C/-44 Little Rock School District Job Description JOB TITLE
DEPARTMENT: LOCATION: Director of Student Assignment Student Assignment 501 Sherman Street SALARY: GRADE: SUPERVISOR: $34,139-$54,859 ADMN12 Associate Superintendent PREPARED BY: C. Russell Mayo_______________ APPROVED BY: Henry P. Williams, Superintendent DATE: January 6, 1995 DATE: January 6, 1995 SUMMARY Directs and coordinates the day-to-day operation of the Student Assignment Office by performing the following duties personally or through subordinate supervisors. ESSENTIAL DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES Directs student assignment program and reviews exceptional assignment cases
Confers with staff and principals to explain assignment requirements based on the Little Rock School District desegregation plan
Directs preparation of printed materials explaining assignment requirements and policies for dissemination to schools and patrons
Counsels patrons having problems understanding assignment procedures and supervises assignment coordinators
Supervises the student recruitment program
Keeps the Associate Superintendent for Desegregation informed and updated on progress made in performing responsibilities relating to student assignment and on any relevant information discovered in the performance of these duties
Assists with developmental planning in the areas of long-range student assignment policies, magnet school development, program placement, and equal educational opportunity planning, and proposal development by providing demographic information and other pertinent information
Assists with monitoring and evaluating the districts desegregation plan
Assists in identifying problems or practices that impede the implementation of quality desegregation in the student assignment process
Stays informed of current issues before the Board of Directors by attending Board Meetings
Provides for the development, implementation, and evaluation of staff training for Student Assignment Office personnel
Attends LRSD Board of Director meetings and other meetings as requested
Coordinates the student assignment appeals committee
and. Performs other duties as assigned
SUPERVISORY RESPONSIBILITIES Manages three subordinate supervisors who supervise a total of six employees in the Parent Recruitment, Student Assignment, and Student Assignment Information area. Is responsible for the overall direction, coordination, and evaluation of these units. Also directly supervises one non-supervisory employee. Carries out supervisory responsibilities in accordance with the organizations policies and applicable laws. Responsibilities include interviewing, hiring, and training employees
planning, assigning, and directing work
appraising performance
rewarding and disciplining employees
addressing complaints and resolving problems. 1M/95U.S. DiSTS
t court EASTEP,?! DISTRICT A-.'t<.t>K'R4S IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT t 3 1995 EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION JAMES W. McC0R?*5ACK. CL??:/ By
----------------------------- op- LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF V. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL DEFENDANTS MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL INTERVENORS KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL INTERVENORS NOTICE OF FILING The Little Rock School District (LRSD) hereby gives notice of the filing of the attached "Little Rock School District Interdistrict School Assignment Guidelines". This document is being filed in order to apprise the court. the monitor and the parties of the desegregation efforts being made by LRSD. Respectfully submitted. LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT FRIDAY, ELDREDGE & CLARK 2000 First Commercial Bldg. 400 West Capitol Street Little Rock, AR 72201 (501) 376-2011 Byr Jistopher Helled Bar No. 81083CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I certify that a copy of the foregoing Notice of Filing has been served on the following people by depositing copy of same in the United States mail on this 3rd day of February 1995: Mr. John Walker .JOHN WALKER, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72206 Mr. Sam Jones WRIGHT, LINDSEY & JENNINGS 2200 Worthen Bank Bldg. 200 West Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Steve Jones JACK, LYON & JONES, P.A. 3400 Capitol Towers Capitol & Broadway Streets Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Richard Roachell Roachell and Streett First Federal Plaza 401 West Capitol, Suite 504 Little Rock, AR 72201 Ms. Ann Brown Desegregation Monitor Heritage West Bldg., Suite 510 201 East Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201 Ms. Elizabeth Boyter Arkansas Dept, of Education 4 State Capitol Mall Little Rock, AR 72201-1071 Christopher Heller^ 2Little Rock School District Interdistrict School Assignment Guidelines It is the intent of the Little Rock School District ("LRSD") that LRSD Interdistrict schools exist primarily to bring non-black students from surrounding school districts together with black students from the LRSD. LRSD non-black students may attend interdistrict schools in the LRSD as outlined in the District's assignment guidelines. The guidelines below will apply to all interdistrict schools in the LRSD. 1. The assignment guidelines are consistent with both the LRSD Desegregation Plan and the Interdistrict Plan with reference to the following sections: a) There will be established interdistrict schools which shall seek to obtain a ratio of between 60 percent and 40 percent of either race with the ideal goal of these interdistrict schools to be 50 percent black/white. Proposed interdistrict schools shall be phased-in to these ratios over time. (Interdistrict Plan, p.3) 2. b) This plan will permit the treatment of interdistrict transfers (including the NLRSD) where students are moving from a situation where their race is a greater proportion of the total student body of a school to a school where their race is a lesser proportion of the student body of a school as Interdistrict Majority-to-Minority transfers under the Court's Order. (Interdistrict Plan, p. 11, Potential Interdistrict M-to-M Enhancements) The process described below will be followed during the LRSD winter pre-registration each year. Following pre-registration each year. additional students may be enrolled at an interdistrict school if there is a seat available for the student and if his or her enrollment does not cause the school's proportion of white students to reach or exceed 50% and does not cause the school's proportion of black students to exceed 60%. as follows: The pre-registration process will be conducted a) Black students from the school's attendance zone will be assigned up to 51% of capacity at each grade level. If demand exceeds capacity, those students who cannot be assigned will be placed on a waiting list. Placement on the kindergarten waiting list will be determined by a lottery. Students who cannot be assigned because of These guidelines assume that interdistrict schools will be located in predominately black attendance zones.3. 4. capacity will be assigned to the closest school with capacity which meets racial balance requirements. If the student's closest school with capacity is an incentive school, that student may choose to attend that incentive school where such an assignment would not inhibit the initial reservation of seats for pre-kindergarten and kindergarten students. Priority for incentive school seats, however, would remain with those students who live in the incentive school attendance zone. b) c) d) Non-black students from the school's attendance zone will be assigned. Non-black students from the Pulaski County Special School District assigned through (PCSSD) and beyond Pulaski County will be the process or appropriate state statutes. Majority-to-Minority transfer The proportion of non-black students will not reach or exceed 50% of the school's total enrollment. Once the Majority-to-Minority transfer students have been assigned, students will be assigned to the school. will not be allowed, however, non-black LRSD An assignment if it would cause the proportion of non-black students to reach or exceed 50% of the total enrollment or would cause the racial balance of the sending school to fall outside of the acceptable racial balance range. Children of staff members will be attendance zone and PCSSD students are placed. assigned after Transfers are subject to desegregation guidelines and the LRSD Desegreijation Plan, p. Employees. 141. Transfer of Children of Those LRSD non-black students currently attending an LRSD interdistrict school may remain until they matriculate out of the sixth grade. However, the siblings of those students may not be assigned to an interdistrict school unless such an assignment complies with these Interdistrict School Assignment Guidelines. LRSD black students who move out of the interdistrict school zone will be reassigned. at the time their address change is processed, to the new attendance zone school. In no event will non-black students from the LRSD, PCSSD or elsewhere be allowed to enroll in a LRSD interdistrict school where to do so would cause that school's enrollment to shift from being majority black to majority white. thereby negatively affecting the interdistrict M-to-M funding status of that LRSD interdistrict school. lottfayVIaiARlialriet.CuidelioM 2Office of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501)376-6200 Fax (501) 371-0100 May 30, 1995 Mrs. Verma Simmons 2715 Montreal Little Rock, AR 72204 Dear Mrs. Simmons: I am responding to your letter on behalf of Judge Susan Webber Wright. Although she is sensitive to the concerns community members have about desegregation and other educational issues, as a matter of policy. Judge Wright does not correspond directly with citizens. Instead she relies on us in her Office of Desegregation Monitoring (ODM) to discuss school matters with individuals and organizations. In the letter you sent to Dr. Williams, you described concerns about the enrollment procedures followed by the Little Rock School District and asked the district to reconsider your daughters assignment to Central High School. While I am sensitive to your concern, individual student assignment issues are generally beyond the purview of our office. ODM serves as an arm of the United States Federal District Court and assists the Court in monitoring the three Pulaski County school districts compliance with their desegregation plans and court orders. While the districts refusal to reconsider your daughters assignment may seem unfair, it appears that the Student Assignment Office followed established procedures. It is unfortunate that an official change of address was not recorded prior to the magnet school assignments being made. I hope you are able to work with the district to find a mutually satisfactory resolution to this issue. If in the future you have questions or concerns which may be appropriate for us to address, please dont hesitate to call on us. Sincerely, Melissa Guldin Associate MonitorJOHN w. Walker, P.A. Attorney At Law 1723 Broadway Little Rock. Arkansas 72206 Telephone (501) 374-3758 FAX (501) 3744187 J*' AUG 5 1 1955 a JOHN W. WALKER RALPH WASHINGTON MARK BURNETTE AUSTIN PORTER. JR. via Facsimile - 371-0100 CJfice of Dessgregaiion Mcnixnng August 29, 1995 Ms. Ann Brown Federal Monitor Office of Desegregation Monitoring 201 East Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Ms. Brown: This is a followup to our just completed telephone conversation regarding Little Rock School District pupil assignment practices. Our discussion centered around the experiences of Samantha Smith and her mother, Ms. Joanne Mitchell. Let me recap the conversation for the record. Arkansas. Ms. Mitchell lives at 101 Ellis Drive, Apt. N, Little Rock, ---- She is in the Central High School attendance zone. During the spring, 1995, she applied for Samantha to attend Parlcview Magnet. She was advised by the Student Assignment Office that Samantha was number (3) three on the waiting list for Visual Arts. Later, when she called the Student Assignment Office, she was advised that Samantha was number (5) five. Surprised that she could move up the list rather than down the waiting list, Ms. Mitchell inquired about viewing the list. Student Assignment told her that list was confidential and did not share it with her. In visiting with Dr. Russ Mayo about the matter, he indicated that there was nothing he could do because she was already on the waiting list. At that point she went to Dr. Williams for assistance. This occurred in April, 1995. Upon being presented the facts, Dr. Williams made the following statement: "why don't you apply for another program?" Mitchell indicated that the only one for which there was not a This occurred in April, 1995. Ms. waiting list was the one for Band and that her child was not interested in Band. Dr. Williams indicated that she should have Samantha apply anyway in order "to get her feet in the door." Ms. Mitchell indicated that was deceptive at which point Dr. Williams indicated "that's how you play the game." Mitchell indicated that she wanted to teach her child the concept of honesty. Dr. Williams indicated "teach her the game of life in When Ms. order to get what she wants."Page 2 Letter to Ms. Ann Brown August 29, 1995 Ms. Mitchell did not provide a false reason, as suggested by Dr. Williams, for getting into Parkview and to date she has not received a Parkview assignment. I spoke with Dr. Williams this morning and provided him a brief synopsis of Samantha Smith's case. I asked him to check into it and to let me hear from him by the end of the day. now 11:00 a.m. and I expect to hear from him at the end of the It is day. This letter is being written for two reasons: 1) to demonstrate the arbitrariness and unfairness of the Student Assignment/Lottery system which is in use in the LRSD
and 2) draw attention to the teaching example which emanates from the to Superintendent and extends to parents and pupils of this I intend to ask Ms. Mitchell to take a polygraph examination to verify the foregoing facts. District. She also informs me that Samantha's grandfather, Grady Smith, from Little Rock, Arkansas, was present during the meeting with Dr. Williams and heard his comments. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Very truly yours, John W. Walker JWW:js cc: Ms. Joanne MitchellJ u y .Ai FILED ii-S DISTRICT COURT eastern district ar wnsas SEP 2 9 1995 Cffics of D65egregai!cn Moniioiifig IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION SEP 2 6 1995 JAMES W.McL9HMACK.Cl.fiK \ A Ml' , M.U oiew LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF j vs. No. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 1, ET AL DEFENDANTS MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL INTERVENORS KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL INTERVENORS The Joshua intervenors filed three motions which have now been resolved by agreement among the parties. The motions were for a temporary restraining order, a preliminary injunction, and to cite the Little Rock School District (LRSD") for contempt of court in connection with student assignments at Pulaski Heights Junior High School. [Doc. # 2477.] At a hearing on August 28, 1995, the attorneys for the Joshua and Knight intervenors informed the Court that the intervenors and the LRSD had settled the matter. Therefore, the motions are denied as moot. IT IS SO ORDERED this r day of September 1995. JUDGE 5 PHIS DOCUMENT ENTERED ON DOCKET SHEET IN COMPI ON ' ICE WITH RULE 5 AND/OR 79(a) FRCP ^^E^T^R^I BY 0 1A- /./ty ,>i hbrc/iry- ''' R liiX ( LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT STUDENT ASSIGNMENT OFFICE 501 SHERMAN ST. LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72202 JAN 1 199<j Oifice d OeseyiegaiioT! Monm MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: Melissa Guldin, Office of Desegregation Monitoring Nancy Acre, Director of Student Assignment DATE: January 11, 1996 SUBJECT: Student Assignment Handbook 1996-97 Enclosed is a draft copy of our Student Assignment Handbook for 1996-97. Please review and return with your comments by January 19. Thank you. NA:pt EnclosureLITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT STUDENT ASSIGNMENT OFFICE 501 SHERMAN ST. LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72202 RECE f-' FEB d 1990 ^-/r 9 Office of Deseflfegation Mo,wormy TO: FROM: Principals ^7^ Nancy Acre, Director of Student Assignment DATE: February 1, 1996 SUBJECT
