very early the next morning. Conditions can change drastically before students actually begin traveling to school or during the day while students are at school. The decision on the safety of travel conditions for students rests entirely with their parents. Students who live outside of Little Rock: please take note of the announcement at the bottom of the next page concerning school bus transportation. School closings and delays will be announced on the following outlets: www.LRSD.org local television stations Planning for an Emergency LRSD-TV, Comcast Cable Channel 4 local radio stations Where should your child go if school is suddenly and unexpectedly closed? Rapidly changing weather or acute health problems could result in a sudden need for a student's dismissal. Talk to your child about an emergency plan today and notify the school, in writing, of both the place to which your child should go if you are not at home and the name of another adult who can be contacted in case of an emergency. Transportation \u0026amp; School Schedules School bus transportation is provided for secondary students who live more than two miles from their assigned schools and for elementary students who live more than one mile from their assigned schools. No transportation is provided for Special Circumstance Transfers, Staff Preference Transfers, four-year-old students or voluntary transfers.  All requests for transportation should be made at the child's school. If your child's school bus does not arrive on time, call Laidlaw Transportation at 447-4130 for assistance. (If you experience persistent difficulties, contact Theresa Kirklin at 447-4142.) Parents of Special Needs students should call 447-7550 for assistance. Students who live in Pulaski County and are authorized for transportation to LRSD schools should call 490-5760 or 982-9416 with bus concerns. To help create a safe and pleasant bus ride, students and parents should familiarize themselves with and follow the bus guidelines listed in the Student Handbook. Curious George, a favorite ltterary charader of the young and the young at heart, visited Fulbright Elementary to help students celebrate National Library Week School Opening \u0026amp; Closing Tintes Elementary Schools: 7:40-2:25 Booker Geyer Springs Terry Woodruff Cloverdale M. L. King Wakefield Fair Park Otter Creek Watson Franklin Rightsell Williams Fulbright Romine Wilson 7:50-2:35 Bale Baseline Brady Carver Chicot Dodd Forest Park Gibbs Jefferson McDermott Mabelvale Meadowcliff Mitchell Pulaski Heights Rockefeller Stephens Washington Western Hills Secondary Schools: 8:45- 3:45 Central Cloverdale Dunbar J. A. Fair Forest Heights Hall Henderson McClellan Mabelvale Mann Parkview Pulaski Heights Southwest Alternative Learning Center Metropolitan Career-Technical Center AM classes: 8:45 to 11:17 PM classes: 1:00 to 3:40 Special note to students who live outside the Little Rock School District and ride buses to LRSD schools: In the event that LRSD schools are open and your \"home\" district is closed due to inclement weather or other circumstances, your. school bus will not run. Your transportation is provided by your home school district, so you must secure your own transportation to school on these days. Curriculum \u0026amp; Graduation Diploma Honors Seal Many students wish to pursue a more challenging academic program in high school in preparation for higher education. A student may earn an Honors Seal on his or her diploma by completing 28 units, taking at least eight Pre-Advanced Placement and/ or Advanced Placement courses (or University Studies courses at Hall High) and earning a grade-point average of at least 3.5. The 28 units include all of the required units listed in the box below plus one additional unit each in math, science and social studies as well as two units in one foreign language. This curriculum reflects the admission requirements of the most competitive universities in the country. LRSO graduation requirements have been strengthened to better prepare students for college and employment opportunities. Seniors in the class of 2004 and after must pass the required classes listed to receive their diplomas. The LRSD's comprehensive curriculum reflects content and skills that are introduced at the elementary level and are built upon as students advance toward mastering subject and grade-level benchmarks. Students are encouraged to take the courses specified in the recommended curriculum (28 units). These courses meet the admission requirements of competdive universities and are good preparation for taking college admission examinations (ACT or SAT tests). The curriculum meets and exceeds the minimum state requirements. More than 400 courses are offered at the high school level. (/ass of 2004 and beyond Accelerated learning Center English ....................................................................... 4 units English ........................................................................ 4 units Social Studies ............................................................ 3 units Social Studies ............................................................. 3 units Mathematics .............................................................. 3 units Mathematics ............................................................... 3 units Science ....................................................................... 3 units Science ........................................................................ 3 units Career Focus ............................................................. 3 units Career Focus .............................................................. 3 units Fine Arts .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . .. .. .. . .. .. .. .. . .. .. .. .. . .. .. .. .... .. .. .. .. . 1 unit Physical Education .....................................................  unit Technology .................................................................. 1 unit (Only one P.E. unit counts toward graduation.) Physical Education ....................................................  unit Health and Safety .......................................................  unit (Only one P.E. unit counts toward graduation.) Oral Communications .................................................  unit Health and Safety ......................................................  unit Fine Arts .....................................................................  unit Oral Communications ................................................  unit REQUIRED UNITS ................................... 18 units English Language Arts ..............................................  unit Electives ...................................................................... 3 units REQUIRED UNITS .................................. ZO units TOTAL UNITS ........................................ Z 1 units Electives ..................................................................... 6 units TOTAL UNITS ....................................... 26 units Early Childhood Education The LRSD offers the highest quality preschool education available and is committed to helping children become independent thinkers, self-confident and eager learners and highly skilled individuals. Selected LRSD schools ofter one or more of the following early childhood education programs: Parent Involvement Classroom Visitation We invite and encourage you to visit your child's class during the school day. Please remember that you are an observer, not a participant, unless other arrangements have been made in advance with the teacher. To provide for the safety of our students while The Four-Year-Old (Pre-K) Program is a free program of fun and learning that provides: Research proves that children are in school, all visitors - including parents should report to the office for a visitor's pass. This allows us to be aware of all visitors in the building.  a certified early childhood education teacher and an instructional assistant in every class  a limit of 18 children in each classroom  developmentally appropriate curriculum and activities. Children must be four years old on or before September 15th of the year of enrollment. This program is available at most elementary schools\nsee the Directory of Schools on the back cover for those schools offering the program. more successful in school when their parents are active in the education process. Parent-Teacher Conferences Parent-teacher conference dates are listed in this calendar. These meetings provide a wonderful opportunity for parents to discuss their child's progress with his or her teacher. Teachers consider these conferences with parents to be extremely beneficial in helping to maintain and strengthen the important connection between home and school. For more information, call the Student Registration Office at 447-2950. Rockefeller Early Childhood Magnet School offers a preschool program that provides educational experiences and child care for children aged six weeks to three years. There is a monthly charge for this program. See the Directory of Schools on the back cover for contact information. \"My name is .... \" Counselor Wanda Varady works with pre-k students at Mitchell Elementary on their very first day of school. The CARE Program is a nonprofit, self-supporting program of child care provided for elementary age students. The program operates before and after school and all day on most school holidays. The CARE Program provides a structured program of creative activities and recreation in a nurturing environment. A CARE Program is located in every LRSD elementary school where there are at least 15 participants in grades k-5 and at selected schools for four-year-olds. Call the CARE Program office at 447-7400 for more information. Volunteer Activities Parent-Teacher Associations (PTAs) at individual schools are your first opportunity for involvement. The PTA Council, the district's organization of PTA presidents and committee chairmen, supports the efforts of the schools and the district. The PTA provides a means for communication and volunteer support for public schools in the LRSD. Ginny Kurrus, 224-4154, is PTA Council President for the 2003-2004 school year. The Volunteers in Public Schools (ViPS) program involves parents and other citizens in the education of children. Volunteers serve in many capacities, such as tutors, mentors, speakers, school recruitment team members and classroom helpers. Partners in Education (PIE) brings businesses and schools together in support of education. All businesses, large and small, are invited to participate in this program. Business partners recruit employees as volunteers, make in-kind donations and/or contribute funds to help meet the school's needs. There are many ways to get involved at the school or district level, and you are encouraged to do so. If you are interested in volunteering, please call 447-2965 to find out how you can play a role in the success of our students. The Title I Parent Involvement Program promotes parent participation in schools served by federal Title I and VI funds. Parents become partners in the learning process by attending workshops and receiving additional educational training and encouragement to work individually with their children. A lending library of materials for parents is located in the Parent Involvement Office. Call 447-2065 for more information. Testing \u0026amp; Evaluation The LRSD has a comprehensive assessment system that measures academic achievement and growth for all students. These tests fall into two categories: norm-referenced and criterionreferenced. Norm-referenced tests are designed to measure the academic achievement of students in Arkansas compared to students across the country who have taken the same test at the same time and at the same grade level. Criterion-referenced tests measure how well our students are learning the state standards and benchmarks. Assessments are scheduled as outlined in the box at right\nplease note that the state test dates are subject to change by the Arkansas Department of Education. The Arkansas Department of Education's current assessment program - Arkansas Comprehensive Testing, Assessment and Accountability Program (ACTMP)-includes a normreferenced test (Stanford-9) and criterion-referenced tests (Benchmark, End-of-Course and Alternate Portfolio Assessment). Exceptions are made for students with disabilities whose Individual Education Plan specifies that participation in standardized testing is inappropriate and for some students identified as limited-English proficient. These students will participate in the Alternate Portfolio Assessment. The LRSD voluntarily participates in the Arkansas Educational Planning and Assessment System (EPAS). EXPLORE and PLAN, two assessments in the EPAS, are administered at grades 8 and 10, respectively. These assessments are designed to provide information to aid students in educational, personal and career development. PLAN is considered to be a predictor of how well students will perform on the ACT. Several examinations are offered for those students who are interested in attending a college or university. The exams required for admission vary from one institution to another. Students should consult with their high school counselor about which of these tests to take. Deadlines for registration and test dates for some of these exams are included in this calendar. Although these tests are most commonly known by their initials, the actual names of the examinations are: ACT AP PSAT/NMSQT SAT I SAT II American College Testing Program Advanced Placement Examination Preliminary SAT/National Merit Scholarship Qualifying Test Scholastic Aptitude Test SAT Achievement Test Assessment Grades When Administered Developmental Reading Assessment K-2 September 2003 \u0026amp; April 2004 Norm-Referenced: Stanford-9 Achievement Test 2 March 1 - 12, 2004 Stanford-9 Achievement Test 5, 7 \u0026amp; 10 April 12 - 23, 2004 Criterion-Referenced: Mid-Year End-of-Course Algebra When Completed January 27, 2004 Mid-Year End-of-Course Geometry When Completed January 29, 2004 Primary Benchmark 4 March 30 - April 1, 2004 Intermediate Benchmark 6 March 30 - April 1, 2004 Middle Level Benchmark 8 March 30 - April 1 , 2004 Benchmark Exam Field Testing 3, 5 \u0026amp; 7 March 30 - April 1 , 2004 Alternate Portfolio Assessment due to PRE 4, 6, 8\u0026amp; 11 March 8 - 12, 2004 End-of-Course Literacy 11 March 31 - April 1 , 2004 End-of-Course Algebra When Completed April 27, 2004 End-of-Course Geometry When Completed April 29, 2004  For gifted/talented identification only. ** TAP schools (Rockefeller and Stephens) will be involved in SAT-9 testing at grades 1 and 3 at the same time. Certain control schools will test at grade 3 only. Forest Heights Middle School's Career Fair exposed students to many new and exaling career possibilities. The Destination Imagination team at Carver Magnet Elementary qualified for the 2003 Global Competition in Knoxville, Tennessee. Health, Safety \u0026amp; Nutrition Student Health Every school provides a school nurse who is available either full- or part-time. The nurse conducts routine assessments or physical examinations, screening programs and health counseling. Health Education, including sessions on Growth and Development, is provided. Parents are encouraged to inform the school nurse of all concerns regarding their child's health. Arkansas law requires that all students with special health care needs, including chronically ill, medically fragile and technology-dependent students, must have an Individual Health Care Plan with input from parents and physicians. Forms are available from your school nurse or registrar. Students who have a chronic condition such as asthma, diabetes or seizures must have an Emergency Action Plan written by the child's physician or nurse practitioner. For more information, please call Health Services at 447-7482. Required Immunizations You must show proof of immunization every time your child enrolls in a new school. Immunization records are to be presented at the school. Safe, Secure Schools Arkansas law states that a child who does not have the vaccines required for his or her age cannot be admitted to school. Safety is extremely important to us. That's why all LRSD schools follow security and safety rules. All students receive instruction and testing on the Student Handbook, which describes acceptable behavior and the consequences of unacceptable behavior. It is essential that students and their families are familiar with this book. Parents and students should be aware of the federal law requiring a recommendation for expulsion of at least 12 months for any student who brings a weapon to school. If you have questions, call the Office of Safety and Security at 447-2075. Is Your Child Insured?- The LRSD has no liability for children's accidental injuries on campus, so it is important that parents consider the low-cost Student Accident Insurance provided through an independent agency. Both school-time and 24-hour coverages are available. Insurance brochures/ applications, available at all schools, explain the coverage in detail. Additionally, the LRSD provides free student athletic insurance for all students participating in interscholastic sports sanctioned by the Arkansas Activities Association. The LRSD Office of Safety and Security ( 44 7-2075) will be pleased to provide more information. What's Cooking? Our professional Child Nutrition staff takes pride in serving breakfast and lunch to thousands of students every day. Child Nutrition also provides nutrition education as a curriculum enhancement for elementary students and snacks for children in the CARE Program. See the price list below for meal costs\nmenus are posted online at www.LRSD.org. Meal Prices Elementary Secondary Adult Breakfast $0.75 $0.75 $1.00 Lunch $1.50 $1.75 $2.25 Applying for Free or Reduced-price Meals To make sure all eligible children receive a free or reduced-price breakfast and lunch during the 2003-04 school year, you are encouraged to fill out an application for your child ( applications are available at all schools). Students who qualified last year in the LRSD for free and reduced-price meals may continue on that status until September 5, 2003. If you need assistance, please call your child's school. NO STUDENT will receive a free or reduced-pn'ce meal unless a 2003-04 lunch application is on file. Volunteerism is ah've and well in the LRSO! Parents, students and community members pitch in during Sharefest to help out w,lh projects in many distrid schools, such as painting \"No Parking\" zones at Wilson Elementary. A.UGUST 2003 3 s Parents: Please remember to contact the Student Registration Office at 447-2950 if your home address or phone number has changed. 4 Supplemental Pay Day 10 11 T Students attending an Extended Year school (Cloverdale Elem., Mabelvale Elem., Mitchell, Stephens or Woodruff) should consult separate Extended Year calendar. 5 6 SCHOOL \"CHECK-IN,\" 10 AM TO 7 PM 12 13 PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT T h 7 First Day for Teachers F 1 Tri-District Partners in Education Breakfast, 7:30 a.m. @ NLR High School East Campus Pay Day 8 PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT 14 15 6th Grade Orientation: 9:30 am Pay Day 9th Gr. Orientation: Hall \u0026amp;. 9th Grade Orientation: Parkview, 10 am\nMcClellan, Fair, 6 p.m. 11 am\nCentral, 3:30 pm School Bd. Agenda Mtg., 5 pm TEACHER WORK DAYS 2 9 16 17 18 A 19 B 20 A 21 B 22 A 23 24 31 First Day for Students Supplemental Pay Day 25 B 26 Students do not attend class on days that are shaded. Dates are subject to change. A 27 CTA Executive Board Meeting, 4:30 p.m. B 28 School Board Meeting, 5:30 p.m. Students attending Cloverdale, Mabelvale, Mitchell, Stephens and Woodruff elementaries: consult separate Extended Year calendar. A 29 B 30 s SEPTE1\":BER. 2003 s M: T w- Th F s 1 2 A 3 B 4 A 5 B 6 Pay Day Supplemental Pay Day Open House, All Elementary Schools LABOR DAY (Schools Closed) 7 8 A 9 B 10 A 11 B 12 A 13 Open House, All High CTA Council Representative Open House, All Early Student Schools Meeting, 4:30 p.m. Middle Schools Release for Parent PTA Council Meeting, School Board Agenda Conferences* Adm. Bldg. Board Room Meeting, 5 p.m. Deadline to Register for GRANDPARENTS DAY October SAT 14 15 B 16 A 17 B 18 A 19 20 Interim Report Week School Board Election Leadership Team Meeting Professional Pay Day Development Day {Students Out) Deadline to Register for October ACT Supplemental Pay Day 21 22 B 23 A 24 B 25 A 26 B 27 CTA Executive Board School Board Meeting, Deadline to Register for Meeting, 4:30 p.m. 5:30 p.m. November SAT II First Dav of Autumn ROSH HASHANAH 28 29 A 30 B *Early release will be 12:50 p.m. for elementary students and 2 p.m. for secondary students. Students do not attend class on days that are shaded. Dates are subject to change. Students attending Cloverdale, Mabelvale, Mitchell, Stephens and Woodruff elementaries: consult separate Extended Year calendar. --- - -- OCTOBER. 2003 s T Th F s 1 A 2 B 3 A 4 Pay Day 5 6 B 7 A 8 B 9 A 10 B College Night, 6-9 p.m., CTA Council Representative School Board Agenda Statehouse Convention Meeting, 4:30 p.m. Meeting, 5 p.m. Center YOM KIPPUR 12 13 A 14 B 15 A 16 B 17 PTA Council Meeting, Pay Day End of 1st Quarter Teacher Records Parkview H.S. Leadership Team Meeting Day (Students Out) Broker Appreciation Day Supplemental Pay Day COLUMBUS DAY NATIONAL BOSS DAY NAT. CHILDREN'S DAY NATIONAL SCHOOL LUNCH WEEK 19 20 Professional Development Day (Students Out) 21 A PSAT/NMSQT Test 22 B CTA Executive Board Meeting, 4:30 p.m. RED RIBBON WEEK 23 A 24 School Board Meeting, 5:30 p.m. B 26 27 A 28 B 29 A 30 B 31 A Da Ii ht Savin Time Ends Elementary Report Cards Sent Home ._ _____ Students do not attend class on days that are shaded. Dates are subject to change. Students attending Cloverdale, Mabelvale, Mitchell, Stephens and Woodruff elementaries: consult separate Extended Year calendar. Deadline to Register for December SAT Secondary Report Cards Sent Home Pay Day HALLOWEEN 11 Parent Institute SAT Test 18 PSAT/NMSQT Test 25 ACT Test NOVE1\":BER. 2003 s T Th F 2 3 B 4 A 5 B 6 7 ELECTION DAY 9 10 A 11 B PTA Council Meeting, Fulbright Elem. VETERANS DAY 12 A CTA Council Representative Meeting, 4:30 p.m. School Board Agenda Meeting, 5 p.m. Deadline to Register for December ACT AEA CONFERENCE / PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT 13 B 14 A Pay Day 1 SAT Test 8 15 16 17 B 18 A 19 B 20 A 21 B 22 Interim Report Week 23 24 ViPS Reading Day Leadership Team Meeting CTA Executive Board Meeting, 4:30 p.m. School Board Meeting, 5:30 p.m.  AMERICAN EDUCATION WEEK / CHILDREN'S BOOK WEEK A 25 B 26 27 THANKSGIVING DAY Supplemental Pay Day 28 30 THANKSGIVING HOLIDAY (Schools Closed) Students do not attend class on days that are shaded. Dates are subject to change. Students attending Cloverdale, Mabelvale, Mitchell, Stephens and Woodruff elementaries: consult separate Extended Year calendar. 29 s :OECE1\":BER. 2003 s M 1 Pay Day 7 8 14 15 Pay Day 21 22 Deadline to Register for January SAT First Da of Winter 28 29 T A 2 B 9 PTA Council Meeting, Hall H.S. A 16 23 30 Th B 3 A 4 A 10 B 11 CTA Council Representative Meeting, 4:30 p.m. School Board Agenda Meeting, 5 p.m. B 17 CTA Executive Board Meeting, 4:30 p.m. 24 31 NEW YEAR'S EVE A 18 School Board Meeting, 5:30 p.m. 25 STMAS WINTER VACATION (Schools Closed) Students do not attend class on days that are shaded. Dates are subject to change. Students attending Cloverdale, Mabelvale, Mitchell, Stephens and Woodruff elementaries: consult separate Extended Year calendar. F s B 5 A 6 SAT Test A 12 B 13 ACT Test B 19 A 20 Supplemental Pay Day HANUKKAH BEGINS 26 27 KWANZAA BEGINS JA.NU.AR.Y 2004 s 4 11 18 25 5 Classes Resume 12 19 M.L. KING JR. DAY Schools Closed 26 Elementary Report Cards Sent Home T Th 1 NEW Y A SD Y F 2 Pay Day Deadline to Register for February ACT WINTER VACATION (Schools Closed) s 3 B 6 A 7 B 8 A 9 B 10 A 13 B PTA Council Meeting, Geyer Springs Elem. 14 A CTA Council Representative Meeting, 4:30 p.m. SEMESTER EXAMS School Board Agenda Meeting, 5 p.m. 15 B End of Znd Quarter Pay Day 16 Teacher Records Day (Students Out) Supplemental Pay Day 17 20 A 21 B 22 A 23 B 24 Open House: Cloverdale MS, Dunbar, Forest Hts., Henderson 5:30-6:30\nMabelvale MS, Mann, Pulaski Hts. MS, Southwest 7-8 Leadership Team Meeting School Board Meeting, 5:30 p.m. Open House: Central, Fair, Hall, McOellan-5:30-6:30\nParkview 7-8 \"CHECK US OUT,\" ALL SCHOOLS, 9 AM TO 1 :30 PM Magnet Schools Fair, Park Plaza Mall SAT Test A 27 B 28 A 29 B 30 A 31 Mid-Year End-of-Course Algebra Exam CTA Executive Board Meeting, 4:30 p.m. Mid-Year End-of-Course Geometry Exam OPEN ENROLLMENT FOR THE 2004-2005 SCHOOL YEAR Secondary Report Cards Sent Home Students do not attend class on days that are shaded. Dates are subject to change. Students attending Cloverdale, Mabelvale, Mitchell, Stephens and Woodruff elementaries: consult separate Extended Year calendar. FEBR.U.AR.Y 2004 s M T 1 2 B 3 Pay Day A 4 School Counselor Appreciation Day B 5 Th A 6 F s B 7 ACT Test OPEN ENROLLMENT FOR THE 2004-2005 SCHOOL YEAR / NATIONAL SCHOOL COUNSELING WEEK 8 15 22 29 9 A 10 B 11 A 12 PTA Founders Day CTA Council Representative School Board Agenda Luncheon, Fellowship Meeting, 4:30 p.m. Meeting, 5 p.m. Student Center Open House, Metropolitan Career-Technical Center NATIONAL CAREER \u0026amp; TECHNICAL EDUCATION WEEK 16 B 17 A 18 B 19 Interim Report Week PRESIDENT'S DAY DAISY BATES DAY 23 A 24 Leadership Team Meeting B 25 CTA Executive Board Meeting, 4:30 p.m. ASH WEDNESDAY A 26 School Board Meeting, 5:30 p.m. B 13 A Early Student Release for Parent Conferences* Pay Day PCEP Day (High Schools) A 20 B Deadline to Register for March SAT Supplemental Pay Day 14 VALENTINE'S DAY 21 B 27 A 28 Deadline to Register for April ACT *Earl release will be 12:50 p.m. for elementary students and 2 p.m. for secondary students------- -------- -------Students do not attend class on days that are shaded. Dates are subject to change. Students attending Cloverdale, Mabelvale, Mitchell, Stephens and Woodruff elementaries: consult separate Extended Year calendar. l\\AR..C:U: 2004 s T Th 1 B 2 A 3 B 4 Pay Day STANFORD-9 ACHIEVEMENT TESTING (Grade Z) 7 8 A 9 PTA Council Meeting, Booker Elem. B 10 A 11 CTA Council Representative Meeting, 4:30 p.m. School Board Agenda Meeting, 5 p.m. F A 5 B 6 B 12 A 13 STANFORD-9 TEST (Grade Z) / ALT. PORTFOLIO ASSESSMENT DUE TO PRE (Gr. 4 6 8 \u0026amp; 11) / NAT. SCHOOL BKFST. WEEK 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Pay Day ST. PATRICK'S DAY s SPRING BREAK (Students Out) First Da of S rin 21 22 B 23 A 24 B 25 A 26 27 Supplemental Pay Day Leadership Team Meeting End of 3rd Quarter Teacher Records SAT Test CTA Executive Board School Board Meeting, Day (Students Out} Meeting, 4:30 p.m. 5:30 p.m. Deadline to Register for May SAT 28 29 B 30 A 31 B ViPS volunteer hours \u0026amp; End-of-Course Literacy award nominations due Exam, Grade 11 (thru 4/1) BENCHMARK EXAMS (Grades 4, 6 \u0026amp; 8\nthru 4/1) Note: Benchmark field testing also will occur for grades 3, 5 and 7 on March 30, 31 .andA._pr.il1. ---- ------- Students do not attend class on days that are shaded. Dates are subject to change. Students attending Cloverdale, Mabelvale, Mitchell, Stephens and Woodruff elementaries: consult separate Extended Year calendar. .APR.IL 2004 s 4 5 A Elementary Report Cards Sent Home Da Ii ht Savin Time be ins 11 12 B EASTER 18 19 A T 6 B 7 A PASSOVER 13 A 14 B PTA Council Meeting, CTA Council Representative Jefferson Elem. Meeting, 4:30 p.m. Th F 1 A 2 B 3 End-of-Course Literacy Exam, Grade 11 (Cont.) Pay Day BENCHMARK EXAMS (Gr. 4, 6 \u0026amp; 8\nCont.) 8 B School Board Agenda Meeting, 5 p.m. 15 A Pay Day ACT Test 9 A 10 Secondary Report Cards Sent Home School Custodian Appreciation Day 16 B 17 STANFORD-9 ACHIEVEMENT TESTING (Grades 5, 7 \u0026amp; 10) 20 B 21 A 22 B 23 A 24 Leadership Team Meeting School Board Meeting, Supplemental Pay Day Bus Driver Appreciation 5:30 p.m. Day ADMINISTRATIVE PROFESSIONALS DAY EARTH DAY STANFORD-9 ACHIEVEMENT TESTING (Grades 5, 7 \u0026amp; 10) / NATIONAL LIBRARY WEEK/ NATIONAL VOLUNTEER WEEK 25 26 B 27 A 28 B 29 A 30 Interim Report Week End-of-Course Algebra CTA Executive Board End-of-Course Geometry Professional Exam Meeting, 4:30 p.m. Exam Development Day ViPS \"An Evening for the Deadline to Register (Students Out) Stars\" for June SAT Pay Day s ARK. PTA CONVENTION, LR (thru 5/1) Students do not attend class on days that are shaded. Dates are subject to change. Students attending Cloverdale, Mabelvale, Mitchell, Stephens and Woodruff elementaries: consult separate Extended Year calendar. l\\'IA.Y 2004 s Final report cards: elementary- mailed home on June 1\nsecondary-mailed home on June 11. 2 3 Professional Development Day (Students Out) T 4 National Teacher Day LRSD Teacher of the Year Banquet, 6 p.m. B 5 Th F A 6 B 7 Child Nutrition Employee Appreciation Day Deadline to Register for June ACT AP EXAMS / TEACHER APPRECIATION WEEK / CHILD NUTRITION EMPLOYEE APPRECIATION WEEK 9 10 MOTHER'S DAY 16 17 23 24 Baccalaureate MEMORIAL DAY 30 (Schools Closed) B 11 A 12 B 13 A 14 PTA Council Spring Luncheon National School Nurse Day CTA Council Representative Meeting, 4:30 p.m. School Board Agenda Meeting, 5 p.m. AP EXAMS / SENIOR EXAMS (Tuesday-Friday) Pay Day A 18 B 19 A 20 B 21 Leadership Team Meeting Supplemental Pay Day B 25 A 26 B 27 A 28 Graduation, Alltel Arena: CTA Executive Board Last Day for Students Last Day for Central, 7 p.m. Meeting, 4:30 p.m. End of 4th Quarter Teachers Graduation, Alltel Arena: Sch. Bd. Mtg., 5:30 p.m. Teacher Records Parkview, 6 p.m.\nGraduation, Alltel Arena: Day McClellan, 8:30 p.m. J. A. Fair, 6 p.m.\n31 Hall, 8:30 p.m. Students do not attend class on days that are shaded. Dates are subject to change. Students attending Cloverdale, Mabelvale, Mitchell, Stephens and Woodruff elementaries: consult separate Extended Year calendar. s 1 SAT Test ARK. PTA CONVENTION A 8 B 15 A 22 Adult High School Graduation, Mann Middle School: 2:30 p.m. 29 High Schools 13. PULASKI HEIGHTS 27. FULBRIGHT \" 40. ROMINE COMPUTER SCIBNCE 401 N. Pine St., 05 300 Pleasant VaJley Or., 12 AND BASIC SKILLS 1. CENTRAL INTERNATIONAL 447-3200 447-4700 INTERDISTRICT + \" STUDIBS * 3400 Romine Rd., 04 1500 S. Park St., 72202 14. SOUTHWEST 28. GEYER SPRINGS \" 447-6300 447-1400 3301 S. Bryant St., 04 5240 Mabelvale Pike, 09 447-3400 447-4800 41. STEPHENS \"  2 . J.A. FAIR SYSTEMS MAGNET * 3700 W. 18th St., 04 13420 David 0. Dodd Rd., IO IS. ALTERNATIVE LEARNING 29. GIBBS FOREIGN LANGUAGES/ 447-6400 447-1700 CENTER INTERNATIONAL STUDIES 800 Apperson St., 02 MAGNET  42. TERRY \" 3 . HALL UNIVERSITY STUDIBS 447-3520 lllS W. 16th St., 02 10800 Mara Lynn Dr., 11 6700 \"H\" St., OS 447-4900 447-6500 447-1900 Elementary Schools 30. JEFFERSON \" 43. WAKEFIBLD \" 4. McCLELLAN BUSINESS/ 2600 N. McKinley St., 07 75 Westminister Dr., 09 16. BALE \" 447-5000 Temporarg Address: 6900 Pecan Rd., 06 COMMUNICATIONS MAGNET  6501 W. 32nd St., 04 447-6600 9417 Geyer Springs Rd., 09 447-3600 31. MARTIN LUTHER KING JR, WASHINGTON BASIC SKILLS/ 447-2100 HIGH-INTENSITY LEARNING 44. s. 17. BASELINE \" INTERDISTRICT MAGNET * + \" MATH-SCIENCE INTERDISTRICT PAR.KVIEW ARTS \u0026amp; SCIBNCE 3623 Baseline Rd., 09 905 Martin Luther KingJr. Dr., 02 MAGNET * + \" MAGNET  447-3700 447-5100 2700 S. Ma in St., 06 2501 John Barrow Rd., 04 447-2300 447-6700 18. BOOKER ARTS MAGNET * 32. McDERMOTT \" 6. 2016 Barber St., 06 1200 Reservoir Rd., 07 45. WATSON \" METROPOLITAN CAREER- 447-3800 447-5500 7000 Valley Or., 09 TECHNICAL CENTER / ACCELERATED LEARNING 447-6800 19. BRADY \" 33. MABELVALE \"  CENTER 7915 W. Markham St., OS 9401 Mabelvale Cut-off 46. WESTERN HILLS \" 7701 Scott Hami lton Dr., 09 447-3900 Mabelvale, AR 72103 4901 Western HiJls Ave., 04 447-1200 447-5400 447-6900 20. CARVER BASIC SKILLS/  Middle Schools MATH-SCIENCE MAGNET  34. MEADOWCLIFF \" 47. WILLIAMS TRADITIONAL 2100 East 6th St., 02 25 Sheraton Or., 09 MAGNET  7. CLOVERDALE MAGNET 447-4000 447-5600 7301 Evergreen St., 07 * 6300 Hinkson Rd ., 09 447-7100 21. CHICOT \" 35. MITCHELL ACADEMY OF 447-2500 lll00 Chicot Rd. CREATIVE DRAMATIC ARTS \"  48. WILSON \" 8. DUNBAR INTERNATIONAL Mabelvale, AR 72103 2410 Battery St., 06 4015 Stannus Rd., 04 STUDIBS/GIFTED \u0026amp; TALENTED 447-7000 447-5700 447-7200 EDUCATION MAGNET  22. CLOVERDALE \"  36. OTTER CREEK \" 49. WOODRUFF \"  ll0O Wright Ave., 06 6500 Hinkson Rd., 09 16000 Otter Creek Pkwy., 09 3010 W. 7th St., 05 447-2600 447-4200 447-5800 447-7300 9. FOREST HEIGHTS 23. DODD \" 37. PULASKI HEIGHTS \" 4594071- 2E70v0er green Dr., 05 6423 Stagecoach Rd., 04 319 N. Pine St., 05 KEY TO SYMBOLS 447-4300 447-5900 . 10. HENDERSON HEALTH Magnet schools/programs 24. FAIR PARK \" 38. RIGHTSELL \" + lnterdistrict schools .. SCIBNCES MAGNET  616 N. Harrison St., 05 911 W. 19th St., 06 401 John Barrow Rd., 05 447-4400 447-6100 Schools that offer 4-year-old programs 447-2800 \" ROCKEFELLER ELEMENTARY Extended year educa tion schools 25. FOREST PARK \" 39. 11. MABELVALE MAGNET  1600 N. Tyler St., 07 AND EARLY CHILDHOOD 10811 Mabelvale W. Rd. MAGNET \" The Little Rock School District ca lendar, 447-4500 designed to give information to staff, Mabelvale, AR 72103 700 E. 17th St., 06 447-3000 26. FRANKLIN COMMUNICATIONS 447-6200 pat rons and citizens, is published by the TECHNOLOGY ELEMENTARY \" LRSD Communica tions Department. Call 12. MANN ARTS \u0026amp; SCIENCE MAGNET  1701 S. Harrison St., 04 501-447- 1025 for more info rmation. 1000 E. Rooseve lt Rd., 06 447-4600 447-3100\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_1075","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":["2003-01"],"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--Finance","Education--Economic aspects","Education--Evaluation","Educational law and legislation","Educational planning","Educational statistics","School board members","School boards","School superintendents","School improvement programs"],"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/1075"],"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 2 2003 OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING Agenda Little Rock School District Board of Directors' Meeting January 2003 :- n.., ?-~ ~ C: .... !I: Oz 0~ 1g-\u0026lt; m-n\n,\n, C: -z\n,\n,n o--\u0026lt; .... i5 r-z nu, ~ :\u0026lt; ~ c13 ~ U) n 0 !I: !I: C: z  iz5 \"'\n,- 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 BOARD OF DIRECTORS REGULAR MEETING January 23, 2003 5:30 p.m. 8. Performance - Mabe/vale Magnet Middle School Choir REPORTS/RECOGNITIONS/PUBLIC COMMENTS: A. Superintendent's Citations 8. Partners in Education - New Partnerships Rockefeller Elementary and Early Childhood Magnet School - Anne Mangan Little Rock Job Corps - Tim Foley and Willie Jones C. Remarks from Citizens (persons who have signed up to speak) D. Little Rock Classroom Teachers Association E. Joshua lntervenors F. PTA Council REPORTS AND COMMUNICATIONS: A. Remarks from Board Members 8. Desegregation Update C. Budget Update D. Construction Report: Proposed Bond Projects E. Internal Auditors Report F. Technology Update 0\"0 \u0026gt;,-m::0 ,.. ,_-,: ii: Oz o\u0026gt; el~ m.., ::0 C: -z\non .o...' \"~\"' r-z C\")(/) ~ Regular Board Meeting January 23, 2003 Page 2 V. APPROVAL OF ROUTINE MATTERS: A. Minutes B. Personnel Changes C. Student Calendar, 2003-04 D. Superintendent's Evaluation/Contract Extension VI. INSTRUCTIONAL SERVICES DIVISION: A. Completion of Program Evaluations VII. ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DIVISION: VIII. BUSINESS SERVICES DIVISION: A. First Reading: Policy DGD - Visa Purchasing Pro-Card B. Agreement Between City of Little Rock and LRSD - Use of Facilities C. Donations of Property D. Financial Report IX. SCHOOL SERVICES DIVISION: X. DISTRICT OPERATIONS: XI. CLOSING REMARKS: A. Superintendent's Report: 1. Dates to Remember 2. Special Functions XII. EMPLOYEE HEARINGS XIII. ADJOURNMENT n~ ?\"-i::l ,r--,_- t!I: Oz o\u0026gt; el~ m-.,\n,c, C: -z\n,on o-t r- c5 r-z nv, ~ :\u0026lt; i::l i8 ~ V, 8 !C !I: C: z E c5 z V, I. PRELIMINARY FUNCTIONS CA.LL TO ORDER/ ROLL CALL Ill. PROCEDURAL MATTERS STllnl'NT Pl'RS:nRIUNl\".I' Ill. REPORTS/RECOGNITION PUBLIC COIIIIENTS rv. REPORTS/ COMMUNICATIONS A. REMARKS FROM BOARD MEMBERS To: From: Through: Subject: Little Rock School District 810 West Markham Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 January 23, 2003 Board of Directors Debbie Milam, Director, VIPS/Partners in Education ~ T. Kenneth James, 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: Rockefeller Elementary and Early Childhood Magnet School and Little Rock Job Corps !1:1 0 m CJJ p C: ~ m fl a, C: 8 !!I C:\ng ?\nm :\u0026lt; ~ c'3 ::!l CJJ n 0 31: 31: C: z ~ z CJJ :,0 m 31:~ m~ 31: CJJ ~\nB :::oo CJJ:I: I ROCKEFELLER ELEMENTARY SCHOOL To: Debbie Milam, Director, VIPS/Partners in Education u From: ~Anne Mangan, Principal, Rockefeller School Subject: Partners in Education Program: New Partnership Date: December 12, 2002 Partnership Agreement Between Rockefeller Elementary and Early Childhood Magnet School And Little Rock Job Corps Rockefeller Elementary School commits to the following:  Share new educational strategies that would benefit students in job training.  Notify job corp. students about any on-site technology inservice training.  Provide opportunities for educational training for students in the work world.  Provide opportunity for students to participate in community service.  Allow students to work in their field of interest such as community relations or facility services.  Develop collaborative plans between community and school. Little Rock Job Corps commits to the following:  Tutoring for elementary school students  Lunch Buddy Program  Grounds Cleanup  Recess supervision  Screening for any workers under the age of 21 .  Survey students to determine interests.  Mr. Willie Jones will be the liaison between community organization and the school. VIPS commits to the following:  Background check on persons 21 of age or older  Training for any volunteer workers 700 i::ast 17th Street  Phone 447-6200  Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 _, \u0026lt; '54.n Individual Approach to a World if Knowledge\" TO: THROUGH: FROM: SUBJECT: January 23, 2003 Board of Directors T. Kenneth James, Superintendent of Schools Bill Goodman, District Engineer f$.._ b January Construction Report, Bond Projects Construction started on January 7 for the interior renovation of Central High School. Twelve [12] construction phases are scheduled. Each construction phase consists of moving students from a wing on a floor to the portable classrooms. The moves are done between semesters so as to limit the disruption of students and teachers. Construction will take thirty-five [35] months, with completion in December 2005. The exterior renovation of Central High School was completed in December 2002. The exterior renovation included a new roof and the cleaning of the exterior masonry. This project was funded in part by a National Park Service grant, \"Save America's Treasures\" in the amount of $500,000. The purchase ofland at Central on the north side of Daisy Bates Drive has been completed. Engineers are designing a parking lot that will be an addition to the existing student parking lot. This will relieve the congestion of parked cars on the streets around the school. Construction is scheduled for completion in July. Construction for the media center addition to Wilson Elementary has begun. The project also consists of general renovation to the building, electrical upgrade to support technology, and correcting ADA problems. Call me at 44 7-1146 if you have any questions. 810 W Markham  Little Rock, Arkansas 72201  www.lrsd.kl2.ar.us 501-124-2000  fax: 501-324-2032 !.D., m\n:o z~ z ,m- :_n, -c.:,mo o::c \u0026gt;Z -tO m -\u0026lt; Facilitv Name Administration Central Franklin Hall Mabelvale MS Mann Otter Creek Romine Wilson CONSTRUCTION REPORT TO THE BOARD JANUARY 23, 2003 BOND PROJECTS UNDER CONSTRUCTION Proiect Descriotion Cost Asbestos abatement $380,495 Renovation - Interior $10,200,266 Renovation $2,511,736 Major renovation \u0026amp; addition $8,637,709 Renovation $6,851,621 Partial Replacement $11,500,000 Repair surface water drain $25,000 Major renovation \u0026amp; addition $3,534,675 Renovation/exoansion $1,263,876 est. (\n()mp1euon Date Feb-03 Dec-05 Apr-03 May-03 Dec-03 Dec-03 Jan-03 Feb-03 Auo-03 BOND PROJECTS CONSTRUCTION WINTER/SPRING 2002-2003 Est Comp1euon Facilitv Name Proiect Descriotion Cost Date Administration Fire alarm $32,350 Mar-03 Baseline Renovation $953,520 Unknown Brady Addition/renovation $973,621 Jun-04 Carver Parking lot $111,742 Jul-03 Central Parking Student parking $50,000 Jul-03 Central/Quigley Stadium light repair \u0026amp; electrical repair $100,000 Jul-03 Dunbar Renovation/addition $6,161,950 Dec-04 Facility Services Fire alarm $12,000 Jun-03 6 classroom addition \u0026amp; cafeteria/music J. A. Fair room addition $3,155,640 Mar-04 Forest Park Replace window units w/central HVAC $485,258 Aug-03 McClellan Classroom Addition $2,155,622 Mar-03 Parkview Addition $2,121,226 Mar-04 Procurement Fire alarm $25,000 Jun-03 Pulaski Hgts. Elem Renovation $1,193,259 Dec-04 fulaski Hgts. MS Renovation $3,755,041 Dec-04 -- Southwest Drainage corrections $56,402 Jun-03 Student Assignment 1 ~ire alarm $9,000 Jun-03 Tech Ctr/ Metro Renovation Addition/Renovation - Phase II $2,725,000 Feb-04 Williams 1 Renovation $2,106,492 Dec-03 Williams I Parking expansions $183,717 Dec-03 Wilson Parking Expansion I $110,000 Jun-03 BOND PROJECTS PLANNING STARTED CONST. DATE TO BE DETERMINED t:st (.