{"response":{"docs":[{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1376","title":"Proceedings: ''Joshua: Objection to Little Rock School District's Motion for Unitary Status''","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":["2001-11-19"],"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--21st Century","Little Rock School District","School districts--Arkansas--Pulaski County","Education--Arkansas","Educational law and legislation","Education--Evaluation","School administrators","School integration","Court records"],"dcterms_title":["Proceedings: ''Joshua: Objection to Little Rock School District's Motion for Unitary Status''"],"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/1376"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["Available for use in research, teaching, and private study. Any other use requires permission from the Butler Center."],"dcterms_medium":["legal documents"],"dcterms_extent":["97 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1714","title":"Court filings: District Court, memorandum brief in support of motion to disqualify Judge Susan Webber Wright","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":["2001-11-16"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System"],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--21st Century","Little Rock School District","Office of Desegregation Monitoring (Little Rock, Ark.)","Education--Arkansas","Educational law and legislation","Educational planning","Education--Evaluation","Education and state","School management and organization","School integration","Court records","Judicial process"],"dcterms_title":["Court filings: District Court, memorandum brief in support of motion to disqualify Judge Susan Webber Wright"],"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/1714"],"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":["36 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":["Wright, Susan Webber, 1948-"],"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"This transcript was create using Optical Character Recognition (OCR) and may contain some errors.  J:.a~;..~- DISTRICT COURT -~ Cl1N DISTRICT ARKANSAS IN THE UNITED STATES DISTR1CT COURT EASTERN DISTRJCT OF ARKANSAS NOV 16 2001 WESTER.i\"l DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT V. CASE NO. 4:82CV00866SWW PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRJCT NO. 1, ET AL :MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL !.\",:~.;rv:: \\~.1 : ~ ':17.~ ' r '-  .. MEMORANDUM BRJEF IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO DISQUALIFY JAMESw M By:  cCORMACK, CLERK bi:Pc.!lRR' PLAINTIFF DEFENDANTS INTERVENORS INTERVENORS Disqualification of federal justices, judges and magistrates is governed in part by 28 U.S.C.  455, which provides as follows in subsection (a): Any justice,judge, or magistrate of the United States shall disqualify himselfin any proceeding in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned. Inliljebergv. Health Services Acquisition Corp., 486 U.S. 847, 108 S.Ct. 2194, 100L.Ed.2d 855 (1988), the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed the disqualification of a trial judge who was a trustee of a university which had an interest in the case, notwithstanding the trial judge had no personal knowledge of the transaction at issue and did not attend a meeting of the trustees where the transaction was discussed. The Court held that scienter was not an element ofa  455(a) violation, stating that disqualification \"does not depend upon whether or not the judge actually knew of facts creating an appearance of impropriety, so long as the public might reasonably believe that he or she -1- knew.\" 486 U.S. at 860. Commenting on the connection between the important public policy of confidence in the judiciary and the appropriate inquiry under 455(a), the Court stated: Id. at 864-865. The problem ... is that people who have not served on the bench are often all too willing to indulge suspicions and doubts concerning the integrity of judges. The very purpose of  455(a) is to promote confidence in the judiciary by avoiding even the appearance of impropriety whenever possible. Thus, it is critically important in a case of this kind to identify the facts that might reasonably cause an objective observer to question [the judge's] impartiality. Section 455(a) is not concerned with actual bias. \"Disqualification is required ifareasonable person who knew the circumstances would question the judge's impartiality, even though no actual bias or prejudice has been shown.\" Gray v. University of Arkansas, 883 F.2d 1394, 1398 (8th Cir. 1989) ( citing United States v. Poludniak, 657 F .2d 948 (8th Cir. 1981 )). See also Liteky v. United States, 510 U.S. 540, 548, 114 S.Ct. 1147, 127 L.Ed.2d 474 (1994) (stating that grounds for disqualification under 455(a) should be \"evaluated on an objective basis, so that what matters is not the reality of bias or prejudice but its appearance\"). In United States v. Tucker, 78 F .3d 1313 (8th Cir. 1996), the Eighth Circuit reversed and remanded the dismissal of an indictment brought by the Independent Counsel against Governor Tucker and ordered that the case be reassigned on remand to a different judge. The Court relied upon \"the high profile of the Independent Counsel's work and of this case in particular,\" together with newspaper articles establishing connections between the trial judge, the President and Mrs. Clinton and Governor Tucker. 78 F.3d at 1325. The Court cited 28 U.S.C.  2106 as authority for the reassignment order, but incorporated and applied the \"appearance of impartiality\" standard from  455(a). Id. at 1324. -2- In In re Boston's Children First, 244 F .3d 164 (1st Cir. 200 I), involving a challenge to - elementary school assignments based upon race, the First Circuit ordered the disqualification of the trial judge under 455(a) due to public comments on the case. In response to criticism that she had certified a class in prior litigation before resolving standing issues, but had failed to immediately certify a class in the pending case, the judge made the following statements to the local newspaper: In the [prior] case, there was no issue as to whether [the plaintiffs] were injured. It was absolutely clear every woman had a claim. This is a more complex case. 244 F.3d at 166. While making clear that there was no finding of actual bias or violation of ethical responsibilities by the trial judge, the Court noted that the school assignment program was a matter of significant local concern and that the judge's comments were reasonably open to misinterpretation. The Court further found that \"a reasonable person might interpret [the judge's] comments as a preview of a ruling on the merits of petitioner's motion for class certification, despite the fact that defendants had not yet filed a response to that motion.\" Id. at 170. Assuming that the trial judge's comments in In re B?ston 's Children First reasonably could be understood as a preview of her ruling on class certification, the comments were, at the most, subtle and indirect. Indeed, in denying a petition for rehearing en bane, the Court acknowledged that disqualification was a close question on the facts before it and that disqualification under 455(a) . generally required a \"case-by-case determination.\" Id. at 171 . Comparison \\vith the instant case is instructive, however, because the comments of the Court as reported in the Arkansas Times article were neither subtle nor indirect. Just as in In re Boston's Children First, the Court's comments here addressed a case pending before her on a matter of significant public concern. Unlike In re Boston's Children First, the Court's comments appear to take direct aim at the soon-to-be-filed Compliance -3- Report, the issue of the LRSD's unitary status and the possible end of court supervision. There is hardly any need for interpretation with regard to the Court's intentions or expectations concerning the future progress of the case. The fact that the Court's meaning was reasonably clear to those present is indicated by the reported reaction. Some parents of public school children expressed \"dismay\" at the Court's remarks. Others received the same comments with \"boisterous applause.\" Finally, subsequent developments in the case have given the LRSD reasonable grounds to believe that the Federal Monitor may have pre-judged the issue of unitary status and that, regardless of the Monitor's personal opinions and conclusions, the Monitor may have become an evidentiary source on the merits of unitary status through her ex parte communications with the Court. These facts have come to light through the events surrounding the Court's decision to allow the ODM monitors to function, not as a facilitating participant in the remedial process, as directed by the Revised Plan( 10), but as potential adverse witnesses. In addition to supporting the suggestion of an appearance of partiality under 455( a), the ex parte communications are separately disqualifying pursuant to 28 U.S.C.  455(b)(l) and Canon 3A(4) of the Code of Conduct for United States Judges, 175 F.R.D. 363, 367 (1998). In Edgar v. K.L., 93 F.3d 256 (7th Cir. 1996), the Seventh Circuit disqualified a trial judge in litigation challenging the constitutionality of the Illinois mental health system. The Court found that at least one ex parte meeting betweei: the judge and the members of a court-appointed panel of mental health experts had addressed the merits of the case. The Court noted that the \"discussions in chambers were calculated, material, and wholly unnecessary\" and that two members of the panel had become partisan by their public criticisms of the state's mental health system. 93 F.3d at 259- 260. Compare Association of Mexican-American Educators v. State of California, 195 F.3d 465, -4- 493 (9th Cir. 1999) (finding no evidence that the district court had relied upon a court-appointed technical advisor as \"a source of evidence\"); and Liddell v. Board of Education of City of St. Louis, 105 F.3d 1208, 1211-1212 (8th Cir. 1997) (noting with approval a ruling by the district court that court-ordered negotiations between a settlement coordinator and the parties \"would be confidential from the court and outside parties\"). Significantly, the trial court in Edgar v. K.L. refused to allow the defendants to discover the content of the ex parte communications and invoked a \"judicial privilege\" with respect to them. The Seventh Circuit ruled: 93 F.3d at 258. The judge did not elaborate on the nature, extent, or legal support for his claim of \"judicial privilege,\" but a phrase of that kind usually refers to the deliberative process. No privilege covers arrangement of administrative details ... To invoke a privilege is therefore to confess that the discussions covered the substance of potential testimony and the conduct of the litigation - and if this is not so in fact, it is nonetheless what we must assume, because no evidence in the record undermines the inferences naturally to be drawn from the outline for the September 7 meeting. Likewise, in the present case, the Court has invoked a privilege with respect to the ex parte conversations between the Court and the Federal Monitor and has prohibited the LRSD from discovering from the Federal Monitor the content of those conversations. The Court's shielding of the ex parte conversations from discovery by the LRSD, while permitting the ODM monitors to testify as potential adverse witnesses against the LRSD, together with the statements attributed to the Federal Monitor concerning the merits of the case and the probable intentions or reactions of the Court to developments in the case, supports a reasonable inference that the conYersations addressed the merits of unitary status and were unfavorable to the LRSD. See also United States v. Craven, -5- 239 F.3d 91, 103 (1st Cir. 2001) (vacating a sentence influenced by the trial court's ex parte contacts - with a court-appointed expert, remanding for sentencing before a different judge, and noting that \"it is difficult, if not impossible, for a judge, no matter how sincere, to purge that [ ex parte] information from her mind - and, equally, to maintain the perception of impartiality\"). CONCLUSION For the foregoing reasons, and in order to rigorously maintain the appearance as well as the reality of impartiality in this important case in the public interest, the LRSD respectfully prays for the voluntary or mandatory disqualification of Judge Wright from further responsibility in the case and for the reassignment of this case to another judge of the District Court. Respectfully Submitted, LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT FRIDAY, ELDREDGE \u0026 CLARK Christopher Heller (#81083) John C. Fendley, Jr. (#92182) Robert S. Shafer (#81141) First Commercial Bldg., Suite 2000 400 West Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201-3493 (501) 376-2011 BY~ -6- CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE - I certify that a copy of the foregoing has been served on the following people by fax and mail on November 16, 2001: Mr. John W. Walker JOHNW. WALKER,P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Sam Jones Wright, Lindsey \u0026 Jennings 2200 Worthen Bank Bldg. 200 West Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Steve Jones JACK, LYON \u0026 JONES, P.A. 425 W. Capitol, Suite 3400 Little Rock, AR 72201-3472 Mr. Richard Roachell Roachell Law Firm 11800 Pleasant Ridge Road, Suite 146 Post Office Box 17388 Little Rock, Arkansas 72222-7388 Ms. Ann Marshall Desegregation Monitor 1 Union National Plaza 124 W. Capitol, Suite 1895 Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Mark Hagemeier Office of the Attorney General 323 Center Street 200 Tower Building Little Rock, AR 72201 C 'TE:-.iP'GWVicweMlrsd J wpd -7- 1 - 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 - 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 - 24 25 Page 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT vs. CASE NO. 4:82CV00866SWW PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL KATHERINE KNIGHT , ET AL NOV 1 6 ZOOi Vffi:~~ ~;; OESEGfiEGATiO~J MLl~liDRme PLAINTIFF DEFENDANTS ' INTERVENORS INTERVENORS * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ORAL DEPOSITION OF ANN MARSHA.LL (Taken November 14 , 2001) * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * APPEARANCES : On Behalf of the Plaintiff MR. CHRIS HELLER and MR. CLAY FENDLEY Friday , Eldredge \u0026 Clark 400 West Capitol , Suite 2000 Little Rock , Arkansas 72201 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 II 12 13 )4 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 2  25 On Behalf of North Little Rock School District MR. J. ALLEN CARNEY Jack, Lyon \u0026 Jones 425 West Capitol, Suite 3400 Lirtle Rock, Arkansas 7220 I On Behalf of Intervenors Mrs. Lorene Joshua, el al MR. JOHN WALKER Attorney at Law 1723 Broadway Street Lirtle Rock, Arkansas 72201 ALSO PRESENT: JOY SPRINGER, TAMMY DOWNS INDEX TOPIC PAGE Stipulations 4 Witness Sworn In: Ann Marshall 5 Examination by Mr. Heller Examination by Mr. Walker Further Examination by Mr. Heller Further Examination by Mr. Walker Reporter's Certificate 133 Exhibit 1 Exhibit 2 Exhibit 3 Exhibit 4 Exhibit 5 Exhibit 6 EXHIBITS 23 23 23 24 24 80 5 118 125 129 (Exhibits Attached Following Transcript.) Page2 Page 3 Page 4 I ANSWERS AND DEPOSITION OF ANN MARSHALL, a witness 2 produced at the request of the Plaintiff; taken in the 3 above-styled and numbered cause on Wednesday, the 14th 4 day of November, 200 I, before Jerry R. Lawson, CCR, a 5 Notary Public in and for Jefferson County, Arkansas, 6 commencing at 2:40 p.m., at the offices of Friday, 7 Eldredge \u0026 Clark, 400 West Capitol, Suite 2000, 8 Little Rock Arkansas 72201, pursuant to the agreement 9 hereinafter. se.t .fo.rt.h.. .... STIPULATIONS 10 II 12 IT IS STIPULATED AND AGREED BY and between the 13 parties through their respective counsel that the I 4 deposition of ANN MARSHALL may be taken for any and all I 5 purposes according to the Federal Rules of Civil 16 Procedure. 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 .......... I PROCEEDINGS 2 WHEREUPON, 3 Ai\"lN MARSHALL, Page 5 4 having been called for examination by counsel for the 5 Plaintiff, and having first been duly sworn, was 6 examined and testified as follows: 7 EXM1INATION 8 BY l'v1R. HELLER: 9 Q. Would you tell us your name and address, please, 10 Ms. Marshall. 11 A. Ann Marshall, I RiYiera Circle, Little Rock, 12 Arkansas. 13 Q. Okay. And how are you employed? 14 A. I'm a desegregation monitor for Judge Susan Webber 15 Wright. 16 Q. Would you review for us briefly your education. 17 A. I have an undergraduate from Hendrix College in 18 English. I have an advanced degree in volunteer 19 management from the Arkansas Public Administration 20 Consortium. I'm certified in planning and training 2 I with the Institute of Cultural Affairs. I'm a 22 certified master trainer with the National Association 23 of Partners in Education, which is headquartered in 24 Washington, D.C. 25 Q. Do you have any other certifications relating to 2 (Pages 2 to 5) Page 6 Page 8 1 the field of education? I Q. Prior to the time you assumed your position as the 2 A. Not that are current. 2 director of the Office of Desegregation Monitoring, 3 Q. Have you previously been certified in the field of 3 what was your highest salary, approximately? 4 education? 4 A. I don't recall. Are you saying as an associate in 5 A. Yes. 5 the -- 6 Q. What certifications did you hold? 6 Q. Well, let's say -- 7 A. English. 7 A. -- Office of Metropolitan Supervisor? 8 Q. Okay. And you're certified to teach English? 8 Q. -- before you went to work for the Office of the 9 A. Yes. 9 Metropolitan Supervisor, what was the highest paying 10 Q. And would you review briefly your employment 10 job you held? 11 history. 11 A. Probably coordinator of Volunteers in Public 12 A. How long do you want me to go -- how far would you 12 Schools and Partners in Education. 13 like for me to go back? 13 Q. And approximately what did that pay? 14 Q. Well, let's -- 14 A. I have no recollection, Chris. I could -- 15 A. Do you want me to start now and go backwards? 15 somewhere probably in the high 40's. I'm not sure. I 16 Q. Let's start at the beginning of the things related 16 It's been a long time. 17 to education. 17 Q. And do you recall what your beginning salary was 18 A. I taught English and science in Forrest City from 18 with the Office of Metropolitan Supervisor? 19 approximately 1 970 to 1972. I moved to Little Rock 19 A. No, I don't. :, 20 and was the -- no, I'm sorry, that's incorrect. I was 20 Q. Okay. Do you recall what your beginning salary 21 an order editor for Eaton Hoisting Equipment in 21 was as director of the Office of Desegregation 22 Forrest City for approximately a year and a half. Then 22 Monitoring? 23 I moved to Little Rock, and I was the first woman 23 A. I believe it was ninety-eight five in that -- 24 employed as an epidemiologist in the field of venereal 24 perhaps ninety-eight. I don't recall exactly. But 25 disease for the State Health Department. 25 that's close. Page 7 Page 9 l Then I joined the Little Rock School District as 1 Q. So, you've never ,vorked as a school administrator, 2 the coordinator of Volunteers in Public Schools. I was 2 principal or assistant principal or an)1hing like 3 in that position until approximately 1984, '85, when I 3 that? 4 was employed by the Arkansas Department of Education as 4 A. I've worked as an administrator in a school 5 a coordinator to de,elop the Arkansas School Volunteer 5 district by virtue ofmy emplo)ment, on the 6 Program. I remained in that position for about a 6 administrative salary scale, in Partners in Education; ,. 7 year. 7 but I have not been a principal or an assistant '; 8 I returned to the Little Rock School District as 8 principal. : 9 coordinator of Volunteers in Public Schools. Also 9 Q. Have you received any training from the Arkansas ,: 10 during that time, I was coordinator of Partners in 10 Department of Education related to their new ACT AP 11 Education. I was employed by Mr. Revelle as an 11 system and benchmark exams or Smart Start or anything 12 associate monitor in the Office of Metropolitan 12 related to that new state curriculum standards and 13 Supervisor beginning in 1989. '88 or '89. And since 13 benchmarks? 14 that time with the conversion of the office to the 14 A. Training -- can you be a little bit more specific? 15 Office of Desegregation Monitoring, I've been employed 15 Q. Well, was there any formal training that you 16 steadily, assuming the position of monitor in April of 16 attended to learn about the ACT AP standards or the 17 199 1. 17 benchmark exams? 18 Q. Okay. Did you teach in Forrest City for one year 18 A. I think the sessions that I attended would be more 19 or two years? 19 accurately called awareness sessions. To me, there is 20 A. Approximately a year and a half. 20 a distinction between awareness and training. But I 21 Q. Okay. And which school or school district did 21 did attend a session that wJs to begin to help people 22 you -- 22 understand what was coming. 23 A. Forrest AcadeJT.y. 23 Q. Do you know whether or not ADE offers any formal 2-l Q. -- teach in? 24 training related to the implementation of ACT AP, the 25 A. It was Forrest /..cademy. It was a private school. 25 benchmark exams or the curriculum standards? .. 3 (Pages 6 to 9) Poge 10 1 A. Yes, they do for the -- for the State's teachers 2 and administrators. 3 Q. Has anyone in your office received such training? 4 A. I believe that Gene Jones has attended sessions. 5 Q. How would you describe your relationship with 6 Judge Wright? 7 A. She's my supervisor. 8 Q. Do you ever see Judge Wright socially? 9 A. As far as -- ,veil, I see her at lunch. We share 10 lunch. She's in -- it's her custom to take staff 11 members to lunch for their birthdays, and I'm asked to 12 join that. She and I attend the same church; and so we 13 occasionally will see each other at services, although 14 she tends to go to the early service and I tend to go 15 to the later one. 16 Q. Okay. Have you been to her home or has she been 17 to your home? 18 A. I was -- she's never been to my home. I was in 19 her home approximately maybe eight or nine years ago. 20 It's been a long time. 21 Q. And has Judge Wright ever been to your offices? 22 A. She's been to the new offices one time, to see 23 them. And before that in our old offices when we were 24 over at the River l\\larket, she was also there one time, 25 to see -- just to see what we've done with the space. Poge 11 l 2 Q. Besides your office and her chambers, what places have you been together with the judge? 3 A. To lunch. Q. Do you consider Judge Wright to be a friend? A. A colleague. 4 5 6 Q. Do you .ever discuss family or personal matters 7 with her? 8 A. Well, I think that the judge was clear yesterday 9 that what passes between us is privileged. So, I guess IO I would hesitate to go there. 11 Q. Well, I'm not asking you what may have been said 12 in that regard but only whether or not you and the 13 judge have such discussions. 14 A. 1n general terms. She has a school-age child and 15 I have school-age children. So, comments in a general 16 nature. 17 Q. Did she discuss with you her decision about 18 whether or not to put her child in private school? 19 MR. W Al.KER: Objection -- 20 A. No. 21 MR. W Al.KER: -- to that. I don't think 22 23 24 25 that would be a proper subject for inquiry, and l would just flag that for presentation to the judge for inquif}'. And I would suggest to you -- I'm not Page 12 1 telling you what to do, because I'm not 2 representing you. But I would suggest to you 3 that's not within the scope of what she told 4 Chris that he could talk about. 5 THE REPORTER: She told what? 6 rvm.. WALKER: Chris that he could inquire 7 into. 8 THE REPORTER: Thank you. 9 NIB.. HELLER: Well, unless I heard 10 incorrectly -- 11 A. I said \"no.\" 12 Q. (By Mr. Heller) Have you ever asked the judge for 13 legal or personal advice on any matters? 14 A. Never. 15 Q. Have you ever made any public appearances with her 16 or worked on any speeches for her or anything like 17 that? 18 A. I don't know ifwe are where we're supposed to be; 19 but I certainly don't llllnd telling you, no. 20 Q. How would you define your job? 21 A. Hard. 22 Q. Could you give us the expanded version? 23 A. Sometimes harder than others. My role is to 24 assist the Court in monitoring the school case. 25 Q. And how do you go about that? P,ge 13 I A. Well, a number of approaches. Primarily we 2 monitor in three main modes. We review a number of 3 documents that are produced by the school districts, 4 some on a routine basis, others may be exceptional in 5 nature. We make visits to the schools, and we -- we 6 observe. We look around. And thirdly, we will talk to 7 individuals. Sometimes those people call us, 8 unsolicited phone calls. But those are the three 9 primary modes by which we collect information. IO Sometimes we will target a specific topic by 11 virtue of perhaps a provision in the desegregation 12 plan, an issue that has become prollllnent by one means 13 or another. And then oftentimes we will make a formal 14 written report to the Court. And, of course, you've 15 had -- you've seen a number of those documents. 16 Q. What's the purpose of assisting the Court in 17 monitoring a school case? 18 A. To enable the Court to fulfill -- 19 MR. WALKER: Justa -- 20 A. -- its charge. 21 MR. \\V ALKER: -- moment. I'm going to 22 object to that, too. That -- that is 23 something that the Court can only determine 2  and the Court of Appeals and that 's already 25 specific:illy reduced to writing. 4 (Pages IO to I 3) Page 14 Page 16 I Now, if there is another purpose that I had - I'm -- that's been so long. But I started to - 2 Ms. Brown -- Marshall has identified and 2 say I think that it was perhaps based on that of the 3 reduced to writing and the Court has agreed 3 Metropolitan Supervisor, but I don't have direct 4 on and it's pretty clear, then I don't think 4 knowledge of that. : 5 that there would be any objection to her 5 Q. Okay. Do you know -- so, are you saying that this ,; 6 answering that. But other than that, I think 6 job description you're referring to was in existence ,, 7 that that's a question properly -- a question 7 when you assumed the office? I, 8 more properly directed to the Court. 8 A No, not the same job description. It was 9 Q. (By Mr. Heller) Let me tell you this, Ms. Brown, 9 certainly modified after the Eighth Circuit's ruling, 10 since I believe that before we went on the record -- IO and -- and I don't have any direct knowledge. 11 I'm sorry, Ms. Marshall -- before we went on the 11 Q. Okay. How is your job described in that 12 record, you said you had not been deposed before, 12 document? 13 correct? 13 A I haven't looked at it in years, and I didn't ,, 14 A. I don't ever remember having been deposed. 14 review it for today. I didn't anticipate that ,; 15 Q. Okay. Well, the way this works is Mr. Walker can 15 question. 16 make objections for the record, but you will still be 16 Q. Is it a document that Judge Wright has approved in 17 required to answer the question unless you personally 17 any way, to your knowledge? \" 18 decide not to. But he's not your lawyer. 18 A. As far as I know, it's -- it came from her 19 MR: W Al.KER: That's right. 19 office. 20 A. I understand that. 20 Q. Have you ever discussed your job description with : 21 Q. (By Mr. Heller) I suppose he can advise you not 21 Judge Wright? 22 to answer a question, but it's up to us whether or not 22 A Years ago when I was hired, yes. 23 to do that, so -- 23 Q. Has your job description changed over the years? 24 A. Well, I really don't -- 24 A You mean the written document? 25 MR. WALKER: Ms. Marshall -- 25 Q. Well, first the written document, has that -- when - Page I 5 Page 17 1 A. -- !mow the protocol. 1 is the last time the wTitten document was changed? 2 MR. WALKER: -- I would -- I would ask 2 A. I don't know that it has changed. 3 on that kind of question you recess the 3 Q. Has it changed in the last five years, to your 4 deposition to let the Court answer that 4 knowledge? 5 question or be directed, because you're not 5 A. I don't believe so. 6 represented by counsel. But you have to -- 6 Q. Do you ever have discussions with Judge Wright 7 of course, like he says, you have to exercise 7 about exactly what your job is and what you're trying 8 your own choice. 8 to accomplish? './ 9 A. I do know that the judge is available should we 9 A Well, certainly we'd discuss what it is that my IO need a ruling; but candidly, this is a new procedure 10 job is. She is my supervisor, and I report to her. I I for me and I don't understand the -- I don't know the 11 Q. Well, can you relate any discussions you've had 12 protocol. 12 about what your job is with Judge Wright? 13 Q. (By Mr. Heller) Well, my only question is that 13 A No. I guess perhaps I don't understand your 14 you described your job as assisting the Court in 14 question. I'm not trying to be coy. I'm just trying 15 monitoring the school case; and my question is: To 15 to understand what you're saying. 16 what end? What's the -- what's the purpose of that 16 Q. Well, I'm trying to understand what the 17 work? 17 understanding is between you and Judge Wright about 18 A. In order to supply information to the parties and 18 what your job is. And if it's accurately described in 19 to the Court th:it can be helpful. particularly in 19 a written job description, if you can tell me about 20 promoting compli:ince with the commitments that the 20 that; or if it's not, you can tell me about whatever 21 parties have made. 21 discussions you've had with the judge. 22 Q. Okay. Do you have a written job description? 22 A. I believe that it's correctly embodied in the job 23 A. I do. 23 description. And I don't ha\\e th:it with me, but it's - 24 Q. Where did that come from? 24 something that's availabh::. 25 A. I believe that it was a modification of what 25 Q. \\V ell, is there an)1hing that you recall about it .... .. S (Pages 14 to 17) Page 18 Page20 1 or can relate now about the understanding between you 1 disqualify the Court. 2 with Judge Wright about what your job is? 2 MR. HELLER: You are not required to sit 3 MR. WALKER: Well, let me say one other 3 here. 4 thing. As I understand it, this is about to 4 MR. WALKER: So, I suggest that we  5 get information in preparation for the 5 recess the hearing and call the judge. I 6 hearing on Monday. It is not to deal with 6 suggest we do that. \\ 7 the question of disqualification, since 7 MR. HELLER: There's no reason to. : 8 Mr. Heller was not ambitious enough, if -- if 8 MR. WALKER: Ms. Brown, do you mind -- 9 courageous enough to make a motion to recuse 9 Ms. Marshall, do you mind doing that? 10 the Court. 10 THE WITNESS: Well, actually considering 11 So, I ask, Ms. Brown, that you limit 11 what J'ye just told you, this varies 12 your questions or -- or that you call the 12 considerably from what I had been given to I 13 judge to see whether your questions should be 13 undermnd by you yesterday. So, perhaps ., 14 limited to matters that relate to the 14 that will be best thing to do. \u003c :: 15 evidentiary hearing that is set for the 19th 15 MR. WALKER: The deposition notice says :; 16 and the 20th. 16 one thing and what Mr. Heller said in court 17 lfhe wishes to challenge the Court and 17 is another thing, and they both have to be 18 her authority based on her personal 18 taken together. And the Court -- 19  relationship with you or anything else, 19 MR. HELLER: You're absolutely 20 he'll have ample time beyond the time to 20 incorrect. I pointed out to the Court that 21 prepare that we are supposed to be spending 21 you were ,,Tong when you suggested that I 22 getting prepared for this hearing on Monday. 22 wanted ro take these depositions about what 23 MR. HELLER: Well, if you'll read the 23 their testimony might be. I pointed out in 24 deposition subpoena, it's limited to matters 24 court -- and it will show up in the 25 concerning Ms. Bro,m's relationship to the 25 transcri pt -- that we specifically asked to Page 19 Page 21 1 Court, not what her testimony might be on I take these depositions concerning the 2 Monday. And that's what we intend to 2 communications benveen the Court and the ' 3 pursue. 3 monitor's office. 4 A. From our conversations yesterday, Chris, what I 4 MR. \\VALKER: Well, that's concerning the 5 understood you intended to ask me was about documents 5 hearin g on Monday: and she said very clearly 6 that I had shared with the Court, which I've prepared. 6 on the issues that are before the Court on -- ' 7 Any other area, I have not reviewed. 7 on Monday and Tuesday, she can only -- := 8 Q. (By Mr. Heller) Okay. Well, I -- and I 8 Ms. Bro\\\\11's -- or i\\ls. Marshall's testimony  9 understand that, and I'm just asking you for as much as 9 can only relate to the issues that she told  IO you can remember about these issues. And we're 10 us both that we could present. 1 l certainly going to talk about the documents, but our 11 THE WITNESS: Well, I'm happy to share 12 purpose is to talk about the communications generally 12 what documents I found, Chris; but my \" 13 and the relationship generally between your office and 13 understanding was that that was the thrust of 14 Judge Wright. 14 your inquiry. And since I don't -- I'm not 15 MR. WALKER: Well, let us -- I would 15 represented by any counsel and I'm not eager 16 like to suggest that we recess the hearing 16 to be in the middle of a disagreement between 17 and call the judge. My understand is that we 17 you two. maybe the best thing would be to 18 weren't to be wasting time on matters that 18 call Jud ge Wright. 19 the Court is not going to be addressing at 19 MR. HELLER: Well, let's -- before we do ' 20 this hearing. Even t11ough she said you could 20 that, let's at least take a look at the 21 depose her, I don't t11ink I w:mt to be 21 documents that you\\e brought with you in 22 sitting in a room listening to you take the 22 response to the deposition subpoena. 23 time that we're supposed to be spending 23 A. Two that l\\e sent to the Court -- and these 24 preparing for tri:il on the 19th :ind 20th, 24 actually went 10 Julie, and I sent those today :ind they 25 trying to -- for you to tind ways to try to 25 ,vere the comrnunic:ition that -- thank you, Tammy -- I 6 (Pages I 8 lo 21) Pge 22 I got from you, saying that the documents still weren't 2 ready, so I informed Julie. Whether those were shared 3 with the judge, I truly do not know. But I did send 4 them to the Court, because we're responsible for 5 organizing the documents and I can't get my work done 6 without them, so I notified my boss "},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1177","title":"Little Rock School District, Quarterly Status Report, School Services, 1st Quarter","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":["2001-11-09"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System."],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--21st Century","Little Rock School District","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","Educational statistics","School attendance","School discipline","School enrollment","Teachers","Student activities"],"dcterms_title":["Little Rock School District, Quarterly Status Report, School Services, 1st Quarter"],"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/1177"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["reports"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\nThe transcript for this item was created using Optical Character Recognition (OCR) and may contain some errors.\nPre-AP/ AP Course l i \\i .. \"' -~ ~ ij r0e -~ c::a I.. . :..t.=.. Pre-AP/AP Grades - \"C\" Teacher Absences Drop-out Data ~ C) \u0026amp; ~ ~ ~ ~ Vo) ~ ~ ~ a ~ -~ ~ aJ V) c5 C) -s V) ~ ~ a~ .~..... Disciplinary Data -0 0 N ~ .... (LI .0 E z~ ~ -0 'i:: LI. Table of Contents Pre-AP and/or AP Course Enrollment Pre-AP and/or AP Grades -\"C\" or better Teacher Absences Drop-Out Data Disciplinary Data Grade Distribution Academic High Risk Attendance Report Volunteer Hours Professional Development Report John Ruffins John Ruffins Richard Hurley Everett Hawks Linda Watson John Ruffins Everett Hawks Mark Milhollen Debbie Milam Bonnie Lesley \"ti \"\"I ftl \u0026gt; \"ti -\u0026gt;-- \"ti n Q = \"\"I fl\u0026gt; ftl \"\"0 \"\"I ftl I \u0026gt; \"\"0 \u0026gt; \"ti C, \"\"I ~ Q. ftl fl\u0026gt; rj .., ftl ~ n ::r' ftl \"\"I \u0026gt; C\"' fl\u0026gt; ftl =n ftl C\u0026amp; i:, \"\"I Q \"C I Q -= LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDENT November 9, 2001 Ms. Ann Marshall, Federal Monitor Office of Desegregation Monitoring One Union National Plaza 124 West Capitol, Suite 1895 Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Ann: RECEIVE Nov 9 zoo, OfflG1: u, ~MONITORING Attached is a copy of our Quarterly Status Report for your information and files. The dropout dpta was not available at the time of printing. Please let me know if you have any questions. TKJ/bjg Attachment Sincerely, --r.T. Kenneth James, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools 810 West Markham Street  Little Rock, Arkansas 72201  (501) 324-2012 .., n, = (') :r\" I!\u0026gt; \"\"I \u0026gt; i::r \"n', = (') n, \"\" 0 \"\"I 0 '0 I 0 = ~ Pre-AP/ AP Course Enrollment Pre-AP/AP Grades - \"C\" Teacher Absences Drop-out Data Disciplinary Data Student's Enrolled in at Least One AP, PRE-AP Course for 2001-2002 by School, 1st Quarter Thursday, Nove111ber OJ, 2001 School 1CENTRAL HIGH SCHOOL_ _ lc.LOVERDALE MIDDLE S_CHOOL -- - - DUNBA_R_INT'L STUDIES _MAGNET MIDDLE SC !FAIR HIGH SCHOOL =-- Grade Total Gender Black %Black White % White Other %Other 09 562 F 65 12% 95 17% 8 1 % M 56 10% 96 17% 9 2% 10 M 2Z 5-0\u0026amp;~ _Q_Q_ 13% 5 _ 1% 508 F 42 8% 77 I 15% 10 2% F + - ~6 +- 9~o __ ,_92 _ 23% _ ,_4 __ 1 1!'.'.'o_ M ~ 14 _\n__3% 69 17% ~ - 1_ 2_o/g__ F _J_ - ~1_ --+- J3% 72 15% I 5 __ 1% _\n11 408 ,_M_ _22 , 4% 65 13% 4H 1% ~ 1 _ __ 06 _I_ 294 F 64 22% 3 1 % 1 0% M 59 20% 4 1 % 2 1 % r - 07 _J__ 234 F 67 29% 1 0% 1 0% M 38 16% 4 2% 1 0% 08 '- 215_ F 64 30% 5 2% I 1 0% _ M ~L _ 17% _ 3 1 % 1 0 0% 06 ~ 26_7-_:-- F __46 _j_ IT% __ _2.?_ 10o/~ r- 14 5% 07 08 09 10 11 12 M 3] _ 1_ J 4% _ . _31 _ LJ2% - _ 11 4% 233 F 48 . 21% _32 +--- 14_0/g_ 11 _ 5% M + 39 _ ~ __ _1 7_o/_o_~~3 14% -i- _ 11 __ _, 5%_ 225 F 41 18% 29 13% 1 4 2% _ , M 36 16% 43 19% 8 4% 269 F 42 16% 18 7% 0 0% L 224 M 2_j 8% ,- 7 __ 3% ~ 2 1% F 39 17% __ J3 _ j__ 6% _,_ 0 0% M ,- 23_  1 0%_ 1 13 l_ 6% 4 2% F !.- 38 l _19% 1 9 5% 1 1% M J 25_ 13% T 8 7-4/o- J __ 0 _ ,__ 0% 196 187 F 29 16% 6 3% 4 2% 1FORES_LHEIGHTS MIDDLE_SCHOOL - - ~ r 06 r M 30 16% ' 9 5% 0 0% F 37 15% 31 12% 1 0% M 26 10% 1 28 11 % 2 1 % T - l _ 07 _J_ 24_4 _ _ ,__ 1 -~F_ _1_ _4~ 0~-~1~6~%~_~3~5---,-_1~4~'~o --+-=2 __1- '--''=o- M I 2.___ 11% 31 13% 3 1% 08 --'-- 240 F J 28 12% 27 11 % 1 4 _----=-- 2/o - ~ ---1 _M I _29 1 12% 24 10% I 4 ~- 2_o/g HALL HIGH SCHOOL 09 414 F 5Q___ L 14% __ 20\n,%__~ 4 1% LRSD /11for111atio11 Service Dept. Page I o/3 HALL HIGH SCHOOL_ - - HENDERSON MIDO_L~ SCHOOL IMABELVALE MIDDLE SCHOOL IMA~_N ARTS/SCIENG_ES MAGNET ___ _ - --- ---- MC CLELLAN HIGH SCHOOL ... - - AR~VIEW ARTS/SCIENCE MAGNET LRSD /11for111atio11 Service Dept. 09 10 - 11 12 - 06 07 - 08 06 07 414 370 293 255 203 - 179 - 174 M 28 7% 18 4% 3 1 % F 78 21 % 44 12% 5 1 % M 56 15% 15 4% 5 1% F 64 22% 16 5% 4 1 % M 37 13% 15 5% 2 1% F 23 9%_ . _2_1_ -1 _ll%_ 5 2% M . j3 5% 22 _ 9_% 5 2% F L 41 -1 20/o __\n~ 4% J__ 3 1% M 38 _ 19% _ . _ 18 L 9% _ , 9 4% F 45 25% _ 11 6% 5 3% M 42 23% 13 7% 5 3% F 49 27% 6 3% 5 3% M 42 23% 9 5% 3 2% F +- 42 r 24~o 12 7% Q_ 0% M 2_1 _ 12% 11 6% 3 2% _ E --3._3 20% 6 4% o 0% , _M 32 19% 5 3% 3 -~2%~ , 08 -l 136 I _ F -1-- _35_ 26% 15 11 % 3 2% 1 M 1 - 20 15% 9 7% 3 2% 06 _ O_l_ __ 09 10 11 12 291 - 2-7.J 27_9 -1 328 I 264 254 L 201 F 39 13% 57 20% 9 3% M 35 12% 41 14% 7 2% F 52 19% 60 22% 7 3% M 33 12% 33 12% 8 3% F 47 17% 41 15%_L_ 11 4% M - 39 l 14% 45 16o/c 6 2% F L- ~9---i 123/o -+-- 4_ 1= 1/4 ~ 1 0% M 35 11 % 1 0% 0 0% F 53 20% 4 2% 4 2% M 21 8% 2 1 % 0 0% F 42 17% 3 1 % 0 0% M 30 12% 6 2% 1 0% F I- 39 19_% _ L _6_ f... ~O_ 4 2% M 23 11 /g_ __ 2 1 % 1 0% 09 294 F 63 1 21% 66 22% -L... j_3 __ ~ 4% - ' - M -r--49 17% I 42 14% 12 4% __ . _j_Q__ 295 _t MF L 550..2. _ _ 17% 65 22% 12_J_..4% _. J 1 , 18% 32 11 % 6 --r 21o [ 11 - --1 2TL~l -~MF~--=67~--2~4~%~-1~ 4=9~-~18~0=1/ 0 _____,1-~8~---'-l-=3~%~ 40 14% 52 19% 3 I 1% l _1_2-=:I_ 27__Q_ C F 33 12% 52 19% 10 .L.__4.o/o Page 2 of 3 UJUO tno-do.10 7 I PARKVIEW ARTS/SCIENCE MAGNET PULASKI HEIGHTS MIDDLE_SCH.OOL_ - -- - ~-M~ -~~24~ --~11~ % --~39- -I, -1~8%~ -1 -~1 --~ OL _ .. 252 _ ,'____~F_ .........I... . ~2=2~-+--9~0=1/o_---,-1_ 3~6~+I_ 1~4~/c~o_ _,1_~2~--~ 1 M 22 9% I 53 I 21 % 1 0% 1% r--- 0% 08 244 ! _ _j SOUTHWEST JVIIO_DLE_SCHOOL _ _ _ -- -- _ 06 F:_ _ ~_31 _J __13 ~%~--+--' ~ 5~1_1\u0026gt;----_~2~1% ___ 0 M ,_ 24 -, __J 0Lo 50 I 20% -- 4 _ ___j F _ ~ -- _32 _ J _ _1 8% 0 1 0%_ .j. I 2.. - 0% - _ 2_% 1% 07 1.6_2 M 21 12% 2 1% 1 -- - l - - -- ~~~- F _ .J 28 ____ 17%_ _2_ 1 % _ 0 2 0% 1% M 13 8% 0 0% 1 1% 08 165 F 32 19% 1 1% 0 0% M 20 12% 0 0% 1 1% Grand Totals: I 3309 0 2373_ L- 0 367 0 LRSD fllformatio11 Service Dept. Page 3 of 3 B}BQ JRO-dOJQ Student's that passed AP or Pre-AP Courses for 2001-2002 by School, 1st Quarter Thursday, November 01, 2001 School Grade T Total Gender - Black T %Black I White I % White- Other ,-%Other CENTRAL_ HJGH SCHOOL 09 562 F 94 17% 311 55% 28 5% M 49 9% 291 , 52% 25 1 4% 10 508 F 53 10% 199 39% 35 7% M 39 __ 7 8%_ _,_ _16.L__l __ 32%_ -1- :J 5_ 3% F 68 17% 346_' _ 85% 1B 4% M - 24 - L 6.(o --+- 263 - _ 64% - -- 41 - 10% j_2 - _4_92 -l- F -+ 52_ 11 .(g_,-238 48% 26 5%_ I _,__ M +-- 42 9% 188 38% _20 4% 06 _} 29_1 F 202 69% 10 3% 4 1% 1 11 _408 lcLOVERDALE_MJDQLE_SCHOOL_ -.=-___::_- - ' M , 186 63% 12 4% 3 1% _ 07 ----' 234 F 193 82% I 4 2% 4 2% M I 106 45% 7 3% 3 1 % 1 L _08-:--215- I F I 216 100% 18 8% 2 1% J M 1 109 51% 9 4% 0 0%_~ [DUNBAR INT'L STUDIES MAGNET MIDDLE_SCL _06 I 267 _ 1- -_r=---i- 123 46% I 89 33% -- 5Q____ __ 21%_ ---,- __ ___ _M _I _ 10j __ 38% I 114 43% 38 __ 14% 233_ - ,-- MF -  1_8437 1 _6336~0 C 102 44 % - -~ 3_9_ 17.(Q ,c 109 4]% _I_ 36 _ 15% 2_25~ -~F _l_ -~1~1~ 1 - -+! ------4--'=9-=01/o~--'----=8=8~_____,3=9'--'-o/c=--o _1 -'--\"'5---__7' -o''/-co\"-_ M 89 1 40% 120 53% 21 9% -~ -- - -1---~~--~--~~-~~~~~-~~--~~ 07 08 FAIR HIGH SCHOOL 09 269 F 87 32% 36 13% 0 0% _10 L 224 ---- - -- ' -- M 39 14%___,_ 10 4% _ _]__ 3 __,___ _ 1_% 1 ' F_ !- _59 -, 26%. _ 21 -t-- 9%_ ~ 0 0% M_ -'- 36 _16% 17 _ 8% 5 ___ 2% 11 196 - 12 187 F -~ __ Q6~ __J4% 31 16% 4 2% M _ ~ _32 _ 1 21 % 14_ 7%--~-=-_J) - --r- _ Q% F 1 51 1 27% , 10 1 5% 7 4% IFOREST HEIGl:ITS_MlDDLE_SCHO_OL---=- - - ' 06_ - 255 - M 36 19% 17 9% 0 0% F 147 58% 138 54% 2 1% M 79 1 31% 105 41% 9 4% 07 _ ___j_ 244 I F 117 48% I 144 I 59% I 4 I 2% I _ QB 240 !HALL HIGH~S=C=-H~O~O~L~ -------~I 09 _J 41_4 i M _.l 73 30% I 108 44% 9 J_ 4% _J _(.__ F - ~ 82 --__34% 116 48% -15___1 _ 6% M __ 60 25% I 89 37% 18 7% 1 t- - - I -r- - ~ F 1_96 I 23% 48 12% 8 I 2% - LRSD luformatio11 Service Dept. Page I o/3 IJ}IJO }OO-dOJO HALL HIGH SCHOOL 12 255 F 39 __ _\n_ _j5%_-' 26 j 10% _J 5 2% - M 13 5_% ___ 31 -+--12% 7 3% HENDERSON MIDDLE SCHOOL 06 203 F 177 87Lo __23_ 1 jj_o/o , 9 4% - M 14 \"l _ ___ 72Lo -5.5 __ _27% 24 12% 07 179 F 168 94% _40_ ~ 22% 18 10% M 140 78% 46 26% 12 7% 08 F 160 89% 13 ! 7% 16 9% M 112 63% 26 1 15% 5 3% MABELVALE MIDDLE SCHOOL 06 174 F 132 76% 40 23% 0 0% - M , _ 49 _ _ 28% . 34 -r _ 20% 8 _ 5,,to 07 j66 F 88 L 53% 23 14% 0 0% M ~- 68 =-i ~1%--10 L 6%- 12_ T 7% 08 136 [MANN ARTS/SCIENCES MAGNET ___ -=-- ~- Q6 = 29_1 F -1- 115 I _ 85%_ 50 37% 11 -+-_8_% M I 52 38% 26 19% 6 I 4% F 127 44% 200 69% 42 14% M 108 37% 162 56% 25 9% 07 273 F 168 62% 217 79% 28 10% M 102 37% 102 37% 22 ' 8% MC CLELLAN HIGH SCHOOL 08 279 F _, __ 14_8~.._53% 141 51% 44 16% M _116 j 42% 166 59% 24 I 9% F -' 70 21 % 9 3% 1 - f- 0% 1 M 51 I 16% 2 1% 0 0% 10 264 F 88 33% 3 1 % 7 3% - M 35 13% 4 2% 0 0% 11 254 F 109 43% 3 1% 0 0% - M 50 20% 20 8% 1 0% 12 201 - PARKVIEW ARTS/SCIENCE MAGNE_L_ 294 F 72 36% 15 7% 7 ,- 3% M 44 -, 22/o  -3 L----1 % , - 1 0% F 139 _ : _ 47%_ ~ -1113 __c5~() , 25 9% 10 295 M __ 80 27% 1 105 36% 38 _13% F ~. _ 99- -=- 34% __ 1 150 _ 1 51% -t 42 14% _ M 102 35% , 72 24% 19 6% _ _11 277__ F 149 54% , 138 50% 17 6% M 80 29% 147 53% 9 3% ~~1=2~~2~ 0 _.._ _F,___ __~ 52. 19% 111 41% 39 __ 1__14% LRSD !,,for111atio11 Service Dept. Page2of3 BJBO Jno-do.10 PARKVIEW ARTS/SCIENCE MAGNET 12 270 M 37 14% 72 27% 11 4% euLASKI HEIGHTS MIDDLE SCHOOL 1 06 221 F 98 44% 181 82% 10 5% M 70 32% 152 69% ' 4 2% _JJ7 252 F 59 23% 134 53% 3 1% M 55 22% I 198 79% 4 2% ,---- -- 08 2_44 _, F 85 ___ _35% ,_204 84% __Q_ 0% -- -- _, _ _ M_ - _fil) 24% 183 75% 14 --'-- 6% rsoUTHWEST MIDDLE SCHOOL ---- ' 06 ' ' 178 F 101 57% 0 0%+ 10 ~+- 6% -+-- M_ _ --M_ 30% 5 3% 0 -,- _ 0%_ 07 _162 _ F -I- --1)9 - __filo/o 6 4% ~ - 4% - M 45 28% 0 0% 1 1% 08 165 F 113 68% 1 1% 0 0% M 54 33% Q_ _L_ 0% 5 3% LRSD /uformatio11 Service Dept. Page 3 o/3 UJBO Jno-do.10 LOCATION/DATE 13 14 15 16 17 20 BOOKER BALE BRADY BADGETT MCDERMOTT CARVER 1 1 1 1 BASELINE FAIR PARK FOREST PARK FRANKLIN GIBBS CHICOT W. HILLS JEFFERSON CLOVERDALE DODD MEADOW CLIFF MITCHELL KING ROCKEFELLER G. SPRINGS PUL. HEIGHTS RIGHTSELL ROMINE STEPHENS 1 WASHINGTON WILLIAMS WILSON WOODRUFF 1 MABEL VALE 1 TERRY FULBRIGHT OTTERCREEK WAKEFIELD WATSON MANN DUNBAR FOR. HGTS. JR. 1 2 PUL. HGTS. JR. SOUTHWEST HENDERSON A.L.C. CLOVERDALE JR. MABELVALE JR. CENTRAL HALL METRO PARKVIEW J. A. FAIR McCLELLAN CHARTER Teacher Absences - AUGUST 2001 21 22 23 24 27 28 29 30 31 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 3 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Page 1 TOTALS 0 0 0 0 0 6 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 11 0 0 0 2 2 0 1 3 0 .1 0 6 6 1 0 2 0 1 1 2 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 \"'I 0 \"O I 0 =.... LOCATION/DATE 4 5 6 7 10 BOOKER BALE BRADY BADGETT MCDERMOTT CARVER BASELINE FAIR PARK 1 FOREST PARK FRANKLIN 1 1 GIBBS CHICOT 1 W. HILLS 1 JEFFERSON CLOVERDALE 1 DODD MEADOWCLIFF MITCHELL 2 1 KING ROCKEFELLER 1 G. SPRINGS PUL. HEIGHTS RIGHTS ELL 1 ROMINE STEPHENS WASHINGTON 1 WILLIAMS WILSON 1 WOODRUFF MABEL VALE TERRY FULBRIGHT OTTERCREEK WAKEFIELD WATSON 3 MANN DUNBAR 1 FOR. HGTS. JR. 1 PUL. HGTS. JR. SOUTHWEST 2 2 HENDERSON 1 1 1 A.LC. 1 CLOVERDALE JR. 1 3 1 MABELVALE JR. 1 2 CENTRAL 1 1 2 3 2 HALL 1 METRO PARKVIEW 1 4 J. A. FAIR 1 1 1 2 McCLELLAN 1 3 3 CHARTER Teacher Absences - SEPTEMBER 2001 11 12 13 14 17 18 19 20 21 24 25 26 27 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 3 1 1 2 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 4 1 2 2 1 4 1 2 1 2 1 1 2 2 3 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 2 1 5 2 1 2 2 5 1 1 1 1 1 2 Page 1 28 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 6 1 1 1 1 3 3 1 4 6 2 3 2 TOTALS 1 ,_ _1 2 2 0 0 3 1 2 4 0 5 1 5 2 2 0 5 1 5 1 4 3 2 3 13 1 3 2 4 3 3 0 0 6 4 7 10 3 18 6 3 16 20 27 5 5 9 23 23 0 \u0026gt; t') = Q. !'I\u0026gt; 3\n:\n LOCATION/DATE 1 2 3 4 5 8 BOOKER BALE BRADY 1 1 2 1 BADGETT MCDERMOTT 1 1 1 CARVER 2 1 BASELINE 1 2 FAIR PARK FOREST PARK FRANKLIN 1 1 2 GIBBS CHICOT 2 1 1 2 1 1 W. HILLS 1 JEFFERSON CLOVERDALE 3 1 1 DODD 2 2 MEADOW CLIFF MITCHELL 1 1 2 KING ROCKEFELLER 1 1 3 2 2 G. SPRINGS 2 1 PUL. HEIGHTS 3 RIGHTS ELL 1 1 ROMINE 1 STEPHENS 1 1 1 1 WASHINGTON 1 1 1 3 4 WILLIAMS 1 WILSON 1 WOODRUFF 1 1 1 MABEL VALE 1 TERRY 1 1 FULBRIGHT 1 1 1 OTTERCREEK 1 WAKEFIELD 1 WATSON 1 1 1 1 1 MANN 1 2 2 DUNBAR 1 1 2 2 3 FOR. HGTS. JR. 2 1 PUL. HGTS. JR. SOUTHWEST 1 1 HENDERSON 5 2 2 A.L.C. CLOVERDALE JR. 2 3 1 4 4 2 MABELVALE JR. 2 1 4 1 CENTRAL 1 1 2 3 2 HALL 1 1 3 1 2 METRO 1 PARKVIEW 2 1 1 J. A. FAIR 2 1 2 4 McCLELLAN 2 1 2 1 CHARTER 1 2 Teacher Absences - OCTOBER 2001 9 10 11 12 15 16 17 18 19 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 3 3 1 1 1 2 1 1 4 3 1 2 2 2 1 1 3 1 1 1 2 3 1 1 1 1 4 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 1 2 2 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 3 3 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 7 2 3 1 2 1 2 2 1 3 1 3 2 1 1 4 2 1 1 2 2 5 1 2 1 4 1 6 1 1 1 1 3 2 5 3 1 1 1 5 2 2 3 1 2 5 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 4 1 3 1 2 1 1 5 1 1 1 Page 1 TOTALS 1 0 10 0 7 4 7 2 1 13 2 20 2 4 12 6 1 9 3 19 5 6 6 2 5 22 1 9 4 1 2 8 3 3 10 15 16 20 6 11 21 0 31 29 20 23 3 5 24 20 6 0 \"\"I 0 \"O I -=0 \u0026gt;-- ti\u0026gt; = C. ,==., ff\u0026gt; ,:, ff\u0026gt; \"O 0 -\"'I Grade Distribution Academic High Risk  C) ~ .~~ ~ ~ \u0026gt; ~ ~ ~ ~ Q 0 z Attendance Report Volunteer Hours Oiscipli1111ry Data LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 2000-2001 ANNUAL DISCIPLINARY MANAGEMENT REPORT 0 r:, ~ r:, 0 \"O 3 f'il -Cl TO: FROM: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201 August 23, 2000 Board ofDirec:~~i Linda W ats~istant Superintendent THROUGH: Dr. Kenneth J runes, Superintendent SUBJECT: Annual Disciplinary Management Report The following data represents the Annual Disciplinary Management Report for the 2000- 2001 school year. An analysis of the 1999-2000 and 2000-2001 school years is presented. The Discipline Sanctions by Reason Codes and Recidivism Reports for the 2000-2001 school year are also included. \u0026gt; f') = Q,, :\"!'\n::\n \u0026lt; 0 C -= \"\"\"'I'' :t 0 C\n:i -:: \"'I 0 i\n' \"\"'' Q = It,) School Name E11rolled ' Blk -ACC- LEARN 274 76% ---- -- - ---- AGENCIES 132 62% CENTRAL 2072 55% -- FAIR 900 80% -HA-LL - ----- 1458 72% ---- MCCLELLA 1149 91% METRO ------ -- PARKVIEW 1162 51% Totals 7147 68% ALT LEARN 63 97% ---- ----  CLOVRJR 760 86% DUNBAR 747 59% FORST HT 759 65% HENDERSN 566 77% MABELJR 517 79% MANNM/S 854 53% PUL HT J 749 56% SOUTHWST 529 92% Totals 5544 69% BADGETT 187 93% -- BALE 338 76% - -- - --- - -- I------- -- - ~--- BASELINE 311 83% B-OO-KER 545 56% - ----- ----- BRADY 346 75% CARVER 511 53% ------- -- --- - -- -- CHARTER 89 85% CHICOT 510 67% --- .. ---- --- DODD 222 65% FORST PK 306 37% --------- FRANKLIN 464 97% GEYER SP 337 -87% ~\nSe\n.\n,ices Dept. JU3WdOpA3Q fBUOJ 3JO.JJ LRSD Discipline Management Report 2000/2001 Short Term/CIC S11spe11sio11 Lo11g Term/ALE Suspe11sio11 ! I BM J BF WM WF Total BM BF i WM WF Total BM ' 5  1 2 0 8 2 i 0 1 0 3 0 55 11 5 4 75 4 ' 1 ' ! o. 0 5 0 148 87 23 231 281 15 7 i 2  0 24 2 183 91 27 12 313 18 : 2 I 0 0 20 0 482 204 73 211 780 45 7 I i 1 1 54 0 290 149 25 3 467 25 6 0 1 32 2 36 13 4 2 55 0 0 I j 0 0 0 0 42 14 15 14 85 0 1 i 0 0 1 0 I 1241 570 174 79 2064 109 24 i 4 2 139 4 158 24 5 0 187 7 3 q 0 10 0 344 139 24 14 521 8 2 I 1 0 11 0 139 100 33 2 274 2 1 1 0 4 0 228 121 33 12 394 14 1 1 0 16 0 141 60 24 11 236 5 6 1 0 12 0 62 29 10 2 103 4 1 0 0 5 0 66 20 10 6 102 5 0 0 0 5 0 78 30 12 1 121 1 1\n0 0 2 0 ' 196 83 15 7 301 8 3 I 2 0 13 0 1412 606 166 .55 2239 54 18 !  5 0 78 0 I 3 0 0 0 3 0 0 I 0 0 0 0 : 14 3 0 0 17 0 i 0 0 0 0 0 - - I 8 0 2 ol 10 . 0 i 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 3 0 : 0 I 0 0 0 0 4 3  1 0 8 0 i i 0 0 0 0 0 3 5 2 0 10 0 0 i 0 0 0 0 . - 40 19 4 1 64 1 I 1 I 0 0 2 0 8' 2 1 0 11 0 0 i 0 .0 0 0 8 0 2 0 10 0 0 I 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 28 2 0 0 30 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 7 7 0 29 0 0 0 0 0 0 .JOOff .13.lJUOJOA 09-Aug-0I Expulsion Total I I BF WM: WF Total #S11sp : Blk 0 oi 0 0 11 73% oi -- - - -- - -- 0 0 0 80 89 ---- - 0 O! 0 2 -:f07 +...- 84% oi ... 0 0 0 333 ' 88% 0 0 0 0 834 I 88% ---- ----- -------- ------------ .... - - 0 0 0 2 501 i 94% 0 0 0 0 55 L 89% - ------- -- 0 0 0 0 .86 ! 66% 0 0 0 4 2207 ! 88 0 0 0 0 197 !' 97% 0 0 0 0 532 i 93% 0 0 0 0 278 I 87% 0 0 0 0 410 I 89% 0 0 \u0026lt;i 0 248 I 85% ------------ -- --- - ---- ... 0 oj 0 0 108 i 89% 0 0 0 0 107 ! 85% -  -------- - . 0 0 0 0 123 ' 89% 0 0 0 0 314 i 92% I 0 0 0 0 2317 I I 90% 0 ol 0 0 3 I 100% 0 0/ 0 0 17 ' I 100% - 0 ol 0 0 10 ' I 80% 0 OJ 0 0 3 ! 100% ------- ------- -- -- -------- -- --- 0 0 0 0 8 ' 88% 0 0 0 0 10 ! L 80% oi - ---- - - - 0 0 0 66 I' 92% 0 01 0 0 11 ! 91% - -- ---- -  --- 0 0 0 0 10 I i 80% 0 0 0 0 6 ! 100% 0 0 0 0 30 II 100% 0 0 0 0 29 I 76% ------ School Name Enrolled %Blk GIBBS 300 53% JEFFRSN 404 41 M LKING 597 54% MABEL EL 346 75% -MC-D-ERMOT 366 53% ~--- ---- MEADCLIF 264 73% MITCHELL 278 96% -- ------- ----- -- ----- OTTER CR 370 51% PULHTE 311 53% ----- -- ------- ----- RIGHTSEL 264 99% ROCKFELR 412 61% ROMINE 305 65% STEPHENS 327 94% - TERRY 490 46% WAKEFIEL 344 81% -  ------- ---,- WASHNGTN 491 59% WATSON 451 96% WESTHIL 266 74% WILLIAMS 454 52% - WILSON 288 89% WOODRUFF 281 85% Totals 11775 68 GTotal 24466 68% iRSD/,ifo\n:\n,\n~,, \nvices Dept. L~D Discipline Management Report 2000/2001 Short Term/CIC Suspension Lo11g Term/ALE Suspension BM BF WM wFI Total BM BF WM WF Total BM 17 7 6 0 30 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 3 0 0 18 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 3 1 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 22 6 2 0 30 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- - 18 3 4 0 25 0 0 I 0 0 0 0 33 9 4 0 46 0 0 I 0 0 0 0 - ---- ------ -- 1 0 0 0 1 0 i 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 3 0 ! 0 0 0 0 0 - -- 1 1 0 0 2 0 ! 0 0 0 0 0 7 6 0 0 13 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 . 1 0 4 0 I I 0 0 0 0 0 45 9 0 1 55 1 i 0 0 0 1 0 20 2 4 1 27 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 0 0 7 0 I 0 0 0 0 0 13 0 2 0 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 2 9 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 29 5 10 0 44 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 395 98 56 4 553 2 1 0 0 3 0 I 3048 1274 396 138 4856 165 43 10 2 220 4 i..rnou .133JUOf0A 09-Aug-0J Expulsion Total BF WM WF Total #S11sp j %Blk i 0 0 0 0 30 80% --- 0 0 0 0 18 100 0 0 0 0 6 I 33% --- 0 0 0 0 I 30 I 93% 0 0 0 0 6 100% -- -------- 0 0 0 0 25 I 84% 0 0 0 0 46 I --- i 91% ----------- 0 0 0 0 1 I 100% 0 oj 0 ~- 0 3 I 67% -------------- 0 0 0 0 2 I 100% 0 0 0 0 13 I j _ 100% ____________ 0 0 0 0 4 ! 75% 0 ol 0 0 56 98% -t- ---- !-------- _,, _ ----- - 0 , ol 0 0 27 81% 0 0 0 0 7 II 100% ----- 0 0 0 0 15 87%  0 0 0 0 9 100% 0 0 0 0 3 i 100% 0 0 0 0 44 77% 0 0 0 0 6 100% 0 0 0 0 2 100% 0 0 0 0 556 89 I 0 o, 0 4 5080 II 89% 2000 - 2001 Annual Disciplinary Management Report Summary The 2000-2001 Annual Disciplinary Management Report indicates, when compared to the 1999-2000 school year, there was a slight increase in the overall number of suspensions. -The data indicates 154 more suspensions were issued during the 2000-2001 school year. The data also indicates an increase of one expulsion during the same comparison period. 1998-1999 1999-2000 2000-2001 Short-term suspensions 4865 4588 4756 Long-term suspension/ALE referrals 446 335 220 Expulsions 1 3 4 Totals 5312 4926 5080 The Recidivism Report indicates the following: 1998-1999 1999-2000 2000-2001 Number of students committing offenses 3237(5312) 3011(4926) 3156(5080) The October 1, 2000 student enrollment figures indicate that 25,393 students were enrolled in the District schools. Therefore, the above data demonstrates that only 12% of the student population was involved in incidents that lead to suspensions. \u0026gt; n = Q. f') a\n:\n \u0026lt; 0 c= .... f') .f',) = 0 C\nz .'\",: 1 0 i\n' \"\"'' Q = -I School Name Enrolled ACC LEARN 274 AGENCIES 132 CENTRAL 2072 FAIR 900 HALL 1458 MCCLELLA 1149 METRO - PARKVIEW 1162 Totals 7147 ALT LEARN , 63 CLOVR JR 760 DUNBAR 747 FORST HT 759 -H-E-N-D-ER--S--N- - -. ---5-66- MABEL JR 517 MANN MIS 854 ------- PUL HT J 749 SOUTHWST 529 Totals 5544 BADGETT 187 BALE 338 BASELINE 311 BRADY 346 CARV~R 511 CHARTER 89 --- CHICOT 510 DODD 222 - ---- FORST PK 308 FRANKLIN 464 --- GEYER SP 337 GIBBS 300 LRSD Discipli11e Management Report 2000/2001 Semester II Short Term/CIC S11spe11sio11 Lo11g Term/ALE Suspension I WF! j BF I ' Blk BMJ BF WM Total BM !WM WF .Total .BM I 76% 5j 1 1 0 7 2 l 0\n0 0 2 0 - I 31j I I 62% 7 2 2 42 3 I 1 i 0 0 4 0 55%  971 71 15 12 195 4 I 4 i 0 0 a 2 80% 99 62 22 8 191 12 1 I -o 0 13 0 - I 72% 2411 120 36 10 407 22 4 0 0 26 0 91% 123 64 11 1 199 17 6 0 0 23 2 21 8 2 2 33 0 0 l 0 0 0 0 --- 51% 31 4 15 12 62 0 1 I 0 0 1 0 68% 648 337 104 47 1136 60 17 I 0 0 77 4 97% 127 21 4 0 152 7 2 0 0 9 0 86% 222 79 12 8 321 3 i 1 0 0 4 0 59% 87 75 17 2i 181 1 I 1 0 0 2 0 I : 65% 123j 70 16 8 217 a I 1 I 1 0 10 0 77% 93j 40 18 1! 158 3 i 3 0 0 6 0 ---- -- . . 79% 34 18 6 2 60 3 0 I 0 0 3 0 53% 47 15 9 6 77 4 I 0\n0 0 4 0 56% 46 16 6 1 69 1 1 0 0 2 0 1151 2j 92% . 45 8 170 3 1 I\n1 0 5 0 69~. 894 379 96 361 1405 33 10 Ii 2 0 45 0 93% 2 0 0 0 2 0 O  0 0 0 0 76% 13 3 0 0 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 83% 4 0 2 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 75% 4 3 I 1 0 8 0 0 I 0 0 0 0 53% 3 3 1 0 7 0 0 i 0 0 0 0 85% 32 15 4 11 52 1 1 : 0 0 2 0 -1----- ------- 67% 6 2 1 0 9 0 ! 0 I 0 0 0 0 (l5% 51 0 1 0 6 0 0 ! 0 0 0 0 ----- 37% 5! 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 97% 25 2 0 0 27 0 0 0 0 0 0 - ~- -- 87% 10 6 1 0 17 0 0 0 0 0 0 53-% ----14 6 3 -0 23 0 0 i 0 0 0 0 24-Aug-01 Expulsio11 Total WM \\ I BF  WF Total #Susp %Blk i 0 o\n0 0 9 I 89% -- 0 o! 0 0 46 Ii 91% 0 oi 0 2 205 87%  0 .. . ol 0 0 . 204 85% 0 0 0 0 433 89% . ------- - 0 0 0 2 224 95% 0 0 0 0 33 88% -------- - ------ --- 0 01 0 0 63 57% 0 o/ 0 4 1217 88% 0 oi I 0 0 161 : 98% 0 o! 0 0 325 i 94% - 0 o\n0 0 183 ! i 90% ------- 0 0! 0 0 227 ' 89% 0 Oi 0 0 164\n85% -- -------- -- -------------- 0 oi 0 0 63 ' . 87% 0 0/ 0 0 81 'i 81% ol I --------- 0 0 0 71 l 90% O! I 0 0 0 175 : 94% 0 o!l 0 0 1450 I 91 I 0 qi 0 0 2 100% 0 0 0 0 16 100% 0 oi 0 0 6 67% 0 0 0 0 --- - 8 . i 88% -J.--.---.- ----- - 0 0 0 0 I 7 86% 0 o! 0 0 54 ! 91% .. --------------r-------------- --- 0 oi 0 0 9 i 89% 0 ol 0 0 6 83% ----- ---------- 0 ol I 0 0 5 i 100% 0 oi 0 0 27 100%  --- 0 oi 0 0 17 I l 94% 0 o, 0 0 23 lI 87% __. ....,.___ _._ ___. .....,__.,~.i--.,_,... ___. ,.___ . ,..._,._c._ __. .__,_,.,~.~---------\",1~------...~--ll'-\"'r:,o,~41' .. ...... ,...,. . ...- .-...-.. ~-~.- ..,.._,,.__,. ,,.._...,,...,.....,.__,.,__,. . .,. . ..-.. ...,.-.,..,..... .. .,,., ..-. r 111:n Tufnmrn1ln11 .l:Pri,lrP\u0026lt; Deni. Page J of2 JU3WdOf3A:\u0026gt;Q jBUOJ ':JJO.IJ J.rndaH a:,u11puany School Name Enrolled Blk JEFFRSN 404 41% M LKING 597 54% MABEL EL 346 75% - MCDERMOT 31)6 53% MEADCLIF 264 73% MITCHELL 278 96% OTTER CR 370 51% PULHTE 311 53% ROCKFELR 412 61% ROMINE 305 65% STEPHENS 327 94% TERRY 490 46% WAKEFIEL 344 81% WASHNGTN 491 59% WATSON 451 96% - ---- WILLIAMS 454 52% -W-I-L-S-O-N-- --- - .288 89% WOODRUFF 281 85% Totals 10700 68\"/o GTotal 23391 68\"/o LRSD Discipline Management Report 2000/2001 Semester Ii Short Term/CIC S11spe11sio11 Lo11g Term/ALE Suspension ! BM ! BF WM WFi Total I BM I BF Ii wM. WF Total BM 14 3 0 0 17 0 i 0 ! 0 0 0 0 ' o! 0 3 ol 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 9j 2 1 0 12 0 ! 0 ! 0 0 0 0 1: 0 0 ol 1 0 0 I 0 0 0 0 14 1 4 0 19 0 0 iI 0 0 0 0 13 7 2 0 22 0 0 i 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 4 0 0 8 . o 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 1 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 32j 6 0 1 39 1 I 0 ! 0 0 1 0 13 2 4 0 1~ 0 0 i 0 0 0 0 sj 0 0 0 5 0 I 0 ! 0 0 0 0 71 oi I i 0 1 8 0 l 0 i 0 0 0 0 --+- 7  0 0 oj 7 . 0 ! 0 I 0 0 0 0 -- 22 3 7 0 32 0 0 i 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 oi 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 - 2 0 0 0 2 0 i I 0 I 0 0 0 0 272 70 38 2 382 2 1 I 0 0 3 0 1814 786 238 851 2923 95 ! 28 i 2 0 125 4 I . , 24-A11g-0J Exp11/sio11 Total I BF WMI WF Total #S11sp iI %8/k I I 0 oi 0 0 17 I ! 100%- ----- 0 o! 0 0 3 I\n0% 0 oj 0 0 I 12\n92% -- 0 01 . 0 0 1 100% 0 oi 0 0 19 79% ---- 0 0 0 o 22 91% 0 ol 0 .0 . 1 100% ..------------ 0 0 0 0 3 67% 0 0 0 0 8 100% ----------- r------------- 0 0 0 0 4 ' 75% 0 oi I 0 0 40 97% ------------- 0 0 0 0 19 i 79% 0 01 0 0 5 I 100% oi --------1 ------ 0 0 0 8 II 88% 0 oj 0 0 7 ! 100% oi - -------------- 0 0 0 32 i 78% --~i - 0 0 0 2 100% - -- 0 0 0 0 2 100% 0 o! 0 0 385 90% I 0 O' I 0 4 3052 89% Discipline Sanctions by Reason Code Year: 2000/2001 Quarter: 1 to Quarter: 4 09-Aug-OJ .~, Ill Level School Lvl Code O(fense BM WM OM BF WF OF TOTAL Q. r., Senior High ACC LEARN 060 FAILURE TO FOLLOW RULES OR DIRECTIVES 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 t::, 062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECTIVES 1 0 0 0 O 0 -.\n 1 110 USE OF VERBAL ABUSE/FIGHTING WORDS/GES 0 0 0 0 0 ., s: 2 020 BATTERY 0 1 0 0 0 0 .C.. . 2 030 THEFT/THEFT BY RECEIVING 1 0 0 0 0 0 o = 2 040 FIGHTING/MUTUAL COMBAT 3 0 0 0 0 0 3 2 090 NON-THREATENING PROFANITY AT OR ABOUT 0 0 0 0 0 3 071 PHYSICAL ASSAULT OF STAFF 0 0 0 0 0 3 092 POSS./WEAP KNIFE/CLUB/FACSIM.BLADE LESS 0 0 0 0 0 \u0026gt; n 11 Ill Q. Senior High AGENCIES 062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECTIVES 0 0 0 0 0 r., a 110 USE OF VERBAL ABUSE/FIGHTING WORDS/GES 1 0 0 0 0 0\n:\n 2 020 BATTERY 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 :c: c,o 2 030 THEFT/THEFT BY RECEIVING 0 0 0 1 0 0 =- . 2 040 FIGHTING/MUTUAL COMBAT 9 0 0 2 0 0 11 ~ 2 080 VANDALISM (INTENTIONAL DESTRUCTION/PROP 0 0 0 0 0 1 \":i\n'- - 2 090 NON-THREATENING PROFANITY AT OR ABOUT 0 0 0 0 2 2 105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 0 0 3 0 0 4 2 110 DISORDERLY CONDUCT 10 0 1 0 13 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGORY I OFFEN \u0026gt; 2 115 33 3 0 3 2 0 41 --r., 2 121 REPEATED VIOLATION CATEGORY 11 OFFENSE 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 = Q.. . 3 072 VERBAL ABUSE OF STAFF 0 0 0 0 0 Ill = 3 121 USE OF A WEAPON 0 0 0 0 0 n r., 80 :\nz:, Senior High r., CENTRAL 030 MINOR ALTERCATION 1 0 0 0 0 0 \"C 0 050 LEFT SCHOOUCLASS WITHOUT PERMISSION 0 0 0 0 0 1 ...,. . 060 FAILURE TO FOLLOW RULES OR DIRECTIVES 2 2 0 0 0 5 080 FAILURE TO SERVE DETENTION 3 2 0 9 3 0 17 090 REFUSED TO SERVE DETENTION 3 0 0 1 0 0 4 100 USE OR POSSESSION OF TOBACCO 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 131 USE/POSS ALCOHOL 0 2 \u0026lt; 0 2 0 0 0 0 132 USE/POSS. DRUGS 2 0 3 0 7 C .. -= 133 REPEATED SCHOOUCLASS TARDIES 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 r., r., 2 010 ASSAULT 2 0 0 2 0 0 4 ., :c: 2 020 BATTERY 6 0 0 6 0 0 12 0 C 2 030 THEFT/THEFT BY RECEIVING 4 0 0 0 0 5 .,,. 2 040 FIGHTING/MUTUAL COMBAT 22 0 16 3 0 42 2 090 NON-THREATENING PROFANITY AT OR ABOUT 2 0 6 0 0 9 2 100 SEXUAL MISCONDUCT/BEHAVIOR OR INDECENT 0 0 0 0 2 .-e, t 2 105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 6 0 0 2 3 0 11 0 2 1 io DISORDERLY CONDUCT 16 2 0 15 1 0 34 ,\n.\n, ,. 2 115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGORY I OFFEN 70 6 0 30 5 0 111 Q = 2 120 HARASSING COMMUNICATIONS 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 ~ 2 121 REPEATED VIOLATION CATEGORY II OFFENSE 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 122 FALSIFYING SIGNATURE/INFORMATION 0 0 0 0 0 r., -e r., 2 150 POSSESSION OR USE OF ALCOHOL 6 0 0 0 1 0 7 Q 2 151 POSSESSION OR USE OF DRUGS 0 3 0 0 0 0 3 \"O a 3 011 SALE OR DISTRIBUTION OF DRUGS 0 0 0 0 0 1 r., = 3 060 BURN OR ATTEMPT TO BURN SCHOOL PROPER 0 2 0 0 0 0 2 - LRSD Information Services Dept. Page I of 13 ,eve/ School Lvl Code O[fense BM WM OM BF WF OF TOTAL ienior High CENTRAL 3 071 PHYSICAL ASSAULT OF STAFF 1 0 0 0 0 0 3 072 VERBAL ABUSE OF STAFF 2 0 0 0 0 3 3 080 POSSESSION OF FIREARM 0 0 0 0 0 1 ~ 3 090 POSSESSION OF WEAPON 1 0 0 2 0 0 3 ., = 3 120 INCITING TO RIOT 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 C. l'I) 3 121 USE OF A WEAPON 0 0 0 0 0 ~\n 3 130 VIOLENT TAKING BY FORCE OR THREAT 0 0 0 0 0 1 ...,.. 3 140 TERRORISTIC THREATENING 5 2 0 0 0 8\n: --- C 307 o.... ,enior High FAIR 030 MINOR ALTERCATION 1 0 0 0 0 2 = 040 BEHAVIOR THAT VIOLATES A PERSON'S RIGHTS 3 0 0 0 0 0 3 050 LEFT SCHOOUCLASS WITHOUT PERMISSION 0 0 4 0 0 5 060 FAILURE TO FOLLOW RULES OR DIRECTIVES 5 3 0 0 0 0 8 \u0026gt; 062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECTIVES 5 0 3 0 0 9 ,:, = 070 REFUSE TO OBEY BUS RULES/REGULATIONS 0 0 0 0 0 1 C. n, 080 FAILURE TO SERVE DETENTION 0 0 0 0 2 a 090 REFUSED TO SERVE DETENTION 0 0 1 0 0 2\n ::i: ' 1 100 USE OR POSSESSION OF TOBACCO 0 0 0 0 0 1 IJQ. 1 110 USE OF VERBAL ABUSE/FIGHTING WORDS/GES 4 2 1 3 0 0 10 ,::,r 132 USE/POSS. DRUGS 0 0 0 0 0\n 133 REPEATED SCHOOUCLASS TARDIES 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 :,\n-- 2 010 ASSAULT 13 0 0 3 0 0 16 2 020 BATTERY 5 0 0 1 8 2 030 THEFT/THEFT BY RECEIVING 11 0 2 0 0 14 \u0026gt; 2 040 FIGHTING/MUTUAL COMBAT 31 2 1 23 2 0 59 ::i l'I) 2 050 GAMBLING 3 0 0 0 0 0 3 = ::i. 2 060 FALSE ALARM 0 0 0 0 0 1 == ,:, 2 \" 070 LOITERING OR CRIMINAL TRESPASS 6 0 15 2 0 24 l'I) 2 090 NON-THREATENING PROFANITY AT OR ABOUT 17 4 1 4 0 0 26 ,, l'I) 2 100 SEXUAL MISCONDUCT/BEHAVIOR OR INDECENT 2 0 0 1 0 0 3 'O 0., 2 105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 3 0 0 0 0 0 3 - 2 110 DISORDERLY CONDUCT 10 0 7 0 0 18 2 115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGORY I OFFEN 36 1 0 14 2 2 55 2 120 HARASSING COMMUNICATIONS 5 0 0 0 0 0 5 2 121 REPEATED VIOLATION -CATEGORY II OFFENSE 13 0 0 2 0 16 \u0026lt; 2 122 FALSIFYING SIGNATURE/INFORMATION 0 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 C 2 123 POSSESSION OR USE/PAGING DEVICE 0 2 0 0 4 =.... 2 124 MEMBERSHIP AND PROHIBITIVE GANG/ORGANI 0 0 0 0 0 l'I) .I'!,) 2 150 POSSESSION OR USE OF ALCOHOL 8 2 0 2 0 13 ::i: 2 151 POSSESSION OR USE OF DRUGS 4 0 0 0 6 0 C 3 011 SALE OR DISTRIBUTION OF DRUGS 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 ., \"' 3 071 PHYSICAL ASSAULT OF STAFF 2 0 0 0 0 3 3 072 VERBAL ABUSE OF STAFF 3 0 0 0 0 4 3 140 TERRORISTIC THREATENING 2 0 0 0 0 3 .\",t t 333 Q\n, Senior High HALL 030 MINOR ALTERCATION 2 0 0 5 0 0 7 \"\"'' 050 LEFT SCHOOUCLASS WITHOUT PERMISSION 5 0 0 5 0 0 10 Q = 060 FAILURE TO FOLLOW RULES OR DIRECTIVES 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 ~ 062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECTIVES 19 0 3 0 0 23 0 l'I) 070 REFUSE TO OBEY BUS RULES/REGULATIONS 2 0 0 1 0 0 3 ,\u0026lt;, 110 USE OF VERBAL ABUSE/FIGHTING WORDS/GES 3 0 0 4 0 0 7 Q \"O 131 USE/POSS ALCOHOL 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 a fl 132 USE/POSS. DRUGS 0 0 0 0 2 -= LRSD Information Services Dept. Page 2 of JJ Level School Lvl Code O[fense BM WM OM .BF WF OF TOTAL Senior High HALL 1 133 REPEATED SCHOOUCLASS TARDIES 0 0 0 2 0 0 2 1 140 FALSIFY INFO/RECORDS (ELEM) 1 0 0 0 0 O 1 2 010 ASSAULT 0 0 0 2 0 0 2 ~ 2 020 BATTERY 21 0 0 3 0 0 24 \"'! Ill 2 030 THEFTfTHEFT BY RECEIVING 3 0 0 0 0 4 ,Q, . 2 040 FIGHTING/MUTUAL COMBAT 34 8 2 34 1 1 80 0 i\n 2 070 LOITERING OR CRIMINAL TRESPASS 3 0 0 0 0 0 3 ...,.. 2 080 VANDALISM (INTENTIONAL DESTRUCTION/PROP 1 0 0 2 0 4 s: C 2 090 NON-THREATENING PROFANITY AT OR ABOUT 44 2 15 2 0 64 .... ::\n- 2 100 SEXUAL MISCONDUCT/BEHAVIOR OR INDECENT 5 0 0 0 0 6 = 2 105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 194 14 6 83 6 2 305 2 110 DISORDERLY CONDUCT 48 7 3 19 2 0 79 2 115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGORY I OFFEN 84 13 4 22 1 0 124 \u0026gt; 2 120 HARASSING COMMUNICATIONS 4 0 0 0 0 0 4 I\") = 2 121 REPEATED VIOLATION CATEGORY II OFFENSE 5 0 0 0 0 0 5 ,Q, . 2 122 FALSIFYING SIGNATURE/INFORMATION 8 0 3 2 2 16 a\n::\n 2 123 POSSESSION OR USE/PAGING DEVICE 1 1 0 0 0 0 2 ::= 2 150 POSSESSION OR USE OF ALCOHOL 6 0 0 1 1 0 8 ~- =- 2 151 POSSESSION OR USE OF DRUGS 5 0 0 0 0 0 5 :\n, 3 011 SALE OR DISTRIBUTION OF DRUGS 0 0 0 0 0 i\n ::i:- 3 071 PHYSICAL ASSAULT OF STAFF 3 0 0 1 0 0 4 3 072 VERBAL ABUSE OF STAFF 20 2 1 3 0 0 26 3 090 POSSESSION OF WEAPON 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 092 POSS./WEAP KNIFE/CLUB/FACSIM.BLADE LESS 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 \u0026gt;.... 3 140 TERRORISTIC THREATENING 0 2 4 0 0 7 -,, = 834 Q. = Senior High MCCLELLA 030 MINOR ALTERCATION 0 0 0 0 0 = I\") 040 BEHAVIOR THAT VIOLATES A PERSON'S RIGHTS 3 0 0 2 0 o 5 ,, :\n, 050 LEFT SCHOOUCLASS WITHOUT PERMISSION 45 5 0 20 0 71 ,, \"::, 060 FAILURE TO FOLLOW RULES OR DIRECTIVES 26 3 0 6 0 0 35 0 \"'! 062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECTIVES 20 0 1 7 0 0 28 - 070 REFUSE TO OBEY BUS RULES/REGULATIONS 0 0 0 0 0 100 USE OR POSSESSION OF TOBACCO 1 0 0 0 0 0 110 USE OF VERBAL ABUSE/FIGHTING WORDS/GES 3 1 0 0 0 0 4 131 USE/POSS ALCOHOL 3 0 0 0 1 0 4 ~ 0 132 USE/POSS. DRUGS 4 0 0 1 0 0 5 C 133 REPEATED SCHOOUCLASS TARDIES 17 0 3 0 0 21 -,=, 2 010 ASSAULT 7 0 0 3 0 0 10 ,, \"'! 2 020 BATTERY 6 0 0 2 0 0 8 ::i: 0 2 030 THEFTfTHEFT BY RECEIVING 0 0 0 0 0 C \"'! 2 040 FIGHTING/MUTUAL COMBAT 33 1 0 29 0 0 63 \"\" 2 050 GAMBLING 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 070 LOITERING OR CRIMINAL TRESPASS 15 0 14 0 0 30 2 080 VANDALISM (INTENTIONAL DESTRUCTION/PROP 3 1 0 0 6 .\"\",t: t 0 2 090 NON-THREATENING PROFANITY AT OR ABOUT 15 0 18 0 0 34\n, \"\" 2 100 SEXUAL MISCONDUCT/BEHAVIOR OR INDECENT 1 0 0 1 0 0 2 \"Q\" 2 105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 6 0 0 2 0 0 8 :, 2 DISORDERLY CONDUCT 13 3 2 0 0 19 ~ 110 2 115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGORY I OFFEN 70 3 1 35 0 110 ,0, \u0026lt; 2 121 REPEATED VIOLATION CATEGORY II OFFENSE 4 0 0 2 0 0 6 ,, Q 2 140 USE OF FIREWORKS 0 0 0 0 0 'O 2 150 POSSESSION OR USE OF ALCOHOL 0 0 0 0 2 ,a, 2 151 POSSESSION OR USE OF DRUGS 0 0 0 0 0 -:, lRSD Information Services Dept. Page3 o/13 Level School Lvl Code Offense BM WM OM BF WF OF TOTAL Senior High MCCLELLA 3 071 PHYSICAL ASSAULT OF STAFF 1 0 0 0 0 0 3 072 VERBAL ABUSE OF STAFF 7 0 3 0 0 11 3 080 POSSESSION OF FIREARM 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 ~ 3 081 POSSESSION OF FIREARM,HANDGUN 0 0 0 0 0 \"'! = Q. 3 090 POSSESSION OF WEAPON 2 0 0 0 0 1 3 \"' 3 140 TERRORISTIC THREATENING 4 0 0 0 0 5 0\n 501 .... \"'! Senior High METRO 030 MINOR ALTERCATION 0 0 0 0 0 s: C 1 040 BEHAVIOR THAT VIOLATES A PERSON'S RIGHTS 0 0 0 0 0 .s... 050 LEFT SCHOOUCLASS WITHOUT PERMISSION 11 0 4 0 0 16 = 060 FAILURE TO FOLLOW RULES OR DIRECTIVES 7 0 0 0 0 0 7 062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECTIVES 4 2 0 0 0 0 6 110 USE OF VERBAL ABUSE/FIGHTING WORDS/GES 2 0 3 0 0 6 \u0026gt; 133 REPEATED SCHOOUCLASS TARDIES 2 0 0 1 0 0 3 ,., = 2 030 THEFT/THEFT BY RECEIVING 0 0 0 0 0 Q. \"' 2 080 VANDALISM (INTENTIONAL DESTRUCTION/PROP 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 a\n 2 090 NON-THREATENING PROFANITY AT OR ABOUT 0 0 0 0 0 ::i: 2 110 DISORDERLY CONDUCT 0 0 2 0 0 3 (JO. =- 2 115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGORY I OFFEN 0 0 0 0 0 ,, 2 120 HARASSING COMMUNICATIONS 0 0 0 0 1 0\n :,\n- 2 122 FALSIFYING SIGNATURE/INFORMATION 0 0 0 0 0 2 123 POSSESSION OR USE/PAGING DEVICE 0 0 0 0 0 3 000 USE OF RAP RINGS,CHEMICAL AGNTS OR FACS 0 0 0 0 0 3 072 VERBAL ABUSE OF STAFF 0 0 0 0 0 1 \u0026gt;.... 3 090 POSSESSION OF WEAPON 0 0 0 0 2 .... =\"' 55 Q. = Senior High PARKVIEW 080 FAILURE TO SERVE DETENTION 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 =,., 1 132 USE/POSS. DRUGS 0 7 0 0 0 0 7 ,\",' 2 020 BATTERY 0 0 0 0 0 1 \"\"O' 2 030 THEFT/THEFT BY RECEIVING 1 0 3 1 0 6 -0., 2 040 FIGHTING/MUTUAL COMBAT 0 0 3 2 0 6 2 090 NON-THREATENING PROFANITY AT OR ABOUT 5 2 0 2 2 0 11 2 110 DISORDERLY CONDUCT 4 0 0 3 0 0 7 2 115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGORY I OFFEN 26 3 1 1 6 0 37 2 120 HARASSING COMMUNICATIONS 0 0 0 0 0 1  ~ 0 2 121 REPEATED VIOLATION - CATEGORY II OFFENSE 0 0 0 0 0 1 c 2 150 POSSESSION OR USE OF ALCOHOL 0 0 0 1 0 0 =.... \"' 2 151 POSSESSION OR USE OF DRUGS 1 0 0 0 0 2 \"\"'!' 3 072 VERBAL ABUSE OF STAFF 0 0 0 0 2 ::i: 0 3 092 POSS./WEAP KNIFE/CLUB/FACSIM.BLADE LESS 0 0 0 0 0 .C, 3 121 USE OF A WEAPON 0 0 0 0 0 ,. 86 Senior High 2207 -:, Middle School ALT LEARN 030 MINOR ALTERCATION 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 \"'! 0 0$0 LEFT SCHOOUCLASS WITHOUT PERMISSION 0 0 0 0 0 ,\n:.\n, ,. 060 FAILURE TO FOLLOW RULES OR DIRECTIVES 0 0 0 1 0 0 Q 062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECTIVES 0 0 0 0 0 = ~ 080 FAILURE TO SERVE DETENTION 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 090 REFUSED TO SERVE DETENTION 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 fl\u0026gt; \u0026lt; 110 USE OF VERBAL ABUSE/FIGHTING WORDS/GES 3 0 0 0 0 0 3 fl\u0026gt; Q 1 132 USE/POSS. DRUGS 3 0 0 0 0 4 \"O a 2 020 BATTERY 2 0 0 0 0 3 fl\u0026gt; = 2 030 THEFT/THEFT BY RECEIVING 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 - - LRSD Information Services Dept. -- Page 4 o/13 Level School Lvl Code O[fense BM WM OM BF WF OF TOTAL Middle School ALT LEARN 2 040 FIGHTING/MUTUAL COMBAT 14 0 0 2 0 0 16 2 050 GAMBLING 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 080 VANDALISM (INTENTIONAL DESTRUCTION/PROP 0 0 0 0 0 1 ~ 2 090 NON-THREATENING PROFANITY AT OR ABOUT 29 0 1 5 0 0 35 ., = 2 100 SEXUAL MISCONDUCT/BEHAVIOR OR INDECENT 5 0 0 1 0 0 6 C. fl\u0026gt; 2 105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES  54 2 0 11 0 0 67 i:::, i\n 2 110 DISORDERLY CONDUCT 11 0 0 4 0 0 15 ...,.. 2 115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGORY I OFFEN 10 0 0 1 0 0 11 s: C: 2 120 HARASSING COMMUNICATIONS 1 0 0 0 0 0 -o 2 121 REPEATED VIOLATION -CATEGORY II OFFENSE 4 0 0 0 0 0 4 = 2 122 FALSIFYING SIGNATURE/INFORMATION 0 0 0 0 0 2 150 POSSESSION OR USE OF ALCOHOL 3 0 0 0 0 0 3 2 151 POSSESSION OR USE OF DRUGS 5 0 0 0 0 0 5 \u0026gt; 3 071 PHYSICAL ASSAULT OF STAFF 0 0 0 0 0 n = 3 072 VERBAL ABUSE OF STAFF 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 C. fl\u0026gt; 3 120 INCITING TO RIOT 5 0 0 1 0 0 6 a j\n 3 140 TERRORISTIC THREATENING 0 0 0 0 0 ::i:: 197 (iQ\" Middle School CLOVR JR 030 MINOR ALTERCATION 4 0 0 0 6 =- :\ni:, 040 BEHAVIOR THAT VIOLATES A PERSON'S RIGHTS 9 0 0 0 0 10 i\n ~ 050 LEFT SCHOOUCLASS WITHOUT PERMISSION 8 0 0 2 0 0 10 060 FAILURE TO FOLLOW RULES OR DIRECTIVES 18 1 1 7 0 0 27 062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECTIVES 43 0 3 .19 0 0 65 070 REFUSE TO OBEY BUS RULES/REGULATIONS 0 0 0 0 0 1 \u0026gt;.... 080 FAILURE TO SERVE DETENTION 12 0 0 7 0 1 20 .... l'I! = 090 REFUSED TO SERVE DETENTION 13 1 0 3 0 0 17 C. = 100 USE OR POSSESSION OF TOBACCO 1 0 0 0 0 0 n= 110 USE OF VERBAL ABUSE/FIGHTING WORDS/GES 7 1 9 0 0 18 I'll 133 REPEATED SCHOOUCLASS TARDIES 2 0 0 0 0 3 :i:l tll \"O 2 010 ASSAULT 4 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 \"'I 2 020 BATTERY 9 1 0 0 0 11 - 2 030 THEFTfrHEFT BY RECEIVING 5 0 0 1 0 0 6 2 040 FIGHTING/MUTUAL COMBAT 61 4 3 51 3 7 129 2 070 LOITERING OR CRIMINAL TRESPASS 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 2 090 NON-THREATENlNG PROFANITY AT OR ABOUT 18 2 0 7 1 0 28 . \u0026lt; 2 100 SEXUAL MISCONDUCT/BEHAVIOR OR INDECENT 10 0 0 0 0 11 0 = 2 105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 23 1 6 1 0 32 -= tll 2 110 DISORDERLY CONDUCT 12 0 0 5 0 0 17 .tl,l 2 115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGORY I OFFEN 60 0 0 14 0 75 ::c: 0 2 120 HARASSING COMMUNICATIONS 5 0 0 0 0 6 C \"'I 2 121 REPEATED VIOLATION - CATEGORY II OFFENSE 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 \"' 2 122 FALSIFYING SIGNATURE/INFORMATION 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 150 POSSESSION OR USE OF ALCOHOL 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 151 POSSESSION OR USE OF DRUGS 4 0 0 1 0 0 5 .\",C ' 0 3 000 USE OF RAP RINGS,CHEMICAL AGNTS OR FACS 0 0 0 0 0\n, 3 010 SALE OR DISTRIBUTION OF ALCOHOL 1 0 0 0 0 0 \"\"'' Q 3 071 PHYSICAL ASSAULT OF STAFF 2 0 1 0 0 4 = 3 072 VERBAL ABUSE OF STAFF 4 0 0 1 0 0 5 ~ 3 090 POSSESSION OF WEAPON 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 !':) 0 2 0 0 13 \u0026lt; 3 140 TERRORISTIC THREATENING 10 !':) 532 Q \"C Middle School DUNBAR 030 MINOR ALTERCATION 0 0 0 0 2 a tll 050 LEFT SCHOOUCLASS WITHOUT PERMISSION 0 0 3 0 0 4 -= LRSD Information Services Dept. Page5 of 13 Level School Lvl Code O[fense BM WM OM BF WF OF TOTAL Middle School DUNBAR 1 133 REPEATED SCHOOUCLASS TARDIES 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 010 ASSAULT 3 0 0 0 0 4 2 020 BATTERY 3 3 0 0 8 ~ 2 030 THEFTITHEFT BY RECEIVING 6 2 0 0 10 \"\"I = 2 040 FIGHTING/MUTUAL COMBAT 45 13 1 Q. 32 1 93 \"' 2 080 VANDALISM (INTENTIONAL DESTRUCTION/PROP 0 0 0 0 0 0\n 2 090 NON-THREATENING PROFANITY AT OR ABOUT 8 2 0 4 0 0 14 -\"\"I 2 100 SEXUAL MISCONDUCT/BEHAVIOR OR INDECENT 7 1 0 0 0 0 8\n: C 2 105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 5 0 0 14 0 0 19 -o 2 110 DISORDERLY CONDUCT 5 0 0 7 0 0 12 = 2 115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGORY I OFFEN 34 4 0 31 0 0 69 2 120 HARASSING COMMUNICATIONS 12 1 0 0 15 2 121 REPEATED VIOLATION - CATEGORY II OFFENSE 2 0 2 0 0 5 \u0026gt; 2 122 FALSIFYING SIGNATURE/INFORMATION 0 0 0 0 2 I\") = 3 071 PHYSICAL ASSAULT OF STAFF 0 0 0 0 2 Q. \"' 3 072 VERBAL ABUSE OF STAFF 1 0 0 0 0 2 a\n 3 092 POSS./WEAP KNIFE/CLUB/FACSIM.BLADE LESS 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 ::c 3 140 TERRORISTIC THREATENING 3 2 0 0 0 0 5 ~- :r 278 ~ Middle School FORST HT 030 MINOR ALTERCATION 0 0 0 0 0\n :i::-- 040 BEHAVIOR THAT VIOLATES A PERSON'S RIGHTS 0 0 0 0 0 1 060 FAILURE TO FOLLOW RULES OR DIRECTIVES 4 0 0 7 062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECTIVES 33 6 0 24 2 0 65 080 FAILURE TO SERVE DETENTION 0 0 0 0 0 -\u0026gt; 1 110 USE OF VERBAL ABUSE/FIGHTING WORDS/GES 0 0 0 0 0 -:\"I' 2 010 ASSAULT 0 0 0 0 2 Q. = 2 020 BATTERY 14 0 3 0 19 = I\") 2 030 THEFTITHEFT BY RECEIVING 3 0 0 8 0 0 11 \"' ~ 2 040 FIGHTING/MUTUAL COMBAT 89 5 39 136 \"' \"C 2 060 FALSE ALARM 0 0 0 0 0 0., 2 080 VANDALISM (INTENTIONAL DESTRUCTION/PROP 2 0 0 0 0 - 3 2 090 NON-THREATENING PROFANITY AT OR ABOUT 11 0 2 2 0 16 2 100 SEXUAL MISCONDUCT/BEHAVIOR OR INDECENT 10 0 0 1 0 0 11 2 105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 4 0 0 2 0 0 6 2 110 DISORDERLY CONDUCT 38 9 26 0 1 75 \u0026lt; 0 2 115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGORY I OFFEN 14 0 8 1 0 24 c 2 120 HARASSING COMMUNICATIONS 2 1 0 0 0 4 -\"=' 2 121 REPEATED VIOLATION - CATEGORY II OFFENSE 3 0 0 0 0 4 \"\"\"'I 2 122 FALSIFYING SIGNATURE/INFORMATION 0 0 0 0 0 ::c 0 2 150 POSSESSION OR USE OF ALCOHOL 0 0 0 1 0 0 C \"'I 3 010 SALE OR DISTRIBUTION OF ALCOHOL 0 0 0 0 0 \"' 3 060 BURN OR ATTEMPT TO BURN SCHOOL PROPER 3 0 0 0 0 0 3 3 071 PHYSICAL ASSAULT OF STAFF 2 2 0 0 0 0 4 3 072 VERBAL ABUSE OF STAFF 1 0 0 0 0 0 .,, \"\"I 0 3 090 POSSESSION OF WEAPON 0 0 0 0 0\n, \"' 3 091 POSSESSION OF WEAPON.KNIFE-BLADE 2 1/2\" 3 0 0 0 0 4 \"Q' 3 121 USE OF A WEAPON 0 0 0 0 0 1 = 3 140 TERRORISTIC THREATENING 3 0 0 0 5 ~ --- 0 410 \"' Middle School \u0026lt; HENDERSN 030 MINOR ALTERCATION 0 0 0 2 0 0 2 \"' Q 040 BEHAVIOR THAT VIOLATES A PERSON'S RIGHTS 1 0 0 0 0 0 \"O 062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECTIVES 2 0 0 1 1 0 4 a \"' 090 REFUSED TO SERVE DETENTION 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 -= LRSD Information Services Dept. - !bSJs\u0026amp;,..... Page 6 of 13 Level School Lvl Code O[fense BM WM OM BF WF OF TOTAL Middle School HENDERSN 1 110 USE OF VERBAL ABUSE/FIGHTING WORDS/GES 0 0 0 0 2 132 USE/POSS. DRUGS 0 0 0 1 0 0 2 010 ASSAULT 0 0 0 0 2 ~ 2 020 BATTERY 4 0 0 0 0 0 4 \"\"I = 2 030 THEFT/THEFT BY RECEIVING 0 0 Q. 0 0 0 r., 2 040 FIGHTING/MUTUAL COMBAT 68 6 4 24 2 105 t:::, ~- 2 090 NON-THREATENING PROFANITY AT OR ABOUT 5 2 0 4 0 0 11 .... \"\"I 2 100 SEXUAL MISCONDUCT/BEHAVIOR OR INDECENT 3 0 0 1 0 0 4 \u0026amp;: C 2 110 DISORDERLY CONDUCT 0 0 0 2 0 0 2 .o... 2 115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGORY I OFFEN 53 7 2 25 3 3 93 = 2 120 HARASSING COMMUNICATIONS 2 0 0 1 0 0 3 2 121 REPEATED VIOLATION CATEGORY II OFFENSE 0 0 0 0 0 2 150 POSSESSION OR USE OF ALCOHOL - 0 0 0 0 0 \u0026gt; 3 071 PHYSICAL ASSAULT OF STAFF 0 0 0 0 0 r:, = 3 072 VERBAL ABUSE OF STAFF 0 0 0 0 0 Q. r., 3 090  POSSESSION OF WEAPON 0 0 0 1 0 0 a\n 3 091 POSSESSION OF WEAPON.KNIFE-BLADE 2 1/2\" 0 0 0 0 0 = 3 140 TERRORISTIC THREATENING 2 0 2 0 0 5 ~- =- 248 :x, Middle School MABEL JR 030 MINOR ALTERCATION 2 0 0 0 0 3 ~- ,:- 050 LEFT SCHOOUCLASS WITHOUT PERMISSION 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 060 FAILURE TO FOLLOW RULES OR DIRECTIVES 3 0 0 0 0 0 3 062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECTIVES 2 0 3 0 0 6 070 REFUSE TO OBEY BUS RULES/REGULATIONS 3 0 0 2 0 0 5 \u0026gt;.... 090 REFUSED TO SERVE DETENTION 1 0 0 0 0 0 .... r., = 110 USE OF VERBAL ABUSE/FIGHTING WORDS/GES 2 0 0 3 0 0 5 Q. = 133 REPEATED SCHOOUCLASS TARDIES 0 0 0 0 0 = r:, 2 010 ASSAULT 0 0 0 0 0 r., :x, 2 020 BATTERY 0 1 0 0 0 0 t!I \"'O 2 040 FIGHTING/MUTUAL COMBAT 22 3 0 9 0 0 34 .0, 2 090 NON-THREATENING PROFANITY AT OR ABOUT 0 0 0 0 2 - 2 100 SEXUAL MISCONDUCT/BEHAVIOR OR INDECENT 4 1 0 0 0 6 2 110 DISORDERLY CONDUCT 6 0 0 0 8 2 115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGORY I OFFEN 12 7 0 0 21 2 120 HARASSING COMMUNICATIONS 3 0 0 0 1 0 4 \u0026lt; 0 2 121 REPEATED VIOLATION - CATEGORY II OFFENSE 1 0 a 2 0 0 3 c 3 071 PHYSICAL ASSAULT OF STAFF 0 0 0 0 0 1 =.... t!I 3 072 VERBAL ABUSE OF STAFF 0 0 0 0 2 t!I \"\"I 108 = Middle School 0 MANN M/S 040 BEHAVIOR THAT VIOLATES A PERSON'S RIGHTS 0 0 0 0 0 .C, 060 FAILURE TO FOLLOW RULES OR DIRECTIVES 0 0 0 0 0 ... 1 110 USE OF VERBAL ABUSE/FIGHTING WORDS/GES 0 0 0 0 0 2 010 ASSAULT 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 020 BATTERY 5 0 0 0 7 \"'Cl \"\"I 0 2 030 THEFT/THEFT BY RECEIVING 0 0 2 0 0 3 .\n.\n. , 2 040 FIGHTING/MUTUAL COMBAT 19 3 2 7 0 0 31 ... Q 2 090 NON-THREATENING PROFANITY AT OR ABOUT 5 0 0 0 7 = ~ 2 100 SEXUAL MISCONDUCT/BEHAVIOR OR INDECENT 5 0 0 0 0 0 5 - 2 115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGORY I OFFEN 24 8 2 0 36 t:::, t!I \u0026lt; 2 150 POSSESSION OR USE OF ALCOHOL 0 1 0 0 0 2 r., Q 2 151 POSSESSION OR USE OF DRUGS 0 0 0 0 0 't:I 3 010 SALE OR DISTRIBUTION OF ALCOHOL 0 0 0 0 0 a r., 3 090 POSSESSION OF WEAPON 0 0 0 0 0 -= LRSD Information Services Dept. Page 7 of 13 ',eve[ School Lvl Code O[fense BM WM OM BF WF OF TOTAL v1iddle School MANN M/S 3 092 POSS./WEAP KNIFE/CLUB/FACSIM.BLADE LESS 0 0 0 0 0 3 130 VIOLENT TAKING BY FORCE OR THREAT 1 0 0 0 0 0 3 140 TERRORISTIC THREATENING 6 0 0 0 0 7 C, 107 \"'I = v1iddle School PUL HT J 030 MINOR ALTERCATION 6 2 0 0 0 0 8 C. n 040 BEHAVIOR THAT VIOLATES A PERSON'S RIGHTS 0 0 2 0 0 3 0 050 LEFT SCHOOUCLASS WITHOUT PERMISSION 0 0 2 0 0 3 -\n \"'I 060 FAILURE TO FOLLOW RULES OR DIRECTIVES 0 2 0 0 4 6= C 062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECTIVES 0 0 0 0 0 1 -o 080 FAILURE TO SERVE DETENTION 4 0 0 2 0 0 6 = 110 USE OF VERBAL ABUSE/FIGHTING WORDS/GES 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 133 REPEATED SCHOOUCLASS TARDIES 0 0 0 0 0 2 010 ASSAULT 4 0 0 0 0 0 4 \u0026gt; 2 020 BATTERY 0 1 0 0 0 0 n = 2 030 THEFT/THEFT BY RECEIVING 0 0 0 0 2 C. n 2 040 FIGHTING/MUTUAL COMBAT 31 5 0 15 0 0 51 a 2 090 NON-THREATENING PROFANITY AT OR ABOUT 1 0 2 0 0 4\n:\n ::i:: 2 100 SEXUAL MISCONDUCT/BEHAVIOR OR INDECENT 0 0 0 0 0 (IQ. 2 105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 8 0 0 1 0 0 9 =- 2 110 DISORDERLY CONDUCT 0 0 0 0 0 ,:,\n 2 115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGORY I OFFEN 14 1 0 2 0 0 17 ,:- 2 120 HARASSING COMMUNICATIONS 1 0 0 0 0 2 2 121 REPEATED VIOLATION CATEGORY II OFFENSE 0 0 0 0 0 3 140 TERRORISTIC THREATENING 0 0 0 0 2 \u0026gt;- 123 -~ Middle School SOUTHWST 2 010 ASSAULT 0 0 0 0 0 = C. 2 020 BATTERY 12 1 2 0 0 16 == n 2 030 THEFT/THEFT BY RECEIVING 5 0 0 0 0 0 5 n 2 040 FIGHTING/MUTUAL COMBAT 81 3 2 39 5 2 132 ,:, n 2 080 VANDALISM {INTENTIONAL DESTRUCTION/PROP 0 0 0 0 0 'C 0 \"'I 2 090 NON-THREATENING PROFANITY AT OR ABOUT 12 0 0 2 0 0 14 - 2 100 SEXUAL MISCONDUCT/BEHAVIOR OR INDECENT 8 0 0 0 10 2 105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 3 0 1 1 0 0 5 2 110 DISORDERLY CONDUCT 10 2 2 14 0 0 28 2 115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGORY I OFFEN 52 0 19 0 0 72 ~ 2 120 HARASSING COMMUNICATIONS 6 0 1 2 0 0 9 S:. REPEATED .VIOLATION CATEGORY II OFFENSE C 2 121 0 0 0 0 0 -= 2 124 MEMBERSHIP AND PROHIBITIVE GANG/ORGANI 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 n n \"'I 3 071 PHYSICAL ASSAULT OF STAFF 0 0 0 0 2 ::i:: 3 072 VERBAL ABUSE OF STAFF 0 0 2 0 0 3 0 C 3 091 POSSESSION OF WEAPON.KNIFE-BLADE 2 1/2\" 1 0 0 0 0 0 \"' I 3 140 TERRORISTIC THREATENING 9 0 3 0 0 13 314 Middle School 2317 ',:t \"'I Elementary 0 BADGETT 1 060 FAILURE TO FOLLOW RULES OR DIRECTIVES 2 0 0 0 0 0 2\n-, 2 040 FIGHTING/MUTUAL COMBAT 0 0 0 0 0 \"Q' 3 = Elementary BALE 062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECTIVES 0 0 0 0 0 ~ 2 040 FIGHTING/MUTUAL COMBAT 0 0 0 0 0 0 n \u0026lt; 2 105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 1 0 0 0 0 0 n Q 2 110 DISORDERLY CONDUCT 6 0 0 1 0 0 7 ~ 2 115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGORY I OFFEN 3 0 0 0 0 0 3 a n - 3 071 PHYSICAL ASSAULT OF STAFF 0 0 0 0 0 -= LR.SD Information Services Dept. n:u\nc ._ Page 8 of 13 Level School Lvl Code O(fense BM WM OM BF WF OF TOTAL Elementary BALE 3 092 POSS./WEAP KNIFE/CLUB/FACSIM.BLADE LESS 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 3 140 TERRORISTIC THREATENING 0 0 0 0 0 17 C, \"'I Elementary BASELINE 040 BEHAVIOR THAT VIOLATES A PERSON'S RIGHTS 0 0 0 0 0 :::, Q.,, 060 FAILURE TO FOLLOW RULES OR DIRECTIVES 0 0 0 0 0 tD 2 010 ASSAULT 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 .i\n..\n. 2 115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGORY I OFFEN 3 2 0 0 0 0 5 \"'I 2 120 HARASSING COMMUNICATIONS 0 0 0 0 0 s: .C.. . 2 121 REPEATED VIOLATION - CATEGORY II OFFENSE 0 0 0 0 0 =- 10 = Elementary BOOKER 2 010 ASSAULT 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 040 FIGHTING/MUTUAL COMBAT 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 3 \u0026gt; Elementary BRADY 2 090 NON-THREATENING PROFANITY AT OR ABOUT 1 0 n 0 0 0 0 = Q.,, 3 091 POSSESSION OF WEAPON.KNIFE-BLADE 2 1/2\" 0 1 0 0 0 0 tD 3 3 092 POSS./WEAP KNIFE/CLUB/FACSIM.BLADE LESS 1 0 0 0 0 0\n 3 140 TERRORISTIC THREATENING 2 0 0 3 0 0 5 ::r: 8 rRi\" =- Elementary CARVER 030 MINOR ALTERCATION 0 0 0 2 0 0 2 ,:l 070 REFUSE TO OBEY BUS RULES/REGULATIONS 0 0 0 0 0 i\n :i:- 2 030 THEFT/THEFT BY RECEIVING 0 0 0 1 0 0 2 040  FIGHTING/MUTUAL COMBAT 2 0 0 , 0 0 3 2 120 HARASSING COMMUNICATIONS 0 0 0 3 -- \u0026gt; 10 ........ Elementary CHARTER 030 MINOR ALTERCATION 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 = 060 FAILURE TO FOLLOW RULES OR DIRECTIVES 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 Q.,, = 062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECTIVES 8 0 0 2 0 0 10 n fl, 070 REFUSE TO OBEY BUS RULES/REGULATIONS 0 0 0 2 0 0 2 ,:l 110 USE OF VERBAL ABUSE/FIGHTING WORDS/GES 0 1 0 0 0 0 fl, \"O 2 010 ASSAULT 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 -\"'I 2 030 THEFT/THEFT BY RECEIVING 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 040 FIGHTING/MUTUAL COMBAT 4 1 0 0 0 6 2 090 NON-THREATENING PROFANITY AT OR ABOUT 0 0 0 0 0 2 105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 1 0 0 0 0 2 2 110 DISORDERLY CONDUCT 10 1 0 7 1 0 19 \u0026lt; 0 2 121 REPEATED VIOLATION - CATEGORY 11 OFFENSE 5 0 0 1 0 0 6 =c 3 071 PHYSICAL ASSAULT OF STAFF 7 0 0 2 0 0 9 .... fl, fl, 3 072 VERBAL ABUSE OF STAFF 0 0 0 3 0 0 3 \"'I 3 140 TERRORISTIC THREATENING 0 0 0 0 2 ::r: 0 66 C \"'I Elementary CHICOT 2 010 ASSAULT 0 0 0 0 2 \"\" 2 020 BATTERY 0 0 0 0 0 2 115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGORY I OFFEN 0 0 0 0 0 \"'t1 3 071 PHYSICAL ASSAULT OF STAFF 0 0 0 0 0 \"'I 0 3 080 POSSESSION OF FIREARM 0 0 0 0 0\n, \"\" 3 090 POSSESSION OF WEAPON 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 Q 3 091 POSSESSION OF WEAPON,KNIFE-BLADE 2 1/2\" 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 = ~ 3 140 TERRORISTIC THREATENING 0 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 11 ~ \u0026lt; Elementary DODD 2 110 DISORDERLY CONDUCT 0 0 0 0 2 ~ Q 3 071 PHYSICAL ASSAULT OF STAFF 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 \"O 3 3 092 POSS./WEAP KNIFE/CLUB/FACSIM.BLADE LESS 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 tD = 3 140 TERRORISTIC THREATENING 4 0 0 0 0 5 - LRSD Information Services Dept. Page 9 o/13 ',eve/ School Lvl Code Offense BM WM OM BF WF OF TOTAL 10 ~lemeritary FORST PK 040 BEHAVIOR THAT VIOLATES A PERSON'S RIGHTS 3 0 0 0 0 0 3 2 020 BATTERY 1 0 0 0 0 0 C1 2 110 DISORDERLY CONDUCT 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 '\"I = 6 Q. fl) =lementary FRANKLIN 2 040 FIGHTING/MUTUAL COMBAT 5 0 0 0 0 0 5 t, 1\n 2 090 NON-THREATENING PROFANITY AT OR ABOUT 0 0 0 0 0 .... '\"I 2 100 SEXUAL MISCONDUCT/BEHAVIOR OR INDECENT 0 0 0 0 0 s: = 2 115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGORY I OFFEN 14 0 0 0 0 0 14 .... = 2 120 HARASSING COMMUNICATIONS 1 0 0 0 0 0 = 2 121 REPEATED VIOLATION - CATEGORY II OFFENSE 3 0 0 o 0 4 3 090 POSSESSION OF WEAPON 0 0 1 0 0 2 3 092 POSS./WEAP KNIFE/CLUB/FACSIM.BLADE LESS 0 0 0 0 0 \u0026gt; 3 140 TERRORISTIC THREATENING 0 0 0 0 0 (\") = 30 Q. fl) Elementary GEYER SP 2 010 ASSAULT 1 2 0 0 0 0 3 a\n::\n 2 040 FIGHTING/MUTUAL COMBAT 1 0 0 0 0 0 ::i:: 2 090 NON-THREATENING PROFANITY AT OR ABOUT 0 1 0 0 0 0 CIQ. 2 110 DISORDERLY CONDUCT 7 0 0 5 0 0 12 =- ::c 2 115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGORY I OFFEN 2 0 1 1 0 0 4 1\n 2 120 HARASSING COMMUNICATIONS 1 0 0 0 0 2 1:\" 2 121 REPEATED VIOLATION - CATEGORY II OFFENSE 1 0 1 0 0 3 3 130 VIOLENT TAKING BY FORCE OR THREAT 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 140 TERRORISTIC THREATENING 1 0 0 0 0 2 \u0026gt;.... 29 .... lt Elementary GIBBS 110 USE OF VERBAL ABUSE/FIGHTING WORDS/GES 0 0 0 0 0 = C. 133 REPEATED SCHOOUCLASS TARDIES 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 == (\") 2 040 FIGHTING/MUTUAL COMBAT 3 1 0 2 0 0 6 fl) 2 105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 1 0 0 0 0 0 ::c fl) 2 110 DISORDERLY CONDUCT 5 1 2 0 0 9 \"'C 0., 2 115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGORY I OFFEN 0 0 2 0 0 3 - 2 120 HARASSING COMMUNICATIONS 2 0 0 0 0 3 3 071 PHYSICAL ASSAULT OF STAFF 1 0 0 0 0 2 3 090 POSSESSION OF WEAPON 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 140 TERRORISTIC THREATENING 2 0 0 0 0 3 \u0026lt; 30 0 C Elementary JEFFRSN 030 MINOR ALTERCATION 6 0 0 2 0 0 8 .=... 060 FAILURE TO FOLLOW RULES OR DIRECTIVES 3 0 0 0 0 0 3 fl) fl) '\"I 070 REFUSE TO OBEY BUS RULES/REGULATIONS 0 0 0 0 0 1 ::i:: 2 010 ASSAULT 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 C 2 100 SEXUAL MISCONDUCT/BEHAVIOR OR INDECENT 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 ., \"\" 3 090 POSSESSION OF WEAPON 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 140 TERRORISTIC THREATENING 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 18 \"\"C:t '\"I Elementary ML KING 1 110 USE OF VERBAL ABUSE/FIGHTING WORDS/GES 0 0 0 2 0 0 2 0\n, 2 030 THEFT/THEFT BY RECEIVING 0 0 0 0 1 0 \"' 2 120 HARASSING COMMUNICATIONS 0 0 0 0 0 Q = 3 130 VIOLENT TAKING BY FORCE OR THREAT 0 0 0 0 2 = 6 t, ~ Elementary MABEL EL 030 MINOR ALTERCATION 2 0 0 0 0 3 \u0026lt; ~ 040 BEHAVIOR THAT VIOLATES A PERSON'S RIGHTS 1 0 0 1 0 0 2 Q 'O 060 FAILURE TO FOLLOW RULES OR DIRECTIVES 3 0 0 0 0 0 3 a fl) 062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECTIVES 0 2 0 0 4 -= LRSD Information Services Dept. Page JO o/13 level School Lvl Code O(fense BM WM OM BF WF OF TOTAL lementary MABEL EL 1 110 USE OF VERBAL ABUSE/FIGHTING WORDS/GES 0 0 0 0 0 2 010 ASSAULT 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 020 BATTERY 0 0 0 1 0 . 0 1 ~ 2 030 THEFT/THEFT BY RECEIVING 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 ., = 2 110 DISORDERLY CONDUCT 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 Q. ~ 2 115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGORY I OFFEN 6 0 0 0 0 7 ~ 3 071 PHYSICAL ASSAULT OF STAFF 3 0 0 0 0 0 3 -.1,\n 3 090 POSSESSION OF WEAPON 0 0 0 0 0 CT C: 30 -o Elementary MCDERMOT 2 100 SEXUAL MISCONDUCT/BEHAVIOR OR INDECENT 0 0 0 0 0 = 2 110 DISORDERLY CONDUCT 4 0 0 0 0 0 4 2 121 REPEATED VIOLATION CATEGORY II OFFENSE 1 0 0 0 0 0 6 \u0026gt; Elementary MEADCLIF 2 040 FIGHTING/MUTUAL COMBAT 4 0 0 0 0 5 =n 2 090 NON-THREATENING PROFANITY AT OR ABOUT 1 0 0 0 0 0 Q. ~ 2 100 SEXUAL MISCONDUCT/BEHAVIOR OR INDECENT 0 0 0 0 0 1 a 2 105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 6 0 1 0 0 8\n::\n = 2 110 DISORDERLY CONDUCT 4 2 0 0 0 0 6 (IQ. 2 115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGORY I OFFEN 0 0 1 0 0 2 =- 2 120 HARASSING COMMUNICATIONS 0 0 0 0 0 C'. \"' 2 121 REPEATED VIOLATION - CATEGORY II OFFENSE 0 0 0 0 0 ~ 25 Elementary MITCHELL 040 BEHAVIOR THAT VIOLATES A PERSON'S RIGHTS 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 060 FAILURE TO FOLLOW RULES OR DIRECTIVES 0 0 1 0 0 2 \u0026gt; 062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECTIVES 0 0 0 0 0 ........ ~ 1 110 USE OF VERBAL ABUSE/FIGHTING WORDS/GES 0 0 0 0 0 = Q. 2 010  ASSAULT 0 0 2 0 0 3 == 2 030 THEFT/THEFT BY RECEIVING 0 0 0 0 0 n 1 ~ 2 040 FIGHTING/MUTUAL COMBAT 4 0 0 0 0 0 4 :\n.:, ~ 2 060 FALSE ALARM 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 \"O 0 2 090 NON-THREATENING PROFANITY AT OR ABOUT 2 0 0 0 0 0 ., 2 - 2 100 SEXUAL MISCONDUCT/BEHAVIOR OR INDECENT 3 0 0 2 0 0 5 2 105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 7 0 0 0 0 0 7 2 110 DISORDERLY CONDUCT 4 0 0 0 0 5 2 120 HARASSING COMMUNICATIONS 0 0 0 4 0 0 4 \u0026lt;! 3 000 USE OF RAP RINGS.CHEMICAL AGNTS OR FAGS 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 c 3 071 PHYSICAL ASSAULT OF STAFF 0 2 0 0 0 0 2 .=... 3 072 VERBAL ABUSE OF STAFF 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 ~ .~, 3 091 POSSESSION OF WEAPON,KNIFE-BLADE 2 1/2\" 0 0 0 0 0 = 3 120 INCITING TO RIOT 0 0 0 0 2 0 C 46 ., \"\" Elementary OTTER CR 060  FAILURE TO FOLLOW RULES OR DIRECTIVES 0 0 0 0 0 Elementary PUL HT E 1 060 FAILURE TO FOLLOW RULES OR DIRECTIVES 0 0 0 0 0 1 .\",t t 2 040 FIGHTING/MUTUAL COMBAT 0 0 0 0 2 0\n, 3 Elementary RIGHTSEL 2 100 SEXUAL MISCONDUCT/BEHAVIOR OR INDECENT 0 0 0 0 0 Q = 3 140 TERRORISTIC THREATENING 0 0 0 0 0 -I\u0026gt;:\u0026gt; 2 0 Elementary ~ ROCKFELR 030 MINOR ALTERCATION 2 0 0 3 0 0 5 ~ ~ 1 110 USE OF VERBAL ABUSE/FIGHTING WORDS/GES 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 Q 'O 2 040 FIGHTING/MUTUAL COMBAT 2 0 0 1 0 0 3 a ~ 2 110 DISORDERLY CONDUCT 0 0 0 0 0 -= lRSD Information Services Depl Page 11 of 13 Level -School Lvl Code O[fense BM Elementary WATSON 3 071 PHYSICAL ASSAULT OF STAFF 1 3 140 TERRORISTIC THREATEN ING 2 Elementary WESTHIL 2 115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGORY I OFFEN 3 Elementary WILLIAMS 030 MINOR ALTERCATION 2 040 BEHAVIOR THAT VIOLATES A PERSON'S RIGHTS 4 060 FAILURE TO FOLLOW RULES OR DIRECTIVES 062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECTIVES 3 070 REFUSE TO OBEY BUS RULES/REGULATIONS 1 2 010 ASSAULT 0 2 040 FIGHTING/MUTUAL COMBAT 2 2 115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGORY I OFFEN 1 2 121 REPEATED VIOLATION -CATEGORY II OFFENSE 2 2 122 FALSIFYING SIGNATURE/INFORMATION 0 3 140 TERRORISTIC THREATENING 13 WILSON 060 FAILURE TO FOLLOW RULES OR DIRECTIVES 3 092 POSS./WEAP KNIFE/CLUB/FACSIM.BLADE LESS 2 3 140 TERRORISTIC THREATENING 3 Elementary WOODRUFF 2 110 DISORDERLY CONDUCT 2 mD  ._. i Information Services Depl e liillll WWWlll'I l - WM OM BF WF OF TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 4 - 9 0 0 0 0 0 3 -- 3 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 0 0 6 0 0 2 0 0 3 1 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 4 1 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 18 44 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 3 6 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 Elementary 556 Grand Total 5080 a w~~ Page 13 of 13 .~, = Q. ft) et -..\n,\n\n: .o=... = \u0026gt; f':I = Q. ft) 9\n::\n ::r:: (JQ. =- :\ni:, .\n ,:- -\u0026gt;... ft) = Q. == f':I ft) :\ni:, ft) 'O -0., \u0026lt; 0 C -= ft) .ft,) ::r:: 0 C ~ .\"-,c t 0\n, \"\" C1 \"'I =- Recidivism Report - Black/White Q. ('I\u0026gt; t, Year: 2000/2001 Quarter: 1 to Quarter: 4 ~-- \"'I Counts Each Student Once s: -C LEVEL -SCHOOL BM BF WM WF OM OF Total o = Senior High ACC LEARN 7 2 0 11 AGENCIES 21 8 3 0 0 33 CENTRAL 105 66 19 19 0 0 209 \u0026gt; r:, =- FAIR 123 68 15 8 4 4 220 Q. ('I\u0026gt; HALL 245 117 29 12 16 16 423 a\n:\n MCCLELLA 177 91 10 2 3 3 284 a:o:= METRO 26 11  3 2 43 :r ::i:, PARKVIEW 27 12 12 9 61 ~- :\n:- Senior High 1284 Middle Schoo ALT LEARN 86 19 3 0 109 239 \u0026gt; CLOVRJR 138 78 4 5 9 9 -.... ('I\u0026gt; DUNBAR 76 49 19 3 3 149 = Q. =- FORST HT 107 73 17 5 4 4 208 = r:, ftl HENDERSN 81 36 12 4 5 5 141 ::i:, ('I\u0026gt; MABEL JR 95 37 12 4 4 4 153 \"'C -0., MANN MIS 46 13 6 5 2 2 72 PUL HT J 101 47 32 4 185 SOUTHWST 119 63 5 4 5 5 198 \u0026lt; Middle Schoo 1454 0 c Elementary BADGETT 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 =.... ('I\u0026gt; BALE 11 3 0 0 0 0 14 ('I\u0026gt; \"'I ::= BASELINE 6 0 0 0 0 7 0 .C, BOOKER 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 \"\" BRADY 5 3 0 0 0 9 CARVER 3 5 0 10 -0 \"'I 0 CHARTER. 24 9 3 0 0 37\n, \"\" CHICOT 8 2 0 0 0 11 Q = DODD 8 0 2 0 0 0 10 -~ FORST PK 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 t, ('I\u0026gt; \u0026lt; ...... r:, l :U y ......-u,w Q Thursday, August 09, 2001 Page I o/2 \"O a ('I\u0026gt; -= ~ '\"I Recidivism Report - Black/White = Q. \"0' Year: 2000/2001 Quarter: 1 to Quarter: 4 -\n Counts Each Student Once '\"I s: C LEVEL -SCHOOL BM BF WM WF OM OF Total -o = Elementary FRANKLIN 16 2 0 0 0 0 18 GEYER SP 12 4 3 0 20 GIBBS 14 5 5 0 25 \u0026gt; r'l JEFFRSN 11 3 0 0 0 0 14 = Q. \"' ML KING 0 2 2 6 3\n:\n MABEL EL 11 2 2 0 0 0 15 ::i:: ~- MCDERMOT 3 0 0 0 0 0 3 ::r ,:, MEADCLIF 12 2 4 0 0 0 18\n :\n:- MITCHELL 27 9 3 0 0 0 39 OTTER CR 0 0 0 0 0 PUL HT E 0 2 0 0 0 3 --\u0026gt; RIGHTSEL 0 0 0 0 2 =\"' Q. ROCKFELR 6 5 0 0 0 0 11 == r'l ROMINE 2 0 0 0 0 3 \",:', STEPHENS 28 7 0 0 0 0 36 '\"ti' 0 TERRY 15 2 3 0 0 21 -'\"I WAKEFIEL 4 0 0 0 0 0 4 WASHNGTN 12 0 2 0 0 0 14 WATSON 7 2 0 0 0 0 9 \u0026lt; WEST HIL 3 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 c = WILLIAMS 26 5 10 0 0 0 41 -\"\"'' WILSON 6 0 0 0 0 0 6 '\"I ::i:: WOODRUFF 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 C J Elementary 418 Grand Total 3156 .,, '\"I 0 ..\n..\n, Q ::s ~ 0 \"\u0026lt;' (l\u0026gt; t . ilii!JIIC WI. ,_ .-.,: ~  i ni1:=ar . Q Thursday, August 09, 2001 Page2of2 'O 3 -\"=' LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT GRADE DISTRIBUTION REPORT 001 CENTRAL HIGH SCHOOL BY TEACHER WITH 35% OR MORE D's AND F's, 2001-2002 QUARTER ONE Thursday, November OJ, 2001 Teacher /BLANCHARD J BROWN C CARUTH P ~ OXB DAVIS M Sec Course Title 101 I P21001 AUTO BODY I _!_92 j_ P21001 !AUTO -~ODY I TEACHER TOTALS -- - ---- PERC-ENT-TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's 101 050141 EURO HIST AP 104 020041 WLD HIST R 105 020041 WLD HIST R 20.!_j 050141 ,EURO HIST AP r2 04 020041 WLD HIST R 2~ Q20041 -:_wLD HIST-~ t EACHER TOTALS PERCENT TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's 101 K30081 STATISTICS 102 K20081 CONCEPT GEOM c 1 o~t K20081 :coNCEPT GEOM 1-201 K50001 STATS AP I 202 K20O81 !CONCEPT GEOM I 203 K20081 ,CONCEPT GEOM ~ 'BACHER TOTAL_ _ - PERCENT - -- r TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's - t- 101\n030041 us HISTORY R-I 102 030041 us HISTORY R 201 030041 US HISTORY R 202 030041 1us HISTORY R TEACHER TOTALS - PERCENT TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's 101--i-091001 l H\u0026amp;INT:DESIGN - 101 110001 FAM\u0026amp;CONS SCI LRSD l11formatio11 Service Dept. JU3Wd0f3A3O fUU0Jl1113J0Jd A 0 0 0 I 0.0% 7 1 5 5 - 3 4 25 21.4% -i- 1 0 0 6 1 0 - 8 -- j 8.9% - 0 3 3 5 11 11.5% 3 6 - B C D F I NC Total 2 0 2 I 0 0 I 0 4 4 0 2 2 0 0 I 0 4\n- --- 0 --,-0 - 2 2 4 0 8 I - ---'-- - -  ] - __j_ 25.0% 1 25.0% 50.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% ~ - .L - - - 50.0% 6 3 0 0 0 0 16 0 3 7 9 2 0 22 1 3 2 4 1 0 16 4 l- 4 1 0 I 0 _J 15 --t-- 3----r- 4 8 3 I 2 o 23 -- - .! r - ----~--  - -- --l--- --- 6 - +- 4 9 1 0 25 -~-- - - i -- 25 17 _ - _ 17_ _J_ _E__ 6 0 117 ,- 1- ----- 21.4% 14.5% 14.5% 23.1% 5.1% 0.0% 37.6% . - - 7 2 -- 0 2 I 0 0 12 --- - -j- - - 4 3 6 3 0 0 16 -i_ - ~- - - __, __ -~ - 5 4 4 0 J ___ o_ -- 14 +- - 6 0 -- .... 0 0 0 I 0 12 I --1- I 4 5 I 3 6 0 0 19 ! 4 I 9 2 2 0 I 0 17 I 26 24 15 17 0 I 0 ! 90 ~ ~8.9% _ t- ~6. 7/~=-CJ:6-7% -, 18.9% 0.0% 0.0% ---L - - 35.6% - 12 5 6 0 0 24 5 6 6 3 0 0 23 7 5 6 3 0 0 24 9 5 2 4 0 0 25 33 . - 17 19 16 I 0 0 96 - -- - -----\n-\n-t-- - - --r L 34.4% 17.7% _ 1~8% _j_ 16.7% _ 0.0% __ 0.0% 36.5% ---,- - - ~-0- -, - - 0 8 2 6 1 20 L 4 2 I 1 7 O_ _j_O_ _ 20 - - ___L -- Page J o/47 I LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT GRADE DISTRIBUTION REPORT 001 CENTRAL HIGH SCHOOL BY TEACHER WITH 35% OR MORE D's AND F's~ 2001-2002 QUARTER ONE Thursday, November OJ, 2001 Teacher DAVIS M [DUCKER L -- EASTER M FIELDS W Sec Course Title t 102 110001 FAM\u0026amp;CONS SCI 201 j ~1001 H\u0026amp;INT:DESIGN 201 , 110001 1FAM\u0026amp;CONS SCI ' 20~ 10001 ~FAM\u0026amp;CONS SCI CHER TOTALS - - - --- PERCENT TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's F14001 SPANISH I F14001 SPANISH I - F14001 SPANISH I F14001_ ~ PANISH I F14001 !SPANISH I 203 F14001 SPANISH I ~EACHER TOTALS PERCENT j __ TO,!...AL -PER\u0026lt;\n_ENT OF D's AND F's 102 E50081 ENG IV AP - - 1-03 tt40021-l-ENGLISH IV R t 103 - E50081 tENG IV AP - 202 E40021 ENGLISH IV R 203 E40021 ENGLISH IV R r 201..__ E50081 EN~IV ~p TEACHER TOTALS PERCENT TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's 101 210001 AF ROTC 19 101 102 102 ~ 211001 AFROTC I 10 Z10001 AF ROTC I 9 211 OQ~ __ /FROTC I 10 Z10001 IAF ROTC I 9 211001 : AFROTC 110 LRSD /11for111atio11 Service Dept. + A B C D F I NC 2 4 5 3 7 0 0 3 7 4 ~-3- 0 0 3 9 4 2 7 0 0 3 l-- 1 _ __i_ 4 1 2 I - 8 0 0 i 20 -j 33 --=---i_21 ~~ 33 0 j 0 I 16.4% 27.0% 17.~ 12.3% I 27.0% 0.0% I 0.0% 1 -'- ----'- ___J_ - --~---~- ____j 5 4 2 2 6 1- --+ 4 39.3% 7 6 8 0 0 __,__ __0 0 --I------ 4 0 0 0 Total 21 18 25 18 122 23 26 23 18 - ' 6 5 3 4 i- 4 4 -- ~ 6 20 14.5% - 0 1 2 0 0 0 3 2.2% 2 0 0 2 0 L 0 0 24 2 5 3 12 1 0 24 26 27 19 41 5 0 138 __ _j 18.8% 19.6% 13.8% 29.7% 3.6% I 0.0% 7 4 2 2 4 11 30\n..... 15 _ +- 5 .j 12 6 2 6 I ---l 46 43.5% 5_ +- 10 5 15 14 4 53 I ~--- o I o o J__J __ o ---j---o o I o o 1 0 0 1 4 0 0 0 0 --------- 3 4 --, j__ 27 , 21 1 21 24 25 21 139 21.6% l 33.1% 38:1% l 2.2% 2.9% 0 0.0% 5 2 0 0 0 --- t--- 40.3% 2 3 3 0 0 14 0 0 0 0 5 3 4 10 0 0 18 0 0 6 0 _j 0 6 2 2 9 0 0 15 o-- 2---,----1--+---o-~I - o --,- 3 -- --~---~--~' ~ Page 2 o/47 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT GRADE DISTRIBUTION REPORT 001 CENTRAL HIGH SCHOOL BY TEACHER WITH 35% OR MORE D's AND F's, 2001-2002 QUARTER ONE Thursday, November OJ, ZOO/ Teacher Sec Course Title TEACHER TOTALS i--- 1 PERCENT ~ - TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's HALL-JONES B 101 ' S10001 ENG I RR 101 S20021 READ II RR 101 S30001 ENG Ill RR 102 S10001 ENG I RR 201 S10061 PHYS SCI RR 1-201 S10081 ~IOLOGY I RR ~ 1 S201_21 EARTH SCI ~R ~ S1006:1._J:_HY~ SCI RR ~ CHER TOTALS PERCENT f--- - TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's HOLT-MCMILL ER T ~  104-1 E200~1 ~ENGLISH 11 R _!_05:1i2_Q021 fNGLISH II R 207 E20021 ~ENGLISH II R ~ 8 _10021 ENGLISH IR_ j!_ACHERTOTALS PERCENT l TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's -l-1_Q1 I E10021 ~~NGLISHJ R 102 E10021 ' ENGLISH IR 103 I E10021 ENGLISHIR 201 E10021 ENGLISH IR 202 E10021 !ENGLISH IR 203 E10021 1ENGLISH IR -TEA-CHE-R TOTALS ---- - - PERCENT -- TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's E40061jENG IV IS - - 101 I_ 104 _l E~0021 _1EN_GLISH JV R LRSD I11formatio11 Service Dept. iuawdoJaA:\u0026gt;Q rguo1si.aJo.Jd s.1noH .Jaa1un10A -1 -,-- A 5 8.2% 5 0 0 0 9 20.5% 5 3 10 11 .9% 3 3 2 4 2 1 15 - 11.5% ---+-- _J - 5 _'L 9 ., B 8 13.1% 2 0 1 2 - 0 0 3 C 7 ~- -- 11.5% - 0 2 0 2 0 1 D F I -1 0 -~-- 11 30 -- 18.0% 49.2% 0.0% - 67.2% 0 2-1 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2 2 0 2 2 0 1 0 - -4 - + - 2 -~ 1 -~- 0 1 I 1 0 -1- - 9 ---+- - - --- ---+--- _j 7 10 9 _, + I I I I 1 - 0 -- 20.5% 15.9% _ 22.7~ 20.5% 0.0% 8 7 4 5 24 - 28.6% 5 7 3 7 3 4 29 22.1% - I-I I J -~ 43.2% 5 r - 3 6 0 5 j 4 -!-- 2---+--- _3 _ , 4 _ _ _ 4 __ L 0 0 -- 5 3 6 0 18 21.4% 4 3 4 1 5 4 14 16.7% 38.1% ----- 18 0 -- - 21.4% 0.0% - --- 5 6 0 _J ------- 1 5 8 0 _j - -- - --~-- ! 4 I 7 1 0 I 1 I 6 I 0 I 1 I 10 I 0 I I 5 I 8 I 0 ~ -1 _ 21 __1 - 45 I 0 I 16.0% 16.0% 34.4% 0.0% --- ------ - 50.4% -r- - 9---4--, I 4 ' 2 0 6 I 3 3 5 0 - ~ - 1 ~ --j - -+ - NC 0 0.0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 t- - _1_ 0.0% 0 0 0 0 I 0 0 0.0% - - I 0 J__ 0 -+ -1-- - I I J . Total 61 9 1 5 8 7 5 3 - - 6 - 44 -- 23 23 18 20 84 23 26 20 19 21 22 131 -- 24 26 - Page 3 o/47 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT GRADE DISTRIBUTION REPORT 001 CENTRAL HIGH SCHOOL BY TEACHER WITH 35% OR MORE D's AND F's, 2001-2002 QUARTER ONE Thursday, November 01, 2001 Teacher MCDONALD D - LMCLENDON J MCMILLER J MILLER B Sec Course Title 105 E40021 ENGLISH IV R 1 201 E40061 ENG IV IS 202 E40061 ENG IV IS l 204 L E40021 ENGLISH IV R ITEACHER TOTALS r PERCENT TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's 101 081001 HEAL TH: 103 I 081001 HEAL TH: 105io81001 fl:JEALTH: 201 I Q.81001~ALTH: 2031 081001 HEAL TH: 205 081001 HEALTH: TEACHER TOTALS ~ __ PERCENT _ TOTAL PER\u0026lt;:\n_ENT OF D's AND F's 07 M30021 CHEMISTRY I - --+ 08 M30021 CHEMISTRY I 109 M30021 'cHEMISTRY I 206 M30021 CHEMISTRY I 207 M30021 CHEMISTRY I f 210 1 M10101 _!'.CTIVE PHYS TEACHER TOTALS PERCENT _ r TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's 109 K10001 ALGEBRA I 110 K10001 ALGEBRA I 111 K10001 ALGEBRA I 206 ~ 20041 ,s3EOMETRY R 207 . K20041 GEOMETRY R 20~ K20041 1GEOMETR~ R LRSD lllformatio11 Service Dept. A 4 1 3 23 16.9% 9 12 4 15 7 6 53 39.0% 1 2 + - - ! 3 0 13 20 15.4% 0 3 2 2 3 5 B 2 5 7 12 41 30.1% 3 3 C 4 4 4 5 24 17.6% D 4 1 7 2 21 15.4% F I 12 0 3 0 - 1 3 0 - -- -~ 2 0 - -+- - 27 0 - -- -t- - 19.9% 0.0% - - - - 35.3% NC 0 0 0 0 0 0.0% 4 4 0 0 4 4 5 0 0 Total 23 17 22 24 136 21 28 -------'- 6 - 4-~--3--1----0--+---o--,1~ 2 2 5 0 - 0----i---- 26 __, 2 2 5 - 5--+---4---+--0--4--0--j--2-3 --1 2 4 4 4 0 0 20 18 13.2% 17 23 25 0 0 136 3 4 5 - _,__ .\n-- 12.~%_]_ 1~.9% -1- 35.3% 4 7 -  - --l- 7 2 2 ---- ' 18.4% 0.0% - 0.0% ---- - 6 4 6 8 0 0 5 6 8 0 0 - 2 0 -- _.j._ 24 19 25 42 0 18.5% 14.6% 0.0% 6 3 5 6 3 6 9 3 -+ 9 7 --1 5 5_ _ J 19.2% 51.5% 6 ~ - 32.3% 10 7 5 5 I 4 0 0 0 ~-+- ~ ~ -+ -~ 5 2 ~ _Q_ 0 0 0 0.0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 27 22 19 25 20 17 130 25 26 20 18 21 22 Page4 of47 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT GRADE DISTRIBUTION REPORT 001 CENTRAL HIGH SCHOOL BY TEACHER WITH 35% OR MORE D's AND F's, 2001-2002 QUARTER ONE Thursday, November OJ, 2001 Teacher Sec Course Title A ITE-A_C-H_ER_ TO TALS 15 PERCENT r TOTAL PERCENT OF D's-AND F's -~I 11.4% B 37 28.0% C 30 22.7% D F I 21 0 --1 - ------t-- -- 15.9% 0.0% __ _L___ NC 0 0.0% Total 132 MILLERR ___ t 110jE11001 COMM I - - 7 3 5 T I 1 0 29 22.0% 37.9% 3 11 - T o 0 25 111 I E11001 COMM I 112 / E11001 COMMI 211 E11001 COMM I 212 E11001 COMM I 1 21u E11001 1coMM 1 _ TEACHER TOTALS PERCENT 11 3 8 11 4 44 30.3% + L 2 6 0 0 24 9 10 0 0 24 7 2 2 4 0 0 23 6 4 2 0 0 ~ 4 5  3 9 0 0 25 34 _ ~ 13 12_-+--1-_-_-_4-2=======0=====~o---+-_145_ 23.4% 9.0% 8.3% 29.0% 0.0% 0.0% TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's 37.2% J _i___ __ j - - - -+---,----------------------,----------- - --~------~ PAGLIANITE R 101 E30021 ENG Ill R 5 6 3 4 4 0 I 0 PAXTONV 102 E30021 ~ENG 111 R + I 8 6 _.j. _ 7_---+ __ 3_---+ __ 0_ t 0 103 E30021 ENG Ill R_ 3 - j _ 3 _ + __ 4_-------+--- 2 I 7 2 __ O P202 E30021 ENG Ill R 1 r 4 t-~ --f-~ - 3---+---0---+-- 0 01 E30021 ]ENG Ill R__ 5 5 1 2 0 0 203 E30021 ENG Ill R 4 - 7 ----1--- 3 -- T 5--+ 4 0 0 I TEACHER T\u0026lt;!__TA.l:__ PERCENT I- - ---- ---t----. TOTAL PRCENT OF D'!_!iND F's 103 052009 _GRAMMAR: 1.... 104 E30021 ENG Ill R I 105 E30021 ENG Ill R 204 E30021 ENG Ill R 205 E30021 ENG Ill R 206 E30021 IENG Ill R TEACHER TOTALS - PERCENT TOT AL PERCENT OF D's AND F's 15 - 11.5% 3 0 0 0 4 8 7.0% ~- -1------- 33 30 28 22 2 0 I -+----+- T - 25.4% J.. 23.1 % _ 21.5% 16.9% 1.5% 0.0% 38.5% 7 6 3 -~ 1 - 0 _ 0 _ ~ _ 0 2 2 2 6 25 21.9% 8 3 7 4 26 - -- 22.8% 1 3 1 0 - - .... - ----+--- 11 3 6 8 2 29 - - 25.4% ---' 9 6 3 24 21.1% 0 0 0 2 1.8% 0 0 0 0 0 0.0% ~ -- -----~- 1 - -T -- [PRATHER L 101 P21161 MED PROFS I 0 0 --+ 22 25 21 14 25 23 130 14 19 20 19 23 19 114 102 P21161 jMED PRO1=:S I 0 __j__ __3 _ 2_~_ _0 _ -t--_0_~I _ 0 _l_ 6 LRSD /11for111atio11 Service Dept. Page 5 o/47 J.l0d3H 33UBpuanv LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT GRADE DISTRIBUTION REPORT 001 CENTRAL HIGH SCHOOL BY TEACHER WITH 35% OR MORE D's AND F's, 2001-2002 QUARTER ONE Thursday, November OJ, 2001 Teacher Sec Course Title fTEACHER TOTA0__ __ f- PERCENT TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's [ROBERTSON T =-+---1-0-1 ~ 240001 -AFROTCIV 12 - SAINE N 102 240001 AF ROTC IV 12 103 240001 AF ROTCIV 12 201 220001 AFROTC 1110 201 230001 AFROTCIII 11 201 t 231001 -+AFROTClll 12 _ 201 -1 240001 ,AF ROTCIV 12 ,-203 i 240001 AF ROTCIV 12 TEACHER TOTALS PERCENT I-TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's 1 106 K10001 ALGEBRA I - --- I 107 -K-10 Q01 .:AL_GEBR-A-1 ~ 0_8-+-_K_10001 ALGEBRA I 203 K10001 ALGEBRA I 204 K10001 ALGEBRA I TEACHER TOTALS PERCENT -1 TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's 7  TEETER E 1WILDER B 102 M20021 BIOLOGY IR 103 M20021 BIOLOGY IR 104 M20021 BIOLOGY I R 203 M20021 BIOLOGY I R 204 M20021 iBIOLOGY IR TEACHER TOTALS I PERCENT r TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's - -_ 1 101f K30041 TRIG/ADV ALG 102 K30041 TRIG/ADV ALG LRSD /11formatio11 Service Dept. A 0 0.0% 2 0 3 3 12 16.2% 1 0 0 -0 2 3 2.7% 1 0 2 0 2 5 4.6% L B 2 22.2% 0 0 0 2 3 0 7 9.5% C D F I NC 3 2 2 0 .j. --- I 3~-~0/o_ _ 22.2% J 22.2% r o.o I 0 0.0% + 44.4% 0 0 -- - 0 ~- 0 0 0 0 0 6 9 6 0 0 21 28.4% _J 0 0 8 3 0 0 0 11 - 14.9% 44.6% 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 9 0 0 3 0 -1- 0 0 0 0 0 -1- 0 0 0 22 29.7% 1 1.4% - 0.0% ~ 1_ ~ o I o -0- ,- 0 0 0 21 37 39 10 0 0 19.1%_ 7_ 33.6% Q s.5% --9.-1-1/.-f---O.-O-%--r 0.0% 2 5 3 12 11.0% 4 .l 44.5% 2 6 --- 4 4 3 4 5 4 2 6 16 24 14.7% _ _l_ 22.0% 67.9% 6 6 5 1_ _ 9_ 10 11 7 14 8 50 0 0 0 2 -- - 0 0 0 0 0 0 45.9% 1.8% 0.0% ----'- - -~ - 0 0 -t- Total 9 2 1 26 26 15 1 2 74 - 24 2-5- 17 19 25 110 22 24 17 24 22 109 20 21 Page 6 o/47 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT GRADE DISTRIBUTION REPORT 001 CENTRAL HIGH SCHOOL BY TEACHER WITH 35% OR MORE D's AND F's, 2001-2002 QUARTER ONE Thursday, November 01, 2001 Teacher Sec Course Title A B C D F I NC Total WILDERB -1-04 --K3,00-61 -T-RIG- P-RE--AP, ------1-2 ---6- ---3- --I -1- --I -----0- ---0- ---23- - 201 K30041 TRIG/ADV ALG -+- [ 202 K30041 TTRIG/ADV ALG 203 I K30041 T RIG/ADV ALG [TEACHER TOTALS - - PERCENT TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's LRSD /11formatio11 Service Dept. JuawdopA:\u0026gt;(I fBD0ft.t.3J0.fJ 1 3 r 2 20 ,- 15.9% - 5 __L _5 - 7 6 1-- 4 4 27 ., 29 . - 21.4% 23.0% 6 +- 3 I 0 0 20 1--0 t- - -4 1 0 21 0 ---,- - 5 _ _l_ 6 I 0 21 ~-1-- -- - 31 19 0 0 126 ' -+ 0.0% 7 - 24.6% 15.1% 0.0% 39.7% - Page 7 o/47 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT GRADE DISTRIBUTION REPORT 002 HALL HIGH SCHOOL BY TEACHER WITH 35% OR MORE D's AND F's, 2001-2002 QUARTER ONE Thursday, November OJ, 2001 Teacher [BA_!_LEY S BEST J !BRANCH K BURKEPILEW Sec Course Title 106 081001 HEALTH 108 081001 /HEAL TH 112 j 081001 _HEALTH - - 114 081001 HEALTH f- 123---t-081001 -HEALTH I-- ' 124 081001 HEALTH ,- TEACHER TOTALS PERCENT TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's 101 K50001 STATS AP 102 K30021 PRE-CALCULUS ' 104 ] K10001 ALGEBRA I 109 K10001 ALGEBRA I 311 K10001 ALGEBRA I 312 K10001 ALGEBRA I ( EACHER TOTALS _ PERCENT ~ - ~ Tf!TAL PERG_ENT OF D's AND F's 101 051103 COMMUN 1A 102 E21001 COMMUNICA II 104 E12001 DRAMA I 105 E12001 iDRAMA I _ 106 E11001 COMMUNICA I td oIT..12001 .DRAMA I _ TEACHER TOTALS PERCENT t TOTALPERCENTOFD'sANDF's 102 K20061 GEOM PRE-AP 103 K20061 GEOM PRE-AP :-105 -t-K20001 1ALGEBRA II t 107 K10001 ALGEBRA I 111 + K20001 ~ALGEBRA II LRSD I11formatio11 Service Dept. JU3Wd0f,M3O flW0f lt3J0.fd - - ' A 8 2 1 3 5 0 19 14.8% 3 13 7 2 2 28 ---i - -+ 20.7% 5 5 5 10 26 20.3% 4 1 0 2 B 6 3 10 1 7 28 21.9% 2 5 4 5 4 _j_ C 4 3 5 5 -T -- - _.._ 3 - 2 22 17.2% 2 0 7 9 4 6 ,- _J_ I D F 2 11 1 I 4 ' 5 I 8 I ---i--- - ___._ 1  9 13 46 10.2% 35.9% - 46.1% o o T I 0 0 0 0 0 - 0 0 0.0% -.l T ~ --0~ --0~ -I 2 6 0 6 7 0 6 11 0 6 12 0 NC 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 31 13 29 19 24 12 128 7 16 27 28 28 29 21_ J 28 21 _ _,___3_6_-l--_1_-+ 0 15.6% ' ~0.7_j__!5.6% 26.7% 0.7% _ 0.0% _ 135 42.2% 1---,- 5 --,-- -------- 6 0 0 0 2 0 8 9 2 2 0 3 _ ,_ _ 4 10 _ ,__ _ 3 __.. _0_ _ _1 2 5 -- 6- 13 0 6 _ J __3_ _,___ ?---+-__3 - -+--0 -,- 21 26 31 24 0 8 4 2 5 20.3% 2 7 1 3 2 ---r- - ~ ---+--- 24.2% 18.8% 0.0% -- ---\"-- 43.0% 7 5 10 6-T 7 0 14-1 - 1 - ' - -- - 12 0 ,__ -- 2 6 _j___ ~-- 0 13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0% 0 8 26 25 27 29 128 23 0 24 0 28 0 28 0 13 Page 8 o/47 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT GRADE DISTRIBUTION REPORT 002 HALL HIGH SCHOOL BY TEACHER WITH 35% OR MORE D's AND F's, 2001-2002 QUARTER ONE Thursday, November 01, 2001 Teacher IBURKEPILE W COLLINS J [EASTER E EDDINGS !FALLS J-=- - Sec Course Title 112 K10001 ALGEBRA! [TEACHER TOTALS PERCENT TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's 102 K20081 CONCEPT GEOM 201 K20121 ESL GEOMETRY 202 K20121 ESL GEOMETRY 301 K10021 ESLALG 1 202 I K10021 ESL ALG 1 1 402-r K20041 'GEOMETRY TEACHER TOTALS PERCENT TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's _ + 109 E40021 E40021 E40021 E40021 ENGLISH IV ENGLISH IV ]ENGLISH IV lENGLISH IV ENGLISH IV 1~1 302 t 306 307 - E40021 308 E40021 ENGLISH IV TEACHER TOTALS PERCENT -- ---- TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's 101 K20001 ALGEBRA II --+-- -- -- 105 K10001 ALGEBRA I 107 112001 ACTPREP-MTH: 110 K10001 ALGEBRA! 111 K10001 ALGEBRA I 305 K10001 ALGEBRA I TEACHER TOTALS PERCENT r TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's 108 1 M10101 ACTIVE PHYS LRSD /11formatio11 Service Dept. t..lOOff .133JUOf0 J\\ A 0 8 5.6% - 1 3 0 5 3 0 12 12.8% r B 2 22 15.5% 3 3 5 14 14.9% -'- C D F I NC 5 9 10 0 0 20 . _ ._.]9_ . _ so ___ 3_. 1- o 14.1% 27.5% 35.2% 62.7% 2 ,- 2 2 2 2 8 4 _ _j_ 8 5 6 16 27 17.0% 28.7% -- 46.8% - 7 0 2 5 2 17 2.1% 0.0% 0 T 0 0 2 0 1 -5 8 8.5% 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0% 2 + 3 6 F 1_ 1 7 --+ __ 1_ ~ _ o 2 4 9 4 I 5 1 0 0 5 1- 7 4-+ 6_-+-- 0 0 -+ 2 2 L +8- + 5_ -9 _O 0 3 4 3 3 5 0 0 --' 4 9 - i. 5 - 8--r 3 o o  13 27 -t _ 38 _ ~ 2~_: 35 2 0  _9._31/o _1_ 19.3% ~ 27.1% __J_ _17.9~ 25.0% 1.4% 0.0% 2 2 8 - 5.7% 4 3 3 2 5 4 2 2 2 2 7 3 5 19 . -21 13.5% 14.9% 2 - T 3 42.9% 5 5 0 3 5 8 26 18.4% - 58.9% 8 10 -- 13 0 11 13 10 1 2 0 3 2 2 57 10 40.4/4T-7.1% - 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0% 0 Total 26 142 15 8 7 21 20 23 94 20 25 22 26 18 29 140 23 27 5 30 28 28 141 22 Page 9 o/47 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT GRADE DISTRIBUTION REPORT 002 HALL HIGH SCHOOL BY TEACHER WITH 35% OR MORE D's AND F's, 2001-2002 QUARTER ONE Thursday, November OJ, 2001 Teacher iFALLS J FORTSO GRAVES K GUYM HANNAH R Sec Course Title 109 I M10101 ACTIVE PHYS ~ !_:!Q_ ffi10101 _tCTIVE PHYS 111 M10101 _,ACT!_YE PHYS r 112t--M10101 ACTIVE PHYS ~ 10101 1',CTIVE PHYS_ TEACHER TOTALS -------- PERCENT - TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's -,- - 101 P21181 WELDING 1 ~ 102 L P21181 WELDING 1 TEACHER TOTALS PERCENT TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's 101 030021 ESL US HIST +- 1- 102 _ 030021 j ESL US !:f_lST 102 030041 US HISTORY 103 104 105 030041 US HISTORY --+- - 030041 US HISTORY 030041 \\Js HISTORY TEACHER TOTALS PERCENT -- -- - - TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's 102 + E20021 ENGLISH II 103 E20021 -+ENGLISH II 104 I E20021 ENGLISH II 110 E10141 ENG I WKSHP 301 I E20021 ENGLISH II TEACHER TOTALS ' PERCENT f--- - _ -J- TOTAL PER\u0026lt;\nENTOF D's AND F's 101 E11001 COMMUNICA I 103 E11001 COMMUNICA I LRSD b1formatio11 Service Dept. JU3Wd0f3A3O fBU0JloS3J0.lc{ A 9 6 3 9 10 ' - 41 - 1 1--- :-- -I L 28.9% 0 0 0 0.0% 1 0 0 3 B 3 6 5 18 12.7% 0 1 1 33.3% 1 3 9 6 4 3 C D F I NC 4 7 3 0 0 0 - ]__ \"!_ __ t-- - 5_ . 6_ l- 0 0 1 0 2 11 4 3 4 2 0 - - -- --+- 3 3 3 2 L o --1-9 -+--3-1 --~-2-1 -~---6 --\"1 --o- --- 13.4% - 0 0 0 0.0% 3 21.8% ~-19._01/.~_4_.2% ___l___ 0.0% 40.8% 1 - ---1-- 1 2 66.7% 66.7% o o _ L 0 0 0 0 - ----+-- 0.0% 0.0% 0 0 0 0.0% 1 1 0 0 - - 2 1 I 1 0 6 3 1 - 5--1-2- 0 - ---- .+- - -4- 5 _ 1 _ _ J___? o 1 o_ ,. _ 7_-\n__0_ -111---5_-+-__3_ -f--- 0_ _ 6 2 8 1 . 0 Total 24 15 27 28 26 142 1 2 3 7 8 25 24 20 23 6 26 28 15 25 7 0 107 -1 5.6% -+- 24.3\"!.- _, 26.2o/\n-,14.0% +--2-3-.4- o/-c. -+--6-.5%--1- 0.0o/\n- -r- - 4 2 2 4 5 17 14.0% 7 2 4 5 5 4 3 5 4 11 5 7 21 32 17.4% 26.4% 6 0 5 2 J.rndalJ a:rnupuany 37.4% 6 4 9 4 5 28 23.1% -- 40.5% 3 0 ---+-- 8 0 3 5 2 21 17.4% 0 2 - 1.7% 2 9 L - 5 _ - - ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0% 0 0 22 - 23 23 28 25 121 25 27 P\u0026lt;,ge /0o/47 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT GRADE DISTRIBUTION REPORT 002 HALL HIGH SCHOOL BY TEACHER WITH 35% OR MORE D's AND F's, 2001-2002 QUARTER ONE Thursday, November 01, 2001 Teacher HANNAH R ~HNSON ~ LASKER A .!:!=FFINGWELL D Sec Course Title 104 E11001 COMMUNICA I l __!_95 ~ 1001 fOMMUt::JICA I 115 E11001 -lCOMMUN ICA I 116 E! 1001 L~OMMUNICA I TEACHER TOTALS PERCENT TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's 101 1 M10101 ACTIVE PHYS 102 I M20021 BIOLOGY I 1041M10101--rACTIVE PHYS - 1\"o\"67\" M10101 .ACTIVE PHYS j 10H M10101 :ACTIVE PHYS 307 M10101 ACTIVE PHYS TEACHER TOTALS PERCENT - TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's --i---109 '010041 -CIVICS - ---\n_ 110 + ~10041 !CIVICS - , 111 t-i10041 CIVICS 112 010041 CIVICS lTEACHER TOTA!:__ L PERCENT TOT AL PERCENT OF D's AND F's 103 ~ E10141 -ENG I WKSHP 104 E10141 ENG I WKSHP 105 E10141 IENG I WKSHP TEACHER TOTALS PERCENT TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's 101fM10041~ PHYS I PR-AP - 101 M40001 GEOL-SPACE 102 jj10041 jPHYS I PR:._AP LRSD lllformatio11 Service Dept. tU3WdOf3A3Q fgUOJllll3JO.lJ A B C D F I NC Total 4 3 3 3 7 0 21 9 0 0 5 3 ---t- 4 2 -- -+ - - 6 ___ 2 _[ l\" L 22 16.9% 2 1 5 11 6 26 18.2% 2 3 10 12.5% 29 12 1 22.3%-t 9.2% ~ 4 3 9 6 4 6 32 22.4% I 4 -, 3 6 6 19 4 7 6 0 0 4 5 9 0 0 3 5 9 I 0 ~ 3- -T 2 -4-- --1 4 1 2 - - 0 -,-- 0 --1- 6 0 0 5 6 4 I o o 23 26 36 16.1% 18.2% 25.2% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% ---'- 4 2 7 3 16 -+ - - ---- .L 43.4% - - - -~- 8 2  -_!! I 0 - 2- 0 ' 0 -----t--~- 0 - t- 0 3 4 0 0 26 9 0 23. 7% 20.0% ~ ----l 32.5% 11.3% 0.0% 0 0.0% 4 - _L_ __ _J_ - -----'-- --~--- 3 3 0 3 ,- 1 9--, 12 6 1 9 27 -}--- --- 1.4% 12.2% _ _1__ 36.5% \" 43.8% 9---4~-o-T 7 2 0 11 4 0 27 10 0 -~----- L 3J.5% 13.5% _j__0.0% ---1. 50.0% 0 0 0 0 0.0% 2 7- T - 7---0--, 3 Q 0 3 2 3 7 0 _7 _ l_ __5_ l_ 10_ __L. __ 2_-------'--__ 2 _ _____._ __ ---'-_0 - 22 23 27 18 26 27 143 20 20 21 19 80 --t-- 25 25 24 74 20 16 27 - _j Page /I of47 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT GRADE DISTRIBUTION REPORT 002 HALL HIGH SCHOOL BY TEACHER WITH 35% OR MORE D's AND F's, 2001-2002 QUARTER ONE Thursday, November OJ, 2001 Teacher [LEFFINGWELL D MALONE H Sec Course Title 114 M10101 ACTIVE PHYS 1-115 j ~10101 iACTIVE Pf-i.YS 116 -1 M10101 :ACTIVE PHYS TEACHER TOTALS \u0026gt; PERCENT TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's - -- I - -- - 103 M20021 BIOLOGY I 104 M20021 BIOLOGY I ~~20021 i BIOLOGY I_ r~ ?6 M20021 BIOLOGY I 301 r M20021 Bl\u0026lt;2_LOGY I f-\n-302 . M20021 BIOLOGY I TEACHER TOTALS - PERCENT TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's A 3 9 0 21 14.9% 0 0 2 3 2 1 8 5.5% -t- 109 jEE11001 COMMUNICA I - 2 - - - 110 E11001 COMMUNICA I ~ ~ - ~ 111 f- ~11001 -1COMMUNICA I 112 E11001 COMMUNICAI J 113 E11001 COMMUNICA I 114 E11001 COMMUNICA I 1TEACHER TOTALS PERCENT TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's 1 107 M20021 ,BIOLOGY I I 108 M20021 BIOLOGY I 109 M20021 BIOLOGY I 110 M20041 BIO I PRE-AP 111 M20041 BIO I PRE-AP -,-- - - 112 M20041 BIO I PRE-AP LRSD /11formatio11 Service Dept. 9 4 8 6 30 21.0% 2 0 0 1 9 11 I I I I I B C D F I NC 4 4 1 12 0 0 6 i 5 _o __ J 1 o _,_ o 3 +- ~ --l- 7 __ 1- _ 1_2____ 0 28 32 13 43 4 0 ~ 19.9%n 2.7~ 9.2% -, - 3=0=.5=o/=co ==-=-=2=-.8-=-o/-co_-_-+~: _O.O_/ 39.7% 6 5 2 2 4 24 16.4% 7 2 5 3 4 2 23 16.1% 4 5 2 6 10 9 -i-- 8 I 4 5 0 0 11 I 10 2 0 0 4 0 0 --- --~ 54 - 37.0% _L - T- 5 1 2 3 3 --+- 15_ J_ 10.5% 4 5 3 4 5 I ~ 41 28.1% 40.4% 1 0 - 3 l 1 3 I 0 18 J 1 12.3% 0.7% 7 6 [ _ 0_-+- 0 0 0 0 0.0% 0 5 t 6 0 0 8-,--2- ~ I - 0 - 1 --- -- -1 3 7 I 1 o 9 11 43 L 30.1% - 51.0% 2 5 I 6 I 8 2 --r- 2 6 1 3 0 30 _,_ 2 21.0% 1.4% - --- -- -- - 8 0 10 I 0 10 I 1 4 I 0 2 I 0 1 1 -,. 0 0 0 0.0% 0 0 0 0 0 - : I Total 24 27 27 141 22 29 25 24 22 24 146 27 23 21 25 22 25 143 20 25 22 23 28 2 7 Page 12 o/47 podaH a:mupuany LITTLE .ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT GRADE DISTRIBUTION REPORT 002 HALL HIGH SCHOOL BY TEACHER WITH 35% OR MORE D's AND F's, 2001-2002 QUARTER ONE Thursday, November OJ, 2001 Teacher RIDLEY R Sec Course Title lEACHER TOTALS - PERCENT TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's I 105 M30021 - CHEMISTRY I 303 M30021 CHEMISTRY I I 304 I M30021 CHEMISTRY I 305 M30021 CHEMISTRY I 306 M30021 CHEMISTRY I ~ ~7 _0:130021 iCHEMISTR~ _ -TEACH- ER TOTALS ---- - PERCENT I TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's 1 A 23 + 15.9% I 0 0 0 0 3 0 3 - 2.1% I B 36 24.8% 0 6 7 C D F 24 25 35 41.4% 5 6 3 I 9 4 4 5 14 6 I 2 I 11 I 5 12 I 6 52.1% I 2 0 I 0 0 I 0 NC 0 0.0% - 0 0 0 0 0 Total 145 16 18 I 25 I 24 I 29 28 140 'ROMAIN K - --+--~-------------------------~-------------- 101 K20061 GEOM PRE-AP I 2 1 8 ' 5 4 4 0 I 0 23 1 '- --t-! ----+----------------------------------------- 101 K30021 PRE-CALCULUS ' 2 \" _ 8_ _ 1 7 I 2 I 0 1 t1- 0 20 h o2- K20001 ALGEBRA II L o - o --:_ -- - -+-- __  .._, --9---+-I - 1- o , 1-9 r 103 b K20041 ~ GEOMETRY - ~ -- 0 0 ' ~- j !- ~--2-0-+- - 2- _)._ O ~ 29 SANDERS D 104 K2006~ _GEOM PRE-AP _ 1 2 + _ 3- -\n_ 5- --t- 7 __8 --,-- __Q_ _ j 0 25 ~ 306 K20041 GEOMETRY O I 4 _ j_ 4 _ _J~ , _1 _ _ 0 _ -I 25 EACHER TOTALS 6 20 31 23 56 I_ 5 0 141  -- P-ER- C-'ENT - 4.3% 14.2% -~ 22.01:- -i - 16.3- .!.-. --3-9-. 7-%-_r 3.5% 1 - 0.0% - TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's 101 T O10~ 1 CIVICS - 102 010041 CIVICS -+- 103 1 010041 1CIVICS 104 , 010041 ,CIVICS 105 010041 CIVICS 106 I 010041 ICIVICS TEA CHER TOTALS PERCENT TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's I I ! 2 0 0 0 2 5 4.0% I 0 3 2 3 4 13 I I I --r 10.3% - - __L 2 4 3 5 8 23 -I I I 56.0% _9_ + 5 7 4 8 I 6 39 I - - - 5 0 7 1 - -, 3 0 I 11 I I I 9 I 0 8 I 43 3 I - -- - --+- ------\n- ----, 1 a.3o/~ l 31__:0__ _3 4_.1_o\n_.. ~-2_.4_ 65.1% 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0% 17 22 15 24 22 26 126 - -- -~ -- - --- . -- ----- ,-- 3 I 12\n3 _ ~I _ 8 __ J [_HELLS~ 101 I 050001 WRLD HIST AP 1 0 I I 12 2 3 7 I 0 0 0 0 30 21 - _ 1ou 020041 WORLD HISTRY LRSD /11formatio11 Service Dept. Page 13 of47 J.rndaH a\n,uupuany ! I LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT GRADE DISTRIBUTION REPORT 002 HALL HIGH SCHOOL BY TEACHER WITH 35% OR MORE D's AND F's, 2001-2002 QUARTER ONE Thursday, November OJ, 2001 Teacher Sec Course Title A B C D F I NC Total SHELLS B 102 050001 WRLD HIST AP 2 4 7 7 3 0 0 23 103 J_ 050001 WRLD HIST AP 6 6 2 2 8 1- 0 25 TEACHER TOTALS 9 25 18 15 31 1 0 99 - - --~ -- PERCENT 9.1% 25.3% 18.2% 15.2% 31.3% 1.0% 0.0% - -- t - .L ____ _[_ -- ----- TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's 46.5% ,WEBB,C 106 020041 WORLD HISTRY 6 2 6 2 0 18 113 020041 WORLD HISTRY 5 6 5 2 5 0 0 23 113 040041 US GOVERNMNT 5 3 4 10 4 0 27 114lli20041 WORLD HISTRY 6 5 2 2 5 0 0 20 - - -r j --- 115 020041 WORLD HISTRY 0 4 2 4_._._7 3 0 --t-~ lt-116 020041 ~ORLD HISTRY - -- 8 5 ~3- 0 I 10 1 0 27 T - TEACHER TOTALS 30 24 18 10 43 rl 10 j_ 0 135 - - - - ~ -t - -1--- 31.9% - -- PERCENT 22.2% 17.8% 13.3% 7.4% 7.4% 0.0% L_ TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's 39.3% ~ 1131 E30021 -EN_GLISH Ill - - 1-~ ? __ ~- - 11-=i_- 0 -r- - WILSON F 2 6 4 1-- 0 26 - 114 E30021 _jENGLISH Ill 1 4 7 5 7 0 0 24 1 115 E30021 ENGLISHIII - j -- - ----'--  - - 0 6 4 - 2 8 0- 0 20 116 E30021 ENGLISH Ill 1 7 10 2 7 0 0 27 117--t E30021 - 1 ENGLISH Ill 2 10 3 2 6 0 0 23 118 I E30021 ENGLISH Ill 2 9 8 8 0 0 28 TEACHER TOTALS 8 42 36 15 47 0 0 148 f - PERCENT 5.4% 28.4% 24.3% ' 10.1% L_ ~~-8% 0.0% I 0.0% t-- TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's 41 .9% - LRSD lnformatio11 Service Dept. Page 14 o/47 UOOff .133}UOJOA LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT GRADE DISTRIBUTION REPORT 003 MANN ARTS/SCIENCES MAGNET BY TEACHER WITH 35% OR MORE D's AND F's, 2001-2002 QUARTER ONE Thursday, November Of, 2001 Teacher Sec Course Title A B C D F I NC Total FREEMAN 101 K71001 MATH PLUS 7 0 2 3 5 0 0 0 10 103 [ K70021 JMATH 7 1 6 4 10 0 - ! 0 0 21 -- - - ' - - 104 K70021 MATH 7 5 5 7 L 6 __ j 0 0 0 23 ' -- 106 1 K70021 ... MATH? 0 4 7 8 0 --+-- 0 0 19 l -- -1 ---, - 107 K70021 MATH? 0 3 6 15 0 ' I 0 _j_ _J 24 \u0026gt; - --\n- - --- ' 1TEACH~ TOTALS 6 20 27 44 0 0 0 97 1 27.!Wo 1-45.4o/-\n- -+ 0.0%-r 0.0% r-\n- - ~ PERCENT 6.2% 20.6% _l - .1__0___:0% J_ TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's 45.4% !LEVIN 101 K80021 MATH8 2 5 -L- 7 3 6 0 -,- 0 __J 23 --~-- - . - -- --- -- - - 101 K80041 --1MATH8 PRE-AP 1 4 -7 -, 4 2 0 0 18 - -- -.- -+- - 101 K81001 JMATH PL_US 8 4 2 3 1 0 - _J__O 11 -- +- -- 102 K80021 MATH8 1 4 4 4 0 I 0 14 103 K80021 MATH8 0 2 4 11 0 0 18 TEACHER TOTALS 8 16 23 13 24 0 0 84 - - - ---j -- PERCENT 9.5% 19.0% 27.4% 15.5% 28.6% 0.0% 0.0% L TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's - 44.0% LRSD lllformatio11 Service Dept. Page 15 o/47 lo.JOOff .133JUOfOA LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT GRADE DISTRIBUTION REPORT 005 PARKVIEW ARTS/SCIENCE MAGNET BY TEACHER WITH 35% OR MORE D's AND F's, 2001-2002 QUARTER ONE Thursday, November OJ, 2001 Teacher Sec Course Title A B C D F I NC Total ACKLEN R 101 M20021 ,BIOLOGY I 0 0 11 7 0 0 19 1of] M20021 BIOLOGY I 0 0 6 8 4 0 0 18 ! - -- T -----+--- - 103 M20021 BIOLOGY I 0 0 2 15 9 I 0 0 26 t 1BIO I PRE/AP - - -+ - 103 M20041 0 3 -l- 5 10 6 0 0 24 ! -- -~ ------ 104 M20021 BIOLOGY I 0 0 1 8 9 0 0 18 105 M20021 BIOLOGY I 0 0 7 16 0 0 24 7 ITE__ACHER TOTALS 0 4 15 59 51 =r_ o I 0 129 + - 1. 1 - ~ PERCENT 0.0% 3.1% 11.6% 45.7% 39.5% 0.0% 0.0% -+-- TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's 85.3% - - _j.._!_0!__ l 020081 _ AFR/AFR AM H ---~- -- ,--- - -- ~RDIMANW_ 3 8 --9 -+ 0 0 1 0 _,__ ?1 - 105 020041 ~ - WLD HISTORY r 0 L 2 7 -+ 8 0 0 0 17 106 020041 WLD HISTORY 4 1 7 4 5 2 0 23 107 020041 WLD HISTORY 5 6 3 14 0 0 29 111 020041 WLD HISTORY 5 4 5 10 0 0 0 24 TEACHER TOTALS 17 21 31 36 I 5 4 0 114 --, - -, -! PERCENT 14.9% 18.4% 27.2% J 31.6% ~ 4% I 3.5% 0.0% - - - TOT AL PERCENT OF D's AND F's 36.0% +=101 [ M10101 l -+ I - MCGEE E ACTIVE PHYS 0 3 10 L 9 1 0 0 23 -- --- ----- -' - 102 M10101 ACTIVE PHYS 0 4 5 6 5 0 0 20 103 M10101 ACTIVE PHYS 3 3 7 6 7 0 0 26 104 M10101 ACTIVE PHYS 0 3 7 9 7 0 0 26 TEACHER TOTALS 3 ... 13 29 30 20 I 0 0 95 - .j 31.6%--j - PERCENT 3.2% 13.7% 30.5% 21.1% 0.0% 0.0% - ...j TO-TAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's 52.6% ROBERTS C 101 010041 CIVICS 5 7 10 0 0 24 102 010041 1CIVICS 0 5 6 11 2 0 0 24 103 010041 CIVICS 0 4 1 6 8 0 0 19 104 010041 CIVICS 2 2 8 8 3 0 0 23 106 010061 _)_CIVICS PR/AP 9 8 4 2 3 0 0 26  - - - -+ L - TEACHER TOTALS 12 L 20 24 34 26 0 0 116 - -- - - -- +-- -- PERCENT 10.3% 1 17.2% 20.7% 29.3% 22.4% 0.0% 0.0% TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's 51 .7% - --- - -- LRSD I11for111atio11 Service Dept. Page 16 of47 JU3WdOJ3A30 JBUOffifi3J0Jd Ii.IO Off J33JOOJO J\\ J.wdaH aJuupuany )tS!H lf~!H 3!W3pBJV LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT GRADE DISTRIBUTION REPORT 007 DUNBAR INT'L STUDIES MAGNET MIDDLE SCHL BY TEACHER WITH 35% OR MORE D's AND F's, 2001-2002 QUARTER ONE Thursday, November 01, 2001 Teacher Sec Course Title A B C D F I NC Total MOSBY A 101 I 037007 KEYBOARD 7-8 3 3 4 4 5 0 0 19 I 105 037005 KEYBD APPL: 8 4 L 4 3 4 0 J_ 0 23 I- 1 KEYBOARD 7-8 - -- --+-- - +-- -f-- 201 037007 5 2 2 6 4 0 0 19 +- --~ 205 037005 KEYBD APPL: 4 3 5 5 5 0 0 22 - - - - .j ---+- '-- ITEACHl!_R TOTALS _ 20 12 15 18 L 18 0 0 83 ~- - - 21.7% -1- - ~ _ PERCENT 24.1% 14.5% 18.1% 21.7% 0.0% 0.0% TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's 43.4% VAN NORTON P 101 E80021 READ/WRITE 8 5 2 6 4 0 0 18 105 1- E80201 . RED/WRT PAPS 2 1 6 5 7 0 0 21 105 E82021 ESL ENG 8 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 -1 + - 106 E80021 READ/WRITE 8 0 1 2 4 5 0 _j__ 0 12 ' .L -- + -+ ---1--  ,TEACHER TOTALS 8 3 10 15 1~~ 0 i _ O.~o/\n-\n52 r -+-- -t I ~ PERCENT 15.4% 5.8% I 19.2% 28.8% 30.8% 0.0% 1-_ --'- L___ TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's_ 59.6% ------- _j LRSD I11formatio11 Service Dept. Page 17 o/47 J.rndaH 33uupuany LITTLE NOCK SCHOOL DISTRICT GRADE DISTRIBUTION REPORT 008 FAIR HIGH SCHOOL BY TEACHER WITH 35% OR MORE D's AND F's., 2001-2002 QUARTER ONE Thursday, November OJ, 2001 Teacher A. OURY COLEMAN, M. [CULNRY FOODS - D. JONES Sec Course Title 101 F24001 SPANISH II 102 103 0 04 I 105 I 108 F14001 SPANISH I F24001 ~SPANISHII TEACHER TOTALS PERCENT - TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's 1- 101 -\n_1 52103 } :_SY. TOT_ 101 153001 .P SYCHO-LOGY 106 1 020041 WORLD HISTRY I 109 020041 WORLD HISTRY I 110 I 020041 WORLD HISTRY I 114 I 020041 WORLD HISTRY lTEACHER TOTALS - - ~ PERCENT -- - - TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's 101 P11341 1ND TECH ED 102 P11341 IND TECH ED TEACHER TOTALS L PERCENT - TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's -t- - - 101 K10001 ALGEBRA I 101 K10041 PRE AP ALG.1 102 K10001 ALGEBRA I 102 K20021 ALG II PR-AP 103 K10001 ALGEBRA I ~ 104 ~ K10001 LALGEBRA I TEA CHER TOTALS \u0026gt;- PERCENT 1-- TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's LRSD I11formatio11 Service Dept. JU3Wd0[3J\\3Q ,~U0Jl1113J0.fd unoH .1aaJonI0A A 2 0 ~ I I : 2 2 10 7.3% 0 2 0 0 2 3 B C 4 2 _L - ~ - + -! --, - i~-~ t 12 20 8.8% 14.6% 0 5 2 3 4 I I I 6 10 10 5 7 7 -t I I I D F I 10 8 0 8 5 0 7 12 0 4 I 15 o _ 6 ____ 12 i- _ 0 _ _I_ 2 6 0 . ---f -- i- - 37 58 0 27.0% 69.3% --- 0 42.3% 0.0% - - - - - - -.,,. - 0 I 0 NC 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0% 0 ' ----+ - +- - 5 1 0 0 4 - - 5 r o I 0 13 2 0 0 5 3 I 0 0 8 0 0 0 --,-- I I Total 26 20 26 26 25 14 137 19 20 27 18 22 7 I 15 --+- 3~-t 35 I 11 0 +-a.~0/~ - 107 - - - 6.5% 0 _ 14.o J__ 36.4~ 32. 1% L 1 o.3% 0.0% ~ ~- . 43.0% 7' ~- --r - 01 -~ - 0 0 0 0 I 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 3 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 4 -----+- t-- 0.0% -I- 25.0% 0.0% 25.0% 25.0% 25.0% 0.0% L 50.0% ~ 2 4 3 5 10 0 0 24 3 7 1 8 2 0 0 21 0 3 4 3 13 0 0 23 2 8 3 3 0 0 0 16 1 5 11 3 4 0 0 24 0 2 4 6 13 0 0 25 _j, 8 29 26 28 42 0 0 133 - 6.0% 21.8% 19.5% 21.1% 31.6% 0.0% 0.0% - 52.6% - - - P\"ge 18 of47 J.rndaH a\n,uupuany 'fS!}I ({~!ff 3!W3pu\n,y I LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT GRADE DISTRIBUTION REPORT 008 FAIR HIGH SCHOOL BY TEACHER WITH 35% OR MORE D's AND F's~ 2001-2002 QUARTER ONE Thursday, November OJ, 2001 Teacher D.CUMMINGS DI ESL.TECH [ACKLES HALL L Sec Course Title 101 E20161 ENG.II PREAP 102 E20161 +ENG.II P~EAP 105 E30021 _ENGLISH Ill 106 E30021 ENGLISH Ill !TEACHER TOTALS f- PERCENT TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's 101 P21261 DIESL TECH 1 102 L P21001 ~AUTO BODY I [TEACHER TG__TALS PERCENT - TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's _ j 102 1 P21021 AUTO TECH I TEACHER TOTALS PERCENT ----+ TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's - - --+ 103 010041 CIVICS 104 010041 CIVICS 105 010041 CIVICS 105 030041 t-jus HISTORY 106 010041 CIVICS 107 010061[CIVICS PREAP TEACHER TOTALS PERCENT TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's __ _]_J 018]52001 --1BIBLE/IN_LIT 101 E40021 ENGLISH IV j 102 E40021 -ENGLISH IV - 103 E40021 ENGLISH IV 104 E40021 ENGLISH IV l 105 J_ E40021 ENGLISH IV --+ LRSD l,zformatio11 Service Dept. A 2 3 7 8.7% 0 0 1 B 4 2 6 2 14 17.5% 0 1 - C 4 I _3 _l 3 + -- _j_ -- 3 13 16.3% 0 0 0 D F I NC 6 3 0 0 2 7 0 0 -- --\"-- 2 11 0 0 ---+--- 3 12 0 0 -- 13 33 0 0 --+- -+- - - 16.3% 41.2% 0.0% 0.0% - 57.5% 0 0 0 0 1 0 -+ 0 0 -j- 1 __ -+ 0 --l- 0 -1-- 0 0 0.0% 50.0% 0.0% - I 5_0.~~0% l ~o __ o.oo/~ _, 50.0% i 0 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 --t- - --- --+-- 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% --~-------- -, 100.0% 5 --- 9 - 0- -/-0 2 8 11 0 0 0 ___J _ 1_-+-_ 9 ---i-- _ 9_-+--__1 - -+--0- 1 I 2 10 1 10 0 0 ~ -4 ~r l- ~ -- : -----+----2-----+--- ~ ---+----+-------,-- -+ 8 19 +- 44 48_---+-_ 5 ----+---0-- 6.5% 15.3% 35.5% 38.7% 4.0% 0.0% 1 - l _J_ 42.7% 0 0 0 - 0 0 0 -- 0 0.0% 0 3 5 2 5 9 4 5 - 3 - _j_ ---+-- + - 0 0 0 0 4 4 0 - -------+- 3 - 2-~ 0 - - 6 5 ' 5 0 0 7 8 5 2 0 0 0 11 5 3 I __ t_ 6 0 ---'- - - .L 0 _J Total 18 16 25 21 80 1 2 1 22 22 20 23 18 19 124 11 22 16 23 22 25 Page/9of47 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT GRADE DISTRIBUTION REPORT 008 FAIR HIGH SCHOOL BY TEACHER WITH 35% OR MORE D's AND F's, 2001-2002 QUARTER ONE Thursday, November OJ, 2001 Teacher !HARRISON K. Sec Course Title TEACHER TOTALS PERCENT TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's -- - - 1 ~ - K20001 IALG EBRA 102 K20001 ALGEBRA 1 103 K20001 ALGEBRA 104 K20001 ALGEBRA 105 K20001 ALGEBRA 106 K20001 ALGEBRA !TEACHER TOTALS - PERCENT TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's 101 B20041 PAINTING 102 l B10001 INTRO TO ART I 1 05 - B10001 l1NTRO TO ART TEACHER TOTALS PERCENT -I A 10 8.4% 0 0 - 2 1.6% 2 7 10 - _, .. 20.8% _ j : I B 41 --, 34.5% 2 -, 2 2 2 5 14 11.4% 0 I C D F I 25 23 20 0 16.8% 0.0% ----~-- 36.1% NC I 0 - -- 0.0% .L_ 2- ~,--4----1-1 -~i - -0 - - - 0 0 2 4 _j 10 8.1% 0 4 17 0 I 0 5 12 0 0 6 7 0 I 0 6 I 16 0 0 - 3 6 0 0 --- 28 69 0 0 22.8% -- 56.1%- ~ 0- -,- 0.0% - 78.9% 0 0 0 0 7 5 1 7 0 0 2 , _ 0 = 3 ]'-=- 8 ~_,__ __5_ ___._ _0 _ 9 I ~ -~ 9 _ j __12 0 1a.ao\n.-t- 1s.1o\n. I 1a.ao\n. 2s.oo\n. o.oo\n. 7 -j -1 0 0.0% _____l_____ -- - ~-------+-__ T_O~T.'AL PER!\n_ENT OF D's AND F's -l _ _ 43.8% M. MEHYOU 101 F11001 FRENCH I I '1 9 4 101 F21001 FRENCH II 4 -5 ---+-- 101 F31001 IFRENCH Ill - -----r- ~~ - 1 -..._ 3 1 4 0 3 I 3 ,- 2 0 4 2 4 0 101 F51001 jFRENCH 1v AP _ _J __ o_ _ __ 1 __ J_ 102 F11001 FRENCH I - 102 F21001 FRENCH II 0 5 - 4 -j --- 3 3 --1 --+ 0 1 0 5- -, 4 5 0 6 8 0 103 F21001 !FRENCH II 4 4 5 9 0 25 22 --1 - 20.5% 18.0% (!EACHER TOTALS PERCENT 21 J_ 17 .2o/.\n--i-17.2% 21 33 0 27.0% 0.0% --~ - TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's 44.3% 4 - - ---- -- ----..- M.HARDER 106 M30021 CHEMISTRY I 2 1 5 7 5 0 107 M30021 CHEMISTRY I 4 3 7 8 6 0 I 108 M30021 CHEMISTRY I 2 3 9 5 10 0 2 I 2 5 L 109 [\u0026amp;i20021 JBIOLO_GY I LRSD I11for111atio11 Service Dept. 0 -3 0 - ---1...----~---~-- J.rndal{ 33UUpmmv I -- I ~- I I - - 0 0 0 - 0.0% 0 0 0 _J 0 Total 119 19 22 20 18 25 19 123 22 25 48 20 27 122 20 28 29 12 .. Page 20 o/47 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT GRADE DISTRIBUTION REPORT 008 FAIR HIGH SCHOOL BY TEACHER WITH 35% OR MORE D's AND F's, 2001-2002 QUARTER ONE Thursday, November OJ, 2001 Teacher Sec Course Title ~.HARDER __ _ 109 I M30021 !CHEMISTRY I N. AUSTIN (PALMER R 113 I 131011 _l\\DVSCI/RSRCH TEACHER TOTALS --- -- ---- - PERCENT TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's 101 172135 TRAVEL/TOUR 107 031019 COMPTECH INT 109 031019 COMPTECH INT 111 031019 COMPTECH INT 113 031019 COMPTECH INT 115 031019 COMPTECH INT PieACHER TOTALS r-- PERCENT TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's ::fo~ K20041 GEOMETRY 101 1-- K20061 1 GEO~ PRE-AP 102 K20041 GEOMETRY 102 K20061 GEOM PRE-AP 103 K20041 GEOMETRY 104 K20041 GEOMETRY TEACHER TOTALS ~ PERCENT --t-- . TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's 101--r 020041 WORLD HISTRY 101 I 040041 US GOVERNMNT 102 020041 WORLD HISTRY 102 040041 US GOVERNMNT 103 020041 WORLD HISTRY 105 020041 LWORLD HISTRY TEACHER TOTALS PERCENT TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's LRSD lllformatio11 Service Dept. I -1 I A _2_J 11 - -~ 9.3% 3 3 0 0 3 10 10.9% 2 1 2 4 B 7 2 -- 19 j 16.1% 1 5 2 3 3 5 19 20.7% 3 3 4 3 3 4 11 8.4% 20 ~ 1 5.3% f 3 0 4 10 0 18 15.0% 10 5 4 4 2 26 21.7% J.JOdaH .33UUpuanv C D F I NC Total o I 3 6 0 o I 17 5 I 2 1 33 0 28 I 27 0 -t- - 23. 7% 22.9_% __ L._2_8_.0_%__J_ ~0% 50.8% 0.0% 2 3 5 3 5 5 23 25.0% 4 5 8 i -t 6 6 I 4 4 2 4 10 0 21 22.8% 43.5% 7 --1. 8 2 2 3 3 19 20.7% - 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0% -f --j I 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0% I 0 4 ~ , 00 -+-- 0- 1 ---+-- -----l--- - ' 5 5 0 I 0 --+ - --r-----c - --j- - ~ i ~ I ~ - +--~----4 5 I 10 o o 32 35 I 33 0 0 25.2% - - 24.-4_%_'--2_6_. 7_%_ l 0~0% 51.1% 5 3 5 2 6 10 31 - 25.8% - --- - 5 1 5 5 5 0 5 3 3 8 4 31 14 ----+-- - 25.8% 11.7% 37.5% 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0- ~-0 0 0 - 0.0% 0.0% 17 14 15 13 19 14 92 25 15 23 16 28 24 131 22 21 14 13 26 24 120 Pagel/ o/47 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT GRADE DISTRIBUTION REPORT 008 FAIR HIGH SCHOOL BY TEACHER WITH 35% OR MORE D's AND F's, 2001-2002 QUARTER ONE Th11rsday, November OJ, 2001 Teacher lp1CKERING J R.CARPENTER RON HART Sec Course Title 1 101 052007 MYTHOLOGY f 10HJE30021 ....JENGLISH Ill 101 E50081 ENG IV AP -102 E30021 EN-GLISH Ill L.!_02 j E50081 ENG IV AP_ : 103  E30021 ENGLISH Ill TEACHER TOTALS I PERCENT  T(!!AL PERCENT OF D's AND F's 101 P21201 RADIO BRDCT1 - ~ ..i TEAC-HER TOTALS -- - PERCENT OTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's 112001 -ACT P-REP-MTH 103 112001 ACT PREP-MTH 105 K20081 ' CONCEPT GEOM 106 ~ 10001 ALGEBRA I 107 108 4 K10001 .A LGEBRA I K10001 ALGEBRA I TEACHER TOTALS PERCENT TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's ~ REGAN --~_102 -+ 052003 1 ACT_ PR_EP_ E_NG 103 E10041 1 ENG I PRE-AP 104 E10041\nENG I PRE-AP 108 I E10021 ENGLISH I 108 I E20141 ENG.II WKSP TEACHER TOTALS PERCENT - TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's ~ .ANDERSON 101 101 LRSD lllformatio11 Service Dept. - - - E11001 COMMUNICA I E11121 J_LEADE~SHIP l _J_ l_ I - --, A 2 2 1 3 0 9 7.9% 0 0 15 10 0 2 2 0 29 24.2% - 10 6 4 0 21 18.9% B 4 5 3 -+ - 6 4 --, 3 25 21.9% 0 0 0.0% --'- 6 3 _J - 0 2 2 2 15 12.5% 0 3 3 3 5 14 12.6% 4 T 2 21 _J 4 C D F I NC 0 6 0 0 0 6 9 0 0 ~ !_ --I- 1 3 0 j______Q__ ~ t ~  ~ ~ 6 1 1 , 1 .__ o 28 - 26 26 0 24.6% 0 I- - - -, - 7 22.8% 45.6% -- 0 22.8% 0.0% 0 0 0 --- 0 0 0.0% 0 _ _ o __0 _1 __1_ +- _ o_ o 0.0% ~0!o _J_ 100.:_0 L ~~ _l_ _ ~0% 100.0% __9 ----l-- o 1 o - T- - o 2  0 2 0 0 1()__~ __ 4 __ 1 o-r- o ___, __ o 4 7 4 0 0 -+ - - 2 3 2 7 0 0 4 14 7 0 0 21 17.5% o o o o I --,c---------+-----!-- ----, 10 4 2 0 I 2 4 7 0 2 6 15 0 0 - 0 0 0 8 3 12 0 22 17 36 1 0 1 Total 12 23 16 22 18 23 114 1 22 17 24 19 15 23 120 10 25 20 26 30 111 -----+----+-- J____ -- 19.8% 15.3% 32.4% 0.9% 0.0% 47.7% ----- ------ 7 5 1 0 T 0 19 0 ___._ _o_ ---L_ __o_ _ J_ ___Q_ 0 _ j 25 Page 22 o/47 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT GRADE DISTRIBUTION REPORT 008 FAIR HIGH SCHOOL BY TEACHER WITH 35% OR MORE D's AND F's, 2001-2002 QUARTER ONE Thursday, November OJ, 2001 Teacher S.ANDERSON S.GOODNIGHT THOMPSON P TOM ROSS Sec Course Title 102 E11001 COMMUNICA I 103 E11001 'COMMUN I CA I 104 E11001 COMMUNICA I +- - 105 E11001 COMMUNICA I TEACHER TOTALS ' PERCENT TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's 101 f 101 H02 102 105 107 109 111 T30001 ATHL TCS GIii T40001 ATHLTCS G IV T30001 ATHL TCS GIii T40001 'A THL TCS G IV 131011DVSCI/RSRCH 131011 ADVSCI/RSRCH 131011 ADVSCI/RSRCH 131011 ADVSCI/RSRCH TEACHER TOTALS r PERCENT I-- TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's ~ 01 E30041 ENG 3 PRE~AP 102 E30041 ENG 3 PRE-AP I 103 E30041 ENG 3 PRE-AP ~ 106 j E40021 ENGLISH IV 107 r E40021 [ENGLISH IV f- - TEA CHER TOTALS PERCENT TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's 101 E20141 ENG.II WKSP 102 103 104 E20141 ENG.II WKSP 052003 ACT PREP- ENG E30021 ENGLISH Ill '---~ LRSD lllformatio11 Service Dept, A 0 1 5 0 31 21.8% 2 8 3 8 0 5 28 25.7% 2 3 0 7 7.0% 5 4 11 0 -I -1 B 5 7 2 6 26 18.3% 0 0 0 0 3 6 6 4 19 - 17.4% 5 4 7 5 2 23 23.0% 3 3 7 4 C D F I 5 3 11 0 6 9 5 0 - - - - 7 7 4 0 5 ~-=- ~-=- -=-5----+-- _2 30 29 26 0 - +- 21.1% 20.4% 18.3% _ _j_ 0 o l o _L 0 2 4 2 9 17 15.6% - 7 8 2 3 6 38.7% 0 0 0 0 0 t _ 0-1 0 0 --i- 3 2 6 2 13 11.9% 41.3% 4 4 4 6 5 4 8 11 9 32 29.4% 3 4 4 4 6 0.0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0% 0 0 0 0 0 NC 0 0 0 _(__ q_ l.. 0 0.0% 0 L _o r 0  ~ 0 -+ I 0 I o 0 0 0 0.0% 0 0 0 0 0 26 23 21 0 0 26.0% 23.0~21.0% 1 0.0% ., 0.0% -~-- 44.0% 7 --,------------- _ _j_ 2 4 6 0 3 5 9 0 0 0 0 0 Total 24 28 25 21 142 2 8 3 8 13 20 26 29 109 20 22 18 21 19 100 20 24 24 23 P\"ge 23 of47 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT GRADE DISTRIBUTION REPORT 008 FAIR HIGH SCHOOL BY TEACHER WITH 35% OR MORE D's AND F's, 2001-2002 QUARTER ONE Thursday, November 01, 2001 Teacher Sec Course Title A B C D F I NC Total TEACHER TOTALS I PERCENT 20 17 11 14 I 29 0 0 91 ,-22.0% I ~ ---+- __ J __ --+---- -- - 18.7% 12.1% 15.4% 31.9% 0.0% 0.0% -- - +- _JOT1_L PERG_~N_T_OF D's AND F's 47.3% ~- UMERAH 101 K20081 CONCEPT GEOM 0 0 3 4 4 0 0 11 102 K20081 CONCEPT GEOM 8 5 8 0 0 23 104 K20081 CONCEPT GEOM 0 3 8 10 4 0 0 25 I 107 K20001 1ALGEBRA II 0 3 13 6 3 0 0 25 10a I K20001 ALGEBRA II 1 I 1 6 I 14 I 4 0 0 j 26 i 113 I K20081 !CONCEPT GEOM _ 3 3 I 5 I 9 I 4 0 0 24 +- - I 43 i - -- TEACHER TOTALS I 11 48 27 0 0 134  5 I - - -- --- I I PERCENT 3.7% 8.2% i 32.1% I 35.8% 20.1% 0.0% I 0.0% TOTALPERCENTOFD'sANDF's __ 56.0% -- LRSD I11formatio11 Service Dept. Page 24 o/47 J.JOd3H 33UUpuanv I LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT GRADE DISTRIBUTION REPORT 009 FOREST HEIGHTS MIDDLE SCHOOL BY TEACHER WITH 35% OR MORE D's AND F's, 2001-2002 QUARTER ONE Thursday, No1ember OJ, 2001 Teacher JOHNSON T. ROBERT ROBERSON - [WILLIAMS K Sec Course Title 203 E80041 ENG 8 PRE-AP [ .1_03 E80061 1 RESRCH8PR-AP 204 E80041 ENG 8 PRE-AP +- 205 E80021 READ/WRITES TEACHER TOTALS - - PERCENT TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's 205 S60081 SOC ST 6 RR 205 S70061 SCIENCE 7 RR ' 205 1 S70081 'soc ST 7 RR 205 L S80081 roe ST 8 RR 1 502 I S60061 SCIENCE 6 RR 502 S60081 SOC ST 6 RR 502 502 503 503 504 I 504 '-- S70061 SCIENCE 7 RR S70081 SOC ST 7 RR S60061 ,SCIENCE 6 RR S80061 SCIENCE 8 RR - S60061 SCIENCE 6 RR S6ooa 1 l soc ST 6 RR- ~ 504 + S70061 SCIENCE 7 RR L 504 r S70081 SOC ST 7 RR I 504 ~ S80081 !SOC ST 8 RR I 506 S60081 SOC ST 6 RR I 506 S70061 SCIENCE 7 RR 506 S70081 SOC ST 7 RR 506 S80081 SOC ST 8 RR TEACHER TOTALS . PERCENT TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's 106 1 K80061 ALG I PRE-AP 201 K80021 MATH 8 tlBU K80021 jMATH 8 -- LRSD /11formatio11 Service Dept. A 0 5 1 2 8 9.1% 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 J._ - 1 - 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 10.3% 0 0 0 ' I I I I B 11 4 10 2 27 30.7% 0 C 4 3 -+ - 5 7 ~ -- 19 21.6% 0 0 0 0 - I _ o _ ~-1 -L 0 2 0 0 I 0 0 0 I I D 4 2 -..,-- 1 4 11 12.5% 37.5% 0 2 --- 0 0 0 0 0 i 0 0 F I 7 1 5 ___L_Q_ 5 ---- 5 0 0 22 1 25.0% 1.1% 0 0 -~- 0 0 ---+-- 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 NC 0 0 0 0 0 0.0% 0 0 0 0 I O 0 I o 0 0 I 0 --+- - - 0 0 0 0 ~_0_......,f,_ - 2 I t- 0 -+----+,-----+---- _____, -+ - 1 0 1 ~- _ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 7.7% 9 l_O -r - - + 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 15.4% - - 0 I 1 r- -1 13 33.3% I 56.4% 5 5 2 12 _j__1_0 _ L 11 2 0 0 0 9 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 4 23.1% 10.3% 0- -.-1 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0% 0 0 0 t Total 27 19 22 20 88 2 1 4 1 i3-i 1 2 I ' i 3 2 3 1 2 1 4 1 2 2 2 2 39 20 23 28 Page 25 o/47 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT GRADE DISTRIBUTION REPORT 009 FOREST HEIGHTS MIDDLE SCHOOL BY TEACHER WITH 35% OR MORE D's AND F's, 2001-2002 QUARTER ONE Tlt11rsday, November OJ, 2001 Teacher Sec Course Title A B C D F I NC Total ~ILLIAMS K 202 KS0041 MATHS PRE-AP 0 0 6 3 I 0 0 10 203 KS0041 MATHS PRE-AP 0 2 7 10 0 I 0 20 I-- -- - - - ~ + + TEACHER TOTALS 0 12 30 47 10 2 0 101 --!- - --1- - -+- --- PERCENT 0.0% 11.9% 29.7% 46.5% 9.9% 2.0% 0.0% - - - - - TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's 56.4% - - - LRSD I11formatio11 Service Dept. Page26 of47 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT GRADE DISTRIBUTION REPORT 011 SOUTHWEST MIDDLE SCHOOL BY TEACHER WITH 35% OR MORE D's AND F's, 2001-2002 QUARTER ONE Thursday, November OJ, 1001 Teacher DAVIS, D. [DIRDEN, R. JACKSON, A. Sec Course Title 201 M80041 SCI 8 PRE-AP 202 M80021 SCIENCE 8 204 M80021 1SCIENCE 8 I--- - 206 M80021 SCIENCE 8 207 I M80021 SCIENCE 8 rTEACHER TOTAs - PERCENT -T~OT AL PERCENT OF D's AND F's 111 S60021 'READ/WR 6RR 111 S80021 1READ/WR 8 RR 114 -t S60041 MATH 6 RR 114 ' S70041 MATH 7 RR 114 S80041 MATH 8 RR 115 S60021 READ/WR 6RR 115 S70021 READ/WR 7 RR 1 115 S80021 READ/WR 8 RR [TEACHER TOTALS ____ _ PERCENT \u0026gt;--------- - A 13 1 3 1 3 21 28.8% 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0% TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's --4 __ 201 M60041 SCI 6 PRE-AP 3 202 M60021 SCIENCE 6 6 205 M60021 SCIENCE 6 ---- - 206 M60021 SCIENCE 6 - - l 207 M60021 SCIENCE 6 TEACHER TOTALS ~- -- PERCENT TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's 201 E60021 READ/WRITE6 205 E60021 READ/WRITE6 207 j E60061 RESRCH6PR-AP 2 -3 -0 14 13.3% 2 3 0 LRSD l11formatio11 Service Dept, UUOff .1\n)3}UU(O J\\ I J B C D F I NC 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 5 0 0 0 2 - --- +- ~ ~ --, ---- 3 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 I 2 0 0 0 I I o o I o Total 16 5 2 4 1 7 3 3 3 1_-1 14 3.6% _j_ 50.0% 13 _ _,1'--o ___ o_ -L _ o __j 28 6 2 4 20 19.0% 5 3 2 [_ 46.4% o.o o.o __o.0 1c_. --i 46.4% 4 - 0 0 o -i----o 3 4 7 0 0 7 8 3 0 ---\n--- --+----\u0026gt;------+ 3 4 . 12 - ---t- ----+- - --+--- 2 6 7 0 ----+--- 19 22 29 - _..__ ----r-- - - 18.1% 6 4 4 21.0% 27.6% 1.0% 48.6% 7 3 8 3 _ [ _9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0% 0 0 0 14 26 21 25 +- 19 105 21 21 18 Page17of47 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT GRADE DISTRIBUTION REPORT 011 SOUTHWEST MIDDLE SCHOOL BY TEACHER WITH 35% OR MORE D's AND F's~ 2001-2002 QUARTER ONE Thursday, November OJ, 2001 Teacher JAMES B JOHNSON, M. OWENS Sec Course Title TEACHER TOTALS PERCENT TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's 201 080021 Tsoc ST a 204 SOC ST 8 205 SOC ST 8 206 080041 SOC ST8PREAP 207 080021 SOC ST 8 TEACHER TOTALS PERCENT TOTAL PERC-ENT OF D's AND F's 201 060021 SOC ST 6 202 060021 SOC ST 6 205 060021 SOC ST 6 206 060041 SOC ST6PREAP r 207 060021 SOC ST 6 TEACHER TOTALS L PERCENT TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's 10~ 060021 Tsoc ST 6 - - 103 060041 ~so~ ST6PREAP 104 060041 SOC ST6PREAP - - - 105 060021 SOC ST 6 106 060021 SOC ST 6 TEACHER TOTALS r -- -- PERCENT TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's 102 f- K60041 CMATH6 PRE-AP 103 K60021 MATH 6 104 K60021 MATH 6 105 K60041 ,MATH6 PRE-AP 106 K60021 MATH 6 LRSD Informatio11 Service Dept.' JuawdopA3Q 11mo111113J0.fd A 5 8.3% - 0 0 0 3 4 5.4% 5 0 0 5 0 10 10.4% 0 7 5 0 0 12 12.5% 3 1 7 2 I-B C D F I NC Total 10 14 7 24 0 60 ~ - 16.7% 23.3% 11.7% 40.0% 0.0% -~- 51 -7 ,- 2 5 3 0 0 11 4 13 5 0 0 23 3 3 3 3 0 0 12 3 2 5 0 0 0 13 0 4 8 2 0 0 15 8 15 34 13 0 74 - r 10.8% 20.3% 1 45.9% r -+ 17.6% 0 0.0% t--- 0.0% 6 6 3 7 2 24 6 6 4 4 4 24 25.0% 25.0% - 4 .-J- 7 4 _ I o 3 1- _ o 3 5 5 6 18 _J 63.5% 2 10 0 0 13 - ' -,.. 2 0 5 0 4 0 0 --+ O_ - 13- 1 -.- - 24 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 13.5% I 25.0% 1.0% 0.0% - 21 18 21 16 20 96 38.5% ---~-- -1 ~ 11 6 0 7 0 -+-28 - _L - _ o_-4-__ 1_---+ __ o 1-= o _ 1 12 -~ 0 ~ 0 0  __ 0 8 --+- 1 8 0_ 7 5 0 l 0 23 6 T o o 25 29 18 0 0 96 -,- ' - -- 19 19.8% 18.8% 30.2% 18.8% 0.0% 0.0% 4 1 2 2 5 4 j - 7 5 7 49.0% 1 6 7 2 7 -+- 6 0 0 8 0 0 0 5 _J_ _Q 0 0 0 0 ..L - 0 --, - 13 21 23 12 26 Page28of47 J.JOd.JH 33UBpuanv LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT GRADE DISTRIBUTION REPORT 011 SOUTHWEST MIDDLE SCHOOL BY TEACHER WITH 35% OR MORE D's AND F's, 2001-2002 QUARTER ONE Thursday, November 01, 2001 Teacher Sec Course Title rEACHER TOTALS PERCENT -- -- - TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's ~HEPHERoi=_I - -- 101 037001 CAREER ORIEN 102 037001 1CAREER ORIEN 103 036003 KEYBOARDING 105 037001 !CAREER ORIEN 107 I 037001 CAREER ORIEN TEACHER TOTALS A 14 ,_ 14.7% -+--- I 2 I 2 I 1 I 0 I 4 9 -- - STAGGS S. STRIGEL, I. [!ATE, K. I PERCENT t- -- -- ____ _J_ TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's 102 O80021 7 SOCST 8-- 103 1 080021 soc ST 8 104 080021 SOC ST 8 106  080021 SOC ST 8 107 080041 _,_soc ST8PREA.!:__ [TEACHER TOTALS I- - - PERCENT L TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's 202 K70021 MATH 7 + 203 K70021 MATH 7 r204 K70021 -,MATH 7 206 K7004\"!.._1J1ATH7 PRE-AP _ EACHER TOTALS PERCENT -t TO-TA L PER-CENT OF- D's AND F's 202 E70021 READ/WRITE? 204 E70061 1 RESRCH?PR-AP 215 E70021 READ/WRITE? LRSD /11formatio11 Service Dept. 10.1% - 3 0 0 - 1- 5 9 11.5% 0 0 0 6 r- - 6 8.3% 0 2 B 14 14.7% r 2 1 I 0 I 1 I 2 6 [___ _ \" 6.7% 4 2 7 15 19.2% C D F I NC Total 24 23 20 L_ 0 - - - - 1- 0 95 -I --25.3-% 24.2% 21.1% I 0.0% I 45.3% ---~-0.0_!'~ - 4 5 I 6 I 0 I 0 I 19 6 9 I 5 I 0 I 0 23 4 3 I 1 I 0 I 0 I 9 5 8 I 4 I 0 ' 0 i 18 3 5 I 6 I 0 I 0 20 22 30 22 0 0 89 I ...J. - - ~ 24.~~ _ _l _E.7 ~ 24. 7% 0.0% 0.0% I ~ -- 58.4% 3--~ - 5- ,--- 9- --r-- o - -- o 19 1 3 7 0 0 15 0 3 3 0 0 10 rr- -4 - i- 6 _,_ o-- o o -l---- -+--- - . ~- - 4 3_ 3 ~ 0 J _ -0 - -7 - 22 12 12 20 22 0 0 78 15.4% ~ 25.6 ~-28.2/~ 0.0/~- I -O.oo/:- 53.8 9 ~ -- 6 -T 1 0 18 I - ~- - 9 i _ 4 _ _I__ 4_ -- 0 0 18 2 1 3 5 11 -l-- 4 _ 9 _ __,f,--__2_ ---+-_0 0 4- 1 3 j O O 0 18 18 15.3% 0 - - 6 2 I -- --\n- 26 22 7 0 0 72 ---+- - 36.1% 30.6% 9.7% 0.0% 0.0% 40.3% 4 - 5-~ 0 0 I - f--4 - 0 -r- 0 _l 2 9 4 ~-4-~ __ 6_~ __ 0 __j_--=- 0 _L 11 19 17 Page 29 o/47 i I LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT GRADE DISTRIBUTIONREPORT 011 SOUTHWEST MIDDLE SCHOOL BY TEACHER WITH 35% OR MORE D's AND F's~ 2001-2002 QUARTER ONE Thursday, November OJ, 2001 Teacher Sec Course Title A B C D F I NC Total TEACHER TOTALS 3 8 15 9 12 0 0 47 '. ~19.1 .=\n_ 2s.5d o.o ~ -- - PERCENT 6.4% 17.0% 31.9% 0.0% L TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's - --\u0026lt; 44.7% [!ATUM -- T - ---, - 201 K60021 MATH6 0 4 I 8 6 7 0 0 25 I 202 K60041 1MATH6 PRE-AP 0 5 4 5 0 0 0 14 205 K60021 MATH6 0 2 5 10 0 19 206 K60021 MATH6 0 1 2 3 10 0 0 16 207 K60021 MATH6 0 2 6 I 5 9 0 0 22 t TEACHER TOTALS_ 0 13 22 24 36 1 0 96 r - - PER-CENT 0.0% 13.5% ~-I 22.~ 0% ..L_37.~% J 1.0% 0.0% TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's 62.5% IWOODLEYC - 1E60021 fREAD/WRITE6 7 - - -r- - 211 0 3 2 4 8 1 I 0 18 215 E60041 ENG 6 PRE-AP 5 8 2 2 I 2 0 0 19 216 E60021 READ/WRITE6 0 7 4 3_-1- 7 [_O 0 21 ~EACHER TOTALS - . - __)_ 5 18 _ 8 _ l _ 9 I 17 I 1 0 58 +---- PERCENT 8.6% 31.0% 13.8% 15.5% 29.3% 1.7__J_ 0.0% ' - _j_ __ __, TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's 44.8% - L - - ---- LRSD l11formatio11 Service Dept. P\"ge 30of47 J.rndaH a:mupuany LITTLE NOCK SCHOOL DISTRICT GRADE DISTRIBUTION REPORT 012 MCCLELLAN HIGH SCHOOL BY TEACHER WITH 35% OR MORE D's AND F's, 2001-2002 QUARTER ONE Thursday, November OJ, 2001 Teacher lj,.LEXANDER JAMES Sec Course Title 131 M20021 BIOLOGY I f- 13ir M20021 BIOLOGY I _ 13t+-M20021 1 - BIOLOGY I f 214 1 M10101 _ACTIVE PHYS , 22?__M10101 1ACTIVE PHYS ~ 231 ~ M30021 Cl::!_EMISTRY I TEACHER TOTALS - - - - ....,_ PERCENT TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's - 101 I O31081 ' ccEREL_I_ - ~ 103 031121 CCE COOPI PM 1 103 Q41121 -+CCE CP II PM 104 Q31101 CCE COOP I 201 031081 CCE REL I I 201 041081 CCERELII !TEACHER TOTALS PERCENT A 0 3 3 1 2 10 8.8% 2 2 0 4 4 13 22.8% __j J_ --+- B 3 3 14 6 3 4 33 28.9% 3 0 7 12.3% C 6 .L - 4 2 3 5 D 3 8 6 0 5 11 F 6 2 I NC 0 0 0 I 0 0 - j -- 0 0 0 -----, I o L-o 0 0 - -- - -- i- 21 + 33_ ___,__1_1_--+--__o --t 18.4% __1__ 28.9% ~-14_.9_0/co __ O.O_ _ _j__ 0 --- 0.0% 43.9% 0 -- 0 0 I - 0-1 2 I 1 11 0 0 4 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 6 17 0 24.6% - ---+- - 0 0.0% -+- - 10.5% 29.8% 0.0% Total 19 12 30 16 14 23 114 13 - 8 2 19 13 2 57 TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's 40.4% [ooGAN-ARMON~R _1~ _1_0_1_ _1_ 10_0_2_1~ 1FAM D_Y_N_AM_IC_S_ _____3 _ ___5_ ___4_ ___2_ ___2_ -_-_-=-__o _ ___o_ ___16_ _ 102 091001 HSE/INT DSN: 6 0 7 2 5 0 0 20 CARTER MARION 104 091009 CHILD DEVEL: 201 091013 CLOTH MGMT: 202 --l- 091013 1CLOTH MGMT: L 203 -L 110021 FAM DYNAMICS [TEACHER TOTALS - PERCENT TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's 102 K20041 GEOMETRY 1i 4 K20001 ALGEBRA II 121 - K20041 ~GEOMETRY 201 K20001 ALGEBRA II 4- - - -- 202 K20041 -GEOM- ETRY -- --- LRSD I11formatio11 Service Dept. _l 2 7 3 2 4 0 0 18 2 4 J 2 + 4 + 2 0 0 I 14 3 1 1 0 2-- - 7 ~ -q__ 0 ] 14 5 6 _ , 3 ---+---2---+ __ o -1---o 11 21 t _ 23_ -\n~ --+ _ ~ I 22 Q Q T 99 21.2% 23.2% 2~.2% j 13.1o/\"._ ~ 22.21/~_0.0% 0.0% 35.4% 3 3 6 2 10 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 5 ,-6-+- - 6- -1 -o-- - o - ----~-_L 5 2 3 4 5 I 3 5 0 0 L -=-5-__ t_ 4 - 9 -t- - 0-_J_O 5 5 -2 ~ 8 - 24 10 24 23 28 Page JI o/47 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT GRADE DISTRIBUTION REPORT 012 MCCLELLAN HIGH SCHOOL BY TEACHER WITH 35% OR MORE D's AND F's, 2001-2002 QUARTER ONE Thursday, November 01, 1001 Teacher CARTER MARION CHAMBERS A I_QQ N IN____ J [puCKERY KRYSTAL Sec Course Title 204 I K20041 1GEOMETRY [TEACHER TOTA_!:S PERCENT - , TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's A 19 14.7% B 23 - 17.8% I r102 Q11001EXP IND TECH- -j- 2-1 -- 111 M10101 ACTIVE PHYS 113 M10101 ACTIVE PHYS 201 M10101 ACTIVE PHYS 212 M10101 ACTIVE PHYS 213 1 M10101_:ACTIVE PHYS _ TEACHER TOTALS PERCENT TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's 101 E40021 1ENGLISH IV 4 0 0 3 3 _ -- 0 --!-- 1 2 2 -- - - 5 14 4.6% 13.0% 0 3 f 103 3 8 t E40021 iENGLISH IV ---- -+ 04 E40021 ENGLISH IV _! 203 E40021 +ENGLISH~ ' 204 E40021 ENGLISH IV -- 1TEACHER TOTALS PERCENT -I TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's 113 K10001 1 ALGEBRAI 121 K10001 ALGEBRA I ' 1241 K10001 ~ALGEBRA I 211 K10001 ALGEBRA I 213 K10001 ,ALGEBRA I 214 K10001 ALGEBRA I TEACHER TOTALS - ., PERCENT TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's - 2 3 11 19 19.6% 0 2 0 2 6 5.2% 0 __j_ I I ' - 3 3 4 21 21.6% 6 4 3 4 3 6 26 - 22.6% ~ o J ~ C 10 31 24.0% i 8 4 4 1 7 - 8 32 L 29.6% 6 -- -j - 3- - 3 - - _.!_ __ l 18 - --, 18.6% 3 9 4 0 4 3 23 - 20.0% 0 - [EACKLES,V - - 03 I P21021 f1.UTO TECH I ----'------ LRSD Iufor111atio11 Service Dept. D F I NC 4 4 0 0 21 - 35 _1__ 0 0 16.3% 27.1% 0.0% I Q,Qo/o _j_ - I _____l_ _ 43.4% - 4 0 0 11 2 0 0 8 6 0 0 6 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 9 4 0 0 -1- 41_+ 38.0% ---- 52.8% 3 4 _ 1_-+- 5 1 14--t- 16 0 0 - - 14.8% 0.0% 0.0% - __ 5 --- 0 ....L _ 0 10 0 0 3 0 ~-- 0 4 0 0 --t:j_ _ o_ _ _ -:--o 25 0 0 14.~- 25.8% 0.0% - 40.2% 5 5 0 0 0 0 ~ -- T -\n--1= ~ 2 I 4 2 25 I --- 21.7% 52.2% 7 I 0 0 3 i 0 I 0 9 I 0 ' 0 35 0 ' 0 -- 30.4% 0.0% 0.0% Total 20 129 .L..-- 19 18 21 11 14 25- J_ 108 l-j_ i ! I - 17 28 14 18 - 20 97 19 23 22 15 14 22 115 - 1 Page31 of47 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT GRADE DISTRIBUTION REPORT 012 MCCLELLAN HIGH SCHOOL BY TEACHER WITH 35% OR MORE D's AND F's, 2001-2002 QUARTER ONE Thursday, November OJ, 100/ Teacher Sec Course Title r EACHER TOTALS L PERCENT _ TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's - ' FORTSON, G 103 P21181 WELDING 1 TEACHER TOTALS 1 PERCENT TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's [F-RANKS E-- - I 101 ' 030041 US HISTORY - GRAY JANICE 103 050061 US HISTRYAP 104 I 030041 1US HISTORY 203 I 030041 US HISTORY 204 I 030041 IUS HISTORY 211 I 050061 1US HISTRY AP !TEACHER TOTALS PERCENT - TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's ~ - 122 K20001 ALGEBRA II 1 123 K20001 ALGEBRA II ( 134 K20081 _._CONCEPT GEOM f-222 K20001 ALGEBRA II j 224 K20001 ALGEBRA 11 '- 231 K20001 ALGEBRA II TEACHER TOTALS PERCENT TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's I GREEN RACHEL 101 ~ M20021 _BIOLOGY! - + -----+ --+ 102 M20021 BIOLOGY I 104 M 20021 'BIOLOGY I 204 M20021 BIOLOGY I 212 M20021 BIOLOGY I 221 M20021 BIOLOGY I LRSD foformatio11 Service Dept. JU3WdOf3A3Q fBUOJi113JO.l\u0026lt;f A 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 4 0 3 2 0 0 9 7.2% 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0% 1 0 0 0 0 0 I I - B C D F 0 0 1 0 - 1 0.0% 0.0% 100.oo/. T 0.0% - _J _j ___ --~-- 0 0 0 0 - - ------t- 100.0% 1 1 0.0% -'- 0.0% .J...._100.0% 100.0% 7 2 - - - t-- - - 5 5 7 5 3 I 2 I 3 4 ! 2 I 5 I 8 I 6 2 I 4 I 10 I 3 31 29 23 0 0 0.0% 5 6 5 8 3 6 33 I NC Total 0 0 1 0.0% r 0.0% - - 7 0 0 1 0 ___, 0 1 r 0.0% 0.0% ,- T 0 0 I 23 t 0 0 23 I 0 I 0 I 16 I 0 0 I 21 I 0 I 0 I 19 I 0 I 0 I 23 Q Q I 125 -t---------1--- 24.8% 23.2% 18.4% 26.4% 0.0% 0.0% 44.8% 0 4 7 2 T 0 0 13 1 4 13 3 0 0 21 1 ' 2 8 ..!__-----+ - 0 0 18 -- - - -i-- 0 9 13 4 0 0 26 - 1 6 _ 10~ ~ _ 0 0 22 1 4 I 14 3 0 0 22 --- 4 29 65 24 0 0 122 - -'-- - 3.3% 23.8% 53.3% 19.7% 0.0% 0.0% - - 73.0% r=o_ ~- - r 1 2 - --5- 8 _.J __0 -17 - 0 2 4 7 0 0 13 -r 2 3 6 0 0 12 -- -- - ~- 5 5 5 0 0 16 0 2 8 11 0 0 21 0 l 3 2 7 L_O _ _l_ 0 .L - 12 -- Page33 o/47 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT GRADE DISTRIBUTION REPORT 012 MCCLELLAN HIGH SCHOOL BY TEACHER WITH 35% OR MORE D's AND F's, 2001-2002 QUARTER ONE Thursday, November OJ, 2001 Teacher HEARN T !@GESS lHOLEMAN E Sec Course Title TEACHER TOTALS PERCENT TOT AL PERCENT OF D's AND F's 101 E30021 ENGLISH Ill 104 E30041 ENG 3 PRE-AP 113 E30021 ENGLISH Ill 203 E50041 ENG Ill AP 211 E30041 ENG 3 PRE-AP 214 E30021 ENGLISH Ill j_iiACHER TOTALS~ - PERCENT TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's 101 031001 KEYBOARDING: 102m 31005 WORD PROC:A J.04 C30161 -1BUSINESS LAW ~ 03 031005 WORD PROC:A 12 031001 'KEYBOARDING: 14 L C20021 _,_WRD PROC AJB TEACHER TOTALS t- PERCENT TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's -i-- 101 -, 031201 ICT REL I 103 Q31241 ICT COOP! PM 103 Q41241 JCT CP II PM 104 Q31221 ICT COOP I 104 Q41221 ICT COOP II 122 201 201 202 C10043 KEYBD/KEYAPP ICT REL I JCT B_EL II 172103 ,WRKPL READY: LRSD /11for111atio11 Service Dept. A 1 1.1% 0 0 2 0 1 B 4 4.4% 6 6 10 4 3 - 30 C 15 - 16.5% 4 4 4 6 5 D 27 29.7% 78.0% 3 6 4 7 7 F 44 - 48.4% 5 0 7 2 I 0 1- 0.0% 0 0 0 0 _4 _ L 2 _ 6 _,_ _ o_-+- 21 __ L __29_ --+-__21_ --+-__1_ NC 0 0.0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 91 18 17 18 26 17 16 4 112 3.6% 26.8% 0 L 24.1 % J_ 25.9% 18.8% 0.9% 0.0% --~--~-------\nl - 4 3 2 1 4 3 17 21.5% 4 2 0 2 0 4 0 3 3 0 1 3 9 11.4% 4 4 7 0 5 3 2 + + -, -1- J. J.1odaH a:mupuany 3 3 1 4 3 3 17 21.5% 3 0 0 4 0 2 0 --l 44.6% 2 2 0 0 3 3 4 0 0 I o --+--- o 1 I - --L _ 5 ---~ - 0 1 2 0 0 0 12 0 - - - 0 0 15.2% 45.6% 10 24 30.4% 0.0% 0.0% 4- ~ 2 2 3 0 6 2 1 0 _j_ 0 0 0 0 0 2 4 0 4 2 I 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 1 I O L __ 4_~1 _ 2 _ t_ 0- ::-=\n0 0 l 14 14 7 12 11 21 79 17 11 2 21 13 15 3 11 P\"ge34of47 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT GRADE DISTRIBUTION REPORT 012 MCCLELLAN HIGH SCHOOL BY TEACHER WITH 35% OR MORE D's AND F's, 2001-2002 QUARTER ONE Thursday, November OJ, 2001 Teacher Sec Course Title A B C D F I NC Total TEACHER TOTALS PERCENT f---- 16 17.0% _L 27 11 L -- 28.7% 11.7% 23 17 t -24.5\n/o - - -- _ 18.1% ____.....___ ---~- 42.6% 0 0.0% - 0 0.0% 94 /JoNES D J TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's __ ,,_ 10_2-rl_K_1_0_00_1~ !A_L_G_E_BRA l _______2 _~ [ _ -_4- _- ~~_ _2_ - -~~---0 _-=-_- __2 _ ___0_ ___0_ ___1_ 0_ 103 K10001 ALGEBRA I 5 ' 2 5 4 3 0 0 19 104 K10001 ALGEBRA I 7 4 9 3 0 0 24 201 K10001 ALGEBRA I 3 4 3 1 6 0 0 17 202 1 K10001 ALGEBRA I 4 4 7 6 4 0 0 25 I ----- - - - -t -- +---' I ' I -- - - - TEACHER TOTALS j_17 23 21 I 29 18 0 I 0 108 - - -- - - - - -1 -- 203 K10001 ALGEBRA I 2 2 0 9 0 0 0 13 PERCENT 15.7% 21.3% 19.4% 26.9% 16.7% 0.0% 0.0% -- - - ---i- - '--- TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's 43.5% ~ ELLY CINDY 102 E20021 ENGLISH II 3 I 4 0 1 3 0 0 11 7 - 103 E20021 ENGLISH II 1 2 2 I 10 9 0 0 -l 24 ' --- +- - ----+---- -- - -- -1 104 E20021 ENGLISH II 1 1 6 2 6 0 0 J__ 16 E20021 j ENGLISH II -- --~t-= 0-, - 7 111 3 8 3 9 0 0 _I_ 23 211 E20021 ENGLISH II I 0 2 1 1 I 5 0 0 9 ~ 13 _ __20021 j ENGLISH} - - -, --- - -\n-- - 1 2 6 0 9 I - -- I- 0 0 18 -  - -+ - +-- - TEACHER TOTALS 6 14 23 17 41 0 0 101 - - -'- - I - - - \"--- - --+- - _J_ ~- PERCENT - 5.9% 13.9% 22.8% 16.8% 40.6% 0.0% 0.0% -- __ L___ -- TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's 57.4% IMoRE ERICA _ ~ - 10~ ._\n091007 f OODS/~UTR:_ - 1-- - - r --- ~- ---- - 2 3 3 2 r -- + - 9- t , 103 ~ 0081 fD PRD MGT I 1 4 2 I 6 I - - - 4 3 -J --- t- 104 I 110001 FAM\u0026amp;CONS SCI 1 8 2 I 5 - -~- - 0 ----t-_Q 11 0 0 -T 22 --1- 0 0 19 113 I 140081 1FD PRD MGTII 0 0 1 0 ! 2 0 0 3 201 I 110001 FAM\u0026amp;CONS SCI 0 6 11 i 3 I 0 0 21 202 I 091007 FOODS/NUTR: 2 I 4 8 0 I 2 3 0 19 204 I 110001 FAM\u0026amp;CONS SCI 3 5 5 6 2 0 0 21 TEACHER TOTALS 8 29 l 33 21 22 I - - -r PERCENT 6.9% 25.0% 28.4% 18.1% I 19.0% 3 L_ 0 116 2.6% 0.0% ----- \u0026gt;--- - -- _!. TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's 37.1% -I /NICHOLS SANDRA I jENG I WKSHO':._- - - 1- . - l - -4--T - - 101 E10141 1 l ____ 2 7 =r=- 0 ~ -- 0 I 15 , LRSD lllformatio11 Service Dept. Page 35 of47 J.rndaH a\n,uupuany LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT GRADE DISTRIBUTION REPORT 012 MCCLELLAN HIGH SCHOOL BY TEACHER WITH 35% OR MORE D's AND F's, 2001-2002 QUARTER ONE Thursday, November OJ, 100/ Teacher NICHOLS SANDRA ONEIL S Sec Course Title 102 E10161 ENG I WK PAP 133 E10141 ENG I WKSHOP ~ --- TEACHER TOTALS - PERCENT t- TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's 101 E11001 COMMUNICA I 103 E11001 COMMUNICA I 132 E11001 COMMUNICA I 201 E11001 COMMUNICA I  - f-\n223 _, E11001 ,COMMUNICA I f_~24 E11001 COMMUNICA I TEACHER TOTALS PERCENT TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's PERKINS MICHAEL _w~ ' M10101 ACTIVE PHYS ~ M10101 ACTIVE PHYS 133 1 M10101 ) CTIVE PH_:tS M10101 AC-TIVE PHYS- 221 M10101 ACTIVE PHYS 233 M10041 PHYS I PREAP TEACHER TOTALS - PERCENT - TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's -\n- A 2 4 - B 6 5 15 7.8% -1 _29~% 3 2 2 3 2 13 9.6% 2 0 1 0 4 6 3 0 2 6 21 15.4% ,- 1 - r ~ --- 0 o -r 0 I- 0 0 5 4 6 4.2% -r 6.3% 1 ___L C 5 4 11 - D F 0 3 : ---+---1 6 6--+- - I NC 0 0 0 0 7 - 0 Total 16 20 51 21.6% J 9.8% 31.4% 0 0.0% 0.0% 2 4 2 4 14 10.3% 1 2 4 5 6 19 20.0% 41.2% 4 5 +-4- ~ - 3_J 2 10 0 11 0 8 0 -~:-t -~ 13 - I o - -1-- 19 I 69 Q 1 14.0o/\n-:_ 50.7/o _ _:- 0.0% 64.7% 0 21 0 29 0 16 j___O-+- 24 0 22 T - 0 24 0 136 0.0% 18 12 24 16 13 0 0 0 0 12 _j_ 31 35 0 _j_ 0 95 1_32.6% 36.8% 0.0% --'----0.0% 69.5% RAFTER,P ~+--_1_02~J_M_30_0_6_1 ~1A_N_A_T_\u0026amp;_ PH_Y_s_ _____4_ _____, _ _5~ ~-~~- _4= ==-=-~_10_ _-_ T __o_ -'-__0_ ___2_ 4_ I 111 M30061 ANAT \u0026amp; PHYS 2 2 4 3 15 0 0 26 113 M20021 BIOLOGY I 10 5 5 1 5 0 0 26 203 M20021 BIOLOGY I 211 M20021 BIOLOGY I 222 M20021 BIOLOGY I 'TEACHER TOTALS ___ - - - f-- PERCENT L_ TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's LRSD /11formatio11 Service Dept. unoH .iaaJunro A 3 1 3 5 0 0 13 1 2 1 9 2 0 0 15 1 4 2 3 8 0 0 18 - 1- 21 15 18 23 45 0 0 122 -1 - ___ j_ 17.2% 12.3% .L 14.8% 18.901_co~_36_.9_0/co~_0.0_%_ _t __0 .0% 55.7% Page 36 of47 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT GRADE DISTRIBUTION REPORT 012 MCCLELLAN HIGH SCHOOL BY TEACHER WITH 35% OR MORE D's AND F's, 2001-2002 QUARTER ONE Th11rsday, November 01, 2001 Teacher !SHOFNER KAREN SMITH D Sec Course Title 102 E10141 ENG I WKSHOP ,_ _!9~ E10141 ENG I WKSHOP 111 J E10141 ENGIWKSHOP (TEACHER TOTALS -- t - PERCENT TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's 112 r E11061 DEBATE I 113 E11061 DEBATE I 114 E11061 DEBATE I 202 E11061 'DEBATE I  221 -l E11061 ,-DEBATE I ~ 234 ~ E11001 rCOMMUNICA I TEACHER TOTALS PERCENT f-- TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's ~MITHSON, L --+-----+-_E10141 IENG_!_WKSHOP E10141 ENG I WKSHOP STANDLEY J [Tu_MPLETON HEATH - -t--- E10141 ENG- I WKSHOP F ACHER TOTALS --- -- PERCENT TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's 101 l 010041 _ _G_!.Yl~S _ 102 + 010041 (CIVlg_S 103 010041 CIVICS 202 010041 CIVICS 203 010041 CIVICS 211 010041 CIVICS TEACHER TOTALS PERCENT TOTAL PERCENT OF D's AND F's ---+--- 102 M30021 CHEMISTRY I 103 - M30021 CHEMISTRY I LRSD /11formatio11 Service Dept. JU3WdOpAaQ JEUOJ!ili3JO.lc:J A 2 0 0 2 3.5% 0 2 B 2 6 9 15.8% C D F I NC 6 5 0 0 10 7 4 0 0 ~----+---- 6 6 1 0 0 22 --r--18 ___ 6 0 0 '--- - ._ --4----- - ----+ - 38.6% 31.6% 10.5% 0.0% 0.0% 42.1% - - -- 2 2 3 4 0 0 4 3 6 0 0 -j- 0 3 I 2 0 0 2 2 0 3 t 0 0 -1 2 2 o 3 r- o o 2 4 7 - 2 -7 10 - t- - 0 - 0 8 14 15 10 28 0 0 j _: 10.7% -,- 18.7% -~ 20.-0/4-o r- 13-.3/-co~_3_7._3_1/o~_O.O/co~~-0._0/~- 50.7% Total 15 23 19 57 11 16 7 8 8 25 75 2 !_ _ 1 -----l _ 6_---+_ _6 _ ___o_ 1 ~ _ 4_ _ J 5_-----! _ 2 _ 14 0 __j___ o __ ... _ 16 0 26 ...J_ - 2 5 7 I 4 0 0 0 18 4 6.7% 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0% 0 11 18.3% 4 3 2 12 10.8% 3 3 t - 13 --l- 12 20 0 4- ~--t-1-- .j 0 0.0% 60 21.7% 20.-0% _ 33.3% 0.0% _..__ 53.3% - 4 13 I 0 - _,__ --- t-- -----l--- L __ O 0 0 20 8 24 2 4 6 3 5 22 19.8% J 8-r 4 2 3 0 7 12 1 - 0 5 10 0 0 25 3 6 0 0 15 4 8 0 0 19 25 52 0 0 111 - ------+-- -+-- 22.5% 46.8% 0.0% 0.0% 69.4% ____J_ - ----, ----,---- 5 3 _4_ _j_ __6 -0 -~- 0 17 Page 37 o/47 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT GRADE DISTRIBUTION REPO\nThis project was supported in part by a Digitizing Hidden Special Collections and Archives project grant from The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation and Council on Library and Information Resources.\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\u003cdcterms_creator\u003eLittle Rock School District\u003c/dcterms_creator\u003e\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n\n "},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1729","title":"Court filings concerning motion to add and/or substitute class representatives, motion in Limine to prohibit testimony by Office of Desegregation Management, and motion to compel PCSSD compliance with Plan 2000, Section F (discipline)","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":["2001-11"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System"],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--21st Century","Joshua Intervenors","Little Rock School District","Office of Desegregation Monitoring (Little Rock, Ark.)","Special districts--Arkansas--Pulaski County","Pulaski Association of Classroom Teachers (PACT)","Pulaski Association of Support Staff (PASS)","Arkansas. Department of Education","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","Educational law and legislation","Educational planning","Knight Intervenors","School management and organization","School integration","School improvement programs","School discipline","Court records"],"dcterms_title":["Court filings concerning motion to add and/or substitute class representatives, motion in Limine to prohibit testimony by Office of Desegregation Management, and motion to compel PCSSD compliance with Plan 2000, Section F (discipline)"],"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/1729"],"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":["78 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"District Court, motion to add and/or substitute class representatives; District Court, notice of deposition; District Court, the Joshua intervenors' response Little Rock School District's (LRSD's) motion to compel; District Court, motion in Limine to prohibit testimony by Office of Desegregation Management; District Court, memorandum brief in support of motion in Limine to prohibit testimony by Office of Desegregation Management; District Court, Pulaski County Special School District (PCSSD) motion for enlargement of time; District Court, three orders; District Court, Joshua intervenors' response to the Little Rock School District's (LRSD's) motion in Limine to prohibit testimony by the Office of Desegregation Management and the Joshua intervenors' motion to quash the deposition subpoenas; District Court, two orders; District Court, motion to disqualify; District Court, order; District Court, response to Pulaski Association of Classroom Teachers (PACT) motion to compel compliance; District Court, memorandum of the Pulaski County Special School District (PCSSD) in opposition to Pulaski Association of Classroom Teachers (PACT) and Pulaski Association of Support Staff (PASS) motion to compel Pulaski County Special School District (PCSSD) compliance with Plan 2000, Section F (discipline); District Court, reply of Knight intervenors to Pulaski County Special School District's (PCSSD's) response to Pulaski Association of Classroom Teachers' (PACT's) motion to compel; District Court, brief in support of reply to response to Pulaski Association of Classroom Teachers' (PACT's) motion to compel compliance; 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.  FILED U.S. DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT ARKANSAS IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS NOV O 9 2001 WESTERN DMSION ~,;:MES W. McCORMACK, CLERK LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT CASE NO. 4:82CV00866S~ED PULASKI COUNT SPECIAL SCHOOL RECEI  VS. DISTRICT, ET AL. MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL. KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL. NO\\! 13 2001 Qtf.\\tl~ IBl:..l..-miiifi-ll1l11~11. MOTION TO ADD AND/OR SUBSTITUTE CLASS REPRESENTATIVES PL.AIN'HFlERK DEFENDANTS INTER VEN ORS INTER VEN ORS Come now the Joshua Intervenors, by and through undersigned, for their Motion to Add and/or Substitute Class Representatives, who respectfully move the Court for leave to add additional class representatives. For cause, the Joshua Intervenors respectfully show the Court: 1. That the Little Rock School District, through its counsel, Christopher John Heller and John Clay Fendley, have .ra ised the issue the identity of the Joshua class representatives; 2. Joshua herein addresses the inference of inadequacy of representation by the Plaintiff by submitting additional parents of school age children of A.fric,an American descent as class representatives; 3. Donna Stone and Dennis Stone are respectfully submitted as additional class representatives on behalf of their minor children: Denise, age 14; Dennis Jr., age 11 and Danielle, age 5; 4. Danielle Stone is enrolled in the kindergarten program at Franklin Elementary; Dennis Jr. is in the 5th grade at Franklin and Denise is in the 9th grade at Hall High School; 5. The Intervenor class members are adequate representatives of the class who understand the lawsuit herein and the obligations of class representation. They verify that they will represent the interests of the class as in the additional or substitute class representatives; 6. There is no prejudice to the Plaintiff by the addition or substitution of the proposed class representatives; and 7. The Joshua Intervenors have discussed this matter with Plaintiffs counsel and said counsel does not object to this addition. WHEREFORE, premises considered, the Joshua Intervenors respectfully request that the Court add Donna Stone and Dennis Stone as additional and/or substitute class representatives on behalf of the Joshua class. Respectfully submitted, John W. Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR  72206 501-374-3758 501-374-4187 (fax) .  j J( 1 By  ~'lJv -'QVt(i/1-li_ J?hn W. Walker . VERIFICATION We, Donna Stone and Dennis Stone, are familiar with the Joshua litigation in this case and wish for the litigation to continue because, in our opinions, the Joshua interests have yet to be satisfied. The allegations above in the Motion to Add and/or Substitute Class Representatives are correct in our opinion. We have had the obligations of class representation explained to us by class counsel, John W. Walker, Esquire; understand those obligations; and we are prepared to further and fully represent the interests of not only our three children, but the interests of other children who are similarly situated and within the d finition oft class herein. DENNIS STONE, SR. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby state that a copy of the foregoing motion has been sent to all counsel of record on this~day of ~001. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DMSION RECEIVED NOV 13 2001 OfftCEOF IIIIIIEUl10N DIORING LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF V. NO. 4:82CV00866 SWW PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL MRS.LORENEJOSlflJA,ETAL KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL DEFENDANTS INTERVENORS INTERVENORS NOTICE OF DEPOSITION TO: Mr. Gene Jones Office of Desegregation Monitoring 1 Union National Plaza 124 West Capitol, Suite 1895 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Ms. Ann Marshall Office of Desegregation Monitoring 1 Union National Plaza 124 West Capitol, Suite 1895 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Ms. Margie Powell Office of Desegregation Monitoring 1 Union National Plaza 124 West Capitol, Suite 1895 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that at beginning at 9:00 a.m. on Wednesday, November 14, 2001, at the law offices of Friday, Eldredge \u0026 Clark, LLP, 400 West Capitol Avenue, Suite 2000, Little Rock, Arkansas, that the undersigned will take the depositions upon oral examination of Gene Jones, Ann Marshall and Margie Powell, pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure before a notary public or other officer duly authorized to administer oaths. You are notified to appear at such time and place and take part in the examination as you may be advised. F,\\IIOME\\BBrown\\Fendley\\LRSD\\dcsegregation\\DepoNotii:e2.wpd Respectfully submitted, John C. Fendley, Jr. FRIDAY, ELDREDGE \u0026 CLARK 400 West Capitol A venue, Suite 2000 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 TEL: (501) 376-2011 FAX: (501) 376-2147 Attorneys for Plaintiff By, ifal-- 4w.a4t 71 ohnC. Fendley, Jr. -2- CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing pleading has been served by facsimile and U.S. mail on this 9th day of November 2001 upon: Mr. John W. Walker John W. Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Mr. Sam Jones Wright, Lindsey \u0026 Jennings 2200 Worthen Bank Bldg. 200 West Capitol Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Mr. Steve Jones Jack, Lyon \u0026 Jones, P.A. 425 W. Capitol, Suite 3400 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-3472 Mr. Richard Roachell Roachell Law Firm 11800 Pleasant Ridge Road, Suite 146 P.O.Box 17388 Little Rock, Arkansas 72222-7388 F:IHOMEIBBrown\\Fendley\\LRSD\\deaegrcgation\\DepoNotice2.wpd -3- Ms. Ann Marshall Desegregation Monitor 1 Union National Plaza 124 W. Capitol, Suite 1895 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Ms. Sammye Taylor Office of the Atttorney General 323 Center Street 200 Tower Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Dr. Ken James Superintendent Little Rock School District 810 W Markham Little Rock, AR 72202 AO 88 (Rev. 11191) Subpoena in a Civil Case UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DMSION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF V. NO. 4:82CV00866 SWW PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL DEFENDANTS MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL INTERVENORS KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL INTERVENORS SUBPOENA DUCES TECUM TO: MS. MARGIE POWELL Office of Desegregation Monitoring 1 Union National Plaza 124 West Capitol Suite 1895 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 YOU ARE COMMANDED to appear in the United States District Court at the place, date, and time specified below to testify in the above case. PLACE OF TESTIMONY COURTROOM DATE AND TIME X YOU ARE COMMANDED to appear at the place, date and time specified below to testify at the talcing of a deposition in the above case. PLACE OF DEPOSmON Friday, Eldredge \u0026 Clark, LLP 400 West Capitol A venue, Suite 2000 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 DATE AND TIME Wednesday,Novemberl4,2001 l :00 p.m. (until completed) [X] YOU ARE COMMANDnD to produce and permit inspection and copying of the following documents or objects at the place, date, and time specified below (list documents or objects): See the attached Exhibit \"A\". PLACE Friday, Eldredge \u0026 Clark, .LLP 400 West Capitol A venue, Suite 2000 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 DATE AND TIME Wednesday,November14,2001 1:00 p.m. (until completed) D YOU ARE COMMANDED to permit inspection of the following premises at the date and time specified below. A Any organization not a party to this suit that is subpoenaed for the talcing of a deposition shall designate one or more officers, directors, or wmanaging agents, or other persons who consent to testify on its behalf, and may set forth, for each person designated, the matters on which the erson will testi . Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 30 6 . ISSUING OFFICER SIGNATURE AND TITLE (INDICATE IF ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFF OR DEFENDANl) DATE ISSUING OFFICER'S NAME, ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER John C. Fendley, Jr. Friday, Eldredge \u0026 Clark, LLP .f.00 West Capitol Avenue, Suite 200 ...,ittle Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501) 376-2011 (See Rule 45, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Paru C \u0026 D on Revme) AO 88 (Rev. 11/9 1) Subpoena in a Civil Case PROOF OF SERVICE DATE SERVED SERVED ON (PRINT NAME) SERVED BY (PRINT NAME) DECLARATION OF SERVER PLACE MANNER OF SERVICE TITLE I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America that the foregoing information contained in the Proof of Service is true and correct. AExecuted on _________ _ - DATE SIGNATURE OF SERVER ADDRESS OF SERVER Rule 45, Federal Rula of Civil Procedure, P1rta C \u0026 D: (c) PROTECTION OF PERSONS SUBJECT TO SUBPOENAS. - (1) A party or 10 attorney rt1pooslble (or the luu1oce and service of a subpoena sb1ll t1~ rt1pooslble steps to avoid Imposing undue burden or t1peme on a person ubJect to that subpoena. The court on btb1lf of which the subpoena was luued shall enforce this duty 10d Impose upon the party or attorney In breach of 1h11 duty an appropriate sanction, which may Include, but Is not limited to, lost earnings and a reasonable attorney's fee. (l)(A) A person commanded to produce and permit lmpectloo and copylo1 of de1l1nated boolul, papen, documents or taneJble tblop, or Inspection or premlst1 need not appear lo person 11 the place of production or Inspection uolts1 commanded to appear for depolilloo, beartn1 or trial. (8) Subject to para1npb (d)(l) of this rule, a person commanded to produce and permlt Inspection and copyto1 may, within 14 days alter service of the subpoena or before the time specified for compliance II such time ls lt11 than 14 days alter service, serve upon the party or attorney designated In the subpoena written objection to Inspection or copytn1 of any or au of the deslpated materials or of tbe premilea. II objection Is made, the party servln1 the subpoena shall not be entitled to lmpect and copy the materials or Inspect the premlsea ucept punuant to ID order of the court by which the subpoena was luued. II objection bas betu made, tbe party servln1 the subpoena may, upon notice to the penoo commanded to produce, move at any time for an order to compel the production. Such an order to compel production shall protect any penon who ii not a party or an officer of a party from sl1n10caot e,cpeose resullln1 from the Inspection 10d copyln1 commanded. (3)(A) On timely motion, tbe court by which a subpoena was luued shall quash or modify the subpoena If It (I) falls to allow reasonable time (or compliance; (U) requires a person who Is not a party or an officer of a party to travel to I place more than 100 mllt1 from the place where that person resides, Is employed or reaul1rly transacts buslnt11 lo person, ucept that, subject to the provisions of clause (c)(3)(8)(111) of this rule, such a penon may In order to attend trial be commanded to travel from any such place within tbe state In which the trial Is held, or (IU) requlrt1 disclosure of prlvile\u0026ed or other protected matter and no exception or waiver applies, or (iv) subjects a person to undue burden. (8) II a subpoena (l) requires dilclosure of a trade secret or other confideodal resnrcb, development, or commercial Information, or (U) requires disclosure of an unretaioed expert's opinion or information not describing specific events or occurrences in dispute and resulting from tbe expert's study made not at the request of any party, or (IU) requlrt1 a person who Is not I party or an officer of a party to incur substaotl1l upeose to travel more tban 100 mllt1 to attend trial, the court may, to protect a person subject to or affected by the 1ubpoen1, quaab or modify the subpoena or, II the party in whose behalf the subpoena Is luued shows a substantial need for the testimony or material that cannot be otherwise met without undue bard1blp and a11ure1 that the penoo to whom the subpoena iJ addressed will be reasonably compeuated, the court may order appanoce or production only upon specified condldons. (d) DUTIES IN RESPONDING TO SUBPOENA. (1) A person respoodio1 to a subpoena to produce documents shall produce them II Ibey are ~I in the u111al coune of bu1lnt11 or shall oreaniu and label them to correspond with the cateaortes in the demand. (2) Whoo information subject to a subpoena Is withheld on a claim that Is prlvileeed or subject to protection as trial preparation materials, the claim shall be made A expre11iy and shall be supported by a description of the nature of the documents, communications, or tbinp not produced that Is sufficient to enable the demandin1 party to contest the .cblm.  Exhibit \"A\" Please produce the following: All documents pertaining to communications between the Office of Desegregation Monitoring and Judge Susan Webber Wright or her law clerks pertaining to LRSD's Revised Desegregation and Education Plan and/or LRSD's compliance therewith from January 21, 1998, to the present, not previously made available to the parties in this case. Incorporating the definitions set forth below, the documents to be produced include, but are not limited to, notes of any meetings between anyone from ODM and Judge Susan Webber Wright, briefing documents prepared by anyone from ODM for Judge Susan Webber Wright, calendar entries which reflect the dates and times of meetings between employees of ODM and Judge Susan Webber Wright; any email communications between the ODM and Judge Susan Webber Wright and any other documents in any form which reflect the substance of communications between the ODM and Judge Susan Webber Wright which have not been previously made available to the parties in this case. Definitions \"Document\" shall mean any original written, typewritten, handwritten, printed or electronically recorded material, as well as all tapes, disks, non-duplicate copies and transcripts thereof, now or at any time in your possession, custody or control; and, without limiting the generality of the foregoing definition, but for the purposes of illustration only, \"document\" includes notes, correspondence, memoranda, business records (stored electronically or otherwise), e-mails, diaries, calendars, address and telephone records, photographs, tape recordings and videotapes. \"Pertaining to\" shall mean constituting, embodying, arising out of, incident to, referring to, mentioned, bearing upon, reflecting, evidencing, affecting, concerning, providing evidence for, or relating to the transaction, individual, entity, act, object, conference, contention, communication, allegation or activity identified. \"Communication\" shall mean every manner or means of disclosure, transfer or exchange, and every disclosure, transfer or exchange of information whether orally or by document or whether face to face, by telephone, U.S. mail, e-mail, personal delivery, or otherwise. \"Office of Desegregation Monitoring\" or \"ODM\" shall include all persons employed by or otherwise working on behalf of the Office of Desegregation Monitoring, United States District Court, Eastern District of Arkansas. FILED ' U.S. DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT ARKANSAS IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NOV O 9 2001 EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DMSION ~~:MES W. McCORMACK, CLERK LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT DEP CLEHK PLAINTIFF ; t,~   ' fn - --;-;;-  'I .. ~'!'I\\ U'I ..,.,_.,., vs CASE NO. 4:82CV-fl!CEIVED PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT, ET AL. NOV 13 2001 OFFICE OF DEFENDANT MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL. KATHERINE WRIGHT KNIGHT DESEG~TION MONITORINBINTER VEN ORS THE JOSHUA INTERVENORS' RESPONSE LRSD'S MOTION TO COMPEL INTER VENO RS On or about October 26, 2001 , District counsel, John Clay Fendley and John Christopher Heller, moved to compel the Joshua Intervenors to answer and otherwise respond to interrogatories and requests for production of documents that it had served on Joshua on or about August 11 , 2001. The Joshua Intervenors responded to the LRSD's discovery requests on September 24, 2001. The responses, Joshua believes, were full and complete. The first set ofLRSD interrogatories was followed by a second set at which point Joshua requested and the Court granted a hearing upon Joshua's motion for relief On October 2, 2001 , the Court addressed both sets of interrogatories and made considl!rable reference to both sets either upon reference thereto by counsel for the respective parties or upon her own inquiry. At the_time of the proceeding, the Court did not have before her the extensiye responses made by Joshua to the first set ofLRSD interrogatorles. The ODM, 1 however, did have those responses. At the conclusion of the hearing, the Court quashed the LRSD interrogatories which had not been answered. Joshua submits that, at least by implication, the Court quashed any challenge to the first set of interrogatories as well because Little Ro~k argued during the hearing that many ofJoshua responses to the first set of interrogatories were unresponsive. Because the Court did not have all of the Joshua responses before her, and because the LRSD motion to compel did not attach the Joshua exhibits which accompanied Joshua' s first answers to discovery, the exhibits (See Attachment 1) are now being submitted to the court so that it can make its own determination of whether Joshua's responses were sufficient under the circumstances of the issue then before the Court, i.e. whether the March 15, 2001 Compliance Report submitted by LRSD justified and warranted a declaration of unitary status for the LRSD. Joshua notes that LRSD sought information that it already had which had been provided by Joshua such as the \"addresses\" for the monitors identified. See its Exhibit 3 to this motion. Counsel verbally informed Messrs. Fendley and Heller that counsel's business address was the address of the monitors. In the motion to compel, Messrs. Fendley and Heller note that the responses were unverified and had been noted in the September 27th letter to counsel. A review of the September 27th letter by counsel did not disclose a request for verification. Counsel notes though that pleadings signed by counsel have the same force as verified pleadings in that counsel is an officer of the court and is obliged to submit only truthful responses to court required mqumes. Finally, Joshua requests the court to review the transcript of the October 2, 2001 proceeding in the event that the Court is persuaded that the objections to Joshua's responses are 2 the Motion to. Compel be denied. Respectfully submitted, John W. Walker, P.A. 1 723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72206 501-374-3758 501-374-4187 BrW-~ CERTIFICATE OF SE~ I do hereby state that a copy of the foregoing response has been delivered to all counsel of record including the ODM on this '_!f:f5__day ofNovember, 2001 (JblM~ --------- ------ FRIDAY ELDREDGE \u0026 CLARK HERSCHEL H. PRIOAY ( 1922-1994) WILLIAM H. SUTTON, P.A. BYRON M. EISEMAN, JR., P.A. JOE J). BELL, P.A.  A. BUTTRY, P.A. lCK S. URSERY, P.A. E. DAVIS, JR., P.A. J S C. CLARK, JR., P.A. THOMAS P. LEGGETT, P.A. JOKN DEWEY WATSON, P.A. PAUL B. BENHAM HI, P.A. LARRY W. BURKS, P.A. A. WYCKLIPP NISBET, JR., P.A. JAMES EDWARD HARRIS, P.A. J. PHILLIP MALCOM, P.A. JAMES M. SIMPSON, P.A. JAMES M. SAXTON, P.A. J. SHEPHERD RUSSELL UI, P.A. DONALD H. BACON, P.A. WILLIAM THOMAS BAXTER, P.A. BARRY E. COPLIN, P.A. RICHARD D, TAYLOR, P.A. JOSEPH 8 . HURST, JR., P.A. ELIZABETH ROBBEN MURRAY. P.A. CHRISTOPHER HELLER, P.A. LAURA HENSLEY SMITH, P.A. ROBERTS. SHAPER, P.A. WILLIAM M. GRIFFIN lU, P.A. MICHAELS. MOOR..E, P.A. DIANE S. MACKEY, P.A. WALTER M. EBEL Ill, P.A. KEVIN A. CRASS, P.A. WILLIAM A. WADDELL, JR., P.A. SCOTT J. LANCASTER, P.A. M. GAYLE CORLEY, P.A. ROBERT B. BEACH, JR., P.A. J. LEE BROWN, P.A. JAMES C. BAKER, JR., P.A. H.ARRY A. LIGHT, P.A. SCOTT H. TUCK.ER, P.A. GUY ALTON WADE, P.A. PRICE C. GARDNER, P.A. TONIA P. JONES, P.A. DAVID 0 . WILSON, P.A. HAND DELIVERED Ms. Ann Marshall Desegregation Monitor One Union National Plaza 124 West Capitol, Suite 1895 Little Rock, AR 72201 Re: ODM Depositions Dear Ann: \u003c, ATTORNEYS AT LAW A LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP www.frldayflrm.com 2000 REGIONS CENTER 400 WEST CAPITOL LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201-3493 TELEPHONE 501-376-2011 FAX 501-376-2147 3425 NORTH FUTRALL DRIVE, SUITE 103 FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS 72703-811 TELEPHONE 501-695-2011 FAX 501-895-21.7 208 NORTH FIFTH STREET BLYTHEVILLE, ARKANSAS 72315 TELEPHONE 870-782-2898 FAX 870-7822Q18 November 9, 2001 JEFFREY H. MOORE, P.A. DAVID M. GRAF, P.A. CARLA GUNNELS SPAINHOUR, P.A. JOHN C. FENDLEY, JR., P.A. JON ANN ELIZABETH CONIGLIO, P.A. R. CHRISTOPHER LAWSON, P.A. GREGORY 0 . TAYLOR, P.A. TONY L. WILCOX, P.A. FRANC. HICK.MAN, P.A. BETTY J, DEMORY, P.A. LYNDA M. JOHNSON, P.A. JAMES W. SMITH, P.A. CLIFFORD W. PLUNKETT, P.A. DANIELL. HERRINGTON, P.A. MARVIN L. CHILDERS K. COLEMAN WESTBROOK, JR. ALLISON J. CORNWELL ELLEN M. OWENS JASON B. HENDREN BRUCE 8 , TIDWELL MICHAEL E. KARNEY KELLY MURPHY MCQUEEN RECEIVED NOV ./3 2001 OfRCEOF ~MOIIIORflli JOSEPH P. MCKAY ALEXANDRA A. IFRAH JAY T. TAYLOR MARTIN A. KASTEN BRYAN W. DUKE JOSEPH G. NICHOLS ROBERT T. SMJTH RYAN A. BOWMAN TIMOTHY C. EZELL T. MICHELLE ATOR KAREN S. HALBERT SARAH M. COTTON PHILIP 8. MONTGOMERY KRISTEN S. RIGGINS ALAN G. BRYAN OP COUNSEL S.S. CLARK WILLIAM L. TERRY WILLIAM L. PATTON, JR. H.T. LARZELERE, P.A. JOHN C. ECHOLS, P.A. A.O. MCALLISTER CHRISTOPHER HELLER LITTLE ROCK TEL 501-370-1501 FAX 5012445344 htllerCfec.n,t Please find enclosed copies of our Motion in Limine and Brief, which were filed today, as well as Deposition Notices and Subpoenas for yourself and members of your staff. As you can see from our Motion in Limine, we believe that the people in your office should not be allowed to testify in this proceeding. The purpose of the depositions is not to learn what a particular witnesses' testimony might be in court, but only to determine whether the court has received extra-judicial infonnation on the merits of the case from the Office of Desegregation Monitoring. We believe we are required to investigate the possibility of extra-judicial communications on the merits of this case before the hearing continues on November 19, 2001. We therefore have little flexibility in the scheduling of the depositions but, if Tuesday or Thursday would be more convenient for you than Wednesday, we would be amenable to rescheduling for one of those days. Finally, please let me know whether you will accept service of the enclosed subpoenas or if it will be necessary for us to secure service in accordance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. I Ms. Ann Marshall November 9, 2001 Page2 CJH/bk Enclosures cc w/enc. via fax: Hon. Susan Webber Wright Mr. John W. Walker Mr. Richard Roachell Mr. Samuel Jones Mr. Mark Hagameier Mr. Steve Jones Dr. Ken James  IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DMSION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT V. CASE NO. 4:82CV00866SWW PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL. MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL. KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL. MOTION IN LIMINE TO PROHIBIT TESTIMONY BY OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING RECEIVED NOV t..3 2001 DEFENDANTS INTERVENORS INTERVENORS Comes the Little Rock School District (\"LRSD\"), by its undersigned attorneys, and for its motion in limine to prohibit testimony by the Office of Desegregation Monitoring (\"ODM\"), states: 1. Counsel for the Joshua Intervenors has given notice that three members of the ODM will be called as witnesses for the Intervenors at the hearing on unitary status. 2. The ODM was created as an arm of the court for the purpose of monitoring the implementation of the settlement agreement. Pursuant to that purpose, the ODM (i) operates under a budget approved by the court and subject to the court's broad discretion, (ii) has access to school district personnel and to information concerning the school districts, (iii) reports to the court and to the parties regarding progress with the requirements of the Districts' desegregation plans, (iv) serves a collaborative function in identifying and facilitating discussion among the parties with regard to desegregation remedies, and ( v) facilitates agreement between the Joshua Intervenors and the LRSD with regard to compliance issues under the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. 3. It is contrary to the purpose and function of the ODM for its members to testify as witnesses on adversarial issues between the parties, particularly the issue of unitary status. Testimony by ODM members regarding the factual predicates for unitary status will be perceived as either hostile or favorable to particular parties. It will be the duty of counsel to cross-examine the ODM witnesses for bias or impeachment. In short, appearing as a witness on the issue of unitary status is contrary to the ODM's long-standing and historic function as an agent of the court and destructive of its collaborative and facilitating role with the parties. 4. If the members of the ODM are permitted to appear as witnesses on the issue of unitary status, then the LRSD has a due process right, supported by Rule 706(a) of the Federal Rules of Evidence (\"FRE\"), to depose them with regard to their expected testimony and to cross-examine them at the hearing. The LRSD will be entitled to explore (i) whether the ODM witnesses have formed conclusions or opinions regarding the LRSD's request for unitary status, (ii) the basis for those conclusions or opinions, and (iii) the witnesses ' credibility. 5. The issue of credibility will place the parties in the untenable and unfair position of asking the court to disbelieve witnesses who (i) represent the remedial arm of the court itself, and (ii) have had more than a decade of experience in working with the court and the parties in the role of monitor and facilitator. The working relationship over that period of time includes numerous ex parte contacts between the ODM and the court. 6. The court stated at the hearing held on June 29, 2001 (i) that counsel for the Joshua Intervenors was free to call the members of the ODM as witnesses \"to the extent ... they have knowledge on the matters at issue,\" and (ii) that the court had spoken informally with an ODM staff member and that the court had no objection to such member sharing with the parties \"the information she has.\" (Transcript of 6/29/01 Hearing, 27-28) These statements by the court necessarily indicate a belief that the ODM has evidence which is relevant to the issue of unitary status and that is not 2 merely cumulative of evidence that may be presented independently by the parties. 7. The LRSD is aware of a recent statement by the Federal Monitor in a public forum to the effect that the LRSD \"is not ready for unitary status.\" This circumstance indicates that the Federal Monitor (i) has formed an opinion or conclusion that is not strictly within the ODM' s charge to act as a monitor for the court and a facilitator for the parties, and (ii) has aligned herself publicly and to a significant degree with the position of the Joshua Intervenors on the issue of unitary status. 8. Independently of the ODM witnesses' testimony on the merits, it is material to the LRSD's case whether the ODM and the court have had ex parte discussions on the issue ofunitary status or related issues. If such discussions have occurred, issues arise concerning (i) whether the court has acquired personal knowledge of disputed evidentiary facts, within the meaning of 28 U.S.C.  455(b )(1 ), (ii) whether the impartiality of the court might reasonably be questioned, within the meaning of 28 U.S.C.  455(a), and (iii) whether the court has considered ex parte communications on the merits or on procedures affecting the merits, within the meaning of Canon 3A(4) of the Code of Conduct for United States Judges. 9. The LRSD reserves it right to investigate whether there have been ex parte communications between the ODM and the court on any and all matters affecting the LRSD's right to an impartial hearing on its request for unitary status, and if so, to seek an appropriate remedy. WHEREFORE, the LRSD prays that the court prohibit testimony by members of the ODM at the hearing on the LRSD's request for unitary status, and for all other just and proper relief. 3 Respectfully submitted, Little Rock School District, Robert S. Shafer Christopher Heller and John C. Fendley, Jr. FRIDAY, ELDREDGE \u0026 CLARK 2000 Regions Center 400 West Capitol Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-3493 (501) 376-2011 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I certify that a copy of the foregoing has been served on the following persons by mail on November 9, 2001 : Mr. John W. Walker JOHN W. WALKER, P.A. 1 723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Sam Jones Wright, Lindsey \u0026 Jennings 2200 Worthen Bank Bldg. 200 West Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Steve Jones JACK, LYON \u0026 JONES, P.A. 425 W. Capitol, Suite 3400 Little Rock, AR 72201-3472 Mr. Richard Roachell Roachell Law Firm 11800 Pleasant Ridge Road, Suite 146 Post Office Box 17388 Little Rock, Arkansas 72222-7388 4 Ms. Ann Marshall (Hand Delivered) Desegregation Monitor 1 Union National Plaza 124 W. Capitol, Suite 1895 Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Mark Hagameier Office of the Attorney General 323 Center Street 200 Tower Building Little Rock, AR 72201 F:\\HOME\\BRENDAK\\lrsd\\descgmotion in limine.wpd 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT V. CASE NO. 4:82CV00866SWW PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL. MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL. KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL. MEMORANDUM BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF MOTION IN LIMINE TO PROHIBIT TESTIMONY BY OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING PLAINTIFF DEFENDANTS INTERVENORS INTERVENORS The ODM was created under the court's inherent equitable powers, at the direction of the Eighth Circuit, to replace the Office of Metropolitan Supervisor. Little Rock School District v. Pulaski County Special School District, 921 F.2d 1371 , 1394 (8th Cir. 1990). The purpose of the ODM is to function as an \"agent\" of the court for the ongoing \"supervision or monitoring\" of the settlement agreement. Id. at 1386, 1388. Indeed, the Eighth Circuit has made clear that the ODM's monitoring of the parties' compliance with the settlement agreement is equivalent to monitoring by the court itself under its retained jurisdiction to oversee implementation of the settlement agreement. Id. at 1390; compare Jenkins v. State of Missouri, 890 F.2d 65, 67-68 (8th Cir. 1989) (noting that the creation of a desegregation monitoring committee at the remedial stage was within the court's inherent equitable powers). The only intimation of a testimonial role for the ODM in the opinions of the Eighth Circuit is with regard to its budgetary process. In Little Rock School District v. Pulaski County Special School District, 971 F.2d 160, 166 (8th Cir. 1992), the Eighth Circuit held that the parties were entitled to review the ODM's proposed budget and to submit recommendations and objections to the court. The Eighth Circuit noted that there might be \"rare occasions when issues are of such importance that an evidentiary hearing is required,\" id., but such a heari "},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1727","title":"Court filings: District Court, Pulaski Association of Classroom Teachers (PACT) and Pulaski Association of Support Staff (PASS) motion to compel Pulaski County Special School District (PCSSD) compliance with Plan 2000, Section F (discipline)","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":["2001-10-29"],"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","Pulaski Association of Classroom Teachers (PACT)","Pulaski Association of Support Staff (PASS)","Special districts--Arkansas--Pulaski County","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","Education--Standards","Educational law and legislation","School discipline","School management and organization","School employees","School integration"],"dcterms_title":["Court filings: District Court, Pulaski Association of Classroom Teachers (PACT) and Pulaski Association of Support Staff (PASS) motion to compel Pulaski County Special School District (PCSSD) compliance with Plan 2000, Section F (discipline)"],"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/1727"],"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":["32 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"This transcript was create using Optical Character Recognition (OCR) and may contain some errors.  / ~ :: ::~:.~\\; ~:::~:';, . SlJ~.~Y-i\\~4)i~ I , ~~ : .~~~ ~-  r FILED EA U.S. DISTRICT COURT STERN DISTRICT ARKANSAS OCT 2 ~ ZIJ1JI - U. S. DiSTR[CT JL'CCE IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS oc f 2 9 2001 WESTERN DIVISION _~;MES W. McCORMACK, CLERK LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF DEP CLERK V. No. 4:82CV00866SWW PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHoorRECE~,.,eo DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL KA THERINE KNIGHT, ET AL OCT 3 0 2001 OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING DEFENDANTS INTERVENORS INTERVENORS PULASKI ASSOCIATION OF CLASSROOM TEACHERS {PACTI AND PULASKI ASSOCIATION OF SUPPORT STAFF {PASS) MOTION TO COMPEL PCSSD COMPLIANCE WITH PLAN 2000, SECTION F (DISCIPLINE) The Pulaski Association of Classroom Teachers and The Pulaski Association of Support Staff, by and through their Attorneys, Roachell Law Firm, for their Motion to Compel, state: 1. They are Intervenors herein and have standing to bring this motion. 2. In its Order dated February 22, 2000, the Court approved conditionally Plan 2000 submitted by PCSSD and stated: 11  this Court will judge Plan 2000 with the expectations that PCSSD will implement the plan without delay, conscientiously and in all good faith. Should PCS SD fall short of these expectations, the Court will not hesitate to exercise its jurisdiction to compel compliance. 11 3. After repeated w~~s 1Jy PACT and PASS to the Board of Directors as well as to administrative officials, PCSSD has failed to comply with the Court's order and Section F of Plan 2000 as more fully set forth in the PACT and PASS Report and Attachments-PCSSD Desegregation Plan 2000-Section F (Discipline) attached hereto and - incorporated herein word for word as part of this motion. 5. The actions of the district in failing to comply with the Court approved plan 2000 continue from the date of the report to this date. 6. After hearing, the Court should order the district to forthwith comply with the Court's Orders with regard to Section F-Plan 2000 (Discipline) and consider such sanctions as may be appropriate. WHEREFORE, the Pulaski Association of Classroom Teachers and the Pulaski Association of Support Staff pray that the Court order PCS SD to comply with Section F (Discipline) of Plan 2000 as ordered by the Court; and that they may be granted all other relief to which they may be entitled. 2 Respectfully submitted: Richard W. Roachell ROACHELL LAW FIRM P.O. Box 17388 Little Rock, Arkansas 72222-7388 (501) 224-1110 ~.c-::;..__ Richard W. Roachell (78132) CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Richard W. Roachell, hereby state that a true and correct copy of the foregoing was mailed via U. S. Mail on this ____ day of October, 2001 to the following person(s) at the address(es) indicated. Mr. John Walker John W. Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 7220 I Mr. Sam Jones Wright, Lindsey \u0026 Jennings 200 West Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Steve Jones Jack, Lyon, \u0026 Jones, P.A. 425 W. Capitol, Suite 3400 Little Rock, AR 72201-3472 Mr. Mark Hagemeier Office of the Attorney General 323 Center Street 200 Tower Building Little Rock, AR 72201 Ms. Ann Marshall Desegregation Monitor I Union National Plaz.a 124 W. Capitol, Suite 1895 Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Christopher Heller Mr. John C. Fendley, Jr. Friday, Eldredge \u0026 Clark First Commercial Bldg., Suite 2000 400 West Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201-3493 Richard W. Roachell (78132) 3 Pulaski Association of Classroom Teachers and Pulaski Association of Support Staff Report \u0026 Attachments PCSSD Desegregation Plan 2000 - Section F (Discipline) July 2001 As Knight Intervenors, the Pulaski Association of Classroom Teachers (PACT) and the Pulaski Association of Support Staff (PASS) contend that the Pulaski County Special School District (PCSSD) has failed to implement, in a timely manner, the terms outlined in Section F (Discipline) of the PCSSD Desegregation Plan 2000 and, in doing so, has delayed its obligation to bring parity and equity to the discipline administered to both black and white students in the District. This report and attachments are being submitted after efforts by PACT and PASS to make the PCS SD aware that the implementation of Section F (Discipline) has been unsuccessful. INTRODUCTION For several years, PACT and PASS have voiced concerns regarding the inconsistencies in administering discipline to PCSSD students. Teachers became very optimistic in November of 1999 when the PCSSD approved a new desegregation plan that was more process-oriented in the area of discipline; a desegregation plan that would examine all facets of discipline in PCSSD. The Court approved the PCSSD Desegregation Plan 2000 on February 22, 2000. The discipline provisions, as outlined in Section F (Discipline) of Plan 2000, addressed many teacher concerns regarding discipline in the PCSSD schools and contained tirnelines for completion and/or implementation. The specific terms of Section F (Discipline) are as follows: Paragraph 1 initiated the process that was to fully assess the District's efforts to eliminate racial disparities in the imposition of discipline. This involved maintaining discipline records on all students and collecting the relevant data. Paragraph 2 called for the PCSSD to develop criteria for identifying: (i/ teachers and other staff members who are experiencing problems which require attention; (ii) schools which have atypically high discipline rates; and (iii) schools which have atypically high racial disparities in discipline. PCSSD was to submit this information to the Joshua Intervenors no later than 45 days after Court approval of Plan 2000 (May 5, 2000). Paragraph 3 required the PCSSD to provide assistance to school personnel identified by the criteria outlined in Paragraph 2. Paragraph 4 called for the creation of a Discipline Study Panel to consider causes for the high rates of discipline for African-American students and possible 1 remedies. This included: reviewing discipline records; interviewing and/or surveying African-American students; and considering possible relationships between unmet academic needs and discipline rates. A written study was to be completed no later than 150 days after Court approval of Plan 2000 (August 18, 2000) and was to include suggested measures for prevention and intervention. Paragraph 5 required the PCSSD to develop a specific initiative to reduce the rates of discipline in the PCSSD shown in ODM's report dated March 18, 1998. This was to be implemented no later than 150 days after Court approval of Plan 2000 (August 18, 2000). Paragraph 6 required PCSSD to adhere to the policies set forth in its Handbook for Student Conduct and Discipline. The fact that timelines were attached gave Plan 2000 credibility to teachers. PACT and PASS genuinely believed that, for the first time, the District would conduct a full-scale review . of the discipline procedures in a serious and purposeful way, one that would eventually lead to better discipline in the classroom and fair and equitable treatment for students. However, the PCSSD has disregarded established timelines, misinterpreted key components, misrepresented the facts, and generally delayed its desegregation obligations as outlined in Section F (Discipline). DISREGARD FOR EST ABISHED TIMELINES Rather than anticipate Court approval of Plan 2000 and develop a preliminary schedule of meeting dates the way PCSSD did in its Middle School Conversion Plan, the PCSSD chose to wait until the week prior to the August 9, 2000 hearing before the Court to even begin compliance efforts for Section F (Discipline). This was approximately nine (9) months after PCSSD approval of Plan 2000 and approximately five (5) months after Court approval of Plan 2000. By the time compliance efforts for Section F (Discipline) started on August 11 , 2000: 1) The 45-day timeline for developing criteria and submitting it to Joshua as outlined in paragraph 2 had passed; 2) The timeline, as outlined in paragraph 4, for completing a written study on the work done by the Discipline Study Panel (a panel that had not even begun any of its work) was within one (1) week of passing; and 3) The timeline for implementing the specific initiative outlined in paragraph 5 was within one ( 1) week of passing. Once compliance with Section F (Discipline) of Plan 2000 was actually initiated by the PCSSD there was nothing organized or deliberate about its efforts. There was no discipline data relevant to the in-depth study that was to be conducted, and the Discipline Study Panel that was convened on August 11, 2000 could not do any of its work until paragraphs 1 and 2 of Section F (Discipline) had been completed. Moreover, the charge of the Discipline Study Panel changed with every meeting, as did the make-up of the group. The charge went from \"conducting a comprehensive study on the disciplining of African-American students\" on August 11, 2000, to 2 \"developing strategies and criteria to eliminate racial disparities in discipline\" on September 8, 2000, to \"discussing proposed methods for determining racial disparity in discipline and identifying teachers and staff who are experiencing problems which require attention\" on October 31, 2000, to \"establishing criteria for identifying i, ii, and iii in paragraph 2\" on November 9, 2000, to \"continue criteria development\" on November 16, 2000. The charge of the Panel changed like the wind to the point that members of the Panel, themselves, were confused as to what they were actually there to do. CHRONOLOGICAL ACCOUNT OF CORRESPONDENCE AND EVENTS (Misinterpretation of Key Components of Plan 2000) (Misrepresentation of the Facts) August 4, 2000 August 11, 2000 August 14, 2000 Memo from Dr. Ruth Herts, Director of Equity, to teachers stating that the first meeting date of the Discipline Study Panel would be August 11, 2000. An excerpt from Section F (Discipline) of Plan 2000 that pertained to the work of the Panel was included with the memo. Letter from Attorney John Walker to Eddie Collins, Assistant Superintendent for Pupil Personnel, stating that Joshua would not be able to effectively participate in the August 11, 2000 meeting of the Discipline Study Panel for several reasons, one of which was \"the predicate basis of the work of the discipline study committee [sic] had not been provided.\" First meeting of the Discipline Study Panel as described in paragraph 4 of Section F (Discipline) of Plan 2000. Dr. Herts provided an agenda for the meeting. The first four items on the agenda were discussed, including the purpose/charge of the Panel as outlined in F (4). Mr. Walker informed the Panel that the District waited too late to get started and that he would file a Contempt of Court Motion. When asked why the District had waited so long to get started, Mr. Collins responded by saying, \"The Superintendent wanted to wait until the new Assistant Superintendent for Equity and Pupil Services was on board.\" The Panel passed a motion to discontinue the meetings until such time as all parties could participate. Memo from Dr. Herts regarding correspondence to Eddie Collins from the Joshua Intervenors urging the PCSSD to respond to requests by Joshua as a \"matter of good faith effort on the part of the District.\" Memo from Karl Brown, Assistant Superintendent of Equity \u0026 Pupil Services, stating that the next meeting of the Discipline Study Panel would be August 24, 2000. 3 August 21, 2000 Memo from PACT President, Deen Minton, stating that the teachers on the Panel would not be able to attend the August 24, 2000 meeting. This was on the fourth day of school and teachers wanted and needed to be in their classrooms early into a new school year in order to \"set the tone\" for the year. August 28, 2000 Memo from PACT President, Deen Minton, to Karl Brown stating that the teachers on the Panel would not be able to attend a September 8, 2000 meeting. Teachers wanted and needed to be in their classrooms for SAT-9 preparation and testing. August 29, 2000 Memo from Karl Brown to Discipline Study Panel members noting that the August 24, 2000 meeting was officially rescheduled for September 8, 2000. The statecl purpose of the meeting was '\"to develop strategies and criteria to eliminate racial disparities in discipline in the District.\" September 8, 2000 Meeting with administrator representatives on the Discipline Study Panel and Margie Powell of ODM. September 14, 2000 Memo from Dr. Welch, Director of Pupil Services \u0026 Athletics, to members of the Discipline  Study Panel stating that the next meeting was October 3, 2000. Minutes from the September 8, 2000 meeting stated that '\"this committee [sic] is charged with completing an assessment of the objective of eliminating racial disparities in the imposition of school discipline\" and that \"this committee [sic] also has the responsibility to review discipline records and conduct an interview and/or survey with AfricanAmerican students regarding their experiences in the system in general and in the discipline process in particular.\" The minutes also reflected that consensus was reached on several paragraphs in Section F (Discipline) of Plan 2000; however, this was a consensus reached at a meeting with only the administrative representatives from the Panel present. September 15, 2000 Memorandum #A-00-035-R from Superintendent Smith, Karl Brown, and Dr. Clowers, Director of Accountability, to all principals revising the collection of data procedures for Section F (Discipline), paragraph 1 of Plan 2000. (a) The memo states that \"specific proposals have been sent to the Joshua Intervenors that specify criteria, data collection, . and analysis methodology to address Section F (Discipline), part 2, subsections i and iii of the Plan.\" The memo disregarded item ii altogether and further specified that the very criteria the Panel was charged with developing had 4 October 3, 2000 supposedly already been sent to Joshua. PACT and PASS representatives on the Panel had no knowledge of, and certainly no input into anything sent to Joshua. (b) This memo identifies \"principals or other administrative staff' in the definition of \"staff member\" as outlined in Plan 2000. Even though the memo referred to administrators as \"staff members,\" the criteria and analysis methodology used solely targeted teachers. The memo implies administrators are included as staff members as per Plan 2000; however, the fact is that they are not. ( c) Attachments to this memo contained a page entitled \"Reason Codes\" and one entitled \"Response Codes.\" Reason codes are the reasons students are disciplined and should correspond to the rules in the Handbook/or Student Conduct and Discipline. Response codes are the actions that administrators take when a rule has been broken and should correspond to the consequences outlined in the Handbook for Student Conduct and Discipline. These codes do not align with those in the Handbook, thus making data collection using these codes flawed and rendering the data itself useless. Meeting of the Discipline Study Panel. No agenda provided. There was an objection made by PACT and PASS because the make-up of the Panel had changed from the August 11, 2000 initial meeting (two more administrators were present). Panel members inspected a 378-page document titled, \"Activity Tracker Detail Report.\" This was a detailed account of each student's discipline data for the 1999-2000 school year. While reviewing this report, it was noticed that many rule numbers listed did not correlate to those in the Handbook for Student Conduct and Discipline. In other words, students were being suspended for breaking rules that were not delineated in the PCSSD's discipline policies as set forth in the Handbook. Panel members stated that the Computer Center should make sure that all rule numbers and consequences align with the District's policies as described in Handbook for Student Conduct and Discipline, since this is the docwnent that parents and students must sign for every year. The PACT and PASS representatives on the Panel requested to review all referrals written and to be provided with a breakdown of suspensions by rule number violated/gender/race. The Panel was told that there was not enough room to hold all the referrals written and that there were problems with the \"people downstairs\" in that 5 October 12, 2000 October 23, 2000 October 31, 2000 November 9, 2000 they were having trouble getting data from the Computer Center. PACT and PASS representatives on the Panel stated that without the requested data, the Panel could not do what it was responsible for doing. Mr. Brown responded by saying, \"We are out of compliance anyway, so there's no need to rush.\" Dr. Welch sent copies of PCSSD Annual Disciplinary Report Summaries for 1997-98, 1998-99, and 1999-00 to the members of the Discipline Study Panel. These reports did not contain a breakdown of suspensions by rule number/race/gender as requested. Memo# A-00-081 from Dr. Welch to members of the Discipline Study Panel stating that the next meeting was October 31, 2000. Meeting of the Discipline Study Panel. Agenda provided. Mr. John Walker and Ms. Joy Springer attended part of the meeting. Mr. Walker stated that it was the District's responsibility, not the Panel's, to develop and submit to Joshua the criteria for identifying teachers and other staff experiencing problems and schools with high discipline rates. He stated that this had not been done. Dr. Clowers said that he had talked to Sam Jones and that the criteria and method used for evaluating the criteria had been sent to Joshua on August 29, 2000. Before he left, Mr. Walker stated that the Panel was not to be administrator-controlled. Brenda Bowles, Coordinator for Multicultural Curriculum, stated that \"we\" could do paragraphs 1, 2, and 3 of Section F (Discipline) and submit it to Joshua. No vote was taken. Meeting of the Discipline Study Panel. Agenda provided. Dr. Welch was elected Chair of the Panel and Georgia Norris was elected as Recorder. The first item on the agenda was to establish criteria for identifying i, ii, and iii in paragraph 2 of Section F (Discipline). The Panel was now being asked to develop criteria that had already been sent to Joshua. (See Memorandum #A-00-035-R dated September 15, 2000 and October 31, 2000). Brenda Bowles prepared a \"Criteria\" sheet for identifying schools, based on discussions by the Panel. The Panel passed a motion that all rules must align with those in the Handbook for Student Conduct and Discipline. PACT and PASS continued to stress the importance of aligning reason codes and response codes with the PCSSD's discipline policies set forth in the Handbook/or Student Conduct and Discipline. In order to conduct a comprehensive study on discipline, it is imperative to have complete and accurate data. Student disciplinary records must reflect the correct rule 6 that was broken and the actual discipline imposed in order to determine whether students are disciplined in a fair and equitable manner. PACT and PASS have no knowledge that an alignment of the codes with the Handbook bas yet occurred. Heated discussions centered on Dr. Clowers' method of identifying teachers and other staff members who are experiencing problems. Dr. Clowers interpreted this to mean ''those teachers and staff members who send atypically large numbers of students to a building administrator for disciplinary referral.\" The PACT and PASS representatives strongly disagreed with his interpretation and the formula he developed for several reasons: 1. The term \"problem\" needs to be clearly defined; 2. Dr. Clowers' formula creates an automatic bias against the teachers. It makes discipline problems appear to be the result of some failing on the part of the teacher and it singles-out teachers because teachers are the only ones who write disciplinary referrals. The Disciplinary Referral Form is the negotiated form used by teachers when excluding a student from class for disciplinary reasons. Although administrators are considered \"other staff members,\" they take action on the referral, they don't write it. Therefore, the administrator would never be identified as \"experiencing problems\" using Dr. Clowers' formula. 3. Teachers do not impose consequences for discipline (suspensions, Saturday school, expulsion, etc.), administrators do. Yet, nowhere in Dr. Clowers' formula are the building level administrator's actions on the referral taken into account or analyzed. 4. When reviewing a teacher's referrals, violations need to be categorized as \"classroom infractions\" versus \"other Handbook infractions\" because there are many infractions that are beyond a teacher's control (i.e., fighting, possessing a weapon, smoking, etc.). 5. It is unclear whether Dr. Clowers' formula actually identifies teachers who write atypically large numbers of referrals or who send atypically large numbers of students to the office. In either case, his method does not provide the data that is necessary to address the underlying intent of Section F (Discipline) of Plan 2000, which is to eliminate racial disparities in the imposition of school discipline. 7 6. PCSSD 'Policy and the negotiated Master Contract hold teachers responsible for the behavior of students and expect that, \"when and where unacceptable behavior occurs to take appropriate action.\" This creates a Catch-22 situation for teachers. Teachers who are \"unable to assist the student to maintain proper controls of his behavior\" are to refer that student to the appropriate administrator using a Disciplinary Referral Form. However, for each referral form written, the teacher receives a \"tally mark.\" Too many '\u003ctally marks\" will result in a teacher being \"redflagged\" and identified as possibly having a problem with discipline. Administrators are using the '\u003ctally marks\" to intimidate teachers to not write referrals. While this intimidation might decrease the actual number of referrals written, thereby looking good on paper, the results are: 1) student discipline is not improved; 2) student misbehaviors are not corrected; and 3) disparities in discipline are not addressed. But, because the PCSSD can point to fewer referrals written, it once again can pat itself on the back for a job-well-done when in. fact, it has done absolutely nothing to address, much less achieve, its actual goal of eliminating racial disparities in the imposition of discipline. 7. The PACT and PASS believe that the inequities causing a disparity in discipline exist in the actions taken by the administrator, not in the number of referrals written by a teacher. This actual example was discussed at one of the Panel meetings to show that inequities in administrative actions do exist: Two male students, one black and one white, were both referred by a teacher for violating Rule #3. The teacher wrote two referrals; therefore she received two \"tally marks\". The administrator suspended one of the male students and only conferenced with the other. The inequity is in the consequence imposed, not in the number of referrals written. However, using Dr. Clowers' criteria and analysis methodology, these administrative actions are not recorded or analyzed anywhere. November 16, 2000 Meeting of the Discipline Study Panel. No agenda provided. Dr. Welch told the Panel that there were still problems \"downstairs\" so the data that was requested was still not available. PACT and PASS requested that all principals in the District submit to the Panel ALL discipline forms, other than the negotiated referral form, that are being used in their buildings. The Panel needed to see what other forms individual building principals are requiring teachers to use to report discipline infractions in order to clarify how data was being collected. This inf orrnation was never 8 March 19, 2001 April 3, 2001 May 3, 2000 provided. The District continued to collect data from only one form when, in reality, some schools use other forms. Again this leads to inaccurate data collection. The Panel reviewed all referrals written at Sylvan Hills Jr. High throughout the 1999-2000 school year to get an understanding of how consequences were administered. It was stated that the next meeting would be the last week of November or the first week of December. Dr. Welch would notify Committee members when it would be. Memo from Dr. Welch stating that the next meeting of the Discipline Study Panel would be on April 3, 2001, approximately four ( 4) months after the Panel said it would next meet. Meeting of the Discipline Study Panel. No agenda provided. Dr. Welch gave Panel members a seven-page document containing the six (6) paragraphs of Section F (Discipline) indicating responsibilities, specific tasks, etc., and a discipline data collection grid. Dr. Welch stated that the criteria that would be sent to Joshua would be \"that little grid coupled with Clowers' formula for identifying schools as significant or not significant.\" It was agreed that no names would ever be released; however, identification of teachers was not discussed. Discussion centered on each school's Equity Monitoring Team reviewing school data for item iii of paragraph 2. No vote was taken. The Computer Center complied with the October 3, 2000 request for a breakdown of suspensions by rule number, gender, and race. Dr. Welch had only one copy of this report titled, \"SAS System Breakdown by Rule/Gender/Race.\" He stated that he would send each Panel member a copy later. Panel members have yet to receive their copies. Dr. Welch generated a status report on the progress of the Discipline Study Panel. This report stated that, \"At the April 3, 2001 meeting of the Discipline Panel, it was agreed to go forward with the following proposal as agreed to by the Panel\" and that the Panel worked together to develop criteria for Section F (Discipline), paragraph 2, subsections i, ii, and iii in Plan 2000. It was further stated that these criteria had been \"agreed upon\" by the Panel. Much of the material contained in this report is false. The Panel did not agree to Dr. Clowers' criteria or his formula for identifying \"teachers and other staff members experiencing problems which require attention.\" PACT and PASS representatives repeatedly stated, for the record, that the Knight Intervenors reserved the right to submit a separate report. The 9 May 7, 2001 Panel did not disagree with the use of Dr. Clowers' method of identifying schools with high discipline rates and high racial disparities. Dr. Clowers explained that a school would be identified as \"significant\" or \"not significant\" using a statistical calculation known as a \"large-sample confidence interval for the difference of two proportions.\" The criteria for identifying schools as \"significant\" or \"not significant\" was discussed in detail. This report was presented to the PCSSD School Board at its May Board Meeting. At this School Board meeting the PACT President pointed out to the School Board which parts of the report were inaccurate or misleading and expressed PACT and PASS concerns with the Discipline Study Panel and with the implementation of Section F (Discipline) of Plan 2000. PACT and PASS Panel members received another report, dated May 7, 2001, on June 7, 2001. This report contained some infonnation that was never even discussed in any of the Discipline Study Panel meetings. The material, which was sent to Karl Brown by Dr .. Welch, regarded Plan 2000 Discipline Criteria. This packet of material contained three (3) separate documents, prepared by Dr. Clowers, describing the criteria and procedures that he was going to use to address Section F (Discipline), item 2, subsections i, ii, and iii of Plan 2000. Two of these procedures are word-for-word what they were on November 9, 2000 when the Panel discussed them. One procedure was agreed to (subsection iii) and one was strongly disagreed to (subsection i). The third procedure, (subsection ii), had never before been seen by the PACT and PASS representatives on the Panel. PACT and PASS have no idea why 5% was used and had never seen the graphs and charts that accompanied the document. However, it was erroneously reported that there had been \"meaningful input by all concerned parties\". CONCLUSION The Knight Intervenors are deeply concerned by the PCSSD's minimal efforts to comply with Section F (Discipline) of Plan 2000 and are disturbed by the PCSSD's dictatorial behavior throughout the process. Even though a Discipline Study Panel was indeed formed per Section F (Discipline), its composition changed often and it was given charge after charge. However, decisions made by the Panel were ignored and the PCS SD essentially worked in isolation of the Panel. The PCSSD continues to disregard established timelines, misinterpret key components, and misrepresent facts surrounding its efforts to comply with Section F (Discipline) of Plan 2000. In Section F (Discipline) of Plan 2000, the PCSSD committed to eliminate \"racial disparities in the imposition of school discipline.\" This commitment was made twenty (20) months ago and approved by the Court sixteen (16) months ago, yet the PCSSD has still not completed or implemented provisions contained in Section F (Discipline). The very foundation of the PCSSD's compliance efforts, the collection of accurate and/or complete data, has yet to be carried out. Mathematicians would agree that solving any problem in statistics involves the following three steps: (1) definition of the problem; (2) collection of the data; and (3) analysis of the data. If the problem is misinterpreted and is not clearly defined and if the data collected is inaccurate and/or incomplete, then the analysis will most likely be flawed. Such is the case in Dr. Clowers' misinterpretation of the \"problem\" and his subsequent analysis methodology. Dr. Clowers interpreted paragraph 2, subsection i, \"teachers and other staff members who are experiencing problems\" to mean those teachers and staff members who send large numbers of students  to a building administrator for disciplinary referral. The PACT and PASS representatives on the Panel strongly disagreed with Dr. Clowers' interpretation of subsection i and just as strongly objected to his analysis methodology. The Knight Intervenors see the \"problem\" as the racial disparity that exists in the imposition of discipline, not the total nwnber of referrals written. In other words, a disparity could exist whether 2 or 200 referrals were written because the disparity is not in the number of referrals written by the teacher, the disparity exists in the nature of the discipline imposed by the administrator (suspension, Saturday school, expulsion, etc.). Dr. Clowers' statistical analysis does nothing to identify true problems. (See November 9, 2000 under \"Chronological Account of Correspondence and Events) Contrary to information contained in the May 3, 2001 and the May 7, 2001 status reports, the Discipline Study Panel was never involved in the development of, and certainly never agreed to the criteria for identifying \"teachers and other staff members who are experiencing problems\" as described in paragraph 2, subsection i of Plan 2000. How could the Panel \"develop and agree to\" criteria that was supposedly submitted to the Joshua Intervenors on August 29, 2000 when, in reality, the Panel had only met one time prior to that date (August 11, 2000) and had not addressed that topic at all? (See August 11 , 2000 and September 15, 2000 under \"Chronological Account of Correspondence and Events\") ODM, in its report dated March 18, 1998, made several recommendations to the PCSSD on ways to improve discipline procedures and reduce racial disparities in the imposition of school discipline. A few of the suggestions included: 1) offering staff development activities and training based on demonstrated need, rather than routine offerings; 2) modifying discipline plans if they are faulty, \"don't wait too long to determine why;\" 3) holding district-wide discipline summits where everyone can get the same information at the same time; 4) encouraging shared decision-making; and 5) sharing reports and other relevant discipline information with all employees. Had the PCSSD taken any or all of the suggestions made by ODM nearly three years ago, the PCSSD could have quite possibly achieved its objective of eliminating racial disparities in the imposition of school discipline. However contrary to ODM recommendations, currently teachers receive no training whatsoever from the PCSSD in the area of discipline; site-based shared decision making is discouraged; and the PC "},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1234","title":"Oral deposition of Judy Magness","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":["Bushman Court Reporting"],"dc_date":["2001-10-05"],"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 law and legislation","Education--Finance","School board members","Court records","School management and organization"],"dcterms_title":["Oral deposition of Judy Magness"],"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/1234"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["documents (object genre)"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\nDeposition taken at the Friday, Eldredge and Clark Law Firm, Little Rock, Arkansas\nThis transcript was created using Optical Character Recognition and may contain some errors.\n   CERTIFIED COPY IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, PLAINTIFF vs No.LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL, DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL DEFENDANT MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL INTERVENORS INTERVENORS DEPOSITION OF MRS JUDY MAGNESS DATE: October 5, 2001 TIME: 1:07 p.m. PLACE: The Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark Law Firm 400 West Capitol, Suite #2200 Little Rock, AR 72201-3493 APPEARANCES On Behalf of the Plaintiff: On Behalf of the Defendants: Mr. John w. Walker, Attorney John w. Walker Law Firm 1723 Broadway Street Little Rock, AR 72206 Mr. Clay Fendley, Attorney Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark 400 West Capitol, Suite 2200 Little Rock, AR 72201-3493 ALSO PRESENT Joy Springer, The John w. Walker Law Firm Tony Rose, Sue Strickland, \u0026amp; Katherine Mitchell, Deponents Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box *4 Sweet Horne, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 - 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 - CERTIFIED COPY AGREEMENT OF COUNSEL ... SWEARING OF THE WITNESS .. EXAMINATION OF MRS. JUDY MAGNESS By Mr. Walker .. SIGNATURE SHEET .... ERRATA SHEET. . COURT REPORTER'S CERTIFICATION .. * * * * * * * * * Cobb Court Reporting P. O. Box #4 sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: ( 501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax PAGE . . . 3 . . 3 .3-67 . .   68 .69 . 70 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY 3 STIPULATIONS The deposition of Judy Magness, produced, sworn and examined at the Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark Law Firm, 400 west Capitol, Suite #2200, Little Rock, AR 72201-3493 commencing at 1:07 p.m., on October 5, 2001, in the captioned cause at the instance of counsel for the Plaintiff, and said deposition being taken according to the terms and provisions of the Arkansas Rules of Civil Procedure. It is stipulated and agreed all forms and formalities in the taking, transcribing, forwarding and filing of said deposition by witness, are hereby waived by the parties, the right being expressly reserved to object to the testimony of the witness at the time of trial as to incompetency, irrelevancy and immateriality, other than those with respect to the form of questions as propounded to the witness. * * * * * P R O C E E D I N G S THEREUPON, JUDY MAGNESS having been called for examination by counsel for the plaintiff, and having been first duly sworn, was examined and testified as follows: DIRECT EXAMINATION Questions by Mr. Walker: Q. State your name Mrs. Magness. Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box #4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: ( 501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 - 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY 4 A. Judy Magness. Q. I'm smiling Mrs. Magness because I recall a conversation you and I had involving Dr. Henry Williams, do you recall that? A. We had several, which one? Q. Well, there was one when you were real hopeful that things would work with him and he would remain here--- A. Is that the telephone call I made to you? Q. Yeah. A. I'm still hopeful of that Mr. Walker. Q. Were you aware that he's back in Kansas City according to legend as principal of a charter school? A. No, but I think he'd be good at that\nhe really cares about kids. Q. Well, I just mentioned that. I thought about it when we thought about his deposition. You don't have to--- A. And I think at the time--- Q. respond to that. A. that I said to you, you know, it would be wonderful--Q. You don\"t have to put this on there. A. Why not. Q. Because it's not going to be helpful to Judge Wright. But I just--- A. That I always encouraged you to be a statesman and--Q. Oh, I'll give you an opportunity to say that--- A. Okay. Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box #4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: ( 501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY 5 Q. I mean on the record. I'll give you an opportunity to--FENDLEY: Let's just leave all of this on the record. WALKER: Well, that's fine\nwe\"ll leave it on the record. Now let me get to the questions. Q. Mrs. Magness, do you believe in racial segregation? A. Absolutely not. Q. Are you a member of any organization dedicated and devoted to eliminating racial segregation in your private activities? A. Say that one more time. Q. Are you a dues paying member of any association which has the purpose of eliminating racial discrimination? A. I don't pay many dues to organizations I'm apart of. Q. Well, I guess the answer is no. A. I'm trying to think about that. Q. We can come back to it, I'll go on to something else because I want to be, I want to be faithful to what I said about trying to get out of here brief as possible. REPORTER: Speak up Mr. Walker. Q. What is your interpretation of the term eliminate achievement disparity between the races, just those words? Eliminate achievement disparity between the races, what, how do you construe that? A. I construe that to mean that by some assessment, pick any, you know there's several so you would have to decide that any Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box t4 sweet Horne, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 - 25 CERTIFIED COPY 6 person taking that assessment regardless of their race would do as well as the next person. But that takes in to consideration all that has going in to the making each of those people. Q. I'm just asking now--- A. into each persons. Q. you\"re a college graduate, right? A. Yes. Q. Masters degree? A. No. Q. What\"s your degree in? A. Education. Q. I see. You were a teacher at one time? A. Years ago. Q. I see. Mrs. Magness I just asked you a question to tell me what the term meant, eliminate achievement disparity between the races. I didn't ask you how it comes about, what does that term mean, eliminate the achievement disparity between the races? A. Did you say achievement disparity the time before? Q. Yes, ma\"am. Eliminate achievement disparity between the races, what does that mean? A. That any person could achieve what another person could. Q. Does not the word eliminate mean to end? A. Yes. Q. Does not it means ah, does not it contemplate affirmative Cobb Court Reporting P . o. Box t4 Sweet Home, AR 72164- 0004 Phone : ( 501) 490 - 0066 (501) 490 - 0926 - Fax 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY 1 action? A. Well--- Q. I'm going to eliminate dirt in this room, that means that I'm going to come in here and get a broom or something and eliminate dirt in this room. Eliminate means to remove doesn't it? A. One definition. Q. Can you tell me any other definition or synonym that means something other than to remove? Any other synonym that relates to eliminating? A. Well, I mean you can get several\nwhy? Q. Well, the point is I'm trying to find out here--A. If I understand English? Q. Yes, ma\"am--- A. Uh-huh. Q. that's part of it. Now achievement disparity, what does that mean to you between the races? A. That there would be a difference in the way one group ah, reflected what they were able to do as opposed to another. Q. Now Mrs. Strickland--- A. No. Q. I mean, not Mrs. Strickland but Mrs. Magness--- A. That's okay, people get us mixed up all the time. Q. No, no, no, no I don't, I don\"t\ny'all are two different people. Do you perceive that there is an achievement disparity Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box t4 sweet Horne, AR 72164-0004 Phone, ( 501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY between the races or students in the Little Rock School District? A. I guess it will depend upon--Q. You can\"t answer that--- A. what measurement you\"re taking--- 8 Q. just a moment, can you answer that first of all yes or no\nis there an achievement disparity? A. Ah, I mean you're going to have to go a little more in depth there. Q. All right. I'm going to tell you, I want you to answer your questions like you are --- A. Uh-huh. Q. but it will be much more of a pleasure for me to put you on the stand and have you answer like this. I'm trying to get though some direct answers. A. Great. Q. Do you understand that there--is there, is there an achievement disparity right now between the races in the Little Rock School District that is evident? A. On some recent test scores that we received, namely ACTAP--- Q. Go ahead. A. there was a difference in the scores between all of the races that we serve in the Little Rock School District. Q. My question is there an achievement disparity between black Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box J4 sweet Horne, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 CERTlFl\"ED COPY 9 students and nonblack students\nthat's really what I'm talking about. A. The test scores reflected a difference--Q. I see. A. in those groups, yes. Q. Has there ever during your dozen years on the board--A. No. Q. Is it thirteen? A. No. Q. How many, nine? A. Seven. Q. Seven. During your seven years on the board has there ever been a time when there was not an achievement disparity between the black and the white students? A. Not as reflected on test scores that I've seen. Q. I see. Now during that time before 1998 and your tenure on the board, did the board ever by a board resolution or motion determine as its purpose to eliminate the achievement disparity between the races? 20 A. There was never a formal vote--- 21 Q. All right. 22 A. or resolution because our intent--- 23 Q. No, no, no, no, you can't keep--- 24 _ A. was always to--- 25 Q. Mrs., Mrs--- Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box #4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 - 25 CERTIFIED COPY 10 FENDLEY: She can answer. WALKER: She cannot--- A. our intent was always to--- WALKER: She can't state, just a moment, let me say this. She cannot state the intent of other people. She cannot talk about a collective intent. The only way that intent is manifested is by a vote\notherwise she's giving an opinion about somebody else's opinion or purpose. FENDLEY: Well, she can--- MAGNESS: When we voted to approve this--FENDLEY: she can give her opinion and you can make your objection to whether or not she's authorized to make that opinion or not. WALKER: See, I'm going to ask if there was a vote\nI didn't ask why there wasn't a vote. Q. Was there a vote? A. Restate your question. Q. Was there ever a vote of the board to eliminate the achievement disparity between black and white students before 1998? A. In other words someone would have said I move--- Q. Yes. A. that we eliminate disparity between--- Q. Yes, ma' am. A. No. Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box #4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 - 25 CERT\\F\\ED COPY 11 Q. I see. Now do you know what was in the minds of every board member throughout this period of time, these seven years? I'm serious since you say you know what they thought. Do you know what was in--- A. I did not say I know what they thought. Q. I see. A. and no, I do not know what they thought. Q. Well, you were fixing to say the reason that they didn't do something was because of what--you can't speak for anybody but yourself can you Mrs. Magness? A. That's correct. Q. All right. Now when you came onto the board what was the standard by which student achievement was assessed? A. At that time it was one of the national test and I am thinking that it was one of the SAT\"s, it wasn\"t IX but it was one of the ones prior to that. Q. But they have different SAT'S don't they? They have SAT IV, SAT VI--- A. Yeah, they change them. Q. Yes, but it was always a SAT test wasn\"t it\nSAT test? A. As far as I recall it was. Q. That's called a Standardized Achievement Test isn\"t it? A. With the exception of, of course, students who take the AP classes have an opportunity--- Q. To take? Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box *4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 - 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 A. to take the AP exams. Q. But let me ask you--- CERTIFIED COPY 12 A. and that would be referenced against other students across the nation that take those. Q. But my question is--what does SAT stand for, Mr--A. Standardize Achievement Test. FENDLEY: I think it's Stanford. MAGNESS: Stanford? It is Stanford, you\"re right. Stanford Achievement Test\nright, thank you. Q. Now have you all, have you all ever abandoned the Stanford Achievement Test? A. Ah, we scaled back on it. Q. When did you do so? A. About--! can't remember if it was two or three years ago because we were going to use other test that we thought would give us better information. Q. Who thought, the board, this collective board? A. Yes. Q. Did the board--- A. The board voted to do that\ncorrect. Q. They voted to do that? A. Right. Q. Did they vote the scale back on the test, the Stanford test? A. They voted to do the Stanford test in grades 4, 8, and 10 I Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box i4 sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: ( 501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 - 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY 13 believe. Q. That was enlarging it wasn't it, putting it to use in more grades wasn't it? A. No. Q. How many grades had they used it in before? A. What, it started three or third or fourth grade through eleven\nwe were giving it to all of them. Q. I see. Now those test always showed that there was an achievement gap didn't they between black and white students? A. As whole groups\nyes. Q. I see. Does not, are you familiar with the court rulings in this case? A. Well, I have read most of them that I have received\nI don\"t know what are you referring to. Q. Doesn\"t the model relate to African-American students as a group rather than as individuals? A. Yes. Q. And does not the term eliminating the achievement disparity between the races apply in your opinion, to eliminating the achievement disparity between black students or AfricanAmerican students as a race in comparison to white students or nonblack students as a race or group? A. And where are you seeing that phrasing? Q. I'm just saying, we\"re talking about the class of students being African-American aren't we? Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box t4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY 14 A. Well, and you're stating, I mean is that wording in one of the documents? Q. No. We\"re talking, if you want to have a disparity, you can fend with me if you wish, if you want to have a disparity judgment it got to be between one group and another doesn\"t it? A. Yeah, but we serve more than two groups of students. Q. I understand. But you lump the students as either for our purposes--- A. Uh-huh. Q. as either African-American or black as one group, right? A. Uh-huh. Q. And all other students--FENDLEY: Yes. A. Yes, yes\nI\"m sorry. Q. All right. All the other students are put in that category aren't they? A. For some report\nyes. Q. All right. Now do you believe that you all have committed to eliminate the achievement disparity between the races to any one at any time? A. You want to--- Q. Have you ever as a board made the commitment to eliminate achievement disparity between the races? A. In what ways are you wanting to know? Q. I'm just saying has there ever been that board commitment Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box t4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: ( 501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY 15 in a document? A. Yeah. Q. I see. Now isn\"t it true also that you committee to in taking the state\"s money, twenty million dollars, that you eliminate, that you agreed to bring the, to narrow the gap to a point where black students and white students were within ten points of each other? A. That was the old agreement. Q. Well, has the agreement with the state ever changed? Well, if you call the old agreement, has that agreement with the state ever changed? I mean I would like to see it if it has changed. Where is the state agreement. A. Well, quite frankly I don't remember the ah--do you have that, the last--- Q. The old agreement--- A. it was worked out with the state? FENDLEY: Not with me, no. MAGNESS: Okay, because I would need to be refreshed on that before I could answer anything on it. FENDLEY: I mean, you just tell him you don\"t know. MAGNESS: Okay. WALKER: That\"s fine. Q. You say the old agreement some how or another has changed and you\"re no longer committed. Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box J4 Sweet Horne, AR 72164-0004 Phone: ( 501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 - 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED copy 16 A. Now, I didn\"t say it has changed, I said the old agreement said that. Q. Well, what about are you familiar with the--is the old agreement still in effect? A. Which old, which one? Q. The one that you talked about, that old agreement that you said that was under the old agreement\nis it still--- A. I don't know, I don't know. Q. Well, tell me then what's the basis of your statement that that was under the old agreement\nso what\"s if it's under the old agreement? Has that agreement been modified in your opinion? A. I do not know. Well, let me put it this way, I don't remember. I know we have been in discussions with the state and worked something out but particulars I do not know. Q. Do you know if the Joshua Intervenors were parties to that agreement? A. I don't know. Q. Do you agree or have your lawyers informed you that they represented to the court that the revised plan on January 16, 1998 incorporated the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals seven elements which it considered to be crucial and with respect to which no retreat would be approved? A. Yes. Q. And one of them was the effort to eliminate achievement Cobb Court Reporting P . o. Box i4 Sweet Home , AR 72164- 0004 Phone : (501) 490 - 0066 (501) 490 - 0926 - Fax - - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 disparity between the races? A. Yes. CERTIFIED COPY 17 Q. Now do you agree that the only legitimate means to eliminate the racial disparity in achievement is by improving African-American achievement? A. I don't think that's the only one. Q. Have you represented to the court that that was the only legitimate one? FENDLEY: You personally? WALKER: I mean the board. A. Not me personally. Q. I mean the board. Has not the board, you were president of the board in 1998 weren't you? A. Right. Q. You read this memorandum to the district court didn't you? A. That's correct. Q. And that\"s what it says here\nisn't that your commitment? A. That's right. Q. Now are you backing away from that commitment now? A. Absolutely not. Q. I see. Now are you saying that this is not the only one? Why would you tell the court that this is only legitimate means if it's not the only one? 24 . A. No, let\"s back up. 25 Q. Just a minute. Cobb Court Reporting p, o. Box f4 sweet Horne, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 - 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY 18 A. Your question was--- Q. Just a minute, let me go back. I said do you agree that the only legitimate means to eliminate the racial disparity in achievement is by improving African-American achievement. I asked you that question and you said no, not the only one. A. It, it's not the only legitimate way. As Mr. Berkley stated--- Q. Well, why would you say that--- A. it's the only acceptable way because the other way could be that we would try to drag down other kids scores and that, and you could narrow it. Q. You don't have to drag down anybody's, you don't have to drag down any--- A. I hope not because we\"re not going to do that. Q. Just a moment, just a moment. You don't have to drag down anybody's scores if you focus on improving African-American achievement do you? A. That's correct. Q. So as you teach these white kids and you focus--A. As we teach all kids. Q. no, as you teach these white kids who are already up, you can focus on the deficiencies of the black kids can you not? A. Yes. Q. Specifically, that doesn't bring the white kids down does it Mrs. Magness? Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box #4 Sweet Horne, AR 72164-0004 Phone: ( 501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY 19 A. No. You asked me if that was the only legitimate what to do it and my answer was no, that's not the only legitimate way but that\"s the only acceptable way to do it. Q. Well, we're not talking about in this lawsuit bringing anybody\"s achievement down are we? A. I hope not Mr. Walker. Q. Well now .if you say that it's the only legitimate way if by improving African-American achievement, that means then you have to focus on African-American achievement doesn\"t it? A. Yes. Q. Which means that you, by focusing upon African-American achievement, means that you have to focus away from all students to African-American students doesn't it? A. No. Q. Doesn't it mean that if you have a disparity you have been focusing upon all children? A. Not necessarily. Q. All right. Why is the disparity there you're going to say, tell me you\"re going to say it's because of socioeconomics? A. I'm going to say there are lot of reasons for disparity. Q. What are they, what are they in your professional opinion? A. From everything I've read and heard there are several reasons we have disparity. One could be that the test are bias. Another is socioeconomic. Another is parent involvement. Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box *4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY 20 Q. What else? A. Well, of course, the experiences that the child has and the readiness to learn when they get to school. Q. Well, you knew all of these things when you all entered into the settlement agreement in '89--- A. That's right--well, I don't know about that. Q. and you knew of all of those things when you entered into it in 1998. A. That's correct. FENDLAND: You, she knew? WALKER: Meaning the board. Q. You knew those things. A. Uh-huh, yes. Q. What you're saying now is that's not something you just learned last week? A. No. Q. All right. So if you knew those things and you still make the commitment to eliminate the achievement disparity it is based isn't it that there is no inherent racial inferiority of black people? FENDLEY: Let me object to the question and you say committed to eliminate the achievement disparity. WALKER: You may. Q. First of all you do accept the notion that there is no such thing as white superiority and black inferiority, isn't that Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box #4 Sweet Horne, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY 21 correct? A. That is correct. Q. All right. So once you accept the premise that all people are equal then you have to accept the premise that all students can learn don\"t you? A. Absolutely. Q. All right. And then that means that you make them, I mean you put them in that best posture so they can learn equally well don't you? A. Yes. Q. That's why you adopted English as a second language, for instance, for the Hispanic children? A. Right. Q. And that's recognition of the fact that they had a deficiency with respect to being able to understand English--A. Uh-huh. Q. to the same extent. So that means if you focus on the Hispanics you can focus upon black people doesn't it? A. Right. Q. Now where are the focus programs that have been developed in accordance with 2.7--- A. Okay. Q. what are the focus programs? A. Some of them would include the pre-K III initiatives in the elementary schools--- cobb Court Reporting P . o . Box f4 Sweet Horne , AR 72164-0004 Phone : ( 501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 - 25 CERTIFIED COPY Q. Right. A. and the fact that we have increased our four-year-old programs and those have always been there for students whose background need enrichment. Q. Pre-K is one, what are the other programs? A. Okay, the--- FENDLAND: Pre-Kand Early, the Early one--WALKER: Early Childhood, what else. A. Ear--yeah, Early Childhood. Okay, the fourth--- 22 Q. Let me, let me, let me offer you a little bit better help. I'll let Mr. Fendley answer this question for you for the record and I'll adopt, let you adopt his answer since he\"s been on the Compliance Committee. If you want to answer for her Mr- FENDLEY: I'm not, you\"re not taking my deposition. WALKER: But I don\"t want you but I mean since you want to suggest some answers t o her. FENDLEY: I, you, she had already sai d the fouryear- old program and you--- MAGNESS: She was just, he was just repeating it. WALKER: He didn't say, she didn\"t say Early Childhood. Q. But I'm saying that's fine, if he wants to state them Cobb Court Reporting P . o. Box 14 Sweet Home , AR 72164- 0004 Phone : (501) 490 - 0066 (501) 490 - 0926 - Fax 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY 23 whatever it is I'm going to tell you they don't exist. Pre-K, that one what else? A. Early Childhood. Q. Early Childhood, thank you. A. ELLA. Q. ELLA. A. Smart Step, Smart Start. In some of our schools we\"re using Success for All which is a proven model to particularly help those students who have not come in with the skills that they need. Q. What else? A. Ah, at Washington we have ah, what is that reading programs, it's been proven very effective in one of the ah, schools in the ah, delta down in southeast. Oh, it's a reading program, Direct Instruction and it has also met with a lot of national recognition. Q. What else? A. We have changed our math and science curriculums because we could tell from the scores that we were receiving that our students were not improving--- Q. What else? A. and ah, all the programs that we have put in have been ah, nationally recognized. Q. Well, name them\nI'm not asking you to explain them. A. Okay. Reading, writing workshop in our middle schools ah, Cobb Court Reporting P . o. Box t4 Sweet Horne, AR 72164- 0004 Phone: (501) 490 - 0066 (501) 490 - 0926 - Fax 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 - 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY accelerated learning center for high school kids that needed more one-on-one and ah, another alternative--- Q. Well, just tell me the programs without explaining them. A. I might like to explain them. Q. I don't want you--- A. You may not know about them. Q. but I don't want you to explain them now but, you know, just tell me what they are. 24 A. Okay, let me see. Ah, increased use of computers which ah, can offer if used properly enhance instruction and achievement. Q. All right. A. We are improving our fine arts program with a new fine arts director--- Q. All right. A. based on research recently. And we went to the middle school concept, that's not exactly a program, that's more of a framework in which to put the programs. Q. All right, what else? A. But the framework also--Q. I'm not asking--- A. made it easier--- Q. I'm not asking for you to explain them--A. I am to explain to you that--- Q. No, no, I want you to answer my question. FENDLEY: But she\"s--Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box t4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: ( 501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY WALKER: No, no, no, no, she can't explain. FENDLEY: she's not wasting time. WALKER: No, no, no, no, no. I'm not, only asking her to identify the programs, I'm not asking her to explain them. 25 FENDLEY: Well, she\"s identifying some of them in my interpretation by explaining what they are as opposed to giving a name. WALKER: All right. If you don\"t mind her staying that's fine. MAGNESS: I have all afternoon. WALKER: Well good, thank you. Thank you, you know I can stay all night. A. Ah, the middle school structure does help our kids because a group of kids are taught by a group of teachers which hopefully then allows teachers to really be on top of the achievement of the students and give them any extra help they need, be sure they don't fall through the cracks, et cetera. I'll stop there. Q. No, I want the other programs, I want you to tell me all of the programs that you all have adopted. A. Those are the ones that I can think of off the top of my head. Well, we do have some other good ones of course like East Labs, Cisco, university School--- Q. Cisco, okay go ahead\nUniversity School, what else? Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box *4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 A. E-Slabs. Q. Okay. CERTIFIED COPY 26 A. And then we have our good program an McClellan the business education program that is, has been recognized and won lots of awards. Q. Has it won awards in Little Rock or won--A. Yes, yes. Q. Okay, when was that? A. Ah, either last year or the year before and then two years before that. Q. All right. All right, keep going. A. Well, let me see. At Central we have International Studies, Magnet. Q. All right, what else? A. umm, that's enough. Q. That\"s enough I'll as--- A. That\"s just ah, that\"s just a cross section. Q. Well, that's fine. I have listened and you more so than any of the other board members have identified these programs. But 2.71 talks about program evaluation. A. That's correct. Q. Have these programs been evaluated that you have just mentioned? A. Ah, some of them have--- Q. Well, the ones that are listed on here, I don\"t see a Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box #4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 - 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY single one that you listed on there, on here being listed on page 148 as having been evaluated. A. Okay. Q. Look, look, now make sure, look at--- A. 2.7. whatever does not say that it has to be a yearly written, formal, evaluation does it? 27 Q. Well now I don't know how you interpret this but I'm saying at least none of the programs that you have mentioned appear to have been listed under what you all reported to the court had been done as of March 15. Now I stand to be corrected, you say here program evaluation and you understand you all were committed to make program evaluation? A. Right, uh-huh. Q. All right. And then you say that in addition to--A. Well, your middle school was evaluated--- Q. Well, just a moment. A. and science was evaluated, science and math was evaluated. Q. Well now look, look. A. Uh-huh. Q. Math--show me if you can see middle school on there as something you reported to the court as having been evaluated? A. Ah, yes, it's up in one of the top paragraphs on here I think. Q. What does it say? A. Ah, let me let your read it. It's right in here. Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box *4 sweet Horne, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY 28 FENDLEY: Just for the record she's referring to the paragraphs under the heading Program Evaluation which discusses the board research agenda. Q. It says, P-R-E, is this what you\"re referring to? P-R-E prepared the initial components of the evaluations for pre-K III literacy, the National Science Foundation Project components, and the implementation of middle schools in August of 2000, that's the initial components. Now are you saying that you all have seen those final evaluations? A. We saw a draft--- Q. That's yes or no. Have you seen a final evaluation--A. Not the final. FENDLEY: She can answer any way she wants to. WALKER: My question is my question. FENDLEY: She doesn't have to answer yes or no. Q. Have you seen a final evaluation? I don't mean to fend with you, have you seen a final evaluation? A. No. Q. All right. And isn't it true that the board did not accept the evaluations that were presented? A. We saw the draft evaluations that were presented and we did not think that they were thorough enough--- Q. Mrs. Magness--- A. and we had questions about them so rather than accept flawed what we considered to be not as good as we would like Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box J4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 - 25 CERTIFIED COPY 29 evaluations, no we did not formally accept those. Q. All right now, I want you to have an understanding. If I want you opinion about how other people thought, I'll ask it. If I want an opinion about what the board did, I'll ask that. I object to anything where you speculate about the motivation of other people. Now this situation--- A. Well, obviously if we didn't formally accept them, we did not think they were what we wanted. Q. That's right. Now have you ever received what you wanted with respect to the evaluations that were presented? A. Which evaluations? Q. The ones that you referred to that you did not accept? A. We have not accepted a final evaluation of those programs. Q. I see. But yet you told the court that you had finally evaluated those programs didn't you? FENDLEY: Object as to form, that's not what we told the court. Q. Didn't you tell us that the evaluations had been completed? A. I don't know. Q. That's fine. Now I notice here you have Success For All as a program with some great review, is that right? A. It supposedly is and yes, it is working in some of our schools. Q. Okay. Were you aware that Dr. Lesley had eliminated Success For All in a number of schools? Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box #4 sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 - 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY FENDLEY: Object as to form--Q. Were you aware of that? FENDLEY: it assumes facts not in evidence. WALKER: Well, it may not be in evidence but we're not in court. Q. Were you aware that she has eliminated Success For All? A. I was aware--- FENDLEY: Object as to the form of the questions. Q. Well, do you know whether she has, I'll put it that way. Do you know whether she's eliminated Success For All because 30 her notion was--first of all do you know if she's eliminated it before this year? A. Ah, I know that Success For All--- Q. Do you know is my question, do you know if she had eliminated the Success For All programs in a number of schools? FENDLEY: Let the witness answer. WALKER: That's what I'm asking, do you know if she did that? A. I know that Success For All was taken out of some schools because it was not effective. Q. All right. Now have you seen any written evaluation from anybody including Dr. Lesley to the effect that Success For All was not effective in a particular school, a written eval--- A. Yes. Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box f4 Sweet Home , AR 72164- 0004 Phone : ( 501) 490 - 0066 (501) 490 - 0926 - Fax 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY Q. Where are those evaluations now and when--A. Well, it's not--- Q. when can I see them? 31 A. it is the result of tests that were given the students and their academic achievement. Q. Let me ask you my question. You understand Mrs. Magness, you told me you were a college graduate too, so nobody here can say that they don\"t understand questions. A written evaluation is an evaluation that I can put finger on and see. Is there a written evaluation which determined from the PRE Department that determine that Success For All was not a working program? A. Well, I don\"t know what you're looking for in a written evaluation Mr. Walker what, what components do you want to be there? What do you want it to look like? Q. Mrs. Magness, first of all have you seem such a written evaluation, that's all\ni f so I'd like to see it. But have you seen such an evaluation? A. I told you that I have seen the test results--- Q. I'm not asking about the test results, I'm talking wri--A. That's all I've seen on them. Q. Now you understand an evaluation is more than test results don't you? A. So eliminating--Q. No, no, no--- A. the disparity gap--- cobb Court Reporting P . o . Box t4 Sweet Horne , AR 72164-0004 Phone : (501) 490 - 0066 (501) 490 - 0926 - Fax 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY 32 Q. no, no, no, now lis--- A. would be more than just test scores? Q. listen. Do you understand that you as a board set up and approved an evaluation model and format? A. umm, yes. Q. I see. Do you expect evaluations to be made pursuant to that model and format? A. Yes. Q. Have you ever seen an evaluation of Success For All pursuant to that format? A. No. Q. I see. A. But that has never been one of the ones on our agenda specifically. Q. Well, you listed--- A. Now the evaluation will be of like what was the achievement of students in reading K-3. Q. Well, what were--- A. that program will be involved in trying to raise those achievement levels. Q. Well can you tell me what is on the agenda for complying with 2.71 by board motion, by board motion--- A. Uh-huh. Q. can you tell me which programs are there? A. The ones that were evaluated last year--cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box t4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: ( 501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 , 25 CERTIFIED COPY Q. National Science, Early Literacy, and Middle School? A. And English as a second language and quite frankly I've forgotten what we put down for this year. Q. Well, I don\"t see National Science being evaluated here. FENDLEY: You're not looking. 33 WALKER: I see that you said--you indicated that it was evaluated sufficiently to make a judgment so I determined that wasn\"t an evaluation\nso am I wrong about that? A. It was an evaluation. Q. All right, that's fine. A. It was that we had other questions and it was to be ah, looked at again, our questions answered and brought back. Q. So that the evaluation was incomplete? A. Right. Q. So you\"re saying that you're going to rest on an incomplete evaluation as an evaluation in compliance with 2.71? A. I'm going to say that for me I will accept that for this last year but because it is not what I think it should be, I will not accept it further. Q. Now show me anywhere on here where you have applied, where you have evaluated the Early Literacy program? A. Ah, right here. Q. You prepared the initial components of evaluation for pre-k through literacy. That means that you set an agenda doesn\"t it? It doesn\"t mean that you have made an evaluation does it Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box #4 sweet Home, AR 72164- 0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax 2 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY Mrs. ah--- A. I have seen an evaluation of that. Q. Well, what is it called and who has it? FENDLAND: You've got it. SPRINGER: No we don't. 34 WALKER: Well, that's fine. Is that what you've referred to as the draft Mrs. Magness? A. Ah, the one I saw was a draft, yes. SPRINGER: Thank you. Q. I see. Well, you don\"t call a draft an evaluation do you? A. I call it a draft evaluation Mr. Walker, what would you want me to call it\na draft funny word sheet? Q. Well, have you seen any final evaluation of any of the programs contemplated under 2.7 or 71, a final evaluation of any--- A. Not, not a final evaluation of specific programs. Have I seen the result of the achievement increased and achievement results of those\nyes. Q. Have you been informed by Dr. Lesley that the evaluation by Dr. Nunnery that is referred to here on page 148 was an incompetent evaluation? A. Nope. Q. Did you consider his evaluation to be competent? A. I haven't seen it. Q. Have you any--- cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box #4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY A. Unless his, unless he, I mean, he was, I think he was involved in the draft versions that we saw. Q. I see. Are you a friend of Dr. Lesley's? A. Yes. Q. I see. Do you spend a lot of time with her? A. No. Q. Do you spend a lot of time in receiving her e-mails? A. No. Q. Do you receive any e-mails from her? A. I\"ve received one or two. Q. Do you send her e-mails? A. I've responded to one. Q. I see. WALKER: Mr. Fendley can we have those? MAGNESS: You should have it. WALKER: Not from Mrs. Magness. 35 FENDLEY: If they\"re still available\nwe'll see. MAGNESS: I doubt if they are, I delete mine regularly. WALKER: Well, we know there is a deletion program, are you familiar with the administrative regulation on deletion of e-mails? A. Huh-uh. FENDLEY: No. Q. Did you know that one had been promulgated by the Cobb Court Reporting P, 0, Box t4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 - 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY 36 superintendent saying that to keep these jokers for two weeks and then they're to be eliminated? FENDLEY: That's a paraphrase. WALKER: Fifteen days and they\"re supposed to be moved off. A. I think that's a good practice. Isn't that what they do in business? Q. No, ma'am. Are you familiar with the fact that the court has said that when you eliminate these--are you familiar with the court saying that if you have eliminated them after the request has been made--- A. Uh-huh. Q. She will construe ah, she will, she will determine an adverse inference upon that fact? Now do you know what an adverse inference is? A. No. Q. An adverse inference I would take would be--the inference is that the information deleted would be helpful to the person seeking it. A. Uh. Oh, if I've got them I mean I, you know--Q. You've got them, that's fine. A. No, I said if I have them you're more than welcome to'em. Q. All right. Now I understand that you and Mr. ah, Dr. Darty have a material disagreement over the accomplishments of the school district with respect to remediation, is that fair to Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box #4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY 37 say? A. I don\"t know. Q. Did you not take issue with his statement at the school board meeting last week or week before last? A. Urnrn, I took--not, no. Q. You did not, that's fine. A. No. Q. Do you believe that the achievement gap that exist in the Little Rock School District between black and white students can be eliminated? A. I believe that--- Q. That's a yes or no\nI don't want an explanation now. FENDLEY: Let me, I'll object then because you didn\"t put any sort of time frame on there. Q. I just asked you if you believe that it can be eliminated\nthat's yes or no. FENDLEY: Ever? WALKER: Mr., please don\"t try to influence my answer. Q. Do you believe it can be eliminated? A. Well, I'll ask, in what time frame? Q. See you suggested--- A. So a little more. Q. No, no. Do you believe that the achievement gap can be eliminated by the Little Rock School District? Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box t4 sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY 38 A. Yes. Q. I see. Now I'll ask you the question, over what time frame will it take at the minimum? A. I don\"t know. Q. Will it take 12 years? A. I\"m not going to put a time on it. Q. I see. But you do acknowledge that there has to be if that as a goal before you can begin to address the subject, elimination? A. I am not as concerned about looking at that--Q. Mrs. Magness listen to the question--- A. if I am seeing that--- Q. I\"m not asking about your concerns--A. every--- Q. I'm only concerned about you--A. student does--- FENDLEY: Let her--WALKER: No--- A. to the best--- FENDLEY: finish her answer. WALKER: I'm only concerned that you answer my question. A. that that student can do. WALKER: I'm only--- REPORTER: One at a time, please. Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box t4 sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY 39 Q. I'm only concerned about your answer to my question. This is not a lawsuit about getting every student to do what, the best he can\nyou understand that don't you? A. No. Q. Is it your understanding that this lawsuit is about getting every student to be able to do the best he can\nis that your understanding? A. That the lawsuit is about every student achieving high academic--- Q. So that's your belief? You understand in the world Mrs. Magness that not every student can be a high achiever academically\nyou understand that don't you? White and black students and not everyone can be a high achiever? A. No, but they can do--I want them to be able to--Q. Mrs., Mrs--- A. achieve the most they can. Q. But there is not way for determining what a person's limits are is there? There\"s no way for you to determine that. A. No. Q. So the point here is and you understand that the law requires that students who have been the victim of discrimination be the ones who are the target of remediation. They're the ones who are owed the remedy\nyou know that don't you? A. Say that again. Cobb Court Reporting P, o. Box #4 sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone, ( 501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 - 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY Q. Upon the finding of discrimination---A. Uh-huh. 40 Q. and there is a class defined, you then have what's called victims of discrimination. And the remedy has to apply to the victims, you understand that do you not? A. Yes. Q. I see. Now the remedy has to be specifically applied to the interest of black children here, do you understand that? A. Uh-huh. Q. And not white children. FENDLEY: You need to say yes or no. MAGNESS: Right, okay. FENDLEY: I mean that\"s for the record, she can\"t get uh-huh or huh-uh. MAGNESS: Wait, I\"m sorry. A. Say that last one again. Q. The remedy goes to black children not to white children. A. Right. Q. All right. Now are there any programs that you know of including middle school, early literacy and National Science that goes specifically to remediating the academic achievement disparities that black students suffer? A. Yes, all those. Q. What is the intended incremental remediation of black student deficiency on an annual basis expected by this school Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box #4 sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 - 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 . 25 CERTIFIED COPY 41 district? A. Explain that a little more. FENDLEY: Do you need to turn your tape over. Q. we understand that students, Mrs. Magness we understand if you have students in 30 percentile and white in the 60 that the goal is not to move the whites up but it's to move the blacks up\ndo you accept that premise? REPORTER: One moment. You may continue. Do you accept that premise, that was his last words. A. Ah, say it again one more time. Q. Do you accept that where the white students are already beyond the national norm, the 60 percentile or above in general and the blacks are way below say in the 30 percent, that the goal is to move the blacks, the black students, the AfricanAmerican students closer to the white students? A. I accept that as a goal. Q. Fine. And isn't it true that your plans and programs have to be focus upon doing that? A. Yes. Q. All right. And it's not to be trying to get these white students as far as they can go? A. I think we can do both. Q. Now the focus of the law, the requirement of the lawsuit is to remediate the underachievement of blacks students isn't it? A. It is to increase--- cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box *4 sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: ( 501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY 42 Q. Can you say yes or no to that? A. No. Q. You can't, that's fine. I want you to say no because you don't believe it\nI understand where you're--- FENDLEY: Well, she didn't say she didn't believe that. WALKER: Well, your belief is--A. I did not say I didn't believe that. Q. Your belief has been stated many times Mrs. Magness is we're here committed to teach all children and get them as far as they can go\nthat's your position. A. That's right. Q. All right. And that means doesn't it Mrs. Magness that it's not upon dealing with the lowest achievement group? A. Yes, it is dealing with the lowest achievement group. Q. All right. You saw your report which said what has happened in the district is this: There are some modest black gains and there are some gains for whites but nonetheless the gap is not changing yet. But what is happening is that the poorest white students are suffering while black students are gaining\nyou did not see that report? A. No. Q. All right. The gains have come, for white kids have at the expense of poor white kids, have you seen that? A. No. Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box #4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY Q. You understand that when black students don\"t learn poor white kids don\"t learn either? 43 A. When any student does not learn any group of students in a classroom do not learn then I would say most of them are not in that classroom. Q. The evidence is that white students continue to learn and improve, your own record shows--- A. So are you saying that our black kids are not smart enough to do that? Q. The record shows here that your focus is upon improving the education of all students, so your teachers work with those students they're most comfortable with. A. I disagree. FENDLEY: Object as to form. Q. All right, you may disagree. All right, well then how can you--when you say Mrs. Magness that it\"s easier to get a group of students in a lower percentile, say 20 to 30 percentile up 15 or 20 points then it would be to get a student in the 60th or 70th percentile up 10 or 15 points? A. I would say it would depend on the age of the student and the grade level. Q. Mrs. Magness just it's a matter of reasoning the person--A. Uh-huh. Q. whose got the furthest to go has the possibility of making the greatest gain\nisn't that correct? Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box H sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: ( 501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 - 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY 44 A. Has the possibility, yes. Q. I see. But in this district over the years the only gains on the SAT anyway are reflected for white students. A. I disagree. Q. Can you tell me any time in the last four years when that was not reflected? A. No, I cannot. Q. So in the last four years you acknowledge that those--- A. No, I don't know. Q. Have you looked at the SAT results? A. Yes, but I have not--I don't remember comparing them. Q. Have you heard Dr. Lesley say that the achievement disparity in lower grades, I think second or third grade pre-k through 3 has been eliminated? A. No, not eliminated. Q. Have you heard her say that it's to the point where it statistically inconsequential? A. No--- Q. I see. A. I don't remember her saying that. Q. I see. A. I know that we, that our programs that we have put in there have improved the achievement level of all the students. Q. Mrs. Magness can you explain why the predominantly black schools do not have lower class sizes then the mixed schools? Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box #4 sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: ( 501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY A. I don't know whether they do or not. Q. You haven't seen your own report? A. I hav--I don't remember reading the report that said the size of the classrooms. Q. Do you recall previously testifying that it was contemplated that there would be smaller classes for those children who were in the most disadvantaged circumstances? A. I\"ve never testified before. Q. You've never given a deposition before? A. No. FENDLEY: In this case? MAGNESS: Not in this case. Q. Well, maybe it's at the school board meeting. Have you ever taken that position publicly? A. Okay, say it again. 45 Q. That the children in the most disadvantaged circumstances needed to have the lower pupil/teacher ratios? A. I don\"t remember saying that. Q. Do you believe that? A. I believe--well, if I had all the money in the world and could design the school, I would make all pre-K through second at least 1 to 15. Q. Mrs. Magness if you have a group of--you understand when children come to school they come there as a reflection of their environment? Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box t4 sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: ( 501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 - 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY A. [Witness nodding head up and down.] Q. Is that right? REPORTER: Answer verbally. A. Oh--- Q. You said oh, and she was nodding yes. A. Yes, yes\nI was thinking on that. 46 Q. Now you understand that the children from Mr. Rose\"s and Mrs. Strickland's area who come to school score lower, white children from their area score lower than the children who come from your area? A. I wouldn\"t agree to that. Q. Would you not agree that the children whom they represent who are white are generally as a group of lower socioeconomic status compared to your children, the kids in yours? A. No. Q. Are you familiar with the census tracks which show the relative socioeconomic status of students? A. No, I have not\nI don't remember seeing that. Q. Do you believe that the children in southwest Little Rock, the white students in southwest Little Rock have the same socioeconomic status as the ones in your census track? A. Some of them. Q. Well now we know that there are some blacks who do and there are some whites--- A. Uh-huh. Cobb Court Reporting P . o. Box t4 Sweet Home , AR 72164- 0004 Phone : ( 501) 490 - 0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY 47 Q. but we\"re talking about groupings. would you think--- A. So now you\"re talking about all of southwest Little Rock? Q. No, no, I\"m just saying the census tracks there. Would you not agree Mrs. Magness that if you were dealing with only white students and you didn't have a black student around and you had poor kids who happened to be white irrespective of where they lived but they lived in groups and you had schools for them and you had middle class to rich kids and you had schools for them, wouldn\"t you feel that those students from the lower group would have lower test scores on standardize test when they entered school than the ones in the well-to-do group? A. When they entered school? Q. Yes, ma' am. A. Yes. Q. And would not those test score disparities remain throughout absent int ervention by the school district? A. I don\"t know that. Q. All right. But at least if you recognize it the goal is to get these students up to the same level as it is the other students isn\"t it? A. Uh-huh. Q. All right. Which means then the teachers over here with these students have more work to do in order to move them ahead at a comparable, so they can be at a comparable level than the students over here? Cobb Court Reporting P . O. Box i4 sweet Home , AR 72164- 0004 Phone : ( 501) 490 - 0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax 4 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY A. I don't know that. Q. Is not that reasonable Mrs. Magness? A. I don't know. Q. So then why do we talk about socioeconomic status if socioeconomic status doesn't mean anything? One of your arguments to me have been this is all attributed to socioeconomic standards. A. No, I did not say that. Q. Did you not indicate at the board meeting that the differences in achievement were due to socioeconomic status? A. No. Q. Did you hear Dr. Lesley say that? A. No. Q. Did she not say anything even comparable to that? A. Socioeconomic status was discussed. 48 Q. All right, that's fine. Doesn't it stand to reason if you got a group of kids over here who can't really read and don't have worldly experiences and don't have two-parent families and support systems that the teachers are going to have to work more with them than a group of differently situated students over here? A. I don't know. Q. Can you honestly say you don't know Mrs. Magness? A. I can honestly say that. Q. I see. Did you agree years ago to double funding? Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box t4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY A. No, I was not in on that decision. Q. Do you support double funding now? A. Umm, I'm supporting it because I have agreed to it with this plan. Q. But do you support it conceptually? 49 A. Conceptually I support putting the money and the resources where they're needed the most. Q. Well, go back to my hypothetical. A. Okay. Q. The students over here start out lower and they're all white [indicating with right hand]. A. Okay. If, well, it doesn't matter to me--- Q. The students over here [indicating with left hand]--A. what color these kids are--- Q. so my point is--- A. or what their background is--Q. but I'm saying--- A. what I want Mr. Walker--- Q. just a moment, listen to my question\nlet me finish. My question is a nonracial hypothetical\nso race isn't an issue now. You got poor kids over here [indicating with right hand] who are white and you\"ve got rich kids over here [indicating with left hand] and the white kids are behind over here [motioning with right hand] and these are at National norms or about [indicating with left hand]. Where did put in my Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box *4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 - 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY 50 hypothetical--- FENDLAND: Just for the record Mr. Walker, you\"re not going to be able to see which hand you're point to. WALKER: Well now, one hand, other hand. Q. Now do you devote more resources to the underachievers or to the high achievers? A. You devote the resources wherever they're needed. If the underachievers need the resources because the way that their school is structured and the way their teachers are teaching, need more resources then yes, that's where they go. Q. Listen to my question. A. You also have to be sure that you have the necessary resources that will meet the needs of these kids. Q. But now in the hypothetical you would acknowledge that the need is greatest to bring these kids up over there [indicating with right hand]? A. The need is the greatest there. Q. So that means you should put more resources--- FENDLEY: For the poor kids is what you\"re--A. For the poor kids. Q. Yes. So you should put more resources in the area where the poor children are, isn't that correct? A. Again Mr. Walker it depends--- Q. Under your hypothetical. A. it depends on how those, how that is going to be addressed, Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box #4 sweet Horne, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY 51 what is going to be done to bring those kids up, to raise their achievement levels. Q. Well, the need--- A. And if it requires more money and more resources, yes. Q. Well, do you not feel that it's going to necessarily require more resources when the children are poorer? A. It may. Q. All right. Now let's just talk about reality for a moment. Now I\"ve spoken to Mrs. Strickland about this and I don't know whether she's backing away from it but you look at McClellan and, McClellan especially and Mabelvale and Cloverdale and you compare those facilities with Central or Parkview, you acknowledge that McClellan is not the equal physically don't you of Parkview and Central? A. In what way? Q. The physical facilities. Even the appearance of the thing, the interior of the building, I mean you acknowledge that don't you? A. Well no. Q. That's fine. A. I would say McClellan and, you know, probably doesn't look any worse than Central. Now Parkview is newer so, you know, it looks better. Q. I see. Now would you not acknowledge that in general the schools of the southwest are not equal to the schools in the Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box #4 Sweet Horne, AR 72164-0004 Phone: ( 501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 - 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY 52 west? A. No. Q. I see. would you not acknowledge that the teacher turnover in the schools in the southwest is greater than it is in the schools in the west? A. I don\"t know that. Q. Do you not acknowledge that the educational need for educational achievement is different in the southwest than it is in the west? A. In what ways? Q. Well, they, you have more underachieving students as determined by standardize test in the southwest than you do in the west. A. Now when you\"re saying west what, what are you--- Q. I'm saying Pulaski Heights, that northwest, Pulaski Heights, Forest Heights, Parkview, those schools as over against Coverdale and Mabelvale. A. And the question was? Q. You know, just the achievement level of students? A. I'm trying to remember. Now Parkview I think we should take out since it is a magnets but--- Q. Let\"s, just assume, just assume for my instance, you can deal with assumption\nlet's assume that that's for real. If you're trying to get all students to more or less the same achievement level, you put the resources in the area do you not Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box t4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 - 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY where the deficiencies are evident don't you? A. I would think so\nyes. 53 Q. That means then that you should have instead of equal resources in all schools, you should have greater resources in some schools than others doesn't it? A. And as I recall--- Q. Doesn't that mean that, yes or no? A. this says equitable. Q. Well, we're talking about resources here. Now if we know the schools in the southwest are deficient in terms of what they can do, in terms of money, you don't try to have an equal thing across the board do you? A. I don't know that I would agree with the deficient. Q. I see, I see. I don't need to have any further--I think that ah, I just have one or two more questions\njust a moment. [A recess was taken at 2:08 p.m., proceedings resumed at 2:09 p.m., to-wit:] REPORTER: We are on the record, sir and you may continue. DIRECT EXAMINATION CON'T Questions by Mr. Walker Con't: Q. Did the board ever publicly discuss the issue before Dr. Carnine began approaching the State Department of Education about loan forgiveness or the subject of loan forgiveness? A. Okay, say the first of that again. Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box t4 Sweet Horne, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax 2 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY 54 Q. Did the board--let me change that question. Did the board ever authorize Dr. Corinine to approach the State Department of Education about loan forgiveness of the 20 million dollar loan\ndid they do that by a motion? A. I don't remember. Q. Did you, did the board ever make an evaluation of whether it had remediated any portion of the achievement disparity that it committed to the State of Arkansas that it would eliminate? A. You\"re going to have to go further on that. FENDLEY: Object to the form of the question. Q. Was any elimination in the disparity gap known to the board as of January 2001 as evidence by a writing the board had before it? A. Umm, as in a formal document? Q. Yes, ma'am. A. No. Q. All right. Did Dr. Corinine in a public meeting ever inform you that he was meeting with me with respect to loan forgiveness during the meetings that he was having with the State Department of Education on that subject? A. Not that I remember. Q. Did you feel that you all were committed to the agreement with the state to remediate achievement disparities between black and white students to the extent of 10 percent? A. Say that again? Cobb Court Reporting P . o . Box t4 Sweet Home , AR 72164- 0004 Phone : (501) 490 - 0066 (501) 490 - 0926 - Fax 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY 55 Q. Did you feel that the board was committed to fulfill its agreement with the state to remediate achievement disparities as provided--- A. So now I can tell you if I feel the board was and read their minds? Q. No, I\"m asking did the board ever have, let's read the, I'm not asking you--what's the question? FENDLEY: It's exactly--- WALKER: Let's take the question. Q. Did the board ever commit to the state that it would remediate achievement disparity, I'm going to do it in three steps, did it ever do that? A. Ah, that was part of the agreement--Q. That's right. A. in '89. Q. All right now what steps did the board take to comply with that\nto do that what steps did it take to comply with that? FENDLEY: Wel l, let me just object as to form because that assumes--- MAGNESS: Right. FENDLEY: ah, since a standard was never decided under that test, we could have met that standard in 1989. Q. My question now--- FENDLEY: So there wouldn\"t be any ah, issue of remedying anything. Cobb Court Reporting P . o. Box i4 Sweet Horne , AR 72164- 0004 Phone : (501) 490 - 0066 (50 1 ) 490 - 0926 - Fax - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 - 25 CERTIFIED COPY 56 WALKER: Well, that's an argument for me counsel that he has not been successful on and the judge told him that the other day when you weren\"t in court. FENDLEY: Well, I'll object to that, that's not true. WALKER: She told you, he told him in no uncertain terms when you weren't in court that she wasn\"t buying that you all did not have a duty to eliminate or remediate achievement disparities and he can get the transcript and see it. Q. You haven't been told that have you? A. John, we're all trying to eliminate and remediate the disparity score, we're all trying. Q. I haven't heard you, I haven\"t heard you say one thing that leads me to believe that you are. Your notion is that you education the children and they learn if they want to and you're teaching all children. FENDLEY: Object, that's argue--Q. That's what I've heard. FENDLEY: you're just arguing with the witness. Q. Now I'm asking you did you have a commitment to the board to do that, to the State Board of Education to eliminate disparity? A. The board in '89 made that commitment. Q. All right. Did the board, any subsequent board which you Cobb Court Reporting P. O. Box t4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 were on--- A. We did not, we--- Q. back away, back away--A. no. CERTIFIED COPY Q. All right. Is that still the commitment? 57 A. It is still, as far as I know, nothing has changed\nit is still the board's commitment to eliminate the disparity between the races. Q. In achievement? A. Yes. Q. I see. What is the timetable that the board has for eliminating--- A. We do not have--Q. the disparity? A. a timetable. Q. So it could take a thousand years? A. It could. Q. That's good. Did Dr. Corinine ever tell you that it was contemplated that the Joshua Intervenors would have a role before matters got to you in the development of policies, programs, and procedures with respect to the revised desegregation plan? A. Okay, say your first part again? Q. Did he tell you that before things came to the board for approval--- cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box #4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: ( 501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY 58 A. Uh-huh. Q. that the Joshua Intervenors would have a role in the development of programs, policies, and procedures? A. Not in those specific words. Q. In any words did he tell you that? A. It was my understanding that it would be ah, a cooperative effort and that I am, you would receive as much information as we could possibly get to you and that and, you know, we were going to work on this together. Q. Now what was your source of that information Mrs. Magness? A. Well, this whole document. Q. That's fine. were you informed by Dr. Corinine that we were being so involved? A. That was my understanding. Q. Did you receive, were you aware of a statement that we made--were you aware of the statement that I made before the board that I refer to on July 22, 1999 that we were not being involved in the planning\ndo you recall me--let me just draw my attention to this right here. In bullet number 4 down here, this is response #2 and #17 to your answers to interrogatories. The four little squares is what I'm referring to. A. I know, I just wanted to read the rest of it. Q. I don't want you to read the rest of it right now, I'll give you a copy of it and you have, we have given all of these to your lawyer so if they want to share it with you they can. Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box #4 Sweet Horne, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY 59 But do you recall me appearing before the board and telling you in 1999 that we were not being involved? A. I'm trying to remember if I was at that board meeting. Q. That's fine. Well, the minutes will reflect but you don't recall it right now do you? A. Not at this moment. Q. I'll take that back then and Mr. Fendley, I would appreciate if you would ask him to share all these answers to interrogatories with you all. A. Which bullet were you talking about on here? Q. The fourth down that's square, down at the bottom. A. Oh, on the very bottom. Q. It says that the Joshua Intervenors were not being involved. A. Well, am I missing it. Q. If you will show to me and I'll show it to you what I'm talking about. A. Oh, okay, just that one little sentence. Q. Yes, ma'am. Well, there were several others. \"We all agree that Dr. Roberts role was to be more significant and had not been significant.\" Well, I won't go--you just don't have a recollection of that and that's understandable. Were you informed that the Joshua Intervenors were go be involved in the compliance program and trying to see to it that things worked? A. In what ways? Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box #4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: ( 501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY 60 Q. Based on your understanding from Corinine or anybody in 1999, did you have an impression as to the role of the Joshua Intervenors with respect to help and to work things out? A. umm, yes, that--- Q. All right. A. yeah. Q. All right. Now was it your understanding that there were Compliance Committee meetings going on throughout this period? A. That's right. Q. Were you aware that the Joshua Intervenors sought to be involved in those meetings? A. Yes. Q. Were you aware that we were denied that privilege? A. Yes. Q. What would be the reason for keeping Joshua out of those compliance meetings when the purpose of the plan was for us to work together? A. Because that was an internal working committee--Q. That's fine. A. that needed to work through problems and offer, and come up with solutions and then at that point I would think would be the time your involvement would be needed. Q. I see. But you were aware that Mr. Fendley was involved in those meetings were you? A. Yes. Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box *4 sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 - 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY 61 Q. I see. What was it--- A. Well, not all of them I don't think was he--I don't know. Q. Well, didn't he have a role in that committee? A. I understood that he did attend, I don't know that he attended every one of them. Q. What was it that Mr. Fendley could contribute to that committee that even approach what I could contribute to it? A. [Laughing]. Q. I'm talking about I'm another party, we're trying to work things our--- A. Uh-huh. Q. he's simply the lawyer and the understanding was that we are trying to work these things out so that when they come to the board that can become a beta comply and if there are difference at that time we'll bring them to the attention of the board so the board can make the judgment, what was wrong with that approach? A. It was nothing wrong with that approach and it should have been done but I still didn't feel like that you should be sitting in on the compliance meetings. Q. That's fine. A. I mean if you want to work on things for the districts and programs and things we can do at your office and we'll be glad to come down and sit in on it. Q. Were you aware that we did it, that we were involved in a Cobb Court Reporting P . o . Box t4 sweet Horne , AR 72164- 0004 Phone : (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY 62 number of the committees of the board? A. Yes. Q. Well why, if we can be involved in helping to deal with then handbook--- A. Uh-huh. Q. and with the Research Committee--A. Uh-huh. Q. other things, what made compliance, those were compliance issues, what made compliance off limits? A. It was not off limits. The committee which was made up of the, as I understand it, the senior administrators whose responsibility was to see that this program was done. It was their meeting to discuss with, you know, among themselves, be sure that communication was going back and forth from all the different divisions, being sure that we were doing this the best we could and then, I mean we weren't in on any of those either, board members were not\nnobody was in on those. Q. Did you expect that the superintendent would be involve? A. He would have to be kept up to speed on it. Q. I see. So you're letting three or four people talk about, and Mr. Fendley talk about compliance issues and then maybe you would share some of those wi th us? Was there a party less integral to the whole process than the Joshua Intervenors? FENDLEY: Was there a party less integral? Q. Less integral to whole process than the Joshua--cobb Court Reporting P . o. Box 14 Sweet Home , AR 72164 - 0004 Phone : (501) 490 - 0066 (501) 490 - 0926 - Fax 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY 63 A. What does that mean? Q. If you don\"t understand it then I'll go on. A. I don\"t understand, less integral. Q. integral. Did you ever receive any reports from the Compliance Committee? A. Yes. Q. In a public board meeting? A. Yes. Q. And they told you what they were doing? A. Yes. Q. So those ought to be reflected in the minutes? A. Well, let me back up to say that what were was getting was ah, reports our regular agendas about ah, Mr. Babbs would make a report and there were times when we would get reports from different of the associate or assistance, which was the second, the next one down as to what was being done in their division\nyes. Q. Now the only thing I recall those things being were statements by Mr. Babbs telling you that he had met with Dr. Roberts, he had picked him up at the airport or--- A. We heard from Dr. Roberts. Q. wait a minute, I'm talking about the compliance and that ah--- A. That's all part of it. Q. you had a meeting but nothing substantively ever appeared Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box t4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: ( 501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY 64 on your agenda. Well, let me say if it did ah, we ought to be able to get it. So you're saying that you received reports from Mr. Babbs substantive in nature dealing with the Compliance Committee activities and I'm accepting that--- A. No, wait, wait, wait, wait--- Q. so I'm asking now Mr. Fendley--A. back up. Q. for copies of all those things. A. Hold it. SPRINGER: The minutes, we can get the minutes. A. I didn't, I did not say that. I said we got reports from the Compliance Committee, I didn't say it was about their activities. Q. Well, what else would it be now you\"re getting upon the stand--- A. Okay, it would be like policies and procedures and programs and test results and Dr. Roberts and different things that were going on within the district that were necessary and needed to help us to comply with what we have said we would do\nthat's what I meant Mr. walker. WALKER: All right. Then I would like to get Mr. Fendley, copies of all the reports that were sent by Mr. Babbs to the board members that had been to the board meetings regarding the Compliance Committee. MAGNESS: There are none regarding the Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box #4 Sweet Horne, AR 72164-0004 Phone: ( 501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY 65 Compliance Committee. Q. Well Mrs. Magness, my question deal with what reports did you get from Mr. Babbs or anyone else regarding the Compliance Committee and its work. And you\"re telling me now that they sent various things to you and I just like to have a copy it, that's all. A. No, I did not say that. Q. Well, tell me again what you said. A. I said that we received in our regular board meetings much of the business that we conducted had to do with policies, procedures and programs that were put in place to comply with this report. And yes, we did receive and interim report and you have a copy of that and then we received a draft, and then we received a final report\nso yes, you have all those. Q. So that\"s all you say you received? A. That's all I can think of at the moment. Q. Did you ever ask him what his committee did to address the issue of remediation of achievement disparities? Did you ever ask him that question yourself? A. Not that specific question, no. Q. Did he ever give the board a report on what he and the committee had determine needed to be done in order to remediate the achievement disparities of African-American students? A. Did Mr. Babbs say that? Q. Yes, ma'am. Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box i4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY 66 A. No. Q. All right. Now did anybody representing the Compliance Committee address that subject before the board? FENDLEY: When you say representing you mean on behalf of the--- WALKER: On behalf of--yes, yes. A. I don't think I understand that question. Q. Well, if Mr. Babbs wasn't there did someone else appear and give a Compliance Committee report? A. No. Q. Did Mr. Babbs ever tell you that there was an annual assessment as provided by 2.7 and 2.71 or all programs in the district? A. No. Q. Did anybody on the Compliance Committee ever address the issue of annual written assessment as contemplated by 2.7 and 2. 71? A. Not in specific relation to all programs. Q. That's right. A. No. Q. Did they ever provide a writing indicating that the Compliance Committee had made an assessment of any program and determined that it was not working? A. No. Q. Did they ever make an assessment of any program and Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box #4 sweet Horne, AR 72164-0004 Phone: ( 501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY determine that it was working? A. Q. A. The Compliance Committee? Yes, ma'am. No. WALKER: All right. No more question. FENDLEY: No questions. 67 [The deposition ended at 2:27 p.m., October 5, 2001.]  * * * * Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box #4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax \u0026lt;e 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 (- 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 CERTIFIED COPY 68 SIGNATURE PAGE I, JUDY MAGNESS, hereby certify that the above and foregoing deposition is a full, true, correct and complete transcript of the proceeding [mark the appropriate box]: ( ) had at the time of the taking of my deposition. (OR) (~ubject to the notations on the attached Errata Sheet made by me or at my Date STATE OF ARKANSAS COUNTY OF PULASKI direction. Hffk~ ss. SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO before me, a Notar!.(,Public in Notary Public MY COMMISSION (SEAL) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 CERT\\F\\ED COPY 69 ERRATA SHEET (Upon completion, please sign and date this sheet below.) Page K Line _L Page ___:)_ Line JL Page~ Line 21_ Page :f5_ Line 2- Page _d!j_ Line.:\n._ Page P]_ Line _/3_ Page j_ Line ~ Page i3 Line i Page Line Page Line Page Line Page Line Change: To: c..a,11,, Reason: Change: To: Reason: Change: To: Reason: Change: does To: 0 Reason: Change: To: Reason: Change: To: Reason: Change: (t! tt'il) '\n, e. To: Reason: Change: To: Reason: Change: To: Reason: Change: To: Reason: Change: To: Reason: Change: To: Reason: Date Cobb Court Reporting P , O. Box t 4 Sweet Home , AR 72164 - 0004 Phone : ( 501) 490 - 0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax Page I of I - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 CERTIFIED COPY 70 REPORTER'S CERTIFICATE STATE OF ARKANSAS ss. 429-84-1622 COUNTY OF PULASKI I, Gloria Y. Cobb, A Certified Court Reporter and Notary Public in and for the aforesaid County and state, do hereby certify that the witness, JUDY MAGNESS, was duly sworn by me prior to the taking of testimony as to the truth of the matters attested to and contained therein\nthat the testimony of said witness was taken by me in stenomask and was thereafter reduced to typewritten form by me or under my direction and supervision\nthat the foregoing transcript is a true and accurate record of the testimony given to the best of my understanding and abili ty. I FURTHER CERTIFY that I am neither counsel for, related to, nor employed by any of the parties to the action in which this proceeding was taken\nand, further, that I am not a relative or employee of any attorney or counsel employed by the parties hereto, nor financially interested, or otherwise, in the outcome of this action\nand that I have no contact with the parties, attorneys, or persons with an interest in the action that affects or has a substantial tendency to affect impartiality, that requires me to relinquish control of an original deposition transcript or copies of the transcript before it is certified and delivered to the custodial attorney, or that requir es me to provide any service not available to all parties to the act. My Commiss i on Expires: January 16, 2007 Cobh Court Re porting P , o. Box t4 Sweet Horne , AR 72164-0004 Phone : (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax\nThis project was supported in part by a Digitizing Hidden Special Collections and Archives project grant from The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation and Council on Library and Information Resources.\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\u003cdcterms_creator\u003eBushman Court Reporting\u003c/dcterms_creator\u003e\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n\n "},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1237","title":"Oral deposition of Larry Berkley","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":["Bushman Court Reporting"],"dc_date":["2001-10-05"],"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","Educational law and legislation","School board members","Court records","School management and organization"],"dcterms_title":["Oral deposition of Larry Berkley"],"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/1237"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["documents (object genre)"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\nDeposition taken at the Friday, Eldredge and Clark Law Firm, Little Rock, Arkansas\nThis transcript was created using Optical Character Recognition and may contain some errors.\n   CERTIFIED COPY IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, PLAINTIFF vs No.LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL, DISTRICT NO . 1, ET AL DEFENDANT MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL INTERVENORS INTERVENORS DEPOSITION OF MR. LARRY BERKLEY DATE: October 5, 2001 TIME: 10:21 a.m. PLACE: The Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark Law Firm 400 west Capitol, Suite #2200 Little Rock, AR 72201-3493 APPEARANCES On Behalf of the Plaintiff: On Behalf of the Defendants: Mr. John w. Walker, Attorney John w. Walker Law Firm 1723 Broadway Street Little Rock, AR 72206 Mr. Clay Fendley, Attorney Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark 400 west Capitol, Suite 2200 Little Rock, AR 72201-3493 ALSO PRESENT Joy Springer, The John w. Walker Law Firm Tony Rose, Sue Strickland, \u0026amp; Katherine Mitchell, Deponents Cobb Court Reporting P . o. Box #4 Sweet Home , AR 72164- 0004 Phone : (501) 490 - 0066 (501) 490 - 0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 2 CERTf Ff ED COPY PAGE AGREEMENT OF COUNSEL ..................... 3 SWEARING OF THE WITNESS. EXAMINATION OF MR. LARRY BERKLEY  .   . . .  . . . .    3 By Mr. Walker ..................... 3-38 SIGNATURE SHEET. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 0 ERRATA SHEET. . . . . . . . . . . COURT REPORTER'S CERTIFICATION .. * * * * * * * * * Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box #4 sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax . . . 41 . 42  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11  12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CE TIFIED COPY 3 STIPULATIONS The deposition of Larry Berkley, produced, sworn and examined at the Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark Law Firm, 400 West Capitol, Suite #2200, Little Rock, AR 72201-3493 commencing at 10:21 a.m., on October 5, 2001, in the captioned cause at the instance of counsel for the Plaintiff, and said deposition being taken according to the terms and provisions of the Arkansas Rules of Civil Procedure. It is stipulated and agreed all forms and formalities in the taking, transcribing, forwarding and filing of said deposition by witness, are hereby waived by the parties, the right being expressly reserved to object to the testimony of the witness at the time of trial as to incompetency, irrelevancy and immateriality, other than those with respect to the form of questions as propounded to the witness. * * * * * P R O C E E D I N G S THEREUPON, LARRY BERKLEY having been called for examination by counsel for the plaintiff, and having been first duly sworn, was examined and testified as follows: DIRECT EXAMINATION Questions by Mr. Walker: Q. Mr. Berkley, you have given depositions before have you Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box #4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11  12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 4 not? A. Yes. Q. I'll just go straight to the issue. How long have you been a member of the Board of Education of the Little Rock School District? A. Five years. REPORTER: Both of you speak up a little bit, please. A. Okay. I've been on it five years. Q. Do you hold an office on the board? A. Not at this time. Q. Have you ever served as either president or vice president of the board? A. Both. Q. When were you president of the board? A. '98 I think. I'll have to go back and look at the records. Q. All right. A. Yes, okay. I'll lean forward. Q. Do you hold an office at that time? A. I do not. Q. What is your education? A. I have a Masters Degree in Physics from the University of Missouri and a bachelors degree and masters degree in physics. Q. What work do you do? A. I'm a medical physicist. I'm Vice President of Medical Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box *4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY Physics and Engineering at CARTI. Q. I see. Is that with UAMS? 5 A. we have a facility at UAMS but CARTI in independent of all the facilities that we serve. Q. I see, all right. Mr. Berkley are you familiar with the revised desegregation and education plan? A. Yes. Q. Have you and the board members had occasion to, as a board in a public meeting, ever discuss that plan together as a board since 1998? A. we have received regular updates from administration and from the consultants and--- Q. I understand, my question though doctor, Mr. Berkley, have you and the other board members in a public session ever had occasion to discuss that in a public setting? FENDLEY: I'm going to object to the--Q. Not simply to receive reports. A. Well, in conjunction with receiving those reports and I believe there was some discussion related to the management study that we had done that related to the deseg plan. Q. Have you had occasion to receive information that, from you lawyers in a public session regarding the revised desegregation and education plan in so far as its implementation was concerned? I'm talking about in a public meeting instead of one-on-one? Cobb Court Reporting P . o . Box t4 Sweet Horne , AR 72164-0004 Phone : (501) 490-0066 (501) 490 - 0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 6 A. I believe there have been updates from them. Q. In a public meeting? A. I honestly can\"t recall that. Q. Have you and the board members before today ever met with the lawyers privately regarding the revised desegregation and education plan? A. Privately? Q. Yes, sir. FENDLEY: Do you mean independently or together? WALKER: Two persons at one time at any time or more. A. I do not recall doing that. Q. I see. Has it been your practice as a board that whenever two board members met that you would give notice to the press of that meeting? A. Ah, it is our practice yes. Q. I see. Has it been your practice that you would do that even if it were for something as mondain as lunch? A. As a general rule, yes\nthere may have been exceptions to that. Q. I see. Do you know under the Freedom Of Information Act the only exception is to discuss personnel matters? FENDLEY: Object as to form. Q. You may answer. A. I believe that there is some, one interpretation of that Cobb Court Reporting P . o. Box #4 Sweet Home , AR 72164-0004 Phone : ( 501) 490-0066 (501) 490 - 0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 7 that says that. Q. Mr. Berkley do you recall being informed by Dr. Les Carnine that the district had substantially complied with the expectation of the revised desegregation and education plan? A. Yes. Q. When did he do that? A. I can\"t give you a date. Q. All right. Did he do it over a period of time? A. We have had regular reports from the administration particularly Mr. Babbs ah, that's a regular part of our meetings. Q. Well, I understand that. Did Mr. Babbs or anyone else inform you and the other board members in a public session and all my questions will be about public sessions because I presume you all cannot act in private? A. That's correct. Q. That the requirements of the revised desegregation and education plan had been fulfilled? A. I don't recall the exact words but I think substantial compliance is the corrects words. Q. Okay. Do you recall that I've appeared before the board on several occasions to complain that the plan requirements were not being met? A. You? Q. Yes, sir. Cobb Court Reporting P . o. Box 44 sweet Home , AR 72164- 0004 Phone : (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11  12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY a A. I remember you coming to the board concerned about ah, a position be potentially eliminated as a result of the management plan that we had done. Q. Is that all you recall about that meeting? A. Yes. Q. I see. We have prepared responses to your counsel's interrogatories. Have you seen the interrogatories which were prepared by your counsel and submitted to the Joshua Intervenors? BERKLEY: umrn, have I seen it? REPORTER: I'm sorry, I didn't hear you. FENDLEY: I don't think you have. A. No. Q. I want to show--- FENDLEY: I\"m not suppose to answer, if you don't recall--- BERKLEY: I don\"t recall, I don\"t recall seeing them. Q. I see. In order to refresh your memory about that meeting I give you a response to those interrogatories, Response #2 to Interrogatory #7, this is the response to interrogatory #2 and #17. And this purports to be a tape, \"tape of John Walker before LRSD School Board July 22, 1999\", that was prepared by the secretary of the district. Would you look at that and see, it's four pages, would you look at that for a moment and see if Cobb Court Reporting P , o. Box #4 Sweet Home , AR 72164- 0004 Phone : (501) 490 - 0066 (501) 490 - 0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11  12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 9 it refreshes your recollection. A. This is something at King School? Q. Just look at it and see if it refreshes your recollection. FENDLEY: Do you want him to read it all? WALKER: No, just, just--- FENDLEY: Well, what do you want him to do with it? WALKER: Well, if he want's to, he can read it if he wishes. I presume he reads fast, he's a physicist. FENDLEY: He can read it at whatever pace he pleases. A. I do recall you coming to the board with concerns--- Q. No, my question was does that refresh your recollection? A. About ah, you coming to the board another time about some concerns at Hall High. Q. Did this refresh your recollection about complaints that we were making regarding implementation as early as July 22, 1999\ndoes this refresh your recollection? A. No. Q. That's fine. Now did you ever--you were the president during that year weren't you? A. I can look and see. Q. '99 to 2000? A. August '99, that would have been '98, '99? Q. Well, this was July. Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box #4 sweet Horne, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11  12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 10 A. July '99 I would have been president. Q. Yes, sir. A. That's right. Q. All right. Now do you remember as president of the board ever asking Dr. Carnine or any administrator to respond to the comments that I had made after giving them thoughtful consideration on July 22, 1999? A. No. Q. Do you recall any board member ever asking the administration to give any response to the board to any of the comments that I've made regarding criticisms with implementations of the desegregation plan? Any written, anything to the board members or any staff members regarding those things? FENDLEY: I'm going to object, I'm not sure I understand the question. WALKER: Well, let me make sure you understand. Q. Now usually when people appear before the board unless it's a matter where some person has a particular comment to be made, you all generally say nothing\nisn't that generally what happens? A. When the public comes before the board? Q. Yes. A. Yes. Q. All right. Now isn't it also fair to say that when I have Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box #4 sweet Home , AR 72 164-000 4 Pho ne : (50 1 ) 490 - 00 66 (50 1 ) 490 -0 92 6 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY appeared before the board most of the board members have basically been silent. A. I wouldn't--- Q. That's fine. A. make a statement like that. 11 Q. Have you all, when I've come before the board especially in July and made these kinds of complaints about nonimplementation, is it fair to say that you did not ask Dr. Carnine or any other administrator to give a response to these considerations at that time? A. I can't speak for the other board members. Q. But you didn't did you? A. I did not\nno, sir. Q. All right. Now do you know of any official action being taken with respect to the remarks made by the Joshua Intervenors, myself, or Mrs. Springer at any time as a board? A. As a board? Q. Yes, as a board. A. And official action by the board--Q. Yes, sir\nyes, sir--- A. in response to your request? Q. Yes, sir. FENDLEY: And let me just clarify, a request made to the board at a meeting? WALKER: Or comments, yes. Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box #4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 12 FENDLEY: So you\"re talking about at a meeting? WALKER: At a meeting, any public session\nyes. A. I do not recall any official action by the board. Q. I see. Now do you recall that we have consistently told you that the plan required the involvement of Drs. Roberts and Ross in the divination and promulgation of policies, programs, and procedures as contemplated by the revised desegregation plan? A. I remember reading your words about your interpretation of the plan that you should be involved with that. Q. Well, what about the, you do not recall me having said on the 22nd that ors. Roberts and Ross would be integrally involved and there was an understanding that these two persons would have a role in planning, development and divination of new policies, programs, and procedures for moving us beyond where we were into where we wanted to be\nyou don\"t recall that? A. I don\"t recall that but it does make sense. Q. Pardon? A. It does make sense. Q. It does? A. Yes. Q. I see. Now have you had a report from anyone setting forth whether or not Dr. Roberts was involved in the establishment of policies, programs and procedures regarding the revised Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box i4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone, ( 501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11  12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 13 desegregation plan, did anybody tell you that he was involved? A. No, sir but I will say this: I asked Dr. Roberts in a public meeting and at least one occasion, I think more than one occasion whether he had any concerns about our compliance with the plan and he said no. Q. Well, did you ask him whether he was involved? A. Well, I would assume that that would part of compliance. Q. Well, did he have, what was his role, what was your understanding if his role with respect to developing policies, programs, and procedures by which to implement the desegregation plan\nwhat was your understand was his role, not whether or not he had some concerns? A. My understanding was that he was an individual that you had approved and that the administration and you and he would decide what was appropriate. Q. That's fine. That was your clear understanding wasn't it? A. I can't tell you details about what his involvement should be or should have been but he is an individual who you approved and we agreed would be a good person to take on that task and during the course of those years except for these ah, few exceptions that you\"re referring to, we didn't hear much from you. Q. Is it your belief that you didn\"t hear much from me? Did you not get numerous--- A. We had public meetings twice a month for three years. Cobb Court Reporting p , o . Box H Sweet Horne , AR 7216 4-0004 Phone : (501) 490 - 0066 (501) 490 - 0926 - Fax  3 4 5 6 8 9 10 11  12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 14 Q. Did you not receive reports from Dr. Carnine that he was meeting with me from time-to-time? A. Oh, yes. Q. So would you not have been hearing from me in that way? Let me go on to something else. Did you get the impression that Dr. Carnine was an honest and candid man? A. Yes. Q. Did you get the impression that he was giving you full reports regarding and accurate reports regarding implementation of the plan? A. He had delegated that primarily to Mr. Babbs. Q. I see. Did you get the impression that Mr. Babbs was a knowledgeable and competent person that could perform the task that you all assigned him? A. Yes. Q. I see. Were you in court when his testimony was given after ah, in July? A. I was not. Q. I suppose you read his testimony? A. I have not. Q. Has anyone given you an appraisal of his testimony or a summary of his testimony regarding program implementation? A. No official. Q. I see. Anybody unofficially? A. Ah, I wouldn\"t want to say that. Cobb Court Reporting P . o. Box 14 Sweet Home , AR 72164-0004 Phone : (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  2 4 5 7 8 9 10 11  12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 15 Q. I see. Now the plan calls for, does it not call for remediation of achievement disparities between African-American and none African-American students? A. The revised desegregation plan? Q. Yes, sir\nyes, sir. A. I think it refers to attempts to do that. Q. I see, that's fine. Is it your position that you all did not commit to address elimination of the disparity between black and white achievement? FENDLAND: I'm going to object to the form--WALKER: You can still answer. FENDLAND: in that it did not address that, we committed to--- WALKER: I notice Mrs. Magness shaking her head while your deposition is being given, so that's fine\nshe can do that. A. we ah--- Q. or is it your position, you've heard her statement--FENDLAND: I'll note for the record that he can't see Mrs. Magness, she's sitting behind me. WALKER: I saw Mrs. Magness shaking her head like this--- FENDLAND: Well now, that doesn't matter. Q. Well now you heard Mrs. Magness' statement, I'll just change the question, you heard Mrs. Magness' statement in ah, Cobb Court Reporting P . o. Box #4 Sweet Home , AR 72164-0004 Phone : (501) 490 - 0066 (501) 490 - 0926 - Fax  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 16 the public meeting the other night when Dr. Darty made his comments and when Mr. Curris made his comments--- A. Uh-huh. Q. that the plan did not require elimination or addressing African-American achievement disparities\nyou heard that didn't you? FENDLAND: Let me--- A. Is this my testimony of Mrs. Magness? Q. Did you hear her, did you--- FENDLAND: Let me object to the form of the question, please. You asked address, you asked two questions. WALKER: I'll change it but before I ask this question do you all plan to make the e-mails available after March 15th? FENDLAND: In accordance with the court's order. WALKER: After March 15th? FENDLAND: We'll let you know that sometime today. WALKER: I may have to then, continue these depositions after today because I don\"t want to go into things that are not, the court's not going to let us address and she said that you couldn't have it both ways. FENDLAND: I understand. WALKER: All right. FENDLAND: And I don't mind telling you more Cobb Court Reporting P . o. Box t4 sweet Home , AR 72164- 0004 Phone : (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 11 than likely we're going to go with her option 2. them in? WALKER: Which is to let them in? Not to let FENDLAND: Not, not--WALKER: That's fine. FENDLAND: no e-mails after March 15th. WALKER: That's fine. Q. Now you\"re familiar with the revised plan and I'm just going to put it--you have it in front of you I see\nall right. Can you draw my attention to the section that deals with remediation of achievement disparities and to help you I'll suggest that it's around 2.7. A. Right. Not around 2.7, it is 2.7. Q. I see. A. Designed to improve--Q. Yes, sir. A. and that does not mean it is a commitment to achievement. Q. All right. Little Rock show imple,emt programs designed to improve and remediate the acievement desparities, the academic achievement. Do you take the position that the district has not agreed to make a conscienous effort to eliminate achievement disparities between the races? A. Say that again, please. Q. Do you take the position that the district has not agreed to make a conscienious effort to eleminate the achievement Cobb Court Reporting P. O. Box *4 sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone, ( 501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11  12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY disparities between the races? A. I believe that the deseg, revised deseg plans speaks for itself. Q. Let me ask it again. 18 A. The commitment is to design program with the intent to reduce the disparity. The difference is ah, is there anything in the plan which requires us to achieve that reduction in disparity. We did make a commitment to design the programs to attempt to remove the disparity. Q. Do you agree that the only legitimate means to eliminate the racial disparity in achievement is by improving AfricanAmerican achievement? A. Say that again. Q. Do you agree that the only legitimate means to eliminate the racial disparity in achievement is by improve AfricanAmerican achievement? A. Oh, that's not the only legitimate way, it's the only acceptable way. Q. Is that the only legitimate way? A. You can reduce the performance of the non-African-American kids and reduce the disparity. That's not acceptable but it's legitimate. Q. I see. Now do you recall that there was a brief submitted in 1998 which recognized that the Court Of Appeals said that you could not retreat, the board could not retreat from among Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box #4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 11  12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 19 other things the agreed effort to eliminate disparity between the races, it didn't say--let me show you. A. This is germaine to this revised deseg plan? Q. I'm asking you do you agree that the 8th Circuit has indicated that there would be no retreat approved from the agreed effort to eliminate achievement disparity between the races? A. If that's what you say\nI wasn't aware of it before that. Q. You weren't? Well, are you aware of the brief that your counsel prepared in conjunction with me and submitted to the court, this is for everybody so I won't have to go over it again. \"The 8th Circuit identified seven elements of the LRSD's existing desegregation obligations which it considered crucial, and with respect to which no retreat should be approved. Id. at 256. Those elements were: (1) double funding for students attending incentive (virtually all-black) schools\n(2) operation of the agreed number of magnet schools according to the agreed timetable\n(3) operation of the agreed number of interdistrict schools according to the agreed timetable\n(4) intradistrict desegregation of PCSSD according to the agree timetable\n(5) the agreed effort to eliminate achievement disparity between the races\n(6) the agreed elements of early childhood education, at least in the incentive shcools\nand, (7) appropriate involvement of parents.\" were you aware of that? I'll show it to you [hands Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box #4 sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: ( 501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11  12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CE. TIFIED COPY 20 document to wi tness]. A. 1998? Q. Yes, sir. A. Okay. Q. were you aware of it? A. No. Q. All right. Now with respect to the plan itself which you have before you, look at it on page 1, were you aware that this plan requires that the orders of the District Court and Court of Appeals interpreting or enforcing sections A through D above will be in effect followed? A. Yes. Q. All right. Now do you still take the position as Mrs. Magness stated, as I understand she stated in a public board meeting that you all simply had to make an effort to do it\ndo you take that position that you simply can make an effort to do it and then fulfill the expectations of this case? A. The way I understood what that said is that shall not retreat from the effort to do that. Q. Okay. A. And I don\"t believe that we have done that. Q. Well, I take it that you all do not agree that you are required to eliminated the achievement disparity? A. Read the whole thing. Q. I'm asking do you, I'm asking you now do you--first of all Cobb Court Reporting P . o. Box t4 sweet Horne, AR 72164-0004 Phone : (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED copy 21 did you ever agree to eliminate the achievement disparity at least to the extent in the state's settlement agreement--- A. Ah, as I recall that is a fuzzy, the end point was not clearly defined. Q. Did it not say that the achievement disparity would be eliminated to the point there would--- A. How do you define that, that--- Q. That's fine. A. My understanding that the issue was that at the end point was not clearly defined\nthere\"s the problem. Q. I see. Well have you all, during the intervening years, ever sought as a public board to define the end point? A. Nope. Q. I see. Why haven\"t you done that and why haven\"t you as a board member sought to have it done? A. Because it's not a trivial thing to do. Q. But it's twelve years 1989 until now and in twelve years you could have addressed it as a board, could you not have? A. we could have but I don't think that we--- Q. That's fine. A. we are not educators, we are not experts in how you would define such a thing like that. Q. I see, that\"s fine. Now Mr. Berkley can you tell me what programs were specifically developed by which to eliminate achievement disparity between the races for which you have seen Cobb Court Reporting P . O. Box i4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone : (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY an evaluation? Have you ever seen any of the evaluations of any programs? A. Yes, but I don't recall the detail of those. 22 Q. Are you familiar, I call you attention to page 148 of your March 15 program? FENDLAND: Which one? REPORTER: I'm sorry, I didn't hear you? FENDLAND: I said which one. WALKER: Well, let me go back, let me go back to that\nthank you Mrs. Springer. Q. Can you identify any programs which were designed to eliminate achievement disparity between the races? A. In particular ah, I don't know if you would call it a program but a process to ah, ah, increase the participation of African-American kids in ah, pre-AP and AP classes. Q. I'm asking you about a program to remediate the achievement disparities--- A. Well, that's the intent, that's the--- Q. So your answer is that putting more black kids into pre-AP and AP courses, is that your answer? A. That's the one I can think of right now. Q. Can you thi nk of any other program, is that a program or is that a process, did you say? A. I don't how you would define it, I think of it as a process. Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box t4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone : (501) 490 - 0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11  12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 23 Q. Well, let me ask you. Has the board ever approved any program itself other than process for remediating achievement of African-American students? A program? A. Well, the Early Childhood Literacy Program, I think is intended to increase the reading level of all kids particularly those who are behind and the intent of that would be as well to reduce the disparity. Q. That was the intent, so that would deal with the pre-K kids, right? A. And up through 3. Q. Up through 3. Now what are the programs that apply to the children in grades 4 and 5 by which to remediate achievement disparities? A. There well may be but I don't recall that. Q. You don't know of any. Have you ever asked the question? A. I have not. Q. All right. What are the programs for remediating the achievement disparities of students who happen to be AfricanAmerican who are in special education? A. I don't recall specific programs. Q. I see. Do you know of any other programs which have been designed to eliminate achievement disparities between AfricanAmerican and white students or nonwhite students--nonblack students? A. I don't recall any right off. Cobb Court Reporting P . o. Box #4 Sweet Home , AR 72 164-0004 Phone : ( 501) 490 - 0066 (501) 490 - 0926 - Fax  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11  12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 24 Q. I see. Now since one of your board members says the plan doesn't say you have to close the gap it says best effort, good faith effort, look at your plan and draw my attention to where those statements are made, please. A. You said 2.7. Q. 2.7 doesn't say that in my opinion, maybe if you want to say 2.7 I'll go on. A. Repeat your question, please. WALKER: Would you repeat it, please. [The reporter did as requested]. REPORTER: You may continue, sir. A. Well, there are several sections that can influence the--Q. No, I want you, I want you to just draw my attention--FENDLAND: Well, let him finish his answer, please. WALKER: Well that's fine, if you said there are several sections\njust tell me where those several sections are. A. You didn't let me finish. Well, influence the performance of the African-American kids including parential involvement, eligibility, and participation in extracurricular activities--Q. Just a moment, please listen to my question. FENDLEY: Well, are you finished Mr. Berkley? BERKLEY: Yes. Q. Well the point, now I want you to draw my attention to the Cobb Court Reporting P . o. Box t4 Sweet Horne, AR 7216 4-0004 Phone : ( 501) 490 - 0066 (501) 4 90 - 0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11  12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 25 sections of the plan which say that you do not have to actually close the gap but only as Mrs. Magness said, use your best effort and good faith effort to do so. I want to see any where in here where it said good faith effort and best effort to address achievement of the disparity gap? A. Well, there's a few places in this document that says that we do not have to do but I don't believe it says that. Q. Thank you. Now were you shown by any, by Dr. Carnine a program assessment each year of the academic programs which were in place for improving African-American achievement? A. No. Q. All right. 