Student Assignment Handbook lt'brar Enclosed you will find a copy of the 1996-97 Student Assignment Handbook. It details the process for registering students for the 1996-97 school year. A packet of registration materials has been distributed to your secretary/registrar. Although very few of the procedures have changed since 1995 Pre-Registration, we would like to call your attention to several items. 1. The acceptable racial ranges have been re-calculated (page 2). 2. Transportation will not be provided for any four-year-olds except those attending Crystal Hill Interdistrict Magnet School or Clinton Interdistrict Magnet School. 3. Retention lists must be submitted at the end of the third nine weeks and at the close of the school year. High school lists should include any kindergarten students who will be retained (page 2). 4. Do not allow anyone to complete pre-registration forms before February 6 (page 5). 5. Do not distribute OERFs to NLRSD or PCSSD students (page 10). 6. Register only those students who live in your school's attendance zone. If you have any questions concerning these procedures, please contact either Julie Wiedower or Audrey Lee at *44. cc: Assistant Superintendents Melissa Guldin, Office of Desegregation MonitoringStiinmary of the Court Proceedings of May 13, 14, 15 Judge Wright stated that she had chosen to review the settlement agreement after six years although the settlement agreement does not require such a review. She stated that the portions of the settlement agreement that trouble her are INCENTIVE SCHOOLS AND STUDENT ASSIGNMENTS. Dr. Herbert Wahlberg, an educational psychologist, testified that the extra funding and enhancements of incentive schools have failed to raise achievement scores of black children. He stated that he did not believe that incentive schools were effective in raising achievement levels anywhere
he stated that he did not know whether the failure was caused by poor implementation or whether the theory simply does not work. Wahlberg testified that the schools fail in three aspects: They fail to attract white children, achievement scores of black children are not raised. and the "exotic" curriculum is inefficiently implemented so that it harms learning. The judge asked Dr. Wahlberg if he had an opinion as to whether black children benefit from going to school with white children. He answered that the percentage of white children in the room has no bearing on what black children learn. He stated that some studies show a mild gain to black children and some show a mild harm so that his conclusion is that there is no effect. In the witness' opinion the socio-economic status of the parents has a consistent relationship with ability.Wahlberg states that there is an achievement gap between minorities and whites which is measurable on the first day of school. He states that children between birth and eighteen years only spend ten per cent of their time in schools and it is unreasonable to expect a school to bear the burden of closing the achievement. He says that it is impossible and that no school district has ever done it. Dr. Wahlberg enumerated 9 factors which affect the quality of learning: 1) Abilityprior achievement. A good reader in the 3rd grade is usually a good reader in the 6th grade. 2) Motivationcapacity to persevere through a difficult situation. A good view of oneself. 3) Ageall thi^s being equal, older students know more. 4) Amount of instructionMore homework, longer school years result in more learning. 5) Quality of instructionMastery learning and cooperative learning have more effect on achievement than desegregation. English, math, civics, history, geography, foreign languages, art and music should be concentrated upon. 6) Classroom environmentChildren should be appropriately challenged. A pleasing climate with good morale results in more productivity. 7) Home environment90% of waking hours spent there. If a child is read to, stimulated, and taken to extracurricular activities, he learns more.8) Peer groupappropriate friends and appropriate activities, particularly in early adolescence when youngsters are geared more toward friends than home, will help a child be a better student. He or she should be steered toward academic competitions, chess. ballet, etc. 9) Televisionthe more television a child watches, generally the poorer they do in school. Wahlberg was asked what he would do to help disadvantaged students. He stated that he would concentrate on learning. He stated that there is a crisis of achievement in the United States. He would assign more homework and extend the school year. He would also change methods of teaching and incorporate mastery learning and cooperative learning. Wahlberg stated that parent education programs have had good success rates. He stated that the above ideas would help the achievement of minority students more than desegregation. Wahlberg testified that the reason socio-economic factors are so important is that if a child's parents value education, have money, and are well-educated, it is more likely that the parents have a wider vocabulary, have taken the child on outings, and that the child was read to and may know his alphabet before beginning school. He stated that child is generally more motivated, will try harder, and may be healthier and miss less school. Wahlberg stated that the benefits continue as the parents go to school more often. coach their children, know other parents so can better keep up with what their child should be doing, and they reinforce what their 34 children learn. Wahlberg pointed out that Asian Americans generally do better in school than white children but not because white children have been discriminated against in favor of Asians, but because of the culture of the Orient. He stated that in that culture parents and teachers are revered, academic achievement reflects on the family. and the school year is longer with a more demanding curriculum. Dr. Wahlberg testified that up to 50% of a child's capacity for achievement is formed by four years of age. By age 8, 80% of a child's achievement in the twelfth grade is predictable. Children of low socio-economic status adjust more poorly to moving from school to school than do middle class students. In very large cities there is lots of movement between schools. particularly where there is mandatory desegregation. According to Dr. Wahlberg, the difference in racial achievement levels in all states is fairly consistent. The main reason for achievement disparity is socio-economic. The witness was asked whether establishing themes at schools helps achievement. Wahlberg stated that a heavy vocational theme hurts academic learning but a foreign language theme helps. An experiment that Wahlberg helped conduct had the following requirements for students in one group: 1) Parents signed pledge to send children to school clean and neat everyday
2) Homework every night (teacher pledge)
3) Principal signed a pledge
4) Merchants contributed money for books. The children in the above group had better test scores than the children in the control group. Wahlberg said that hjgh schools have three tracks: general.vocational, and academic. Dr. David Armor, a sociologist, testified next. He stated that he has concluded from his studies that mandatory integration was not having positive effect either sociologically or a academically. He stated that mandatory busing produces so much white flight that it is ineffective as a remedy. Armor testified that much of the achievement gap between black and white children is because of the long history of segregation. but he believes that desegregation will not eliminate the achievement gap which is influenced so much by home environment. He supports Title I programs to help achievement and magnet schools to voluntarily desegregate a school district. He stated that a magnet should not be based on non-academic programs. Armor stated that he knows of no desegregation plan that he is aware of that overcame the achievement gap. He stated that the majority of the gap lies outside the school purview because the capacity to learn is formed in the early years. Armor stated that studies show that between 87%-100% of the achievement gap in 6th grade is due to home environment. When a lawyer questioned Armor as to whether the lowered expectations of teachers toward children from low socio-economic backgrounds could cause the difference in achievement, the witness answered negatively. Armor stated that the gap is there from the first, so it couldn't be caused by the teacher. Dr. Armor also pointed out that in Wilmington, Delaware, where the school district is fully and successfully desegregated, the achievement gap has stayed the same.Ie Araor testified that he does not believe that most people have a negative attitude toward mandatory busing because of racism. He stated that he thinks parents just don't believe race is a legitimate basis for assigning children to schools. Armor stated that the only school districts that have stabilized with mandatory busing plans began with a very large (80/20) white to minority ration, and were all metropolitan areas which included the central city and huge parts of the suburbs. Armor testified that most districts that began 60/40 or 50/50 are becoming resegregated because of white flight. The judge stated that racial balance requirements are "choking" the school districts. Armor testified that our consent decree^ requires much stricter racial balance than most districts. Armor testified that once school district becomes 70% a minority, the considerations for desegregation change. He stated that at that point a district should just try to have as many integrated schools as possible, and live with the fact that the rest are predominantly black. Armor testified that for even a voluntary plan. with neighborhood schools and desegregation options, to stabilize a district racially, there need to be some 50/50 schools or schools that are 60/40% white, or the district will become all minority. His recommendation for Little Rock is to have no more mandatory student assignments. He stated that in the voluntary plans that he has designed, all students are assigned first to neighborhood schools. He said that he tries to draw zones that make sense but may naturally integrate some schools. Thenvoluntary options are adopted such as M to H transfers, and magnet schools strategically placed in minority neighborhoods. An attorney asked Dr. Armor if it was feasible to build schools in one-race neighborhoods. He answered affirmatively if there is a growing population or other need. He stated that a district should build instead of bus
he wouldn't deprive a minority of a new school just because it is going to be all black. He stated if the new school was going to be all white, it could probably be integrated with M to M transfers. If the new school is in the inner city, it should have magnet programs. Dr. Armor testified that a study in Boston showed that black children have high levels of self-esteem whether they are in an integrated environment or not. Armor said that he also sees no correlation between more resources and higher achievement.Summary of Court Proceedings on May 30 Gary Orfield The judge stated that the focus of the hearings is to give evidence to the parties so that they can reach modifications. She wants the opinions of the witnesses to generate some new thinking. The judge stated that she was gravely concerned about continuing the incentive schools as they are now. Gary Orfield is a professor of education and social policy at Harvard. He is a political scientist who has studied school desegregation since the late 196O's. He started and heads the Harvard Project on Desegregation which was begun in 1992. That project studies Milliken remedies. Milliken I held that mandatory desegregation remedies must be limited to districts that could be proved to have committed discriminatory practices. Milliken II gave district courts the power to fashion remedies with the contemplation that you could solve the harms of segregation with remediation components. Orfield testified that most districts hurriedly put remedies together by educators with no significant evaluation components
therefore, the districts are unable to see if the remedies are effective. Orfield stated that he reviewed the planning process documents and the monitoring reports. He also visited four of the incentive schools. Professor Orfield stated that the incentive school plan has lots of severe problems conceptually. He stated that those problems are magnified by poor implementation. He testified that there were a lot of good ideas in the plan but the ideas were conceived in a rush without thinking how they would play out in actually running the school. He testified that it would be very burdensome to manage the plan
