{"response":{"docs":[{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_710","title":"School closings","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":null,"dc_date":["1993/2002"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System"],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","Little Rock School District","Education--Arkansas","School buildings","Education--Finance","Educational statistics"],"dcterms_title":["School closings"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Butler Center for Arkansas Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://arstudies.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/bcmss0837/id/710"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["Available for use in research, teaching, and private study. Any other use requires permission from the Butler Center."],"dcterms_medium":["documents (object genre)"],"dcterms_extent":["81 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\nFILED U.S. DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT ARKANSAS AUG 4 1993 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT AUG 0 2 1993 O\n!\nCS 0! Dese3f5'' Ki AonAonng EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION CARL R. BRENTS, CLERK DSP. cLenx LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFFS VS. No. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 1, ET AL DEFENDANTS MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL INTERVENORS KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL INTERVENORS ORDER By Order dated June 11, 1993 [doc.#1848], the Court approved the Little Rock School District's (\"LRSD\") attendance zones for the King Interdistrict School on condition that the Ish Incentive School remain open unless the LRSD establishes that fewer than 100 students wish to attend Ish during the 1993-94 academic year. this regard, the Court directed that within 10 days from June In 9, 1993 , the LRSD submit to the Court its proposed survey of potential Ish students' along with its plan for executing the survey and implementing the survey results. The LRSD complied with the Court's directive and, by Order dated June 30, 1993 [doc.#1873], the Court approved the LRSD's King/Ish survey process, the revised form letter with attachments, and the revised school selection form. None of the parties objected. Now before the Court is the motion of the LRSD to close the Ish Incentive School [doc.#1908] on grounds that the survey process has The Court determined that the 100 students who will decide the immediate future of Ish will come from the following groups: (1) students now attending Ish who reside within the Ish attendance zones\n(2) students not attending Ish but nrhA lit,A *1..* T_l. * . . ..a. who live within the Ish attendance zones\nand (3) students now attending Ish but who live outside the Ish attendance zones.indicated that only 82 students in the group listed by this Court in its June 11, 1993, Order wished to attend Ish. The Joshua Intervenors (\"Joshua\") have responded in opposition to the motion. Having carefully considered the parties' pleadings, the Court finds that the goals of the settlement plan will not be adversely impacted by the granting of the LRSD's motion to close the Ish Incentive School, and that the motion should be and hereby is granted. Joshua objects to the survey and the manner in which it was conducted on grounds that (1) the survey did not consider preschool children who may have desired to attend pre-school programs at Ish, and (2) it is reasonable to assume that an equal percentage of the students who did not respond to the survey would have opted for Ish to that percentage which actually did so, i.e. 55.4%, and on that basis. presumed is 145.^ the actual number of preferences which may be Joshua further states, in a somewhat conclusory manner, that \"[t]he process was designed to fail.\" Joshua's objections to the survey and the manner in which it was conducted are denied as untimely. In the June 11, 1993 order, the Court specifically stated that \"[t]he Joshua Intervenors will have 5 days to file their response and objections to the LRSD's survey and plan, and 5 days to file their response and objections to the amended student assignment plan.\" In the June 30, 1993, I Order, 2 conclusion. the Court approved the LRSD's King/Ish survey process, in Joshua has not submitted a brief in support of its response setting forth any authority that would support such a -2-part because no objections had been filed. Joshua has not attempted to explain its neglect of the Court's deadlines, and it is now far too late to ask this Court to consider objections to the survey and its process. Joshua also objects to the closing of incentive schools which are located in predominately black neighborhoods. While such concerns are certainly valid, the Court notes that the King Interdistrict school, which will be desegregated, is a new school in a black neighborhood and, indeed, is in close proximity to Ish. There thus is no net loss of schools in predominately black neighborhoods with respect to the closing of Ish. The Court would also note that the granting of the LRSD's motion to close Ish due to an insufficient number of students does not conflict with the terms of the settlement plan, states the following with respect to incentive schools: The plan There shall be a limited number of incentive schools, for a period of at least six years, sufficient to accommodate that number of black students who, by attending those schools, make it possible to achieve a student population in the remaining Little Rock schools (elementary area schools) of 55 percent black and 45 percent white with variance of 5 percent. to these elementary The recruitment of white students area schools may increase the percentage of white students in these schools to maximum percentage of 60 percent. The incentive schools shall be: Franklin, Garland, Ish, Mitchell, Rightsell, Rockefeller, and Stephens. ___ incentive schools will be desegregated in phases through a combination of white recruitment into the incentive The schools, and by reserving a designated number of seats in each incoming kindergarten class for the enrollment of white students. As new Interdistrict Schools are established those seats attributable to LRSD will be available for those students who otherwise would or could have been assigned to an incentive school\nany -3- a arecruitment and/or any assignment shall be in accordance with each district's student assignment plan. Funding for the incentive schools shall be set at two times the level for the elementary area schools to ensure that the children who are in racially-isolated settings are provided meaningful opportunities for desegregated experiences/activities. shall utilize the demonstrable implementing To meet that goal, the parties services of a consultant who has experience in developing and successfully such programs in a majority-black educational setting. Interdistrict Plan, April 29, 1992, pg. 4. According to the desegregation plan. the double funding allotted the incentive schools is intended to help alleviate the racial-isolation of the children attending these predominately one- race schools. The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals has stressed the importance of this incentive school feature: It may be helpful for us to state those elements of the i989i_plan that we consider crucial, and with respect to ..1 1. __ retreat should be approved. They are as (1) double funding for students attending the incentive (virtually all-black) schools ... which no follows: They are Appeal of Little Rock School District, 949 F.2d 253, 256 (Sth Cir. 1991). However, in accordance with the aforementioned survey process, the LRSD gave the parents of Ish Incentive School students the choice of removing their children from a racially-isolated setting by electing to send them to King, a new, desegregated Interdistrict School in the same general neighborhood. King offers many program enhancements, including four curriculum specialists. a 56 station computer lab, electronic-assisted instruction. and an automated media center. Also, as previously noted by the Court, if Ish were to close and its students transfer to King, the LRSD committed to -4-increase the total number of four-year-old classes at King from two to four. Nevertheless, to the extent the granting of the LRSD's motion to close Ish is a disputed modification of the plan, the Court finds that such modification is in compliance with the standards for reviewing disputed modifications as set forth by the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals in Appeal of Little Rock School District, supra, 949 F.2d 253. There, the Court stated: To modify [a] consent decree[] io decree[], the court need only identify a defect or deficiency in its original decree which impedes achieving its goal, either because experience has proven it less effective [or] disadvantageous, or because circumstances and conditions its it either 1 effective have changed which warrant fine-tuning the decree, modification will be upheld if it furthers the original purpose of the decree in a more efficient way, without upsetting the basic agreement of the parties. A Id. at 258, quoting with approval Heath v. De Courcy, 888 F.2d 1105, 1110 (6th Cir. 1989). Here, the Court finds that the insufficient number of Ish students (fewer than 100) is changed circumstance which a constitutes a defect or deficiency in the plan and impedes the goals set forth therein. Furthermore, the Court finds that the circumstances and conditions thus have changed which warrant \"fine- tuning\" the plan. The closing of Ish, when considered in light of the opening of the desegregated King Interdistrict School, furthers the purpose of the plan in a more efficient way without upsetting the basic agreement of the parties. Although the Court grants the LRSD's motion to close Ish, it does not excuse the LRSD from its obligation to recruit white -5-students to desegregate the remaining incentive schools, reiterates that it will closely watch all proposed school The Court closings and school capacity alterations to determine whether there is a developing pattern of closing schools in areas largely inhabited by black citizens while increasing the capacity of schools in areas largely inhabited by white citizens, not evidence such a pattern. The motion to close Ish does IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the LRSD's motion to close the Ish I Incentive School be, and xt is hereby, granted. Dated this 2nd day of August 1993. UNITEO states'DIsTRIC' 'RI CT JUDGE THIS DOCUMENT ENTERED ON DOCKET SHEET IN COMPLIANCE WITH RULE 58 AND/OR 79(a) FRCP ON -6-iL NOV 2 1995 OBice Oi Dssegrsaa-ion rvicruicnng IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION .x7 2 d 1995 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, Plaintiff, VS. PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT, ET AL., Defendants. * * * * * *  it 4r * A A A No. LR-C-82-866 6y\n^Pt^'URiwyACK, CLERK CLftK ?_S Ois\nI cSN c:s 'C| ,^,:y^,\\s^g ORDER Before the Court is the motion of the Little Rock School District (\"LRSD) for modification of desegregation plan, filed on June 30, 1995. At that time, the LRSD was seeking the Court's permission to close Fair Park Elementary School and Badgett Elementary School beginning the 1995-96 school year. The motion is now moot, the LRSD having withdrawn the request. Also before the Court is the motion of the Pulaski County Special School District (PCSSD\") for approval of new school sites. filed on July 21, 1995. The PCSSD was seeking the Court's permission to build a new Daisy Bates Elementary School and a new junior high school at Crystal Hill. This new construction, as well as the purchase of computers for use by fifth and sixth grade students in the PCSSD, was to be financed from a millage increase the PCSSD intended to ask the voters to approve. Because the PCSSD determined not to ask for a millage increase, the motion for new construction is moot. 2 5 6 6 LBecause these motions (docket entry # the Clerk is directed to 2432 \u0026amp; # 2443) are moot, remove them from the pending motions report. SO ORDERED this day of November 1995.\nt judge PHIS DOCUMENT ENTERED ON DOCKET SHEET IN COMPLIANCE WITH RULE 58 AND/OR 79(a) FRCP ON JANCE 2. 20 o.  OJU. UxL cc,^^  C^cx^j iLctp. i \u0026lt;'(zp'-^ 2\u0026gt;-Z9-(^3 C/0^'' C~ '7- / -Z- ^3 Drc/e iH i i ZZ i- C/o),/'. u1 From: John W. Walker To: Anr' Brown Date-1/9/96 Time: 17:17:4S Page 2 of 2 DRAFT Bob Morgan Member of the Finance Committee Little Rock Strategic Planning Committee Little Rock. AR C'O Dr. Henry Williams Dear Mr. Morgan: I appreciate your talking to me today regarding your committee's plans for closing schools and saving money. I was somewhat surprised to find that you believe that I have been an inadequate representative of the Joshua class by my advocacy to keep older schools in minority neighborhoods open and to have them enhanced in accordance with the plan. You acknowledged that while you were at the ODM you proposed and pormoted the same philosophy with respect to school closing and cost savings and that you sought to have the p jns modified to reflect you ideas. That causes me a great deal of distress because the ODM is not authorized to change the olan nor to substitute its judgment or that of its staff for that of the parties. I can see now why we experienced such difficulty in making the incentive schools work. If as an ODM monitor, you actively sought to undermine those schools, as you apparently did, and shared your ideas with the Little Rock school administrators, that undoubtedly sent a strong message from the Court to those administrators through you as a court agent. 1 do not believe that Judge Susan Wright was aware of this. But I am putting her on notice of my comments to you by copy of this letter with a request that we meet with the Court to determine the extent to which your influence was extended. I requested any writings that you may have to support your proposed further school 'closings and your argument to the Strategic Planning group regarding v/hich schools should be retained and which sections of the city should be favored. Fearing that 1 may have misrepresented our conversation, I invite your immediate response prior to the 7:30 Thursday morning meeting of the committee where I plan to be present. Thank you for your attention to this matter. i r Dr Henry Williams Mr. Fred Smith, Financial Director LRSD Ms Linda Pendexter Ms Ann Brown Honorable Susan Webber Wright - From: John W. Walker To: Airn Brown Dale: 1/9/96 Time: 17:37:32 i, JOHN W. WALKER, P.A. } 1 1 I Page 2 of 3 t.-'i-.' . 51'.' ' ATTORNEY AT 1723 SRQADVtkY LITTLE ROCK, ARKAN^,S 72206 TELEPHONE (^1) 374-3768 FAX (501) 374-4187 J-*.  JOKWW. WALKER  RALPH WASHINGTON MARK BURNETTE \" AUSTIN PORTER JR. [Delivered by Fax 324-2146 \u0026amp; U.S. Mall] January 9. 1996 V k Mr. Bob Morgan Member of the Finance Committee Little Rock Strategic Planning Committee c/o Dr. Henry Williams, Superintendent Little Rock School District 810 W. Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Mr. Morgan: I appreciate your talking to me today regarding your committee's plans for closing schools and saving money I was somewhat surprised to find that you believe that I have been an inadequate representative of the Joshua class by my advocacy to keep older schools in minority X'J\nI IV : : k lt' A I.-- neighborhoods open and to have them enhanced in accordance with the plan. You acknowledged that while you were at the ODM you proposed and promoted the contrary philosophy with respect to school closing and cost savings and that you sought to have the plans modified to reflect your ideas. That caLises me a great deal of distress because the ODM is not authorized to change the plan nor to substitute its judgment or that of its staff for that of the parties. I can see now why we experienced such difficulty in making the incentive schools work. If. as an ODM monitor, you actively sought to undermine those schools, as you apparently did and shared your ideas with the Little Rock school administrators and public opinion makers, that undoubtedly sent a strong messagejromlhe Court to those administrators (through you as a court agent). I do not believe that Judge Susan Wright v/as aware of your efforts to change our agreement: but I am putting her on notice of my comments to you, by copy of this tetter with a request that we meet with the Court to determine the extent to which your influence was extended and whether any corrective action is in order.  A( 1 RR  i Prom: John W Walker To: Ann Brown Date\n1/9/96 Time: 17:38:32 Page 3 of 3 Page Two Mr. Bob Morgan January 9, 1996 I also requested any writings that you may have to support your proposed further school closings and your argument to the Strategic Planning group regarding which schools should be retained and which sections of the city should be favored for money saving reasons. You indicated that you did not provide any. Fearing that I may have misrepresented our conversation, I invite your immediate response prior to the 7\n30 Thursday morning meeting of the committee v/here I plan to be present. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Sincerely, [Original Signed By Undersigned Counsel] John W. Walker JWWJp cc: Dr. Henry Williams Mr. Fred Smith, Financial Director LRSD Ms. Linda Pendexter Ms. Ann Brown Honorable Susan Webber Wright Bl i !KJOHN W. WALKER. PJL ATTORNEY AT LAW 1723 BROADWAY LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72206 TELEPHONE (501) 374-3758 FAX (501) 374-4187 Ja.M 1 i Office of Desegregahcn Wonaoruig JOHN W. WALKER RALPH WASHINGTON MARK BURNETTE AUSTIN PORTER JR. [Deiiverad by Fax 324-2146 \u0026amp; U.S. MaiQ January 9,1996 Mr. Bob Morgan Member of the Finance Committee Little Rock Strategic Planning Committee c/o Dr. Henry Williams, Superintendent Little Rock School District 810 W. Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Mr. Morgan: I appreciate your talking to me today regarding your committee's plans for closing schools and saving money. I was somewhat surprised to find that you believe that I have been an inadequate representative of the Joshua class by my advocacy to keep older schools in minority neighborhoods open and to have them enhanced in accordance with the plan. You acknowledged that while you were at the ODM you proposed and promoted the contrary philosophy with respect to school closing and cost savings and that you sought to have the plans modified to reflect your ideas. That causes me a great deal of distress because the ODM is not authorize to change the plan nor to substitute its judgment or that of its staff for that of the parties. I can see now why we experienced such difficulty in making the incentive schools work If, as an ODM monitor, you actively sought to undermine those schools, as you apparently did, and shared your ideas with the Little Rock school administrators and public opinion makers, that undoubtedly sent a strong message from the Court to those administrators (through you as a court agent). I do not believe that Judge Susan Wright was aware of your efforts to change our agreement\nbut I am putting her on notice of my comments to you, by copy of this letter, with a request that we meet with the Court to determine the extent to which your influence was extended and whether any corrective action is in order.Page Two Mr. Bob Morgan January 9,1996 I also requested any writings that you may have to support your proposed further school closings and your argument to the Str^egic Planning group regarding which schools should be retained and which sections of the city should be favored for money saving reasons. You indicated that you did not provide any. Fearing that I may have misrepresented our conversation, I invite your immediate response prior to the 7:30 Thursday morning meeting of the committee where I plan to be present. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Sincerely, [Original Signed By Untfersigi John W. Walker /\nJWWJp cc\nDr. Henry Williams Mr. Fred Smith, Financial Director LRSD Ms. Linda Pondexter Ms. Ann Brown Honorable Susan Webber WrightJI. frt'^ Ah BEcervED DEC 13 2001 DATE: TO: OmEEOf OESGGR^or^ONms December 13, 2001 BOARD OF DIRECTORS FROM: Dr. Kenneth James, Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: TO DISCUSS AND CONSIDER POTENTIAL SCHOOL CLOSURES FOR THE 2002-2003 ACADEMIC YEAR BACKGROUND INFORMATION: As you know, Board Policy FBC outlines the procedures for school closures. Current policy states that closures will be based upon the following factors:  Excessive cost of operation due to enrollment\n Excessive cost of renovation and repair due to the age and physical condition of the facility\n Inability of the district to deliver the required curriculum in the facility\n Any applicable federal court orders. The policy further states that a public announcement of the proposal to close a school will precede the closing date by at least twelve months, except in cases of extreme emergency. Revised Desegregation and Education Plan: Sections 3.6, 3.7 and 4.3 of the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan must be considered in determining whether to close schools. Section 3.6 reguires that we, not seek to close schools in African-American ^ighborhoods solely because of age or poor maintenance except when a new ool will be located in the same general area. We do not intend to nmend the closing of any school solely because of age or poor nance, \"so this section of the Plan will not come into play.Regular Board Meeting, December 13, 2001 Board Report Page 2 Section 3.7 of the Plan reads as follows: 3.7 Modification Standard: During the term of this Revised Plan, LRSD shall not recommend modifications to attendance zones or grade level structure or the construction, enlargement or closing of a school other than as provided in this Revised Plan unless: 3.7.1 Such action would further the goal of desegregating LRSD or eliminating the vestiges of past discrimination to the extent practicable\nor, 3.7.2 The LRSD Board of Directors determines (i) that the educational benefits expected from such action substantially outweigh any adverse effects of the proposed action, (ii) that no practical alternative to the proposed action exists which will accomplish the educational objective, and (iii) that to the extent practicable measures will be initiated to counteract any adverse affects of the proposed action. Section 3.7 applies during the term of the revised plan. According to Section 9 of the Revised Plan, the term of the plan is ended. Section 9 - Term\nThe term of the Plan shall be three (3) school years beginning the 1998-99 School Year and ending on the last day of classes of the 2001 School Year. Given our Covenant and the uncertainty of the federal court proceedings, however, it would be wise to consider the closing of schools, only in cases where the Board can make the determinations required by Section 3.7.1 or 3.7.2. Section 4.3 of the Revised Plan describes the ideal racial composition of the Interdistrict schools as being as close to 50%-50% as possible with the majority race of the host district remaining the majority race at the Interdistrict School. Although the Plan describes the ideal racial composition and not the required racial composition, the Board should be - aware that the impact on Washington would be to move further from the ideal composition while the impact on Romine would be to move closer to the ideal composition.Regular Board Meeting, December 13, 2001 Board Report Page 3 statewide Budget Reduction: As a result of the recent budget reductions statewide, we anticipate losing between $2.3 million and $2.4 million dollars in expected revenue this year. It is important to note that this loss will automatically be carried forward to the 2002- 2003 fiscal year. There is also the distinct possibility that additional reductions in revenue could take place prior to the end of this fiscal year, unless the state revenue forecast rebounds quickly. ! The district currently has two (2) schools with enrollment below 200 students, and thirteen (13) schools with an enrollment below 300 students. Staff has prepared background data and information for two schoolsBadgett Elementary and Dodd Elementary, as current enrollment falls below 200 students. We have also included enrollment data for the Charter Program, which is housed at Badgett. A. ENROLLMENT DATA: Badgett Elementary: Enrollment: 153 = 64% usage Building Capacity: 239 # of Certified Staff: 11.8 # of Non-Certified Staff: 7.40 Enrollment w/o 5 grade: 130 students-required to move, of which 85 students are in the Badgett zone, \u0026amp; 45 students will go back to AZ school Building capacity is based upon average class size. IRegular Board Meeting, December 13, 2001 Board Meeting Page 4 In the event that Badgett is closed:  All non AZ students at Badgett will return to their AZ schools.  Rockefeller and Washington students currently attending Badgett would return to their attendance zone school.  Students within the East 6 and 9*^ street corridor would be assigned to Rockefeller. Net impact on Rockefeller would be an increase of 68 students (65 B, and 3 NB). In this scenario, Rockefellers total enrollment would increase from 389 students to 457 students. The percent of Rockefellers African American enrollment would increase from 64% to 70% (K-5). The building capacity at Rockefeller is 481 students.  Students south of the airport would be assigned to Washington. Net impact on Washington would be an increase of 55 students (49 B, and 6 NB). In this scenario, Washingtons total enrollment would increase from 459 students to 514 students. The percent of Washingtons African American enrollment would increase from 57% to 61%. The building capacity at Washington is 678 students. B. ENROLLMENT DATA: Dodd Elementary: Enrollment: 188 = 69% usage Building Capacity 271 # of Certified Staff 17.5 # of Non-Certified Staff 10.3 Enrollment w/o 4yr olds, b* graders, and Spec. Educ 140 required to move, of which 120 students are in the Dodd zone \u0026amp; 20 students will go back to AZ school *Buiiding Capacity is based upon average class sizeRegular Board Meeting, December 13, 2001 Board Report Page 5 Kenwood Subdivision: The Kenwood subdivision is currently in progress. There are 210 lots in this subdivision. We have obtained information from the City of Little Rock Planning Commission, which indicates that 150 lots will be developed over the next five years, with the remaining 60 lots being developed at a later time. These are single-family homes to be developed in phases. According to information obtained from the developer: Phase 1 will have 49 homes with a target date of August, 2002. Phase 2 will have 53 homes with a target date of January 2003. Phase 3 is too far out to project and is dependent upon interest and demand. Potential Impact: Based upon a formula used by the Planning Department, the anticipated impact for the 2002-2003 school year would be 14-20 elementary students. The anticipated impact for the 2003-2004 school year would be 11-15 elementary students. In the event that Dodd is closed:  All non-AZ students at Dodd will return to their Attendance Zone schools.  Students north of Colonel Glenn would go to Romine. Net impact on Romine would be an increase of 45 students (16 B and 29 NB). In this scenario, Romines enrollment would increase from 284 students to 329 students. The percent of Romines African American enrollment would decrease from 70% to 64%. The building capacity at Romine is 403 students.  Students (east of Shackleford Road) from the Pecan Lake/Tall Timber subdivision would go to Western Hills. Net impact on Western Hills would be an increase of 46 students (40 B and 6 NB). In this scenario. Western Hills enrollment would increase from 277 to 323 students. The percent of Western Hills African American enrollment would increase from 72% to 74%. The building capacity at Western Hills is 320 students.  Students from the lower quadrant of the present Dodd zone (south of Colonel Glenn and Lanehart), would go to Otter Creek. Net impact on Otter Creek would be an increase of 46 students (20 B and 26 NB). In this scenario. Otter Creeks enrollment would increase from 397 students to 443 students. The percent of Otter Creek's African American enrollment would decrease from 55% to 53%. The building capacity at Otter Creek is 415. Special Note: Four classrooms are to be added to Otter Creek by the start of school in August. In the event that the classrooms are not available by the opening of school in August, it would be necessary to relocate a couple of classes. iRegular Board Meeting, December 13, 2001 Board Report Page 6 C. In the event that the Charter Program is closed:  All of the 83 students at the Charter School will return to their AZ schools. This will have limited space impact upon the receiving schools. D. EDUCATIONAL DATA: I have attached an academic school profile for the two school sites, and the Charter Program. Dr. Bonnie Lesley will provide an overview of the academic performance at each campus. E. FISCAL IMPACT OF POTENTIAL CLOSINGS: I have attached a complete cost breakdown for the three potential closings. In summary, we are projecting the following savings: BADGETT: 536, 048.68 DODD: 738, 909.39 CHARTER: 479, 669.98 TOTAL PROJECTED SAVINGS: $1,754, 628.05 $ $ i It is anticipated that the district will be able to absorb the majority of the certificated teaching staff from the two sites and the Charter program, given the normal attrition rates of the district. The non-certified staff will be absorbed across the district as needs dictate.Regular Board Meeting, December 13, 2001 Board Report Page 7 F. ADDITIONAL ENROLLMENT HISTORY-ATTACHMENTS: 1. Cost analysis sheet 2. 3. 4. Educational Assessment Information Six Year Enrollment Comparisons of Schools with Less Than 250 Students, I Elementary Enrollment Sorted by School Totals. G. CONCLUSIONS:  The loss of approximately $2.4 million in revenue this fiscal year has created an emergency financial situation in the district. It is important to note that this is not only a one-year loss in revenue.  There is the possibility that we will lose additional revenue this year if the economy continues to decline, thus creating an additional financial hardship.  The District must reduce expenditures for the 2002-2003 fiscal year if we are to meet contractual obligations and remain financially responsible and solvent.  It is evident that the cost to operate a facility with declining enrollment is significantly higher. The cost per child to operate Badgett, Dodd, and the Charter Program is significantly more than the average of other similar area school facilities.  If the District is to close any school, the Board must take action on or before the January 10*^ Agenda meeting, in order to properly notify parents and provide ample time for students to complete the registration process for the 2002-2003 academic year.Regular Board Meeting, December 13, 2001 Board Report Page 8 I In closing this informational report, it is important to note that the Superintendent brings forward this information after careful analysis and much deliberation with senior administrative staff. While our current financial situation has been exacerbated by the largest reduction in state revenue in the history of the State of Arkansas, it is important to note that the current enrollment situation also dictates that we examine the cost effectiveness of operating facilities that are experiencing declining enrollment now and in the future. We are charged with being good stewards of the taxpayers resources and maximizing our efficiency. We are in the process of reviewing other potential areas of reduction for the 2002-2003 fiscal year and will bring forth additional recommendations after the first of the year. H. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Board of Directors review the data as presented and provide the Superintendent and staff with direction on potential school closures for the 2002-2003 academic year. Attachments:r:L_:r iz_:cz: I JJTTL ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT SELECTED BUDGET INFORMATION ____ 2001-2002 Kindergarten Classroom Music Special Ed GfT' _ Counselor Library Princip^ Office Upkeep of Bldg Total T 1st Quarter 7^ Four Year Old Kindergarten Classroom Music Special Ed___ G/T 1_ Counselor Nurse Library Principal's Office Upkeep ofBIdg Total { Gluafterl Classroom Music Supervision Transportation Total FTE-Cert Cert__ 1.00 P2 0.40 l.bo ____0.4b' 1.00 'i.ob 'too N-Cert 4.00 11.80 1 BADGETT 1-40 2.00 140 FTE-Cert Cert TOO ___2.00 ___2.bo J____ojq 2-2O 0-5b TOO FTE N-Cert l.bo 5.50 1.00 1.00 17.50 0.40 0.40 TOO lob 10.30 Salary 129,773.00 291,417.00 \"18,831.20 _31916.0b _17,3bl4b 44,313.00 41691.54 103,713.80 36,150.00 618,113.94 Salary_ 146,723.00 '66,271.00 347,673.00 15,48100 129,400.20 21,635.50 _47,9iTqq 6,996.20 56,531.67 96,951.00 '31876'00 871,450.5'7 .M -183.37 4^19138 ' FTE-Cert Cert 5.50 ' 0.20 1.00 N-Cert 3.00 6.70 74.38^ Grand Total 36.00 3.00 94^ Salary 151,889.00 -Z'^il 22 1087810.50 _43,20b.0b 31'1,640.50 20.70 1,801,205.01 Ringe Purch Ser Supplies Capital 8,058.80 79,442.21 ' 4,479.87 8,810.76 4,203.47 io\n697.8i 10^40351 25,196\nb5 ^1'1,871.23 163,163.71 350.00 8,572.00 1,473.00 Other DODD Fringe 113,790.23 ' 17338.19 ' 96,290.17 13,871.98 122244.15 15\n254.35 1'11,^0.85 2,331.21 i2'2ZZ 50 22,906.61 11,821.50 231,977.34 2,000.00 26,8^.00 27,209.00 1,498.00 11,5'43.00 2,000.00 0.00 __ __ 237,831.80 381.78T2T 23,311.07 1_42J26\n76 21,511.87 55,010.81 54,568.b5 _ 128,909.85 ' 7Q,373.23 822,02965 Estimated Sav^ings_ _ -37,831.80 _J5b,ooq.qq -23,311.07 -P-22 - :21^1f87 -55,010.81 -53,095^05 -128,9b9.85 -66,378.23 -536,b48.68 Remainjng Itos^__ _______o.ob ' 231,781.21 _____o.bb 42,726.76 2 __ P-22 12-00 _1,473.00  o.oq -lZi2,bMbq 285,980.97 Purch Ser 1,900.00 48,3^.00 51,435.00 CHARTER Fringe 142,170.36 _1,936.00 _3q,369J2 16,454.00 90,929.48 Purch Ser io,7oo\nbb 17,500.00 28,200.00 486,070.53 106,844.00 Supplies 3,200.00 \"\" 300.00 3,728.0b 1,748.00 100.00 1,609.00 10,685.00 Supplies 23,200.00 19,000.00 41200.00 64,428.00 Cai^ital 1,400.00 1,400.00 Capital__ 10,500.00 10,500.00 13,900.00 Other 67 00 350.00 417.00 Other 1,200 00 1,200.00 1,617.00 Totai 63780.23 ' ' 83,909.19 450,991.17 __19,353.98 162,444.35 26,^9.85  59,^1.85 9,328.01 17125717 121,507.61 j7,64T5b 1,167,364.91 Savirigs -63,780.23 ' -38,562.92 -251074.27 -19,353.M _l_2 92j -22,889.85 -59,261.85 ' -9,328,01 -70.509.j7 -121,507.61 -77,641.5b -738,909.39 Remaining Costs___ \" 0.00 45,346.27 198,916.9 b - o.ob 162,444.35 _ IJP-OO O.bb 0.00 _1,748.00 QOO 2o,boq.qb '_428,455.52 Total 239,659.^ 9,677.00 139.179.6'2 96,154.00 484,669.98 Savings -234,659.36 -9,677.00 -139,1/9.62 1j96,1 54.00 Remaining ' 5,bob.b'o _ _ obb b\noo b.oo 479r669.98 \" 5,000.00 2,474,064.54 1,754,628.05 719,436.49Principal: BADGETT ELEMENTARY PROFILE Mary Golston Observation Survey-Kindergarten Sub-Test Letters Word Print Vocabulary Dictation 1999-2000 2000-2001 2001-2002 2002-2003 2003-2004 46.20 6.23 8.60 8.77 14.53 47.14 12.21 10.79 13.29 10.14 Observation SurveyGrade 1 Sub-Test Letters Word Print Vocabulary Dictation 1999-2000 2000-2001 2001-2002 2002-2003 2003-2004 52.43 14.38 17.95 21.24 20.75 53.42 14.97 17.13 27.1 28.03 Observation SurveyGrade 2 Sub-Test Letters Word Print Vocabulary Dictation 1999-2000 2000-2001 2001-2002 2002-2003 2003-2004 17.08 13.57 20.19 31.38 43.43 29.85 Developmental Reading Assessment % Readiness = Level 2, Kindergarten\nLevel 16, Grade 1\nLevel 24 Grade Level Grade 2 Kinder Score Kinder % Grade 1 Score Grade 1 % Grade 2 Score Grade 2 % 1999-2000 2000-2001 2001-2002 2002-2003 2003-2004 1.23 21.6%' 6.24 ~5.9%| 7.62 11.8% I 1.78 50.0% 12.71 26.5%l 17.71 42.9% Achievement Level TestsReading RIT Grade Level Grade 2 Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Target 192 198 2051 212 Spr. 2000 Spr. 2001 Spr. 2002 Spr. 2003 161 196 198 194 165 189, 193 201 Achievement Level TestsReadingCohort Growth Grade Level Grades 2- 3 Grades 3- 4 Grades 4- 5 Target 12.6 7.9 6.6 Spr. 2001 Spr. 2002 Spr. 2003 27 -3 3Achigygrngnt Level TestsLanguage Usage RIT Grade Level Grade 2 Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Target 193 199 207 213 Spr. 2000 Spr. 2001 Spr. 2002 Spr. 2003 173 197 200 199 169 192 200 204 Achievement Level TestsLanguage UsageCohort Growth Grade Level Grades 2- 3 Grades 3- 4 Grades 4- 5 T arget 8.9 5.7 4.8 Spr. 2001 ________19 3 4 Spr, 2002 Spr. 2003 Achievement Level TestsMathematics RIT Grade Level Grade 2 Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Target 192 200 208 215 Spr. 2000 Spr. 2001 Spr. 2002 Spr. 2003 169 190 201 198 171 191 201 201 Achievement Level TestsMathematicsCohort Growth Grade Level Grades 2-3 Grades 3-4 Grades 4-5 Target 11.9 8.7 8 Spr, 2001 Spr, 2002 Spr. 2003 22 10 0 Arkansas Benchmark ExaminationGrade 4 Literacy Level 1998-99 Adv. Prof. Basic Below B. 1999-00 2000-01 0% 12% 12% 76% 0% 27% 27% 45% 0% 15% 15% 69% 2001-02  2002-03 Arkansas Benchmark ExaminationGrade 4 Mathematics Level 1998-99 Adv. Prof. Basic Below B. 1999-00 2000-01 0% 0% 18% 82% 2001-02 2002-03 0% 5% 27% 59% 0% 23% 23% 54% Stanford Achievement Test 9Grade 5 Sub-Test 1997-98 Reading Language Math Basic Bat. Complete 1998-99 1999-00 Retention Rate Grade Kinder Grade 1 14% 16% 14% 19% 20% 16% 18% 12%, 20% 19% 11% 10% 7% 12% 13% 2000-01 2001-02 1997-98 1998-99 1999-00 22% 25% 13% 22% 21% 11% 20% 7%, 13% 13% 2000-01 2001-02Grade 2 Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5Principal: DODD ELEMENTARY PROFILE Faith McLaughlin Observation Survey-Kindergarten Sub-Test Letters Word Print Vocabulary Dictation 1999-2000 2000-2001 2001-2002 2002-2003 2003-2004 51.35 13.32 14.41 22.15 21.65 52.00 13.70 15.00 22.06 21.52 Observation SurveyGrade 1 Sub-Test Letters Word Print Vocabulary Dictation 1999-2000 2000-2001 2001-2002 2002-2003 2003-2004 52.95 17.33 18.86 46.48 33.71 52.47 17.63 22.63 50.59 35.03 Observation SurveyGrade 2 Sub-Test Letters Word Print Vocabulary Dictation 1999-2000 2000-2001 2001-2002 2002-2003 2003-2004 19.67 19.96 65.40 60.93 69.91 59.32 Developmental Reading Assessment % Readiness = Level 2, Kindergarten\nLevel 16, Grade 1\nLevel 24 Grade 2 Grade Level Kinder Score Kinder % Grade 1 Score Grade 1 % Grade 2 Score Grade 2 % 1999-2000 2000-2001 2001-2002 2002-2003 2003-2004 6.32 86.5% 19.76 58.3% I 32.8 51.7% I 5.24 80.0% 21.2 73.5% 32.64 82.8% Achievement Level TestsReading RIT Grade Level Grade 2 Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Target 192 198 205 212 Spr. 2000 Spr. 2001 Spr. 2002 Spr. 2003 173 187 198 205 181 183 198 202 Achievement Level TestsReadingCohort Growth Grade Level Grades 2- 3 Grades 3- 4 Grades 4- 5 Target 12.6 7.9 6.6 Spr. 2001 Spr. 2002 Spr. 2003 10 11 4Achigygrnent Level TestsLanguage Usage RIT Grade Level Grade 2 Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Target 193 199 207 213 Spr. 2000 Spr. 2001 Spr. 2002 Spr. 2003 179 190 202 206 183 182 201 208 Achievement Level TestsLanguage UsageCohort Growth Grade Level Grades 2- 3 Grades 3- 4 Grades 4- 5 Target 8.9 5.7 4.8 Spr, 2001 3 11 6 Spr, 2002 Spr. 2003 Achievement Level TestsMathematics RIT Grade Level Grade 2 Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Target 192 200 208 215 Spr. 2000 Spr. 2001 Spr. 2002 Spr. 2003 181 187 202 205 182 194 201 205 Achievement Level TestsMathematicsCohort Growth Grade Level Grades 2-3 Grades 3-4 Grades 4-5 Target 11.9 8.7 8 Spr. 2001 Spr, 2002 Spr, 2003 13 14 3 Arkansas Benchmark ExaminationGrade 4 Literacy Level 1998-99 Adv. Prof. Basic Below B. 1999-00 2000-01 0% 35% 35% 30% 3% 21% 42%| 33% 0% 24% 29% 48% 2001-02  2002-03 ^^j^^^sas^^BenchrTTark_ExarnjnationGrade 4 Mathematics Level 1998-99 Adv. Prof. Basic Below B. 1999-00 2000-01 5% 14% 29% 52% 2001-02 6% 21% 15% 58% 5% 5% 14% 76% 2002-03 Stanford Achievement Test 9Grade 5 Sub-Test 1997-98 Reading Language Math Basic Bat. Complete 1998-99 Retention Rate Grade Kinder Grade 1 26% 34% 22% 30% 29% 35% 44% 25% 34% 35% 1997-98 1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 30% 36% 28%, 32% 32% 42% 55% 33% 40% 39% 26% 31% 14% 26% 25% 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02Grade 2 Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 I I ri^-gTiMCHARTER ELEMENTARY PROFILE Principal: Krishna Young Obsgrvation Survey-Kindergarten Sub-Test Letters Word Print Vocabulary Dictation 1999-2000 2000-2001 2001-2002 2002-2003 2003-2004 'S 'Ka Observation SurveyGrade 1 Sub-Test Letters Word Print Vocabulary Dictation 1999-2000 2000-2001 2001-2002 2002-2003 2003-2004 a Observation SurveyGrade 2 Sub-Test Letters Word Print Vocabulary' Dictation 1999-2000 2000-2001 2001-2002 2002-2003 2003-2004 TiV s\nTC j'i Developmental Reading Assessment % Readiness = Level 2, Kindergarten\nLevel 16, Grade 1\nLevel 24 Grade 2 Grade Level Kinder Score Kinder % Grade 1 Score Grade 1 % Grade 2 Score Grade 2 % 1999-2000 2000-2001 2001-2002 2002-2003 2003-2004\nkj2i3feste ?T/ In Achievement Level TestsReading RIT Grade Level Grade 2 Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Target 198 205 212 -Sfa-//. 