MAGNET REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA September 24, 2013 I. Call to Order II. Reading of the Minutes of August 13, 2013 Ill. General Report A. Correspondence B. Financial Transactions C. Newspaper Articles D. Recruitment Update E. LRSD Original Magnet Schools Personnel - Vacancies and New Hires IV. Business and/or Action Items A. Discussion and Approval for Stipulation Magnet Schools BudgetKelsey Bailey, Chief Financial Officer, LRSD B. Discussion of Job Description and Selection Process for Executive Director Position C. Discussion of Magnet Schools Evaluation Report - New Submission D. Discussion of Sibling Preference Policy for Middle School Students E. Set Next Meeting Date V. Adjournment DRAFT MAGNET REVIEW COMMITTEE MINUTES August 13, 2013 The regularly scheduled meeting of the Magnet Review Committee was held in the Magnet Review Committee Office, 1920 North Main Street, Suite 101, North Little Rock, Arkansas on Tuesday, August 13, 2013. Members Present: Dr. Sadie Mitchell, Chairperson - LRSD Oliver Dillingham, ADE Dr. Robert Clowers, PCSSD Danny Reed, ADE Joy Springer, Joshua lntervenors Members Absent: Micheal Stone, NLRSD Guests: Kelsey Bailey, Chief Financial Officer - LRSD Margie Powell, ODM The meeting was called to order at 8:45 a.m. by Chairperson Dr. Sadie Mitchell. She immediately called for a reading of the minutes of July 10, 2013. Joy Springer offered one correction to the minutes. Oliver Dillingham made a motion to approve the minutes as corrected, and Dr. Robert Clowers seconded the motion. The minutes were unanimously approved as corrected. Copies of an e-mail received from Dr. Robert Clowers, PCSSD MRC representative, were given to Committee members. Dr. Clowers provided information that Dr. Janice Warren is now the Assistant Superintendent for Equity and Pupil Services, as well as continuing as the Director of Elementary Education. Dr. Clowers also provided contact information for Dr. Warren. No action was required by the MRC. -!JRAFT DRAFT An e-mail was sent to all Student Registration Offices to notify them of the scheduled date for the annual SWAP meet, planned for Monday, July 29, 2013, in the MRC Office. Copies were given to MRC members for their information. Dr. Sadie Mitchell provided MRC members with a copy of an e-mail she sent to a parent concerned about her student's acceptance to Central rather than Parkview. No action was required by the MRC. Bills in the amount of $174.78 were presented for payment. Oliver Dillingham made a motion to pay the bills, and Dr. Clowers seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously to pay the bills. With regard to newspaper articles since the previous MRC meeting, two e-mails were given to MRC members for their information. These articles came from the office of Hogan Lovells and related to Civil Rights issues. When talking about a recruitment update, it was noted that several contacts have been received from parents regarding their children's assignment for the new school year. The MRC Office has been answering their calls and following up on information at their request. An ad has been placed with the Metro Little Rock Magazine, which has a shelf-life of one year and is given to new families moving into the area. Copies were given to MRC members for their information. Vacancies and new hires at the Stipulation Magnet Schools include a new Principal at Mann Magnet, Keith McGee, and an Assistant Principal at Booker, Charlotte Cornice. Dr. Mitchell has requested that her secretary compile a list of all support staff and custodians who also have been hired, and she will have that available for the next MRC meeting. Kelsey Bailey, Chief Financial Officer at Little Rock School District, came to the table to present preliminary budget information for the Stipulation magnet schools. The average in the schools for the previous year is the basis for the -2- DRAFT DRAFT new budget. The average is down in all schools except for Gibbs, with the total average now at 3,371.88. Dr. Mitchell noted that the MRC used to submit the budget in July of each year, but now the timeline is set for a September submission. She called the Committee's attention to a Court Order received from Judge Price indicating that a September submission was in order. Mr. Bailey also noted that Arkansas is behind time in providing their indirect costs rates, and no information was received from the State until April, 2013. It should have been received in October, 2012. Mr. Bailey further explained that indirect costs are costs that are not used for student services. Ms. Springer asked Mr. Bailey if LRSD is going to continue with the magnet schools when 50% of the funding is not there anymore. Has it been discussed how LRSD will be funding the schools? Mr. Bailey said it all depends, but it has been discussed. They may have to re-do attendance zones. It all depends on the judge and whether he will want the schools to stay in existence. Dr. Mitchell noted that LRSD is trying for the MSAP Grant for Stipulation magnet schools. They had this grant before and, hopefully, will be selected again. Dr. Clowers said that PCSSDis talking about a phase-out if funding is stopped for magnet schools. It will depend on the judge. Ms. Springer asked if all the districts are all planning for the ending of funding for magnet schools. Mr. Bailey said thinking is that there will be a five-seven year phase-out. But, you still have to see if districts will allow students to cross district lines. Dr. Mitchell thanked Mr. Bailey for coming before the MRC and told him they are looking for his budget submission in September. -3- DRAFT A draft copy of a Job Description for Director of the Magnet Review Committee Office was given to all Committee members for their review. Ms. Springer wants to give it consideration and talk about it at the next meeting. She will need at least a day or two to go over it. Dr. Mitchell said she didn't know if there was an urgency for the posting. Danny Reed asked who does the interviewing and hiring. Dr. Mitchell said that LRSD does so in accordance with their guidelines, but with the input of the MRC. Dr. Clowers asked about the oversight of curriculum requirement. Dr. Mitchell that Donna Creer did a lot of work with the schools as the oversight of curriculum requirements. With regard to the Stipulation Magnet Schools Evaluation Report, MRC members were given a packet of correspondence which occurred recently with Dr. Jeanne Dreyfus, External Evaluator. In the end, Dr. Dreyfus felt it was a lot larger than she had expected and suggested that a new evaluator be hired. Dr. Mitchell said that she would talk to Dr. Karen DeJarnette, in LRSD, to see what could be done. Dr. Mitchell will report back to the MRC in September. A discussion was held with regard to Mann Magnet's discipline program. A copy of the report prepared by Cassandra Steele was given to each Committee member. Ms. Springer noted that she had asked if this discipline program was placed in all the middle school magnets, and the answer is yes. Ms. Springer is pleased that students will be able to access the program from their area school. Dr. Clowers complimented Ms. Springer about a great job she did recently for PCSSDd iscussing the deseg plan with school personnel. Dr. Mitchell said that all Business and Action Items, with the exception of Mann's discipline program will remain as agenda items for the next MRC meeting. It was agreed by consensus that the next MRC meeting will be held in the MRC Office on September 17, 2013, at 8:30 a.m. -4- DRAFT When no further business was brought before the Committee, Joy Springer made a motion to adjourn the meeting, and Oliver Dillingham seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously, and the meeting was adjourned at 10:00 a.m. -5- Magnet Review From: Sent: To: Subject: customerservice@arkansasonline.com Thursday, August 22, 2013 10: 11 AM Magnet Review Subscriber transactions Thank you for contacting the ARKANSADSE MOCRAT-GAZETTE! MAGNERTE VIEWC OMMITTEE, Your newspapers will be donated to Newspaper in Education. Thank you. We value you as a subscriber. Please call our customer service department should you have any further questions at 1-800-482-1121 or 501-378-3456 during normal business hours which are: Sunday: 6:45 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. Monday through Friday: 6:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Saturday: 6:00 a.m. to 10:00 a.m. No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2013.0.2904 / Virus Database: 3211/6596 - Release Date: 08/21/13 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. MAGNET REVIEW COMMITTEE BILLS TO BE PAID SEPTEMBER 24, 2013 Arkansas Democrat-Gazette (Subscription Renewal) American Home Life (MRC's Office Rent for September, 2013) American Home Life (Communications Expense for August, 2013) Capital Business Machines (Monthly Charge for Maintenance Contract for the MRC Office Copier) Staples (Supplies for the MRC Office) CompSys (Monthly Billing to Act as Host for MRC's E-Mail) TOTAL BILLS TO BE PAID 60.00 825.00 182.50 78.12 120.56 48.33 $1,314.51 ,S tays oughti n LRs chools uit Attorneys say pending appeals will factor into hearings EVIE BLAD ARKANSADS EMOCRAT-GAZETTE Attorneys for the little Rock School District and an intervenor group asked a federal judge Monday to delay a December trial to determine whether the state should be released from a desegregation settlement agreement that requires it to pay about $70 million in annual aid to Little Rock and two other central Arkansas school districts. The same attorneys previously made a similar request to U.S. District Judge D. Price Marshall Jr., asking him for a continuance, which would have stalled the trial while the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in St. Louis considers whether the state's authorization of independently run charter schools in Pulaski County violated that settlement agreement. Marshall denied that motion. On Monday, the attorneys moved for a stay, a different legal mechanism that would also delay the court proceedings. The request was made by attorneys for the state's largest school district and the Joshua intervenors, which represent black students in the decades-old case. Marshall previously ruled against the Little Rock School District in the charter school matter, disagreeing with its claim that the state approved open-enrollment charter schools without regard for their effects on district magnet schools and other court-approved desegregation efforts. The district has asked the appeals court to overturn that ruling. The state - represented by the attorney general's office - has argued previously that any delay in the December hearing could be costly because it pays the desegregation aid to the Little Rock, North Little Rock and Pulaski County Special school districts monthly. But the appeals court's decision in the charter school issue will be a factor in the December hearings, attorneys for the Little Rock district and the Joshua intervenors wrote. That's because the state's argument in its motion for release from the agreement is that it has complied "in good faith" with the terms of the settlement. "The question of whether the State is currently violating the 1989 Settlement Agreement with respect to charter schools cannot be separated from the question of whether the state has generally complied in good faith with that same agreement," wrote Chris Heller on behalf of the Little Rock School District and John Walker on behalf of tl1e Joshua intervenors. If the district court sides with the state and grants it a release from settlement obligations before the 8th Circuit rules, it risks legal confusion and a rehearing of the issue if the appeals court rules in Little Rock's favor on the charter school issue, the attorneys wrote. Little Rock filed the original lawsuit in 1982, arguing that the state and two other school districts had fostered segregation between the three Pulaski County school districts. That suit led to a 1989 settlement under which the state pays about $70 million a year to help finance Little Rock's six 01iginal magnet schools and all three districts' majority-to-minority interdistrict student-transfer programs, some employee healthcare and retirement costs, and general operating expenses. Magnet Review From: Sent: To: Subject: Attachments: Good Afternoon All, Curtis, Kimberly D.H. [kimberly.curtis@hoganlovells.com] Wednesday, August 21, 2013 11 :39 AM Donna Creer
Magnet Review
Keisha Crowder-Davis (keidavis@dallasisd.org)
Amaila Cudeiro (cudeiroa@bsd405.org)
Arthur Culver (culverar@champaignschools.org)
(Jack.Dale@fcps.edu}
Daniel Harrell
David Duff, Duff, Turner, White & Boykin
David Peterson, Super, No. Suburban Spec.
john.davis@dougherty.k12.ga.us
Michael Davis (madavis@philasd.org)
Sandra K. Day (sandy.day@ops.org)
Sandy Day
executive.director@magnet.edu
DC Public Schools - Jim Sandman
DCPS - Harriet Segar (GC's ofc)
DCPS - Kevin Clinton, BoE Staff
DCPS - Peggy Cooper Cafritz
DCPS - Robert Board - Board
DCPS - Robin Martin
DCPS - Sara White (CG's office)
Deidra Honeywell
Delaware - Mary Cooke (mary.cooke@state.de.us)
Denver - John Kechriotis, General Counsel
Denver - Lorna Candler - Deputy General Counsel, Denver Schools
Denver - Michael Bennet - Supt.
Detroit - General Counsel's office
Detroit - M.B. Farrell, Thrun Law Firm
dicaprioj@schenectady.k12.ny.us
oliver.dillingham@arkansas.gov
Don Kennedy
mdonalds@aldine.k12.tx.us
Donna Elam
Dr. Jill A Shackelford
Durango School District - Mary Barter - Superintendent (mbarter@durango.net)
Martha M. Durkin (martha.durkin@tusd1.org)
Pia Durkin Ph. D. (pdurkin@attleboroschools.com)
Duval - Board - Brenda Priestly Jackson
Duval - Board - Kris Barnes
Duval - Board - Nancy Broner
Duval - Board - Vicki Drake
Duval - Dr. Joseph Wise, Supt.
Duval County- Super - Joey Wise
Earnest Washington, Jr.
East Baton Rouge -- Interim Super -- Charlotte Placide
East Dubuque Unit SD - Donald Kussmaul, Super.,
Eileen Baker
Elaine Feese
Elaine Ranieri (eranieri@tampabay.rr.com)
Donna! Elam (dkelam@aol.com)
Elgin - BOE - Amy Kerber
Elgin - BOE - Dale Spencer
Elgin - BOE - Donna Smith
Elgin - BOE - Joyce Fountain
Elgin - BOE - Karen Carney
Elgin - BOE - Ken Kaczynski - President
Elgin - BOE - Maria Bidelman
Elgin - GC - Pat Brancato
Elgin - Superintendent - Dr. Jose Torres
maryellen.elia@sdhc.k12.fl.us
MaryEllen Elia (maryellen.elia@sdhc.k12.fl.us)
WA- Susan Enfield (saenfield@seattleschools.org)
Equity Assistance Centers - Dr. Bradley Scott
Equity Assistance Centers - Dr. Charles Rankin
Equity Assistance Centers - Jerry Graniero
Equity Assistance Centers - Joyce Harris
Equity Assistance Centers - Percy Bates Dr.