that the plan directs so much energy in ways that have nothing to do with achievement progress. Moreover, he stated that the complication of the plan contributes to the administrative implementation problems. Orfield commented that the plans call for very complicated after school and weekend programs along with constantly filling out forms. Orfield stated that there was no reason to expect anyone to cany out the plan. There is no clear sense of purpose because the plan requires too many responsibilities of the staff with the result that the incentive plan does not produce a strong educational product. Orfield stated that the goals for he plan are extraordinarily demanding. Professor Orfield concluded that incentive school remedies are very hard to implement, that school districts rarely succeed in doing so. He stated, however, that there are programs which, if chosen carefully and monitored carefully, are effective in helping disadvantaged students achieve. Professor Orfield testified that incentive schools should have superior staff, administrative support, and significant additional funding. He stated that if you have underachieving students, a low status community, teachers who are unhappy teaching there, and students with no future, it is unlikely to be a successful school. Professor Orfield testified that he has seen very little that has taken place in the last five years which would result in remediation. He stated that there have only been modest educational gains. Orfield stated that the plan contemplated that the process was supposed to be secondary to the outcomes. He testified that if the district only complies with a lot of the details of the plan but does not show good results, then the plan is a failure. When asked to characterize the other experts, Walberg and Armor, Professor Orfield stated that Armor has not done very much independent research and that now he works for parties in civil rights lawsuits. Orfield stated that Armor argues that only parts of a district should be desegregated because only those parts were guilty of discrimination. Orfield stated that Armor ran on an anti-desegregation platform when he ran for the school board in Los Angeles. Orfield said that Armor believes that schools dont affect the achievement of student and therefore schools do not have to provide an equal education. Orfield stated that most scholars in the field disagree with Armor. Orfield stated that schools DO make a difference and that is why everyone sends their children to the best colleges that they can afford. Professor Orfield testified that Walbergs opinions are based on meta-analysis (combining hundreds of studies and then constructing giant statistical models) instead of relying on original research. Orfield stated that this method is highly criticized in education research, but also widely used. Orfield testified that the majority of school desegregation studies are for only one year and are done in the first year of desegregation
therefore, Orfield concludes that the majority of the statistics plugged into the giant model are defective. Orfield stated that there is a vast pool of scholars that do desegregation research and neither Walberg nor Armor are in the pool. According to Orfield, Armor has testified that desegregation actually harms black children but he has abandoned that viewpoint. He named many other researchers who have come up with a lot of information on conditions for effective desegregation. Orfield stated that the researchers are nearly all in disagreement with Walberg and Armor. Professor Orfield said that compensation education is a very difficult task and that only a small number of programs have clearly proven results. He stated that it is very important to target those programs with good track records and specially trained persons must be used. Some of those programs are Reading Recovery
M 444 Success for All, and Algebra Project. Some of the Title One programs are successful and some are not with no net effect from Title One.Schools with disadvantaged students and Title One programs do worse on achievement tests than less impacted schools with no Title One. Children with lower socioeconomic status are more likely to score worse on achievement tests and the converse is also true. If you want to remedy the gap due to socioeconomic status, effective schools have a clear mission, and strong leadership. Good results require extraordinary educational leadership. Standardized tests evaluate content that is not taught exclusively within a school system. Orfield testified that some lower socioeconomic children who dont perform well on standardized tests, do better when put with children with higher socioeconomic status who do perform well on standardized tests. Children need the right level of challenge and motivation. If kids are segregated, disadvantaged kids generally get worse programs and such schools reinforce social status difference. With the low level of competition, they are not challenged and they will not do as well. Professor Orfield stated that if a school has an identity as a minority school or a weak schoolit is hard to attract students. But if you could change identity AND offer a scholarship that would be a great incentive for attracting students. Orfield stated that if you put all gifted programs in poor areas, that whites would come. He stated that if all the white kids come, the school will get better programs. He also stated that all black schools can be very attractive. Professor Orfield said that a number of needed changes are immediately apparent in the incentive schoolsstructural changes that would release a lot of money. He stated that the number of schools should be examined as well as the programs that they offer. He stated that as it is the staff has too much to comply with. He stated that after school programing does not make sense-that the teachers do not want it. He said that the after school program is too expensive and that since there is no required participation, many student who need it may not get it. He stated that there should be targeted tutoring so that children who need help are identified. Orfield stated that the student educational plan takes too much of the teachers time, that there should be a better assessment to identify warning signals for students who need tutoring. Teachers should have to make a long term (five year suggested) commitment and there should be special incentives for principals. He said that perhaps one incentive school should be closed and one should be made a magnet school. Professor Orfield said that there are so many compliance requirements that the staff is unable to focus on the education of children. He stated that based on the plan and interviews with teachers and principals, there is too much pressure on teachers and principals. Professor Orfield said that there is a great deal of evidence that there is no harm to the education of white children by putting them in class with blacks . He stated that black children significantly profit when they got to school with whites. He stated that there is a significant but not large increase in achievement scores when blacks and whites go to school together. The larger gains are what happen in black childrens lives. There is significant evidence to suggest that black children are more likely to go to college if they are in a majority white high school. Most gains are from interaction of isolated children with more successful children. He stated that there is significant research to suggest that if we do certain things in class (like mutual academic projects) that these gains are enhanced with the result of higher achievement and more mutual respect. He stated that desegregation has more benefits than any other intervention. He stated that children that go to desegregated schools are more likely to live in integrated neighborhoods as adults. Separate schools lead to separate lives and separate destinies. Orfield stated that although school has a major influence, it is not more important than the influence of family. Orfield stated that some mandatory desegregation plans work well and some do not. They are usually better when they are in very large metropolitan areas. He said that the maximum education benefit from mandatory plans is when a disadvantaged, racially isolated child is bused to a majority white, middle class school from 1-6 grade. It should be substantially integrated with staff and students and with no tracking on the basis of race. It should also involve parents. He stated that the districts that have gone to neighborhood schools have extremely low achievement in the 100% poor schools, parental involvement did not increase, and white flight did not stop. Orfield stated that the United States is changing from 10% minority to the point that it will be 50/50 in the year 2025. Orfield stated that best kind of goals reflect the metropolitan community and, therefore, he is no advocate of strict racial balance. The higher the racial balance gets in a community, desegregation is more complicated and a schools racial balance must be within a reasonable range. Professor Orfield stated that Little Rock needs a magnet school with a 50/50 ratio in a developing area to get people away from going to private schools.Ir r k I 11/14/96 12:48 501 324 2023 LRSD COIIMLNICATI -^ > ODM Little Rock School District November 14,1996 @002/003 Kress Release More Information
Zeomee Hens. .124-2020 LRSD OrientiitioD Designed to Make 6th to 7tb Grade Transition Smooth for Parents and Students Parents of .students who are currently in the sixth grade will have an opportunity to explore rhe options for their child's educational future on Sunday, November 17. 1996. from 2
3{) - 4 00 p.m. at Henderson Junior High School. 401 John Barrow Road. The annual Junior High Transition Meeting, spon.sored by the l.inle Rock School District (LRSD) Student Assignment Office, is designed to give parents a closer look at the eight LRSD jurdor high schools and the programs offered at each school. Each school will be given one classroom at Henderson which will be decorated to be.sT showcase their school. Principals, teachers and parents of current students will be available to an.swer questions and give prospective parents helpful information to make the transition to iunicr high sthoui a smooth one. The meeting will be followed by open house tours at the schools at 10:00 a.m, and 1 :S0 o.in. as follows: Monday. xNovember 18 Monday. November 18 .Cloverdale Junior High ITunbar International Studies/Gifted & 1? '' .'.La Vi'ednesday, November 20 Wednesdai'. November 20 Taler.tsd Education Magne! Junior High .Forest Heights Junior High Henderson Heaidi Science Magnet Junior 1 810 West Markham Street li iiO li i'lDors! Little Rock. Arkansas 72201 <501)524-2000 T f t} 4
& D s e J H a I J if. I t- k' t i: Ei 11/14/96 12:49 501 324 2023 LRSD COMMUNICATI ODM 121003/003 I I fky I Press Release Transition Meeting (11/14/96) Page 2 Thursday, November 21 Thursday, November 21 Monday, November 25 Monday, November 25 Mabelvale Junior High Horace Mann Arts & Science Magnet Junior High Pulaski Heights Junior High .Southwest Junior High School registration uill be held January 21-31,1997. tirTr V- V. '11 I ?1 f ' 3 :i 'w? -'A "A* .y I 5
-97 NON SUSAN U WRIGHT FAX NO, 5013246576 P.Ol DISTRICT JLT9GE SUSaN ''AEBBER WRIGHT 600 W. C/NPiT'.A.. i.i niE RIX'K, AR 72201 JUL 101997 JLIDGE WRiQHT. u s. JUDGE SINCE JANT.LARY 1997 i HAVE BEEN V^ ORKING WITH THE LITD_E ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT ON THE .STUDENT ASSIGNMENT OF CHILDREN LIVING IN THE WEST LITTLE ROCK AREA AFTER A GREAT AMOUNT' OF EFFORT \RV LITITE HAS BEEN ACCOMPLISHED I HAVE A WHOLE LOT OF KNOftT.EDGE ABOUT THE PROBLEM PARENTS LIVING IN MY AREA ARE SO UPSFT WITH. THE STUDENT ASSIGNMENT OFFICE TOLD ME THAT OTHER AREAS OF TO'WN HAVE RECRLTTINCt MEETINGS. WELL, I TRIED THAT AND IHE ASSIGNMENT OFFICE WAS KIND .E.NOUGH TO PROVIDE ME WITH SW FLYERS AND ABOLT A DOZEN POSTERS. I WENT IX'XIR. TO DOOR TALKING TO P.ARENTS IN SANDPIPER WEST A.ND CHERRYCREEK SLEDIVTSIONS AND I P'lJT UP THE DISTERS ATTENDANCE FOR THE MEETING WAS IN MY OPEMON DlSM.-\L. .,2 PARENTS FROM SANDPIPER & 3 FROM CHERRYCRETK. ALL OF THE OTHER PERSONS W.TERE FROM THE SCFEJOL DISTRICT. (THE ?. FROM ?.vNDPIPER CAME AS M\' SLRFORT) AFIT- "i '. <1 ' ' rO ICO OR so HOUSEHOLDS IN MY NE.1.GHBORHOOD I HEARD THE SAME I- R AND OVER.-T WON'T PLY MA' CHILDREN IN WILSON . IVE NEVER S rUDENT ASSIGNKLENT OFFICE, .ID PVT MA' CHILD IN SCHOOL IF raEY Il NEIO.rIBORHOOD BUT I'M NOT GOING TO PUT THEM IN WESSON....MA' . I ->K JI )LD WERE ASSIGN.E.D TO WILSON A.ND THEY PUT THEIR KIDS IN A Ki, ATE' .MTHOOL ^O I'M GOING TO DO TOAT TOO' .. OF ALL THE PERSONS THAT 1 7 ^(L.KED TO ONL Y 1 PARENT HAD THEIR CHILDREN IN' PUELiC SCHCXTLS AND IT WAS A magnet there . -NOT ENOUGH SPACE TO PUT .ALL THE CHILDREN IN OLTi AREA IN MAGNET SC HOOL S'SO THE ONES TB.AT DON T MAKE IT TO THEIR CHOICE OPT OUT TO PxRIVATE SCHOOl < -M MOST M.l. CF IHE PARENTS COMMENHED .ABOUT HOW ANGRY THEY WERE THAT F HAVE 2 SCHCK.LS LESS THAN 1 xMILES FROM OUR HOMES AND WERE NOT assigned TO THE.M .AND CANNOT EVEN APPLY TO CO THERE I .AM CVRREN FLY WORKENG WTIH THE LITll.E RCX.K SCHOOL OlS'rRlCT TO COMMLINTCATE WITH THESE P.ARENTS THAT PUHi IC SCHOOLS APE GCOD SAFE PLACES FOR OUR CHILDREN. I SINCERELY HOPE YOU'LL TAKE A GOOD LOOK AT OUR .LRE.'- AND PROVIDE. Ol R CfflLDRF '< '.VITI-i .A CHOICE THAT WE CAN GET THESE PARENTS TO AGREE OX N.TLDING .A NEW SCHOOL IN OLR AREA. YObR CONSEJER.a IiON OF .MY CONCERNS IS GREATLY APPRECIATED AND I lCOR FORW ARD TO GREAT THINGS HAlPENING IN 'CHE LITILE ROCK SCHCXX. DISTRICT .iRFLV 7/
'CZ/Uy/- M.AR\'ANNF CAMfBF.Ll, 77c(z MON 6:24 SUSAN W WRIGHT FAX NO, 5013246576 P. 03 1 * anti respond to my person via telephone or writte.u communication, I work.within the Pulaski County School District as a substitute teacner, while waiting to be placed as a secondary Engiish tsacnsr (certification by the Ark. Dept, of Education), but 1 air, also a concerne,d parent. I want to rrake sure that my son and the other black males receive justice in this matter. have a fear that they are being used as a scapegoats, simply because there is not anyone to connect to the liquor bottle alleyedly found by Ms. Clark. 1 I would appreciate my son's name being placed with the black asst, principal, instead of Mr. Allison, whom 1 feel will not properly treat my son fairly because he is a black male. I believe the Asst. Principal I am referring to is a Nr. Twilley (I apologize if I did not spell his name correctly). One final, remark, I do not appreciate the fact that Ms. C.lark fl yei.led at these students and told them to shut up when they asked for permission to speak to tell their side of the. story. We have havQ constitutJ.onal_ rights^ regardless of our age. I hops someone will remind Ms. Clar.k of this fact. It sp-.ct.fu 1 1 y submit I d ^ary rin? Anderson cc cc .Attorney John Walker Judge Susan Webber Wright Retained V."' t ! i V JUl M? MON 8:23 To
Front} Ref J SUSAN W WRIGHT Kupt
Bobby ester, Mary , Artdereon, Dab Artc!e?son, This /iiatC
r Is relevant FAX NO, 5013246576 pcssn 8fcb Grade Student, SHJH P. 02 'J. .-V to a teiephcne call I received from Prlncxpal^Sue Clark at,the Sylvan Hills Jr. High Schoo at* Thursday, Ui&ids the boy' s, bathroom and observed four Stated bathroom. Ms. Clark also stated tnat, she Saw Dah .With u ...d., gave him to buy a cold soda drink at school). Jr. High School at "'-A, ''Ass- She stated Ms. Clark also a soda can in his hand (money T. At 7jj3 a...ii. . .1 dropped my. mornxng from home . i, drop my children off at .school every" rnornxng, and .they dq not leave the school oremises for any reason. _ 1 Wa.tCxhed my son pack his backpack with his books
^ne orixi items ,in his backpack were books, This same fact holds'trri^ for my daughter, son and my daughter off at SHJH this pencils and paper, Tammy, as well. that, she "did not" witness the four s..udenvS drinking.,any kind of wine, but she what was in the strawberry soda of the contents (an assumption) fr assumed" this Is can from sniffing the remainder I was also advised by, my Ms Cl^irk (wljich she did not mention to a green liquor bottle in .the wastebasket oathroom. Eric, Lewis, au anun, not have this grse.h .bottle,and that he t.ie. soda he bought front the machine at * ' ' ' I Below Is the son my person) found __ inside the boy's aiSd a strident at SHJH, Version of my son's^ school. can attest that was drinking and I want an investigation conducted by the Superintendent's office. I ..ou judgment of Mr. Allison,' nor do I trust the judgment into
a boy's bathroom drawing a T^hdipg an .igoiated bottle inside the bathroom and on a. cohvenxent 90ap$goat.