3?-\n5j ri' :si? \u0026gt;4 Spr. 2000 Spr. 2001 Spr. 2002 Spr. 2003 N/A N/A N/A 178 182 192 Achievement Level TestsReadingCohort Growth Grade Level Grades 2- 3 Grades 3- 4 Grades 4- 5 Target Spr. 2001 Spr. 2002 Spr. 2003 7.Q 6.6 N/A N/AAchieygment Level TestsLanguage Usage RIT Grade Level Grade 2 Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Target Spr. 2000 Spr. 2001 Spr. 2002 Spr. 2003 199 207 213 N/A N/A N/A 172 174 199 Achievement Level TestsLanguage UsageCohort Growth Grade Level Grades 2- 3 Grades 3- 4 Grades 4- 5 Target 5.7 4.8 Spr. 2001 N/A N/A Spr. 2002 Spr. 2003 Achievement Level TestsMathematics RIT Grade Level Grade 2 Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Target Spr. 2000 Spr. 2001 Spr. 2002 Spr. 2003 200 208 215 N/A N/A N/A \\77 192 196 I Achievement Level TestsMathematicsCohort Growth ordUcS Z,5 Grades 3-4 Grades 4-5 ----------- ...w. WIWVUI i?s5Bsw!sprwsa3!S^5SS5 X _______87 8 N/A N/A Arkansas Benchmark ExaminationGrade 4 Literacy Level 1998-99 Adv. Prof. Basic Below B. Level Adv. Prof. Basic Below B. .....* 1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 3 i'*'. 1999-00 2001-02  2002-03 0% 0% 25% 75% Grade 4 Mathematics 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 Stanford Achievement Test 9Grade 5 Sub-Test 1997-98 0% 6% 0% 94% Reading Language Math Basic Bat. Complete 1998-99 1999-00 Retention Rate Grade (Kinder 7% 6% 10% 9% 8% 1997-98 I 1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 7% 8% 10% 9% 8% 11% 8% 5% 10% 10% 2000-01 2001-02Grade 1 Grade 2 Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 501 SHERMAN STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72202 OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES Junious C. Babbs, Associate Superintendent TO: Dr. Ken James FROM: Junious Phone: (501)324-2272 SUBJECT: Requested Information DATE: December 10, 2001 In response to information requested in the December 6**' board agenda meeting, the following report is provided: I. SIX YEAR ENROLLMENT COMPARISONS OF SCHOOLS WITH LESS THAN 250 STUDENTS 1996-97 1997-98 1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 BADGETT B VJ/0 TOTAL DODD B TOTAL 185 214 \"79 233 200 \"76 216 179 \"77 796 174 13 146 7 153 156 86 145 79 224 162 131 \"72 145 \"77 114 74 FAIR PARK B W TOTAL 193 62 255 188 60 165 63 160 6T 167 57 164 \"\"45 WILSON B W TOTAL 294 68 297 329 53 278 35 MS 257 3T 2^ 232 2M Redrawn school attendance zones were enacted during the '99 - 00 school year When comparing the 98-99 \u0026amp; 99-00 school year, the key reduction piece is removal of 6th grade classes.  Opening of the new Stephens school January (2001) provided impact by way of Badgett no longer serving as an Alternative School Site for the Washington AZ. II. ELEMENTARY ENROLLMENT  sorted by school totals LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT ENROLLMENT - October 1,2001 (official) SCHOOL 1. Badgett 2. Dodd . 3. Fair Park 4. Wilson 5. Woodruff 6. Rightsell______ 7. Mabelvale 8. Western Hills 9. Meadowcliff 10. Baseline 11. Pulaski Heights 12. Romine 13. Mitchell 14. Forest Park 15. Gibbs 16. Geyer Springs 17. Bale 18. Brady________ 19. McDermott 20. Wakefield 21. Franklin 22. Rockefeller 23. Otter Creek 24. Cloverdale 25. Jefferson______ 26. Williams______ 27. Watson 28. Washington 29. Fulbright______ 30. Carver 31. Terry_________ 32. Chicot 33. Stephens______ 34. King_________ 35. Booker 01-02 ENROLLMENT _________153_________ _________188_________ _________209_________ _________252_________ _________267_________ _________268_________ _________271_________ _________277_________ _________280_________ _________282_________ _________282_________ _________284_________ _________298_________ _________305_________ _________307_________ _________320_________ 330 _________332_________ 374 _________384_________ _________388_________ ________389_________ ________397_________ ________426_________ ________426_________ ________446_________ ________452_________ ________459_________ ________466_________ 495 507 508 545 571 575 Average Elementary School size: 363 Largest Elementary School is Booker with 575 students. Smallest Elementary School is Badgett with 153 students. CAPACITY BEING USED 64% ________________________ __________69%__________ __________74%__________ __________85%__________ __________91%__________ __________61%__________ __________87%__________ __________78%___________ __________78%___________ __________81%___________ __________70%___________ __________100%__________ __________76%___________ __________95%___________ __________89%___________ __________86%___________ __________81%___________ __________83%___________ __________92%___________ __________73%___________ __________81%___________ __________96%___________ __________87%___________ __________90%___________ __________91%___________ __________85%___________ __________68%___________ __________95%___________ __________89%___________ __________85%___________ __________99%___________ __________84%___________ __________80%___________ 89%Little Rock School District OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDENT December 14, 2001 RECEIVED DEC 1 4 2001 Ann Marshall, Federal Monitor Office of Desegregation Monitoring One Union National Plaza 124 West Capitol, Suite 1895 Little Rock, AR 72201 OfflCtOf DESKfiEGAPOW MQNIT3fi0ia FAX: 371-0100 Re: Possible School Closings Dear Ms. Marshall: We are in the process of presenting information to the LRSD Board of Directors to allow the Board to determine what budget cuts must be made in response to the reduction of State funding for education. As a part of this process, we have presented some very preliminary information to the Board of Education concerning the savings which can be achieved by closing certain schools. At our meeting last night, the Board indicated that it would continue to consider the possibility of closing schools as one way to make necessary budget cuts. Now that we know that the Board will continue to consider the possibility of school closings, we would like to share and discuss with you the information we have and to hear your views on this issue. Time is very short because school registration is scheduled for January 28 - February 8^, 2001. We would like to meet with you, if at all possible, on Wednesday, December 19, 2001. Please call me as soon as possible so that we can confirm a time or. if necessary, arrange a different date for a meeting. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, T. Kenneth James, Ed.D. Superintendent of School TKJ/bjg 810 West Markham Street  Little Rock, Arkansas 72201  (501) 324-2012Little Rock School District OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDENT December 14, 2001 Ann Marshall, Federal Monitor Office of Desegregation Monitoring One Union National Plaza 124 West Capitol, Suite 1895 Little Rock, AR 72201 I 1 1 FAX\n371-0100 Re\nPossible, School Closings Dear Ms. Marshall\nallow tte tn H P of presenting information to the LRSD Board of Directors to of ft determine what budget cuts must be made in response to the reduction of State funding for education. As a part of this process, we have oresented some vir? Board of Education concerning the savings which can bl leved by closing certain schpoooslssl.b iAlitty oouf rd moseinetgin sgk laoslts n iagVhto t^hwe 7Byoard indicated that it Now that we know that the Board will continue to consider the Dossibilitv of school informafio^^ January 28 - FebruaT8^?o1)rWe'X'TkZ?^^ school registration is scheduled for CcoonnfLirdme 9ra fti^rrn^n sa sdcif fCearlel nmt dea ates fsoor oan m aese tpinogs.s ibTlhea snok tyhoaut fwoer ycoaunr meet with you. if at all possible, on Sincerely, T. Kenneth James, Ed.D. Superintendent of School TKj/bjg 810 Wejt Mazkhazn Street  Little Rock, Arkansas 72201  (SOI) 324-2012 a 810 West Markham flt? ^Or DATE: Phone\nFay\n(501) 324-2020 (5011 324-2032 January 7, 200z f on+rai V..K.J IKI V41 Ariziir\u0026gt;coc Cyi iihia KuWcib AfkunSuS Deinu(.rui-Gu/.^iiS FkOm: Sueiien Vann, uirector of Lommunicatons SUBJECT: Special Si.huoi Buard Meetings MESSAGE\nThe Little Rock School District (LRSD) Board of Directors will hold a special Board meeting Tuesday, January 15, at 6 p.m. to discuss proposed school closings related to budget reducions. Please note that this issue will not be on the agenda on Thursday, January 10, at the Board's agenda meeting. The reason for the change is that one Board member will be out of town on Thursday, and Superintendent Ken James and Board members felt that the entire Board should be present for the discussion and decision. Additionally, the Board will gather on Thursday, January 17, at noon at Metropolitan Career/Technical Center to have lunch and tour the district's new technology center. The center will house the district's upgraded computer network and telephone systems which are funded through the 2000 capital improvement millage. The network will support the installation of new computers in schools throughout the district. # Pages (including cover) TO Fax# 1 An Individual Approach to a World of Knowledge5013744137 WALKER LAW FIRM P02 JAN 03 02 16:52 JOHN W. WALKER SH.WN CHILDS JuH.k W. XAalker, P.A. Atoeney At Law 1723 Broadway Liitu Rock, .AaituNSAS 72206 Telephone (501) 374-3758 FAX (501) 374-4187 Via Facsimile\n324-2146 OK COUNSEL ROBERT McHENKJ, PA. donna J, Mr HENRY 8210 Hindesson Road tnTLs Rock, .uikansas 72210 Phone: (SOU 372-3425  Fax (601) 372-3428 tUAii\nmdieiiryd@Awbell.aet January 8, 2002 Ms. Katherine Mitchell Ms. Judy Magness Ms. Sue Strickland Mr. Michael Daugherty Mr. Baker Kurrue Mr. Larry Berkeley Mr- Terry Rose Little Rock Board of Directors Little Rock School District 310 West Markham Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Re: School Closing Dear Board Members\nIn that I will be unable to appear before the board at the Tuesday meeting to represent the viewpoints of Joshua, I wish to inform you of the Joshua position with respect to the proposal to close Badgett, Dodd and Fairpark Elementary Schools, brief. I will be First. The Revised Rian (para. 3.6) provides in substance that there will be no school closing of schools in majority black areas absent reasons of compelling nece.s.sity. ______... ... administrators' position the closing is dictated by concerns of ('para. As T understand the economy, i.e., the district is in dire economic .strait,s and simply cannot afford to maintain small schools that are far below capacity in student enrollment. under situation. ordinary circumstances, The argument of economy while a valid one it should not be applied in this years. Badgett has been the subject of closing for We opposed the closing each time. at least ten The staff and board determined to shore the .schoni up with charter school programs and with great fanfare and costs created expectancies that the charter50137441S? WALKER LAW FIRM 225 P03 JAN 08 02 Page iwo January 8, 2002 school idsi was a good one and that the boara would support it by allowing time for it to develop and by giving it the support that it would need to overcome doubts from persons like myself about the propriety and efficacy of charter schools. Thsrefore, to close Badgett would be a breach of faith and commitment as well as of the plan and/or the covenant. Moreover, closing of a black school with the it would constitute the transportation burden upon black students. attendant increase in the Second. David 0. Dodd's closing is also based upon reasons of The Revised Desegregation Plan was based upon geographic attendance zones which were presented to the public as neighborhood schools. economy. Joshua has expressed its concern about the manner in which the neighborhood school zones were drawn and that is record. on Dodd seems to fit the standard submitted to the Court of the desired objective of neighborhood schools. one of racial balance by a zoning plan. That standard was It would seem that Dodd's racial balance is better than that of most schools in the district and that Dodd should be maintained for that reason alone. There are many students who live in the Dodd area who attend private schools. Most of those students are white. district would find ways to attract those enhancement of programs and considerate of their parents. activ.ities It would seem that the students to Dodd by and by- being more Your proposal has a promise not only of closing Dodd but of driving appro.ximately 100 more white children out of the district when those students and parents to remain in the di.strict. wsnt. If economy is indeed the reason for the closing, losing 100 students at per student aid of approximately $5,000 per student,' will take, within a year or two, annually from, the district's at least revenue stream. five million dollars That in turn will increase the district's need to close more schools in order to meet current budgetary considerations. The board has said that It parent? out of the district\nits is not trying to drive white actions appear otherwise. These parents may not be the white parents to which the board refers when the board members discuss student retention. middle to lower income. Ths Dodd parents ara I mention this factor because while Dodd is being mentioned for closing, ths district, without approval, has actually added classrooms at Otter Creek, Court a more middle class economy is neither Dodd. community in the district. Thus, the reason\nonsistent nor logical when applied to David 0.58137441S7 WALKER LAW FIRM P04 JAN 0S '02 Fags Three January 8, 2002 Finally, with respect to Dead, you have a supportive set of parents who actually proKiote the idea of good education and good race relations simultaneously. Those factors have importance when the history of this community is taken into account and when the Revised Plan and Covenant are considered. Third. With respect to the proposed closing of Fairpark, I do not oelievs that the administration Is serious about this closure. It/ 1 believe, is being submitted to deflect attention from the closing of the two lower income schools. income schools, Badgett But like the two lower closing are not substantiated. and Dodd, the justifications for the If economy is the reason for the closing the board may wish to revisit some of the decisions to add administrative staff which were recommended by Superintendent Les Carnins and approved by the board. It IS my belief that a large number of administrative staff were added by Dr. Gamine which were not economically justified at the time. I realize this IS a sensitive area since the board recommendations. approved each of those For example, you approved substantially enhanced pay increases for all the administrators at the associate and assistant superintendent level. While I do not oppose fair pay for administrators, these adminxstrators' pay is comparable to the pay that superintendents receive in other district, and in some cases IS even greater. category, not nine or ten. You expect to find one or two people in this position of Chief Financial Another example is the creation of the Officer, a position which explicitly created to obtain the services of Or. Don Stewart. was It is ironic that the chief defender of the economic basis for the school closings is Dr. Stewart. If the district had maintained its structure without adding Dr. Stewart, it would have saved at least 5100, 000 per year. Stewart, but this example is glaring. I don't want to be personal regarding Dr. I submit that it is more important to actually maintain the \"neighborhood schools\" that the board championed than to hire a person simply because the superintendent likes that person's experience.s and abil ities, The 5100,000 administrative costs associated with that salary would be more than sufficient to continue, on a operation of either Dodd or Badgett, sound economic basis, the assessment is anywhere close to being correct. or perhaps both. If this the district would take time to reevaluate its overall needs and then make some cost, judgments regarding them. it would seem that staffing Administrative costs are but one item. I have previously brought to your attention the large number of small classes in the advanced placement area and have pointed up the lack of econom.ic justi fication. for small classes for .A.P. students. The educational501374413? WALKER LAW FIRM PQ5 JAM OS '02 16:54 Page Four January 8, 2002 justification is students, made takin Sut in any strongest for small classes of underachieving ass, the appropriate assessirient should be I must a note into account all components of the district's business also 35 we consider closing three schools the district IS still planning to build a new school in an upper middle class area in west Little Reck. schools in The poor areas can simply reason of economy in closing not be j ustifred under circumstances where you are opening new schools without regard tor the same concerns for economy. school in the west. You plen to open an expensive new Nor can reasons of econom.y for school closings be justified when there are so many staff members on the payroll whose work is being duplicated unnecessarily by Others. Lastl J  These viewpoints have not been publically discussed by the board members in a public forum. Because they have not and because your procedure does not lend itself to dialogue in public board meetings, may I suggest that before you close any school the board create a committee, rather small, with representatives from the Joshua Intervenors, the teacher's union and the seven school zones, and which includes Dr. James and Dr. Stewart, district's financial circumstances. to review the be simply a resource available to the committee. I would ask that Dr. Stewart I note that Pulaski County School District, In this respect. there. while Dr. Stewart was always had more money than Dr. Stewart said it had. his leadership, Under the district was always very solvent while it clairaed that it was on the verge of disaster. idea, Please consider these views and if you reject my committee I ask that you take no action until Mr. Heller has hjid an opportunity to discuss this matter with Joshua to see if there is some way to avoid any school closing. If this is not possible. Joshua has no choice other than to file formal objections to the anticipated and recommended school closings with the Court. Thank you for listening to me. Sincerely, Johpl^W. Walker Or? Behalf of the Joshua Intervenors JWW\nip5?' iii LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM STREET LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS RECEIVED JAN 1 8 2002 OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING SPECIAL MEETING January 15, 2002 6:00 p.m. Consideration of School Closing Options for 2002-2003 school year DATE: January 15, 2002 TO: BOARD OF DIRECTORS FROM: Dr. Kenneth James, Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: TO DISCUSS AND CONSIDER POTENTIAL SCHOOL CLOSURES FOR THE 2002-2003 ACADEMIC YEAR BACKGROUND INFORMATION: As you know, Board Policy FBC outlines the procedures for school closures. Current policy states that closures will be based upon the following factors:  Excessive cost of operation due to enrollment\n Excessive cost of renovation and repair due to the age and physical condition of the facility\n Inability of the district to deliver the required curriculum in the facility\n Any applicable federal court orders. The policy further states that a public announcement of the proposal to close a  school will precede the closing date by at least twelve months, except in cases of extreme emergency. Revised Desegregation and Education Plan: Sections 3.6, 3.7 and 4.3 of the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan must be considered in determining whether to close schools. Section 3.6 requires that we not seek to close schools in African-American neighborhoods solely because of age or poor maintenance except when a new school will be located in the same general area. M's do not intend to recommend the closing of any school solely because of age or poor maintenance, so this section of the Plan will not come into play.Special Board Meeting, January 15, 2002 Board Report Page 2 Section 3.7 of the Plan reads as follows: 3.7 3.7.1 3.7.2 Modification Standard: During the term of this Revised Plan, LRSD shall not recommend modifications to attendance zones or grade level structure or the construction, enlargement or closing of a school other than as provided in this Revised Plan unless: Such action would further the goal of desegregating LRSD or eliminating the vestiges of past discrimination to the extent practicable\nor. The LRSD Board of Directors determines (i) that the educational benefits expected from such action substantially outweigh any adverse effects of the proposed action, (ii) that no practical alternative to the proposed action exists which will accomplish the educational objective, and (iii) that to the extent practicable measures will be initiated to counteract any adverse affects of the proposed action. Section 3.7 applies during the term of the revised plan. According to Section 9 of the Revised Plan, the term of the plan is ended. Section 9 - Terrn: The term of the Plan shall be three (3) school years beginning the 1998-99 School Year and ending on the last day of classes of the 2001 School Year. Given our Covenant and the uncertainty of the federal court proceedings, however, it would be wise to consider the closing of schools, only in cases where the Board can make the determinations required by Section 3.7.1 or 3.7.2. Section 4.3 of the Revised Plan describes the ideal racial composition of the Interdistrict schools as being as close to 50%-50% as possible with the majority race of the host district remaining the majority race at the Interdistrict School. Although the Plan describes the ideal racial composition and not the required racial composition, the Board should be aware that the impact on Washington would be to move further from the ideal composition while the impact on Romine would be to move closer to the ideal composition.Special Board Meeting, January 15, 2002 Board Report Page 3 statewide Budget Reduction: As a result of the recent budget reductions statewide, we anticipate losing between $2.3 million and $2.4 million dollars in expected revenue this year. It is important to note that this loss will automatically be carried forward to the 2002- 2003 fiscal year. There is also the distinct possibility that additional reductions in revenue could take place prior to the end of this fiscal year, unless the state revenue forecast rebounds quickly. The district currently has two (2) schools with enrollment below 200 students, and thirteen (13) schools with an enrollment below 300 students. Staff has prepared background data and information for two schoolsBadgett Elementary and Dodd Elementary, as current enrollment falls below 200 students. We have also included enrollment data for the Charter Program, which is housed at Badgett. The Superintendent has also included similar financial data and information about Fair Park Elementary, per the Boards direction. A. ENROLLMENT DATA: Badgett Elementary: Enrollment: 153 = 64% usage Building Capacity: 239 # of Certified Staff: 11.8 # of Non-Certified Staff: 7.40 Enrollment w/o S* grade: 130 students required to move, of which 85 students are in the Badgett zone, \u0026amp; 45 students will go back to AZ school Building capacity is based upon average class size.Special Board Meeting, January 15, 2002 Board Meeting Page 4 In the event that Badgett is closed:  All non AZ students at Badgett will return to their AZ schools.  Rockefeller and Washington students currently attending Badgett would return to their attendance zone school.  Students within the East 6* and 9* street corridor would be assigned to Rockefeller. Net impact on Rockefeller would be an increase of 68 students (65 B, and 3 NB). In this scenario. Rockefellers total enrollment would increase from 389 students to 457 students. The percent of Rockefellers African American enrollment would increase from 64% to 70% (K-5). The building capacity at Rockefeller is 481 students.  Students south of the airport would be assigned to Washington. Net impact on Washington would be an increase of 55 students (49 B, and 6 NB). In this scenario, Washingtons total enrollment would increase from 459 students to 514 students. The percent of Washingtons African American enrollment would increase from 57% to 61%. The building capacity at Washington is 678 students. B. ENROLLMENT DATA: Dodd Elementary: Enrollment: 188 = 69% usage Building Capacity 271 # of Certified Staff 17.5 # of Non-Certified Staff 10.3 Enrollment w/o 4yr olds, 5* graders, and Spec. Educ 140 required to move, of which 120 students are in the Dodd zone \u0026amp; 20 students will go back to AZ school *Building Capacity is based upon average class sizeSpecial Board Meeting, January 15, 2002 Board Report Page 5 Kenwood Subdivision: The Kenwood subdivision is currently in progress. There are 210 lots in this subdivision. We have obtained information from the City of Little Rock Planning Commission, which indicates that 150 lots will be developed over the next five years, with the remaining 60 lots being developed at a later time. These are single-family homes to be developed in phases. According to information obtained from the developer. Phase 1 will have 49 homes with a target date of August. 2002. Phase 2 will have 53 homes with a target date of January 2003. Phase 3 is too far out to project and is dependent upon interest and demand. Potential Impact\nBased upon a formula used by the Planning Department, the anticipated impact for the 2002-2003 school year would be 14-20 elementary students. The anticipated impact for the 2003-2004 school year would be 11-15 elementary students. In the event that Dodd is closed:  All non-AZ students at Dodd will return to their Attendance Zone schools.  Students north of Colonel Glenn would go to Romine. Net impact on Romine would be an increase of 45 students (16 B and 29 NB). In this scenario, Romines enrollment would increase from 284 students to 329 students. The percent of Romines African American enrollment would decrease from 70% to 64%. The building capacity at Romine is 403 students.  Students (east of Shackleford Road) from the Pecan Lake/Tall Timber subdivision would go to Western Hills. Net impact on Western Hills would be an increase of 46 students (40 B and 6 NB). In this scenario. Western Hills enrollment would increase from 277 to 323 students. The percent of Western Hills African American enrollment would increase from 72% to 74%. The building capacity at Western Hills is 320 students.  Students from the lower quadrant of the present Dodd zone (south of Colonel Glenn and Lanehart), would go to Otter Creek. Net impact on Otter Creek would be an increase of 46 students (20 B and 26 NB). In this scenario. Otter Creeks enrollment would increase from 397 students to 443 students. The percent of Otter Creeks African American-enrollment would decrease from 55% to 53%. The building capacity at Otter Creek is 415. Special Note: Four classrooms are to be added to Otter Creek by the start of school in August. In the event that the classrooms are not available by the opening of school in August, it would be necessary to relocate a couple of classes.Special Board Meeting, January 15, 2002 Board Report Page 6 C. In the event that the Charter Program is closed:  All of the 83 students at the Charter School will return to their AZ schools. This will have limited space impact upon the receiving schools. D. ENROLLMENT DATA: Fair Park Elementary: Enrollment: 212 = 70% usage Building Capacity 304 # of Certified Staff 18.1 # of Non-Certified Staff 10.8 Enrollment w/o 4 yr olds, and 5*^ graders 164 required to move, of which 121 are in the Fair Park zone. 43 students will return to their AZ school In the event that Fair Park is closed:  All non-AZ students at Fair Park will return to their Attendance Zone schools.  Students south of 1-630 would go to Franklin. Net impact on Franklin would be an increase of 84 students (75 B and 9 NB). In this scenario, Franklins enrollment would increase from 385 students to 469 students. The percent of Franklins African American enrollment would decrease from 97% to 96%. The building capacity at Franklin is 532.  Students east of McKinley, North of Markham and South of Cantrell would go to Brady. Net impact on Brady would be an increase of 38 students (29 B and 9 NB). In this scenario, Bradys enrollment would increase from 338 students to 376 students. The percent of Bradys African American enrollment would decrease from 81% to 80%. The building capacity at Brady is 409.  Students east of Mckinley, South of Evergreen, and North of 1-630 would go to Forest Park. Net impact on Forest Park would be an increase of 17 students (5 B and 12 NB). In this scenario.Special Board Meeting, January 15, 2002 Board Report Page 7 Forest Parks enrollment would increase from 307 students to 324 students. The percent of Forest Parks African American enrollment would remain at 39%. The building capacity at Forest Park is 400 students. E. EDUCATIONAL DATA: I have attached an academic school profile for the three school sites, and the Charter Program. F. FISCAL IMPACT OF POTENTIAL CLOSINGS: I have attached a complete cost breakdown for the three potential closings. In summary, we are projecting the following savings: BADGETT: 536, 048.68 DODD: 738, 909.39 CHARTER: 479, 669.98 FAIR PARK: $ 749,692.03 TOTAL PROJECTED SAVINGS: $ 2,504,320.08 $ $ $ It is anticipated that the district will be able to absorb the majority of the certificated teaching staff from Badgett, Dodd and the Charter program, given the normal attrition rates of the district. If Badgett, Dodd, the Charter Program, and Fair Park Elementary are closed, all of the certified staff could not be absorbed, thus additional reductions in personnel would be necessary. The non-certified staff will be absorbed across the district as needs and resources allow.Special Board Meeting, January 14, 2002 Board Report Page 8 G. ADDITIONAL ENROLLMENT HISTORY-ATTACHMENTS: 1. Cost analysis sheet 2. 3. 4. Educational Assessment Information Six Year Enrollment Comparisons of Schools with Less Than 250 Students. Elementary Enrollment Sorted by School Totals, H. CONCLUSIONS:  The loss of approximately $2.4 million in revenue this fiscal year has created an emergency financial situation in the district. It is important to note that this is not only a one-year loss in revenue.  There is the possibility that we will lose additional revenue this year if the economy continues to decline, thus creating an additional financial hardship. Even if we do not lose additional revenue this fiscal year, it is still essential that we reduce expenditures to balance the 2002-2003 budget.  The District must reduce expenditures for the 2002-2003 fiscal year if we are to meet contractual obligations and remain financially responsible and solvent. At this time, I have targeted a $6.5 million dollar reduction as a target for the 2002-2003 fiscal year.  It is evident that the cost to operate a facility with declining enrollment is significantly higher. The cost per child to operate Badgett, Dodd, the' Charter Program, and Fair Park is significantly more than the average of other similar area school facilities.  If the District is to close any school, the Board must take action at the January 15' Special meeting, in order to properly notify parents and provide ample time for students to complete the registration process for the 2002-2003 academic year.Special Board Meeting, January 15, 2002 Board Report Page 9 In preparation of the consideration of any school closures, the following activities took place:  During the week of December 10-14.1 faxed and mailed a letter to all of the parties involved in the Desegregation case.  During the week of December 17-19.1 met with the following to ensure their understanding of our exploration of school closures for the 2002- 2003 academic year: Dr. James Smith, Superintendent. North Little Rock Schools Dr. Carl Brown. Assistant Supt. Pulaski County Dr. John Archetko. Assistant Supt. Pulaski County Ms. Clementine Kelley. CTA President Mr. Frank Martin. CTA I met with Ms. Ann Marshall on Friday. January 4, 2002. I did not receive a response from Mr. Walker, during this timeframe, but Mr. Walker has written a letter to the Board of Directors.  On December 19*^, letters were mailed to all parents/guardians of students currently attending Badgett. Dodd. The Charter Program, and Fair Park. Informing them of Community Meetings on the following dates: Badgett Elementary/Charter Thursday. January 3\"* Dodd Elementary Monday. January 7^ Fair Park Elementary Tuesday. January 8^ 6:00 p.m.  6:00 p.m. 6:00 p.m. In closing this informational report, it is important to note that the Superintendent brings forward this information after careful analysis and much deliberation with senior administrative staff. While our current financial situation has been exacerbated by the largest reduction in state revenue in the history of the State of Arkansas, it is important to note that the current enrollment situation also dictates that we examine the cost effectiveness of operating facilities that are experiencing declining enrollment now and in the future. We are charged with being good stewards of the taxpayers resources and maximizing our efficiency. We have prepared other potential areas of reduction for the 2002-2003 fiscal year and submit same for your review and consideration.Special Board Meeting, January 15, 2002 Board Report Page 10 1. RECOMMENDATION: A. B. After careful analysis and processing of all information gleaned as a result of our community meetings, it is the recommendation of the Superintendent that Dodd Elementary School and Fair Park Elementary School remain open during the 2002-2003 school year. It is also the recommendation of the Superintendent that the Board consider revoking the charter of the Charter school and reassign the students to their respective attendance zone schools, for the 2002-2003 school year. Projected Savings: $479,670.00 C. It is also the recommendation of the Superintendent that the Board consider closing Badgett Elementary School under the provisions of 3.72 of the Revised Desegregation Plan, effective at the close of the current school year. Projected Savings: $536, 049.00 Attachments:I FTE-Cert FTE LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT SELECTED BUDGET INFORMATION 2001-2002 BADGETT I I Kindergarten Classroom Music Special Ed G/T Counselor Library Principal's Office Upkeep of Bldg Total I i Cert 1.00 6.00 0.40 1.00 0.40 1.00 1.00 1.00 I N-Cert ! 4.00 'ri 11.80 1.40 2.00 7.40 1 st Quarter 1 ADA ' ADM ^52.05 167.95 Salary 29,773.00 291,417.00 18,831.20 33,916.00 17,308.40 44:313.00 42,691.54 103,713.80 36,150.00 618,113.94 % Attend \n90.53% Fringe 8,058.80 79,442.21 4,479.87 8,810.76 4,203.47 10,697.81 10,403.51 25,196.05 11,871.23 163,163.71 I Purch Ser 350.00 26,859.00 27,209.00 Supplies 8,572.00 1,473.00 1,498.00 11,543.00 Capital i Other 2,000.00 2,000.00 0.00 Total 37.831.80 381.781.21 23.311.07 42.726.76 21.511.87 55.6l6.81 54.568.05 128.96'9.85 76,378.23 822,029.65 Estimated Savings -37,831.80 -156,606.06 -23,311.67 ...........6.00 -21,511.87 2 -55,010.81 \"-53,69'5:65 -128,909.85 ' '-66,378.23 -536,648:68 Remaining Costs 0.00 231,781.21 0.00 42,726.76 0.00 0.00 1,473.00 0.00 10,006.00 285,986.97 Four Year Old Kindergarten Classroom Music Special Ed G/T Counselor Nurse Library Principal's Office Upkeep of Bldg Total 1st Quarter r FTE-Cert Cert 1.00 2-00 7:66 0.40 3.60 0.50 1.00 FTE N-Cert ' 1.00 5.50 DODD 1.00 1.60 17.50 0.40 0.40 1.00 2.00 10.30 li 93,38 Classroom Music Supervision Transportation Total 1st Quartet^ Grand Total FTE-Cert Cert ' '5.56 0.20 1.00 FTE N-Cert 3.00 6.70 3.00 .D\u0026gt;^\\AdM': Salary 46,723.00 66,271.06 347,673.00 15.482.06 129:466:26 21,635.56 47,911.00 6,996'.26 56,531.67 96,95i'.'66 35,876.66 871:456.5'7 % Attend , Fringe 13,790.23 17,338.19 96,290.17 3,871.98 _33,044.15 5,254.35 11,350^85 2,33T81 13,977.50 22906.61 11,821.50 23i\n977.34 Purch Ser 1,900.00 1,200.00 48^335.00 51,435.00 : /O/MIOIIU' \u0026lt; 94,82% 222 Salary__  151,889.06 7,741.06 \u0026gt; 108:816.50 43,200.06 311,640:6'6 % Attend 174^3833\n85.63 86.86%\n36.00 CHARTER _ Fringe 42,170.36 1,936.00 30,369.1'2 ' 16,454.06 90,929.48 Purch Ser '16,700.00 17,500.00 28,260^00 20.70 1,801,205.01 486,070.53 106,844.00 Supplies 3,200.00 300.00 3,728.00 1,748.00 100.00 1,609.00 10,685.60 Supplies 23,200.66 19,000.00 42,200.00 64,428.00 Capital 1,400.00 1,400.00 Capital 10,506.66 10,500.00 13,900.00 Other 67.00 350.00 417.00 Other 1,200.66 1,200.00 1,617.00 Total 63,786?23 83,969.19 45'6:991:17 19,353.98 2162,444:35 _ 26:889.85 ' '59:261.85 9:328.61  _72,257.i'7 i2i.567.6l  '97,641:50 i,167,364:'9T Savings -6'3,780.23 -38,562.92 -252,074.27  2:-i9.353.98 _ 2 0.00 226,8'89.85 -59,261.85 1 _:9'328:6i 2270,569.17 \" -121,507.61 '\" -77,641.50 -738:'969':39 Remaining Costs 0.00 45,346.27 198,916.90 0.00 162,444.35 ......... 0:00 ............6.00 6:06 1,746:00 0.00 26,666.00 428,4'55.52 Total '239'659.36 '9,67'7.00 139.179.62' 96.154.00 484 669.96 Savings _ -234,659?36 '2-9,677.00 -139,179:62 ' -96.154.00 -479,669.98 Remaining Costs 5,000.00 \"6.06 Qoo 0.06 5,006:60 2,474,064.54 1,754,628.05 719,436.49Principal: BADGETT ELEMENTARY PROFILE Mary Golston Observation SurveyKindergarten Sub-Test Letters Word Print Vocabulary Dictation 1999-2000 2000-2001 2001-2002 2002-2003 2003-2004 46.20 6.23 8.60 8.77, 14.53 47.14 12.21 10.79 13.29 10.14 Observation SurveyGrade 1 Sub-Test Letters Word Print Vocabulary Dictation 1999-2000 2000-2001 2001-2002 2002-2003 2003-2004 52.43 14.38 17.95 21.24 20.75 53.42 14.97 17.13 27.1 28.03 Observation SurveyGrade 2 Sub-Test Letters Word Print 'Vocabulaiy Dictation 1999-2000 2000-2001 2001-2002 2002-2003 2003-2004 17.08 13.57 20.19 31.38 43.43 29.85 Developmental Reading Assessment % Readiness = Level 2, Kindergarten\nLevel 16, Grade 1\nLevel 24 Grade 2 Grade Level Kinder Score Kinder % Grade 1 Score Grade 1 % Grade 2 Score Grade 2 % 1999-2000 2000-2001 2001-2002 2002-2003 2003-2004 1.23 21.6% 6.24 5.9% I 7.62 11.8% I 1.78 50.0% 12.71 26.5% 17.71 42.9% Achievement Level TestsReading RIT Grade Level Grade 2 Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Target 192 198 205 212 Spr. 2000 Spr. 2001 Spr. 2002 Spr. 2003 161 196 198 194 165 189 193 201 Achievement Level TestsReadingCohort Growth Grade Level Grades 2- 3 Grades 3- 4 Grades 4- 5 Target 12.6 7.9 6.6 Spr. 2001 Spr. 2002 Spr. 2003 27 -3 3Achievement Level TestsLanguage Usage RIT Grade Level Grade 2 Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Target 193 199 207 213 Spr. 2000 Spr. 2001 Spr. 2002 Spr. 2003 173 197 200 199 169 192 200 204 I Achievement Level TestsLanguage UsageCohort Growth Grade Level Grades 2- 3 Grades 3- 4 Grades 4- 5 T arget 8.9 5.7 4.8 Spr. 2001 19 3 4 Spr. 2002 Spr. 2003 Achievement Level TestsMathematics RIT Grade Level Grade 2 Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Target 192 200 208 215 Spr. 2000 Spr. 2001 Spr. 2002 Spr. 2003 169 190 201 198 171 191 201 201 Achievement Level TestsMathematicsCohort Growth Grade Level Grades 2-3 Grades 3-4 Grades 4-5 Target 11.9 8.7 8 Spr. 2001 22 10 0 Spr. 2002 Spr. 2003 Arkansas Benchmark ExaminationGrade 4 Literacy Level 1998-99 Adv. Prof. Basic Below B. 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02  2002-03 0% 12% 12% 76% 0% 27% 27% 45% 0% 15% 15% 69%, Arkansas Benchmark ExaminationGrade 4 Mathematics Level 1998-99 1999-00 Adv. Prof. Basic Below B. 