Summer school

Associate for Instruction to the Deputy superintendent REPORTS to
Deputy Superintendent JOB goal
To assist the Deputy Superintendent in the task of providing leadership, support, and direction in the area of instruction by providing building principals with a vehicle to more effectively utilize the division of instruction to improve teaching and learning. This will be accomplished at the direction of the Deputy Superintendent through staff development, school improvement, inservice education, safety and security, development of programs, and allocation of resources. BASIC PERFORMANCE RESPONSIBILITIES
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Attends Board of Directors' meetings, as necessary, and prepares such reports for the Board as the Deputy Superintendent may request. Serves as the chief advisor to the Deputy Superintendent pertaining to instruction. Serves as a member of the Superintendent's Cabinet. Monitors instruction K-12. Works with Educational Programs staff and principals to determine educational program priorities and goals for the district and schools. Provides leadership and support to assistant supertindents for schools operations and to principals so that they can conduct effective building level needs assessments. Assumes responsibility for conducting the personnel evaluation of personnel as may be assigned by the Deputy Superintendent. Assumes responsibility for assisting the Assistant Superintendents for school Operations, Educational Programs staff and principals to encourage and involve community, staff and students, when appropriate, in decision making related to educational programs and instruction.PU^E POST .JTTI.K KOCK SCHOOL DISTRlCi 810 WE.9T MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201 PI .EASE POM April 6, 1989 rhG Little Rock School District is ing position for the 1989-90 now accepting applications for the fol I school year
ow - POSITION: Deputy Superintendent QUALIFICATIONS: Minimum of a master's degree
doctorate preferred. 1. 2. tion from the State of Arkansas. certificate m school adnlnlstra- 3. High personal and professional integrity. 4. Successful setting. experience as an administrator in an integrated urban 5. Strong management credentials in the area of finance operations, and long range planning. personnel, 6. Demonstrates an administrative style which is flexible preceptive of the views of others. rrexioie ) open, and 7. Evidence of a strong commitment to quality integrated education. REPORTS TO
Superintendent JOB GOAL
( __________ ^dtlCStlOnsl phi 10 S OOhv 205]? u J. 3 that directly benefl? each indiyiduil on a constant, ongoing basis, the translation of the dis- SALARY
Annual twelve (12) month contract comms responsibilities plus benefits package. commensurate with experience and EVALUATION: Performance of this position will be evaluated orovi o -47 t"yannually in accordance Personnel? policy on Evaluation with the of Administrative DEADLINE FOR RECEIPT OF APPLICATIONS: Apr I I 21, 1989Pago Two (2) Deputy Superintendent SEND LETTERS OF INQUIRY TO: Harold Webb Associates Attention: 525 Winnetka Avenue Suite 1 Houston Conley (Little Rock) Winnetka, Ill. 60090 SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS: qualifications, application setting forth in detail personal interest in the position, experience, reasons for and most significant accomplishments as a school administrator. Send current resume and a list of four personal references who can be contacted including names, titles, addresses and telephone numbers. Request that your university credentials be sent to Harold Webb Associates. AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYERLittle Rock School District January 7, 1992 a sOSl Ml J7=5n n Mrs. Ann Brown, Desegregation Monitor 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Little Rock, AR 72201 JAN 1 5 OuiCu Cl 'ioi'idcnng Dear Mrs. Brown: The Board of Directors will Superintendent of Schools to succeed Dr. soon begin searching for Cl Ruth Steele, who new has announced her plans to retire at the end of this school year. The nationwide search will be conducted by co-consultants, Jan Cummings, president of C-Net
and Susan Jernigan of Sockwell & Anderson. Ms. Cummings and Ms. Sockwell will be in Little Rock on January 17 and 18 to gather information about the school district and the type of individual the community wants the Board to employ. To that end, the co-consultants and Board members have scheduled private meetings with groups closely associated with the school district to receive information concerning the qualifications, both personal and professional, superintendent of schools. that the community desires in a You and your staff are cordially invited to attend a meeting with the co-consultants and Board members on Saturday, January 18 at 1p.m. to share your thoughts. This meeting will be conducted in the Board Room of the Administration Building at 810 West Markham Street. This will be an informal, roundtable discussion, so please feel free to dress casually. Sincerely, O. G. Jacovelli, President J Board of Directors J- 810 West Marhham Street Little Roch, Arkansas 72201 (501)324-2000May 5, 1992 Ms. Pat Gee Arkansas State Highway Dept. 10324 Interstate 30 Little Rock, Arkansas 72209 Dear Ms. Gee: As taxpayers in the Little Rock School District, we feel that now is the time for the Little Rock School Board to deal effectively with the needs of the district as well as being sensitive to the needs of the majority of the patrons of the district. The Board must hire an African American Superintendent. It is because of the current high rate of failure for African American students in the Little Rock School District that we support the hiring of an African American Superintendent. There are many factors which have resulted in this very high statistic. Realizing that all of the blame does not belong to the schools, the schools must share some of the responsibility for this problem. There have not been programs or directed curriculum which have dealt with the problems of our children effectively. The fact that the district is 68% African American is a most prevalent statistic which should be considered in the hiring of a Superintendent. We need a Superintendent who can relate to the majority complexion of the district, as well as addressing the most urgent needs of our educational system. At this time, the hiring of a Superintendent who can alleviate our problems and bring our district into focus is most imperative. You must consider the most urgent needs of the district, as well as doing what is best to bring the majority on equal standards as the minority. For too long, the School Board has addressed the needs of the minority and neglected the needs of the majority. The solution for a district such as ours demands special cons ideration. You must consider the fact that African-Americans represent the majority of students in the Little Rock School District, and black patrons and students should be given special consideration in light of the years of neglect. Very truly yours.1. 2 . 3 . 4. 5. 6. 7. Patron's List 9 10, 11V 12 . 13. 14 . 15. 16. ( 17. 18 . 19 . 20. 21. 22 . 23 . 24 . 25. - H2 /z I i 1 I '. iRECEIVED MAR 1 1993 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTER DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION Office of Desegregation Monitoring LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF V. NO. LR-C- PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL. Wed U.S.OISTHICTCOURT EASTERN DISTRICT ARKANSAS DEPENDANTS MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL. - \ -co:
J 7 J INTERVENORS KATHERINE W. KNIGHT, ET AL. :7r3, CLERK INTERVENORS Ey:. D.-.CL
MOTION TO REQUIRE THE LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT TO DEFINE THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THE SUPERINTENDENT'S CONTRACT AND TO DETERMINE WHETHER PAYMENTS HAVE BEEN MADE OR PROMISED BY PRIVATE INDIVIDUALS TO SAID CONTRACT The Joshua Intervenors respectfully move the Court to require the Little Rock School District to set forth the terms and conditions of the employment contract between it and Superintendent Cloyde "Mac" Bernd. Although that contract is a public matter, the public records regarding same are uncertain. The Joshua Intervenors also request that the Little Rock School District disclose whether it has entered into an contractual arrangement or other arrangement with any group of private citizens to supplement the pay of Mr. Cloyde "Mac" Bernd. Joshua is concerned that where private money is paid to public officials without there being public accountability, the public officials may be subject to undue influence of their private benefactors. In this case, the private benefactors, on information and belief. are a group of wealthy citizens from the business sector of the community which is historically all white, but is now tokenly integrated by the presence of black businessman. The School District has a a /7<^/the community and to do the bidi opposition to the more legitimat school children. The Joshua i because the school district, in superintendent's position, did nc $50,000.00 supplement to the pay private group. This factor may h 6 in Lty ist
he a by .on of the school board's first cht ird members Jacovelli and one other-of a person of African American descent who rejected the position. The Joshua Intervenors contend that there was a different offer made to that person than to the Superintendent Bernd and that this constitutes a further act of discrimination in addition to being without appropriate legal authority by the school board. WHEREFORE, premises considered. the Joshua Intervenors respectfully request the court to have the school district of Little Rock set forth the terms of the offers made to Superintendent Bernd and to applicant Williams from Syracuse, New York for the position of Superintendent
to advise whether the district entered into a private arrangement with the group known as "Fifty for the Future" to supplement the pay of any person employed by the Little Rock School District and the terms and writings thereof
and to determine the extent to which payments have been made by Fifty for the Future to Cloyde "Mac" Bernd, or on his behalf. Respectfully submitted. the community and to do the bidding of those interests often in opposition to the more legitimate interests and needs of minority school children. The Joshua interest is also being manifest because the school district, in soliciting applications for the superintendent's position, did not disclose that there would be a $50,000.00 supplement to the pay of the superintendent selected by private group. This factor may have been decisive in the decision of the school board's first choice-without the votes of board members Jacovelli and one other-of a person of African American descent who rejected the position. The Joshua Intervenors contend that there was a different offer made to that person than to the Superintendent Bernd and that this constitutes a further act of discrimination in addition to being without appropriate legal authority by the school board. WHEREFORE, premises considered, the Joshua Intervenors respectfully request the court to have the school district of Little Rock set forth the terms of the offers made to Superintendent Bernd and to applicant Williams from Syracuse, New York for the position of Superintendent
to advise whether the district entered into a private arrangement with the group known as "Fifty for the Future K to supplement the pay of any person employed by the Little Rock School District and the terms and writings thereof
and to determine the extent to which payments have been made by Fifty for the Future to Cloyde "Mac" Bernd, or on his behalf. Respectfully submitted.By: JOHN W. WALKER, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR (5 w. 72206 Walker, Bar No. 64046 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing has been mailed, postage prepaid to all counsel,,sn thi February, 1993. n W. Walker11 RCEjVED D MAY 2 5 1993 Office of Desegregation Mcnitcnng IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION 2 1 1993 Ci,Ml >X LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF V. NO. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL. DEFENDANTS MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL. INTERVENORS KATHERINE W. KNIGHT, ET AL. INTERVENORS ORDER There are pending before the Court numerous motions filed by the Joshua Intervenors. Some of the motions have been responded to
others have not. In reviewing the motions, it appears to the Court that the motion for hearing on the PCSSD's proposed -i reorganization filed May 20, 1992 [Doc. #1597] and the motion for extension of time to submit statement of costs and fees filed August 17, 1992 [Doc. #1657] are moot. It also seems, considering the motion. response, and subsequent monitoring report on the North Little Rock High School cheerleaders and drill team, that the issue of the cheerleaders and drill team at the NLR High School-West Campus filed July 20, 1992 [Doc. #1637] has been resolved and that motion is moot. The Joshua motion for extension of time to respond filed August #1655] is also moot. 13, 1992 [Doc. It further appears to the Court, in light of the fact that no response or further pleadings have been filed, that the following motions are moot and are denied as such: 1. Motion to intervene and for preliminary injunction 4 concerning the selection of cheerleaders at Pulaski Heights Junior High School filed June 24, #1622]