i feel that this the fact thfttfmy son^istblack, arid I do not trust the of a a conclusion placing is due to inside the.
bathroom.' * ....... treatmenh of.the blackstudents , rd SO are the four other students I-have often been told that there the crenc oi.tne^biack scudents are different from the treatment of the wnite students,.and I am concerned this complaint. 1 and disturbed regarding Aafon Walker, and other black rendered at this school, and how they are followed Constantly when they go in the bathroom as a 5roup, as opposed to white students who gather in this same bathroom ahd are not followed or questioned. What is going on withan. this overall enVirotmerit or questioned. Mr. Lester, again, please (investigate this matter to its fullest }7-3-^7 Cr JUL 11 19g/ ANN BROWN OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING 201 E. MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 nro DESEGfiEGAKONMOWTOWS DEAR ANN, THANKS FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK WITH YOU CONCERNING THE OPTIONS AVAILABLE TO PARENTS IN THE WEST LITTLE ROCK AREA. ALTHOUGH WHITE PARENTS MAY HAVE MORE OPTIONS THAN BLACK PARENTS ON WERE TO SEND THEIR CHILDREN TO SCHOOL, I BELIEVE IT IS TOO COMPLICATED AND MANY PARENTS LIVING IN WEST LITTLE ROCK SIMPLY DONT WANT TO PUT UP WITH THE HASSLE THEY HAVE TO GO THROUGH TO GET THEIR CHILDREN ASSIGNED TO A MAGNET SCHOOL OR AN ALTERNATIVE SCHOOL. I PLAN ON WORKING WITH THE LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL SYSTEM TO PROVIDE INFORMATION TO PARENTS IN THE WEST LITTLE ROCK AREA ABOUT THE OPTIONS THEY HAVE AS YOU RECOMMENDED. I ONLY HOPE YOU WILL COMMUNICATE TO JUDGE WRIGHT THAT MORE COMMUNICATION WITH PARENTS IN THIS AREA IS GREATLY NEEDED. AND FURTHERMORE, IF YOU SEE ANY WAY I CAN BE OF ASSISTANCE TO YOU I WOULD BE GLAD TO HELP. THE LITTLE ROCK PUBLIC SCHOOLS ARE GOOD SAFE PLACES FOR OUR CHILDREN BUT WE NEED TO FIND A WAY TO REACH THE UNBELIEVERS. BEST REGARDS, MARYANNE CAMPBELLOffice cf Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501)376-6200 Fax (501) 371-0100 July 23, 1997 Ms. Maryanne Campbell 2623 Creekside Drive Little Rock, AR 72211 Dear Maryanne: Thank you for your recent letter. Im glad we had the opportunity to talk over the phone, and I commend you for your .zeal in wanting to recruit parents to the public schools. Like you, I believe the public schools are a good place for cliildren. I appreciate your ofter to be of help. I think one of the best ways for you to do that is to work with officials in the Little Rock School District to help make parents aware of the various options for their childrens education. When you give the districts recruiters the benefit of your perceptions and ideas, they can better serve the information needs of the community. Your interest in the educational of children is very important, and I hope you will continue to actively support our citys schools. Sincerely yours, Ann S. Brown JOHN W. WALKER RALPH WASHINGTON MARK BURNETTE AUSTIN PORTER, JR. John W. Walker, P.A. Attorney At Law 1723 Broadway Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 Telephone (501) 374-3758 FAX (501) 374-4187 RECEJVSE 11998 OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING via Facsimile 376-2147 / March 31, 1998 Mr. Chris Heller Friday, Eldredge & Clark 2000 First Commercial Bank Building Little Rock, AR 72201 Re: Revised Plan LRSD Student Assignments Dear Chris: A question has arisen with respect to student assignment for which I would like your input. The question is whether white students who wish to attend Incentive or double funded schools who live outside the attendance areas of those schools be allowed to do so? This appears to be an inquiry regarding whether a minority (white in this context) pupil may transfer into another school his/her race is also a distinct minority. I have interpreted 2.3, page 3 of the revised plan to allow the Incentive schools to be desegregated. This seems to be confirmed by 3.1's preamble, i.e. "this revised plan does not require any sudden or drastic changes to the present student assignment plan. II (p.7) If your interpretation is consistent with mine, please confirm in a responsive writing as soon as possible
if it is not, will provide your separate determination. The matter is urgent in view of the fact that white parents may feel that they may not be able to attend Rockefeller and other schools because of the 40-60% numbers that we established essentially for the area schools. If our views diverge, I suggest we address the matter at once. STHcerely Cldh W. Walker JWW:js cc: Judge Susan Webber Wright Mrs. Ann Brown501374418? uhlker lau firm 935 P02 PPR 01 98 18:09 FRIDAY, ELDREDGE & CLARK HCRSCREL R. XRIOAT <|ltS-lSS4J WILUAM R. VWTTONi P<A. JAMES W.MOORE TRON M. CtStWAN. JA-. JO< 0. BClU. P.A. JOHN C. ECHOLS, P.A. JAMES A. SUTTnV. P.A. PREOERICK 9. UH9ERV. P A. OSCAR C. SAVIS. JW.. P A. JAMI9 C OLARl. J" . P * THOMAS P LEBOtTT. P.A. JOHN BEWEV WATSON. P A. PAUL B. BENHAM 1(1. P.A. LARRY W. BURKS. P.A. A. WVCKlIPP NISBET, JI., P.A. JAMtB EoWaRO HARRIS. P.A. J. PHILLIP MALCOM, P.A. JAMCa M. SIMPSON. P.A. JAMES M lAXTQN, J. IHEPHSRS RUBBELL. hi. p a. OOHALO M. SACQN. p.A. WILLIAM THOMAS BARTER. P.A- BBRWV E. COPLIN. P A. RICHAROO TAVtOR, p.A. JOSEPH B. nuhBT. JR.. B.A. ELISABETH NOBBEM BBURRAV, P.A. CHRISTOPHES HELLES, P.A. LAURA HENBlET smith. p.A. ROBERT B- BNAFCR, P.A. WILLIAM M. aRI^PlM III. P.A. MICHAEL B. MOORE. P.A. OIANE 1. MACKtb P.A. WALTER M. EBEL III, P.A. XEWIM A. CSaES. P.A. WILLIAM A. WAOOELL. JR., P.A. A I'ARTNEIOHIP at: INDlVlQUAlS AND PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATIONS attqsnevs at law 2000 FIRST'COMMERCIAL aUlLDINO AOO WEST CAPITOL AVENUE LITTLE SOCK, ARKANSAS 71tOI-3l3 TELEPHONE SOI-STS 201 1 FAX NO. B01-3TS-1147 April 1, 1998 lOOTTJ. LANCAOTEB. F * M, QAVLE COWLEV. P A. ROBEWT a BEACH. JR.. P.A. J LEE IffOWN. P.A, > JAMES C. BAWeW. HBBHV A. (.IBMT. P.A SCOTT H TUCKEW, P.A. JOHM CI.BVTQN RAMOOLPR. F.A 4UV ALTON WADE, P.A. PWrCEC QARDNCR.p.a. TOMIA P. JQMB6. P.A. OAVIO B. WILSON. P.A. JEBPNCV R, MO0RE, P.A. ANOWEW T. TURNER, P.A. OAVtd U(. WRAP, PlA. CARLA OUNAWII SPAINmOUR. P A JOHN e. SENdLE*. JR.. P.A. ALLIBdN CNaVCS WARNES. P.A. W. ohBIUTSPHCR Lawbon CREBONV D. TATLQR TONY L. WILCOX FRAN C. HICKMAN AETTV J. OCUOWy lARIARA J. WANO JAMES W. SMITH CLIRPORO W. PLUWKETT OaMiSL L. MERRINOTON ALLISON J. CORNWELL TOGO A. CRECR CllCN M. OWENS HELENE N. RaVOCR JA3Oli S. HEUGREN BUBAN N. CMILGCRS 4euwcti william J. (MlTH I.B, CLARK WILLIAM L. TIRRT WILLIAM L PaTTOn. Jh H.T, LAWIELEXE, P.A. f nitecT . |60n 370-032a Mr. John W. Walker John W. Walker, P.A. Attorney At Law 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72206 VIA fax: 374-4187 re: LRSD Revised Plan Student Assignments Dear Mr. Walker
We have reviewed the LRSD Revised Plan related to the question raised in your fax of March 31, 1998. We cannot agree with your It is overbroad to say that Section interpretation of Section 2.3. 2.3 'allow[s] th incentive echoola to be desegregated." Section 2.3 was intended to permit the gradual implementation of the student assignment provisions of the Revised Plan. Because the Revised Flan has yet to be approved, LRSD has assigned students for the 1998-99 school year based on the present student assignment plan. We believe this will be consistent with Section 2.3 should the Revised Plan be approved.5013744137 kWLKER LAU FIRM 935 P03 APR 31 9S 13:10 Mr. John w. Walker April 1/ 1998 Page 3 We agree that section 3,2,1 places certain limitations ' ' . However, voluntary student transfers to incentive schools. However, we believe it is premature to consider modification of section 3.2.1 until the district has adopted revised elementary student assignment zones. Even so, we will consider any proposed modification you would like to present at this time. Please do not hesitate to call if you have any questions. sincerely, CC! ^ohn C. Fendley, Jr. John Dr, Leslie V. Carnine (via fax 324-2146) MiRECE Little Rock School District JUL 2 7 1998 OFFICE Or DESEGREGATION MONITORING Memo To: From: Ms. Ann Brown Office of Desegregation and Monitoring Leslie V. Gamine, Superintendent of Schools Date: 07/24/98 Re: Revised Student Assignment Plan This notice is to provide information regarding the process and timeline anticipated within the restructuring and student assignment component of the Little Rock School District Revised Desegregation and Education Plan (Sections). As we approach the start of the 98-99 school year, we are also in a position whereby initial plans must be implemented toward '99-2000 and proposed transition of our schools to reflect elementary - grades K-5, middle school grades 6-8, and high school grades 9-12. At present, we are thoroughly reviewing parameters that exist in our plan to provide baseline information toward the development of newly drawn assignment zones that will be proposed. The following timelines are anticipated: July School attendance zone/baseline information is compiled and reviewed. August - September Review of proposed attendance zones with the LRSD Board of Education. The LRSD Student Assignment Work Team will be asked to reconvene. (Please note enclosure) A representative from Office and Desegregation and Monitoring will be placed on this committee (Melissa Guldin). The Student Assignment Work Team will meet weekly.October - November The proposed plan will be presented and made available throughout the City of Little Rock A series of informational announcements / programs will be provided (i.e. media / press releases, publications. Town Hall meetings, cable program presentations). The Little Rock School District will survey students and parents to seek input toward the proposed restructuring and their 99-2000 intended school assignment. November Necessary revisions and modifications in the plan will be made. RECEIVpd The LRSD will vote to approve the new assignment plan. December - January JUL 2 7 1998 Make plans for '99-2000 registration (i.e. forms, building capacities) OFFICE OF desegregation MONITO W Hold registration for kindergartners, new students, M-to-M applications. Magnet applications. Desegregation Transfer request. Employee Preference requests, and P4 students. Two of the primary individuals with the Little Rock School District that are assigned to this project include Mr. Junious Babbs, Associate Superintendent for Administrative Services and Ms. Julie Wiedower, Interim Director of Student Assignment. While recognizing this significant task, we are positive toward successfully incorporating accurate baseline data and necessary input for work team members that will prompt favorable transition. We are moving rapidly beginning to place things in motion and will communicate with you soon on our initial planning session. If you have questions regarding information that has been provided, I ask that you contact Mr. Babbs. Enclosure: Middle School Pamphlet Student Assignment Work Team (Introduction / Members) cc