Equity Assistance Centers - Ramon Villarreal
Evergreen School District - Victoria Bradford
Ronald Felger (rdf@skbw.com) FW: Office for Civil Rights Issues Notice Requesting Public Comment on Mandatory Civil Rights Data Collection OCRdatamemo.docx Per John Borkowski and Shannon Hodge. Kimberly Curtis Assistant to John W. Borkowski, Partner Hogan Lovells US LLP Columbia Square 555 Thirteenth Street, NW Washington, DC 20004 Tel +1 202 637 5600 Direct: +1 202 637 7269 Fax: +12026375910 Email. kimberly.curtis@hoganlovells.com www.hoganlovells.com Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail. About Hogan Lovells Hogan Lovells is an international legal practice that includes Hogan Lovells US LLP and Hogan Lovells International LLP. For more information, see www.hoqanlovells.com. CONFIDENTIALITY. This email and any attachments are confidential, except where the email states it can be disclosed
it may also be privileged. If received in error, please do not disclose the contents to anyone, but notify the sender by return email and delete this email (and any attachments) from your system. No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2013.0.2904 / Virus Database: 3211/6596 - Release Date: 08/21/13 2 Hogan Lovells To FROM School District Clients and Friends John W. Borkowski Shannon T. Hodge DATE August 21, 2013 MEMORANDUM Hogan Lovells US LLP Columbia Square 555 Thirteenth Street, NW Washington, DC 20004 T + I 202 637 5600 F +I 202 637 5910 www.hoganlovells.com SUBJECT Office for Civil Rights Issues Notice Requesting Public Comment on Mandatory Civil Rights Data Collection On June 21, the Office for Civil Rights ("OCR") at the United States Department of Education (the "Department") issued a notice requesting public comment on proposed changes to the Civil Rights Data Collection ("CRDC"). 1 This memorandum summarizes the key changes the Department has proposed for the 2013-14 and 2015-16 CRDC. Since 1968, OCR has used its statutory authority2 to require the biennial reporting of civil rights data on schools, including information on school demographics, student outcomes, and programs and services available to students. OCR relies on this information when it identifies enforcement priorities, investigates alleged violations of federal civil rights laws, initiates compliance reviews, and provides guidance and assistance to school districts, parents, students, and the public. OCR usually draws upon a sample of 6,000 to 7,000 local education agencies ("LEAs" or "school districts") to provide data for the CRDC. However, it occasionally collects data from all school districts, which it did most recently in 2011-12. Participation in the CRDC is mandatory for all LEAs receiving federal funds. OCR redesigned its CRDC in 2009, adding new requests for data on college- and careerreadiness, student discipline, teacher equity, third-grade retention policies, access to prekindergarten programs, bullying and harassment, and school-level expenditures. In addition, the 2009-10 CRDC requested data disaggregated by race, ethnicity, sex, disability, and English learner status. OCR built on the 2009 changes in 2011-12 by taking steps designed to improve the integrity of the data and by consolidating its fall and spring data collection periods. Notice, 78 Fed. Reg. 37529 (June 21, 2013). Under 20 U.S.C. 3413(c)(l ), OCR has the authority to collect data to ensure compliance with civil rights laws. \\DC 704749/000300 4952303 v1 The proposed changes to the upcoming CRDC are intended to build on the changes implemented during the two most recent data collections. According to OCR, the proposed changes "reflect the need for a deeper understanding of and accurate data about the educational opportunities and school context for our nation's students." The new proposed CRDC questions fall into several categories: school and district characteristics, discipline, harassment and bullying, early childhood education, pathways to college and career, school finance, and teachers. In addition, OCR also proposes to stop collecting some information that it has previously requested. This memorandum summarizes the proposed additions and deletions to the CRDC in each of these categories. The new school and district characteristics about which OCR proposes to collect information include whether a school that does not classify students by grade level has mainly elementary-, middle-, or high-school age students or a combination of those students and whether an LEA has a civil rights coordinator for discrimination against students on basis of sex, race, and disability. The proposals also include new items about juvenile justice facilities, such as the type of facility, the number of days in the facility's regular school year, the total number of hours per week that the facility offers educational programs, and the number of students who participated in such program for specific numbers of days. In addition, OCR proposes to revise existing data items by defining "preschool" as programs and services for children ages three through five. One proposed addition to the discipline questions is an item requesting the number of students with and without disabilities removed from school for disciplinary reasons, disaggregated by race, sex, English learner status, and, where applicable, disability. The proposed CRDC would also request disaggregated data on the number of preschool students who received corporal punishment (by race, sex,.disability, and English learner status), the number of instances of corporal punishment (by students with disabilities and students without disabilities), and the number of school days missed by students who received out-of-school suspensions (by students with disabilities and students without disabilities). OCR also proposes to require school districts to report the number of documented incidents that occurred at the school that trigger discipline. The revised data collection also would include inquiries into whether the school experienced at least one incident that involved a shooting and whether any of the school's students, faculty, or staff died as a result of a homicide committed at the school. OCR also proposes to add harassment and bullying on the basis of both sexual orientation and/or religion to its inquiry into the number of reported allegations of harassment and bullying. The proposal does not require schools to report demographic data on the complainant or alleged harasser, nor does it authorize schools to inquire about the sexual orientation or religion of students. Instead, the proposed question directs school districts to examine the likely motives of the alleged harasser rather than the status of the alleged victim. The proposed changes to early childhood education data items would allow OCR to learn more about how programs serve young children. Specifically, OCR intends to ask whether an LEA provides early childhood programs for children from birth through age two
the cost of preschool and kindergarten
the number of students served by the school district in preschool 2 \\DC - 704749/000300 - 4952303 v1 programs in both district and non-LEA facilities, disaggregated by age
whether the preschool program includes students not eligible for services under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act
and whether a state statute or regulation requires the LEA to provide full-day or part-day kindergarten. According to OCR, the proposed changes to data items on pathways to college and career would "provide a more accurate accourit of course taking and passing opportunities." The proposed questions ask whether and how many students are enrolled in distance education courses and dual enrollment/dual credit programs
whether the school has students who participate in credit recovery programs to graduate from high school
and the number of student absent fifteen or more school days. OCR would also require school districts to report the number of students enrolled in Algebra I in grade seven and Geometry in grade eight, in addition to the number of students who passed Algebra I in grade seven. Under the proposal, LEAs would indicate whether they have a policy that allows retention of third grade students who are not proficient in Reading. Under the proposed changes to school finance data items, school districts would report the number of full-time equivalents ("FTEs") and the amount of the salaries of personnel funded with state and local funds, including instructional staff, support services staff for pupils, support services staff for instructional staff, school administration staff, and non-instructional staff. Under the teacher data collection category, OCR proposes to inquire about the number of FTE psychologists, social workers, security guards, school resource officers, and sworn law enforcement officers funded with federal, state, or local funds. The new CRDC would delete or modify a number of other prior questions. Deleted questions include how many students await evaluations for special education services and whether schools group students by ability in English and Mathematics. In addition, the new CRDC would no longer collect separately the number of students enrolled in Advanced Placement ("AP") foreign language courses ( disaggregated by race, sex, and disability and English learner status). Rather, the new proposal is to include AP foreign language students in the "other" category. Finally, the proposal includes a major technical change in the CRDC process. In school years 2009-10 and 2011-12, the CRDC was a part of the Department's EDFacts information collection. Under the Department's proposed changes, however, the CRDC would become a separate information collection process. As in prior years, the 2013-14 and 2015-16 CRDC would use a Web-based system in which users could upload data files, enter the data in response to questions displayed on the screen, or use a combination of the two methods. The Department, which has received public comments on the proposed CRDC, will revise the proposal and provide an additional public-comment period. * * * * * * 3 \\DC 704749/000300 -4952303 v1 As you start a new school year, we hope this information gives you a sense of the type of information OCR is likely to be collecting in its next two CRDC cycles. If you have any questions about the June 21 notice or OCR data collection more generally, please contact John W. Borkowski at 574-239-7010 or john.borkowski@hoganlovells.com or Shannon T. Hodge at 202-637-5792 or shannon.hodge@hoganlovells.com. 4 \\DC - 704749/000300 -4952303 v1 Magnet Review From: Sent: Subject: Gibbs, Leslie E. [leslie.welch-gibbs@hoganlovells.com] Wednesday, August 28, 2013 9:24 AM Hogan Lovells US LLP Clients and Friends Memorandum Attachments: Hogan Lovells Client Advisory- Title IX - Gender Discrimination - FINAL.pdf Attached is a memorandum prepared by Maree Sneed and Esther Haley Walker. If you have any questions regarding this memorandum, please contact the attorneys listed on the last page. If you have a new e-mail address or would like to be removed from the mailing list, please let me know. Leslie Gibbs Assistant Hogan Lovells US LLP Columbia Square 555 Thirteenth Street, NW Washington, DC 20004 Tel +1 202 637 5600 Direct +1 202 637 7121 Fax +1 202 637 5910 Ema,I lesliewelch-gibbs@hoganlovells com www.hoganlovells.com Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail About Hogan Lovells Hogan Lovells is www hoqanlovellsa nc oinmt.e rnational legal practice that includes Hogan Lovells US LLP and Hogan Lovells International LLP. For more information, see CONFIDENTIALITY. This email and any attachments are confidential, except where the email states it can be disclosed
it may also be privileged. If yreocuer ivseydst einm e. rror, please do not disclose the contents to anyone, but notify the sender by return email and delete this email (and any attachments) from No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG- WWv\.avg.com Version: 2013.0.2904 I Virus Database: 3211/6596 - Release Date: 08/21/13 Internal Virus Database is out of date. 1 Hogan Lovells To School District Clients and Friends FROM Maree Sneed Esther Haley Walker DATE August 28, 2013 MEMORANDUM Hogan Lovells US LLP Columbia Square 555 Thirteenth Street, NW Washington, DC 20004 T +1 202 637 5600 F +1 202 637 5910 www.hoganlovells.com SUBJECT Office for Civil Rights Signs Resolution Agreement Addressing Title IX Protection for Transgender and Gender Nonconforming Students On July 24, 2013, the U.S. Department of Education, Office for Civil Rights ("OCR") and the U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division ("DOJ") entered into a Resolution Agreement with Arcadia Unified School District ("Arcadia"), which required Arcadia to implement districtwide measures to better protect transgender and gender nonconforming students from discrimination. 1 The Resolution Agreement resulted from an investigation by OCR and DOJ of a complaint alleging that the school district prohibited a transgender boy, who had "consistently and uniformly presented as a boy at school and in all other aspects of his life for several years," from accessing sex-specific facilities designated for male students at school and at an overnight academic camp. 2 Although the Resolution Agreement only imposes requirements on Arcadia, other school districts across the country may view such requirements as reflective of what OCR and DOJ consider to be best practices. This memorandum (I) briefly places the Resolution Agreement in context based on past OCR statements about gender discrimination and (2) summarizes the actions Arcadia agreed to perform-and other school districts may consider adopting-in an effort to prevent discrimination of trans gender and nonconforming students. Placing the Resolution Agreement in Context OCR is responsible for enforcing federal civil rights laws that prohibit recipients of federal financial assistance from discriminating based on sex (among other protected categories), in See U.S. Department of Education, Office for Civil Rights, U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division, and Arcadia Unified School District, Resolution Agreement, July 24, 2013, available at: http://www.nclrights.org/site/DocServer/Arcadia Resolution agreement 07.24.2013.pdf. 2 Resolution Agreement, at 1. \\DC - 700999/000060 - 5109447 v1 accordance with Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 ("Title IX"). Although Title IX does not prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, OCR has taken the position that Title IX protects all students from sex-based discrimination and harassment.3 As a result, OCR concluded that sex discrimination may occur "if students are harassed either for exhibiting what is perceived as a stereotypical characteristic for their sex, or for failing to conform to stereotypical notions of masculinity and femininity."4 OCR and DOJ's July 2013 Resolution Agreement with Arcadia more fully explains the steps that OCR and DOJ believe a school district could take to prevent such discrimination. Also, the Resolution Agreement defines key terms (such as gender-based discrimination, gender identity, and gender expression) so that important discussions surrounding these issues can begin to utilize a common vocabulary. Taking Action to Protect Transgender and Gender Nonconforming Students From Discrimination In order to comply with OCR and DOJ's view of Title IX's protections, Arcadia agreed to take certain steps to protect transgender and gender nonconforming students from discrimination. As part of this process, Arcadia agreed to hire one or more third-party consultants with an expertise in child and adolescent gender identity to support it during implementation of the Resolution Agreement. Also, Arcadia agreed to send annual reports to OCR and DOJ detailing its compliance with the Resolution Agreement, including a description of relevant training events for school district employees. As described further below, Arcadia agreed to take two main steps in the Resolution Agreement: (1) better serve the student whose complaint initiated the OCR and DOJ investigation and (2) implement district-wide measures that aim to benefit all similarly-situated students. Because OCR and DOJ may view some of the specific steps Arcadia agreed to take as best practices, other school districts may want to consider revising their own policies in light of the Resolution Agreement. Specific actions Arcadia agreed to take to better serve the original complainant: Provide access to sex-specific facilities designated for male students at the school and district-sponsored activities (such as extracurricular activities) consistent with the student's gender identity, and (if requested by the student) access to private facilities based on privacy, safety, or other concerns