\nomp1euon Facilitv Name Proiect Descriotion Cost Date J. A. Fair Roof repairs $391,871 Unknown Forest Park Diagonal parking $111,742 Unknown Pulaski Hgts. MS ~ nergy monitoring system installation Unknown Southwest dition $2,774,946 Unknown Wakefield build $4,750,000 Jun-04 Wilson ergy monitoring system installation Unknown Woodruff Parkina addition $193,777 Unknown CONSTRUCTION REPORT TO THE BOARD JANUARY 23, 2003 BOND PROJECTS THAT HAVE BEEN COMPLETED Est. comp1euon Facility Name Proiect Descriotion Cost Date Administration Annex Energy monitoring system installation May-02 Alternative Leaming 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 Aua-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 Booker Energy efficient lighting $170,295 Apr-01 Booker Energy monitoring system installation $23,710 Oct-01 Booker Asbestos abatement $10,900 Feb-02 Booker Fire alarm $34,501 Mar-02 Brady Energy efficient lighting $80,593 Seo-02 Brady Asbestos abatement $345,072 Aug-02 Carver Energy monitoring system installation $14,480 May-01 Central Purchase land for school Unknown Dec-02 Central Roof \u0026amp; exterior renovations $2,000,000 Dec-02 Central Ceiling and wall repair $24,000 Oct-01 Central Fire Alarm System Design/Installation $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 $189,743 Jul-01_ Cloverdale MS Major renovation \u0026amp; addition $1,393,822 Nov-02 Dodd Energy efficient lighting $90,665 Aua-01 Dodd Asbestos abatement-ceiling tile $156,299 Jul-01 Dodd Replace roof top HV AC $215,570 Aug-02 Facilities Service Interior renovation $84,672 Mar-01 Fair Park HVAC renovation/fire alarm $315,956 Aor-02 - Fair Park Energy efficient lighting $90,162_'- Aug-01 Fair Park Asbestos abatement-ceiling $59,310 Aug-01 - J. A. Fair Energy efficient lighting $277,594 Apr-01 J. A. Fair j_Press box $10,784 Nov-00 J. A. Fair Security cameras -- - - $12,500 Jun-Q! Forest Park Energy efficient lighting - - $119,788 May-01 Fulbright Energy efficient lighting_ $134,463 Jun-01 Fulbright Energy monitoring system installation -~ $11,950 Aug-01 Fulbright Replace roof top HVAC units $107.~~ '- Aug-02 Fulbright Parking lot $140,000 Sep-02 ulbright Roof repairs $200,000 Oct-02 Gibbs Energy efficient lighting I $76,447 Apr-01 Gibbs - - Energy monitoring system installation I $11,770 Jul-01 Hall Asbestos abatement $168,222 Aug-01 Hall Energy efficient lighting $42,931 Jul-0-1 Hall Energy efficient lighting I $296,707 Apr-01 Hall Infrastructure improvements _ ~ $93,657-1 Aug-01 Hail - Feb-01 Intercom Hall 1 Securitv cameras - $1(),60ot- Jun-01 2 .!l.C, m\na ~z z m r- Facility Name Henderson Henderson Henderson Henderson IRC Jefferson Jefferson Laidlaw Mabelvale Elem. Mabelvale Elem. Mabelvale Elem. Mabelvale Elem. Mabelvale MS Mann Mann Mann Mann Mann McClellan McClellan McClellan McClellan McDermott McDermott Meadowcliff Meadowcliff Meadowcliff Metropolitan --- ~opolitan Metropolitan Mitchell f- Mitchell 1-Aftchell O-akhu-rst Otter Creek Otter Creek 'c5tiercreek -~- Otter Creek Otter Creek -Park-view Parkview Parkview Parkview - Parkview Parkview Procurement Pulaski Hgts. Elem Rightsell Rockefeller Rockefeller Rockefeller CONSTRUCTION REPORT TO THE BOARD JANUARY 23, 2003 BOND PROJECTS THAT HAVE BEEN COMPLETED Project Description Cost Energy efficient lighting $193,679 Roof replacement gym $107,835 Asbestos abatement Phase I $500,000 Asbestos abatement Phase 2 $250,000 Energy efficient lighting $109,136 Asbestos abatement $43,639 Renovation \u0026amp; fire alarm $1,630,000 Parking lot $269,588 Energy monitoring system installation $12,150 Replace HVAC units $300,000 Asbestos Abatement $107,000 Energy efficient lighting $106,598 Renovate bleachers $134,793 Asphalt walks The total $1.8 Walkway canopies million is what has Boiler replacement been used so far Fencing on the projects Partial demolition/portable classrooms listed completed for  Security cameras $36,300 Energy efficient lighting $303,614 Stadium stands repair $235,000 Intercom $46,000 Energy efficient lighting $79,411 Replace roof top HVAC units $476,000 Fire alarm $16,175 Asbestos abatement $253,412 Engergy efficient lighting I $88,297 Replace cooling tower $37,203 Replace shop vent system $20,000 Energy monitoring system installation $17,145 Energy efficient lighting __ $103,642 Energy monitoring system installation $16,695 Asbestos abatement $13,000 HVAC renovation $237,237 Energy monitoring system installation $10,695 Energ efficient lighting ---$81,828 Asbestos abatement $10,000 - -- Parking lot $138,029 -- 6 classroom addition $888,778 HVAC controls $210,000 Roof replacement $273,877 Exterior lights $10,784 ~ AC renovation \u0026amp; 700 area controls $301,938 ker replacement $120,000 _ _ Energy efficient lighting I $315,000 Energy monitoring system installation I $5,290 Move playground $17,000 Energy efficient lighting $84,898 Energy efficient lighting $137,004 Replace roof top HVAC $539,175 Parking addition $111,742 1:st. (.\nOmp1euon 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 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..:Q!_ May-01 Apr-01 Aug-02 Aug-02 Oct-02 Jun-02 Sep-01 Nov-00 Aug-01 Aug-01 Jun-01 Jun-02 Dec-02 Apr-01 Mar-01 Aug-01 Aug-02 3 CONSTRUCTION REPORT TO THE BOARD JANUARY 23, 2003 BOND PROJECTS THAT HAVE BEEN COMPLETED Facility Name Proiect Descriotion Cost Romine Asbestos abatement $10,000 Security/Transportation Bus cameras $22,500 Southwest Asbestos abatement $28,138 Southwest Energy efficient lighting $168,719 Student Assignment Energy monitoring system installation $4,830 Tech Center Phase 1 Renovation $275,000 Technology Upgrade Upgrade phone system \u0026amp; data Terry Energy efficient lighting $73,850 Terry Driveway \u0026amp; Parking $83,484 Terry Media Center addition $704,932 Wakefield Security cameras $8,000 Wakefield Energy efficient lighting $74,776 Wakefield Demolition/Asbestos Abatement $200,000 Washington Security cameras $7,900 Washington Energy efficient lighting $165,281 Watson Energy monitoring system installation $8,530 Watson Asbestos abatement $182,241 Watson Energy efficient lighting $106,868 Watson Asbestos abatement $10,000 Watson Major renovation \u0026amp; addition $800,000 Western Hills Asbestos abatement $191,946 Western Hills Intercom $7,100 Western Hills Energy efficient lighting $106,000 Williams Energy efficient lighting $122,719 Woodruff Renovation $246,419 Est. completion Date Apr-02 Jun-01 Aug-00 Jan-02 Aug-02 Dec-01 Nov-02 Feb-01 Aug-02 Sep-02 Jun-01 Feb-01 Nov-02 Jun-01 Apr-01 Jul-01 Aug-01 Aug-01 Aug-02 Aug-02 Aug-02 Dec-01 Jul-01 Jun-01 Auo-02 .?.,' m\n:o is z z m r- !\" .z.. !B ~ ~ .., r-o \u0026gt;\n:o C: ... o a\n:o U\u0026gt; .:'.\".' c: m .., C'\u0026gt; 0 :c \u0026gt;Z iri~ ~ Current Projects:  New Network Little Rock School District Board of Directors Technology Update January 23, 2003 o Conversion to the new district network is being implemented site by site. Two to three sites per week are scheduled. o As each site comes on the network the benefits include:  Being able to share files and folders across the district  Managing routine maintenance and management from the Tech Center  Managing desktop troubleshooting from the Tech Center  Computer Purchases o Computers are being purchased to bring every school up to a 5:1 ratio of students to computers. Twenty-two schools will receive computers.  E-rate Applications o We have applied fore-rate funding for the 2003-2004 school year for the following:  WAN (wide area network)  Phone system maintenance  Local and long distance telephone service  Cellular and paging service  Servers  Switches  Wakefield cabling and phone system o We were recently notified that final payment is on the way fore-rate projects of the 2001-2002 school year. The district received approximately $1.6 million in e-rate funds for that year.  Technology Plan Update o Technology Planning Committee is meeting regularly to update the district's technology plan. o One component of the plan is an updated Acceptable Use Policy. o The plan is due to the state by April 15, 2003. !D \"ti m\na:, z~ z .m.... TO: FROM: THROUGH: SUBJECT: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS January 23, 2002 Board of Education f#~everly Williams, Director, Human Resources T. Kenneth James, Superintendent of Schools Personnel Changes I recommend the approval of the following personnel changes at the indicated positions, salaries and classifications. In accordance with AC.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 19, 2002 are considered intern teachers. Personnel Changes Page 2 January 23, 2003 NAME Bateman, Robin Reason: Leaving City Boxley, Tracy Reason: Cert. Expired Duckery, Krystal Reason: Cert. Expired Fife, Vanessa Reason: Personal Goodman, Tamora Reason: Personal Pafford, Jennifer Reason: one Given Randall, Leigh Reason: Leaving City Rowland, Patricia Reason: None Given Shawarby, Tina Reason: Personal Stueart, Sam Reason: Personal POSITION SCHOOL START DATE END DATE SALARY CLASS Resignationsff erminations Certified Employees English 8-9-00 1-04 FAIR 12-20-02 TCH925 Special Ed 8-13-01 4-02 DODD 1-7-03 SPE925 Algebra I 1-3-96 1-02 CENTRAL 1-6-03 TCH925 Kindergarten 8-9-00 1-03 RIGHTSELL 12-31-02 K925 ElemV 8-16-93 1-17 KING 1-10-03 TCH925 Special Ed 8-13-98 4-05 BALE 12-31-02 SPE925 Leaming Skills 8-7-02 1-02 BOOKER 1-10-03 TCH925 Secretary 8-7-95 39-19 OTTERCREEK 1-24-03 CLKl0 Spanish 8-7-02 1-01 CLOVERDALE MID 12-20-02 TCH925 History 6-9-87 6-21 CENTRAL 1-17-03 TCH925 ANNUAL SALARY 28588.00 31064.00 27056.00 27567.00 42339.00 33616.00 27056.00 27912.00 26546.00 53213.00 Personnel Changes Page 3 January 23, 2003 NAME Walker, Charles Reason: Leaving City Blackwell, Willie Carlisle, Holly Dobbins, William Field, Marie Moore, Garrick POSITION SCHOOL Social Studies ALC START DATE END DATE 9-16-97 12-19-03 New Certified Employees Biology 11-25-02 MCCLELLAN ElemV 1-6-03 PUL. HGTS. EL. English 1-6-02 PUL. HGTS. MID. Elem IV 1-6-03 WTI.,SON Social Studies 11-25-02 CLOVERDALE MID. SALARY CLASS 4-06 TCH925 6-11 TCH925 1-01 TCH925 4-12 TCH925 1-12 TCH925 4-01 TCH925 ANNUAL SALARY 34637.00 42524.00 annual 25470.10 prorated 26546.00 annual 13411.26 prorated 40763.00 annual 20593.81 prorated 36756.00 annual 18569.44 prorated 30553.00 annual 18299.97 prorated ~ a, C: CJ\u0026gt; z m g: CJ\u0026gt; m ~ m CJ\u0026gt; f\u0026gt; CJ\u0026gt; -\u0026lt; C: C g~ ~~,- m z C ~ C n\n,, Cc: ~-0 ~:-\u0026lt; s~~i ~ -\u0026lt; !'!?\noz - ,.,.~ -~0 z- OU\u0026gt; Cl\n-\u0026lt; ~~ E~  m -\u0026lt; CJ\u0026gt; 0z CJ\u0026gt; Personnel Changes Page 4 January 23, 2003 NAME Swanigan, Carrie Van Brunt, Debra Washington, Lapara Willis, Vora POSITION SCHOOL Elem I BASELINE Special Ed ROCKEFELLER English FAIR Elem I STEPHENS START DATE END DATE 1-6-03 12-3-02 12-18-02 1-6-03 SALARY CLASS 1-01 TCH925 2-12 SPE925 4-01 TCH925 1-05 TCH925 Resignationsfferminations Non-Certified Employees Colorigh, Mary Child Nutrition 10-9-01 1-02 Reason: None Given CLOVERDALE MID. 12-20-02 FSH5 Cyrus, William Maintenance 6-12-00 54-7 Reason: one Given FACILITY SERV. 1-9-03 ADN12 Dunning, Michael Instr. Aide 8-19-02 1-03 Reason: None Given FRANKLIN 1-9-03 INA925 ANNUAL SALARY 26546.00 annual 13411.26 prorated 38083.00 annual 34711.07 prorated 30553.00 annual 15913.02 prorated 29609.00 annual prorated 7340.00 30528.00 11635.00 Personnel Changes Page 5 January 23, 2003 NAME Flanigan, Keith Reason: Accepted Another Position Jackson, Lakeisha Reason: Abandonment Jackson, Rose Reason: Abandonment Laster, Othell Reason: Personal Reed, Delia Reason: Accepted Another Position Saine, Kenoris POSITION SCHOOL Instr. Aide SOUTHWEST Child Nutrition CARVER Child Nutrition PUL. HGTS. MID. Security Officer HALL Instr. Aide FAIR PARK Instr. Aide START DATE END DATE 1-25-01 1-9-03 9-9-02 12-17-02 9-3-02 12-10-02 8-8-02 12-12-02 8-28-00 1-5-03 4-16-96 Reason: Returning to School ACC 12-20-03 Value, Jacqueline Child Nutrition 9-9-02 Reason: Abandonment FAIR 12-3-02 White, Joann Instr. Aide 8-25-86 Reason: Deceased BRADY 12-28-02 White, Latonia Child Nutrition Mgr. 12-1-88 Reason: Personal CHIT.,D NUTRITION 12-25-02 Williams, Sarah Instr. Aide 3-10-80 Reason: Abandonment BRADY 12-9-02 Underwood, Dorothy Child Nutrition 6-1-79 Reason: Retired CHil.,D NUTRITION 1-31-03 SALARY CLASS 1-01 INA925 1-01 FSH5 1-01 FSH5 36-16 SOFR9 1-02 INA185 1-10 INA925 1-01 FSH5 1-04 INA185 2-01 FSMEAL 1-04 INA185 55-18 ADN12 ANNUAL SALARY 10577.00 7312.00 7312.00 16336.00 11106.00 14067.00 7312.00 12163.00 11469.00 12163.00 43680.00 ~ Ill C \"z' m \"\"'' \"m' ~ m \"' f\u0026gt; \"-\u0026lt;' C C g\n~,.. m z C ~ !=' Ou, Oc ::j~ ~- s~~~ m-\u0026lt; 3\n0 o:: z ?\u0026gt;~\n\",o0 -z 8~ ~~ c~  m is\"' z \"' Personnel Changes Page 6 January 23, 2003 NAME Avery, Frankie Barrenstine, Gary Farmer, Gilbert Gipson, Rickey Hagewood, John Harper, Michelle POSITION SCHOOL START DATE END DATE SALARY CLASS New Non-Certified Employees Custodian 11-4-02 1-01 SOUTHWEST CUS12 Maintenance 12-16-02 51-07 FACILITY SERV. MA.INT. Custodian 9-19-02 1-04 SOUTHWEST CUS12 Custodian 12-9-02 1-01 TERRY CUS12 Custodian 12-9-02 1-01 FULBRIGHT CUS925 Instr. Aide 12-2-02 1-03 ACC INA925 ANNUAL SALARY 13399.00 annual 8552.55 prorated 27912.00 annual 14846.81 prorated 17824.00 annual 8552.55 prorated 13399.00 annual 7298.18 prorated 5164.50 annual 2919.07 prorated 11635.00 annual 6855.22 prorated Personnel Changes Page 7 January 23, 2003 NAME Harris, Nicholas Hunter, Roshuanda Johnson, Patrick Jones, Jessinca Murdock, Phyllis Patrick, Mildred Thomas, Anthony POSITION SCHOOL Maintenance FACILITY SERV. Custodian MCCLELLAN Custodian MANN Care START DATE END DATE 12-2-02 11-13-02 11-11-02 11-25-02 CLOVERDALE MID. Security Officer 12-2-02 HALL Instr. Aide 1-6-03 MABELV ALE MID. Custodian 11-11-02 MCCLELLAN SALARY CLASS 40-03 MAINT. 1-01 CUS928 1-01 CUS928 4-01 FSH5 1-05 SOFR9 1-07 INA925 1-01 CUS12 ANNUAL SALARY 17844.00 annual 10098.94 prorated 8971.56 annual 5801.61 prorated 8914.42 annual 5862.20 prorated 6.25 hourly 11764.00 annual 6980.84 prorated 13115.00 annual 6663.84 prorated 11901.70 annual 7394.25 prorated\n:ii \u0026gt; C 3: 1Z Ul ~ m Ul ~ a, C: Ul z m Ul Ul Uml ~ m Ul fl .U..l C: C g~ i~ hi z C\n\u0026gt;:o !=' 0 Ul 0 C: ::j\"O ~:-\u0026lt; s~~i m-\u0026lt; ~o 0~ z ii\"\ns \"\no0z- 8~ ~~ \u0026gt;\no E~ \u0026gt;m -\u0026lt; Ul 0 z Ul Personnel Changes Page 8 January 23, 2003 NAME Walls, Kenya Wold, Donald Phillips, Penny POSITION SCHOOL Secretary CLOVERDALE EL. Program Eval. Spec. CUR/LEARNING START DATE END DATE 12-20-02 1-6-03 Non-Certified Promotions Reimbursement Coor. 1-6-03 CHil.D NUTRITION SALARY CLASS 39-12 CLKl0 66-12 ADN12 52-16 AN12 ANNUAL SALARY 22656.00 annual 11607.01 prorated 50712.00 annual 25558.85 prorated 37650.00 annual 20196.26 prorated LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT STUDENT CALENDAR 2003-2004 MONTH M T w TH M T w TH JULY 2 3 7 8 9 10 SDW AUGUST 4 5 6 7 SEPTEMBER 2 3 4 5 8 9 10 11 OCTOBER 2 3 6 7 8 9 AEA AEA NOVEMBER 3 4 5 6 7 10 11 12 13 DECEMBER 2 3 4 5 8 9 10 11 JANUARY'04 5 6 7 8 FEBRUARY 2 3 4 5 6 9 10 11 12 MARCH 2 3 4 5 8 9 10 11 APRIL 2 5 6 7 8 MAY 3 4 5 6 7 10 11 12 13 JUNE 2 3 4 7 8 9 10 Legend 1 st Day Students H [) End Quarter WO WV Winter Vacation SD sv Spring Vacation sow ER.PC Ear1y Release/Parent Cont. TCD ST DAY Student Days SNOtlVnlV/\\3 ooMd v S3:\u0026gt;IAM3S 1sNI lh # R NOtSN3lX3 l:\u0026gt;WlN0:\u0026gt; / N0llVnlVJ\\3 'ldns o F M T w TH F M 11 14 15 16 17 18 21 SD SD WD WD WD * II 12 13 14 15 18 SD 12 15 16 17 18 19 22 1421 R SD 10 13 14 15 16 17 20 14 17 18 19 20 12 15 16 17 18 1901 13 14 15 9 12 13 14 15 16 19 14 17 18 19 20 21 24 11 14 15 16 17 18 21 Holiday Non-Student WO!k Days Staff Development Staff Development-ADE Waiver T olal Contract Days Last Day Students Record Days 090 A:\u0026gt;ll0d =9NI0~ is~ 'V Proposal to Board ST ER T w TH F M T w TH F DAY H TCD PC 22 23 24 25 28 29 30 31 0 0 0 0 0 19 20 21 22 25 26 27 28 29 10 0 3 4 17 0 23 24 25 26 29 30 20 0 21 21 22 23 24 27 28 29 30 31 21 0 23 0 15 3 0 2 17 0 15 8 0 0 15 0 21 22 23 26 27 28 29 30 18 3 0 19 0 24 25 26 27 20 0 0 0 20 [133] R 23 24 25 26 29 30 31 17 5 0 18 0 SD SDW 20 21 22 23 26 27 28 29 30 20 0 0 2 22 0 # R 11751 25 26 27 28 19 0 20 0 22 23 24 25 29 30 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTALS 175 22 7 10 192 2 STUDENTS DO NOT ATI'END ON THE DAYS SHADED ABOVE 1st Quarter = 42 student days 2nd Quarter = 48 student days 3rd Quarter = 43 student days 4th Quarter = 42 student days Jan 23, 2003 S3:\u0026gt;IAM3S SS3NISna 'Ill/\\ S3:\u0026gt;IAM3S 'NIW0V 'Iii\\ LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM STREET LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS Date: January 23, 2003 To: Board of Directors From: Bonnie Lesley, Ed.D. Associate Superintendent for Curriculum and Instruction Through: T. Kenneth James, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools Re: Completion of Program Evaluations Background Information The Compliance Team made a decision to contract out the eight remaining program evaluations that are due to the federal court by March 15, 2003, to three separate consulting firms. Each of the three has made a commitment to complete the assigned work by the end of January. In the event that any are submitted to us before the January meeting, we will place them on the agenda for the Board's review and approval for submission to the federal court. Otherwise, the Board will need to make these decisions in February. ~ \u0026gt; C 31:: ~ en m ~ m en ~ a, C: en z m eenn emn ~ (\") m en\n,,, 0 C 0 ~ z en Memorandum Date: To: Through: January 23, 2003 Board of Education T. Kenneth James, Superintendent Don Stewart, Chief Financial Officer Prepared by: Darral Paradis, Director, Procurement and Materials Management Subject: Background Proposed New Policy DGD: Visa Purchasing Card (Pro-Card) First Reading One of the areas discussed in February 2002 concerning potential budget reductions for the 2002-2003 school year was to reduce the cost associated with processing purchase orders, by implementing a purchasing card system. The attached policy is the first step in this transition. Our goal is to pilot the program with selected schools and departments for the remainder of the 2002-03 school year. Full implementation will be phased in over the next school year. District wide this program should: reduce costs associated with small dollar purchases(\u0026lt; $1,000)\nreduce paperwork\nimprove reportability and accountability and empower users. Details of the program are available in the LRSD Pro-Card Handbook. Fiscal Impact The District will be utilizing a contract secured by the State of Arkansas and will pay no charges for the use of the cards. The District will be eligible to participate in a rebate program administered by the State. The rebate program rewards participants with cash back dependent upon several variables including but not limited to timely payment and volume of purchases. In addition to the rebate, the actual productivity and costs savings to the District could be substantial. Recommendation It is recommended that the Board of Education approves the proposed new policy and the pilot and phase-in timelines detailed above. LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: DGD VISA PURCHASING CARD (PRO-CARD) Schools and departments may apply to the Procurement Department for the issuance of Visa Purchasing Cards (Pro-Card) to authorized employees. The cards may be used for purchases of $1,000 or less within restricted limits established by the Procurement Department. All Pro-Cardholders must comply with the terms and conditions of the cardholder handbook and agreement approved by the Procurement Department. The location Principal or Director will issue cards to approved individuals. Pro-Cards are best assigned to individual staff members that make frequent, small dollar purchases. All authorized charges are the liability of the District. Adopted: Cross Reference: LRSD Pro-Card Handbook LRSD PRO-CARD HANDBOOK We hope you find our Procurement Card (PRO-CARD) program to be helpful in conducting everyday small dollar (less than $1,000) purchases for the District. The ProCard will simplify the purchasing process and reduce overall costs by reducing the number of purchase requisitions, purchase orders, petty cash transactions and other cumbersome forms of purchasing activity. Please read this handbook in its entirety. The handbook provides information regarding the Pro-Card process. Please do not hesitate to contact the Procurement Department for any questions regarding this program. LOST OR STOLEN CARD CARDHOLDERS: TO REPORT A LOST OR STOLEN CARD IMMEDIATELY CALL USBANKAT 1-800-344-5696 inform them this is a \"Purchasing Card\" NOTE: After contacting US Bank, please notify your Principal/Director and Location Liaison who will in turn contact Procurement. Page 1 PARTICIPANTS AND THEIR ROLES Procurement Dept. Financial Services School/Dept. Principal/Director Location Liaison Cardholder(s) Responsible for the overall administration of the program and will conduct random audits in conjunction with the internal audit department to ensure rule adherence. Responsible for account code reconciliation and payment to US Bank, provider of the Pro-Card. Participates in the setup decisions, such as spending limits for cardholders under their authority. Responsible for reviewing and approving all cardholder purchases for their location and signing off on cardholder monthly statements. Responsible for reporting any violations to the Procurement Department. Person at location delegated by Principal/Director and trained by Procurement to manage the program for that location. Responsible for reviewing the monthly account statements and reallocating transactions from the default account and object code to the final account code. Will have access to the on-line web based software to accomplish this. Acquire authorized and allowable goods for the District using the Pro-card. Ensure there is documentation for each transaction. Reconcile and sign the monthly account statement for any cycle in which transactions have been made. Responsible for immediately reporting a lost/stolen card To US Bank at 1-800-344-5696, the Principal/Director and Location Liaison. Page2 GENERAL KEY INFORMATION The program helps to eliminate the use of local, activity and regular purchase orders for items estimated to cost less than $1,000. The program is not intended to avoid or bypass appropriate purchasing or payment procedures. The program is intended to complement LRSD's existing processes. The program is not intended to replace LRSD's current travel and entertainment program. The card is NOT for personal use. The program can be used for both purchases at a vendor location and for mail, Internet or fax orders. (DO NOT PROVIDE YOUR PRO-CARD NUMBER TO ANYONE OTHER THAN A BONA FIDE VISA CARD VENDOR). The US Bank Pro-Card may be used at any vendor who accepts the Visa card throughout the United States. If a Vendor requires that an account be set up, please coordinate with Procurement BEFORE completing an application. You are responsible for the security of your card and the transactions made with the card. The card is issued in your name and it will be assumed that any purchases made with the card will have been made by you. HOW TO OBTAIN A CARD After receiving approval to be a cardholder from your Principal/Director, you must attend a Pro-Card training class conducted by Procurement. At the class, you will receive a training certificate, a Pro-Card New Account Application Form and an Agreement Form for the Usage of the Visa Pro-Card. Ask your Principal/Director to sign the Agreement Form and forward it along with your New Account Application. Your Principal/Director's signature is required on the Agreement Form prior to card issuance. Your card will be issued to your Location Liaison who will store and check-out to you as approved by the Principal/Director. All card requests must be processed through the Procurement Department. Before first using your card, call the 1-800 telephone number on the label attached to your card to activate its use, sign the back and keep it in a secure place. Although the card is issued in your name, it is the property of the District and is only to be used for approved District purchases. Page 3 !.=.,' z \u0026gt;z C') \u0026gt; ~ ~ C') 5 en z C) ill I en !,\") C 0 .f.\n.. 0z en Using the Pro-Card 1. Obtain Approval: Before placing an order, obtain written approval from your Principal/Director by completing a Pro-Card Expenditure Request Form. Once the form is approved, take it to your Location Liaison who will sign the form and issue out your card. Return your card to your Location Liaison after the transaction is complete and attach the request form to your receipt/proof of purchase documentation. 2. Place The Order: The cardholder may visit, call, fax, email or order via the Internet a vendor to initiate a purchase. Request that the vendor charge the purchase to your purchasing card or card number. If a vendor requires that an account be set up, please coordinate with Procurement BEFORE completing an application. Do not send your card number over the Internet without ensuring the LINE IS SECURE. Inform the vendor of the following:  You are with the LRSD and should be accorded any applicable discounts.  Your name as it appears on the card.  Specific delivery information. Your name should be on the shipping label. \"Visa Purchase\" should be on the shipping label or package.  Your phone number.  Ensure the delivery is FOB destination.  Request documentation showing description and cost of item.  NOTIFY VENDORS NOT TO SUBMIT INVOICES TO PROCUREMENT OR FINANCIAL SERVICES.  COD deliveries are not allowed.  Deliveries will not be accepted at the LRSD Supply Center. NOTE: As a cardholder, we encourage you to rotate vendor sources. It is the policy of the Little Rock School District that minority business enterprises shall have the maximum opportunity to participate in the District's purchasing process. Therefore, the District encourages all minority businesses to compete for goods, services, and construction contracts.   Page4 3. Keep A Record Of All Orders Placed: Keeping a record of the orders you place will allow you to follow-up on late deliveries, order problems, partial shipments and other order issues. Include the following information:  Vendorname/ID.  Date of purchase.  Description and quantity of item(s) purchased.  Total cost of order.  Per item cost if available from the vendor. 4. Receive and Inspect Goods and Services: Inspect all goods and services IMMEDIATELY upon receipt or completion of service. If there is a problem with the order or the service conducted, contact the vendor immediately. Keep notes on problems and their resolution including names, dates and conversation results. Vendors are not permitted to bill an account until the goods or services are delivered. This is Arkansas State law. 5. Document Each Transaction: Each transaction including Internet purchases MUST have valid and complete source documentation from the vendor. Valid source documentation may include:  A receipt and card transaction slip from the vendor.  A packing slip with prices.  An invoice showing credit card payment If a vendor did not provide documentation, contact the vendor directly to provide it. If the vendor will not provide documentation, you must provide your information contained in your Record of Orders Placed and a justification for not having the transaction documentation. If original documentation is lost, contact the vendor directly to provide it. If the vendor will not provide the documentation, you must provide the information in your Record of Orders Placed and a justification for the purchases and the loss of documentation. LACK OF ORIGINAL DOCUMENTATION IS CONSIDERED TO BE A CARDHOLDER VIOLATION. Page 5 \u0026gt;\u0026lt; j\u0026gt;\u0026lt;~ o::c s~! 8 r- .... en l5m z::o en ?i m en ~ (\") 5 en z C) Rl I en r-\u0026gt; 8 .~... 0z en 6. Returns And/Or Exchanges:  Before item(s) are shipped, make arrangements with the vendor for the possible return ofitem(s).  Vendors must credit returns and charge for a new transaction. Exchange oflike items for a different color may not require a credit transaction.  Do not allow a vendor to refund cash for a credit return. It is a vendor violation. It is also a cardholder violation to accept cash as a refund for a credit purchase.  Document all returns and exchanges. This information may be needed if a formal dispute occurs. 7. Account Reconciliation: The monthly cycle ends on 5th of each month. Three to Five days after the end of the cycle, US Bank will send each cardholder a statement identifying the transactions made against the card during the previous billing cycle. The statement will be mailed to the address identified on the New Account Application. Review the statement for accuracy and attach the sales receipts and ProCard Request Forms to the back of the statement in the order in which they appear on the statement. Send the reconciled statement and attached documentation to your Location Liaison for review and approval. The statement will be reviewed/signed by both the Location Liaison and Principal/Director and forwarded to Financial Services for payment processing and filing for reference and/or audit purposes. If your statement is lost or stolen, immediately call US Bank Customer Service at 1- 800-344-5696. YOUR activity may be audited at any time. You are responsible for the transactions identified on your statement. If an error is discovered, you may be asked about the error or dispute resolution process. 8. Statement Accounting: The District default account codes charged will be dependent on the type of purchase made. For those purchases that need to be directed to different cost accounts, the Location Liaison will be responsible for reallocating transactions online from the default accounts and object codes to the final codes. 9. Payment: LRSD Financial Services Department will pay US Bank. You will not be required to pay your Monthly Pro-Card Statement using your own personal funds. Your Principal/Director's signature will be required to verify his/her approval of your monthly purchases upon receipt of your statement. The program does not impact your personal credit rating in any way. Page 6 10. Sales and Use Tax: Tax authorities usually require vendors to include sales but not use tax at the time you purchase goods. The amount is dependent on a variety of factors, including the state, county and city where you are purchasing the goods. A vendor within the state of Arkansas must charge the applicable tax to the transaction. Out of state vendors are to be instructed not to charge taxes. LRSD Financial Services will adjust the state tax payment for out of state purchases. 11. Disputes:  Examples of how Disputed billing can result: a. Failure to receive goods or materials. b. Fraud or misuse. c. Altered charges, incorrect amounts, duplicate charges, statement amounts don't match receipts. d. Defective merchandise credits not processed. e. Quality or service issues.  The cardholder is responsible for contacting and following up with the vendor on any erroneous charges or disputed items as soon as possible. Most issues can be resolved in this way. If the vendor agrees that an error has been made, he will credit your account.  If the cardholder is unable to reach an agreement with the vendor, the next step is to contact the Procurement Department.  US Bank must be notified of any disputed items within 60 days of the last cycle in which the item was purchased.  In the event of fraud, notify the Procurement Department immediately. 12.Daily On-Line Transaction Review: US Bank provides web based on-line software that will allow authorized users to review cardholder transactions on a daily basis. The Principal/Director will have the ability to review transactions for those individual cardholders under their authority. Procurement, Internal Audit and other approved Administrators will have the authority to view any cardholder's account. 13. Lost or Stolen Cards: The US Bank Pro-Card is District property and should be secured just as personal credit cards. If your card is lost or stolen, contact US Bank Customer Service at 1-800-344-5696 to cancel the card immediately. Also notify your Principal/Director and Location Liaison. The Location Liaison will notify the Procurement Department immediately upon notification from cardholder. Promptly send by mail or fax a written confirmation of the request for cancellation of the card. Upon receipt of your call, further use of the card will be blocked. Prompt action in these circumstances can reduce the LRSD's liability for fraudulent charges. Page 7 r\u0026gt; C 0z \u0026gt; :::! 0 z tJ) Purchasing Card Program Restrictions. Violations and Consequences RESTRICTIONS: Each card is assigned a single purchase limit. No transaction may exceed your single purchase limit in value. In addition, each card has been assigned an individual monthly credit limit that cannot be exceeded. Some vendors have been \"blocked\" from usage in the program. If a card is presented to any of these vendors, the transaction will be declined. Most vendors that you currently utilize as a source for products or services will accept your card. If you are declined and believe the decline should not have occurred, call the 800 number on your card. US Bank Customer Service will determine if you were declined because of vendor blocking or exceeding the monthly credit limit or single-purchase limit imposed on the card. Procurement may be contacted for further resolution. VIOLATIONS \u0026amp; CONSEQUENCES: Abuse and/or willful or negligent misuse of the Pro-Card will be investigated and may result in cancellation of the card and could result in termination of employment and/or criminal prosecution permitted by law. Any violation must be documented via memo by the PrincipaVDirector or Procurement with a copy provided to the card holder (informing them of an investigation) for any of the following violations:  Personal, cash or cash type purchases: the District must be reimbursed immediately.  Split purchases (items costing more than $1,000, split between two or more transactions.  Failure to provide original documentation of purchases.  Inappropriate/non-approved purchases as listed below. Non-approved Pro-Card Uses Any personal use Capital Equipment Dues Registrations Fuel Telecommunications Medical/ Ambulance ATM, Cash Advances Travel \u0026amp; Entertainment Charitable Organizations/Donations Consultant Services Any purchase using grant or Title I funds Professional Services Page8 Government Services Supply items otherwise available through the District's Supply Center Any item(s) for which the District has a contract - examples: copiers, technology - hardware, printers, and audiovisual equipment Technology software Alcoholic beverages or products with alcoholic content Tobacco products Any item exceeding the cost limit of a single purchase Any product or service for which the use of District funds would normally be considered inappropriate In Summary The program is designed to be simple and easy to use, providing the goods you need to perform your job. As we continue to improve the way we conduct business, leading to greater cost savings and processing efficiencies, your use of this program will be a significant component in LRSD's overall success. If you have any questions about the program or need additional information, please contact your Location Liaison. Page 9 ?\u0026lt; ?\u0026lt;~ o::c\nRo ~:\n2 -lu, c5m z\n:o Cl) s (\") m Cl) 0 0 0 .f.\n.. z0 Cl) Frequentlv Asked Questions 1. How do I get my card? Answer: The District is preparing a training program for all card users. A card user MUST attend the training class before being eligible for a card. At the training class, the employee will be provided an enrollment packet. Included in the packet will be the ProCard New Account Application and the Employee Usage Agreement form. Once you have attended training, completed and signed the Pro-Card New Account Application and the Employee Usage Agreement form have your Principal/Director forward the documents to the Procurement Department. Your card will be sent directly to the address indicated on your application. Allow 7-10 days for delivery. 2. How do I use my card? Answer: Once you receive your card in the mail, simply call the 1-800 number located on the affixed sticker. Once activated, your card should be used in place of your previous purchasing method for all appropriate items. 3. What should I do if my card is lost or stolen? Answer: Immediately call the US Bank 24-hour customer service toll free number at 1- 800-344-5696. Your Principal/Director and Location Liaison should also be notified. The Location Liaison will notify Procurement. Any verbal requests must be followed up by a written confirmation by mail or fax requesting card cancellation. 4. How do I reconcile my statement? Answer: Match your receipts against your monthly statement to ensure that the two match. If there is a transaction which needs to be disputed either call the vendor to reconcile or contact Procurement. Page 10 LOST OR STOLEN CARD CARDHOLDERS: TO REPORT A LOST OR STOLEN CARD IMMEDIATELY CALL USBANKAT 1-800-344-5696 inform them this is a \"Purchasing Card\" OTE: After contacting US Bank, please notify your Principal/Director and Location Liaison who will in turn contact Procurement. !=' \"Tl z ~ C') \u0026gt;,.... u, ~ C') 0 u, z C) ill I u, !\") 8 z .\u0026gt;.. 0z u, LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM STREET LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS Date: January 23, 2003 To: Board of Directors From: Re: T. Kenneth James, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools Agreement Between the City of Little Rock and the Little Rock School District - Use of Facilities Background Information: Mr. Bryan Day has worked with District representatives to formulate the proposed agreement. The agreement reflects a five-year commitment to promote an adequate program of community education and recreation utilizing City and District facilities. Legal counsel has reviewed this document. Fiscal Impact: Costs will be paid from existing City and District resources. Recommendation: It is recommended that the Board of Directors approve the agreement as submitted. ~ (\") 5 \"z' C) ~ I \"' ~\n= \u0026gt;\u0026lt; \n= 0::,:: 5~ C: :0 ~z 3:::: C) men .z... . !\"' C 0 ! 0 z \"' AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF LITTLE ROCK AND THE LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this day of , 2002, by --- ----- and between the CITY OF LITTLE ROCK, a municipal corporation, hereinafter called \"City\", and the LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, hereinafter called \"District\". WITNESSE TH: WHEREAS, the governing bodies of the City and the District are mutually interested in an adequate program of community education and recreation which can best serve the citizenry most economically\nand WHEREAS, full cooperation between the City and the District is necessary to achieve the best service and creation of a \"City in a Park\" with the least possible expenditure of public funds\nand WHEREAS, the governing bodies of the City and the District desire to appoint representatives to examine possibilities for cooperation between the City and the District in recreation programming and leisure opportunities and services\nand WHEREAS, the City of Little Rock will appoint representatives of the City to serve on a recreation steering committee to examine possibilities for cooperation between the City and the District in recreation programming and leisure opportunities and services\nand WHEREAS, the Little Rock School District will appoint representatives of the District to serve on a recreation steering committee to examine possibilities for cooperation between the City and the District in recreation programming and leisure opportunities and services. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises, said City and said District do now agree to cooperate with each other in carrying out the above purposes, and to that end do agree as follows: 1. The District will make available to the City for community recreational activities certain school playground areas to help the City accomplish its \"City in a Park\" vision, subject to the approval of the Superintendent of Schools of the District, or his delegate. 2. The City will make available to the District certain City parks and recreational facilities for school events, activities and programs, subject to the approval of the Director of Little Rock Parks and Recreation, or his delegate. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. The District agrees to allow the City to use other selected school facilities which are suitable for community recreation, including, but not limited to, computer class rooms, cafeterias, auditoriums, tennis courts, football fields, track fields, gymnasiums, classrooms, subject to the approval of the Superintendent of Schools, or his delegate. A schedule of dates for the use of the District school facilities will be arranged by the parties as to avoid conflict between school and recreation use\nthat in the scheduling of said facilities, school events and programs shall have first priority and recreation programs, established by little Rock Parks and Recreation, shall have second priority, and any other events by other groups or agencies shall have third priority. Whenever possible, the scheduled dates shall be provided to the District prior to December 1\" of the preceding calendar year. A schedule of dates for the use of the City facilities will be worked out in advar1ce by the parties, and that this schedule will be arranged as to avoid conflict between recreation and school use\nthat in the scheduling of said facilities, Little Rock Parks and Recreation activities shall have first priority, and school events and programs shall have second priority, and any other events by other groups or agencies shall have third priority. Whenever possible, the scheduled dates shall be provided to the City prior to December 1st of the preceding calendar year. The City and District shall cooperate to make information about their respective individual and joint programs available to the public. The City's Board of Directors and the Board of Directors of the District have appointed a recreation steering committee to continue searching for new areas of cooperation, and to that end shall meet at least quarterly along with interested community groups, and appropriate City and District administrative officials, using the procedures developed for the group known as the Recreation Steering Committee. Minutes of the meetings shall be provided to the superintendent of schools of the District and Director of Little Rock Parks and Recreation. The committee will make an annual report to the City Board of Directors and little Rock School District Board. The Recreation Steering Committee will: 1.) Research and implement, where possible, best practice models from around the country. - 2 - ?\u0026lt; ?\u0026lt;~ o:c ~o ~~ --4u, c5m ~~ ~ 0 m Cl)\n= \u0026gt;\u0026lt; \u0026gt;\n= O:z:: 5~ C:\n:o ~z .=mz.=. CCII) ~ 0 0 ! 0z Cl) 2.) Develop and implement, where possible, fitness and wellness programs that include regular health screens, health promotion classes and fitness classes. 3.) Expand educational activities and programs, where possible, to include computer, arts, crafts, and humanities classes. 8. The City and the District mutually agree that the sponsor of recreation activities will provide funds to pay for the necessary building, security and custodial services for their respective facilities, and that these services shall, in general be performed by the City personnel when City facilities are used and by District personnel when District facilities are used. 9. The City and the District agree that individual agreements will be prepared between the parties for the use of each facility to clarify responsibilities of both parties. 10. The parties shall jointly conduct a review of the terms of this agreement annually. 11. The terms of this agreement may be altered upon mutual consent of the Boards of the City and the District. Any such modifications to this agreement shall be in writing, signed by the parties hereto. 12. The term of this agreement shall be five (5) years. The parties shall have an option to renew the agreement annually\nprovided, however, that either party shall have the right to terminate this agreement for any reason whatsoever, without penalty, upon giving thirty (30) calendar days written notice to the other party. 13. The District and the City agree to comply with all applicable federal and state laws regarding non-discrimination, including non-discrimination in employment, and specifically agrees not to unlawfully discriminate against any participant because of race, creed, religion, disability, sex or national origin. 14. 15. 16. 17. Independent Contractor. It is expressly agreed that the District and the City are acting as an independent contractors in performing the duties specified herein. Immunity. The City and the District shall rely on tort immunity to the extent it is available to them. This Agreement is governed by the laws of the state of Arkansas. The District and the City agree to comply with all applicable federal, state and local laws, regulations, and ordinances and to require such compliance in - 3 - 18. 19. contractual agreements with subcontractors. The District and the City further agree to comply with the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Equal Employment Opportunity Act, and regulations promulgated thereunder, and to require such compliance in contractual agreements with subcontractors. The officials who executed this Agreement hereby represent and warrant that they have full and complete authority to act on behalf of the City and the District, and that by their signatures below, the terms and provisions hereof, constitute valid and enforceable obligations of each. This Agreement shall be executed in the original, and any number of executed copies. Any copy of this Agreement so executed shall be deemed an original and shall be deemed authentic for any other use. 20. The terms of this Agreement shall be binding upon the parties hereto, their respective heirs, executors, administrators, successors and assignees. 21. This Agreement and the documents referenced or incorporated herein contain the complete and entire agreement of the parties respecting the transactions contemplated herein, and supersede all prior negotiations, agreements, representations, and understandings, if any, among the parties regarding such matters. IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed in their behalf. [Signatures on Next Page] -4- \u0026gt;\u0026lt; i= \u0026gt;\u0026lt; \u0026gt;\n=: C:,\n: 5~ C: XI ~:i: 3.zm.:. mG) CITY OF LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS Bruce Moore City Manager Date: ___________ _ ATTEST: Nancy Wood City Clerk Date: ___________ _ APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: Thomas M. Carpenter, City Attorney By: __________ _ Beth Blevins Carpenter Deputy City Attorney II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II - 5 - LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT T. Kenneth James, Ed.D. Superintendent Date: ___________ _ LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 DATE: TO: January 23, 2003 Board of Education FROM: ~arral Paradis, Director, Procurement and Materials Mgmt. THROUGH: T. Kenneth James, Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Donations of Property Attached are requests to donate property to the Little Rock School District as follows: School/Degartment Item Donor Jefferson Elementary Pizza, valued at approximately Mr. Harold Beckwith School $100.00, for the faculty and staff McClellan Community $150.00 cash for the Boy's Mr. Alvin Smith of High School baseball program State Farm Insurance McClellan Community $50.00 cash for the Boy's Dr. Lee Hinson, DDS High School baseball program McClellan Community $250.00 cash for the Boy's Mr. Tom Dillon of High School baseball program Dillon Enterprises, Inc. McClellan Community $100.00 cash for the Boy's Mr. Everett Martindale, High School baseball program Attorney at Law McClellan Community $100.00 cash Staley, Inc. High School Metropolitan Career- 2003 Dodge Durango, valued Daimler-Chrysler Corp. Technical Center $27,329.00, for the automotive through a partnership with technology program AYES i!:S .~.., z \u0026gt;z C') ,... u, ~ ,C..'.) 0 u, z C) Al f\n~ u,\n=: \u0026gt;\u0026lt; ~\n=: '-:,: 0~ c=\n,o ~z :I: C) mU\u0026gt; .z.. . Board of Education January 23, 2003 Page 2 School/Department Little Rock School District Little Rock School District Welfare Fund 24 office cubicle workstations valued at approximately $400.00 per unit. Total value of donation is approximately $9,600.00. $110.00 cash to be used to purchase school clothing for deserving students University of Arkansas Cooperative Extension Service Bale Elementary School's Peer Helper Service Project It is recommended that these donation requests be approved in accordance with the policies of the Board. JEFFERSON ELEMENTARY SCHOOL December 12, 2002 To: From: Subject: Darral Paradis, Director Procurement and Materials Management Roberta Mannon, Principal j!.ri. Jefferson Elementary School Donation Mr. Harold Beckwith, 365 . Ridge Rd., Little Rock, AR 72207, donated pizza to the Jefferson Faculty and staff. The value of the pizza was approximately $100.00 .. It is recommended that this donation be approved in accordance with the policies of the Little Rock School District. 2600 N. McKinley Street Phone 671-6281 Little Rock. A rkansas 72207 JOHN L. MCCLELLAN COMMUNITY HIGH SCHOOL TO: FROM: RE: DATE: A 8USINSs/COMMUNICATIONS MAGNET Darrell Paradis, Director of Procurement Larry Buck, Principai$ Donations December 16, 2002 I would like to recommend that the following donations to McClellan High School be approved in accordance with the policies of the Little Rock School District: A donation of $150.00 from Alvin Smith, State Farm Insurance, 11701 I-30, Suite 500, Little Rock, AR 72209 for our Boy's baseball program. A donation of $50.00 from Dr. Lee Hinson, DDS, 5304 Mabel vale Pike, Little Rock, AR 72209 for our Boy's baseball program. A donation of $250.00 from Tom Dillon, Dillon Enterprises, Inc., 4805 Westwood, Little Rock, AR 72204 for our Boy's baseball program. A donation of $100.00 from Everett Martindale, Attorney at Law, 902 W. 2 nd St., Little Rock, AR 72201 for our Boy's baseball program. A donation of $100.00 from Staley, Inc., 3400 J.E. Davis Dr., Little Rock, AR 72209 DEC 1 'i 22C2 9417 Geyer Sprinas Road  Phnn~ 447-?1nn  LittlP. Rnr.k Arbnc::::ic:: 7??nQ - December 16, 2002 Mr. Darral Paradis, Director Procurement Department Little Rock School District Mr. Paradis: The Automotive Technology program at Metropolitan Career/Technical Center is in Partnership with AYES (Automotive Youth Education System) as part of that partnership several Dealerships and Manufacturers will donate vehicles to our program. The Daimler-Chrysler Donation Department in Newark, Delaware would like to donate a 2003 Dodge Durango, Valued at $27,329.00 to Metropolitan. The Vehicle will be delivered to our campus from Newark assembly line in Newark, Delaware. I would like to recommend that this donation be approved in accordance with the policies of the Little Rock School District. Yours truly, ~Qt=_ Michael Pterson, Principal Metropolitan Career/Technical Center r- ,, i,.  ,. I\". 1 - ,.r \" t ~ : -~\\-:: .!, ...  ...  \\. ... Metropolitan Career-Technical Center 7701 Scott Hamilton Drive  Little Rock, Arkansas 72209  (501) 565-8465 i!:S ~ (\") 5 \"z' Cl i!ll I \"'\n= \u0026gt;\u0026lt; ~== ._:,: 0~ c::\ni:, ~z :I: Cl zm cn .... View Agreement Letter View Press Release View Tax Form Agreement Accepted, Thank you ... You must print off the Tax Form, sign it, and fax it in to Sherri Beckwith/Charles Irwin @ (248) 276-7253. Once the signed Tax form is received and processed, your donation will be shipped. Assigned School: Metropolitan Career \u0026amp; Technical Center -AYES Edit School Profile VIN 3F515333 Ship Method: Ship Year 2003 Make DODGE Date Comm. Approved: Date Finance Apprvd: 11/19/2002 Model DURANGO Date Assigned: School Response Due School Response Date: Est Delivery Date: Date: 12/04/2002 Fair Market Value $27,329.00 School Notified: 11/19/2002 Date Carrier Delivered: Date School Received: Date School Redonated: Date School Scrapped: Date Archived: Vehicle Pickup Information: Pickup Location Name: Newark Assembly Address: 550 South College Aveune City: Newark State: DE I CJv...\n..J ~ Zip: 19713 Contact Name: Andy McKay Contact Telephone: 302-453-5219 Contact EMail Address: William A McKay/FIN/DCC/DCX XXX Notes: https://zoddda0 l .extra.daimlerchrysler .corn/ data/vehdon/vehicledonation.nsf/default View\n. . . 12/13/2002 PROCUREMENT \u0026amp; MATERIALS MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT 1800 East 6th Street  Little Rock, AR 72202  (501) 324-2230  Fax: (501) 324-2233 DATE: TO: January 6, 2003 Board of Education FROM: ~arral Paradis, Director, Procurement and Materials Management THROUGH: T. Kenneth James, Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Donation The University of Arkansas Cooperative Extension Service at 2301 South University Avenue, LR, AR wishes to donate 24 office cubicle workstations to the Little Rock School District. Each unit consists of a desk, bookshelf, pull-out keyboard tray, printer stand and 2-drawer file cabinet. The donor estimates the value of workstations at approximately $400.00 each for a total estimated value of $9,600.00. It is recommended that this donation request be approved in accordance with the policies of the Board of Education of the Little Rock School District. Thank you. x ?\u0026lt;~ ox ~8 ~ ..... - en c5m ~~ m en ~ F=x \u0026gt;\n:: O:z: [5~ C:\n,o !l1z .3zm..: eCn\u0026gt; LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT ASSISTANT SUPERINTENDENT - SECONDARY SCHOOLS TO: FROM: SUBJECT: December 19, 2002 Darral Paradis, Director of Procurement Marian G. Lacey, Assistant Superintendent for Secondary Schools Donation Bale Elementary School's Peer Helper Service Project has donated the amount of $110.00 to the LRSD Welfare Fund, to be used toward the purchase of school clothing for deserving students. It is recommended that this donation be approved in accordance with the policies of the Little Rod~ School District. TO: FROM: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS January 23, 2003 Board Of Directors ~ Mark D. Milhollen, Manager, Financial Services THROUGH: T. Kenneth James, Superintendent Of Schools ronald M. Stewart, Chief Financial Officer SUBJECT: Financial Reports We recommend that the attached financial reports be approved as submitted. LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT COMBINED STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE FOR THE PERIOD ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2001 AND 2002 I APPROVED RECEIPTS % APPROVED RECEIPTS % 2001/02 12/31/01 COLLECTED 2002/03 12/31/02 COLLECTED REVENUE-LOCAL SOURCES CURRENT TAXES 57,850,000 57,086,336 98.68% 58,550,000 57,147,781 97.61% DELINQUENT TAXES 6,950,000 5,287,912 76.09% 8,000,000 7,108,960 88.86% 40% PULLBACK 28,450,000 29,400,000 EXCESS TREASURER'S FEE 190,000 187,000 DEPOSITORY INTEREST 575,000 353,143 61.42% 385,000 REVENUE IN LIEU OF TAXES 125,000 135,000 220,757 163.52% MISCELLANEOUS AND RENTS 600,000 41,515 6.92% 340,000 219,948 64.69% INTEREST ON INVESTMENTS 600,000 64,221 10.70% 275,000 68,627 24.96% ATHLETIC RECEIPTS 155,000 100,024 64.53% 160,000 136,431 85.27% TOTAL 95,495,000 62,933,150 65.90% 97,432,000 64,902,502 66.61% REVENUE - COUNTY SOURCES COUNTY GENERAL 25,000 11,505 \"46.02% 24,000 11 ,170 46.54% TOTAL 25,000 11,505 46.02% 24,000 11,170 46.54% REVENUE- STATE SOURCES EQUALIZATION FUNDING 54,568,331 24,474,098 44.85% 54,867,630 25,092,813 45.73% REIMBURSEMENT STRS/HEAL TH 7,455,741 1,061 ,832 14.24% 7,590,000 3,891 ,937 51.28% VOCATIONAL 1,325,000 571,502 43.13% 1,340,000 512,285 38.23% HANDICAPPED CHILDREN 1,900,000 19,113 1.01% 1,700,000 320 0.02% EARLY CHILDHOOD 233,992 118,246 50.53% 273,358 136,486 49.93% TRANSPORTATION 3,468,291 1,161,445 33.49% 3,685,226 1,226,542 33.28% INCENTIVE FUNDS - M TO M 3,865,000 1,515,624 39.21% 3,265,000 1,396,152 42.76% ADULT EDUCATION 987,869 329,045 33.31% 1,006,014 273,287 27.17% POVERTY INDEX FUNDS 1,195,000 548,532 45.90% 658,607 329,297 50.00% EARLY LITERACY LEARNING 25,000 120,000 TAP PROGRAM 285,271 142,636 50.00% AT RISK FUNDING 605,000 107,900 17.83% 650,000 57,386 8.83% WORKER'S COMPENSATION 600,000 TOTAL 76,229,224 29,907,337 39.23% 75,441,106 33,059,140 43.82% REVENUE - OTHER SOURCES TRANSFER FROM CAP PROJ FUND 600,000 620,000 TRANSFER FROM OTHER FUNDS 700,000 7,916 1.13% 1,126,233 13,857 1.23% TRANSFER FROM MAGNET FUND 1,639,927 546,642 33.33% 1,664,438 554,813 33.33% TOTAL 2,939,927 554,558 18.86% 3,410,671 568,669 16.67% TOTAL REVENUE OPERATING 174,689,151 93,406,550 53.47% 176,307,777 98,541,483 55.89% REVENUE - OTHER FEDERAL GRANTS 15,868,1 27 4,731,252 29.82% 22,230,023 6,212,729 27.95% DEDICATED M\u0026amp; 0 3,921 ,766 2,083,442 53.13% 3,980,000 2,073,471 52.10% MAGNET SCHOOLS ' 24,802,743 7,683,581 30.98% 25,065,942 9,202,775 36.71% TOTAL 44,592,636 14,498,275 32.51% 51,275,965 17,488,976 34.11% TOTAL REVENUE 219,281,787 107,904,825 49.21% 227,583,742 116,030,457 50.98% LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT COMBINED STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE FOR THE PERIOD ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2001 AND 2002 APPROVED EXPENDED % APPROVED EXPENDED % 2001/02 12/31/01 EXPENDED 2002/03 12/31/02 EXPENDED EXPENSES SALARIES 98,743,100 38,774,495 39.27% 100,865,586 38,613,023 38.28% BENEFITS 25,603,621 9,964,486 38.92% 24,838,361 9,597,788 38.64% PURCHASED SERVICES 20,235,454 7,480,236 36.97% 19,795,774 8,031 ,646 40.57% MATERIALS \u0026amp; SUPPLIES 9,252,512 3,878,947 41.92% 8,347,098 3,485,453 41 .76% CAPITAL OUTLAY 1,792,554 431 ,036 24.05% 1,616,991 486,437 30.08% OTHER OBJECTS 8,402,940 2,824,945 33.62% 8,508,680 2,892,930 34.00% DEBT SERVICE 10,526,942 3,420,466 32.49% 12,217,048 4,880,555 39.95% TOTAL EXPENSES OPERATING 174,557,123 66,774,612 38.25% 176,189,538 67,987,831 38.59% EXPENSES-OTHER FEDERAL GRANTS 16,519,453 5,090,563 30.82% 22,995,210 5,908,341 25.69% DEDICATED M\u0026amp; 0 3,921 ,766 1,924,218 49.07% 3,980,000 1,082,832 27.21% MAGNET SCHOOLS 24,802,743 8,592,494 34.64% 25,065,942 8,567,693 34.18% TOTAL 45,243,962 15,607,276 34.50% 52,041,152 15,558,866 29.90% TOTAL EXPENSES 219,801,085 82,381,887 37.48% 228,230,690 83,546,697 36.61% INCREASE (DECREASE) IN FUND BALANCE (519,298) 25,522,938 (646,948) 32,483,759 BEGINNING FUND BALANCE FEDERAL, MAGNET \u0026amp; OED M\u0026amp; 0 1,937,298 1,937,298 1,645,440 1,645,440 OPERATING 8,489,087 8,489,087 8,557,652 8,557,652 ENDING FUND BALANCE FEDERAL, MAGNET \u0026amp; OED M\u0026amp; 0 1,285,972 828,297 880,253 3,575,550 OPERATING 8,621 ,115 35,121 ,025 8,675,891 39,111 ,302 TOTAL 9,907,087 35,949,322 9,556,144 42,686,852 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT BOND ACCOUNT FOR THE PERIOD ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2002 PROJECT BEG BALANCE INCOME TRANSFERS EXPENDITURES ENCUMBRANCES END BALANCE 07-01 -02 2002-03 2002-03 2002-03 2002-03 12-31-02 $6,200,000 BOND ISSUE FAIR 33,282.90 33,282.90 MCCLELLAN 78,319.02 800.00 77,519.02 CONTINGENCY 1,052,354.15 1,052,354.15 SUBTOTAL 1, 163,956.07 0.00 0.00 800.00 0.00 1,163,156.07 $136,268,560 BOND ISSUES ADMINISTRATION 0.00 182,400.00 78,527.07 21.33 103,851.60 NEW WORK PROJECTS 22,028,270.87 8,254,950.00 5,793,843.81 11 ,330,428.12 13,158,948.94 SECURITY PROJECTS 42,273.97 42,273.97 LIGHTING PROJECTS 348,708.80 343,721.70 4,987.10 MAINTENANCE \u0026amp; REPAIR 5,749,803.26 336,342.00 2,755,842.68 255,340.82 3,074,961.76 RENOVATION PROJECTS 47,947,115.45 50,000.00 10,223,055.21 6,538,321 .10 31,235,739.14 TECHNOLOGY UPGRADES 4,744,881 .05 90,303.80 3,770,719.81 2,212.48 1,062,252.56 SUBTOTAL 80,861,053.40 0.00 8,913,995.80 22,965,710.28 18, 126,323.85 48,683,015.07 REVENUES PROCEEDS-PROPERTY SALE 139,801 .90 45,078.11 5,898.50 178,981 .51 DUNBAR PROJECT 5,266.71 5,266.71 FULBRIGHT PROJECT 0.00 50,000.00 50,000.00 PROCEEDS-BOND SALES 31 ,569,505.02 (8,913,995.80) 22,655,509.22 PROCEEDS-QZAB SALE 1,293,820.97 1,293,820.97 INTEREST STATE OF ARK 469,063.03 469,063.03 INTEREST 5,022,644.80 1,440,804.23 6,463,449.03 SUBTOTAL 38,500,102.43 1,535,882.34 (8,913,995.80) 0.00 5,898.50 31,116,090.47 GRAND TOTAL l ill :ii:i l l lllll l :ia:i aa~ a~ ll.lll2 ii lllili :illl i: lD l~2 222 ~:i ll lllii ilil lil PROJECT CATEGORIES ADMINISTRATION NEW WORK PROJECTS SECURITY PROJECTS LIGHTING PROJECTS MAINTENANCE \u0026amp; REPAIR RENOVATION PROJECTS TECHNOLOGY UPGRADES UNALLOCATED PROCEEDS TOTAL 1 r + I + PROJECT ALLOCATIONS I THRU 12-31-02 I 586,846.55 35,316,294.16 265,814.17 1 4,822,582.99 11 ,095,825.29 52,513,776.00 9,735,402.78 23,949,330.19 138,285,872.13 lN3w,ainorov mx SDNl!fV3H 'IIX LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT BOND ISSUE PROJECT HISTORY THRU THE PERIOD ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2002 EXPENSE 2000-01 889,772.32 443,467.00 113,930.47 2,641,482.13 791,385.63 397,615.34 I 575,016.53 I I 5,852,669.42 EXPENSE 2001-02 (485,325.77) 4,589,606.29 109,609.73 1,832,392.06 4,218,294.40 4,119,045.21 4,325,201.40 18,708,823.32 EXPENSE ENCUMBERED ! j THRU 12-31-02 THRU 12-31-02\nI I 78,527.07 21.33 I 5,793,843.81 11,330,428.12 343,721 .70 2,755,842.68 10,223,055.21 I 3,770,719.81 22,965,710.28 255,340.82 6,538,321 .10 2,212.48 1 I I 18. 126,323.85 I S\u0026gt;RIVW3!f DNISOl:\u0026gt; 1x SN Oil V!f3d0 x S3:\u0026gt;IAH3S lOOH:\u0026gt;S 'XI SUBTOTAL 482,994.95 22,157,345.22 I 223,540.20 j 4,817,595.89 8,020,863.53 21,278,036.86 8,673,150.22 I 65,653,526.87 ENDING ALLOCATION 12-31-02 103,851 .60 13,158,948.94 42,273.97 4,987.10 3,074,961.76 31 ,235,739.14 1,062,252.56 23,949,330.19 72,632,345.26 Operating Operating Operating Operating Operating Operating Operating Operating Fund Total Activity Fund Total Bond Account Capital Projects Fund Capital Projects Fund Capital Projects Fund Capital Projects Fund gapital Projects Fund Capital !:'rojects Fund Capital Projects Fund Capital Projects Fund Capital ~rojects Fund Capital Projects Fund Capital Projects Fund Capital Projects Fund Total Deseg Plan Scholarship Total Rockefeller Sc~~arship Total - - LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT SCHEDULE OF INVESTMENTS BY FUND -FOR THE PERIOD ENDED DECEM-BER- 3-1, -2002 - Purchase Date 12-09-02 07-19-02 08-10-02 12-24-02 - 12-24-02 12-24-02 12-27-02 12-27-02 - 11-14-02 09-09-02 12-19-02 12-19-02 10-29-02 01-18-02 11-15-02 - 01-22-02 07-17-02 01-25-02 11-15-02 09-17-02 09-17-02 12-20-02 09-27-02 08-19-02 Maturity Date ---- 06-09-03 01-19-03 04-08-02 TFN 01-31-03 0-2-14-03- 01-15-03 - 03-01-03 04-02-03 Institution ~egions ~egio__,:i_s Pulaski - - - - Bank of America Bank of America Bank of America - ----- Bank of the Ozarks - - __!.!_90'.'.f?~ Money-Market - - ~O,QQQ.QQ 1.590% ~o~y ~a.i:_ket _ _?Q,QQ0.Q0 2.330% __ Mon~ M_51rl:_e_!_ __ 1 Q,QQ0:Q0 .Q:~80% _ Repo i,.Q00,QQQ.Q0 __1.~ 20'.'.fo __C_ D__ _ _ 6,000,Q00.00 ,_ _1._320_01/o _ _ CD _ !Q,00Q.,000.QQ 1.380% _ __CQ__ 10,000,000.00 Bank of the Ozarks -1- 1.360_%_ ___C _D_ _ 10,000,000.00 __ ----t-_30..!.050,000.00 Bank of -America -- 1.120% Treasury _E!llls 800,523.15 - - - - - - - 03-10-03 Re~ions_ - 1]ooolo - -~ - CQ _ _ - __ - 400,000.66 01-17-03 01-17-03 01-29-03 01-17-03 05-15-03 - 01-22-03 03-14-03- 02-14-03 05-15-03 04-15-03 09-15-03 TFN - 06-10-03 01-30-03 _ ~etropolitan _ 1.100% __ CD _ 1,000,060.28 Bank of the Ozarks 1.350% __ QQ_ _ __ 5,111, 115.89 B~~orp S9uu\n- - __lagoo\n-\n- _ CD ___ 2,049,078.59 Superio_r:__ _ 2.7~Q~ CD 2,500,000.00 USBANK 1.380% __ SQ--= 11,000,000.00 B~k 9-[America - 2.110% _Ir~~~ury Bills 5,300,000 . .QQ Mer!:l!!_Lynch .!.:U0% Treasury Bills 4,940,754.!_I Bank of America 2.000% _ Treasury _ii~ 30,93!,!!Q0.QQ Bank of !be Ozar}~ - 1.4801 _ _ CD ~.000,QQQ.00 Bank of the Ozarks 2.070% CD 3,000,000.00 ~~nk of the Oza!~S ?-?0Q% -  - ~ C(? __ \u0026gt;- 1 Q,Q_00,00Q.Q~ B~k of Am~ica !.130%_ R~po ___ 10,100,000.00 _ _ _ -- _ _ _ _ _ _ 95,~2.~_08.9~ - Bank of America - --- Bank of America -------------- 1.430% . _Ireasury Bil~_ 1----53_4-'-,5_0_8_.8_0-i --- I4,~08.f!0 _ 1.400% _ JreasuryBillsc-~---24_- 8-'-,4_0_5_.5_6-i 248,405.56\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_1744","title":"Notice of appeal and notice of filing Arkansas Department of Education (ADE) project management tool and court order regarding Office of Desegregation Monitoring budget from 2002-2003.","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":["United States. District Court (Arkansas: Eastern District)"],"dc_date":["2003-01"],"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","Education--Arkansas","Arkansas. Department of Education","Project management","School districts","Little Rock School District","Education--Finance","Office of Desegregation Monitoring (Little Rock, Ark.)","Joshua intervenors","Elementary schools","Harris Elementary School (North Little Rock, Ark.)","African Americans--Education","School integration"],"dcterms_title":["Notice of appeal and notice of filing Arkansas Department of Education (ADE) project management tool and court order regarding Office of Desegregation Monitoring budget from 2002-2003."],"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/1744"],"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":["100 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\n\u003cdcterms_description type=\"array\"\u003e   \n\n\u003cdcterms_description\u003eDistrict Court, notice of filing, Arkansas Department of Education (ADE) project management tool; District Court, order; District Court, notice of appeal; District Court, two orders; 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.    IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION RECEIVED JAN - 3 200!' OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING 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 ADE's Project Management Tool for December 2002. Respectfully Submitted, MARK PRYOR Attorney General DENNIS R. HANSEN, # 97225 Chief Deputy Attorney General 323 Center Street, Suite 1100 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501) 682-2081 Attorney for Arkansas Department of Education CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Dennis R. Hansen, certify that on December 30, 2002, 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. SamuelJones,ill Wright, Lindsey \u0026amp; Jennings 200 W. Capitol, Suite 2000 Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. John W. Walker John Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Richard Roachell Attorney at Law P.O. Box 17388 Little Rock, AR 72222-7388 Mr. Christopher Heller Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark 400 W. Capitol, Suite 2000 Little Rock, AR 72201-3493 Mr. Stephen W. Jones Jack, Lyon \u0026amp; Jones 425 W. Capitol, Suite 3400 Little Rock, AR 72201 Ms. Ann Marshall One Union National Plaza 124 West Capitol, Suite 1895 Little Rock, AR 72201 Dennis R. Hansen 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 KA THERINE W. KNIGHT, ET AL INTERVENORS AD~SPROJECTMANAGEMENTTOOL 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 , 2002 i1~i~:~~11~~~~tiil{f~1l~il~~;~~:~r~i~,r.~'1g:~~~l.iV~~:f jif~~~;~icW~tg~ ' 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. IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT VS. 4:82CV00866 WRW/JTR PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, et al. MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, et al. KATHERINE KNIGHT, et al. RECEIVED JAN -8 2003 OFACEOF DESEGREGATION MONITORING ORDER ru .... c:u U.S. DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT ARKNJSAS JAN - 7 20G3 ~~:MES \\N. McCORMAC:(, CLER:-': PLAINTIFF DEFENDANTS INTER VEN ORS INTERVENORS Before the Court is the proposed 2002-2003 budget for the Office of Desegregation Monitoring. Though both LRSD and the Joshua Intervenors filed \"Responses\" which aired concerns about the budget, no specific objections were made by either party. 'I hereby approve the proposed budget as submitted. I am mindful that there may be a motion to adjust OD M's final budget for 2002-2003 following determination of the appeal of my order granting LRSD partial unitary status. ODM's goal should be to submit a proposed budget for 2003-2004 by May 1, 2003, so that I may approve the budget before the 2003-2004 budget cycle begins. If my Order on unitary status is affirmed on appeal, ODM should work with all parties, prior to submission of the proposed 2003 -2004 budget, to develop a more equitable means of apportioning LRSD's share of the cost ofODM. ft; IT IS SO ORDERED this day of January, 2003. \"i 7 2 FILED EAsTMR\\ g,srn,cT COURT ISTR/CT ARKANSAS JAN 0 7 2003 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT coUR; EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS B~:MES W. McCORMACK, CLERK WESTERN DIVISION DEP CLERK LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF V. CASE NO. 4:82CV00866 WRW/JTR PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL. MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL. KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL. RECEIVED DEFENDANTS JAN - 9 2003 INTER VENO RS OFFICE OF INTER VENO RS DESEGREGATION MONITORING NOTICE OF APPEAL The Joshua Intervenors give notice of appeal pursuant to Rule 3(a) of the Rules of Appellate Procedure with respect to Honorable William R. Wilson Jr.' s order and the corresponding judgment, both entered herein on December 20, 2002. t.~ll-~ Robert Pressman 22 Locust Avenue Lexington, MA 02421 781-862-1955 Respectfully submitted, /Jh.101~ John W. Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 501-374-3758 501-374-4187 Rickey H. Hicks Attorney At Law 1100 North University, Suite 240 Little Rock, AR 72207 501-663-9900  CF CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I do hereby state that a copy of the foregoing Notice of Appeal has been forwarded to all counsel of record via United States mail, postage prepaid on this 7th day ofJ anuary, 2002. JliJiJu.~ FILED IN THE UNITED ST A TES DISTRJCT COURT EASTERN DISTRJCT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION U.S. DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT ARKANSAS JAN 2 3 2003 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRJCT JAMES W. McCORMACK, CLERK By: PLAINTIFF DEP CLERK VS. 4:82CV00866 WRW / JTR PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRJCT NO. 1, et al. .MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, et al. KATHERINE KNIGHT, et al. RECEIVED JAN 2 8 2003 OFACE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING ORDER DEFENDANTS INTER VEN ORS INTER VEN ORS Joshua's request for an extension of the deadline for filing a supplemental pleading on the issues raised in their Response to Motion Regarding Site Selection at Maumelle is granted, and Joshua has until noon Monday, January 27, 2003, within which to file this response (or the potential agreed order referenced in Joshua's letter of this date). (\\c\\ IT IS SO ORDERED this ]Zday of January, 2003. - UNITED STATES DISTRJCT JUDGE THIS DOCUMENT ENTERED ON DOCKET SHEET IN COMPLIANCE o~;J..J~Sj,\" Am~ ~:~p 728 RECEIVED :~- FILED U S DISTRICT COURT JAN 3 0 2003 ': a: EASTERN DISTRICT ARKANSAS OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING IN THE UNITED STATES'OISTRICT COURT JAN 18 2003 EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION JAMES W. McCORMACK, CLERK ,By: DEP CLERK '-, 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. ORDER PLAINTIFF DEFENDANTS INTERVENORS INTERVENORS The Court is hereby informed that counsel for Pulaski County Special School District (PCSSD) and the Joshua lntervenors submit the following agreement with - respect to the Harris Redesign and Sherwood Rezoning: 1. The parties agree that the redesign of Harris Elementary School is consistent with the School District's plan and commitment not to close schools that are located in predominately African American areas. 2. The PCSSD Enrollment Count for October 1, 2001-2002 indicates a decline of 484 students. According to the First Quarter 2002-2003 Enrollment Report student enrollment declined from the first quarter of 2002-2003 to the second quarter of 2002-2003 by 209 students. Harris is a predominately African American School with a declining enrollment. Its racial percentage for the 2002-2003 school year is approximately 69% African American and 31% Caucasian. The proposed reassignment of African American students will increase the African American student enrollment from 394491 -v1 1 69% to 78%. African American students fron, Brushy Island will not be reassigned to Harris but will continue to attend Cato Elementary. Cato Elementary student enrollment will remain 75% Caucasian (white) and 25% African American (black). 3. The parties agree that working toward a racially balanced student body is an appropriate goal for Harris Elementary School, and is consistent with Plan 2000. 4. These parties agree that PCSSO shall vigorously recruit minority students (white) from North of the river for placement in the Harris Elementary School. The Director of Equity and Multicultural Education who will report to the Assistant Superintendent of Equity and Pupil Services shall direct this intensification of effort. Timely reports regarding monitoring activities will be sent to Joshua lntervenors and the Office of Desegregation Monitoring. 5. The parties agree to the establishment for the Harris Elementary School of a standing \"recruitment committee\". The committee will provide documentation of their efforts to the Director of Equity and Multicultural Education. One of the recruitment activities efforts will be to partner Harris with Sherwood schools for exchange activities and to provide desegregative experiences for students attending Harris Elementary. 6. PCSSD will vigorously recruit white students North of the river to attend Harris Elementary School. Recruitment will include but not be limited to the following: transportation will be provided, approximately 50 percent of the seats for the four year old, and before and after school programs will be allocated for white students electing to attend Harris. The recruiters explain the educational advantages of attending Harris to parents who are being recruited. 394491-v1 2 7. The Director of Equity and Multicultural Education will closely work with Real Estate Agents, government and community organizations, PTA and PTO's to recruit and provide information about the Harris Specialty Program. 8. PCSSD will locate staff development offerings to showcase the Harris program. 9. It is the objective of the redesign and rezoning plan to a) maintain educational presence in the affected area; b) improve the educational quality of offerings made available in that area; c) help racially balance the other schools in the Northern section of Pulaski County; d) reduce the disparate transportation burdens upon African American students; and e) attract students from home schooling and private schools back to District schools in the Sherwood area. It is expected that these - enrollment percentages will not substantially affect Clinton Elementary School in part because it is an interdistrict school where the ratios are substantially fixed. 10. The projected enrollment at Harris Elementary School will be a minimum of 200 students for the 2003-2004 school year and thereafter; and that present plans will allow a substantially greater enrollment if student demand, after appropriate recruitment efforts, increases. It is the objective of the parties to continue to review the racial balances within the school to maintain racial balances within Harris Elementary School. A primary method for achieving this objective will be to promote the rich and challenging curriculum that the district intends for this school will set it apart from the other schools similarly situated. 11. The parties agree that some faculty changes will be required. A concerted - and sustained effort will be made to provide the students with a racially diverse staff. 394491 -v1 3 12. The parties commit, in the manner provided by the Revised Desegregation Plan, to resolve their matters to the extent possible before either party seeks court review of any differences they have between them regarding Harris Elementary School issues. With these considerations in mind, it is the recommendation of the parties by their counsel that the Court enter this proposal as an order of the Court. Accordingly, having concluded a hearing, the Court approves the PCSSD motion dated December 16, 2002 (doc. no. 3719), as amended and supplemented by the foregoing paragraphs numbered 1 through 12. THIS DOCUMENT ENTERED ON DOCKET SHEET IN COMPLIANCE WITH RULE 58 AN~~CP ON/:-J..K-03 B \u0026lt;) 394491-v1 ,___ ___ - --- - UNITED STATES DI RICT JUDGE , .--i,9-1)3 DATE 4 I:,,\\ t: :; 'i\u0026gt; !r.,.U,- f; S1f..J..:(' /  h ' ! ,. , '7-l_)e.    ..,. . ..'),j ., .. .  \u0026lt;:u._,,)r JAN  .,_, ,v,11;,)~SA.s JAA  3 0 2DOJ 8 ,v,Es l'V ' IN THE Y:  fv,ccc RMAc UNITED ST ATES DISTRICT COURT f(, CLERK EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF v. No. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. I, 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 AD E's Project Management - Tool for January 2003. RECEIVED JAN 3 1 2003 OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING Respectfully Submitted, MIKE BEEBE Attorney General G~ COLETTE D. HONORABLE #96016 Assistant Attorney General 323 Center Street, Suite 1100 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501) 682-8123 Attorney for Arkansas Department of Education CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Colette D. Honorable, certify that on January 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, ill Wright, Lindsey \u0026amp; Jennings 200 W. Capitol, Suite 2000 Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. John W. Walker John Walker, P.A. 1 723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Richard Roachell Attorney at Law P.O. Box 17388 Little Rock, AR 72222-7388 Mr. Christopher Heller Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark 400 W. Capitol, Suite 2000 Little Rock, AR 72201-3493 Mr. Stephen W. Jones Jack, Lyon \u0026amp; Jones 425 W. Capitol, Suite 3400 Little Rock, AR 72201 Ms. Ann Marshall One Union National Plaza 124 West Capitol, Suite 1895 Little Rock, AR 72201 ~~{Q_ Colette D. Honorable 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 KA THERINE 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 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 January 31, 2003 1111~- . ~~~iflt~m~;;~~i11111~;;.i~k,i.\u0026amp;1'.1~~r.im~q~l~!.tj 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_904","title":"Personnel Directory, 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":["2003/2004"],"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","School administrators","School board members","School employees","School management and organization","School principals","School superintendents","Teachers"],"dcterms_title":["Personnel Directory, 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/904"],"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\nThe transcript for this item was created using Optical Character Recognition (OCR) and may contain some errors.\nThis project was supported in part by a Digitizing Hidden Special Collections and Archives project grant from The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation and Council on Library and Information Resoources.\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n\n "},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1489","title":"\"Strategic Planning 2nd Session,\" 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":["Little Rock School District"],"dc_date":["2003/2008"],"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","Education--Finance","Education--Standards","Educational law and legislation","Educational planning","Educational innovations","School enrollment","School management and organization","School improvement programs","School integration","Student activities","Student assistance programs","Parents","School employees"],"dcterms_title":["\"Strategic Planning 2nd Session,\" 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/1489"],"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":["documents (object genre)"],"dcterms_extent":["121 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1563","title":"\"Third-Party Evaluation of the Elementary Level Summer School Program,'' Quality Education and Management Associates, Inc., Little Rock, Ark.","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":["Quality Education and Management Associates"],"dc_date":["2003-01"],"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","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","Education--Standards","Education, Elementary","Educational statistics","Educational innovations","School management and organization","Summer schools","Student assistance programs","School improvement programs","Little Rock School District"],"dcterms_title":["\"Third-Party Evaluation of the Elementary Level Summer School Program,'' Quality Education and Management Associates, Inc., Little Rock, Ark."],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Butler Center for Arkansas Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://arstudies.