Junious C. Babbs, Jr. Julie Wiedower Page 2STUDENT ASSIGNMENT WORK TEAM NEW SCHOOLS AND AREA SCHOOLS JUL 2 7 1998 OmCEOF desegregation MONFiDRlNG 1. INTRODUCTION The Student Assignment Work Team (the Team) was requested by Superintendent Don Roberts to consider whether the Little Rock School District (LRSD) should construct new schools, and whether the school district should consider changes to its present student assignment plan. The task of the Team did not include reconsideration of magnet concepts or interdistrict schools. The Superintendent suggested that the Team specifically examine the need for, and the benefits of, constructing a new Stephens Elementary School and a school in a growth area in the western part of the city. The Superintendent also suggested that the work group consider possible changes in student assignment plans which could lead to more integration and less student transportation. The Team began meeting in late March and generally met weekly through mid-July.Student Assignment Work Team New Schools and Area Schools Junious Babbs (newly appointed) Mary Ann Campbell (newly appointed) Michael Daugherty Pat Gee Melissa Guldin Bill Hamilton Baker Kurrus J.J. Lacey, Jr. Jim McKenzie Leonard Thalmueller Narcissus Tyler Julie Wiedower (newly appointed)Office of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501) 376-6200 Fax (501) 371-0100 April 14, 1999 Mr. Junious Babbs LRSD Student Registration Office 501 Sherman Street Little Rock, AR 72202 Dear Junious: Thank you for spending time with me on Monday discussing the concerns I had raised in my March 18" letter about assigning four-year-olds at Rockefeller. Its wonderfully easy to talk matters over with you. Your openness and positive thinking is a real asset to the district and a joy to me personally. Im glad we both value the importance of preserving Rockefellers success. As we agreed. Im going to call on some creative thinkers to come up with possible options that might allow the children in Rockefellers early childhood program to remain at the school throughout the elementary years, while still accommodating the assignment zone children who have priority for attending the school. The first step toward that end is a brainstorming session next week with Anne Mangan, Pat Price, and Melissa Guldin. Then well schedule some time with you, Francis, Sadie, and Brady (or whomever you think should be involved) to talk over the ideas that have surfaced and get the benefit of the groups collective thinking. Ill keep you posted on all developments. Meanwhile, so we can work from a solid information base, well appreciate having Rockefellers latest enrollment figures for 1999-2000 by race and grade level, including the number of four-year-olds in the zone, the number of four-year-olds enrolled this year who arent slated to return, and any other figures that will help us get an accurate enrollment picture for next year. Thanks so very much for your help. Sincerely yours, Ann S. Brown cc: Anne Mangan Pat Price Melissa Guldinmi 810 West Markham Little R.ock, .AR. 72201 T. 4
.- T, -,. A C t 1 _ 4 ^ . . ^Lxi.i.v.utiac xvcie^c July 19, 2004 For more information
Julie Davis, 447-1027 LRSD Seeks Community Input iQ Student Assignment Flan The Little Rock School District seeks input from the community in the formulation of its revised Student Assignment Plan. For this purpose, the district has organized three community forums where ideas and opinions may be exchanged. The public is encouraged to attend these forums. Tuesday, July 20
6:00 to 7:30 p.m. Little Rock Neighborhood Resource Center, 3805 West 12* Street Thursday, July 29
6:00 to 7:30 p.m. Dee Brown Library, 6325 Baseline Road Tuesday, August 10
6:00 to 7:30 p.m. LRSD Administration Building Board Room, 810 W. Markham Street The primary focus of the meetings will be the snident assignment policies for the districts specialty magnet schools (Central, Fair, Hall and McClellan high schools
Cloverdale, Dunbar, Henderson and Mabelvale middle schools
and King, Rockefeller, Romine and Washington elementary schools). The LRSD Board of Education encourages the community ro participate, obtain information and provide input at the meetings. ###RECEnn=r LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 501 SHERMAN STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72202 OCT 6 1999 OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONlTORi?a OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES Junious C. Babbs, Associate Superintendent Phone: (501)324-2272 E-Mail: jcbabbsff:stuasn.lrsd.kl2.ar.us October 5, 1999 Mrs. Ann Brown Office of Desegregation and Monitoring 201 E. Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Mrs. Brown: In an attempt to follow-up on earlier communication regarding possible areas that may warrant attention in the 99-2000 LRSD Student Assignment process, a meeting is being scheduled with appropriate staff persons to review projected enrollment / capacity compositions and possible strategies that may be enacted. You and / or representatives from your shop are invited to attend. We look to be in touch regarding the scheduled time. Sincerely, .^nious Babbs Date: October 19, 1999 To: Melissa and Gene From. Am Re: LRSD Meeting Attached is a communication from Junious Babbs, who has invited us to attend a meeting in the Student Registration Conference Room next Tuesday, October 26, 1999 at 9:00 a.m.. This meeting is probably to mollify me, because I have suggested that it would be appropriate to review the present student assignment zones to determine whether some minor adjustments (tweaking) might be appropriate. As you know. Ive been particularly concerned about the Rockefeller zoning, because it has created some big kindergarten enrollment numbers that could develop into overcrowding at the successive grade levels. Other schools might have similar problems, although Im not aware of them. At any rate, please plan on attending this meeting with me next Tuesday. Thanks. Enc.10/14/1999 11:20 501-324-2231 LRSD SRO PAGE 02/02 little rock school district 501 SHERMAN STRFFT LITTLE ROCK. AR 72202 OFFICE OF ADMLMSTRATIVE SER-VICES Junious C. Babbs, Associate Superintendent Phone: (501)324-2272 L-Mail: icbabbsf^stuasn lrcrf L-n October 5,1999 Mrs. Ann Brown OflSce of Desegregation and Monitoring 201 E. Markham LittleRock, AR 72201 Dear Mrs. Brown: In an attempt to follow-up on earlier communication attention in the 99-2000 LRSD Student Assignment appropriate staff persons to review projected enrollment / strategies that may be enacted. regarding possible areas that may warrant process, a meeting is being scheduled with capacity compositions and possible You and / or representatives from your shop are invited to attend. We look to be in touch regarding the scheduled time. Sincerely, inious Babbs 10/14/1999 11:20 501-324-2281 LRSD SRO PAGE 02/02 Qi little rock school district 501 SHERMAN STRFFt little ROCK, AR 72202 OFnCE or ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES Junious C. Babbs, Associate Superintendent Phone: (501)324-2272 ' E-Mail
icbabbs@stuasn lrrt kn October 5,1999 Mrs. Ann Brown Office of Desegregation and Momtorine 201 E. Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Mrs. Brown: In an attempt to follow-up on earlier communication regarding oossible areas that o,,,, - strategies that may be enacted. capacity compositions and possible You and / or representatives from your shop are invited to attend. We look to be in touch regarding the scheduled time. Sincerely, L Juinniioouuss BBiabbs Message Page 1 of 1 Ann Marshall From: Sent: Rousseau, Nancy [Nancy.Rousseau@lrsd.org] Friday, October 17, 2003 12:57 PM Subject: FW: Memo from Mr. Babbs Parents - If you are interested in attending this meeting, please let me know, and you can be the LRCH delegates. Obviously, LRCH cannot have 50 parents at this meeting! I cannot attend b/c I already have two places to be during this time. I know that a great many of you are concerned about the proposed assignment plan. Feel free to get involved if you are interested. Nancy -----Original Message----- From: Eggleston, Deana Sent: Friday, October 17, 2003 11:23 AM To: Rousseau, Nancy
Norman, Cassandra
Smith, Vernon
Buck, Larry
Munns, Angela
Bacon, John
Burton, Marvin
Blaylock, Ann
Mangan, Anne
Zeigler, Gwendolyn
Scull, Lillie
Harris, Tyrone Cc: Holmes, Morris
Mitchell, Sadie
Stewart, Don
Glasgow, Dennis Subject: Memo from Mr. Babbs This following message is from Mr. Babbs: This notice is to provide an update regarding proposed 2004-05 student assignment plan activity and mav where things exist for the moment. It is being pulled as an action item for the October 23^ meeting of the Board of Directors. Given recent conversation through Dr. Holmes, and respective board members, thinking is to seek expanded school/program conversation and input opportunity. This__ include members of your Campus Leadership Team (CLT), Parent Teacher Association (PTA), and/or school representatives that you 'd like to bring on board. A called meeting for principals and/or your representative is scheduled for Tuesday, October 21, 2003, 3:30p.m. in the Student Registration Office, 501 Sherman Street. In this session Dr. Holmes is scheduled to provide an overview of this charge. We will look to review background, pertinent data, our present state, anticipated timeline and availability to obtain additional thinking toward recommendation / adoption of a new student assignment plan. Look to see you Tuesday afternoon. cc: Dr. Holmes Deana Eggleston Student Registration (501)447-2955 deana.eggleston@lrsd.org Got I OOO*G of Smiling Facco for your EmoHol Gat tKam r*owl J 10/17/2003Message Page 1 of 1 Ann Marshall From: Sent: Rousseau, Nancy [Nancy.Rousseau@lrsd.org] Friday, October 17, 2003 3:47 PM Subject: FW: Memo from Mr. Babbs Parents - Sorry! I goofed! The message I sent to you about the meeting was incorrect. Tuesday's meeting is for administrators only. The LRSD will be setting up a meeting soon for parents to get information and give feedback. The October 23'^'* vote has been delayed until the November agenda meeting. I will let you all know of the meeting date when I get the information. Nancy This following message is from Mr. Babbs: This notice is to provide an update regarding proposed 2004-05 student assignment plan activity and where things exist for the moment. It is being pulled as an action item for the October 23^ meeting of the Board of Directors. Given recent conversation through Dr. Holmes, and respective board members, thinking is to seek expanded school/program conversation and input opportunity. This may include members of your Campus Leadership Team (CLT), Parent Teacher Association (PTA), and/or school representatives that you 'd like to bring on board. A called meeting for principals and/or your representative is scheduled for Tuesday, October 21, 2003, 3:30p.m. in the Student Registration Office, 501 Sherman Street. In this session Dr. Holmes is scheduled to provide an overview of this charge. We will look to review background, pertinent data, our present state, anticipated timeline and availability to obtain additional thinking toward recommendation / adoption of a new student assignment plan. Look to see you Tuesday afternoon. cc: Dr. Holmes Deana Eggleston Student Registration (501) 447-2955 deana.eggleston@lrsd.org Got I noO's of Smiling Foccs for your Emails! Get thorn nowl j 10/17/2003uo. o L K S D SRO RASE 02/02 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT Student RegistAtion Office 2004-05 School Choice Option Survey I am presently affiliated with: O Wo- TjlB -Use a No.2 pencil only -Fill in bubble completely -Do not fold Or staple a. Original Magnet School b. LRSD Magnet/Specialty School c. Attendance Zone School d. No School I Strongly Disaarge No Opinion Disagree Attendance Zone are important. options outside the Neigh jorhood J__________Agree Strongly Agree School 2. It IS important that schools reflect a diverse st ident population. 3. Diversity promotes equal opportunity and bro? i experience. dens the educational 4. School choice options are desirable even if trs i provided. nsportation is not CJ '-vJ 5. Diversity should take into account factors in addition to race. 6. It is possible to have too many choice options. 7. What options Successful schools must be diverse. attendance zone? should be considered If any, to diversify asJignmentoutsIde of the 8. Random Selection (Luck of the draw) .J O I r L C O O o r 9. 