Treat the student as other male students are treated in education programs and activities offered by the district
Ensure the student's birth name and assigned sex are treated as confidential, personally identifiable information
and OCR, Dear Colleague Letter, Harassment and Bullying 7 (October 26, 2010), available at http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/letters/colleague-20 IO I 0.pdf. 4 Id. at 7-8. 2 \\DC - 700999/000060 - 5109447 v1 Advise the student that he may request a "support team,"5 which would include his parents, himself, an advocate of his parents' choice (if any), a medical professional of his parents' choice (if any), and relevant district personnel, to help ensure that he has the access and opportunity to participate in all programs and activities at school. District-wide measures Arcadia agreed to implement to better serve all of its students: Revise all policies, procedures, regulations, and related documents (such as complaint forms, handbooks, notices, and websites) so that they: o include explicitly "gender-based discrimination as a form of discrimination based on sex "6 ' o state that "gender-based discrimination includes discrimination based on a student's gender identity, gender expression, gender transition, transgender status, or gender nonconformity," 7 and o ensure all students are provided with equal access to programs and activities offered by the school district
Develop a "comprehensive gender-based non-discrimination policy"8
Develop an implementation guide for administrators, faculty, and staff addressing the gender-based non-discrimination policy
Inform students who are undertaking, planning to undergo, or who have completed gender transitions that they have a right to request a support team that will help ensure equal access to and equal opportunity to participate in school district programs and activities
Provide annual training to all certificated district-level and school-based administrators about: o the school district's "obligations to prevent and address gender-based discrimination, "9 o implementation of policies, procedures, and regulations, and o best practices for creating a nondiscriminatory school environment
and Provide age-appropriate instruction to students about gender-based discrimination, accompanied by examples of prohibited conduct. While the Resolution Agreement does not set any new legal standards for school districts, it does illustrate that OCR and DOJ view protection of transgender and gender nonconforming students as falling within the scope of Title IX and that they are prepared to enforce Title IX accordingly. As a result, school districts should review their policies and procedures to ensure that they have Resolution Agreement, at 3. lg_. at 4. Id. at 4. The Resolution Agreement provides detailed definitions for each of these tenns. See j_g., at 1-2. lg_. at 5. lg_. 3 \\DC - 700999/000060 - 5109447 v1 taken steps to prevent discrimination against this particular student population, and that they are providing training for administrators and age-appropriate instruction for students. Finally, although the Resolution Agreement focuses on the K-12 environment, best practices for preventing discrimination of transgender and gender nonconforming students apply to postsecondary institutions that receive federal funds as well. * * * We hope this information is useful to you as you consider your schools' discrimination policies and procedures. If you have questions about the Resolution Agreement or Title IX more generally, please contact Maree Sneed (202-637-6416 or maree.sneed@hoganlovells.com) or Esther Haley Walker (202-637-5764 or esther.walker@hoganlovells.com). 4 \\DC - 700999/000060 - 5109447 v1 Magnet Review From: Sent: Subject: Attachments: Gibbs, Leslie E. [leslie.welch-gibbs@hoganlovells.com] Thursday, September 12, 2013 2: 11 PM Hogan Lovells Client Advisory - US DOE ELL Developments Hogan Lovells Client Advisory - US DOE ELL Developments.pdf Attached is a memorandum prepared by Maree Sneed and Chris Lott. If you have any questions regarding this memorandum, please contact the attorneys listed on the last page. If you have a new e-mail address or would like to be removed from the mailing list, please let me know. Leslie Gibbs Assistant Hogan Lovells US LLP Columbia Square 555 Thirteenth Street, NW Washington, DC 20004 Tel: +1 202 637 5600 Direct: +1 202 637 7121 Fax: +1 202 637 5910 Email: leslie.welch-gibbs@hoganlovells.com www.hoganlovells.com Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail. About Hogan Lovells Hogan Lovells is an international legal practice that includes Hogan Lovells US LLP and Hogan Lovells International LLP. For more information, see www.hoganlovells.com. CONFIDENTIALITY. This email and any attachments are confidential, except where the email states it can be disclosed
it may also be privileged. If received in error, please do not disclose the contents to anyone, but notify the sender by return email and delete this email (and any attachments) from your system. No virus found in this message. Checked by A VG - www.avg.com Version: 2013.0.3392 / Virus Database: 3222/6654 - Release Date: 09/10/13 Hogan Lovells To School District Clients and Friends FROM Maree Sneed Chris Lott DATE September 12, 2013 MEMORANDUM Hogan Lovells US LLP Columbia Square 555 Thirteenth Street, NW Washington, DC 20004 T +1 202 637 5600 F +1 202 637 5910 www.hoganlovells.com SUBJECT U.S. Department of Education English Language Learner Developments Two recent U.S. Department of Education ("Department") developments highlight the growing challenges school districts face in educating English Language Learners ("ELL") and an opportunity school districts and other stakeholders have to shape Department ELL policy and technical assistance going forward. First, in June 2013 the Department published The Biennial Report to Congress on the Implementation of the Title III State Formula Grant Program: School Years 2008-2010, available at http://www.ncela.gwu.edu/files/uploads/3/Biennial Report 0810.pdf. (Title III of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act provides funds to states and school districts to support the education of limited English proficient ("LEP") students
in tum, recipients of Title III funds must meet annual progress goals with respect to LEPs.) The report highlights the growing LEP population in U.S. schools: between 2002-03 and 2009-10, the number ofK-12 LEP students identified for services increased by 7%, and the number of K-12 LEP students served under Title III increased by 22%. The report also details states' mixed progress in achieving annual goals under Title III. Of note: In terms of the percentage of LEP students making progress in learning English, states ranged from 18.4% to 68.3% in 2008-09, and from 19.5% to 97.6% in 2009-10. In terms of the percentage of LEP students scoring at or above proficient in reading or language arts, in 2008-09 states ranged from 5.3% to 84.8% in reading or language arts and from 1.7% to 84.9% in mathematics. In 2009-10, the range for reading or language arts was from 8.6% to 81.9%, and the range for mathematics was from 11.5% to 86%. In 2008-09 and 2009-10, 55% of local education agencies met their targets for the three annual measurable achievement objectives-increases in the number of students (1) \\DC - 700999/000060 5156377 v1 making progress in learning English, (2) attaining English proficiency, and (3) scoring at or above proficiency in reading or language arts and mathematics Second, on September 9, 2013, the Department published a request for information in the federal register asking school districts and other ELL stakeholders to provide "information on priorities for future evaluation and research studies needed to inform effective instruction, assessment, and professional development that is responsive to the needs of English learners." 78 Fed. Reg. 55,068 (Sep. 9, 20 I 2), available at http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2013-09-09/pdf/2013- 21767 .pdf. The notice is an opportunity for school districts to help guide the Department's future ELL policy and technical assistance. The Department has identified the following topics and requested information regarding in which of these areas or others it should conduct new studies: Identification, screening, and assessment practices of ELLs
Strategies for data collection, data analysis, and data-based decision-making
Alignment of English-language proficiency ("ELP") standards with college- and career-ready standards and alignment ofELP assessments with ELP standards
Key features of instruction for ELLs that promote language acquisition
Technology-based instructional strategies that promote ELL achievement
and Professional development. Responses must be submitted by September 25, 2013. Interested parties may submit comments through the Federal eRulemaking Portal or via postal mail. We hope this information is useful to you as you continue to address the challenges of educating ELLs. If you have questions about this information, please contact Maree Sneed (202-63 7-6416 or rnaree.sneed@hoganlovells.com) or Chris Lott (202-637-5877 or christopher.lott@hoganlovells.com). 2 \\DC - 7009991000060 - 5156377 v1 Magnet Review From: Sent: Subject: Attachments: Gibbs, Leslie E. [leslie.welch-gibbs@hoganlovells.com] Monday, September 23, 2013 2:32 PM Hogan Lovells Client Advisory - Bullying Hogan Lovells Client Advisory - Bullying.pdf Attached is a memorandum prepared by Maree Sneed and Esther Haley Walker. If you have any questions regarding this memorandum, please contact the attorneys listed on the last page. If you have a new e-mail address or would like to be removed from the mailing list, please let me know. Leslie Gibbs Assistant Hogan Lovells US LLP Columbia Square 555 Thirteenth Street. NW Washington DC 20004 Tel +1 202 637 5600 Direct +1 202 637 7121 Fax +1 202 637 5910 Email leslie.welch-gibbs@hoganlovells.com www hoganlovells com Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail About Hogan Lovells Hogan Lovells is an international legal practice that includes Hogan Lovells US LLP and Hogan Lovells International LLP. For more information. see www hoganlovells com. CONFIDENTIALITY. This email and any attachments are confidential, except where the email states it can be disclosed, it may also be privileged If received in error, please do not disclose the contents to anyone, but notify the sender by return email and delete this email (and any attachments} from your system. No virus found in this message Checked by AVG - www avg com Version 2013 0 3408 I Virus Database 3222/6692 - Release Date 09/23/13 Hogan Lovells To School District Clients and Friends FROM Maree Sneed Esther Haley Walker DATE September 20, 2013 MEMORANDUM Hogan Lovells US LLP Columbia Square 555 Thirteenth Street, NW Washington, DC 20004 T +1 202 637 5600 F +1 202 637 5910 www.hoganlovells.com SUBJECT Students With Disabilities: Legal Issues Surrounding Being Bullied and Being Bullies On August 20, 2013, the U.S. Department of Education's Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services ("OSERS") issued a Dear Colleague Letter1 addressing school districts' responsibilities under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, 20 U.S.C. 1400 et seq. ("IDEA") when students with disabilities are bullied or engage in bullying. If a student with an individualized education program ("IEP") is bullied or is engaging in bullying behavior, the school district should provide any support and/or services needed to address inappropriate behavior because it has a responsibility under the IDEA to ensure that each student is receiving a free appropriate public education ("FAPE"). This memorandum (1) briefly places this Dear Colleague Letter in context based on past OSER guidance and (2) summarizes the requirements for school districts serving children with disabilities who are bullied or engage in bullying behavior. Placing the Dear Colleague Letter in Context OSERS is responsible for working to ensure school districts across the country provide children with "positive, safe, and nurturing school environments in which they can learn, develop, and participate."2 The August 20, 2013 Dear Colleague Letter from OSERS supplements the July 25, 2000 Dear Colleague Letter that OSERS and the U.S. Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights ("OCR") jointly released to address disability harassment under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 ("Section 504"), Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 ("Title II of the ADA"), and the IDEA.3 Although not all bullying constitutes harassment under Section 504, Title II of the ADA, and the IDEA, the Dear Colleague Letter issued in 2000 acknowledges that bullying can be one of the many forms of harassment that disabled students may face.4 The August OSERS, Dear Colleague Letter, Bullying of Students With Disabilities (August 20, 2013), available at http/ /www2. ed. gov/pol icy/speced/g uid/idea/memosdcltrs/bul lyi ngdcl-8-20-13. pdf. 2 .!,Qa.t 1. 3 OCR and OSERS, Dear Colleague Letter, Reminder of Responsibilities under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (July 25, 2000), available at http://www.ed.gov/ocr/docs/disabharassltr html. 4 lg_. \\DC - 703633/000410 -5135795 v1 20, 2013 letter focuses specifically on bullying (not just bullying that constitutes harassment), a school district's obligations to respond to bullying, and discusses evidence-based practices for preventing and addressing bullying. Requirements for School Districts Defining "Bullying" Bullying can involve "physical behavior or verbal, emotional, or social behaviors (~, excluding someone from social activities, making threats, withdrawing attention, destroying someone's reputation) and can range from blatant aggression to far more subtle and covert behaviors."5 Cyberbullying is a type of bullying that uses technology (such as texting or electronic mail messages).6 The focus of the bullying need not be related to a student's disability in order to trigger a school district's obligations to a bullied disabled student under the IDEA. Although students with disabilities are "disproportionately affected by bullying," some disabled students may not understand the extent to which bullying behaviors are harmful.7 Bullying Can Result in a Denial of FAPE Any bullying that results in a disabled student "not receiving meaningful educational benefit" from the services provided by the school constitutes a denial of FAPE under the IDEA.8 Schools have an obligation under the IDEA to ensure a student receives FAPE in accordance with his or her IEP, which should be revised as needed to ensure the student's needs are met. The Dear Colleague Letter cautions school districts, however, regarding changing the placement of children who have been bullied. The letter states: "While it may be appropriate to consider whether to change the placement of the child who was the target of the bullying behavior, placement teams should be aware that certain changes to the education program of a student with a disability (~, placement in a more restrictive 'protected' setting to avoid bullying behavior) may constitute a denial of the IDEA's requirement that the school provide FAPE in the" least restrictive environment. 9 School Districts Must Meet the Needs of the Bullied and the Bullies School districts have an obligation to disabled students who are bullied and those who are bullies. Although sometimes the focus is on the students who are bullied, school districts must ensure that IEP teams review the IEPs for bullies "to determine if additional supports and services are needed to address the inappropriate behavior."10 Also, bullying may trigger a school's "child find" obligations under the IDEA