1992 [Doc. 2. Motion for Defendants PCSSD and NLRSD to make adjustments in their school lines to comply with one man - one vote principles of 14th amendment and Voting Rights Act filed August 17, 1992 [Doc. #1658]
responses filed August 28, 1992 [Doc. #1665 & #1666]
3. Motion to compel the LRSD to consult with Joshua and other parties prior to making desegregation plan alterations which require court approval filed February 2, 1993 [Doc. #1745]
4. Motion to require the LRSD to define the terms and conditions of the superintendent's contract and to determine whether payments have been made or promised by private individuals to said contract filed February 26, 1993 [Doc. #1764]
Motion for further relief regarding employment of unqualified persons in major administrative positions filed March 16, 1993 [Doc. #1777]
5. Also before the Court is a motion by the LRSD for an extension of time to file its plan for the construction of the Stephens Interdistrict School filed September 3, 1992 [Doc. #1673]. That motion is moot because the LRSD filed the Stephens School plan on September 8, 1992. The Clerk is directed to remove the above motions from the pending motions report. The Court has stated in the past that it expects the parties to confer in good faith on issues in dispute and to consult the monitor in an attempt to resolve their differences without the intervention of the Court. While many of the motions brought before the Court in this case involve issues requiring Court approval, others concern disputes that could be resolved by a good -2-faith effort at communication and cooperation. In the future, the Court will require that those motions contain a statement that the parties have conferred in good faith and that the issue cannot be resolved without the intervention of the Court. In addition, the Court expects the parties to comply with Local Rule 20 concerning the filing of briefs in support of motions. SO ORDERED this day of May, 1993. UNITED JUDGE THIS DOCUMENT ENTERED ON DOCKET 9HffiT M COMFUIANCE WITH RULE 58 AND/OR 79(a) FRCP ON -3-e Dear Mrs. Ann Brown: June 25, 1993 JUL 1 1993 Ofiice of Dessgregation Wo: i.g I have worked as a volunteer in the LRSD for many years. I have a son at Central High School and two children who are graduates of Central. My two graduates have been admitted and are attending very prestigious colleges with academic scholarships due to the quality education they received in the LRSD. I am deeply concerned with the fate of our district and the selection of top administrators for superintendent and associate superintendent. Many other patrons are concerned about the stability of the LRSD which seems to be getting worse instead of better. I sat with a group of parents this past weekend who discussed growing concerns about moving their children to private schools if competent educationally centered leaders are not selected to run the LRSD. The discussion began focusing on the lack of knowledge of the present Superintendent in knowing the background of people in the present administration who are secretly pushing to be recommended as interim superintendent. These concerns originated from several patrons of Forest Park Elementary School as well as myself, who were asked to support the recommendation of Forest Park's former principal as interim superintendent or associate superintendent to the school board. Arma Hart. This past principal is For those of us who know Ms. Hart's self serving nature, we were outraged to know that she is being secretly considered for one of the top administrative positions. We became aware of this woman's manipulative techniques when she used some influential patrons to promote her personal agendas while disregarding the true education needs of our children. In various social settings she has reminded people of how the best qualified person was not chosen for the Desegregation Monitoring Office. She indicated how friendships and the desire to keep the power in certain circles kept her from being selected for the Desegregation Monitor's position. She has said the LRSD would definitely be forced to comply with the desegregation plan if a competent and qualified person was in charge, continues to unrelentlesSly push for power by supplying inaccurate information to uninformed people in strategic She positions that will promote her agendas. She pretends to support causes that these people believe in, in order to gain their confidence and support. Mrs. Hart has, again, seized the opportunity to take advantage of the disarray in the top administrative vacancies in the district to promote her own agenda of gaining power without regard for the needs of our children. Mrs. Brown, there are people who have found Mrs. Hart difficult to work with and are fearful of this woman's unrelenting push for power to gain control. Even concerns have been voiced from certain Pulaski County administrators about remaining top administrators left in our district as possible candidates that they hope will not be placed as interim Superintendent, Mrs. Hart's name led the list. We are hoping that someone who was familiar with Mrs. Hart's professional background would listen and act upon this information before Mrs. Hart's name is recommended publicly. If her name is mentioned publicly, that obnoxious John Walker would find another means to discredit our district publicly with another discrimination accusation. This action would cause more disarray and more tax paying patrons may choose to leave our district. cc: Mr. Riggs Mrs. GeeRECE-' CONTINGENCY COMMITTEE REPORT LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT JULY 18, 1996 r ti'irid JUL 1 5 ' - - - d Office a Deaeflregasion Monitc
. Rett Tucker and Roosevelt Brown, Co-chairmen Debbie Glasgow, Marian Lacey, Betty Mitchell, Skip Rutherford, John Walker Members of the School Board and citizens of Little Rock, my name is Rett Tucker and I am Co-chairman of the Contingency Committee approved by this Board earlier this year. Other members, who are present, include Co-chairman Dr. Roosevelt Brown, PTA Council President Debbie Glasgow, Mann Principal Marian Lacey, CTA President Betty Mitchell, fomier school board president Skip Rutherford and attorney John Walker. On behalf of Dr. Brown, let me begin by thanking the Board for putting your confidence and trust in us. We also want to thank thQ committee members for their dedication and hard work. We met numerous times in the spring and put together the framework of a contingency plan in the event it was needed. We have had almost perfect attendance at every meeting. We took this assignment very seriously. We considered it an honor and an opportunity to participate in this very important process. We resolved from the beginning that we would put our differences aside and work toward consensus. When we were notified Sunday that Dr. Williams was going to Kansas City, we were prepared. To finalize our recommendations, we have met every day this week and now come before you with a recommended plan of action. 1This plan comes to you with our unanimous support. In fact, I must say that our committee-with strong wills, strong personalities, strong views and all the diversity we prize in Little Rocknever once had a split vote and never met an issue that we didnt resolve in a civil and thoughtful way. I have been part of many committees both personally and professionally, but this one has represented the best and most gratifying experience Ive ever had. Lets clarify first what we did not do. Although there has been a great deal of speculation, we did not consider the selection of a permanent Superintendent. That was not our assignment. We do believe, however, that this is a very important decision in its own risht because it comes at such a critical time. We focused on the short-term, although we define short-term as one to two years. Tonight, we have two major recommendations. Our first deals with getting through the next several days and weeks. In this regard, we congratulate Dr. Williams on his new position and wish him well. We thank him for his leadership and his service. This is a tough job. We recognize that and appreciate all he has done. Although Dr. Williams will remain on the payroll until September 1, we know that he will be spending a great deal of his time, his talent and his energy-as he should-on Kansas City and the future. 2While he will still be a very valuable resource for this school district, we propose-from tomorrow through August 14, the formation of a five-person management team which would report directly to the Board. This team would operate in the same spirit that our Contingency Committee has operated: successfiilly addressing a short-term assignment. We spent a great deal of time and thought on the membership of this team. We looked for people with experience, with dedication and who had the energy to take on extra assignments. We recommend the following individuals: Dr. Victor Anderson would serve as the daily operations officer.' He bitings a wealth of experience as a principal, an administrator and, more importantly. as a person who is recognized as both a consensus builder and a team player. He would be in charge of day to day administration. Joining him on the team will be Sadie Mitchell, a former teacher, a former principal, and now an administrator, who has worked very closely with the elementary schools. Also, Jodie Carter, the principal of McClellan High School, who from first hand experience understands both the challenges and the opportunities of our senior high schools. Sadie will be in charge of all elementary schools and Jodie will have the responsibility for the senior high schools. The two other members come from our Contingency Committee. Let me add that neither sought a position on the team. In fact, both had to be drafted. 3Marian Lacey is the principal of Mann Junior High School. She is a principals principal and was such a positive voice on our committee. Marian knows the junior highs and her outstanding record at Mann speaks for itself. She will focus on all aspects of the junior high schools. Skip Rutherford, the only non-educator on the team, understands the school board better than most. He served on the Board from 1987 to 1991, as its president in 1989 and 1990 and coordinated two victorious millage campaigns. He will supervise communication and student assignments and will serve without pay. All of these members will continue to perform their current responsibilities. Marian Lacey will still be the principal at Mann and Jodie Carter will still be the principal at McClellan. Skip Rutherford will still work at Cranford Johnson Robinson Woods. Vic Anderson and Sadie Mitchell will still be district administrators. All of them, however, for the good of the district, will work on the management team which means extra duty and long hours for each of them. Please note that all four educators are or have been successful principals and the non-educator is a former school board member and president The team is experienced. It needs to be because much will be happening over the next four weeks-including the opening and beginning of school. We simply cant put this district on hold for that time period. This professional team addresses that issue. 4The second part of our recommendation relates to the position of Interim Superintendent. We considered many people and possibilities. We listened to board members and to interested citizens. We wanted to recommend someone who could provide effective, steady, experienced leadership
someone with local tics who understands Little Rock, Arkansas and state school funding
someone who could help this district and the Board in its search for a permanent Superintendent. We believe we have found that person. Tonight, we unanimously recommend to you. Dr. Don Robens-the former Director of the Arkansas Department of Education and the former Assistant Superintendent of the Little Rock School District.-Dr. Roberts is an Arkansas native and was educated at Henderson State and the University of Arkansas. He served as State Education Director during the administrations of both Governor Bill Clinton and Governor Erank White. He has been a successful Superintendent in three urban school districts. We recommend him to you as Interim Superintendent for a minimum of one year and a maximum of two. This will give you the time, the breathing room and the opportunity to find the best Superintendent possible. As we know from experience, finding a Superintendent is not always a quick process. Dr. Roberts can and will help you in the search. He is 61 years old and retired in 1994 after seven years as Superintendent of the Eort Worth School District. This is a district with 72,000 students and 9,000 employees. Since that time, he has been doing consulting work with school districts across the country. 5He loves Little Rock, loves Arkansas, knows Little Rock and knows Arkansas. We sought him out for this position. He has always been dedicated to high quality desegregated education and seeks to build cooperation across racial lines. He is known as a person who keeps his word and works in good faith. He is an educator, an administrator and, we believe, a healer. He did not seek the job. We went after him. Dr. Roberts can be here tomorrow to meet with you individually and as a group. He can be in Little Rock and on the job no later than Ausust 15. I We also recommend the following