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 0% 0% 18% 82% 0% 5% 27% 59%, 0% 23% 23% 54% Stanford Achievement Test 9Grade 5 Sub-Test 1997-98 1998-99 Reading Language Math Basic Bat. Complete 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 Retention Rate Grade Kinder Grade 1 14% 16% 14% 19% 20% 16% 18% 12% 20% 19% 11% 10% 7% 12% 13% 22% 25% 13% 22% 21% 11% 20% 7% 13% 13% 1997-98 1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02Principal: DODD ELEMENTARY PROFILE Faith McLaughlin Observation Survey-Kindergarten Sub-Test Letters Word Print Vocabulary Dictation 1999:2000 2000-2001 2001-2002 2002-2003 2003-2004 51.35 13.32 14.41 22.15 21.65 52.00 13.70 15.00 22.06 21.52 Observation SurveyGrade 1 Sub-Test Letters Word Print Vocabulary Dictation 1999-2000 2000-2001 2001-2002 2002-2003 2003-2004 52.95 17.33 18.86 46.48 33.71 52.47 17.63 22.63 50.59 35.03 Observation SurveyGrade 2 Sub-Test  Letters Word Print Vocabulary' Dictation 1999-2000 2000-2001 2001-2002 2002-2003 2003-2004 19.67 19.96 65.40 60.93 69.91 59.32 Developmental Reading Assessment % Readiness = Level 2, Kindergarten\nLevel 16, Grade 1\nLevel 24, Grade 2 Grade Level Kinder Score Kinder % Grade 1 Score Grade 1 % Grade 2 Score Grade 2 % 1999-2000 2000-2001 2001-2002 2002-2003 2003-2004 6.32 86.5%' 19.76 58.3% I 32.8 51.7%| 5.24 80.0% 21.2 73.5% 32.64 82.8% Achievement Level TestsReading RIT Grade Level Grade 2 Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Target 192 198 205| 212 Spr. 2000 Spr. 2001 Spr. 2002 Spr. 2003 173 187 198 205 181 183 198 202 Achievement Level TestsReadingCohort Growth Grade Level Grades 2- 3 Grades 3- 4 Grades 4- 5 Target 12.6 7.9 6.6 Spr. 2001 Spr. 2002 Spr. 2003 10 11 4Achievement Level TestsLanguage Usage RIT Grade Level Grade 2 Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Target 193 199 207 213 Spr. 2000 Spr. 2001 Spr. 2002 Spr. 2003 179 190 202 206 183 182 201 208 I Achievement Level TestsLanguage UsageCohort Growth Grade Level Grades 2- 3 Grades 3- 4 Grades 4- 5 Target Spr. 2001 8.9 5.7 4.8 3 11 6 Spr. 2002 Spr. 2003 Achievement Level TestsMathematics RIT Grade Level Grade 2 Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Target 192 200 208 215 Spr. 2000 Spr. 2001 Spr. 2002 Spr. 2003 181 187 202 205 182 194 201 205 Achievement Level TestsMathematicsCohort Grovirth Grade Level Grades 2-3 Grades 3-4 Grades 4-5 Target 11.9 8.7 8 Spr. 2001 13 14 3 Spr. 2002 Spr. 2003 Arkansas Benchmark ExaminationGrade 4 Literacy Level 1998-gg iggg-oo Adv. Prof. Basic Below B. 2000-01 2001-02  2002-03 0% 35% 35% 30% 3% 21% 42% 33% 0% 24% 29% 48% Arkansas Benchmark ExaminationGrade 4 Mathematics Level iggs-gg iggg-oo Adv. Prof. Basic Below B. 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 5% 14% 29% 52% 6% 21% 15% 58% 5% 5% 14% 76% Stanford Achievement Test 9Grade 5 Sub-Test iggy-ga igga-gg Reading Language Math Basic Bat. Complete i9gg-oo 2000-01 2001-02 Retention Rate Grade Kinder Grade 1 26% 34% 22% 30% 29% 35% 44% 25% 34% 35% 30% 36% 28% 32% 32% 42% 55% 33% 40% 39% 26% 31% 14% 26% 25% iggy-ga igga-gg iggg-oo 2000-01 2001-02CHARTER ELEMENTARY PROFILE Principal: Krishna Young Observation SurveyKindergarten Sub-Test Letters Word Print Vocabulary Dictation 1999-2000 2000-2001 2001-2002 2002-2003 2003-2004 S'\n(SSP, Observation SurveyGrade 1 Sub-Test Letters Word Print Vocabulary Dictation 1999-2000 2000-2001 2001-2002 2002-2003 2003-2004 Observation SurveyGrade 2 Sub-Test Letters Word Print Vocabulary' Dictation 1999-2000 2000-2001 2001-2002 2002-2003 2003-2004 - Developmental Reading Assessment % Readiness = Level 2, Kindergarten\nLevel 16, Grade 1\nLevel 24. Grade 2 Grade Level Kinder Score Kinder % Grade 1 Score Grade 1 % Grade 2 Score Grade 2 % 1999-2000 2000-2001 2001-2002 2002-2003 2003-2004 'Si * Achievement Level TestsReading RIT Grade Level Grade 2 Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Target 198 205 212 -kV w - Spr. 2000 Spr. 2001 Spr. 2002 Spr. 2003 N/A N/A N/A 178 182 192 rST^ Achievement Level TestsReadingCohort Growth Grade Level Grades 2- 3 Grades 3- 4 Grades 4- 5 Target Spr. 2001 Spr. 2002 Spr. 2003 safe 7.9 6.6 N/A N/AAchievement Level TestsLanguage Usage RIT Grade Level Grade 2 Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Target Spr. 2000 Spr. 2001 Spr. 2002 Spr. 2003 199 207 213 N/A N/A N/A ?72 174 199 [Achievement Level TestsLanguage UsageCohort Growth Grade Level Grades 2- 3 Grades 3- 4 Grades 4- 5 T arget 5.7 4.8 Spr. 2001 Spr. 2002 Spr. 2003 N/A N/A Achievement Level TestsMathematics RIT Grade Level Grade 2 Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Target Spr. 2000 Spr. 2001 Spr. 2002 Spr. 2003 200 208 215 N/A N/A N/A Ml 192 196 Achievement Level TestsMathematicsCohort Growth Grade Level Grades 2-3 Grades 3-4 Grades 4-5 Target 8.7 8 Spr. 2001 Spr. 2002 Spr. 2003 N/A N/A Arkansas Benchmark ExaminationGrade 4 Literacy Level 1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 Adv. Prof. Basic Below B. 0% 0% 25% 75% 2001-02  2002-03 Arkansas Benchmark ExaminationGrade 4 Mathematics Level 1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 Adv. Prof. Basic Below B. 2001-02 2002-03 WSsW 0% 6% 0% 94% Stanford Achievement Test 9Grade 5 Sub-Test 1997-98 1998-99 Reading Language Math Basic Bat. Complete 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 Retention Rate Grade 1997-98 1998-99 [Kinder I 7% 6% 10% 9% 8% 7% 8% 10% 9% 8% 11% 8% 5% 10% 10% 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 iPrincipal: Samuel Branch Observation Survey-Kindergarten Sub-Test 1999-2000 2000-2001 2001-2002 2002-2003 2003-2004 Letters Word Print Vocabulary Dictation 47.03 13.03 16.76 30.73 19.97 51.55 15.40 20.80 33.50 19.00 Observation SurveyGrade 1 Sub-Test 1999-2000 2000-2001 2001-2002 2002-2003 2003-2004 Letters Word Print Vocabulary Dictation 53.70 17.44 22.56 28.11 22.22 52.92 17.43 20.78 39.51 29.62 Observation SurveyGrade 2 Sub-Test 1999-2000 2000-2001 2001-2002 2002-2003 2003-2004 Letters Word Print Vocabulary Dictation 19.79 17.73 68.79 38.86 47.69 45.50 Developmental Reading Assessment % Readiness = Level 2, Kindergarten\nLevel 16, Grade 1\nLevel 24, Grade 2 Grade Level 1999-2000 2000-2001 2001-2002 2002-2003 2003-2004 Kinder Score Kinder % Grade 1 Score Grade 1 % Grade 2 Score Grade 2 % 3.54 68.3% 22.44 62.5% 29.07 62.9% 4.75 75.6% 18.16 72.7% 28.56 67.7% Achievement Level TestsReading RIT Grade Level Target Spr. 2000 Spr. 2001 Spr. 2002 Spr. 2003 Grade 2 Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 192 198 205 212 177 190 193 177 174 196 194 205 Achievement Level TestsReadingCohort Growth Grade Level Target Spr. 2001 Spr. 2002 Spr. 2003 Grades 2- 3 Grades 3- 4 Grades 4- 5 12.6 7.9 6.6 19 4 12 Achievement Level TestsLanguage Usage RIT Grade Level Target Spr. 2000 Spr. 2001 Spr. 2002 Spr. 2003 Grade 2 Grade 3 Grade 4 193 199 207 184 197 201 183 196 194[Grade 5 I Inf 212| 20^ I Achievement Level TestsLanguage UsageCohort Growth Grade Level Grades 2- 3 Grades 3- 4 Grades 4- 5 Target 8.9 5.7 4.8 Spr. 2001 12 -3 5 Spr. 2002 Spr. 2003 Achievement Level TestsMathematics RIT Grade Level Target Spr. 2000 Spr. 2001 Spr. 2002 Spr. 2003 Grade 2 Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 192 200 208 215 173 189 195 203 179 195 192 207 Achievement Level TestsMathematicsCohort Growth Grade Level Grades 2-3 Grades 3-4 Grades 4-5 T arget 11.9 8.7 8 Spr. 2001 22 3 12 Spr. 2002 Spr. 2003 Arkansas Benchmark ExaminationGrade 4 Literacy Level 1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 Adv. Prof. Basic Below B. 0% 20% 30% 50% 0% 21% 50% 29% 0% 35% 24% 41% Arkansas Benchmark ExaminationGrade 4 Mathematics Level 1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 Adv. Prof. Basic Below B. 5% 5% 25% 65% 0% 0% 7% 93% 6% 12% 18% 65% Stanford Achievement Test 9Grade 5 Sub-Test 1997-98 1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 Reading Language Math Basic Bat. Complete 17% 18% 12% 19% 20% 34% 42% 19% 34% 34% 28% 29% 15% 26% 26% 25% 31% 15% 24% 22% 24% 17% 12% 21% 21% Retention Rate Grade 1997-98 1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 Kinder Grade 1 Grade 2 Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5'A LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 501 SHERMAN STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72202 OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES Juiiious C. Babbs, Associate Superintendent TO: Dr. Ken James Phone: (501)324-2272 FROM: Junious B SUBJECT: Requested Information DATE: December 10, 2001 In response to information requested in the December 6* board agenda meeting, the following report is provided: I. SIX YEAR ENROLLMENT COMPARISONS OF SCHOOLS WITH LESS THAN 250 STUDENTS 1996-97 1997-98 1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 BADGETT B vwo TOTAL DODD B W TOTAL 185 21^ 214 233 200 216 179 \"77 174 13 146 IM 156 242 145| 79 162) 89j 131 \"72 2W 145 ~T1 114 74 188 FAIR PARK B W TOTAL WILSON B \\N TOTAL 193 62 188 60 165 63^ 160 167 ~T7 2^ 164 294 68 3W 297 \"65 3W 53) 3^ 278 313 3? 232 20 252 Redrawn school attendance zones were enacted during the '99 - 00 school year When comparing the 98-99 \u0026amp; 99-00 school year, the key reduction piece is removal of 6th grade classes.  Opening of the new Stephens school'January (2001) provided impact by way of Badgett no longer serving as an Alternative School Site for the Washington AZ. IL ELEMENTARY ENROLLMENT  sorted by school totals LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT ENROLLMENT - October 1, 2001 (official) SCHOOL 1. Badgett 2. Dodd 3. Fair Park 4. Wilson 5. Woodruff 6. Rightsell______ 7. Mabelvale 8. Western Hills 9. Meadowcliff 10. Baseline 11. Pulaski Heights 12. Romine 13. Mitchell 14. Forest Park 15. Gibbs 16. Geyer Springs 17. Bale 18. Brady________ 19. McDermott 20. Wakefield 21. Franklin 22. Rockefeller 23. Otter Creek 24. Cloverdale 25. Jefferson 26. Williams 27. Watson 28. Washington 29. Fulbright______ 30. Carver 31. Terry_________ 32. Chicot 33. Stephens______ 34. King_________ 35. Booker 01-02 ENROLLMENT 153 188 209 252 267 268 271 277 280 282 282 284 298 305 307 _________320_________ 330 332 374 384 388 389 397 426 426 446 452 459 466 495 507 508 545 571 575 Average Elementary School size: 363 Largest Elementary School is Booker with 575 students. Smallest Elementary School is Badgett with 153 students. CAPACITY BEING USED 64% __________69%__________ 69% __________74%__________ __________85%__________ __________91%__________ __________61%__________ __________87%__________ __________78%__________ __________78%__________ __________81%__________ __________70%__________ 100% 76% __________95%__________ __________89%__________ __________86%__________ __________81%__________ __________83%__________ __________92%__________ __________73%__________ __________81%__________ __________96%__________ __________87%__________ 90% 91% __________85%___________ __________68%___________ 95% __________89%___________ __________85%___________ __________99% 84% 80% 89%POTENTIAL AREAS OF REDUCTION (2002-2003) (1-14-02) TARGET REDUCTION: $6.5 MILLION PROJECTED SAVINGS SCHOOL CLOSINGS: A. CLOSE CHARTER SCHOOL PROGRAM: $479,670.00 B. CLOSE BADGETT ELEMENTARY PROGRAM: $536,049.00 C. CLOSE DODD ELEMENTARY PROGRAM: $738,909.00 D. CLOSE FAIR PARK ELEMENTARY PROGRAM: $749,692.00 ELIMINATE THE TOTAL ATHLETIC PROGRAM: $ 1,874,205.00-2- POTENTIAL AREAS OF REDUCTION ELIMINATE MIDDLE SCHOOL ATHLETIC PROG $ 378,669.00 ELIMINATE THE 6^^ GRADE ATHLETIC PROGRAM: $ 56,062.00 CONSIDER PLACING ATHLETICS OUTSIDE THE SCHOOL DAY: $ 360,000.00 ELIMINATETHETRANSPORTA TION PROGRAM: $5,724,168.00 REDUCE THE DISTRICTS FINANCIAL CONTRIBUTION TO THE FINE ARTS PROGRAM: $ 405,263.00 ELIMINATE ALL ASSISTANT PRINCIPALS: $ 3,541,514.00 ELIMINATE TWO SECONDARY AND TWO ELEMENTARY SCHOOL ASSISTANT PRINCIPALS: $ 300,000.00 ELIMINATE ALL SCHOOL RESOURCE OFFICERS $ 438,560.00 ELIMINATE SCHOOL RESOURCE OFFICER-MIDDLE SCHOOL-SHARE: $ 100,000.00 ELIMINATE THE EXTRA DAYS THAT ARE CURRENTLY BEING PAID DURING THE SUMMER FOR THE SCHOOL RESOURCE OFFICERS: $ 174,375.00-3- POTENTIAL AREAS OF REDUCTION ELIMINATE ONE POSITION IN THE HUMAN RESOURCE OFFICE: $ 40,000.00 ELIMINATE THE UNFILLED POSITION OF ASSOCIATE SUPERINTENDENT: $ 121,500.00 ELIMINATE THE UNFILLED POSITION OF ASST. SUPERINTENDENT-PRE: $ 86,693.00 ELIMINATE THE POSITION OF COMMUNITY SCHOOL DIRECTOR AND REDUCE # OF CLASSES $ 150,000.00 ELIMINATE TWELVE POSITIONS IN THE HIPPY PROGRAM (FIVE ARE CURRENTLY VACANT: $ 220,914.00 ELIMINATE 2 STUDENT RECRUITER POSITIONS: $ 114,000.00 ELIMINATE 2 POSITIONS ON SPECIAL ASSIGNMENT: $ 39,323.00 REDUCE OVERTIME COST BY 50%: $ 150,000.00-4- POTENTIAL AREAS OF REDUCTION: ELIMINA TE THE DAIL Y MONEY PICK-UP AT THE SCHOOL SITES AND REPLACE WITH IN-DISTRICT OPERATION: $ 80,000.00 ELIMINATE THE VIPS PROGRAM: $ 268,141.00 ELIMINATE TWO POSITIONS FROM VIPS OFFICE: $ 40,000.00 REDUCE THE FOUR-YEAR OLD PROGRAM BY 14 CLASSES: $1,124,000.00 ELIMINATE 50% OF CONSULTATION FEE FROM ADMINISTRATIVE SER VICES $ 13 ,000.00 ELIMINATE .50 POSITION OF DROPOUT COORDINA TOR $ 41,000.00 ELIMINATE 4 SCHOOL NURSES $ 154,400.00 ELIMINATE 4 SCHOOL COUNSELORS $ 199,000.00 REDUCE TRAVEL EXPENSE FROM OPERA TING BUDGET BY 50% $ 156,054.00-5- POTENTIAL AREAS OF REDUCTION ELIMINATE DISTRICT CONVOCATION $ 30,000.00 ELIMINATE 30.0 FTE- CERTIFICATED STAFF-SECONDARY: $1,380,000.00 ELIMINATE 50 AIDES: $ 600,000.00 ELIMINATE ONE READING SPECIALIST: $ 62,000.00 ELIMINATE 1.0 LIBRARIAN: $ 45,877.00 REDUCE ALL DISTRICT FUNDED BUDGETS BY 7 72 %: $1,688,000.00 ELIMINATE THE COORDINATOR OF STAFF DEVELOPMENT: $ 86,754.00 ELIMINA TE TWO FTE FROM PRE: $ 92,218.00 ELIMINATE ONE ACTIVITY DIRECTOR AT PARKVIEW: $ 33,000.00 -6- POTENTIAL AREAS OF REDUCTION REDUCE THE BUSINESS OFFICE BUDGET BY: $ 39,000.00 ELIMINATE TWO FTE INSTRUCTIONAL AIDES FROM THE IRC: $ 31,128.00 ELIMINATE ONE PROG. EVAL/ESL FROM IRC: $ *61,069.00 (Title I and District Funds) ELIMINATE ONE FTE SPEC. EDUC. ADMINISTRATOR: 67,045.00 ELIMINATE TWO ADAPTIVE PE POSITIONS FROM SPEC. EDUC. PROGRAM: $ 96,000.00 ELIMINATE ONE FTE CUSTODIAN AT THE IRC: $ 18,740.00 REDUCE THE CONTRACT OF THE DISTRICT OMBUDSMAN FROM 12 MONTHS TO 11 MONTHS: $ 12,420.00 REDUCE THE COST ASSOCIATED WITH PROCESSING PURCHASE ORDERS, BY IMPLEMENTING A PURCHASE CARD SYSTEM: (WILL NOT BE ABLE TO BE IMPLEMENTED DURING THE 2002-2003 SCHOOL YEAR). $ 100,000.00 REDUCE MAIL DELIVERY TO SITES TO EVERY OTHER DAY: $ 21.500.00-7- POTENTIAL AREAS OF REDUCTION REDUCE THE FACILITY SERVICE BUDGET BY: S 100,000.00 REDUCE THE COMMUNICATION DIVISION BUDGET BY: $ 25,500.00 ELIMINATE TEN FTE POSITIONS AT THE END OF THE 2002-2003 FISCAL YEAR-THE FUNDING SOURCE (GRANT) WILL EXPIRE: $ 395,048.00-8- VARIED SCENARIOS TO OBTAIN TARGETED REDUCTIONS SCENARIO #1: PROJECTED SAVINGS: Close Badgett Elementary Close Charter Program Close Dodd Elementary Close Fair Park Elementary $ 536,049.00 $ 479,670.00 $ 738,909.00 $749,692.00 $2,504,320.00 reduction The remaining $4.0 million dollar reductions would come from a combination of the items listed. SCENARIO #2: PROJECTED SAVINGS: Close Badgett Elementary Close Charter Program Close Dodd Elementary $ 536,049.00 $479,670.00 $ 738,909.00 $1,754,628.00 reduction The remaining $4.74 million dollar reductions would come from a combination of the items listed. SCENARIO #3: PROJECTED SAVINGS: Close Badgett Elementary Close Charter Program $ 536,049.00 $479,670.00 $1,015,719.00 reduction The remaining $5.48 million dollar reductions would come from a combination of the items listed.-9- SCENARIO #4: PROJECTED SAVINGS: Close No Schools and make all Target reduction of $6.5 million reductions from the items listed. SCENARIO #5: PROJECTED SAVINGS: Close No Schools Reduce 60 FTE Certified Staff Reduce 100 FTE Non-Certified Staff $2,760,000.00 $1,200,000.00 $3,960,000.00 reduction The remaining $2.54 million dollar reductions would come from a combination of the items listed.John W. Walker, P.A. Attorney At Law 1723 Broadway Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 Telephone (501) 374-3758 FAX (501) 374-4187 JOHN W. WALKER SHAWN CHILDS OF COUNSEL ROBERT McHENRY, P.A. DONNAJ.McHENRY 8210 Henderson Road Little Rock, Arkansas 72210 Phone: (601) 372-3425  Fax (501) 372-3428 Email: mchenryd^wbell.net Via Facsimile - 324-2146 January 16, 2002 Mr. Junious Babbs Associate Superintendent for Administrative Services Little Rock School District 501 Sherman Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Mr Babbs: I understood Dr. Mitchell to say last evening that 78% of the students who attend Badgett Elementary were bused to the school. After the Board meeting, I inquired where she obtained her information and she indicated that it came from you. Would you, therefore, please provide clarification of her comments by providing the following information seriatim: 1) Does the 78% include students in the Charter program and in the school? 2) How did you arrive at your 78%? 3)1 suspect that 78% of the students who attend the Charter program are, in deed, bused there due to the nature of the program and services provided. Is that correct? 4) (a) How of the of the 81 Charter school students (raw number) are bused? (b) How many of these students reside in the Badgett attendance zone? 5) (a) How many of the 153 regular school students (raw number) are bused? (b) How many of these students reside in the Badgett attendance zone? 6) (a) What is the mile(s) radius of attendance zones for Badgett? zone blocks? (b) In other words, how many miles away is the nearest street? The farthest street? 7) Please identify the streets that are in the Badgett attendance zone. 8) Based upon the answer in number 5(a), how far do these students travel to get tothe school? 9) Dr. James report to the Board indicates that 65 black students would be transported to Rockefeller, (a) Please identify the zone blocks where these students currently live and distance Badgett compared to the distance to distance to Rockefeller. (b) In other words, how many additional miles will these students have to travel after being assigned to Washington compared to Badgett? 10) Dr. James further reported to the Board that 49 black students would be transported to Washington, (a) Please identify the zone blocks where these students currently live and the distance to Badgett compared to the distance to Washington. (b) In other words, how many additional miles will these students have to travel after being assigned to Washington compared to Badgett? Finally, would you also please advise whether any of the FTE - certified staff (11.8- Badgett and 6.7 - Charter) members have communicated intentions of retirement, resignations, etc. in order to help confirm the Districts reported approximately million dollar savings by closini the school and charter program. Ig Thank you for your attention to this request. Sincerely, r' /Joy C. Springer* On Behalf of Joshua JCS/ cc: Dr. Kenneth JamesJohn W. Walker, P.A. Attorney At Law 1723 Broadway Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 Telephone (501) 374-3758 FAX (501) 374-4187 JOHN W. WALKER SHAWN CHILDS OF COUNSEL ROBERT McHENRY, P.A. DONNA J. McHENRY 8210 Henderson Road Little Rock, Arkansas 72210 Phone: (501) 372-3425  Fax (501) 372-3428 Email: mchenryd@swbell.net Via Facsimile - 324-2146 Januaiy 16, 2002 Dr. Kenneth James Superintendent for Administrative Services Little Rock School District 810 West Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Dr. James\nThis is to request a copy of the Board minutes from last evening along with a tape recording of the meeting. I will provide a cassette tape to Ms. Beverly Griffin on my way into the office on tomorrow morning. Thank you for your attention to this request. r / Joy C. Springer' On Behalf of Joshua JCS/Arkansas Democrat (gazette | FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 29, 1995 History saves Central High from consultants hit list BY CYNTHIA HOWEIX Democrat-Gazette Education Writer Central High, the Little Rock School Districts flagship school, needs almost $6 million in repairs and renovations and even then it perhaps wont meet the educational demands placed on schools in the 1990s. Those are the findings of a San .Antonio consulting firm hired last February to evaluate the condition of Little Rock schools and make recommendations on the districts building needs. In ail. the firm found that the districts schools and administrative buildings need more than W million in renovations and repairs over the next several years. The consultants. 3D/Intemation- al. described 70-year-old Central as uniquely imposing, a fine old structure and a landmark, but they ranked the school fifth among the citys five high schools in terms of building condition. Generally, restrooms are inadequate, classrooms vary in size and are rated poor to fair, music is in the basement, science facilities need upgrading to be state-of-the- art, traffic and parking conditions are poor, tennis courts are now unusable and the wooden structure previously used as the 'Tiger Den needs to be removed, the consultants said. The school did not appear well- maintained, especially its mechanical systems, the consultants said. Inspectors said the plaster walls and ceiling are deteriorating, and moisture is seeping throu^ the outside walls. Windows need replacing, and acoustical ceilings are needed. Other needs include new I hardware, plumbing repairs, a new I fire alarm system, extensive work ' on the ventilation systems, and an elevator to provide disabled people with access to each of the schools five floors. Repairs also are needed in the library, in the gymnasium and in Quigley Stadium, where the running track should be replaced. \"The last-place ranking of this facility indicates the extent of work required, which, when completed, may not serve the district as a high school of the 1990s. the consultants said in their report. The consultants acknowledged that because of Centrals history and its reputation for high-quality academic programs, closing the building is not really an option. They did suggest that the building might be better used as a community college. .A. second alternative would be a super magnet program high school for accelerated programs and adult education. The consultants said the school needs S3.2 million worth of work in the ne.xt two years to solve immediate problems and meet safety codes. In subsequent years, electrical wiring systems need to be installed to support technology programs. Central, which is listed as a National Historic Landmark, was built in 1926 and early in its history was designated as the countrys most beautiful school. In 1957, Central High attracted international attention when federal troops were called to maintain order as nine black students integrated the previously all-white school. Of the five high schools, the consultants said Parkview Arts and Science Magnet High School, built in 1968, was in the best shape, followed by J.A. Fair, Hall High and McClellan High. The consultants based rankings of schools on physical condition, size, location and capacity to support educational programming. Central isnt the only building with problems. The consultants recommended closing from eight to 11 of the citys elementary and junior high schools. Following is a list of those schools and some of the prottems found by the consu^ tants: Fair Park Elementary  Built in 1929, the school tanks 33id of the 35 elementanes. Ifs heating and air-conditioning system needs replacement as do the plumbing arxf electrical panel boards and al interior finish. Rerxjva- tions would cost $714,626. Woodruff Elementary  Bull in 1911, the school ranks 31st out of 35. Plumbing work Is needed as is repair of the plaster walls. Classrooms and the library are small. The consultants said the fine old building' has outlived its usefulness. Renovation costs total $212,098. Wakefield Elementary  Built in 1959. the school ranks 34lh of 35 and needs plumbing and electncai work along with complete renovation of interior surfaces. The school grounds also need improvements of fencing, sidewalks, paved areas and playground equipment. Protected renovation costs are $1.2 million. Pulaski Heights Elementary  Built in 1925. the school ranks 27th. Needs include new floor tiles and ceilings, replacement of doors and the venolanon system, plumbing and the fire alarm system. The projected cost is $1.4 million. Mitchell Incentive Elementary  Bunt In 1908. the school ranks last among the ele- mentaries. The school f^is structural problems and outdated plumbing, ventilation and electncai systems. The projeraed cost is $580,000. Jefferson Elementary  Constructed in 1950. the school tanks 30th. The school has the typical electncai. mechanical and plumbing problems. Also, the library and offices are small and load-bearing walls are damaged. The school, already undergoing expansion, would take $1.8 million to renovate. MeadowdHI Elementary  Built In 1956, the school tanks 28lh. Virtually all the plumbing and electrical systems need replacement Exterior work is needed. The cost of renovation would ba $1.1 mlKon Ish Elemerttary  Built in 1964 and closed by ths district in 1993. the school Is used on a temporary basis for children who attended Chicot before it was damaged by fire last year. Repair would cost $656,776. GatlaiKl Elementary  Built in 1922, the schrxil tanks 291h. The district has had longstanding plans to dose the school, which needs about $1.4 million in work to its plumbing, heating and electrical systems. The library and cafeteria are too small. Wilson Elementary  Built in 1927, the school tanks 18th out of 35. The school needs about $723,963 in work. Mabelvale Junior High  Built in 1952, the school stands last among the eight junior highs. The heating and air-conditioning equipment on the school roof need replacement, as do the field house and stadium bleachets.Arkansas Democrat (gazette  WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 8, 1995 Committee to review LRSD study Will do the legwork oh school closings BY CYNTHIA HOWELL Democrat-Oazette Education Writer The Little Rock School District will rely on a committee of patrons, employees and school board members to suggest how the dis-  Irict might use a consulting compa- riys recommendations for closing or renovating schools. Tile 3D/Intemational Co. of San Antonio presented its 13-volume, $^,000 study to the board in September. It projected that the district will lose 3,6()0 students by 2005, making school closures necessary. The consultants evaluated each building and estimated costs of repairs, additions and modernization. They presented the district with three options for dealing with the student loss and recommended closing as many as 10 elementaries and one junior high, and building one new elementary school. Doug Eaton, the district's direc- , lor of plant services, told school I board members Tuesday that an | implementation committee will\nmeet for the first time at 9 a m. Thursday to begin considering each proposal'.s possible impact on student assignments, the curricu- 1 lum, personnel, the district budget,  property tax rates and the districts desegregation plan. The committee will make its ! recommendations to the district administration, which will make recommendations to the school board. Henry Williams, district superintendent, said Tuesday that any recommendations for closing schools in 1996^97 should be presented to those schools communities in January. Before then, though, Williams and members of his staff will meet with parent and community groups to explain the study and to emphasize that no decisions on closing schools have been made. Eaton said closing schools and reassigning students will be complicated and must be phased in over several years. Board member Judy Magness said on Tuesday that the consultant's recommendations could leave more students attending schools closer to home, which many parents say they want She alsb said the recommendations coitld lead to more modem schools thiM will better prepare students forlhe 21st century. Board member Michael Daugherty asked why the district should consider closing so many elementary schools when junior highs are losing more students. Board member Linda Pondexter asked what the schools' racial composition would be under a new student assignment plan. The number of predominantly one-race schools would increase, Williams said. Among the schools that could be closed or used for other purposes If the consultants recommendations are accepted are Fair Park, Garland, Ish, Jefferson, Meadowcliff, Mitchell, Pulaski Heights, Wake- field, Wilson, WoodnilT eiemen- taries and Mabelvale Junior H igh ' FRIDAY, DECEMBER 14. 2001  Parents plead cases, but two schools stay in budget axs reach LR board hears of virtues of smallness, then adds Fair Park to possible closures Qnhflfllc for closing because of eir small wUllUUId enrollments. Badgett, at 6900 Pecan Road near the citys air-  Continued from Page 1B port, has 153 students in its regarea for potential budget cuts, ular program and another 80 en- and that he and his staff are rolled in the districts charter preparing recommendations for program, which is housed in the more reductions. same building. Dodd, 6423 Stage- In response to School Board coach Road, has 188 pupils, members who said they cant de- which is 69 percent of the build- cide on closing schools with- mgs capacity. out knowing what their other op- The average elementary tions are, James said he will give school in the district has about them some proposals after the 360 students. The average elementary first of the year. The district would save BY CYNTHIA HOWELL ARKANSAS DEMOCRAT-GAZETTE Were going to refuse to let Dodd close, Tiwana Noon- Faced with the possible loss er, a parent of three Dodd of their neighborhood schools pupils, said, Were going to next year to budget cuts, par- fight. Dodd parents and commu- ents and others from the Bad- gett and David O. Dodd ele- nity members pointed to the mentary school communities number of grants that the school Thursday extoUed the virtues has received in recent years to of their small schools to the Lit- restructure the way reading and tie Rock School Board. language arts are taught. Those James, who has been Little $536,048 by closing the regular Rocks school superintendent for Badgett school and another about six months, just last week $479,669 by closing the charter raised the issue of closing one program, plus $738,909 by closer more of the districts small- ing Dodti est schools next faff as a way to By closing the schools, the help offset escalating costs and number of teaching positions in a declining revenue forecast that the district could be reduced by is already affecting the districts about 20. A similar number of $224 milhon budget. support staff positions also could The district is getting $2.4 be reduced. Board members were sym- grants and programs may not pathetic and made no final de- all be transferable to other million less in state funding this cisions. schools, they said. Additional- However, by the end of the ly, they argued that the special- meeting, the School Board not ly trained staff members will be only directed Superintendent scattered across the district, diKenneth James to continue luting the effectiveness of their planning for the possible clos- training. District officials speculated, year than initially budgeted be- however, that most of the peo- cause of shortfalls that were an- pie in jobs at the affected schools nounced last month in state tax could be absorbed into other collections. That loss is expect- schools as vacancies occur be- ed to be earned forward into the cause of retirements and resignext school year when the dis- nations. ing of Badgett and Dodd as a Diane Krippendorf, a com- trict must meet contractually obligated teacher pay increases. way to save about $1.7 million, munity member, also pointed but also asked him to prepare a out that as many as 200 new feasibility study on closing a homes are planned for the Dodd third small school. Fair Park El- attendance zone, which should ementary at 616 N. Harrison St, boost the schools enrollment where about 200 pupils attend over the next few years. District According to preliminary - . plans, Badgett pupils would be The School Board must make assigned to Rockefeller and a decision on the school closings Washington elementary schools, by Jan. 10 to be able to notify Charter school pupils, who at- affected parents of the changes tend the school by applying, before registration starts for the would return to the schools that  2002 school year. That regis- serve the attendance zones in classes. officials said the new homes tration period  when parents which they live throughout the The presidents of the parent- might bring in 14 to 20 new chil- teacher associations from both dren for the school in each of Dodd and Badgett presented the the next two years. can make a variety of school district. choices for their children  begins Jan. 28. As for Dodd pupils, they School Board with petitions James has said that the pos- Thursday pleading to keep their sible school closings are just one schools. See SCHOOLS, Page 9B would be divided among West- James repeatedly acknowl- ern Hills, Romine and Otter edged that the district is decid- Creek elementary schools if their ing the issue on a very fast time school is closed. line that is contrary to districts Two bands of small children - policy that calls for school clos- set the tone for Thursdays meetings to be considered for at least ing, marching in two circles on 12 months, except in emergen- the administration buildings cies. front steps, waving posters and James assured the board that chanting in support of their is entering dire financial straits, schools, as board members ar- You dont take the largest cut rived for the meeting. Dont in state aid in the history of the close Dodd school, yelled one state and think it is business as group. usual, he said. Please dont close Badgett Badgett and Dodd are targets school, the others said.J a n u a r y 3, 2 0 0 2 District sets sessions on closing 3 schools ARKANSAS DEMOCRAT-GAZETTE The Little Rock School District will hold a series of public meetings, beginning today, at three low-enrollment schools under consideration for closing. The meetings are scheduled at:  Badgett Elementary, 6900 Pecan Road, 6 p.m. today. J  Dodd Element^, 6423 Stagecoach Road, 6 p.m. Monday.  Fair Park Elementary School, 616 N. Harrison St., 6 p.m. Tuesday. The meetings-are open to the public. The district proposes closing schools beginning July 1 because of state budget cuts. The Little Rock School Board will consider the proposal during its regular meeting Jan. 10 at 5 p. at the School District headquarters at 810 W. Markham St.F  Arkansas Democral-Gazette/STEPHEN B. THORNTON Badgett Elementary School parent Jerry Peters (left) Zeigler (center left), Rockefeller Elementary Principal asks Little Rock School Superintendent Ken James a Anne Mangan, and Sadie Mitchell (right), the district's question Thursday night during a public hearing at associate superintendent for school services. Mangan Badgett to discuss the schools possible closing. Lis- and Zeigler attended because Bad^tt tening are Washington Elementary Principal Gwen would attend their schools if Badgett cldses, cIroes students LR parents face closing of 3 schools Badgett meeting held\n2 more set BY PATRICK HEALY ARKANSAS DEMOCRAT (JAZETIT As solemn-faced parents, teachers and administrators discussed the fate of Badgett Elementary School with urgent voices, the children played. Arm in arm, they pranced across the schools packed gym. inspected TV cameramen and galloped through the banana-yellow hallways while adults discussed shutting down Badgett, in east Little Rock, and two other Little Rock elementary schools. The 'Fliursday meeting was the first of three meetings scheduled before the School Board votes whether to close Badgett, Dodd and Fair Park elementary schools. Other meetings are scheduled at Dodd on Monday and at Fair See BADGETTj^age 4B Badgett  Continued from Page 1B Park on Tuesday. Tlie meetings are designed to let school officials explain the shutdown proposal and hear community concerns. Were still in shock, and we still dont want it to happen, said Kim Dunahay, Badgetts Parent Teacher Association president. Even if they vote to close the school, the fights not going to stop. The School Boards vote, rescheduled from Jan. 10 to Jan. 15, comes at a time of financial crisis, said Sadie Mitchell, the districts associate superintendent for school services. In addition to rhe $2.4 million state funding cut, the school district must pay $3 million in promised raises. Altogether, the school district fiiust slice $6 million from its annual budget ol $220 million. Superintendent Ken James Pb-S ! Proposed Wlendance Zones k rl \u0026amp; 31 Arkansas Democrat-Gazetle/STEPHEN B. THORNTON students if the school is closed. The informational meeting Thursday night at the school was the first of three meetings to discuss potential school closings. said, Were going to have to junious Babbs, associate superintendent for deseg-make some tough decisions. regation for the Littie Rock School District, discusses The board is considering clos- proposed attendance zones for Badgett Elementary ing Badgett, Fair Park and Dodd elenientaries primarily due to nickel-and-diine that to death. applauding when parents praised ular elementary schools, their low enrollments, James Normally, a proposal to close Badgett and spoke against its Weve tried regular schook said. This year, 153 students at- schools must be announced one closing. said Carrie Igwe, whose fourth-tend Badgett, 188 go to Dodd, and year before the shutdown date. I like it here because most of grade son, Caleb, has attention tend Badgett, 188 go to Dodd, and year before the shutdown date. ------------- 200 attend Fair Park. But with the budget cuts, James the teachers are nice, and they deficit hyperactivity disorder The average Little Rock ele- said, schools must act fast. let you come into their class- and attends the charter school.  Everybody has to be rooms and they give you treats, He has special needs    ' '  1 Igwe said her son did poorly mentary school has 363 students. ____------- ,  If the tliree schools are closed, touched, James told the crowd. 10-year-old Kenetra Lowe said . . their students would attend dif- Tliis is not a win-win situation. after the meeting. Id rather stay in his classes until he came to The one-hour meeting went here. I may be shy to go to an- Badgett. Igwe said she doesnt the next school year. more smoothly than past dis- other school. I wouldnt have any want her son to return to regu- Some teachers would find cussions about closing Badgett, friends on the first day. lar classes, and she balks at pri-     Parents and educators ex- vate school tuition. ferent schools at the start of other jobs in the district, but oth- In 1995, a proposal to close Bad- ' ers could be laid off, James said, gett met with parentsprotests pressed concern about the 83 It certainly seemed reason- and a court challenge that forced students who attend Badgetts money to send him to a private able to me, board Vice President the School Board to back down, charter school. The students, school, she said, unless the Lit- But on Thursday, audience many of whom have learning dis- tie Rock School District is going '     ......  '  to pay it for us. Judy Magness said. When youve _________ got to cut $6 million, you cant members listened quietly, twice abilities, would be sent to reg- We dont have the kind of Z 0 0 3 V A J enuBp I January 1 5. 2 0 0 2  I Some proposed cuts, such as U C n 0 01S eliminating the districts year- '*'*\"\"**** opening ceremony, reducing mail  Continued from Page 1B delivery and removing one hu- The schools have been con- man resources job, dont direct-sidered for closure primarily ly target classrooms. because of their low enrollments. Others da They mclude cutting This year, 153 pupils attend Bad- school police officers, eliminating gett, 188 go to Dodd, and 200 at- r.----------- , v tend Fair Park. The average Lit- letic programs and scaling back the middle-school or sixth-grade ath-tie Rock elementary school has fine arts budget by $400,000. 