a bullying incident may cause a school to identify a child who is in need of special education and related services. 11 OSERS, Dear Colleague Letter, Bullying of Students With Disabilities 2 (August 20, 2013), available at http://www2 edgov/policy/speced/guid/idea/memosdcltrs/bullyingdcl-8-20-13.pdf. 6 Id. 7 11- 8 )_g_. 9 )..Qa. t 3. 10 )_g_. 11 )_g_a.t 2 (citing 34 C.F.R. 300.111, 300 201). 2 IIDC - 703633/000410-5135795 v1 Policies and Practices Addressing Bullying OSERS invites all school districts to reevaluate their policies and practices in light of the July 25, 2000 Dear Colleague Letter, and the August 20, 2013 Dear Colleague Letter and its enclosure: "Effective Evidence-based Practices for Preventing and Addressing Bullying."12 OSERS posits that there is no "one-size-fits-all" solution to bullying.13 Instead, it suggests that schools adopt a "comprehensive, multitiered behavioral framework" that can be used to "establish a positive school environment, set high academic and behavioral expectations for all students, and guide delivery of evidence-based instruction and interventions that address" all students' needs (not just those with disabilities).14 Such an evidence-based framework would include: (1) teaching students and personnel what behaviors are expected and how to respond appropriately when bullying occurs
(2) providing active adult supervision of students, (3) providing training and ongoing support to school personnel and students, (4) disseminating anti-bullying policies to school personnel, parents, and students, in a form accessible to those with disabilities, and (5) collecting data about instances of bullying. We hope this information is useful to you as you consider your schools' compliance with the IDEA. If you have questions about the August 20, 2013 Dear Colleague Letter issued by OSERS or the IDEA more generally, please contact Maree Sneed (202-637-6416 or maree.sneed@hoganlovells.com) or Esther Haley Walker (202-637-5764 or esther.walker@hoganlovells.com). 12 OSERS, Dear Colleague Letter, Bullying of Students With Disabilities, Enclosure (August 20, 2013), available at http ://www2. ed .gov/pol icy/speced/g uid/idea/memosdcltrs/bu llyi ngdcl-en closure-8- 20-13 pdf. 13 l_g_a.t 1. 14 l_g_. 3 \\DC - 703633/000410 - 5135795 v1 Magnet Review From: Sent: To: Magnet Schools of America [communications@magnet.edu] Sunday, September 15, 2013 7:02 AM Magnet Review Subject: Study Finds Magnet Students Outperform Peers by Wide Margins (J Like - MAGNET SCHOOL.....U'~ OF AMERICA State Study Finds Hartford Magnet Students Outperform Peers by Wide Margins A new report released by the Connecticut State Department of Education found that students attending one of the city's magnet or suburban schools outperform their peers by wide margins in math, reading, writing, and science. The report is the first of its kind to measure the performance of students attending one of the interdistrict magnet programs supported by the state. Magnet Schools of America is proud to host its next national conference in Hartford in 2014 where magnet school teachers, principals, and leaders will share their best practices and visit Hartford's top magnet schools. MSA Board Member, Susan Eaton also wrote a great piece about Hartford's interdistrict magnet programs and how other school districts can replicate their success. It is definitely worth a read! like us on Face book() View our profile on Linked~ Forward this email :>1 ifSafeUnsubscribc This email was sent to magnet@magnetschool.com by communications@magnet.edu Update Profile/Email Address Instant removal with SafeUnsubscribe'"' Privacy Policy. Magnet Schools of America 1909 K Street, NW Suite C-140 Washington DC 20006 CoostantC.OOtact" 1l13m@iBii11 Conn ecticutS tate Department of Education CMT /CAPT Results for Hartford Resident Students The data in the following pages contain CMT and CAPT performance of Hartford resident students who are enrolled in local and choice programs. Notes: Data reflect Hartford resident students
students from other towns are not included. State Department of Education does not report CMT/CAPT results for student counts less than 20. 2013 data include performance of Hartford resident students in the CT Technical High Schools. 2013 Hartford Public Schools results do not include Ramon E. Betances Early Reading Lab, a school that is under special review. These data represent annual snapshots of student performance
as such, the cohort of students tested from one year to the next will be different. The 2012 Hartford Magnet School results for the "percent of students at or above goal in Science" is being reissued (see page 9). Connecticut State Department of Education, September 3, 2013 1 of 9 HARTFORD RESIDENT STUDENTS ATTENDING LOCAL AND CHOICE PROGRAMS BY GRADE Reading Percent at/above Goal 2013 Writing Percent at/above Goal 2013 Grade HPS Regular Hartford Magnet CREC Magnet Open Choice Grade HPS Regular Hartford Magnet CREC Magnet Open Choice 3 25.5 36.4 53.7 31.7 3 37.2 47.7 59.0 37.0 4 27.1 39.5 51.0 39.2 4 31.3 37.5 46.0 42.8 5 29.6 46.9 75.0 52.3 5 34.6 49.4 60.0 43.1 6 34.6 60.6 43.0 54.5 6 30.0 49.0 41.7 52.1 7 41.2 62.0 66.3 66.4 7 23.1 45.0 45.6 46.5 8 36.8 51.8 50.0 61.6 8 26.4 42.9 50.7 50.0 10 5.4 26.9 25.3 15.2 10 15.5 44.7 49.5 35.8 Math Percent at/above Goal 2013 Science Percent at/above Goal 2013 Grade HPS Regular Hartford Magnet CREC Magnet Open Choice Grade HPS Regular Hartford Magnet CREC Magnet Open Choice 3 25.1 29.9 52.9 30.6 5 18.2 41.5 60.0 39.2 4 24.8 39.0 53.7 39.6 8 15.5 32.4 24.4 36.4 5 26.8 43.7 57.1 45.8 10 4.7 30.4 15.2 13.7 6 26.8 48.0 30.6 43.1 7 18.8 31.2 39.8 39.8 8 18.9 36.8 37.0 35.4 10 4.9 26.0 31.1 19.8 Connecticut State Department of Education, September 3, 2013 2 of 9 HARTFORD RESIDENT STUDENTS ATTENDING LOCAL AND CHOICE PROGRAMS BY GRADE Reading Percent at/above Proficiency 2013 Writing Percent at/above Proficiency 2013 Grade HPS Regular Hartford Magnet CREC Magnet Open Choice Grade HPS Regular Hartford Magnet CREC Magnet Open Choice 3 45.8 59.3 74.6 54.7 3 65.0 71.5 76.9 63.6 4 44.5 61.5 74.5 60.8 4 63.7 68.8 76.2 78.3 5 46.4 64.6 92.9 71.6 5 65.8 84.8 93.3 80.8 6 54.9 78.1 65.3 73.6 6 58.6 78.4 73.5 76.0 7 55.7 80.9 77.9 86.9 7 51.7 74.9 71.9 74.8 8 53.8 70.7 69.2 79.8 8 58.7 74.4 75.4 82.7 10 38.1 74.8 68.1 63.3 10 56.8 88.9 94.6 74.7 Math Percent at/above Proficiency 2013 Science Percent at/above Proficiency 2013 Grade HPS Regular Hartford Magnet CREC Magnet Open Choice Grade HPS Regular Hartford Magnet CREC Magnet Open Choice 3 54.6 66.0 77.9 60.4 5 42.5 70.1 96.7 66.9 4 52.4 62.5 87.0 67.9 8 32.7 57.9 50.4 61.8 5 45.8 62.9 89.3 73.7 10 34.3 71.9 64.1 51.6 6 53.8 73.4 69.4 73.4 7 45.7 66.5 72.8 78.8 8 49.5 72.2 80.3 88.9 10 29.5 64.7 63.3 49.4 Connecticut State Department of Education, September 3, 2013 3 of 9 HARTFORD RESIDENT STUDENTS ATTENDING LOCAL AND CHOICE PROGRAMS BY RACE Hartford Resident Students: Reading Percent at/above Goal 2013 CMT and CAPT Race HPS Regular HREGn Hartford Magnet HMn CREC Magnet CRn Open Choice OCn Latino/Hisp 24.7 3138 45.7 823 46.8 267 46.6 253 Native Amer. < 20 < 20 < 20 < 20 African Amer. 34.4 1853 47.7 650 47.6 275 45.4 485 Asian 27.8 115 53.1 32 < 20 < 20 Hawaiian/Pacific < 20 < 20 < 20 < 20 White 51.1 231 73.9 111 < 20 58.3 < 20 Two+ races 24.6 134 57.9 38 < 20 43.8 < 20 Hartford Resident Students: Math Percent at/above Goal 2013 CMT and CAPT Race HPS Regular HREGn Hartford Magnet HMn CREC Magnet CRn Open Choice OCn Latino/Hisp 19.3 3251 36.0 833 40.4 267 42.3 267 Native Amer. < 20 < 20 < 20 < 20 African Amer. 24.0 1886 31.6 652 35.5 276 32.9 496 Asian 32.6 135 51.6 31 < 20 < 20 Hawaiian/Pacific < 20 < 20 < 20 < 20 White 38.1 247 62.2 111 < 20 < 20 Two+ races 14.0 136 39.5 38 < 20 < 20 Connecticut State Department of Education, September 3, 2013 4 of 9 HARTFORD RESIDENT STUDENTS ATTENDING LOCAL AND CHOICE PROGRAMS BY RACE Hartford Resident Students: Reading Percent at/above Proficient 2013 CMT and CAPT Race HPS Regular HREGn Hartford Magnet HMn CREC Magnet CRn Open Choice OCn Latino/Hisp 42.7 3138 68.4 823 70.0 267 68.0 253 Native Amer. < 20 < 20 < 20 < 20 African Amer. 55.9 1853 72.9 650 70.2 275 69.3 485 Asian 42.6 115 78.1 32 < 20 < 20 Hawaiian/Pacific < 20 < 20 < 20 < 20 White 70.6 231 89.2 111 < 20 < 20 Two+ races 43.3 134 86.8 38 < 20 < 20 Hartford Resident Students: Math Percent at/above Proficient 2013 CMT and CAPT Race HPS Regular HREGn Hartford Magnet HMn CREC Magnet CRn Open Choice OCn Latino/Hisp 44.2 3251 68.2 833 76.0 267 71.2 267 Native Amer. < 20 < 20 < 20 < 20 African Amer. 52.9 1886 62.6 652 71.0 276 69.6 496 Asian 54.8 135 77.4 31 < 20 < 20 < 20 < 20 < 20 < 20 White 68.0 247 85.6 111 < 20 < 20 Two+ races 44.1 136 76.3 38 < 20 < 20 Connecticut State Department of Education, September 3, 2013 5 of 9 HARTFORD RESIDENT STUDENTS ATTENDING LOCAL AND CHOICE PROGRAMS BY RACE Hartford Resident Students: Writing Percent at/above Goal 2013 CMT and CAPT Race HPS Regular HREGn Hartford Magnet HMn CREC Magnet CRn Open Choice OCn Latino/Hisp 24.8 3593 42.5 917 41.2 289 45.0 289 Native Amer. < 20 < 20 < 20 < 20 African Amer. 35.1 2090 43.3 719 51.6 304 42.8 549 Asian 36.5 126 52.9 34 < 20 < 20 Hawaiian/Pacific < 20 < 20 < 20 < 20 White 46.1 245 68.1 113 < 20 < 20 Two+ races 27.5 138 59.0 39 < 20 < 20 Hartford Resident Students: Science Percent at/above Goal 2013 CMT and CAPT Race HPS Regular HREGn Hartford Magnet HMn CREC Magnet CRn Open Choice OCn Latino/Hisp 12.8 1493 31.5 340 24.3 111 36.0 111 Native Amer. < 20 < 20 < 20 < 20 African Amer. 15.1 906 31.8 299 23.3 129 27.8 216 Asian 8.7 69 < 20 < 20 < 20 Hawaiian/Pacific < 20 < 20 < 20 < 20 White 26.3 99 51.2 43 < 20 < 20 Two+ races 12.3 65 54.2 24 < 20 < 20 :onnecticut State Department of Education, September 3, 2013 6 of 9 HARTFORD RESIDENT STUDENTS ATTENDING LOCAL AND CHOICE PROGRAMS BY RACE Hartford Resident Students: Writing Percent at/above Proficient 2013 CMT and CAPT Race HPS Regular HREGn Hartford Magnet HMn CREC Magnet CRn Open Choice OCn Latino/Hisp 55.7 3593 75.0 917 75.8 289 76.5 289 Native Amer. < 20 < 20 < 20 < 20 African Amer. 67.7 2090 77.1 719 78.6 304 74.5 549 Asian 57.1 126 82.4 34 < 20 < 20 Hawaiian/Pacific < 20 < 20 < 20 < 20 White 73.9 245 90.3 113 < 20 < 20 Two+ races 65.9 138 87.2 39 < 20 < 20 Hartford Resident Students: Science Percent at/above Proficient 2013 CAPT and CMT Race HPS Regular HREGn Hartford Magnet HMn CREC Magnet CRn Open Choice OCn Latino/Hisp 33.1 1493 63.2 340 58.6 111 60.4 111 Native Amer. < 20 < 20 < 20 < 20 African Amer. 40.7 906 64.2 299 60.5 129 61.6 216 Asian 17.4 69 < 20 < 20 < 20 Hawaiian/Pacific < 20 < 20 < 20 < 20 White 70.7 99 79.1 43 < 20 < 20 Two+ races 41.5 65 87.5 24 < 20 < 20 Connecticut State Department of Education, September 3, 2013 7 of 9 HARTFORD RESIDENT STUDENTS ATTENDING LOCAL AND CHOICE PROGRAMS BY RACE CTHSS (Grade 10 Only)% at/above Proficiency and% at/above Goal 2013 Race Reading Reading Reading Math Math Math Writing Writing Writing Science Science Science Prof. Goal n Prof. Goal n Prof. Goal n Prof. Goal n Latino/Hisp 66.4 13.3 113 52.2 10.4 115 85.3 28.4 116 58.6 12.1 116 Native Amer. <20 <20 <20 <20 African Amer. 55.3 2.1 47 61.7 10.6 47 90.2 17.6 51 62.7 2.0 51 Asian <20 <20 <20 <20 Hawaiian/Pacific <20 <20 <20 <20 White <20 <20 <20 <20 Two+ races <20 <20 <20 <20 Connecticut State Department of Education, September 3, 2013 8 of 9 HARTFORD RESIDENT STUDENTS ATTENDING LOCAL AND CHOICE PROGRAMS BY RACE Hartford Magnet Data Corrected from 2012 transmission Hartford Resident Students: Science Percent at/above Goal 2012 CMT and CAPT Race HPS Regular HREGn Hartford Magne HMn CREC Magnet CRn Open Choice OCn Latino/Hisp 13.0 1433 30.9 311 26.4 129 67.9 78 Native Amer. <20 <20 <20 <20 African Amer. 14.7 902 31.9 235 28.4 141 66.1 174 Asian 9.1 55 <20 <20 <20 Hawaiian/Pacific <20 <20 <20 <20 White 21.9 96 48.8 41 <20 <20 Two+ races 14.8 128 <20 <20 <20 Connecticut State Department of Education, September 3, 2013 9 of 9 June 2013 Volume 26, Number 5 TheA bellR eport What we think about, and what we'd like you to think about Published as a community service by The Abell Foufldation Years After a Landmark Court Decision, Connecticut's Solution to School Segregation Shows Promise: Can it Inform Action in Baltimore? ABELL SALUTES: "The ETC": helping entrepreneurs grow companies "further and faster" and "creating new jobs in Baltimore." Tom Murdock was reaching school and saw a need-in his case, in the classroom learning process. Following the pattern of so many similar and successful scare-up stories, he began to put together a business plan designed to fill char needinvicing friends in to share. The plan led co a relationship wich cofounders (in Long Island) and to a meeting with che Emerging Technology Centers (ETC) in Baltimore. Mr. Murdock says, "Ac char point our group found icselfhappily in che ETC's incubation process, where we were introduced to managers whose contributions to our scare-up's organization and growth became a chapter in a book we began writing together." This history, wriccen cogecher, led to che founding scare-up company known today as Moodlerooms. There are many Moodlerooms stories where che ploc involves, at a critical point along the way, the involvement of che ETC. The ETC is an initiative of the Baltimore Development Corporation, a nonprofit technology business incubator chat works with early-scage Baltimorebased technology entrepreneurs. The continued on page 8 By Susan Eaton J use beyond the bleak jail for juveniles, pasc bodegas painted tropical hues and commercial vacancy signs along Hartford, Connecticut's Broad Street, stands a sleek, shiny collection of modern buildings. On weekday mornings, a chain of yellow buses encircles chis meticulous, bustling 14-acre compound called The Learning Corridor. Kids hop through che buses' accordion doors, file into buildings, and sectle into classrooms where the mix of complexions and family incomes does nor match Census data culled from these streets. Many of the roughly 1,570 students scattered among che elementary, middle, and two high schools here have indeed been "bused in" to-yes-engineer rhe creation of racially and economically diverse schools in chis otherwise extremely poor Latino neighborhood. Some of the children who attend schools on chis campus do live nearby. Ochers come from Hartford's African-American neighborhoods to the north. A large share of the