2.71 says that LRSD shall assess the academic programs implemented pursuant to 2.7 after each year in order to determine the effectiveness of the academic programs in improving African-American achievement. As a board did you all ever do that after each year? A. You mean all programs? Q. Yes, sir. A. Evaluate all programs? Q. Well, the ones that were implemented pursuant to 2.7 in order to determine the effectiveness of the academic programs in improving African-American achievement, did you ever do that as a board? A. Not specifically that. Q. That's fine. Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box #4 sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone, ( 501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY A. we did review academic performance of African-American kids. 26 Q. My question was--well that fine, you said you reviewed it. Did any of those assessments reveal that a program was not and was not likely to improve African-American achievement, did you all make that kind of assessment? A. I don\"t remember that. FENDLEY: As a board? WALKER: As a board. A. I don't remember it. Q. Now did you see written assessments that you would contend as a board member and as a physicist which comply with 2.71 from your administrative staff on an annual basis? A. No, I don't recall all of the assessments that we got Mr. Walker. Q. Well, isn't it fair to say that you were never, that all of your assessments would have been presented to you in a public board meeting--- A. Yes. Q. or through the mail? A. Yes. Q. Okay. A. Now they would have been done in a public assembly. Q. And isn't it fair to say that you all never discussed in a public board meeting whether any program was improving African-cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box #4 Sweet Horne, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 27 American achievement, any particular program? A. It would be fair to say that I don\"t recall that. Q. That's fine. Do you know of any particular program which has overall improved African-American achievement\na program, I'm not talking about a process now? A. But there are individual schools where we\"ve had programs that improved academic performance of African-American kids. Q. Well, can you tell me what those programs are? A. No, I don\"t recall those. Q. Can you tell me where those schools are? A. Not--- Q. All right. A. off the top of my head\nno. Q. All right. Are you aware of the test, the standardize test that were in place in 1989 at the time the commitment was made with the state in the original plan to remediate achievement disparities\nwere you familiar with the test that were in place at that time? FENDLEY: I'll object to the form of the question\nit assumes facts not in evidence. Q. Well all right, let me ask. You were aware that testing had been going in this school district long before you became a school board member? A. Correct. Q. And when you came on some five years ago which would have Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box #4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11  12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY been 1996, you were aware that the test in place that were standardize were nationally standardize test\nwere you not? A. Correct. Q. You were aware that they included at least the SAT IX? A. Correct. Q. And other SAT test? A. Right. 28 Q. I see. Did you know of any nationally standardize test that were being utilized by the Little Rock School District at the time you came onto the board? A. No. Q. I see. So if the plan, you said something about this being vague, so if the only standardize test being used were the SAT tests, would you not expect that those were the test that would have been the benchmark for determining improvement of remediation or remediation of achievement disparities between black and white students? FENDLAND: Let me object, the question calls for speculation by the witness on what drafters of the 1989 settlement agreement intended. Q. That\"s fine, that's fine. Now you can still go ahead and answer the question. A. Please repeat it. Q. The question basically is that those are the test in use, would you not--first of all are those tests still in use? Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box #4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: ( 501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11  12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 29 A. Yes. Q. I see. Have you met with any school board members to change those tests for evaluation purposes? You and the board, have you all changed those tests for any reason, any purpose? A. Well, I think we\"ve reduced the number of tests\nI don\"t recall exactly which ones have been eliminated. Q. All right. But the test that were in place when you came onto the board are still in place, are they not? A. Right. Q. I see. Now has the board determined that it will change that particular test, the SAT IX test? A. I don\"t think so. Q. What is the purpose of giving these students the SAT IX test in the f i rst place in your opinion as a physicist and as a board member? A. A physicist doesn't have much to do with it. Q. Well, physicist suppose to be among our most bright people, most logical. A. It's to assess our performance relative to national norm. Q. That's right. And also to determine from year-to-year how students are improving their academic performance, isn\"t that correct? A. Yes. Q. All right. A. Hopefully improving. Cobb Court Reporting P . o. Box t4 sweet Horne , AR 72164-0004 Phone : ( 501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 30 Q. I see. Now doesn't 2.1 say that if you find that programs are not working--- FENDLEY: 2.7.1. WALKER: 2.7.1, I\"m sorry. Q. Doesn't that in effect say that if your programs are not working you have to throw them out and get some others? A. It says either modifying how the program is implemented or replacing the program. Q. That's basically the same thing isn\"t it? A. No. Q. I see. Well have you all ever modified any program or replaced any program that you determined was not working--first of all did you all ever determine that a particular program was not working? A. I don\"t recall that. FENDLEY: Let me just clear up are you meaning the board rather than him? WALKER: Meaning the board, meaning the board. He can\"t act individually. A. No. I rely on the administrators to do that. Q. Have t he administrators ever come to you and told you that in their opinion after assessment or evaluation, particular programs were not working to improve African-American achievement? A. I don\"t recall that but I\"m sure that that kind of activity Cobb Court Reporting P . o. Box t4 sweet Home , AR 72164- 0004 Phone : ( 501) 490 - 0066 (501) 490 - 0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 31 goes on all the time. Q. Well, at least to the board it isn't. No persons on the administrative staff have come before the board to inform you that a particular program, any program has not worked and is not likely to work to improve African-American achievement? A. You know, I don't recall that but it could well be that when they introduce new programs that is, they wouldn't say this program is bad, they would say we're implementing a new progr am because we think it's better\nand that doesn't mean they didn't go through that process and I'm not aware of it. Q. This says that you shall assess the academic programs each year and then change it if it's not working. A. Right. Q. Now does that mean that you as a board tolerated change without an assessment? Change such as the one you mentioned, people coming up like Dr. Les was saying, well we think that this will be better than what we have\ntherefore, we don't need to make this assessment we'll just put this other thing in place? A. Mr. Walker I don't believe that happened. Q. I see. Well, you said that some people have come up, that means basically your instruction department doesn't it? A. Right. Q. And they\"ve come up with other programs, is that right? A. Right. Cobb Court Reporting P . o. Box t4 Sweet Horne, AR 72164-0004 Phone : ( 501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY Q. But that, that was not after an assessment that preexisting programs were not working? A. I wouldn't make that assumption. 32 Q. I see. And you have not seen such an assessment have you? A. I don't recall seeing it. Q. That's fine. Now you understand, would you assume that under this plan the assessments that were being made ah, had to be documented? A. I don't know about that\nI don't know what the standard is as far as--there's all kind of program evaluations. Q. I see. A. There are informal program evaluations and there are formal evaluations. Q. What does your plan call for? A. It says evaluate. Q. Doesn't it say that the evaluation has to be pursuant--did you all as a board not adopt a particular writing regarding program evaluation, do you recall that? A. I recall implementing a program within the last couple of years for program evaluations. Q. Do you not recall specifically developing a program evaluation written format? A. I don't recall that\nno, sir. Q. Now as a physicist you know that if you're going to evaluate anything it has to be pursuant to and you evaluating Cobb Court Reporting P . o. Box t4 Sweet Home, AR 72164- 0004 Phone : (501) 490 - 0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11  12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 33 things in a series of things that are somewhat related, it has to be pursuant to criteria and standards that are uniformly applied, would you not say that? A. Sometimes. Q. Is that any reason why there should be education and then an investigation? A. Yes. Q. What's the reasons? A. It\"s a very different world. Q. Well, I mean what's so different about it? I mean, the, the, the--- A. Logic is highly quantifiable and there are a lot of things in education that are not quantifiable. Q. You assume that? A. No, I know that. Q. How do you know it? A. Oh, I work as a medical physicist and in medical physic there are a lot of things, biological things that are not quantifiable like there are in pure physics. Just as in education you can\"t define all the parameters, you can't measure every parameter and when you mix all these parameters together you, the end result is something which is sometimes not quantifiable. REPORTER: One moment. You may continue, sir. Q. Now I call your attention to page 148 and I show you thing Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box #4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: ( 501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11  12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 so you won't have any problem. A. What's is this document? CERTIFIED COPY 34 Q. That's in the report that you all submitted saying that you were ready for release from court supervision. A. Right. Q. That deals with program evaluation. Look at the bottom of the page, can you tell me, there is listed a number of programs that the district says it evaluated. A. Right. Q. Have you ever seen those evaluations? A. I don't recall Mr. Walker, we see lots of evaluations and lots of reports and I can't recall every one of them. Q. Now I\"ve been trying to see some of these evaluations, now I haven't seen them and I'm wanting to tell--if you tell me that you have seen them then that's fine. Just tell me which ones you have seen that you recall, any one that you recall seeing? A. I really can't tell you. Mr. Walker there's so much stuff that comes in front of us, by us that--- Q. Now you understand--- A. now I'm not going to say that I haven't seen something because--- Q. Well--- A. I don't remember a lot of what I've seen. Q. Were you aware that the judge had said that she's really Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box *4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11  12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 35 concerned about your evaluations, that's what we're focusing upon now--- A. Right. Q. and upon remediation efforts. A. Right. Q, All right. Now can you tell me as you sit here today Mr. Berkley before you go onto the stand if you go on the stand, if you before March 15 had seen any written evaluation of any of those programs that are listed there? A. Again Mr. Walker, I don't recall seeing them--Q. That's fine. A. but it could well be that I have seen them. Q. Well, I've given it to you so that you can refresh your--A. Okay. Q. Now you've met with Mr. Fendley before today haven't you? A. Correct. Q. You've had a chance to be made aware that the court was concerned about the evaluation issue. A. Correct. Q. All right. And not withstanding that meeting with Mr. Fendley and the court's concerns that were made known to you, you still can't come up with a single program evaluation that you've ever seen can you? FENDLEY: I'm going to object, he's asked and answered\nhe doesn't evaluation he's seen. Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box #4 sweet Horne, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11  12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY Q. But I'm asking right now, you've had a chance to--A. I'm not going to change my answer. 36 Q. you don't have to change your answer but he can't tell you not to change your answer\nI'm going to ask another question. Did you think about the issue of evaluation before you came to this deposition today? A. Before is a long time. Q. Before today. Anytime? A. I thought about it when the hearing was going on--Q. All right. A. and that there was concern about it. Q. All right. Now you were in court during that time--A. Some of that time--- Q. at least one day--- A. some of the time. Q. now since that time, being aware of the court's concern, can you say you have reviewed any evaluation that was in writing regarding any of the programs that are on page 148 of your report saying that you had done those things? A. I do not recall that. WALKER: That's fine. Just a moment. [A recess was taken at 11:14 a.m., proceedings resumed at 11:15 a.m., to-wit:] REPORTER: We are on the record, sir and you may continue. Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box #4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: ( 501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY DIRECT EXAMINATION CON'T Questions by Mr. Walker Con't: 37 Q. Did you ever receive a report from any administrator that your Evaluation Department before March 15 was not performing at a professional level? FENDLEY: Object to the form, March 15 what year? WALKER: 2001. A. I did not receive a report that they were not performing as professionals. Q. I see. Do you have at this time at PRE Evaluation Department, PRE Department? A. I think that we are reorganizing it. Q. So that you don\"t have one? A. I think that--- FENDLEY: He's answered the question. WALKER: Just a moment, now. Q. I want you to tell me if you have a PRE Department in your opinion? A. In my opinion? Q. Yes, sir. A. I do not know that a department per sa exist. Q. I see. A. That does not mean that evaluations aren't going to happen. Q. What is the last date that you had an Evaluation Cobb Court Reporting P . o. Box #4 sweet Home , AR 72164- 0004 Phone : (501) 490 - 0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 8 9 10 11  12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 38 Department, a PRE Department? FENDLEY: Object, that assumes that we don't have one now which is not his testimony. REPORTER: You need to speak up. Q. What is the last date that you had a PRE staff of more than two people? A. I don't know. Q. What is the last date that you have had a conversation with any person in a PRE Department regarding PRE evaluation of programs that had the purpose of assessing the effectiveness of academic programs in improving African-American achievement? A. Repeat the question. WALKER: Would you do so? [The reporter did as requested.] REPORTER: All right, sir. FENDLEY: Let me say an objection as to the form of the question. Q. That's fine\nnow you can still answer. A. I don't recall a particular date. WALKER: All right, I don't have any more questions of you Mr. Berkley for right now\nthank you. Berkley. BERKLEY: Okay. FENDLEY: I don't have any questions of Mr. WALKER: Okay, you can go\ngood to see you. Cobb Court Reporting P . o. Box 14 Sweet Home , AR 72164- 0004 Phone , (501) 490 - 0066 (501) 490 - 0926 - Fax  1 2 2001.] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11  12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 39 [The deposition ended at 11:17 a.m., October 5, * * * * * Cobb Court Reporting P , o. Box f4 sweet Horne, AR 72164- 0004 Phone : ( 501) 490 - 0066 (501) 490 - 0926 - Fax (- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 (- 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 CERTIFIED COPY 40 ERRATA SHEET (Upon completion, please sign and date this sheet below.) Page ..!::L Line -1fL_ Page -:2.. ~ Line Zr::, Page ~s Line b Page ~3 Line '7 _ Page3\"3 Line _!X_ Page ss Line~ Page Line Page Line Page Li ne Page Line Page Line Page Line Change: 9o To: Reason: Change: To: Reason: Change: To: Reason: Change: To: Reason: Change: To: Reason: Change: -\\:14~1JlM+'b\\ cc.Q P 1 '2 dl \\ ~Ci-PV':f S.: To: Reason: Change: To: Reason: Change: To: Reason: Change: To: Reason: Change: To: Reason: Change: To: Reason: Change: To: Reason: fo -\u0026lt;-4-0 / Page Date Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box t4 sweet Home , AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax of 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 CERTIFIED COPY 41 SIGNATURE PAGE I, LARRY BERKLEY, hereby certify that the above and foregoing deposition is a full, true, correct and complete transcript of the proceeding [mark the appropriate box]: ( ) had at the time of the taking of my deposition. (OR) (vr--subject to the notations on the attached Errata Sheet made by me or at my direction. /o- 2-le-\u0026lt;::\u0026gt; I Date ~~BERKLEY STATE OF ARKANSAS COUNTY OF PULASKI ss. SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO before me, a and for the aforesaid county and state on this of ~ Notary ttlic in J-\u0026amp;- day Notary Public MY COMMISSION EXPIRES: (SEAL) Cobb Court Reporting P . o. Box J .4 sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone : (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 ERTIFIED COPY 42 REPORTER'S CERTIFICATE STATE OF ARKANSAS ss. 429-84-1622 COUNTY OF PULASKI I, Gloria Y. Cobb, A Certified Court Reporter and Notary Public in and for the aforesaid County and state, do hereby certify that the witness, LARRY BERKLEY, was duly sworn by me prior to the taking of testimony as to the truth of the matters attested to and contained therein\nthat the testimony of said witness was taken by me in stenomask and was thereafter reduced to typewritten form by me or under my direction and supervision\nthat the foregoing transcript is a true and accurate record of the testimony given to the best of my understanding and ability. I FURTHER CERTIFY that I am neither counsel for, related to, nor employed by any of the parties to the action in which this proceeding was taken\nand, further, that I am not a relative or employee of any attorney or counsel employed by the parties hereto, nor financially interested, or otherwise, in the outcome of this action\nand that I have no contact with the parties, attorneys, or persons with an interest in the action that affects or has a substantial tendency to affect impartiality, that requires me to relinquish control of an original deposition transcript or copies of the transcript before it is certified and delivered to the custodial attorney, or that requires me to provide any service not available to all parties to the act. My Commission Expires: Notary Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box #4 sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax\nThis project was supported in part by a Digitizing Hidden Special Collections and Archives project grant from The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation and Council on Library and Information Resources.\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\u003cdcterms_creator\u003eBushman Court Reporting\u003c/dcterms_creator\u003e\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n\n "},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1239","title":"Oral deposition of Sue H. Strickland","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":["Cobb Court Reporting"],"dc_date":["2001-10-05"],"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","Educational law and legislation","School board members","School management and organization","Court records"],"dcterms_title":["Oral deposition of Sue H. Strickland"],"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/1239"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["documents (object genre)"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\nDeposition taken at the Friday, Eldredge and Clark Law Firm, Little Rock, Arkansas\nThis transcript was created using Optical Character Recognition and may contain some errors.\n   CERTIFIED COPY IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, PLAINTIFF vs No.LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL, DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL DEFENDANT MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL INTERVENORS INTERVENORS DEPOSITION OF MRS. SUE H. STRICKLAND DATE: Octobers, 2001 TIME: 11:22 a.m. PLACE: The Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark Law .Firm 400 west Capitol, Suite #2200 Little Rock, AR 72201-3493 APPEARANCES On Behalf of the Plaintiff: On Behalf of the Defendants: Mr. John w. Walker, Attorney John W. Walker Law Firm 1723 Broadway Street Little Rock, AR 72206 Mr. Clay Fendley, Attorney Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark 400 west Capitol, Suite 2200 Little Rock, AR 72201-3493 ALSO PRESENT Joy Springer, The John w. Walker Law Firm Tony Rose, Judy Magness, \u0026amp; Katherine Mitchell, Deponents Cobb Court Reporting P . o. Box #4 Sweet Home , AR 7216 4-0004 Phone : (501) 490 - 0066 (50~) 490 - 0926 - Fax  3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11  12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 26 CERTIFIED COPY 2 AGREEMENT OF COUNSEL .. SWEARING OF THE WITNESS ... EXAMINATION OF MRS SUE H. STRICKLAND By Mr. Walker .. SIGNATURE SHEET .. ERRATA SHEET. COURT REPORTER'S CERTIFICATION. * * * * * * * * * Cobb Court Reporting P , o. Box #4 sweet Home , AR 72164 - 0004 Phone : ( 501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax PAGE . 3 . . . . . . . 3 . . . 3-28 . . . . . . 2 9 .30 . 31  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 3 STIPULATIONS The deposition of Sue H. Strickland, produced, sworn and examined at the Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark Law Firm, 400 west Capitol, Suite #2200, Little Rock, AR 72201-3493 commencing at 11:22 a.m., on October 5, 2001, in the captioned cause at the instance of counsel for the Plaintiff, and said deposition being taken according to the terms and provisions of the Arkansas Rules of Civil Procedure. It is stipulated and agreed all forms and formalities in the taking, transcribing, forwarding and filing of said deposition by witness, are hereby waived by the parties, the right being expressly reserved to object to the testimony of the witness at the time of trial as to incompetency, irrelevancy and immateriality, other than those with respect to the form of questions as propounded to the witness. * * * * * P R O C E E D I N G S THEREUPON, SUE H. STRICKLAND having been called for examination by counsel for the plaintiff, and having been first duly sworn, was examined and testified as follows: DIRECT EXAMINATION Questions by Mr. Walker: Q. Mrs. Strickland state your name for the record. Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box i4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: ( 501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 4 A. Sue Strickland. Q. Mrs. Strickland do you take the position--what is your position about the board's obligation with respect to implementation of the revised desegregation plan and the court orders in this case, what is your position regarding that? FENDLEY: I object to the form. WALKER: Well, let me make sure we know, we\"re talking about the same thing. Q. Are you familiar with the revised desegregation plan? A. I am. Q. Are you familiar with the Court Of Appeals having set forth seven elements which your counsel agreed that could not be retreated from? A. I am aware. Q. Now what is your understanding of the board's commitment with respect to implementation of the revised desegregation plan and existing court orders? What are you all suppose to be doing? A. We\"re suppose to be implementing it to the best of our ability. Q. Do you understand that you have made, that you have agreed to make a specific effort to elimination achievement disparity between the races? Do you agree with that? Do you disagree with that? A. I\"m not sure exactly if it says that and--cobb Court Reporting P . O. Box H Sweet Home , AR 72164- 0004 Phone : (501) 490-0066 (501) 490 - 0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 5 Q. I see. A. I believe--- Q. I\"m sorry, go right ahead. A. I believe that it is our intent to close the gap as best we can. Q. Well--- A. To make a genuine effort. Q. Do you agree--well, were you told by Mr. Fendley and Mr. Heller that you had told Judge Wright in 1998 the following: The Eighth Circuit identified seven elements of LRSD's existing desegregation obligations which it considered crucial, and with respect to which no retreat should be approved. elements were: (1) double funding for students attending incentive (virtually all-black) schools, yes? A. Yes. Those FENDLEY: Let me just object to the form of the question to the extent you\"re asking about not communications between ah, either myself of Chris and Mrs. Strickland outside the context of a public board meeting. WALKER: Well, at any time, I mean I don\"t, I'm going to ask the question--- FENDLEY: Well, we're objecting, it\"s privileged. Q. Well, well, did you have any one-on-one meeting with Mr. Heller to discuss, I mean or Mr. Fendley to discuss the Cobb Court Reporting P. O. Box *4 sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11  12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 6 commitments that were being made to the court back in 1999 or at any other time? A. Have been meetings with him, yes. Q. Do you, are you, were you aware of this public document which was presented to the court? Look at it. Since he\"s now dealing with the concept of privilege. FENDLEY: I just objected to the extent of your question because you just said any conversation. WALKER: Well my question--let me go on now. Q. The second element would be operation of the agreed number of magnet schools according to the agreed timetable? A. I was aware of this, yes. Q. Intradistrict desegregation of PCSSD according to the agree timetable? A. As me a question. Q. It's the same, these are the elements that you cannot retreat from. A. Right, I was aware of this, yes. Q. The agreed effort to eliminate achievement disparity between the races, were you aware of that? A. Let me read that. Q. Were you aware of that? A. Uh-huh. Q. Ma'am? FENDLEY: You need to speak up. Cobb Court Reporting P. o . Box #4 sweet Home , AR 72164- 0004 Phone : (501) 490 - 0066 (501) 490 - 0926 - Fax  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11  12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY Q. You have to say yes or no. FENDLEY: Well, if your answer is going to be yes or no, you need to say yes or no so she can take it down. 7 WALKER: To her without getting an answer from Mr. Fendland. A. I don\"t believe that, that I have ever seen it in writing where it says that you must close the disparity gap. Q. I\"m asking only about what is written before you. A. Uh-huh. Q. were you aware that that had been committed by your counsel? Yes or no. FENDLAND: I'm going to object to the form of the question. That's a quote from an Eighth Circuit opinion. Q. were you aware that this was committed in a paper prepared by your council? A. I was aware of the paper. Q. Were you aware of this particular commitment? FENDLAND: Object to the use of the term commitment. Q. Now you answered the first one Mrs. Strickland, number 1 and number 2, and number three and number 4 but when we get down to number 5 why can\"t you answer the same way? What makes that difficult? A. Well, I was not aware that it state, was stated exactly like that. Cobb Court Reporting P. O. Box #4 sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone, ( 501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 8 Q. That's right. But that is there now, this is a surprise to you isn't it? Yes or no. A. Probably, yes. Q. All right. Why is it a surprise Mrs. Strickland, why is that a surprise to you number 5, so that the record will be clear about what we\"re talking about it's the memorandum filed with United States District Court January 29, 1998. Why is that a surprise to you? A. I have never had any doubt in my mind that it was our intent to close the disparity gap as best we could. I have never seen anywhere saying that we\"re guaranteed that we're going to close this gap. Q. But number 5, this is the first time that you have been aware of it like being presented this way\nis that correct? A. That\"s probably, it's the first time I have read those words exactly like that. Q. That's fine. A. I was thinking that it was taking it more from the revised desegregation plan which is what we had said we were doing. Q. Do you agree that the only legitimate way to achieve elimination of the achievement disparity is by improving African-American achievement\ndo you agree with that? A. No, I don't. Q. That's fine. Now let me ask you if you have a gap between black and white students, let's say students, white students Cobb Court Reporting P . o. Box #4 Sweet Home , AR 72164- 0004 Phone : (501) 490 - 0066 (501) 490 - 0926 - Fax  3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 9 are at the 60 percentile and blacks are in the 30 percentile and you want to achieve that gap, is it fair to say that you have to focus your attentions upon the students who are in the lower numbered? A. Certainly\nyes. Q. I see. That has to be the focus point of your efforts doesn\"t it more so than just continuing to do the same things you've been doing\nisn\"t that correct? FENDLAND: Object to the form. WALKER: I'll change the question. Q. If you\"re going to narrow the gap and raise the achievement of the ones in the bottom, you'd have to focus upon them don't you? A. I think so, yes. Q. All right. A. And I think we've done that. Q. But you don\"t recognize that the only legitimate means to eliminate the racial disparity is by improving African-American achievement? A. Well, I think--- Q. That's yes or no, I not asking for your opinion. FENDLAND: She can answer your question however she--- WALKER: This is a deposition--STRICKLAND: Uh-huh. Cobb Court Reporting P.O.Box#4 ' Sweet Horne, AR 72164-0004 Phone: ( 501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 10 WALKER: I\"m conducting this, this is not court. FENDLAND: Well, she--- WALKER: Do you agree--- FENDLAND: the witness can answer the question in anyway she feels. WALKER: You can ask her whatever you want to if you want to clear up anything\nthis is my deposition, this is discovery. FENDLAND: You can\"t tell the witness how to answer the question. Q. I\"m asking you now do you agree with the statement that the only legitimate means to eliminate the racial disparity in achievement is by improving African-American achievement? A. I think we have to improve African-American achievement\nthat is not the only way. Q. Do you recognize that your counsel has written that that's the only way? Read it down in the last paragraph. Read it. Were you aware that your counsel who has told you that you all are ready for unitary status had made that commitment? FENDLAND: Object, counsel didn't make any commitments. A. I think we\"ve done that, I think we've improved. Q. We didn't say improve, this doesn't say anything about improving. Your position seems to always be improving isn't it? Your whole statement is that you all are committed to Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box 14 Sweet Home , AR 72164- 0004 Phone , (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11  12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 11 improving the educational options for black students? A. [Witness nodding head up and down.] REPORTER: Answer yes. FENDLEY: Object--WALKER: She nodded yes. FENDLEY: Well, let me object to the form of the question if that was finished. STRICKLAND: I think I was nodding that I was listening. Q. Well, let me ask you. Is it your position that you don't, you only have to make your best efforts to eliminate the gap, not to actually eliminate it\nis that your position? A. I think you have to make a genuine effort to do everything you can to help close that gap. Q. All right. Does that mean that you have to develop programs which are addressed and devoted to meeting the specific educational needs of the African-American children? A. I certainly do\nyes. Q. Can you tell me any program that the board has approved for eliminating, not improving, eliminating the gap\nname one program? A. I think everything we do. Q. You can't name a particular program can you? A. I think everything we do. Q. But I'm asking you right now can you name a particular Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box #4 sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: ( 501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 8 9 10 11  12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 12 program? A. I have given you my answer. FENDLEY: She's answered the question. Q. I understand you have given me your answer, can you tell me any program that the board approved after January of 1998 which had that intended effect\nany particular program? A. Everything we do. Q. Well, just name the programs then. Name the programs. A. Everything we do\nyou have my answer. Q. Mrs., Mrs., Mrs. Strickland you got to name a program for me\ncan you name one program, do you know one program that you all do that has that purpose? A. Yes, all of them\neverything we do. Q. I see. Are you familiar with the evaluations that are set forth on page 148 of the March 15, 2001 report? A. Yes. Q. Have you ever seen a written evaluation of any of those programs that are set forth there? A. Yes, I have. FENDLAND: At the bottom of the page? Q. Yes, you\"ve seen that? A. Yes. Q. Name the ones you have seen. A. Well, I've seen a number of them. Q. Name the ones. Cobb Court Reporting P . o . Box *4 Sweet Home , AR 72164-0004 Phone: ( 501) 490-0066 (501) 490 - 0926 - Fax  1 2 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 13 A. Understanding your school, I have the Hippy Program, the Charter school program ah, that's just the ones I think off the top of my head. The Model Inks--- Q. Go ahead, look at them all. A. English A Second Language, Campus Leadership. Q. You've come up with five. A. That's the ones I can think of off the top of my head but--- Q. I see. Now Mrs. Strickland--- A. I would say we've probably seen all of them. Q. Do you have a Hippy program? A. Well, yes. Q. You still have a Hippy program? A. Well, we cut it back tremendously. Q. Was it working to eliminate African-American achievement disparity at the time you cut it back? A. I really don't know. Q. Can you tell me which of these programs actually worked in your opinion to eliminate African-American Achievement disparities? FENDLAND: Which are the program on the bottom of 148? WALKER: That are listed on page 148\nyes. FENDLAND: Do you want to include all the ones that are discussed in this paragraph? Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box *4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 14 WALKER: The ones at the bottom that are listed at 148. FENDLAND: The bullet points only. STRICKLAND: Uh-huh. A. Well, you know closing the disparity gap was a part of that program--- Q. I'm only asking you--- A. it's a part of everything. Q. Mrs. Strickland, I'm just asking you to tell me which of these programs had that result? FENDLAND: What result? WALKER: Of closing the disparity gap, that's what she said. Q. Which one of them had that, which ones of those had that result? A. Well, I believe most of the things we do helps to close that disparity gap. Q. Well, how do you measure the closing of the gap in your opinion? A. I don't r eally know. Q. Well, how can you say that it has that--A. When the scores have improved. Q. Let me ask you this. How can you make an assessment that the gap has been closed without knowing--- A. Ah, excuse me? Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box t4 Sweet Home , AR 72164- 0004 Phone: (501) 490 - 0066 (501) 490-092~ - Fax  3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 15 Q. How can you make an assessment that the gap--are you saying that the gap has been closed? A. Nope. Q. I see. A. Did I say that? Q. Well, that's what I thought you were saying. A. I said it helps--- Q. I stand corrected. A. all of our programs helps to close that gap. Q. I see. Let me ask you, you've been on the board now seven years? A. Right. Q. What was the, what was the test in use for determining the standardize test in use at that time for assessing student achievement or student performance\nwhat was the test? A. Ah, I really don't know. Q. I see. Did the board ever discuss what test it would use for assessing or achieving, for assessing student achievement? Did you all ever have a public discussion regarding that? A. You talking about closing the disparity gap? Q. No, for just evaluating student performance, did you all ever discuss what test you all would use? A. Overall test? Q. Yes, ma'am. A. Well, we have a number of tests we use. Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box #4 sweet Horne, AR 72164-0004 Phone, (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11  12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY Q. But did you all as a board ever discuss those test? A. Discuss them in what way? 16 Q. Well first of all, can you identify the test that you understood, the standardize test that you all used say when you came onto the board\nwhat were they? A. SAT was one of them. Q. What else? A. Ah, I really don't remember but there were several. Q. I see. What--did you all as a board ever eliminate the SAT? A. I don't think so. Q. I see. Do you know of any other test by which the administration was directed to measure student achievement in 1995, 6, 7, or 8, you know any other test, standardize test? A. Well, we do ACTAP. Q. ACTAP, is that by 1998? A. I don't, I'm not sure what year it was started. Q. I see. A. SAT is really the only one I remember. Q. Mrs. Strickland do you know of any time the board ever addressed as a board the issue of whether any program that was in place was actually working to effectively either narrow or close the achievement disparity between black and white students, any program? Did you all ever have that discussion? A. We have discussed many times the closing the disparity Cobb Court Reporting P , o. Box t4 sweet Home , AR 72164-0004 Phone, (501) 490-0066 (501) 490 - 0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COP 11 gap--- Q. Listen to my question. A. and our effort to do so. Q. My question is did you all ever assess as the plan says--FENDLAND: You meaning the board? WALKER: The board\nanytime I'm talking. Q. You understand we recognize that you can't make a judgment by yourself for the board can you? A. Right. Q. All right. FENDLAND: Ah,, I'm distinguishing between you meaning LRSD and you as the board. WALKER: The board, always. FENDLAND: Okay. Q. LRSD is the board isn\"t it? You all delegate everything to staff\nis that right but you are the responsible parties? A. We\"re the responsible parties. Q. All right. FENDLAND: Well, I'm making the distinction between you ask her did you, are you saying did anybody in the district do it or did the board do it? WALKER: The board. FENDLAND: Okay. Q. 2.71 says that the district shall assess the academic programs which were implemented pursuant to 2.7 after each year Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box #4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY in order to determine the effectiveness of the academic programs and improving African-American achievement\nyou\"re familiar with that aren\"t you? A. Yes. 18 Q. Now in order to assess these programs they have to first be identified don't they Mrs. Strickland? A. [Witness nodding head up and down.] Q. Ma'am? REPORTER: Answer, yes. A. Yes. Q. All right. Can you identify the programs which were implemented that you all assessed? A. No. Q. Can you identi--you can\"t can you? A. No. Q. Now isn't it fair Mrs. Strickland to say that you all did not see annual assessments of all of the programs that you--you said earlier , now listen to what I'm saying, you said everything was supposed to be working toward that end didn't you? A. Right. Q. Now that meant then that you had to have an assessment every year under this of all those programs didn't you? FENDLAND: I'm going to object to the form of the question, that's a legal conclusion as to the meaning of Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box t4 Sweet Horne , AR 72164- 0004 Phone : (501) 490 - 0066 (501) 490 - 0926 - Fax  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 19 the--- Q. I'm asking you the question now\nhe can object at court and that's for the record of course. In your opinion you have to under this policy, you would have to make an assessment of each one of those programs every year wouldn't you? FENDLAND: The same objection. Q. You still have to answer the question. A. I have to answer the question? Q. Yes, ma'am. FENDLAND: If you understand it. A. I think the answer should be yes. Q. All right. Now isn't it fair to say that you never saw written assessments, let's talk about them unwritten later, but you never say written assessments of each one of these myriad programs, myriad meaning many, that were in operation in the school district on an annual basis did you? A. I don't remember seeing every one\nI remember some. Q. Well, we saw on page 148--- A. Uh-huh. Q. I think you identified five but you have far more programs than the dozen that are listed on this page don't you? A. Yes. Q. All right. And is it fair to say that you all never as a board made a judgment that a particular program was working to improve African-American achievement did you? Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box 14 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone, (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 20 A. We did not. Q. All right. Can you tell me as you sit there which program, in your opinion according to the administrators especially Dr. Carnine, has worked to improve African-American achievement? Can you identify any particular program? FENDLEY: Let me object to the form if you're asking her to speculate which program Dr. Carnine thinks improved the performance. Q. I'm only talking about reports that were made to you by-you don't make assessment yourself do you Mrs. Strickland? A. I do not. Q. You only rely on those people you hire. A. That's right. Q. And they come to you as a board in a board meeting and make presentations. A. That's right. Q. All right. Now can you tell me any programs that they reported to you had been effective in improving AfricanAmerican achievement? I just want you to tell me yes, if there were some and which ones they were. A. No, I don't remember. REPORTER: You're going to have to speak up a little bit more for me. A. I'm sorry. I don\"t remember. Q. Now you understand that there have been a lot of program Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box t4 Sweet Horne , AR 72164- 0004 Phone : (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11  12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY changes in the last three years, isn't that correct? A. That's right. Q. Now those program changes came about under Dr. Lesley didn't they? A. Yes, they did. 21 Q. And they came about without there having been an assessment of existing programs\nisn't that fair to say a written assessment that was presented to the board? A. I don't know. Q. Well, you don't ever remember seeing any written assessments made as contemplated by 2.7 and presented to the board do you? FENDLAND: I object to the form. Q. Now, you can answer the question. You don't remember seeing any of those do you? A. I don't remember. Q. All right. Now you don't just go and get rid of programs as a matter of routine unless you have made as an education an appraisal that those programs are not effective do you? That would be the normal expectation wouldn't it Mrs. Strickland? A. Yes\nright. Q. Now, but you all actually did that when Dr. Lesley came in because she said I think this can work better\nshe told you that didn't she? FENDLEY: Object, that is a compound question. Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box t4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone, (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11  12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 22 Q. She has come--you a friend of Dr. Lesley's now aren\"t you? A. I am? Q. Are you not? A. I\"m an acquaintance of hers I think you would say. Q. All right. A. And I hope that I'm a friend to everybody at the school district. Q. You, you\"re my friend, at least you used to be my friend\nI haven\"t talked to you for the last couple of years but you-does Dr. Lesley attend your church? A. No. She visited with me one Sunday. Q. I see. That's sort of friendship, isn't it? A. Yeah, I consider\nyeah, I guess she's a friend. Q. And you all talk about school matters a lot don\"t you one-on- one? A. Well, if I have a problem with anything, I don\"t understand anything--- Q. You call her? A. Dr. Lesley is a good one for me to call. Q. I see. And you have more one-on-one communication with Dr. Lesley than any other school administrator don't you? A. No, I wouldn\"t say that. Q. Well, who else would you have more one-on-one communication with? FENDLAND: I think you need to define a time Cobb Court Reporting P . o. Box #4 sweet Home , AR 72164- 0004 Phone : (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  2 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 23 period on that. WALKER: Well, I'll do that. Q. But at this time which board, which school administrator do you have the most one-on-one communication with? A. Probably the superintendent. Q. Okay, that\"s fine. Now before he came--no, in the first months after he came which school board member did you have-which school staff member did you have the most contact with? A. When he first, when, when who first came Dr. James? Q. Yes. A. Would you tell me where this is leading, I don\"t quite understand this? Q. I'm leading, I\"m trying to get up to the point of programs and I'll just go to it. A. Uh-huh. Q. Dr. Lesley told you did she not that she could put into place some better programs than the ones that were existence to help improve learning for all children didn\"t she? A. I don\"t think she\"s ever told me that\nno. Q. What did she tell you? A. I don't know\nwhat conversation you\"re referring to. Q. Well, did she ever tell you that the program that she contemplated would work better than the ones that were already in place in order to achieve improvement of African-American progress in schools? Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box #4 sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 24 A. You mean, you\"re asking me if she told me that personally? Q. Yes, ma'am. A. I don\"t think so. Q. Did she ever tell the board that? A. I don't remember those words. Q. I see. Now--- A. But if I may clarify that, my assumption is anytime that a new program is implemented it's working toward that goal because we all know the deseg plan. Q. Well now, Mrs. Strickland you know that every time a new superintendent comes in you get new programs don\"t you? A. Well, that\"s true some time. Q. All right. Now you all don't just throw out programs that are working do you? A. we try not to. Q. All right. Did you have any programs before Dr. Lesley came that in your opinion had been or were successful in remediating African-American achievement, any one program? A. I can't think of one. Q. You can't think, now can you think of one since she's come that's been effective in remediating African-American achievement? A. I believe that our test scores are better. Q. No, we're talking about programs now rather than what somebody has told you or you believe represents better scores. Cobb Court Reporting P . o. Box t4 sweet Home , AR 72164- 0004 Phone : (501) 490 - 0066 (501) 490 - 0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11  12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY But the thing now, can you think of any program? A. No. 25 Q. All right. Now you talk about test scores, the only uniform test score that's been in place throughout these years has been the SAT hasn't it? A. I think so. Q. So if you're going to measure progress and you've been an educator at one time haven't you? A. R.ght Q. And what you try to look at as an educator is a continuum over, things over a period of time rather than a snapshot, isn't that correct? A. That's right. Q. All right. Now if test scores show basically flatness in terms of black achievement and white achievement over a continuum, does not that indicate that whatever gap existed is still there? A. If it\"s flat? Q. Yes, ma'am. A. Yes. Q. All right. Now has the board ever said that it's going to look at some other, that it's going to adopt a different appraisal system for determining remediation of the achievement gap? A. Not that I know of. Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box #4 Sweet Horne, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11  12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 26 Q. All right. Now with respect to evaluations Mrs. Strickland, you've always wanted to have people held accountable haven't you? A. Yes, sir. Q. And you also have always presumed that your people would be truthful haven't you\nthat is your administrators? A. That's right. Q. Did you find Dr. Carnine to be truthful in your opinion? A. Sometimes, no. Q. That's right. Did Dr. Carnine report to you that he was regularly meeting with John w. Walker with respect to the issues contained in the revised Desegregation and Education plan? A. He did. Q. I see. Did he tell you that I was i n agreement with what was going on? A. I don't know that he ever told us those words. Q. I see. Now did he tell you that program evaluation was proceeding as contemplated by the plan? A. Yes, I believe so. Q. You\"re aware now are you not that program evaluation was not proceeding as the plan required\nhave you been made aware of that? A. Well, I think that's a statement you\"re making. Q. Has anybody else representing the district told you that Cobb Court Reporting P . o. Box #4 sweet Home , AR 72164 - 0004 Phone : ( 501) 490- 0066 (501) 490 - 0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 21 the district court has found grave problems with your programs evaluations both existence of them and the substance of them\nhas anybody told you that? FENDLAND: Let me object to the form of the question. She hasn't been told that because the district court hasn't made those findings. Q. Well, have you been in court at any time? A. Not on this particular case\nnot this time. Q. Have any of your school board members told you that they have been in court and heard Judge Wright? A. I know some board members that have been in court. Q. I see. Did any of those board members represent to you or did the superintendent represent to you in any writing or statement that the court expressed grave concerns about the district evaluation program? A. I heard her remarks. Q. All right. Now is that anything that you know--now you understand with respect to program evaluation that you all have to have written evaluations as over against somebody's thought that this thing is working or not, there's a difference between somebody's opinion about whether something is working and whether or not an assessment has been made, a written assessment, an evaluation. FENDLAND: I'm going to object\nthat's a compound question. Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box #4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: ( 501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 28 WALKER: I'll change it\nthank you. FENDLAND: You started asking one question and you changed. WALKER: You're absolutely right. Q. If someone, if you make a commitment to do program evaluation for instance as it is set forth here, those programs were to be--that's a program evaluation commitment isn't it Mrs. Strickland? A. Yes. Q. All right. That's from the plan isn't it? Now 2.7 is what it addresses and it says here that you shall assess the academic programs after each year in order to determine the effectiveness of the programs and improving African-American achievement. It doesn't say anything about assessing the effectiveness of the programs from an effectiveness of white student improvement does it? It talks about improving black students, right? A. [Witness nodding head up and down.] Right. REPORTER: Answer, yes. A. Yes, I'm sorry. WALKER: All right. No further questions. FENDLAND: I don't have any questions. [The deposition ended at 11:55 a.m., October 5, 2001.] * * * * * Cobb Court Reporting P . o . Box 14 Sweet Home , AR 72164- 0004 Phone , (501) 490 - 0066 (501) 490 - 0926 - Fax ERTIFIED COPY 29 (- 1 ERRATA SHEET 2 3 (Upon completion, please sign and date this sheet below.) 4 5 Page Line Change: 6 To: 7 Reason: 8 Page Line Change: 9 To: 10 Reason: 11 Page Line Change: 12 To: 13 Reason: 14 Page Line Change: 15 To: 16 Reason: 17 Page Line Change: 18 To: 19 Reason: 20 Page Line Change: (- 21 To: 22 Reason: 23 Page Line Change: 24 To: 25 Reason: 26 Page Line Change: 27 To: 28 Reason: 29 Page Line Change: 30 To: 31 Reason: 32 Page Line Change: 33 To: 34 Reason: 35 Page Line Change: 36 To: 37 Reason: 38 Page Line Change: 39 To: 40 Reason: 41 42 Page of - 43 SUE H. STRICKLAND Date 44 Cobb Court Reporting P. 0. Box t4 Sweet Horne, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490 - 0926 - Fax 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 CERTIFIED COPY SIGNATURE PAGE I, SUE H. STRICKLAND, hereby certify that the above and foregoing deposition is a full, true, correct and complete transcript of the proceeding [mark the appropriate box]: had at the time of the taking of my deposition. (OR) subject to the notations on the attached Errata Sheet made by me or at my direction. - Date STATE OF ARKANSAS COUNTY OF PULASKI ss. SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO before me, a Notary Public in and for the aforesaid county and state on thi s o-\u0026lt;'7.\u0026lt;/o --u. of {Jc\n/: (SEAL) Cobb Court Reporting P . o. Box t4 Sweet Home , AR 72164- 0004 Phone : (501) 490 - 0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax day    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 CERTIFIED COPY 31 REPORTER'S CERTIFICATE STATE OF ARKANSAS ss. 429-84-1622 COUNTY OF PULASKI I, Gloria Y. Cobb, A Certified Court Reporter and Notary Public in and for the aforesaid County and state, do hereby certify that the witness, SUE H. STRICKLAND, was duly sworn by me prior to the taking of testimony as to the truth of the matters attested to and contained therein\nthat the testimony of said witness was taken by me in stenomask and was thereafter reduced to typewritten form by me or under my direction and supervision\nthat the foregoing transcript is a true and accurate record of the testimony given to the best of my understanding and ability. I FURTHER CERTIFY that I am neither counsel for, related to, nor employed by any of the parties to the action in which this proceeding was taken\nand, further, that I am not a relative or employee of any attorney or counsel employed by the parties hereto, nor financially interested, or otherwise, in the outcome of this action\nand that I have no contact with the parties, attorneys, or persons with an interest in the action that affects or has a substantial tendency to affect impartiality, that requires me to relinquish control of an original deposition transcript or copies of the transcript before it is certified and delivered to the custodial attorney, or that requires me to provide any service not available to all parties to the act. My Commission Expires: Cobb Court -Reporting P. o. Box #4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax\nThis project was supported in part by a Digitizing Hidden Special Collections and Archives project grant from The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation and Council on Library and Information Resources.\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\u003cdcterms_creator\u003eCobb Court Reporting\u003c/dcterms_creator\u003e\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n\n "},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1231","title":"Oral deposition of Tony Rose","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":["Cobb Court Reporting"],"dc_date":["2001-10-05"],"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","Educational law and legislation","School board members","School management and organization","Court records"],"dcterms_title":["Oral deposition of Tony Rose"],"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/1231"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["documents (object genre)"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\nDeposition taken at the Friday, Eldredge and Clark Law Firm, Little Rock, Arkansas\nThis transcript was created using Optical Character Recognition and may contain some errors.\n   CERTIFIED COPY IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, PLAINTIFF vs No.LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL, DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL DEFENDANT MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL DEPOSITION OF MR. TONY ROSE DATE: October 5, 2001 TIME: 12:38 p.m. INTERVENORS INTERVENORS PLACE: The Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark Law Firm 400 West Capitol, Suite #2200 Little Rock, AR 72201-3493 APPEARANCES On Behalf of the Plaintiff: On Behalf of the Defendants: Mr. John w. Walker, Attorney John w. Walker Law Firm 1723 Broadway Street Little Rock, AR 72206 Mr. Clay Fendley, Attorney Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark 400 west Capitol, Suite 2200 Little Rock, AR 72201-3493 ALSO PRESENT Joy Springer, The John w. Walker Law Firm Judy Magness, Sue Strickland, \u0026amp; Katherine Mitchell, Deponents Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box #4 Sweet Horne, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  4 5 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY AGREEMENT OF COUNSEL. SWEARING OF THE WITNESS . . EXAMINATION OF MR. TONY ROSE By Mr. Walker. . SIGNATURE SHEET . . ERRATA SHEET . . COURT REPORTER'S CERTIFICATION . . * * * * * * * * * Cobb Court Reporting P . o. Box Jl4 Sweet Home , AR 72164-0004 Phone : (501) 490 - 0066 (501) 490 - 0926 - Fax PAGE . . 3 . . . . 3 ... . 3-24 . .      25 . .26 . 27  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 3 STIPULATIONS The deposition of Tony Rose, produced, sworn and examined at the Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark Law Firm, 400 West Capitol, Suite #2200, Little Rock, AR 72201-3493 commencing at 12:38 p.m., on October 5, 2001, in the captioned cause at the instance of counsel for the Plaintiff, and said deposition being taken according to the terms and provisions of the Arkansas Rules of Civil Procedure. It is stipulated and agreed all forms and formalities in the taking, transcribing, forwarding and filing of said deposition by witness, are hereby waived by the parties, the right being expressly reserved to object to the testimony of the witness at the time of trial as to incompetency, irrelevancy and immateriality, other than those with respect to the form of questions as propounded to the witness. * * * * * P R O C E E D I N G S THEREUPON, TONY ROSE having been called for examination by counsel for the plaintiff, and having been first duly sworn, was examined and testified as follows: DIRECT EXAMINATION Questions by Mr. Walker: Q. State your name. Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box i4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: ( 501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11  12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY A. Tony Rose. Q. Mr. Rose were you informed that the school district had committed to the revised desegregation and education plan in January of 1988? A. I'm aware of the district committing to that plan. Q. You were not on the board at that time? A. I was not on the board at that time. 4 Q. I see. Were you aware that the plan calls for remediation of academic achievement of African-American students? A. My understanding is it calls for efforts to remediate the gap. Q. Well, look at 2.7. A. 2.7. REPORTER: Now, speak up a little bit for me, please. ROSE: Yes, ma'am. Q. 2.7 says it shall implement programs, policy, and procedures- -- A. Designed--- Q. designed to improve and remediate the achievement gap, the academic achievement of African-American students. A. Yes, sir. Q. Then 2.71 said that in order to do that you\"re going to have an annual assessment of the academic programs to determine the effectiveness of those programs in improving African-cobb Court Reporting P. O. Box H Sweet Home , AR 72164- 0004 Phone : (501) . 490 - 0066 (501) 490 - 0926 - Fax  4 5 6 8 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 American achievement. A. Yes, sir. CERTIFIED COPY Q. Have you ah, when did you go onto the board? A. A year and two weeks ago. 5 Q. I see. Have you seen an assessment--first of all, have you seen a litany or a listing of the academic programs in place when you came onto the board or during that year? A. A full list\nno, I don't believe I have. Q. I see. Do you agree that in order to make an assessment of a program the program has to have some kind of identity? A. It depends on the nature of the assessment. Q. well, if you\"re going to make an assessment as contemplated here, you have to know what the program is before you can determine the effectiveness of the academic program in improveing African-American achievement\nyou have to know what it is don't you? A. That's fair\nyes. Q. All right. Have you been given a listing of the programs which are in place, which were in place when you came on the board which had the purpose of improving African-American achievement? A. I understand that pursuant to the plan their are three programs. Q. What were those three? A. That's the National Science Foundation math and science Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box 14 sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone, ( 501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 6 program whatever it's called, the ah, early literacy, Pre-K literacy whatever it's called, and the middle school program. Q. What are the source of your understanding? A. The ah, report I believe\nthe compliance report. Q. Well now the plan is the plan, so I want you to--well, now that is a compliance--- A. Right. Q. I\"m saying here I would like to see where the plan says that there were three programs. A. I don\"t believe it does. Q. All right. Now are you saying that those were the only plans that you knew of which had the purpose of determining the effectiveness of--let me change it, change it. Are those the only programs which were in place that the board assessed in order to determine the effectiveness in improving AfricanAmerican achievement? A. Those were the programs that were apart of the program evaluation agenda as I understand it. The board approved program evaluation agenda. Q. Now this, this does not, 2.7 doesn\"t address or relate to the evaluation agenda. A. No. Q. It talks, it says here and I read it literally, \"it shall assess the academic programs implemented pursuant to 2.7 after each year in order to determine the effectiveness of the Cobb Court Reporting P . O. Box *4 Sweet Home , AR 72164-0004 Phone : (501) 490 - 0066 (501) 490 - 0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY programs in improving African-American achievement.\" A. It certainly says that, yes. 7 Q. All right. Are there any academic programs, programs which have been--which were implemented pursuant to 2.7 as of the time you came onto the board? A. The, my understanding has been that since the ah, desegregation orders were issued that the board has directed the district, the administrators have made their best efforts to comply to improve education level. Q. Well now Mr. Rose--- A. Did I misunderstand the question? Q. I don't mean to get or cross words with you--A. And I don\"t want to get cross words with you. Q. now I want to go through this. It says that Little Rock shall implement, 2.7 says that you shall implement the policies, programs, and procedures designed to improve and remediate the academic achievement of African-American students. A. Yes, sir. Q. Are you saying--- FENDLAND: Including but not limited to Section 5 of the revised plan. WALKER: That's right. Q. Now are you saying that to your knowledge the only programs that have that purpose were the National Science Foundation Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box 14 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone 1 ( 501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 8 grant, the early literacy program, and the middle school program? A. No, sir\nI'm not saying that. Q. Right. Now my question then is can you identify the other programs which were placed into effect by the school board which had the purpose of complying with 2.7 or its subordinate sections? A. No, I can\"t identify those those programs. Q. All right. Now if you can\"t identify a thing and you say you had it, that means you can\"t assess it doesn't it? A. Correct. Q. All right. FENDLAND: Are you meaning the board still? WALKER: I\"m meaning the board. ROSE: Board meaning the district because the board doesn't do the assessment. WALKER: Fine. Q. But you understand--now you are aware and I don't want to, I mean you are aware when you went on the board early on you were disappointed with the evaluation or assessment system in place\nis that fair to say as a board? A. Yes, sir. Q. And you all didn't approve the assessments that had been or evaluations that had been submitted? A. I believe if my recollection is correct and it may be hazy Cobb Court Reporting P . o . Box f4 Sweet Home , AR 72164 - 0004 Phone : ( 501) 490 - 0066 (501) 490 - 0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11  12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 9 on this because I did attend several board meetings before I was actually sworn on the--- Q. Right. A. board, so which board meeting? Q. Well, whichever--- A. I believe in August before I came on the board is when the National Science Foundation evaluation was not approved. Q. All right. And since that ti--- A. Tabled actually. Q. All right. And since that time it has not been approved has it? The evaluation. A. I do not believe that it has. Q. In fact, since that time no evaluation has been approved by the board has it? No written evaluation has been approved by the board? A. We have received assessment reports that we have accepted on several programs. Q. But now an evaluation report is different from an assessment isn't it? A. Probably. Q. Now you are aware that the Evaluation Department has to abide by progressional standards in performing evaluations are you not? A. I would assume so. Q. That's why you have a P-R-E department. Cobb Court -Reporting P. o. Box *4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: ( 501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  2 3 4 6 7 8 9 10 11  12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 10 A. Yes. Q. And you would also agree that when people do their own assessments of what they are doing they have in effect a conflict of interest? A. I would agree that that is a possibility. Q. All right. So that if you come to me and ask me how my program is working, I have a self-serving interest in saying to you that my program is working okay if that\"s an assessment? A. It's entirely possible that you could say that\nyes. Q. All right. Now but as a board you would want to at least have an evaluation that has purpose, content, criteria, conclusions and you all at least have adopted a set of evaluation guidelines haven\"t you? FENDLAND: Let me say that\"s a compound question. You went through the criteria and then ask him if he'd adopted it. Q. Right. You all have adopted a set of evaluation criteria haven't you? A. Yes. Q. I see. And just a verbal assessment does not meet the evaluation model does it? A. That's correct. Q. All right. Now have you ever seen any assessment of any program from the prospective of whether that program would or likely would not improve African-American achievement in this Cobb Court Reporting P . o. Box #4 sweet Home , AR 72164-0004 Phone : (501) 490 - 0066 (501) . 490-0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY district\nanything in writing? A. Yes. Q. You\"ve seen some. Can you identify it, please? A. The National Science Foundation assessment. Q. Now the National Science Foundation assessment but that wasn't approved by the board was it? A. The original one was tabled by the board. Q. And there has not been one approved since then has it? A. I don't believe it has\nno. 11 Q. Now that National Science Foundation grant was intended to apply at the southwest school, McClellan\nis that correct? A. Ah, I'm not sure. Q. What schools were included within the ambit of the National Science Foundation grant? A. I do not remember the original parameter\nthat was before I came onto the board. I know that the programs that have been developed using that grant money have been put in places, a great many schools. Q. I see. Now are you saying that that, the purpose of that was to improve African-American achievement? A. Yes, sir. Q. Is it fair, I mean have you read the grant proposal? A. I don't recall. Q. Have the heard the criticism that the grant proposal did in fact have that as one of its primary purposes but that is no Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box t4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 12 longer the primary purpose of the NSF grant\nare you aware of that criticism? Are you aware of that being a criticism? A. Are you making that criticism now? Q. I've made it before. A. Well, if you're making it now then I'm aware of it now. That's the first I've--- Q. But before now you have not? A. No, sir. Q. I see. Now if you're going to, if the program is for the purpose of improving African-American achievement that's different than improving achievement of all students isn't it? A. No, sir. Impr oving the achievement of all students will improve t he achievement of African-American students by definition. Q. Well let me, let me, let me see how that works. If you have white students at the 60 percentile level and black students at the 30 percentile level and they all go up as some figures show they did by say 5 percent--- A. Then they've all improved. Q. but this is not eliminating the disparity gap is it Mr. Rose? A. No, if the gap remains the same it certainly hasn't improved. Q. All right. Now do you agree that the only measuring standard that is in effect that the district has approved is Cobb Court Reporting P . o. Box H sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone : (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 13 the SAT test, the S-A-T? A. In what sense, I\"m sorry, repeat your question. Q. Are you familiar with the criteria for determining whether or not the gap has been narrowed or eliminated? A. I understand that there are several standardize test and when we receive reports of those scores they're always broken down by race. Q. Well, we\"re talking about the test themselves\nwhat are those test other than the S-A-T? A. There's the ACTAP. there's ah, there\"s the state benchmark exams, district benchmark exams. Q. Now you understood that when we went, when this case was resolved in 1989 there was no ACTAP or Benchmark? A. Yes, sir\nI understand that. Q. And we\"re looking at achieving ah, narrowing the achievement gap that you have to use a consistent standard over a period of years, is that fair? A. That\"s probably the best way to do it\nyes. Q. I see. Now did the board ever decide in a board meeting that it was going to use ACTAP for that purpose of measuring whether or not the gap had been changed or was that something that was just presented to you by Dr. Lesley in the last year or so since you've been on the board? A. I don\"t recall the board approving or disapproving of which standards, which exams are going to be used. Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box t4 sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11  12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY Q. Do you recall her coming to you once and telling you all that the achievement gap had been eliminated? A. No, sir. 14 Q. Now you had a Research committee doctor, I mean Mr. Rose, do you remember being on that Research Committee? A. Yes, sir. Q. Did that Research Committee--do you understand Mrs. Springer participated in it? A. Absolutely, that's where I met Mrs. Springer. Q. Did that Research Committee have any purpose? A. A charge from the board. Q. I see. A. A vague charge. Q. Vague. Now is that Research Committee still in place? A. As far as I know the committee had not been disbanded. Q. Do you recall ever seeing criticism of the Research Committee by Dr. Lesley? A. Yes, I believe I have. Q. Do you remember her stating that we need to get rid of this sucker? A. I remember you reading that in court. Q. Were you surprised at that? A. Surprised, no. Q. Why would you get rid of a Research Committee that the board approved--- cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box t4 sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone, (501) 490 - 0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11  12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY A. I wouldn't. Q. if the purpose--you wouldn\"t? Does the staff have the power by inaction of a committee to overrule the board? A. The authority or the power? Q. Power. A. Yes. Q. It has the power, okay. A. They have the power to do through inactivity to negate policy. 15 Q. That's right\nI see. So they negated the policy in this case by in effect not using or continuing to use the Research Committee after February of this year, isn't that fair to say? A. Restate the question. Q. You haven\"t been to a committee meeting of the Research Committee since February have you? A. I believe we met once in the summer. Q. Did Mrs. Springer get notice of it? A. I don't know. Q. Did you all do anything? A. We talked about how to continue the work of the committee, who would chair it in the interim until Dr. James selected a new chair. Q. Who was present at that meeting? A. Myself, Dr. Lease, Mr. Babbs, there were others. Perhaps the teacher representative whose name escapes me and--- cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box #4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 16 Q. But not the Joshua representative. A. No, I don't believe Mrs. Springer was there. Q. But now it couldn't have been the summer if Dr. Lease was there. A. Early summer--- Q. But she was gone before the summer wasn't she? She left in late April--- A. Is that right--- Q. early May isn't it? A. I thought i t, I thought she left in June. Q. She didn't leave until June? A. I thought she left in June. Q. I see. A. I could be mistaken about that or have the date of the meeting wrong for that sake. Q. Did you all keep minutes of that meeting? A. I did not, I don't know if any--- Q. Did anyone? A. I don't recall. Q. All right. Now can you explain why the Research Committee didn't meet between February and the summer other than because Dr. Lesley sai d we want to kill this sucker? A. I don't think that would have had anything to do with it. Q. I see. Well isn't that, didn't she say that the Research Commi ttee activities should be under her program area? Cobb Court Reporting P . o. Box t4 sweet Home , AR 72164- 0004 Phone : (501) 490 - 0066 (501) 490 - 0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 17 A. She didn't say it to me\nI don't, I haven't heard her say that. Q. I see. You take the position that the district needs to be focusing upon low performing students, is that right? FENDLAND: Who is you? A. Yeah. WALKER: You personally. A. Me personally? Q. Yes. A. Yes, I've taken that position. Q. And if you want to improve the academic achievement of low performing students would you not agree that you would develop different strategies for relating to them than you would for achieving, for improving the achievement of already high performing students? A. Certainly. Q. And would you not agree that in order for low performing students who are already in high school to be served best that you would have to relate to their foundational needs more seriously than you would the students who are already high performing, highly performing? A. More seriously, what do you mean by that? Q. Well, the students can't read and write. You want to make sure that they can at least do those things before they go into something else? Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box t4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone, (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  2 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY A. Certainly. Q. And you don't have to follow that same approach with already high performing students, isn\"t that correct? A. You don't have to follow the same approach with students who already read and write\ncorrect. 18 Q. All right. Now, so for all practical--you know that most of the students who are low performing are black? A. I know that most of the students are black and so it follows that most of the students who are low performing are black. Q. Well, you understand that most of the white student are upper income, are middle to upper income? A. I assume that to be true. Q. Well you can look at the census tracks can\"t you--A. Yes, sir. Q. and you can tell that? A. Yes, sir. Q. All right. And if you were to come up with a system which allowed segregation of students--if you just wanted to say we wanted these classes segregated, all you would have to do is just simply say all the students who were in a certain test score range would be over here [motioning with right hand] but the ones who are in another lower test score range would be over here [motioning with the left hand] and the result would be predictable wouldn't it Mr. Rose? Cobb Court Reporting P. O. Box #4 Sweet Home , AR 72164- 0004 Phone : (501) 490 - 0066 ( 501) 490-0.926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11  12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY A. I'm sorry, are we segregating them by race or by test score? Q. Well, if you wanted--A. I mean by location? 19 Q. if you wanted to do it by race and you know that the test score performance is likely to be a certain way, if you do it you know what the outcome is going to be. In other words if you say we want to use race, if we want to get a racial result but we have to have a nonracial explanation for it, remember now we want a racial result but you can't come out and say we trying, nobody in the district can come out and say we want a racial result, so in order to get a racial result you can look at those characteristics that are most common to the racial groupings and then adopt criteria for placement that most apply to those racial groups. A. I'm sorry Mr. Walker, I quit listening to the question when you implied that there were people in the district who wanted racial results. Q. Oh, you don't believe that? A. No, sir\nI do not. Q. Are you not aware of ah, teachers and administrators referring in some cases to students ah, in racial terms? A. I've never heard it. Q. You've never even heard that the--- A. I've never heard teachers refer to students in racial Cobb Court Reporting P. O. Box i4 sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 10 11  12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY terms. Q. But you don\"t hear teachers, you've never heard those reports? A. I hear teacher a lot. Q. Are you in the schools very much? A. Yes, sir. Q. Why are you there? A. Many reasons. My wife is a teacher, my daughter is a student--- Q. Where does your wife teach? A. Chicot. Q. Who is the principal there? A. Jane Harkey. 20 Q. Okay. Now you don't suggest that you hear all the comments between teachers and students do you? A. Absolutely not\nnot for a moment would I suggest that. Q. All right. You\"re not aware of the teacher at Dunbar who said that he was tired of teaching these dumb ass niggers? A. No, sir. Q. All right. So you just don't believe that people still have racial motivation in 2001 do you? A. No, sir\nI believe that they do. Q. But you believe that nobody in this district does? A. I believe nobody is denying children an education because of their race. Cobb Court Reporting P . o . Box 1f4 Sweet Home , AR 72164 - 0004 Phone : (501) 490- 0066 (501) 490 - 0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 21 Q. Well, there are different ways to deny education. You can let all kids be in a classroom, you can let them all hold their hands up but only call on certain kids from time-to-time\nthat's one way of separating kids isn't it? A. Sure. Q. You can give some kids, give all kids homework but you can give some kids verbalized instruction one-on-one and then not give it to the others and there\"s no way that those students have to complain about it\nbut you don\"t believe that kind of thing happens do you? A. I don\"t have any examples of it. I'm not saying that it doesn't happen. Q. I see. A. Do you have example of it? Q. Oh, yeah. You can give students extra--A. Have you reported those to the board, sir? Q. Oh, yes\nwe have. A. To the board. Q. Well wait a minute. First of all you understand that our charge is not to report things to you? A. No, sir\nI understand that once a month you have a spot on my agenda that you\"ve never appeared for to report things to me. Q. Do you understand that the purpose that what we have been doing is making our reports to the responsible administrators, Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box #4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: ( 501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERT\\F\\ED COPY 22 have you not seen the answers to the interrogatories on all the letters and other correspondence that has gone to the--- A. No, sir\nI have not. Q. Are you not aware of the scores and scores of letters of complaints that we--- A. I am aware that you--- FENDLEY: I'll object to the form, that is not true. We don\"t have any indication of the example you just gave. Q. Mr. Washington testified in court, I don\"t know whether you were there--- A. I did not hear Mr. Washington\"s testimony. Q. Mr. Washington testified that he was aware of the example of the white teacher at Dunbar rushing in to the student lounge and said that I'm just tired of teaching these dumb ass niggers. Now you would expect us not to bring those things to the board would you not if we\"re trying to cooperate with the district and bring--and you would expect us to bring them to the attention of your responsible administrators? A. I would certainly hope that a situation like that would be brought very quickly to the attention of someone who can do something about it. Q. Do you have anything to indicate that we have not been doing that over the past three years? A. Do I have anything to indicate that you have not been Cobb Court Reporting P . o. Box 14 Sweet Home , AR 72164 - 0004 Phone : ( 501) 490 - 0066 (501) 490 - 0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 23 submitting--no, sir\nI do not have anything to indicate that you have not been submitting those kinds of reports. Q. Have you not been told by Ms. Mitchell and Mr. Babbs that we regularly and frequently brought to their attentions items of discrepancy and racial treatment within the schools? A. I don\"t recall, I don't recall. Q. Or did you assume that because I wasn't coming to the board to talk that we were not bringing things to the attention of your administrators? A. That is my assumption\nyes. Q. Well now, you understood Mr. Rose and I told you once or twice that we were, the purpose that we saw this of the plan was to foist good will and good working relationships upon the parties and to try to work at the lowest possible level to have things resolved so that when they got to the board they would be really serious matters. A. That's reasonable but I take those sorts of racial slurs like you just described as a serious matter. Q. Why should we do that and tell me, not this is a question, why should we bring that to the attention of the board if we bring it to the attention of the administrators and they try to find a way to work it out? A. That's probably, you're probably correct. Q. And why should we put that in the public domain ah, other than to perhaps embarrass a particular_ teacher or characterize Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box *4 sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11  12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 24 teach misbehaviors in a way that is not helpful? Why should we try to do anything to put the teachers down? Did I not come before you and say that we were trying to shore up the district rather than to pull it down? A. Yes, you said that. 2001.] WALKER: All right. No more questions. FENDLEY: I have no questions. [The deposition ended at 1:03 p.m., Octobers, * * * * * Cobb Court Reporting P . O. Box H sweet Home , AR 72164-0004 Phone : ( 501) 490 - 9066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 ' 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 CERTIFIED COPY SIGNATURE PAGE I, TONY ROSE, hereby certify that the above and foregoing deposition is a full, true, correct and complete transcript ~/the proceeding [mark the appropriate box): 25 J\\? had at the time of the taking of my deposition. (OR) ( ) subject to the notations on the attached Errata Sheet made by me or at my direction. Date STATE OF ARKANSAS COUNTY OF PULASKI ) ) ss. ) SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO before me, a and for the aforesaid county and state on this of cOcJl\u0026amp;lHA , 2001. Notary Public in /} c\n-/j..