363 pupils. We will do whatever they If the three schools are closed, hand out to us. said Athledc some teachers would find other Director Johimy Johnson, who positions in the district, but some oversees the districts $1.8 milhon could be laid off James said. Because ofstate funding cuts, stone yet. the district must slash $6.5 nul- The Volunteers in Public lion from its annual budget of Schools program and its budget $220 million. Besides closing of $270,000 also could be cut Smce schools, board members are con- 1972, the program has connected sidering broad cuts to staff, trans- volunteers with schools for tutor-athletic program. Nothing is in portation, athletics, pre-kinder- ing, mentoring and field trips, garten and other programs. Debbie Milam, coordinator of * Ideas range from cutting one the program, said she under- 1 librarian to eliminating the trans- stands the budget crisis but hopes ' portation and athletic programs, her program is left alone. Such sweeping cuts probably They would lose aa wweellll-- would be pared down over time, trained, experienced staff, Mil- \u0026lt;James said. am We^U stiU volun- Some of those things you teers. We just wont have Kcant do, James said Monday, re- screened volunteers or trained fferring to the prospect of cutting volunteers. said. Well still have volun-a11 of the $5.7 million transportation program. School Board member Tony Rose said the board can tweak the 11 piu^cuil. - ----------------------------------- . James and board members will budget proposals. Instead of tnm-  meet in coming months to dis- ming the budgets at all schools cuss the 50 listed options and how by 7.5 percent, for instance, the they would affect students. board could pass that cut at 4 per- You try to get the majority [of cent or 5 percent. cnuittss]l aass ffaarr aawwaavy ffrroomm tthhee ccllaassss-- Therell be tradeoffs, he said. room as said. you possibly can, James If we cut this, then we 11 keep this. ZX* o D CfTs C5m^ o 5 33. SCT' a g\u0026lt;1 5 Sc O= 7fi - ?o a2. qgq . oS :G ^53 \"a   S g 3 ' S?! E\u0026lt; 2fl tRr 0w \" oM (Z3 f6 \u0026gt;  \u0026lt; B (/) o z cz\u0026gt; \u0026gt; co q n m aS W o 1 C3 I o \u0026lt; 5. r s ., 00  \"R Em M \u0026lt;! n O  rt rt 5 2. 2 Egmi^o-EnW  ft 3 O. m 00 OoQq O co \u0026lt;! \"R3 S2P. r* S Cu O o S CL E S 3  2. fl CL o OQ '**  \u0026lt;D  m C. \u0026lt; oE. 3 S 1 \u0026gt;1 !I\u0026lt;3 ft 3*23 0   2. a R- 3 'm' P.O !R'\"-2.3 o' r^\u0026gt;-rT r* n\u0026gt; o ..... V' n\u0026gt; O 5 LrS\nf  Q- cr w CT j \" foqft no wj [- rti w o ft -I w 3 n oq r. S' n w n K - o a R Q S S3 \" S 33 e ft 9S - - - 2 3 R- . o T 3 \u0026amp;. ? r 7 S o S n n O O o n\u0026gt; c*-  o 3 o a nj ^3 p- C. CT 0^ T o gJls-o 8\nH-S's i-- \"  3 2.-^0/ S\no o o  g -o G- 5  2. o 8 (A r V! r.   o 3 ~ 2 . -cJ rr^p Ct* w s CD CD C/3 05  CD Q CZ\u0026gt; C9 \u0026lt;\"-f \u0026lt;c/3 o n w o t3 c 2. 5=^ 3 BI I a oO ' C2T 3o C3T- o fwl a. S  a 5^ o J o S' S    5 e- M E o 5 w ^'^8 M R- OS !. o ftj \u0026gt;-: LL  n 5^ n o {r 2. 55* 1 X 3 S co CD 00 3 o Ct* a S' 5 5\" S' . R' f  s f CL n 55 c S S-g a 3  qr rse S s  \"a . S d5q ' S' B G',^3 o\u0026gt; 2. b -a S. n 1\nThis project was supported in part by a Digitizing Hidden Special Collections and Archives project grant from The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation and Council on Library and Information Resoources.\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n\n "},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_707","title":"Strategic planning process","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":null,"dc_date":["1993/2003"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System"],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","Little Rock School District","Education--Arkansas","Educational planning","School board members","School improvement programs"],"dcterms_title":["Strategic planning process"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Butler Center for Arkansas Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://arstudies.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/bcmss0837/id/707"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["Available for use in research, teaching, and private study. Any other use requires permission from the Butler Center."],"dcterms_medium":["documents (object genre)"],"dcterms_extent":["148 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\nRECEived NOV 7 Office of Desegregation 95 IMonitoring A Vision For The Future Little Rock School District Proposed Strategic Plan 1996-2001A mission statement is a broad statement of the unique purpose for . which the district exists and the specific function it performs. Mission Statement The mission of the LRSD is to equip all students with the skills and knowledge to realize their aspirations, think critically and independently, learn continuously and face the future as productive contributing citizens. This is accomplished through open access to a diverse, innovative and challenging curriculum in a secure environment with a staff dedicated to excellence and empowered with the trust and support of our community. 1 Beliefs are a statement of the district's fundamental convictions, values, and character. Beliefs We believe....  All people have equal, inherent worth.  Every individual can learn.  Higher expectations coupled with effort stimulate higher levels of performance.  Attitude always influences behavior.  All citizens share the responsibility to ensure that quality education is available to the children of our community.  Excellence in education and fairness for all (equity) are both compatible and inseparable.  The family is a primary influence development of a child. on the  Educated and involved citizens are necessary to sustain the health of a democracy.  Accepting and utilizing cultural and racial diversity enrich and strengthen the community.  Education can enhance every aspect of a person's life.  With every right comes a responsibility.  Actions speak louder than words.  Self-worth allows each individual to aspire to excellence and develop his/her unique capabilities.  Every individual is responsible for contributing to the general welfare of the community. 2 Objectives are an expression of the district's desired, measurable end results of student success, performance and/or achievement. Objectives  By the year 2001, average student performance for every identified sub group (race, gender) will be at or above the 75th percentile as measured by standardized tests.  No later than the year 2001, no fewer than 9 out of 10 students will meet or exceed LRSD standards of performance identified in the core curriculum.  Each student will set and achieve challenging educational goals tailored to his or her interests, abilities and aspirations related to meaningful work, higher learning, citizenship or service to others. 3 Strategies are the means by which the district can accomplish its objectives. Strategies  In partnership with our community, we will establish standards in the core curriculum (reading/language arts, mathematics, science, and social studies) at each appropriate level, as well as develop the means of assessing whether students have met these standards.  We will develop the means to successfully implement or modify the Desegregation Plan in order to achieve unitary status as well as the objectives in the Strategic Plan.  We will develop and implement a broad range of alternatives and interventions for students scoring below the 50th percentile on standardized tests or who are at serious risk of not achieving district standards in the core curriculum.  We will design and implement internal and external communication plans to improve public trust and community support.  We will build strong partnerships with other community agencies and organizations to address external issues that are interfering with students' learning. our 4 Strategies (Continued)  We will develop and implement personnel policies and procedures to ensure all employees are making optimal contributions to our mission and objectives.  We will design a comprehensive staff development system to best achieve the mission and objectives in the Strategic Plan.  We will construct a delivery system that allows us to plan and implement individualized educational goals for all LRSD students that does not predetermine or limit options at an early age.  We will develop and implement plans to establish financial stability and achieve the strategic objectives of the district.  We will develop and implement plans to restore public confidence in the safety and security of our schools.  We will integrate appropriate technology to help achieve our objectives, as well as effectively operate the district.  We will redesign our educational system, its organizational structure and decision-making processes to best achieve the mission and objectives of the Strategic Plan. (No action team necessary, due to dependency on the other strategies.) 5Parameters are the guiding principals that establish the framework within which the district will accomplish its mission. Parameters *  No new program or service will be accepted unless it is consistent with the Strategic Plan, benefits clearly exceed costs, and provisions are made for staff development and program evaluation.  No program or service will be retained unless benefits continue to exceed cost and it continues to make an optimal contribution to the mission.  School-based decision making will always be consistent with the Strategic Plan as well as the Desegregation Plan.  We will not tolerate behavior that diminishes the dignity or self-worth of any individual.  We will maintain a positive fund balance in the operating budget.  We will not tolerate ineffective performance by any employee. * Contractual items will be subject to negotiation. 6 PVe will develop the means to successfully implement or modify the Desegregation Plan in order to achieve unitary status as well as the objectives in the Strategic Plan. Strategy 2 Action Plan Year 1 Year 2/3 Year 2. X 1. Identification of LRSD desegregation plan obligations. X 2. Determine plan requirements/obligations which are not feasible or educationally sound. X 3. Establish a timetable and plan for complying with all feasible obligations. X 4. Seek joint plan modifications and recognition of completed obligations through consultation with ODM, Joshua Intervenors, Knight Intervenors, all for the purpose of enabling the LRSD to achieve goals and objectives. X 5. Declare intention to cooperate with and establish working relationships with Joshua Intervenors, Knight Intervenors, and ODM. 8 We will develop and implement a broad range of alternatives and interventions for students scoring below the 50th percentile on standardized tests or who are at serious risk of not achieving district standards in the core curriculum. Strategy 3 Action Plan Year 1 Year 2/3 Year JZl X 1. Adopt a policy statement providing for intervention as an operative and vital part of elementary school instruction. X 2. Expand comprehensive Reading Recovery/Literacy Support early intervention services for K-3 students who are at risk of not developing literacy skills. X 3. Develop an intervention team at each school which provides systemic support including professional development for teachers which enables all children to sustain adequate yearly progress through grade 3. X 4. Promotes school-wide reform and ensures access of children (from the earliest grades) to effective instructional strategies and challenging academic content. Content will include intensive complex thinking and problem-solving experiences through an integrated literature-based program. X 5. Implement middle school programming to provide a developmentally appropriate educational environment for the academic success of adolescents. X 6. Redesign the delivery system at the alternative learning center to improve academic skills and to address the social, emotional, and behavioral needs of the students. 9 Strategy 3 Action Plan (Continued) X 7. Train requesting teachers in the Math/Science crusade (K-12) to better implement the Goal 2000 plan and give them the background for following the guidelines set forth by the NCTM (National Council of Teachers of Mathematics) and the related science organization. X 8. Provide extended day academic programming for students at risk of failing and in need of extra assistance in core subjects. X 9. Implement a three week summer program for identified at risk students in the middle level grades in order to provide an on-going three year experience in science and math. 10VJe will design and implement internal and external communication plans to improve public trust and community support. Strategy 4 Action Plan Year 1 Year 2/3 Year 4/5 X 1. Communicate key issues with consistency to our audiences. X 2. Increase credibility with teachers, principals, and members of the district's staff through more timely and accurate information flow to and from LRSD's central administration. X 3. Achieve positive relationships with key members of the media in order to help ensure a consistent flow of accurate information to our various audiences. X 4. Expand the use of available tools to positively influence the perceptions of parents, as well as other audiences within the district, with regard to the quality of education received by all children within the LRSD's schools. X 5. Shift focus away from the district back to its individual schools (as well as to their students and teachers). X 6. Create a system that ensures a constant flow of \"success stories\" from the individual LRSD schools into the Districf s Office of Communications for release to the public. X 7. Create positive spokespersons out of parents, teachers and other influential members of the community. 11 Strategy 4 Action Plan (Continued) X 8. Improve the existing system that was designed to direct the media toward the appropriate information source within the District 12We will build strong partnerships with other community agencies and organizations to address external issues that are interfering with our students' learning. Strategy 5 Action Plan Year 1 Year 2/3 Year 4/5 X 1. Expand the role of Partners in Education to include the development of business and community partner coalitions with neighborhood school emphasis in an effort to expand resources which address external issues interfering with students' learning. X 2. Improved opportunities for young people to develop positive interactions with adults who are mentors. X 3. Increase the level of grant funding available to the LRSD to utilize in partnerships with community agencies and organizations to address external issues that interfere with students' learning. X 4. Design and develop a joint working agreement with LRSD and community agencies and organizations that ensures availability of and access to comprehensive support services for all LRSD students. 13 V^e will develop and implement personnel policies and procedures to ensure all employees are making optimal contributions to our mission and objectives. Strategy 6 Action Plan Year 1 Year 2/3 Year JZl X 1. Develop job descriptions that are consistent and specific. X 2. Design recruitment/entrance standards to attract superior personnel who excel academically or otherwise in their major fields of study, experience, or interest X 3. Develop a fair, equitable compensation system for all employees that is objective, fairly administered and tied to the performance of the school. X 4. To maximize student-teacher contact time, decrease substitute personnel expense to the district and enhance the morale of all district personnel. X 5. Create monetary and non-monetary incentives to reward district employees who work for the betterment of our students. X 6. Provide staff with opportunities to pursue educational endeavors that will promote high educational standards within the district X 7. Develop an evaluation process which accurately assesses employee performance and serves as a tool for professional growth. X 8. Develop a termination process which is fair, equitable and effective. [ Contractual items will be subject to negotiation.] 14 We will construct a delivery system that allows us to plan and implement individualized educational goals for all LRSD students that does not predetermine or limit options at an early age. Strategy 8 Action Plan Year 1 Year 2/3 Year 4/5 X lA. Prepare for implementation of site-based management to allow individual schools choice to do what is best to meet the needs of their students. X IB. Implement site-based management to allow individual schools choice to do what is best to meet the individual needs of their students. X 2A. Identify a variety of school innovation options throughout the district to be offered to best meet the needs of students at individual schools. X 2B. Develop a variety of innovation options throughout the district to be offered to best meet the needs of students at individual schools. X 2C. Implement a variety of irmovation options throughout the district to be offered to best meet the needs of students at individual schools. X 3A. Establish a seed school with University Teacher Education ties to do ongoing research in the practical applications of various school programs and options, to keep current with literature in the field, to provide a site for exemplary individualized education for a student body representative of the LRSD student population, to do training by demonstration and example as well as precept, and thus continually adding to the list of potential programs and options for educational individualization. 16 Strategy 8 Action Plan(Continued - Page 2) X 3B. Support and maintain operation of seed school. X 3C. Utilize the seed school to support teacher education and the testing of new educational programs and strategies designed to maximize individualized education. X 4. Allow students in grades K-12 to move at their own developmental and intellectual pace as teachers discover their learning styles to eliminate permanent ability tracking. X 5A. Acquire alternative assessment methods that allow teachers to determine a students actual functioning level so as to provide appropriate programming and to eliminate permanent ability tracking. X 5B. Implement alternative assessment methods that allow teachers to determine a studenf s actual functioning level so as to provide appropriate programming and to eliminate permanent ability tracking. X 6. Strengthen pupil service teams to be utilized as a first line screening mechanism for students evidencing problems so that alternative program options will be implemented for students not requiring Special Education. X 7. Collaborate with the community to offer early childhood programs for children ages 2 to 4 as an option for district patrons, with preference going to low socio economic status (SES) families, to provide experiences and information needed to equalize student preparation. X 8. Cultivate and use the community centralized resources guide (refer to strategy 5) for the individual development of each and every student. 17Strategy 8 Action Plan(Continued - Page 3) X 9. Provide commuruty based services that enable parents, students, and community to work together to further a child's education. X 10. Create an educational climate which encourages parent/ teacher interaction by eliminating major barriers and providing increased opportunities for participation in the learning process. 18We will develop and implement plans to establish financial stability and achieve the strategic objectives of the district. Strategy 9 Action Plan Year 1 Year 2/3 Year 4/5 X 1. Develop strategies to retain and attract students to the LRSD to assure adequate future revenues from sources that will be increasingly based on the size of student population. X 2. Develop a financial committee composed of LRSD personnel and community representatives to function as an advisory committee to the LRSD Board and Superintendent on budget development, monitoring, implementation, and other financial matters. X 3. Develop Board fiscal policy statements and manual to be housed in an official repository addressing revenues, expenditures, millage increase, debt service, monitoring, reporting, facilities planning, and staffing and procedures to effectively communicate to the public, teachers, and administration. X 4. Develop a five year revenue forecast (by month for the first year and annually for years two through five) for the District. X 5. Develop a five year expense forecast (by month for the first year and annually for years two through five) for the District X 6. Revise the process and develop policy on monitoring actual performance compared to budget to include Board briefings, mid-year adjustments and amendments, and report formats. 19 Strategy 9 Action Plan(Continued - Page 2) X 7. Select peer school districts and develop performance indicators for comparison purposes in order to identify areas and possible means for improvement X 8. Establish a committee of District and non-District representatives to monitor proposed legislation and/or regulations and make recommendations for new, or revisions to current, laws and regulations that would impact operations of the LRSD. X 9. Establish a goal to prepare a budget document that will meet the criteria for the Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA) Distinguished Budget Presentation Award. X 10. Develop resource sharing partnerships with North Little Rock School District (NLRSD) and Pulaski County Special School District (PCSSD). 20We will develop and implement plans to restore public confidence in the safety and security of our schools. strategy 10 Action Plan Year 1 Year 2/3 Year 4/5 X 1. Provide ongoing conflict resolution training and skill development for students. X 2. Improve behavior and safety on school buses and bus stops. X 3. Control access to school buildings, grounds and events. X 4. Implement a staff development plan for all personnel to fully understand safety policies and procedures. X 5. Develop and enhance a system of communication among schools, administration, and the public regarding issues of safety and security. X 6. Inform the public of plan in regard to the following (a) control of drug activity (b) violence prevention (c) campus and bus security\n(language that is direct and easy for all to understand). X 7. Develop a credible evaluation plan that will ensure complete and proper implementation. 21 We will integrate appropriate technology to help achieve our objectives, as well as effectively operate the district. Strategy 11 Action Plan Year 1 Year 2/3 Year 4/5 X 1. Define technology in terms of the educational and administrative needs of the LRSD. X 2. Establish a broad based technology advisory board for the LRSD. X 3. Acquire and implement the technology needed to meet current and future instructional and administrative needs of the LRSD. X 4. Assemble a technical staff to implement and support district information technologies, including computer hardware and software applications, networking, computer operations, and audiovisual services. X 5. Design and implement a comprehensive technology training program for all LRSD employees (teachers, administrators, and support staff) that provides appropriate facilities, tools, training, and supplies to maximize effectiveness. X 6. Train students in the use of technology so that they are able to access, evaluate, and apply information. X 7. Train students to use current technology to increase competencies in problem solving, specific content areas and critical thinking skills. 22 NOV 08 85 11 Ml c*'t P.l Pulaski County Special School District 925 East Dixon Road Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 (501) 490-2000 Post Ofhce Box 8601 Ltitle Rock, Arkansas 72216 FAX (501) 490-0483 Date: Time: , jj:s5' /4. /H. To: ^n//y From\ny/y Number of Pages (including cover sheet): 7' Message SCHOOL CAPACITY INFORMATION PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT October 17, 1935 HIGH SCHOOL SCHOOL CAPACITY Jacksonville Mills North Pulaski Oak Grove Jr./Sr. Robinson Sylvan Hills -IO2S 780 900 935 506 998 JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOLS SCHOOL CAPACITY Puller Jacksonville North Jacksonville South Northwood Robinson Scott (Alternative Sch.) Sylvan Hills 945 737 727 1014 514 125 925 ELEiVIEMTARY SCHOOL SCHOOL CAPACITY Adkins Arnold Drive Baker Bates Bayou Meto Cato Clinton College Station Crystal Hill Dupree Fuller Harris Jacksonville Landmark Lawson Oak Grove Oakbrooke Pine Forest Pinewood Robinson Scott Sherwood Sylvan Hills Murrell Taylor Tolleson ASO 420 328 768 66A 600 800 340 820 465 526 525 785 599 365 476 555 440 656 500 280 492 519 444 570Office of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501)376-6200 Fax (501) 371-0100 Date: Novel er 27. 1995 From: in Brown To: Leon Modeste and Linda Young Subject: LRSD Draft Proposed Strategic Plan My staff and I have reviewed the proposed strategic plan you sent me earlier this month, as 1 had indicated we would in my November 7 memo to you. Our comments and questions are listed below. We applaud your efforts and those of the many employees and volunteers who participated in the strategic planning process. We heartily wish you every success in the plans implementation, and look forward to the progress it should foster. 1. The document reflects lots of hard work and contains many excellent proposals. It is general enough to allow for changing circumstances but precise enough to outline specific actions. 2. Tlie proposals are complementary to the LRSDs desegregation plan and goals and should work well in tandem with the districts desegregation commitments. 3. One idea that struck us as particularly valuable was that proposed in Strategy 8. Establishing ties to higher education entities and having those schools conduct ongoing research into the practical applications of a variety of educational programs is a type of input and evaluation that should be very helpful to the district. 4. Some of the strategies could be quite expensive, those for technology and the summer program for at-risk students for example. How does the district expect to finance these and the other recommendations? 5. The objective to raise average student performance on standardized tests to the 75th percentile or above for every subgroup is very ambitious. However, given the nature of standardized testing and the student population of the LRSD, it is also probably highly unrealistic. 6. Achieving the proposals will obviously involve additional types and phases of planning. How and when does the district plan to attach specific implementation steps, dates, responsible persons, benchmarks, and evaluation criteria to each of the proposals?Office of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501)376-6200 Fax (501) 371-0100 November 27, 1995 Dr. Henry P. Williams Little Rock School District 810 West Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Hank: Ive recently received and read a copy of the LRSD Proposed Strategic Plan for 1996-2001. The plan obviously represents a tremendous amount of work on the part of many vitally interested and involved people. It contains many excellent ideas and laudable objectives and fits well with the districts desegregation plan and goals. 1 congratulate you, your staff, and the citizen volunteers on completion of this worthwhile planning process. When do you expect to announce more details about how the strategic plan will be carried out, such as the execution steps and dates, budgetary allotments, the names of those responsible for various aspects of implementation, and the evaluation criteria? 111 appreciate receiving this information as soon as its available so my staff and 1 can be on the lookout for ways to positively highlight your strategic plan in action. 1 wish you every success in bringing the strategic plan to life. Please let me know how 1 may be of assistance. Sincerely yours, Ann S. Brown cc: Members, LRSD Board of Education JOHN W. WALKER, P.A. RECS3WD JOHN W. WALKER RALPH WASHINGTON MARK BURNETTE AUSTIN PORTER JR. ATTORNEY AT LAW 1723 BROADWAY LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72206 TELEPHONE (501) 374-3758 FAX (501) 374-4187 JAN 1 I 1996 Office of Desegregaficri Mor lung [Delivered by Fax \u0026amp; U.S. Mail] January 9,1996 Honorable F. G. \"Buddy\" Villines Pulaski County Judge County Administration Building 201 S. Broadway Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Jim Dailey Mayor of the City of Little Rock, Arkansas City Hall 500 W. Markham St. Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Patrick Henry Hayes Mayor of the City of No. Little Rock P.O. Box 5757 No. Little Rock, AR 72119 Dear Sirs\nI was privileged to attend a meeting of the Board of Directors of New Futures this morning. That organization has budgeted funds to support what is known as the \"Little Rock School District's Strategic Plan\". Mayor Dailey is a member of that Board of Directors. I was pleased to know that the support was being given to the Strategic Plan but 1 am somewhat curious to know whether the same support has been given to the plans of desegregation which were entered into between the three Pulaski County School Districts, the Arkansas Department of Education, the teachers, and the black plaintiffs in the school case. Letters of support of the Desegregation Plans were promised along with good faith efforts of public officials to make the plans work. The purpose of this letter is to ascertain the specific efforts and budgets which have been adopted to support the parties' desegregation efforts.Page Two Honorable F.G. \"Buddy\" Villines Mr. Jim Dailey Mr. Patrick Henry Hayes January 9,1996 Would each of you kindly provide me with any letters of support or ordinances or resolutions of support, including financial support, which have been directed toward the desegregation efforts. I would also like for you to delineate the specific problems, if any, which you perceive to be in need of corrective action. I particularly invite Mayor Dailey's reply. Thank you for your cooperation. Sincerely, Joi Walker JWW:lp co: Dr. Henry Williams Mr. Bobby Lester Mr. James Smith Ms. Ann Brown All Counsel of Records A Little Rock School District wSS S .- To: From: Subj ect: January 22, 1996 Ann Brown, Federal Monitor Office of Desegregation Monitoring iX inda Young and ^ieon Modeste Strategic Plan Facilitators Office Little Rock School District Strategic Plan JAH 2 4 1996 In accordance with our telephone conversation, we are responding to your request for an update on the Strategic Plan. We are most grateful to you and your staff for taking the time to read the LRSD Strategic Plan. Also, we deeply appreciate your support and thoughtful comments. There were two specific questions that you were concerned about: First, what are our expectations of funding action plans that are expensive? It is our intention to implement a funding strategy with the support of our advisory committees. We will be seeking a variety of funding sources. However, this is not anticipated for this first year. Second, a response to your request regarding implementation: We are currently making preparations to move into the most difficult part of \"implementation phase\". the Strategic Plan, which is the Dr. Williams has assigned key administrators to specific strategies (See Attached). On January 30 and 31, 1996, Dr. Howard Fedema will facilitate the \"Mutual Expectations Workshop\". At that time the key administrators will began to design their work through the lens of the strategic plan. If you or any of your staff wish to attend the workshops, please feel free to inform us 810 West Markham Street  Little Rock, Arkansas 72201  (501)324-2000 Response to Strategic Plan page 3 Attachment strategy Assigned Administrator #1 Curriculum Gene Parker, Supervisor Communications, English, ESL, and Foreign Languages/ Acting Director of Reading #2 Desegregation Russ Mayo, Associate Supt. of Desegregation #3 Scores Below 50% Victor Anderson, Asst. Superintendent/Secondary #4 Communications Suellen Vann, Director, Communications #5 Community Partnerships Debbie Milam, VIPS Coordinator *6 Personnel Brady Gadberiry, Director Labor Relations #7 Staff Development Sterling Ingram, Director Staff Development #8 Equity Patty Kohler, Director Div. of Except. Children #9 Finances Fred Smith, Manager Support Services #10 Safety JoEvelyn Elston, Director Pupil Services #11 Technology David Beason, Director Information Services Strategic Plan Facilitators Linda Young, Liaison New Futures/Restructuring Director Leon E. Modeste, Special Asst, to Superintendents LnTLii Rock School Distkiof OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDENT April 15. 1996 Walter Hussman Publisher Arkansas Democrat-Gazette P. O. Box 2221 Little Rock, AR 72203 Dear Walter: Public education has been, and will continue to be, an important concern among residents of this community. It is critical, therefore, that dialogue exists between educators and the community. It is equally important that media representatives meet periodically with educational leaders to discuss the issues which we must address. In fact, the Tri-District Desegregation Plan calls for regular meetings between a media coalition and the superintendents of the three public school districts. I would like to invite you, or your representative, to meet with Bobby Lester, Pulaski County Special School District Superintendent\nJames Smith, North Little Rock School District Superintendent\nand me on Wednesday, April 24, at 8:30 a.m. The meeting will be held in the Board Room of the Little Rock School District Administration Building, 810 West Markham. I look forward to meeting with you, other media representatives, and the other local superintendents. Sir/cerely, :\u0026lt;\nnry P. Williams Superintendent of Schools cc: Bobby Lester James Smith 810 West Miirkliain Sired l.ltLle R\u0026lt;x:k, ArkajiMUH 72201 (501)321-2(X)0 * Little Rock School District 810 West Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 April 18, 1996 TO: All Little Rock School District Personnel FROM: Linda Young, Internal Coordinator, Strategic Planning ^^B-c^on Modeste, internal Coordinator, Strategic Planning THROUGH: enry r. Willi\nis, Superintendent of Schools RE: Questions Following the April 5th Strategic Planning Update As promised, we are providing responses to the questions and thoughtful concerns that were articulated by staff members across the district following the closed circuit telecast about strategic planning. We are very pleased with the interest in and positive comments about our district-wide effort to ensure continued success for our students into the 21st century. What follows is a response by Dr. Williams to your questions. We encourage each of you to continue to think about the strategies addressed through our strategic planning effort and to become involved in the work that must be done to ensure that our mission becomes our reality. Again we encourage you to become involved by volunteering to serve on one of the numerous stratgic planning teams that are currenly being formed. Listed below are the lead administrators responsible for the implementation of the strategic plan. Please feel free to contact us or any of the strategy leaders if you wish to become involved. Leon Modeste, Internal Coordinator Linda Young, Internal Coordinator 324-2011 324-2112 I Strategy | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Title Core Curriculum Standards Implement Desegregation Plan Students Testing Below 50% Communication Plans Community Partnerships_____ Personnel Policies Staff Development____________ Equitable Delivery System Financial Stability____________ School Safety_________________ Use of Technology Leader Gene Parker Russ Mayo_____ Vic Anderson Suellen Vann Debbie Milam Brady Gadberry Sterling Ingram Patty Kohler Fred Smith JoEvelyn Elston David Beason I Telephone# | 324-0510 ~ 324-2429 324-2005 324-2020 324-2297 324-2118 324-2130 324-2190 324-2003 324-2162 324-2056Little Rock School District Strategic Planning Update April 18, 1996 Follow Up Questions And Answers Is it really possible by the year 2001 for average student performance for every identified sub group to be at or above the 75th percentile as measured by standardized tests'? Those of us who have taken a course in measurements and statistics have probably come away from that experience believing that this objective is impossible to achieve. Why? The answer is simply because of the nature of statistics. But, the strategic planning committee wanted to set objectives that would really stretch us and force us to grow into a new way of thinking about what can happen for students. This objective is a desired objective. Our hope is that through the strategic planning effort -all of us- administrators, teachers, and support staff-will come together to create an optimum learning environment for all students. The intent of this environment will be to nurture all of our students in ways that encourage them to achieve their personal maximums. The strategic planning committee has identified ambitious strategies for moving the district toward realization of this objective. Specifically, strategies 1, 3, 7, and 8 address comprehensive systemic changes designed to accomplish this through standards for curriculum and assessment, innovative strategies for improving below grade level performance, staff development, and site-based management. Finally, do I believe that the intent of this objective is obtainable? Yes - absolutely. As we work together throughout the district, building on a common belief system, we can achieve our mission. Student behavior and discipline issues in our classrooms and schools remain major concerns for most of us. Where among the twelve strategies are these concerns addressed? These concerns are actually addressed throughout the entire strategic plan. However, they are exphcitly addressed in strategy 10 which focuses on the development and implementation of actions aimed at restoring public confidence in the safety and security of our schools. These actions include providing ongoing conflict resolution training and skill development for our f '71^ J LriTLE Rock School District APf !996 OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDENT j AA pri1l 11 5c , 11 n9n9n6 | Of D: Dear Colleagues: As a foUow up to the Strategic Planning. Update on Friday, April Sth, I would like to take this opportunity to share with you my personal excitement regarding the progress that has been made in the strategic planning effort. I am encouraged by the positive comments and the thoughtful questions that I have received since our closed circuit broadcast. From the update, you no doubt gleaned that we have undertaken a comprehensive effort to take our school district into the 21st century. The secret to our future success hes in the development of specific action strategies based on a clear vision for the future, rather than the more familiar long range planning which perpetuates, ultimately, an unsatisfactory status quo. The eleven strategies represent a monumental opportunity to create a world class school system that will sustain and challenge all students as they journey through our educational programs. Specifically, I am extremely pleased to report that we are making progress on developing standards for student performance, curricular content, and delivery systems. These standards will ensure the continuity between and among the components of learning experience necessary to produce successful learners. In doing so, they will provide us with clear direction about what we need to do, how we need to do it\nand, for a change, they will provide us with information about what we must have in order to do it well. Through the strategic planning effort we have made significant progress in identifying appropriate strategies for students who are performing below grade level. We plan to share more information about this in the very near future through revised policies, procedures, and the identification of new options for early intervention and ongoing academic support. Several of you have expressed concerns about the issues of disciphne, safety, and security. Let me assure you that as we continue to move through the strategic planning process, we will focus on discipline, safety, and security as 810 West MaiWiam Street  Little Rock, Arkansas 72201  (501) 324-2000 RECESVSO Little Rock School District 810 West Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 APR i 3 1996 Office of Desegregation Monitoring April 18, 1996 TO: All Little Rock School District Personnel FROM: Linda Young, Internal Coordinator, Strategic Planning .