students, however, travels up to an hour from che suburbs beyond the city limits. Educators in several other "magnet" schools in and around Hartford open their doors each morning, too, to a scudent body chat reflects rhe diversity of the region, as opposed to the homogeneity found in most of Connecticut's public schools, which enroll scudents from just one cown or neighborhood. As of summer 2012, chere are 31 interdistricc magnet schools in the Greater Hartford region, including chose at The Learning Corridor, enrolling about 13,000 scudents and supported by a mix of state, local, and philanthropic funds. (Four more are scheduled to open chis fall.) Another state-funded program, called Open Choice, enrolls about 1,700 students and provides transportation for children who live in Hartford to attend suburban schools. Students who live in Hartford's suburbs can also transfer into Hartford through chis program, though only a few dozen have chosen char option in recent years. In the larger national public education context, where entrenched racial and economic segregation is the norm, the purposeful integracion effort that has taken root and blossomed here is undoubtedly an outlier. Bue ic is an educational anomaly char may be instructive for other racially and economically stratified regions. Created in response to a 1996 stare court ruling, rhe schools and programs in and around Hartford have nor only substantially reduced rhe share of students of color in high-poverty, segregated schools, bur rhey have also engendered a broad array of innovative educational options char have proven appealing to families of all racial and economic backgrounds and resulted in promising outcomes for the students who take pare. How did all chis come into being in of all places, Connecticut, one of the nation's wealthiest and mosc economically unequal scares? The story of what emerged in Connecticut and why is instructive not just for Balri more, bur also for the numerous metropolitan areas across rhe country beset by segregation and educational inequality. continued fom page I The Long Road to Remedy In 1989, a single mother of two, Elizabeth Horton Sheff, signed on as lead plaintiff in the civil rights case Sheff v. O'Neill. Sheff's lawyers argued chat the racial and class segregation in che region's public schools denied students che "substantially equal education" granted in the state's Conscicucion. In all, a racially diverse group of 19 schoolchildren and their families were plaintiffs in the case. Elizabeth Horton Sheff and the national civil rights organizations and local lawyers who brought Sheffsaw ic firsc as a way ro assist children of color and economically disadvantaged children in Hartford and, by implication, low-income students of color in ocher similarly challenged Conneccicuc cities. But from the beginning, their aspirations looked far beyond Conneccicuc. They imagined char Sheff might be the long dreamed about case chat could revive the ideals inspired by the iconic 1954 United States Supreme Court ruling, Brown v. Board of Education. In Brown, the Court declared unanimously char "in the field of public educacion separate but equal has no place." Brown sparked the civil rights movement, which toppled enforced, intentional segregation in the American souch. However, the sotermed de facto segregation common in the North-segregation created not by wriccen law, bur consequential nonetheless- would prove far harder for civil rights lawyers co eradicate. In 1974, the U.S. Supreme Court severely limited Brown's power and reach with the lesser-known 5-4 decision Milliken v. Bradley, which exempted Detroit suburbs from inclusion in urban desegregation plans. This meant chat urban school districts, where the pool of whice students was shrinking, were on their own in remedying segregation. As whice flight from cmes sped up, desegregation became increasingly difficult to achieve especially in che north. Because Sheff was brought in scare court, it represented a detour around the federal Milliken roadblock. The Sheff case was different in another important way, too. Sheff's lawyers did nor bother crying co prove char govern menc officials had intentionally segregated students by race or ethnicity. Rather, they argued chat the condition of racial and ethnic segregation cue off white students and students of color from necessary, viral exposure to ocher cultures, experiences, and knowledge. Racial and ethnic segregacion's accendant-concentraced poverty-the lawyers argued, overwhelmed even the best Hartford educacors who worked in schools with hallmark sympcoms of profound, chronic institutional disadvantage: constant disruptions, neglect, instability, and stress. In 1996, seven years after Sheff was filed, Conneccicuc's highest court ruled in favor of the plaintiffs. In this 4-3 decision, the scare Supreme Court found chat it was the school district borders themselves- lines thac are coterminous with established racially segregated housing patterns-chat had created race and class isolation and the resulting inequality in the first place. The Court ordered lawmakers co fashion a remedy to reduce racial and ethnic segregation in Greater Hartford's public schools, but it provided no guidance on how to go about doing ic. "Racial and ethnic segregation has a pervasive and invidious impact on schools, whether the segregation results from intentional conduct or from unorchestrated demographic factors," wrote chenChiefJ uscice Ellen Peters. "We conclude ... chat che school districting scheme ... as enforced with regard to these plaintiffs, is unconstitutional." The Sheff ruling hinged on unusual language in Connecticut's Consriturion char prohibited "segregation," which rhe courr, in chis case, declared need not be intentional in nature ro warrant remedy. This case forced public discussion and debate about segregation, and ics victory meant rhac reducing segregation would remain on political agendas. Major civil rights cases like Sheff require enormous investments of rime and money. Interestingly, if such a case were brought today, it would likely be a far srronger one. Since che rime Sheff was argued in the early 1990s, the research base on rhe educational harms of racial isolation and of concentrared poverty and on rhe potential of race and class diversity has grown far stronger and remarkably larger. After the court decision in 1996, the Sheff remedy rook several years to even begin to materialize in a serious way. As rhe years went on, district borders would remain sacrosanct, bur schools goc builr and programs were created ro make ir easier ro cross those lines. Geccing the schools up and running and the money allocated for chem required constant vigilance on rhe part of the legal ream, which included local lawyers and civil rights lawyers from rhe American Civil Liberties Union and rhe NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund. As che scare began co increase its investments in Sheff, many onlookers speculated chat spending millions to promote diversity would nor move urban or suburban parents to leave the typically racially homogenous schools to which they'd ordinarily be assigned. "People are happy in their neighborhood schools," then-Commissioner of Education Ted Sergi said of Hartford parents during a legislative commiccee hearing in 2001. Even some Sheff supporters doubted whether large numbers of white suburbanites, with access to some of the The Abell Report is published quarterly by The Abell Foundation 2 111 S. Calvert Srreec, 23rd Floor, Baltimore, Maryland 21202-6174 (410) 547-1300 Fax (410) 539-6579 The Abell Reporcs on the Web: www.abell.org continued from page 2 highest performing schools in the state, would put their children on buses to Hartford no matter how good the new schools might be. As it turned out, however, the doubters were wrong. Magnet schools and the transfer program Open Choice are so popular among both urban and suburban parents that demand for them is not being met. "It's good news that the schools are so popular and so successful," says Liz Dupont-Diehl, who lives in suburban Windsor and has two daughters who attended middle school at The Learning Corridor. "Bue it's bad news because people are getting left out." Sheff s Mantra: "Quality Integrated Education" From Sheff's earliest days, its plaintiffs, lawyers, and allies talked about the need to provide "quality integrated education." The implication here was chat, unlike desegregation remedies of the 1970s, merely meeting some kind of numerical diversity standard would not suffice. Lawyers, educators and parents demanded that the educational remedy had to be of the highest quality, and it had to be responsive to and inclusive of families from many racial, ethnic, and economic backgrounds. Each so-termed "Sheff" magnet school has a particular curricular theme or focus, and each opens its enrollment to students throughout the region. In order to be considered by the court a part of the remedy, schools must consistently meet an "integration standard," which requires chat at least 25 percent of the students be white. (Though crude, this standard is based upon current and forecasced demographics in the region.) To meet chis goal, school officials have largely relied upon "affirmative marketing," through which they reach out co parents and families, and recruit and advertise offerings in communities whose demographics might help chem create the diversity standard. No schools use quotas to meet the integration standard, as students are always selected via lottery. In other words, no students are selected on the basis of their race or ethnicity. None of the schools impose admission requirements, such as tests or specialized applications or interviews. No student is compelled to attend a magnet school. It is difficulc to calculate the overall cost of the Sheff remedy. All students who attend magnets, for example, would obviously be educated somewhere. Bur state officials routinely cite rhe overall cost of providing the remedy to be more than $2 billion. It would have been far less costly-and agreeable to the plaintiffs, too-if lawmakers had regionalized the schools, but chat option was never seriously debated in a state wedded to the idea of local control. Post Sheff, there are 65 interdistrict magnets in the state, no doubt many of chem inspired by the Sheff case. Magnets chat existed before the ruling tend to be more racially diverse than non-magnet schools overall, but are not required by the court co meet desegregation standards. Scace officials refer co these as "non-Sheff' magnets. As impressive as the integration remedy is, data show chat the offerings are meeting only 72 percent of the demand among Hartford families, and that demand is growing both in Hartford and its suburbs. In 2012, about 16,000 students entered che school choice lottery for either magnets or Open Choice with 5,700 of them from Hartford and about 10,000 from suburban communities. This marked a 21 percent increase in applications from the previous year. In 2012, about 34 percent of Hartford's African-American and Latino students attended schools in "integrated settings" as a result of the Sheff remedies. In lace April 2013, a scare judge extended for a year a prior legal settlement char required 41 percent of children of color in Hartford co be in diverse schools. As a result, three more existing Hartford schools became designated as interdiscricc magnets in the spring of 2013 and will open in September. Under the extension agreement, state officials also promised to cry to increase suburban participation rn the Open Choice program through financial incentives. In spite of demographic change that has brought increasing racial and economic diversity to several of Hartford's older suburbs, public schools beyond Hartford's closest neighbors still enroll comparably miniscule shares of students of color and/or students from low-income families. In Hartford, meanwhile, 92 percent of students come from families earning low incomes. In Hartford's nonmagnet schools, all or nearly all of the students are students of color. Hiscorically, it has been more difficult for interdiscricc magnets operated by Hartford Public Schools co achieve the required diversity in enrollment. Magnet school seats are assigned in the spring by a Regional School Choice Office within the state's Department of Education. Some families chosen by the lottery may decide nor to enroll, which can open up more seats and a second lottery. A common complaint among integration critics is chat even voluntary efforts depend disproportionately upon attracting African-American and Latino students from disadvantaged communities so they can attend schools in affluent white suburbs and face the burden of adapting. This has not been the case in Hartford, though, where opportunities for integration have quite deliberately been spread throughout the region and where most magnet schools enroll predominantly students of color. In face, the most popular schools for both urban and suburban families are more likely co be found in Hartford's poorest Latino neighborhood where The Learning Corridor is located, or in che city's ocher working-class neighborhoods. Where Innovation Meets Integration: Sheff's Magnet Schools Hartford's Learning Corridor houses four interdiscricc magnet schools. In addition to the Arcs Academy, there is another high school, che Greater Hartford Academy of Mach and Science, as well as the Montessori Magner 3 continued from pag, 3 School, which enrolls 3-12 year olds. The Hartford Magnet Trinity College Academy (HMTCA), for grades 6-8, brings cogecher roughly 600 students from about cwo dozen cities and towns for a comprehensive, rigorous curriculum. In 2011, HMTCA was awarded che Dr. Ronald P. Simpson Award, which recognizes che cop magnet school in che country, from che professional organization Magnet Schools of America. The Greater Hartford Academy of che Arcs (GHAA), with 766 students, has proven particularly popular among families in che region. Some GHAA students accend school there all day, caking their required courses in math and English ac the 16-acre Learning Corridor complex. Some ocher students cake che required courses at a high school in the community where chey live and come each afternoon co GHAA for arcs classes. Unlike many ocher arcs or performing arcs high schools, GHAA does not require chat students audition or submit portfolios for admission. This means that a wide range of skills and experience will often be represented in each classroom. For example, one student may have taken private baller lessons since she was 3, while another may have never been in a dance studio before coming co GHAA. The school's director of che arts, Kim Stroud, acknowledges chat chis policy of "being open co all" is not beloved by all of the teachers all of the time. "le is a real issue," says Stroud. "We have to talk about these things. But we have as a core mission valuing diversity and honoring diversity. That is what we do here. I chink it would be easier, in a way, yes, if we had auditions, if we sec some standard in terms of skill levels in the arcs prior co entry. Bue if we did chat, then we just would not be us." Because of che popularity of the arcs high school, in 2010, educators opened a second campus chat houses music and cheater arts programs on the former sire of the famous Colt gun factory, which supplied weapons for the Civil War, World War I, 4 and World War II. Just off che interstate highway, on che former site of a housing project, the 355 students at che Breakthrough Magnet Elementary School crave! from 24 cities and cowns. In 2012, Breakthrough was named a "School of Excellence" by che professional organization Magnet Schools of America. It is among che highest achieving and most popular of che interdiscricc magnet schools. The school's principal, Norma NeumannJohnson, testified ac che Sheff trial in favor of che plaintiffs and is an active member of che ShejfMovement-a grassroots organization of educators, parents, and ochers chat advocates for che expansion of Sheff remedies. In che hallway ac Breakthrough, docs on a colorful map connote the some 25 nations from which Breakthrough's students trace their immediate families' origins: Mexico, Mozambique, Vietnam, and Poland. Neumann-Johnson, who has worked as a teacher and adminiscraror in che city schools for more than four decades, describes Breakthrough as a "global community for students of character." Drawing on che rich racial and cultural diversity of the school, Breakthrough includes an intensive focus on geography and culture within a character- based curriculum chat emphasizes personal responsibility, integrity, and contribution co che school community. A culture of belonging and responsibility permeates Breakthrough. Students set formal cables in their classrooms for lunch, help ouc wich che laundry, tend a rooftop garden, and staff a school score. Each Friday morning, che entire school assembles in che auditorium for games, interactive presentations, or social events. Different grades cake cums hosting the Friday assemblies. Breakthrough's students practice mindfulness in medication classes where one student explains, "I quiet che negative voices and learn co listen co che positive stories about what I can do and who I am." To che west, in suburban Avon, where the median family income is $109,161 compared ro Hartford's paltry $29,000, che Reggio Magnet School for che Arcs enrolls about 300 scudents from more than a dozen cities and towns in che region. Curriculum here is based on che philosophy of the educator Reggio Emilia who, in ravaged pose-World War II Iraly, introduced early childhood centers chat focused on respect, community exploration, and a self-guided curriculum. A white school board member in Avon, Barbara Zuras, helped found the school and has been a leading supporter of che interdiscricc magnet school. She is also an outspoken advocate for creating racially diverse learning experiences even in children's earliest years. "Connecticut needs co build on chis crack record by making quality, integrated preschool education universally available for 3 and 4yearolds," testified Zuras before the state legislacure in 2012. "This scare should avoid creating a segregated preschool education syscem for low-income children of color." In Bloomfield, a predominantly black suburb just north of Hartford, the more than 700 students in grades 6-12 at the Metropolitan Learning Center (MLC) graduate with an international baccalaureate degree. MLC emphasizes global studies with che aim of helping students develop "caring, inquiring, and openminded perspectives" and of becoming "empowered as agents of change creating a better and more peaceful world." le was named a "Magnet School of Excellence" for che past five consecutive years by Magnet Schools of America. The Capitol Region Education Council (CREC), which is similar in operation co a regional school district, operates some of the magnet schools. Its funding comes from a mix of local member school districts chat participate in magnets, state funds sec aside for the Sheff remedy, foundation dollars, and federal grants. Enrollment in CREC's magnets is remarkably diverse. Overall, about 33 percent of scudents in che CRECrun schools are African-American, 30 percent are white, and 28 percent are Latino. Close co half come from families earning low incomes. CREC's mission continued ftom page 4 is straightforward: "To promote racial integration and reduce racial, ethnic, and economic isolation and foster an understanding of and an appreciation for cultural diversity." Hartford Public Schools also oversees some of the interdistricc magnet schools-all are in che city of Hartford and most are in existing buildings. The small, private Goodwin College, in East Hartford, oversees three magnet schools. "I think we have a great story co tell about what is possible," says Robert Cocco, a member of the grassroots group the Sheff Movement. Cotto is also a former teacher at the Metropolitan Learning Center and a member of Hartford's Board of Education. He remembers moving from Hartford as a child and being one of just a few Puerto Rican students at his suburban school. "So, I do chink I understand the really huge potential of diversity, for increasing opportunity," he says. "I also chink I understand what a welcoming school should be, what a school chat strives coward true equality needs co do in order co realize chat potential. And I do feel like I've seen that here." Encouraging Early Results The U.S. Census Bureau reports chat by the end of che decade, no single racial or ethnic group will constitute a majority among children. In about three decades, no single racial or ethnic group will have a majority in the country as a whole. The way Cocco sees it, che more than 15,000 young people participating in che Hartford region's integration efforcs will be particularly well prepared for chis transformed nation. What's more, he suggests, is chose young people will be the men and women best qualified co be "leaders in a society chat will look very different from che one their parents knew." The "quality" pare of che Sheff Movement's "quality and integrated education" mantra is best measured, Cocco says, by the satisfaction level among parents and students
the level of engagement observed in the classrooms and dance studios, during recitals and in robotics competitions at the schools
the low reacher turnover races
che constructive, welcoming climate
the collaboration among students
and the positive social relationships that break down stereotypes. Seeing that Sheff's goal was not co nudge up rest scores, but co provide more students access co opportunity and expanded horizons, Cotco's measures seem like logical ones. However, it is also true that test scores remain a meaningful measure for policymakers and ochers who measure school success. By this standard, coo, Sheff remedies have, so far, made the grade. A 2009 study in the peer-reviewed journal Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis compared academic results between students who had applied co Connecticut's magnets and were not selected through the blind lottery and students who were selected and attended a magnet school. The magnet school students who lived in urban zip codes (these students were moscly Latino or black) made greater gains and did significantly better in math and reading in high schools and on reading cescs in middle school. What's more, the suburban students-this group being largely white-who attended magnets outdid their peers at traditional suburban (and generally much whiter and more affluent) schools, coo. The "achievement gap" between white students and students of color tended co be smaller in magnet schools than it was in traditional schools. The study also showed chat students in magnet high schools and regular high schools stated similar racial attitudes, but students of color in magnet schools were significancly more likely to say they felt close co white students and had white friends than did students of color who did not attend magnets. Similarly, white students in magnets were significantly more likely than students in nonmagnet schools co say they were close co students of color and had students of color as friends. This study is particularly informative because it avoids the common methodological concern of "self-selection" bias embedded in simple comparisons between students who choose a school and students who attend a school to which they are assigned. Self-selection bias refers to the fact that qualities chat plausibly cause a family to purposefully choose a given school-say, perseverance, foresight, planning, drive, ambition-might themselves be factors contributing to higher relative academic performance. But che 2009 study avoids that pitfall by using as a control group students who did choose to attend magnets but who were denied entry. More recent data from 2011 show that, on average, the region's seven interdistrict magnet high schools record far higher graduation rates than even some of the more affluent suburban districts in the Hartford region. Perhaps most revealing, interdiscricc magnets do a far better job at graduating students from families who earn low incomes than even several far more affluent school discricts. The graduation rate for low-income students ac magnet schools ranges from about 85 percent co higher chan 90 percent. (By comparison, the graduation rate for low-income students in Hartford char year was about 60 percent in 2011 and 53 percent in 2010.) In 2012, achievement data showed that students who live in Hartford and attend either a magnet school or who are enrolled in che Open Choice program tend to outperform their counterparcs in che Hartford Public Schools. These simple comparisons do not control for potential self-selection bias. However, the size of the differences makes the data informative. The share of Hartford resident students meeting or exceeding scare goals on mandated rests was typically 20 co 40 percentage points higher in magnets or Open Choice. A Deep Grassroots Connection Since che beginning, Sheff's lawyers, educator allies, and concerned community members built their strong multiracial, mulci-echnic, economically diverse base of urban and suburban supporters through old-fashioned community organizing. The lawyers were empowered 5 continuedfr om page5 by chis broad community base, and the interviews and meetings with community leaders and parents informed not only the shape of the case but rhe negotiations about remedy as well. In 1987-a full two years before Sheff was filed-the now well-known local civil rights lawyer John Brittain was at che cime a law professor ac the University of Connecticut. He worked with community- based advocates and ochers co put together a meeting between civil rights lawyers, parents, teachers, union activists, ministers, priests, and rabbis. The meeting was called co calk about a report recently issued by the state's very own Department of Education. The report derailed and lamented the intensifying racial segregation of the state's schools and called segregation "educationally, morally, and legally wrong." On chat day, Brittain, who would go on co become dean of the Thurgood Marshall School of Law at Texas Southern University in Houston and Senior Deputy Director at the Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights, laid out the history of the construction and maintenance of segregation. He and his colleagues from the NAACP Legal Defense and Education Fund then laid out some plausible legal options. For Brittain, that meeting brought back memories of his days organizing AfricanAmerican voters in Mississippi. "People in the North were conditioned co living separately," Brittain recalls years later. Inequality, he adds, "was something everyone knew about. Bue once we got people talking, right under the surface was a feeling chat we could do better, that it didn't have co be chis way." The intensity of the community-based organizing dissipated somewhat following the much-watched trial in the early 1990s and then after the court decision in 1996. About a decade ago, however, parents, local educators, and Greater Hartford residents regenerated Sheff's communitybased advocacy by forming the Sheff Movement Coalition. Coalition members, some of whom had been plaintiffs (, or had testified for the plaintiffs in the original case, have been meeting formally, usually at least once a month, for 10 years. Among the seven (and far less ambitious) voluntary incerdistrict desegregation programs in the nation, none has a grassroots advocacy counterpart chat is as institutionalized and active as the Sheff Movement. The Sheff Movement has a well-established routine of gathering at one of the incerdistrict magnets, the Capital Preparatory Academy on Main Street, which sics just beyond Hartford's downtown. Members spread our donuts and coffee in the school library, which in 2012, was officially named the Sheff Center, in Elizabeth Horton Sheff's honor. Members organize public forums related to Sheff and to ocher educational trends. They testify at legislative hearings, and hold meetings with state legislators and informational sessions for local school board members and suburban PTOs. Members have also in recent years sat on panels at national meetings of education scholars and policy expercs. They have sat behind cables at local magnet school fairs. They have crunched data to demonstrate the Sheff schools' and Open Choice's strong records of academic achievement. They get quoted regularly in the press. They publish and disseminate shore newsletters chat announce events and bring readers into daily life in diverse schools in the region. Lead plaintiff Elizabeth Horton Sheff often chairs the regular meetings and remains one of the case's most quoted spokespeople. These days, she says, she cries co strike a balance between complaints over the fact chat "not enough people have access co quality integrated education" and celebration "over the incredible success we have been able co achieve here." Baltimore Parallels? Racial segregation came co characterize Greater Hartford and its schools in much the same way it did in other formerly grand American cities. Like in Baltimore, a confluence of economic trends, government housing policies and practices, and racially discriminatory banking and insurance practices encouraged, exacerbated, and then cemented in place incense race and class isolation in Hartford. Baltimore, with a longstanding identity as a border city between north and south, embarked on school desegregation soon after che Brown v. Board of Education decision. As Harold Baum chronicles in his book, Brown in Baltimore, rhe city school board was one of the first in the nation to end its de Jure system peacefully. However, the board instituted a weak "freedom of choice" plan char kept the current school assignment plan in place, but allowed for blacks and whites to choose different schools if they wanted, with no regard to race. Thus, as Baum shows, blacks did choose schools chat they perceived were of higher quality, but whites tended to choose the schools chat were close co their homes and were more likely to remain predominantly white. Baltimore did not provide transportation co transferring students. Like in other similarly situated urban districts, white flight ro the suburbs of Baltimore County concinued during these years, eventually making desegregation efforts pointless within the city. (Hartford never had a desegregation plan.) Today, metro Baltimore and metro Hartford have similar rates of segregation between blacks and whites. In Baltimore, about 64 percent of whites would have co move to different neighborhoods in order co be evenly distributed in the region. In Hartford, chat number is about 62 percent. Called a "dissimilarity index," a number of 60 or higher is considered "very high" segregation. Of the 138 largest metro areas in the United Sraces, Baltimore has the 19th highest index for segregation between whites and blacks. Hartford is ranked 24th. Connecticut's government did not write laws mandating school segregation as they did in Maryland and 16 ocher states. Bue it did aid and abet the creation of segregated education by siring and building schools in