When Dr. Roberts arrives on August 15, the management team will become an advisory team to him. Dr. Roberts would, of course, take over the day to day operations, but we envision the advisory team helping him on both a regular and as-needed basis. Their assistance in this transition will be invaluable. As I noted earlier, we believe Dr. Roberts should be given a one- year contract with the possibility of another year if needed. He has indicated he is not interested in the full-time Superintendents position, but, again, that subject is a matter for the Board to discuss at the appropriate time. We believe his compensation package should be comparable to that of Dr. Williams. 6Dr. Roberts said it is extremely important to him that the citys leadership, the business community and other groups come together in support of the public schools. We've seen a sreat deal of that happening already and tonight we have with us Mayor Dailey, other elected officials, city leaders, school patrons, parents and interested citizens who are here in support of quality desegregated public education in our city. As chairman of the Greater Little Rock Chamber of Commerce, I can pledge to Dr. Roberts, the board, and the management team, the Chambers continued support. The next two Chamber Chairmen, Doug Buford and Janet Jones, are here to back me up. Finally, and this is very important
to provide tfiis district with stability as it works its way through some difficult problems and prepares for the 21st century, our colleague and fellow committee member John Walker, has agreed-in good faith-to a two-year moratorium on initiating any new legal action against the school district related to the settlement agreement. Dr. Roberts expressed reservations to our committee about accepting a position in a district embroiled in litigation and controversy. This offer was made by Mr. Walker to Dr. Roberts because of Dr. Roberts past record in the Little Rock School District and the State Department of Education. This means that the Board, Dr. Roberts and the employees in the District, for the first time in almost 40 years, can concentrate totally and fully on educating our children and on implementing and, if necessary, modifying the current desegregation plan and getting out of court. 7These are our recommendations. We believe they serve as a sound and reasonable short-term plan. We also believe they serve as a new beginning for the district and a bridge to the future. It is amazing what we can accomplish when we work together. Madame President and members of the Board, the Contingency Committee respectfully requests your approval of these recommendations. Havina discharaed our duties and responsibilities, we have concluded our assignment and will disband as a committee following tonights meeting. We thank you for this opportunity to serve our school district and our citv. Dr. Brown and I as well as members of the committee available to answer any questions you might haye. are now Thank you. C:\wpwin6 l\wpdocsUucker\SupenntendeRL78 8@002 002 810 \Sest Nlu-rkbiitn Stv I Ic Kock, ."8'3 2.i '9" 14:41 .ini ,324 202
* I.RSD COM'li XrCATl fWM 602 004 'nBain4|aais^ fditKaUtU^ imOKn^ Little Kock School District .iJTTLE ROCK TO BEGIN SEARCH LOR PERMAuNENT SOPER INTET^ENT March 2.5. 19.97 boi Immediate Release tor more information Snellen Vann, 324-.2ri2(j The Littie Rock School District will begin its search for a permanent superhiteQaent m the next few weeks, according to Dr. Don Roberts, interim suoennteadent. who will assist the school board in the search process. "Wtien I rerarned to Littie R.ock as interim superintendent in August, I pledged to help better position the district so that it could recruit ar, outstanding permanent superintendent and to assist in that recruiting effort." Dr. Roberts said. "I am now centident Uttls ftoc.k can and will attract several quality applicants, and I will work very closely with the boai'd until the new' superintendent is on tlie job and is famihar with the .districts operation
"We knew Dr. Roberts would be here in a hill-time role for an interim rime," sai.d John PJggs. president of the school board 'But whai a terrific leader and eo.mmunicator he ha.s beer." i'liiore) 810 West Markham Street Little Kock. Arkansas 72201 (.50.1)32.4-2000 (W 97 4:42 .-lO) 324 2023 I.RSD COM'II \ 1 CATf ODV Ei003 004 LR.SD Superintendent Search Rage 2 of 3 "He has unified our boar d, strengthened our district and uplifted our community." Riggs said. "He will now assist us in locating his pennanent successc>r and will continue to work With us on a consulung basis. In many ways, this may be the best of both worlds. Both Dr. Roberts and JRiggs said the riming was right to begin the search tor a permanent superintendent. If we wait any longer," Riggs said, "the good candidates will be signing contracts elsewhere,'' "We hope to have the new superintendent in place this summer so that ne or she will nave .several months as superintendent-designate to work with Dr. Roberts If Riggs adaed. "It the search goes weii. a.s vze e.xpect, Dr. Roberts will step down as superintendent sometime before the end iif the year." Rett J ucker, immediate pant chakman ot the Greater Little Rock Chamber of Commerce who co-chaired the district's contingency committee which recommended Dr. Roberts interim appointment, said, "Ilie transidon is working exactly as we had hoped. Ur. Roberts has done a superb job, and I am grateful he will continue to help the Little Rock School District mov fonvard." Riggs said he has asked school board members Dr. Kaiherine Mitchell and Larry Beridey to wo: with Dr. Roberts in coordinating an.d recomn-iending the superintendent selection process. Riggs .-iaid he anticipated the district retainiiig a national search firm. (more) 0.3, 25 97 14-43 SC.l 324 2023 I RS!) f'iniMi \rc4Ti ODM 1^004^ 004 LRSD Supeimnendent Searci? Hage J cif 3 L'nder Dr. Roberts leadership, the .Little .Rock School District was granted a nine molitli monncnum from federal court monitoring. The district, folio wing Dr. Roberts recomrr.endauon. has established school and community work team.s to m.3ke recoromeiidalions m the areas of student assigEment
eumculum, school revitalization
discipline and alternative education
leader.sh.ip and staff development, technology
incentive schools and classroom-coramiinip.' links Dr. Roberts has committed to as ist foe district through rhe nine month process of recommending change.s in the district destgieganon pian to the coimt. "While foere is always work to os 'lone and improvement to be made in education, Dr. Roberts saio, ['m ver
- proud that the Little Rock Schoo) District continues to ourpertorm other urban dislricts and to set the pace in Arkansas when, it comes to National Merit and National Achievement Semifjnali.5ts as well as numerous other .academic and athletic competitions. Dr. Roberts sard he and his family would continue to 1 iI'e in the central Arkansas area and mat he would be available to the school district on an as-needed basis in the liiture.11 S"'' T EY: 4- 7-9' : lb ISAM :.jA RiCGS LiTTLE RXK- -3013710100
# 2/ 2 April 3, 1997 rMaiiic Addresji Cits. State .Zip > ht. Luue Rock Sciiool D.islrict Board of Directoi's is beginning the search for a new supermuinderu As pa/ t of the seiechon process, the Board is forming a C
(izefis ' d'u.soiy foimmttee. T OU have lieen nonunated to serve as a member on the Citizens Advisory <. oi!Hnntee, The charge of Viis cominittee is to generate a list of qualifies and characteristics that the cominittee feels are essentia) for potential superintendent eandidates The work of the committee will be completed in one 3-bour meeting. i he comraitwc will meet Rom 6:00 p.rri. to 9
00 p,n. on Tuesiiay, April 15*''' in (he i.V oai j Room of die .Administration Biuiding, 81.0 West Markham A lijrdat dinner Vv'.t! '>0 fved i 5 JO p.in Drvss Wi! be casual t he Board of Directors hopes you are w'iliing and able to pailicipate in this important meeting. Please caU-Swi^G*ifffir. at 32420 i2 to confimi your pdrt)Cip<U)on tAS soon as possible , i \ -f i i'hanks lor yon oonynued support of oar public schools. Siiiccrely .ii.!bi! Riggs. iV, President ERS1..> Board of Directorsco nj 1T. 0 a !.iTTLE ROCKSCHOOI. DISTRICT Advisory Committee for Superintendents Search J Revised 4/9/97 April, 1997 o '9 NAME i ! Humphrey, .loa I .Innes, Doris Ui i j Joyce, Linda Hi^iinendy, Rarh Kiirrus, Baker GENDER Male Pcmalc Female Frraak Female I U) Q' j Massey, Don na I
Muse, Itohn I i iatierson, Paula I Male Feniah Male ifACE y Klack While lllaek White While White Blaek OlwiANiZATION ALR - Vive Chanectior HoiKhwest Neighborhood Assoc -f I .Idhu Barrnw Neighbvrbnnd ! I Assoe, City Hoard Parent/Ccaeiier (arent/Aliiance New Party.laren t r. ' Smith, Benny .1 Female -----j. Whitt Black Male Black .New Party Parent [Pa renlZrarenfTforTubJic Schools i ( 'xr V-/a -r/Ij eer. AdvUoiy (.'omjuittce Superintendents' Search pauc 2 'l erQ, Andy T ISI 'AJ Cl J^^kcr, Diane Li' u. Malt Female Wilde i White Buford, Doug Tucker, Rett Williams, lluris <>*Mncy, Kevin Anthony. Leta ( harks. Dale Wd.svn. Do
Moore, Delia T Male Male r, i Female ! Male Female Male Mak i Female White White Black ' White Kiack Black Blaek Black l i Nayies, Dorothy Female Block I hALR-Dcpt. 'if Fiaunre and Ecology I'strcnls for PuWk Schools I-R Charitbcr f^niberZAlliance FTA tjouneil Palx^nt ' leadership Riiitmitable _____developers ____^D^ted Way/Slrategie New Futures f Charlt 1 Male Black I ! liowen, Ver neH L Brock, 1'oni j_Fcniale White White Stephens Scbooi ____J Frm<^al-St^E(I^an Schooi Parent/ Geyer Springs First Baptist _____ .. 4_'Cf- Crj cf' Ct b? Advison- Cnmntittce Superintendents Search April, 1997 page 3 T T U' U'l ir PoreeH. Nolan ! Delon s f' ! Howard, Kiidnlnh -X j Marshall, Pam j Gibson. Don Rt-,, jVleRejio', a. Faeinta OUman, Flea nor Mitchcd, Bey p/aaWe Fee I ftregory, Brenda X"i Co.idman-CiiaiidJer f /tdriene Male Female Male j ]'Van:i]k* Femafu Feniale Fcniak J Frniak __ j
Feinjue _________[Mate Fetnak- ____j retr ! Female ! Whiiit Kiack Bfark Black j Black j Black Wck I Black ____
White ___Black I Widu Bhirk Biack _ Grandparent i*TA/larkvie5v Principals fo)u,ii(tablc _____Mtdtown/yrKkJiw SchwiJ Ministcdal AJIiann < Airtra? High Srhcol Student <Tz\ <1.1 GT7I __________J CTA I I 1 1 I ---------------------- 1 -------1 ) ____i j Fxec. Dir. I.K Housing /Parent Authorifj' ____I PareiiUjivfllyemcBt Crtiinatr Jtz Cl Advisiu-y C'nnupittee Superintendents Search April, 1997 page 4 Revised 4/9/97 j Ambrose, Ethel I PFemaic I'Whiu" u
Ood.sont Tommy Armstead, VIeki : Leopoufos, rhuddeus '^^loiiRson. Mozeila i HamiUnti, Wilijam (Uii!) i Nauiifn, Lon Eilic! Marlin, Bitty R^'<*sevrt?, Dr. i Williams, SJacy CaratliRc, Btibra I ' Benjamin, Wieke, Dr cz_z Mak- Fem.Tile j Mak j i Female } Mak I Femak Female Male pMalc I i I Kemak : Eeuhik I Black I Black 7"'wi!)tn _
Bbek Biaik I Black TCoalition nl Little Rock j Ncithborhoods Tp^-nt^ightsvll Pritsident- LRaIXH* I SEwJcnVParkview Majiuet ' ' 'j Stephens S'cighlHirknnd Associalini^ j Prcshlenl I I eaclier/Parkvicw Magnet f'*'* t Vicw/S(iff Station Black j I I Blai-k h White ! White i Association^ l<esi<knt N/VACP .Arts & Htiinanities/Slrakgic 1 J 1 1 H i H ___J05 2i 97 11:10 Q50I 324 2023 I.kSD COM'irXICATI - . OOM Soo? 002 Little Rock School District Special Board Committee Meeting For Immediate Release May 21,1997 For more information: Snellen Vann, 324-2020 The Little Rock School District (LRSD) Board of Directors v,TJl meet as a committee at 4:30 p.rn. on Thursday, May 22, 1997. The Board will receive infi-irmaTinn from Hazard, Young, Attea & Associates, the firm which is assisting in the search to fill the supermtendents position. The meeting will be foEowed by the regular monthly Board meeting at 6:00 p.m. in the Board Room of the LRSD Administration Building, 810 West Markham. 7Tr^ 1 06 03. 97 10:17 501 324 2023 I.RSD COMMCMCATI -> ODM @002'002 Little Rock School District Special Board Meetings For Immediate Release June 3, 1997 For more information: Suellen Vann, 324-2020 The Little Rock School District (LRSD) Board of Directors will hold special meetings this week to conduct interviews with candidates for the position of superintendent. .Tne meetings are scheduled are: Tuesday, June 3, 1997 5:00 p.m. Board Room LRSD Administration Building 810 West Markham Wednesday, June 4, 1997 5:00 p.m. Board Room Greater Little Rock Chamber of Commerce 101 South Spring Street Thursday, June 5,1997 5:00 p.m. Board Room Greater Little Rock Chamber of Commerce 101 South Spring Street Friday, June 6, 1997 5:00 p.m. Board Room Greater Little Rock Chamber of Commerce 101 South Spring Street The meetings will be conducted in executive session. fj 11 jj }f ii n Little Rock School District OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDENT St^.- RECEIVED JUN - 1997 RECEIVED June 5, 1997 OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORIMQ JUN 5 - 1997 OfflCEOF DESEGREGATION MONITORING The Little Rock School District Board of Directors is hosting three informal receptions to provide an opportunity for you to meet the three finalists for the position of superintendent of schools. These receptions are open to the public, but especially to members of the Advisory Committee for the Superintendents Search who developed the criteria for the selection process. The receptions will be held: In the Administration Building Board Room 810 West Markham Street June 9, 11 and 13 (Monday, Wednesday, and Friday,) 5:00 - 6:00 p.m. \Ne look forward to seeing you there! 810 West Markham Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501) 824-2000 BJJuDI Fa'/: 1 ?d-2932 Jun 9 9^ > I P. 02/02 Little Rock School District Rtccptions for Superiatendent Candidates Rescheduled For liLmediate Release June <, 1997 For more infonnation. S'uellen Vann. 324-2020 Receptions tor the three finalists for the position, of supenntendent of the Little Rock Schcol fiJistrict (LRSD) have been postponed . i he revised schedule tor the candidate lecev-tions is' Wednesday, June 1 . 5:00 - 6:00 p.m. Kenneth James Thursday . Jtme 12, .S.OO - 6:00 p.m. Jimmy Scales Friday. June 13. 5