10. Socio-Economic (Free/Reduced Lunch) C o Academic Proficiency (Test Scores) o o o 11. Race (Cultural Group) 12. Sibling Preference (Brother or Sister Living in tie Same Household) C.J O o For District Use Only I P S ci Parent Forums School Choice Proposal The Little Rock School District (LRSD) is proposing changes in the student assignment plan for the 2004-05 school year. The LRSD Board of Education wishes to allow parents additional opportunities to provide input before the Board makes a decision on the recommendation. Two parent forums will be held: Elementary schools: Tues., Oct. 28 Secondary schools: Wed., Oct. 29 5:30 - 7:00 p.m. 5:30 - 7:00 p.m. Location: Board Room, LRSD Administration Building, 810 West Markham. If a parent cant attend the session designated for his/her childs school level, the parent is invited and encouraged to attend the other session. The primary reason for revision of the current school assignment plan is that recent court decisions (Unitary Status / U.S. Supreme Court - University of Michigan) have affected the manner in which we assign students. Need is identified to develop a student assignment procedure where race-based decisions are no longer the sole factor in determining assignments. The plan will affect our current students only when they move to the next school level-for example, when our current fifth grade students enroll for middle school or eighth grade students enroll for high school during the January 26 - February 6, 2004 registration period. The Board of Education and district administrators remind all parents of the districts commitment toward diversity within our schools. We will closely monitor the equitable allocation of resources, including funding and personnel, in order to ensure that students at all schools have experienced teachers, appropriate materials, updated technology, equipment, and current textbooks that promote equal educational opportunity and academic excellence for all students. i October 22, 2003 Dear Specialty Magnet School Patron: You may have heard that the Little Rock School District is developing an updated student assignment plan for implementation during the 2004-05 school year. This proposed plan will be presented to the Little Rock Board of Education for review/approval on November 6, 2003. I want to share with you information about the plan and meetings that will be held to allow for additional input. Attached is a list of Frequently Asked Questions, or FAQ, providing information about the proposed plan. The plan will affect our current students only when they move to the next school level-for example, when our current fifth grade students enroll for middle school or eighth grade students enroll for high school during the January 26 - February 6, 2004 registration period. The primary reason for revision of the current school assignment plan is that recent court decisions (Unitary Status / U.S. Supreme Court - University of Michigan) have affected the manner in which we assign students. Need is identified to develop a student assignment procedure where race-based decisions are no longer the sole factor in determining assignments. The Board of Education and district administrators remind all parents of the districts commitment toward diversity within our schools. We will closely monitor the equitable allocation of resources, including funding and personnel, in order to ensure that students at all schools have experienced teachers, appropriate materials, updated technology, equipment, and current textbooks that promote equal educational opportunity and academic excellence for all students. Please read the attached FAQ. You are invited to attend one of the scheduled meetings to provide input regarding the proposed student assignment plan: Elementary schools- Tuesday, October 28, 2003 - 5:30 - 7:00 p.m. Secondary schools- Wednesday, October 29, 2003 5:30 - 7:00 p.m. Location
LRSD Board Room - 810 West Markham Street If a parent cannot attend on the specified night for the school level, he or she is certainly welcome to attend the other session. I encourage you to provide your input on either of the scheduled evenings outlined above. Sincerely,b a 2004-05 Proposed School Assignment Plan Frequently Asked Questions Why is the district proposing a change in the student assignment plan? The primary reason for revision of the current assignment plan is that recent court decisions (unitary status / U.S. Supreme Court - University of Michigan) have affected the maimer in which we assign students. Need is identified to develop a student assignment procedure where race-based decisions are no longer the sole factor in determining assignments. What guided the proposal being presented to the School Board? A survey was done of more than 1000 stakeholders (parents, staff, community) representing every school in the Little Rock School District. More than 85% of those responding (535) agree that School Assignment Options outside the Neighborhood School Attendance Zone are important. Additionally, 90% felt that It is important that schools reflect a diverse student population. In addition, the district Strategic Plan Mission Statement (developed by members of our community) states that our schools should not only reflect, but embrace, diversity. Our School Board has been equally clear in its Covenant for the Future which was adopted in February of 2001. Will attendance zones be changed? No Will there be significant student movement as a result of proposed changes? No. Approximately 90% of LRSD students attend their attendance zone school, stipulation magnet, or participate in the M-to-M program. Will the Stipulation! Original Magnet (Parkview, Mann, Booker, Carver, Gibbs, Williams) assignment process change? No. These schook will continue to operate under the current assignment plan. Two meetings are scheduled for additional input from parents and other community residents. They are: Elementary schools - Tuesday, Oct. ZS** 5:30 - 7:00 p.m. 5:30 - 7:00 p.m. Secondary schools - Wednesday, Oct. 29**"Location: LRSD Board Room Administration Building 810 West Markham Please invite your thinking and input. WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 11,1993 LRSD hired former official to draw up alternate plan The short-handed Little Rock School District turned to an old ally recently. The district hired Dr. James Jennings, its associate superintendent of desegregation from 1987-92, as a consultant July 27 to write an alternative student assignment plan. He was paid $1,381.25 for his services, a district spokesman said Tuesday. The district has a desegregation office, plus a number of staff members who work in its student-assignment section. Jennings was a temporary addition to that department. His job was to develop a student assignment plan to use if U.S. District Judge Susan Webber Wright had refused to close Ish Elementary School. Wright Oversees the Pulaski County school desegregation case. Jennings student assignment plan was built on the premise f that the judge would require the district to operate Ish and the nearby Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Elementary School in the same 1993-94 academic year. But Wright ended up accepting the districts proposal to close Ish and let the students attend King, so the district scrapped Jennings plan. The new King school is scheduled to open Aug. 23, the first day of classes. As a district employee, Jennings gained experience writing student assignment plans for the district. He is now teaching at Hendrix College in Conway.FRIDAY, MARCH 12, 1993 9B LR district delays assignment of 12,000 to elementary schools BY CYNTHIA HOWELL Democrat-Gazette Education Writer The 1993-94 school assignments for as many as 12,000 elementary pupils in the Little Rock School District have not been completed and were not mailed as scheduled Thursday. Marie Parker, associate superintendent for organizational and learning equity, said Thursday that the need to establish an attendance zone for the new King Interdistrict Elementary School has caused a slight delay in sending out assignments to the districts elementary schools. The only exceptions are the elementary magnet school assignments, which have been mailed. Junior high and senior high school assignments were mailed Thursday as scheduled. Parker said she did not know exactly when the elementary assignments will be mailed. A proposed attendance zone for the new King School at Ninth Street and Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Drive has been developed, she said. That proposal has been submitted to the superintendent and the districts attorney, who will pass the proposal on to the other parties in the 10-year-old Pulaski County school desegregation lawsuit and to U.S. District Judge Susan Webber Wright for approval. Also, community meetings are being planned for next week to allow members of the public to review the proposed zone boundaries for the new school. Parker said it is necessary to establish the King zone so that children who live in the zone can be assigned to the new school when other school assignments are made. Otherwise, children might be assigned-to one school now, only to have their assignments changed once the new zone is approved. 1 King is supposed to serve children who live in the area of the school, as well as white children from the Pulaski County Special School District who volunteer to attend the school. . The school, which is to be completed by mid-July, will accommodate about 700 children and will have a special academic theme. A district commit- tee has interviewed candidates for principal of the school. Nei- ther the principal nor the theme of the school has been selected. Arkansas Democrat ^(gazette THURSDAY, JUNE 5, 1997 West LR neighbors to meet, size up idea of single school ARK.-\NSAS DEMOCR.-\T-GAZErTE West Little Rock parents who I want to learn more about their public schools will have the oppor- [ tunity to speak with Little Rock School District officials this i evening. ' School district parent re- ' cruiters from the Student Assignment Office will meet with parents today in the Books-A-Million party room at 12201 W. Markham St. from 6 to 7 p.m. Maryanne Campbell, a resident of the Sandpiper Creek subdivision, organized the meeting to rally her neighbors behind the idea - of sending their children to a sin- i gle school, in effect making it their neighborhood school. Most children in the Sandpiper Creek area off Bowman Road south of Kanis Road are in the attendance zones of Wilson or Dodd elementary schools. In fact, Camp: bell said, very few of them attend either one, with many opting out of the public school system altogeth-. er. I dont think its normal for kids to have to go to private, schools, but its an accepted norm here, Campbell said. Unless we imite, nothing will change. Becky Rather, one of the school districts two full-time parent recruiters, said that children from- this part of west Little Rock are scattered through Wilson, Dodd,' magnet and private schools. WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 15, 2003 5B |Parents question diversity plan at forum zone boundary lines for the BY CYNTHIA HOWELL ARKANSAS DEMOCRAT-GAZETTE A proposal to lessen the role that race plays in student assignments to some Little Rock magnet schools may be intended to promote diversity, but it has the potential to create more one-race schools, parents told district leaders Tuesday night. About a half-dozen parents attended the forum at the districts administration building on proposed changes to the assignment plan that could go into effect next school year. That plan, if adopted by the School Board on Oct. 23, would take into account a students standardized test scores and family income level, in addition