accordance with a racially and economically separate setup chat decades of racial discrimination had continued from page 6 brought into being. Race and class separation remains such an embedded part of the Connecticut landscape chat if it had not been for Sheff, it might escape notice. With its focus on access, opportunity, and che present-day effects of longstanding structural discrimination, the Sheff case shares qualities with the important public housing desegregation case from Baltimore, Thompson v. HUD. Filed in 1995 on behalf of African-American families who had been relocated co segregated neighborhoods following che demolition of their public housing projects, Thompson argued chat city officials and HUD purposefully placed replacement public housing in segregated areas as a way co appease white residents who did not wane ic in their neighborhoods. After about 10 years of licigacion, Federal District Court Judge Marvin J. Garbis found chat che U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) violated che Fair Housing Ace of 1968 by concentrating African-American public housing residents in che poorest, most segregated neighborhoods of Baltimore Cicy. However, city officials were not held responsible and che Court viewed chem as accors within a fragmented system chat failed co consider che region as a whole and thus limited their ability co sire housing beyond municipal borders. In his decision, Judge Garbis wrote chat HUD had created che city of Baltimore like "an island reservation ... a container for all of the poor of a contiguous region." A central element of che remedy was continuation of che Baltimore Housing Mobility Program (BHMP), created in an earlier phase of che case. A more recent secdement, in 2012, continued che program and court jurisdiction until ac lease 2019. A voluntary program, BHMP has enabled nearly 2,000 African-American families co move from high-poverty neighborhoods co lower-poverty neighborhoods chat provide easier access co high-performing schools and job opportunities. According co a 2009 report issued by che Poverty and Race Research Action Council and the Baltimore Regional Housing Campaign, schools in neighborhoods co which program participants moved, enrolled, on average, 33 percent of students who are eligible for free and reduced lunch (a proxy for poverty) compared with 83 percent poverty in their former neighborhoods' schools. The report also showed chat in the families' new neighborhood elementary schools, 69 percent and 76 percent of students scored proficient or higher on scare math and reading tests, respectively, compared co 44 percent and 54 percent who did at their former schools. Perhaps most important, though, is chat 88 percent of seeded participants said in a su rvey chey are satisfied or very satisfied with che schools in their new communities. About 89 percent of seeded parents say their children appear co be learning better or much better at their new schools. In a recent report on deepening school segregation trends in Maryland, che Civil Rights Project at UCLA acknowledged chat there is no "magic solution for comprehensive integration of schools" in che Baltimore region. "It would be foolish co claim chat there is one," writes report author, UCLA professor Gary Orfield, co-director of the Civil Rights Project. "Ic is equally foolish, on che ocher hand, co do nothing about the continuing spread of segregated schools and resegregacion of neighborhoods or not co use school choice and magnet methods appropriately co create integrated schools where ic is feasible. Stably integrated communities are more successful educationally and socially chan resegregaced communities, which tend co experience rising poverty and declining educational and job opportunities." Toward Stable Integration A constructive first step coward what Or field calls "a stably integrated" community might be co bring Baltimore's regional housing experts and advocates cogecher wich Connecticut's regional education experts and advocates to think collaboratively about comprehensive, complementary strategies co reduce segregation. Every metropolitan area has its own set of challenges, both political and practical. Bue community members, educators, and leaders who embark upon discussions about reducing segregation through schooling opportunities also face some common questions. At the outset, it is important co realistically assess the political obstacles a regional school integration plan might face and co chink in advance about where interests might converge. Similarly, a thorough review of existing state education policy would ensure chat proposals do not violate existing laws and could also identify ways co facilitate regional efforts. Baltimore's ambitious new plan co rebuild and refurbish ics aging school facilities might provide an opening co discuss che creation of regional magnet schools or ocher programs chat provide opportunities for students from all racial, ethnic, and economic backgrounds co attend diverse schools. For example, could any of che planned new or renovated city schools become regional magnet schools? If so, what themes or curricular focuses might be most effective in attracting students from the city and the suburbs? Would it be possible co place magnet schools near job centers or major regional employers? Are there any existing summer programs or excracurricular programs chat bring urban and suburban students together? If yes, how might chose be expanded? "I always keep in mind chat segregation was created by people," Sheff's lead plaintiff Elizabeth Horton Sheff said recendy. "And chat doesn't make me depressed. le reminds me chat ic can be undone by people." Susan Eaton is research director at the Charles Hamilton Houscon Inscicuce for Race & Justice at Harvard Law School. She is the author of The Children in Room 4: American Education on Trial, a narrative non-fiction book about che Sheff v. O'Neill case. 7 Baltimore School for the Arts-a local example of a "one-way" interdistrict high school? While Maryland does not have legislation requiring interdistricr enrollment among school districts, Baltimore City's Baltimore School for the Arts may well serve as an example of what is possible with at least one-way interdistrict transfer. Opened in 1980 and located in the Mt. Vernon neighborhood of downtown, Baltimore School for the Arcs (BSA) is a public high school offering a pre-professional am program with a challenging college-preparatory academic program. Admission to irs music, dance, visual art, theatre, and theatre production programs is based solely on audition
there are no academic criteria. While BSA is a school within the Baltimore City Public School Sys rem, it has an independent Board of Overseers rhat ensures fidelity to the original mission and engages in substantial fund-raising. While BSA attracts a majority of its students from Baltimore City, the school is open to studencs throughout the state. Typically, 25 percenr of its 400 studencs reside in rhe counties surrounding Baltimore City. Families of these non-city students are responsible for contributing $5,360 in tuition and must provide their own transportation. The State of Maryland contributes its share of per pupil funding for these students, but there is no portion paid by the sending school district. As a result of this one-way incerdistricting, BSA has attracted a more racially and economically diverse student body than other Baltimore City high schools. In 2012, 56 percenc of BSA students were African-American, 36 percenc white, 5 percenc Asian, and 3 percent Hispanic
less than one-third of its students come from families who qualify for free and reduced meals. Compare that to the average Baltimore City Schools high school population, which is 90 percent African-American and 76 percent eligible for free and reduced lunch. This mix appears to be beneficial for all studencs: Baltimore School for the Arts earns a high School Performance Index score from the state, and is particularly noted for its ability to close the achievement gap in English and math among socioeconomic groups. Its srudencs' average combined SAT score of 1542 is the highest in Baltimore City, and more than 95 percent of its entering 9th graders graduate in four years. ABELL SALUTES continued from page I ETC describes its involvement with these Aedgling companies rhis way: "We move their business ahead further and faster than they could on their own." To back up rhe claim, the ETC has data: It estimates rhar in rhe 14 years in which it has been operating, ETC companies have created companies in excess of $375 million in economic activity for Baltimore City. In its mentoring relationship, rhe ETC offers a comprehensive array of business services: Aexible turnkey solutions rhat free the founding entrepreneurs to focus on rhe critical success factors driving the business. The ETC incubator offers office space with common conference rooms and services, relieving companies of a number of administrative derails. The full-rime ETC staff assists companies by providing srraregic planning
help with decision making on product development and marketing
and use of 8 an extensive network of volunceer mentors and professional service providers to give start-up companies unprecedented access to business, university and governmenc concracrs, public and private funding sources, and new opportunities with both early-stage and mature technology companies. Over its 14 years in existence, the ETC has had an impressive record of results: Of281 companies assisted, 85 are still in business as of this writing
All graduate companies remain in Maryland, 56 percenc in Baltimore Ciry
More than 2,000 jobs have been created at an average salary of $70,000
More than 1.5 billion in outside investment has been raised by ETC companies
and Thirty-nine percenc of the companies have successfully transferred technology from a university or federal lab. Deborah Tillett, president of the ETC, poincs our the defining characteristic of rhe ETC: "The ETC provides more than the opportunity for individual companies to maximize their growth potencial, it provides a creative environmenc in which like-minded encrepreneurs can increase rheir companies' porencial through shared learning, partnerships, joinc vencures, and collaborations. Some other companies we have served include Looking Glass, Groove Commerce, Ainsley & Co., Millennial Media, R2i, Straighrerline, and CSA Medical." In a typical year, the ETC receives about one-quarter of its operating budget from Baltimore City-the remainder is earned in the form of fees and services from its 86 portfolio companies. Abell Salutes ETC president Deborah Tillett, for helping rhe many start-up Moodlerooms get off rhe ground fast, and go further than the founders could on their own, and for helping to create jobs in Baltimore. NEW STAFF 2013-2014 NAME OF SCHOOL: BOOKER ARTS MAGNET SCHOOL POSITION NAME OF STAFF RACE ASSISTANT CHARLOTTE CORNICE AA PRINCIPAL FOURTH GRADE BENJAMIN GRANT C TEACHER RESOURCE JANE HARKEY C TEACHER MEDIA SPECIALIST EMILY HESTER C FOURTH GRADE MELANIE MINOR C TEACHER VISUAL ARTS CARRIE PORTER C TEACHER FIFTH GRADE RACHEL SCHNEIDER C TEACHER GENDER F M F F F F F NAME OF SCHOOL: POSITION 5TH GRADE 1ST GRADE NEW STAFF 2013-2014 CARVER MAGNET NAME OF STAFF LYNNETTE PITTS CYNTHIA FINSTROM RACE GENDER BLACK FEMALE WHITE FEMALE NAME OF NEW STAFF 2013-2014 SCHOOL:_GIBBS ___________________ _ POSITION NAME OF STAFF RACE GENDER 2ND GRADE LAURA SUTTON w F 4TH GRADE JULIE DA VIS w F KINDERGARTEN LAUREN GASKELL w F RESOURCE DEBORAH BAKER w F NEW STAFF 2013-2014 NAME OF SCHOOL:_WILLIAMS MAGNET SCHOOL POSITION NAME OF STAFF RACE COACH ANTONI LASKER B ART AMANDA MAMULA w 4TH GRADE STACI HULA w MEDIA CLERK SANDRA MCINTOSH B 1ST GRADE CARISE ECHOLS(INTERN B FROM LAST YEAR) COUNSELOR CHARRIT A HUNNICUT B GENDER M F F F F F NEW STAFF 2013~2014 NAME OF SCHOOL: MANN MAGNET ARTS/SCIENCE MIDDLE SCHOOL POSITION NAME OF STAFF RACE GENDER SPANISH ASHLEY BOSHEARS WHITE FEMALE TEACHER ENGLISH WILLIAM BRAZLE WHITE MALE TEACHER 6TH MATH SHEA DRAKE BLACK FEMALE 6TH MATH DIANE Ross WHITE FEMALE 8TH MATH SARA GAINES WHITE FEMALE 7TH MATH CHRISTY MCNEARY BLACK FEMALE 6TH SCIENCE ST ARLETTE INGRAM WHITE FEMALE 7TH SOCIAL CLARICE SUMMONS BLACK FEMALE STUDIES 8TH SOCIAL ANGLEA MORRISON BLACK FEMALE STUDIES 7TH MATH AMISTA SUTTON WHITE FEMALE ENGINEERING TREMAYNE WHITE BLACK MALE TECHNOLOGY NEW STAFF 2013-2014 NAME OF SCHOOL: PARKVIEW HIGH SCHOOL POSITION NAME OF STAFF SPECIAL ED CHANDLE CARPENTER HISTORY TEACHER PATRICK DONOVAN EAST LAB PHILICIA BELL ENGLISH TYESHAIL MILLER TEACHER ENGLISH DEANNAH JOHNSON TEACHER *CAREER COACH FRANK NEWSOME *CAREER COACH ROBERTO CANDELARIA ASST. HEAD TORRENCE TILLMAN CUSTODIAN INTERIM DANCE ALLISON CLARK TEACHER RACE GENDER B F w M B F B F w F B M H M B M w F ~CAREER COACl-1 POS/T/0!'1S ARE PAID THROUGH PULASKI TECHNICAL COLLEGE B'r' WAY OF ARKANSAS OEP,,RTMENT OF CAREER DUCA TION Horace Mann VACANT SEATS LRSD NLRSD PCSSD SCHOOL B w T B w T B w T Mann/SCIENCE 6 -2 7 7 0 5 5 3 10 13 7 6 5 11 1 3 4 0 8 8 8 2 6 8 2 5 7 1 9 10 Mann/ARTS 6 -8 6 6 -2 9 9 6 11 17 7 2 7 9 -2 9 9 4 4 8 8 7 11 18 0 6 6 -1 19 19 A number with a negative sign indicates the number of students that district is over by in that particular grade and magnet side. TOTAL CAPACITY= 900 Sept 03 2013 B w 0 TOTAL BLK 460 164 134 758 61.0% PowerHouse QUIZ More + - ---- ---------------------------------------- ~--------------------- 1 LRSD SCHOOLC OUNTSB Y SCHOOL- C~ 2013/09/18 PAGE 1 . CHOOL: 005 PARKVIEWAR TS/SCIENCEM AGNET class Black Slack Other Other Total Max Vacancy count Percent count Percent count Capacity SP 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 09 143 54.2% 121 45.8% 264 325 61 10 150 56.4% 116 43.6% 266 315 49 11 132 54.1% 112 45 .9% 244 285 41 12 135 54.0% 115 46.0% 250 ~ 275 25 Total 560 54.7% 464 45. 3% 1024 00 /~ F2=Screen wait F3=EXit F6=TOp line F9=Retrieve FlO=TOp Fll=Bottom F12=Break Fl4=View Parkview Magnet Swap Report 2013-2014 Parkview # Seats LRSD NLRSD PCSSD (current count B w T B w T B w T 9/19/13 From Swap Reporto -- ... 60 . ,. (15 13 _.,, Science 100 30 30 7- 8 12 25 9 0 3 3 0 7 7 6 5 11 10 5 8 13 0 7 7 0 7 7 11 5 6 11 4 5 9 4 10 14 12 5 5 10 6 7 13 7 8 15 Band 42 12 12 24 2 2 4 7 7 14 9 3 3 6 1 0 1 4 6 10 10 1 4 5 0 0 0 3 4 7 11 0 3 3 1 2 3 4 4 8 12 -1 2 2 1 1 2 0 4 4 Dance 38 11 10 21 2 1 3 6 8 14 9 -1 0 0 0 1 1 2 6 8 10 0 -2 0 -1 -2 0 -4 6 6 11 1 0 1 1 1 2 2 5 7 12 2 5 7 0 1 1 0 3 3 Drama 54 16 16 32 3 3 6 8 8 16 9 0 -2 0 0 2 2 2 2 4 10 1 0 1 1 3 4 0 2 2 11 2 2 4 1 2 3 4 4 8 12 0 2 2 .. 0 2 2 2 2 4 Orchestra 13 4 3 7 1 1 2 ,_. 2 2 4 9 -1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 2 10 0 0 0 1 0 1 -1 1 1 11 -1 -1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 12 0 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 Visual Arts 42 13 13 26 2 2 4 6 6 12 9 -3 -1 0 1 1 2 2 2 4 10 3 -3 3 0 2 2 1 4 5 11 1 1 2 -2 1 1 2 1 3 12 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 -1 1 Vocal Music 36 10 10 20 2 2 4 5 7 12 9 0 3 3 0 1 1 2 3 5 10 2 -1 2 0 1 1 0 6 6 11 -5 -2 0 2 1 3 3 5 8 12 0 -1 0 -1 2 2 4 4 8 SEPTEMBER 3, 2013 BLACK WHITE OTHER TOTAL %BLACK 560 254 208 1022 55.0% SCIENCE UPDATED 9/19/13 CIE RACE COUNT TOTALW/L RACE COUNT GRADE NB 16 124 BLK 112 09 NB 17 153 BLK 142 10 NB 1 120 BLK 121 11 NB 3 54 BLK 50 12 BAND UPDATED 9/19/13 GRADE RACE COUNT TOTALW/L RACE COUNT 09 NB 3 36 BLK 33 10 NB 1 46 BLK 45 11 NB 0 20 BLK 20 12 NB 2 23 BLK 21 DANCE UPDATED 9/19/13 GRADE RACE COUNT TOTALW/L RACE COUNT 09 NB 17 132 BLK 115 10 NB 24 159 BLK 135 11 NB 12 104 BLK 92 12 NB 0 74 BLK 74 DRAMA UPDATED 9/19/13 GRADE RACE COUNT GENDER GENDER RACE COUNT GENDER GENDER (FEMALES) (MALES) (FEMALES) (MALES) 09 NB 39 30 9 BLK 124 74 50 10 NB 33 22 11 BLK 163 112 51 11 NB 13 10 3 BLK 112 58 54 12 NB 13 8 5 BLK 88 56 32 ORCHESTRA UPDATED 9/19/13 GRADE RACE COUNT TOTALW/L RACE COUNT 09 NB 6 26 BLK 20 10 NB 5 32 BLK 27 11 NB 1 24 BLK 23 12 NB 0 12 BLK 12 VISUAL ARTS UPDATED. 9/19/13 GRADE RACE COUNT TOTALW/L RACE COUNT 09 NB 39 145 BLK 106 10 NB 39 154 BLK 115 11 NB 33 150 BLK 117 12 NB 47 118 BLK 71 VOCAL MUSIC UPDATED 9/19/13 GRADE RACE COUNT TOTALW/L RACE COUNT 09 NB 11 80 BLK 69 10 NB 6 102 BLK 96 11 NB 6 61 BLK 55 12 NB 1 72 BLK 71 10 DAY COUNT FOR THE STIPULATION MAGNET SCHOOLS BOOKER MAGNET BLACK 286 CARVER MAGNET BLACK 212 GIBBS MAGNET BLACK 158 WILLIAMS MAGNET BLACK 220 Total capacity Booker Magnet 579 Carver Magnet 398 Gibbs Magnet 330 Williams Magnet 473 WHITE 105 WHITE 75 WHITE 94 WHITE 100 OTHER TOTAL PRECENTAGE 119 510 8-56.0% 0-44.0 % OTHER TOTAL PRECENTAGE 57 344 B - 64.4% 0 - 38.6 OTHER TOTAL PRECENTAGE 40 292 B - 54.7% 0 - 45.3% OTHER TOTAL PRE CENT AGE 88 408 B - 53.2% 0 - 46.8% 10 DAY COUNT FOR THE STIPULATION MAGNET SCHOOLS SCHOOL #VAC LRSD NLRSD PCSSD B 0 T B 0 T B 0 T BOOKER K 10 1 5 6 0 1 1 1 2 3 1 7 0 3 5 0 0 0 0 2 2 2 17 2 9 11 1 2 3 0 3 3 3 7 1 1 2 0 2 2 1 2 3 4 10 0 3 3 0 2 2 0 5 5 5 23 2 18 20 0 1 1 0 2 2 CARVER K 6 0 3 3 0 0 0 0 3 3 1 4 0 3 3 0 1 1 0 0 0 2 4 0 3 3 0 0 0 0 1 1 3 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 14 2 4 6 0 3 3 2 3 5 5 26 4 19 23 0 0 0 0 3 3 GIBBS K 5 2 1 3 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 8 0 3 3 0 0 0 2 3 5 2 3 0 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 4 3 0 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 7 1 5 6 0 0 0 1 0 1 WILLIAMS K 9 4 0 4 0 2 2 0 3 3 1 8 0 6 6 0 1 1 0 1 1 2 12 3 7 10 0 1 1 0 1 1 3 3 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 4 15 4 6 10 1 1 2 1 2 3 5 16 3 10 12 1 1 2 1 1 2 Mitchell, Sadie From: Sent: To: Subject: Attachments: Please see attached. From: Mitchell, Sadie Carson, Cheryl Monday, September 23, 2013 1 :20 PM Mitchell, Sadie RE: Recruitment RECRUITMENT ACTIVITIES FOR AUGUST AND SEPTEMBER 2013.rtf Sent: Monday, September 23, 2013 11:28 AM To: Booth, Dexter