()0 6-00 p.m. Leslie Carnine J he receptions will he neld in tne Board Room of the LRSD .Administration Budding. 810 West Markham. The public is invited to meet the finalists during this time. The monthly Board agenda meeting which was to be helo. on June 12 lias ocen piistponed tinti! Thuisday, Jvme 19. at 5'00 p.m. Sio West Markham Street Little Rock. Arkansas 72201 * (501)324-2000 LRSD SORT'S OFFICE 414 FOO TON :o < > ? s * J h- 1 I J s*" ' : 1 Lhtle Rock School District OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDENT June 12,1997 Mr. John Walker, Attorney 1723 S. Broadway Little Rock, AR 72206 Dear Mr. Walker: This is to advise that the finalists for the position of Superintendent of Schools were provided with a copy of the Desegregation Plan by Federal Express prior io their arrival in Little Rock. if we can provide additional information, piease advise. Sincerely, // Don R. Roberts Superintendent of Schools cc: John Riggs, iV 810 West Markham Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501) 3iil-2000OR-^0 97 10:38 501 324 2023 I.RSD COM'irXTCATJ ()T)M 002/002 Little Kock School District Speciai Board Meeting For iramediate Retcase Jiuie I 1997 For more information
Suellen Vann, .124-202{l dhe L ittle Rock School District (LRSD) Board of Directors wi ll hold a special meeting at 6
00 p.m. Sunday, June 22, 1997. The special meeting wil.' be held to discuss cantiiiiates ..dr the position of superintendent. Ine meenngs will be held in the Administration Building, 810 West Markham. MEDIA NOTE
oir.ce this is a personnel issue, the Beard wil! conduct much of the meeting in executive .session. 810 West Markham Street Little Rock. Arkansas 72201 ntc 4-2000 Little Rock School District Superintendents Since 1982 Ed Kelley June 1982 to July 1987 Van Jones July to October 1987 (interim) George Cannon October to November 1987 (interim) November 1987 to July 1989 Ruth Steele July 1989 to June 1992 Mac Bernd July 1992 to July 1993 Estelle Matthis July to October 1993 (interim) Hank Williams October 1993 to July 1996 Don Roberts August 1996 to August 1997 (interim) Leslie Carnine August 1997JOHN W. Walker, P.A. Attorney At Law 1723 Broadway Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 Telephone (501) 374-3758 FAX (501) 374-4187 JHN W. WALKER -ALPH WASHINGTON
aRK BURNETTE USTIN PORTER, JR. RECEIVED ^tc 1 5 1397 December 12, 1997 Honorable Judge Susan Webber Wright United States District Judge OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING 600 West Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 Re: LR-C-82-866 LRSD V PCSSD Dear Judge Wright: Enclosed please find the job postings by the Little Rock School District for four positions: Associate Superintendents for Desegregation, Support Services and Instruction and Director of Planning, Research and Development. I am writing to request that you allow the Office of Desegregation Monitoring to review and study the impact of the salary structure set forth in the postings, i.e. $70-90,000.00 plus car allowance and benefits with one position being open ended defined as negotiable. We have previously had extensive budget hearings. There is budget that allows payment of $100,000.00 or more including benefits to any group of employees. I believe that allowing the District to make these changes without court approval will have no tendency to have an adverse impact upon the ability of the District to meet, not only its desegregation obligations, but its other obligations as well. The effect will be magnified because the concept of equal pay will mean that scores of administrators may be able to make legitimate claims for upward pay adjustments. This will include principals and other persons at the Director level. a Dr. Leslie Carnine, the new superintendent, may not be aware of the budget concerns of the Court or the history of pay to administrators in the District. The Court is reminded that there has been no showing of a dearth of qualified applicants for administrative positions and thus, that huge payment is required to attract necessary staff. The salaries are grossly out of line for this district in comparison to other districts in the State except the possibility of the Pulaski County Special School District where we have raised similar concerns regarding pay inflation for administrators, many of whom are unnecessary. Dr. Carmine's principal advisor appears to be Mr. Brady Lexington Herald-Leader | 04/23/2003 | Let's hope James is as good as they say Page 1 of3 REAL Otm Click here to visit other RealCities sites New! Browse and Search Adt from The Herald-Lea ly fv.1 a<kc Great Grandparents Grandparents Your Parents Who are your ancestor
I "YaurFamilv Name '^i Seat V <:?!?: I I j' (:) r I iolS:DiLjK\a^. I Our Local Channels + . News j Business j Sports j Entertainment v Living Search Back to Home > News > I Help I Contact Us I Site Index I Archives I Place an Ad I Newspape Wednesday, Apr 23, 2003 Shopping > Search the Archives News Breaking News Columnists Local Nation Obituaries Photos Politics Weather Weird News World Our Site Tools Weather Lexington Jackson, Breathitt County Louisville (Standiford) Local Events go + 54+34 + 51+38 + 58*38 Yellow Pages Discussion Boards Maps & Directions Subscribe to The Lexington Herald- Leader Have The Lexington Herald-Leader delivered to your home everyday Subscribe today CATCH FREE LEGENDS Posted on Wed, Apr. 23, 2003 Local Find a Joi an Aparti a Home, Let's hope James is as good as they say By Cheryl Truman HERALD-LEADER COLUMNIST After a search most notable for what it didn't offer the public an opportunity to meet the candidates Fayette County's school board made the safest pick of the bunch: a middle-aged white male, fluent in the language of management-speak and team-building. You might have thought the board would have gone for candidate Joyce Bales, who is nationally recognized for narrowing the achievement gap. The board could have finally broken the race barrier in the superintendent's office with either of two other candidates. But it didn't. It picked an apparently nice guy with a clean record and an acquaintance with Kentucky Education Commissioner Gene Wilhoit. The board says Little Rock Superintendent Ken James is the best. We'll have to take board members' word for it, since nobody got to meet either James or the others, all but one of whom were identified by the newspaper. Board chair Kathy Lousignont said that Lexington citizens were ready to take the search "to the next level" secrecy which she contends was necessary to get the best candidate. Board member Angie Tedder opined that only the Herald-Leader was offended by the search being conducted behind closed doors. They're wrong. The public may cut the board a little slack about its search style as long as it delivers a genius superintendent who will deliver immediate, dramatic results that make everybody happy. But no superintendent is perfect, and the board has set up James to take a potentially dangerous fall. Come spring 2004, Lexington citizens may well doubt the board's judgment about James, and James may http://www.kentucky.com/mld/kentucky/news/local/5694508.htm V w. BKEAK Updated V 23, 2003 Mounta Named 11:53 Pr Mounta Named 11:53 pr Russia: MHtion I - 11:39 Malays! Rejects 11:33 Pr U.N. In to Retui 11:12 pr 4/23/2003 Lexington Herald-Leader | 04/23/2003 | Let's hope James is as good as they say TICKETS Page 2 of 3 wonder why he left Little Rock. Enter to win 2 free tickets to any Lexington Legends home game. Enter Legends contest % For the sake of the schools, I hope James is the best. And for the sake of that $195,000 a year he's getting, I hope his superiority and brilliance assert themselves within a few weeks of when he starts work. Because of the exclusionary way he was selected and the inflated salary he's making while the rest of the school system battles for pocket change, a performance that's only competent just won't cut it. Because if James takes a wrong step if he cuts the wrong program, closes the wrong school, refuses to build the right school in the right place - the impact will be like walking into a propeller. And the school board, which is so immensely satisfied with itself just now, will take a public relations hit that will make the messy Robin Fankhauser resignation look like a garden party. Reach Chery! Truman at (859) 231-3202 or 1-800-950-6397 Ext. 3202, or ctruman @herald-!eader. com. RELATED LINKS More School news B email this | print this | license this | reprint this Re you by ui in 8i First N LastN State jChoo Email PHOTOS < more pt FRi http://www.kentucky.coin/mld/kentucky/news/local/5694508.htm 4/23/2003 DATE: 810 West Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 Phone
Fax
(501) 447-1030 (501) 447-1161 5 [Z ^Iq3__________ TO: FROM: Suellen Vann, Director of Communications SUBJECT: Spe<^ I fy}ec'l^i MESSAGE: /he bJI Il k^[J) /b<f o r> 1 S j>oie cr(~ 4^ te C2T>n~^ g- 03 Cyy\ S
'Tly^ Pages (including cover) To Fax # An Individual Approach to a World of Knowledge 06/02/2003 16:55 501-324-2023 LRSD COMMUNICATIONS (i: PAGE 01/01 810 West Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 For Immediate Release June 2, 2003 For more information
Tony Rose Board Vice President 569-8122 School Board Narrows Superintendent Candidate List The Board of Education of the Little Rock School District has narrowed the list of candidates for the position of Superintendent to six, according to Board Vice President Tony Rose. The six, in alphabetical order, are: Donald Carlisle - Miller Place, New York Jack Clemmons, - Lubbock, Texas Mary Guinn - Gary, Indiana Joan Kozlovsky - Pylesville, Maryland Stan Mims - New York, New York T. C. Wallace, Jr. - Macombe, Michigan During the next week, the Board will continue to gather information on the six candidates. Rose, who is leading the Superintendent search, said the Board will begin to arrange interviews next week, ### 06/12/2003 17:49 501-324-2023 LRSD COMMUNICATIONS PAGE 01/01 810 West Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 For Immediate Release June 12, 2003 For more information: Julie Davis, 447-1025 School Board Names Interim Superintendent The Board of Education of the Little Rock School District has named an Interim Superintendent of Schools. Dr. Donald M. Stewart was named to lead the district while the Board continues its search for a permanent replacement for Dr. T. Kenneth James who accepted the superintendent position in Lexington, Kentucky. Stewart has served as the Chief Financial Officer of the Little Rock School District for three and one-half years. Prior to that period, Stewart was Assistant Superintendent for Business Affairs for the Pulaski County Special School District and for the North Little Rock School District. Stewart has worked for the Arkansag Department of Education and has served as Superintendent of Schools in Gentry, Arkansas and in Norfork, Arkansas. Stewart began his career as a fifth grade teacher in the Fort Smith Public Schools. He holds both the Arkansas Administrator Certificate and Teacher Certificate. In 1976, Stewart earned the Doctor of Education Degree from the University of Arkansas in Fayetteville. Additionally, he earned the Educational Specialist Degree and the Master of Education Degree from the University of Arkansas. He also holds the Bachelor of Science in Education Degree from Arkansas State University. ### Media Note
Dr. Stewart will be out of town on Friday, June 13
therefore, if you wish to interview Dr. Stewart, you may contact him the week of June 16 through his assistant at 447-1011. 810 West Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 For Immediate Release May 21, 2004 For more information