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/bcmss0837/id/1563"],"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":["44 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1538","title":"\"Third-Party Evaluation of the Lyceum Scholars Program,'' Quality Education and Management Associates, Inc., Little Rock, Ark.","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":["Quality Education and Management Associates"],"dc_date":["2003-01"],"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","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","Education--Standards","Educational innovations","Educational law and legislation","Educational statistics","School improvement programs","School management and organization","School integration","Student assistance programs","Philander Smith College","Education, Secondary","Little Rock School District"],"dcterms_title":["\"Third-Party Evaluation of the Lyceum Scholars Program,'' Quality Education and Management Associates, Inc., Little Rock, Ark."],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Butler Center for Arkansas Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://arstudies.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/bcmss0837/id/1538"],"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":["66 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1565","title":"\"Third-Party Review of the Campus Leadership Teams Evaluation in 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":["Ross, Steven M."],"dc_date":["2003-01"],"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","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","Educational innovations","Educational statistics","Little Rock School District","School management and organization","School employees","School improvement programs","School integration","Student assistance programs","Student activities"],"dcterms_title":["\"Third-Party Review of the Campus Leadership Teams Evaluation in 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/1565"],"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":["documents (object genre)"],"dcterms_extent":["45 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1540","title":"\"Third-Party Review of the Hippy Evaluation in 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":["Ross, Steven M."],"dc_date":["2003-01"],"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--Evaluation","Education--Standards","Educational law and legislation","Educational innovations","Education--Finance","Educational statistics","School management and organization","School improvement programs","School employees"],"dcterms_title":["\"Third-Party Review of the Hippy Evaluation in 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/1540"],"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":["37 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_458","title":"Program Evaluations for the Comprehensive Partnerships for Mathematics and Science Achievement (CPMSA), 1998-99, 1999-2000, 2000-01, and 2001-02","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":["2002-12-19"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System."],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","Little Rock School District","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","Educational statistics"],"dcterms_title":["Program Evaluations for the Comprehensive Partnerships for Mathematics and Science Achievement (CPMSA), 1998-99, 1999-2000, 2000-01, and 2001-02"],"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/458"],"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\nProgram Evaluations for the received DEC 1 1 2002 desegregation monitoring 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 Division of Instruction Little Rock School District 3001 S. Pulaski Little Rock, AR 72206 www.lrsd.org 501/447-3320Table of Contents CPMSA Strategic Plan for 1998-1999 CPMSA Program Evaluation for 1998-1999 May 20,1999, Feedback from NSF Site Visit Team July 16,1999, Presentation Handouts for Reverse Site Visit to NSF 1999-2000 CPMSA Strategic Plan CPMSA Program Evaluation for 1999-2000 January 24,2000, Feedback from NSF Site Visit Team September 2000February 2002 CPMSA Strategic Plan CPMSA Program Evaluation for 2000-2001 January 16, 2001 Feedback from NSF Site Visit Team March 15, 2001 Feedback from Mid-Point Review (Reverse Site Visit to NSF) April 11, 2001 Revised CPMSA Strategic Plan September 1,2001February 28, 2002, CMPSA Strategic Plan CPMSA Program Evaluation for 2001-2002 May 7, 2002, Feedback from Reverse Site Visit to NSF September 2002August 2003 Strategic PlanLITTLE ROCK PARTNERSHIPS FOR MATHEMATICS AND SCIENCE (LRPMSA) Management Plan Year One 1998-99 Strategy 1. Implement a plan to improve the achievement of all students Action Step 1. Form vertical teams involving all 5 high schools, all 8 junior high schools and representative elementary schools Drivers 6 C y Indicators List of team members Timeline September, 1998 Responsibility' Vanessa Cleaver Principals 2. Send representatives to College Board Vertical Teams (VT) Conference List of conference participants February, 1999 3. Train representative to facilitate group meeting Phyllis Caruth participated in College Boards train the trainer workshop Februry, 1999 Vanessa Cleaver Phyllis Caruth 4. VT to meet on a quarterly level Agenda and sign-in sheets Spring, 1999 Ongoing 12. Ensure the developed policies for mathematics and science education for all students will continue to be implemented 3. Add policies to strengthen the course offerings for mathematics and science 1. 2. 3. 1. Include matli/science improvement component in individual school improvement plans (SIP) Assess progress of schools in following or meeting their plan Review and revise middle and high school Curriculum Catalog Develop K-12 talent development plan to improve G/T, honors, and AP student enrollment and success 2 2 sips submitted and reviewed Annual principal evaluation conference Published High School Curriculum Catalog, 1999- 2000 K-12 Talent Development Committee established Eliminated the honors/enriched layer of courses between the regular level and the Pre-AP/AP level at grades 6-12 for 1999-2000 school year October, 1998 Spring, 1999 December, 1998 November, 1998 Sadie Mitchell Frances Cawihon Marian I acey Dennis Glasgow Sadie Mitchell Frances CawtF.on Marian Lacey Dr. Bonnie Lesley Dr. Bonnie Lesley Talent Development Committee Dr. Lesley I 22. Construct curriculum maps ofLRSD standards/benchm arks with Arkansas standards, SAT9 testing objectives (plus other tests as appropriate), and instructional materials K-12 Curriculum maps for science and mathematics January, 1999 Dennis Glasgow Vanessa Cleaver Project Staff 4. Implement a standards-based curriculum 1. Pilot standards- based programs at District schools, monitor schools to determine level of implementation 1 List of schools/teachers who are piloting programs Spring, 1998 Dennis Glasgow Vanessa Cleaver Project Staff Principals 2. Provide training for teachers who pilot programs Training dates, agendas and participants Fall, 1997 3. Provide training for 6\"' grade mathematics teachers who implement Connected Mathematics__ Training dates, agendas, participants Spring, 1999 Ongoing (4 34. 5. 6. J 7. Project (CMP) Provide training for 9\"' grade teachers who will implement Active Physics Provide training for 6\"' grade science teachers who will implement Science and Technology for Children (STC) Provide training for 4'' and 5' th grade teachers who will implement Investigations in Number, Data and Space Implement STC U Classroom observation Spring, 1999 (6 66 August, 1999 Dennis Glasgow Vanessa Cleaver Project Staff Dennis Glasgow Vanessa Cleaver Project Staff 4Principals 8. Implement CMP 4 Classroom observation August, 1999 9. Implement Investigations 10. Implement Active Physics Classroom observation Classroom observation August, 1999 August, 1999 5. Increase level of support for science and math education among all relevant stakeholders 6. Ensure all relevant stakeholders understand systemic change as a strategy for improving mathematics and science education 1. 1. 2. 3. Implement Family Math and Science program in six schools Present to Christian Ministerial Alliance Present to Volunteers in Public Schools (VIPS) Board Present to the Little Rock Parent 4 5 Schedule and participants Agenda Agenda Agenda Spring, 1999 November, 1998 March, 1999 April, 1999 Principals Family Math and Science Coordinators Vanessa Cleaver Vanessa Cleaver Vanessa Cleaver 5Jeacher Association Council 4. Design a dissemination brochure for key stakeholders about the LRPMSA 5 Brochure June, 1999 Vanessa Cleaver Suellen Vann 7. Develop plan to improve students interest in pursuing mathematics, science and engineering 8. Develop a plan to assure success tor all students in Algebra 1 1. Expand VITAI. LINK to include more businesses that have careers with math/science focus 2. Expand and monitor SECME programs 1. Coordinate the establishment of a two-week, halfday Algebra 1 program - Summer Mathematics Advanced 3 1 Math/science additions to VITAL LINK Phase-in schedule for SECME at District schools Schedule for SMART April, 1999 Spring, 1999 August, 1999 Vanessa Cleaver Debbie Milam Vanessa Cleaver Jo Evelyn Elston Vanessa Clea\\ er SMART Committee 6Readiness Ifaining (SMART) 99 9. Io increase the coordination among existing funding sources in support of sj stemic reform in mathematics and science 10. Plan professional development 1. Develop plan to fund (Title I, NSF) the new positions of lead teachers for mathematics and science standards-based curriculum implementation 3 Lead teachers hired August, 1999 Dr. Bonnie Leslej Dennis Glasgow Leon Adams Vanessa Cleaver 1. Provide ongoing training for new and first year secondary mathematics and science teachers 1 Agendas for inservices for new/first-year teachers Fall, 1998 Ongoing Vanessa Cleaver Dennis Glasgow Project Staff Principals ! i ___ I 7J I L I I I I I / r Little Rock Comprehensive Partnerships for il I I ! i i i Mathematics and Science Achievement Haas. # / 'V i ! I II I I Aimual Progress Report 1998-1999 1 i % I ) I  LITTLE ROCK COMPREHENSIVE PARTNERSHIPS FOR MATHEMATICS AND SCIENCE ACHIEVEMENT (LR CPMSA) The Little Rock Comprehensive Partnerships for Mathematics and Science Achievement (LR CPMSA) is a major effort to promote a higher standard of learning and performance in mathematics and science in all students in the Little Rock School District (LRSD). OVERVIEW OF THE SYSTEM There are fifty-one schools in the LRSD, serving approximately 25, 000 students: TOTAL 35 8 5 1 1 L 51 elementary schools middle schools high schools vocational technical school Alternative Learning Center Accelerated Learning Center (high school) There are 919 K-12 mathematics and science teachers in the LRSD. More specifically, 735 are elementary teachers, 94 secondary science teachers, and 90 secondary mathematics teachers. The following list describes the District's student demographics by race/ethnicity: Afidcan American 67% Hispanic, Asian, and other minorities 3%, White 30% The LR CPMSA is a comprehensive program designed to focus on all K-12 mathematics and science programs through a variety of components addressing the needs of students, educators, and parents. The primary program components include: 1. 2. 3. 4. Implementation of standards-based curricula Development of district-wide policy and practice changes Resource convergence Paitnerships Small scale implementation of some of the curricula occurred during the 1998-1999 school year, the first year of planning/implementation of the LR CPMSA, for the purpose of developing training and trainers for the programs and reforming the curriculum. A very comprehensive professional 1998-1999 Annual ReportT development program was then launched to prepare nearly 800 mathematics and science teachers for the first phase of implementing high quality standards-based curricula, effective instructional practices, and effective student assessment. Professional development occurred during the first year in preparation for implementation of standards-based curricula for all students in the following grade and subject levels during the 1999-2000 school year:  4* and 5* grade mathematics teachers  6* grade mathematics teachers  6* grade science teachers  9* grade science teachers  1 -5* grade science teachers (1 kit) SI INFLUENCE ON THE SYSTEM I Standards-Based Curricula/Instruction The mathematics and science curricula that are being phased-in over a period of four years are national curricula that were developed with fimding from the National Science Foundation: Mathematics Investigations in Number, Data, and Space Connected Mathematics Project (CMP) Elementary (K-5) Middle School (6-8) Heath McDougal-Littell High School (11-12) I Pacesetter Pre-calculus Through Modeling High School Science Science and Technology for Children (STC) Elementary - 6* grade Science and Life Issues (SALI) grade Science Education for Public Understanding Project (SEPUP) 8* grade Active Physics 9* grade Mathematics and science vertical teams were formed to align local mathematics and science standards and benchmarks to the national standards. These standards and benchmarks were used to I' 1998-1999 Annual Report 2 I I Ihelp select McDougal-Littel for the high school mathematics courses because it is well aligned with the national standards. Standards-based textbook programs are currently used as resources for biology, chemistry, and earth science. The textbook-based programs are used to support the districts science standards and frameworks that are based on the national standards in science. Additional resources are used by teachers as necessary to flesh-out the standards-based program. The implementation schedule for the standards-based curricula is detailed in the following chart- Standards-Based Mathematics and Science Implementation Schedule Grade Level Kindergarten r* Grade 2 Grade 3 Grade 4*^ Grade 5 Grade 6'\" Grade 7 Grade 8 Grade 9\" Grade 10-12' Grades IB\" 1999-00 2000-01 \u0026gt; 1 STC kit \u0026gt; 1 STC kit \u0026gt; 1 STC kit \u0026gt; 1 STC kit \u0026gt; All 4 modules of INV \u0026gt; 1 STC kit \u0026gt; All 4 modules of INV \u0026gt; All 5 modules of CMP \u0026gt; All 4 STC kits \u0026gt; 2 modules of CMP \u0026gt; 2 modules of CMP \u0026gt; All Active Physics modules \u0026gt; Continue 1 STC kit \u0026gt; Continue 1 STC kit \u0026gt; All 4 modules of INV \u0026gt; Continue 1 STC kit \u0026gt; All 4 modules of INV \u0026gt; All 4 STC kits 2001-02 \u0026gt; All 4 modules of INV \u0026gt; All 4 modules of INV \u0026gt; All 4 STC kits \u0026gt; All 4 STC kits \u0026gt; All 4 STC kits 2002-03 \u0026gt; All 4 STC kits \u0026gt; All 5 modules of CMP \u0026gt; All SALI kits \u0026gt; 3 modules of CMP \u0026gt; All 5 modules of CMP \u0026gt; All SEPUP Modules Secondary mathematics and science curricula will align with National Standards and textbooks will be used along with supplementary resources to support those standards. Pacesetter Pre-Calculus will be available at the high school level. INV - Investigations (Grades K-5 Math) CMP - Connected Math Project (Grades 6-8 Math) STC - Science and Technology for Children (Grades 1-6 Science) SALI - Science and Life Issues (Grade 7 Science) SEPUP - Science Education for Public Understanding Project (Grade 8 Science) Active Physics - (Grade 9 physics) All students in the identified grade-levels in grades K-8 will participate in the standards-based curricula according to the schedule. In grades 9-12 all students will be taught a curriculum that 1998-1999 Annual Report 3Tl aligns with the national standards. Not all students, however, will participate in the same program. Ninth grade physics students, for example, may take Active Physics or Pre-AP Physics, a theorybased course. Also, Pre-calculus Through Modeling is an elective course for students. Students may elect trigonometry as their pre-calculus course. I Assessment System (1998-1999) The assessment program consists of a menu of assessments that included the following: Standford Achievement Test (SAT-9) Arkansas Benchmark Exams EXPLORE and PLAN (Pre-ACT tests) Local Criterion-Referenced Test (CRT) ACT (optional) Advanced Placement Exams (optional) Grades 3,5, 7, 8,10 (mathematics and science) Grades 4, 8 (Literacy and math) Grades 8, 10 (math and science reasoning) Grades 2-6 (math and literacy) High school (math and science reasoning) AP students (math and science) These assessments are aligned with the curriculum. The closest alignment is obtained through the state benchmark exams and local CRTs. The EXPLORE, PLAN, ACT and AP exams are also closely aligned with the curriculum. The SAT-9, EXPLORE, PLAN, state benchmark exams and local CRTs were used with all (some exemptions allowed for special education and Limited English Proficiency (LEP) students) students at the identified grade levels. The ACT and AP exams were elected by a smaller group of students. 1998-1999 Annual Report 4 I I I,Professional Development Extensive professional development was provided for the standards-based curricula being implemented by the district. The professional development for the 1998-99 school year was as follows: STANDARDS-BASED PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT (List each activity conducted during the 98-99 project year.) Activity 12/10/98 03/10/99 03/11/99 03/24/99 03/16/99 03/17/99 04/06/99 04/07/99 04/08/99 04/17/99 04/20/99 04/22/99 04/27/99 04/28/99 04/29/99 05/04/99 05/05/99 1 Year Math/Science Teacher Training 1' Year Math/Science Teacher Training 1' Year Math/Science Teacher Training Extended Year Algebra I Planning 4* Grade STC Training 4' Grade STC Training s' Grade CMP Training S*** Grade CMP Training s' Grade CMP Training 6' Grade CMP Training 4* Grade STC Training 4 Grade STC Training 5 Grade TERC Training 5*' Grade TERC Training s' Grade TERC Training 5*' Grade TERC Training s Grade TERC Training 05/06/99 5* Grade TERC Training 05/11/99 s Grade TERC Training 05/12/99 s' Grade TERC Training 05/13/99 S* Grade TERC Training 05/13/99 Math Vertical Teams 05/18/99 STC Training of Trainers 05/18/99 Math Vertical Tearns 05/19/99 STC Training of Trainers 05/19/99 S* Grade STC Training 06/02/99 Kindergarten UMS Math Training 06/02/99 4' Grade TERC Training 06/02/99 1'Grade STC Training 06/02/99 3\"* Grade STC Training 06/03/99 1' Grade UMS Math Training 06/03/99 4\"'Grade TERC Training 06/03/99 2* Grade STC Training 06/03/99 5' Grade STC Training 06/04/99 2\"^ Grade UMS Math Training 06/04/99 4\"' Grade TERC Training 06/02/99 - 06/15/99 Active Physics Training 06/15/99 SMART Training (Algebra) 06/28/99 - 07/02/99 Math Solutions Training 07/06/99 - 07/16/99 Conceptual Physics Training 07/12/99 - 07/30/99 Summer Science Institute 08/12/99 9-12 Grade Math Training 08/12/99 9-12 Grade Science Vertical Tearns 08/12/99 Geology and Space Science Training 1998-1999 Annual Report Number of Participants For Mathematics Elem M/S 5 5 4 3 15 16 16 16 Sec. 1 1 1 4 Number of Participants For Science Elem. M/S 12 12 12 Sec. 3 4 3 16 17 21 23 Number of Hours Trained 22 22 22 24 24 24 27 29 29 2 1 5 9 6 13 6 22 105 121 120 121 111 121 19 3 6 2 54 135 132 128 98 18 19 10 46 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 1 6 1 6 6 3 6 6 6 3 6 6 6 6 6 60 3 30 60 105 6 6 6(List each activity conducted during the 98-99 project year.) Number of Participants For Mathematics Number of Participants For Science Number of Hours Trained Activity 08/13/99 9-12 Grade Math Training 08/13/99 - 08/13/99 08/13/99 08/13/99 08/16/99 08/16/99 08/16/99 08/16/99 08/16/99 08/16/99 08/16/99 08/16/99 08/16/99 08/16/99 08/16/99 08/16/99 08/17/99 08/17/99 08/17/99 09/01/99 09/01/99 09/02/99 09/02/99 09/08/99 09/08/99 09/10/99 09/14/99 09/20/99 09/21/99 09/21/99 09/22/99 09/23/99 09/24/99 09/28/99 09/29/99 09/30/99 Physics Training Earth Science Training Chemistry - SEPUP Training Biology - Project Life Training 3\"* Grade TERC Training 5**' Grade TERC Training 6'*' Grade CMP Training T'W Grade Math Training 8\" Grade Algebra Training 9-12 Grade Math Training 6*\" Grade Project Life Training 7'\" Grade Project Life Training Grade SEPUP Training Physics Training Chemistry Training Biology - Project Life Training 3^ Grade TERC Training 5' Grade TERC Training 6* Grade CMP Training 4* Grade STC Training s' Grade STC Training 5'*' Grade STC Training 6*^ Grade STC Training 4* Grade TERC Training 5\"' Grade TERC Training s' Grade TERC Training 4* Grade TERC Training 1' Grade STC Training Math Vertical Teams 2\"^ Grade STC Training 3^ Grade STC Training 4\" Grade TERC Training 4\" Grade TERC Training 6*\" Grade CMP Training Physics Training Physics Training 1998-1999 Annual Report Elem M/S Sec. 51 Elem M/S Sec. 104 89 20 6 10 17 96 89 21 33 31 21 30 29 6 19 25 11 16 4 16 51 14 37 19 13 12 6 17 19 15 4 7 17 10 20 19 19 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 1 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 I I I I 1': jiThe total number of teachers and administrators who participated in professional development during the 1998-99 school year is as follows: Professional Development Totals List the total number of participants in each of the following categories: (non-duplicate count) A. Teachers B. Preservice teachers C. Administrators/Supervisors 40 D. Other school staff 13L Total W List the number of participants who were: A. Male 131 B. Female 838 List the number of participants who were: A. White, non-Hispanic B. Black, non-Hispanic C. Hispanic D. Asian, Pacific Islander 333 2 1 E. American Indian/Alaskan Native Most of the professional development undertaken during the 1998-99 school year was initial formal training on the standards-based curriculum that the teachers were targeted to implement. All teachers who are implementing standards-based curricula are provided professional development. Principals, counselors, and lead teachers are also provided with professional development to assist 1998-1999 Annual Report 7them in understanding the standards-based curricula and the systemic change initiative being undertaken in the Little Rock School District. Once implementation began in the 1999-2000 school year, follow-up training has occuned, both at a district level and at the individual classroom level. Lead teachers in math/science provide individual teachers with in-classroom coaching, demonstration lessons, team teaching, and technical assistance. Policy Changes The policies for mathematics and science education are part of the systemic reform in all core curriculum areas in the Little Rock School District. For the past year, the District has been involved in a comprehensive process to review and revise the Board of Educations policy manual, resulting in an almost totally new set of policies in the section on Instruction. Those most relevant to Driver 2 are listed in the table below: The policies that \"indicate a coherent vision that encompasses all students \" are as follows: NEPNCode Ta IQ, IG-R IGA IGBA IGE, IGE-RI IHBB IHBEA. IHBEA-R IHCC IKE __________________Title_____________ Academic Content Standards/Benchmarks Curriculum Development, Adoption, and Review Curriculum Program Alignment and Coherence Grant-funded Projects Purpose Establishes academic content standards/benchmarks that high school graduates will possess Requires that all curricula be standards-based Curriculum Guides Gifted and Talented Education English as a Second Language Pre-Advanced Placement and Advanced Placement Courses General Education Graduation Requirements, Effective For the Graduating Class of2002 Requires that all special curricula and programs be aligned with the District's Strategic Plan Requires that grant-funded programs be tightly aligned with the District's Strategic Plan Requires that curriculum guides be aligned with state and national standards Establishes definition of giftedness and requires that all students have an opportunity to participate in gifted programs Requires that appropriate and equitable programs and services be provided for ESL students to ensure achievement of the standards and benchmarks Provides for pre-AP and AP courses in grades 6-12 and ensures that there are no barriers to participate in these programs Establishes 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 The Little Rock School District is committed to standards-based educational programs that ensure i! jl that all students will be appropriately challenged. The policies listed above address the components of a standards-based curriculum and ensure that all students are enrolled in high quality and I I 1 I i i I N I I I 3 I 1998-1999 Annual Report 8 111rigorous programs. By policy, all Little Rock School District students must enroll in and successfully complete Algebra I-II and Geometry and Physics I, Biology I, and Chemistry Ias minimums. The Recommended Curriculum includes a fourth year in both mathematics and science and a second year of technology applications. Recruiting high quality mathematics and science teachers is one of the priorities of the Little Rock School District. We continually work in partnerships with area colleges and universities to identify potential teachers in these priority areas, and we are currently working on a grant application with the University of Arkansas at Little Rock (UALR) on a preservice program related to mathematics and science. The issue of providing adequate time for ongoing professional development of mathematics and science teachers has been a challenging one in the Little Rock School District due to our emphasis on keeping teachers in the classroom for the highest possible quality of instruction and on the shortage of qualified substitutes that would free teachers for professional development activities. A Cabinet-level retreat will be held to initiate a plan for a total infrastructure in support of a high quality professional development program for the District. Alignment The following policies and regulations address the requirement of a tight alignment among curriculum, instruction, assessment, and professional development: IG-R: IGA: IGBA: IGE: IGE-RI: Curriculum Development, Adoption, and Review Curriculum Program Alignment and Coherence Grant-Funded Projects Curriculum Guides Curriculum Guide Development Policies on professional development alignment are still under development. Currently, policies addressing assurance of adequate financial and administrative support for the ongoing professional development of mathematics and science teachers are still under development. However, the current practice is to support the development of mathematics and science teachers through as many funding sources as are available - such as the local budget. 1998-1999 Annual Report 9'r I Eisenhower funds, Class-size reduction funds, other grants, etc. (See Resource Convergence for further details). Six elementary math/science teachers, one middle school science teacher, one middle school math teacher, and one high school math teacher currently serve as teacher leaders in the implementation of new standards-based curriculum and instruction. These teachers were selected based on the demonstration of outstanding work in implementing standards-based instruction in the classroom. They serve as professional developers, coaches/mentors, and role models for other teachers in the District. Their new roles are one of the ways that the District recognizes and rewards our outstanding teachers. Teachers are encouraged to participate in all national, regional, and state recognition programs, and Little Rock mathematics and science teachers are frequently among the winners in such recognition programs. The Districts accountability system includes rewards and recognition for schools that meet the challenging trend and improvement goals established by the State and by the District. Each school is then encouraged to recognize and reward its outstanding teachers and students. Dr. Leslie Gamine, superintendent of the Little Rock School District, serves as principal investigator of the LR CPMSA. Dr. Camine has provided support and guidance for the LR CPMSA since his arrival in 1998. Dr. Camine has provided visibility for the LR CPMSA with the School Board, community members, administrators, and teachers in the district. An Advisory Committee was identified and met monthly to review the CPMSA project activities and to focus discussion on the progress in meeting the objectives. Members of the Advisory Committee include representatives from the programs primary partners and the six senior LRSD personnel. Additional committee members include school administrators, counselors. teachers, parents, business and community leaders, and professionals in areas of mathematics and science. Another layer of support, during the 1998-1999 school year, was the Management Team. The Management Team consists of senior administrators including the superintendent, associate and I 1998-1999 Annual Report 10 Iassistant superintendents. The following list identifies the departments of the other district personnel represented on the management team: \u0026gt; \u0026gt; \u0026gt; \u0026gt; \u0026gt; \u0026gt; \u0026gt; \u0026gt; \u0026gt; Mathematics and Science Planning, Research and Evaluation Gifted and Talented Staff Development Early Childhood Pupil Services Volunteers in Public Schools/Partners In Education Communications Business Office The management team met monthly to identify and address issues that impacted or impeded the progress of the CPMSA. Such issues include the following: \u0026gt; Current district policies/practices   a  Attendance Grades G/T - Talent Development Graduation \u0026gt; Endorsement of proj ect activities The Little Rock School District instituted a policy to establish campus leadership teams at each school to improve performance of all student populations in support of the Districts commitment of sustained school improvement. The campus team consists of school administrators, staff (both school and central office), students, parents, and business/community patrons. The work of the campus teams is organized around the basic components of the Little Rock School District Student Success Model: \u0026gt; \u0026gt; \u0026gt; \u0026gt; \u0026gt; \u0026gt; Skills and Knowledge Continuum Personalized Education Programs Staff Development Community Support Assessment Communication 1998-1999 Annual Report 11Resource Convergence There are four main funding sources that are leveraged in support of improving mathematics and science education: Dwight D. Eisenhower Fund, State Textbook (Math) Fund, Local District .f Budget and the Districts Title I Fund. During the 1998-99 school year, approximately 93% of the Eisenhower budget was used to support mathematics and science education in the Little Rock School District. More specifically, approximately $98,000 was used to fimd the positions of two teacher specialists who, collectively, provide demonstration lessons, team teaching, joint plaiming, school level and district-wide inservice directed at hands-on math and science instruction and the integration of social studies and language arts with science and mathematics. In addition. approximately $58,000 of the Eisenhower Funds were used for training on new mathematics and science standards-based programs as well as other professional development opportunities for mathematics and science teachers (workshops, conferences, consultant fees, materials, etc.). Approximately 95% of the local district budget for mathematics and science were leveraged for inkind services provided by the co-principal investigator, an elementary mathematics specialist and a middle school science specialist. In addition, the local budget (for mathematics and science) was I used to purchase curriculum materials, equipment and office supplies. Other uses of the local budget for mathematics and science include training expenses, and local travel (mileage). The local I district budget was used to match one-half of the Program Evaluators salary and for in-kind services provided by the principal investigator. Lead teachers were hired to help facilitate the implementation of standards-based mathematics and science curricula in the classroom. The lead teachers are funded in the following maimer: 2 - Class-Size Reduction Allocation 1 - Title VI Funds 4 - LR CPMSA 2 - District budget A key resource during the 1998-99 school year was provided by the district budget after securing a waiver from the Arkansas Department of Education to provide three paid days of 1998-1999 Annual Report 12 'Iadditional training for teachers in the implementation of new standards-based curricula and campus leadership planning. The Little Rock Center of Excellence for Research, Teaching and Learning (CERTL) is designed to provide standards-based teacher training and student laboratory experiences in math and science in support of the LR CPMSA. The Little Rock CERTL operates through area institutions of higher education. The University of Arkansas at Little Rock (UALR) and Philander Smith College (PSC) serve as sponsoring institutions for CERTL. UALR and PSC provided the following services for CERTL: Lab School for Teachers/Summer Institute for Students UALR Training provided for pre-service and inservice teachers one week prior to the two- week institute for rising 5''' and 6'^ grade students. Once the institute began, master teachers mentored participating teachers as they applied their learning in a real-life environment by instructing students using standards-basedpedagogy. Summer Algebra Readiness Training PSC A summer institute designed to prepare a group of capable but underachieving rising 9^ grade students for success in Algebra I. The institute was led by a PSC faculty site facilitator and master middle/high school mathematics teachers who were assisted by undergraduate PSC students who served as mentors. Active Physics LRSD Resources provided to pay consultant fees for Active Physics professor from Wisconsin. Eighteen teachers completed coursework that qualified them to receive four hours of graduate physics credit. Leveraging of resources made this training possible for teachers. The Eisenhower Professional Development grant paid stipends to teachers for participating in the course\nthe District provided tuition reimbursement for teachers and supplies/materials for the course\nand, UALR provided the mechanism for teachers to get college credit for training. Additional funding resources were provided by the Arkansas Statewide Systemic Initiative (AS SI) to provide mini-grants to two LRSD schools for implementation of the Family Math/Science Program. State funds provided under the Advanced Placement Incentive Program, Act 929 of 1997 were allocated for teachers to attend one-day and/or two-day conferences (registration fees only) for Pre-Advanced Placement and Advanced Placement teachers. During 1998-99, thirty-one (31) mathematics teachers, grades 6-12, attended College Boards two-day Mathematics Vertical Teams Conference in Little Rock. In addition, twenty-six (26) science teachers, grades 6-12, attended 1998-1999 Annual Repon 13UALRs Vertical Teams Conference for science teachers. A total of $9,525 in state funds was allocated for LRSD mathematics and science teachers. SECME is a premiere pre-college program that prepares and motivates students for engineering and other technical fields. LRSD received $22,000 from SECME to implement the SECME program in thirteen elementary and secondary schools. SECMEs goal, which is tightly aligned with the LR CPMSA goals, is to increase the pool of minorities who are prepared to enter and complete post secondary studies in engineering, mathematics, and science. The Little Rock School District SECME program works in partnerships with faculty from the school of engineering at the University of Arkansas at Little Rock (UALR). The faculty provides in-kind contributions to deliver technical assistance to school teams. LR CPMSA funds were used to support the SECME program in five additional schools. The use of technology and telecommunications is expanding in the District with the programs and opportunities available: 1. 2. 3. Compressed Video - Available at three schools (two elementary schools and one middle school). The compressed video is the virtual classroom project that connects the sites with each other and with the University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences (UAMS). Professors from UAMS will provide learning experiences for students that will promote their competency in biology and other sciences. EAST (Environmental and Spatial Technology) Labs - Located at Central High and McClellan High Schools. Students have access to a project-based curriculum that integrates advanced software applications ranging form architectural and design engineering systems to global positioning systems and geographical information system software. The focus of this program is on the integration of the tools as aids to the learning process. Cisco Academy - Available at Hall High School. This program prepares students for jobs in network administration. The program involves a partnership with Cisco Systems as well as Pulaski Technical College, a Cisco regional academy that will provide teacher training and program monitoring. I I I In addition to the aforementioned programs, all school sites have access to the Internet. Most I J ' access areas are presently in the media centers although many schools are adding computers to the classroom as funds permit the purchases of the equipment. Internet is being used in a variety of I ways: using the web for searching local and distant libraries, databases, educational sites. I collaborating on projects and creating web sites. 1998-1999 Annual Report 14 aPartnerships During the 1998-99 school year, the initial year of the LR CPMSA, presentations about the goals of the LR CPMSA were developed and delivered to the following organizations: 1. 2. 3. 4. Little Rock PTA Council Volunteers in Public Schools Board Christian Ministerial Alliance Vital Link Business Partners In addition, a dissemination brochure was developed to describe the goals and objectives of the Little Rock CPMSA. During 1998, the District entered into a partnership with the Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD) called the Urban Professional Development Initiative. This initiative enabled District staff to develop an improved plan for delivering professional development to support implementation of new initiatives including those in mathematics and science. A partnership with the Arkansas Statewide Systemic Initiative (ASSI) provided Family Math and Science Programs in five additional elementary and middle schools. Currently, 58% of the Districts elementary and middle schools have implemented the Family Math and Science Program (up from 46.5%). An effort to promote understanding and acceptance among stakeholders about the systematic change necessary for improving mathematics and science education was through the Vital Link partnership. Vital Link is a system that is designed to give middle school students a behind-the- scenes look at the world of work. Seventy-three (73) businesses hosted nearly 400 rising 7* grade students for one week providing first-hand knowledge of the connection between skills learned in the classroom and those needed for success in the workplace. During the Vital Link Business Orientation, business representatives received an overview of the Little Rock CPMSA goals and objectives. The businesses along with the participating teachers were asked to provide more experiences in the work place that would allow students to see and understand the relationship between school and the work place. Of the nearly 400 students who went through the program. 