Brown, Lori
Barksdale, Mary
Hobbs, Felicia
Carson, Cheryl
Mcgee, Keith Cc: 'Magnet Review' Subject: Recruitment Send me a bullet list of things that you have done for recruitment since August. I need this information for the MRC meeting in the morning. I am sorry for such short. Please send by then end of the day. To: From: Subject: Date: Dr. Sadie Mitchell, Associate Superintendent for Elementary Schools Cheryl A. Carson, Principal, Booker Arts Magnet School Recruitment Activities September 23, 2013 Please find listed below recruitment activities during the 2013-2014 school year. Tours have been conducted. Addressed parents at Kindergarten Orientation and encouraged them to refer other families Spoken with parents at Open House and encouraged them to refer other families Collaborated with PTA to host Grandparent's Day on September 11, 2013 Contacted Student Registration in LRSDa nd PCSSDo n several occasions to facilitate the assignment of students Mitchell, Sadie From: Sent: To: Subject: Barksdale, Mary Monday, September 23, 2013 4:21 PM Mitchell, Sadie RE: Recruitment Back to School Bash at the Museum of Discovery for all staff, parents, children and friends (PTA paid) Open House ---discussed Recruitment and Parents Importance telling other parents Grandparents Days PTA Newsletter Facebook developed by our VIPS Coordinator Asked Dr. Suggs for a meeting of Magnet Schools to discuss strategies for recruitment Visited with all three Magnet school assignment people per district over the phone begging for help with assigning students Toured a few parents, and talked to some on the phone about coming to Carver Hosted the Love Your School Grant Kick Off Supported the development of our new STEM room----lmagination Station Stressed CUSTOMERS ERVICEW ITH OUR STAFFa nd RECRUITMENTa s a priority Greeted and thanked the Readers of 9/11 Discussed with the PTA President that recruitment must be our top priority- we are entertaining the idea of purchasing ads in two Family magazines From: Mitchell, Sadie Sent: Monday, September 23, 2013 11:28 AM To: Booth, Dexter
Brown, Lori
Barksdale, Mary
Hobbs, Felicia
Carson, Cheryl
Mcgee, Keith Cc: 'Magnet Review' Subject: Recruitment Send me a bullet list of things that you have done for recruitment since August. I need this information for the MRC meeting in the morning. I am sorry for such short. Please send by then end of the day. Mitchell, Sadie From: Sent: To: Subject: Brown, Lori Monday, September 23, 2013 4:41 PM Mitchell, Sadie RE: Recruitment 1. Updated Williams School website 2. Hosted school tours 3. Distribution of Williams Bumper Stickers 4. School marquee 5. Artwork displayed at school partners From: Mitchell, Sadie Sent: Monday, September 23, 2013 11:28 AM To: Booth, Dexter
Brown, Lori
Barksdale, Mary
Hobbs, Felicia
Carson, Cheryl
Mcgee, Keith Cc: 'Magnet Review' Subject: Recruitment Send me a bullet list of things that you have done for recruitment since August. I need this information for the MRC meeting in the morning. I am sorry for such short. Please send by then end of the day. EI Mundo LeMonde Die Welt The World Gibbs International Magnet School Vol. No. 16 Issue No. 2 Gibbs Magnet School of International Studies and Foreign Languages Inside this Newsletter IMPORTANT EVENT DATES NATIONS AT GIBBS WATER FROM THE SOLE CHILDREN'S THEATRE GIBBS PTA NEWS Important Event Dates LABOR DAY NO SCHOOL Monday, September 2 GIBBS OPEN HOUSE Thursday, September 5 GRANDPARENTS LUNCHEON Friday, September 6 PTA MEETING Thursday, September 12 NATIONS AT GIBBS FOR 2013-2014 Our class nations this year have changed at a couple of grade levels. Please note the changes below. Pre-K Harris Germany Pre-K Parrish France Kindergarten Shaw China Kindergarten TBA Australia 1 stGrade Sub-Saharan AFRICA 1st Grade Blome Kenya 1st Grade Love Nigeria . 2 Grade 2nd Grade 2nd Grade 3rd Grade EAST ASIA Sims Japan Sutton Taiwan MIDDLE EAST 3rd Grade Alonso Egypt 3rd Grade White Saudi Arabia 4th Grade LATIN AMERICA 4th Grade Davis Brazil 4th Grade Long Mexico 5th Grade WESTERN EUROPE 5th Grade Barbarotto Spain 5th Grade Gillespie U. K. (United Kingdom of Great Britain & Northern Ireland) WATER FROM THE SOLE By Coach Passini OzarWk atePrr oject The Ozark Water Project is a nonprofit organization that asks for donations of clean, in good repair, gently used footwear of all kinds. The donated shoes finance well digs and the installation of water purification systems in poor nations bringing clean water to the Earth's people. Word of the collection has gone home with all students this week in the PE letter from Coach Passini. PT A has been asked to get this information of the collection out on their email line. An additional flyer will be sent with each student next week ...... TO BRING YOUR DONATED FOOTWEAR TO OPEN HOUSE NEXT WEEK El Mundo ON THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 5TH AND ON THE FOLLOWING DAY, FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 6th if you forget. At open house, shoes will be collected outside the entrances to the building. Collection boxes will be available on Friday inside the school entrances. The Voyager After School Students will count and bag the shoes for pickup. This is simple stewardship supporting the Earth's precious resource called "water". So Gibbs students, families, and staff, CLEAN OUT YOUR CLOSETS AND DONATE SHOES AT THE GIBBS OPEN HOUSE TO THE OZARK WATER PROJECT! IT'S WHAT WE DO AT -( Our first year with the project, Gibbs families donated a mountain of shoes!) FOR THE ARTS, PLAY, & RECREATION: CHILDREN'S THEATRE FROM LR CULTURE VULTURE Arkansas Arts Center has announced the 2013-2014 Children's Theatre season lineup. The season will open with Pinkalicious the Musical, running from September 20 through October 6. Based on a popular children's book by Elizabeth and Victoria Kann, LeMonde Die Welt this story is about a girl who turns pink. The songs are written by John Gregor. Next up will be The Sorcerer's Apprentice, just in time for Halloween. It will run from October 25 through November 10. Alan Keith Smith has adapted Johann Wolfgang van Goethe's poem of magic and imagination. In this version, a modem young girl is taken on a mystical journey where she meets a medieval sorcerer's apprentice. The holiday show at the Children's Theatre will involve a train filled with toys. From November 29 through December 15, The Engine That Thought It Could will take the stage. Alan Keith Smith has adapted Rev. Charles S. Wing's 1906 story to create this tale of hope and determination - with plenty of holiday fun thrown in. The winter blues will melt like butter with Click, Clack, Moo: Cows That Type. From January 24 through February 7, this comical romp through the barnyard will be on stage. It involves Farmer Brown, typing cows, striking foul, and learning about compromise. It is adapted from Doreen Cronin's book with illustrations by Betsey Lewin. The familiar tale The Boy Who Cried Wolfwill premiere at the Children's Theatre from March 7 through 23. Based on Aesop's story, Alan Keith Smith has adapted this timeless classic about honesty. The 2013-14 season will conclude with Sleeping Beauty. The World Based on the Brothers Grimm folk tale, it will be on stage from April 25 through May 11, 2014. This classic tale of love, courage and the triumph of good over evil is sure to delight audiences of all ages. Bradley Anderson is the artistic director of the Arkansas Arts Center Children's Theatre, and Dr. Todd Herman is the executive director of the Arkansas Arts Center. GIBBS PTA NEWS By President Johnson GIBBS OPEN HOUSESeptember 5th at 5:30 p.m. Check out your child's classroom. Catch up on what they're learning this year. There will be pizza & drinks for the kids and sweet treats and door prizes for the parents. Please donate cookies or other storebought desserts for the dessert table. Contact Open House Chair - Rokina Gibson - RokinaGibson@yahoo.com REMEMBER TO CHECK THE WISH LISTS FOR YOUR TEACHERS AND SPECIALISTS! Grandparents Luncheon is Friday, September 6th Grandparents, please come eat with your grandchild/ren on the 6th! Our PT A membership drive is ongoing! Please join the Gibbs PT A for only $5 per membership. Get grandparents to join as well. Our first PT A meeting will be Thursday, September 12. Working together can make all the difference in the world! El Mundo Gracias, Dr. Felicia Hobbs, Principal LeMonde Die Welt The World Recruitment Plan for Gibbs Magnet School of International Studies & Foreign Languages 2013-2014 1. Publicity in the local news media and LRSD website A. Gibbs has been in the Arkansas Democrat Gazette newspaper twice already this year: (1) First Day of School with Fathers Bringing Students to School I . -- Arkansas DemocratGazette/ M ELISSA SUE GERRITS 08/19/13 - Amy Nicholas embraces daughter Avery Nicholas, 7, at Gibbs Magnet Elementary School August 19, 2013 while they wait to hear which classroom Avery will be in for her first year of school at Gibbs. (2) Ja anese Students at Gibbs B. Gibbs has been featured on local television three times this year: (1) Japanese Students at Gibbs (2) 9/11 Day of Service and Remembrance with Firefighter Ceremony (3) Ozark Water Project C. Gibbs has been featured on LRSD website three times already: (1) Gibbs Educator at Global Conference in NYC Gibbs Educator Participates in Japan Society's Global Conference in NYC In May, Ms. Vicki Stroud Gonterman, International Studies Specialist at Gibbs International Magnet School, received a select invitation to participate in the Third Annual Going Global: International Student Social Networking Conference for Educators organized by the Japan Society. Gonterman, one of only ten US-based educators invited, attended the three day conference, August 7-9 in New York, with educators from Japan and Pakistan. The all-expenses paid conference was sponsored in part by the Japan Foundation Center for Global Partnership and the Toshiba International Foundation. The U.S.-Japan Foundation submitted Gonterman's name for inclusion in the conference as she was their 2006 Elgin Heinz Humanities Educator of the Year. Gonterman now has a Japanese "Kamishibai" lesson published online with the Japan Society on their educator's website! Click here to view the lesson. Also, as a result of participation in the conference, Gonterman is currently establishing a new partnership with an international elementary school in Japan. Photo: Gonterman is sitting on the far right of the first table with educators from Japan and Pakistan. (2) Two LRSD Teachers Win Competitive Study Opportunity at the Truman Library Chris Gonterman, Physical Education Teacher at Hall High School, and Vicki Stroud Gonterman, International Studies Specialist at Gibbs International Magnet Elementary School, have both been selected as winners of the Summer Teachers Seminar entitled, "U.S. Presidents and the Middle East: Truman to Obama," offered by the Truman Library in Independence, Missouri this July. The two will attend the weeklong conference, along with teachers selected from across the United States, attend lectures, and utilize the Truman Library's primary source documents on Presidential Policy Making in the Middle East to create lesson plans. The competitive application process included a personal essay explaining the content and pedagogy that would be utilized in their classroom along with an application and resume. (3)Reading Quiz Bowl Results Results for Gibbs Magnet's First Reading Bowl! Gibbs International Magnet School has just concluded its first Reading Bowl of the year! Students in grades 3-5 had an assigned book over the summer. Upon their return to school in August, the children anticipated involvement in a quiz bowl competition around their book. The competition was conducted in each classroom. The winning team in each classroom faced off against the winning team in the opposing grade level homeroom! Homeroom winners were: Third Grade - Mrs. Jennifer White's students
4th Grade - Mrs. Julie Davis's students
and Fifth Grade - Ms. Jennifer Gillespie's students! Each student on the winning teams received a certificate with their team photo. A trophy is also displayed outside each classroom! These children exhibited great sportsmanship! They are looking forward to the next Reading Quiz Bowl at Gibbs! Pictured above are (1) fourth graders and (2) third grade students competing in the first-ever Gibbs Reading Quiz Bowl! D. Gibbs is also featured on the LRSD Access Channel with our "9/11 Day of Service and Remembrance" which included First Lady of Arkansas, Ginger Beebe, reading to a Kindergarten class and many other service volunteers reading in grades K-3. 2. Community Involvement: (1) Gibbs fifth graders perform at Opening Ceremony of WorldFest annually for school and community relations (City of Little Rock and LR Racial and Cultural Diversity Commission) (Friday, September 27, 2013) (2) Other community events such as with Clinton Foundation or Sister Cities Commission as come up during the year. 3. Weekly newsletter (every Wednesday) 4. Special Days at School (1) Grandparents Day Luncheon (September) (2) Dads Day Luncheon (October) (3) Mom Day Luncheon ( 4) Coffee Cafe, monthly 5. Special Evenings at Gibbs: (1) New Student/Family Or
This project was supported in part by a Digitizing Hidden Special Collections and Archives project grant from The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation and Council on Library and Information Resoources.

<dcterms_creator>Arkansas. Department of Education</dcterms_creator>