Suellen Vann, 447-1030 School Board Sets Superintendent Candidate Interviews The Little Rock School District Board of Directors has selected five candidates to interview for the position of Superintendent of Schools. The itinerary for each candidate will be as follows: Public reception Interview with Board Dinner with Board 5:00 p.m, 6:00 p.m. Board Room, LRSD Administration Building SupeimJmdartsCcifaenceRDoni,LRSDAdiiiin.Bldg. FoUowinginlerview Undetermined location TourwithBoard member Nexlmcming Sites throughout the city The dates for the interviews will be June 1, 2, 3,4, and 7. The five candidates selected for interview for the position of Superintendent of Schools arc: Roy C. Benavides Roy Gregory Brooks Libby S. Gardner Stan Lamar Mims Jim V. Scales Odessa, Texas Sorrento, Florida Pflugerville, Texas Grayslake, Illinois Dallas, Texas The specific date when each candidate will be interviewed has not been finalized.06/01/2004 17:30 501-447-1161 LRSD COMMUNICATIONS RASE 01/01 -Rn -------- 1^/ /^r/ ISgf 310 ^^est Markh Little Rock, AR Direct Phone: m I (501) 447-1030 (501) 4474025 rwx XZ*' DATE: June 1, 2004 TO: Central Arkansas Media Cynthia Howell, Arkansas Democrat'Gazette FROM: Suellen Vann, Director of Communications SUBJECT: Special School Board Meeting MESSAGE: The Little Rock School District (LRSD) Board of Directors will hold a special meeting on Tuesday, June 8, at 5 p.m. The meeting will be held in response to a petition by Concerned Citizens United (CCU) requesting that the Board hold a special meeting for the purpose of discussing the appointment of Dr. Morris Holmes as the permanent Superintendent of Schools. Dr. Holmes currently serves as Interim Superintendent of Schools. In announcing the special meeting, School Board President Tony Rose said that the CCU will have 45 minutes in which to present to the Board, followed by seven minutes for each of the Board members to provide remarks. The meeting will be held in the Board Room of the LRSD Administration Building, 810 West Markham. # Pages (including ccner) 1 To Fax # An Individual Approach to a World of Knowledge06/01/2004 11:05 501-447-1161 LRSD COMMUNICATIONS PAGE DATE: 810 West Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 Direct Phone: Communications Office- (501) 447-1030 (501) 447-1025 TO: FROM: June 1, 2004 Central Arkansas Media Cynthia Howell, Arkansas Democrat-Gazeite Suellen Vann, Director of Communications SUBJECT: Press Conference MESSAGE: Tony Rose, president of the Little Rock School District (LRSD) Board of Directors, will hold a press conference at 3
45 p.m. today to respond to the Concerned Citizens United petition for a special meeting of the Board. The press conference will be held in the Board Room of the LRSD Administration Building, 810 West Markham. # Pages (including cover) 1 To Fax # An Individual Approacli to a World of Knowledge 1_I\OV rwuc. 01/ Oi //V" ___ West Markham 1^1 S Liftle R.ock, AR 722QI For Immediate Release June 2, 2004 For more infonnation: Qi iaT1o^ vuxix, /lUJV Superintendent Candidate Withdraws from Consideration Dr. Roy Benavides of Odessa, Texas has withdrawn his name from consideration for the position of Little Rock School District Superintendent of Schools. Therefore, the reception and interview scheduled with Dr. Benavides for Friday, June 4, have been cancelled. ftrrff06/11/2004 11:51 501-447-1161 LRSD COMMUNICATIONS PAGE 01/01 810 West Markham Linle Rock, AR 72201 Direct Phone
Communications Office: (501) 447-1030 (501) 447-1025 DATE: June 11, 2004 TO: Central Arkansas Media Cynthia Howell, Arkansas DemGcrat-Gazetie FROM: Suellen Vann. Director of Communications SUBJECT: Special School Board Meeting MESSAGE: The Little Rock School District (LRSD) Board of Directors Uld a special meeting th., Friday, Junt 11,, discus, candidate, for the position of Superir,tcndct of Schools. The meeting wiU begin at 5,00 p.m. in the Board Room of the LRSD Administration Building, 810 WeM Markham. * Pages (including cover) 1 To Fax # An Individual Approach to a World of Knowledge RECEIVED AUG 1 2000 OFRCEOF DESEGBEGATOOOfflTORiNG NARRATIVE EVALUATION OF THE SUPERINTENDENT'S 1999-2000 PERFORMANCE GOALS July 2000 OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDENT Date: July 11. 2000 To
Members of the School Board Re
Narrative Evaluation of the Superintendents 1999-2000 Performance Goals The 1999-2000 District Performance Priorities were an ambitious plan to provide foundational support for the changes that have been recently implemented in the Little Rock School District. Those changes are a direct result of the LRSD Strategic Plan and Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. Based on those two plans, of which the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan is an outgrowth of the Districts Strategic Plan, the District is on course to (1) have increased success rate for all students, and (2) be declared unitary by the Federal Court. We have established a priority to insure that a compliance plan for the Revised Desegregation and Education plan is in place and functioning. II. We are continuing efforts to provide technology and support its utilization by teachers and students. III. A cornerstone process of Campus Leadership is the Districts accountability plan that will become operable during the 1999- 2000 school year. IV. The Instructional Division has established a series of implementation goals to ensure the comprehensive standards- based system for the Little Rock School District. V. The operations component has established a variety of goals to support the overall mission of the District.1999-2000 Performance Goals July 2000 Page 2 Goal I. The Superintendent will provide facilitator and coordination support to achieve the goals as outlined in the District Performance Priorities for 1999-2000 school year. Evaluation: The Critical Performance Priorities report/evaluation, given to you under separate cover, was a very ambitious undertaking for the 1999-2000 school term. We are reminded that many of the goals are multi-year issues. However, we are very pleased with the progress that has been achieved. I salute the staff, particularly the lead individuals on each of the sub-goals, fortheir leadership. I was particularly pleased with the response that was generated by three special publications. First, the first Annual Report to the Community in several years was produced and published as a newspaper supplement to the Arkansas Democrat - Gazette. The date of issue was September 1999. Second, we developed a report on Plan Talk which was well received by the authors at the University of Arkansas at Little Rock. The original report was controversial and the response / report by the District went a long way in establishing a professional basis for progress among the academic community. That report was completed in January 2000. Finally, the compliance report to the community was produced and mailed to households in Little Rock in April 2000. The report was titled Good News from Good Schools and was an executive summary of the compliance report that was filed with the federal court in March 2000. The report, though not required, was complimented by all parties as a precursor to the report that is required to be filed in March 2001. We have noted to you that we are preparing the results or the impact of the Critical Performance Priorities. We have called this the Annual Report. In the near future this will become known as the District Report Card. Based on the trend analysis that we publicize on a quarterly basis, the District had a tremendous year in almost all categories. The report will be given to you under separate cover.1999-2000 Performance Goals July 2000 Page 3 Goal II. The Superintendent will provide necessary technical support and guidance for District Accountability to become operational during the 1999-2000 School year. Evaluation: A. Quality Initiative: The District obtained the first level and is working toward The Arkansas Quality Award. We have filed an application to move to the next level and a group of examiners will be here in late August to review the application and the progress of the District. Based on the change that has occurred, and the progress of the District in obtaining positive student results, we believe we will be moving to the next level. This is a comprehensive evaluation process and I have outlined generally the review areas. The following areas are reviewed: 1. Leadership a. Senior Leadership Direction b. Organizational Performance Review 2. Public Responsibility and Citizenship a. Responsibility to the Public b. Support of Key Communities 3. Strategic Planning a. Strategy Development Process b. Strategic Objectives c. Strategy deployment, action plan development & deployment 4. Customer and Market Focus a. Customer Relationships b. Customer Satisfaction Determination1999-2000 Performance Goals July 2000 Page 4 5. Information and Analysis Analysis of Organizational Performance 6. Human Resource Focus a. Work Systems b. Employee Training and Development c. Employee Well-Being and Satisfaction 1. Work Environment 2. Employee Support Environment 7. Process Management a. Design Process b. Production and Delivery Process 8. Business Results a. Customer Focused Results b. Financial and Market Results c. Human Resource Results d. Supplier and Partnership Results Note: The District became the first school District in the State to be recognized for quality practices and we anticipate being recognized again for additional achievement in October 2000. B. Campus Leadership Handbook The Campus Leadership plan has already become a very important part of the Districts development. The utilization of the Campus Leadership Team as an important part of the development of the millage program gave the team credibility in a very real way.1999-2000 Performance Goals July 2000 Page 5 The participatory decision-making or site-based decision-making model that is being utilized will become stronger and more effective with time and training. As a reminder, we previously indicated that normal implementation of a site-based decision-making model is five years. This is the second year of implementation. The teams will play a very important role in their own restructuring and the implementation of technology and renovation plans for their particular facilities. The Leadership Handbook is an outline for achieving a quality school program with ample input and quality checks to ensure not only continuous improvement but also the bottom line of improved achievement for all children. (You have copies of the handbook and we are currently updating for distribution to principals and team members in July. The Cluster Coordinating Committees agreed on several edits and additions for the 2000- 2001-school term. c. Incentives and Sanctions (Campus Leadership Handbook pages 46-54 and Arkansas Comprehensive Testing. Assessment and Accountability Program pages 11 & 12) I have attached the section from the Campus Leadership Handbook for your information. I also recommend to you that the Incentive Plan that was approved by a 4-3 margin at the May regular meeting by the Board be reconsidered. It is vitally important that there be a super majority in consensus on the plan for Little Rock. There are two very important facets to accountability - - rewards and sanctions. Rewards and/or incentives are there for celebration and motivation. They must be based on a non-competitive plan, whereby you do not pit campus against campus. As I listened to the discussion, it was obvious that not enough time had been given for the Board to become familiar with the philosophy or why this plan is an important aspect of the accountability system for Little Rock. Essentially, it is part of a positive strategy for Little Rock to cope with the State Accountability Plan. What you saw was the initial phase and the other quality indicators will be added as the State Accountability Plan is implemented. We have emphasized the State Accountability Plan, but I also want you to know that we have coordinated this incentive plan with all of the other accountability features of the Districts Strategic Plan, the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan, and a variety of federal initiatives such as IDEA /Title I. If you have reviewed the information in the Campus Leadership Handbook, you will note that the sanctions are tied to the State Plan. Hopefully, you will also note that the District is being much more proactive in providing1999-2000 Performance Goals July 2000 Page 6 assistance and calling for change than is the State. As you know, the District has a significant number of schools with well below average student achievement. It is without a doubt the most important challenge this District will face over the next several years. Lack of progress would certainly negatively impact the strides the District has made over the last three years. Many, if not all, of the Critical Performance Priorities have been directed at making improvements in the core program, which translate into achievement improvements for all of the District students. What you should be able to discern is that the Accountability Plan which is being proposed by the state has been interwoven into the Campus Leadership strategy, of which the basic structure is in place in the District. There will be modifications and additions as the State Plan comes into being. Also, as has been previously stated, it is consistent with the Districts Strategic Plan and the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. Goal III. The Superintendent will provide the necessary leadership to continue the trend for: Evaluation: A. Improved academic performance We will be reporting areas that are familiar and in some instances new areas of assessment. 