to the students race, in creating a mix of students in the districts 12 special-academic-program or magnet schools that have attendance zones. Thats different than the current system in which race is the main consideration in attempting to achieve a particular mix of students at each of those schools. Delaney Fleming, a black parent, questioned how relying on family income and test scores could lead to diversity in student enrollment when black families are typically poorer than whites and black children on average have lower test scores than their white classmates. He said the two new criteria reinforce racial differences. What safeguards will be instituted to ensure that the plan wont resegregate the schools? Fleming asked. What steps will be taken so schools in the western part of the city wont become predominantly white while the schools in the test of the district will remain or become predominantly black? Junious Babbs, associate superintendent for administrative services, said a new plan is necessary because the district has been declared unitary or desegregated by the U.S. District Court in terms of its student assignments to schools. The district cannot continue to use race as a basis for assignments without that being considered discriminatory. TTie district has the option of assigning all students to schools based on the attendance zones in which they live, Babbs said. About 70 percent of districts 25,000 students already go to their attendance zone schools while 10 percent attend the attendance-zone magnet schools. However, district leaders decided to keep schoolchoice options after getting the results of a community survey that showed 90 percent of parents and school staff said diversity is important in schools and more than 80 percent favored school choice. Babbs agreed that the district, which is now 69 percent black, may end up with more one-race schools. But district leaders will monitor schools to prevent the inequitable distribution of resources among them, he said. Debbie Carreiro, a white parent at Dunbar Magnet Middle School, said giving top priority to students living in the attendance zone will likely leave few seats for others to transfer to Dunbar for its unique gifted education and intematioii^ studies programs. Her own family selected attendance-zone magnet schools years ago when her west Little Rock attendance-zone school was too full I hit all the negatives in the Little Rock School District and found a positive, she said. The proposed assignment plan wont change existing attendanceschools. Nor would It affect the way students are assigned to the six original magnet schools Parkview High, Mann Middle, and Booker, Carver, Gibbs and Williams elementaries which do not have attendance zones. Students now attending the attendance-zone magnet and specialty schools will be grandfathered, or be able to continue attending those schools.O c t o b 8 r 3 0. 2 0 0 3 1 CD oo CD u !/> co X u 3 tf) o !Z) OD CZ3 s g I/) o ap:: o C g b s !3 0-3 e CO s G 03 03 z: <0 s g^ M I 13 .S' SO
S P <U C *3 .2- OJ -S aj *3a-i.3 QJ fl) fl S" - 00^ Q.-5 o " 2 W O 3 (U -2 S tUn boO Gc I, 9P^ 'J X e 3> C SJ2 e w J3 3 J g r A > 0 ) G, 2 G Oe 5 C s C S p-S^cgS iJ-Ss p o.-a ? u tS .S bn I >. G <U C *3 O U n) fi U U X U ' uIS*3 Eg UI-O'S.^ 2I :s g 35 M s o s g 2UD PO3 ngj utj- SflrSis o <U U p Tun nof O V proposal stands, all lawsuits, he said. IldllOlCl children who apply to go to mag- net schools that have attendance tor, just not the only factor, as Continued from Page 1B zones would be put into the ap- the result of a U.S. Supreme ifications, but isnt the fact that plication pool. But students who Court order last summer on Student race can still be a fac-you have this plan running more differ the most in terms of admission decisions at the Uni-whites away from the school dis- race, academic achievement and versity of Michigan law school, trict? asked one black audience family income from the stu- Babbs said. Although the case member. dents living around the schools centered on a specific law Russ Carter, a parent of two would be given preference in the school, the decision is viewed in district students, urged Junious selection process. In other legal circles as having implica- Babbs, an associate superin- words, their names might go in- tions for admissions procedures tendent for the school district, to the pool more times, giving in other education systems, and others to adjust the pro- ^ejn a greater chance of being The change in the Little Rock posed system so the magnet and ^dpjnly selected for the school, assignment plan is being prospecialty schools can retain their 'JS jfiiue Honeycutt, whose chil- posed for next school year even current racial ratio goals of 60 dren attend King Elementary, though Wilsons order on unipercent black and 40 percent said the proposal is an attempt tary status is being appealed to white. to prevent the district from fac- the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Ap-, Gina Parker, another parent, ing another 30 or more years in peals and state lawmakers are on o. >> s
J VI y VaI ? j= o .g .2 o o. .w cflTSflwi^O.S- ^-5543.2. G 13 o G D3 i:
3 13 IK 3 13 3 2^ "G _fl j_i Ui .y o .5 Q c-T GSg 3 2 <U 2 .G crt *3 aj ftO ' .eg5 2 >1 Cm <D ..Q tc aczj <9 - g G S G 5 n SP-E g > .G G-- G S - B S's -n I" .17) o also asked for some assurances court. the brink of meeting in a special about the racial make-up of the Ann Marshall, the federal de- legislative session to consider i schools under a new plan. Mt E Da 3-2 3 s S* G O .G ,0 -G efl E G S'S*" 2 S 7 .3 K'S ".a u n '2 o o V. SS rt O D3 W > .y fS e O V) 73 .!U c xj .5 U O O 3 2 tUJ {UJ JI3- Q_ 2 Ui fl tuf) ^3 o 3 G G X D C iZ)/3GGa)gJ'(UC^X 'U'^_ .w cfl*- E spa P H 2 "73 S' S?-2 it li nJ uJ G m flj fl /i _ hG G S bfi O D3 d U u u <D r> G-XJ j3 no c/: .3 lA O oO u<ut /()/) 5 O nJ X b i- 9(/-) u -o) *o oo ca G O 132 4G= S J a 2 c E (Z)y) 13 I Im yj G 13 G jj:
- - - tZ) Q segregation monitor in Pulaski a range of education reforms, in- I dont want to see us back County who said she was at- eluding the way school districts where we were [with racial seg- tending the session as a district are funded. regation], Parker said. Is there parent, said the fed-e--r-a-l- -c--o-u--r-t-s Pressed by a parent at the some middle ground where we arent actively forcing the school Tuesday session about why the could have 60/40 split without districts to abandon race-based hurry to change the system when making race the sole factor? Is school assignments and that an there are so many uncertainties, there a way to design that? alteration now might be prema- Babbs said it was being done on LeRoy Mayfield, a black par- ture.--------------------------------- the basis of research and legal ent who lives in southwest Lit- Babbs said at both forums advice. : tie Rock and has children at this week that the plan would af-ra Parkview and Central high feet the 10 percent of district stu- g I schools and Williams Magnet El- dents who typically opt for trans- signment process," he said. The , ementary School, complained fers to the 12 affected magnet legal decisions indicate to us that I that the proposal is too compli- schools. The district could go to we must change. We are step-csted. a strict attendance zone olan. nine out on that Snnreme Cmirf We would be ill-advised to retain our present student as- . a strict attendance zone plan, phig out on that Supreme Court This is totally confusing, he Babbs said, but results of an Au- ae^isjon. :S 5 "y S u 5P o <u ! c ts .G C.2 o o c t, c J2 _ 2 o " X o tn .. O > u 0 w 2 N o on u .^"0 <u 2 3 P -G G *' c5 E 5 <D (Z) I "Gd= 2 0 X Ss o (/) E h 2 ^12 </) S 1 _M_M. ['/5) *- 3 G "G fl c OJ G O U *0 U "O u said. In laymans terms, how can gust survey sHbwed that over- 'iTh'^ School Board was ini- I get my son into, say, Dunbar? whelming percentages of par- tially scheduled to vote on the Babbs said that under the cur- ents and employees believe stu- changes Oct. 23 but delayed a rent system. Mayfields child is dent diversity and school choice vote until Nov, 6. ineligible to transfer to Dunbar are important. Board member Baker Kurrus because only whites can trans- Babbs has repeatedly cited told parents Tuesday that he is fer from another attendance court orders as the reason for up in the air about what the zone into Dunbar. Mayfields making the proposal. district should do child can still apply to the dis- One of those orders was UU..SS.. I think there is a chance tricts six original magnet schools District Judge Bill Wilsons Sept, we wont do anything this year, unaffected by the proposal sys- 13, 2002, decision declaring the Kurrus said. There is a risk in tem. Those are Parkview, Maim, Little Rock district unitary, or doing that, but there is a chance Carver, Gibbs, Williams and desegregated, in most areas of it wont change. The Sth Circuit Booker magnet schools. its operations. The district has could rule tomorrow that this Wilma Hill, who is raising her spent the past 40 years under district is not unitary. What grandchildren, said education court order trying to achieve a would be most productive quality has to be the main con- racial mix of students in schools, would be for you to communi-cern of the district but also ob- Once unitary, a district cannot cate with your board members served that the proposed as- make race-based school assign- not what you think about all of signment system offers some ments without risking accusa- this but how do you think it hope of diversity. tions of discrimination in new should be. M O HM jS rSa? G[fl suz U U a X U E 3 _ flj O u L 2 " 5 U* O " 73 -c c E >-B 5 S SS Ovio.SranjU.SpQ e SO O' O. C _ oS"G y) arot abjf*l'^i p53 S P-G- C0 05 2-g.S S 1 S >,5 o.i cc-^.aocc^ <<ySN_gMQ.2Sr uu .1 ufc 3 a 5.: W C <u Q V) "O G g *CH C CZTJ f-flj .3 O 3 N di nj -3 1^2 E O o M-s g 2 g u S*-5 3 G 2 (/> o o CM (D E (D o z LR board tom on factoring in students race Assignment plan eludes panel Race Continued from Page IB The desire by some board members to eliminate race from the assignment process puts the district at odds with parents, Berkley initially motioned to approve the policies that would have created the framework for the new assignment plan. Strickland seconded the motion but later expressed reservations. Day asked Strickland to withdraw her second to the motion, causing the motion to die and no new motion was put forward. "I was counting in my head, and I think the vote [on the revisions] would have been 3- 3, Day said later. That would not have done anybody any good. This is so important. Its a lightning rod of an issue. We > ............... ------ .need to be unanimous or close even in a diminished role is The other schools are Hall, Junious Babbs, the associate su- to^t Sharply divided over unacceptable as it would give Chris Heller, the districts at- whether race should be a factor some preference to white stu- Cloverdale, Mabelvale the ch^ges in the assignment torney, warned the board that , r.. AA A 1. . flv ..X. _ J__x__. J__x____ ,1 . fl, flx XJ A fl.ff.y.xM ... r.1 r. T^l 9 3X7 9 n CT 73 73-17* 17 . . . x . The proposed plan calls for employees and community family income and test scores members who responded over- to be considered, along with whelmingly in favor of school student race, as factors in per- choice and diversity in a district mitting students to transfer out survey in August. of their neighborhood schools That was validated by par- to go to any of 12 magnet or ents attending a series of three special-program schools such public forums on the plan in teas Central High, Dunbar Mag- cent weeks. net Middle and Martin Luther In the public sessions, race BY CYNTHIA HOWELL ARKANSAS DEMOCRAT-GAZETTE continued reliance on King Jr. Magnet Elementary was the factor on which there schools. was the most agreement, said Fair and McClellan high perintendent who is overseeing I in making student assignments dents over black students for Henderson middle schools