1998-1999 Annual Report 15 J 42% indicated an interest in mathematics and 48% indicated an interest in science. Students participating in Vital Link recorded their experiences daily in a journal. Outputs and Outcomes of the System via SI Influence The following chart presents an itemized summary of the stated goals for the LR CPMSA project as of the 1998-1999 school year. Additionally, imder the heading entitled, Key Performance Indicators, is information indicating the extent to which each of the goals has been achieved. Three codes are used in the colunm entitled. Status: TARGET MET (target has been fully met)\nON TARGET (work is progressing as scheduled towards target)\nand NOT YET (indicating that work is not progressing as district expects and is thus identified for review by the CPMSA project staff). Note: August, 1999 - The LRSD board of directors adopted a comprehensive assessment program (for students in grades 3-11) that would allow student growth to he measured from the beginning of the year to the end of the year through CRTs aligned with the curriculum standards. Utemized Summary of Project Goal/Outcomes Key Performance Indicators Baseline 1997-1998 to 1998-1999 Status 1. To enact policies and practices that will result in an increase by 2% the composite scores of underrepresented minority students in grades 2-11 on the Stanford Achievement Test\nI a. SA T-9 complete battery for all students Decrease in the percent of 5 grade students scoring above the 50' percentile from 40% during the 1997- 1998 school year to 37% during the 1998-1999 school year\nNOT YET Decrease in the percent of 7'* grade students scoring above the 50' percentile from 40% during the 1997- 1998 school year to 37% during the 1998-1999 school year\nI Increase in the percent of 10'* grade students scoring above the 50\"' percentile from 37% during the 1997- 1998 school year to 39% during the 1998-1999 school year\nNOT YET ON TARGET I I I j b. SA 1-9 complete battery for underrepresented minority students Decrease in the percent of S* grade students scoring above the 50'' percentile from 25% during the 1997- 1998 school year to 23% during the 1998-1999 school year\nNOT YET I I 1 I I I I 1998-1999 Annual Report 16 I I I k ilc. Project Goal/Outcomes Key Performance Indicators Baseiine 1997-1998 to 1998-1999 Decrease in the percent of 7* grade students scoring above the 50* percentile from 26% during the 1997- 1998 school year to 24% during the 1998-1999 school year\nDecrease in the percent of 10* grade students scoring above the 50* percentile from 25% during the 1997- 1998 school year to 23% during the 1998-1999 school year Status NOT YET NOT YET SAT-9 mathematics sub-test for all students grades 5, 7, 10 Decrease in the percent of 5* grade students scoring above the 50th percentile on the SAT-9 (mathematics) from 33% to 31% during the 1998-1999 school year\nNOT YET No change in the percent of 7* grade students scoring above the 50* percentile on the SAT-9 (mathematics) - 35% (1997-1998 and 1998-1999) NOT YET Decrease in the percent of 10* grade students scoring above the 50th percentile on the SAT-9 (mathematics) from 42% during the 1997-1998 school year to 41% during the 1998-1999 school year\nNOT YET d. SAT-9 mathematics sub-test for underrepresented minority students Decrease in the percent of 5* grade students scoring above the 50* percentile from 20% during the 1997- 1998 school year to 24% during the 1998-1999 school year\nNOT YET Increase in the percent of 7* grade students scoring above the 50* percentile from 18% during the 1997- 1998 school year to 21% during the 1998-1999 school year\nON TARGET Decrease in the percent of 10* grade students scoring above the 50* percentile from 30% during the 1997- 1998 school year to 27% during the 1998-1999 school year NOT YET e. SA T-9 science sub-test for all students grades 5, 7, 10 Decrease in the percent of 5* grade students scoring above the 50* percentile from 38% during the 1997- 1998 school year to 33% during the 1998-1999 school year\nNOT YET / SA T-9 science sub-test for underrepresented minority students 1998-1999 Annual Report Decrease in the number of 7* grade students scoring above the 50* percentile from 40% during the 1997- 1998 school year to 39% during the 1998-1999 school year\nDecrease in the percent of 10* grade students scoring above the 50th percentile from 42% dining the 1997- 1998 school year to 40% during the 1998-1999 school year\nDecrease in the percent of 5* grade students scoring above the 50* percentile from 22% during the 1997- 1998 school year to 19% during the 1998-1999 school year\n17 NOT YET NOT YET NOT YET JProject Goal/Outcomes Key Performance Indicators Baseline 1997-1998 to 1998-1999 Status 1998-1999 Annual Report Decrease in the percent of 7* grade students scoring above the 50\"' percentile from 27% during the 1997- 1998 school year to 26% during the 1998-1999 school year\nDecrease in the percent of lO\"' grade students scoring above the 50'*' percentile from 29% during the 1997- 1998 school year to 25% during the 1998-1999 school year State Benchmark Exam Decrease in the number of 4* grade students scoring at the Proficient and Advanced Proficient levels on the mathematics exam from 26.3% during the 1997-1998 school year to 22.1/% during the 1998-1999 school year. A decrease of 4.2%\nGrade 8 EXPLORE EXPLORE is acts 8^ grade program that assesses students academic progress and helps students begin to explore and plan for the wide range of educational and career options open to them. Increase in the local mean score on the EXPLORE (mathematics) for S* grade students from 11.9 during the 1997-1998 school year to 14.6 during the 1998-1999 school year - 23% increase. The mean score for African American students increased from 11.7 during the 1997-1998 school year to 13 during the 1998-1999 school year on the EXPLORE (mathematics) - 11% increase. Increase in the local mean score on the science portion of the EXPLORE for all 8\" grade students from 11.3 during the 1997-1998 school year to 13.7 during the 1998-1999 school year - 21% increase. Increase in the local mean score for African American students on the science portion of the EXPLORE increased from 11.2 during the 1997-1998 school year to 12.1 during the 1998-1999 school year - 8% increase. PLAN PLAN is acts 1 (f'' grade program that provides a midpoint review of students progress toward their educational and career goals. Increase in the local mean score for 10*^ grade students on the math portion of the PLAN from 14.9 during the 1997-1998 school year to 15.6 during the 1998-1999 school year - 5% increase. A slight decrease in the mean score for African American students on the math portion of the PLAN from 13.8 during thel997-1998 school year to 13.7 18 NOT YET NOT YET NOT YET ON TARGET ON TARGET ON TARGET ON TARGET ON TARGET ON TARGET I I I I I I I' 1 J2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Project To implement policies and practices that will enroll all district 8^ and/or 9\"' graders in Algebra I by 2003\nTo increase the algebra success rates for all students by 2%\nTo increase the number of students who eruoll in geometry and trigonometry by 2%\nTo increase the student success rates in geometry and trigonometry by 2%\nTo increase the student success rates in biology by 2%\nTo increase the student success rates in chemistry from 62% in Year 1 to 75% in year V of the agreement\nTo increase the enrollment in physics from 17% to 30% by year V\n1998-1999 Annual Report Key Performance Indicators Baseline 1997-1998 to 1998-1999 during the 1998-1999 school year - ,7% decrease. Increase in the local mean score for 10'*' grade students on the science reasoning portion of the PLAN from 16.2 during the 1997-1998 school year to 16.7 during the 1998-1999 school year - 3% increase. An increase in the mean score for African American students on the science reasoning portion of the PLAN from 15.4 during the 1997-1998 school year to 15.5 during the 1998-1999 school year - .7% increase. LRSD Quality Indicator - 90% of a middle school's student will be enrolled in Algebra I by grade 8 - practice implemented during the 1998-1999 school year. Increase in the number of students who were successful in Algebra I from 57% during the 1997-1998 school year to 59% during the 1998-1999 school year. Increase in the number of students who enrolled in trigonometry from 497 during the 1997-1998 school year to 548 during the 1998-1999 school year resulting in a 10% increase\nA decrease in the number of students who enrolled in geometry from 1843 during the 1997-1998 school year to 1442 during the 1998-1999 school year- 22% decrease. An increase in the number of students who successfully completed geometry from 44% during the 1997-1998 school year to 57% during the 1998-1999 school year - 13% increase A decrease in the number of students successfully completing trigonometry from 80% during the 1997- 1998 school year to 75% during the 1998-1999 school year - 4% decrease An increase in the number of students who successfully completed biology from 56% during the 1997-1998 school year to 60% during the 1998-1999 school year - 4% increase. An increase in the number of students successfully completing chemistry from 66% during the 1997-1998 school year to 76% during the 1998-1999 school year. Increase in the number of students enrolling in physics from 136 during the 1997-1998 school year to 151 19 Status ON TARGET ON TARGET ON TARGET TARGET MET TARGET MET NOT YET TARGET MET NOT YET ON TARGET ON TARGET ON TARGET JProject Goal/Outcomes Key Performance Indicators Baseline 1997-1998 to 1998-1999 Status during the 1998-1999 school year - A 11% increase. 9. The CPMSA school district shall implement an articulated, standards- based curriculum, instructional, and assessment program that has been field tested by NSF or recommended by entities such as professional science educational organizations, and/or jurisdictions like the state where the CPMSA school district is located. The CPMSA school district shall also design and implement standards-based professional development for teachers, staff development for counselors and administrators, and student enrichment activities that support this articulated, standards-based program. Professional development began for implementation of standards-based mathematics and science program for all teachers at identified grade levels\nProfessional development also provided for principals and counselors during the 1998-1999 school year ON TARGET Summary Nearly 700 professional development hours were designated to prepare teachers to implement high- quality standards-based mathematics and science curricula. The LR CPMSA is moving in the right directions towards achieving its outcomes and goals. In August 1999, the Little Rock Board of Directors adopted a comprehensive assessment program for students in grades 3-11. This program will allow student growth to be measured from beginning of the year to the end of the year through criterion-referenced tests that are tightly aligned with curriculum standards. Results of these assessments will provide a catalyst for determining professional development and student academic enrichment needs in mathematics and science. Services provided by institutions of higher learning and other partners, for teachers and/or students. will also be driven by student achievement data. Modifications will be made in the following areas to further address student achievement in mathematics and science: 1 1998-1999 Annual Report 20 I I I, !Science curriculum A need exists to accelerate the science curriculum along with mathematics to ensure that all students receive high-quality standards-based instruction. The project staff is working closely with the superintendent to modify this program. High School Plan Standards and benchmarks aligned with national standards were developed for K-12 mathematics and science. Vertical teams will continue to be utilized to ensure a smooth transition in mathematics and science for all students through grade 12. The project staff will review high school models (for mathematics and science) that will provide a comprehensive high-quality education. Partners The primary partners, University of Arkansas at Little Rock, Philander Smith College, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, and the Museum of Discovery, continue to provide professional development for teachers and enrichment programs for students that are aligned with the goals of the LR CPMSA. These programs include the Summer Science Institute, Summer Mathematics Advanced Readiness Training, Summer Algebra Readiness Program, and the After-School Science Clubs. These programs, which provide important support, will be scaled up to reach more students and teachers. 1998-1999 Annual Report 21 I' NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION 4201 WILSON BOULEVARD ARLINGTON, VIRGINIA 22230 May 20,1999 Dr. Leslie Carnine Superintendent Little Rock School District 810 West Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Dr. Carnine: On behalf of the National Science Foundations (NSF), Division of Educational System Reform, 1 wish to express our gratefulness to the Little Rock School D/sfricf personnel, including teachers, principals, and students for their effective participation and warm hospitality during the site visit held on April 27-29 1999 _ The purpose of this site visit was to assess the progress made by the Little Rock Comprehensive Partnerships for Mathematics and Science Achievement Program (LRCPMSA) to date. One of the key findings of the site visit was the notable progress made by the Little Rock School District in some of the areas relative to K-12 systemic reform in mathematics and science education. Piloting and implementing standards- based curriculum programs is, unequivocally, a Year 1 accomplishment w ic will lead the Initiative to further progress in this critical area. Likewise the establishment of new policies and measures, particularly programmatic is definitely an aspect of the District that favors the achievement of the Initiative s vision. While working with educational systems in the transformation and renewal of K- 12 mathematics and science education using systemic reform as a strategy, it this multifactorial enterprise, standards-based becomes apparent that among this multifactorial enterprise, curriculum implementation, professional development, an p measured bv reliable standards-based assessment systems are the three most S and cVrSequential elements. Therefore, the LRCPMSA is encouraged to ensure the quality of these essential variables, their alignment correspondence through effective, research-baset^ strategies^h patolar, the LRCPMSA is urged to revisit its profess,ona development com^ne make it consistent with the Initiatives purpose and concern to NSF-in order to make it consisteni wnn me - scope of work. Professional development is, consequent y. to be prioritized in the immediate future. fDr. Lelslie Camine 2. The major concern raised, as a direct result of this visit was the lack of substantive evidence to support the value added of the CPMSA Program in Little Rock to the Districts reform agenda in science and mathematics. The absence of an action plan to guide the work in Year 1 and the fact that approximately 62% of NSF funds are still unused are some of the factors contributing to this situation. There are fundamental areas that the LRCPMSA needs to focus in the immediate future. These areas include: (1) Convergence of the usage of all resources that are designed for or that reasonably could be used to support science and mathematics education fiscal, intellectual, material, curricular, and extra-curricular- into a focused and unitary program to constantly upgrade, renew, and improve the educational program in mathematics and science for all students. (2) Broad-based support from parents, policymakers, institutions of higher education, business and industry, foundations, and other segments of the community for the goals and collective values of the program, based on rich presentations of the ideas behind the program. (3) Accumulation of a broad and deep array of evidence that the program is enhancing all students achievement, through a set of indices (e.g., achievement test scores, higher level courses passed, advanced placement tests taken, college admission rates, college majors, portfolio assessment, research experiences, ratings from summer employers). (4) Improvement in the achievement of all students, including those historically underserved. The LRCPMSA is requested to attend a reverse site visit at NSF in July 1999. The purpose of this visit is to assess the progress made by the initiative in its first year of implementation and the specific plans for the immediate future, particularly Year 2. Furthermore, assessment of the impact and value added of the CPMSA Program to the Districts science and mathematics education agenda will be the primary focus of the reverse site visit. The evaluation of the progress made by the CPMSA in Little Rock conveyed during this reverse site visit, including a detailed analysis of the 1997 and 1998 mathematics and science student performance data by grade level, will be used by NSF to determine the level of funding for the LRCPMSAs second year of funding. It is important to underscore that per the extant cooperative agreement,Dr. Leslie Carnine 3. the level of continued NSF support will depend upon an annual review of achievement, the level of support from other sources, and the availability of funds. Likewise, the LRCPMSA is reminded that based on this annual progress report, the Foundation will determine whether full support to the CPMSA will continue or if funding to phase-out this effort will occur. The following set of dates are suggested for this purpose: July 9,16, or 23, 1999. The LRCPMSA is expected to select one of these dates or suggest a different option to NSF. The Initiatives key leadership should attend the reverse site visit, including the Principal Investigator, the co-Principal Investigators, and the Project Director. Attached is a copy of the site visit report. It includes major findings, concerns, and recommendations. Please share it with the LRCPMSAs staff and Districts representatives. Please call me at (703) 306-1685, extension 5836, should you have questions or comments regarding the content of this report. May I wish you success in achieving high standards of excellence in science and mathematics education for all students in the Little Rock Independent School District. Sincerely, I JuHo E. Ldpez-Ferrao Program Director Division of Educational System Reform cc: Luther S. Williams Dennis Glasgow Vanessa Cleaver National Science Foundation Directorate for Education and Human Resources Division of Educational System Reform Urban Systemic Program Little Rock Comprehensive Partnerships for Mathematics and Science Achievement (LRCPMSA) Program Site Visit Report April 27-29,1999 Introduction The Comprehensive Partnerships for Mathematics and Science Achievement (CPMSA) Program The Comprehensive Partnerships for Mathematics and Science Achievement (CPMSA) Program strives to improve the quality and quantity of science and mathematics education delivered by entire school districts or systems. Recognizing that currently only a small percentage of precollege students ultimately pursue undergraduate studies in science and mathematics fields, the National Science Foundation (NSF) has encouraged the development of activities that focus on students who have not previously shown much interest in science, but who might become involved and successful if properly motivated to do so. Thus, the primary goal of the CPMSA Program is to develop systemic approaches to increase the number of students enrolling in and successfully completing precollege courses which will prepare them to pursue undergraduate programs in the sciences, engineering, and mathematics. Building on NSFs strategy of forging alliances and partnerships for systemic reform, eligible city school systems were required to link to institutions of higher education, business and industry, professional organizations, community-based organizations, and other educational organizations to facilitate the attainment of the following objectives:  Develop or revise courses and other enrichment activities in the elementary and secondary schools with a substantial number of students enrolled to improve the quality of precollege science and mathematics education.  Develop and strengthen the capacity to deliver standards-based quality instruction in school science and mathematics education for students that will result in a significant increase in the number of them becoming high school graduates who are academically prepared to enter college and major in the sciences, mathematics, or engineering. Develop and sustain district-wide policies that will significantly increase student enrollments and successful completion of gatekeeping courses, such as algebra in the eighth and ninth grades.  Substantially decrease or eliminate academic tracking, improve academic counseling, and facilitate the successful transitions of students from elementary to middle school, from middle school to high school, and from high school into undergraduate programs in science, mathematics, engineering, and technology.  Stimulate efforts among secondary schools and colleges and universities, as well as relevant informal science organizations (e.g., museums, aquaria, etc.) in the region to develop summer enrichment activities.  Stimulate efforts among professional organizations, business and industry to become involved in mentorship programs for precollege students to motivate them to succeed in challenging science and mathematics courses\nand coordinate the partners involved in the various NSF-supported programs, as well as precollege programs supported by other Federal agencies and private sector organizations, to avoid duplication, and to share resources to maximize the available funding.  Develop outreach programs to involve parents and guardians of students, especially those students who are not currently high achievers in the system.  Function in a complementary and collaborative way with other related NSF-funded educational activities within the region, such as the Statewide Systemic Initiatives (SSI) and the Alliances for Minority Participation (AMP). Effective FY 1999, the CPMSA Program, along with the Urban Systemic Initiative (USI) Program, were merged into the new Urban Systemic Programa K-12- based program through which NSF seeks to stimulate interest, increase participation, improve achievement, and accelerate career advancement and success of all students of the participating school districts. The Little Rock School District The Little Rock School District serves a total of 24,886 students for the 1998-99 school year. The District operates 50 school buildings, including 35 elementary schools, 8 junior-high schools, 5 senior-high schools, one vocational-technical- high school, and one alternative school. Since 1982, a federal court order and the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals have guided Districts efforts for the 2desegregation of schools. School assignment is based on attendance zones, and predominantly minority neighborhoods are served by schools with high minority student enrollment. Minority students comprise 71% of the total student body: 67% African American\n29% White\nand 4% Hispanic, Asian, and other minorities. There are 2,191 teachers of whom 919 teach science and mathematics: 735 science and mathematics elementary teachers, 94 secondary science teachers, and 90 secondary mathematics teachers. The CPMSA Program in Little Rock keystaff includes a Director of Mathematics and Science, a Project Director, a Science Specialist, a Mathematics Specialist, and two Science and Mathematics Specialists. The Little Rock Comprehensive Partnerships for Mathematics and Science Achievement (LRCPMSA) Program The Little Rock Comprehensive Partnerships for Mathematics and Science Achievement (LRCPMSA) Program is a collaborative effort for systemic reform of public education aimed at impacting all students. Its overall mission is to develop educational systemic change approaches to produce significant increases in the number of students who are prepared to pursue undergraduate study in science, mathematics, engineering, and technology. The LRCPMSA goals include: (i) Prepare 100% of graduates to successfully complete Algebra\n(ii) Increase the number of students who successfully complete upper-level mathematics and science courses\n(iii) Adopt a Board policy to require that students in Advanced Placement (AP) courses take the AP examination\n(iv) Revise the mathematics curriculum to limit the number of topics for each grade level and subject and to increase the depth at which each topic is taught\n(v) Implement standards-based pedagogy in all classrooms\n(vi) Provide support programs for students in upper level mathematics and science courses\n(vi) Increase the knowledge and involvement of parents in the mathematics and science programs\nand (vii) Provide targeted staff development to assist staff in facilitating the above stated objectives. To accomplish these goals, the Little Rock School District plans to build a partnership effort among leading institutions in the central Arkansas area, including higher education institutions (e.g., the University of Arkansas at Little Rock, Philander Smith College, and the University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences: the Arkansas Museum of Science and History\nmunicipal agencies, such as the City of Little Rock and the Little Rock Housing Authority\nthe Central Arkansas Library System\nand the Little Rock Alliance for Our Public Schools. LRCPMSAs monitoring and oversight will be done by the Governing Board\nthe Districts Mathematics and Science Director, the Project Director, and the Science and Mathematics Specialists. 3The NSFs Site Visit Julio E. Lopez-Ferrao, cognizant NSF Program Director, visited the LRCPMSA, on April 27-29,1999. The purpose of the visit was to assess the progress made by the CPMSA Program in Little Rock to date. The visit consisted of an introductory meeting on April 27 with the Superintendent, Assistant Superintendent for Curriculum and Instruction, the Director of Mathematics and Science, the Project Director, the Mathematics and Science Specialists, teachers and other Districts representatives in which an overview of the District and the Initiative was provided. A meeting on April 28 with key project-related personnel who are contributing to the achievement of the CPMSA goals and objectives followed this activity. Information on curriculum, professional development, assessment, policies, tracking, partnerships, student support programs, and finance was provided. School visits were made on April 28 and 29 to Romaine Elementary School, Forest Heights Junior High School, and Central High School. Findings, Concerns, and Recommendations Curriculum: The Little Rock School District currently requires three units of science and three units in mathematics for graduation. It has developed K-12 standards and benchmarks for science and mathematics correlated with the state frameworks, the state assessment system {Stanford Achievement Test, 9 Edition or SAT 9), local assessments, and textbooks and instructional materials. A new K-12 curriculum scope and sequence for science encompasses the use of Science and Technology for Children (STC) from first through seventh grade\nScience Education for Public Understanding (SEPUP) at the eighth grade\nActive Physics for the ninth grade\nBiologyA Community Context for the 10 grade\nand ChemCom for the 11* grade, followed by one year for an elective course. The mathematics sequence includes Investigations in Number, Data, and Space from Kindergarten through fifth grade\nthe Connected Mathematics Project for sixth through eighth grade\nMath Connections for ninth and tenth grades, and two years of elective courses. The District has initiated the implementation of mathematics and science standards-based curriculum at different levels by piloting various instructional materials with approximately 3.3% of its mathematics and science teachers to date. This activity is viewed as an advance in this area, since it is evident that the Little Rock School District has decided what to be taught and how to teach it by establishing the new standards and benchmarks. Furthermore, it has begun to assist teachers in the appropriate use of effective mathernatics and science curricula. Nevertheless, it needs to be underscored that while the new curriculum sequence for mathematics is being piloted/implemented through the 4use of full and complete instructional programs with a larger number of teachers and classrooms, the science approach to the implementation of standards-based curricula has been through the use of a limited number of kits, units or modules in a reduced number of schools, which appears to be a slower pace approach. In addition, the official K-12 curriculum sequence pursued by the District is still unclear, since the information provided during the site visit does not identify the entire curriculum continuum being currently considered and promoted (e.g.. How do AP and Pre-AP courses fit into the promoted curriculum K-12 sequences for both science and mathematics?). The CPMSA leadership is encouraged to clarify urgently this important component of its science and mathematics reform agenda. Overall, the District appears to have made some progress in the implementation of standards-based curriculum. However, a major concern and an unacceptable condition to NSF remains regarding the pace of the K-12 science standards- based implementation process and results and the lack of a scale-up strategy to be used in order to ensure the participation of a significant number of schools by the end of the five-year implementation process. Likewise, the role of the four existing science and mathematics specialists in this process seems to be ambiguous. Thus, it is recommended that the LRCPMSA consider the use of additional human resources (e.g., lead teachers by regions) districtwide in the immediate future to address this critical aspect of systemic reform as well as the development and implementation of a comprehensive scale-up plan. Professional Development: It is apparent that the Little Rock School District has made efforts to implement standards-based science and mathematics curricula through professional development activities. Similarly, it seems that the CPMSA Program has provided professional development experiences for first year mathematics and science teachers, vertical teams, counselors, and school principals. New and first-year secondary mathematics and science teachers participated in a series of four workshops related to implementation of the mathematics and science curriculum, classroom management, learning styles, use of manipulative materials, cooperative learning, and the use of technology. Inservice programs have begun for all 4*', 5*, and 6' grade mathematics and science teachers for the fall 1999 implementation of new standards-based programs. Analysis of the information provided on mathematics and science inservice programs through August, 1999 indicates that the average duration of the experiences offered to teachers is 2.2 days and that they are essentially focused at assisting teachers with the implementation of new programs, such as STC, Investigations, and Active Physics. Nonetheless, these efforts seem to be fragmented and insufficient that will not lead the Initiative to the districtwide effective implementation of K-12 high-quality curricula as explicitly stated by one of the Initiatives goals. Therefore, the LRCPMSA is encouraged to design a research-based K-12 mathematics and science professional development master 5program for its 919 science and mathematics teachers to be implemented throughout the duration of the project. This program should be aimed at helping the Districts teachers to use high-quality, standards-based curricula at every grade level. Student Performance Assessment: Analysis of the information on student performance assessment (comparison between second semester 1997-1998 and first semester 1998-1999) provided during the site visit reflects an increase in the percent of students graded C or above in courses such as Algebra 1 (+5 /o). Algebra 11 (+6%), Geometry (+3%), Chemistry (+12%), Statistics (+14%), PreCalculus (+7%), AP Calculus (+4%), AP Physics (+1%), and AP Chemistry (+10%). Decreases are shown in Physics (-1%). Biology (-2%), Trigonometry (-1%), and AP Environmental Science (-10%). The Little Rock School District administers the SAT 9 since it is a state mandated test. However, data on this test's results were not provided during the visit. It is recommended that the CPMSA Program in Little Rock design a strategy to gather, interpret, and use student achievement data in order to effectively inform its programmatic decisions in the immediate future. Policies: The Little Rock School District has established a significant number of policies and measures that influence and support K-12 science and mathematics education. Some of these policies include the following\n Establishment of K-12 academic content standards and benchmarks in mathematics and science.  Promotion of mathematics and science standards-based curricula.  Increase in graduation requirements in 1998 (three units of science and three units of science are required currently). A recommended common core and career focus. Class of 2003, includes four units o science and four units of mathematics.  Use of three additional days for professional development through a state waiver.  Elimination of low-level courses effective FY 1999.  Various measures and regulations related to AP courses. The Little Rock School District has, unequivocally, a comprehensive set of policies in place that will benefit and advance the CPMSA Programs expectations in the future. 6Elimination of Tracking: It appears that the Little Rock School District has made particular efforts to meet the individual needs of the student population. The elimination of all lower-level courses constitutes evidence in support of the eradication of academic tracking, which is one of the CPMSAs objectives. Similarly, the inclusion of advanced courses and the various curriculum measures will probably contribute to the successful transition of students from one level to another. Summer Enrichment Activities: The LRCPMSA plans to provide summer enrichment activities for students and teachers through the Southeastern Consortium for Minorities in Engineering (SECME), Joint Recruiting and Teaching for Effecting Aspiring Minorities in Science (J-R TEAMS), and VITAL LINK. SECME is a program offered through a consortium of southeastern universities that motivates minorities to excel in mathematics and science through a club format that includes local and national competitions. JR-TEAMS is a two-week multidisciplinary pre-college science and engineering program that will be offered through a partnership with the University of Arkansas at Little Rock aimed at increasing the number of minority students pursuing degrees in science and engineering. VITAL LINK is a summer work site experience that acquaints students with job requirements and responsibilities in a variety of careers. Furthermore, the Extended Year Algebra I Programa two-week summer institute to serve rising 9^* graders who need additional assistance to be successful in Algebra Iwill be implemented as well. Although the CPMSA Program in Little Rock has clear plans to provide student support through summer experiences, it needs to ensure that each of the programs to be implemented represent an extended learning experience for the students that enhances their classroom learning. A thorough evaluation of the outcomes of the upcoming summer programs is highly recommended. Mentorship Programs for Precollege Students: The University of Arkansas at Little Rock will offer Saturday research for students from 7\"11*** grades who will receive assistance in selecting appropriate research topics, setting up a research design, and carrying on the research. Likewise, the Philander Smith College will offer the Summer Algebra Readiness Institute for 9^-grade students who will enroll in Algebra I during the 1999-2000 school year. The program will target students from Central High School located in the surroundings of Philander Smith College. This innovative program will include a follow-up component through which college students will mentor participating students eight times during the school year. The LRCPMSA is encouraged to increase the number of mentorship programs in partnership with local and state organizations and higher education institutions. Parents and Community: The LRCPMSAs parent and community component includes the use of Family Science and Family Math as the main program. Five 7principals identified two teachers per school to participate in a training program designed to guide the implementation of Family Math and Family Science nights. Each school received small grants to hold three night events. Besides, the LRCPMSA plans to inform parents about standards-based mathematics and science via parent-teachers associations meetings, publications, and media coverage. Presentation have been made before the Volunteers in Public Schools Board and the Little Rock Parent and Teacher Association Council to provide information about the Initiative and changes that will take place. Although still in its first year of implementation, the Initiatives activities related to community outreach and parent involvement seem to be exceedingly restricted. The CPMSA Program in Little Rock is urged to design and implement an aggressive community involvement plan to ensure the effective participation of parents, industry, business, and the private sector in general. Building community support, as clearly expressed by the 1998-99 Work Plan forLRSD Priorities is, indeed, an area to which the LRCPMSA can make a significant contribution. As part of the recommended plan, the LRCPMSA is suggested the production of a brochure aimed at communicating to the public is objectives and main accomplishments. Collaboration with Other Related NSF-funded Educational Activities: It is evident that the Arkansas Statewide Systemic Initiative (AR SSI) has influenced the trajectory of the Little Rock School District, particularly in programmatic areas, such as standards-based curriculum implementation and professional development. Currently, the University of Arkansas at Little Rock is engaged in several partnerships with the District, including SECME, and the implementation of the AR SSI K-4, Math and Science Crusades. Likewise, the Museum of Discovery will implement a system of science clubs to be located at various community centers and after-school programs in Little Rock. Additional Findings Related to the Objective of the Site Visit Cooperative Agreement The analysis of Cooperative Agreement No. HRD-9801615 between NSF and the Little Rock School District (September 1,1998 through August 31,2003) revealed the following major issues and concerns:  Deliverables: The LRCPMSA showed no significant data or evidenced a process in place to collect the data needed to document each one of the agreed upon deliverables specified under Section 111 A 7, CPMSA Participant and Systemic Change Goals, pages 4-5 of the cooperative agreement. The Initiative does not seem to have a mechanism to gather the information needed and make it available to teachers, principals at. Furthermore, there does not seem to be a strategy by which the CPMSA leadership become aware of the current 8programmatic problems and situations that may be impeding the achievement of the aforementioned targets. Increasing K-12 science and mathematics student achievement and enrollment, as stated in the cooperative agreement, demands specific programmatic actions as well as a specific data collection system in placenone of which were evident during the site visit.  Governing Board: Section III A9, page 9, reads as follows: The CPMSA shall have a governing board as specified in the proposal. The board shall have sanctioned authority and responsibility for oversight of the programmatic components of the CPMSA. The governing board is expected to oversee the development of the goals, the implementation of the activities and the assessment of the outcomes. The board, in concert with the Principal Investigator, shall recommend to the school district the achievement of project goals and objectives. No evidence was presented during the site visit of the governing boards membership or its intervention in the Initiatives operation. Thus, the role of the aforementioned governing board is unclear at this moment.  Funding and Funding Schedule: Section III B, FUNDING AND FUNDING SCHEDULE, page 6 of the cooperative agreement, reads as follows: 1. It is the intent of the Foundation to provide up to $3,228,022 to support the CPMSA over the next 5 years. Funds in the amount of $960, 578 are hereby provided to support the CPMSA for the period September 1, 1999 to August 31, 2000, in accordance with the revised budget dated April 9, 1998. 2. The level of continued NSF support will be negotiated with the Awardee annually and will depend upon an annual review of achievement, the level of support from other sources, and the availability of funds. 3. The Foundation will evaluate annually the CPMSA to determine whether the Foundation will continue to support full activities, or will provide decreased funding to phase out Foundation support of the CPMSA. There was a misinterpretation about NSFs approved budgets for Years 1 and 2. In order to ensure an adequate understanding and the appropriate 9use of NSFs funds, the following amounts reflected in two separate (signed) budgets, were identified as those officially approved: Year 1 Year 2 $198,533 $752,045 The CPMSAs leadership was encouraged to submit a certified financial report of Year 1 expenditures and obligations. Similarly, the leadership was suggested to rebudget Year 1 in order to address some of the major needs identified during the site visit. Year 2 funds will be negotiated after the completion of Year 1. For this purpose, the LRCPMSA leadership will make a presentation of the Initiatives major accomplishments in Year 1 during a reverse site visit to be held by July 31,1999 at the Foundations headquarters.  