1. SAT 9 Growth Data: As previously reported to you, the growth rate for District students is similar to that of students nationally. The average percentile for District students is below the state and national averages. We do, however, have a number of students who do exceptionally well and, on the other hand, we have a significant percentage of students who score in the lowest quartile. As you see and review the results of K-2 Developmental Reading Assessment / No. 2, they are exceptionally promising and will have an impact on the SAT 9 averages in the near future. Based on previous improvement initiatives, you will see a change in that data during the A* and 5* years of the change process. We are currently in the 2"'^ year of the emphasis on the core academics with ELLA and the new math programming.1999-2000 Performance Goals July 2000 Page 7 2. K-2 Developmental Reading Assessment: This may be the most important news the District has received in several years. The attached chart indicates strong growth in each of the primary grades. The chart also indicates the gap being reduced for the racial identities. The focus that has been achieved on staff development and monitoring is only at the 70% level and over the next couple of years we should approach 90% with the faculty. (Some may debate the percentages, but I am much more conservative on the effects of staff development within the first year of implementation.) It is very important for us to maintain the focus. Normally, it takes five years from this point to reach the average norm for accelerated achievement. As a final note, as you read the numbers it emphasizes even more that remediation is singularly the wrong concept. What we must be about is providing enrichment exercises that allow children to develop a vocabulary that is based on that enrichment. And finally, a reminder that we must stay the course and resist the temptation to modify or change programs. At least not for the next five years! 3. 4 Grade State Benchmark Assessment-ACTAAP: The District strategy has been to emphasize elementary / primary staff development and curriculum. The results, which were just noted to you in No. 2, are for the first full year under the new program. As I noted to you, we are not 100%... and as you review the data it suggests that real improvements have been made. We must caution however, that trends are not necessarily based on one year, but we can say it was a watershed event. Preliminary results from the District criterion assessment data suggest that we will have double-digit gains in the 4 grade ACTAAP / reading and mathematics. I have looked at several indicators that are normally very predictive and they all point to that result. If that becomes reality, it will be the first major positive academic event recorded since the-mid 198Os. We expect the official results to be here in early August. If you will remember, we expended significant effort installing the new Northwest Evaluation/Achievement level assessment program last year. All of us were concerned because even though there was tremendous involvement (numbers of teachers), it did push everyone close to overload. The process gives us a reliable and valid view of what is happening with the student. That level of predictability will provide the District with untold opportunities not only to fine tune instruction, but also to level up the curriculum as the improvement trend is established.1999-2000 Performance Goals July 2000 Page 8 4. Enrollment in Upper Division Classes, AP Enrollment and Successful Completion: Again, a success story like the Developmental Reading - - a watershed event. We had significant overall growth in numbers, but what was especially important was the number of African-Americans who not only enrolled, but who also were successful in the upper division classes. The total enrollment in AP Classes rose to 1,791 from 1,435 in the 1997-98 academic year, which translates to a 25% INCREASE. African American enrollment increased to 695 from 471 in the 1997-98 academic year, which translates to a 48% INCREASE. We do not necessarily predict that these numbers will continue to increase so dramatically
it would be our assertion that they will plateau until the middle and elementary school programming produces an increase in numbers. What we do predict is that this will have a very positive effect on the college qualifying scores of the ACT and the SAT. There is an extremely high correlation between classes taken and scores on the ACT and SAT and success in post-secondary education. Please note that we had an additional 135 students in 8 sections of the UALR / Hall High University Studies program. We would note that 93% were successful and that African Americans made up 57% of the class participants. Since the Hall numbers could have been added to the college equivalency AP, the increase is even more spectacular. The total number of students participating in the college equivalency programs INCREASED 34% and African American student participation INCREASED 64%. We would also remind you that we had significant increases in upper division math and science classes, which parallel those college equivalency numbers. If you look at all upper division math and science classes we experienced a 20.6% INCREASE in students. 5. Enrollment in Algebra I & II and Biology: As you know, research has overwhelmingly confirmed that algebra has been described as a gatekeeper course because it has a high correlation with success in many of the other core academic programs. Algebra is required for high school graduation in Arkansas and the student will have to pass the new end-of-course benchmark test. There will also be an end of course biology test as part of the state accountability plan.1999-2000 Performance Goals July 2000 Page 9 What we do have is the number of students who move on to take Algebra II successfully. In 1997-98 there were 386 students and in 1999-2000 there were 533 or a 38% INCREASE. Biology is the twin of algebra as a gatekeeper and it, along with the new 9*" grade physics program, will expand many more opportunities for students to complete a much more rigorous science curriculum. It should be noted that biology and Pre-AP biology had significant increases in enrollment. Biology INCREASED 29% over 1997-98 and the Pre-AP biology INCREASED 7%. 6. Duke University Talent Search Data: The Duke Talent Search Program is an important barometer for the academic student. As we work to improve the general education for all of our students, it is equally important not to forget the students who excel academically. In 1998-99 we had 12 students who were honored by the Duke Talent Search. This year we had 27 students who were chosen to participate in the state recognition ceremonies. The District had approximately 100 students who qualified to take the SAT or ACT in an effort to qualify for the State and National recognition. The initial qualifying standard for a student is to score at or above the 95*^ percentile on the SAT 9 or similar norm referenced test. As an additional thought, of which you may or may not be aware, there is a high predictive correlation on the number of National Merit Finalists which may be produced based on the Duke Talent Search identification program. We have had excellent numbers and it should be a stated objective to increase these numbers and especially to have additional minority students identified. B. Improved learning climate as shovi/n by: 1. Expulsion Data: The numbers continue to look good, if not great. As you know, we went from 119 to one last year, and this year three expulsions. But as you know, the three are currently enrolled in the Juvenile Justice Center and actually remain in an instructional program. We continue to think we will be able to maintain the low numbers in the future.1999-2000 Performance Goals July 2000 Page 10 2. Reportable Offences: Suspensions The numbers continue to drop and that decline should continue. I will say that the Middle School initiative was an important ingredient in that decline. Numbers are important and, noting that, we had 6,247 suspensions in 1997-98, and dropped to 4,926 this year. What is more positive is that all the long-term suspensions are continuing their education at the Alternative Learning Center. Long term suspension numbers also have decreased by 29% since 1997-98. Secondly, we have also a decrease in the percentage of children who were engaged in negative behavior, from about 6% to slightly less than 2% of students receiving a reportable sanction. We are moving aggressively to develop more alternatives for special needs students and for middle school students. This effort will also drop these numbers significantly. What is the goal and what is the reasonable expectation? Slightly less than 1% appears reasonable for suspensions. What is vitally important is that these numbers not be a reflection of misbehavior not being addressed. We will be doing more numerous quality checks with staff and parents to maintain the credibility of the information. 3. Student ParticipationCo-curricular Activities: The area of student participation has been devastated by budgetary woes in the past. Research has been overwhelming regarding students who participate in the co-curricular areas of the arts and athletics - - they have fewer academic and citizenship problems. There are ways to increase participation, and we have been on a mission to improve the overall quality of the programming. I know you understand that learning climate issues are very complex and this is yet another way of creating a more positive learning climate. We do not have good numbers for fine arts participation, but an analysis of the class enrollments indicate a significant increase in interest. We must recognize that part of the change is due to the new middle school programming and the 9 grade move to the high schools. We have 8,077 students participating in a fine arts program. In some instances, much like athletics, a student may be participating in one to three activities or classes. Most students, however, are engaged in no more than two. As mentioned, we have the data on athletic participation for both boys and girls. As you would suspect, some of the increase of the past year would be because of our move to middle school. However, though it1999-2000 Performance Goals July 2000 Page 11 does explain some of the gain, the analysis by grade indicates significantly more participation by both boys and girls. The only grade level that was somewhat flat, was the 12*^ grade, and we would expect that for athletics. The participant INCREASE was 43%, which is excellent. In 1997-98 we had 3,497 young people participating in secondary athletic activities. The number of participants INCREASED to 5,002 in 1999- 2000. We also saw the initiation of an activities advisory committee of parents, sponsors, and students. As has been previously stated, many of the activities are woefully under-funded and we all recognize we must solve some of the equity problems before we can fully realize the potential of co-curricular programs and activities. We believe that with the assistance of the activities advisory committee we can start to see positive improvement in the program over the next several years. We will be recommending a Director of Fine Arts be appointed. 4. Average Daily Attendance
An excellent barometer for learning climate is the attendance of students. We believe that attendance of teachers is also a major issue, but this particular item is specific to student attendance. Research has confirmed what most teachers already know - - those who miss a lot of school have lower academic achievement. There are a lot of reasons for non-attendance, but a primary reason is the lack of interest and the relevancy of instruction as perceived by the student. If you review successful schools research, it becomes quite obvious that their average daily attendance is also above average. You cant teach children who are not there. In 1997-98 the Districts percentage of attendance on a daily basis was 92.35%. In 1998-99 it had inched up to 92.44% which, though appearing small, was fairly significant because the number of days multiplied by the number of students is very significant. However, we are pleased to report that we INCREASED to 94.09% in 1999-2000. The goal is to be at 96%, which appears reasonable, but will still be very difficult to achieve. This is another indicator that the learning climate is becoming more normal. 5. Parent support and involvement: The model which the District is utilizing makes community / parental support a major component. If you will remember, there are six components to the model, and the involvement factor is a key ingredient to quality schools and improved student achievement. As1999-2000 Performance Goals July 2000 Page 12 we entered the school year the strategy employed was to increase the amount of involvement in the following ways: a. Include parents and community members on the campus leadership teams and as a part of the school decision-making model. As previously noted, they played a key role in creating the basis for the millage campaign. In the future they will have a much larger role in the school improvement process. b. The second strategy employed was to capitalize on the vitality of the VIPS and PIE programs by increasing the amount of volunteer and mentoring time at the individual schools. Debbie Milam and the advisory board have been key to increasing the activities which bring the public into the schools. Note the increase in the community volunteer hours in the schools. The numbers have increased from 187,881 hours in 1997-98 to 255,937 in 1999-2000. This is a 36% INCREASE in community volunteer hours. c. The third strategy was to increase the involvement and participation of the PTA. The membership growth and revitalization of a number of the campus units has created a new level of excitement and participation at the school level. It was very exciting to see the State PTA recognize Little Rock in almost every category for exemplary performance. The District received 38% of all awards at the State Level. Membership INCREASED by 36% and we are establishing a goal to pass 20,000 members for 2000-2001. d. The fourth strategy was to develop a new organizational structure for parental participation and involvement. Bonnie Lesley has done an excellent job of bringing together the various groups and this new plan creates the possibility of substantive growth in involvement. As a side note, the prevailing research recognizes that teachers are the most satisfied where parent participation and support are strong. And without belaboring the point, student achievement is also maximized by that same participation and support. 