__ ~ - day ~ Cobb Court Reporting P . o. Box f4 Sweet Home , AR 72164-0004 Phone : (501) 490 - 0066 (501) 490 - 0926 - Fax CERTIFIED COPY 26 - 1 ERRATA SHEET 2 3 (Upon completion, please sign and date this sheet below.) 4 5 Page Line Change: 6 , To: 7 Reason: 8 Page __ Line Change: 9 To: 10 Reason: 11 Page Line Change: 12 To: 13 Reason: 14 Page Line Change: 15 To: 16 Reason: 17 Page Line Change: 18 To: 19 Reason: 20 Page Line Change: 21 To: 22 Reason: 23 Page Line Change: 24 To: 25 Reason: 26 Page Line Change: 27 To: 28 Reason: 29 Page Line Change: 30 To: 31 Reason: 32 Page Line Change: 33 To: 34 Reason: 35 Page Line Change: 36 To: 37 Reason: 38 Page Line Change: 39 To: 40 Reason: 41 42 43 Page of 44 TONY ROSE Date Cobb Court Reporting P. o . Box 14 sweet Home , AR 72164-0004 Phone : (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-092! - Fax    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 CERTIFIED COPY 27 REPORTER'S CERTIFICATE STATE OF ARKANSAS ss. 429-84-1622 COUNTY OF PULASKI I, Gloria Y. Cobb, A Certified Court Reporter and Notary Public in and for the aforesaid County and state, do hereby certify that the witness, TONY ROSE, was duly sworn by me prior to the taking of testimony as to the truth of the matters attested to and contained therein\nthat the testimony of said witness was taken by me in stenomask and was thereafter reduced to typewritten form by me or under my direction and supervision\nthat the foregoing transcript is a true and accurate record of the testimony given to the best of my understanding and ability. I FURTHER CERTIFY that I am neither counsel for, related to, nor employed by any of the parties to the action in which this proceeding was taken\nand, further, that I am not a relative or employee of any attorney or counsel employed by the parties hereto, nor financially interested, or otherwise, in the outcome of this action\nand that I have no contact with the parties, attorneys, or persons with an interest in the action that affects or has a substantial tendency to affect impartiality, that requires me to relinquish control of an original deposition transcript or copies of the transcript before it is certified and delivered to the custodial attorney, or that requires me to provide any service not available to all parties to the act. My Commission Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box #4 Sweet Home , AR 72 164-0004 ~hone : (501) 4 90-0066 (501) 490 - 09 26 - Fax\nThis project was supported in part by a Digitizing Hidden Special Collections and Archives project grant from The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation and Council on Library and Information Resources.\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\u003cdcterms_creator\u003eCobb Court Reporting\u003c/dcterms_creator\u003e\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n\n "},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1307","title":"Proceedings: ''Hearing''","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":["2001-10-02"],"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 School District","School districts--Arkansas--Pulaski County","Education--Arkansas","Educational law and legislation","Educational planning","Court records","School integration","Little Rock (Ark.)--History--21st Century"],"dcterms_title":["Proceedings: ''Hearing''"],"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/1307"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["Available for use in research, teaching, and private study. Any other use requires permission from the Butler Center."],"dcterms_medium":["legal documents"],"dcterms_extent":["221 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_291","title":"Compliance correspondence","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":["2001-10/2001-12"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System."],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--21st Century","Little Rock School District","Education--Arkansas","Educational law and legislation","Education--Evaluation","Educational planning","School administrators","Walker, John W."],"dcterms_title":["Compliance correspondence"],"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/291"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["correspondence"],"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\n1 RECEIVED OCT 2 2001 OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING RECEIVED ' OCT 2 2001 OffICEOF DESEGREGATION MONITORING Mark Pryor Attorney General STATE OF ARKANSAS OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL Mark A. Hagemeier Assistant Attorney General Direct dial\n(501) 682-3643 Direct Facsimile: (501) 682-2591 E-mail: MarkH@ag-Slale ar.us October 1, 2001 John W. Walker John Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72201 374-4187 VIA FACSIMILE and U.S. MAIL LRSD V. PCSSD\nUSDC\n4:82CV866SWW Dear Mr. Walker: This is to confirm the receipt of your facsimile transmission of September 19, 2001. In that faxed letter, you requested that I contact you in writing if I wished to continue to receive copies of communications between LRSD and the Joshua Intervenors. In order for my clients to keep abreast of developments in this case, and in order to respond to the Court at a future point in time regarding what has transpired in this case, my client and I request that we continue receiving communications between the Joshua Intervenors and LRSD. By this, we do not mean to inconvenience your office staff or make undue demands upon your financial resources\ntherefore, if you would like to send us communications between LRSD and the Joshua Intervenors on a weekly or bi-weekly basis in order to reduce your cost, we would certainly be amenable to this arrangement, or others if you could suggest them. Further, Sammye Taylor of this office has withdrawn as counsel from this case. Therefore, would you please have your records reflect that all further correspondence and pleadings should be sent to me. 323 Center Street  Suite 200  Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501) 682-2007  FAX (501) 682-2591 Internet Website  http.7/v^'^Av.ag.state.ar.us/ 1 Page 2 Mr. Walker October 1,2001 Please give me a call if you have any questions or wish to discuss this matter. Very truly yours, MARK A. HAGEMEIER Assistant Attorney General MH/ale cc: via U.S. Mail\nSam Jones Ann Borwn Marshall Richard Roachell Chirs Heller Stephen Jones iU/Ul/Ul X3:4X iD:ns, Hnn narsnaii hro:tlay Fendley Friday Law Firm Page 2/2 Friday Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark HERSCHELH fRIDAY(lM2-IPM} WIUIAMH SUTTON. P.A BYRON U EISEMAN. JR . P A JOED BELL. P.A. JAMES A BUTTRY, P.A FREDERICK S URSERY. P.A OSCAR E DAVIS. JR . P.A JAMES C CLARK. JR. P.A THOMAS P LEGGETT. P,A JOHN DEWEY WATSON. P.A PAULB BENHAM III. P.A LARRY W BURKS. P A A WYCKLIFF NISBET. JR. P.A. JAMES EDWARD HARRIS. P.A J PHILLIP MALCOM. P A JAMES M SIMPSON. P A JAMES M SAXTON. P A J SHEPHERC-RUSSELL III. P.A. DONALD H BACON. P A WILLIAM THOMAS BAXTER. P.A. BARRYE COPLIN. P.A RICHARD D TAYLOR. P.A JOSEPH B HURST. JR . P.A ELIZABETH ROBBEN MURRAY. P.A CHRISTOPHER HELLER. P.A LAURA HENSLEY SMITH. P A ROBERT S SHAFER. P A WILLIAM M GRIFFIN Ill. P A MICHAEL S MOORE. P A DIANES MACKEY. PA. Walter M ebeliii.p.a KEVIN A CRASS. P.A. WILLIAM A WADDELL. JR . P.A SCOTT J LANCASTER. PA M GAYLE CORLEY. P.A ROBERT B BEACH. JR. P A J LEE BROWN. P.A JAMES C. BAKER. JR . P.A HARRY h LIGHT.P A SCOTT H TUCKER. P.A GUY ALTON WADE. P.A PRICE C GARDNER. P.A. TONIA P JONES. P.A DAVID D WILSON. P.A ATTORNEYS AT LAW A LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP WWW fridflyfirm.con 2000 REGIONS CENTER 400 WEST CAPITOL LITTLE ROCK. ARKANSAS 72201-3493 TELEPHONE 501-376-2011 FAX 501-376-2147 3425 NORTH FUTRALL DRIVE, SUITE 103 FM 501-685-2147 208 NORTH FIFTH STREET BLYTHEVILLE, ARKANSAS 72315 TELEPHONE 870-762-2898 FAX 870-762-2918 JEFFREYH MOORE. P.A DAVID M CRAP. P A CARLA GWNILS SPAINHOUP.. P.A JOHN C PENDLEY. JR . P.A JONANN ELIZABETH CONICLIO. P.A R CHRISTOPHER LAWSON. P.A GREGORY D. TAYLOR. P.A TONY L. WILCOX. P.A. PRAN C HICKMAN. P A BETTY J. DEMORY. P A LYNDA M JOHNSON. P A JAMES W SMITH. P.A CLIFFORD W PLUNKETT. P.A DANIEL L HERRINGTON. P A MARVIN L CHILDERS K COLEMAN WESTBROOK. JR ALLISON J CORNWELL ELLEN M OWENS JASONB HENDREN BRUCE B TIDWELL MICHAEL  KARNEY KELLY MUP.PKY MCQUEEN JOSEPH? MCKA7 alexahma a. IFRAH JAY T TAYLOR MARTIN A KASTEN BRYAN W DUKE JOSEPH G. NICHOLS ROBERT T. SMITH RYAN A BOWMAN TIMOTHY C EZELL T MICHELLE AT OR KAREN S HALBERT SARAHM COTTON PHILIP B MONTGOMERY KRISTEN S RIGGINS ALAN G BRYAN OF cetmstt B S CLARK WILLIAM L TERRY WILLIAM L PATTON. JR H T LARZELERE. P A JOHN C. ECHOLS. P.A A.D MCALLISTER October 1,2001 JOHN C. FENDLEY. JR. LITTLE ROCK TEL5\u0026lt;M-9T0-9329 FAX S01-244-4341 VTA FAX: 374-4187 Mr. John W. Walker Attomev at Law 1723 Broadway Little RocL .AR 72206 RE\nLRSD V. PCSSD Dear Mr. Walker: We would like to depose Joshua's LRSD class representative and the Joshua monitors identified in your response to Interrogatory No. 3 of our first set of discovery who monitored LRSD during the term of the Revised Plan. Please provide dates over the next two weeks when they can be presented for deposition. We would expect each deposition to last approximately one hour. We appreciate your cooperation. Sincerely, John C. Fendley, Jr.RECEIVED RECEIVED OCT 2 2001 OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING jw St: 51 OCT 2 znoi OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING Mark Pryor Attorney General STATE OF ARKANSAS OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL A4ark A. Hagemeier Assistant Attorney General Direct dial: (501) 682-3643 Direct Facsimile: (501) 682-2591 E-mail: MarkH@ag.state.ar.us October 1,2001 VIA FACSIMILE and U.S. MAIL John W. Walker John Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72201 374-4187 Re: LRSD V. PCSSD\nUSDC\n4:82CV866SWW Dear Mr. Walker: This is to confirm the receipt of your facsimile transmission of September 19, 2001. In that faxed letter, you requested that I contact you in writing if I wished to continue to receive copies of communications between LRSD and the Joshua Intervenors. In order for my clients to keep abreast of developments in this case, and in order to respond to the Court at a future point in time regarding what has transpired in this case, my client and I request that we continue receiving communications between the Joshua Intervenors and LRSD. By this, we do not mean to inconvenience your office staff or make undue demands upon your financial resources\ntherefore, if you would like to send us communications between LRSD and the Joshua Intervenors on a weekly or bi-weekly basis in order to reduce your cost, we would certainly be amenable to this arrangement, or others if you could suggest them. Further, Sammye Taylor of this office has withdrawn as counsel from this case. Therefore, would you please have your records reflect that all further correspondence and pleadings should be sent to me. 323 Center Street  Suite 200  Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501) 682-2007  FAX (501) 682-2591 Internet Website  http://v'^'w.ag.state.ar.us/ Page 2 Mr. Walker October 1, 2001 Please give me a call if you have any questions or wish to discuss this matter. Very truly yours, MARK. A. HAGEMEIER Assistant Attorney General MH/ale cc\nvia U.S. Mail: Sam Jones Ann Borwn Marshall Richard Roachell Chirs Heller Stephen Jones FRIDAY, ELDREDGE \u0026amp; CLARK A LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP ATTORNEYS AT LAW 2000 REGIONS CENTER 400 WEST CAPITOL LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 7J201-34M TELEPHONE (501) 376-2011 FAX NO. (501) 376-2147 CONFtDSffnAUTY NOTE: The Information in this facsimha transmittal Is lagaify orMleaad and coahilaprt^ irH^flMontY for tha use of the IndMthml or entity namedabtate. tf The rentier this messaoe is not the Intended recipient you are hereby noitited that any disimlnatlon, dIstrhMtion or copy of the transmittal Is sirtetiy prohibited. If you reca/va this transmittal In error, please Immediatafy notify us by telephone and mum the original trvismittal to us at the abwe address da the United States Postal Service. Thanh you. Date: Time: Page: 10/2/01 8:55:14 1 To: Fax #: Ms. Ann Marshall 3710100 From: Clay Fendley Subject: Message: LRSD V. PCSSD: Principals Documents Dear Mr. Walker: We are in receipt of your fax of October 1,2001, concerning your review of documents re quested from principals. We cannot agree to make those available today. Depending on when we do the depositions of Board members, we can begin producing the documents o n Friday going through next week. The process will be slow, however, because we will be required to review each file before your review to ensure there is no personally identifiable student information or personnel records the disclosure of which would constitute a cleariy unwarranted invasion of personal privacy. The documents produced will not include e-mails or conespondence. Your request in this regard is over broad. If you want to see these, you will need to either narrow your request or agree to a protective onder. Please write or call and let us know when you would like to begin your review of document s. Sincerely, Clay Fendley Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark 400 W. Capitol, Suite 2000 Little Rock, AR 72201 E-mail: fendley@fec.net Direct Phone: 501-370-3323 Direct Fax\n501-244-5341Office of Desegregation Monitoring ' United States District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Marshall, Federal Monitor One Union National Plaza 124 West Capitol, Suite 1895 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501)376-6200 Fax (501) 371-0100 October 3, 2001 Mr. Clay Pendley Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark 400 W. Capitol, Suite 2000 Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Clay\nAttached is a copy of a fax I received from you while I was recently on vacation making preparations for my daughters September 30\" wedding. I am perplexed by not only the subject matter but the tone of your message to me. At no time have I asked to attend a meeting of the LRSDs Compliance Committee. Further, I do not recall a conversation with you about attending such a meeting. Your fax, which was addressed solely to me, is surely an error. Id appreciate an immediate explanation and correction, Clay. If others were blind-carboned on this correspondence, please inform them in writing of your correction as well, so no misinformation will stand. Thank you very much. Sincerely yours, - Ann S. Marshall Enc. Bl iu:ns. Mnn narsnaii *f'o\nClay Fendley Friday Law Fir Page 1/1 FRIDAY, ELDREDGE \u0026amp; CLARK A LIMITED LlABILm PARTNERSHIP ATTORNEYS AT LAW 2000 REGIONS CENTER 400 WEST CAPITOL LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201J4M TELEPHONE (501) 376-2011 FAX NO. (501)376-2147 CONFIOeffnAUTY NOTE: TTie inlornallon In Ms facsimile tnmsmitol Is teaaltv orMImd and If (he reader A' hereby notified that any dtslmlnatlon, distribution or copy of the transmittal Is strictly onMblted. If you iran^ltal Inaror, please Immediately notify us by telephone and return the oilginal transmitial to us at the above atiOnss via the Untteb States Postal Service. Thank you. Date: Time: Page: 9/27/01 14:31:04 1 To: Fax #: Ms. Ann Marshall 3710100 From: Clay Fendley Subject: Message: Compliance Committee Meeting This Will confirm our telephone conversation today concerning Fridays Compliance Comm ittee meeting. You stated that you were going to show-up so I could tell you that you are n ot invited and put you out. I stated that I could tell you right now that you are not invited. You stated that you intended to show-up anyway and planned to document it with a earner a. I'm sending you this fax to \"documenr that you are not invited to Compliance Committee meetings. We would respectfully request that you not disrupt our meeting tomorrow. We appreciate your cooperation. Sincerely, Clay Fendley Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark 400 W. Capitol, Suite 2000 Little Rock, AR 72201 E-mail: fendley@fec.net Direct Phone: 501 -370-3323 Direct Fax. 501-244-5341Friday Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark HERSCHEL H. FRIDAY (IW-IRM) WILLIAM H. SUTTON, P.A BYRON M. EISEMAN, JR.. P.A. JOE D. BELL, P.A JAMES BUTTRY. P.A. FREDERICK S. URSERY. P.A OSCAR E. DAVIS, JR.. P.A- JAMES C. CLARK. JR.. P.A THOMAS P. LEGGETT, P.A JOHN DEWEY WATSON, P.A PAUL B. BENHAM lU. P.A LARRY W. BURKS. P.A A WYCKLIFF NISBET, JR,, P.A JAMES EDWARD HARRIS. P.A J. PHILLIP MALCOM. P.A. JAMES M. SIMPSON. P.A. JAMES M. SAXTON. P.A. J. SHEPHERD RUSSELL lU. P.A DONALD H. BACON. P.A. WILLIAM THOMAS BAXTER, P.A. BARRY E. COPLIN, P.A. RICHARD D. TAYLOR. P.A. JOSEPH B. HURST. JR.. P.A ELIZABETH ROBBEN MURRAY. P.A. CHRISTOPHER HELLER. P.A LAURA HENSLEY SMITH, PA. ROBERT S. SHAFER. P.A WILLIAM M. GRIFFIN HI. PA. MICHAEL S. MOORE, P.A. DIANE S. MACKEY. P.A. WALTER M. EBEL UI. P.A KEVIN A CRASS. P.A. ATTORNEYS AT LAW A LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP www.rridayfirm.com JEFFREY H. MOORE. P.A. DAVID M. GRAF. P.A. CARLA GUNNELS SPAINHOUR. P.A. JOHN C. FENDLEY. JR-. P.A JOSEPH P. MCKAY ALEXANDRA A. IFRAH JAY T. TAYLOR MARTIN KASTEN JONANN ELIZABETH CONIGUO, P.A. BRYAN W. URE WILUAM WADDELL, JJf... P.A. SCOTT J. LANCASTER. P.A. M. GAYLE CORLEY. P.A. ROBERT B. BEACH, JR.. P.A J. LEE BROWN. P.A. JAMES C BAKER. JR.. P.A. HARRY A. LIGHT. P.A SCOTT H. TUCKER. P.A. GUY ALTON WADE, P.A. PRICE C. GARDNER, P.A TONIA P. JONES. P.A. DAVID D. WILSON. P.A. 2000 REGIONS CENTER 400 WESrCAPITOL LITTLE ROCK. ARKANSAS 72201-3493 TELEPHONE 501-376-2011 FAX 501-376-2147 3425 NORTH FUTRALL DRIVE, SUITE 103 FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS 72703-4811 TELEPHONE 501-895-2011 FAX 501-895-2147 R. CHRISTOPHER LAWSON. P.A. GREGORY D. TAYLOR. P.A TONY L. WILCOX. P.A. FRAN C. HICKMAN, P.A. BETTY J. DEMORY. P.A. LYNDA M. JOHNSON, P-A JAMES W. SMITH. P.A CLIFFORD W. PLUNKETT, P.A. DANIEL L. HERRINGTON. P.A. MARVIN L. CHILDERS K. COLEMAN WESTBROOK, JR. ALLISON J. CORNWELL ELLEN M. OWENS JASON B. HENDREN BRUCE B. TIDWELL MICHAEL . KARNEY KELLY MURPHY MCQUEEN JOSEPH G. NICHOLS ROBERT T. SMITH RYAN A. BOWMAN TIMOTHY C. EZELL T. MICHELLE ATOR Karen s. halbert SARAH M- COTTON PHILIP B. MONTGOMERY KJUSTBN S. RJGGINS ALAN G. BRYAN OFCOUNSEL B.S. CLARK WILUAM L. TERRY WILLIAM L. PATTON, JR. H.T. LARZELERE. P.A. JOHN C. ECHOLS. P.A. AD. MCALUSTER 208 NORTH FIFTH STREET BLYTHEVILLE. ARKANSAS 72315 TELEPHONE 870-762-2888 FAX 87O-7B2-2B18 September 28, 2001 JOHN C. FENDLEY. JR. LITTLE ROCK TEL 501-370-3323 FAX 501-244-5341 fendlayQftc.nat Hand Delivered Mr. John W. Walker Attorney at Law 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72206 RECEIVED OCT I 200i OFFICE Or RECElVgg OCT I OFFICE Of RE: LRSD V. PCSSD Dear Mr. Walker: In response to your September 5, 2001, request to our office, we are enclosing the State Benchmark Exam results in the form they were provided to the LRSD Board. In response to this morning's request by Ms. Cooley, we are providing the agenda for this morning's Compliance Committee meeting along with my letter referred to in the agenda. Your fax concerning this morning's Compliance Committee meeting is incorrect in that you indicate that the Superintendent turned you away. As you were told this morning, the Superintendent is out of town today. We will review with him our decision to exclude you from the Compliance Committee meeting upon his return. Let me also repeat my offer made to Ms. Springer this morning\nI would be happy to meet with you on a weekly basis to discuss compliance issues. We are contacting Board members and LRSD personnel that yesterday you asked to depose. We will not be able to produce anybody for deposition on Monday. Three of the five Board members who have responded so far are not available on Tuesday. We are going to try to find a date in the next two weeks on which all of the Board members are available. Please let us know your availability over the next two weeks so we can get these depositions scheduled. .I'*'-Mr. John Walker September 18, 2001 Page? We appreciate your cooperation and look forward to hearing from you. Sincerely, cc: Dr. Kenneth James (w/o enclosure) Ms. Aim Marshall (w/o enclosure) a xusy uuOT f aye X/ X FRIDAY, ELDREDGE \u0026amp; CLARK A LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP ATTORNEYS AT LAW 2000 REGIONS CENTER 400 WEST CAPITOL LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201J4M TELEPHONE (JOI) 276.2011 FAX NO. (501)376-2147 CONFtDENTWJTY NOTE: TTk informatton tn tMs facsimile transmittal is togalty ortviieaed anti confbiencial information intantiati only tor tha usa tha intiMiiual or entity namati above. E the reatiar of this message is not the irrtertoed recipiant. you are hereby notiftoti that arty disimtnation, Oistrfbutton or copy tjf the trvtsmitt^isstrtotiy prohibitea. if you recaNe this transmittal in error, please immediately notify us by telephone and return the original transmittal to us at the above address via the United States Postal Service. Thank you. Date: Time: Page: 9/27/01 14:31:04 1 To: Fax #: Ms. Ann Marshall 3710100 From: Clay Fendley Subject\nMessage: Compliance Committee Meeting This will confirm our telephone conversation today concerning Friday's Compliance Comm ittee meeting. You stated that you were going to show-up so I could tell you that you are n ot invited and \"put you out.\" I stated that I could tell you right now that you are not invited. You stated that you intended to show-up anyway and planned to document it with a earner a. I'm sending you this fax to \"document\" that you are not invited to Compliance Committee meetings. We would respectfully request that you not disrupt our meeting tomorrow. We appreciate your cooperation. Sincerely, Clay Fendley Friday. Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark 400 W. Capitol, Suite 2000 Little Rock, AR 72201 E-mail: fendley@fec.net Direct Phone: 501-370-3323 Direct Fax: 501-244-5341( John W. Walker, P.A. Attorney At Law 1723 Broadway Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 Telephone (501) 374-3758 FAX (501) 374-4187 HECSfVSD AUS IS office Of 2001 JOHN W. WALKER SHAWN CHILDS OF COUNSEL ROBERT McHENRY, PA DONNA J. McHENEY Via Facsimile - 244-5344 August 14, 2001 8210 Henderson Road Little Rock, Arkansas 72210 Phone: (501) 372-3425  Fax (501) 372-3428 Email: mcheiiryd@swbell.net Mr. Christopher Heller Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark 2000 Regions Center Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Chris: I take your letter to be simply a rejection of my request that I be informed of meetings of the compliance committee and of all proposals before the compliance committee has had an opportunity to take a position on them. The rest of your letter is a set of self-serving statements with which I disagree. I will respond to several of them, however, as follows: First, I disagree with your premise. I also disagree that you added 8.3 to enable us to have a remedy in the event the District failed to develop the promised programs, policies, and procedures. I always expected to be and still expect to be involved before you all develop any new programs, policies or procedures that have anything to do with implementation of desegregation. I have never wavered from that position. That is different from monitoring with respect to compliance programs. One dealt with actual compliance and the other dealt with setting into place programs, policies and procedures that will help facilitate desegregation and reduce compliance problems in the first place. Second, you indicate that I agreed to be paid $150,000.00 for three years for monitoring. In doing so, you attempt to diminish me and beyond that you deprecate me as well by indicating that my principles are subject to purchase. I never agreed to accept $45,000-50,000 a year for monitoring. We agreed to a total settlement amount for past and future fees in the amount of $850,000.00 approximately. The $150,000.00 was simply deferred. Third, don t talk to me anymore about bad faith. You and Les Gamine totally mislead me from day one. You mislead the Court as well. You withheld data from ODM, Drs. Ross and Roberts and me. Because of that, the District is made to appear that it never had any intent to desegregate as promised. You and Clay Fendley appear to me to have schemed to evade and avoid compliance. Now, you try to make me the heavy for the poor state of compliance that you are in. Beyond that, you specifically kept me out of discussions regarding compliance and discussions with the State of Arkansas regarding loan forgiveness. The morning and night( Page 2 - Letter to Christopher Heller August 14, 2001 eating meetings which you and Les Camine had with me, of which there will be no more, were designed to placate and direct me away from the districts activities so that I would not be fully aware of the various nefarious efforts that you, Clay and Les Carnine were engineering. Fourth, you suggest that in three years we have not proposed a single program, policy or procedure by which to assist the district in meeting its obligations. This simply is wrong, but I need not address it. You now indicate that since trial I have barged into the oflaces of District administrators unannounced and uninvited and other things. You may say what you wish with respect to my activities. I do not agree, however. I notice that you have listed six people as receiving copies. Not one of those people will inform you that I have made a request that either of them verbally provide any information to me since the dont talk to Walker (letter) e-mail from you. My requests, many of which remain unanswered, have been in writing. If you think that I have breached the Judges order, specify your allegations stating the person, place, date and time and witnesses, if any. Otherwise, apologize. Fifth, you now indicate that is inappropriate for me to be personally involved in compliance committee meetings. That is a new position which is contrary to our agreement. Beyond that, it is more appropriate for me to be involved than for you and Clay because we represent the parties in quest of remedy. You both have been obstructionists and now you prevaricate. It is not enough for the policies, etc. to be presented to me at the time they are beinj presented to the Board! The idea was clear that we would work out and work through the programs, policies and procedures before they were presented to the Board in the first place. The fact that I did not appear before the Board is due to the fact that you and Les Camine materially mislead me about what was taking place in the District, withheld information and informed me of the many positive things that were happening, when in fact, they were not happening. Finally, it is evident that good faith was not in you or in the district. You mislead the Board, the community, the Court and me as well. This was the administration in action. Those administrators followed your lead! They sought to cover up, by use of slick language, noncompliance. Now your letter to me is another attempt to cloud reality and to deflect attention from the poor judgment which you and Clay made in letting this District go forward in this court proceeding at this time. You agreed that Little Rock was not ready for unitary status with the caveat that Little Rock was better than other districts and that the covenant should protect the interests of my clients. I did not agree and I told you that in January, February, March. April. May and June when I proposed to you that we delay your motion and then meet regularly, with defined obiectives. to address the problems which needed to be worked out to effectively deliver educational opportunity to black children. Instead, you deliberately chose to put me into the position of having to file objections. You made a money proposal which reflected that you thought you could buy me. You clearly dont know me! My proposal was never about money for myself. Rather, it was to address the issue with the State differently and to seek further benefits from the State that would benefit Black children rather than all children. When you say all, it is now clear that you mean non-Black children. Sure, I want adequate compensation forI Page 3 - Letter to Christopher Heller August 14, 2001 my work. You receive it and there is no public issue or discussion about it and there is no limit on your charges. 1 have readily met with you, Les Carnine and other district staff people when called upon, provided I received adequate notice, and have sought to be involved on a continual basis with the Districts purported compliance efforts. I have employed at least three people who regularly engaged in monitoring activities. That reflects good faith on our part. Your ofBce, on the other hand, has lead the District into a more racially segregated posture than it was three years ago and with all of that, you try to shift the blame onto me. Shame on you, Heller. You are supposed to be a man, not less. Your conduct, advice, actions, and crying are traditional and typical. I need say no more. Check your own fees, however, and see who benefits from continuing this case! Inasmuch as you have seen fit to copy your associate superintendents and Dr. James, in your effort to put me in my place, they are being copied with this letter as is the ODM. The question yet remains about meeting the needs of Black children. For Black children, is there no balm in [the Little Rock School District] ? Is there no physician [here]? Apparently, not. We war when we promised to make peace and to educate Black children. It cannot end until justice is delivered to those children. Sincerely, A / -\u0026lt;rohn W. Walker JWW:js cc. Dr. Ken James Ms. Ann Marshall Ms. Sadie Mitchell Mr. Junious Babbs Dr. Don Stewart Mr Brady GadberryFriday Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark HERSCHEL H. FRIDAY (1922-1994) WILUAM H. SUTTON. P.A. ^YRON M. EISEMAN. JR. P.A. JOE D. BELL, P.A. JAMES BUTTRY. P.A. FREDERICK S. URSERY. P.A. OSCAR E. DAVIS, JR.. P.A. JAMES C. CLARK, JR., P.A. THOMAS P. LEGGETT, P.A. JOHN DEWEY WATSON. P.A. PAUL B. BENHAM lU. P.A. LARRY W. BURKS. P.A. A. WYCKLIFF NISBET. JR., P.A. JAMES EDWARD HARRIS. P.A. J. PHILLIP MALCOM. P.A. JAMES M. SIMPSON, P.A. JAMES M. SAXTON, P.A. J. SHEPHERD RUSSELL UI. P.A. DONALD H. BACON. P.A. WILUAM THOMAS BAXTER, P.A. BARRY B. COPLIN, P.A. RICHARD D. TAYLOR. P.A. JOSEPH B. HURST. JR.. P.A. ELIZABETH ROBBEN MURRAY. P.A. CHRISTOPHER HELLER. P.A. LAURA HENSLEY SMITH, P.A. ROBERT S. SHAPER. P.A. WILUAM M. GRIFFIN UI. P.A. MICHAEL $. MOORE. P.A. DIANE S. MACKEY. P.A. WALTER M. EBEL HI. P.A. ATTORNEYS AT LAW A LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP www.fridayfirm.com 2000 REGIONS CENTER KEVIN CRASS. P- 400 WEST CAPITOL WILLIAM A. WADDELL. JR. P.A. SCOTT J. LANCASTER P.A. M. GAYLE CORLEY. P.A. ROBERT B. BEACH, JR. P.A. I. LEE BROWN. P.A. JAMES C. BAKER JR. P.A. HARRY A. LIGHT, P.A. SCOTT H. TUCKER P.A. GUY ALTON WADE. P.A. PRICE C GARDNER P.A. TONIA P. JONES. P.A. DAVID D. WILSON. P.A. LITTLE ROCK. ARKANSAS 72201-3493 TELEPHONE 501-376-2011 FAX 501-376-2147 237 EAST MILLSAP, SUITE 7 FAYETTEVILLE. ARKANSAS 72703 TELEPHONE 501-895-2011 FAX 501-695-2147 JEFFREY H. MOORE. P.A. DAVID M. GRAF. P.A. CARLA GUNNELS SPAINHOUR. P.A. JOHN C. FENDLEY. JR.. P.A. JONANN ELIZABETH CONIGLIO, P.A. R. CHRISTOPHER LAWSON. P.A. GREGORY D. TAYLOR. P.A. TONY L. WILCOX. P.A. PRAN C. HICKMAN. P.A. BETTY J. DEMORY. P.A. LYNDA M. JOHNSON. P.A. JAMES W. SMITH. P.A. CLIFFORD W. PLUNKETT. P.A. DANIEL L. HERRINGTON. P.A. MARVIN L. CHILDERS K COLEMAN WESTBROOK. JR. ALLISON J. CORNWELL ELLEN M. OWENS JASON B. HENDREN BRUCE B. TIDWELL MICHAEL E. KARNEY KELLY MURPHY MCQUEEN JOSEPH P. MCKAY ALEXANDRA A. JAY T. TAYLOR IFRAH MARTIN A. KASTEN BRYAN W. DUKE JOSEPH G. NICHOLS ROBERT T. SMITH RYAN BOWMAN TIMOTHY C. EZELL T. MICHELLE ATOR KAREN S. HALBERT SARAH M. COTTON OF COUNSEL B.S. CLARK WILLIAM L. TERRY WILLIAM L. PATTON. JR H.T. LARZELERE. P.A. JOHN C. ECHOLS. P.A. A.D. MCALLISTER 208 NORTH FIFTH STREET BLYTHEVILLE. ARKANSAS 72315 TELEPHONE 870-762-2896 FAX 870-762-2918 received August 9, 2001 AUG 1 5 2C0I CHRISTOPHER HELLER LITTLE ROCK TEL 501-370-1506 FAX 501-244-5344 baUrfc.n9t Mr. John Walker JOHN W. WALKER, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 OFFICE OF desegregation MONITOfljNG gB0VS RE: LRSD V. PCSSD AUG 1 3 2001 Dear John: 1/ This letter is in response to your letter of August 2, 2001, to Dr. James requesting that you be informed of future meetings of the Comphance Committee and all proposals that relate to desegregation comphance before the Comphance Committee or the cabinet has an opportunity to take a position on them. This will also acknowledge and respond to your verbal request to attend Comphance Committee and other meetings. For the reasons set forth below, we cannot accommodate your requests. First, the Revised Plan imposes no obligation on the District to involve you in the development of programs, pohcies and procedures. During negotiations leading up to the Revised Plan, you stated that you wanted a remedy available to you should the District fail to develop the promised programs, pohcies and procedures. As a result, we agreed to add Section 8.3 of the Revised Plan. Section 8.3 provides: Comphance issues subject to enforcement in accordance with Section 8.2 shall include LRSD's implementation of the program, policies and/or procedures developed in accordance with this Revised Plan. Before the end of the transition period, LRSD shall develop and/or identify the programs, pohcies and/or procedures to be implemented in accordance with this Revised Plan and provide the to Joshua. Joshua shall have [the] right to invoke the process described in Section 8.2 if LRSD fails to adopt programs, pohcies and/or procedures required by this Revised Plan\nadopts facially deficient programs, pohcies and/or procedures\nor, fails to implementMr. John Walker August 9, 2001 Page 2 the programs, policies and/or procedures adopted in accordance with the Revised Plan.II As Section 8.3 makes clear, it was never contemplated that you would be involved in the development or identification of the programs, pohcies and procedures required by the Revised Plan. Rather, the District agreed in advance to pay you for monitoring so that you could put the District on notice of any comphance problems. You agreed that you would invoke Section 8.2 as soon as you discovered any compliance problems. The District retied upon that agreement in implementing the programs, policies and procedures outlined in the Compliance Plan and the Interim Compliance Report. Your objection to the District being declared unitary after not having invoked Section 8.2 smacks of bad faith o Sumlarly, we have no reason to believe that the purpose of your request is to work with the District in a positive, constructive manner. In three years, you have not proposed a .single program, policy or procedure. Yourrecent conduct suggests a different motive for your request. Among other things, you have barged into the offices of District admimstrators unannounced and uninvited, have threatened to embarrass\" District admimstrators, have denied receiving documents that were provided to you and have communicated with District administrators without our consent, even after Judge Wright specifically ordered you not to do so. We can only conclude that this request is being made to afford you a greater opportunity to engage in last minute discovery and to attempt to harass and intimidate District personnel. Finally, as the attorney for Joshua, we do not believe it is appropriate for you to be personally involved in meetings and policy discussions at the level requested. Every new pohcy adopted by the Board has been provided to you before being adopted, and you are on the agenda for every Board meeting. That was and is your forum to discuss policy. The fact that you rarely appeared at Board meetings over that last three years further suggests you have acted in bad faith. Moreover, most, if not all, committees within the District include a Joshua class member, even if not a representative assigned by you. The District has worked at good faith for three years to implement the Revised Plan without any significant input fi-om you, even after the Interim Compliance Report was filed. Please be assured that we will continue to do so even though we decline the request set forth in your letter of August 2. Sincerely, Christopher Heller CJH\nlkh Mr. John Walker August 9,2001 Page 3 cc: Dr. Kenneth James Ms. Ann Marshall Ms. Sadie Mitchell Mr. Junious Babbs Dr. Don Stewart Dr. Brady Gadberry10/04/01 11:20 To:Honorable Susan Webber Wright FronrClay Fendley Friday Law Firn Page 1/1 FRIDAY, ELDREDGE \u0026amp; CLARK A LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP ATTORNEYS AT LAW 2000 REGIONS CENTER 400 WEST CAPITOL LITTLE ROCK. ARKANSAS 72201-3493 TELEPHONT (501) 376-2011 FAX NO. (501) 376-2147 CONFIDENTIALITY NOTE: The information in this facsimile transmittal is legally orivileoed and confidential information Intended only for the use of the individual or entity nanyed above. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disimlnatlon, distribution or copy of the transmittal Is strictly prohibited. If you receive this transmittal In error, please Immediately notify us by telephone and return the original transmittal to us at the above address via the United States Postal Service. Thank you. Date\nTime\nPage\nTo\nFax#\n10/4/01 11\n26\n54 1 Honorable Susan Webber Wright 6045169 From\nClay Fendley Subject\nMessage\nPlaintiffs Motion for Contempt Dear Judge Wright\nIn light of your Order entered yesterday and Joshua's representation that it would comply with the Court's decision, we believe our pending Motion for Contempt is moot and hereby withdraw the motion. Thank you for your time and attention to this matter. Sincerely. Clay Fendley Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark 400 W. Capitol. Suite 2000 Little Rock, AR 72201 E-mail\nfendley@fec.net Direct Phone\n501-370-3323 Direct Fax\n501-244-5341lo:Ms. Ann Marshall FroB:Cldy Fendley Friday Law Firs Page 1/1 FRIDAY, ELDREDGE \u0026amp; CLARK A LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP ATTORNEYS AT LAW 2000 REGIONS CENTER 400 WEST CAPITOL LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201^493 TELEPHONE (SOI) 376-2011 FAX NO. (501)376-2147 C0NFX3EHTWJTYNOTE: The Infonnatlon In this f^nUk transmittal Is leaally luMImd and confidential Monratlon Intended gnl]^ Idr the use of the Individual ar entity named above. If the reader of this message Is not the Intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disiminatlon, distribution or copy of the transmittal Is strictly prohibited. If you receive this transmittal In error, please Immediately notlly us by telephone and return the original transmittal to us al the above address via the United Stales Postal Service. Thank you. Date: Time: Page: 10/4/01 11:20:04 1 To: Fax#: Ms. Ann Marshall 3710100 From: Clay Fendley Subject: Message: LRSD V. PCSSD - Motion for Contempt and Depositions Dear Mr. Walker: In light of the Judge's Order entered late yesterday afternoon and representation to the Co urt that will comply with her ruling, we will be withdrawing our pending Motion for Contemp t. This renders the depositions scheduled for this afternoon moot, and we have advised th ose involved that they need not appear. Thank you for your cooperation. Sincerely, Clay Fendley Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark 400 W. Capitol, Suite 2000 Little Rock, AR 72201 E-mail: fendley@fec.net Direct Phone: 501-370-3323 Direct Fax: 501-244-5341/C -f-e! JOHN W WAl.tn7.P SHAWN CHILDS JOHN w. Walker, P.A. ArroBNEYArLAW 1723 BKOAUwiy Rock, Arkansas 72206 TKI^HONE (601) 374.3758 PAX (601) 374-4187 Via Fax: 376-2147 kobehtiS^IS DONNaJ.McHZNTO Road Email nicheaiydswbaILaet Nir. Clay Fendley Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark 400 W. Capitol, Suite 2200 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Dear Mr. Fendley: Please have the pe^o^el files f*e deposed today w.th the witnesses If you have obj ection to this, please let with Judge Wright. me know so that I can take the matter up this morning Thank you for your attention to this matter. ^iccfoly. Joi Walker JVvHA^lp cc: Ms. Arm Marshall10/08/01^ 15:04 To:Ms. Ann Marshall FroB:Clay Fendley Friday Law Firm Page 2/5 AGREEMENT FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER This Agreement arises out the Little Rock School District Desegregation case, U.S.D.C. No. LR-C-82-866. Hereinafter, \"LRSD\" shall refer to the Little Rock School District and \"Joshua\" shall refer to the Joshua Intervenors, attorney John Walker and any agents or employees of the Joshua Intervenors or attorney John Walker. LRSD and Joshua will be collectively referred to as the \"parties. IT IS HEREBY AGREED: II 1. LRSD shall make available for review correspondence, e-mails and other documents obtained from LRSD principals for the purpose of responding to Joshua's August 13, 2001, discovery request. It is understood that the documents to be provided may include student information and personnel information which the LRSD considers confidential. Accordingly, the parties agree that all correspondence, e-mails and other documents provided to Joshua in response to Joshua's August 13, 2001, discover}' request shall be considered Confidential Discovery Material and shall be used only for the purposes of the Little Rock School District desegregation case (including any appeals) and not for any other purpose whatsoever. Confidential Discover}- Material shall not be gu'en, shown, made available, or communicated in any wuy to anyone except those persons to whom it is necessary for purposes of the Little Rock School District desegregation case. 2. (a) C onfidential Discovery Material may not be disclosed to any person other than: Counsel of record of the parties to this litigation\nPage 1 of 4 I10/08/01^15:04 To:Ms. Ann Marshall Froffi:Clay Fendley Friday Law Firm Page 3/5 (b) Paralegal, clerical, and other such personnel employed or retained by, or working under the supervision of, counsel of record of the parties to this litigation. (C) Consultants or expert witnesses (as defined in Fed. R. Civ, P. 26(b)) engaged by counsel of Joshua\n(d) The Court and court personnel\nand (e) An other person or entity as to whom counsel for LRSD agrees in A\\Titmg, or whom the Court directs shall have access to such infonmatinn Counsel for Joshua may disclose Confidential Discovery' Material to the class representative only to the extent that disclosure is necessary in order for counsel for Joshua to understand the meaning or context of the Confidential Discovery Material and only after counsel for Joshua has made a good faith attempt to understand the document without assistance from the class representative. Counsel for Joshua shall provide LRSD's counsel with wTitten notice identifying documents which have been disclosed to the class representative within ten (10) days of disclosure. 3. All persons to whom Confidential Discovery Material is disclosed or by whom Confidential Discovery Material is used, shall be informed of and agree to be bound by the terms of this Agreement and shall take all necessaiy' precautions to prevent any disclosure or use of Confidential Discovery' Material other than as authorized by this Agreement and shall agree to submit to the personal jurisdiction of the United States District Court, Eastern District of Arkansas, on any issue relating to compliance with the Agreement. Counsel subject to this Agreement shall take all reasonable steps necessary to advise any person to whom Confidential Discovery Page 2 of 410/08/01 15:04 To:Ms. Ann Marshall FrorarClay Fendley Friday Law Firm Page 4/5 Material may be disclosed, or by whom it may be used, of the terms of this Agreement and, in addition, before disclosure of any Confidential Discovery Material, shall obtain from any person described in subparagraphs 2(b), 2(c), and 2(d) herein a wntten affidavit of acknowledgment that such person has reviewed a copy of this Agreement and will comply with its terms in all respects. Such original signed affidavits shall be retained by counsel of record and a copy provided to opposing counsel within seven (7) days of execution. 4. If Joshua wants to use Confidential Discover}' Material for a purpose other than the Little Rock School District desegregation case, the Confidential Discover} Material at issue shall be treated as Confidential Discover}^ Material until LRSD agrees in writing that the information and/or documents may be used for another purpose or the United State District Court presiding over the Little Rock School District desegregation case issues an order authorizing Joshua to use the information and/or documents for another purpose. 5. Nothing in this Agreement shall prevent Joshua from producing any document or intormation in his, her, or its possession in response to a lawful subpoena or other compulsory process\nprovided that notice shall be given to LRSD at least fourteen (14) business days prior to the return date of the subpoena or other compulsory process, or, if the subpoena or other compulsory process has a return date of less than fourteen (14) days, notice shall be given to LRSD in writing or by telephone as soon as possible but in no event later than forty eight (48) hours prior to the return date. Page 3 of 410/08/01 15:04 To:Ms. Ann Marshall From.Clay Fendley Friday Law Firm Page 5/5 6. Nothing in this Agreement shall be deemed as a waiver by LRSD of any privilege, a waiver of its right to object to production of information or documents on the basis that said information is not subject to discovery under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, or of its right to object to the introduction of information or documents into evidence. 7. Within ninety (90) days after the conclusion of hearings on Joshua's objection to LRSD being released from Court supervision, all Confidential Discovery Material and documents containing or reflecting information designated as Confidential Discovery Material, including but not limited to copies, summaries and excerpts, shall be returned to LRSD or at the option of LRSD all such Confidential Discover}' Material shall be certified as having been destroyed, provided that counsel may retain their work product, copies of court filings and official transcripts and exhibits, provided that the Confidential Discovery Material contained therein will continue to be treated as provided herein. 8. This Agreement be effective immediately upon execution by the parties and shall survive the conclusion of this litigation. 9. The parties agree to file a joint motion for cntr\\' of a protective order consistent with the terms of this Agreement. John C. Fendley, Jr. Attorney for LRSD John W. Walker Attorney for Joshua DATED\nDATED: Page 4 of 410/08/01 15:04 To:Ms. Ann Marshall FroiB:Clay Fendley Friday Law Fir Page 1/5 FRIDAY, ELDREDGE \u0026amp; CLARK A LBUTED LIABILm PARTNERSHIP ATTORNEYS AT LAW lOOO REGIONS CENTER 400 WEST CAPITOL LITTLE ROCK. .ARKANSAS \"MOl-JAM TELEPHONE (501) 376-2011 FAX NO. (501)376-2147 CONFIDEKTtMJTY NOTE: The information in Ms facsimile transmittal Is legally anvileoed anti conMemlal Information intendeitonly lor the use of the Indhndual or entity nameOabaie. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby nolifled that any disiminatlon, distribution or copy of the transmittai Is strlctty prohibited. If you receive this transmittal in error, please Immediately notify us by telephone and return the original transmittal to us at the above address via the United States Postal Service. Thanh you. Date: Time: Pages: 10/8/01 15:03:42 5 To: Fax #: Ms. Ann Marshall 3710100 From: Clay Fendley Subject: Message: E-mails Dear Mr. Walker: We have ready for your review the e-mails of principals through March 15, 2001. There ar e a total of 5454 e-mails. We will make them available for your review on a computer in ou r office. Please call and let me know when you want to begin reviewing the e-mails. I am attaching the Agreement for Protective Order which you agreed to sign at the Octobe r 2, 2001, hearing. Please bring the signed agreement with you when you come to review the e-mails. We appreciate your cooperation. Clay Fendley Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark 400 W. Capitol, Suite 2000 Little Rock, AR 72201 E-mail: f6ndley@fec.net Direct Phone: 501-370-3323 Direct Fax: 501-244-5341I I xua y taw I XI (It raye j./i FRIDAY, ELDREDGE \u0026amp; CLARK A LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNEliSIIir ATTORxNEYS AT LAW 2000 REGIONS CENTER 400 WEST CAPITOL LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS \"2201-3493 TELEPHONE (501) 376-2011 FAX NO. (501)376-2147 CONFIDEHTIAUTY NOTE: The information in this facsimile transmittal is legally orivileoed and confidential information intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above. If the reader of this message Is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disimlnatlon, distribution or copy of the transmittal is strictly prohibited. If you receive this transmittal in error, please immediately notify us by telephone and return the original transmittal to us at the above address via the United States Postal Service. Thank you. Bate: T ime: Page: 10/09/01 14:49 1 To: Fax: Ms. Ann Marshall 3710100 From: Clay Fendley Subject:FOIA of Board Minutes Message: Dear Mr. Walker: We have complete set of Board minutes in our office which we can make available for you review at your convenience. a Sincerely, Clay Fendley Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark 400 W. Little E-mail: Direct Direct Capitol, Suite 2000 Rock, AR 72201 f endley@f ec.net Phone: Fax: 501-370-3323 501-244-53410,1 '* 71/|eZX.j 1 ) John w. Walker, P.a. Attorney At Law 1723 Broadway Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 Telephone (501) 374-3758 FAX (501) 374-4187 JOHN W. WALKER SHAWN CHILDS Via Facsimile - 324-2146 October 16, 2001 OF COUNSEL ROBERT McHENRY, PA. donna J. McHenry 8210 Hendbkson Road Little Rock, Arkansas 72210 Phone: (601) 372-3425  Fax (501) 372-3428 Email: mcheiiryd^wbell.net Dr. T. Kenneth James Superintendent of Schools Little Rock School District 810 West Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 RECEIVED OCT i 9 2001 Dear Dr. James: QfflCtOf DEsestEOAnoiiiytofii^ I am in receipt ofDr. Linda Watsons letter dated October S  her 11 onm j\n-.,  T,- , 5, 2001 m response to mine of compliance issues at Rightsell and Stephens schools In that we we are requestmg that this matter be referred to the ODM as September 11, 2001 regardinj'g are not satisfied with the response, provided by the plan. Please let me hear from your by return mail Sinperely, John W. Walker JWW:js Enclosures cc: Dr. Linda Watson Mr. Junious Babbs Ms. Ann Marshall Mr. Clay Fendley John w. Walker, P.A. Attorney At Law 1723 Broadway Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 Telephone (501). 374-3758 FAX (501) 374-4187 JOHN W. WALKER SHAWN CHILDS Corrected Copy Via Facsimile - 324-2146 September 11, 2001 OF counsel ROBERT McHENRY, PA. DONNA J. McHENEY 8210 Henderson Road Little Rock, Arkansas 72210 Phone: (501) 372-3425  Fax (501) 372-3428 Email: mchenrydl^wbelLnet Dr. Kenneth James Superintendent of Schools Little Rock School District 810 West Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Dr. James: new This is to advise that I attended a conference and made a monitoring visit today at the Stephens School where Ms. Sharon Brooks is the principal. I am once again disturbed about my findings regarding Ms. Brooks treatment of black boys. Ms. Sadie Mitchell and Ms. Frances Cawthon Jones should recall that I contacted them after school started last year to bring to their attention complaints that I had received regarding Ms. Brooks treatment of black boys at Rightsell Elementary. She effectively suspended the boys in Ms. Irbys first grade class for more than two months when she separated the boys from the girls and placed them with Ms. Tims and Mr. Harris who were not certified teachers. During a conference today, I learned that Ms. Brooks gave a four year old black male student a ten day suspension for the offense of a false alarm. Her punishment of this child was harsher than the punishment recommended for students in grades K-5 for the same offense. Ms. Brooks provided the parent with her right to appeal, however, she attempted to renege on the parents right to appeal by not allowing the child to remain in school. Ms. Brooks provided the parent with a suspension notice that indicated the child remain in school upon appeal. Rather than allow him to continue his regular educational opportunities as provided by the appeals procedure, Ms. Brooks placed the student in in-school suspension pending further appeal. We believe her actions are not only retaliatory, but they also violate the revised plan. We are, therefore, invoking the process with respect to Ms. Brooks treatment of black boys while at Rightsell and her current actions at Stephens citing Sections 2.1\n2.5\n2.5.1\n2.5.4\n2.8, 2.12, 2.12.2, and 2.13 of the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. The names of the parents and students at Right sell may be obtained from the classroom roll of Ms. Irby and their PEFs and the names of the parties involved at Stephens are identified in a letter written by Ms. Springer to Dr. Watson on yesterday, September 10, 2001.Thank you for your attention to this request. icereJ 1 i^ictated but not read John W. Walker JWW:js co: Ms. Ann Marshall  Mr. Chris Heller Mr. Junious Babbs Ms. Sadie Mitchell Ms. Frances Cawthon Jones St 810 West Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 __________ Phone: (501)324-2170 E-mail: lwatson@alc.lrsd.kl2.ar.us LINDA WATSON, Ed. D. ASSISTANT SUPERINTENDENT __________ STUDENT DISCIPLINE Fax: (501) 324-0536 October 5,2001 John W, Walker, P. A. Attorney at Law 1723 Broadway Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 Dear Mr. Walker: -- - XT I 1 2001 1/ I am writing to respond to your letter dated September 11, 2001. I forwarded a letter to Mrs. Springer, dated September 15, 2001, which stated that the situation with the four-year old student had been resolved since the students 10-day suspension'was modified to a two-day suspension. Stephens 2000 2001 and Rightsells 1999  2000 annual discipline numbers were reviewed before the beginning of this school year. Mrs. Brooks has addressed discipline in her school unprovement plan and will be working towards decreasing the number of suspensions. We are aware that starting a new program is sometimes difficult when students are adjusting to a new administration and different expectations. Please note that Rightsell.s suspensions dropped once, the expectations for student behaviors had been established and implemented. Also, Rightsells academics and test scores improved greatly once the students were aware of the expectations. We believe the same will happen at Stephens. If you have further questions, feel free to contact me. Sincerely, Dr. Linda Watson C\nDr. Ken James, Superintendent Jumous Babbs, Associate Superintendent Attorney Clay Fendley John W. Walker, P.A. Attorney At Law 1723 Broadway Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 Telephone (501) 374-3758 FAX (501) 374-4187 JOHN W. WALKER SHAWN CHILDS Via Fax: 376-2147 OF COUNSEL ROBERT McHENRY. P.A. DONNA J. McHENRY 8210 Henderson Road Little Rock, Arkansas 72210 Phone: (501) 372-3425  F.ax (501) 372-3428 Email: mchenryd@swbeU.net October 16,2001 Mr. Christopher Heller Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark 400 W. Capitol, Suite 2200 Little Rock, .Arkansas 72201 Dear Mr. Heller: Please find enclosed our listing of witnesses, the subject areas of their testimony and our exhibits. I have previously informed the Court that at this next proceeding I am not inclined to call any additional witnesses on the two primary issues before the Court at this point, i.e., evaluations and discipline. They both, however, relate to the issue of remediation of achievement disparities of Afidcan American students. Please be advised that I will be asking the Court for rebuttal time to your case in an amount which is sufficient to address issues that you may seek to interject for the first time. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Sipcerely, W. 5^er JWW:lp Enclosures cc: Honorable Susan Webber Wright All Counsel Ms. .Ann Marshall IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF V, NO. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. LET AL DEFENDANTS MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL. INTERVENORS KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL. INTERVENORS 1. JOSHUA INTERVENORS SUPPLEMENTAL WITNESS AND EXHIBIT LISTS I Witness List The Joshua Intervenors respectfully give notice to the school district that it will possibly call the following witnesses: 1) school board members Berkley, Mitchell, Magness, Strickland and Rose (depositions have been taken)\nDr. Daughtery, Mr. Kurrus and Ms. Magness are on record with their tape recorded statements before the school board\n2) the ODM Monitors (Ms. Marshall, Mr. Jones, Ms. Powell) will discuss their reports and findings and will share opinions which have been professionally formed\n3) Mr. Ray Simon, State Superintendent of Education (Mr. Simon will address the manner in which the State was persuaded to abandon a key provision of the Settlement Agreement by LRSD officials and state political leaders)\n4) Dr. Terrence Roberts and Dr. Steve Ross (will discuss their involvement or5) 6) 7) 8) 9) 10) noninvolvement in development of policies, programs and procedures, evaluations and remediation of achievement disparities)\nMs. Estelle Mathis, former Associate and Acting Superintendent of Schools, LRSD, will address the district's commitment to use and the actual use and results of national standardized tests in evaluating remediation of student achievement disparities\nthe school principal of each school in the LRSD (by agreement Joshua will limit the numbers of principals who may be presented to the Court). These principals will be called for sure: Mr. Howard, Central\nMr. Smith, Hall\nMr. Carter, McClellan\nMs. Brooks, Stephens, Ms. Cox, Baseline\nMr. Mosby, Southwest\nMr. Saine, ALC\nMr. Oliver, Watson\nand several vice principals from Hall, notably Mr. Wade and Mr. Moore. These principals will address remediation and discipline. district administrators Gadberry, Briggs, Frances Jones, Ed Williams and Everett Hawks will address programs, facilities and evaluations\nDr. John Flxiker, will provide an analyst of data over time which addresses the issues raised in the ODM reports, the State Department of Education reports and the district's own reports regarding the effects of remediation. Dr. John Nuimery and Ms. Kay Rainey, persons identified by Dr. Bonnie Lesley as Program Evaluators, will address program evaluations\nparents Donna Stone, Marion Humphrey, Pam Mercer and Deodis Fleming and teachers, Michael Faucett and LaVanna Wilson and Nona Whitaker will address discipline and remediation according to their personal knowledge.Exhibit List The Joshua Intervenors do not anticipate introducing any additional exhibits except school board minutes and recorded statements by school board members Magness, Strickland, Kurrus and Daughtery. Joshua reserve the right to supplement the exhibit list before trial after reviewing the emails of the district which have not been completed by undersigned counsel. Joshua also reaffirms that it will rely upon ODM reports, which are already before the Court, regarding discipline and student achievement. Respectfully submitted. . JOHN W. WALKER, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 (501) 374-3758 (Tel.) (501) 374-4187 (Fax) , ( By: Joh /, : Walker, Bar No. 64046 Robert Pressman 22 Locust Avenue Lexington, MA 02421 (781) 862-1955CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing has been mailed, postage prepaid to the following counsel or record, postage prepaid on this /^^ay of November, 2001. Mr. Christopher Heller Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark 400 W. Capitol, Suite 2200 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Mr. Sam Jones Wright, Lindsey \u0026amp; Jennings 2200 Worthen Bank Building 200 West Capitol Little Rock. .AR 72201 Ms. Ann Brown Marshall ODM One Union National Plaza 124 West Capitol, Suite 1895 Little Rock, .Arkansas 72201 I Mr. Mark Hagemeier Office of .Attorney General 323 Center Street 200 Tower Building Little Rock. .AR 72201 / Jo\nW.Walker iDins. ttnn ndrsnaix rromzLiay rendley Friday Law Firm Fage 1/1 FRIDAY, ELDREDGE \u0026amp; CLARK A L1^U^ ED HABILI l Y PARTNEHSHIP ATTORNEYS AT LAW 2000 REGIONS CENTER 4fl WEST CAPITOL LITTLE ROCK. ARKANSAS 72201-3493 TELEPHONE (501) 376-2011 FAX NO. (.\"101) SltllAT CONFiDENTiAUTY NOTE: The informatktn in (his facsimiie transmittal is legaiiy otiviietted and conOdendai information intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disimination. distribution or copy of the transmittai is strictly prohibited, if you receive this transmittal in error, please immediately notify us by telephone and return the original transmittal to us at the above address via the Urrited States Postal Service. Thanh you. Date: Time: Page: 10/24/01 14:46:50 1 To\nFax#\nMs. Ann Marshall 3710100 From: Clay Fendley Subject: Message: LRSD V. PCSSD Dear Mr. Walker\nPlease advise on what dates next week the Joshua class representative can be made avail able for deposition. Thank you for your cooperation. Sincerely, Clay Fendley Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark 400 W. Capitol, Suite 2000 Little Rock, AR 72201 E-mail: fendlGy@fec.net Direct Phone: 501-370-3323 Direct Fax: 501-244-5341(Kev, 1/aO)  kKSn EXHIBITS jjections Identification date 6/ No. Rulings Pc. ss C\\ VS. description .^ffer/Rec'dyJfl ' C.JC au U5 Cf. bbb cyl 44g - C)(l cyl (,no I I Ofl b,'ii Cxi 45^ ex i 6 CxI C.^'S CK. U'}L, I Icy ^TT , a Uig I Cl (a'19 g g 1^2 I I LXSD E. S kRSP EterKCri) u I* uRsn IRSO  Li u\n\u0026lt; I  I Ut^SP f, It It causeno7~^ ^vtseJ Jill Iiii-2xk3o Xooa LRso hvxUl^ Lt^so ll n It It l 5-Oo ^C-lnfld/s - P^'me.i pals' I t^s4-t j-U-t-Ct $gto.. n-3t-\u0026lt;5e kKSO iXeywQ It, U-s-T? Pr-.Adu C\u0026gt;ue P, ^\u0026lt;x:gs^ A-vf ftssk Phtt^ttp\u0026lt;| Die.PrdgSg T\" 15-1? 4- S ii^^cats^LBacduLs_6:\u0026lt;M4filL!ifi\u0026lt;i. EPfeeVive.. Disctpkkej______________ ki\u0026gt;\\Ja Lt^fl.4-g~on rvu^M Vt? Ll^3P OiSciprrtt^ri P^dLAg^g mcftl__Re^arl lRSP  I It t' 0 t-KSQ Jl Ikf\\e*. */ou/ ta (RiitXDeh) ----- EXHIBITS ejections DATE No. Identification Rulings Offer/Rec'd) I I I1L^-6 Sa\u0026lt; CjC cy C,g4 CxI -C^ 6g^ Lex Ml -CXi 691 qx C-'f. w Ci. I vs. ot- 0.1 description 4-0 .er- Op, l\u0026lt;^Ap\u0026lt;art M e ma Vft C.ile\u0026lt;p/, LPt5 0 Ij-f. ALVACVoafAZ cause NO. r?-34\u0026gt; ^nareL O, ula.4sart Oi^cipiiwe. S\u0026lt;|ke\u0026lt;K Si u-3i-q2 Ujrwttuafy 4ak\u0026lt;U t-^-OI idt^P Flta.ent.u-y Cji.rUf a-J-it-.H - PtnH t-Rsp .Jh\u0026amp; rnz? fa^^1 ti-liet' .L Lear.',. ypd 'riS* ra^r^-^ S^j-kli-^O ^q-od t Ml \u0026lt;3a al Fp\u0026lt;\u0026gt;^rAwv E UaIu.a4 la rt fklnick. CluU 41-oa i \"jLilSO de-e I USO -l^S^rnta4 itv\\ re: -Hmer. Ac.kvcMeit' ex LfeSQ  Cof*mund4-id3 1j\u0026lt;\u0026amp; fees! Prafc4-icec CK C4\\ ql LlL_z^ I I Lg-SO uso LfcSt\\ LJtSP t)g.so n ! - PpA\u0026lt;U-ie-e - Curr /H4^-keM.a4-igS j Sg.ie\u0026gt;^c.e icul^fam. [iHsVracl.ari ftssgS5\nkxg^i- F(a ^SgSS\u0026gt;w.fc\\-V- ^foeessgs CiS.se\u0026gt;n*t ^aV^a^ fi (ig\u0026lt;:rKStne^i Resuli-S 1 A\u0026lt;aai - ^rg^rg-VA EoalualtoA(Kev. 1/80)  t Ij I j-.S (Rlit/DefO -------- EXHIBITS )j ections date No. Identification Rulings Offer/Rec'd) C)( I ^0^ 5 C\\C Q '6 I vs. description Li\u0026lt;SD u?.s tRse \" L^SO '* tr^sQ CK 'lio Ilksd \" c-yl nil Li^sn \" na cyl TI3 ^^4L211 tt Brii \u0026lt;* .S4-uA.^F Pfec4f^\nUlK I Pre CAUSE NO. - /\u0026gt;la.4-K j Sci dice ^ck p\u0026gt;\nv t ipC4V K^l fi u^so kfcSD LRSD /A\u0026lt;m6 Wor\\ C u i I I ) S vJun * Ui!  Cra\u0026lt;R.4-V-u, ateJ Pfa i  ' * - E Sckools -______/J t^k -Sg.kjotj f\u0026gt;rarai^a^4__________ -urrig.lu.wq OaccLi\u0026gt;\u0026gt;...e^4s ^^''l-ttSe ~l~a ISoai-el E~4u li-^-Cl -----------------------oV l3\u0026gt;rUxg|p.\u0026gt;U La.'tgh4:s a)C nn a-f Cg\u0026gt;ergt D\u0026gt;g __ini'eK/J ^reKv^eq.sg. 4- .^-KI ^l'=l kxSC E\u0026gt;o.xrda-fEJ ^^\u0026lt;251 ucgl-idw I -4- t 'I 6\u0026gt;%\u0026amp; j^UVMmer- ScliOdl ^\u0026lt;SO0 ]__.\\\u0026gt;aluq-Vi o I C)c! 'li.Ti I \u0026gt; Oi^ _it lEf'j__PiojrfUws 5-^-0/ ^\u0026gt;0\"g3L\u0026lt;Kev. l/ao)  JI LK-sn ejections DATE (Plft/Deft} EXHIBITS vs. No. Identification Rtiliiigs 'Offer/Rec'd) B-ao-D| C{ ^^4 1 description ^Av\\pu3 Le,gJ.rski'|J IcLA caus^Tno. raya^ Dra.p-f' ^-IS-i Al-J-tzr. t\u0026amp;Wj-Atn. A nVikrf.,Mc.^4 FttAkeUaH in.g 4-riJr*t Di\nia..vs fla-kej g-ll-i} niz) \u0026lt;^| \\ \u0026gt;Z^v f. 4-a 6kaj-/gy Lj4:i-r^ 5-xx-po S4u i Per, t On 'k J A, ifckoo i I c/ I I ^31 -----4-0 60 ,--------------------------------------------------VJ n3:x ^33 USD C\u0026lt;lm,pt\u0026lt;,s U j^SQ 0|d^ Pe^,\n-4-c^ ski 3^-1*? n sk.'k e ^=5^------'^^'1 l^cUxoal kj3rfl/ow.^4 Pla.\nF\\ppra\u0026gt;sJ Is. Ans. kaa' 1 - a \u0026lt;^x: dj'/A To prd/*\u0026lt;v*.\\p PlaaS Sc.(\\a^l Qaa.t~^i i -^^0____S-ksk^e, Bev,e..k fOnL/l\u0026lt;g.r fc\u0026gt;\u0026lt;5re ^krsal I Q I 1^/ I DHAr' k._ LRSO gft.-T c-t: 11is El.lni. -4- S I i ecancjarsj Ctv sFriday Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark HERSCHEL H FRIDAY 119221994) WILLIAM H SUTTON. P A BYRON M EISEMAN. JR , P a JOE 0 BELL. P A JAMES A aUTTRY. P A FREDERICKS URSERY. P A OSCAR E DAVIS. JR . P A JAMES C CLARK. JR . P A THOMAS P LEGGETT, P A JOH.N DEWEY WATSON. P A PAUL B BENHAM ill. P A LARRY W BURKS. P A A WYCKLIFF NISBET. JR . P A JAMES EDWARD KARRIS. P A I PHILLIP MALCOM. P A JAMES M SIMPSON. P A JAMES M SAXTON. P A J SHEPHERD RUSSELL III. P A. DONALD H BACON, P A WILLIA.M THOMAS BAXTER. P A BARRY E COPLIN. P A RICHARD D TAYLOR. P A JOSEPH B HURST. JR . P A ELIZABETH ROBBEN MURRAY. P A CHRISTOPHER HELLER. P A LAURA HENSLEY SMITH. P A ROBERT S SHAFER. P A WILLIAM M GRIFFIN HI. P A MICHAEL S MOORE. P A DIANE S MACKEY. P A Walter m ebel hi. p a KEVIN A CRASS. P A WILLIAM A. WADDELL. JR.. P.A SCOTT J. LANCASTER. P.A. M GAYLE CORLEY. P A ROBERT B BEACH. JR . P A J LEE BROWN. P.A. JAMES C. BAKER. JR . P A HARRY A LICHT. P A SCOTT H TUCKER. P.A GUY ALTON WADE. P A PRICE C GARDNER. P A TONIA P JONES. P A DAVID D WILSON. P A ATTORNEYS AT LAW A LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP www.fridayfjrm.com 2000 REGIONS CENTER 400 WEST CAPITOL LITTLE ROCK. ARKANSAS 72201-3493 TELEPHONE 601-376-2011 FAX 501-376-2147 3425 NORTH FUTRALL DRIVE. SUITE 103 FAYETTEVILLE. ARKANSAS 72703-4811 TELEPHONE 501-685-2011 FAX 501-695-2147 JEFFREY H. MOORE. P.A. DAVID M. GRAF. P.A. CARLA GUNNELS SPAINKOUR. P.A. JOHN C. FENDLEY. JR.. P.A JONANN ELIZABETH CONIGLIO. P A. R CHRISTOPHER LAWSON. P.A. GREGORY D. TAYLOR. P.A. TONY L. WILCOX, P.A FRAN C. HICKMAN. P.A. BETTY J. DEMORY. P.A. LYNDA M. JOHNSON, P.A. JAMES W. SMITH. P.A. CLIFFORD W. PLUNKETT. P.A. DANIEL L. HERRINGTON. P.A. MARVIN L. CHILDERS K. COLEMAN WESTBROOK. JR ALLISON J CORNWELL ELLEN M OWENS JASON B. HENDREN BRUCE B. TIDWELL MICHAEL E. KARNEY KELLY MURPHY MCQUEEN JOSEPH P. MCKAY ALEXANDRA A. IFRAH JAY T. TAYLOR MARTIN A. KASTEN BRYAN W. DUKE JOSEPH G. NICHOLS ROBERT T. SMITH RYAN A. BOWMAN TIMOTHY C. EZELL T. MICHELLE ATOR KARENS HALBERT SARAH M. COTTON PHILIP B. MONTGOMERY KRISTENS. RIGGINS ALAN C. BRYAN orCOUNSEL B S CLARK WILLIAM L. TERRY WILLIAM L. PATTON. JR. H.T. LARZELERE. P.A. JOHN C. ECHOLS. P.A. A.D. MCALLISTER 208 NORTH FIFTH STREET BLYTHEVILLE. ARKANSAS 72315 TELEPHONE 870-782-2898 FAX 870-762-2918 November 1, 2001 CHRISTOPHER HELLER LITTLE ROCK TEL S01-370-1S0* FAX 501-244-S344 halltrOftc.nat Hand Delivered Mr. John Walker received JOHN W. WALKER, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72206 NOV 2 2001 Re: LRSD V. PCSSC OFFICE OF desegregation MONITOSIKQ Dear John: Enclosed is our Exhibit and Witness List for the November 19-20, 2001 hearing. Yours very truly, Christopher Heller I CJH^k Enclosures cc: Clay Fendley all counsel1. Dr. Bonnie Lesley 2. Dr. Leslie V. Gamine 3. Dr. Ken James 4. Dr. Linda Watson 5. Sadie Mitchell 6. James Washington 7. Dr. Kathy Lease 8. Jo Evelyn Elston 9. Dr. Steven Ross 10. Dr. Katherine Mitchell 11. Michael Daugherty 12. Judy Magness 13. H. Baker Kurrus 14. Larry Berkley 15. Tony Rose 16. Sue Strickland 17. Jonathan Lupton 18. Doug Murray 19. David Yarberry/Pattie Allen 20. Dr. Don Roberts F.\\J10ME\\BRENDAK'Jnd\\des-un)iary-wit-iist-11-19-01 wpd LRSD Witness List November 19-20, 2001 21. 22. received NOV 2 ?eoi WSffiREBAWJffiffligjjiig The Joshua class representative(s) and monitors Any witness listed by Joshua.* w - RECEIVED Exhibit No. 1.: 1. 2. 3. LRSD EXHIBIT LIST FOR NOVEMBER 19-20, 2001 NOV 2 2001 OfflSOF KSBSHESAnaSiOTOT LRSD Notebook of Information on Communications about African American Achievement. Memorandum to selected staff from Bonnie Lesley, Aug. 18, 1998, setting up meeting to review Revised Desegregation and Education Plan and specifically to discuss need to open access and ensure success of African Americans in Advanced Placement courses Memorandum to selected staff from Bonnie Lesley, Aug. 27, 1998, following up on the August 26 meeting with list of assignments and possible program strands to use in planning Memorandum to selected staff from Bonnie Lesley, Sept. 18, 1998, on K-12 Talent Development\nadded Elorace Smith to committee on AP\nattached several articles relating to minorities in AP courses A. B. C. The Canary in the Mine: The Achieivement Gap Between Black and White Students by Mano Singham from September 1998 Kappan The Philadelphia Partnership: Improving College Access and Retention Among Minority and Low-Income Students by Steven Ender, et al in the Summer 1998 issue of The College Board Review. Some articles about the Talent Development Middle School model researched by Mona Briggs. 4. Copy of an article from The American Prospect, September/October 1998 distributed to staff, The Black-White Test Score Gap, by Christopher Jencks and Meredith Phillips. 5. Copy of an article distributed to staff from Education Week, Sept. 9, 1998, Bridging the Remediation Gap\nWhy We Must (and How We Can) Align K-12 Standards with College Placement by Michael Kirst. 6. Memorandum from Bonnie Lesley to secondary principals, December 16, 1998, urging them to convene a staff committee to determine ways to enroll as many students as possible in the Pre-AP and AP courses\nspecific reference to the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. 7. Memorandum to principals from Bonnie Lesley, Feb. 8, 1999, on high expectations with attached article from ERIC, Expectations for Students. 1- 8. Memorandum to principals from Boimie Lesley, Feb. 12, 1999, on the importance of building relationships between teachers and students for improved student achievement\narticle attached, Working with Students and Adults from Poverty by Ruby Payne. 9. Memorandum to high school principals, counselors, and registrars from Bonnie Lesley, Aug. 27, 1999Administrative Directive: High School Curriculum\nsection on Equity, with specific references to section 2.6 of the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan and the importance of curriculum access. 10. Memorandum from Bonnie Lesley in September 1, 1999, Learning Links on Teaching ALL the Kids\nattached article by Adela Solis, Extending Advanced Skills Instruction into the Education of Disadvantaged Students 11. Memorandum from Boimie Lesley in September 22, 1999, Learning Links celebrating the big jump in numbers of students earning a 3 or above on the Advanced Placement examinations\nattached tables. 12. Memorandum in October 13, 1999, Learning Links on Getting Smart and attaching an article, Making American Smarter: A Centurys Assumptions About Inate Ability Give Way to a Belief in the Power of Effort, by Lauren Resnick. 13. Memorandum to selected staff from Bonnie Lesley, November 10, 1999, reconvening the K-12 Talent Development Committee to work on a local adaptation of Project AVID, in collaboration with Dr. Terrence Roberts\nspecific references to the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan\nsummary of initiatives already implemented\netc. 14. Memorandum to principals from Bonnie Lesley in December 1, 1999, Learning Links recommending transition strategies from one level of schooling to another to improve academic achievement. A. Summer Programs Help Students Adjust to Key Transition Points B. When Standards Fails 15. Article in December 1, 1999, Learning Links: Teaching AP European History in a Multiethnic Setting for principals 16. Memorandum in January 26, 2000, Learning Links with attached article, Why Every Child in America Deserves a School Where She/He is Known and Valued by Davis Marshak. 17. E-mail from Bonnie Lesley to high school principals and other staff, Jan. 24, 2000, attaching an article on College Freshmen Bored by High School Senior Year. 218. Memorandum from Bonnie Lesley in February 9, 2000, Learning Links on how to improve student achievement\nattached article, Improving Chicagos Schools 19. E-mail from Bonnie Lesley to Division of Instruction and Cabinet, March 9, 2000, attaching an article by Anne Quindlen from Newsweek on The Best High Schools and the importance of challenging courses. 20. E-mail from Bonnie Lesley to staff, March 16, 2000, relating to placing into the budget needed funds for the administration of the Pre-AP and AP programs. 21. Memorandum from Bonnie Lesley in March 22, 2000, Learning Links on the importance of students taking challenging courses\nattached article from Southern Regional Education Board, Good News, Bad News and Actions for Helping II Students Complete a Challenging Program of Study. 22. E-mail from Bonnie Lesley to selected staff, April 12, 2000, inviting us to hear Dr. Andrew Billingsley speak on The Black Family. 23. Memorandum from Bonnie Lesley to middle and high school staff in April 19, 2000, Learning Links on attendance at the Administrators AP Conference\nreference to Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. 24. Memorandum from Bonnie Lesley in May 3, 2000, Learning Links encouraging participation in Dr. Terrence Roberts training on Learning to Cope with Differences and attaching a reading list that might be helpful. 25. Memorandum from Bonnie Lesley in May 3, 2000, Learning Links related to Project AVID\nattached article by Mary Catherine Swanson, Education for the New Millennium. 26. E-mail from Bormie Lesley to various staff. May 4, 2000, with rationale for changes in the graduation requirements and the importance of high expectations for all students. 27. Memorandum from Bonnie Lesley in May 17, 2000, Learning Links on equity\nattached article, We Should Not Kid Ourselves: Excellence Requires Equity, by Bradley Scott. 28. E-mail from Les Camine to staff, July 25, 2000, with attached article, Is the Test Score Gap Really Color Based? by William Bainbridge. 29. E-mail from Bonnie Lesley to high school curriculum staff, Aug. 11, 2000, with attached article on Advanced Placement, Not Exclusion. 30. Memorandum to Associate Superintendents, September 11, 2000, from Bonnie Lesley on the role of counselors in enhancing academic achievement. 331. Memorandum to selected staff from Bonnie Lesley, October 2, 2000, with copy of a self-assessment instruction, Bridging the Gap: Self-Assessment Instrument developed by the Mackenzie Group, Washington, DC. 32. Memorandum to principals from Bonnie Lesley, October 2, 2000, with attached report, Dispelling the Myth\nHigh Poverty Schools Exceeding Expectations. 33. Memorandum to principals in November 1, 2000, Learning Links on stereotype research and attaching an article by Claude Steele, Stereotype Threat and the Test Performance of Academically Successful African Americans, from the book. The Black-White Test Score Gap by Christopher Jencks and Meredith Phillips\nreference to Terrence Roberts. 34. E-mail from Bonnie Lesley to NSF team, Nov. 16, 2000, advising them of the purchase of the video-tapes from the Columbus meeting for NSF participants on Bridging the Gap. 35. E-mail from Bonnie Lesley to selected staff, Nov. 20, 2000, advising them of the importance of successful implementation of the IB programs at Cloverdale Middle and McClellan High if the magnet grant got funded. 36. E-mail from Bonnie Lesley to Les Camine, Nov. 20, 2000, with rationale for building in incentives for African American students to take challenging courses\nreferences the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. 37. E-mail from Suzi Davis to a parent, Dec. 5, 2000, with an explanation of the criteria for placement of students in advanced courses and the differentiated curriculum for Pre-AP at the middle school level. 38. Memorandum from Bonnie Lesley to the Board of Education, Dec. 14, 2000, proposing changes in the graduation requirements, with rationale\nreferences to equity and the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. Exhibit No. 2.: LRSD Notebook of Information on Communicating Best Practices. 1. Memorandum to Division of Instruction, Sept. 18, 1998, establishing procedures for the publication of Learning Links, a weekly publication for principals from the Division. Literacy 1. Memorandum to selected staff from Bonnie Lesley, Aug. 26, 1998, on development of the literacy plan\nattached article, Urban School Development: Literacy as a Lever for Change. 4s . 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Memorandum to middle school principals in Dec. 9, 1998, Learning Links with references to three books providing the research base for the middle school ReadingAVriting Workshop program. Memorandum from Bonnie Lesley to principals in Jan. 6, 1999, Learning Links with suggested books that outline best practices in the development of literacy. Memorandum from Bonnie Lesley to middle school principals in Jan. 13, 1999, Learning Links advising them of multiple copies of books they will receive on best practice in teaching middle-level literacy. Memorandum from Bonnie Lesley to principals in Jan. 21, 1999, Learning Links on potential programs to remediate reading problems. Memorandum from Bonnie Lesley to elementary principals in July 21, 1999, Learning Links advising them they will receive an additional book on development of literacy. Memorandum from Bonnie Lesley to middle and high school principals in August 4, 1999, Learning Links relating to remediating reading problems at the secondary level\nattached article from Harvard Education Letter, Johnny Still Cant Read? Memorandum from Bonnie Lesley to middle school principals in Aug. 25, 1999, Learning Links on teacher participation in training and on strategies for developing vocabulary\nattached article, Six Whole Class Vocabulary Strategies for the Content Areas by Hanus, et al and Teaching Vocabulary in the Subject Areas by Karen Wood. Memorandum from Bonnie Lesley to middle school principals in September 1, 1999, Learning Links on teaching reading to students performing at the lowest levels\nattached articles. A. B. C. D. E. A research synthesis on what works in restructuring urban middle school reading and writing programs. Reading Comprehension Instruction for At-Risk Students: Research- Based Practices that Can Make a Difference Teaching Them All to Read: Results of a Nationwide Study of Successful Literacy Programs for Young Adolescents Alternatives to More of the Same for Poor Readers' Students at Risk: The Slow Reader in the Middle Grades 510. Memorandum to SEA principals from Bonnie Lesley, Nov. 15, 1999, on evaluation research on SEA\nattached article, Success for All: A Summary of Evaluations by Jeanne Weiler. 11. Memorandum from Bonnie Lesley in Nov. 17, 1999, Learning Links on early literacy\nsummary of research on what works in high-poverty schools\ncharacteristics of effective teachers\nattached article, Study Details Effectiveness of High-Poverty Schools in Reading Education During Early Grades from Michigan State University. 12. Memorandum to principals in Dec. 8, 1999, Learning Links from Bonnie Lesley on how to teach vocabulary\nattached article, Making Vocabulary Development Manageable in Content Instruction by Katherine Misulis. 13. E-mail from Bonnie Lesley to elementary principals, Dec. 17, 1999, requesting information on the implementation of Animated Literacy at the kindergarten level. 14. E-mail from Bonnie Lesley to elementary and middle school principals, Jan. 11, 2000, with suggestions for the next years Title I budget\npotential changes in SPA. 15. Memorandum from Bonnie Lesley to elementary principals in Jan. 12, 2000, Learning Links with research on Direct Instruction and Success for All\nattached article, Prepackaged School Reform by Jay Mathews. 16. Memorandum to elementary principals and brokers in Mar. 22, 2000, Learning Links on research-based reading program\nattached research summary, Improving the Reading Achievement of Americas Children: 10 Research- Based Principles. 17. Memorandum to high school principals in Apr. 12, 2000, Learning Links on the research base for the ninth grade English I Workshop program\nattached chapter from Best Practice: New Standards for Teaching and Learning in Americas Schools. 18. E-mail from Kathy Lease to middle and high school principals. May 30, 2000, advising caution in using only one set of data to make decisions about program changes. 19. Memorandum from Bonnie Lesley to reading staff. Mar. 19, 2000, on evaluating the content of the professional development program for teaching reading. 20. Memorandum to Suzi Davis and Barbara Brandon, March 26, 2000, asking them to develop a program to address needs of middle and high school students with low performance in reading. 621. Research Report, Every Child Reading: A Professional Development Guide, November 2000 22. Research base for Early Literacy Learning in Arkansas (ELLA) 23. Report: Early Literacy Learning in Arkansas, General Information. 24. Research Report from Educational Research Service, How Children Learn: What Cognitive Research Tells Us About Effective Instruction. 25. Research Report from NCREL, Meaningful, Engaged Learning and Components of a Learner-Active, Technology Infused Classroom: What It Looks Like. 26. Research Report from National Reading Panel, Teaching Children to Read: An Evidence-Based Assessment of the Scientific Research Literature on Reading and Its Implications for Reading Instruction. April 2000. 27. Whats the Big Idea? Integrating Young Adult Literature in the Middle School, from the January 2001 English Journal. 28. To Grammar or Not to Grammar: That Is NOT the Question, from Voices from the Middle: Contextualizing Grammar by Constance Weaver, Carol McNally, and Sharon Moerman. 29. Just the Facts: Research and Theory about Grammar Instruction, from Voices from the Middle: Contextualizing Grammar by Constance Weaver, Carol McNally, and Sharon Moerman. 30. Developing Students Textual Intelligence Through Grammar, from Voices from the Middle: Contextualizing Grammar by Constance Weaver, Carol McNally, and Sharon Moerman. 31. The Evolution of Middle Schools by Paul George in December 2000 Education Leadership. 32. Holding Sacred Ground: The Impact of Standardization by Carl Glickman in December 2000 Education Leadership. 33. Response to Literature as a Cultural Activity, Reading Research Quarterly, January/ February/March 2000. 34. Reading AloudAre Students Ever Too Old? from Education World. Memorandum from Dennis Glasgow to secondary science teachers, Jan. 11, 1999, on ninth grade physics implementation. 7Exhibit No. 3: LRSD Notebook of Information on Best Practice in Curriculum and Instruction. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Memorandum to selected staff from Bonnie Lesley, Aug. 26, 1998, with attached excerpt from book by Douglas Reeves (ADE consultant on implementation of Smart Start), Making Standards Work: How to Implement Standards-Based Assessments in the Classroom. School, and District. Memorandum to principals in Oct. 28, 1998, Learning Links information about a recommended book. Best Practice: New Standards for Teaching and Learning in Americas Schools. Memorandum to principals in Nov. 11, 1998, Learning Links\nattached speech by Hayes Mizell, Principals as Leaders in Standards-Based Reform. Memorandum to staff in Aug. 11, 1999, Learning Links on a new publication^ Taking Responsibility for Ending Social Promotion. Memorandum in Aug. 18, 1999, Learning Links on curriculum standards\nattached article, Realizing the Promise of Standards-Based Education. Letter to McRel Institute, Sept. 16, 1999, requesting permission to make copies of certain pages of Essential Knowledge: The Debate Over What American Students Should Know. Memorandum in Nov. 9, 1999, Learning Links on standards-based reform\nattached article by Mike Schmoker and Robert Marzano. Memorandum to selected staff from Bonnie Lesley, Nov. 22, 1999, establishing a committee to develop Instructional Standards for the District\nattached copies of several research-based models for consideration. Memorandum to selected staff from Bonnie Lesley, Dec. 8, 1999, with follow-up to committee working on Instructional Standards\nattachments to support the work, including research article from ERS, How Children Learn: What Cognitive Research Tells Us About Effective Instruction. 