Evaluation: Section III A, item 12, page 6 of the cooperative agreement reads as follows: The Awardee shall use the evaluation component found in the proposal ora modified version approved by NSF. There was no evidence of an evaluation plan being used by the LRCPMSA during the site visit. Thus, the Initiative is not in compliance with this inherent component of the agreed statement of work. It is urged to revisit its evaluation strategy and develop a comprehensive evaluation plan that: (i) specifies the strategies to gather, interpret, and use relevant data, (ii) addresses each of the Initiatives components, and (iii) informs the CPMSA leadership in its decision-making process and allows it to readjust plans. Summary One of the key findings of the April 27-29,1999 site visit was the notable progress made by the Little Rock School District in some of the areas relative to K-12 systemic reform in mathematics and science education. Piloting and implementing standards-based curriculum programs is, unequivocally, a Year 1 accomplishment, which will lead the Initiative to further progress in this critica area. Likewise, the establishment of new policies and measures, particular y programmatic policies, is definitely an aspect of the District that favors the achievement of the Initiatives vision. While working with educational systems in the transformation and renewal of K- itiiiiv vir\\iiiy vvivii uvwuwi i-\u0026gt; x x *. 12 mathematics and science education using systemic reform as a strategy, it becomes apparent that among this multifactorial enterprise, standards-based curriculum implementation, professional development, and student performance 10 measured by reliable, standards-based assessment systems are the three most critical and consequential elements. Therefore, the LRCPMSA is encouraged to ensure the quality of these essential variables and their alignment and correspondence through effective, research-based strategies. In particular, the LRCPMSA is urged to revisit its professional development componenta concern to NSFin order to make it consistent with the Initiatives purpose and scope of work. Professional development is, consequently, a domain that needs to be prioritized in the immediate future. The major concern raised, as a direct result of this visit was the lack of substantive evidence to support the value added of the CPMSA Program in Little Rock to the Districts reform agenda in science and mathematics. The absence of an action plan to guide the work in Year 1 and the fact that approximately 62 /o of NSF funds are still unused are some of the factors contributing to this situation. There are fundamental areas of concern that the LRCPMSA needs to address in the immediate future. These areas include: (1) Convergence of the usage of all resources that are designed for or that reasonably could be used to support science and mathematics education fiscal, intellectual, material, curricular, and extra-curricular into a focused and unitary program to constantly upgrade, renew, and improve the educational program in mathematics and science for all students. (2) Broad-based support from parents, policymakers, institutions of higher education, business and industry, foundations, and other segments of the community for the goals and collective values of the program, based on rich presentations of the ideas behind the program. (3) Accumulation of a broad and deep array of evidence that the program is enhancing all students achievement, through a set of indices (e.g., achievement test scores, higher level courses passed, advanced placement tests taken, college admission rates, college majors, portfolio assessment, research experiences, ratings from summer employers). (4) Improvement in the achievement of all students, including those historically underserved. Reverse Site Visit The LRCPMSA is requested to attend a reverse site visit at NSF in July 1999. The purpose of this visit is to assess the progress made by the Initiative in its first year of implementation and the specific plans for the immediate future, particularly Year 2. Furthermore, assessment of the impact and value added of 11 the CPMSA Program to the Districts science and mathematics education agenda will be the primary focus of the reverse site visit. The evaluation of the progress made by the CPMSA in Little Rock conveyed during this reverse site visit, including a detailed analysis by grade level of the 1997 and 1998 mathematics and science student performance data, will be used by NSF to determine the level of funding for the LRCPMSA second year of funding. It is important to underscore that per the extant cooperative agreement, the level of continued NSF support will depend upon an annual review of achievement, the level of support from other sources, and the availability of funds. Likewise, the LRCPMSA is reminded that based on this annual progress report, the Foundation will determine whether full support to the CPMSA will continue or if funding to phase-out this effort will occur. The following set of dates are suggested for this purpose\nJuly 9,16, or 23, 1999. The LRCPMSA is expected to select one of these or suggest a different option to NSF. The Initiatives key leadership should attend the reverse site visit, including the Principal Investigator, the co-Principal Investigators, and the Project Director. 12Reverse Site Visit NSF Friday, July 16,1999 Presentation \u0026gt; Value added by CPMSA \u0026gt; Year One Accomplishments \u0026gt; Data \u0026gt; Year Two Plan \u0026gt; Question and Answer SessionVALUE ADDED BY CPMSA Plan and Process Alignment for improved Student Achievement Little Rock School District Process Data Analysis Campus Plan Process Interventions Professional Development Standards Assessment Accountability Parent Involvement SP X X X X X X RDEP X X X X X X Title I X X X X X X X X ACSIP X X X X X X X X ACTAAP X X X X X X UPDI X X X X X NSF X X X X X X CLP X X X X X X X X SP RDEP Title I ACSIP ACTAAP UPDI NSF CLP strategic Plan Revised Desergregation and Education Plan Title I Arkansas Comprehensive School Improvement Planning Arkansas Comprehensive Testing, Assessment, and Accountability Program Urban Professional Development Initiative National Science Foundation Campus Leadership PlanRelationship of CPMSA Goals and LRSD Quality Indicators _____________________ CPMSA Goals_________________________ (a) LRSD agrees to enact policies and practices that will result in an increase by 2% after Year I of the agreement the composite scores of underrepresented minority students in grades 2-11 on the SAT9. For each subsequent year of the agreement, the LRSD agrees to enact policies and practices that will result in a 5% increase of the composite scores of underrepresented minority students on the SAT9. Nofe: LRSD will no longer administer the SAT9 at grades 2-1 J. Rather, students in grades 2-11 will take each semester a new District-adopted CRT that is aligned with the currictdum standards and benchmarks. LRSD Quality Indicators 65% of a schools students in every sub-group of race and gender at grades 5, 7, and 10 shall perform at or above the 50* percentile in SAT9 mathematics. The percent of students in every sub-woup of race and gender at grades 5, 7, and 10 performing at or above the 50 percentile in SAT9 mathematics will meet or exceed the trend or improvement goals each year. 100% of a schools students in grades 4, 6, and 8 shall perform at or above the proficient level in mathematics on the Arkansas criterion-referenced test The percent of students performing at or above the proficient level in mathematics on the grades 4, 6, and 8 Arkansas criterion-referenced tests will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. 90% of a schools students shall perform at or above the proficient level in mathematics each semester on the District CRT. The percent of students performing at or above the proficient level in mathematics will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each semester on the District CRT. The percent of students demonstrating gains from the pre-test to the post-test will meet or exceed the improvement goal each year on the District CRT. (b) The LRSD agrees to implement policies and practices that will enroll all district eighth and/or ninth grade students in Algebra I by the Year 2003. 90% of a middle schools students will be enrolled in Algebra I by grade 8. The percent of students enrolled in Algebra I by grade 8 will meet or exceed the trend goal each year._____________________________________________________________________CPMSA Goals________________ (c) The LRSD agrees to increase the algebra success rates for all district students by 2% after Year I of the agreement\n5% after Year II of the agreement\n5% after Year III of the agreement\n5% after Year IV of the agreement\nand 5% after Year V of the agreement. (d) The LRSD agrees to increase the numbers of students who enroll in geometry and trigonometry by 2% in Year 1 of the agreement\n5% in Year II of the agreement\n5% in Year III of the agreement\n5% in Year IV of the agreement, and 5% in Year V of the agreement.___________________________ (e) The LRSD agrees to increase the student success rates in geometry and trigonometry by 2% after Year I of the agreement\n5% after Year II of the agreement\n5% after Year III of the agreement\n5% after Year IV of the agreement\nand 5% in Year V of the agreement. (f) The LRSD agrees to increase the student enrollment rates and student success rates in biology by 2% in Year I of the agreement\n5% in Year II of the agreement\n5% in Year III of the agreement\n5% in Year IV of the agreement\nand 5% in Year V of the agreement.____________________________________ (g) The LRSD agrees to increase the student success rates in biology by 2% after Year I of the agreement\n5% after Year II of the agreement\n5% after Year III of the agreement\n5% after Year IV of the agreement\nand 5% after Year V of the agreement.____________________________________________________ (h) The LRSD agrees to increase the student success rates in chemistry from 62% in Year I of the agreement to 75% in Year V of the agreement.__________ (i) The LRSD agrees to increase the student enrollment in physics from 17% to 30% by Year V of the agreement. LRSD Quality Indicators 100% of a schools secondary students shall perform at or above the proficient level in Algebra I. The percent of secondary students performing at or above the proficient level in Algebra I will meet or exceed the trend goal each year. Note: The success rate will also be determined by grades. Note: Geometry is required of all LRSD students for graduation. 100% of a schools secondary students shall perform at or above the proficient level in Geometry. The percent of secondary students performing at or above the proficient level in Geometry will meet or exceed the trend goal each year. Note: The success rates in Geometry and Trigonometry will also be determined by grades._________________________________________ Note: All LRSD students are required to take Biology Ifor graduation. Note: The success rate in Biology I will be determined by grades Note: The success rate in Chemistry I will be determined by grades. Note: Effective fall 1999, all LRSD students must take Physics I in order to graduate.CPMSA Goals LRSP Quality Indicators (j) The LRSD agrees to increase the numbers of students who graduate with SEM proficiency from 40% to 70% by Year V of the agreement. 65% of middle and high school students will be enrolled in at least one Pre-AP or AP course each year. The percent of students enrolled in at least one Pre-AP or AP course will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. 90% of a high schools students who take the ACT will earn a score of at least 19. The percent of students earning a score of 19 or above will meet or exceed the trend goal each year. 65% of a high schools students will complete the requirements to earn the Honors Seal on their diplomas. Note: Four years of mathematics and science are required. The percent of students completing the requirements for the Honors Seal will meet or exceed the trend goal each year. (k) The CPMSA school district shall implement an articulated, standards- based curriculum, instructional, and assessment program that has been field tested by NSF or recommended by entities such as professional science educational organizations, and/or jurisdictions like the state where the CPMSA school district is located. The CPMSA school district shall also design and implement standards-based professional development for teachers, staff development for counselors and administrators, and student enrichment activities that support this articulated, standards-based program. _________ (I) The LRSD shall implement practices to recruit qualified minority science and mathematics professionals with the goal of increasing minority faculty by 10% by Year V of the agreement. ________________________________ (m) The CPMSA school district shall submit a written program management plan to the cognizant NSF program officer, annually, no later than two months after notification of the award (in year 1) and after notification of continuation of the award in years 2, 3, 4, and 5. ----------------------------------------------------- See Year Two Plan. Success will be determined by numbers of newly certified science and mathematics teachers. See annual Management Plan.CPMSA Goals :h (n) The following quantitative goals for student enrollment and successful completion rates for specific award year are minimal and should be exceeded: \u0026amp;e data report LRSD Qoality Indicators 1998-99 1999-2000 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 10% of the projected increase from the baseline 30% of the projected increase from the baseline 50% of the projected increase from the baseline 70% of the projected increase from the baseline 100% of the projected increase from the baselineLRCPMSA YEAR ONE ACCOMPLISHMENTS 1992^-1999 POLICY #1 - Standards-Based Curriculum, instruction, and Assessment  Developed content standards and benchmarks in mathematics and science for grades K-12  Developed curriculum maps that correlate standards/benchmarks to SAT-9 test, State Mathematics and Science Frameworks, local resources, and assessment strategies  SMART 99 (Summer Mathematics Advanced Readiness Training), an extended year Algebra I program, July 26-August 6, 1999 - Program designed to serve 60 ninth grade students. This program will focus on strengthening skills needed before entering Algebra I by providing opportunities for students to solve real life problems by reasoning, modeling, verbalizing and generalizing patterns and relationships. The graphing calculator will be one of the many tools that students will have access to at all times.  SARP (Summer Algebra Readiness Program), a CERTL activity provided by Philander Smith College, designed to serve 75 ninth grade students beginning July 19, 1999 and concluding August 6, 1999. (Focus of this program is the same as SMART 99).  Summer Science Institute - A CERTL activity provided by UALR, designed to serve 135 fourth and fifth grade students, July 19-30, 1999. The program will focus on hands-on science learning experiences for students that support the newly adopted LRSD Science Curriculum Standards.  Piloted Investigations in two schools:  Romine Elementary School - AH teachers(K-5) in all classrooms implemented  Jefferson Elementary School - All 4** grade teachers in all classrooms implemented  Piloted Science and Technology for Children (STC) in 4 schools\n Chicot Elementary School - All 4 kits in all 5** grade classrooms  Rockefeller Elementary School - 2 kits in all 1* 2\", and 3^^ grade classrooms  Wakefield Elementary School - 2 kits in all 2\", 4* and S* grade classrooms  Franklin Elementary School - 2 kits in all 1-5 grade classrooms  Piloted one module of Connected Mathematics Project (CMP) in all 6 and 7* grade classrooms.  Proposal submitted, pending approval, by UALR for GEAR-UP grant to implement AVID for all 7*^ grade students in 4 middle schoolsDRIVER #2 - Policies and Procedures The Division of Curriculum, Instruction and Assessment (CIA) developed a work plan that identified 52 priorities including the activities of the CPMSA for the 1998-99 school year. One of the major tasks of the work plan was to review and recommend revisions of the Boards Instruction policies. Policies submitted to the Board addressed the following:  Increase in graduation requirements  Requirements for Pre-AP/AP Courses  Recommendation to eliminate low level courses  All students required to take Physics  Quality Index for Schools to improve students achievement  Increase the number of students who are successful in upper level courses  Increase the number of students who are enrolled in upper level courses Plan for 1999-2000  Review and revise grading policy  Review and revise attendance policyDRIVER #3 - District Leadership, Governance and Management  Developed and operationalized Campus Leadership Teams  Management team met monthly to address administrative or policy issues effecting the CPMSA  Governing Board (Advisory Committee) met monthly to review data, program implementation schedules, and to address any corrections needed  Proposal submitted to improve infrastructure for mathematics and scienceDRIVER #4 - Convergence of Resources  Teacher training/research provided by UALR  Local district funds. Eisenhower funds, Title VI, Class Size Reduction funds leveraged with NSF funds to improve infrastructure for mathematics and science  Mini grants provided by Arkansas SSI to two LRSD schools for Family Math and Science Program  Local district budget used to help achieve CPMSA objectives  Stipend for SMART mentors  Stipend for SECME participants  Training for Active Physics  Professional development for math and science specialist - National conferences I t  state textbook funds used for standards based curriculum materials  State funds allocated for teachers to attend AP/Pre-AP training (Science \u0026amp; Mathematics Vertical Teams Workshop)DRIVER #5 - Professional Development  Principals and other building administrators participated in hands-on activities in mathematics and science. Discussed the differences between standards- based instruction and traditional instruction  New and first year secondary mathematics and science teachers participated in a series of four workshops related to the implementation of the mathematics or science curriculum, classroom management, learning styles, use of manipulative materials, cooperative learning and use of technology  Training provided to teachers for the Fall, 1999 implementation of new standards-based programs\n Investigations - All 4* and 5* grade teachers in all schools (full implementation)  STC - All 6* grade science teachers in all schools  CMP - All 6** grade mathematics teachers in all schools  Active Physics -17 science teachers representing all five high schools  Junior High School Mathematics Vertical Teams met monthly Sept. 98- Jan. 99 teachers grades 6-12 attended College Boards  31 mathematics Mathematics Vertical Teams (MVT) Conference in Little Rock - Feb. 99  MVT Steering committee formed and met twice (following MVT Conference) to set short and long term goals for the LRSD\nexplored ways to involve more teachers  26 science teachers grades 6-12 attended UALRs Vertical Teams Conference for science teachersDRIVER #6 - Partnerships, Parental Involvement, Public Awareness  Expanded Family Math and Science program to 5 new schools. Currently 25/43 elementary and middle schools have participated in the Family Math and Science Program  CPMSA Presentation made to the following organizations:  Little Rock PTA Council  Volunteers in Public Schools (VIPS)  Chrisitan Ministerial Alliance  Vital Link Business Partners  Presented an annual update to the LRSD Board of Directors  Designed dissemination brochure (draft)  SMART 99 parent meetingAssessment Practices and Data Utilization  Administered quarterly CRTs to all students in grades 2-6  Administered SAT-9 to grades 5, 7. and 10 as mandated by the Arkansas State Dept, of Education (ADE)  Administered State Benchmark Exams to all students in grades 4, 8, and 11  Data gathered quarterly (and by semester) to determine number of students who are successfully completing the mathematics and science courses listed below: Algebra I Chemistry Pre-Calculus AP Biology AP Physics Algebra 11 Geometry Statistics AP Calculus AP Statistics Biology Physics T rigonometry AP Environmental Science AP Chemistry  Data gathered quarterly (and by semester) to determine number of students who are enrolled in the courses listed below: Geometry Physics Trigonometry Biology  All data disagregated by race, gender and schoolI I I i i I I LRPMSA YEAR ONE DATA 1998^-1999 I Ii SAT-9 Scaled Scores Test Date: September 14, 1998 Test Date for End of Year 1 is September 15, 1999 Five Year Goal: 22% increase First Year Goal: 2% increase Black Students Problem Math Solving Procedures Total Math Science 5th Grade Male Female Total 612 616 615 609 618 613 611 616 614 610 613 612 7th Grade Male Female Total 641 641 641 639 644 641 640 642 641 635 635 635 10th Grade Male Female Total n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 676 678 677 663 666 665 12nd Success Rates of Students in Math and Science Courses Five Year Goal: 22% increase First Year Goal\n2% increase Number Percent of 2nd Number Percent of Semester with 'C or 97-98 Miove \"C or Above Semester with 'C or 98-99 Above 'C' or Above Black Male Black Male Algebra I Algebra II AP Biology AP Calculus AP Chemistry AP Environmental AP Physics AP Statistics Biology Chemistry Geometry Physics Pre-Calculus Statistics Trigonometry 569 409 15 17 3 1 2 3 618 338 595 16 10 19 109 244 154 13 13 1 1 1 2 249 177 166 8 9 10 74 43% 38% 87% 76% 33% 100% 50% 67% 40% 52% 28% 50% 90% 53% 68% 572 398 19 21 10 6 0 3 485 297 451 31 20 11 120 259 183 14 17 8 3 0 2 230 199 192 19 14 9 72 45% 46% 74% 81% 80% 50% 0% 67% 47% 67% 43% 61% 70% 82% 60% % Change 2% 8% -13% 4% 47% -50% -50% 0% 7% 15% 15% 11% -20% 29% -8% 1Success Rates of Students in Math and Science Courses Five Year Goal: 22% increase First Year Goal\n2% increase Number Percent of 2ncl Semester with 'C or 97-98 Above \"C or Above 2nd Semester 98-99 Number Percent of with 'C or Above \"C or Above Black Female Black Female 1 Algebra I Algebra II AP Biology AP Calculus AP Chemistry AP Environmental AP Physics AP Statistics Biology Chemistry Geometry Physics Pre-Calculus Statistics Trigonometry 591 526 37 38 10 1 0 5 654 455 666 29 12 22 134 343 277 34 28 8 1 0 4 386 303 262 21 12 21 86 58% 53% 92% 74% 80% 100% 0% 80% 59% 67% 39% 72% 100% 95% 64% % 588 494 31 34 11 9 0 7 579 393 522 32 17 27 173 335 286 23 27 10 5 0 7 341 307 273 22 14 24 129 57% 58% 74% 79% 91% 56% 0% 100% 59% 78% 52% 69% 82% 89% 75% Change -1% 5% -18% 6% 11% -44% 0% 20% 0% 12% 13% -4% -18% -7% 10% 22nd Success Rates of Students in Math and Science Courses Five Year Goal\n22% increase First Year Goal\n2% increase Number Percent of 2nc/ Number Percent of Semester with 'C or 97-98 Maove \"C or Above Semester with 'C or 98-99 Above \"C or Above Total Black Total Black % Change Algebra I Algebra II AP Biology AP Calculus AP Chemistry AP Environmental AP Physics AP Statistics Biology Chemistry Geometry Physics Pre-Calculus Statistics Trigonometry 1160 935 52 55 13 2 2 8 1272 793 1261 45 22 41 243 587 431 47 41 9 2 1 6 635 480 428 29 21 31 160 51% 46% 90% 75% 69% 100% 50% 75% 50% 61% 34% 64% 95% 76% 66% 1160 892 50 55 21 15 0 10 1064 690 973 63 37 38 293 594 469 37 44 18 8 0 9 571 506 465 41 28 33 201 51% 53% 74% 80% 86% 53% 0% 51% 54% 73% 48% 65% 76% 87% 69% 1% 6% -16% 5% 16% -47% -50% -24% 4% 13% 14% 1% -20% 11% 3% 32nd Success Rates of Students in Math and Science Courses Five Year Goal: 22% increase First Year Goal\n2% increase Number Percent of Semester with 'C or 97-98 Above \"C or Above 2nd Semester 98-99 Number Percent of with 'C or Above \"C or Above Non-Black Male Non-Black Male % Change Algebra I Algebra II AP Biology AP Calculus AP Chemistry AP Environmental AP Physics AP Statistics Biology Chemistry Geometry Physics Pre-Calculus Statistics Trigonometry 274 240 31 75 23 4 24 18 252 198 249 50 6 7 110 163 156 31 64 20 3 22 18 160 139 142 41 5 2 101 59% 65% 100% 85% 87% 75% 92% 100% 63% 70% 57% 82% 83% 29% 92% 270 228 35 47 29 19 10 17 238 163 215 49 9 10 109 197 160 29 38 26 16 10 17 159 128 147 42 7 9 89 73% 70% 83% 81% 90% 84% 100% 100% 67% 79% 68% 86% 78% 90% 82% 13% 5% -17% -4% 3% 9% 8% 0% 3% 8% 11% 4% -6% 61% -10% 42nd Success Rates of Students in Math and Science Courses Five Year Goal\n22% increase First Year Goal: 2% increase Number Percent of Semester with 'C or 97-98 Above \"C or Above 2nc/ Semster 99 Number Percent of 98 with 'C or Above \"C or Above Non-Black Female Non-Black Female % Change Algebra I Algebra II AP Biology AP Calculus AP Chemistry AP Environmental AP Physics AP Statistics Biology Chemistry Geometry Physics Pre-Calculus Statistics Trigonometry 275 287 42 61 27 3 11 32 292 249 333 41 5 14 144 224 213 34 54 24 3 11 31 225 196 245 36 5 13 135 81% 74% 81% 89% 89% 100% 100% 97% 77% 79% 74% 88% 100% 93% 94% 271 305 46 57 24 24 9 27 297 217 254 39 9 9 146 213 245 40 49 24 20 7 26 234 182 212 36 8 7 122 79% 80% 87% 86% 100% 83% 78% 96% 79% 84% 83% 92% 89% 78% 84% -3% 6% 6% -3% 11% -17% -22% -1% 2% 5% 10% 5% -11% -15% -10% 52nd Success Rates of Students in Math and Science Courses Five Year Goal: 22% increase First Year Goal: 2% increase Number Percent of Semester with 'C or 97-98 Above \"C or Above 2nd Semester 99 Number Percent of 98 with 'C or Above \"C or Above Total Non-Black Total Non-Black % Change Algebra I Algebra II AP Biology AP Calculus AP Chemistry AP Environmental AP Physics AP Statistics Biology Chemistry Geometry Physics Pre-Calculus Statistics Trigonometry 549 527 73 136 50 7 35 50 544 447 582 91 11 21 254 387 369 65 118 44 6 33 49 385 335 387 77 10 15 236 70% 70% 89% 87% 88% 86% 94% 98% 71% 75% 66% 85% 91% 71% 93% 541 533 81 104 53 43 19 44 535 380 469 88 18 19 255 410 405 69 87 50 36 17 43 393 310 359 78 15 16 211 76% 76% 85% 84% 94% 84% 89% 98% 73% 82% 77% 89% 83% 84% 83% 5% 6% -4% -3% 6% -2% -5% 0% s3% '7% 10% 4% -8% 13% -10% Algebra I Algebra II AP Biology AP Calculus AP Chemistry AP Environme*' AP Physics AP Statistics Biology Chemistry Geometry Physics Pre-CalcL. I noo-  6Success Rates of Students in Math and Science Courses Five Year Goal\n22% increase First Year Goal: 2% increase 2nd Semester 97 98 Number Percent of with 'C or Above \"C or Above 2nd Semester 98 99 Number with 'C or Above Percent of \"C or Above All Students All Students % Change Algebra I Algebra II AP Biology AP Calculus AP Chemistry AP Environmental AP Physics AP Statistics Biology Chemistry Geometry Physics Pre-Calculus Statistics Trigonometry 1709 1462 125 191 63 9 37 58 1816 1240 1843 136 33 62 497 974 800 112 159 53 8 34 55 1020 815 815 106 31 46 396 57% 55% 90% 83% 84% 89% 92% 95% 56% 66% 44% 78% 94% 74% 80% 1701 1425 131 159 74 58 19 54 1599 1070 1442 151 55 57 548 1004 874 106 131 68 44 17 52 964 816 824 119 43 49 412 59% 61% 81% 82% 92% 76% 89% 96% 60% 76% 57% 79% 78% 86% 75% 2% 7% -9% -1% 8% -13% -2% 1% 4% 11% 13% 1% -16% 12% -4% 7District Enrollment by Grade Percent 1997-1998 1998-1999 Change 7th 8th 9th 10th 11th 12th 1800 1783 1742 1923 1738 1477 1755 1763 1676 1913 1681 1492 -3% -1% -4% -1% -3% 1% Total 10463 10280 -2% Proportion of Students Enrolled to Total District Enrollment, Grades 7th - 12th Algebra I Algebra II AP Biology AP Calculus AP Chemistry AP Environmental AP Physics AP Statistics Biology Chemistry Geometry Physics Pre-Calculus Statistics Trigonometry Number enrolled in 1997-98 1709 1462 125 191 63 9 37 58 1816 1240 1843 136 33 62 497 1998 16.33% 13.97% 1.19% 1.83% 0.60% 0.09% 0.35% 0.55% 17.36% 11.85% 17.61% 1.30% 0.32% 0.59% 4.75% Number enrolled in 1998-99 1701 1425 131 159 74 58 19 54 1599 1070 1442 151 55 57 548 1999 16.55% 13.86% 1.27% 1.55% 0.72% 0.56% 0.18% 0.53% 15.55% 10.41% 14.03% 1.47% 0.54% 0.55% 5.33% Difference Between 97 \u0026amp; 98 0.21% -0.11% 0.08% -0.28% 0.12% 0.48% -0.17% -0.03% -1.80% -1.44% -3.59% 0.17% 0.22% -0.04% 0.58% 1student Enrollment in Math and Science Courses Five Year Goal\n22% increase First Year Goal\n2% increase 2nd Semester 97-98 2nd Semester 98-99 2nd Semester 97-98 2nd Semester 98-99 2nd Semester 97-98 2nd Semester 98-99 Black Male Black Female Total Black Algebra I Algebra II AP Biology AP Calculus AP Chemistry AP Environmental AP Physics AP Statistics Biology Chemistry Geometry Physics Pre-Calculus Statistics Trigonometry 569 409 15 17 3 1 2 3 618 338 595 16 10 19 109 572 398 19 21 10 6 0 3 485 297 451 31 20 11 120 % Change 1% -3% 27% 24% 233% 500% -100% 0% -22% -12% -24% 94% 100% -42% 10% 591 526 37 38 10 1 0 5 654 455 666 29 12 22 134 588 494 31 34 11 9 0 7 579 393 522 32 17 27 173 % Change -1% -6% -16% -11% 10% 800% 0% 40% -11% -14% -22% 10% 42% 23% 29% 1160 935 52 55 13 2 2 8 1272 793 1261 45 22 41 243 1160 892 50 55 21 15 0 10 1064 690 973 63 37 38 293 % Change 0% -5% -4% 0% 62% 650% -100% 25% -16% -13% -23% 40% 68% -7% 21% 1student Enrollment in Math and Science Courses Five Year Goal: 22% increase First Year Goal: 2% increase 2nd Semester 97-98 2nd Semester 98-99 2nd Semester 97-98 2nd Semester 98-99 2nd Semester 97-98 2nd Semester 98-99 Non-Black Male Non-Black Female Total NonBlack Algebra I Algebra II AP Biology AP Calculus AP Chemistry AP Environmental AP Physics AP Statistics Biology Chemistry Geometry Physics Pre-Calculus Statistics Trigonometry 274 240 31 75 23 4 24 18 252 198 249 50 6 7 110 270 228 35 47 29 19 10 17 238 163 215 49 9 10 109 % Change -1% -5% 13% -37% 26% 375% -58% -6% -6% -18% -14% -2% 50% 43% -1% 275 287 42 61 27 3 11 32 292 249 333 41 5 14 144 271 305 46 57 24 24 9 27 297 217 254 39 9 9 146 % Change ^i% 6% 10% -7% -11% 700% -18% -16% 2% -13% -24% -5% 80% -36% 1% 549 527 73 136 50 7 35 50 544 447 582 91 11 21 254 541 533 81 104 53 43 19 44 535 380 469 88 18 19 255 % Change -1% 1% 11% -24% 6% 514% -46% -12% -2% -15% -19% -3% 64% -10% 0% 22nd student Enrollment in Math and Science Courses Five Year Goal: 22% increase First Year Goal\n2% increase 2nd Semester Semester 97-98 98-99 All Students Algebra I Algebra II AP Biology AP Calculus AP Chemistry AP Environmental AP Physics AP Statistics Biology Chemistry Geometry Physics Pre-Calculus Statistics Trigonometry 1709 1462 125 191 63 9 37 58 1816 1240 1843 136 33 62 497 1701 1425 131 159 74 58 19 54 1599 1070 1442 151 55 57 548 % Change 0% -3% 5% -17% 17% 544% -49% -7% -12% -14% -22% 11% 67% -8% 10% 3 JLRPMSA YEAR TWO PLAN 1999-2000 LITTLE ROCK CPMSA YEAR TWO ACTIVITIES 1999-2000 PERSONNEL  The Project Director remains on full time status. BUDGET: $51,000  A full time secretary will be continued to manage office activities and perform clerical duties. BUDGET: $18,360 a The Program Evaluator will move from 25% FTE to 100% FTE with approximately one half salary provided by NSF and one half by the district: BUDGET: $24,000  Ten lead teachers will be utilized to improve the infrastructure for mathematics and science in the districts 50 schools. These lead teachers will provide professional development and classroom level support for the mathematics and science teachers in their cluster. NSF will fund the salaries of four of those lead teachers. BUDGET: $160,000  A full time Instructional Aide will be employed to assist with the implementation of standards based curriculum modules and materials. BUDGET: $10,000 TRAVEL a Travel to NSF Meetings. BUDGET: $5,000 STANDARDS BASED CURRICULA      a Implement Investigations in grades 4 and 5 with all teachers in all schools Implement Science and Technology for Children (STC) in grade 6 with all teachers in all schools Implement 1 STC kit in grades 1-5 with all teachers in all schools Implement Connected Mathematics Project (CMP) in 6** grade with all teachers in all middle schools Implement 2 modules of CMP in 7^ and 8* grade with all teachers in all schools Implement Active Physics in all high schools for o\" grade students PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT  a a New secondary mathematics and science teachers will attend 4 workshops per year. Substitutes will be provided and paid approximately $44/day. BUDGET: 24 substitutes x 4 days x $44/day = $4224 Inservice on new curriculum standards provided for all science and mathematics teachers Training to begin Spring, 2000 for the following teachers\nInvestigations - all 2\"^ and 3' grade teachers in all schools - all 4 modules 1    STC - all K-5 teachers in all schools - 2\" kit CMP - All 7^ grade teachers in all schools - all CMP modules All teachers implementing new standards based curriculum programs in mathematics and science will receive approximately 20 hours of follow-up that includes classroom visits and support by a lead teacher, and district-level follow-up training. Approximately 50% of districts 919 K-12 mathematics and science teachers will receive training on alternative assessment Mathematics and science vertical teams to meet monthly Subcontract with UALR to provide Laboratory School for Teacher Enhancement ACADEMIC SUPPORT PROGRAMS   a   a  a    Conduct 8 follow-up sessions during the school year for 135 summer extended year Algebra I participants. Twelve high school mentors plus 10 college student mentors will conduct sessions. Dr. Frank James, Philander Smith College will facilitate (CERTL). BUDGET: $25/day x 8 days x 12 mentors = $2400 Conduct Summer Mathematics Advanced Readiness Training (SMART) for 240 rising 9* grade students. BUDGET: $100/suppiies x 240 students = $24,000 1 site facilitator x $102/day x 12 days = $1,224 16 teachers x $82/day x 12 days = $15,744 48 student mentors x $40 day x 10 days = $19,200 TOTAL BUDGET $38,568 Continue to Provide tutoring for students in advanced mathematics and science courses Conduct extended year program in science - SUBCONTRACT WITH UALR BUDGET: $50,220 Implement SECME program in 5 new schools during the 1999-2000 school year Continue to increase SECME program with the addition of 9 new schools for the 2000-2001 school year. Two teachers per school to attend summer institute for SECME training (Summer, 2000). BUDGET: $2200 (includes registration, meals, lodging, graduate tuition, and airfare) x 18 teachers = $39,600 Continue to expand VITAL LINK by increasing the number of students participating who are underrepresented and underserved. BUDGET: $6,300 Subcontract with UALR to provide JR-TEAMS Program BUDGET: $24,670 Subcontract with Museum of Discovery to provide Community Based Science Clubs. BUDGET: $40,000 Train students to use the technology component that is embedded in adopted curriculum Train students to use the internet for research purposes and exchange of information 2PARENT/FAMILY/COMIVIUNiTY INVOLVEMENT a    Increase the number of schools participating in the Family Math \u0026amp; Science program. BUDGET: $2,916 Print and disseminate brochure about CPMSA. BUDGET: $1,200 Develop presentation about standards based curricula for Campus Leadership teams, PTA meetings, churches, businesses (brown bag lunch sessions) Develop and produce a video to be aired on LRSD Access Channel about the CPMSA GOVERNANCE a  a  Plan a r/2 -day retreat for the CPMSA Governing Board. A consultant will be obtained to guide the group through team building activities and strategic planning. The governing board will form subgroups that will concentrate on certain aspects of the CPMSA. BUDGET: $1,000 Governing board will meet quarterly to review data and discuss mid-term corrections - subcommittees will meet monthly. Management team will meet quarterly to assist with administrative matters concerning the implementation of the project activities. Project Staff will meet weekly to provide feedback on CPMSA activities ASSESSMENT PRACTICES \u0026amp; DATA UTILIZATION a a a Administer quarterly CRTs in grades 3-11 Administer SAT-9 to grades 5, 7, and 10 as mandated by the State Administer State Benchmark exams to grades 4, 6, 8 and end-of-course (Algebra I and Geometry) TOTAL ESTIMATED BUDGET FOR YEAR TWO - $479,458 (Not including fringe benefits) 3 ILITTLE ROCK PARTNERSHIPS FOR MATHEMATICS AND SCIENCE ACHIEVEMENT (LRPMSA) Strategic Plan, 1999-00 Strategies Action Steps Person(s) Responsible Timeline Measurable Outcomes Driver 1: Implementation of comprehensive, standards-based curricula and/or instructional materials that are aligned with instruction and assessment available to every student served by the system and its partners. 1.1 Provide appropriate interventions for students who are at risk of not meeting or exceeding the mathematics and science standards 1.2 Implement a standards-based curriculum 1.1.1 1.1.2 1.1.3 1.2.1 1.2.2 1.2.3 1.2.4 1.2.5 Conduct extended year Algebra I programs Provide tutoring for students in advanced mathematics and science courses Conduct extended year programs in science ELEMENTARY MATHEMATICS 1.2.11 Implement Investigations in Number, Data, \u0026amp; Space in grades 4 and 5 at all schools and with all teachers MIDDLE SCHOOL MATHEMATICS 1.2.21 Implement Connected Math Project (CMP) in 6' grade in all schools with all teachers 1.2.22 Implement 2 modules of CMP in 7th gth gj.2(Jgg jjj 3JI schools with all teachers HIGH SCHOOL MATHEMATICS 1.2.31 Use content standards and benchmarks to provide standards- based instruction ELEMENTARY SCIENCE 1.2.41 Implement STC Kit in grades 1-5 in all schools with all teachers MIDDLE SCHOOL SCIENCE Vanessa Cleaver Principals Vanessa Cleaver Dennis Glasgow Vanessa Cleaver Dennis Glasgow Vanessa Cleaver Project Staff Principals August, 2000 September, 1999 August, 2000 Fall, 1999 Fall, 1999 Implementation of SMART '00 List of participants Assessment of Pre/Post test Tutoring plans of participating high schools Number of students participating Classroom observations Feedback/analysis given ongoing in grade level, campus, math dept. It n tlj .2.51 Implement all 4 kits of STC in 6*' I grade in all schools with all teachers 1.2.6 HIGH SCHOOL SCIENCE Fall, 1999 1.3 Implement alternative assessment methods that allow teachers to determine a students actual functioning level in math and science so as to provide appropriate programming and to eliminate ability tracking______ 1.4 Train students to use cunent technology to access, evaluate, and apply information and to increase competencies in problem solving, specific content areas and critical thinking skills 1.3.1 1.4.1 1.2.61 Implement Active Physics in all high schools for 9 grade students 1.2.62 Utilize content standards and benchmarks to implement standards-based instruction______ Provide training for mathematics and science teachers on alternative assessment 1.3.11 Implement alternative assessment Train students to use technology component that is embedded in adopted curriculum 1.4.2 Train students to use the Internet for research purposes and exchange of information Dennis Glasgow Marion Woods Vanessa Cleaver Teachers December, 1999 1999-00 Ongoing Classroom observations feedback/analysis given ongoing in grade level, campus, math department 50% of all mathematics and science teachers receive and implement training samples ol alternative assessments Number of students trained H 21.5 Establish an infrastructure to support systemic change in mathematics and science 1.6 Implement vertical teams in mathematics and science 1.5.1 1.5.2 1.5.3 1.6.1 Hire lead teachers Divide elementary schools into 6 clusters and create a middle school cluster, assign a math/science lead teacher for each of the elementary clusters and a math and a science lead teacher for both the middle schools and high schools clusters Provide training for lead teachers Form and implement science vertical teams 1.6.11 1.6.12 Generate list of skills students need before entering next course Meet regularly to develop consistency among science teachers at the middle school and high school levels 1.6.2 Implement math vertical teams 1.6.21 1.6.22 1.6.23 Continue to train teachers to use vertical teams toolkit Meet in horizontal teams to outline lesson plans for the year Develop quarterly assessments for secondary math courses Dennis Glasgow Dennis Glasgow Vanessa Cleaver Dennis Glasgow Vanessa Cleaver Dennis Glasgow Rene' Carson Vanessa Cleaver Vanessa Cleaver Phyllis Caruth Teachers hired List of Clusters Ongoing September, 1999 September, 1999 September, 1999 Ongoing August, 1999 Ongoing August, 1999 August, 1999 Sign-in sheet, agenda List of participants Sign-in sheets List of skills Meeting dates Agendas Sign-in sheets Training/meeting dates Lesson plan outlines Assessment instruments 3j 1.7 Plan professional development rm Conduct needs assessment for mathematics and science teachers I Vanessa Cleaver Dennis Glasgow I September, 1999 Needs assessment evaluated and analyzed 1.7.2 Implement professional development plan Project Staff Ongoing Number of teachers participating in professional development 1.7.3 1.7.4 Provide math \u0026amp; science staff with opportunity to pursue educational endeavors that will promote high educational standards within the District Provide follow-up training for teachers using standard-based curricula Dennis Glasgow Project Staff Dennis Glasgow Vanessa Cleaver Lead teachers 1.7.5 1.7.6 Train principals, assistant principals, and central administrative staff on the systemic reform in math and science Provide training for \"Brokers\" of each school on math and science reform Vanessa Cleaver Sadie Mitchell October, 1999 August, 1999 Ongoing July, 1999 Number of teachers selected to participate in educational endeavors All teachers using standards- based curricula will receive at least 20 hours of follow-up training Dates of training Sign-in sheets 4r DTh^FITD^oTmcnT^f a coherent, consistent set of policies that snpVorts provisions of broad-based reform in mathematics and science at the K-12 level. 