6. Reduction in the dropout rate: This priority is a major quality issue. As you know, the District experienced a higher than average dropout rate for a significant number of years. In 1997, the District started the ACC Program at Metropolitan to assist with the non-traditional student who was in1999-2000 Performance Goals July 2000 Page 13 danger of dropping out The average number served in 1997 was 100. In 1998, the program was expanded and the evening high school program was consolidated with the ACC Program. The average number served rose to 200. In 1999, the program was expanded again at Metropolitan and a site-based program utilizing PLATO software was initiated at all high schools except Parkview, which is a traditional magnet high school. The average number served again increased, to approximately 400. We anticipate that the program will continue to expand in the year 2000 with the option of serving overaged sophomores. Currently, the program at Metro is open to students needing to make up credits who are either 11* or 12*^ grade in age. Evaluation: In 1997-98, the reported dropout rate was 8.7%, or 926 students who left school. That rate is equivalent to slightly less than 40% who started O* grade, but did not finish. The figure improved to 6.8% in 1998-99 with the utilization of the alternative programs mentioned above or 689 students. The estimate for 1999-2000 is 4.46% or 550 students, which is a considerable improvement. Since the final rate is not established until school has started, it may drop to the 4% level primarily by returning students. We will make a push to recover several of these students. The goal for 2000-2001 is to be in the 3.4% range, or less than 400 students. As a final note, the drop out improvement is estimated to have generated $1,7 million in state monies. The dollars generated easily pay for the operation of the ACC and ALC. We have placed two alternative programs on probation for the coming year. Both have suffered from small enrollments and the challenge will be to increase their enrollment and the student achievement levels. We are recommending that this be a critical performance priority.APPENDIX I GOAL I : Critical Performance Priorities End of Year Report 1999-2000 Provided under separate cover.APPENDIX II GOAL II : Campus Leadership Handbook Pages: 1. 46-54 2. 11-12I I 1 I i Rewards for Schools The District shall develop a system to reward (a) Quality Schools - schools absolutely meeting all the performance indicators established by the Arkansas Department of Education and (b) Improving Schools - schools demonstrating improvement, meeting a preponderance of the trend and/or improvement goals established by the Arkansas Department of Education and LRSD. The following points are established for each indicator. They will be added to determine a schools total score. 0 1 2 3 Declined in performance from previous year or semester Maintained last years performance and/or improved but did not meet trend/improvement goal Met trend/improvement goal Exceeded trend/improvement goal A definition ofpreponderance and the number of minimum points required for rewards will be established. Quality Schools and Improving Schools Quality Schools and Improving Schools may be recognized and rewarded in the following ways, as determined by the Superintendent: 3. A presentation will be made to the Board of Education on the schools achievements involving both staff and parents, a press release commending the schools performance will be issued, and schools will be featured in District publications, on cable television, and on the web page. b. The school may be designated as a mentor school and granted resources to provide technical assistance and support to another school in the District identified for improvement. { 3 s c. As appropriate, the District will support a schools application for state and national recognition in the national Blue Ribbon School program. d. The District will collaborate with the community to identify other possible recognitions of the schools progress and achievement. e. Schools will receive a grant to encourage and facilitate further improvement. The amount of the grant will be determined by annual budget appropriations. Awarded funds will be used for innovative programs, to provide additional materials and supplies, to support technology enhancements, to improve meaningful parent involvement, and/or for professional development of the staff. f. Each school will receive a banner/flag that celebrates its success. 5Rewards for Staff and Students Each Quality and each Improving School is encouraged to design, in collaboration with parents and the community, celebrations of success and recognition for contributing teachers, teacher teams, other staff, and parent/community volunteers, as well as students who meet the performance goals. Sanctions According to ADE and the State Board of Education, sanctions in the ACTAAP system are applied for the purpose of improving teaching and learning, not for punishing schools or the people in them. The LRSD supports this view. Each Arkansas school is expected to achieve annually a minimum percentage of its total possible points assigned for the performance indicators in the ACTAAP system for accountability. Failure to do so will result in the following designations, as determined by the Arkansas Department of Education: First year: Second year: Third year: Fourth year: Fifth year: Sixth year: High Priority Status Alert Status Low Performing Status Academic Distress Phase I Status Academic Distress Phase II Status Academic Distress Phase III Status To be eligible for removal of any sanction designation, leading up to, but not including. Academic Distress Phase I, a school must attain the minimum percentage of its total possible points for two consecutive years. Once classified as Academic Distress Phase I, a school must comply with the rules and regulations to be promulgated by the ADE in order to be removed from this category. Failure to do so will result in the designation of Academic Distress Phase II, and so forth. The District will not identify schools for sanctions. Rather, the District will ensure the following levels of technical assistance and/or corrective actions for schools identified for improvement by the Arkansas Department of Education. In other words, the District will form a partnership with each school in need of improvement and will assist and support that school in its improvement efforts. To that end, the District has reorganized staff in the Division of Instruction to form a multidisciplinary School Improvement department. A common mission for all Division of Instruction teams will be to help schools help students achieve the challenging standards established by the Arkansas Department of Education and the LRSD and as measured by the various performance, trend, and improvement indicators. The assignment of a Broker for each school is another level of support. 47 I ii I ) The following technical assistance and support services are established for schools requiring improvements
Technical Assistance and Support for Schools Identified for Improvement Year/Status/ Definition LRSD Assistance/Support Assigned Responsibility YEAR ONE: WARNED The first year that an LRSD school fails to meet its performance, trend, and/or improvement goals. The Superintendent will ensure that staff are designated to: 1. Inform the principal, the central office broker, the Campus Leadership Team, the Cabinet, and the Board of Education of the designation of the school and its implications. Testing and Program Evaluation Team 2. Provide appropriate levels of technical assistance to the school as it develops and implements its School Improvement Plan so that it addresses specific elements of student performance problems and includes waivers of any policies or regulations that impede the ability of the school to education its students. Technical Assistance Team
Curriculum/ Instruction Team 3. Conduct a School Improvement Audit to determine the extent to which the Campus Leadership Plan is being implemented at the school. Technical Assistance Team 4. Require the recommendations from the School Improvement Audit to be addressed in the following year's School Improvement Plan, if not possible to do so immediately. 5. Monitor regularly and conduct formative evaluations of the implementation of the School Improvement Plan, reviewing with the principal and the Campus Leadership Team formative data and making suggestions for modifications and adjustments to the implementation plan. 6. Provide the principal, the broker, members of the Campus Leadership Team, and other appropriate staff opportunities to participate in professional development activities that should lead to school improvement. i I i Associate Superintendent for School Services Associate Superintendent for School Services Professional Development Team
Curriculum/ Instruction Team
Associate Superintendent for School Services 48I YearZStatusZ Definition LRSD AssistanceZSupport Assigned Responsibility YEAR TWO: HIGH PRIORITY STATUS The Superintendent will ensure that staff are designated to: A school identified by ADE that for two consecutive years fails to meet the performance, trend, and/or improvement goals. 1. Inform the principal, the central office broker, the Campus Leadership Team, the Cabinet, and the Board of Education of the designation of the school and its implications. 2. Provide appropriate levels of technical assistance to the school as it develops and implements its School Improvement Plan so that it addresses specific elements of student performance problems and includes waives of any policies or regulations that impede the ability of the school to educate its students. 3. Conduct a comprehensive Curriculum Audit to determine the extent to which the school is implementing the District curriculum and the quality of its interventions for students not meeting the standards. 4. Require that the recommendations from the Curriculum Audit be addressed in the following years School Improvement Plan, if impossible to do so immediately. Possibly mandate the implementation of specific actions, professional development, or programs to address needs identified in the Curriculum Audit and/or the analysis of disaggregated student performance data. 5. The District shall take corrective action during the High Priority Status Year through one or more of the following: (a) (b) (c) (d) Decrease the decision-making authority of the Campus Leadership Team. (b) Require participation in remedial training or professional development, and then implementating the necessary changes. Reflect the school's low performance in the evaluation of the principal, as well as teachers and other staff who contributed to the low performance of the school. Replace the school principal. Testing and Program Evaluation Team Technical Assistance Team
Curriculum/ Instruction Team Curriculum/ Instruction Team
Planning and Development Team Associate Superintendent for School Services Associate Superintendent for School Services 49 i3 Year/Status/ Definition LRSD Assistance/Support Assigned Responsibility :i Year Three: Alert Status The Superintendent will ensure that staff are designated to: s I i t 1 J >{ - .3 A school identified by ADE that for three consecutive years fails to meet the performance, trend, and/or improvement goals. 1. 2. 3. Inform the principal, the Campus Leadership Team, the Cabinet, and the Board of Education of the designation and its implications. Conduct follow-up or monitoring of implementation of School Improvement and Curriculum Audit recommendations. Mandate appropriate specific actions, professional . development, and/or programs to address student needs. 4. Continue to provide appropriate technical assistance as the school develops and implements its School Improvement Plan. 5. The District shall take corrective action during the Alert Status Year through one or more of the following: (a) Decrease the decision-making authority of the Campus Leadership Team
(b) Require participation in remedial training or professional development and then implementing the necessary changes
(c) (Reflect the schools low performance in the evaluation of the principal, as well as teachers and other staff who contributed to the low performance of the school. (d) Reconstitute the school staff by replacing the principal and up to 50 percent of the teachers and other staff, as appropriate. Testing and Program Evaluation Team Technical Assistance Team
Curriculum/ Instruction Team Associate Superintendent for School Services Technical Assistance Team