^SK/^on Modeste, Jnternal Coordinator, Strategic Planning THROUGH: enry P, Willii s. Superintendent of Schools RE: Questions Following the April 5th Strategic Planning Update As promised, we are providing responses to the questions and thoughtful concerns that were articulated by staff members across the district following the closed circuit telecast about strategic planning. We are very pleased with the interest in and positive comments about our district-wide effort to ensure continued success for our students into the 21st century. What follows is a response by Dr. Williams to your questions. We encourage each of you to continue to think about the strategies addressed through our strategic planning effort and to become involved in the work that must be done to ensure that our mission becomes our reality. Again we encourage you to become involved by volunteering to serve on one of the numerous stratgic planning teams that are currenly being formed. Listed below are the lead administrators responsible for the implementation of the strategic plan. Please feel free to contact us or any of the strategy leaders if you wish to become involved. Leon Modeste, Internal Coordinator Linda Young, Internal Coordinator 324-2011 324-2112 I Strate^ i 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ________________Title Core Curriculum Standards Implement Desegregation Plan Students Testing Below 50% Communication Plans Community Partnerships_____ Personnel Policies Staff Development____________ Equitable Delivery System Financial Stability____________ School Safety_________________ Use of Technology Leader Gene Parker Russ Mayo_____ Vic Anderson Suellen Vann Debbie Milam Brady Gadberry Sterling Ingram Patty Kohler Fred Smith JoEvelyn Elston David Beason ] Telephone# | 324-0510 324-2429 324-2005 324-2020 324-2297 324-2118 324-2130 324-2190 324-2003 324-2162 324-2056Little Rock School District Strategic Planning Update April 18, 1996 Follow Up Questions And Answers Is it really possible by the year 2001 for average student performance for every identified sub group to be at or above the 75th percentile as measured by standardized tests'? Those of us who have taken a course in measurements and statistics have probably come away from that experience believing that this objective is impossible to achieve. Why? The answer is simply because of the nature of statistics. But, the strategic planning committee wanted to set objectives that would really stretch us and force us to grow into a new way of thinking about what can happen for students. This objective is a desired objective. Our hope is that through the strategic planning effort -all of us- administrators, teachers, and support staff-will come together to create an optimum learning environment for aU students. The intent of this environment will be to nurture all of our students in ways that encourage them to achieve their personal maximums. The strategic planning committee has identified ambitious strategies for moving the district toward realization of this objective. Specifically, strategies 1, 3, 7, and 8 address comprehensive systemic changes designed to accomplish this through standards for curriculum and assessment, innovative strategies for improving below grade level performance, staff development, and site-based management. Finally, do I believe that the intent of this objective is obtainable? Yes - absolutely. As we work together throughout the district, building on a common belief system, we can achieve our mission. Student behavior and discipline issues in our classrooms and schools remain major concerns for most of us. Where among the twelve strategies are these concerns addressed? These concerns are actually addressed throughout the entire strategic plan. However, they are explicitly addressed in strategy 10 which focuses on the development and implementation of actions aimed at restoring public confidence in the safety and security of our schools. These actions include providing ongoing conflict resolution training and skill development for our Page Two October 10, 1996 I hope you make it clear as soon as possible and in as widespread a manner as possible that we are not in disagreement of this fundamental principle. Sincerely, W. Walker JWW:lp cc\nMs. Ann Brown Dr. Roosevelt Brown Mr. Rett Tucker A Vision For The Future Little Rock School District Proposed Strategic Plan 1996-2001 A mission statement is a broad statement of the unique purpose for which the district exists and the specific junction it performs. Mission Statement The mission of the LRSD is to equip all students with the skills and knowledge to realize their aspirations, think critically and independently, learn continuously and face the future as productive contributing citizens. a This is accomplished through open access to diverse, innovative and challenging curriculum in a secure environment with a staff dedicated to excellence and empowered with the trust and support of our community. 1 Beliefs are a statement of the district's fundamental convictions, values, and character. Beliefs Wc believe....  All people have equal, inherent worth.  Every individual can learn.  Higher expectations coupled with effort stimulate higher levels of performance.  Attitude always influences behavior.  All citizens share the responsibility to ensure that quality education is available to the children of our community.  Excellence in education and fairness for all (equity) are both compatible and inseparable.  The family is a primary influence on the development of a child.  Educated and involved citizens are necessary to sustain the health of a democracy.  Accepting and utilizing cultural and racial diversity enrich and strengthen the community.  Education can enhance every aspect of a person's life.  With every right comes a responsibility.  Actions speak louder than words.  Self-worth allows each individual to aspire to excellence and develop his/her unique capabilities.  Every individual is responsible for contributing to the general welfare of the community. 2 Objectives are an expression of the districts desired, measurable end results of student success, performance and/or achievement. Objectives  By the year 2001, average student performance for every identified sub group (race, gender) will be at or above the 75th percentile as measured by standardized tests.  No later than the year 2001, no fewer than 9 out of 10 students will meet or exceed LRSD standards of performance identified in the core curriculum.  Each student will set and achieve challenging educational goals tailored to his or her interests, abilities and aspirations related to meaningful work, higher learning, citizenship or service to others. 3 Strategies are the means by which the district can accomplish its objectives. Strategies  In partnership with our community, we will establish standards in the core curriculum (reading/language arts, mathematics, science, and social studies) at each appropriate level, as well as develop the means of assessing whether students have met these standards.  We will develop the means to successfully implement or modify the Desegregation Plan in order to achieve unitary status as well as the objectives in the Strategic Plan.  We will develop and implement a broad range of alternatives and interventions for students scoring below the 50th percentile on standardized tests or who are at serious risk of not achieving district standards in the core curriculum.  We will design and implement internal and external communication plans to improve public trust and community support.  We will build strong partnerships with other community agencies and organizations to address external issues that are interfering with students' learning. our 4 Strategies (Continued)  We will develop and implement personnel policies and procedures to ensure all employees are making optimal contributions to our mission and objectives.  We will design a comprehensive staff development system to best achieve the mission and objectives in the Strategic Plan.  We will construct a delivery system that allows us to plan and implement individualized educational goals for all LRSD students that does not predetermine or limit options at an early age.  We will develop and implement plans to establish financial stability and achieve the strategic objectives of the district.  We will develop and implement plans to restore public confidence in the safety and security of our schools.  We will integrate appropriate technology to help achieve our objectives, as well Operate the district.  We will redesign our as effectively educational system, its 0/^^ organizational structure and decision-making processes to best achieve the mission and objectives of the Strategic Plan. (No action team necessary, due to dependency on the other strategies.) 5In partnership with our community, we will establish standards in the core curriculum (reading/lan^uage arts, mathematics, science, and social studies) at each appropriate level, as well as develop the means of assessing whether students have met these standards. Strategy 1 Action Plan Year 1 Year 2/3 Year 4/5 X 1. Adopt a definition for content standards in the Little Rock School District. X 2. Adopt a definition for performance standards in the Little Rock School District. X 3. Submit the components of performance standard sets in the Little Rock School District. X X 4. Develop performance standards for the Little Rock School District. X 5. Adopt a definition for delivery standards in the Little Rock School District. X 6. Adopt components of delivery standard sets in the Little Rock School District. X 7. Develop delivery standards for the Little Rock School District X X 8. Develop a trainer-of-trainers model for the Little Rock School District to use to train all appropriate human resources on how to implement and achieve the standards. 7 We will develop the means to successfully implement or modify the Desegregation Plan in order to achieve unitary status as well as the objectives in the Strategic Plan. Strategy 2 Action Plan Year 1 Year 2/3 Year 4/5 X 1. Identification of LRSD desegregation plan obligations. X 2. Determine plan requirements/obligations which are not feasible or educationally sound. X 3. Establish a timetable and plan for complying with all feasible obligations. X 4. Seek joint plan modifications and recognition of completed obligations through consultation with ODM, Joshua Intervenors, Knight Intervenors, all for the purpose of enabling the LRSD to achieve goals and objectives. X 5. Declare intention to cooperate with and establish working relationships with Joshua Intervenors, Knight Intervenors, and ODM. 8 We will develop and implement a broad range of alternatives and interventions for students scoring below the 50th percentile on standardized tests or who are at serious risk of not achieving district standards in the core curriculum. Strategy 3 Action Plan Year 1 Year 2/3 Year 4/5 X 1. Adopt a policy statement providing for intervention as an operative and vital part of elementary school instruction. X 2. Expand comprehensive Reading Recovery/Literacy Support early intervention services for K-3 students who are at risk of not developing literacy skills. X 3. Develop an intervention team at each school which provides systemic support including professional development for teachers which enables all children to sustain adequate yearly progress through grade 3. X 4. Promotes school-wide reform and ensures access of children (from the earliest grades) to effective instructional strategies and challenging academic content. Content will include intensive complex thinking and problem-solving experiences through an integrated literature-based program. X 5. Implement middle school programming to provide a developmentally appropriate educational environment for the academic success of adolescents. X 6. Redesign the delivery system at the alternative learning center to improve academic skills and to address the social, emotional, and behavioral needs of the students. 9 Strategy 3 Action Plan (Continued) X 7. Train requesting teachers in the Math/Science crusade (K-12) to better implement the Goal 2000 plan and give them the background for following the guidelines set forth by the NCTM (National Council of Teachers of Mathematics) and the related science organization. X 8. Provide extended day academic programming for students at risk of failing and in need of extra assistance in core subjects. X 9. Implement a three week summer program for identified at risk students in the middle level grades in order to provide an on-going three year experience in science and math. 10We will design and implement internal and external communication plans to improve public trust and community support. Strategy 4 Action Plan Year 1 Year 2/3 Year 4/5 X 1. Communicate key issues with consistency to our audiences. X 2. Increase credibility with teachers, principals, and members of the district's staff through more timely and accurate information flow to and from LRSD's central administration. X 3. Achieve positive relationships with key members of the media in order to help ensure a consistent flow of accurate information to our various audiences. X 4. Expand the use of available tools to positively influence the perceptions of parents, as well as other audiences within the district, with regard to the quality of education received by all children within the LRSD's schools. X 5. Shift focus away from the district back to its individual schools (as well as to their students and teachers). X 6. Create a system that ensures a constant flow of \"success stories\" from the individual LRSD schools into the Districts Office of Communications for release to the public. X 7. Create positive spokespersons out of parents, teachers and other influential members of the community. II Strategy 4 Action Plan (Continued) X 8. Improve the existing system that was designed to direct the media toward the appropriate information source within the District 12We will build strong partnerships with other community agencies and organizations to address external issues that are interfering with our students' learning. Strategy 5 Action Plan Year 1 Year 2/3 Year 4/5 X 1. Expand the role of Partners in Education to include the development of business and community partner coalitions with neighborhood school emphasis in an effort to expand resources which address external issues interfering with students' learning. X 2. Improved opportunities for young people to develop positive interactions with adults who are mentors. X 3. Increase the level of grant funding available to the LRSD to utilize in partnerships with community agencies and organizations to address external issues that interfere with students' learning. X 4. Design and develop a joint working agreement with LRSD and community agencies and organizations that ensures availability of and access to comprehensive support services for all LRSD students. 13 We will design a comprehensive staff development system to best achieve the mission and objectives in the Strategic Plan. strategy 7 Action Plan Year 1 Year 2/3 Year 4/5 X 1. To reformulate a district-level Staff Development Planiung Council which will bring together stakeholders to advise and assist in the development of policy for and evaluation of a staff-development system that is site-specific and driven by the three objectives adopted by the LRSD. X 2. To train the Staff Development Planning Council, central administrative staff, and staff at five schools on teaming for school improvement. X 3. To meet the needs and address the problems of school sites through the use of school improvement teams. X 4. To establish a district and community technical assistance network to support school improvement teams. X X 5. To evaluate the staff development system within the district 15 We will construct a delivery system that allows us to plan and implement individualized educational goals for all LRSD students that does not predetermine or limit options at an early age. strategy 8 Action Plan Year 1 Year 2/3 Year X lA. Prepare for implementation of site-based management to allow individual schools choice to do what is best to meet the needs of their students. X IB. Implement site-based management to allow individual schools choice to do what is best to meet the individual needs of their students. X 2A. Identify a variety of school innovation options throughout the district to be offered to best meet the needs of students at individual schools. X 2B. Develop a variety of innovation options throughout the district to be offered to best meet the needs of students at individual schools. X 2C. Implement a variety of innovation options throughout the district to be offered to best meet the needs of students at individual schools. X 3A. Establish a seed school with University Teacher Education ties to do ongoing research in the practical applications of various school programs and options, to keep current with literature in the field, to provide a site for exemplary individualized education for a student body representative of the LRSD student population, to do training by demonstration and example as well as precept, and thus continually adding to the list of potential programs and options for educational individualization.____________________ 16 Strategy 8 Action Plan(Continued - Page 2) X 3B. Support and maintain operation of seed school. X 3C. Utilize the seed school to support teacher education and the testing of new educational programs and strategies designed to maximize individualized education. X 4. Allow students in grades K-12 to move at their own developmental and intellectual pace as teachers discover their learning styles to eliminate permanent ability tracking. X 5A. Acquire alternative assessment methods that allow teachers to determine a student's actual functioning level so as to provide appropriate programming and to eliminate permanent ability tracking. X 5B. Implement alternative assessment methods that allow teachers to determine a students actual functioning level so as to provide appropriate programming and to eliminate permanent ability tracking. X 6 Strengthen pupil service teams to be utilized as a first line screening mechanism for students evidencing problems so that alternative program options will be implemented for students not requiring Special Education. X 7 Collaborate with the community to offer early childhood programs for children ages 2 to 4 as an option for district patrons, with preference going to low socio economic status (SES) families, to provide experiences preparation. and information needed to equalize student X i 8. Cultivate and use the community centralized resources guide (refer to strategy 5) for the individual development of each and every student._____________________________________________________ 17Strategy 8 Action Plan(Continued - Page 3) X 9. Provide community based services that enable parents, students, and community to work together to further a child's education. X 10. Create an educational climate which encourages parent/teacher interaction by eliminating major barriers and providing increased opportunities for participation in the learning process. 18We will develop and implement plans to establish financial stability and achieve the strategic objectives of the district. strategy 9 Action Plan Year 1 Year 2/3 Year 4/5 X 1. Develop strategies to retain and attract students to the LRSD to assure adequate future revenues from sources that will be increasingly based on the size of student population. X 2. Develop a financial committee composed of LRSD personnel and community representatives to function as an advisory committee to the LRSD Board and Superintendent on budget development, monitoring, implementation, and other financial matters. X 3. Develop Board fiscal policy statements and manual to be housed in an official repository addressing revenues, expenditures, millage increase, debt service, monitoring, reporting, facilities planning, and staffing and procedures to effectively communicate to the public, teachers, and administration. X 4. Develop a five year revenue forecast (by month for the first year and annually for years two through five) for the District. X 5. Develop a five year expense forecast (by month for the first year and annually for years two through five) for the District X 6. Revise the process and develop policy on monitoring actual performance compared to budget to include Board briefings, mid-year adjustments and amendments, and report formats. 19 Strategy 9 Action Plan(Continued - Page 2) X 7. Select peer school districts and develop performance indicators for comparison purposes in order to identify areas and possible means for improvement X 8. Establish a committee of District and non-District representatives to monitor proposed legislation and/or regulations and make recommendations for new, or revisions to current, laws and regulations that would impact operations of the LRSD. X 9. Establish a goal to prepare a budget document that will meet the criteria for the Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA) Distinguished Budget Presentation Award. X 10. Develop resource sharing partnerships with North Little Rock School District (NLRSD) and Pulaski County Special School District (PCSSD). 20We will develop and implement plans to restore public confidence in the safety and security of our schools. Strategy 10 Action Plan Year 1 Year 2/3 Year 4/5 X 1. Provide ongoing conflict resolution training and skill development for students. X 2. Improve behavior and safety on school buses and bus stops. X 3. Control access to school buildings, grounds and events. X 4. Implement a staff development plan for all personnel to fully understand safety policies and procedures. X 5. Develop and enhance a system of communication among schools, administration, and the public regarding issues of safety and security. X 6. Inform the public of plan in regard to the following (a) control of drug activity (b) violence prevention (c) campus and bus security\n(language that is direct and easy for all to understand). X 7. Develop a credible evaluation plan that will ensure complete and proper implementation. 21 Strategy 11 Action Plan (Continued - Page 2) X 8. Train teachers, administrators, and other school support staff to use current technology to increase productivity and maximize effectiveness. X 9. Gather, store, and analyze student data bases used to provide accurate and timely reports. 23IRh. MAY 8 1998 it  OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING LnTLE Rock School District OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDENT May 7. 1998 Ms. Ann Brown, ODM 201 E. Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Ms. Brown: The Little Rock School District is preparing to conduct an update session of the Strategic Plan. We believe that the periodic update is vital to successful strategic implementation and to the organization itself. This session will provide an opportunity to review the revised desegregation plan, re-validate priorities, and gain a narrower focus with more intense concentration of effort on significant objectives. The team will also review the progress that has been made in the implementation of the strategic plan over the past months. It is my hope that you will agree to serve on the strategic planning team. The team will meet Thursday, June 4 and Friday, June 5 at St. James United Methodist Church, 321 Pleasant Valley Drive in Jones Hall. On June 4 and 5, breakfast will be available at 7:30 a.m. with the sessions beginning at 8:00 a.m. Sessions will conclude at 9:00 p.m. on June 4 and 5:00 p.m. on June 5. Thank you for your consideration of this matter. Please call Linda Young at 324-2112 to confirm your participation. Sincerely, Kes Carnine Soperintendent 810 West Markham Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501) 824-2000P\u0026gt;. (4*- SiAA-f^ 2 19S8 Little Rock School District OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING June 1, 1998 Ms. Melissa Guldin, ODM 201 E. Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Ms. Guldin: Thank you for agreeing to serve on the Little Rock School District Strategic Planning Team. Attached for your review is overview information about the Little Rock School District, a copy of the Strategic Plan, and a copy of the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. The team will meet Thursday, June 4 and Friday, June 5 at St. James United Methodist Church, 321 Pleasant Valley Drive in the Peck Building, Entrance 6. Breakfast will be available at 7:30 a.m. with the sessions beginning at 8:00 a.m. Sessions will conclude between 9:00 and 10:00 p.m. on June 4 and 5:00 p.m. on June 5. In order to provide full participation from the team and accomplish the work that must be completed, it is important for all members to be present during the entire session. A map of the St. James facility is enclosed for your convenience. The Peck Building is labeled Building Entrance 6 and is located on the East side or freeway side of the building. The meeting will be held in Room 109. If you have any questions, please give me a call at 324-2112. Thanks again. Sincerely, Linda Young New Futures Liaison and Restructuring Director 810 West Markham Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201  (501)324-2000DATE: TO: FROM: RE: Little Rock School District November 4, 1998 Strategic Planning Team Members Young, New Futures Liaison J NOV 5 1998 OFJCEOF DESEGREGATION MCMITORINQ D ^3 Strategic Plan Update Session November 10, 1998 7:30 - 5:00 St. James United Methodist Church 321 Pleasant Valley Drive Enclosed are the draft action team recommendations for Strategies Two, Four and Ten as requested by the team in June. Please review the material prior to the meeting on November 10. A special note of clarification, action team ten has developed a new action plan and added steps to several original action plans. The complete list of original and newly developed action steps have been provided for action plans in which additional steps are proposed. An agenda and map of St. James United Methodist Church is also enclosed for your review. Breakfast will be provided at 7:30 a.m. with the meeting beginning at 8:00 a.m. The meeting will be held in Room 109, the same room used for the June session. If you have any questions, please give me a call at 324-2112. Thanks so much for your continued participation in the Little Rock School District. Attachments 810 West Markham Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201  (501)324-2000Little Rock School District Strategic Plan Update received November 10,1998 NOV 5 1993 I. Introduction AGENDA OmCEOF DESKRESATIGSMOHnTORfSiS II. Purpose ill. Review Components IV. Presentation of Action Plans V. Discussion of Action Plans VI. Revisit Components VII. Implementation Schedule VIII. Next StepsStrategy 2 Contents page In partnership with our community, we will establish standards in the core curriculum at each appropriate level, as well as develop the means of assessing whether students have met these standards. Content Standards/Performance Standards (Plans 1-4) Plan 1 Results: Adopt a definition for content standards in the Little Rock School District. Plan 2 Results: Adopt a definition for performance standards in the Little Rock School District. Plan 3 Results: Adopt components of performance standards sets in the Little Rock School District. Plan 4 Results: Develop performance standards for the Little Rock School District. Delivery Standards (Plans 5-7) Plan 5 Results: Adopt a definition for delivery standards in the Little Rock School District. Plan 6 Results: Adopt components of delivery standard sets in the Little Rock School District. Plan 7 Results: Develop delivery standards for the Little Rock School District. Standards Training (Plans 8-9) Plan 8 Results: Develop a trainer of trainers model for the Little Rock School District to use to train all appropriate human resources on how to implement and achieve the standards. Plan 9 Results: Ensure parent (family) understanding of the core curriculum standards and how progress will be measured.Action Plan STRATEGY NO. PLAN NO. 2 9 DATE\n11/2/98 SPECIFIC RESULTS: Ensure parent (family) understanding of the core curriculum standards and how progress will be delivered. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. ACTION STEP (Number each one) Design and distribute a family friendly brochure that uses clear, straightforward language to describe the core content standards for each grade level at the elementary, middle, and high school levels. Distribution opportunities should include pre-registration and/or registration times at each school and permanent displays in each school office, at the central office, and at student assignment with copies available for take home, as well as on the district's web page. Other distribution outlets may include realtors, city offices, including the Chamber of Commerce, and relevant public events. Design a core curriculum standards orientation speakers presentation to be used by district personnel at PTA meetings, open houses at schools, and at community forums. Schedule and publicize core curriculum presentations with question and answer sessions throughout the community, including sites such as churches, community centers, and individual schools, to be presented prior to implementation of the standards. Record and play intermittently such presentations on the districts TV channel. Design and distribute at the beginning of each school year tip sheets for families to use to reinforce and support the teaching and learning of standards at home. Tip sheets should address primary and intermediate grades at the elementary level and the middle school level and should outline family involvement opportunities in student learning. Redesign student report cards and interim progress report forms to accurately reflect student progress in relation to the core curriculum standards and grade or course level benchmarks. (See Plan #4, Action Steps 4-10.) Responsible: Assigned To\nstarting Date: Due Date: Completed Date: (Shaded areas for management phase) #COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS STRATEGY NO. PLAN NO. 9 DATE\n9/10/98 COSTS Tangible: BENEFITS Tangible:  /Annual brochure printing (tri-fold, front/back in house at .20 each for 50,000 brochures) $10,000.00 Families and patrons will be informed about the learning e.xpectations for all students who attend the LRSD.  Postage (bulk rate - .20 per brochure) 10,000.00  Speaker presentation kits (25 notebooks with instructions and transparencies at $10 per notebook) 250.00 Families and patrons will get clear, consistent information about the core curriculum standards.  Teacher/parent/administrator committees to design tip sheets Families will have written guidelines that show them how to help their children achieve the standards set for their children by the LRSD. - stipends for 40 teachers (5 per core area per elementary and middle schools at $125 per teacher) 5,000.00  Aimual tip sheet printing in house at .20 each for 26,000 sheets 5,200.00  Teacher/administrator committees to redesign report cards and interim progress reports -stipends for 36 teachers (12 per elementary, middle, and high school levels at $175 per teacher) 6,300.00 Assessment and teaching will match and families and students will be provided with a clear picture of student performance in relation to student expectations for achievement. 2 Intangible\nIntangible: (Have you considered opportunity costs and return on investment?)STRATEGY 4 Communication Plans We will design and implement internal and external communication plans to improve public trust and community support.Strategy4 Contents Page Plan 1 Results\nCommunicate key issues with consistency to our audiences. Plan 2 Results: Increase credibility with teachers, principals, and members of the districts staff through more timely and accurate information flow to and from the Little Rock School Districts (LRSD) central administration. Plan 3 Results: Achieve positive relationships with key members of the media in order to help ensure a consistent flow of accurate information to our various audiences. Plan 4 Results: Expand the use of available tools to positively influence the perceptions of parents, as well as other audiences within the District, with regard to the quality of education received by all children within the LRSDs schools. Plan 5 Results: Shift focus away from the.District back to its individual schools (as well as to their students and teachers). Plan 6 Results: Create a system that ensures a constant flow of success stories from the individual LRSD schools into the Districts Office of Communications for release to the public. Plan 7 Results: Create positive spokespersons out of parents, teachers and other influential members of the community. Plan 8 Results\nImprove the existing system that was designed to direct the media toward the appropriate information source within the District. Plan 9 Results: Assess and evaluate the communication plan.Action Plan Strategy No. Plan No. 4 9 Specific Results: Assess and evaluate the Communication Flan Date: 10/15/98 # 1 Action Step (Number each one) Assigned To: Starting Date: Due Date: Completed Date: Provide quarterly reports to the Superintendent regarding the status of the COMMUNICATIONS PLAN RECOMMENDATIONS AND, WHERE POSSIBLE, INCLUDE MEASURABLE RESULTS. Compare past and future results of the School Climate/Human Relations Survey TO DETERMINE IF PUBLIC TRUST AND COMMUNITY SUPPORT HAS IMPROVED.  Cambridge Management Group, Inc. Responsible: 2 (Sftaded areas for management phase)Cost-Benefit Analysis Strategy No. 4 Plan No. Date: 10/15/98 Costs Tangible: Benefits Tangible: District staff time to prepare reports $-0- Paper/ Distribution $-0- District would have current status of implementation of, and results from, the Communications Plan 9 Intangible: Intangible: Additional reporting requirement which reduces staff time for other responsibilities Provides evidence/assurance that communications efforts are proceeding in an orderly and well-planned manner based on the Communications Plan (Have you considered opportunity costs and return on investment?)October 30, 1998 Dear Strategic Planning Committee Members: The Strategy 10 School Safety team recognizes the need for closer working relationships between the Little Rock School District and the juvenile justice system. For this reason, we support legislation that would require the juvenile justice system to do the following\nWhen a student has been charged with a serious feiony violation and has been incarcerated by the juvenile authorities, the juvenile authorities should be required to contact the school district and advise the school district of the charges pending against the juvenile before the juvenile is allowed to return to school. The Strategy 10 School Safety team believes that the above-proposed legislation would assist the Little Rock School District and the Juvenile Justice System in three ways\n1. 2. 3. Juveniles who commit a serious crime may be coming back to the school where the victim may be attending. This would create a problem for the school and the students involved. When a school is not notified that a juvenile has been involved in a serious incident, the school does not have the opportunity to counsel the juvenile before he/she returns to the school setting. Sometimes it might be more appropriate to place the juvenile in an alternative school as opposed to the original school setting. The juvenile would be afforded an opportunity to receive counseling and more individualized academic support. At the same time, the juvenile would be removed from the environment where he/she could be harmed or cause harm. The proposed legislation will assist the district in protecting juvenile offenders and assist the school district in becoming proactive rather the reactive. Sincerely, Action Team #10Strategy 10 Contents Page Plan 1 Results: Provide ongoing conflict resolution training and skill development for students. Plan 2 Results: Improve behavior and safety on school buses and bus stops. Plan 3 Results: Control access to school buildings, grounds, and events. Plan 4 Results: Implement a staff development plan for all personnel to fully understand safety policies and procedures. Plan 5 Results: Develop and enhance a system of communication among schools, administration, and the public regarding issues of safety and security. Plan 6 Results: Inform the public of plan in regard to the following (a) control of drug activity (b) violence prevention (c) campus and bus security\n(language that is direct and easy for all to understand.) Plan 7 Results: Develop a credible evaluation plan that will ensure complete and proper implementation. Plan 8 Results: Develop, enhance and improve the communication/distribution and equitable implementation of the LRSD Students Rights and Responsibilities Handbook.Action Plan Strategy No. Plan No. 10 1 Date: 10/30/98 Specific Results: Provide ongoing conflict resolution training and skill development for students. # Action Step (Number each one) Assigned To: Starting Date: Due Date: Completed Date: 2 Evaluate effectiveness of training effort\nput in curriculum/classroom instruction. 3 Institutionalize conflict mediation and violence prevention programs in all schools by making them a part of the local Campus Leadership annual review process.  Cambridge Management Group, Inc. Responsible:Cost-Benefit Analysis Strategy No. Plan No. 10 1 Date: 10/30/98 Costs Tangible: Benefits Tangible: Staff time involved in developing an Quality indicators of program effectiveness. evaluation instrument for the conflict mediation program. staff time involved in implementing the assessment process. Intangible: Intangible:Action Plan Strategy No. Plan No. 10 2 Date: 10/30/98 Specific Results: Improve behavior and safety on school busses and bus stops. # Action Step (Number each one) Assigned To: Starting Date: Due Date: Completed Date: 8 Assess neighborhood groups to determine interest in participating in a pilot Parent Patrol program for bus stops.  Cambridge Management Group, Inc. Responsible:Cost-Benefit Analysis Strategy No. Plan No. 10 2 Date: 10/30/98 Costs Tangible: Benefits Tangible: Staff time $0 Community members involved with school district. Safety and security department VIPS staff Laidlaw staff Intangible: Intangible: Enhances opportunities for community involvement in school district.Cost-Benefit Analysis Strategy No. Plan No. 10 5 Date: 10/30/98 Costs Tangible: Benefits Tangible: Additional resources for expansion and refinement of the School Resource Officer program. SRO program provides additional security. Additional resources (and possible redirection of existing dollars) for expansion of prevention programs such as Officer Friendly. Improved prevention programs at the elementary level Intangible: Intangible: Improved morale of school district staff. Improved public perception of school district. Improved public confidence in the districts commitment to providing a safe and orderly learning climate.LnTLE Rock School District OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDENT March 1,1999 Ms. Ann Brown 201 E. Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, AR 72201 MAR Z (93 Dear Ms. Brown: OFFICEOF  okesregationmonitorjnq I am pleased to share that the Board of Directors of the Little Rock School District approved the Strategic Plan 1998 - 2003 at the January board meeting. Paula Patterson and Diane Vibhaker did an outstanding job of presenting the Strategic Plan recommendations to the Board. A special thank you to Paula and Diane. The work outlined in the plan is proceeding on the timeline that was recommended. The District is actively implementing the major initiatives of campus leadership, middle school implementation, and standards based curriculum development in the core areas, all of which will lead to increased student achievement. I have enclosed a copy of the approved plan. Again, thank you for your commitment and support to the District. Your participation on the Strategic Planning Team is greatly appreciated. Sincerely, Leslie V. Carnine Superintendent Encl. 810 West Markham Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501) 834-2000 Strategic Plan 1998 - 2003 1 A mission statement is a broad statement of the unique purpose for which the District exists and the specific function it performs. Mission The mission of the LRSD is to equip all students with the skills and knowledge to realize their aspirations, think critically and independently, learn continuously and face the future as productive, contributing citizens. This mission is accomplished through open access to a diverse, innovative and challenging curriculum in a secure environment with a staff dedicated to excellence and empowered with the trust and support of our community. 1 Parameters are the guiding principles that establish the framework within which the District will accomplish its mission. Parameters  We will not tolerate behavior that diminishes the dignity or self-worth of any individual.  