2.1 Implement pro- grams, policies and/or procedures designed to ensure that the district hires, assigns, utilizes and promotes qualified African Americans in a fair and equitable manner in such a way to maintain a teaching staff which is approximately third African American one- 2.2 Implement Administrative regulations to support a Board Policy that requires the development of a coherent, articulated set of K-12 academic standards and benchmarks in 2.1.1 Implement LRSD Minority Recruitment Plan 2.1.2 Provide tuition reimbursement to 2.1.3 support teachers, especially minority teachers, to gain certification endorsement in critical math or science areas Support teachers on a district level with a stipend to participate in 8 graduate hours of physics to obtain physics certification endorsement 2.2.1 Train principals, and teachers about the academic content standards 2.2.2 Develop a brochure that informs parents about the standards Robert Robinson Principals Richard Hurley Principals Dennis Glasgow Dennis Glasgow Vanessa Cleaver Math/Science Staff Bonnie Lesley September, 1999 Ongoing September, 1999 Ongoing September, 1999 September, 1999 September, 1999 Number of African American teachers hired Percentage of African American teachers by school, by district, and by subject Number of newly certified math and science teachers by race, gender, and subject area Number of teachers supported by tuition reimbursement by race, gender and subject area Number of teachers paid a stipend to complete graduate physics hours Published standards and benchmarks in math and science, K-12 Number of principals and teachers who received training Completed brochure for parents 5mathematics and science 2.3 Implement administrative regulations to support a Board Policy that all curricula be standards-based and to define what students should know or be able to do at the conclusion of each grade level or course 2.4 Implement administrative regulations to support a Board Policy that guarantees that all students have an opportunity to participate in gifted programs, pre-AP and AP programs 2.2.3 2.2.4 2.2.5 Develop delivery standards to complement the content standards Approve a Board Policy that requires that the curriculum at all levels reflects the academic standards Ensure by policy that all special curriculum and instruction programs be aligned with the Strategic Plan, the revised desegregation plan and the regular education program 2.3.1 Develop administrative regulations to ensure that all curricula are standards- based 2.3.2 Develop benchmarks for each grade level and course that will move students toward the standards 2.4.1 Develop administrative regulations to help guarantee that all children have an opportunity to participate in gifted, pre- Ap and AP programs 2.4.2 Provide training for teachers and counselors about strategies for increasing the rate of participation and success of Bonnie Lesley Bonnie Lesley Bonnie Lesley Bonnie Lesley Bonnie Lesley Mable Donaldson Vanessa Cleaver Dennis Glasgow January, 2000 September, 1999 September, 1999 September, 1999 September, 1999 September, 1999 January, 1999 Completed and approved delivery standards Board policy approved including this language Board policy approved including this language Written and approved administrative regulations to support the Board Policy 100% of curriculum documents referenced to th\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\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_1776","title":"Responses concerning site selection at Maumelle, reduction of the Office of Desegregation Management budget, appellants' motion to hold appeal in abeyance, Pulaski County Special School District's (PCSSD's) motion to approve the re-design of Harris Elementary School and for the rezoning of the Harris and Sherwood attendance zones.","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","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Maumelle, 34.86676, -92.40432"],"dcterms_creator":null,"dc_date":["2002-12"],"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","Joshua intervenors","Office of Desegregation Monitoring (Little Rock, Ark.)","Education--Finance","Harris Elementary School (North Little Rock, Ark.)","Elementary schools","School integration","Little Rock School District","School attendance"],"dcterms_title":["Responses concerning site selection at Maumelle, reduction of the Office of Desegregation Management budget, appellants' motion to hold appeal in abeyance, Pulaski County Special School District's (PCSSD's) motion to approve the re-design of Harris Elementary School and for the rezoning of the Harris and Sherwood attendance zones."],"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/1776"],"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":["64 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\u003cdcterms_description type=\"array\"\u003e   \n\n\u003cdcterms_description\u003eDistrict Court, Joshua intervenors' response to motion regarding site selection at Maumelle and for other relief; District Court, Joshua intervenors' response to the reduction of the Office of Desegregation Management budget; Court of Appeals, appellants' motion to hold appeal in abeyance pending ruling by the District Court on the matter of recusal; District Court, plaintiff's response to the Office of Desegregation Management's 2002-2003 budget; Court of Appeals, plaintiff-appellee Little Rock School District (LRSD) response to appellant's motion to hold appeal in abeyance; District Court, Pulaski County Special School District (PCSSD) motion to approve the re-design of Harris Elementary School and for the rezoning of the Harris and Sherwood attendance zones; District Court, Pulaski County Special School District?s (PCSSD?s) reply to Joshua intervenors' response to motion regarding site selection at Maumelle and for other relief; District Court, order; Court of Appeals, Joshua intervenors' statement of issues and other documents    This transcript was create using Optical Character Recognition (OCR) and may contain some errors.    DNI\\IO!INOW NOl!V93H93S30 jQ 30HjQ RECEIVED lOOl 6- :BO JOHN W. WALKER, P.A. DEC - 9 2002 OFFICE OF C3J\\13,~3H DESEGREGATION MONITORING JOHNW. WALKER SHAWN CHILDS Mr. Christopher Heller . FRJDA Y, ELDREDGE \u0026amp; CLARK , 400 W. Capitol, Suite 2200 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Ms. Ann Brown Marshall ODM One Union National Plaza 124 West Capitol, Suite 1895 Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Sam Jones A'ITORNEY AT LAW 1723 BROADWAY LITTLE ROCK, ARKAl\\lSAS 72206 TELEPHONE (501) 374-3758 FAX (501) 374-4187 OF COUNSEL ROBERT McHENRY, P.A. December 6, 2002 DONNA J. McHENRY 8210 HENDERSON ROAD LITILE ROCK, ARK,INSAS 72210 PHONE: (501) 372-3425  F,1x (501) 372-3428 E~L4..IL: mchenryd@swbell.net Mr. Dermis R. Hansen Office of the Attorney General 323 Center Street 200 Tower Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201. Nlr. Steve Jones JACK,LYON \u0026amp; JONES, P.A. 425 W. Capitol, Suite 3400 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-3472 WRJGHT, LINDSEY \u0026amp; JENNINGS 2200 Worthen Bank Building Mr. Richard Roachell ROACHELL LAW FIRM Plaza West Building 200 West Capitol Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Re: LRSD v. PCSSD, Dear Counsel: 415 N. McKinley, Suite 465 Little Rock, Arkansas 72205 I Enclosed you will find Joshua Intervenors' Response to Motion Regarding Site Selecition at Maumelle and for Other Relief. JWW:lp Enclosure j IN THE l JNITED STATES DISTRJCT COURT\" ' --  ~ V   EASTERl\"J DISTRJCT OF ARKANSAS:~ .  WESTERl\"-J DIVISION  - --- LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRJCT V. NO. 4:82CV00866 WRW/JTR PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL _DISTRJCTNO.l, ET AL MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL PLAINTIFF DEFENDANTS INTER VEN ORS ; INTER VEN ORS JOSHUA INTERVENORS' RESPONSE TO MOTION REGARDING SITE SELECTION AT MAUMELLE AND FOR OTHER RELIEF The Joshua Intervenors respectfully request the court to defer approval of middle school site pending a hearing. Joshua does not opposed the site for it is in keeping with the provision of the revised desegregation plan. Joshua concerns relate to the extent the racial balance can be assured, I the burdens which will be imposed upon the black student who \\,Vill be recruited to attend the school, the recruitment process which will be Ltsecl to recruit students from little rock and the ft.mping for the ! I school. I I ! Joshua notes that the current plan is dependent upon state funding (Arkansas Detartment of Education) under the majority to minority transfer provisions. The state is not invol:ved in this proceeding and has not indicted whether it will continue the majority to minority funding . Joshua wishes to be assured that the proposed school will remain desegregated pursuant to the Settlement Agreement and funher that the State may not later argue that it was not involved in these -1- - proceedings. Joshua is informed that the Office of Desegregation Monitoring is preparing a repo1i regarding issues associated with site selection, recruitment and other matters associated with opening a new school. J oslma therefore believes that the Court should solicit the ODM vievvpoints regarding the school as well as possible problems which may be associated with funding withdrawal by the State of Arkansas before the Court issues an Order as requested by the Pulaski. County Special School District. WHEREFORE, the Joshua Intervenors request that the State of Arkansas be info1med of ' these proceedings and be afforded an opportunity at least to express their future support or lack of I ' support of M to i\\11 funding so that that matter may be addressed, and appe~led if necessary, before final plans regarding site selection and school construction are approved. Joshua also requests that the Court direct the ODM to provide a response to the petition filed by the PCSSD before finalizing any order of approval. Robert Pressman, Mass Bar No. 405900 22 Locust A venue Lexington, MA 02421 (781) 862-1955 Respectfully submitted. 7chiv\\:V. Walker, AR Bar No.!64046 ' .,.,. / I ,1 (),HNW.WALKERP.A. i -1723 Broadway i Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 (501) 374-3758 (501) 374-4187 (Fax) -2- Rickey Hicks, AR Bar No. 89235 Attorney at LavY Evergreen Place 1100 North University, Suite 240 Little Rock, Arkansas 72207 (501) 663 -9900 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing lws been sent by fa)f and U.S . Mail, postage prepaid to the fc 1lowing counsel ofrecord, on this_\u0026amp;.,_ day of -~ , 2002: Mr. ChTistopher Heller FRIDAY, ELDREDGE \u0026amp; CLARK 400 W. Capitol, Suite 2200 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Ms. Am1 Brown Marshall ODM One Uni.on National Plaza 124 West Capitvi, Suite 1895 Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Sam Jones WRIGHT, LINDSEY \u0026amp; JENNINGS 2200 Worthen Bank Building 200 West Capitol Little Rock, Arkansas 7220 l Mr. De1mis R. Hansen Office of the Attorney General 323 Center Street 200 Tower Building Little Rocle Arkansas 72201 Mr. Steve Jones JACK, LYON \u0026amp; JONES, P.A. 425 W. Capitol, Suite 3400 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-3472 Mr. Richard Roachell ROA CHELL LAW FIRM Plaza West Building 415 N. McKinley. Suite 465 Little Rock, Arkansas 72205 John '. Walker -3- DNNOllNOW NOllY03l!03S30 d030WO lOOl o 1 ::13 Q3Al3~3l:I RECEIVED DEC 1 O 2002 J. J / r.:. u.!.: ';..;-'- _ { '-\"' sT1::   0i.~rr,1r -,  omcE OF ,J Liii';fF6-'-- 1-- 1 -:-,-,. DESEGREGATION MON11ORIKG Dr::c -~' -'--~::2,1s C Q 9 2002 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRJCT co#,.~s If: iFi:: .  EASTERN DISTRJCT OF ARKANSAS'------~':,., c:u:: ,--,,,. WESTERN DIVISION - --~ - 1  --:,.1 .. ~ - .t::. LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF V. CASE NO. 4:82CV00866 WRW/ PULASKI COu1,ffY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL. MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL. KA THERINE KNIGHT, ET AL. JOSHUA INTERVENORS' RESPONSE TO THE REDUCTION OF THE ODM BUDGET DEFENDANTS INTER VEN ORS INTER VEN ORS The Joshua Intervenors believe that the ODM budget should not be diminished in any way pending a determination that its role has to be substantially reduced. There are many unfinished tasks to be performed by the ODM and while there may be criticism of the ODM role and the past activity, there is no record basis for that criticism. We also note with concern that the Court anticil-iates reducing the role of ODM now that the Court has pa1tially released the Little Rock School District from further Court supervision. We note that that decision is on appeal. We also note that the ODM staff has already been materially reduced. We see no reason therefore for further reduction of the budget. We also question the necessity for the budget being reduced and request that the Court consider holding a hearing on the subject in the event that the Court is inclined to effectuate any budget reductions. Respectfully submitted, i  ' l Robert Pressman, Mass Bar No. 4 5 22 Locust A venue Lexington, MA 02421 (781) 862-1955 alker, AR Bar No. 64046 W. WALKER, P.A. . 1 723 Broadway Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 (501) 3 74-3758 (501) 374A 87 (Fax) Ri cey icks, Attorney at Law Evergreen Place 1100 No1ih University, Suite 240 Little Rock, Arkansas 72207 (501) 663-9900 2 l - CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing h~been sen~ and U.S. Mail, postage prepaid to the fo,lowing counsel of record, on this t day of , , 2002: Mr. Christopher Heller FRIDAY, ELDREDGE \u0026amp; CLARK 400 W. Capitol, Suite 2200 . Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Ms. Ann Brown Marshall ODM One Union Nati0nal Plaza 124 West Capitol, Suite 1895 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Mr. Sam Jones WRIGHT, LINDSEY \u0026amp; JENNINGS 2200 Worthen Bank Building 200 West Capitol Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 ,, .J -- ------ Mr. Dennis R. Hansen Office of the Attorney General 323 Center Street 200 Tower Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Mr. Steve Jones JACK; LYON \u0026amp; JONES, P.A. 425 W. Capitol, Suite 3400 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-3472 Mr. Richard Roachell ROACHELL LAW FIRM . Evergreen Place 1100 North University Little Rock, Arkansas 72207 M,. Michael E. Gans, Clerk United States Court of Appeals 111 South 10th Street St. Louis, MO 63102 Re: 02-3867 Little Rock School District v. Joshua Intervenors Dear Mr. Gans, 22 Locust Avenue Lexington, MA 02421 December 10, 2002 Herewith is the Joshua Intervenors' \"Appellants' Motion to Hold Appeal in Abeyance Pending Ruling by the District Court on the Matter of Recusal.\" Mr. Walker requested me to file this motion and to sign it for him. As indicated in the certificate of service, it will be provided to other counsel and the desegregation monitor by Fax and U.S. Mail. cc to other counsel, Ms. Marshall, and Mr. Walker Sincerely, ~G'~ IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT APPEAL NO. 02-3867 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, V. PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL. MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL. KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL. PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE DEFENDANTS INTERVENORS-APPELLANTS INTERVENORS Appellants' Motion to Hold Appeal in Abeyance Pending Ruling by the District Court on the Matter of Recusal The Joshua Intervenors, appellants in this appeal, respectfully move for the entry of an order holding this appeal in abeyance, pending the district court's ruling on a motion by the Joshua Intervenors seeking the recusal of the District Court (Hon. William R. Wilson, Jr.) pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Sec. 455 (b) (2). Intervenors also seek such other related relief. Intervenors-Appellants make the following allegations in support of this motion: 1. On September 13, 2002 the District Court ruled that the Little Rock School District had attained partial unitary status. 2. After the denial by the District Court of post-trial motions, these intervenors filed a notice of appeal on November 12, 2002. 3. On November 25, 2002, these intervenors filed in the District Court, pursuant to 28 u.s.c. Sec. 455(b)(2), a motion 1 seeking the recusal of the District Court and the vacating of all orders, rulings, and judgments entered by the District Court subsequent to its receiving assignment of this case on January 3, 2002, including the Memorandum Opinion and the Judgment which are the subject of this appeal. See Attachment (Items 3710-11); see also Items 3713-15. 4. On November 22, 2002, this court distributed a briefing schedule for this appeal. 5. This appeal could be affected by the motion in the District Court in multiple ways. For example, it could be mooted, if the District Court granted the motion. In contrast, if the District Court denies the motion, these Intervenors might well appeal that judgment -- and it would be in the interests of judicial economy for the recusal issue to be decided in this Court before the merits issue, which could be mooted by this Court's ruling on the matter of recusal. WHEREFORE the Joshua Intervenors respectfully pray that this Court enter an order: (a) holding this appeal in abeyance, pending the District Court's ruling on a motion by the Joshua Intervenors' seeking the recusal of the District Court; (b) requiring the Joshua Intervenors to inform this court of whether the District Court's ruling on recusal will prompt a further appeal by Joshua Intervenors, not later than 10 business days after the District Court's judgment on that issue becomes final; 2 (c) allowing the other parties in the case, whose counsel are - identified on the certificate of service, to inform this Court within the same time period whether the District Court's ruling on recusal will prompt an appeal by that party: and (d) granting such other relief as the needs of justice may require. ~e~-- Robert Pressman 22 Locust Avenue Lexington, MA 02421 781-862-1955 Respectfully submitted, ~~w. w~ (~ RP) John W. Walker John W. Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72206 501-374-3758 Certificate of Service I hereby certify that this motion has been served by FAX and U.S. Mail on the following counsel and the Desegregation Monitor on December 10, 2002. Christopher Heller Friday, Eldridge \u0026amp; Clark 400 West Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Steve Jones Jack, Lyons and Jones 425 West Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201-3472 Ms. Ann Marshall Desegregation Monitor 124 West Capitol #1895 Little Rock, AR 72201 3 Sam Jones Wright, Lindsey \u0026amp; Jennings 200 West Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Richard Roachell Roachell Law Firm 415 N. McKinley, #465 Little Rock, AR 72205 Dennis Hansen Office of the Attorney General 323 center st. Little Rock, AR 72201 Robert Pressman U. S. District Court, Eastern District of Arkansas Page 1 of 245  . _. SEJ\\RCfl. . to.GIN SUGGESTIONS -:USER PREFS COURlWATCH HELP , .. ~ - . . - . RACER U.S. District Court Case Search Docket Sheet for 4:82-CV-866 U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Arkansas - Click here for Caption Page j Proceedings include all events Ct:-::.=..7.F:D.il:ea:dtJ e I DNooc.  II. I mage II D escrip tio n :===::;:=======:: 11/26/2002 3715 Yes: 1 Page(s): 21 KB; PDF :=========: ORDER by Judge William R. Wilson any party that wants to respond to Joshua's Motion to Recuse should file the response as soon as possible. In addition to any other matter any such party might want to address, I would beinterested in comments regarding the law clerk issue (cc: all counsel) [Date Entered: 12/02/02, By: de] B Yes: 7 Page(s); IVlliMORANDUM BRIEF by Littl_e Rock School in support 11/26/2002 3714 197 KB; PDF of response to Joshua's motion for vacating of orders and recusal [3713-1) [Date Entered: 11 /26/02, By: bm] ::=====: 11/26/2002 B3713 Y es: 3 Page(s); 41 the vacating of orders and recusal [3710-1) [3710-2) [Date RESPONSE by Little Rock School to Joshua's motion for KB; PDF Entered: 11/26/02, By: bm] :======: B NOTICE by Arkansas Education of filing of ADE's Project Yes: 3 Page(s); 36 11 /26/2002 3712 KB; PDF Management Tool for November 2002 [Date Entered: 11 /26/02, By: bm] !:=====: 1112512002 3711 Yes: 19 Page(s); of motion to recuse district judge [3710-1), of motion to B IVlliMORANDUM by Joshua intervenor plaintiff in support 721 KB; PDF vacate orders, rulings and judgments [3710-2) [Date Entered: 11/25/02, By: de] :=====~ B MOTION by Joshua intervenor plaintiff to recuse district Yes: .H...:Page(s); 11/25/2002 3710 290 KB; PDF judge, and to vacate orders, rulings and judgments [Date Entered: 11/25/02, By: de] 1:====~ ::::::========:~====================: B ORDER by Judge William R. Wilson the parties have to 1112512002 3709 Yes: 10 Page(s); and including 15 days from entry of this Order to file 240 KB; PDF objections regarding the proposed 2002-2003 budget of the ODM (cc: all counsel) [Date Entered: 11/25/02, By: de] 1:====~ :======~::========================:! [JI I DOCKETING LETTER: 8 USCA Number 02-3867; 11/25/2002 No counsel to proceed on appendix [Date Entered: 11/25/02, By: de] =======' ~=========:~===================~! nn ORDER by Judge William R. Wilson granting motion to Yes: 3 Page(s): 51 extend time to respond to PCSSD'S motion for approval of http ://www.are.uscourts.gov/wconnect/wc.dll?usdc_racer~get_casejb~4:82-cv-866~~All+Dc. .. 12/6/02 -- - -------- ------- IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DNISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT V. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL  MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL RECEIVED DEC 12 2002 OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING PLAINTIFF DEFENDANTS INTER VEN ORS INTERVENORS PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSE TO THE ODM'S 2002-2003 BUDGET The LRSD for its Response to the ODM's 2002-2003 Budget states: 1. It is the LRSD's understanding that the ODM's 2002-2003 budget covers the - period of July 1, 2002 through June 30, 2003. ODM's 2002-2003 was submitted to the Court on November 20, 2002 and provided to the parties by Order filed November 25, 2002. While the LRSD has concerns about the ODM's budget, the LRSD does not believe those concerns can be addressed in a fair and reasonable manner given that the budget cycle is almost half over. 2. The LRSD has two primary's concerns about the ODM's 2002-2003 budget. First, while the LRSD recognizes that the ODM has decreased its budget for 2002-2003, the LRSD being granted partial unitary status should permit the ODM to further decrease its staff. Staff salary and benefits constitute 86% of the ODM's budget. Additional staff reductions should permit the ODM to further reduce its budget for 2003-2004. 3. Second, the LRSD being granted partial unitary status renders inequitable the Court's Interim Order of June 27, 1989 apportioning the cost of ODM to the school districts on a per pupil basis. The LRSD proposes that the ODM be directed to work with the school districts to develop a more equitable means of apportioning the Districts share of the cost of ODM and to submit with its 2003-2004 budget a new means of apportionment. 4. The LRSD respectfully requests that Court direct the ODM to submit its proposed 2003-2004 budget on or before May 1, 2003 such that the Court may approve the budget before the 2003-2004 budget cycle. WHEREFORE, the LRSD prays that the Court enter an Order directing the ODM to consider additional staff reductions for 2003-2004; directing the ODM to work with the school districts and the State or Arkansas to develop a more equitable means of apportioning the cost of ODM and to submit with its 2003-2004 budget a new means a apportionment; and directing ODM to submit its proposed 2003-2004 budget on or before May 1, 2003. F:IHOME\\FENDLEY\\LRSD 2001 \\unitary-response-ODM-budget.wpd Respectfully Submitted, LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT FRIDAY, ELDREDGE \u0026amp; CLARK Christopher Heller (#81083) John C. Fendley, Jr. (#92182) 2000 Regions Center 400 West Capitol :~==--=--72-2_0_1__:-:3.~~4.4~93=-----/-, _V_ __\" '------\"_ ...._ 2 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 December 10, 2002: Mr. John W. Walker JOHNW. WALKER, P.A. 1 723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Sam Jones Wright, Lindsey \u0026amp; Jennings 2200 Nations Bank Bldg. 200 West Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Steve Jones JACK, LYON \u0026amp; JONES, P.A. 425 W. Capitol, Suite 3400 Little Rock, AR 72201-3472 Mr. Richard Roachell Roachell Law Firm Plaza West Building 415 N. McKinley, Suite 465 Little Rock, Arkansas 72205 Ms. Ann Marshall Desegregation Monitor 1 Union National Plaza 124 W. Capitol, Suite 1895 Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Dennis R. Hansen Office of the Attorney General 323 Center Street 200 Tower Building Little Rock, AR 72201 F:IHOME\\FENDLEYILRSD 2001 \\unitary-rcsponse-ODM-budgct.wpd 3 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEAL FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT RECEIVED OEC 1 3 2002 QfflC0F DRHI\\EGATION MONITORING LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE V. APPEAL NO. 02-3867 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL DEFENDANTS INTER VEN ORS-APPELLANTS INTERVENORS  MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT'S RESPONSE TO APPELLANT'S MOTION TO HOLD APPEAL IN ABEYANCE Plaintiff-Appellee Little Rock School District (\"LRSD\") for its Response states: 1. This appeal should not be held in abeyance pending the District Court's ruling on the Joshua Intervenors-Appellants' (\"Joshua\") Motion to Recuse filed November 25, 2002. This is a case of substantial public importance which should be decided without undue delay. 2. The District Court has already indicated that it will not recuse based on the grounds asserted by Joshua. See Order filed October 29, 2002, attached hereto as Exhibit A.  Tfius ,' this appeal will not be rendered moot. 3. The \"interests of judicial economy\" would not be served by this Court deciding the recusal issue before the merits of this appeal. For the reasons set forth in the District Court's Order filed October 29, 2002, it is clear that 28 U.S.C.  455(b)(2) does not require the District Court to recuse. Consequently, delaying this appeal to allow this Court to first consider the recusal issues cannot be justified. If Joshua decides to appeal on the recusal issue, that appeal may be consolidated with this appeal for oral argument. The issues in the two appeals will be - completely different making it unnecessary for them to be briefed at the same time. Thus, \"interests of judicial economy\" would not be served by holding the this case in abeyance. WHEREFORE, the LRSD prays that Joshua's Motion be denied; that the LRSD be granted its costs and attorneys' fees expended herein; and that the LRSD be awarded all other just and proper relief to which it may be entitled. F:\\HOME\\FENDLEY\\unitary-appeal-responsc-mot-abey.wpd Respectfully Submitted, LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT FRIDAY, ELDREDGE \u0026amp; CLARK Christopher Heller (#81083) John C. Fendley, Jr. (#92182) 2000 Regions Center 400 West Capitol Lilli~ (5~ B : C::::.:ller 2 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 December 12, 2002: Mr. John W. Walker JOHNW. WALKER, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Sam Jones Wright, Lindsey \u0026amp; Jennings 2200 Nations Bank Bldg. 200 West Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Steve Jones JACK, LYON \u0026amp; JONES, P.A. 425 W. Capitol, Suite 3400 Little Rock, AR 72201-3472 Mr. Richard Roachell Roachell Law Firm Plaza West Building 415 N. McKinley, Suite 465 Little Rock, Arkansas 72205 Ms. Ann Marshall Desegregation Monitor 1 Union National Plaza 124 W. Capitol, Suite 1895 Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Dennis R. Hansen Office of the Attorney General 323 Center Street 200 Tower Building Little Rock, AR 72201 F:IHOME\\FENDLEY\\unitary-appeal-responsc-mot-abcy.wpd 3 u.foilki~J?uAT EASTERN DISTRICT ARKANSAS UNITED ST ATES DISTRICT COURT . . EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS OCT 2 9 2002 WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT vs. 4:82CV00866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, et al. Defendants MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, et al. KATHERINE KNIGHT, et al. ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR HEARING REGARDING RELEVANCE OF 28 U.S.C. 455 TO THE PRESENT PROCEEDINGS Intervenors Intervenors 1. On July 22 - July 24, 2002, an evidentiary hearing was held in this case on the issues raised by Little Rock School District's motion for unitary status. 2. On September 13, 2002, a memorandum opinion was entered which ruled upon the issue of unitary status. 3. Last Friday, October 25, 2002, Joshua Intervenors filed a Motion for Hearing Regarding Relevance of28 U.S.C. 455 to the Present Proceedings, raising two issues: a. Whether I should disqualify because approximately fifteen years ago I represented The Honorable Henry Woods, the presiding judge in this case at that time. This representation was in connection with a mandamus petition by the LRSD and Joshua Intervenors (the latter represented by Mr. Walker, among others); :,E. X,, HJ B I .,  .. b. Ms. Janet Pulliam, former counsel ofrecord for a party in this case,joined my staff on September 26, 2002, as a law clerk (she came aboard nearly two weeks after the September 13 Memorandum Opinion). 4. I will deal with the issue involving Ms. Pulliam first. From the outset, Ms. Pulliam has been kept completely separate from this case, and will be in the future. Attached as Exhibits A and B to this order are interoffice memos dealing with this issue. I believe they resolve this question. SERVING AS A LAWYER IN THE MATTER IN CONTROVERSY 5. I turn now to my representation of Judge Woods in the 1987 mandamus proceeding. LRSD and Joshua Intervenors filed a petition for a writ of mandamus, asking that the Eighth Circuit disqualify Judge Woods. LRSD v. PCSSD, 839 F.2dl296, 1301 (8th Cir. 1988). I entered the case, at that time, for the limited purpose ofrepresenting Judge Woods before - the Eighth Circuit in connection with the request that he be disqualified. Crucially important is the fact that the mandamus issues had nothing to do with the merits of the underlying case. The mandamus was argued orally before the Eighth Circuit (sitting in Little Rock) on November 3, 1987, and, two days later, the Court handed down its decision, denying the request for mandamus. The November 5 opinion, LRSD v. PCSSD, 833 F.2d 112, 113 (8th Cir. 1987), was very brief, and included this language: Another opinion will be filed in due course further explaining our reasons for the conclusions expressed today with respect to the election and disqualification matters, and addressing as well the other questions raised in these cases. I was shown as counsel of record \"for Judge Woods in mandamus\" in the November 5 decision. Thereafter, I had no further involvement. 2 6. The Eighth Circuit handed down a supplemental opinion on February 9, 1988,LRSD v. PCSSD, 839 F.2d 1296 (8 th Cir. 1988). In this opinion, the Court explained, in more detail, why the petition for mandamus had been denied in the November 5 opinion. I am not shown as counsel ofrecord in the February 9 opinion. 7. Actually, the answer to Intervenors' question appears in LRSD v. PCSSD, 833 F.2d 112. The court stated: [A] lawyer with whom Judge Woods once practiced appeared at one time for an amicus curiae in a case called Clark v. Board of Educ. of the Little Rock School Dist., No. LR-C-64-155. The District Court first consolidated Clark with the instant case, then later severed it and returned it to the docket of another judge. Disqualification is sought under 28 U.S.C.  455 (b)(2), which requires disqualification \"where in private practice ... a lawyer with whom [the judge] previously practiced law served during such association as a lawyer concerning the matter.\" We disagree with this argument. Clark was a closed case , or at most dormant, when it was consolidated with this one, and in any event it has now been severed. We do not think that such a fleeting and tenuous connection between the present case and the judge's partner's activities while in practice years ago, was intended by Congress to require recusal. Id. at 113. Likewise, my appearance fifteen years ago was brief (\"transitory''). I represented none of the parties, and, as stated above, the narrow recusal issue that I addressed on behalf of Judge Woods had nothing to do with the merits of the underlying case. 8. In United States v. DeTemple, 162 F.3d 279 (4th Cir. 1998), the Court held that the recusal of a district judge was not required when the judge, as a lawyer, represented a creditor of the defendant (in a bankruptcy fraud case) because the creditor's debt played no part in th~ defense or prosecution of the case. In other words, the key here is the phrase the \"matter in controversy.\" In United States v. Cleveland, 1997 WL 222533, * 11 (E.D. La. May 5, 1997), the Court stated: In this Court's view, a former representation should trigger the \"matter in controversy\" requirement if the issues with which it dealt are put \"in issue\" in the 3 subsequent case in the sense that they need to be resolved by the judge who is presiding over the subsequent case. If the judge need not resolve an issue that either she or her former partners were involved in, then there is no appearance of impartiality and the purpose of Section 455(b )(2) is satisfied. In reaching this conclusion, the district judge in Louisiana cited LRSD v. PCSSD, 839 F.2d 1296. WAIVER \u0026amp; ESTOPPEL 9. On top of the fact that my appearance in the case was brief and did not involve, in any way, any of the issues pending before me, a motion to disqualify me under section 455 would not be timely. On January 3, 1984, the Joshua Intervenors, represented by Mr. John W. Walker and Mr. Wiley A. Branton, Jr., filed a Petition to Intervene (docket no. 452). On April 23, 1984, Judge Woods entered an Order ( docket no. 4 70) denying Joshua's Petition to Intervene. On May 23, 1984, the Eighth Circuit entered an Order (docket no. 565) directing Judge Woods to grant Joshua permission to intervene as parties in this case. Thus, Mr. Walker was counsel ofrecord for Joshua before, during, and after the 1987 mandamus proceeding in which I appeared as counsel for Judge Woods. As the Ninth Circuit pointed out in E. \u0026amp; J. Gallo Winery v. Gallo Cattle Co., 967 F.2d 1280, 1295 (91h Cir. 1992): It is true that under section 455 a judge may have an obligation to recuse himself or herself without a motion from one of the parties; it \"is self-enforcing on the part of the judge.\" However, it does not necessarily follow that a party having information that raises a possible ground for disqualification can wait until after an unfavorable judgment before bringing the information to the court's attention. It is well established in this circuit that a recusal motion must be made in a timely fashion. \"The absence of such a requirement would result in ... a heightened risk that litigants would use recusal motions for strategic purposes.\" While there is no per se rule that recusal motions must be made at a fixed point in order to be timely, . .. such motions \"should be filed with reasonable promptness after the ground for such a motion is ascertained.\" (Emphasis adde~.) (Citations omitted.) 4 10. On January 3, 2002, this case was assigned to me by random selection (docket no. 3570). At that time, Mr. Walker knew full well that, thirteen years earlier, I had represented Judge Woods in the mandamus proceeding that Mr. Walker, himself, helped initiate in an attempt to have Judge Woods removed from this case. See LRSD v. PCSSD, 839 F.2d at 1301 . Yet, it was only after my September 13, 2002 Memorandum Opinion ruling against Joshua on 5 of the 6 asserted grounds for denying unitary status that Joshua's lawyers chose to file the motion for a section 455 hearing. If there ever was a case of waiver and estoppel, this is it. I hasten to point out again, however, that even if Joshua had not elected to take a ''wait and see approach\" to deciding whether to file their section 455 motion, there would be no reason for me to recuse since I have never served \"as lawyer in the matter in controversy.\" 11. In Joshua's section 455 motion, there appears this curious language: The Court, in writing its Opinion dated September 13, 2002, included virtually all the citations from the Court of Appeals .. . hereto but did not refer to, mention or address these two important Opinions in which the Court, participated as a trial attorney in private practice. Motion at 3. One reading the above quoted language with a jaundiced eye might take it to suggest that I attempted to hide my 1987 representation of Judge Woods in the mandamus proceeding. I described the language as \"curious\" since, as noted, Mr. Walker was counsel of record for Joshua at the time and one of the moving parties who filed the petition for writ of mandamus. See LRSD v. PCSSD, 839 F.2d at 130 l. Thus, it is clear beyond peradventure that Mr. Walker knew of my being involved in this case on behalf of Judge Woods. For Joshua's benefit-- I will explain my reason for not citing these cases -- a reason much less sinister than Joshua may be suggesting: they had no bearing on - the unitary status issues that were decided in my September 13, 2002 Memorandum Opinion. 5 CONCLUSION 12. Since this Order fully sets forth my involvement in, and my knowledge of, the matters raised in Joshua's section 455 motion, there is no reason for a hearing, i.e., there is nothing material I could add to the above. And, in my opinion, I have fully answered the \"concerns\" of Joshua. 13. If and when Joshua's counsel obtain copies of the briefs I filed in connection with the mandamus issue, 1 I will be willing to look at the issue again if, and only if, these briefs reveal that my participation in the case was significantly different from my clear recollection. At that time, however, Joshua's counsel would be required to convince me that raising the question at this late date, after losing, was not for \"strategic purposes.\" 14. Joshua's pleading raises thequestionoftherelevance of28 U.S.C. 455 to the present proceedings. Answer: none. SUGGESTION 15. It is obvious that Joshua's counsel feel aggrieved by my September 13, 2002 Memorandum Opinion. I again commend the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals to them. That Court has had a world of experience in hearing disappointed suitors. In fact, this is its forte. IT IS SO ORDERED this 7--1/ j tay of October, 2002. THIS DOCUMENT ENTERED ON DOCKET SHEET IN COMPLIANCE Wll)W)JLE ~ AND/OR 79(a~ ON ~f/!!?._~y~ 1My file has long since been destroyed. 6 \\ ij \\j'-' BILL ~ILSON JUDGE TO: DATE: RE: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS 600 W. CAPITOL, ROOM 423 LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201-3325 (501) 604-5140 Facsimile (501) 604-5149 MEMORANDUM All Hands at 423 U.S. Courthouse September 30, 2002 LRSD case Janet Pu Ilium was, at one time, one of the attorneys for the Little Rock School District. So, she will not be involved in this case in any way whatsoever, directly or indirectly. EXHIBIT A .. , Kay Holt - 09/25/2002 1 U 3 AM Per Judge .. ... To: Mary Johnson/ARED/08/USCOURTS@USCOURTS, Christa Newburg/ARED/08/USCOURTS@USCOURTS, Valerie Glover/ARED/08/USCOURTS@USCOURTS, Christina Conrad/ARED/08/USCOURTS@USCOURTS cc: Subject: LRSD case When Janet comes on board we've got to put a Chinese wall between her and the LRSD case. She was involved in it at some point. EXHIBIT B EDWARD L . WRIGHT (1903-1977) ROBERT S. LINDSEY (1913-1991) ISAAC A. SCOTT, JR . JOHN G. LILE WRIGHT, LINDSEY \u0026amp; JENNINGS LLP ATTORNEYS AT LAW KIMBERLY WOOD TUCKER RAY F . COX , JR . TROY A. PRICE PATRICIA SIEVERS HARRIS JAMES M. MOODY. JR . KATHRYN A . PRYOR GORDON S. RATHER, JR . TERRY L . MATHEWS DAVID M. POWELL ROGER A. GLASGOW C . DOUGLAS BUFORO. JR . PATRICK J . GOSS ALSTON JENNINGS, JR . JOHN R. TISDALE KATH LYN GRAVES M. SAMUEL JONES Ill JOHN WILLIAM SPIVEY Ill LEE J . MULDROW N.M. NORTON CHARLES C. PRICE CHARLES T. COLEMAN JAMES J . GLOVER EDWIN L. LOWTHER, JR. CHARLES L. SCHLUMBERGER WALTER E. MAY GREGORY T. JONES H. KEITH MORRISON BETTINA E . BROWNSTEIN WALTER McSPADDEN ROGER D. ROWE JOHN 0 . DAVIS JUDY SIMMONS HENRY VIA HAND DELIVERY The Honorable Wm. R. Wilson, Jr. United States District Court 600 West Capitol, Room 423 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 -3325 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 DO VE R Writer's Direct Dial No . 