Curriculum/ Instruction Team Associate Superintendent for School Services 50Year/Status/ Definition LRSD Assistance/Support Assigned Responsibility Year Four: Low Performing Status A school identified by ADE that for four consecutive years fails to meet its performance, trend, and/or improvement goals. The Superintendent will ensure that staff are designated to apply one or more of the following sanctions: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Revoke the authority of the school to design its School Improvement Plan. Require participation in remedial training or professional development and then implementing the necessary changes. Reflect the low performance of the school in the performance evaluations of responsible staff, including the principal, as well as teachers and other staff who contributed to the low performance. Conduct follow-up audits to determine the extent to which the school has effectively implemented the recommendations of the School Improvement Audit and the Curriculum Audit conducted in years one and two. Reconstitute the school staff by replacing the principal and up to 50 percent of the teachers and other staff, as appropriate. Associate Superintendent for School Services Technical Assistance Team
Curriculum/ Instruction Team Associate Superintendent for School Services 51Year/Status/ Definition LRSD Assistance/Support Assigned Responsibility YEAR FIVE: ACADEMIC DISTRESS PHASE I STATUS The Superintendent will ensure that staff are designated to apply one or more of the following sanctions: A school identified by ADE that for five consecutive years fails to meet its performance, trend, and/or improvement goals. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Revoke the authority of the school to design its School Improvement Plan. Require participation in remedial training or professional development and then implementing the necessary changes. Reflect the low performance of the school in the performance evaluations of responsible staff, including the principal, as well as teachers and other staff who contributed to the low performance. Conduct follow-up audits to determine the extent to which the school has effectively implemented the recommendations of the School Improvement Audit and the Curriculum Audit conducted in years one and two. Reconstitute the school staff by replacing the principal and up to 50 percent of the teachers and other staff, as appropriate. Sanctions for Central Office Associate Superintendent for School Services Technical Assistance Team
Curriculum/ Instruction Team Associate Superintendent for School Services Effective Year Two, upon the Superintendents recommendation, the performance evaluations of central office staff designated to provide leadership in human resources, teaching and learning, school improvement, school services, administrative services, and technology, including members of the Superintendents Cabinet, shall also reflect the schools low performance if it can be determined that they shared responsibility, through their decisions or actions, or lack thereof, for the low achievement of schools identified for sanctions. Sanctions for the Superintendent will be determined by the Board of Education. 52School Role When Identified for Sanctions Each school identified for sanctions shall
a. b. c. d. e. f. In consultation with central staff and the Campus Leadership Team develop or revise a School Improvement Plan in ways that have the greatest likelihood of improving the performance of all children in meeting the expected improvement goals outlined in ACTAAP and the Quality Index. Align all the schools systems and resources behind the effective implementation of the plan. Submit the plan in a timely manner to school and District-level staff for review, feedback, and approval. Implement the plan, conducting self-monitoring on a frequent basis to determine success and then making appropriate adjustments. Consult frequently with District-level staff assigned to support the school and to provide technical assistance. Improve the skills of its staff by providing effective professional development activities. At least ten percent of the Title 1 funds (if received) shall be committed over a two-year period to professional development
or the school must otherwise demonstrate that it is effectively carrying out professional development activities from other funding sources. Decisions about how to use the professional development funds shall be made by teachers, principals, and other school staff in that school during the first year a school is identified for sanctions. Definitions School Improvement Audit^This audit will include a review of the meeting minutes of the Campus Leadership Team, the participation level of CLT members, quality of the School Improvement Plan, use of disaggregated data for decision-making, action research projects underway, sense of collective responsibility, quality of professional development, etc. If the school receives Title 1 funds, the audit will include determinations of the extent to which the school is in compliance with federal regulations and expectations. The audit team will be composed of staff from both the central office and campus levels. A written report will be compiled by the audit team and then approved by the Assistant Superintendent for School Improvement and the Associate Superintendent for School Services. It shall be provided orally and in writing to the Assistant Superintendent for School Services, the principal, the broker, and the Campus Leadership Team. Copies will be provided to the Superintendent, the Cabinet, and other appropriate central office staff who need to be involved in the school's improvement efforts. 53J Curriculum AuditThe comprehensive curriculum audit will include a review of the schools master schedule, its curriculum maps, its ACSIP plans and processes, observations of classrooms, the extent to which the District curriculum is being implemented, the professional development experiences of the staff, the quality and use of instructional materials, learning climate, academic guidance, etc. The audit will include interviews with most staff and representative numbers of students and parents. The curriculum audit team will be composed of both central office and campus-level staff. A written report will be compiled by the audit team, approved by the Associate Superintendent for Teaching and Learning and provided orally and in writing to the Associate Superintendent for School Services, the Assistant Superintendent for School Services, the principal, the broker, and the Campus Leadership Team. Copies will be provided to the Superintendent, the Cabinet, and other appropriate central office staff who need to be involved in the schools improvement efforts. 6 I 2 54Campus Leadership Team Calendar The calendar is approximate of the activities that you consider as you work together to create a more effective school. The asterisk (*) denotes where a form or additional information exists to accomplish the task or confirm the activity. January Campus Leadership Team has initial meeting* a. b. c. d. Introduction to the process orientation activities for new members team expectations planning process reviewed Review and interim evaluation of campus plan activities. Consideration of modification to current year campus plan and submit to designated individual for review. Discuss plans for update of needs assessment. February Campus Leadership Teams work with developing skills in problem solving and consensus building, conflict resolution and communication. Request specific type of technical assistance. March Monitor and adjust campus plan Draft action plan due to Assistant Superintendent Begin process of working with the campus community to address perceived needs of campus for following year April Discuss and start evaluation of Campus Leadership Teams problem solving process and team effectiveness. Start Evaluation of current year campus plan and establish timelines for completion of evaluation and communication with stakeholders. Create strategy and set in motion the collection of published research and data collection requirements for discussion and analysis by Campus Leadership Team in preparation for next years campus plan. May Evaluate assessment results Campus Leadership develops and communicates draft of focus areas based on assessment results. 11June July August September October November December Submit evaluation of campus plan (There is a recognition that current year results of ACT / SAT would not be available or certain other current year results. The incentive plan will indicate those particular areas and that the previous years results will be utilized in those cases.) District-wide Campus Leadership Team Meetings Campus Leadership Team refines initial draft of campus goals and further starts development of action plans on determined focus areas. District wide Campus Leadership Team Meetings by Cluster Opening of School Campus Leadership Team meetings with faculty on Campus. Share recommend goals for current year and draft of action plans. Confirm goals. Designate problem solving and action teams for accomplishment of goals Communication with all stakeholders the goals of the campus*. Prepare final action plans and submit to Superintendent and Board for final approval. Acceptance or modification required goals and action plans. Hold public meeting and share results of previous years campus goals and action plans Inform public and staff of opportunities to serve on the Campus Leadership Teamshare Leadership Team membership expectations. Receive nominations for membership on the Campus Leadership Team for each membership category*. Current Leadership Team checks on implementation of action plans. Problem solving teams Election of Leadership Team members* Collection of data to ascertain effectiveness of action plans and problem solving teams Initiate mid year report of progress * Appointment of members to the Leadership Team* 12APPENDIX III GOAL III : K-2 Developmental Reading AssessmentK-2 Developmental Reading Assessment Scores, 1999-2000 2 = Proficient LRSD Average = 4.43 16 = Proficient LRSD Average = 19.06 24 = Proficient LRSD Average = 30.18 Kindergarten Badgett_____ Wakefield Garland Baseline Chicot Cloverdale Woodruff Franklin Watson Romine Wilson Mabelvale Geyer Springs Mitchell Bale Western Hills Fair Park Brady_______ King________ Rockefeller Meadowcliff Booker Otter Creek Rightsell_____ Forest Park Washington McDermott Williams Dodd Pulaski H. Gibbs Terry________ Carver Fulbright Jefferson 1.26 1.29 1.40 1.84 1.99 2.10 2.10 2.30 2.30 2.91 3.06 3.09 3.11 3.33 3.57 3.68 3.75 3.84 3.90 4.30 4.37 4.53 4.77 4.92 4.98 5.63 5.85 5.96 6.39 6.41 6.46 7.71 7.91 9.70 9.89 Grade 1 Badgett_____ Garland Chicot Wakefield Cloverdale Watson Mitchell Brady Rightsell Baseline Washington Pulaski H. Romine Terry_______ Geyer Springs Meadowcliff Dodd Mabelvale King_______ Booker Gibbs Bale Wilson Fulbright Otter Creek Rockefeller Franklin Western Hills Carver Fair Park McDermott Woodruff Forest Park Jefferson Williams 6.29 10.79 11.28 11.38 12.20 12.40 12.42 13.52 14.00 14.18 17.08 17.09 17.44 17.65 18.54 20.05 20.14 20.24 20.42 20.72 20.79 21.33 21.89 21.98 22.05 22.07 22.21 22.44 22.72 22.73 23.81 24.08 25.70 25.90 30.12 Grade 2 Badgett Garland Wakefield Dodd Chicot Meadowcliff Mabelvale Mitchell Baseline Watson Pulaski H. Wilson Washington Brady______ Bale Cloverdale Fair Park Rockefeller Geyer Springs Gibbs_______ McDermott Woodruff Otter Creek Booker_____ Terry_______ Jefferson Forest Park Franklin_____ Romine_____ Carver______ King________ Williams Rightsell Western Hills Fulbright 8.14 18.50 20.24 22.78 23.35 23.56 24.67 24.71 24.94 26.30 26.55 26.57 27.56 27.55 28.30 28.36 28.97 29.02 29.79 30.70 31.00 32.60 32.86 32.92 33.00 33.20 34.09 34.13 34.18 34.71 36.39 38.13 38.16 38.97 39.1506/09/2003 09:00 501-324-2023 _^LRSD COMMUNICATIONS
! /LZZy 810 West Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 Direct Phone: Communications Office: (501) 447'1030 (501) 447-1025 ^Ot DATE: June 9, 2003 TO: Central Arkansas Media Cynthia Howell, Arkansas Democrat-Gazette FROM: Suellen Vann, Director of Communications SUBJECT: Special School Board Meeting MESSAGE: The Little Rock School District (LRSD) Board of Directors will hold a special meeting Monday, June 9, to consider candidates for the position of Superintendent of Schools. The meeting will begin at 5:30 p.m. in the Board Room of the LRSD Administration Building, 810 West Markham. # Pages (including cover) 1 To Fax # An Individual Approach to a World of KnowledgeI
'?! \\ 810 West Markham Little R^ock, AR 72201 For Immediate Release May 26, 2004 For more information: Suellen Vann, 447-1030 School Board Finalizes Superintendent Candidate Interviews The Little Rock School District Board of Directors has selected five candidates to interview for the position of Superintendent of Schools. The itinerary for each candidate will be as follows: Public reception Interview with Board Dinner with Board 5:00 p.m. 6:00 p.m. Board Room, LRSD Administration Buildmg Supeintendasts ConfasneeRoom, LRSD Admin. B Idg. Following interview Undetermined location Tour with Boaiu member Nectmoming Sites teou^ut the city The dates for the interviews will be June 1-7. The five candidates selected for interview for the position of Superintendent of Schools are: June 1 June 2 Roy Gregoiy Brooks Jim V, Scales June 3 June 4 June 7 Libby S. Gardner Roy C. Benavides Stan Lamar Mims Sorrento, Florida Dallas, Texas Pflugerville, Texas Odessa, Texas Grayslake, Illinois fffj ft ftfi ff
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.