10. Memorandum to selected staff from Bonnie Lesley, Dec. 14, 1999, with more models to consider for the Instructional Standards. 11. Memorandum to Terrence Roberts, Steve Ross, ODM, John Walker, and CTA from Bonnie Lesley, Dec. 15, 1999, requesting their input on the work relating to development of Instructional Standards. 812. Document: Summary of Teaching and Learning Research-Based Models, prepared for June 2000 workshop for high school teachers and used subsequently in other meetings as a summary of best practice. 13. Memorandum in Oct. 4, 2000, Learning Links to principals from Bonnie Lesley on readings before the Oct. 25-26 workshop on Teaching and Learning\nattached three articles. 14. Memorandum to Division of Instruction from Bormie Lesley, June 7, 2001, on constructivism with attached publication from Detroit Public Schools. Exhibit No. 4.: LRSD Notebook of Information on Mathematics/Science. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 1. 8. 9. Memorandum from Dennis Glasgow to secondary science teachers, Jan. 11, 1999, on ninth grade physics implementation. Memorandum from Dennis Glasgow to principals, Aug. 25, 1999, on the deployment of mathematics/science lead teachers. Mathematics Program Descriptiondocument prepared to submit to the National Science Foundation in April 2000. Science Program Descriptiondocument prepared to submit to the National Science Foundation in April 2000. K-12 Curriculum Implementation Plandocument prepared to submit to the National Science Foundation in April 2000. CPMSA Staffingdocument prepared to submit to the National Science Foundation in April 2000. Professional Development Plan for Mathematics and Sciencedocument prepared to submit to the National Science Foundation in April 2000. Little Rock CPMSA Strategic Plan, September 2000February 2002document prepared to submit to the National Science Foundation in April 2000. Memorandum from Vanessa Cleaver to eighth grade mathematics teachers, May 9, 2000, on the extended-year Algebra I program. 10. E-mail from Dennis Glasgow to a parent. Mar. 23, 2000, providing research base for the middle school mathematics program, the Cormected Mathematics Project (CMP). 93 . 11. Memorandum from Boimie Lesley to elementary and middle school principals in June 14, 2000, Learning Links on the research and theory behind new mathematics curricula\nattached article, Wheres the Balance in Math Instruction? 12. E-mail from Dennis Glasgow to parents, Nov. 9, 2000, with information about research behind LRSDs adoption of the elementary mathematics program. 13. E-mail from Debbie Berry to Bonnie Lesley, Nov. 17, 2000, expressing appreciation for attendance at a national conference on new mathematics curriculum. 14. Memorandum from Bonnie Lesley in Feb. 14, 2000, Learning Links on national study on how best to teach mathematics\nattached article from Education Week, Forget Math Feud, Take Broader View, NRC Panel Urges. 15. Memorandum from Bonnie Lesley in Aug. 23, 2000, Learning Links on standards-based mathematics\nattached article, Spread the Word by Lee Stiff. 16. Research Report on new mathematics curriculum used in decision-making: Preliminary Comparison of Michigan State Wide Testing\nResults in STC Adopted Districts, June 18, 1998. 17. Research Report on Exemplary Promising Mathematics Programs, Eisenhower National Clearinghouse. 18. Research Report on Connected Mathematics as one of the Exemplary Promising Mathematics Programs, Eisenhower National Clearinghouse 19. Research Report, Middle Grades Mathematics Textbooks: A Benchmarks- Based Evaluation, Project 2061. 20. Research Report, Investigations in Numbers, Data and Space: Validation StudyPretest and Posttest Results, Scott Foresman, Jan. 12, 2001. Exhibit No. 5.: LRSD Notebook of Information on Assessment Planning/Training Activities. 1. Memorandum from Bonnie Lesley to elementary principals, Oct. 20, 1998, providing information on Smart Start training on standards, assessments, and accountability 2. Copy of handout from ADEs training for educators on Smart Start: Higher Student Achievement through Standards and Performance Assessment, fall 1998 103. Plan and Process Alignment for Improved Student Achievement, Little Rock School District (Matrix showing relationship of various required plans to District processes), created fall 1998 4. Invitation to meeting on Systemic Planning Session for Assessment and Program Evaluation, May 18, 1999 5. Agenda for Assessment and Program Evaluation Work Session, May 18, 1999 6. Portfolio of Services of Division of Instruction, 1999-2000 7. Agenda for Division of Instruction, June 17, 1999 meeting\npresentation on the LRSD Assessment Plan 8. Memorandum in July 28, 1999, Learning Links with attached article on Changing the Entitlement Culture -emphasis on results rather than process. 9. LRSD Assessment Plan\nUsing Assessment to Enhance Student Achievement (PowerPoint presentation slides)presented to Board of Education in August 1999 10. Reading List prepared to distribute at the summer 2000 Campus Leadership Institute\nsection on Building and Maintaining Accountability Systems is about assessment and program evaluation 11. Transparencies used in July 19, 2000, Curriculum Day for principals, assistant principals, and brokers. 12. Notebook/handouts for July 19, 2000, Curriculum Dayfocus on quality management, data-driven decisions, and LRSD assessment programs 13. Memorandum in August 23, 2000, Learning Links with attached Primer on Assessment Literacy for distribution to Campus Leadership Teams 14. District Assessments: The Assessment Program for 2000-01 15. Memorandum to the Board of Education for July 26, 2001, agenda on Proposed Amendments to the Assessment Program Memorandum to elementary and junior high principals, Nov. 16, 1998, on schedule for picking up SAT9 testing materials Exhibit No. 6: LRSD Notebook of Information on Assessment Processes(Examples). 1. Memorandum to elementary and junior high principals, Nov. 16, 1998, on schedule for picking up SAT9 testing materials 11 s. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Memorandum to elementary school principals, Dec. 14, 1998, on procedures for upcoming administration of the criterion-referenced tests in reading and mathematics Memorandum to elementary and junior high principals, Jan. 5, 1999, on the testing procedures for grades 4 and 8 ACTAAP Benchmark examinations Memorandum to elementary and junior high principals and counselors, Jan. 26, 1999, on inservice schedule for test coordinators for the ACTAP Benchmarks for grades 4 and 8 Memorandum to selected administrators on Data Quality with attached paper written by Dr. Glynn Ligon Memorandum to elementary principals, Aug. 17, 1999, relating to use of released items from Smart Start assessments E-mail to curriculum staff, Aug. 23,1999, relating to use of released items from Smart Start assessments E-mail to elementary and middle school principals, Sept. 17, 1999, inviting them to an overview session on the new pre- and post-test Achievement Level Tests developed by Northwest Evaluation Association. Memorandum in Sept. 22, 1999, Learning Links to principals identifying training needs to administer the Observation Survey and Developmental Reading Assessment 10. Memorandum to principals and K-2 teachers in March 15, 2000, Learning Links setting up an assessment training review for the Developmental Reading Assessment and Observation Survey 11. E-mail to Bonnie Lesley on Mar. 17, 2000, suggesting a resource on how to assess technology knowledge 12. Memorandum in Apr. 5, 2000, Learning Links to elementary and middle school principals and test coordinators on new information relating to ACTAAP Benchmark examinations in grades 4 and 8 and the field testing in grade 6. 13. Document entitled Description of the Assessment System prepared in April 2000 in response to a request from the National Science Foundationrelating to the assessment of mathematics and science 14. Document entitled Procedures for Providing Data Analysis/Interpretation to Decision Makers prepared in April 2000 in response to a request from the 12National Science Foundation^relating to the assessment of mathematics and science 15. Document entitled Orientation to the Analysis and Interpretation of Test Results prepared in April 2000 in response to a request from the National Science Foundationrelating to the assessment of mathematics and science. 16. E-mail to Kathy Lease, May 23,2000, providing feedback to proposed survey of middle school students and teachers. 17. E-mail to principals, Aug. 25, 2000, providing information on upcoming administration of the Achievement Level Tests in September. 18. E-mail to Bonnie Lesley, Aug. 31, 2000, providing information on new middle school report card 19. E-mail to Bonnie Lesley, Aug. 31,2000, providing copy of new middle school report card report 20. Memorandum from Linda Austin to Marian Lacey providing Middle School Report Card Update 21. E-mail to middle school principals, Jan. 3, 2000, setting up training for teachers on how to administer the State Benchmark examinations 22. Memorandum to Division of Instruction, Feb. 1, 2000, setting agenda for Feb. 2 meeting\nincludes information on the District Assessment Plan 23. E-mail to elementary principals, Feb. 1, 2000, providing information on the use of calculators on Benchmark examinations 24. E-mail to principals, Feb. 3, 2000, providing copy of assessment schedule/matrix to distribute to teachers 25. Document prepared in fall 1999 by PRE on Achievement Level Tests: Assessments that Make a Difference 26. Memorandum to all principals and test coordinators, Mar. 17, 2000, establishing training sessions for the administration of the Benchmark and end-of-course examinations 27. Memorandum in Apr. 5, 2000, Learning Links to high school principals and test coordinators providing new information from ADE on the end-of-course literacy examination 1328. E-mail to Kathy Lease and Les Gamine, Apr. 7, 2000, providing rationale for adding science assessments to the Achievement Level Tests 29. Memorandum in Aug. 30, 2000, Learning Links to elementary principals and K-2 teachers including pre-testing instructions for the Observation Survey and Developmental Reading Assessment 30. Memorandum in Aug. 30, 2000, Learning Links to all principals and test coordinators establishing inservice schedule for administration of the SAT9 and ALTS 31. Memorandum in Sept. 8, 2000, Learning Links to elementary principals relating to K-2 assessment and the importance of the language arts instructional block 32. Memorandum in Sept. 27, 2000, Learning Links to elementary and middle school principals relating to the administration of the end-of-module tests in mathematics and the end-of-unit tests in science 33. Memorandum in Sept. 26, 2000, Learning Links to elementary principals relating to instructions to complete the Observation Survey and Developmental Reading Assessment 34. Memorandum to principals, Oct. 13, 2000, requesting feedback through a survey for consideration by the Assessment Focus Group\ncopy of survey attached 35. Memorandum to principals, Feb. 13, 2001, with information on the administration of the climate surveys for parents, teachers, students, and administrators 36. E-mail, Feb. 26, 2001, relating to administration of surveys for the Extended Year Education school evaluation 37. E-mail to curriculum directors, Feb. Tl, 2001, relating to discussion of the potential purchase of an electronic curriculum/assessment management system 38. E-mail to principals and selected others on Mar. 1, 2001, relating to an information session on ALT online testing 39. E-mail to principals. Mar. 1, 2001, providing spring testing schedule for elementary, middle, and high schools 40. E-mail to Les Gamine, Mar. 8, 2001, providing outline of PRE responsibilities for Dr. James, incoming superintendent 41. Memorandum to elementary principals. Mar. 14, 2001, providing information on end-of-module mathematics criterion-referenced tests 1442. E-mail between various staff. Mar. 14-15, 2001, relating to analysis of results of mathematics and science criterion-referenced tests 43. Document entitled Mathematics, Reading, and Language Achievement Tests: Administration Guide prepared by PRE for use in training sessions for the ALTs, 2000-01 Exhibit No. 7: LRSD Notebook of Information on Dissemination of Assessment Results. 1. Memorandum to elementary principals and teachers in Feb. 3, 1999, Learning Links, attaching the results for the second quarter reading and mathematics CRTs 2. Memorandum to Les Camine, June 1, 1999, providing status report on the development of the Quality Index and reporting on recommendations of Dr. Steve Ross relating to the assessment program 3. E-mail to Cabinet, Sept. 28, 1999, providing preview of grade 8 Benchmark examination results 4. E-mail to middle school principals, Oct. 8, 1999, relating to dissemination of Benchmark results 5. E-mail between Lucy Neal and Kathy Lease, Oct. 28-Nov. 2, 1999, relating to need for SAT9 scores to evaluate Title VI 6. Memorandum to Judy Milam, Nov. 4, 1999, requesting report on quarterly SFA assessments 7. Memorandum to Kathy Lease, Nov. 4, 1999, requesting report on DRA results for fall 8. E-mail to Kathy Lease, Dec. 3, 1999, advising her of Dr. Camines request for results of climate surveys 9. E-mail to Bonnie Lesley, Apr. 3, 2000, with report on Advanced Placement scores 10. Memorandum to principals in Apr. 5, 2000, Learning Links providing information on packets being sent to schools on ALT results 11. E-mail to John Ruffins and Kathy Lease, Apr. 12, 2000, requesting course enrollment data for NSF report 12. Memorandum to principals and teachers in Apr. 26, 2000, Learning Links with comparisons of second quarter CRT results for 1998-99 and 1999-2000 1513. E-mail to Diane Barksdale, Apr. 19, 2000, providing feedback on ALT scores 14. Memorandum to all principals in May 10, 2000, Learning Links providing information about a data interpretation workshop to be conducted by NWEA staff 15. Memorandum to counselors and ALT coordinators in May 10, 2000, Learning Links providing information about a data interpretation workshop to be conducted by NWEA staff 16. Memorandum to professional staff of Division of Instruction in May 10, 2000, Learning Links providing information about a data interpretation workshop to be conducted by NWEA staff 17. E-mail to Dennis Glasgow and Ed Williams, May 15, 2000, requesting a special report on the middle school ALT mathematics scores 18. E-mail to SEA principals. May 23, 2000, relating to training for SEA schools for improved academic achievement 19. E-mail to Virginia Johnson, May 19-23, 2000, relating to data collections for NSF evaluations and results of middle school student survey 20. E-mail to elementary principals, June 1,2000, relating to results of 1999-2000 Developmental Reading Assessment 21. E-mail to Kathy Lease, June 7, 2000, requesting report on Science ALTs 22. E-mail to Virginia Johnson and Ed Williams, June 7, 2000, relating to data requests from Dr. Camine 23. E-mail to Kathy Lease, June 7, 2000, requesting results of middle school student survey 24. E-mail to Bonnie Lesley, June 23, 2000, requesting interpretation of DRA results 25. E-mail to Les Camine, July 7, 2000, providing information on interpretation of DRA results 26. E-mail to Kathy Lease, Ed Williams, and Linda Austin, July 13, 2000, requesting data for Southwest Education Development Lab relating to implementation of the Collaborative Action Team 27. E-mail to Sadie Mitchell and Frances Cawthon Jones, July 14, 2000, relating to DRA interpretations 1628. E-mail to Pat Busbea, Patricia Price, and Ed Williams, July 14, 2000, relating to interpretation of DRA results\nattached document defines proficient 29. E-mail to Patricia Price and Pat Busbea, July 17, 2000, requesting correlation of teacher participation in ELLA training and student achievement 30. E-mail to elementary staff, July 21, 2000, attaching copy of presentation slides to the Campus Leadership Institute on DRA results 31. E-mail to Leon Adams, July 28, 2000, providing rationale from Mitchell Academy for the abandonment of Success for All, based on data analysis 32. E-mail to selected SFA principals, Aug. 8, 2000, with report on achievement of SFA schools as compared to others and with suggestions on possible abandonment of SFA based on data analysis 33. E-mail to Bonnie Lesley, Aug. 9, 2000, from Freddie Fields relating to possible modification of SFA and requesting ELLA training, based on data analysis 34. E-mail to Kathy Lease, Sept. 14, 2000, from Linda Austin requesting copy of LRSD Assessment Notebook 35. Memorandum to curriculum division, Oct. 25, 2000, announcing available reports on grades 4 and 8 Benchmark examinations 36. Memorandum to Board of Directors, Oct. 25, 2000, announcing available reports on grades 4 and 8 Benchmarks 37. Memorandum to Cabinet, Oct. 25, 2000, announcing available reports on grades 4 and 8 Benchmarks 38. Memoranda to selected principals, Nov. 3, 2000, congratulating them for achievement on grade 4 Benchmarks 39. E-mail to Kathy Lease, Nov. 6, 2000, requesting several sets of data to include in Compliance Report 40. E-mail to Patricia Price and Dennis Glasgow, Nov. 8, 2000, attaching spreadsheets on Benchmark data by SES status 41. E-mail to Kathy Lease from Tara Adams, Jan. 17, 2001, requesting information on interpretation of the ALT results 42. E-mail to principals and cabinet, Jan. 17, 2001, with attached reports on SAT9 scores, five-year comparison\nSAT9, three-year comparison\nand SAT9 quartile report. 1743. E-mail to principals, May 30, 2000, with attached sample letter to parents that can accompany the ALT results 44. Document entitled Identified Issues from Data/Attendance Focus Group prepared by PRE 45. Document entitled Assessment Window prepared with advice from Focus Group 46. Document entitled Assessment Advisory Committee, 2000-01 with names of advisory committee members 47. Copies of PowerPoint presentation to Board of Education, Nov. 16, 2000: A Quick Look at the 4* Grade Benchmark Exam and a Preview of the SAT-9 48. E-mail to Steve Ross, Nov. 20, 2000, including feedback to a draft plan he had written relating to loan forgiveness 49. E-mail to principals and Cabinet, Nov. 29, 2000, with information on how to access test data on the ADE web page 50. Memorandum to IRC Staff, Dec. 1, 2000, relating to available SAT9 and Benchmark reports 51. Memorandum to middle school principals, Dec. 11, 2000, attaching reports on assignments of eighth graders to high schools 52. E-mail to SFA principals and facilitators, Feb. 23, 2001, announcing training on the SFA Student Data Base 53. E-mail to Virginia Johnson, Mar. 14, 2001, relating to analysis of end-of-module test results 54. E-mail to Bonnie Lesley, Apr. 23, 2001, with attached information on the Duke Talent Search 55. E-mail to middle school principals, June 29, 2001, reminding them of information sent to them earlier about how to access test data on the ADE web site 56. E-mail to principals, June 29, 2001, attaching copies of DRA test results 18Exhibit No. 8:. LRSD Notebook of Information on Planning for Program Evaluation. 1. Memorandum to designated principals from Mona Briggs, Aug. 23, 1999, providing information on standards for accreditation from ADE 2. Memorandum to elementary staff, Jan. 20, 1999, relating to an ADE evaluation of Early Literacy Learning in Arkansas (ELLA) 3. Memorandum to Kathy Lease and Ed Williams, June 29, 1999, on program evaluation with attached articles on qualitative research and an example of a research report from Austin ISD by Glynn Ligon 4. Memorandum to Division of Instruction, Feb. 1, 2000, with agenda relating to program implementation 5. E-mail to Virginia Johnson and Debbie Milam, Feb. 4, 2000, suggesting a model for the evaluation of VIPS programs 6. Memorandum in March 15, 2000, Learning Link relating to progress made by schools implementing the ALT assessment program 7. Document from Kathy Lease- alendar of meetings with Dr. Steve Ross since March 15, 2000\nattached planning document on program evaluation 8. E-mail to Bonnie Lesley, Mar. 24, 2000, providing information about a meeting with Dr. Steve Ross to discuss the middle school evaluation 9. E-mail to Kathy Lease, May 23, 2000, providing feedback on proposed middle school student survey 10. E-mail to Bonnie Lesley, Marian Lacey, and Sadie Mitchell, June 12, 2000, from Les Camine requesting information about the middle school evaluation 11. E-mail from Steve Ross to Kathy Lease, June 27, 2000, with attached design notes for Title I/Elementary Literacy Program Evaluation 12. E-mail from Kathy Lease to her staff, Aug. 6, 2000, requesting them to place the memorandum and program evaluations on the Board agenda 13. E-mail from Kathy Lease to Les Camine, Aug. 10, 2000, providing copies of drafts of the ESL and middle school evaluations\nthen his questions and her answers. 14. Memorandum to Board of Education, Aug. 24, 2000, from Kathy Lease presenting the program evaluations: Title I/Elementary Literacy, LRCPMSA 19(mathematics and science), English as a Second Language, and Middle School Transition and Program Implementation. Attached is her PowerPoint presentation: Program Evaluation. 15. E-mail from Steve Ross to Les Camine, Sept. 7, 2000, giving his feedback to the program evaluation reports. 16. E-mail from Debbie Milam to Cabinet members, Sept. 20, 2000, requesting permission to conduct interviews of parents on the subject of parental involvement. 17. E-mail from Kathy Lease to staff, Oct. 11, 2000, advising them of an upcoming meeting with Dr. Steve Ross related to program evaluation 18. E-mail from Virginia Johnson to Bonnie Lesley and Vanessa Cleaver, Oct. 20, 2000, relating to our required participation in an evaluation study conducted by the National Science Foundation 19. Memorandum to Gene Jones, ODM, from Kathy Lease, Oct. 27, 2000, inviting him to an intensive work session with Dr. Steve Ross on program evaluation 20. Document prepared by PRE in November 2000 that lists Additional Programs and Strategies Requesting Evaluation 21. E-mail to Cabinet members from Kathy Lease, Nov. 28, 2000, attaching Dr. Steve Ross planned presentation to the Board of Education on Using Evaluation for Program Improvement: Lessons Learned 22. E-mail from Bonnie Lesley to Virginia Johnson, Jan. 2, 2001, setting up a meeting to finalize CPMSA program evaluation plan 23. E-mail from Virginia Johnson to Bonnie Lesley, Jan. 3, 2001, attaching her tentative plan 24. E-mail from Kathy Lease to Les Camine and Junious Babbs, Jan. 5, 2001, providing information relating to outsourcing program evaluations to Dr. John Nunnery 25. E-mail from/to Virginia Johnson, Jan. 5-20, 2000, relating to submission of Core Data Elements to the National Science Foundation 26. E-mail from/to Virginia Johnson, Apr. 14-16, 2000, relating to CPMSA program evaluation issues 27. E-mail from Kathy Lease to Les Camine, Jan. 22, 2001, attaching a draft of the work from Dr. John Nunnery 2028. Memorandum (one of several) from Kathy Lease, Jan. 24, 2001, inviting participants to the first meeting of the Research Committee 29. Memorandum from Kathy Lease to John Walker, Jan. 24, 2001, inviting him to participate in first meeting of Research Committee 30. Agenda for Feb. 5, 2001, meeting of the Research Committee and sign-in sheet 31. E-mail from Bonnie Lesley to Eddie McCoy, Ed Williams, and Karen Broadnax, Feb. 16, 2001, to set up a meeting to discuss ESL program evaluation 32. Memorandum from Kathy Lease to Research Committee setting up Feb. 26, 2001, meeting 33. Agenda for Feb. 26, 2001, Research Committee meeting and sign-in sheet 34. Invoice from Dr. John Nunnery to LRSD for services rendered, February-March 2001 35. E-mail from Bonnie Lesley to CPMSA staff, Feb. 21, 2001, setting up a meeting to discuss the CPMSA program evaluation 36. E-mail from Virginia Johnson to Bonnie Lesley, March 14, 2001, providing updates 37. E-mail to middle school staff from Bonnie Lesley, Mar. 15, 2001, summarizing a meeting to plan for a Middle School Team Leaders Institute, including recognition of need to train team leaders on assessment and using data 38. E-mail from Bonnie Lesley to CPMSA staff. Mar. 19, 2001, setting up follow-up meeting to discuss CPMSA program evaluation 39. Memorandum to Carnegie Management Team, March 20, 2001, from Bonnie Lesley with information about counseling program and need for a program evaluation 40. Memorandum from Kathy Lease to Research Committee, Apr. 16, 2001, setting up next meeting on summer school evaluation and program evaluation for the National Science Foundation grant 41. Sign-in sheet for Apr. 23, 2001, meeting of the Research Committee 42. E-mail from Bonnie Lesley to Dennis Glasgow, Suzi Davis, and Laura Beth Arnold, April 17, 2001, to discuss program evaluation for Element 5 of the Safe Schools/ Healthy Students project 2143. E-mail from Virginia Johnson to Bonnie Lesley, Apr. 18, 2001, relating to next steps in providing information about SAT9 item analyses for teachers 44. E-mail from Mona Briggs to Bonnie Lesley, Apr. 25, 2001, relating to survey needs for national evaluation of Safe Schools/ Healthy Students project 45. E-mail from Dennis Glasgow to elementary and middle school staff, Apr. 26, 2001, summarizing a large scale study that links classroom practices to student achievement in mathematics 46. E-mail among team working on CPMSA program evaluation, Apr. 18-May 2, 2001, relating to model for program evaluation and data analysis 47. E-mail from Kathy Lease to Research Committee, May 2, 2001, with attached latest version of the Guidelines for Program Evaluations 48. Agenda for May 7, 2001, meeting of the Research Committee and sign-in sheet 49. E-mail from Don Crary to Bonnie Lesley, May 24, 2001, announcing that a program evaluator had been hired by New Futures to conduct the program evaluation for Safe Schools/ Healthy Students 50. E-mail from Kathy Lease to Research Committee with attached memorandum relating to next meeting on June 11, 2001 51. Agenda for June 11, 2001, meeting of the Research Committee and sign-in sheet 52. E-mail from Junious Babbs to Bonnie Lesley, June 12, 2001, relating to information on program evaluation 53. E-mail from Kathy Lease to Compliance Team, June 14, 2001, with an outline of a plan for the completion of the Middle School Evaluation 54. E-mail from Kathy Lease to Research Committee, June 14, 2001, attaching a copy of final draft of Dr. Nunnerys evaluation of the mathematics/science programs 55. E-mail from Dennis Glasgow to Ed Williams, July 3, 2001, requesting additional ALT reports 56. E-mail from Vanessa Cleaver to others working on CPMSA program evaluation, July 10, 2001, requesting help in publishing a three-year progress report on the CPMSA 22Exhibit No. 9: - 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. LRSD Notebook of Information onWritings on Program Evaluation-Literacy. PreK-3 Literacy Plan (with needs assessment, see pp. 12-26), June 1999 Memorandum to Board of Education from Bonnie Lesley, June 24,1999, requesting their review of the proposed PreK-3 Literacy Program Plan Report on Level of ELLA training for K-2 teachers, May 10, 2000 Definition of Proficient for the Developmental Reading Assessment, K-2, May 2000 Report on Spring 2000 Developmental Reading Assessment, Percent At or Above Readiness Correlation StudyAmount of Training Hours and Student Achievement on the Developmental Reading Assessment, Spring 2000 Correlation StudyMultiple Comparisons of Effect of Four Approaches to Literacy Development, Spring 2000 Executive Summary, Title EElementary Literacy Program Evaluation, July 2000 Title I/Elementary Literacy Program Evaluation, August 2000 .. 10. Updated Draft of Title I/PreK-3 Literacy Plan Program Evaluation, December 2000 - 11. Progress Report on Elementary Literacy Plan to Board of Education, January 2001 ~ 12. Update on Implementation of the PreK-3 Literacy Program Plan, June 2001, presented to Board of Education 13. Copies of slide presentation to Board of Education on PreK-3 Literacy Program, June 2001 14. E-mail to principals and Division of Instruction from Bonnie Lesley, June 29, 2001, attaching copies of the formal Update on Implementation of the PreK-3 Literacy Program Plan to the Board of Education, plus the Highlights documents, and a copy of the presentation slides. 15. E-mail to elementary principals and other staff from Bonnie Lesley, June 29, 2001, attaching tables of DRA results by middle school feeder pattern. 2316. Evaluation of Success for All Programs, Little Rock School District, Year 1: 1997-98 by Steve Ross, Mary McNelis, Tracey Lewis, and Steve Loomis, University of Memphis 17. Evaluation of Success for All Program, Little Rock School District, Year 2: 1998-99 by Weipling Want and Steven Ross, University of Memphis, July 1999 18. Memorandum to elementary principals from Bonnie Lesley in Sept. 1, 1999, Learning Links, assigning supervision of the Success for All program in the Division of Instruction for greater effectiveness 19. Memorandum to Kathy Lease from Bonnie Lesley, Mar. 31,1999, attaching a copy of a contract for the evaluation of the Success for All program 20. Memorandum from Bonnie Lesley to selected SFA staff, Oct. 8, 1999, setting up training on Success for All 21. Memorandum from Bonnie Lesley to SFA principals, Nov. 11, 1999, providing to them copies of their contracts with the University of Memphis for SFA services 22. Memorandum from Bonnie Lesley to SFA principals, Nov. 15, 1999, providing them a study on SFA effectiveness\nattached article, Success for All: A Summary of Evaluations, by Jeanne Weiler, ERIC. 23. E-mail from Bonnie Lesley to selected SFA principals, Aug. 8, 2000, suggesting that data analysis indicates SFA not being effective in their schools\nattached tables. 24. Report on Success for All Inservice activities, 1999-2000 School Year 25. Reports from eight-week assessments in Success for All schools, 1999-2000. 26. Success for All Implementation Report for December 1, 1999 (site visit reports from the University of Memphis that are done twice annually) 27. Success for All Implementation Reports for Spring 2001 (site visit reports from the University of Memphis that are done twice annually) 28. Executive Summary, English as a Second Language Program Evaluation, July 2000 29. English as a Second Language Program Evaluation (submitted to Office of Civil Rights), October 2000 24Exhibit No. 10: LRSD Notebook of Information onWritings on Program Evaluation-Mathematics/Science. 1. Proposal to National Science Foundation, Aug. 1, 1998, to fund Collaborative Partnerships in Mathematics and Science Achievement (see pp. 2-4 for needs assessment). 2. Management Plan for Year One, 1998-99, CPMSA (based on proposal for funding to the National Science Foundation. 3. 1999-2000 Strategic Plan, CPMSA (based on data analysis and decisions about next steps) 4. September 2000February 2002 Strategic Plan, CPMSA (based on data analysis and decisions about next steps) 5. September 1, 2000August 31, 2003 Strategic Plan, CPMSA (based on data analysis and decisions about next steps) 6. Revised Three-Year Strategic Plan, April 11, 2001, CPMSA (based on data analysis and decisions about next steps) 7. Annual Progress Report, 1998-99, submitted to the National Science Foundation. 8. Letter from National Science Foundation to Dr. Les Camine, May 20, 1999, with follow-up report to Site Visit of April 27-29, 1999. 9. Document prepared for December 3, 1999, Site Visit: Relationship of CPMSA Goals and LRSD Quality Indicators 10. Agenda forNSF Site Visit, December 3, 1999 11. Letter from National Science Foundation to Dr. Les Camine, January 24, 2000, with follow-up report to Site Visit of December 1-3, 1999. 12. Annual Progress Report, 1999-2000, submitted to the National Science Foundation. 13. Copy of slide presentation to the National Science Foundation Site Visit team, December 1-3, 1999. 14. Letter from National Science Foundation to Dr. Les Camine, January 16, 2001, with follow-up report to Site Visit of December 6-8, 2000. 15. Copy of slide presentation to Board of Education relating to CPMSA progress, January 2001. 2516. Copy of slide presentation to the National Science Foundation Midpoint Review (reverse site visit) in Washington, DC, February 5, 2001. 17. Letter from National Science Foundation to Dr. Les Camine, March 15, 2001, with follow-up report on Midpoint Review presentation in Washington, DC (reverse site visit) of February 5, 2001. 18. Systemic Initiatives Core Data Elements, 1998-99: Results for Little Rock, report submitted to the National Science Foundation relating to implementation of new mathematics/science programs 19. Systemic Initiatives Core Data Elements, 1999-2000: Results for Little Rock, report submitted to the National Science Foundation relating to implementation of new mathematics/science programs 20. Program EvaluationSigns of Success: Trends in Mathematics and Science Student Performance, 1997-98 and 1999-2000, report submitted by CPMSA Program Evaluator to project staff. 21. Program EvaluationBenchmark ExaminationOpen Response Mathematics Items: Student Outcomes of a Targeted Initiative with 4* Grade Students, 1998- 99. 22. Program EvaluationACTAAP Benchmark Examination Mathematics Results, Grades 4 and 8, 1997-98 to 2000-01. 23. Program EvaluationDistrict Criterion Referenced Tests (CRTs), Higher-Level Mathematics and Science, 3\"^ Quarter, 2000-01 24. Program EvaluationStanford Achievement Test, 9*'' Edition, Mathematics Results, 1997-98 to 2000-01. 25. Program EvaluationStanford Achievement Test, O* Edition, Science Reasoning Results, 1997-98 to 2000-01. 26. Program EvaluationAdvanced Placement Test: Mathematics Results, 1997-98 to 2000-01. 27. Program EvaluationAdvanced Placement Test: Science Results, 1997-98 to 2000-01. 28. Program EvaluationAmerican College Test Results for 8* Grade EXPLORE, 1997-98 to 2000-01. 2629. Program EvaluationAmerican College Test Results for 10* Grade PLAN, 1997-98 to 2000-01. 30. Program EvaluationAmerican College Test Results for 12* Grade ACT Test, 1997-9810 2000-01. 31. Program EvaluationComprehensive Partnerships for Mathematics and Science Achievement: Tabulated Indicators for Systemic Changes, 1997-98 to 2000-01, Part I: Graduation Data Summary and SEM Proficiency by Ethnicity. 32. Program EvaluationComprehensive Partnerships for Mathematics and Science Achievement: Tabulated Indicators for Systemic Changes, 1997-98 to 2000-01, Part II: Enrollment by Grade Level and Ethnicity. 33. Program EvaluationComprehensive Partnerships for Mathematics and Science Achievement: Tabulated Indicators for Systemic Changes, 1997-98 to 2001-02: Qualitative Indicators. 34. Program EvaluationComprehensive Partnerships for Mathematics and Science Achievement: Tabulated Indicators for Systemic Changes, 1997-98 to 2000-01: Part 4: Higher Level Mathematics and Science Course Enrollment and Successful Completion. 35. Program EvaluationSMART (Summer Advanced Mathematics Readiness Training), 1999 and 2000. 36. Program EvaluationAfter School Science Club, 1999 and 2000. 37. Executive Summary, CPMSA (Collaborative Partnerships for Mathematics and Science Achievement) Program Evaluation conducted by PRE, July 2000 38. CPMSA Program Evaluation conducted by PRE, August 2000 39. Updated draft of CPMSA Program Evaluation by John Nunnery, Feb. 26, 2001 40. Final Draft of CPMSA Program Evaluation by John Nunnery, July 2001 41. Grant Proposal to the National Science Foundation for supplemental funding relating to the implementation of the CPMSA projectLittle Rock Center of Excellence for Research, Teaching, and Learning (CERTL), October 1, 1998 42. LRSD Mathematics and Science Mini-Grant Application for 2001-02 to provide funds to schools to accelerate their implementation of the CPMSA project 43. E-mail from Bonnie Lesley to CPMSA team, Dec. 11,2000, praising them for their preparation and performance at the NSF Site Visit 2744. E-mail exchange with Bormie Lesley and Vanessa Cleaver relating to need for data to evaluate SECME program, Feb. 16,2001 45. E-mail ffom/to Vanessa Cleaver and Bonnie Lesley, Feb. 21-Mar. 22, 2001, relating to needs to expand SMART program for Algebra I Readiness 46. Agendas for Advisory Committee/Goveming Committee/Steering Committee, September 1998May 15, 2001 47. E-mail from Dennis Glasgow to elementary principals and other staff, April 11, 2001\nattached Validation Study on Investigations in Number, Data, and Space (elementary mathematics curriculum)\ncontains achievement data for districts around the country\nattached paper. 48. E-mail from Dennis Glasgow to elementary principals and other staff, April 25, 2001, providing information on the relationship between participation in professional development and student achievement\nattached bar graph. 49. E-mail from Dennis Glasgow to elementary principals and other staff, April 25, 2001, attaching a summary of a large scale study by the Miliken Family Foundation that links classroom practices to student achievement in mathematics. 50. E-mail from/to Bonnie Lesley and Eddie McCoy, Apr. 26, 2001, relating to an item analysis of SAT9 results that Ms. McCoy volunteered to do for the CPMSA program evaluation team 51. SAT9 item analysis for grades 5 and 7mathematics, completed by Eddie McCoy in June 2001. Exhibit No. 11: LRSD Notebook of Information on Writings on Program Evaluation-Other. 1. Executive Summary, Middle School Transition Program Evaluation, July 2000 2. Middle School Transition Program Evaluation, August 2000 3. Memorandum to Brenda James (Mann principal) from Bonnie Lesley, March 1, 1999, in response to their request to waive the implementation of new middle school curriculum and processes\nincludes evaluation concerns 4. Request for Waiver from the LRSD middle school curriculum for 2001-02 from Mann Middle School 285. 6. 7. 8. 9. Letter from Doima Creer to Bormie Lesley, Mar. 23, 2001, requesting her to attend the April 10, 2001, meeting of the MRC relating to discuss of Mann Middle Schools request for waiver. Letter to Donna Creer, MRC Executive Director, from Bonnie Lesley, March 28, 2001, evaluating Mann Middle Schools performance under the waiver that had been approved and recommending that the waiver not be granted for 2001-02 Letter from Donna Creer to Bonnie Lesley, Apr. 11, 2001, providing follow-up to the Magnet Review Committee meeting of April 10, 2001 relating to Mann Middle Schools request for waiver. Letter to Jim Fullerton (Mann Middle School principal), April 16, 2001, from Les Camine, Sadie Mitchell, Marian Lacey, and Bonnie Lesley denying Manns request for waiver for 2001-02 from the LRSD curriculum. Memorandum from Marian Lacey to Jim Fullerton, May 16, 2001, encouraging Mann Middle School to collaboratively plan for the conection of the decline in reading and language arts performance. 10. E-mail to Jim Fullerton from Bonnie Lesley, May 23, 2001, with recommendations for Mann Middle Schools curriculum and efforts to narrow the achievement gap 11. E-mail from Jim Fullerton to Bonnie Lesley, June 5, 2001, inviting her to a meeting to discuss changes at Mann Middle School relating to narrowing the achievement gap 12. Sample letter to parents from Mann Middle School, Aug. 1, 2001, to set up a program devoted to the academic improvement of the lowest achieving sixth grade students. 13. Memorandum to curriculum staff from Bonnie Lesley, Aug. 27, 1998, assigning duties related to the Talent Development Plan to improve access and success in AP courses\nattached planning strands with notes from meeting. 14. LRSD AP and Pre-AP Professional Development Course Survey Results (study on training experienced by AP and Pre-AP teachers conducted by Mable Donaldson to guide decision-making related to professional development plan for these teachers). 15. Memorandum in April 12, 2000, Learning Links from Bonnie Lesley to high school principals, cabinet, and Division of Instruction including analysis of Status of Enrollment in Advanced Placement and Pre-Advanced Placement Courses\nTwo-Year Comparison of Advanced Placement Examination Participation and Scores' 2916. Evaluation of HIPPY Program: A Look at Outcomes for Children at the End of 3\"* Grade and 6'* Grade, July 1999, conducted by PRE 17. Site Visit Report from Arkansas HIPPY, Feb. 26, 2001. 18. Monitoring Reports provided to schools and the District by the Division of Child Care and Early Childhood Education (annual assessments) 19. Little Rock School District Technology Plan, 2001-2004, December 2000\nsee pp. 17-25 on evaluation of current status and see pp. 26-45 for program goals) 20. Inventory of Computers by School, Spring 2001 21. Priorities for LRSD Professional Development, 1999-2000 and 2000-01 22. Report to the Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development relating to LRSDs participation in the Urban Professional Development InitiativeFirst Quarter Report, April 14, 1999\nincludes a plan for evaluation and baseline measures. 23. Memorandum to the Board of Education from Bonnie Lesley, Feb. 22, 2001, requesting approval of the proposed professional development policy and regulations\nnote the emphasis on using student performance data to drive the program, on expectations for improved education achievement and equity of outcomes for all students, and on the need for program evaluation. 24. Vital Link: Passage to 00 25. Alternative Learning Environment (ALE) Program Evaluation\nTwo-Year Comparison: Lyceum Scholars High School (LSHS) 26. Program EvaluationPhilander Smith College/LRSD Lyceum Scholars High School, 1999-2000. 27. Summer School 2000 (final to be added upon completion) Exhibit No. 12: LRSD Notebook of Information on Writings on Program Evaluation-School District Improvement. 1. Document: Guidelines to School Improvement Planning, August 1999 (distributed to participants of summer 1999 Campus Leadership Team Institute)\nsee pp. 1-16 of using data for decision making and prioritizing\npp. 29-30 on Plan Evaluation.) 301. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Memorandum in Feb. 9, 2000, Learning Links from Bonnie Lesley on conducting a formative evaluation of the progress on the School Improvement Plan with attached ERS research article: School Improvement: Factors Leading to Success or Failure Document of notes made by Bonnie Lesley in efforts to analyze the first ALT results in spring 2000, by school Memorandum in Dec. 16, 1998, Learning Links to principals from Bonnie Lesley establishing the waiver process, with attached application form, including a required evaluation design. Memorandum to Cabinet from Bonnie Lesley, Jan. 4, 1999, requesting feedback on a draft plan to restructure the Districts Title I program in order to align it with new literacy and mathematics curricula and Smart Start, as well as with the Strategic Plan and the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. Memorandum to elementary principals from Bonnie Lesley, June 9, 1999, clarifying Title I program issues and the importance of aligning Title 1 programs with efforts to improve achievement. Memorandum to Board of Education from Bonnie Lesley, Aug. 12, 1999, on issues relating to changes in the Districts Title I Plan for 1999-2000. Memorandum to John Walker, et al, from Bonnie Lesley, Sept. 1, 1999, relating to changes in the LRSD Title 1 Plan for 1999-2000\nattaching copy of the plan. Feedback from Arkansas Quality Award to 1999 application for Level I Award, September 8, 1999 10. Planning document to write the application for the Arkansas Quality Award, prepared by Bonnie Lesley in April 2000 11. E-mail to selected staff from Bonnie Lesley, Apr. 26, 2000, thanking them for contributions to the writing of the application for the Arkansas Quality Award 12. E-mail from Bonnie Lesley to selected staff. May 4, 2000, with attached copy of application to Arkansas Quality Award program 13. Application for the Arkansas Quality Award: Little Rock School District: Dedicated to Excellence, May 5, 2000 14. Agenda for planning meeting for Arkansas Quality Award site visit. August 14, 2000, with attachment, Arkansas Quality Award Application Procedure 15. Agenda for Arkansas Quality Award Site Visit, August 16-18, 2000 3116. Feedback from Arkansas Quality Award after site visit on August 16-18, 2000. 17. Memorandum to Ann Brown and ODM Staff from Bonnie Lesley, Aug. 4, 1999, in response to draft of their report. 18. Memorandum from Ann Brown to Bonnie Lesley, Oct. 15, 1999, in response to Aug. 4 memorandum. 19. Letter from Kathy Lease to N.W. Marshall at ODM, Oct. 11, 1999, stating concern that NCEs were used to make judgments in Achievement Disparity report. 20. Letter from N.W. Marshall to Kathy Lease, Oct. 22, 1999, in response to her concerns. 21. Memorandum from Bonnie Lesley to curriculum staff. May 10, 2000, with copy of feedback\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_297","title":"Compliance court orders","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":null,"dc_date":["2001-10/2001-12"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System."],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--21st Century","Little Rock School District","Education--Arkansas","School districts--Arkansas--Pulaski County","Educational law and legislation","Education--Evaluation","School administrators"],"dcterms_title":["Compliance court orders"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Butler Center for Arkansas Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://arstudies.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/bcmss0837/id/297"],"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\nIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT LT FiLED EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION OCT 0 1 2001 ^ames w. McCormack, CLERK LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAWTIFF*\u0026lt; V. NO. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1,ETAL DEFENDANTS MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL. INTERVENORS KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL. INTERVENORS JOSHUA INTERVENORS MOTION FOR DEFINITION AND CLARIFICATION OF THE ISSUES AND FOR OTHER RELIEF The Joshua Intervenors request the Coun to enter a written ruling defining the issue and the scope of this proceeding. The Joshua Intervenors make this request in order to obtain clarification of the issue(s) that the Court is now hearing and of the expectations of the Court with respect to issues which the LRSD seeks to inject into the proceedings which have not been raised by the LRSD in a formal pleading. The precipation for this motion is affirmative inquiries into the activities of Joshuas counsel for which no complaint is made or relief sought. On August 13,2001, the LRSD served an extensive set of interrogatories upon the Joshua Intervenors. (See Plaintiffs Motion to Compel filed Friday, September 21,2001. On Monday, September 24,2001, the district withdrew its motion and on September 25,2001, the Court entered an Order dismissing the motion as moot.) The LRSD has now filed a second set of interrogatories upon Joshua. Those interrogatories reflect that LRSD is trying to develop the defense to its motion for declaration of unitary status that the -1-4 Joshua Intervenors had certain duties to assist the LRSD in reaching unitary status under the Revised Desegregation Education Plan which duties were not fulfilled by Joshua. The LRSD, however, has not filed a motion or presented at any time during these proceedings a request for relief with respect to unitary status regarding the involvement of the Joshua Intervenors. The only relief that the district has sought has been a citation of contempt of court upon Joshua counsel and that motion is now pending for hearing before the Court on October 16, 2001. The Joshua Intervenors have responded by undersigned counsel to the first set of interrogatories propounded by counsel for the LRSD. Joshua noted in responding to those interrogatories that it was answering them without waiving objection to the propriety of the district filing them in the first place. (See Exhibit C) Joshua is without notice of the purpose of either set of interrogatories. The LRSD counsel informed the Court on June 29,2001, that it expected to introduce only one exhibit in support of its motion for unitary status. Mr. Heller then stated: \"Our only exhibit will be the DRA scores that were announced to the board last night, and reported in the paper this morning. Beyond that there is nothing else that we plan to use .. . See pages 13 and 14 of the transcript before the Court dated June 29, 2001. The Court and the Settlement Agreement determined that the burden of proof was upon the Joshua Intervenors to demonstrate the shortcomings or failings of the LRSD which supported Joshuas position that a declaration of unitary status was premature and not supported by the evidence. During the proceedings on June 29, 2001 before the Court, LRSD did not indicate that it was in need of any information whatsoever from the Joshua Intervenors. This was because its March 15,2001 Compliance Report and the DRA scores, supra, reflected the success of the Revised -2-Desegregation and Education Plan. The focus of the June 29, 2001 proceeding was upon the information to be provided Joshua by the LRSD that related to the issue of the districts compliance with the Court Orders herein. The Court indicated\na) . . . . I would ask that the district open up its personnel to him [Joshua counsel] and to his staff so that he will be able to get whatever discovery he needs . . . and that you willingly hand over discovery\nb) ... if its true that Mr. Pendley is sitting on a whole lot of stuff I would hope that he would provide it to Mr. Walker\ninsofar as Mr. Walker needs to review it.\nc) since the LRSD is a public institution I dont have the same protective attitude towards its documents and other papers that I might, if you were not a public institution\nd) .... so I would hope that you would be cooperative and give Mr. Walker what he needs. Pages 26 and 27 [letters parenthesized are not a part of the Court transcript]. The Court went on to indicate that Mr. Walker should hand over to Mr. Heller and Mr. Pendley any exhibits he intends to use. Page 29. When Joshua sought to address the issue of the State obligation, the Court directed that Joshua remain focused on the issue before the Court. [Underlining added for emphasis]. The Court said: I am not here to talk about the States obligation, and you may file something with the Court... in the form of a motion. All lam here right noyv is to talk about Little Rock, whether Little Rock is substantially complying. \" (June 29, 2001 transcript. -j-page 34). The Court further made it clear that she did not wish to address Mr. Walkers unwritten objections regarding promises made in the Convenant of the school District. She said: . you want to file something with the Court objective to that, that's not before me right now.  The Court indicated to defense counsel that she would expect Mr. Walker to ... let them know what you are going to use ... but I am not going to require that any FOI requests that you put there be filtered through the attorney. Pages 46 and 47. The Court only required Joshua provide to the district with its witness and exhibit list. Page 53. That has been done. The LRSD refuses, since the beginning of the school term, to provide any further e-mail review to the Joshua Intervenors unless Joshua agrees to a protective order. See exhibit F, letter from J. Clay Fendley dated September 12,2001. Joshua notes that no such order was required for the top administrators e-mails and that the Court has not imposed that requirement. The Plaintiff LRSD is now in the position where it has sought not only discovery from the Joshua Intervenors regarding issues not before the Court for which LRSD seeks no relief from Joshua, it compounds the problem by propounding further interrogatories and discovery beyond the voluntary responses which were provided to the plaintiff on September 24, 2001. A copy of the districts second set of interrogatories and requests for production to the Joshua Intervenors regarding Joshuas objections to unitary status is attached hereto as Exhibit A. There is also attached hereto as Exhibit B, a letter with objections to the responses from the plaintiff that is extensive regarding the first set of interrogatories. The third attachment (Exhibit C) is Joshua counsels letter to district -4-counsel regarding the discovery. The Joshua Intervenors respectfully request the Court to define the parameters of the districts efforts to obtain discovery from the Joshua Intervenors and to determine what issues, if any, the Court will address in the proceedings that are now in recess, if any, other than the districts motion for a declaration of unitary status. Joshua brings to the attention of the Court that it is frustrated with the status which Joshua finds itself in because of the LRSD attorneys refusal to cooperate, as directed, and provide discovery in the form of FOIA responses as directed and as requested. Joshua is also frustrated because the district lawyers, through Superintendent Kenneth James, have sought to impede the Joshuas access to information. Dr. James has now promulgated a regulation known as Administrative Direct ADB which requires that the district charge Joshua for FOIA copies at the rate of $.25 per page, see Exhibit D. Because of that AD, the district now refuses to provide responses to Joshua without prepayment of costs if the document is 25 pages or more. The administrative directive came after and upon the Courts directive that Joshua may use FOIA in order to obtain information. It has been applied only to Joshua. Joshuas frustration is further noted by Administrative Directive EGAD fExhibit Ei which requires the school district employees to delete their e-mail files within 15 days after transmittal or reception. This directive was created, on information and belief, to be effective on October 1, 2001 and in response to the Courts comments regarding e-mail use during the last hearing. Joshua submits that it was made by Dr. James in an effort to prevent access to information by the Joshua Intervenors and to frustrate the Courts Orders. The Joshua Intervenors respectfully submit that clarification is needed from the Court to determine the extent to which they should be required to respond to a second set of interrogatories -5- and to further reply to a first set of same which (a) have no essential purpose, (b) about which the Court has never been given notice by the school district, and (c) for which no relief is sought by LRSD. The Court is further called upon to clarify whether the district may frustrate Joshuas access to information which the Court authorized Joshua to obtain by promulgation and enforcement of restrictive administrative regulations which effectively apply only to Joshua. Joshua is further concerned that the regulations appear to be an effort by the district to limit the scope of the Courts mling with respect to Joshuas access to information. In other words, the district appears to be attempting to overrule the Courts decision that Joshua is entitled to access to information freely and without restrictive conditions. WHEREFORE, the Joshua Intervenors pray that the Court enter an Order defining and clarifying the issues which are before the Court. Joshua further prays for other relief including (a) providing Joshua access to the promised e-mails, (b) quashing interrogatories which plaintiff has submitted to Joshua, and (c) suspending implementation of the Policy Directives DB-KDB and DB-EGAD. Respectfully submitted. JOHN W. WALKER, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 (501) 374-3758 (Tel.) 1) 374-4187 (^) By: W. Walker, Bar No. 64046 -6- CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing^as been mailed, postage prepaid to the following counsel or record, postage prepaid on this j^^^ay of September, 2001. Mr. Christopher Heller Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark 400 W. Capitol, Suite 2200 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Ms. Ann Brown Marshall ODM Qne Union National Plaza 124 West Capitol, Suite 1895 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 / John W. Walker .J. -7- 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF V. No. 4:82CV00866SWW PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL DEFENDANTS MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL INTERVENORS KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL INTERVENORS PLAINTIFFS SECOND SET OF INTERROGATORIES AND REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION TO THE JOSHUA INTERVENORS REGARDING JOSHUAS OBJECTIONS TO UNITARY STATUS Comes the Plaintiff, Little Rock School District (\"LRSD\"), and submits the following Interrogatories and Requests for Production to be answered within thirty days in accord with Rules 33 and 34 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. GENERAL DEFINITIONS AND INSTRUCTIONS (A) \"you\" or \"your' .It Shall mean the Joshua Intervenors' LRSD class representative and counsel for the Joshua Intervenors and any person (as defined below) acting on their behalf\n (B) \"person Shall mean any individual, corporation, partnership, joint venture, firm, association. proprietorship, agency, board, authority, commission, and other such entities\n(C) \"communicate\" or \"communication\" Shall mean every manner or means of disclosure, transfer or exchange, and every disclosure, transfer or exchange of information whether orally or by document or whether face to face, by telephone, mail, personal delivery, or otherwise\n(D) \"document' .11 ihi't' f\\Shall mean any original written, Typewritten, handwritten, printed or recorded material, as well as all tapes, disks, non-duplicate copies and transcripts thereof, now or at any time in your possession, custody or control\nand, without limiting the generahty of the foregoing definition, but for the purposes of illustration only, \"document\" includes notes. correspondence, memoranda, business records, diaries, calendars, address and telephone records, photographs, tape recordings, videotapes and financial statements. Without limitation of the term \"control\" as used in the preceding sentence, a document is deemed to be in your control if you have the right to secure the document or a copy thereof V from another person or a public or private entity having actual possession thereof. If a document that is responsive to a request for identification or production is in your control, but is not in your possession or custody, identify the person with possession or custody. If any document that is responsive to a request for identification or production was. but is no longer, in your possession or subject to your control, state what disposition was made of it, by whom, and the date or dates or approximate date or dates on which disposition was made, and why\n(E) \"identify\" (i) As to a person (as defined), shall mean the person's name, business and residence address(es), occupation, job title\nand, if not an individual, state the type of entity and the address of its principal place of business\n(ii) As to a document, shall mean the type of document (letter, memo, etc.) the identity of the author or originator, the date authored or originated, the identity of each person to whom the original or copy was addressed or dehvered, the identity of such person known or reasonably behevedby you to have present possession, custody, or control thereof. 2and a brief description of the subj ect matter thereof, all with sufScient particularity to request its production under Rule 34 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure\n(hi) As to a communication, shall mean the date of the communication, the type of communication (telephone conversation, meeting, etc.), the place where the cnrmm ini cation took place, the identity of the person who made the communication, the identity of each person who received the communication, and of each person present when it was made and the subject matter discussed\n(F) \"Pertaining to It Shall mean constituting, embodying, arising out of, incident to, referring to. mentioned, bearing upon, reflecting, evidencing, affecting, concerning, providing evidence for, or relating to the transaction, individual, entity, act, object, conference, contention. communication, allegation or activity identified\n(G) To \"describe in detail It Shall mean to provide with respect to any act, occurrence, transaction, event. statement, communication or conduct (hereinafter collectively, \"act\") all facts concerning any such act known to Plaintiffs after due inquiry, including but not limited to a description of each act, the date, the location, and the identify of each person involved\n(H) \"or\" shall be construed either conjunctively or disjunctively to bring within the scope of these Interrogatories any information which might otherwise be construed to be outside their scope\nThe singular includes the plural number, and vice versa. The masculine includes the feminine and neuter genders. The past tense includes the present tense where the clear meaning is not distorted by change of tense. 3If you do not answer any Interrogatory or Request for Production because of a claim of privilege, set forth the privilege claimed, the facts upon which you rely to support the claim of privilege, and identify all documents for which such privilege is claimed- INTERROGATORY NO. 1: Please identify all persons who participated in the preparation of the responses hereto. 1 INTERROGATORYNO. 2: Please identify all persons you intend to call as a witness i at the hearing set for November 19 and 20, 2001. INTERROGATORY NO. 3: Please identify all documents you intend to introduce as an exhibit at the hearing set for November 19 and 20, 2001. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 1: Please produce all documents identified in the preceding interrogatory. INTERROGATORY NO. 4: Please identify and describe in detail all communications between you and persons in any way connected to the National Science Foundation pertaining to LRSD's National Science Foundation Grant. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 2: Please produce aU documents pertaining to communications between you and persons in any way connected to the National Science Foundation pertaining to LRSD's National Science Foundation Grant. INTERROGATORY NO. 5: Please identify and describe in  detail all commumcations between you and Dr. Terrence Roberts pertaining to LRSD's compliance with its Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 3: Please produce all documents pertaining to communications between you and Dr. Terrence Roberts pertaining to LRSD's Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. a.INTERROGATORY NO. 6: Please identify and describe in detail all nnm-rrm-m'cations between you and Dr. Steven Ross pertaining to LRSD's compliance with its Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 4: Please produce aU documents pertaining to communications between you and Dr. Steven Ross pertaining to LRSD's Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. INTERRQGATORY NO. 7: For each expert witness that you may call as a witness 7 at the hearing set for November 19 and 20, 2001, please provide a complete statement of all opinions and the basis and reasons therefor\nidentify and describe in detail the documents, communications, data or other infoimation considered by the witness in forming the opinions\nprovide the quahfications of the witness, including a list of all publications authored by the witness withing the preceding ten (10) years\nprovide the compensation to be paid for investigation and testimony\nand provide a listing of all other cases in which the witness has testified as an expert at trial or by deposition within the preceding four (4) years. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 5: Please produce all documents identified in the preceding interrogatory. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 6: Please produce all contemporaneous time records maintained by you pertaining to your monitoring of LRSD's implementation of the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. INTERROGATORY NO. 8: Please identify and describe in detail all information provided to you by LRSD employees either anonymously or without the knowledge or 5consent of counsel for LRSD pertaining ro LRSD's compliance with the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 7: Please produce all documents provided to you by LRSD employees either anonymously or without the knowledge or consent of counsel for LRSD pertaining to LRSD's comphance with the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. INTERROGATORY NO. 9: Please identify all LRSD employees who have provided you information or documents without the knowledge or consent of counsel for LRSD pertaining to LRSD's compliance with the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. INTERROGATORY NO. 10: Please identify and describe in detail all oral r.riTnmuTiications between you and LRSD employees since August 17, 2001, pertaining to LRSD's Revised Desegregation and Education Plan which took place outside the presence of coxmsel for LRSD. INTERROGATORY NO. 11: For each Joshua monitor identified in response to Interrogatory No. 3 of Plaintiffs First Set of Interrogatories and Requests for Production of Documents, please: (a) describe in detail all education, training and experience that you believe quahfies them to serve as monitors\n(b) describe in detail all monitoring activities undertaken by them, mcluding the dates, times and locations where monitoring occurred and the subject matter of the morutoring\nand (c) describe in detail each and every instance where the monitoring revealed what you contend was noncompliance or bad faith implementation of LRSD's Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. 6REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 8: Please produce all documents pertaining to your monitoring of LRSD's Revised Desegregation and Education Plan, including but not limited to any notes or summaries of monitoring activities. INTERROGATORY NO. 12: You allege in your response to Request for Production No. 1 of Plaintiff s First Set of Interrogatories and Requests for Production of Documents that Dr. Les Camine and Chris Heller requested that you not publish any monitoring reports. Please identify and describe in detail aU communications between you and Dr. Camine and/or Mr. Heller pertaining to your monitoring reports. v'\"' REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 9: Please produce aU documents pertaining to communications between you and Dr. Camine and/or Mr. Heller pertaining to your monitoring reports. INTERROGATORY NO. 13: In your response to Intemogatory No. 8 of Plaintiffs First Set of Interrogatories and Requests for Production of Documents, you allege that the Compliance Committee refused to share quarterly reports produced by the School Services Division, please identify and describe in detail all communications between you and any Compliance Committee member pertaining to these quarterly reports. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 10: Please produce all documents pertaining to communications between you and any Compliance Committee member pertaining to these quarterly reports. A INTERROGATORY NO. 14: In your response to Interrogatory No. 8 of Plaintiffs First Set of Interrogatories and Requests for Production of Documents, you allege that It 'Joshua's counsel was continually misled and misinformed by LRSD school officials including Camine andHeUerregarding desegregation accomphshments.\" Please identify and describe in detail all communications between you and any LRSD official in which you were 7misled or misinformed about LRSD's implementation of the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 11: Please produce all documents pertaining to communications between you and any LRSD official in which you were misled or misinformed about LRSD's implementation of the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 12: Please produce all documents pertaining to communications between you and any LRSD employee pertaining to the semester by semester discipline statistics referred to in your response to Interrogatory No. 8 of Plaintiffs First Set of Interrogatories and Requests for Production of Documents. INTERROGATORYNO. IS: In your response to Interrogatory No. 8 of Plaintiffs First Set of Interrogatories and Requests for Production of Documents, you allege that you did not follow through on compliance issues \"in response to and at the request of and from Superintendent Camme and District counsel Chris Heller and upon promised (sic) of fair and adequate remedy thereof.\" Please identify and describe in detail all communications between you and Dr. Gamine and/or Mr. Heller pertaining to (a) a request that you not follow through on comphance issues and (b) a promised remedy for a compliance issue raised by you\nplease also describe in detail the promised remedy, state whether you contend that the promised remedy was not provided, and if not, please identify all facts and documents which support this contention and identify all persons with knowledge pertaining to the promised remedy. REQUEST FQR PRODUCTIQN NO. 13: Please produce all documents pertaining to your response to the preceding interrogatory. INTERROGATORYNO. 16: Please identify each and every LRSD student that you contend was subject to racial discrimmatio-n in the imposition of discipline during the term 8of the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan\nfor each student and/or incident of discrimination, please also describe in detail all facts and documents which support your contention and identify all persons with knowledge pertaining to your contention. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 14: Please produce all documents pertaining to your response to the preceding interrogatory. INTERROGATORY NO. 17: In your response to Interrogatory No. 10 of Plaintiff s First Set of Interrogatories and Requests for Production of Documents, you allege, \"Not all black children who are disciplined are [] included in the discipline reports.\" Please identify and describe in detail ail facts and documents which support this allegation and identify all persons with knowledge of this allegation\nplease also identify each and every LRSD student that you contend was disciplined but was not included in discipline reports. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 15: Please produce all documents pertaining to your response to the preceding interrogatory. INTERROGATORY NO. 18: Please identify and describe in detail each and every instance in which you contend that the Ombudsman's response to a matter referred to the Ombudsman by you failed to comply with the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan\nand for each such instance, please identify all facts and documents which support you contention and identify all persons with knowledge of the underlying incident you referred to the Ombudsman and the District's response thereto. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 16: Please produce all documents pertaining  to your response to the preceding interrogatory. INTERROGATORY NO. 19: Please identify each and every instance in which you contend that you referred a matter to the Ombudsman and the Ombudsman failed to take any action in response to your referral\nand for each such instance, please identify all facts and 9documents which support you contention and identify all persons with knowledge of the underlying incident you referred to the Ombudsman and the District's response thereto. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 17: Please produce all documents pertaining to your response to the preceding interrogatory. INTERROGATORY NO. 20: Do you contend that all or part of the cmrent disparity in academic achievement on standardized tests between LRSD's Afincan-American andnon- African-American students is a vestige of racial discrimination by LRSD? If so, please state how much of the current disparity you contend is a vestige of racial discrimination by LRSD, V ' identify all facts and documents which support that contention and identify all persons with knowledge pertaining to this contention. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 18: Please produce all documents pertaining to your response to the preceding interrogatory. INTERROGATORY NO. 21: Please identify all provisions of the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan which you contend required the District to involve you in the development of programs, pohcies and procedures, identify all facts and documents which support that contention and identify aU persons with knowledge pertaining to your contention. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 19: Please produce all documents pertaining to your response to the preceding interrogatory. INTERROGATORY NO. 22: Please describe in detail what role you contend Dr.  Terrence Roberts and Dr. Steve Ros's should have played in the development of programs, policies and procedures under the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan, identify all facts and documents which support that contention and identify all persons with knowledge pertaining to your contention. 10REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 20: Please produce all documents pertaining to your response to the preceding interrogatory. INTERRQGATQRY NQ. 23: Do you contend that the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan required District staff to prepare periodic monitoring reports regarding implementation of the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan? If so, please identify all facts and documents which support that contention and identify all persons with knowledge . pertaining to your contention. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 21: Please produce all documents pertaining to your response to the preceding interrogatory. INTERROGATORY NO. 24: Do you contend that Dr. Bonnie Lesley constructed a plan the implementation of which would result in a set of in-school racially segregated assignment programs? If so, please identify and describe in detail the plan, identify all facts and documents which support your contention and identify all persons with knowledge pertaining to your contention. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 22: Please produce all documents pertaining to your response to the preceding interrogatory. INTERROGATORY NO. 25: Do you contend that professional conflicts existed between Dr. Bonnie Lesley and any other staff member? If so, please identify and describe in detail the conflicts (including but not limited to the duration of the conflict and resolution, if any), identify all facts and documents which support your contention and identify all  persons with knowledge pertaining to your contention. REQUEST FQR PRQDUCTIQN NQ. 23: Please produce all documents pertaining to your response to the preceding interrogatory. 11 INTERROGATORYNO. 26: Do you contend that the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan required the District to maintain lower pupil teacher ratios at the former Incentive schools? If so, please identify those provisions of the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan which imposed such a requirement, identify all other facts and documents which support your contention and identify all persons with knowledge of your contention. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 24: Please produce all documents pertaining to your response to the preceding interrogatory. V, . INTERRO' GATORY NO. 27: Do you contend that the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan required the District reduce the disparity in academic achievement on standardized tests between LRSD's Afincan-American and non-African-American students? If so, please state by how much, identify those provisions ofthe Revised Desegregation and Education Plan which imposed such a requirement, identify all facts and documents which support your contention and identify all persons with knowledge of which support your contention. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 25: Please produce all documents pertaining to your response to tte preceding interrogatory. INTERROGATORY NO. 28: Do you contend that the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan requires LRSD to establish programs, provide services or provide any kind of assistance solely for the benefit of black students? If so, please identify those provisions ofthe Revised Desegregation and Education Plan which impose such a requirement, identify  all facts and documents which support your contention that such a requirement exists, and identify all persons with knowledge of facts which support your contention. 12 INTERROGATORY NO. 29: Do you have, or have you ever had, a written plan or any other document which sets forth the purposes and procedures for Joshua monitoring of LRSD? If so, please identify those documents. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 25: Please produce all documents identified in the preceding interrogatory. INTERROGATORY NO. 30: Do you contend that the Revised Desegregation and . Education Plan or any other currently effective document or Order requires or authorizes Joshua monitoring of LRSD? If so, please identily and describe in detail all facts and documents which support your contention and identify all persons with knowledge of facts supporting your contention. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 25: Please produce all documents pertaining to the response to the preceding interrogatory. Respectfully Submitted, LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT FRIDAY, ELDREDGE \u0026amp; CLARK First Commercial Bldg., Suite 2000 400 West Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201-3493 (501) 376\n202^ // BY: Christopher Helkm(#8'1083) John C. Fendley, Jr. (#92182) 13CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I certify that a copy of the foregoing has been served on the following people by depositing a copv of same by U.S. Mail)unless hand-dehvery indicated) on September 27,2001: Mr. John W. Walker JHand-Delivered) JOHN W. WALKER, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Sam Jones Wright, Lindsey \u0026amp; Jennings 2200 Worthen Bank Bldg. 2P0 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 RoacheU Roachell Law Firm 11800 Pleasant Ridge Road, Suite 146 Little Rock, Arkansas 72222-7388 Ms. Ann Marshall Desegregation Monitor 1 Union National Plaza 124 W. Capitol, Suite 1895 Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Sammye Taylor Office of the Attorney General 323 Center Street 200 Tower Building Little Rock, AR 72201 istopher Heller F:\\HOMEKFENDLEY\\LRSD 2001\\aes-uniafy-int-rfp-Joshua-002.wpd 14Friday Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark HERSCHEL H. FRIDAY (1922-1994) WILLIAM H. SUTTON. P.A BYRON M SISEMAN. JR, P.A JOE D. BELL. P.A JAMES BUTTRY, P.A FREDERICK S. URSERY, P.A. OSCAR E. DAVIS. JR,. P.A JAMES C. CLARK. JR.. P.A THOMAS P. LEGGETT. P.A JOHN DEWEY WATSON. P.A PAUL B. BENHAM HL P.A LARRY W. BURKS. P.A A. WYCKLIFP NISBET, JR.. P.A JAMES EDWARD HARRIS. P.A J. PHILLIP MALCOM. P.A JAMES M. SIMPSON. P.A JAMES M. SAXTON. P.A J. SHEPHERD RUSSELL lU. P.A. DONALD H. BACON. P.A WILLIAM THOMAS BAXTER. P.A. BARRY E. COPLIN. P.A RICHARD D. TAYLOR, P.A JOSEPH B. HURST. JR. P.A ELIZABETH ROBBEN MURRAY. P.. CHRISTOPHER HELLER P.A LAURA HENSLEY SMITH. P.A. ROBERT S. SHAFER P.A WILLIAM M. GRIFFIN IH. P.A MICHAEL S. MOORE, P.A DIANE S. MACKEY. P.A. WALTER M. EBEL m. P.A KEVIN A. CRASS. P.A ATTORNEYS AT LAW A LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP www.fridayfirm.com 2000 REGIONS CENTER 400 WEST CAPITOL WILLIAM WADDELL, JR. P- LITTLE ROCK. ARKANSAS 72201-3493 SCOTT J. LANCASTER P.A M. GAYLE CORLEY. P.A ROBERT B. BEACH. JR. P.A J. LEE BROWN. P.A JAMES C. BAKER JR. P.A HARRY A LIGHT. P.A SCOTT H. TUCKER PA. GUY ALTON WADE. P.A PRICE C. GARDNER P.A TONIA P. JONES. P.A DAVID D. WILSON, P.A TELEPHONE 501-376-2011 FAX 501-376-2147 3425 NORTH FUTRALL DRIVE, SUITE 103 FAYETTEVILLE. ARKANSAS 72703-4811 TELEPHONE 501-695-2011 FAX 501-685-2147 JEFFREY H. MOORE. P.A DAVID M. GRAF. P.A CARLA GUNNELS SPAINHOUR P.A JOHN C. FENDLEY. JR. P.A JONANN ELIZABETH CONIGLIO. P.. R CHRISTOPHER LAWSON. P.A GREGORY D. TAYLOR P.A TONY L. WILCOX. P.A FRAN C, HICKMAN, P.A BETTY J. DEMORY, P.A LYNDA M. JOHNSON, P.A JAMES W. SMITH. P.A CLIFFORD W. PLUNKETT. P.A DANIEL L. HERRINGTON, P.A MARVIN L. CHILDERS K. COLEMAN WESTBROOR JR ALLISON J. CORNWELL ELLEN M. OWENS JASON B. HENDREN BRUCE B. TIDWELL MICHAEL E. KARNEY KELLY MURPHY MCQUEEN JOSEPH P. MCKAY ALEXANDRA A JAY T. TAYLOR MARTIN IPRAH KASTEN BRYAN W. DUKE JOSEPH G. NICHOLS ROBERT T. SMITH RYAN BOWMAN TIMOTHY C. EZELL T. MICHELLE ATOR KAREN S. HALBERT SARAH M. COTTON PHILIP b'. MONTGOMERY KRISTEN S. RIGGINS ALAN G. BRYAN OF COUNSEL B.S. CLARK WILLIAM L TERRY WILLIAM L. PATTON. JR. H.T. LARZELERE, P.A JOHN C. ECHOLS, P.A. AD. MCALLISTER 208 NORTH FIFTH STREET BLYTHEVILLE. ARKANSAS 72315 TELEPHONE 870-762-2898 FAX 870-762-2918 September 27, 2001 JOHN C. FENDLEY. JR. LITTLE ROCK TEL 501-370-3323 FAX 501-244-5341 fBndleyQftc.nat Hand Delivered Mr. John W. Walker Attorney at Law 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72206 RE\nLRSD V. PCSSD Dear Mr. Walker\nWe have received and reviewed your responses to our First Set of Interrogatories and Requests for Production ofDocuments. We find your responses inadequate and respectfully request that you immediately supplement your responses as follows\nInterrogatory No. 2\nPlease provide the name and address of your class representatives. Interrogatory No. 3\nPlease provide addresses for the monitors identified. Interrogatory No. 4\nYour reference to the files of LRSD personnel is nonresponsive. You then identify but fail to describe in detail areas of alleged noncompliance or bad faith implementation. Please describe in detail each allegation. Request for Production No. 2\nPlease identify the correspondence with Junious Babbs, Dr. Les Camine, Sadie Mitchell, James Washington and \"other central office administrators\" to which you refer. Your assertion that \"[c]opies of these files have been previously provided to counsel for the District\" is not true if you mean by you. We may have these files, but we have no way of know to what letters within these files upon which you rely.  \u0026gt;Mr. John Walker September 27, 2001 Page 2 Interrogatory No. 5: Neither Dr. Camine nor Mr. Babbs acknowledged that the Comphance Plan was not provided to you -until Mr. Babbs letter of August 25, 2001. In fact, Mr. Babbs' letter states. If 'You will find no revision in it comparable to the copy of the draft that was mailed to your attention prior to board submission and adoption.\" Do you deny receiving a draft of the Comphance Plan prior to submission to the Board? Do you deny receiving a copy of the June 10, 1999, version of the Comphance Plan on July 1, 1999? Interrogatory No. 6: As we read your response, your answer to this interrogatory is \"no.\" Please let us know if our understanding is incorrect. Please bear tn mind that this interrogatory was not hmited to preparation of the Comphance Plan. InterrogatorvNo. 7: As we read your response, your answer to this interrogatory is \"no.