plan. They wanted to go back .......auigiuuciit v.ci Miduik biuucnts lor ----, -----.-----"z7
---------------: i . ' , to certain magnet schools, a transfers to the special-program Romine. Washington and to using race alone, stymied Little Rock School schools. Rockefeller elementaries.---------------Several of the parents at the Board made no decision Thurs- Im all for promoting di- Those schools serve students forums said they feared the diday on proposed assignment versity [at the magnet schools] their surrounding neighbor- minished reliance plan revisions that would put but I dont think it is appropri- hoods most of which are pre- would result in some of the the district into compliance with ate to use race as a classifica- dominantly black but also ac- magnet schools becoming vir- federal case law. tion, Kurrus said. It punishes transfer students from else- tually black while other schools The boards failure to act some people because of their where in the city. Virtually all would become predominantly , marked the second time in two race
it promotes some people white. weeks that it has delayed a de- because of their race, and I think have been white. Babbs said the assignment cision on changes to the as- hs time to put that behind us. signment plan. The delays are Im very concerned about using beginning to hamstring districts race as a diversifier, even for preparations for the 2004-05 reasons we think are good. I pre-registration period that be- think were making a mistake. gins the last week in January. Board members Sue Strick- , . Additionally, district leaders land and Mike Daugherty also and income as including the districts at- said they were unwilling to vote **hnhibtv tnr c. torney say that a failure to for the plan because of the con- change the existing system of tinued use of race as a factor, assigning students to schools while board members Larry based solely on student race Berkley, Tony Rose and Bryan makes the district vulnerable to Day favored it. Board member accusations of discrimination Katherine Mitchell, who has and new lawsuits. been critical of the plan, missed But board member Baker the meeting. of those students to this point whitCA on race its The proposed revisions proposal was prompted by the would enable all students to ap- districts release last year from ply for transfers to a special pro- federal supervision of most of gram school, but more weight its desegregation efforts and by would be given to students a U.S. Supreme Court decision whose race, achievement level that said race cannot be the sole measured by factor in school admission deeligibility for subsidized school cisions. meals would provide the Its a unique approach." Day most diversity in a school. In said Thursday night about the other words, the names of those district proposal. "Theyve tried students would go into the pool jq protect what we have, yet of applicants more often giving conform with the law. It's im- them a better chance of being pedant to me to protect what selected in the random lottery, have been working on for so Kurrus said the proposed plans See RACE, Page 5B long without ending up back in court. there is a legal risk of new lawsuits if the assignment system is not changed. I think given the state of the law and our goals this is probably the best we can do. Weve tried to follow the Supreme Courts guidance. Other (^stricts are in the same situation trying the same kinds of things. Asked about eliminating race from the assignment equation and relying just on farnily income and student test scores for diversity in schools, Heller said there is a significant overlap between students of low income and black students, "but you would have less racial diversity if you took race out ... maybe 15 to 20 percent less racial diversity. Rose said Thursday night that he expects the board to discuss the issue again and attempt to make a decision by the boards next meeting, Nov. 20.April 2 3. 2 0 0 4 11 to study pupa assignment plan ARKANSAS DEMOCRAT-GAZETTE Mike Daugherty, a Little Rock School Board member, and Ju- nious Babbs, the Little Rock School Districts associate superintendent for administrative services, will co-chair an U-member committee charged with recommending a long-term student assignment plan for a dozen of the districts magnet and other special-program schools. School Board President Tony Rose announced the names of the committee leaders and members Thursday night. The committee will likely conduct one or more public forums before making a recommendation on a plan to the School Board, possibly as soon as mid-June, Rose said. Faced last fall with some legal issues that made a change in the old assignment plan necessary, School Board members struggled with the issue before settling in December on a one- year plan for 2004-05 only. The board agreed at the time to form a committee to make recommendations on an assignment plan for future years. The assignment-plan changes affect those special-program schools other than the citys six original magnet schools that were initially designed to attract a racially diverse student body even if students didnt live in a schools surrounding neighborhood. Some of the affected schools include Central and Hall highs as well as Dunbar Middle and Martin Luther King Jr., Elementary schools. As the plan has been changed for the coining year, diversity in student achievement and family income are considered along with student race. The temporary plan carries no guarantees that the enrollments at the affected schools wont become virtually all black while others become largely white. The committee members are Lisa Black, Tom Brock, Jody Carreiro, Tommy Hodges, Duane Jackson, Mallory JeweU, Freeman McKindra, Stephanie Purifoy, Jan Vasques, Alma Viscarra and Carol Young.August 2 5. 2 0 0 4 Group demands LR halt assignment plan School district panel stands by changes 75 00 to ft 73 P o y3 y y) fcj C 3'cR 2. yT y> n - 0 3-^ 3 CL O 5 Ts' as BY CYNTHIA HOWELL ARKANSAS DEMOCRAMAZETTE A local activist group Tuesday called on Little Rock School District leaders to slow the train down on developing a new student assignment plan for 2005-06 so officials can get more public input on a new plan and find ways to improve some neighborhood schools. The Concerned Citizens United, which formed earlier this year to advocate for students who organizers say are underserved, made the demands at a news conference outside the districts Student Registration Office. District leaders worked over the summer with a 13-member citizens committee to formulate a new assignment plan for 12 specialty program schools, including Central High, Dunbar Middle and King Elementary, which are popular with students and parents. The committee is expected to put the finishing touches on its proposal over the next several days so it can be presented to the School Board in early September. Terence Bolden, chairman of e Concerned Citizens United, said Tuesday that more legwork needs to be done before any new plan is enacted. He urged the district to hold more public forums on assignment plan issues. Three forums were held in the summer, but community members who might have otherwise attended i were likely distracted by vacations and not necessarily focused on school-related issues, he said. Additionally, he said district leaders and the committee should include measures in the new plan to improve the quality of education at individual neighborhood schools, 'We believe the student assignment plan cannot be looked at alone, Bolden said. Teacher assignments to schools and the quality of education provided at neighborhood schools should be part of the approach to developing a long-term scheme for student assignments that the community at large can sup- See PLAN, Page 5B ys yj S' o' 5- y> fO w "t: ... 2 CT 3 - > P ni 2 3 o- n2<^ftO'**a3F 2 5 as :: o 13 S-- ft S'- - 3 ft='<(ren ooeg-Q Stj *- Z^x5?3 to^^3S^ O ra i gra J-g ig O S 1'5? HS: ft C c 3 & -r, O C 73 -t as r'e.S > <5 - a- ~ c < -. S 3 in O o c r* ys ft y as 2 S to 73 fB 3 n as n o = 2 5 g 5 CL 73 I ft ft era < y> m ft ft (JQ as =! a.: LOCjq &3 TJ ft c - 2 3- S Z 3^ ft
rt O yi ft 5 O tT ft 5^ c 13**' BJ c n * 3 c 2 ni 03 ft yi ifS S c - . 3 c S 2 2 o o 2 ft 325"-.8S3 >3-2.5^rt'3S2' 2 73 E 7) Q c ft O' 3 ft 75 TJ as as Q 3 = 3 3 ft 2 o = S' 2. -Sn^'S- 73 O as Q. ^3 3 T3 0} co a> I ai CD = s: Sie'S Y P ft ft 73 o 2 a . s ft as 7Q : 3 73 5 ft c-c ft cu o O O 3 T* ft C. 2.73 TJ CL 0 ST to y) 2- 03 C/i ft ft CT.'S < ft = 2.S S
s g-i g"? i
= 5. - ^2. 3 . 8 ?g-g'E.2.ra3ra o n "o'g = = 5 e= 2.Sirs -S S'" < ! n-? c. 5 E-" = . ra ~!,312 ra":ot! ci-5- ra 05 3- -g-o s 2 =-3 o re Si : ft 3 CL 2 ni no 2. w 2 O 3 3 ft O J. 03 O as f? &} ,7' w 1/3 ft as ? 3 ft &3 3 ft o 2 cn yj H rt, rt . in CL as 3-3 u 3 K' 03 = 5' 3 S' no 7 3.2: =r s g1^=SS 3 rt- 75 CC 3* Bi ------------- ft> a. 2. to CT to to 7= rt. Lf ft = 3 3 rt* -3 3 CT* " ri'ftrt. oSl-^ns: clOv3 3 3 cl2 rzT K 2 g S w alS y] y> irt cC &} y3 3 n ft b3 y) 3 S g -CT o 2 3 ft CT O 3 O O 3 ft rt- -1 I 73 to ft it "O 71 rj 73 O __ 3* C n. 3 o x. 2 n DT- fn as o Z75'?2 05 O S3 ft 3> ft ft CD C CL O as 0 2 = 3 .2 OS a cr as " ft 1 Bs t/s as 3 as C- .^2 o o ? * S. 75 3 C . 73 O 75 O (re N 3 c =r i 3
? = fl,^ y) 2. cn fc X BS 7) as as 3* to 3- 2 W5 cr fh O. o C CL. ftrtto 'F' "'"2b -S-S 3 :g,a o 3 3 S-=S!?.' = 3.03 2 c 2. . 3. 5. CTO n = s'i = "rag 5'2 5 O TJ ft XJ o / y3 - a. o 5:3 = GO f Zt. r- = 75 as 03 o Cl - ..c ~ - as 3- O 5. ft = C/t = >5 ETTft 3 3'< - n 3. r. '<^3f6gn>3to S " a- m g W - ft O CD CL 2 c^c to X- ft 3. ft ft w 3- 3t
as c S-o^ B, Q 73 JU 3 rt ** r*. i ? ft ft S
ra g'o 3 = o.ra QQ Cl d . ft to ft to Q 3 73 S g S m 3 3* O CLj^ ft r I O 2 to CT S CL 52. O CL as x
ft 7) f& f^ ZT* 3* to 2- 2 BS 75 ^eng ra S -^5 ra g 2 g 3-'.. .nSS^gns- ^g O J erg 3 2. to LS yj ... 5'0'g ra o M ^n?-gS.g3 ra3"?ra. gNSa.wg$g.3Ci. :Lsra_oggS5a.5-3o^3,^gSre. = ^o = w = ra5S!iire35a. gg$3craaQra-'<_ = raTO'Orj_-, sSraJ'ra^ _3_ " 2=-S-.re-nig^o0 2 3. N 75 to o 2 CTrt. ^30^
^ <5 ft Ti ft 7) -"Cre 3 < ft 5. ft ft - ra -? S S S == 2 S^ra-2 o H re 5 nJS.-3 3: ft 2.cre to ? s. ft a. {/) ft 3 2 3 ft 2. O O 5 S
2 S - as Cl O ft as ft Q. O !=L 3" 3 3 ft Cro 2 ra ys 0 X, a K.1 >-t cr ft 3. N o 2. (T 2 5 ft 3 73 ft ft CL C n as 7) c o *2 3 to a> . uj 3 3 n. n n> rt. ft 73 3 Tftft*i^7)30 2.2 11, 5 ft C - 73 ZT ft ft 3 3 = ys y) zi BJ o .. 03 y> = 3 S 3 BS CL Q- < o ere < -2. r m '75 5 O . < "J ft 2. 3 S "I 3- 5 5 w " 3" _ 7) 0 75 ft 0 ft ft 3. 3" ft S-i :eS'3 5 ?E2?_Xin3ra - re o " 3' 7- ? ,2 5 Q- 73 ft 73 3 -ere ft S < 3:' 2 2 == fS nJ " w 2_ y, <2wto3^2a''' 2-~cl< c c 3 < I fp I fD r.* f5 rtf f5 3 O CL - 22 - '5 to L CX.2 ft = S 'E- S S -U as ft r ft as as n ZTs >1 i 3 ft 3 7 " ra . T* ^T* f5 o < ra 3 Z = 5' 2.- o * n '*3 73 ft O o as Bi 3 X 2 O 3 O C ft CTO rt 8 tw rt 2 tj S-" ? era 5 "o' (/3 3 ere 3" ?r i
: & 2 g-s o '' 3 as -.3 3 rt. to ft 3 yi ft ~ --------re 3 3 ft yi O ? ? w O O S ns a. 3. as ft as 3 2 Q to fD a. 3 n ~ S 3" ra p 3' o'grs = r ft 3-G.3-3 ' rt 2rt^a5ftrtf/3 rtto(-t73l-|rtCl,3^U^y)^^ft ~'rt^as. 73rttoJr373^2 rt 2 BS K b 7) O 2 T3 3 fB Cu as 7) 3 O Si f^ 73 > _, - to 3* O 75 2. M 7 to ft n to 3 O = =25 o o W ra a. c to o ft - as ft ft CL Si X' O ft O ft 3 Vi C> 3* O 3- Z ft ft 3 o ft ft o *< O- to 2.3 * 3 ft CD . cl' 2 ao w 3-ra 8 5 o ra K SiO - 3 85 Si 3. 2 're' - ra - - - 5 s ra as 3 73 Z o 5 c 3 ft ft CL 3 n Q ft o 7)
S era 2^22 :Z' 3. S. ftrt rt. 3-^ 2 2 o hi zrt 73 M . r < 3* I 1 ft I O I ft ft 2. re 3* 75 to ft ** 73 ZC-' s a.
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.