No new program or service will be accepted unless it is consistent with the Strategic Plan, benefits clearly exceed costs, and provisions are made for staff development and program evaluation.  No program or service will be retained unless benefits continue to exceed cost and it continues to make an optimal contribution to the mission.  The Campus Leadership Plan will always be consistent with the Strategic Plan as well as the Desegregation and Education Plan.  We will maintain a positive fund balance in the operating budget.  We will not tolerate ineffective performance by any employee. * Contractual items will be subject to negotiation. 2Beliefs are a statement of the Districts fundamental convictions, values, and character. Beliefs We believe....  All people have equal, inherent worth.  Every individual can learn.  Higher expectations coupled with effort stimulate higher levels of performance.  Attitude always influences behavior.  All citizens share the responsibility to ensure that quality education is available to the children of our community.  Excellence in education and fairness for all (equity) are both compatible and inseparable.  The family is a primary influence on the development of a child.  Educated and involved citizens are necessary to sustain the health of a democracy.  Accepting and utilizing cultural and racial diversity enrich and strengthen the community.  Education can enhance every aspect of a persons life.  With every right comes a responsibility.  Actions speak louder than words.  Self-worth allows each individual to aspire to excellence and develop his/her unique capabilities.  Every individual is responsible for contributing to the general welfare of the community. 3 Objectives are an expression of the Districts desired, measurable end results of student success, performance and/or achievement. Objectives  Each student will set and achieve challenging educational goals tailored to his or her interests, abilities and aspirations related to meaningful work, higher learning, citizenship or service to others.  By 2003, at least 9 out of 10 students will meet or exceed LRSD standards of performance identified curriculum. in the core  By 2003, at least 65% of students in every identified sub-group of race and gender will perform at or above the national average in reading and mathematics on standardized tests\nat least 30% will perform at the highest quartile in reading and mathematics on standardized tests\nand no more than 10% will perform at the lowest quartile in reading and mathematics on standardized tests. 4 Strategies are the means by which the District can accomplish its objectives. Strategies  We will design our educational system, its organizational structure and decision-making processes to best achieve the mission and objectives of the Strategic Plan as well as the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan.  In partnership with our community, we will establish standards in the core curriculum (reading/language arts, mathematics, science, and social studies) at each appropriate level, as well as develop the means of assessing whether students have met these standards.  We will develop and implement a broad range of alternatives and interventions for students scoring below the 50* percentile on standardized tests or who are at serious risk of not achieving District standards in the core curriculum.  We will design and implement internal and external communication plans to improve public trust and community support.  We will build strong partnerships with other community agencies and organizations to address 5 Strategy 1 We will design our educational system, its organizational structure and decision-making processes to best achieve the mission and objectives of the Strategic Plan as well as the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. (Implementation of Strategy 1 will be accomplished through other strategies.) 7 In partnership with our community, we will establish standards in the core curriculum (reading/language arts, mathematics, science, and social studies) at each appropriate level, as well as develop the means of assessing whether students have met these standards. Strategy 2 Action Plan Year 1 Year 2/3 Year 4/5 1. Adopt a definition for content standards in the Little Rock School District, (completed) 2. Adopt a definition for performance standards in the Little Rock School District, (completed) 3. Submit the components of performance standard sets in the Little Rock School District, (completed) 4. Develop performance standards for the Little Rock School District, (completed) 5. Adopt a definition for delivery standards in the Little Rock School District, (completed) 6. Adopt components of delivery standard sets in the Little Rock School District, (completed) 1. Develop delivery standards for the Little Rock School District, (completed) 8. Develop a trainer-of-trainers model for the Little Rock School District to use to train all appropriate human resources on how to implement and achieve the standards. 9. Ensure parent understanding of the core curriculum standards and how progress will be measured. X X X X X X X X X X X 8 We will develop and implement a broad range of alternatives and interventions for students scoring below the 50\" percentile on standardized tests or who are at serious risk of not achieving District standards in the core curriculum. Strategy 3 Action Plan Year 1 X X X X i Year 2/3 X X X X X Year 4/5 X 1. Adopt a policy statement providing for intervention as an operative and vital part of elementary school instruction, (completed) 2. Expand comprehensive Reading Recovery/Literacy Support early intervention services for K-3 students who are at risk of not developing literacy skills. 3. Develop an intervention team at each school which provides systemic support including professional development for teachers which enables all children to sustain adequate yearly progress through grade 3. 4. Promotes school-wide reform and ensures access of children (from the earliest grades) to effective instructional strategies and challenging academic content. Content will include intensive complex thinking and problem-solving experiences through an integrated literature-based program. 5. Implement middle school programming to provide a developmentally appropriate educational environment for the academic success of adolescents. 6. Redesign the delivery system at the alternative learning center to improve academic skills and to address the social, emotional, and behavioral needs of the students. 9 Strategy 3 Action Plan X X X (Continued) 7, Train requesting teachers in the Math/Science crusade (K-12) to better implement the Goal 2000 plan and give them the background for foliowin\nthe guidelines set forth by the NCTM (National Council of Teachers of Mathematics) and the related science organization. 8. Provide extended day academic programming for students at risk of failin\nand in need of extra assistance in core subjects. ig X 9. Implement a three week summer program for identified at risk students in the middle level grades in order to provide an on-going three year experience in science and math. 10We will design and implement internal and external communication plans to improve public trust and community support. Strategy 4 Action Plan Year 1 X X X X Year 2/3 X X X X X X X X Year 4/5 1. Communicate key issues with consistency to our audiences. 2. Increase credibility with teachers, principals, and members of the Districts staff through more timely and accurate information flow to and from LRSDs central administration. 3. Achieve positive relationships with key members of the media in order to help ensure a consistent flow of accurate information to our various audiences. 4. Expand the use of available tools to positively influence the perceptions of parents, as well as other audiences within the District, with regard to the quality of education received by all children within the LRSDs schools. 5. Shift focus away from the District back to its individual schools (as well as to their students and teachers). 6. Create a system that ensures a constant flow of success stories from the individual LRSD schools into the Districts Office of Communications for release to the public. 7, Create positive spokespersons out of parents, teachers and other influential members of the community. 8. Improve the existing system that was designed to direct the media toward the appropriate information source within the District. 11 Strategy 4 Action Plan (Continued) X 9. Assess the implementation of the communication plans and evaluate their effectiveness. 12We will build strong partnerships with other community agencies and organizations to address external issues that are interfering with our students learning. Strategy 5 Action Plan Year 1 Year 2/3 Year 4/5 1. Expand the role of Partners in Education to include the development of business and community partner coalitions with neighborhood school emphasis in an effort to expand resources, which address external issues interfering with students learning. 2. Improved opportunities for young people to develop positive interactions with adults who are mentors. 3. Increase the level of grant funding available to the LRSD to utilize in partnerships with community agencies and organizations to address external issues that interfere with students learning. 4. Design and develop a joint working agreement with LRSD and community agencies and organizations that ensures availability of and access to comprehensive support services for all LRSD students. 13 X X X X X X X X We will design a comprehensive staff development system to best achieve the mission and objectives in the Strategic Plan. Strategy 7 Action Plan Year 1 Year 2/3 Year 4/5 1. To reformulate a District-level Staff development Planning Council which will bring together stakeholders to advise and assist in the development of policy for and evaluation of a staff-development system that is site-specific and driven by the three objectives adopted by the LRSD. 2. To train the Staff Development Planning Council, central administrative staff, and staff at all middle schools on teaming for school improvement. 3. To meet the needs and address the problems of school sites through the use of campus leadership teams. 4. To establish a District and community technical assistance network to support campus leadership teams. 5. To evaluate the staff development system within the district. 15 X X X X X X X We will construct a delivery system that allows us to plan and implement individualized educational goals for all LRSD students and that does not predetermine or limit options at an early age. Strategy 8 Action Plan Year 1 Year 2/3 Year 4/5 X X 1 A. Prepare for implementation of site-based management to allow individual schools choice to do what is best to meet the needs of their students. X IB. Implement site-based management to allow individual schools choice to do what is best to meet the individual needs of their students. X 2A. Identify a variety of school innovation options throughout the District to be offered to best meet the needs of students at individual schools. X 2B. Develop a variety of innovation options throughout the District to be offered to best meet the needs of students at individual schools. X 2C. Implement a variety of innovation options throughout the District to be offered to best meet the needs of students at individual schools. X 3 A. Establish a seed school with University Teacher Education ties to do ongoing research in the practical applications of various school programs and options, to keep current with literature in the field, to provide a site for exemplary individualized education for a student body representative of the LRSD student population, to do training by demonstration and example as well as precept, and thus continually adding to the list of potential programs and options for educational individualization. X 3B. Support and maintain operation of seed school. 16 Strategy 8 Action Plan (Continued)  X X X X X X X X X X 3C. Utilize the seed school to support teacher education and the testing of new educational programs and strategies designed to maximize individualized education. 4. Allow students in grades K-12 to move at their own developmental and intellectual pace as teachers discover their learning styles to eliminate permanent ability trackin\ng- 5A. Acquire alternative assessment methods that allow teachers to determine a students actual functioning level so as to provide appropriate programmin\nand to eliminate permanent ability trackin\ng- g 5B. Implement alternative assessment methods that allow teachers to determine a students actual functioning level so as to provide appropriate programming and to eliminate permanent ability tracking. 6. Strengthen pupil service teams to be utilized as a first line screening mechanism for students evidencing problems so that alternative program options will be implemented for students not requiring Special Education. 7. Collaborate with the community to offer early childhood programs for children ages 2 to 4 as an option for District patrons, with preference going to low socio economic status (SES) families, to provide experiences and information needed to equalize student preparation. 8. Cultivate and use the community centralized resources guide (refer to strategy 5) for the individual development of each and every student. 9. Provide community based services that enable parents, students, and community to work together to further a childs education. 10. Create an educational climate, which encourages parent/teacher interaction by eliminating major barriers and providing increased opportunities for participation in the learning process. 17We will develop and implement plans to establish financial stability and achieve the strategic objectives of the District. Strategy 9 Action Plan Year 1 Year 2/3 Year 4/5 1. Develop strategies to retain and attract students to the LRSD to assure adequate future revenues from sources that will be increasingly based on the size of student population. 2. Develop a financial committee composed of LRSD personnel and community representatives to function as an advisory committee to the LRSD Board and Superintendent on budget development, monitoring, implementation, and other financial matters. 3. Develop Board fiscal policy statements and manual to be housed in an official repository addressing revenues, expenditures, millage increase, debt service, monitoring, reporting, facilities planning, and staffing and procedures to effectively communicate to the public, teachers, and administration. 4. Develop a five-year revenue forecast (by month for the first year and annually for years two through five) for the District, (completed) 5. Develop a five-year expense forecast (by month for the first year and annually for years two through five) for the District, (completed) 6. Revise the process and develop policy on monitoring actual performance compared to budget to include Board briefings, mid-year adjustments and amendments, and report formats. 7. Select peer school districts and develop performance indicators for comparison purposes in order to identify areas and possible means for improvement. 18 X X X X X X X We will develop and implement plans to enhance public confidence in the safety and security of our schools and to ensure discipline and an orderly learning climate. Strategy 10 Action Plan Year 1 Year 2/3 Year 4/5 X X 1. Provide ongoing conflict resolution training and skill development for students, parents/family, and staff. ? Improve behavior and safety on school buses and bus stops. X X X X ! i I i J. Control access to school buildings, grounds, and events. 4. Implement a staff development plan for all personnel to fully understand safety policies and procedures. 5. Develop and enhance a system of communication among schools, administration, and the public regarding issues of safety and security. 6. Inform the public of plan in regard to the following (a) control of drug activity (b) violence prevention (c) campus and bus security\n(language that is direct and easy for all to understand). 7. Develop a credible evaluation plan that will ensure complete and proper implementation. 8. Develop, enhance, and improve the communication/distribution and equitable implementation of the LRSD Students Rights and Responsibilities j Handbook. I 20 X X 1 I I I T IT X X X X II i_KOv ^/UJ'^h*UinxOh i iUH'b oxz ^LU'UO /\u0026lt; 810 Wp^r Markham ISKI \\^\\ T T^i. n . .1. An X-iuLie iVMVjS., Direct Phone: Cximniunicarions Office: (50i) 447-1030 (501) 447-1025 DATE: January 23, 2003 UUX OZ.H XU4,d TO\nFROM- Central xVrkansas Media Cynthia Kowell, Arkansas Dernocrac-Gazeite Suellen Vann, Director of Communications SDEJECT: Special School Board Meeting Situation MESSACiE: Meiitberf of the Little Rock School District (LRSD) Board of Directors will participate in rhe Strategic Planning .sessions next week. Because more tlian one Board member will participate, we are notifying the media regarding the dates, times and location of die meetings. The Strategic Planning Team will meet at die Greater Second Baptist Church Eeliowship Hall, 5615 Geyer Springs Road, as loUows\nMonday, January 27 5 pul Tuesday, January 23 3 aixi Wednesday, Januar\n29 8 am  Pages Imclucling cover) Ar, Individual A\nI o hix # 1 each to a World ot KnowledgeLittle Rock School District OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDENT February 19, 2003 received FEB 2 0 2003 DESEGflEGATION MONITORING Ms. Ann Marshall Office of Desegregation Monitoring 1 Union National Plaza 124 W. Capitol, Suite 1895 Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Ann: I am writing to express my sincere appreciation of your service to the Little Rock School District through your dedicated work as a member of the Strategic Planning Team. You brought sound advice and good insights to the planning process. Enclosed is a draft of the work produced at the January session. We are now following up on your recommended strategies as action teams are formed to develop action plans. Action teams leaders have been appointed for the six strategies and will participate in action team leader training on February 25'^' Action teams will be working over the next 234 months to design detailed plans for each proposed strategy. You will receive a copy of the proposed action plans for your review on May 28^' If you are interested in serving on an action team please contact Linda Austin at 447-1125. We look forward to seeing you at the follow up session on June S* and 6. The session will again be held at Greater Second Baptist Church, 5615 Geyer Springs Road. We will be sending more meeting details closer to the actual meeting date. Again, thank you for your service and commitment to the Little Rock School District. Sincerely, T. Kenneth James, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools 810 West Markham Street  Little Rock, Arkansas 72201  (501) 447-1002STRATEGIC PLAN INTRODUCTION The Little Rock School District utilizes the strategic planning process as a planning and decision-making strategy to ensure that our students are ready to meet the diverse demands of a changing world. The development and implementation of a Strategic Plan serves as a primary guide. The Little Rock School District Strategic Plan, developed by hundreds of volunteers in the community, was originally adopted in 1996 and updated in 1998. On Jan. 27-29. 2003. a 30-member Strategic Planning Team composed of parents, community members, teachers, students, Board members and school administrators came together to review and update the plan. The Team arrived at consensus in identifying common beliefs, creating a mission for the school system, setting parameters and developing objectives and far-reaching strategies for accomplishing the mission. For each of the strategies identified by the Planning Team, an Action Team will be formed to develop plans for implementation. This step in the process will occur from March 2003 to May 2003. This Is where you can make a difference. The Little Rock School District invites you to participate on an Action Team. Your perspective will help design a school system that will prepare our students for a successful future in a diverse and changing world. Simply complete the attached application of interest and return it to the Little Rock School District. You will be contacted by the Director of Planning and Development. Thank you in advance for your sincere interest and willingness to make a difference. s c s o o 2 n\u0026gt; c \u0026gt; 5 3 2 NJ 05  ro r . o 5^ )B DRAFT: 2003-05 STRATEGIC PLAN Mission Statement of the Little Rock School District PARAMETERS  We will not tolerate behavior that diminishes the dignity or self-worth of any individual.  We will accept no new program or service unless it is consistent with the Strategic Plan, benefits clearly exceed costs and provisions are made for staff development and program evaluation.  We will retain no program or service unless benefits continue to exceed cost, and it continues to make an optimal contribution to the mission.  We will ensure school improvement plans are always consistent with the Strategic Plan.  We will ensure effective implementation and equitable distribution of technology throughout the district.  We will maintain a positive fund balance in the operating budget.  We will not tolerate ineffective performance by any employee. I  We will honor the provisions identified in the Covenant for the Future. TTie mission of the Little Rock School District, an educational partnership of C ft Si. 7S \" c o (Z OQ  B\u0026gt; 2 o 3 the entire community, is to prepare and inspire all students to achieve academic excellence and persoruil fulfillment while becoming contributing citizens by offering open access to an innovative, challenging curriculum in a nurturing, disciplined environment that embraces diversity. 73 o 5 B I 3 cS 5- 3 n 3 T. Kenneth James, Ed.D. Superintendent of SchoolsOUR BELIEFS OBJECTIVES STRATEGIES We believe:  All people have equal, inherent worth.  Every individual can learn.  Higher expectations coupled with elfort stimulate higher levels of performance.  Attitude always influences behavior.  All citizens share the responsibility to ensure that quality public education is available to the children of our community.  Excellence in education and fairness for all (equity) are both compatible and inseparable.  The family is a primary influence on the development of a child.  Each student will be required to set and achieve challenging educational and personal fulfillment goals tailored to his or her interests and abilities related to meaningful work, higher learning, citizenship and service to others.  All students will meet or exceed graduation requirements or complete the provisions identified in their individual achievement plans.  By 2009, 100% of our students will perform at or above the proficient level identified on applicable state-approved examinations. Little Rock School District Board of Directors  Educated and involved citizens are necessary to foster the health of a democracy. Dr. Katherine Mitchell Zone 1  Embracing cultural and racial diversity enriches and strengthens our community.  Education can enhance every aspect of a persons life.  With every right comes a responsibility.  Actions speak louder than words.  A sense of self-worth allows each individual to develop unique capabilities and to aspire to excellence.  Every individual is responsible for contributing to the general welfare of the community. R. Micheal Daugherty Zone 2 Judy Magness Zone 3 H. Baker Kurrus Zone 4 Larry Berkley Zone 5 Tony Rose Zone 6 Sue Strickland Zone 7  We will develop and implement plans to acquire and effectively utilize the financial resources needed to achieve the strategic objectives of the district.  We will hire, train, motivate and evaluate all employees to ensure optimal contributions to our mission and objectives.  We will ensure all teachers are using effective, research-based instructional strategies and assessment data to help each student perform well academically.  We will build effective partnerships with our community to address economic and social issues that interfere with student learning and success.  We will assist and engage parents as full and equal partners in educating their children.  We will develop and implement practices and procedures to create optimal learning environments that embrace diversity. Special thanks to the parents, business and community leaders, students. district staff and School Board mem-bers who volunteered their time in January to begin the LRSD Strategic Plan Update process. S s Pi O p. Pi w w Z J O \u0026gt; s H Z O 11 H O I \u0026lt;ED EE \u0026lt;u .1 o = 3O (S cco 1o2 o MO Q \"oc y as V O fES Z Z a Xi fig X ra E U \u0026lt; O) \u0026lt;Vu. a = -g OJD C . c 3 9C s E oE I uE \u0026lt;000 cco UI 1 \"l I 2 cu 0e0 0c0 'E uu C3 oc 0B0 s Ia s BCS i J 'Sb S wu II Is  ^6 1 I  \u0026lt;5 I ,2 11 u Sil 2\u0026lt;3 a ts 2  g H-.2 I -- O-o P sa  O O =s  .1   .5 f-\n. Little Rock School District I --------------- OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDENT July 17, 2003 received Ms. Ann Marshall Office of Deseg. Monitoring 1 Union National Plaza 124 W. Capitol, Suite 1895 Little Rock, AR 72201 JUL 2 1 2003 DESEGREGAWHMONITORIMG Dear Ms. Marshall, Thank you for your participation on the Strategic Planning Team for the Little Rock School District. Your personal commitment of many long hours and thoughtful vision resulted in an outstanding framework for the Strategic Plan. As you know, the next step is to present the draft to the Little Rock School District Board of Education and seek adoption of the proposed Strategic Plan. The presentation is scheduled to occur at the Board meeting at 5\n30 p.m. on July 24*^ in the Board Room at 810 West Markham. We hope that you will attend this important meeting, attendance. Please call Linda Austin at 447-1126 to confirm your Enclosed is a copy of the proposed Strategic Plan 2003-2008 that includes the beliefs, mission, parameters, objectives, strategies and action plans. The detailed action steps serve as administrative guidance and do not require Board approval. Therefore, these are not included in this document. You will receive a copy of the detailed action steps in August. Again, thank you for your service and commitment to the Little Rock School District. Donald M. Stewart, Ed.D. Interim Superintendent of Schools 810 West Markham Street  Little Rock, Arkansas 72201  (501) 447-1002 BECEl\u0026gt;/tU JUL 2 1 2003 desegregation moniiorino A Vision For The Future Little Rock School District Proposed Strategic Plan 2003 - 2008 A. mission statement is a broad statement of the unique purpose for which the district exists and the specific function it performs. Mission Statement The mission of the Little Rock School District, an educational partnership of the entire community, is to prepare and inspire all students to achieve academic excellence and personal fulfillment while becoming contributing citizens by offering open access to an innovative, challenging curriculum in a nurturing, disciplined environment that embraces diversity.Beliefs are a statement of the districts fundamental convictions, values, and character. Beliefs We believe:  All people have equal, inherent worth.  Every individual can learn.  Higher expectations coupled with effort stimulate higher levels of performance.  Attitude always influences behavior.  All citizens share the responsibility to ensure that quality public education is available to the children of our community.  Excellence in education and fairness for all (equity) are both compatible and inseparable.  The family is a primary influence on the development of a child.  Educated and involved citizens are necessary to foster the health of a democracy.  Embracing cultural and racial diversity enriches and strengthens our community.  Education can enhance every aspect of a persons life.  With every right comes a responsibility.  Actions speak louder than words.  A sense of self-worth allows each individual to develop unique capabilities and to aspire to excellence.  Every individual is responsible for contributing to the general welfare of the community.Objectives are an expression of the districts desired, measurable end results of student success, performance and/or achievement. Objectives  Each student will be required to set and achieve challenging educational and personal fulfillment goals tailored to his or her interests and abilities related to meaningful work, higher learning, citizenship and service to others.  All students will meet or exceed graduation requirements or complete the provisions identified in their individual achievement plans.  By 2009, 100% of our students will perform at or above the proficient level identified on applicable state-approved assessments.Si Parameters are the guiding principals that establish the framework within which the district will accomplish its mission. Parameters  We will not tolerate behavior that diminishes the dignity or self-worth of any individual.  We will accept no new program or service unless it is consistent with the Strategic Plan, benefits clearly exceed costs, and provisions are made for staff development and program evaluation.  We will retain no programs or services unless their benefits continue to exceed cost and they make an optimal contribution to the mission.  We will ensure school improvement plans are always consistent with the Strategic Plan.  We will ensure effective implementation and equitable distribution of technology throughout the district.  We will maintain a positive fund balance in the operating budget.  We will not tolerate ineffective performance by any employee.  We will honor the provisions identified in the Covenant for the Future.Strategies are the means by which the district can accompiish its objectives. Strategies  We will develop and implement plans to acquire and effectively utilize the financial resources needed to achieve the strategic objectives of the district.  We will hire, train, motivate, evaluate and retain employees to ensure optimal contributions to our mission and objectives.  We will ensure all teachers are using effective, researchbased instructional strategies and assessment data to help each student perform well academically.  We will build effective partnerships with our community to address economic and social issues that interfere with student learning and success.  We will assist and engage parents and families as full and equal partners in educating their children.  We will develop and implement practices and procedures to create optimal learning environments that embrace diversity.We will hire, train, motivate, evaluate and retain employees to ensure optimal contributions to our mission and objectives. strategy 2 Action Plan Year 1 Year 2/3 Year 4/5 X 1. Update and redesign the employment application forms for certified and non-certified positions. X 2. Increase the number of National Board Certified teachers in the Little Rock School District. X 3. Implement an employee referral program for teachers.IVe will ensure all teachers are using effective, research-based instructional strategies and assessment data to help each student perform well academically. strategy 3 Action Plan Year 1 Year 2/3 Year 4/5 X 1. Realign the districts curriculum with the States curriculum frameworks based on the grade-specific information. X X 2. Ensure the implementation of a common core curriculum in all schools that is fully aligned with the districts curriculum standards and those effective research-based instructional strategies included within the Professional Teacher Appraisal System (PTAS). X 3. Establish research methodology to investigate the relationship of *PTAS scores with academic gains by students on approved measures of achievement. X 4. Investigate the relationship of *PTAS scores with academic gains by students on approved measures of achievement. X 5. Include *PTAS implementation indicators as a component on the formal evaluation of the Principals Appraisal System. X 6. Ensure inter-rater reliability of the *PTAS Assessment Process. X 7. Develop high quality professional development activities, including models and resources for professional development, which are aligned with *PTAS and the districts curriculum.X X 8. Develop school improvement plans that guide daily work and activities and are based specifically on the needs reflected in student assessment data and that incorporate effective, research-based instructional strategies and high quality professional development. X X 9. Develop a relational student database. X X 10. Develop a web-based system for disseminating and reporting student data to teachers, administrators and parents. *1 Use of PTAS evaluation subject to approval of the LRSD Board of Directors and Classroom Teachers Association.We will build effective partnerships with our community to address economic and social Issues that Interfere with student learning and success. strategy 4 Action Plan Year 1 Year 2/3 Year 4/5 X 1. Lead a coalition of community partners to improve the service delivery systems to enhance academic, social and economic opportunities for students and their families. X 2. Design, implement and sustain an assets-based out of school program for all students to include:  Health and fitness  Academic enrichment  Mentoring  Arts and culture  Leisure time activities  Homework help and tutoring  Character development activities X 3. Establish, in collaboration with the community, a health task force to enhance an infrastructure for coordinated school health system to improve health status and reinforce healthy behaviors with PreK-12 students.We will assist and engage parents and families as full and equal partners in educating their children. Strategy 5 Action Plan Year 1 Year 2/3 Year 4/5 X 1. Establish a family advisory group. X 2. Develop parent and family involvement vision. X X 3. Create opportunities to assist and engage parents as full and equal partners in the education of their children. X X 4. Develop a wide-ranging parental communication system for a diverse mix of parents of children in the school system. X X 5. Establish a parent and family information resource center in each school. This plan is consistent with Arkansas Legislative Act 603 of 2003 We will develop and implement practices and procedures to create optimal learning environments that embrace diversity. strategy 6 Action Plan Year 1 Year 2/3 Year 4/5 X 1. Establish building level, school-wide positive behavioral/ social skills support systems for students and staff that address discipline. X 2. Establish small learning communities in secondary schools that provide nurturing and supportive environments for all students. X 3. Provide every student the opportunity to form a continuous relationship with a caring adult throughout students school career. X 4. Ensure all students receive support to succeed academically in their educational endeavors, PreK-12. X 5. Implement the Personalized Career/Education/Planning (PCEP) process at the elementary, middle, and high school levels. X 6. Establish a transition program that ensures the successful assimilation of students from level to level and campus to campus. X 7. Collaborate with area businesses to provide workbased learning opportunities for students. X 8. Improve family involvement in students school activities. I X 9. Improve communication with families and students. X 10. Provide customer-friendly, professional environment on every campus. This plan is consistent with Arkansas Legislative Act 603 of 2003Arkansas Demcx:raf:^(i^azcttc | FRIDAY, APRIL 14, 1995 M.. A I mia DaaV Mowanan*** 1'**' LRSD will use TV to involve public The Little Rock School District will use its cable television channel over the next week to explain plans to develop long-term operations for the district and to recruit volunteers to help with that planning. Information on the strategic plan will be broadcast on cable television Channel 4 in Little Rock at 9 a.m. today and again at 2 p.m. Beginning Monday, the district will broadcast an hourlong program on the strategic plan. That video will be shown at 8:15 a.m. and 1:30 p.m. each workday next week The tape is of a community meeting earlier this month on the planning process. The school district is seeking more than 200 people to serve on 11 action teams. To learn more or to volunteer, people should contact Linda Young at the school district Administration Building at 810 W. Markham SL in Little Rock. The teams will begin work this spring on plans for the school board to consider in October.8B  TUESDAY. APRIL 18,1995 Arkansas Democrat '^(gazette Tucker vetoes bill giving teachers 3 more days to prepare BY ELIZABETH CALDWELL Democrat-Gazette Oapitot Bureau Public school-teachers will not get an additional three days to plan for the 1995-96 school year. Gov, Jim Guy Tucker vetoed the bill Monday that granted the extra days. Senate Bill 539 by Senate Education Committee Chairman Lu Hardin, D-Russellville, would have reduced the number of days that teachers have contact with students from 178 to 175 during the next school year. Tucker said that would amount to a reduction of more than $14 million in teaching time. For students having difficulties or students in courses such as foreign languages, this reduction of time in contact with teachers can be very harmful,\" Tucker wrote in a veto letter released Monday. Hardin said he was extremely disappointed.\" He said the bill was intended to send a message to teachers that we believe they are professionals.\" Hardin said the le^slation arose out of a meeting with Russellville teachers, who asked for more time to comply with a 1991 act requiring major curriculum changes. - Tucker said he has asked Gene Wilhoit director of the General Education Division of the state Department of Education, to work with the state Board of Education on ta^eted waivers. Hardin said waivers might be a solution if Tucker and Wilhoit will take an active role in encouraging districts to apply. The key here is morale,\" Hardin said. Tucker vetoed another bill Monday that would have changed the way Southland Greyhound Park at West Memphis distributes money from racing days that are set aside for charity. Because there was not an accompanying appropriations bill, none of the money actually would have been available. Tucker said. Currently, Southland contributes about S500.000 annually for indigent health programs. House Bill 1946 by Rep. Ben McGee, D-Marion, would have set aside 3200,000 of the money for emergency medical services for Crittenden, Cross. Lee, Mississippi. Poinsett and St. Francis counties. It was just an oversight, McGee said of the missing ap- propriations bill. Other vetoes Tucker an- nounced Monday were:  HB 1267 by Rep. Keith Wood. D-Hope. which would have exempted the state Physical Therapy Board from certain laws concerning professional services contracts. Tucker said the bill would have exempted the agency from purchasing, personnel, budgetary and accounting regulations designed to ensure the proper expenditure of public funds.  HB 2127 by Rep. Claud Cash. D-Trumann, which would have licensed mobile manicurist units. Tucker said the state Board of Cosmetology requested the veto because of increased administrative costs and the increased risk of the spread of nail fungi.  HB 2087 by freshman Rep. Sue Madison, D-Fayetteville. which dealt with cruelty to animals.  HB 1269 by McGee, which would have exempted contractor licensing surety bonds from income. sales and use taxes.  SB 236 by Sen. Jay Bradford. D-Pine Bluff, which would have made it illegal to replace insurance policies over and over again to receive higher commissions. The following bills were vetoed because similar bills already have been signed into law:  HB 1872 by Rep. Larry Goodwin, D-Calamine. which would have increased the waste tire fee on truck tire sales.  HB 1207 by freshman Rep. Ted Thomas. R-Little Rock, which would have allowed juveniles with two previous felony convictions to be tried as adults. These bills were vetoed Friday:  HB 1556 by Rep. Bob McGinnis. D-Marianna. which would have required small and insufficiently funded police and fire pension funds to be administered by the Arkansas Local Police and Fire Retirement Systems. Similar legislation already has been signed into law.  