\" Please let us know if our understanding is incorrect. Please bear in mind that this interrogatory was not limited to preparation of the Interim Comphance Report. Interrogatory No. 8: You reference your objections to LRSD being granted unitary status. From what we can decipher from your objections, you refer to disparities in the areas of discipline, achievement and special education. For these three areas and any others revealed by monitoring, please state (a) when you became aware of the disparity\n(b) when you communicated your knowledge of the disparity to LRSD\nand (c) whether's LRSD's response to the racial disparity comphed with the Re-vised Plan\nand if not, why you did not invoke the process for raising comphance issues pursuant to Section 8.2 fo the Re-vised Plan. As to the \"notes and files\" of LRSD personnel, please specifically identify the documents to which you are referring and/or provide copies of those documents as requested in Request for Production No. 5. Interrogatory No. 9: Please describe tn detail the alleged incidents of racial discrimination in the imposition of discipline. To the extent you reference correspondence with LRSD personnel, please specifically identify the documents to which you are referring and/or pro-vide copies of those documents as requested in Request for Production No. 6. Interrogatory No. 10: As LRSD understands your response, you answer to this interrogatory is that you do not know. Please let us know if our understanding is incorrect. Interrogatory No. 11: Please state whether's LRSD's response to each incident referred to the Ombudsman comphed with the Revised Plan\nand if not, why you did not invoke the process for raising comphance issues pursuant to Section 8.2 fo the Revised Plan. Request for Production No. 8: You indicate we should refer to the files of the Ombudsman. We would hke to be sure that his file is complete by comparing it to your file. Accordingly, please identify and/or provide copies of ah correspondence between you and the Ombudsman.Mr. John Walker September 27, 2001 Page 3 Interrogatory No. 12: Your answer is nonresponsive. The obligation under Section 2.5 was to implement programs, pohcies and/or procedures to ensure that there is no racial discriTninatinn with regard to student discipline. The District's discipline pohcies and procedures are outlined very clearly in the Students' Rights and Responsibihties Handbooks for each grade level. Do you contend that these were inadequate\nand if so, please identify ah facts and documents which support your position and provide us copies of any documents identified as requested in Request for Production No. 9. Interrogatory No. 13: Your answer is nonresponsive. The obhgation under Section 2.5.1 was to strictly adhere to the policies set forth in the Student Rights and Responsibihties Handbook. Do you contend that LRSD failed to do so\nand if so, please identify all facts and documents which support your position and provide us copies of any documents identified as requested in Request for Production No. 10. Interrogatory No. 14: Your answer is nonresponsive. The obligation under Section 2.5.2 was to purge students' discipline records after the fifth and eighth grades. Do you contend that the District failed to do so\nand if so, please identify all facts and documents which support your position and provide us copies of any documents identified as requested in Request for Production No. 11. Interrogatory No. 16: Your answer is nonresponsive. The obhgation under Section 2.5.4 requires LRSD to work with students and their parents to develop behavior modification plans for students who exhibit frequent misbehavior. Do you contend that LRSD failed to do so\nand if so, please identify all facts and documents which support your position and provide us copies of any documents identified as requested in R,equest for Production No. 13. Interrogatory No. 17: You state your position but fail to identify and describe in detail the facts and documents supporting your position\nplease do so and provide copies of any documents as requested in Request for Production No. 14. Please also identify the testimony of Junious Babbs, Sadie MitcheU, Bonnie Lesley and Dr. Leshe Gamine which you beheve supports your position. Interrogatory No. 18: As we understand your response, your answer to this interrogatory is \"none. Please let us know if our understanding is not correct. tl Request for Production No. 16: Please provide copies of all documents responsive to this request.Mr. John Walker September 27, 2001 Page 4 Due to the Court's deadline of November 1, 2001, we respectfully request that the above information and documents be provided on or before October 5,2001. If we have not reached some agreement by that date, we will file a motion to compel on October 8,2001. We agree to reimburse you for the cost of copying the documents requested. We appreciate your cooperation. Sincerely, cc: Dr. Ken James Ms. Ann Marshall JOHN W. Walker, P.A. Attoeney At Law 1723 Beoadway Little Rock, Aeeansas 72206 Telephone (501) 374-3758 FAX (501) 374-4187 '*% J JOHN W. WAT,KF,R SHAWN CHILDS Via Fax: 376-2147 OF COUNSEL ROBERT McHENEY, P.A. DONNAJ.McHENEY 8210 Hendeeson Road Lotle Rock, Arkansas 72210 Phone\n(501) 372-3425  Fax (501) 372-3428 Email\nmchenrydz^wbeH-nec September 20, 2001 Mr. Clay Fendley Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark 400 W. Capitol, Suite 2200 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Dear Clay: We are not involved in litigation as that term is normally used. We are in the midst of an action where, despite our burden of proof, the district is defending its motion to be declared unitary. Accordingly, you are not entitled to inquire of us as to matters that you raise in your interrogatories. What difference does it matter regarding what we know, or knew along the way, regarding the district's performance now that you are at the end of the road for compliance, according to your motion. It really doesn't matter. The question is simply did your client do what it was committed to do now. All of the information regarding compliance is in your hands. I believe that your interrogatories are simply an effort to deflect our attention from acquiring information from you which will further demonstrate the lack of performance of the school distnct in fulfilling its commitments. I view the interrogatories much like I view your resistance to our e-mail requests, i.e., to place as many obstacles in the path of access to knowledge which you know, as a member of the compliance committee who also wore the hat of lawyer, shows noncompliance. The way I am feeling today, you may as well prepare your motion and that will be another matter that we wiE have a hearing on. Even if I provide a response to your \"interrogatories\" it will be upon the premises that we object to them because they are not pertinent at all to the issues of the lawsuit and that they are not designed to lead to helpful information to establish the district's case. Therefore, while you are in the process of preparing your motion, would you also request the court to set an expedited hearing on it as well as on your motion for contempt. We can use such a hearing date to determine the further parameters of your case before you proceed in November. It is my position that you cannot use information which was not present at the time '7  bii (LPage Two September 20, 2001 of your motion to support your motion. Accordingly, you should soon be prepared to inform me of any additional information which you have developed since March 15, 2001, when your time at bat comes. TWWilp cc\nMs. Arm Marshall Sinper^ly, fl LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT ADMINISTRATIVE DIRECTIVE\nKDB Effective: July 16, 2001 PROCESS FOR MAKING REQUESTS FOR INFORMATION UNDER THE FOIA Purpose The specific purposes to be served by these procedures are:  To ensure that the District complies with the requirements of the Arkansas Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) as amended in 2001\n To ensure reasonable and timely citizen access of District records\n To ensure that the privacy rights of students and staff are protected in the release of District records\nand  To ensure an orderly and efficient process for obtaining information from the District. Definitions Records: Records shall be interpreted as writings, recorded sounds, films, tapes, or data compilations in any form, required by law to be kept, which constitute a record of the performance or lack of performance of official functions. All records maintained by LRSD employees in the scope of their employment shall be presumed to be public records. Before records are provided for inspection or copying, the custodian of the records shall determine if the records contain information that is not . releasable under the FOIA, Family Education Rights and Privacy Act of 1974 (FERPA), or other applicable statutes. If the records contain information that is not releasable, it shall be the responsibility of the custodian to delete that information and make the remainder of the records available. Electronic Information\nFor the purpose of this administrative directive, electronic information shall be interpreted to include all data processing time required to manipulate computer or other technologically stored or generated data into a format that is transferable to the requester. Custodian of the Records: For the purpose of these regulations and the convenience of the public, the custodian of the records will be the person having administrative control of that record.I  LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT ADMINISTRATIVE DIRECTIVE: KDB Effective: July 16. 2001 continued . Process for Obtaining Information through the FOIA AV  Any citizen of the State of Arkansas may request records open under the .Arkansas FOIA from the LRSDs custodian of the record.  The request may be made in person or by telephone, mail, facsimile transmission, electronic mail, or other electronic means provided by the custodian.  To facilitate the retrieval of the records, the request shall be sufficiently specific to enable the custodian to locate the records with reasonable effort.  The requester should indicate whether or not he/she wants to inspect the records or receive copies of the records. The LRSD will copy the requested records when the requester wants copies and it is reasonable for the District to make the copies.  In an effort to be responsive to the public and avoid accounting procedures that are not cost effective, the District will not charge for the first 25 pages that it copies for a citizen unless the total number of copies exceeds 25 in one calendar month. If it requires more than 25 pages of copies to meet a single request for information, or if a citizen makes additional requests for information within the month which would require more than 25 total pages of copies, the District will charge the requester 25 cents for each copy including the first 25 pages. Additionally, the District will charge the requester the actual costs of mailing or transmitting the record by facsimile or other electronic means. Special requests for electronic information will be handled as follows: 1, The District may agree to summarize, compile, or tailor electronic data in a particular manner or medium and may agree to provide the data in an electronic format to which it is not readily convertible. 2. Where the cost and time involved in complying with the requests are relatively minimal, the District may agree to provide the data as requested. 3. If the custodian agrees to a request, the District will charge the requester the actual, verifiable costs of personnel time exceeding two (2) hours associated with the tasks, in addition to copying costs. 4. The charge for personnel time shall not exceed the salary of the lowest paid employee who, in the discretion of the District, has the necessary skill and training to respond to the request. 5. The District will provide an itemized breakdown of charges-for expenses incurred.LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT ADMINISTRATIVE DIRECTIVE: KDB Effective: July 16, 2001 continued If the estimated fee exceeds twenty-five dollars ($25.00), the District will require the requester to pay the fee in advance. Requests must be made during normal business hours. Any requests received by facsimile or other means after regular business hours will be considered received at the start ofthe next business day.  If the information is in active use or storage at the time of the request, reasonable time will be established for the custodian to comply. The custodian will set a time, date, and place within three days at which time the records will be made available. To the extent practicable the custodian will do this in consultation with the person requesting the record for the convenience of both parties. If the person requesting the information does not come at the appointed time, the records may be returned to active use or storage.  In the event that the requester is seeking information regarding a third party, the custodian of the records will within 24 hours make efforts to the fullest extent possible to notify the person about whom the information is being sought. If personal contact cannot be made within the 24 hours, an overnight letter shall be sent to the last known address ofthe subject ofthe request. The District may also seek an Attorney Generals opinion about the release of the records. If an Attorney Generals opinion is sought, the records will not be released before the Attorney General has issued his/her opinion.uy/Zt/Ui rKi 14:52 KAA DRAFT I UU5 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT administrative DIRECTIVE\nEGAD Eifective:- October 1,2001 the use and DELETION OF ELECTRONIC mail With the spread of telecommunications throughout District recognizes that employees will shift information, and contact others. As the electronic work place, the the ways they share ideas, transmit staff members are connected to the global community, their use of new tools and systems brings r-.... well as opportunities. The District expeds that aTempiX^e: electronic mail and telecommunications  ' well as opportunities. new responsibilities as to the performance of tasks . will learn to use tools and apply them in appropriate ways associated with their positions and assignments. use of telecommunications to explore Dracticp-? communication systems expedite the sharing of effective Purpose The specific purposes of this directive To ensure that the District. To ensure that the District: are: To ensure s electronic mail system is used appropriately\ns electronic mail system works efficiently\nand an orderly and efficient process for the reasonable and timely AYtrpnRniic moil J purging of extraneous mail. Inappropriate Use The following behaviors networks: are inappropriate and are not permitted on the District A. B. C. employees because messages are not entirely secure\nSending or displaying offensive messages or pictures\n* . - . - ------Iu! piuLures, to any office D. E. promotion of or opposition to elections and business\nor for the any ballot proposition including union Using obscene, harassing, or insultino languaqe- F. Engaging in practices that threaten the may introduce a virus^\nViolating copyright laws\nnetwork (e.g., loading files thatu DRAFT UU4 G. H. I. J. Using others passwords\nTrespassing in others'folders, documents, or files' Employing the network for commercial purposes\nor Promoting, supporting or celebrating religion or religious institutions. Review or'Files and Communications The Districts computer network is the property and responsibility of the LRSD may review files and communications -3 maintain the systems integrity and to ri X \"  using the system responsibly. Users should that files stored on District servers will b- As such, network administrators transmitted through the network to that staff members are ensure ifi private. not expect .... Network administrators will sunervknr i i report inappropriate behaviors to the employee's supervisor who will take appropnate disciplinary action  inappropriate behavior, violations, c. supervisor for appropriate action. Violations e-mail system and/or disciplinary action. . Any other reports of or complaints will be routed to the employees fT-iay result g toss of access to the Storing_and Deletion of Electronic Messages and Files Many employees send and receive an extremely large volume of e-mail . . -------------/iciy icjiye voiurn day. Storage o.f e-mail in the Microsoft Outlook software has every impact on the efficiency of the system If Inboxes. \"Sent Items, a great negative users want to save files kept in personal folders or folders and Deleted Items,\" they must be appropriately stored rs in one of the other computer programs or drives. in Jo ^hat end mail left in Inboxes. \"Sent Items\", and/or \"Deleted Items will administrators from SX7J?1 be toiX'bto\"\"' longer will teTost tcthe the Microsoft Outlook was sent or received. Any mail or files all users ample time to clean and file October 1. 2001 to allow any e-mail that they wish to save to folders. !he T-eacXTT\"T \"g-up folders to save e-mail, they should refer to fUer ass Stoned ^RSD website for step-by-step directions. 11 luiLfier assistance is needed, o ea.sp  Don Department. please contact the LRSD Information ServicesFriday Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark HERSCHei  lOAV (IK2J-IVWI wtUUAM M. SUTTON. P A nYRCN M. EISEMAN. JR . P A JOE 0. BELL. P.A. JAMCS auTTRr. I*.*. PrSDERICX S. URSERY. P.a. ''SCAR . DAVIS, JR.. P.A. \\MESC. CLARK, JR.. P.A. . fHOMAS P. LECGETT. P_R. JOHN OEWEY WATSON. P.x PAUL a. BENHAM III. P.X Larry w. buaks. p.a. A. WYCXJJPP NISBET. JR., P.A. James edward karris, ..x i. PHiuUr maLCOM. Ka. JAMES M. SIMPSON. P.A lAUa U. SAXTON. P.A J. SKEPHCRO RUSSELLHI. P.A. DONALD K. BACON. P.A WXLUAM THOMAS OAXTEa. P.A. BARRY S. COPLIN. P.A. RICHARD O. TAYI.0a, P.a. jO5:pk u. HURST, JR.. ..a. l^UEAaETH ROBBEN MUKKAT, P.A. CXRJSTOPHEX HBLU:*, P.A. LAURA HENSUrr SMITH, P.A. ROBERT S. SHaPBR. P.A. wiluaM .m. caiFFiN in, p.a. MJCHaE1.S. MOORE. . X 01 ANU S. .MACKEY, P.A. Walter m. ebel dl p.a. xaviN A. CRASS, p.x attorneys at law A LIMITED LIASILITY PARTNERSHIP www.rridaydrm.com 2000 REGIONS CENTER 400 WEST CAPITOL WAOOELU JK, F.A. SCOTT J. LANCASTE3L P.A. M. CaYLE CORLEY, P.x ROBERT II. OCaCK, JR.. P A. J, t-ee uhown. p.a. JAMBS C flAKER, JR.. P.x HAftav LICHT. SCOTT K TOCXER. P.A. OUY ALTON WADS. F,A PRICE C. GARDNER. KA. TONIA P. JONES. KA. DAVTO O. WILSON, P.A, LITTLE ROCK. ARKANSAS 722Q1-34S3 telephone 501-376-2011 FAX S01-37S-2147 3125 NORTH FUTRALL DRIVE. SUITE 103 FAYETTEVILLE. ARKANSAS 727C3-411 TCLEFHONE 5Oi-aos-2Qii FAX 501.S0S.2147 IEFFR.EY H. MOORI'. F A- 0AV1O M CMAl'. r.A.  CARLA CUNNIIL\n! SI'AINKOUR. Ka. JOHN C. FUPOLHY. JR . Ka. lONANH ELIZAaeTH CONlGLlO. X.A. IL CHRISTOFHER LAWSON, r A. CRfCORY . TAYLOR. F.A TONY L. WILCOX. I'.A. FRAN C. HICKMAN. r,A. BETTY J. OUMOkY. I'.A. LYNDA M, JOHNSON. r.A,. JAMSS W. SMITW. P.A, CUFFORD W. FLUNKUTT. P.A. OANXEL L. IIEXXINCTON. F.a. MARVtN L. CHILOBRS JL COLEMAH wesTHROOIC. JIL ALLISON J. COrNWRLL SLLZN M. OWENS JASON U. HRNOREH naves a. nDweij. KJCHaELS. KARNEY KELLY MURPHY MCQUEEN JOSE^H K MCKAV ALKXANOILA A J^Y T. TAYLOR IFRAH Martin a. kast.n BBVaH W, duke JOSUrMG NICW0I4I ROAERT T. SMITH RYAN A. QQWMaN TIMOTHY C. EZELL T MICHEXXS ATOR Karen s. halbert SaRaH M. cotton PHIUP a. MONTGOMERY KRISTEN 3. RJCCn^S ALAN C. aaVAN SOB NORTH FIFTH STREET BLYTHEVILLS. ARKANSAa 72315 TELEPHONE eT0.7B2\u0026gt;ZB8fl FAX a7O-7a2'2Bia r\u0026lt;F Ci'^UNdU. a.S. CUtRX WILUAM U TERRY WTLUAM L PATTON. JK H.T. LARZaUlRC. P.A JOHN C ECT-IOLS. KA. A D. mCavU.'JTER September 12, 2001 JOHN C. FENOLEY. JR. LITTLE ROCH TEL 5^1-370-3323 FAX 31-a44-S341 }andlay\u0026lt;S|rc.n( \\/ILUA ( Via FacsimUe/Mail) Mr. John W. Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 Dear Mr. Walker\nWe are in receipt of your letter dated September 12,20OD We agree that our communication On this issue should be in writing. Accordingly, please provide us a written proposal for a Protective Order. We will not make any e-mails responsive to your FOIA requests to principals available for your review until we reach an agreement on a Protective Order. Sincerely, John C. Fendley, Jr. JCF/bgb P\n\\H0MEU3BfDwn\\Fcn\u0026lt;lJey\\IJlSD\\w]ur twpd 200lg] IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS OCT 0 3 2001 WESTERN DIVISION JAMES vy McCQfiMACK By\nA '   ' LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, Plaintiff, vs. PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, et al., Defendants, MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, et al., Intervenors, KATHERINE KNIGHT, et al., Intervenors. * * * * * * * * * * * * * No. 4:82CV00866 SWW OCT s 2001 OFFICE OF desegregation MONITORIMG ORDER On October 2, 2001, the Court held a hearing in this matter to address the Joshua Intervenors motion for definition and clarification of the issues and other relief. For the reasons stated at that hearing and the reasons stated below, the Court made the following rulings on the issues presented in that motion: The Little Rock School Districts second set of interrogatories and requests for production to Joshua are quashed except to the extent that the Court required Joshua to respond to the LRSDs contention interrogatories and requests for production during the hearing. Joshua is directed to provide the LRSD with any documents from Joshua monitors or members ofthe Joshua class that support or do not support an assertion that the LRSD has misled Joshua. If the LRSD cannot appreciate the significance of a witness or exhibit after Joshua provides its witness and exhibit lists to the LRSD for the upcoming hearing, the LRSD may ask Joshua for the significance of that witness or exhibit. The Court expects Joshua to stand by its 5 1 5 representation at the hearing that it will provide that information. The parties will submit an agreed protective order governing e-mails requested from the LRSD by Joshua. Concerning Joshuas access to e-mails beyond March 15, 2001, the LRSD is directed to notify the Court on or before Friday, October 5, 2001, which of the two options it will choose: Option 1: (A) Present evidence concerning the LRSDs activities with respect to the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan beyond the date of March 15, 2001\nand (B) Produce the e-mails requested by Joshua beyond that date. Option 2: (A) Present evidence concerning the LRSDs activities with respect to the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan up to the date of March 15, 2001, and not beyond\n(B) Correspondingly, the LRSD would have no obligation to produce the e-mails requested by Joshua beyond that date. Should the LRSD choose Option 1, it is directed to ensure that it does not delete e-mails without preserving copies for Joshua. Other than the requirement in this paragraph to preserve copies of requested e-mails for Joshua should the LRSD select Option 1, the Court will not suspend implementation of LRSD Administrative Directive EGAD (The Use and Deletion of Electronic Mail). By agreement of the parties as reflected at the hearing, the LRSD shall be permitted to take the depositions ofthe Joshua monitors and class representatives at a date and time to be agreed by the parties. If either party requests, the Court will be available to the parties during these depositions to address issues that cannot be resolved without the Courts intervention. The Court requests that the parties provide the Court advance notice of the dates and times for the depositions if the parties wish the Court to be available during the depositions. 2Joshua is directed to pay the LRSD the amount required for the FOIA requests pursuant to LRSD Administrative Directive KDB (Process for Making Requests for Information Under the FOIA). Because the LRSD has assured the Court that LRSD Administrative Directive KDB applies to any person requesting FOIA material from the LRSD, the Court will not suspend implementation of LRSD Directive KDB. Counsel for Joshua may, as always, participate in Joshuas continuing monitoring of the LRSD. The participation of counsel for Joshua in the monitoring shall be consistent with the Courts Order entered August 20, 2001, in which the Court stated: [T]he Court directs counsel for Joshua Intervenors to go through counsel for the Little Rock School District when seeking information from the district or district officials and personnel that is pertinent to the case, and to inform counsel for the Little Rock School District prior to contacting district officials and personnel about matters not currently before the Court. To clarify, counsel for Joshua is not required to inform counsel for the LRSD before visiting a LRSD campus\nhowever, if counsel for Joshua intends to communicate with district officials and personnel while visiting, counsel for Joshua shall be required to contact coimsel for the LRSD as set forth above. The LRSD Student Handbook shall govern issues relating to the presence of counsel for Joshua at individual student disciplinary hearings. IT IS SO ORDERED THIS DAY OF OCTOBER, 2001 CHIEF judg: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 3 THIS DOCUMENT ENTERED ON DOCKET SHEET IN COMPLIANCE WITH RULE 58, AND/OR 79(a) FRCP ON BY. FILED U.S. DISTRICT COURT IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT^^^^R'^o'strictArkansas EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION OCT 0 \u0026lt;1 2001 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 4:82CV00866 SWW NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, ET AL RECEIVER MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL MRS. KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL OCT 5 2001 OFFICE Of DESEGREGATION MONITORING ORDER JAMES By:___ : RK ----X DDEEPP CCLLEERR PLAINTIFF DEFENDANTS INTERVENORS INTERVENORS The Court previously scheduled a hearing on Little Rock School District's motion for contempt against John Walker. In light of the correspondence received from Clay Fendley,  counsel for the LRSD, the contempt hearing will not be necessary. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the contempt hearing scheduled for Tuesday, October 16, 2001, is hereby canceled. and the motion for vs . contempt is denied as moot. DATED this day of October, 2001. susaH' wmeBKRWBTGHT / Chief United States District Judge THIS DOCUMENT ENTERED ON DOCKET SHEET IN COMPLIANCE WITH RULE.58 AND/OR 7^) FRCP O N BY-----SSLI----- ^A copy of Mr. Pendley's faxed letter is attached to this order. RECEIVED OCT - 9 2001 omcta IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF V. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. LET AL DEFENDANTS MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL INTERVENORS KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL INTERVENORS RESPONSE TO ORDER FILED OCTOBER 3. 2001 Plaintiff Little Rock School District (\"LRSD\") for its Response to Order filed October 3, 2001, states: 1. LRSD objects to being forced to select from the two options offered by the Court. Joshua has requested all e-mails of the District's administrators and principals. This request is over broad and would place an undue burden on LRSD to respond. Every e-mail created by an administrator or principal is not relevant nor reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. LRSD also objects to the Court's selection of March 15, 2001, as a cut-off date for the presentation of evidence for two reasons. First, the term of the Revised Plan did not end until May 31, 2001, the last day for students for the 2000-01 school year. Second, late compliance could constitute substantial compliance, and LRSD should be granted unitary status if it has substantially complied with the Revised Plan. See Revised Plan, Section 11. 2. Without waiving these objections, LRSD states that it selects Option 2 with the understanding that documents \"concerning the LRSD's activities with respect to the Revised Desegregation Plan up to the date of March 15, 2001\" will not be excluded from evidence simply because the documents are dated after March 15, 2001. As LRSD understands the Court's decision, the Court does not want to hear evidence related to activities undertaken after March 15, 2001, which should have been performed before March 15, 2001.Respectfully Submitted, LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT FRIDAY, ELDREDGE \u0026amp; CLARK First Commercial Bldg., Suite 2000 400 West Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201-3493 (501)376-2011 BY: (L - leller (#81083) ' h la-,, T,- /'tiOOICTl Cl^uistopher Heller ^6hn C. Fendley, Jr. (#92182) 2CERTIFICATE 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 (unless otherwise indicated) on October 5, 2001: Mr. John W. Walker (hand-delivered) JOHN W. WALKER, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Sam Jones Wright, Lindsey \u0026amp; Jennings 2200 Worthen 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 11800 Pleasant Ridge Road, Suite 146 Post Office Box 17388 Little Rock, Arkansas 72222-7388 Little Rock, AR 72201 Ms. Ann Brown (hand-delivered) Desegregation Monitor 1 Union National Plaza 124 W. Capitol, Suite 1895 Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Mark Hagemeier Office of the Attorney General 323 Center Street 200 Tower Building Little Rock, AR 72201 L . Christopher Heller J\u0026lt;^ C. Fendley, Jr. 3 RECEIVED OCT - 9 2001 omcfcOk IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF V. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1,ETAL DEFENDANTS MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL INTERVENORS KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL INTERVENORS MOTION FOR ORDER AUTHORIZING ALTERNATIVE MEANS FOR PREPARATION OF TRANSCRIPT OF THE OCTOBER 2, 2001, HEARING For its Motion, Plaintiff Little Rock School District (\"LRSD\") states: 1. This Court's Order of October 3,2001 quashed LRSD's second set of interrogatories and requests for production \"except to the extent that the Court required Joshua to respond to LRSD's contention interrogatories and requests for production during the hearing\" of October 2, 2001. 2. Immediately after the October 2, 2001 hearing, counsel for LRSD approached the court reporter about obtaining a transcript and was advised that a hearing transcript could not be prepared before the November 19,2001 hearing due to preexisting obligations. Counsel asked the court reporter if someone else could transcribe the tape or if LRSD could obtain a tape of the proceeding and have it transcribed. We were advised that the court reporter was not authorized to release tapes of proceedings. 3. This Court has inherent authority to control proceedings before it and authorize some alternate means of having the transcript prepared prior to the November 19,2001 hearing, including authorizing another reporter to transcribe the tape or authorizing release of the tape to LRSD to have it transcribed. LRSD would agree to provide all requesting parties a copy of the transcript preparedfrom the tape and to return the tape to the court reporter so an official transcript can be prepared at her convenience. WHEREFORE, LRSD prays that this Court issue an Order authorizing the court reporter to employ some alternate means of preparing a transcript of the October 2, 2001 hearing, and for all other just and proper relief to which it may be entitled. Respectfully Submitted, LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT FRIDAY, ELDREDGE \u0026amp; CLARK First Commercial Bldg., Suite 2000 400 West Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201-3493 (501) 376-21114------y ChfisWpEer Heller (#81083\u0026lt; John C. Fendley, Jr. (#92182) 2CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I certify that a copy ofthe foregoing has been served on the following people by depositing a copy of same in the United States mail (unless otherwise indicated) on October 9, 2001: Mr. John W. Walker JOHN W. WALKER, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Sam Jones Wright, Lindsey \u0026amp; Jennings 2200 Worthen Bank Bldg. 200 West Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Richard Roachell Roachell Law Firm 11800 Pleasant Ridge Road, Suite 146 Post Office Box 17388 Little Rock, Arkansas 72222-7388 Ms. Ann Marshall (hand-delivered) Desegregation Monitor 1 Union National Plaza 124 W. Capitol, Suite 1895 Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Steve Jones JACK, LYON \u0026amp; JONES, P.A. 425 W. Capitol, Suite 3400 Little Rock, AR 72201-3472 Mr. Mark Hagemeier Office of the Attorney General 323 Center Street 200 Tower Building Little Rock, AR 72201 Christopher FTeller John C. Fendley, Jr. 3A. received OCT 15 2001 ORRCEOF FILED IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT OCT 1 1 2001 EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS ...  .cdv WESTERN DIVISION JAMES W. McCORMACK, CLERK By:. DEP CLERK C.P LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF V. NO. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1,ETAL DEFENDANTS MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL. INTERVENORS KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL. INTERVENORS JOSHUA INTERVENORS RESPONSE TO THE LRSDS RESPONSE TO ORDER FILED OCTOBER 3, 2001 The Joshua Intervenors object to the response of the LRSD because it seeks to condition the Courts Order. The Courts Order was clear and unambiguous and should not be modified absent compelling cause which cause is stated for the record. Respectfully submitted. JOHN W. WALKER, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 (501) 374-3758 (Tel.) (501) 374-4187 (Fax) By: .A- Joi Walker, Bar No. 64046 -1-4\u0026lt;  CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE counsel or record, postage prepaid on this I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing has been mailed, postage prepaid to the following // day of October, 2001. Mr. Christopher Heller Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark 400 W. Capitol, Suite 2200 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Mr. Sam Jones Wright, Lindsey \u0026amp; Jennings 2200 Worthen Bank Building 200 West Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 Ms. Arm Brown Marshall ODM One Union National Plaza 124 West Capitol, Suite 1895 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Mr. Mark Hagemeier Office of Attorney General 323 Center Street 200 Tower Building Little Rock, AR 72201 Johtiz^. Walker -1-OCi 1 2001 ucOF KSEGREGAIiON MONITORING IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION FILED U.S. DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT ARKANSAS OCT 1 7 2001 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, Plaintiff, vs. PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. Let al.. Defendants, MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, et al.. Intervenors, KATHERINE KNIGHT, et al.. Intervenors. * * * * * * * * * * * * * JAMEl By:_ B W. McCORMACK, CLERK V DEPTLERK No. 4:82CV00866 SWW RECElVbiJ OCT 18 2001 OIWEOF (OTESKnONMWRIHG ORDER The Court is in receipt of Little Rock School Districts response [docket no. 3517] to this Courts Order [docket no. 3515] filed October 3, 2001, as well as Joshua Intervenors response in opposition [docket no. 3520] to LRSDs response. LRSD states in its response that it objects to being forced to select from the two options offered by the Court. jii LRSD also states that it objects to the March 15, 2001 cut-off date for the presentation of evidence. The Court notes LRSDs objections. The Court acknowledges that LRSD may have evidence concerning its activities with respect to the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan (Revised Plan) subsequent to March 'In its October 3, 2001 Order [docket no. 3515], the Court directed LRSD to choose from two options as follows: Option 1- Present evidence concerning the LRSDs activities with respect to the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan beyond the date of March 15,2001\nand produce the e-mails requested by Joshua beyond that date.\nOption 2- Present evidence concerning the LRSDs activities with respect to the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan up to the date of March 15, 2001, and not beyond\nand correspondingly, the LRSD would have no obligation to produce the e-mails requested by Joshua beyond that date. Without waiving its objections, LRSD has informed the Court that it selects Option 2. 1 S 5 2 115, 2001 which may bear on the issue of whether LRSD has complied with the Revised Plan. The Court gave LRSD an opportunity to elect to present this evidence and LRSD has now rejected this opportunity. Should the Court ultimately sustain Joshuas objections to the Compliance Report and deny unitary status to LRSD, LRSD may in the future, when circumstances warrant. file additional motions in support of unitary status that would include compliance activities subsequent to March 15,2001. The Court wishes to reiterate to LRSD the significance of the March 15, 2001 deadline. On March 15, 2001, LRSD filed its Notice and Compliance Report (Compliance Report) [docket no. 3410], representing to the Court that as of that date, the district had achieved unitary status. Specifically, LRSD stated: LRSD hereby files the attached Compliance Report in accordance with Section 11 of its Revised Desegregation and Education Plan (Revised Plan). LRSD has substantially and in good faith complied with terms of the Revised Plan.^ The Court reminds LRSD that the hearings scheduled on November 19 and 20, 2001, concern Joshuas objections to this Compliance Report. There is no reason to obfuscate the issue by complaining about Joshuas activities- Joshuas activities are not relevant unless such activities relate to the trustworthiness of evidence presented by Joshua. It is the Compliance Report, and Joshuas objections thereto, which are now before the Court, and upon which the Court will focus. The Compliance Report represents that LRSD had complied with certain requirements of the Revised Plan\nhowever, the evidence presented to date by Joshua demonstrates otherwise. The Court anticipates that LRSD will present evidence that the representations in the Compliance ^Docket no. 3410 (Notice of Filing Compliance Report and Request for Scheduling Order), Paragraph No. 1. 2Report are accurate and truthful. The truthfulness and accuracy of LRSDs representations in the March 15, 2001 Compliance Report could have bearing on the Courts disposition of the unitary status question. The Court assumes, without deciding, that if the district is in compliance, good faith will not be an issue. However, should the Court find compliance in some areas but a failure of compliance in others, the districts good faith will determine the extent to which the Court may withdraw its monitoring activities. See Freeman v. Pitts, 503 U.S. 467, 491 (1992) (A courts discretion to order the incremental withdrawal of its supervision in a school desegregation case must be exercised in a manner consistent with the purposes and objectives of its equitable power. Among the factors which must inform the sound discretion of the court in ordering partial withdrawal [is] ... whether the school district has demonstrated, to the public and to the parents and students of the once disfavored race, its good-faith commitment to the whole of the courts decree ....). THEREFORE, the Courts Order [docket no. 3515] of October 3, 2001 is hereby clarified to bring into focus for LRSD the significance of the March 15, 2001 deadline. IT IS SO ORDERED THIS 17 DAY OF OCTOBER, 2001 CHIEF JUDG. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT The Court is mindful that the district has promised good faith in the revised plan: LRSD shall in good faith exercise its best efforts to comply with the Constitution, to remedy the effects of past discrimination by LRSD against African-American students, to ensure that no person is discriminated against on the basis of race, color, or ethnicity in the operation of LRSD and to provide an equal educational opportunity for all students attending LRSD schools. LRSD Revised Desegregation and Education Plan of January 16, 1998 at 2.1 [Exhibit A to 59 docket no. 3107]. 3 THIS DOCUMENT ENTERED ON DOCKET SHEET IN COMPLIANCE WITH RULE 58 AND/OR 79(a) FRCP ON BY. IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT received PLAINTIFF V. LR-C-82-866 OCT 2 6 2001 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1,ET AL DEFENDANTS MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL INTERVENORS KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL INTERVENORS MEMORANDUM BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO COMPEL Joshua failed to respond to Plaintiffs First Set of Interrogatories and Requests for Production of Documents within the time prescribed by Fed. R. Civ. P. 33(b)(3), failed to submit verified responses as required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 33(b)(1) and (2), and failed to fully respond as required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 33(b)(1). Because Joshua's responses were untimely. Fed. R. Civ. P. 33(b)(4) prohibits Joshua from raising objections. It provides, \"Any ground not stated in a timely objection is waived unless the party's failure to object is excused by the court for good cause shown.\" (emphasis supplied). Accordingly, Joshua should be compelled to provide full. complete and verified responses to Plaintiffs First Set of Interrogatories and Requests for Production of Documents pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(a) as requested in Plaintiffs letter of September 27, 2001, attached as Exhibit 3 to the accompanying Motion. See also Fed. R. Civ. P. 34(b).Respectfully Submitted, LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT FRIDAY, ELDREDGE \u0026amp; CLARK First Commercial Bldg., Suite 2000 400 West Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201-3493 (501)376-2011 BY: /Christopher Heller (#81083) / C. Fendley, Jr. (#92182) / 2CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I certify copy of the foregoing has been served on the following persons by mail on October Ao , 2001: Mr. John W. Walker JOHN W. WALKER, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Sam Jones Wright, Lindsey \u0026amp; Jennings 2200 Worthen 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 11800 Pleasant Ridge Road, Suite 146 Post Office Box 17388 Little Rock, Arkansas 72222-7388 Little Rock, AR 72201 Ms. Ann Marshall Desegregation Monitor 1 Union National Plaza 124 W. Capitol, Suite 1895 Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Mark Hagameier Office of the Attorney General 323 Center Street 200 Tower Building Little Rock, AR 72201 ol ihopher Heller ' /I n C. Jr. \\J Fendley, FAHOME\\FENDLEY\\LRSD 200I\\dcs-mol-compcl-cIarification-bri.wpd 3IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF V. LRC 82 86,^gQ0yEO PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1,ETAL oct 2 6 MB' DEFENDANTS MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL INTERVENORS KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL INTERVENORS PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO COMPEL Plaintiff Little Rock School District for its Motion for Compel states: 1. Plaintiff served the Joshua Intervenors with Plaintiffs First Set of Interrogatories and Requests for Production of Documents (Exhibit 1 attached) by mail on August 9, 2001, making Joshua's responses due on or before September 11, 2001. Joshua hand-delivered responses to LRSD on September 24, 2001. 2. Joshua's responses (Exhibit 2 attached) were unverified and otherwise failed to comply with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Plaintiff outlined the deficiencies in a letter dated September 27, 2001 (Exhibit 3 attached), and requested that Joshua supplement its responses. 3. Joshua has not responded to Plaintiffs letter of September 27, 2001. 4. Joshua should be compelled to provide responses to Plaintiffs First Set of Interrogatories and Requests for Production of Documents that comply with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. 5. Joshua attached a copy of Plaintiffs September 27, 2001, letter to their Motion for Definition and Clarification of the Issues and for Other Relief. This Court held a hearing on that Motion on October 2, 2001, and issued an Order the following day. While the Court quashedPlaintiffs Second Set of Interrogatories and Requests for Production, it did not address Joshua's responses to Plaintiffs First Set of Interrogatories and Requests for Production of Documents. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays that Joshua be ordered to provide full, complete and verified responses to Plaintiffs First Set of Interrogatories and Requests for Production to the Joshua Intervenors Regarding Joshua's Objections to Unitary Status\nthat Plaintiff be awarded its costs and attorneys' fees expended herein\nand that Plaintiff be awarded all other just and proper relief to which it may be entitled. Respectfully Submitted, LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT FRIDAY, ELDREDGE \u0026amp; CLARK First Commercial Bldg., Suite 2000 400 West Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201-3493 (501)376-2011 BY: AJhristopher Heller (#810'^3)^ ^hn C. Fendley, Jr. (#92182) 2CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I certify that a copy of the foregoing has been served on the following persons by mail on October 25, 2001: Mr. John W. Walker JOHN W. WALKER, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Sam Jones Wright, Lindsey \u0026amp; Jennings 2200 Worthen 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 11800 Pleasant Ridge Road, Suite 146 Post Office Box 17388 Little Rock, Arkansas 72222-7388 Little Rock, AR 72201 Ms. Ann Marshall Desegregation Monitor 1 Union National Plaza 124 W. Capitol, Suite 1895 Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Mark Hagameier Office of the Attorney General 323 Center Street 200 Tower Building Little Rock, AR 72201 JI istopher Heller n C. Fendley, Jr. F \\HOME\\FENDLEY\\LRSD 200l\\des-fno(-compel-clarificatjon wpd 3 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF V. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1,ET AL DEFENDANTS MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL INTERVENORS KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL INTERVENORS PLAINTIFF'S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES AND REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION TO THE JOSHUA INTERVENORS REGARDING JOSHUA'S OBJECTIONS TO UNITARY STATUS Comes the Plaintiff, Little Rock School District (\"LRSD\"), and submits the following Interrogatories and Requests for Production to be answered within thirty days in accord with Rules 33 and 34 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. GENEIUKL DEFINITIONS AND INSTRUCTIONS (A) \"you\" or\"your\" Shall mean the Joshua Intervenors' LRSD class representative and counsel for the Joshua Intervenors and any person (as defined below) acting on their behalf\n(B) \"person\" Shall mean any individual, corporation, partnership, joint venture, firm. association, proprietorship, agency, board, authority, commission, and other such entities\n(C) \"communicate\" or \"communication\" Shall mean every manner or means of disclosure, transfer or exchange, and every disclosure, transfer or exchange of information whether orally or by document or whether face to face, by telephone, mail, personal delivery, or otherwise\n(D) \"document z \u0026gt;  EXHIBIT IShall mean any original written, typewritten, handwritten, pnnted or recorded material, as well as all tapes, disks, non-duplieate copies and transcnpts thereof, now or al any time in your possession, custody or control\nand, without limiting the generality of the foregoing definition, but for the purposes of illustration only, \"document\" includes notes. correspondence, memoranda, business records, diaries, calendars. address and telephone records, photographs, tape recordings, videotapes and financial statements. Without limitation of the term \"control\" as used in the preceding sentence, a document is deemed to be in your control if you have the right to secure the document or a copy thereof from another thereof. person or a public or private entity having actual possession If a document that is responsive to a request for identification or production is in your control, but is not in your possession or custody, identify the person with or custody. possession If any document that is responsive to a request for identification or production was. but IS no longer, in your possession or subject to your control, state what disposition was made of it, by whom, and the date or dates or approximate date or dates on which disposition was made, and why\n(E) \"identify (i) As to a person (as defined), shall mean the person's name, business and residence address(es), occupation, job title\nand, if not an individual, state the type of entity and the address of its principal place of business\n(ii) As to a document, shall mean the type of document (letter, memo, etc.) the identity of the author or originator, the date authored each person to whom the original or copy was addressed or originated, the identity of or delivered, the identity of such 2The singular includes the plural number, and vice versa. The masculine includes the feminine and neuter genders. The past tense includes the present tense where the clear meaning is not distorted by change of tense. If you do not answer any Interrogatory or Request for Production because of a claim of privilege, set forth the privilege claimed, the facts upon which you rely to support the claim of privilege, and identify all documents for which such privilege is claimed. fNTERROGATORY NO. 1: Please identify all persons who participated in the preparation of the responses hereto. INTERROGATORY NO. 2: Please identify the Joshua Intervenors' LRSD class representative and the date on which that person became Joshua s class representative. INTERROGATORY NO. 3: Please identify all persons who performed monitoring for you during the term of LRSD's Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 1: Please produce all of your monitonng reports that were shared with LRSD during the term of LRSD's Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. fNTERRQGATORY NO. 4: Please identify and describe in detail all areas of noncompliance and bad faith implementation communicated by you to LRSD dunng the term of LRSD's Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 2: Please produce all documents pertaining to areas of noncompliance and bad faith implementation communicated by you to LRSD during the term of LRSD's Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. 4interrogatory no. 5: Please state whether you received a copy of LRSD's Compliance Plan dated June 10, 1999, on July, 1, 1999, and if not, please state when you received a copy of LRSD's Compliance Plan dated June 10, 1999. INTERROGATORY NO. 6: Please identify and describe in detail all communications between you and LRSD pertaining to the format or content of LRSD's Compliance Plan dated June 10, 1999. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 3: Please produce all documents pertaining to communications between you and LRSD pertaining to the format or content of LRSD's Compliance Plan dated June 10, 1999. INTERROGATORY NO. 7: Please identify and descnbe in detail all communications between you and LRSD pertaining to the format or content of LRSD's Interim Compliance Report filed March 15, 2000. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 4: Please produce all documents pertaining to all communications between you and LRSD pertaining to the content and format of LRSD's Intenm Compliance Report filed March 15, 2000. INTERROGATORY NO. 8: Please identify and describe in detail all racial disparities revealed by your monitoring during the term of LRSD's Revised Desegregation and Education Plan\nand for each area of racial disparity state: (a) (b) (c) When you became aware of the disparity\nWhen you communicated your knowledge of the disparity to LRSD\nWhether LRSD's response to the racial disparity complied with the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan\nand if not, why you did not invoke the process for raising compliance issues pursuant to Section 8.2 of the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. 5request for production no. 5: Please produce all documents to your response to the preceding Interrogatory regarding racial disparities. pertaining interrogatory no. 9: Please identify and describe in detail all incidents of racial discrimination in the imposition of discipline which occurred during the term of LRSD's Revised Desegregation and Education Plan, and separately with regard to each such incident, please state: (a) (b) (c) When you became aware of the incident\nWhen you communicated your knowledge of the incident to LRSD\nWhether LRSD's response to the incident complied with the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan\nand if not, why you did not invoke the process for raising compliance issues pursuant to Section 8.2 ofthe Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 6: Please produce all documents pertaining to your response to the preceding Interrogatory regarding incidents of racial discrimination in the imposition of discipline. INTERROGATORYNO. 10: On average, about 85% of LRSD's suspensions are of African-American students (See Compliance Report, March 15, 2001, p. 24). Please explain how much of that 85%, if any, you contend results from racial discrimination by LRSD and identify all facts and documents with contention? support that REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 7: Please produce all documents pertaining to your response to the preceding interrogatory. 6INTERROGATORY NO. 11: Please identify and describe in detail all incidents involving student discipline which you referred to the LRSD Ombudsman\nand separately for each such incident, please state: (a) (b) When you became aware of the incident\nWhen you communicated your knowledge of the incident to the ombudsman\n(c) Whether LRSD's response to the incident complied with the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan\nand if not, why you did not invoke the process for raising compliance issues pursuant to Section 8.2 of the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 8: Please produce all documents pertaining to your communications with the LRSD Ombudsman. INTERROGATORY NO. 12: Please identify all facts and documents which support your objection to LRSD's compliance with Section 2.5 of the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 9: Please produce all documents identified in the preceding interrogatory. INTERROGATORY NO. 13: Please identify all facts and documents which support your objection to LRSD's compliance with Section 2.5.1 of the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 10: Please produce all documents identified in the preceding interrogatory. 7interrogatory NO, 14: Please identify all facts and documents which support your objection to LRSD's compliance with Section 2.5.2 of the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 11: Please produce all documents identified in the preceding interrogatory. INTERROGATORY NO. 15: Please identify all facts and documents which support your objection to LRSD's compliance with Section 2.5.3 of the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 12: Please produce all documents identified in the preceding interrogatory. INTERROGATORY NO. 16: Please identify all facts and documents which support your objection to LRSD's compliance with Section 2.5.4 of the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. REQUEST EOR PRODUCTION NO. 13: Please produce all documents identified in the preceding interrogatory. INTERROGATORY NO. 17: Please state whether you contend that the \"Program Evaluation Agenda\" and/or the \"Assessment Plan\" set forth on pages 53-57 in the Interim Compliance Report filed March 15, 2000, complied with LRSD's obligation under Section 2.7.1 of the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. If not, please: (a) identify and describe in detail all facts and documents supporting your contention\n(b) (c) state when you determined that they did not comply\nwhen you communicated to LRSD your belief that they did not comply\nand, 8(d) why you did not invoke the process for raising compliance issues pursuant to Section 8.2 of the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 14: Please produce all documents pertaining to your response to the preceding interrogatory. fNTERROGATORY NO. 18: Please identify and describe in detail all programs, policies and procedures proposed by you pertaining to LRSD's obligations under the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 15: Please produce all documents pertaining to programs, policies and procedures proposed by you pertaining to LRSD's obligations under the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 16: Please produce all documents received by you in the ordinary course of business (as opposed to in response to an FOIA request) during the term of LRSD's Revised Desegregation and Education Plan pertaining to your participation on LRSD committees or in LRSD activities. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 17: Please produce all documents pertaining to your invoking the process for raising compliance issues pursuant to Section 8.2 of LRSD's Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. Respectfully Submitted, LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT FRIDAY, ELDREDGE \u0026amp; CLARK First Commercial Bldg., Suite 2000 400 West Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201-3493 (501) 37(UO+I-------. BT Christopher Heller 1083j John C. Fendley, Jr. (#92182) 9CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 1 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 August 9, 2001: Mr. John W. Walker JOHN W. WALKER, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Sam Jones Wright, Lindsey \u0026amp; Jennings 2200 Worthen 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 I 1800 Pleasant Ridge Road, Suite 146 Little Rock, Arkansas 72222-7388 Little Rock, AR 72201 Ms. Ann Brown Desegregation Monitor 1 Union National Plaza 124 W. Capitol, Suite 1 895 Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Sammye Taylor Office of the Attorney General 323 Center Street 200 Tower Building Little Rock, AR 72201 ^Christopher Heller F HOME'FES'DLEY'LRSD 2CWJ\\(ks-uniian in( ffpJoshua00l ''pd 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF V. CASE NO.4:82CV00866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ETAL. DEFENDANTS MRS. LORENE lOSHUA, ET AL INTERVENORS KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL INTERVENORS JOSHUAS ANSWERS TO PLAINTIFFS FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES AND REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION REGARDING JOSHUAS OBJECTIONS TO UNITARY STATUS INTERROGATORY NO. 1: Please identify all persons who participated in the prepar ation of the responses hereto. ANSWER NO. 1: John W. Walker as counsel for the Joshua Intei-venors and Joy C. Springer, Monitor. INTERROGATORY NO. 2: Please identify the Joshua Intervenors LRSD representative and the date on which that person became Joshuas class representative. ANSWER NO. 2: The Defendant LRSD is aware of the class representatives. There have been no new or additional persons identified as class representatives. INTERROGATORY NO. 3: Please identify all persons who performed mortitoring for you dming the term of LRSDs Revised Desegregation and Educational Plan. ANSWER NO. 3: The following persons performed monitoring: John W. Walker, -1- I m  EXHIBIT zJoy C. Springer, Kirke Herman, Carolyn Cooley, Margaret Freeman, Lorene Joshua, Delois Sykes and Frances Caldwell. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 1: Please produce all of your monitoring reports that were shared with LRSD during the term of LRSDs Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. RESPONSE NO. 1: The Joshua Intervenors counsel, in response to and at the request of Supeiintendent Les Camine and District counsel Chris Heller, in an effort to be cooperative with them did not publish any monitoiing reports of the concerns which he had with respect to LRSD Plan implementation between 1998 and 2001. See the written communications from Heller, Camine and Walker - Comi Exhibits 558 and 566. fNTERRQGATORY NO. 4: Please identify and describe in detail all areas of noncompliance and bad faith implementation communicated by you to LRSD \u0026amp; term of LRSDs Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. ANSWER NO. 4\nPlease see Joshuas Opposition to LRSDs Motion for Unitary Status filed herein. The Agieement entered between Little Rock School District and the State of Arkansas regarding the 20 million dollar loan forgiveness. Also see the notes and files of Superintendent Les Camine, Distiict counsel Chirs Heller, Junious Babbs, James Washington, Sadie Mitchell, Marion Lacey, Linda Watson, Brady Gadberry, Victor Anderson, Bonnie Lesley and Gene Parker that contain correspondence and other documentation fiom Joshua. There is a partial list of items in the March 15, 2001 Compliance Report. In addition, undersigned counsel had numerous conversations with -2-Superintendent Camine and District Attorney Heller regarding noncompliance issues at Rightsell Elementary School involving discipline, lack of academic achievement, segr egation of boys from gir ls as a punitive measrrre\ndouble funding, maintenance and proper staffing, equipment and materials at the Incentive Schools\nthe proposed closing of Mitchell Elementary school\nthe closing of Ish School rmder the guise of it not being a repairable facility and later being refurbished to house the new Ish Instructional Resource Center\nPulaski Heights Middle School involving disparate treatment of Afiican American students and staff, disparate discipline, lack of academic achievement, use of racial slurs and r acial epitaphs by staff, assault of students by staff and discriminatory learning environment\nHall High School involving discriminatory learning environment. dispar ate discipline, lack of recognition of academic honors and lack of academic achievement\nCloverdale Middle School involving discriminatory learning environment, dispar ate discipline and lack of academic achievement\nthe creation and implementation of Office of Ombudsperson\ndiscriminatory practices mvolvmg the removal of the principal at J. A. Fan High School\nthe promotion of Gayle Bradford to School Services and of other principals who engaged in discriminatory conduct towar d Afiican American students and/or staff (Faith Donovan, Nancy Rosseaum etc.)\nMabelvale Middle School involving discr iminatory learning envirorrment, disparate discipline and lack academic achievement\nDunbar Middle School involving disparate discipline of students including the use of resource officer in investigation and determination of discipline decisions. assault of student by staff member, use of racial slru s by staff and lack of academic -3- achievement\nForest Heights Middle School involving disparate discipline, disciiminatory discipline practices\nWakefield Elementary involving the quality of education being delivered and discriminatoiy learning environment\nForest Park Elementary involving discriminatoiy learning environment, discriminatory practices regarding the participation in field tiip activities, racial comments by members of the PT A\nMeadowcliff Elementary involving dispar ate discipline\nWestern HiUs Elementary involving retaliatory treatment of staff member who complained about lack of and poor implementation of lEPs and education of African American students\nRockefeller Elementary involving disparate discipline of students and staff\nHorace Mann involving discriminatory grading practices. discriminatory discipline nrles established at the school level, dispar ate discipline practices, assault of student by staff member\nCentral High School involving discriminatory practices in student participation in extracrmicular activities- cheerleader tryouts, homecoming queens, mock court, student council, disparate discipline practices. one race AP classes and favoring white students hr these classes, lack of academic achievement and favoring white students in awards and activities\nParkview involving discriminatory practices in coimseling services, dispar ate discipline, discrinrinatory practices in student participation hr extracrrrricular activities (band and choir). discriminatory teaching assignments, lack of academic achievement\nMcClellan involving imequal facilities, staff, learning evtiorrment, resorrrces, and staff use of racial epitaphs\nseveral incidents of discriminatory assignment practices\nnumerous incidents of the Districts failm e to properly implement lEPs of African American students\nand Safety -4-and Secmity Director Bobby Jones staff use. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 2: Please produce all documents to areas of noncompliance and bad faith implementation commimicated by you to LRSD during the teim of LRSDs Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. RESPONSE NO. 2: Refer to response given in Inteirogatory Answer No. 4. Documents are located in files entitled John W. Walker in the offices of Junious Babbs, Supeiintendent Cainine, Sadie Mitchell, and other central office administrators including the offices of Ombudsperson, James Wasliington. Copies of these files have been previously provided to counsel for the District. Also refer to Court Exhibits 556, 557, 558 and 566. Also see attached documents. INTERROGATORY NO. 5: Please state whether you received a copy of LRSDs Compliance Plan dated June 10, 1999, on July, 1, 1999, and if not, please state when you received copy of LRSDs Compliance Plan dated June 10, 1999. ANSWER NO. 5: I obtained with difficulty and only after repeated requests of the plan from Disbict officials. Superintendent Cainine and Junious Babbs acknowledge that the compliance plan was not provided to counsel for Joshua Intervenors until after a request was made for it along with the compliance handbook.. See Com! Exhibits 559 and 562. (Plan was received shortly after the date indicated in Babbss letter of August 31, 2001, Coml Exhibit 562.) INTERROGATORY NO. 6: Please identify and describe in detail all communications between you and LRSD pertaining to the format or content of LRSDs -5-Compliance Plan dated Jxme 10, 1999. ANSWER NO. 6\nThere were no communications between the parties regarding the format or content of the Compliance Plan. District officials and other compliance committee members developed the plan without input from Joshua. District officials did not request any input from Joshua although Joshua sought on many occasions to be involved in the process. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 3: Please produce all documents pertaining to commimications between you and LRSD pertaining to the format or content of LRSDs Compliance Plan dated June 10, 1999. RESPONSE NO. 3: Refer to response given in Inteirogatoiy Answer No. 6. ENTERROGATORY NO. 7: Please identify and describe in detail all communications between you and LRSD pertaining to tlie format or content of LRSDs Interim Compliance Report filed March 15, 2000. ANSWER NO. 7: There were no communications between the parties. District officials and other compliance committee members developed the content and format of LRSDs Interim Compliance Report filed on Maich 15, 2000 without input from Joshua. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO.4: Please produce all documents pertaining to all communications between you and LRSD pertaining to the content and format LRSDs Interim Compliance Report filed March 15, 2000. RESPONSE NO. 4: Refer to response given in Interrogatory Answer No. 7. INTERROGATORY NO. 8: Please identify and describe in detail all racial -6-disparities revealed by youi' monitoring during the term of LRSDs Revised Desegregation and Education Plan\nand for each area of racial disparity state: (a) When you became awaie of the disparity\n(b) When you communicated your knowledge of the disparity to LRSD (c) Whether LRSDs response to the racial disparity complied with the Desegi egation and Education Plan\nand if not, why you did not invoke the process raising compliance issues pursuant to Section 8.2 of the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. ANSWER NO. 8: Please refer to the Joshuas Response in Opposition to LRSDs Motion for Unitaiy Status filed herein. Also see Interrogatory Response No. 4. Distiict officials and members of the compliance committee withheld and refused to shai e the quailerly reports which were produced by the School Services division of the Distiict. These reports were indicative of the racial disparities that remained present in the Distiict. Also see the notes and files of Superintendent Les Cainine, District counsel etuis Heller, Junious Babbs, James Washington, Sadie Mitchell, Marion Lacey, Linda Watson, Brady Gadbeny, Victor Anderson, Bonnie Lesley and Gene Parker that indicate dates of communications. Joshuas coimsel was continually misled and misinformed by LRSD school officials including Camine and Heller regarding desegregation accomplishments. In addition, the Distiict did not regularly provide the semester by semester discipline statistics. The Joshua Intervenors counsel did invoke the process for raising compliance issues pursuant to the revised plan which he had with respect to LRSD -7-Plan implementation between 1998 and 2001 involving several issues, however, in response to and at the request of and from Supeiintendent Camine and District counsel Chris Heller and upon promised of fair and adequate remedy thereof, he did not follow through on the compliance issues that were raised. Joshuas right to contest in a vigorous manner the Districts release from comt jurisdiction after the Districts report of March 15, 2001 is independent of the number of times Joshua invoked the process described in Section 8 of the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan, REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 5: Please produce all documents pertaining to yom response to the preceding Inteirogatoiy regaiding racial disparities. RESPONSE NO. 5: Refer to response given m Interrogatory Answer No. 8. Also see Coml Exhibits 556, 557, 558, 566 and 582. Also see attached documents. INTERROGATORY NO. 9: Please identify and describe in detail all incidents of racial discrimination in the imposition of discipline which occmred during the term of LRSDs Revised Desegiegation and Education Plan, and separately with regard to each such mcident, please state: (a) When you became awar e of the incident\n(b) When you communicated your knowledge of the incident to LRSD (c) Whether LRSDs response to the mcident complied with the Revised Desegiegation and Education Plan\nand if not, why you did not invoke the process for raising compliance issues pur suant to Section 8.2 of the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. -8-ANSWER NO. 9\nJoshua received notice of numerous incidents involving racial discrimination over the three year period. See Response in Interrogatory No. 4. Also see the files of Ombudsman, James Washington. Also see letter addressed to Superintendent Camine with copies to James Washington and Dr. Linda Watson dated November 8, 2000, Coml Exhibit 567. There were munerous racial incidents during this period including, but not limited to the following schools: Hall High School, McClellan, Central, Parkview and Fair High Schools, Pulaski Heights, Marm, Cloverdale, Southwest Dunbar and Forest Heights Middle Schools, Brady, Western Hills, Carver, Forest Park, Dodd, Rightsell, Gibbs and Pulaski Heights Elementary schools. Many of these cases were referred to the office of the Ombudsman. Also see Answer to Interrogatory Nos. 8 and 11. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 6: Please produce all documents pertaining to your response to the preceding Interrogatory regarding incidents of racial discrimination in the imposition of discipline. RESPONSE NO. 6\nSee the files of Dr. Linda Watson, Student Hearing Officer and those of the Ombudsperson, James Washington. Also see Com! Exhibits 567, 568 and attached docirments. INTERROGATORY NO. 10: On average, about 85% of LRSDs suspensions are of Afiican-American students (See Compliance Report, March 15, 2001, p. 2 Please explain how much of that 85%, if any, you contend results from racial discrimination by LRSD and identify all facts and documents with support that contention? -9-ANSWER NO. 10\nLRSD did not adopt specific compliance standards for the area of student discipline, or monitor such standar d at pailiculai' schools exhibiting problems of racial disparity in discipline. LRSD has this obligation under Section 6 of the revised plan. LRSDs failure in this regard diminishes Joshuas ability to segiegate instances of racial dispaiity in discipline. Not all black children who are disciplined are not included in the discipline reports. Fuilheimore, it is our opinion that when African American students engage in the same conduct as white students, the white students are not disciplined. In addition, the quarterly reports which confinn the continued disparity were withheld by Districts officials. REQLIEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 7: Please produce all documents pertaining to yom response to the preceding mtenogatory. RESPONSE NO. 7: See response in Intenogatory No. 10. rNTERROGATORY NO. 11: Please identify and describe all incidents involving student discipline which you referred to the LRSD Ombudsman\nand separately for each such incident, please state: (a) When you became awar e of the incident\n(b) When you communicated your knowledge of the incident to the ombudsman\n(c) Whether LRSDs response to the incident complied with the Revised Desegr egation and Education Plan\nand if not, why you did not invoke the process for raising compliance issues pursuant to Section 8.2 of the Revised Desegregation a Education Plan. -10-ANSWER NO. 11\nJoshua handled a number of the cases mvolvmg student discipline during this period for several reasons: 1) the Ombudsman was not allowed to do so initially and 2) the Ombudsman was often working on other matters and was not available. The Ombudsman, James Washington, has reported to Joshua that he has an ongoing investigation of race based mistreatment at Pulaski Heights Middle School. The following cases were referred to the Districts Ombudsman: 1) Millard Russey at Forest Heights Middle School\n2) Alex ONeal at Forest Heights Middle School\n3) Peter Robinson at Hall High School\n4) East End Students attending Pulaski Heights Middle School\n5) Earnest Rump at Southwest Middle School\n6) Antonio Jackson at Pulaski Heights Elementary 7) Rodriquez Roy at Pulaski Heights Middle School\n8) Marcus Walker at Horace Maim Middle School\n9) Maim Middle Schools inles regarding participation in extracurricular activities which are driven by citizenship grades\n10) Cloverdale Middle School regarding its failure to apply appropriate discipline to a white female student. Miracle Null, for use of profanity towards to black teacher\n11) Christopher Murray at Cloverdale Middle School\n12) Calvin Leonard at Gibbs Elementary\n13) Eivvin Parchmann at Meadowcliff Elementary\n-11-14) Justin Simmons at Horace Mann\n15) Marcus Hemy at Pulaski Heights Middle\n16) Quention Bellows at Hall High School\n17) Cedric Beasley 18) Antonio Jackson at Hall High School\n19) Antione Bernard at Brady Elementary\n20) Tommy Bozemann at ALP - Philander Smith\n21) Felicia Duhail at Western Hills Elementary\n22) Brian Gray at Horace Maim\n23) April Hayes at Paikview\n24) LeeAngelo Jones at Rockefeller Elementary\n25) Ronald Payne at Pulaski Heights Middle\n26) Steven Taylor at Hall High School\n27) Peel at Forest Heights\n28) Clevonne Dixon at Hall High School\n29) Maicus Walker at Horace Mann\n30) ClC program implementation (suspensions expunged for white students but not for black students who pailicipated in this program)\nand 31) Letter dated October 9, 2000 regarding disparate treatment of black students bused into Pulaski Heights Middle School. This list may not exhaustive of all incidents of racial discrimination with respect to -12- discipline. Joshua reserves the right to supplement this list. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 8: Please produce all documents pertaining to your communications with the LRSD Ombudsman. RESPONSE NO. 8: Please refer to the files of the Ombudsman including the attached documents. The attached documents, however, are not inclusive of all communications with the Ombudsman. The majority of our communication with the Ombudsman was through telephone conferences, visits to his office and his visits to this office. RefeiTals were made dming these communications. INTERROGATORY NO. 12: Please identify all facts and documents which support your objection to LRSDs compliance with Section 2.5 of the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. ANSWER NO. 12: The program, policies and procedmes identified in the Compliance Plan and the Mai ch 2000 and 2001 reports ai e in terms of such a level of generality as to not be meaningful with regard to achieving compliance with respect to the obligation. Interrogatories Numbers 9 and 11 and Requests for Production related thereto. Also refer to Joshuas Response in Opposition. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 9: Please produce all documents identified in the preceding inteiTOgatoiy. RESPONSE NO. 9: See Iiitenogatoiy No. 11 and 12. See also LRSD Compliance Plan, Comt Exhibit 544. INTERROGATORY NO. 13: Please identify all facts and documents which -13- support your objection to LRSDs compliance with Section 2.5.1 of the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. ANSWER NO. 13: Refer to responses in InteiTogatories Numbers 9 and 11 and Requests for Production related thereto. REQUEST EOR PRODUCTION NO. 10: Please produce all documents identified in the preceding interrogatoiy. RESPONSE NO. 10: Same as Interrogatory No. 13. See also LRSD Compliance Plan, Comi Exhibit 544. INTERROGATORY NO. 14: Please identify all facts and documents which support youi' objection to LRSDs compliance with Section 2.5.2 of the Revised Desegiegation and Education Plan. ANSWER NO. 14: Compliance with Section 6 of the revised plan with respct to compliance standards and the Compliance Plan should have yielded data on paiticpular schools by way of example allowing Joshua, ODM and the Court to assess compliance. The LRSDs Maich 200 and 2001 reports do not provide any data with respect to this obligation. They report that policies adopted and cases are reviewed by the Assistant Superintendent for Discipline. LRSD has not substantially demonstrated that this provision has been complied with. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 11: Please produce all documents in the preceding inteiTogatoiy. RESPONSE NO. 11: Same as InteiTOgatory No. 14. -14-INTERROGATORY NO. 15: Please identify all facts and documents which support your objection to LRSDs compliance with Section 2.5.3 of the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. ANSWER NO. 15: Refer to Couil Exhibits 561, 564, and 565. See also documents attached hereto. Please refer to the testimony of James Washington dated August 2, 2001. (Testimony regai ding his lack of sufficient resources and authority). REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NQ. 12: Please produce all documents in the preceding interrogatoiy. RESPONSE NO. 12: Refer to Answer to Intenogatoiy No. 15. fNTERROGATORY NO. 16: Please identify all facts and documents which support youi' objection to LRSDs compliance with Section 2.5.4 of the Revised Desegiegation and Education Plan. ANSWER NO. 16: Compliance with Section 6 of the revised plan with respct to compliance standards and the Compliance Plan should have yielded data on paiticpular schools by way of example allowing Joshua, ODM and the Coml to assess compliance. The LRSDs Maich 200 and 2001 reports do not provide any data with respect to this obligation. They report that these cases aie referred to the Pupil Services Team. Joshua contends that the LRSD has not substantially complied with this provisions. See attached documents. (Joshua requested data and counsel for the District rephed indicating that no data existed). REQUEST FQR PRQDUCTIQN NQ. 13: Please produce all documents in the -15-preceding intenogatory. RESPONSE NO. 13: Refer to Answer in Intenogatory No. 16. INTERROGATORY NO. 17: Please state whether you contend that the Program Evaluation Agenda and/or the Assessment Plan set forth on pages 53-57 in the Interim Compliance Report filed March 15, 2000, complied with LRSDs obligation under Section 2.7.1 of the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. If not, please: (a) identify and describe in detail all facts and documents supporting your contention\n(b) state when you detennined that they did not comply\n(c) when you communicated to LRSD your belief that they did not comply\nand. (d) why you did not invoke the process for raising compliance issues pursuant to Section 8.2 of the Revised Desegregation and Educational Plan. ANSWER NO. 17: Evaluation under 2.7.1 was to reach all academic programs implemented pursuant to Section 2.7. Also those listed in Section 5 of the plan, as well as others implemented by LRSD to fulfil its obligation under 2.7. Joshuas ability to respond to this intenogatoiy is hindered by the Districts failure to set forth one clear list of all of the progr ams implemented to comply with Section 2.7. In reviewing pages 53- 57, we do not find mention of the full extent of the revised cturiculrrm at grades 4 and above. There is no mention of evaluation of the use os SAJPs, or of the programs listed in Section 5 of the plan. Joshua contends that the LRSD has not substantially complied with this provision. Please refer to the testimony of Jrmious Babbs, Sadie Mitchell, -16-Bonnie Lesley and Superintendent Camine. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO, 14: Please produce all documents pertaining to yom response to the preceding inteiTOgatory. RESPONSE NO. 14: See tr anscript of the July and August, 2001 hearings. INTERROGATORY NO. 18: Please identify and describe in detail all programs, policies and procedures proposed by you pertaining to LRSDs obligations under the Revised Desegr egation and Education Plan. ANSWER NO. 18: District officials and compliance committee members chose not to involve counsel for Joshua in the development of programs, policies and procedures. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO, 15: Please produce all documents pertaining to programs, policies and procedures proposed by you perlaining to LRSDs obligations under the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. RESPONSE NO. 15: Refer to Com! Exhibits 552, 554, 560, 563 and attached documents regarding undersigned counsels complaints regarding non involvement in the development of programs, policies and procedrrres. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 16: Please produce all documents received by you in the ordinary com se of business (as opposed to in response to an FOIA request) during the term of LRSDs Revised Desegregation and Education Plan pertauring to your participation on LRSD committees or in LRSD activities. RESPONSE NO. 16: The following docrrments and notices were sent by the -17-Distiict without request: Distiict officials provided Boaid policies to these offices after they sent to the Board for approval. Quailerly notices were received regarding NSF grant and its agenda for the meeting. Notices of the Biracial Committee meetings. Notices regaiding Charter School Committee and agenda. Joshua counsel and Monitor Springer had to request many of the documents regarding LRSD committees and activities as a part of our ongoing monitoiing activities. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 17: Please produce all documents pertaining to yom- invoking the process for raising compliance issues pursuant to 8.2 of LRSDs Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. RESPONSE NO. 17: See attached documents. Also see Court Exhibits 565,567,568 and 569. Joshua ftulher reserves the right to supplement the answers provided herein. Respectfully submitted, JOHN W. WALKER, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 (501) 374-3758 (Tel.) (501)374-4187 By: ax) j / / 'J alker, AR Bar No. 64046 -18- CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing has been mailei following counsel or record, postage prepaid on this A/ day of-* lostage prepaid to the ^t\n2001. Mr. M. Samuel Jones, III Wright, Lindsey \u0026amp; Jennings 200 West Capitol Avenue Suite 2200 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-3699 Mr. Christopher Heller Friday, 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, Arkansas 72201 Mr. Stephen W. Jones Jones, Lyon \u0026amp; 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 Ms. SammyeL. Taylor Assistant Attorney General 323 Center Street, Suite 200 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 in W. Walker 4 -19- Friday Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark HERSCHEL H. FRIDAY (I922-19P4) WILLIAM H. SUTTON, P.A. BYRON M. EISEMAN, JR., P.A. JOE D. BELL. P.A. JAMES A. BUTTRY, P.A. FREDERICK S. URSERY. P.A. OSCAR E. DAVIS. JR., P.A. JAMES C. CLARK. JR.. P.A. THOMAS P. LEGGETT. P A. JOHN DEWEY WATSON. P.A. PAUL B. BENHAM III. P A LARRY W. BURKS. P.A. A. WYCKLIFF NISBET, JR., P A. JAMES EDWARD HARRIS, P A. J. PHILLIP MALCOM. P.A. JAMES M. SIMPSON, P.A. JAMBS M. SAXTON. P.A. J. SHEPHERD RUSSELL Hl. P.A. DONALD H. BACON. P.A. WILLIAM THOMAS BAXTER. P A. BARRY E. COPLIN. P.A. RICHARD D. TAYLOR, P.A. JOSEPH B. HURST. JR., P.A. ELIZABETH ROBBEN MURRAY. P.. CHRISTOPHER HELLER. P.A. LAURA HENSLEY SMITH. P A. ROBERT S. SHAJTR. P A. WILLIAM M. GRIFFIN 111. P A. MICHAEL S. MOORE. P.A. DIANE S. MACKEY. P.A. WALTER M. EBEL III. P.A. KEVIN A. CRASS. P A. WILLIAM A. WADDELL, JR.. P A. SCOTT J. LANCASTER, P A M. GAYLE CORLEY. P.A. ROBERT B. BEACH. JR.. P.A. J. LEE BROWN. P.A. JAMES C. BAKER. JR.. P.A. HARRY A. LIGHT, P.A. SCOTT H. TUCKER. P.A. GUY ALTON WADE. P.A. PRICE C. GARDNER. P.A. TONIA P JONES. P.A. DAVID D. WILSON. P.A. ATTORNEYS AT LAW A LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP www.fridayfirm.CDm 2000 REGIONS CENTER 400 WEST CAPITOL LITTLE ROCK. ARKANSAS 72201-3493 TELEPHONE 501-376-2011 FAX 501-376-2147 3425 NORTH FUTRALL DRIVE. SUITE 103 FAYETTEVILLE. ARKANSAS 72703-4811 TELEPHONE 501-695-2011 FAX 501-695-2147 JEFFREY H. MOORE, P.A. DAVID M. GRAF. P.A. CARLA GUNNELS SPAINHOUR, P.A, JOHN C. FENDLEY. JR., P.A. JONANN ELIZABETH CONIGLIO, P.A. R. CHRISTOPHER LAWSON, P A. GREGORY D. TAYLOR. P A. TONY L. WILCOX, P A. FRAN C HICKMAN. P A. BETTY J. DEMORY. P.A. LYNDA M. JOHNSON, P.A. JAMES W. SMITH, P.A. CLIFFORD W PLUNKETT, P A. DANIEL L. HERRINGTON. P.A. MARVIN L. CHILDERS K. COLEMAN WESTBROOK. JR. ALLISON J. CORNWELL ELLEN M. OWENS JASON B. HENDREN BRUCE B. TIDWELL MICHAEL E KARNEY KELLY MURPHY MCQUEEN JOSEPH P. MCKAY ALEXANDRA A. IFRAH JAY T. TAYLOR MARTIN A. KASTEN BRYAN W. DUKE JOSEPH G. NICHOLS ROBERT T. SMITH RYAN A. BOWMAN TIMOTHY C. EZELL T. MICHELLE ATOR KAREN S. HALBERT SARAH M. COTTON PHILIP B. MONTGOMERY KRISTEN S. RIGGINS ALAN C. BRYAN OF COUNSEL B S. CLARK WILLIAM L. TERRY WILLIAM L. PATTON. JR. H.T. LARZELERE. P A. JOHN C. ECHOLS. P A. A.D. MCALLISTER 208 NORTH FIFTH STREET BLYTHEVILLE. ARKANSAS 72315 TELEPHONE 870-762-2898 FAX 870-762-2918 JOHN C. FENDLEY. JR. LITTLE ROCK TEL 501-370-3323 FAX 501-244-5341 (ndleyQftc.ntl September 27, 2001 Hand Delivered Mr. John W. Walker Attorney at Law 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72206 RE: LRSD V. PCSSD Dear Mr. Walker: We have received and reviewed your responses to our First Set of Intenogatories and Requests for Production of Documents. We find your responses inadequate and respectfully request that you immediately supplement your responses as follows: Interrogatory No. 2: Please provide the name and address of your class representatives. Interrogatory No. 3: Please provide addresses for the monitors identified. Interrogatory No. 4: Your reference to the files of LRSD personnel is nonresponsive. You then identify but fail to describe in detail areas of alleged noncompliance or bad faith implementation. Please describe in detail each allegation. Request for Production No. 2: Please identify the correspondence with Junious Babbs, Dr. Les Camine, Sadie Mitchell, James Washington and \"other central office administrators\" to which you refer. Your assertion that \"[c]opies of these files have been previously provided to counsel for the District\" is not true if you mean by you. We may have these files, but we have no way of know to what letters within these files upon which you rely. (D EXHIBIT $ I z  1Mr. John Walker September 27, 2001 Page 2 Interrogatory No, 5: Ne\nThis project was supported in part by a Digitizing Hidden Special Collections and Archives project grant from The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation and Council on Library and Information Resoources.\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n\n "}],"pages":{"current_page":40,"next_page":41,"prev_page":39,"total_pages":155,"limit_value":12,"offset_value":468,"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}}]}}