501-212-1273 mJones@wlj .com December 16, 2002 J . MARK DAVIS CLAIRE SHOWS HANCOCK KEVIN W. KENNEDY JERRY J . SALLINGS WILLIAM STUART JACKSON MICHAEL 0 . BARNES STEPHEN R. LANCASTER JUDY ROBINSON WILBER KYLE R. WILSON C . TAO BOHANNON KRIS TI M. MOODY J . CHARLES DOUGHERTY M. SEAN HATCH J . ANDREW VINES JUSTIN T. ALLEN CHRISTINE J . DAUGHERTY , Ph .D. ' MICHELLE M . KAEMMERLING ERIKA ROSS SCOTT ANDREW IRBY HOLLY A . ADEE MICHELLE HARGIS DILLARD PATRICK 0 . WILSON Licensed to practice before the United States Patent and Trademark Office RECEIVED DEC 1 7 2002 OfACEOF DESEGREGATION MONITORJNG Re: Little Rock School District v. Pulaski County Special School District; et al. USDC Docket No.: 4:82CV00866WRW Dear Judge Wilson: Enclosed for the Court's review are courtesy copies of the PCSSD's motion as respects Harris Elementary School and the Harris and Sherwood area attendance zones. MSJ:ao Encl. cc/w/encl.: 385422-v1 Hon. J. Thomas Ray Mr. John W. Walker Mr. Dennis R. Hansen Mr. Christopher Heller Mr. Stephen W. Jones Ms. Ann Brown Marshall Mr. Richard Roachell Cordially yours, WRIGHT, LINDSEY \u0026amp; JENNINGS LLP _/fL7P-- uam~ones, Ill IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT V. NO. 4:82CV00866WRW PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL. RECEIVED MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL. KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL. DEC 1 7 2002 OFACE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING PCSSD MOTION TO APPROVE THE RE-DESIGN OF HARRIS ELEMENTARY SCHOOL AND FOR THE REZONING OF THE HARRIS AND SHERWOOD ATTENDANCE ZONES PCCSD for its motion, states: PLAINTIFF DEFENDANTS INTERVENORS INTERVENORS 1. After an exhaustive review and analysis, numerous community meetings and recommendations from the \"Harris Steering Committee\", the PCSSD proposes to revamp the curriculum at Harris Elementary, to designate it as a specialty school and to modify its attendance zones, primarily to reduce the busing burden borne by African American students. 2. Attached as Exhibit A is a narrative and statistical summary of the pro.posed modifications. The narrative includes the particulars of what is proposed, the reasons why, a description of the process followed to reach the recommendations, and a list of the parents, educators, Joshua representatives and others who comprise the - , Harris Steering Committee. 385142-v1 3. Exhibit B is a serial statistical depiction of the proposed student movement, the schools affected and the Geo Codes involved. 4. Attached as Exhibit C are maps depicting the current attendance zones and the proposed modifications. 5. The PCSSD believes that this plan and these changes present the District's best plan for ultimately desegregating Harris Elementary and for addressing needed changes in the described student assignment areas which, in most instances, have not been adjusted since 1989. WHEREFORE, the PCSSD prays that the Court approve its proposed re-design of Harris and the rezoning of the Harris and other Sherwood area attendance zones. 385142-v1 Respectfully submitted, WRIGHT, LINDSEY \u0026amp; JENNINGS LLP 200 West Capitol Avenue, Suite 2200 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-3699 (501) 371-0808 FAX: (501) 376-9442 By __ _,:;...-~----,,\u0026lt;-1===-------- 060) A aunty Special s 2 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE On December f/4, 2002, a copy of the foregoing was served via 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 385142-v1 3 Mr. Dennis R. Hansen 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 Mr. Richard Roachell Roachell Law Firm P.O. Box 17388 Little Rock, Arkansas 72222-7388 -PROPOSED RE-DESIGN OF HARRIS AND REZONING  OF THE HARRIS AND SHERWOOD ATTENDANCE ZONE 2003-2004 November 12, 2002 Executive Summary During the February 12, 2002, Board Meeting the former Superintendent, Dr. Smith, told the Board that outdated attendance zones for Sherwood, Oa.kbrooke, Clinton, and Harris Elementary schools were causing lost enrollment and diminished housing development. He asked that the Board direct the Administration to proceed with steps necessary to bring a defined proposal for Board and court approval. As part of the plan, Dr. Smith asked the Board to approve planning, with community and staff input, for re-designing Harris Elementary, He said that preliminary plans for Harris included more computer technology, a renewed emphasis on academics plus more staff for physical education, music and art, a preschool class, and an extended-year program. The Board voted to undertake planning steps in compliance with the District's desegregation plan to develop attendance rezoning proposals and a re-design and reconstituting of Harris Elementary. To implement the re-design of Harris Elementary during the 2003-2004, it is necessary to have the program planned and to budget for some expenses during the2002-2003 school year. Background It has become necessary to rezone the Harris and Sherwood attendance zones to relieve the burden of busing borne by the black students in the McAlmont, Rixie, and Brushy Island community and white students in the Sherwood community. Students from these two areas have been bused since the beginning of integration in the Pulaski County Special School District. Desegregating Harris Elementary has been difficult because many Sherwood and Indian Hills communities have become more racially balanced to the point that busing is not as necessary. A special program with an acceptable theme has been planned for Harris Elementary. The purpose is to enhance the learning opportunities of black students attending this school and to attract whites that would volunteer because of the special programs offered at the school. Meetings were held on May 13, 2002, May 16, 2002, September 17, 2002, September 24, 2002, and November 4, 2002, to give parents and patrons the opportunity to have input into the process. The Harris Steering Committee was created from the co1mnunity meetings and met on October '14, 2002, October 21, 2002 and October 28, 2002 to help develop plans for the re-design of Hanis Elementaiy School. Representatives from the Office of Desegregation Monitoring, Joshua Intervenors, and PACT attended community and steering committee meetings. EXHIBIT 1 4 REZONING The consideration of maintaining racial balance in the Sherwood schools was done by reassigning students who live in Sherwood tci schools in that community. Tbis includes the students who live east of Hwy 167 in the Sherwood city limits. Proposed Sherwood school attendance zones meet the required 20% racial balance. Clinton Elementary Magnet also located in the Sherwood community meets the inter-district racial balance requirement, which is 50% black and 50% white. Black students who live in the Harris school community, which is comprised ofMcAlmont, Rixie, and Brushy Island, will be reassigned to Harris Elementary. The proposed reassignment of black students to Harris Elementary will increase the black student enrollment from 69% to 80% (see student enrollment data below from Pulaski County Special School District 2002 Quarterly Report). Harris will become a racially identified school with special programs to enhance learning. Harris Elementary Capacity 525 Current Black Population 117 69% Proposed Black Population 187 81% Current White Population 53 31% Proposed White Population 45 19% Total Enrollment 170 Total Enrollment 232 Clinton Elementary Capacity 833 Current Black Population 334 55% Proposed Black Population 316 55% Current White Population 273 45% Proposed White Population 257 45% Total Enrollment 607 Total Enrollment 573 Oakbrooke Elementary Capacity 500 Current Black Population 102 33% Proposed Black Population 156 39% Current White Population 207 67% Proposed White Population 244 61% Total Enrollment 309 Total Enrollment 400 Sherwood Elementary Capacity 460 Current Black Population 123 36% Proposed Black Population 171 43% Current White Enrollment 219 64% Proposed White Enrollment 230 57% Total Enrollment - 342 Total Enrollment 401 Sylvan Hills Elementary Capacity 456 Current Black Population 150 40% Proposed Black Population 126 37% Current White Population 227 60% Proposed White Population 219 63% Total Enrollment 377 Total Emollment 345 2 - PROBLEM DEFINITION The challenge in planning the program for Harris is four-pronged: 1. The specialty program should not duplicate any magnet program in Little Rock or specialty program in Pulaski County; 2. Designate Harris as a racially identifiable school; 3. The program must attract large numbers of white students; 4. The specialty program must attract black students in the Harris attendance zone. Those programs should provide: a. A focus on an enriched health and science curriculum b. Teachers trained in the sciences and technology c. Integrated technology d. An extended year program (YRE) e. Extended time opportunities for students f. Early childhood learning center g. Physical education and wellness Analysis of Alternatives The planning committee started the process by brainstorming about ways to attract students to Harris Elementary. The committee listed everything they believed should be offered. All ideas were discussed; prioritized ideas were researched. Recommendations The Planning Committee proposes the following recommendations for the Board's consideration: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. The overall focus should be an enriched health and science curriculum. Harris Elementary should be designated as a racially identifiable school. Harris Elementary should be officially designated as a specialty school. The program should be interdisciplinary . . An extended year program should be provided with academic intersessions. The facility must be well maintained and attractive. The District should explore ways that the labs, media center and gym could be opened after school and at night. The school must have access to state-of-the-a1i technology. A District pre-school class should be provided. The District should actively seek corporate, research, and community support for the program in addition to partnerships with the medical community at large. The District shall work beyond the elementary level to develop a plan for students' continuation of study. 3 I  12. There should be a strong recruiting and public relations program. 13. Extended time opportunities (before and after school hours) will be made available for students. 14. The program will partner with a District elementary school (majority white) to ensure that both student populations have opportunities for cross-cultural interactions. OBJECTIVE The objective of Harris Elementary Health and Science Specialty School is to provide a rich and challenging curriculum that will attract white students from outside the Harris attendance zone and maintain the students zoned for Harris. An attractive, safe school environment is a necessary component to accomplishing the objective. 4 HARRIS RE-DESIGN AND IMPLEMENTATION PLAN A. Program Planning Responsibility 1. Conduct community meetings Learning Services/Equity 2. Identify Harris Steering Committee Learning Services/Equity Members 3. Develop a Proposal to present to the Harris Steering Committee Board 4. Obtain Board support Learning Services/Equity 5. Submit the Proposal to the court Equity B. Program Implementation Pending Court Approval 1. Explore partnerships with the medical Learning Services community 2. Create job descriptions for the new Learning Services positions 3. Begin building renovations Support Services 4. Develop curriculum for the Health Learning Services Science Specialty Program 5. Order all equipment Learning Services 6. Develop recruitment plan Learning Services/Pupil Personnel 7. Recruit students Learning Services/Pupil Personnel 8. Post new positions Human Resources 9. Hire Harris staff under reconstitution Principal approach 10. Conduct curriculum inservices for the Learning Services/Staff staff Development/Principal 5 When May 2002-2003 Oct2002 Oct-Nov 2002 Nov 12, 2002 Dec 2002 Dec 2002-Mar 2003 Jan 2003 Jan 2003-Aug 2003 Jan 2003-July 2003 Feb-Mar 2003 Jan 2003 Feb-May 2003 April2003 Spring/Summer 2003 June-Aug 2002 HARRIS RE-DESIGN SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Staff a. Specifically hired for position b. Trained in health, science, and technology c. Science specialist d. Health/wellness/P .E.specialist e. Pre-K teacher/Pre-K Aide f. Nurse 2. Facilities a. Well-maintained and attractive b. Open after hours c. High tech d. Science Lab e. Health Fitness Center f. Early Childhood Center 3. Curriculum a. Interdisciplinary b. Enriched science and health curriculum aligned with state standards c. Integrated technology 4. Organization a. Year round education (YRE) b. Strong security c.  Extended day (before and after school) d. Community based 6 HARRIS RE-DESIGN ESTIMATED COST ANALYSIS District Estimated Cost Specialty Personal \u0026amp; Equipment Science Specialist . lFTE 49,313.00 Health/W ellness/P .E. Specialist lFTE 49,313.00 Nurse lFTE 40,000.00 PCSSD Early Childhood Center Start-up 11,000.00 PCSSD PK Teacher 1 FTE 49,313.00 PCS SD PK Aide 17,000.00 Head Start PK Teacher Head Start PK Aide Head Start - Start Up Year Round Education Principal 12 month contract 18,600.00 Intersession Teachers (15 days) 29,089.00 Transportation (15 days) 7,217.55 Utilities (15 days) 3,000.00 Bookkeeper 12 contract 2,141.00 Custodian 3,385.00 Extended Day Teachers after school 51,264.00 Teachers before school 8,544.00 Voyager Program 2,000.00 Utilities 15,000.00 Extended Day for 15 Intersession Days Intersession before school 480.00 Intersession after school 2,880.00 Technology Computer Lab (3 0 stations) Science Lab Totals 359,539.55 Other Funding Source Cost 25,000.00 25,000.00 14,000.00 78,000.00 10,000.00 152,000.00 Grants and other Sources of Revenue will be actively pursued to fund these programs. n1, c... c.. D... ), rc? V t\\- -- ,/,- c.1 o V,, }l)\\.i,\"' ,~ '- ,,,,.,. ..... ' \\ ~ ~ -t .J T V 7 \" . HARRIS RE-DESIGN - CAPITAL OUTLAY ESTIMATE Item Cost Roof 500,000.00 Sports Floor 50,000.00 Water Proof the Gym and Gutters 30,000.00 Electrical/Technology Upgrade 200,000.00 Structural Integrity 10,000.00 Renovate Bathrooms 20,000.00 Heating and Air 40,000.00 Flooring 50,000.00 Paint Interior of Buildings District Persom1el Spray Paint Interior of Gym District Personnel Total 900,000.00 - - 8 - Chris Young Stephanie J?onald Bobby Carey Cherrie Johnson Gwen Williams Horace Smith Delores Tate Johnnie Mass Val Marshall Joseph Taylor Ophelia J olmson Victor Roy Florence Lyons Mable Bynum Vicky Drake Ricki Bailey Linda Remele Karl Brown Brenda Bowles Shari 'Coston Carolyn Cooley Monica Bolden Deen Minton Harris Steering Conm1ittee 2002-2003 School School School School Board ODM Community Community Community (Parent) Community Community Community (Parent) Community Community Community (Parent) District District District District District Joshua Joshua (Parent) PACT 9 Proposed changes Harris-Sherwood Areas October 22, 2002 Harris students west of Hwy. 67 /167 Loss to Harris Black students 38 White Students 32 Total 70 Students east of Hwy. 67/167 Black White Total Loss to Sherwood Elem. 12 2 14 Loss to Oakbrooke Elem. 5 0 5 Loss to Clinton Elem. 16 17 33 Loss to Sylvan Hills Elem. 26 0 26 Loss to Cato Elem. 36 1 37 Loss to Adkins Elem. 11 4 15 106 24 130 Harris Elem. Gain 143 students Lose 70 students net gain 73 students Black 194 81 % White 45 19% Total 239 Dupree Elem. Gain 8 students Lose 0 students net gain 8 students Black 115 34% White 223 66% Total 348 Sherwood Elem. Gain 62 students Lose 14 students net gain 48 students Black 171 42% White 230 58% Total 394 Oakbrooke Elem. Gain 52 students Lose 5 students net gain 47 students Black 156 39% White 244 61% Total 400 Clinton Elem. Gain 2 students Lose 33 students net loss 31 students Black 316 55% White 257 45% Total 573 Sylvan Hills Elem. Gain O students Lose 26 students net loss 26 students Black 126 37% White 219 63% Total 345 Cato Elem. Gain 0 students Lose 37 students net loss 37 students Black 66 19% White 279 81 % Total 345 Adkins Elem. Gain 0 students Lose 15 students net loss 15 students Black 132 54% White 112 46% Total 244 EXHIBIT I STUDENTS IN HARRIS AND CONTIGUOUS ZONES (Without Integrative Transfers) ( east of Hwy 67-167) September 2002 Geo Codes B W 1501 1505 1510 1512 1515 1518 1521 1556 1557 1558 1559 1560 1561 1596 3730 3733 3755 3756 3757 3902 3940 3963 3975 0105 0141 0 4 7 5 2 0 11 21 15 0 13 15 4 1 7 5 5 12 5 6 0 11 9 14 22 Totals 194 81 % 0 2 5 0 0 4 4 0 0 0 1 4 6 0 0 Area in McAlmont 0 8 2 8 0 0 0 0 1 0 45 19% 239 total STUDENTS IN HARRIS LIVING IN SHERWOOD or JACKSONVILLE (West of Hwy. 67-167) September 2002 Geo Codes B W J acksonvi I le 3988 3989 3990 Totals Sherwood 0 2 0 2 2 0 4 6 South of Kiehl from Summitt to Hwy 1 07 1544 1555 1572 1573 1575 1594 1595 0 5 0 0 0 0 1 4 0 4 0 0 0 0 New Manson Rd. area Geo-code 48 0 To Jacksonville area school To Sherwood Elem East of 67 /167 in Sherwood City Limits Geo Codes 3730 3758 1525 0106 Totals B 0 1 1 0 1 66 w 2 0 0 6 16 To Sherwood Elem North of Kiehl east of Summitt to Hwy. 67-167 Geo Codes 1528 1531 1562 1563 1564 1565 1566 1567 1568 Totals B 4 0 0 0 1 3 2 0 0 32 w 4 1 0 0 3 0 7 1 1 20 Revised Geo-code 15-36 to Clinton Gap Creek/Austin Lakes 2 0 To Oakbrooke Elem Total 2 - Transfers out of Harris Elem for 2002-2003 September 2002 lntradistrict Transfers Harris area Harris area east of Hwy 67/167 west of Hwy 67 /167 Sherwood Elem. 1 2 Sylvan Hills Elem. 1 3 Oakbrooke Elem. 0 1 Cato .Elem. 0 6 Clinton Elem. 1  Totals 3 18 Integrative Transfers Sherwood Elem. 4 22 Sylvan Hills Elem. 0 9 Oakbrooke Elem. 2 47 Cato Elem. 0 0 Clinton Elem 1 ~ Totals 7 81 Grand Total 10 99 EXHIBIT C Current Attendance Zones and Proposed Modifications EDWARD L. WRIGHT (1003-1077) ROBERTS . LINDSEY (1'113 - 1'191 ) ISAAC A. SCOTT , JR . JOHN G. LILE WRIGHT, LINDSEY \u0026amp; JENNINGS LLP ATTORNEYS AT LAW KIMBERLY WOOD TUCKER RAY F. COX, JR . TROY A. PRICE PATRICIA SIEVERS HARRIS JAMES M. MOODY. JR . KATHRYN A. PRYOR GORDON S. RATHER, JR. TERRY L. MATHEWS DAVID M. POWELL 200 WEST CAPITOL AVENUE SUITE 2300 ROGER A. GLASGOW LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201-3699 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 CHARLES T. COLEMAN JAMES J. GLOVER EDWIN L. LOWTHER, JR . CHARLESL. SCHLUMBERGER WALTER E. MAY GREGORY T. JONES H. KEITH MORRISON BETTINA E. BROWNSTEIN WALTER Mc:SPAOOEN ROGER 0 . ROWE JOHN 0 . DAVIS JUOY SIMMONS HENRY VIA HAND DELIVERY The Honorable Wm. R. Wilson, Jr. U.S. District Courthouse (501 ) 371-0808 FAX (501) 376-9442 www .wlj.com OF COUNSEL ALSTON JENNINGS RONALD A . MAY BRUCE R. LINDSEY JAMES R. VAN DOVER Writer's Direct Dial No. 501-212-1273 mjones@wlj.com December 18, 2002 600 West Capitol Avenue, Suite 360 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 J . MARK DAVIS CLAIRE SHOWS HANCOCK KEVIN W. KENNEDY JERRY J. SALLINGS WILLIAM STUART JACKSON MICHAEL 0 . BARNES STEPHEN R. LANCASTER JUDY ROBINSON WILBER KYLE R. WILSON C. TAO BOHANNON KRISTI M. MOODY J, CHARLES DOUGHERTY\" M. SEAN HATCH J. ANDREW VINES JUSTIN T . ALLEN CHR ISTINE J. DAUGHERTY , Ph .D. MICHELLE M, KAEMMERLING ERIKA ROSS SCOTT ANDREW IRBY HOLLY A. ADEE MICHELLE HARGIS DILLARD PATRICK 0 . WILSON Licensed to praclice before the United States Patent and Trademark Office RECEIVED DEC 1 9 2002 OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING Re: Little Rock School District v. Pulaski County Special School District; et al. USDC Docket No.: 4:82CV00866WRW Dear Judge Wilson: I enclose a courtesy copy of the PCSSD reply to Joshua's response to our Maumelle school site motion. The original has been filed and the parties served. Since I know that the Court will entertain precedents for orders, I enclose a proposed precedent for the Court's review. Thank you very much. Cordially yours, WRIGHT, LINDSEY \u0026amp; JENNINGS LLP MSJ:ao Encl. cc/w/encl.: 6-~ 386128-v1 Honorable J. Thomas Ray All Counsel of Record IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS 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. RECEIVED DEC 19 2002 OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING PLAINTIFF DEFENDANTS INTERVENORS INTERVENORS PCSSD'S REPLY TO JOSHUA INTERVENOR$' RESPONSE TO MOTION REGARDING SITE SELECTION AT MAUMELLE AND FOR OTHER RELIEF The key provision of the Joshua response is the second sentence which states: \"Joshua does not opposed (sic) the site for it is in keeping with the provision of the revised desegregation plan.\" Accordingly, and because the acquisition and construction schedule could be compromised if a delay is too extensive, the PCSSD believes that an order should issue forthwith approving the site and reserving for future resolution the remaining issues raised by Joshua. The remaining issues, while important, should not hold hostage the simple matter of the site selected. For instance, Joshua professes to be concerned regarding racial balance, busing burdens and recruitment. The PCSSD went to considerable lengths in its motion to explain these issues. Its principal focus will be to recruit those elementary age children it has already recruited from Little Rock to Crystal Hill Elementary School. The same emphasis will be had at Pine Forrest and Oak Grove Elementary although their 383980-v1 numbers are much smaller. There is no reason to re-invent the wheel. The school will be desegregated if the PCSSD is even reasonably successful in recruiting AfricanAmerican children who have already volunteered to attend these elementary schools. As we explained in our motion, there will be no \"burden\" associated with transportation that does not already exist. The M to M students make a voluntary decision to transfer and volunteer to ride a bus from their neighborhood to these schools. The mere opening of a new middle school will not change this phenomenon. Further, it should be obvious that the PCSSD projections contained in the motion assume that the school will open at capacity. It will not. It will likely be several years before population growth takes it to capacity. Accordingly, by opening at substantially below its ultimate capacity, the numbers of minority students currently projected should result in an initial racial proportion that is far higher in minorities than that projected in the motion. The funding issue is more fundamental ; however, the state cannot simply unilaterally end funding, but would have to have the permission of this Court to do so. It is the position of the PCS SD that the 1989 settlement agreement contains no \"sunset\" provision regarding M to M funding and that it will therefore continue into perpetuity. Finally, the PCSSD seriously doubts that the ODM is preparing a \"report\". Be that as it may, the PCSSD has no reason to believe that the ODM will recommend against the site selected. Accordingly, as we noted at the outset, an order should issue forthwith approving the school site and reserving, if the Court desires to do so, any remaining issues for future resolution. 383980-v1 2 -- - -- - ----  Respectfully submitted, WRIGHT, LINDSEY \u0026amp; JENNINGS LLP 200 West Capitol Avenue, Suite 2200 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-3699 (501) 371-0808 FAX: (501) 376-9442 B _...,,....:::,__--'\u0026lt;------\":::.....,1=-'~-----nty Special CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE On December 18, 2002, a copy of the foregoing was served via 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 383980-v1 Mr. Dennis R. Hansen 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 Mr. Richard Roachell Roachell Law Firm P.O. Box 17388 Little Rock, Arkansas 72222-7388 M.Sa 3 - ---- - - - IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS 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. ORDER PLAINTIFF DEFENDANTS INTERVENORS INTERVENORS Pending before the Court is the PCSSD motion seeking approval of a middle school site to be constructed at the intersection of Murphy and Carnahan Drive in Maumelle, Arkansas. The motion is granted to this extent and the PCSSD is authorized to pursue purchase of the site and construction of the new middle school. Any and all other issues raised by any party as respects this matter are reserved for future disposition. 386131-v1 SO ORDERED this_ day of December, 2002. United States District Judge Wm. R. Wilson, Jr. IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS 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. ORDER PLAINTIFF DEFENDANTS INTERVENORS INTERVENORS Pending before the Court is the PCSSD motion seeking approval of a middle school site to be constructed at the intersection of Murphy and Carnahan Drive in Maumelle, Arkansas. The motion is granted to this extent and the PCSSD is authorized to pursue purchase of the site and construction of the new middle school. Any and all other issues raised by any party as respects this matter are reserved for future disposition. 386131-v1 SO ORDERED this_ day of December, 2002. United States District Judge Wm. R. Wilson, Jr. AO 72A (Rev.8/82) IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT vs. 4:82CV00866 WRW/JTR PLAINTIFF PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. I, et al. MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, et al. KA THERINE KNIGHT, et al. RECEIVED DEC 2 3 2002 OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING DEFENDANTS INTER VEN ORS INTER VEN ORS ORDER 1. Joshua lntervenors move to recuse me as the presiding Judge in this case under 28 U .S.C.  455(b )(2) and further ask me to vacate my Orders, rulings, and judgments in this case under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)(6). See Motion for Recusal of District Judge and for Vacating of Orders, Rulings and Judgments ( docket no. 3 710). The recusal provision at issue reads, in pertinent part, as follows: (b) [Any judge, justice, or magistrate of the United States] shall also disqualify himself in the following circumstances: * * * (2) Where in private practice he served as lawyer in the matter in controversy ... . 1 Rule 60 on vacating Orders reads, in pertinent part, as follows: (b) On motion and upon such terms as are just, the court may relieve a party or a party's legal representative from a final 128 U.S.C.  455(b)(2). A072A (Rev.8/82} 2. judgment, order, or proceeding for the following reasons: . . . ( 6) any other reason justifying relief from the operation of the judgment. 2 In my previous Orders,3 addressing Joshua Intervenors ' \"exploratory\" motions regarding recusal,4 I discussed most, if not all, of the points in Joshua Intervenors ' current recusal motion. Nonetheless, I will address those points again. 3. It appears to me that there are at least two dispositive answers to Joshua Intervenors' Motion for Recusal: a. My brief appearance, over a decade ago, as counsel for the Judge then presiding, the late Henry Woods, in a mandamus proceeding before the Eighth Circuit, touched neither the top nor bottom side of any of the issues that have been before me since I was assigned this case in January of this b. year. At the time I was assigned this case, Joshua Intervenors ' lead counsel knew or should have recalled my brief, isolated appearance 13 years ago, but posed no objection until after my September 13, 2002 decision on LRSD's Motion for an Immediate Declaration of Unitary Status. 2FED. R. C1v. P. 60(b)(6). 3See October 29, 2002 Drder Denying Motion for Hearing Regarding Relevance of 28 U.S.C.  455 to the Present Proceedings at docket no. 3695; November 12, 2002 Order Denying Motion for Extension of Time to File Notice of Appeal at docket no. 3701; November 12, 2002 Amended Order Denying Motion for Extension of Time to File Notice of Appeal at docket no. 3702; and November 12, 2002 Order at 3703. 4See Joshua's October 25, 2002 Motion for Hearing Regarding Relevance of 28 U.S.C.  455 to the Present Proceedings at docket no. 3693; and November 8, 2002 Motion for Extension of Time to File Notice of Appeal at docket no. 3700. -2- A072A (Rev.B/82) 4. In 1987, I represented Judge Woods before the Eighth Circuit in a mandamus proceeding initiated by LRSD, which sought to disqualify Judge Woods from presiding over this case. That mandamus action was a separate and distinct proceeding, involving separate and distinct issues, that were unrelated to the merits of the underlying school desegregation case. Thus, my brief role as Judge Woods' attorney in that long ago mandamus proceeding in no way constituted my serving as a lawyer \"in the matter in controversy,\" as that phrase is used in 28 U.S.C.  455(b)(2).5 Thus, I feel sure that 28 U.S .C.  455(b)(2) does not require my recusal. 5. Joshua Intervenors complain that, when I entered the case earlier this year, I failed to advise them of my long ago appearance on behalf of Judge Woods in that mandamus proceeding. They were not \"advised\" because they knew. Joshua lntervenors ' lead counsel, Mr. John Walker, was deeply immersed in this case in 1987, and has been continuously since then. After LRSD initiated the mandamus action against Judge Woods, Mr. Walker joined in seeking to have him removed from the case. This is reflected in the reported opinion,6 and is a matter of public knowledge. See Attachment A. 6. Mr. Walker avers that he forgot about my brief appearance in the case. The LRSD responds: The fact that counsel for Joshua \"forgot\" the Court's earlier representation ofJudge Woods perhaps provides the best evidence that the issues are unrelated. 7 51 also believe it is significant that, in representing Judge Woods, I was not acting as counsel for any of the parties in the underlying school desegregation case. 6See LRSD v. PCSSD, 839 F.2d 1296, 1301 (8th Cir. 1988). 7Memorandum Brief in Support of Plaintiffs Response to Motion for Recusal at 5. -3- AO 72A (Rev.8/82) Logic and common sense strongly support LRSD's argument. Furthermore, even accepting Joshua's counsel's statement that he forgot about my representation of Judge Woods, the Eighth Circuit has held that litigants \"choose counsel at their peril,\" and, therefore, the mistakes of counsel are imputed to litigants.8 In view of the certain knowledge of Joshua lntervenors' lead counsel of my involvement in the mandamus proceeding in 1987, it seems to me that the averred lack of knowledge on the part of his associate counsel is irrelevant. 7. In addition, Joshua 's Motion for Recusal is not timely. The Eighth Circuit has consistently required actions under 455(b) to be timely, and has subscribed to the view that \"motions to recuse should not 'be viewed as an additional arrow in the quiver of advocates in the face of . .. adverse rulings.\"'9 In affirming Judge Woods' decision not to disqualify, Judge Richard Arnold wrote: At the outset, we note the irony that most of the major parties to this litigation have at some point sought the removal of the trial judge. Not surprisingly, the parties have generally discovered grounds for disqualification at approximately the same time that the District Court has ruled for their adversaries on the merits. The recusal statute does not provide a vehicle for parties to shop among judges. 10 Mr. John Walker was counsel ofrecord for the Joshua Intervenors at their first appearance in this case back in 1984, and he has remained their counsel of record since that time. At the time ' 8See Inman v. American Home Furniture Placement, In c., 120 F.3d 117, 118-19 (8th Cir. 1997). 9 In re Kansas Public Employees Retirement System, 85 F.3d 1353 (8th Cir. 1996) (citation omitted). 10LRSD V. PCSSD, 839 F.2d 1296, 1302 (8th Cir. 1988). -4- AO 72A {Rev.8/82) I entered this case, Mr. Walker knew or certainly should have recalled that I had represented Judge Woods in the 1987 mandamus proceedings in which he joined with counsel for LRSD in seeking to disqualify Judge Woods from presiding over this case. Yet, only after an unfavorable result did Mr. Walker's memory become refreshed regarding my involvement in the 1987 mandamus proceeding, followed in short order by his decision to seek to have me recuse. The fact that Joshua's motion follows a ruling adverse to them renders the motion suspect as a litigation strategy. 11 The court \"cannot permit a litigant to test the mind of the trial judge like a boy testing the temperature of the water in the pool with his toe, and if found to his liking, decides to take a plunge.\"12 8. In their Motion for Recusal, Joshua 's lawyers allege that I decided the merits of this case based on \"fealty and deference to Judge Henry Woods, the individual whose positions [I] was obligated to champion, when serving as an attorney in this case.\" 13 Joshua 's counsel seem to base this assertion on the following circumstances alleged in their motion: After the time that [I] represented Judge Woods in this case, Judge Woods expressed negative views on the fees for attorneys in the case, particularly the Joshua lntervenors .... In the opinion of September 13, 2002, [I] drew upon (at 43) and built upon (at 38-44) Judge Woods' conclusion about attorneys' fees, although recognizing that the matter was not directly relevant to the issue of unitary status ... (at 40). . . . It is reasonable to conclude that Judge Woods' views about attorneys' fees in this case had a greater influence on [me], after receiving assignment of 11 See United States v. Tucker, 82 F.3d 1423, 1425-26 (8th Cir. 1996). 121n re United Shoe Machine,y Co,p., 276 F.2d 77, 79 (1st Cir. 1960) (citation omitted). 13Motion for Recusal at 6. -5- AO 72A (Aev.8/82) this case, because [I] had earlier assumed an advocacy role for Judge Woods by representing him in this case. 14 My representation of Judge Woods in the mandamus action did not have even the slightest connection with the issue of attorneys' fees in this case. A reading of my September 13 Order in its entirety reveals that I criticize fees received by the entire professional group in this case, not just Joshua's counsel. 15 9. Regarding my employment of Janet Pulliam, 16 I fall in line with a recent decision of the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals. That Court, in Byrne v. Nez hat, 17 held that recusal was not required where a judge's law clerk had previously worked for a law firm representing one of the parties because the judge immediately isolated the law clerk from the case. Ms. Pulliam has been completely separated from this case at all times. She has not and will not have any connection with this case. 10. Finally, Joshua's counsel asserts that I \"held negative views about Mr. Walker's earlier role in this case\"18 and that I had \"an unfavorable image of [Mr. Walker] due to the court's 14Motion for Recusal at 5. 15lnterestingly, while this point appears to be lost on Joshua's counsel, they do concede that the concerns I expressed regarding the fees that have been paid to the professional group have nothing to do with the merits of LRSD 's Motion seeking unitary status. 16Joshua lntervenors have apparently abandoned this point because it is not raised in their Motion for Recusal. For the record, it should be noted that Ms. Pulliam began her employment with me several weeks after I entered my September 13, 2002 Memorandum Opinion ruling on LRSD's Motion for an Immediate Declaration of Unitary Stats. 17261 F.3d 1075 (] Ith Cir. 2001). 18See Joshua's Motion for Recusal at 6. -6- AO 72A (Rev.8/82) perception of his role regarding attorneys' fees. \" 19 Both of these purely speculative assertions are supported by no facts and are patently untrue. In my September 13, 2002 Memorandum Opinion (docket no. 3675), I expressly recognized that Mr. Walker \"has manned the barricades of civil rights litigation in Arkansas for over four decades and that he has a reputation for never yielding on matters of principle.\" Id. at 41. If at the time I entered that decision I held a \"negative\" or \"unfavorable\" image of Mr. Walker, as he alleges, I most certainly would not have paid him such a tribute. 11 . Joshua's Motion to Recuse is DENIED. Likewise, Joshua's request under Rule 60(b )(6) that I vacate my orders, rulings, and judgments in this case is DENIED since no valid reason justifying relief has been presented. ~ IT IS SO ORDERED this~O day of December, 2002. Wm. R. Wilson, Jr. UNITED ST ATES DISTRICT JUDGE THIS DOCUMl::1\\JT ENTEREO ON DOCKET SHEET IN COMPLIANCE WITH RULE 58 ANC(!Q~~~:: ON !8'~-~y~ . ' 9See Joshua's Memorandum in Support of Motion for Recusal at 12. -7- JOHN W. WALKER SHAWN CHILDS Michael E. Gans, Clerk O. S. Court of Appeals JOHN W. WALKER, P.A. ATTORNEY AT LAW 1723 BROADWAY LITTLE ROCK, AR.KANSAS 72206 TELEPHONE (501) 374-3758 FA,'{ (501) 374-4187 December 22, 2002 111 South 10th Street - Room 24 . 329 St. Louis, MO 63102 Re : 02 - 3867 Little Rock School District v . Joshua Intervenors Dear Mr. Gans, OF COUNSEL ROBERT McHENRY. PA. DONNA J. McHENltY  8210 HENDERSON RO . .\\D LIITLE ROCK, ARK.-1.NS.\"8 72210 PHONE: (501) 372-3425  F.-\\X (501) 372-3428 ElvL-\\JL: mchenryd@swbell.net RECEIVED DEC 2 6 2002 OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING This letter addresses several issues in connection with this appeal . Transcriots All t,ranscripts needed for this appeal had been prepared earlier for counsel's use in the District Court. Method of Preparation of Appendix The parties will submit separate appendices . Desianation of Record (Appellant) Joshua Intervenors ' designation is attached to this letter. Statement of Issues (Appellant) Joshua Intervenors' statement of i ssues is attached to this letter. cc Chris Heller (LRSD ) other counsel of record in the District Court Aoceal No . 02 - 3867 Little Rock School Dist. v. Joshua Intervenors Joshua Tntervenors ' Desianation of ~he Record (1 . ) docket entries :for the period f.::-om January 1, 1998 to date (2 . ) Exhibits 543 to 872 (e!'ld of list} (all exhibits are marked court exhibits) (3 . ) Pulaski County School Desegregation Case Settlement Agreement, March , 1989 (As Revised September 18, 1989) (4 . ) Joshua Opposition LO Little Rock Compliance Report , 6- 25 - 01 (5 . ) Order , 8- 20 - 01 ( 6 . ) Order 10-3 - 01 (7 . ) Response by LRSD, 10 - 5- 01 (8 . ) Order , 10-17-01 (item 3521) ( 9 . ) Ceder , 11-13-01 ( 10 . ) Order , 11-13 - 01 (1 1 . ) Order , 12 - 12 - 01 (12 . ) LRSD , Motion, Memorandum, and Statement of Facts Not in Dispute , 3- 15 - 02 (13 . ) Order, 5-7 - 02 (14 . ) Order , 5- 9- 02 ( 1 5 . ) Order , 5- 15- 02 ( 16 . ) Joshua Intervenors ' ( 1 7 . ) Order, 9- 12 - 02 ( 18 . ) Order, 10 - 11 - 02 ( 19 . ) Order, ll-12 - 02 Opposition, 5 - 30 - 02 (20 . ) t'1otice of Appeal, 11 - 12 - 02 (21 . ) transcripts Subst antive Hearinqs 7-5-01 7 - 6- 01 8-1 - 01 8-2 - 01 11-19-01 11-20- 01 7- 22 - 02 7 - 23--'02 7-24 - 02 Hearings on Procedural Matters 6- 29 - 01 7 - 9- 01 8 - 17 - 01 11-13- 01 12-11- 01 (22 . ) The Memorandum Opinion and Judgment, 9- 13- 02 and Order 10-11-02 Appeal No . 02-3867 Little Rock School Dist . v . Joshua Intervenors Joshua Intervenors' Desianation OT Tssues (1 . ) whether some of the District Court's findings of substantial compliance with the Revised Plan were induced by legal error in construing the Plan? (2 . ) whether the district court made clearly erroneous findings of fact regarding student discipline, steps to improve and remediate the academic achievement of African American students, participation in extracurricular activities and advanced and enriched courses, guidance and counseling services, and plan compliance ~t Central High School? ( 3 . ) whether the Revised Plan required that the LRSD show progress in eliminating the racial achievement gap in order to establish substantial compliance with the Plan? (4 . ) whether in the course of assessing the LRSD's compliance with the Revised Plan the District Court failed to employ monitor ing by the Office of Desegregation Monitoring (ODM) in the manner required by this Court in 1990? (5 . ) whether the District Court erred in holding the Joshua Intervenors to the requirement LDa~ they exhaust the Plan compliance remedies before they could contend thaL the LRSD did noL substantia~ly comply with a requirement of the Plan? ( 6 . ) whether the Distr~c~ Court er~ed in imposing an evidentiary burden on the Joshua Intervenors regarding Lhe Joshua monitoring activities prior to March 15, 2001?    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"}],"pages":{"current_page":35,"next_page":36,"prev_page":34,"total_pages":155,"limit_value":12,"offset_value":408,"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}}]}}