SB 726 by freshman Sen. John Brown. R-Siloam Springs, which dealt with the release from escrow of funds paid to providers under the state Continuing Care Provider Regulation Act Tucker said he needs more time to study the issue./. SUNDAY, JULY 16, J. \"LR schools to outline long-range plih  The IJttlA Rrv*1r .^hzw\\l _______:ii______. a * I Little Rock School District teams will report on their worl wm The teams are developing^Yec- nvities and the development of a riculum and raise student?' tet P  enhance school desegrega- 5^ V c- tion, establish financial stability-in\ni\u0026amp; the school district, train staff/tm- public, will be broad- prove school safety and expand television in Little the use of technology . More than 200 volunteer 'and  P^^P^^''es finm almost a district staff members are serving zen strategip nlann.n^ octicM on the action teams. will present a status report iW^esday on desegregation ac- long-range strategic plan for oper- dozen strategic planning action ^.r J 5Arkansas Democrat SR O^azcttc FRIDAY, JUNE 23, 1995 -5 LRSD team addresses I compliance Brainstorming tickles desegregation decree BY MARION GAMWLL Democrat-Gazette Staff Vrtter About half the Litle Hock School District Strategic Planning Team No. 2 mei at Hall High School on Thursday to begin working on a plan of action that will comply with a court-ordered desegregation decree. The Little Hock datrict is involved in a 12-year-ld federal school desegregaion lawsuit. While the distfct operates under a court-jpproved desegregation plan witten in 1989. parts of the plainre open to change. The team is one ofa dozen citizen committees hdping to develop a long-range strategy for the district. All conmittees will present their reiommen- dations to the school roard in the fail. Seventeen people were at the meeting. The teams Jerry Peters led a long brainstorming session where members made more than 50 proposals for meeting their objective, which Peters defined as developng the means to successfulb' implement or modify the cesegrega- tion plan in order b achieve unity as well as conply with the (federal court) phn. Members suggesUd, among other things:  Encouraging onmunity and parental involveiaent.  Analyzing the feasibility of different approaches.  Compiling demographic and educational inforaation.  Working closel\nwith neighborhood groups.  Defining school district responsibility more charly. Baker Kurrus said he team needs to bring aboad more black members to \"broden its base. Kurrus said tie team should have an outlim of proposed actions by the eid of the next meeting, set for Jily 13. Al that session, Hus Mayo, assistant superintencent for desegregation, will pnsent results of a study on howthe district can comply with he court plan. Mayos office is acepting proposals from the piblic for modifying the plan. The members briefV talked about U.S. Supreme Courts decision this month the limiting federal judge abilities to propose remedes in a Kansas City, Mo., deegrega- tioii case. While the \u0026lt;ase differs significantly fron Little Rocks, team membw John t Burnett said, the high -ourt \"is sending a strong messige that courts in administeing decrees have gone too far and need to stick more ebsely to improving the originjl problem. A heated discussiot of the value of neighborhoodschools and the prevalence of inequal . treatment of black stulents in I the school system lastd about half an hour after thi meet- ing*s official adjounment. KurruS said the team rill discuss those matters in nore detail in July.Arkansas Democrat/^(ijinzelk f . . THIIRSnAY IIILY.2Q-.19a5 What must LRSD do? 2,097 things Desegregation suit spawns obligations BY CYNTHIA HOWELL Dnrrw.ral Gnzette EducaWon Writer When Little Rock School District ollicials can't sleep, they may count desegregation obligations instead of sheet). Dr. Russ Mayo, the school district's associate superintendent for desegi egation, told a group of about 60 school district cmployee.s and connnunily members Wednesday night that the district has 2,097 individual desegregation obligations. Mayo announced the count during a short presentation on the sta tus of the districts desegregation effoi'Is. He acknowledged that he doesn't know the answer to the desegregation question everyone asks: When will the Little Rock disliict be released from federal court supervision in the 12 year old Pulaski County desegregation lawsuit? \"I don't know, but we're closer than we've ever been before,\" Mayo said, adding that the district will ask for release from supervision on some obligations at an Aug. 30 court hearing before U.S. District Judge Susan Webber Wright. Wright monitors the district's compliance with its desegregation plan. According to Mayo.s count, the district ha.s completely complied with 42 percent of its obligations, or 695 of the 2,097 items. Another 1,078 of the obligations, ,52 percent, are ongoing commilmenLs, such as racially balancing enrollments at each school. 'The district is just beginning to by to meet 74 obligations, Mayo said. Another ,50 were overlooked in the past and are being added to the districts list of things to do. Most  1,784  of the districts obligations are contained in the desegregation plan.s that district ofti ciaLs wrote in 1908 and 1989. The 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals at St Ix\u0026gt;nis ultimately approved those plans in I9t)2. The district has its own plan and an interdistrict plan written by all the parties in the lawsuit. Once the parties agreed to the plans and the courts approved them, the plans became binding. The remaining obligations are the result of court orders issued by Wright and the 8th Circuit and of recent agreements negotiated among the three school districts and the attorneys for the black children and the teacher unions, who are intervenors in the case. The district will never meet ,some of the obligations, Mayo said, because of changed circumstances, shilling demographics, changes in laws or better methods of doing things.Arkansas Democrat\nThis project was supported in part by a Digitizing Hidden Special Collections and Archives project grant from The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation and Council on Library and Information Resoources.\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n\n "},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_789","title":"Strategic planning process","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":null,"dc_date":["1993/2003"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System"],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","Little Rock School District","Education--Arkansas","Educational planning","School boards","Educational law and legislation"],"dcterms_title":["Strategic planning process"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Butler Center for Arkansas Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://arstudies.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/bcmss0837/id/789"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["Available for use in research, teaching, and private study. Any other use requires permission from the Butler Center."],"dcterms_medium":["documents (object genre)"],"dcterms_extent":["82 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\nACTION TEAM VOLUNTEER FORM The Little Rock School District is looking for volunteers to serve as action team members. Name ---- Lutui---- R-mail Address Phone (day) Yig-(p ------- (evening) t\u0026gt;(p3-.4z?7P_______ (FAX) 5'di- ? ?! -6 ICO Please indicate your first, second, third, etc., choice: (These are based on strategies that will require teams to plan action steps.) ___Financial resources  Employee hiring/training  4.' J^Community partnerships Xzuz^u Parent Engagement ---- Instructional strategies/data use ___ Learning environment Please return tn: Ilaiiniiig \u0026amp; Develnpnieiit Little Rock SchunI District 810 W. Markiiani St. Little Rock, AR 72201 To: From: Subject: Little Rock School June 9, 1993 Distric^5^C Mr. Horace Smith, Desegregation Monitoring Office Janet Bernard, Associate Superintendent for School Operations and Climate Long-Range Strategic Plan During our meeting held on May 28, 1993 we discussed a long-range strategic plan to be implemented at each of the Incentive Schools. As Arma Hart mentioned in the meeting, diligently to finalize their plans. principals are trying We would like to have a common format for all the long-range strategic plans. It would be most helpful if you could provide us with a sample format to ensure that we have included all the components necessary for these plans. Your assistance, as always, is greatly appreciated. 810 West Markham Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201  (501)374-3361Strategic Planning Workbook THE CAMBRIDGE GROUPStrategic Planning Workbook THE CAMBRIDGE GROUP hTHE CAMBRIDGE GROUP INTERNATIONAL \u0026amp; DOMESTIC AFFILIATES William J. Cook, Jr., Ph.D. President, Chairman of the Board Judy Wallace Cook Secretary- Treasurer Vonda C. McLain Vice-President, General Manager Constance Anderson Director of Programs Jill Aubume Cook Director of Publications Hobbie Register Office Manager SENIOR ASSOCIATES Stephen V. Barone Howard}. Feddema, Ed.D. Lawrence W. Huggins ASSOCIATES William D. Breck, Ed.D. Donald D. Burger Suzanne Connelly Mark Fredisdorf, Ed.D. Lisa D. Grant Lindsey Gunn, Ph.D. Veronica Huggins Maureen Innes David R. Jennings, Ph.D. Keith W. Lutz, Ed.D. Stephanie Pace Marshall, Ph.D. Charles G. Mason, Ph.D. Claudia J. Martinez James A. McMurray John Messell Carlene Naylor Glenn M. Pclecky, Ed.D. Kay Psencik, Ed.D. Glenn F. Smartschan, Ed.D. Christopher L. Sny, Ph.D. LaVoneia C. Steele, Ed.D. William M. Stuart Odell Stuckey, Ed.D. George J. Szy'manski, Ph.D. Pat Tillotson, Ed.D, Marcia Venus, Ph.D. Ronald Z. Zook, Ed.D. South East Regional Resource Center, Alaska Association for the Advancement of International Education Association of California School Administrators Canadian Strategic Planning Centre for Education, British Columbia Canadian Strategic Planning Centre for Education, Ontario Canadian Strategic Planning Centre for Education, Saskatchewan Bucks County Intermediate Unit #22, Delaware Illinois Association of School Administrators Central Indiana Education Service Center Iowa Area Education Agencies Kentucky School Boards Association Michigan Institute for Educational Management Minnesota Association of School Administrators Southern Education Consortium, Mississippi Rensselaer-Columbia-Greene Counties Board Of Cooperative Educational Services, New York Buckeye Association of School Administrators, Ohio Bucks County Intermediate Unit #22, Pennsylvania South Carolina School Boards Association Texas Association of School Administrators Wisconsin Association of School Boards Copyright  1993 Colonial-Cambridge Management Group, Inc. All rights reserved. Except as noted below, no part of this publication may be reproduced, transmitted, transcribed, stored in a retrieval system, or translated into any language in any form by any means without the written permission of Colonial-Cambridge Management Group, Inc. Licenses Contents of the section Reproducible Materials are licensed for reproduction only by internal facilitators who are certified by The Cambridge Group. This license allows that these masters may be reproduced to make transparencies and hard copy for the purpose of facilitating strategic planning sessions and/or making informational presentations when the certified facilitator providing such services is a full-time employee of the organization for which the strategic plan is being developed. The reproduction of these materials for sale or loan to others is expressly prohibited. Prohibited also is the use of these materials by independent consultants, facilitators, or other individuals for the purpose of providing strategic planning facilitation, consultation, or other seivices for remuneration to any organization of which they are not a full-time employee. CORPORATE OFFICE 5795 Carmichael Parkway Montgomeiy, Alabama 36117 (205) 279-7150 Facsimile (205) 279-7151 Orders* To order additional copies of the Strategic Planning Workbooks. please contact Hobbie Register at The Cambridge Group by phone 205/279-7150 or fax 205/279-7151. The following information should accompany your order:  Name  Shipping Address  Purchase Order Number  Organization  City/State/Zip  Number of Workbooks  Date Materials are Needed  Certification Program Attended Available to Gradi ates of the Strategic Planning Certification Program I Contents I Definitions 1 Beiiefs 3 Mission 5 Strategic Poiicies (Parameters) 7 Strengths 9 Weaknesses 11 Criticai Anaiysis of Organization 13 Competition 15 Externai Anaiysis 17 Objectives IS Strategies 21 Action Pians 23 Reproducibie Materiais 25 C 1993 Colonial-Cambridge Managemetit Group. Inc.Strategic Planning Workbook DEFINITIONS ^BELIEFS A statement of the organizations fundamental convictions, its values, its character. EMISSION A broad statement of the unique purpose for which the organization exists and the specific function it performs. * STRATEGIC POLICIES (parameters) Management pronouncements that establish the parameters within which the organization will accomplish its mission. STRENGTHS Characteristics which contribute to the ability of the organization to achieve its mission. WEAKNESSES Characteristics that limit the ability of the organization to achieve its mission. ORGANIZATIONAL DESIGN The arrangement of functions and relationships among people within an enterprise. COMPETITION Any entity that successfully attempts to fill the same need as the planning organization. EXTERNAL ANALYSIS An examination of those forces over which an organization has little or no control. External change usually impacts an organization by virtue of its existence in a larger, sometimes more complex situation. ^OBJECTIVES An expression of the desired, measurable end results for the organization. For a school district, objectives are restricted to student success, performance, and/or achievement. ^STRATEGIES The broadly stated means of deploying resources to achieve the organizations objectives. ACTION PLANS The explicit portion of a given strategy that outlines the tasks required to implement the program, the person responsible for each task, the due date for the completion of each task, and an analysis of the benefit and costs for the specific action plan. O 1993 Colonial-C'amhriilge Management Clrottp. Inc. 1 2BELIEFS ) DEFINITION A statement of the organizations fundamental convictions, its values, its character. H 7?r'sr$ {25 IMPORTANCE IN PLANNING The belief statement provides the bedrock values which move the organization to commit itself to a specific mission and objectives. It establishes moral and ethical Lhfc* priorities which serve to guide all the organizations activities. The beliefs should not J be mere observations or statements of fact, but sincere, uncompromising convictions. They should be universal in application, but specific in meaning. i4 JX Tpr^cc^ A EXAMPLES We believe that: r Excellence is achievable and always worth the investment. Each individual has unlimited potential. s\u0026gt; Education is the discovery of truth and the creation of new realities. All people have equal intrinsic worth. All people can learn anything. The family is the primary influence in the development of the individual^ Higher expectations yield higher results. USE THIS SPACE TO DESCRIBE THE BELIEFS OF YOUR ORGANIZATION. O /99J Colonial-Cambruige Management Group. Inc. 3 (Beliefs Continued) 4 Strategic Planning Workbook MISSION DEFINITION A broad statement of the unique purpose for which the organization exists and the specific function it performs. IMPORTANCE IN PLANNING The mission is literally the keystone upon which the entire plan is built. Typically written in one sentence, it provides the primary focus of the organization. The mission statement must emphasize the uniqueness, the distinctiveness, the singularity of the organization. Essentially, it represents the commitment of the organizations resources to one purpose. EXAMPLES The mission of the School District is to guarantee all students 100% success through a network of independent competing instructional services that actualize the unique potential of each person.  The mission of the School District is to produce graduates with unlimited capacity to compete in a superior manner in any challenge they undertake by guaranteeing each individual customized, all-inclusive learning experiences, integrating the unique agricultural, medical, and historical resources of our diverse community. USE THIS SPACE TO DESCRIBE THE MISSION OF YOUR ORGANIZATION.  1993 Coloniat-Camhridge Management Group. Inc. 5 6 (Mission Continued) Strategic Planning Workbook STRATEGIC POLICIES (parameters) DEFINITION Management pronouncements that establish the parameters within which the organization will accomplish its mission. IMPORTANCE IN PLANNING The purpose of the parameters is to place self-imposed limitations on the organization\nthat is, to close doors. As such, they sharpen the mission and eliminate the need for continuously making the same decision. Parameters must be stated in exact terms and, typically, will be written in the negative. EXAMPLES Nothing will take precedence over the Pre K-12 instructional program. We will practice participative management at all levels of the organization. We will not tolerate prejudicial discrimination of any kind. * We will not tolerate ineffective employees. All decisions will be made based strictly on what is best for the individual student. USE THIS SPACE TO DESCRIBE THE PARAMETERS OF YOUR ORGANIZATION.  1993 Colonial-Cambridge Mauagetnent Group, Inc. 7 (Strategic Policies Continued) 8 Strategic Planning Workbook STRENGTHS DEFINITION Characteristics which contribute to the ability of the organization to achieve its mission. IMPORTANCE IN PLANNING Strengths are those present attributes that will be most effective in achieving the mission. Organizations that achieve excellence do so by capitalizing on their strengths\nthat is, doing what they do best. EXAMPLES Movement toward participative management Opportunity for professional growth Ability to cope with change * Innovative programs Leadership development efforts Commitment to scholarship Board of Education committed to quality Counseling program Financial resources USE THIS SPACE TO DESCRIBE THE STRENGTHS OF YOUR ORGANIZATION.  1993 Cotonial-CambruJge .Management Group, Inc. 9 10 (Strengths Continued)Strategic Planning Workbook WEAKNESSES DEFINITION Characteristics that limit the ability of the organization to achieve its mission. IMPORTANCE IN PLANNING The weaknesses are those inadequacies that must be overcome if the organization is to accomplish its mission. EXAMPLES * Staff resistance to innovation and change Poorly defined decision-making process  School to school inequalities Inadequate salaries and competitive salary schedules Testing data available but not usable * Inefficient central office organization Over crowded curriculum (unclear objectives) Inequity of expectations Inefficiency of neighborhood school concept Trying to be everything to everybody * Combination classes and schools Elementary grading system Perception of massive data handling without effective outcomes USE THIS SPACE TO DESCRIBE THE WEAKNESSES OF YOUR ORGANIZATION.  J993 C(\u0026gt;lonial-Camhridf\u0026gt;e.Management Group. Inc. 11 12 (Weaknesses Continued)Strategic Planning Workbook CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF ORGANIZATION DEFINITION The arrangement of accountabilities, authority, and information among people within an enterprise. IMPORTANCE IN PLANNING The organizational design is itself strategic, because it represents commitment of resources toward mission and objectives. A critique of the present organizational design quite often reveals its inappropriateness for the changing strategic direction of the enterprise. EXAMPLE Critique of the Organization Design: Span of Influence Gaps Redundancies (Duplications) Decision-making Implications Formal vs. Informal USE THIS SPACE TO DESCRIBE AND CRITIQUE THE ORGANIZATIONAL DESIGN OF YOUR ORGANIZATION. (dO NOT ATTEMPT TO DRAW AN ORGANIZATIONAL CHART)  1993 Colonial-Cambrid^e Manafienienl Group. Inc. 13 (Critical Analysis of Organization Continued) I 14Strategic Planning Workbook COMPETITION DEFINITION Any entity that successfully attempts to fill the same need as the planning organization. IMPORTANCE IN PLANNING A careful analysis of competition is quite often the most productive way of analyzing the planning organization. Dominant characteristics are both contrasted and compared in order to determine the competitions points of vulnerability. EXAMPLE Privale/Parochial Schools Their Advantages 1. Small classes 2. Snob appeal 3. Discipline control 4. Select students 5. Free from state mandates Our Advantages: 1. Public funding 2. Student diversity 3. Multi-cultural 4. Facilities and equipment 5. Teacher qualification Vulnerability: The question of cost versus quality USE THIS SPACE TO LIST YOUR COMPETITION - ADVANTAGES, DISADVANTAGES, AND VULNERABILITY. C 1995 Colonial-Cambruige Managemetii Group, Inc. 15 (Competition Continued) \u0026lt; 16Strategic Planning Workbook EXTERNAL ANALYSIS DEFINITION An examination of those forces over which an organization has little or no control. External change usually impacts an organization by virtue of its existence in a larger, sometimes more complex situation. IMPORTANCE IN PLANNING External, or environmental changes may present significant opportunities if they are appropriately anticipated and structured into programs to capitalize on them\nor, they may present a threat, making it necessary to alter products or modify methods of doing business. By identifying political, technological, and socioeconomic changes, isolating the significant factors, and determining their probable impact, either offensive or defensive programs can be structured to exploit the potential offered or to soften the total impact. EXAMPLE List each social, political, economic, demographic, technological or educational trend. Develop predictions and probable impacts.  CATEGORY: ECONOMIC FACTOR PREDICTION IMPACT I. Public School Revenue I. A. General fund revenue mandated by formula from state 1. A. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. B. Board choice to hold budget/bond election B. 1. 2. Limits programs Limits staff Limits supplies/materials Affects class size Possible school closures/ including busing Reduced building maintenance Revenues not guaranteed Polarizes community USE THIS SPACE TO LIST OTHER EXTERNAL FACTORS, PREDICTIONS, AND IMPACTS.  1993 Coionial-Cambridge Management Group, Inc. 17J ll 1/ (External Analysis Continued) i 18 IStrategic Planning Workbook OBJECTIVES DEFINITION An expression of the desired, measurable end results for the organization. For a school district, objectives are restricted to student success, performance, and/or achievement. IMPORTANCE IN PLANNING The objectives are practical, specific manifestations of the mission. They express, in measurable terms (time, money, quality, quantity) the results the organization will achieve as it fulfills its mission. Specifically stated, they must have broad, organization-wide implications. And they are aspirations, not projections. EXAMPLES * To have 100% of our students graduate or successfully complete their individual achievement programs. No later than 1995, 100% of our high school graduates will be in a post-secondary educational program or in an endeavor of their choice within six months of the successful completion of their educational program. USE THIS SPACE TO DESCRIBE THE OBJECTIVES OP YOUR ORGANIZATION. O 1993 Colonial-Cambridfie Management Group. Inc. 19 (Objectives Continued) 20Strategic Planning Workbook STRATEGIES DEFINITION The broadly stated means of deploying resources to achieve the organizations objectives. IMPORTANCE IN PLANNING In the broadest sense strategy comprehends purpose, function, policies, beliefs, objectives, strategies, and concrete action plans\nhence, strategic planning. But the word strategy in this instance is used in a narrower sense and refers to the means used to achieve the objectives in the organization and its major parts. The objectives are the what\nthe strategies are the how. EXAMPLES We will put in place a network of independent, competing instructional services maximizing flexibility, freedom of choice, 100% success rate, contracts between teachers/students, collaboration with community and corporations. We will organize the district strategically, including instruction and support services to concentrate all efforts and resources toward student success. We will develop the character of each student, with emphasis on appreciation of the common core of human values and a respect for our common traditions of excellence. We will energize and integrate all aspects of our diverse community into full support and implementation of the mission and objectives. We will form a lasting partnership with each graduate and maintain knowledge of his/her progress. We will develop and implement a whole-life learning network. USE THIS SPACE TO LIST STRATEGIES FOR YOUR ORGANIZATION.  1993 Coionial-Cambridge iManagement Group. Inc. 21 22 (Strategies Continued)Strategic Planning Workbook ACTION PLANS DEFINITION The explicit portion of a given strategy that outlines the tasks required to implement that program, the person responsible for each task, the due date for the completion of each task, and an analysis of the benefits and costs for the specific action plan. IMPORTANCE IN PLANNING Action plans insure that the strategies are implemented. They allow specific assignments of tasks to individuals within the organization\nthey provide a means for measuring both individual and organizational performance\nand they provide an effective system of accountability. EXAMPLE See the Action Plan form. USE THIS SPACE TO DESCRIBE THE ACTION PLANS OF YOUR ORGANIZATION.  1993 Colonial-Cambruige Management Group. Inc. 23 24 (Action Plans Continued) riStrategic Planning Workbook Reproducible Materials This section contains material designed to be reproduced by you for use with your district. Included are masters for Action Plan and Cost Benefit Analysis forms. They are copyrighted materials for which a limited license is granted to the purchaser of this workbook. LICENSE GRANTED Contents of the section Reproducible Materials are licensed for reproduction only by internal facilitators who are certified by The Cambridge Group. This license allows that these masters may be reproduced to make transparencies and hard copy for the purpose of facilitating strategic planning sessions and/or making informational presentations when the certified facilitator providing such services is a full-time employee of the organization for which the strategic plan is being developed. The reproduction of these materials for sale or loan to others i,s expressly prohibited. Prohibited also i.s the use of these materials by independent consultants, facilitators, or other individuals for the purpose of providing strategic planning facilitation, consultation, or other services for remuneration to any organization of which they are not a full-time employee.  1993 Cdonfal-Cambridge Management Group. Inc. 25 Action Plan Specific Results: Strategy No. Plan No. Date\n# Action Step (Number each one) Assigned To: Starling Date: Due Date: Completed Date: t 26  i993 Colonial-Camhridge Management Group. Inc Responsible: (Shaded areas for management phase)Cost-Benefit Analysis Costs Benefits Tangible: Intangible: Opportunity Costs: O 1993 Colonial Cambridge Management Croup. Inc. Tangible: Intangible: Strategy No. Plan No. Date: Return on Investment: 27 THE CAMBRIDGE GROUP A DIVISION OF COLONIAL-C AM BR 1 DC E MANAGEMENT GROUP. INC. 5796 CARMICHAEL PARKWAY MONTGOMERY, ALABAMA 36117 (205) 279-7150 FAX (205) 279-7151  1993 COLONIAL-CAMBRIDGE MANAGEMENT GROUP. INC. NO PART OF THIS PUBLICATION MAY BE REPRODUCED OR TRANSMITTED IN ANY FORM OR BY ANY MEANS WITHOUT PRIOR WRITTEN PERMISSION FROM THE PUBLISHER. Page 2 Feel free to invite other memho-rg of your group. Please call Linda Young at 324-2112 to make your reservations so that we can provide adequate seating. Looking forward to working with you. Thanks again. Sincerely, Henry P. illians Superintendent of Schools  die LriTLE Rock School District OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDENT January 25, 1995 JAN 3 0 1995 Bill Mooney Office of Desegregation Monitoring 201 East Markham, Suite 510 0f?.'C2 q\nLittle Rock, AR 72201 Dear Mr. Mooney: I am delighted that you have agreed to serve on the strategic planning team for the Little Rock School District. I am certain that this process will help determine the future direction of the district. Dr. Howard Feddema will serve as the facilitator for the strategic planning process. He is associated with the Cambridge Management Group located in Montgomery, Alabama. Listed below is the schedule for the planning sessions, to be held at the Excelsior Hotel. Tuesday, Feb. 14 5:30 - 7:30 p.m. Planning Session (Light supper provided) An Wednesday, Feb. 15 Thursday, Feb. 16 Friday, Feb. 17 informational session 7:30 3:00 a.m. Breakfast 8:00 a.m. - 10:00 p.m. Planning Session 7:30 3:00 a.m. Breakfast 3:00 a.m. - 10:00 p.m. Planning Session 7:30 3:00 a.m. Breakfast 3:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. Planning Session for members of the planning team. community organizations, and others will be held on Monday, Feb. 6 from 5:30 7:30 p.m. Building, 310 West Markham. in the Board Room of the Administration Please plan on attending this meeting. 810 West Markham Street  Little Rock, .Arkansas 72201  (501) 324.2000 9 Statement of Intention to Establish Green Factor Research Committees Presented to the LRSD Board of Directors - February 9. 1995 As part of the process for moving the Little Rock School District toward unitary status, the Superintendent intends to implement the following measures: A. Establish, committees to research specific areas, Green Factors, that have potential for achieving unitary status Committees will be established to research the following areas\n1. Student Assignment 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Faculty Ratios Staff Ratios Transportation Extracurricular Activities Facilities Student Achievement FEB 9 1995 tries Qi L u 4 The work of the committees will be coordinated by Dr. Russ Mayo, Associate Superintendent, and the Student Assignment Office. B. Define the composition of the committees and the structure of their work Each committee will be composed of ten to fifteen people who understand the importance of unitary status in the Little Rock School District. The committees will include persons with appropriate skills in observing, interpreting, and communicating conditions and factors of influence in the topic areas. Committee members will include teachers, administrators, and community members. Each committee will be co-chaired by a LRSD administrator and an individual selected by the Superintendent. Each committee will produce a report that addresses the opportunity for the LRSD to seek unitary status in its respective area. The reports will identify if such action is feasible and provide information to support its findings. C. Identify the funding source for the committees The Green Factor Research Committees will be financed with funds from the LRSD legal fees account. Approximately 512,000 - $15,000 is anticipated for this activity. Project Timeframe: The Superintendent intends to submit a resolution to the Board for action at the next Board meeting on the establishment of Green Factor Research Committees. Each Research Committee will be expected to deliver its report with a six-week period. Assuming project start up by March 1, the Green Factor reports should be available by mid-April./7/\u0026gt;S JOHN w. Walker, P.A. Attorney At Law 1723 Broadway Little Rock. Arkansas 72206 Telephone (501) 374-3758 FAX (501) 374-4187 FEB 1 5 1995 JOHN W. WALKER RALPH WASHINGTON MARK BURNETTE AUSTIN PORTER. JR. 05fii t i k-,,. February 13, 1995 Dr. Henry Williams Superintendent of Schools Little Rock School District 810 West Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Dr. Williams: I hope that your visit to New Orleans last week after the agenda session was both professionally and personally rewarding. We missed you at the school board meeting where we represented a series of children who had not only been put out of school, but had been arrested as well. Your perspective regarding that issue would have been useful for posterity if nothing else. I am writing to advise you that the Joshua Intervenors will not participate in the District's latest long range planning process which is scheduled to begin, ironically, on Valentine's. Day. The irony is that the District does not consider Black children, especially boys, as sweethearts\nrather, they are viewed almost universally as hoodlums who lie and have no interest in school other than to be disruptive. We can not participate for a number of reasons some of which I now proceed to set out. The first one is set forth in paragraph two above. undertaking is faulty. The second is that the premise of the It presumes that the existing desegregation plan is unworkable and needs to be changed. I can not agree with this premise because the existing plan is the Board's plan which was arrived at over a lengthy period of time and involved much of the community. It was an ambitious undertaking designed to remediate, desegregate and retain children in school, especially Black children. The Board and successive administrations have manipulated public opinion to the view that the plan is unworkable and that our children are criminals in waiting. Because of that prophesy, administrators and Board members yield to the public mentality calling for public repression and more severe punishment measures for actions that often should be the basis for counseling. Your Board seems to forget that the children have constitutional rights that await vindication and that teachers, principals and even police officers are in the schools to vindicate constitutional rights. You all have subverted the process by reversing the question ofwho the intended beneficiaries point. are. This brings me to my third The desegregation plan calls for reduction of suspensions and expulsions. Rather than reduce suspensions and expulsions, the Board and administration have chosen to increase them. Moreover, it now totally disregards the concept imbedded in the desegregation plan that school staff are in loco parentis status rather than police status. As stand-in parents, it is inconceivable that the District would allow police officers to make school disciplinary judgments and then allow the criminal judicial system to incarcerate juveniles without bail for four days and nights. Yet that is what happened to Mabelvale Junior High School students who were simply involved in a fight, approach allows a principal to abdicate her responsibility for making disciplinary decisions by deferring to police authorities the District placed in the environment. These parents were not on notice that they were sending their children to school to be subjected to nonschool ultimate determinations involving simple The social and economic adversities which conveyance of this discretion to resource officers visit upon Black children is immense and pervasive. Police authorities should be removed from the schools or take their orders from school authorities after As stand-in parents This fights. due consideration of due process considerations and the desegregation plan itself. I remind you that we have repeatedly called to the Board's attention the numerous indiscretions and discriminatory acts of Ms. Gayle Bradford at Cloverdale and Mabelvale Junior High Schools. You, your predecessor and the Board have not taken our monitoring reports and other correspondence seriously. We have advised you that Ms. Bradford's situation appears designed to frustrate the desegregation plan and to deny equal education to Black children. You should also be reminded that a large number of the Black staff members have protested her treatment of them and of students. Contrast, if you will, your reaction to those staff members with your reaction to the white staff members at Mablevale Elementary School to a Black principal. I can provide many more examples for you and have done so in the past, reinforces my fourth point. This The School District takes whatever action necessary to goodwill of white patrons and attendance of their children. The same is true of your white staff. We can not P^^'ticipate in a procedure or process where racial views predominate in a manner contrary to achievement and vindication of constitutional rights. Fifth, we participated in a similar process in 1993. modeled on the Syracuse City School District \"Strategic Plan 1991-1996\". See memo to Estelle Matthis from Rin Mnnnov Ha' It was ---- ----  See memo to Estelle Matthis from Bill Mooney dated 7\"\n- That process was under your aegis although you did not officially come to the District until October of 1993. August 23, 1993. have never received a report of the consequences of our work in I 1993. I request a report at this time on that matter. If ourrevisit the same issue in 1995. work was productive in 1993, why is it necessary for us to In passing, I note that Leon Modeste was involved in the Syracuse plan and I believe that your present consultant, whose name I believe is Howard Feddema, was also. The District seems to continually try to recreate the wheel which brings me to my sixth point. The desegregation plan adopted by the Board has never been implemented in good faith. Look at the various ODM reports, the Joshua reports and the Courts various findings. I would like to be made privy to any session involving the public which has been convened for the purpose of implementing the existing plan since you have been here. nothing. It goes without saying that Dr. Bernd did I must therefore conclude that the Board and administration no longer, if they ever did, intend to implement the court approved plan. This bring me to my final point. Joshua can not participate in a process designated to denigrate the court approved plan where the announced goal is to \"get the District out of Federal Court\", especially where the District's treatment of Black children cries out more than ever before for the protection of the Court. As an African American, you more than any of your predecessors, should be aware that our long, tedious, tortured \"stride toward freedom\" has been secured through legal actions taken through and by the Court. It looks as if that is the only arena where we can at least get a fair hearing in these times and hope to have the interests of our children protected. For these and other reasons, count us out. of the \"Strategic Plannning: Creating the Future\" process. Instead, we ask that you devote as much time in implementing the plan and in treating all children as contemplated by it as you and the Board would devote to its dismantlement. Si\nerely, .n W. Walker JWW:js cc: Ms. Ann Brown C0RR2O Contact Person: Sterling Ingram 324-2124 Date: August 23, 1993 To: Estelle Matthis From: Bill Mooney Subj: Syracuse Strategic Plan and Action Plan Examples Based on our discussions in last Fridays Cabinet meeting, I have made a copy of the Syracuse Strategic Plan and copies of some Action Plan examples. This represents everything I have obtained from Syracuse. I tried to remove any of my working notes from the source document, but please forgive me if I missed some of them. If I can be of any other help, just give me a call. ) zI k JOHN W. Walker, P.A. Attorney At Law 1723 Broadway Litile Rock, Arkansas t2206 Telethone (501) FAX (501) 374-4187 r JOHN W. walker R.ALPH WASHINGTON MARK BURNETTE AUSTIN PORTER. JR. I, February 13, 1995 Dr. Henry Williams Superintendent of Schools Little Rock School District 810 West Harkhaa--- - Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Dr, Williams! I hope that your visit to New Orleans last week after the agenda session was both professionally and personally rewardi^. We missed you at the school board meeting where we represented a series of children who had not only been put out of school, but had been arrested as well. Your perspective regarding that issue would have been useful for posterity if nothing else. I ironically, on valentine's. I am writing to advise you that the Joshua Intervenors will not participate in the District's latest long range plannii^ process which is scheduled to begin, ironically, on Valer)tine a Day. The irony is that the District does not consider Black children, especially boys, as sweethearts\nrather, they are viewed almost universally as hoodlums who lie and have no interest in school other than to be disruptive. I I I 1 We can not participate for a number of reasons some of which The first one is set forth in I now proceed to set out.  --- The second is that the premise of the paragraph two above. undertaking is faulty. --r----- j t ..--r. desegregation plan is unworkable chang^. I can not agree with this premise because the existing plan is ^e It presumes that the existing and needs to be changed. Board's plan which was arrived at over a lengthy period of tine lived much of the community. It was an ambitious and involved undertaking designed to remediate, desegregate and retain children in school, especially Black children. successive administrations have manipulated public opinion to the view that the plan is unworkable and that our chil^^ are criminals in waiting. Because of that prophesy, administrators and Board members yield to the public mentality calling for public repression and more severe punishment measures for actions that often should be the basis for counseling. Your Board seems to forget that the children have constitutional rights that avait vindication and that teachers, principals and even police officers are in the schools to vindicate constitutional rights. You all have subverted the process by reversing the question of criminals in waiting. JO'd 00I0I2I 01 The Board and fd uHof woaj Z3J3I 2661/21/20who the Intended beneficiaries are. point. This brings ne to sty third i The desegregation plan calls for reduction of suspensions and expulsions. Rather than reduce suspensions and expulsions. the Board and administration have chosen to increase them. Moreover, it now totally disregards the concept imbedded in the desegregation plan that school staff are in loco parentis status rather than police status. As stand-in parents, it is inconceivable that the District would allow police officers to make school disciplinary judgments and then allow the criminal judicial system to incarcerate juveniles without bail for four days and nights. Yet that is what happened to Mabelvale Junior High School students who were simply involved in a fight. This approach allows a principal to abdicate her responsibility for making disciplinary decisions by deferring to police authorities the District placed in the environment. These parents were not on notice that they were sending their children to school to be subjected to nonschool ultimate determinations involving simple The social and economic adversities which conveyance of f ights. tills discretion to resource officers visit upon Black children is immense and pervasive. Police authorities should be removed from the schools or take their orders from school authorities after due consideration of due process considerations and the I remind you that we have repeatedly desegregation plan itself. called to the Board's attention the numerous indiscretions and discriminatory acts of Ms. Gayle Bradford at Cloverdale and Mabelvale Junior High Schools. You, your predecessor and the Board have not taken our monitoring reports and other correspondence seriously. We have advised you that Ms. Bradford's situation appears designed to frustrate the desegregation plan and to deny equal education to Black children. You should also be reminded that a large number of the Black staff members have protested her treatment of them and of students. Contrast, if you will, your reaction to those staff members with your reaction to the white staff members at Mablevale Elementary School to a Black principal. T many more examples for you and have done so in the past. I can provide This reinforces my fourth point. The School District takes whatever action necessary to retain the goodwill of white patrons and attendance of their children. The same is true of your white staff. We can not participate in a procedure or process where racial views predominate in a manner contrary to achievement and vindication of constitutional rights. Fifth, we participated in a similar process in 1993. It was modeled on the Syracuse City School District \"Strategic Plan 1991-1996'. See leuo to Estelle Matthis from Bill Mooney dated August 23, 1993. That process was under your aegis although you did not officially come to the District until October of 1993. I have never received a report of the consequences of our work in 1993. I request a report at this time on that matter. If our C0  d 00IO1ZE Oi H'd aajiitin'n iiHor uoad 21-: a I S64,/I/Z0I productive in 1993, why is it necessary for us to sao passina, L\u0026lt; work was revisit the same issue in 1995. In passing, 1 note that Leon Modeste was Involved in the Syracuse plan and T believe that your present consultant, whose name I believe is Howard Feddema, iw as also. The District seems to continually try to recreate the wheel which brings se to ny sixth point. The desegregation plan adopted by the Board has never been Implemented in good faith. Look at the various ODM reports, the Joshua reports and the Courts various findings. I would like to be made privy to any session involving the public which has been convened for the purpose of implementing the existing plan since you have been here. nothing. It goes without saying that Dr. Bernd did I Bust therefore conclude that the Board and administration no longer, if they ever did, intend to implement the court approved plan. This bring me to my final point. Joshua can not participate in a process designated to denigrate the court approved plan where the announced goal is to \"get the District out of Federal Court\", especially where the District's treatment of Black children cries out more than ever before for the protection of the Court. As an African Anerican, you more than any of your predecessors, should be aware that our long, tedious, tortured \"stride toward freedom\" has been secured through legal actions taken through and by the Court. It looks as if that is the only arena where we can at least get a fair hearing in these times and hope to have the interests of our children protected. For these and other, reasons, count us out of the \"Strategic Plannnlng: Creating the Future\" process. Instead, we ask that you devote as much time in implementing the plan and in treating all children as contemplated by it as you and the Board would devote to Its dlssantlenent. Sincerely, in W. Walker JWW\njs co: Ms. Ann Brown Id ' ' M ut i,-ac. FES 1 'I9\u0026lt;\ns Offics of Dessgregit\na IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, ET AL PLAINTIFFS V. NO. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT, ET AL DEFENDANTS MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL INTERVENORS KATHERINE W, KNIGHT, ET AL INTERVENORS MOTION TO ENJOIN THE LRSD FROM EXPENDING SUBSTANTIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT FUNDS WITHOUT COURT APPROVAL AND FOR OTHER RELIEF The Joshua intervenors respectfully move the Court to enjoin the Little Rock School District from expending unbudgeted, large sums of school district fends without prior court approval. They also ask the Court to require the Little Rock School District to specify what action they have taken during the 1994-95 school year for compliarxie or in order to promote compliance with their own desegregation initiatives. For cause, the Joshua Intervenors respectfully show the Court that 1. The school district administration and school board have embarked upon a course of action to dismantle the court approved desegregation, integration and remediation plans herein. They have done this through, i.e., bad faith disputation of the plan, disregard lor remediation, proliferation of oiscipiinaiy consequences upon Black children, public relations actions designed to misrepresent facts within the schools, proposing to closing more schools in minority and low income areas, increasing rather than decreasing transportation burdens upon minority children, and expending or proposing to expend large sums of district furxjs to supplement salaries of fevered district personnel under trie guise of 'green Factor* resaarcri committees. For trie latter point, please see exhibit A, a statement approved by the LRSO Board of Directors on February 9,1995. For the other points, Joshua respectfully requests leave to take discovery on them prior to a hearing. 2. The school district plarts to engage in a long rang strategic planning conference beginning on February 14, 1995. The District engaged in such a process in August and September, 1993. The purpose of the confererx^e is to find ways to dismantle the court approved desegregation plan. Such plan, if undertaken for trie stated purpose, is not in good feith\ntherefore, the process should not be allowed. If it is allowed, however, we respectfully submit that the Court should not have any official role in the proceeding through ODM or otherwise because such approach is contrary to the interests of Black children in the District WHEREFORE, the Joshua Intervenors respectfully request the Court to allow them to take discovery, set this matter down for early hearing and thereafter enter an Order (a) finding that the districts actions represent bad faith implementation (rf implementation at all) of trie Court approved Desegregation Plan\nand (b) enjoining the district from proceeding with substantial furtding initiatives including school closings wBhout prior Court approval. Respectfully submitted,t- 0  d 1H i 0 i JOHN W. WALKER. PJL 1723 Broadway Little Rock. AR T23X (501) 374-37S8 loKn W. Walker, Bar No. 64046 By: CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, John W. Walker, do hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing pleading was fonwarded to all counsel of record, by U.S. Mail, postage prepaid, on this__ day of February, 1995. Johi Walker STRATEGIC PLANNING COMMITTEE NAMES ADDRESS PHONE/FAX Anderson, Dr. Victor 6700 \"H\" Street Little Rock, AR 72205 671-6200 (work) 671-6207 (fax) Beason, David 810 West Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 324-2060 (work) 324-2032 (fax) Briggs, Mona 401 N. Pine Street Little Rock, AR 72205 671-6250 (work) 671-6294 (fax) Coleman, Eleanor 1500 West 4th Street Little Rock, AR 72201 372-3519 (home) 375-4620 (fax) Crary, Don 209 West Capitol, 2nd Floor Little Rock, AR 72201 374-1011 (work) 688-8342 (fax) Dedner, Kevin 3314 Holt Road Little Rock, AR 72204 228-0472 (home) student at Central Frazier, Lee Two SL Vincent Circle Little Rock, AR 72205 660-3000 (work) 660-2329 (fax) Harris, Tyronne 901 Martin L. King Dr. Little Rock, AR 72202 324-2135 (work) Johnson, Brad 12017 Cherrystone Circle Little Rock, AR 72209 455-2068 (home) student at Fair Kennedy, Barbara 6423 Stagecoach Road Little Rock, AR 72204 455-7430 (work) 455-7427 (fax) Kohler, Dr. Patty 100 S. Arch Little Rock, AR 72201 324-2180 (work) 324-2032 (fax) Martin, Mahlon 308 East 8th Street Little Rock, AR 72202 376-6854 (work) 374-4797 (fax) Mason, Jesse 2801 S. University Little Rock, AR 72204 569-3584 (work) 569-3588 (fax) Matthis, Estelle 810 West Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 324-2010 (work) 324-2146 (fax) Mayo, Dr. Russ 501 Sherman Little Rock, AR 72201 324-2271 (work) 324-2281 (fax) Miller, Virgil P.O. Box 1681 Little Rock, AR 72203 378-1251 (work) 378-1146 (fax)Strategic Planning Committee Page 2 Milton, Ken 2410 Battery Street Little Rock, AR 72206 324-2415 (work) 324-2150 (fax) Mooney, Bill 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Little Rock, AR 72201 376-6200 (work) 371-0100 (fax) Moore, Delia P.O. Box 3257 Little Rock, AR 72203 376-4567 (work) 376-7607 (fax) Riggs, John 9125 Interstate 30 Little Rock, AR 72209 570-3528 (work) 570-3525 (fax) Robertson, Zeke P.O. Box 1611 Little Rock, AR 72203 373-3383 (work) 373-3090 (fax) Smith, Carole 5709 Kavanaugh Little Rock, AR 72207 663-4334 (work) Steward, John 924 S. Midland Little Rock, AR 72205 378-2154 (work) Stewart, Hezekiah 3701 Confederate Blvd. Little Rock, AR 72206 378-0176 (work) 378-0432 (fax) Strickland, Carroll 4107 Bruno Little Rock, AR 72209 565-5012 (work) Vibhakar, Diane 3917 S. Lookout Little Rock, AR 72205 661-8030 (home) Walker, John 1723 S. Broadway Little Rock, AR 72206 374-3758 (work) 374-4187 (fax) Warren, Judge Joyce W. 1916 South Pine Street Little Rock, AR 72204 340-6725 (work) 340-6788 (fax) Wells, Kathy 2121 S. Gaines Street Little Rock, AR 72206 374-7269 (home) Williams, Dr. Henry 810 West Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 324-2100 (work) 324-2146 (fax) lisupI REMINDER RECEIVED FEB 1 3 W5 OJfice of Desefife\u0026lt;j2fiy( i- LRSD Strategic Planning Process Begins Tuesday, February 14,1995 5:30 p.m. (Light Dinner Provided) Excelsior Hotel Caraway Boom Valet Parking Provided (Identify yourself as participant in LRSD meeting) Dress Casual! Call 324-2112 if you have any questions. See you there!!!RECF' -WK FEB 1 4 1995 Office of Desegregation Monitoring IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION UTTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT. ET AL PLAINTIFFS V. NO. LR-O82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT. ET AL DEFENDANTS MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL INTERVENORS KATHERINE W. KNIGHT, ET AL INTERVENORS MOTION TO ENJOIN THE LRSD FROM EXPENDING SUBSTANTIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT FUNDS WITHOUT COURT APPROVAL AND FOR OTHER RELIEF The Joshua Intervenors respectfully move the Court to enjoin the Little Rock School District from expending unbudgeted, large sums of school district fends without prior court approval. They also ask the Court to require the Little Rock School District to specify what action they have taken during the 1994-95 school year for compliance or in order to promote compliance with thar own desegregation initiatives. For cause, the Joshua Intervenors respectfully show the Court that 1. The school district administration and school board have embarked upon a course of action to dismantle the court approved desegregation, integration and remediation plans herein. They have done this through, i.e., bad faith disputation of the plan, disregard for remediation, proliferation of oiscipiinaiy consequences upon Black children, public relations actions designed to misrepresent facts within theschools, proposing to closing nrare schools in minority and low irxxxne areas, increasing rather than decreasing transportation burdens upon minority children, and expending or proposing to expend large sums of district funds to supplement salaries of favored district personnel under the guise of 'green Factor' research committees. For the latter point, please see exhibit A, a statement approved by the LRSD Board of Directors on February 9, 1995. For the other points, Joshua respectfuUy requests leave to take discovery on them prior to a hearing. 2. The school district plarts to engage in a long rang strategic planning confererxje beginning on February 14, 1995. The District engaged in such a process in August and September, 1993. The purpose of the conference is to find ways to dismantle the court approved desegregation plan. Such plan, if undertaken for the stated purpose, is not in good faith\ntherefore, the process should not be allowed. If it is allowed, however, we respectfully submit that the Court should not have any official role in the proceeding through ODM or otherwise because such approach is contrary to the interests of Black children in the District WHEREFORE, the Joshua Intervenors respectfully request the Court to allow them to take discovery, set this matter down for early hearing and thereafter enter an Order (a) finding that the districts actions represent bad faith implementation fif implementation at all) of the Court approved Desegregation Plan\narxl (b) enjoining the district from proceeding with substantial funding initiatives including school closings without prior Court approval. Respectfully submitted,tOd IHiOi JOHN W. WALKER. PJL 1723 Broadway URIo Rook, AR 72206 (501) 374-3758 By. Ib/n W. Walker, Bar No. 64046 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, John W. Walker, do hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing pleading was forwarded to all counsel of record, by U.S. Mail, postage prepaid, on this__ day of February, 1995. Joh] Walker LRSD SUPPORT SERVICES Fax:1-501 \u0026gt;4-2032 Jan 6 95 16:14 P.Ol January 6, 1995 To\nAnn Brown Office of Desegregation Monitoring Fax t 371-0100 From: Linda Young Little Rock School District 324-2112 This is to confirm the meeting on Wednesday, January 11th at 1:30 in your office with Dr. Williams, Leon Modeste and I regarding p.m. the Strategic Planning Process. Attached is a framework of the Strategic Planning Process for your review. Looking forward to our meeting on Wednesday. Thank You, Linda Youngfl jS 1 Confirm commitment and readiness  Conduct basic awareness session(s)  Explore system capacity and design Prepare for planning  Communicate about planning  Collect vital signs data Build strategic planning team .. Conduct first planning session vS * .. \u0026lt;* -i z Develop action plans  10. Action plans Conduct second planning session  Achieve consensus action plans  Affinn consensus strategic plan Prepare implementation sch^ule (with supporting resource plan) Obtain board approval * 1. Beliefs  2. Mission  3. Parameters 4. Internal Analysis 5. External Analysis 6. Competition 7. Critical Issues  8. Objectives  9. Strategies : Develop capacity for implementation  Communicate approved strategic plan  Develop mutual expectations and system design  Systemize site involvement I**' iejff i. 5.*' S*K- *1^ -. Communicate draft plan ''I 7 Validate pians and process continually \u0026lt;. Build action teams  Regular reviews  Periodic updates A ' -J 1 Little Rock School District OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDENT - RECEIVF'^ January 25, 1995 JAN 3 0 1995 Bill Mooney Office of Desegregation Monitoring 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Office of Desegrega. . Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Mr. Mooney: I am delighted that you have agreed to serve on the strategic planning team for the Little Rock School District. I am certain that this process will help determine the future direction of the district. Dr. Howard Feddema will serve as the facilitator for the strategic planning process. He is associated with the Cambridge Management Group located in Montgomery, Alabama. Listed below is the schedule for the planning sessions, to be held at the Excelsior Hotel. Tuesday, Feb. 14 5:30 - 7:30 p.m. Planning Session (Light supper provided) An Wednesday, Feb. 15 Thursday, Feb. 16 Friday, Feb. 17 informational session 7:30 8:00 a.m. Breakfast 8:00 a.m. - 10:00 p.m. Planning Session 7:30 8:00 a.m. Breakfast 8:00 a.m. - 10:00 p.m. Planning Session 7:30 8:00 a.m. Breakfast 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. Planning Session for members of the planning team. community organizations, and others will be held on Monday, Feb. 6 from 5:30 7:30 p.m. in the Board Room of the Administration Building, 810 West Markham. Please plan on attending this meeting. 810 West Markham Street  Little Rock, Aritansas 72201  (501)824-2000 Page 2 Feel free to invite other members of your group. Please call Linda Young at 324-2112 to make your reservations so that we can provide adequate seating. Looking forward to working with you. Thanks again. Sincerely, Henry P. ] Superintel Schools 'Jr ' I ' f I I s Little Rock School District OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDENT M 5 1995 March 30, 1995 Ann Brown ODM 201 E. Markham, Ste. 510 Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Ms. Brown, The Little Rock School District has begun a Strategic Planning Process. We believe that this is a valuable process for defining the educational future that we want for our children. The Strategic Planning Committee has completed the first planning session. An informational session to share the work of the committee will be held on Wednesday, April 5, 6:00 p.m. in the Board Room of the Administration Building at 810 West Markham. The committee will provide an update on the strategic planning process and share draft materials of the work that has been completed to date with the community. Broad base community participation is needed for the Action Planning phase of the process. Please call Linda Young at 324-2112 if you need further information or assistance. Thanks so much for your continued support of the Little Rock School District. Sincerely, Henry P. Williams 810 West Markham Street  Little Rock, .Arkansas 72201  (501) 324-2000 LRSD SUPPORT SERVICES Fax:1-501-324-2032 fipr 4 95 9:59 P. 02/02 .. - as 73-40] (501)834-3000 SHULTS, BAY \u0026amp; KTJBKVS attornkys at law ISOO WOKTHEN BANK BCIUJINO aOO WEST CAPITOL AVENUE LITT1.E ROCK, ARKANSAS 73201-3037 ROBERT SHULTS THOMAS RAY H. BAKER KLRRUS STEVEN SHULTS DEBORAH K. THUBY TELEPHONE (801) 375-8301 FACSIMILE (501) 375-68! May 22, 1995 Def' 4 '^1 r Mh I 2 2 1995 Ms. Ann Brown Office of Desegregation Monitoring 201 East Markham Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Oiisce ci Dear Ms. Brown\nAlthough I am the co-chairperson of the Little Rock School District's long-range Although lam the co cna desegregation plan, 1 am writmg in my planning action team dealing individual capacity at this time as  h-  - ~implement member of this community at la g  . effort to achieve unitary parent with children in the district and as a a driving the litigation. and have invested my whole future in Little I have resided here for 15 years and have mvesteu my wnoie iuloiu xxx been committed to Little Rock public schools since I retamedAc^Li^  recruitment and 1 have tirst nanu through when trying to decide Rock. I have------ . . , Rock. I have actively assisted in kindergarten knowledge regarding the process which parents go where their children will attend. latest report caused great damage to the The recent publicity surrounding your Little Rock School District and to its prospects for implementation of the aspects of the plan which seem subscribe to the view that ma V .. , snecial needs which must lower socioeconomic students (regardless of r ) district, sits'\nbuild community support and involvement. equal access to a full measure of the Plan will not be possible unless weSirtrLTS, RAY \u0026amp; KUBRCS Ms. Ann Brown May 22, 1995 Page 2 Great damage has been done to this district by the publicity surrounding your latest report. We are struggling to maintain white enrollment. One of the biggest obstacles in this struggle is the general negative perception which results from damaging articles and media publicity. The result of this damage is that children opt out of the public system and their parents cease to support it. I believe our biggest problem district-wide is the perception that the district is failing. This perception erodes community support for the district. There is no community support for a millage increase, and further cuts in the district's programs will result in more damage, more opting out, and more animosity toward the district, making a millage increase even more difficult. I have worked for years against a dual system, one public and one private. We have been fighting this battle for many years (see enclosed article). I fear that the tide has turned against us. I would like to personally invite you to come to one of our planning meetings and let us know how we can be of assistance in implementing the plan. The only qualification for membership on our committee that you be a person of good will who is willing to work. If you feel that the office of desegregation monitoring is not in a position to participate in this process, I would still ask that you attend one of our meetings and let us know how we can be of assistance. Our next meeting is May 31, 1995, at 6:30 p.m. at Hall High School. Please contact me and let me know whether you or someone from your office would be willing to attend and make a presentation to us regarding your office, the role of your office, and the way that we could be a positive influence in the desegregation process. Sincerely yours, H. Baker Kurrus HBK:rdb rt As I sat on the Main Street Mall basking in the noon sunshine, watching the pedestrians trip on the uneven tiles, and a reading the paper, I was initially amused by the letter from the jovial anarchist. Win Farrell, who was rejoicing in the Little Rock electorate's defeat of the 8 mill tax increase. Upon the second reading, I really couldn't tell whether Mr. Farrell's letter was an honest of his views or a clever piece of journalism designed to point out the myopia of the majority. In either case. my amusement faded as I realized that the views ex- pressed by that writer were shared by the many people who pulled the same lever on election day. Although most of the \"nays\" would probably not admit to II long[ing] for thiG day when the public school system in America is wiped out, \" I'm afraid that the negativists share all isolationistic views. too many of the jovial anarchist's There is no crucial flaw in Farrell's notion that each is responsible for educating his own. If such a commitment did in fact exist, the problems of the Little be greatly diminished. Rock school system would It is, however. naive and unrealistic to believe that each member of the community has the time, resources, and ability to provide a well-rounded education to the young members of his immediate family. Such a belief could.be no more realistically held by a wealthy man than by a man of lesser means. It is also unrealistic and naive in a more fundamental sense to think that 6a well-rounded education can be had in a cloistered environment which is not representative of the community as it exists. If the purpose of education is to prepare one for a productive life in the real world, then that end can be best served by conducting the training process in a microcosm which introduces the student not only to math and English, but also to actual problems in a controlled, but representative, atmosphere. In recognition of some of these realities of education, public schools were born. \"Public schools\" have suffered in the past because they were not truly public, and the public has suffered by learning lessons in the streets which should have been learned in the classrooms. It now appears, though, that the lessons were not learned very well and that we are regurgitating the very bitter pill which presently holds the only hope of curing the pernicious disease. I'm not ready to give up on the idea of community improvement through education, any many of Little Rock's citizens are not giving up, but the help and participation of all segments of the community is essential. One need only glance at the precinct-by- precinct results of the last election to see that the people with the most to give are tired of giving. Those less advantaged are doubtless tired, too. I believe that sooner than later we must all realize that this community and its members will succeed or fail together, and that the good education that all desire cannot be had in a roomful of people who pleasantly deny that their neighbors exist, or in a roomful of people who are not receivingfamilial support, direction and encouragement. I am aware of the fact that many of the lessons now being learned in the public schools are horribly unacceptable, but that only means that there is much hard work to be done in the community. It is time that we put our heads together and set about the task.H. BAKER KUERUS 1600 WORTHEN BANK BUILDING UTTLE ROOK ARKANSAS 72201 / RECFIVO Jill 10 1995 Office of Desegregation Mcniioring /n^dJlud^ I fi i wnii^ l^ Siart' K i /i^ Pa, C\\ROBERT SHULTS THOMAS RAY H. BAKER KURRUS STEVEN SHULTS DEBORAH K. TRUBY SHTJLTS, RAY \u0026amp; KURRUS ,ATTORNEYS AT LAW IQOO BOATMEN S BANK BUILDING 200 WEST CAPITOL AVENUE LITTLE ROCK. ARKANSAS 72201-3637 TELEPHONE (501) 375a3Ol FACSIMILE (501) 376-Q861 July 7, 1995 TO: ACTION TEAM 2 MEMBERS Dear Friends, Our next meeting will be held on July 13 at 6:30 p.m. at Hall High School. Please plan on attending the meeting. I enclose to each of you a summary sheet which shows the results of our brainstorming session during our last meeting. Jerry Osterman deserves our thanks for leading the session and for preparing the first draft of the notes. Also enclosed are copies of the litigation summary which Van Light has prepared and copies of an article she provided which covers current issues in desegregation litigation. The article pre-dates the U.S. Supreme Court decision tn the Kansas City case. Last, but not least, I enclose a copy of an outline which I have prepared. This outline is my view of the desegregation plan status, with a particular emphasis on implementing a beneficial strategy for improved relations among the patrons of the district. At our upcoming meeting I would like to discuss the specific action plans which will address the concerns expressed at our last meeting. I believe we should emphasize inclusion of all parties and cooperation among these parties and all monitoring bodies. Sincerely yours, H. Baker Kurrus HBK:rdb Enclosures 7/7/95 TEAM 2 - LRSD STRATEGIC PLANNING LRSD Strategic Planning Team 2 is charged with developing action plans to implement the following strategy\nII 'Develop the means to successfully implement or modify the desegregation plan in order to achieve unitary status as well as the objectives in the strategic plan.  A brainstorming session, held June 22, 1995, collected ideas from all participants without criticism or judgment. These ideas are grouped into four categories, with clarifications by the authors in brackets. This report is being sent to all participants for their review, constructive criticism, and further suggestions. Please forward your comments to Baker Kurrus (Fax\n375-6861) or to Gerry Osterman at 221-2057. The report will be reviewed at the next committee meeting. Most of the ideas can be grouped under the following headings\n1. 2. 3. 4. Desegregation plan performance and review. Quality education for all students. Public involvement, understanding and support. Optimization of the special programs. The ideas stated by the team members are summarized as follows\nDesegregation plan review 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. Implement/modify the plan. Remove all vestiges of segregation. Develop simplified, understandable, focused plan. Develop realistic plan. Consider feasibility of plan components. Consider district revenue. Consider changed circumstances. Meet basic requirement to abolish racial identification (for student bodies, faculty, staff, transportation, extracurricular activities and facilities). Define words in the plan (develop glossary). Consider administrative listing of plan requirements. Tailor the remedy (plan) to the original problem. Involve teachers and administrators in planning.7ni^s [Involve the intervenors and the desegregation plan committees like the magnet review committee and the bi-racial committee early in the process, before suggesting plan revisions and before the decisions are made. We must consult before deciding - and listen. The present process is limited to promoting conflict in court sessions. This damages the district. Failure to improve this process will result in lower education for all Little Rock students] Quality education for all students 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Student centered plans and programs (Reading Recovery, Great Expectations). Emphasize reading, writing and arithmetic. De-emphasize race (emphasize persons). Provide special teaching for disadvantaged. Use best available teaching methods. Define what is wrong with schools for black students. Get honest about race, class and culture. (Analyze and provide for needs and differences like variations in early exposure to print). Define the public schools' responsibilities and limits. Public involvement, understanding and support 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Develop community acceptance (of desegregation and the plan). Increase parent involvement. Educate white \"majority\". Reduce flight of white and black families. Develop historical understanding (of public schools). Change attitudes toward education and race. Investigate Parents for Public Schools (national organization). Optimization of special programs (including neighborhood schools, incentive schools, magnet schools, interdistrict schools, special education, vocational education, alternative schools, summer schools and nursery schools) 1. 2. 3. Emphasize neighborhood schools. Improve effectiveness of Incentive Schools. Consider pairing schools. 24. 5. 6. Determine current demographic (and geographic) information and forecast. Consider magnet schools advantages and disadvantages. Look at neighborhood schools' effect on all students. Additional comments Desegregation must be a good faith effort (and competent). Little Rock School District is accountable for results. We have had a relatively short time to change attitudes. We need timeliness of progress (compliance). Improve security (community peace of mind). [The interests of all litigants, and their duty, is to convert to a unitary system in which racial discrimination would be eliminated root and branch and to provide the best practical education for all students. New communications and probably some reorganization and changed emphasis of the parties is required to achieve these interests.] Gerald Osterman Baker Kurrus cc: Committee members Leon Modeste Linda Young Russ Mayo Henry Williams Ann Brown John Walker Eleanor Coleman Grainger Ledbetter 3Status LRSD Desegregation Case as of June 22, 1995 Plan Implementation Process a. Completion Status Russ Mayo's office conducting audit. Audit results in 3 weeks. (2500 compliance tasks, 1718 remaining) b. Compliance is evaluated in terms of I. Showing Good Faith effort. (that is, demonstrating that there is a genuine commitment to operate a unitary system. The school would operate in compliance with the commands of the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment. The school would not return to its former ways. II. Eliminating all vestages of past discrimination in the school system to the extent practical. Define vestage: a trace\na remnant of the former unconstitutional school system. Green factors Student Assignment Faculty and Staff Facilities Transportation Extra Curricular Activities Availability of equitable (as opposed to equal) education opportunities. Additional Specific harms identified by the District Court specific to the Little Rock case. c. Desegregation Plan Amendment Process (see handout) I. Plan Amendments Pending (at district court) Proposed change to adjust racial balance ratio requirement to match racial balance ratio of affected attendance zone. Proposed changes affecting budget. ii. Plan Amendments Under consideration at LRSD/Deseg Office NONEII. Litigation Affecting Desegregation Plan a. Litigation Currently in Process. i. Claim against State of Arkansas. LRSD Claims that State of Ark. violated Settlement Agreement by way it computes workers' compensation, computers, M to M Transfers. District Court: Sth Circuit: Ruled in favor of LRSD claim. State appealed, Decision pending. i i. Claim against PCSSD. LRSD claims that PCSSD violated Settlement Agreement by way it computes the amount of money to be dispersed to the Interdistrict Schools. District Court: Sth Circuit: Ruled in favor of PCSSD. LRSD appealed, Decision pending. b. Litigation Recently Concluded. i. Joshua Intervenors petitioned Court not to allow the closing of Ish Elementary by LRSD. District Court: Sth Circuit: Ruled in favor of LRSD Upheld District Courts ruling. i i. Joshua Intervenors petitioned Court to create 3 majorityblack school board zones instead of 2. District Court: Sth Circuit: Ruled against petition. Upheld District Court's ruling. HI. Prediction of Completion of Plan Compliance and Release from Court Supervision.2 Lc X 3 co 1) OO s JS  -S 1) Q co (U c^ 3 .3 3 2P w  E 00 x: 3 U 2 G c u o V5 73 73 3 3-0 \u0026lt;U U co U . G. -= I O E CQ o u D 12^ o 03 S oi IZ3 CZ2 O o o 3 O E 3 (D E 3 3 3 O 3 00 o o CT) o O tn tn u o o w 2- CU 3 . 00 3 1) Um co Q 3 hJ .s co (SO 3 3 J= u o o co \"o 13 45 a a\u0026gt; \u0026gt; o _ Q o co 5 u 2 \u0026lt;U CQ fi o bJD fl fl OJD C C3 IS 0^ U) 0) cn IXl o 1) Q 0M CO C P co co 3 \u0026lt;u 73 3 5? .s O o co O 3 co 'S E 73 \u0026lt; co u 0.) U= u 3 (U H VJ 0^ s s o U 73 a\u0026gt; \u0026gt; o Om ex 3 fi m (M 3 CO CU 00 o c 3 .2  G C D G S o X' C cn O T3 \u0026gt; O O 13 gj 3 TS 73 a\u0026gt; \u0026gt; o k a ex 3      s o. 3 CO (U a: 3 c 3 O X) 3 1) s 73 O 33 3 3 \u0026lt;U *3 P . i CO -=i (S co 00 X g .. 2 -2 o o co  4= C tn 5 3 S o CO  M 3 33 r x\u0026gt; 3 \u0026lt;- -s /? C O o a cy e- -z\nCO C/3 CO C \u0026lt;U t) -3 Q Q:^ o cs a. g 3 CZ5 c co u O Q P - Q X t4_ .- o (U 3 j= CQ CZ) 3 .2 3 \"co \u0026gt; w c s A s GO 0^ R tZ! Cj 5 \"S o .u Co -ic u o 05 \u0026lt;uin 195 A. B. I. PLAN IMPLEMENTATION Identify LRSD Plan Obligations. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Classify and Group Plan Obligations. (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (g) (h) (1) Incentive schools Student assignments Interdistrict magnets LRSD magnets Area schools Personnel Transportation Budget Special programs Isolate Goals and Objectives (differentiate from Obligations). Determine and Assign Compliance/Performance Responsibility. Determine Monitoring Responsibility. Consult Joshua Intervenors regarding all of the above. Consult ODM regarding all of the above. Plan and Calendar Regular Meetings with Joshua and ODM regarding all of the above. Seek advice/assistance from Joshua and ODM regarding all of the above. Consult, analyze, discuss, compromise, and seek consensus on all Plan issues. Establish Timetable and Plan for Meeting Unperformed Feasible Obligations.7/7/95 c. Develop Joint (LRSD, ODM, Knight and Joshua) Plan for Release/Recognition of Accomplished Plan Requirements. D. Determine Plan Requirements Which Are No Longer Feasible or Educationally Sound. 1. Consult ODM, Joshua. 2. Use professional educators who recognize LRSD obligations and Joshua goals. 3. Reinvigorate Plan with better, more effective programs which meet the goals. E. Seek Joint (LRSD, Joshua, Knight) Plan Modifications in order to meet goals and objectives. 1. Advise/consult with all parties, including ODM. 2. Consult experts within District and outside to get best educational programs available to meet goals. 3. Address Joshua concerns directly in advance through A. B. C. advice/consult/compromise/consensus process II. ESTABLISH TRUST, CONFIDENCE, AND GOOD FAITH Declare Intention to Cooperate With Knight. Joshua. ODM - reestablish working relationships. Schedule and Follow-up on Cooperative Efforts Outlined in Section I. Cultivate Conununity/Business Support. 2in 195 D. Analyze and Report on Positive Desegregative Results in area schools, interdistrict magnet schools. E. Focus on Rockefeller, and replicate its success in other Incentive Schools. F. Analyze LRSD magnet schools from standpoint of academic performance and desegregation results. G. Publicize Accomplishments. H. Identify Problems and Address Them Cooperatively. III. ARTICULATE LONG-RANGE PLANS FOR LRSD A. Complete Strategic Planning Process. B. Reinvigorate Board of Directors. C. Propose Joint Planning Sessions for Schools (Joshua. ODM, Kmght and LRSD). D. Complete Demographic Study and Use Study in Planning for Growth and Change. E. Outline Budgetary Needs/Examine MiUage/Organize Commitments for Millage. F. Plan for Facilities - Expansion, Reconstruction, and New Construction. G. Exhibit to the Community, Positive, Cooperative Approaches to Problems. H. Concentrate on Recruiting. 3CURRENT ISSUES IN SCHOOL DESEGREGATION LITIGATION Stephen J. Immelt* This presentation addresses litigation issues that arise when school districts attempt to eliminate court supervision under desegregation decrees or when school district actions are challenged on the basis that they produce an impermissible racial impact in terms of the overall operation of the system. (It, therefore, does not address issues of racial discrimination arising solely in an employment context) The presentation begins with a brief overview of the legal issues that shape desegregation cases, with particular emphasis on recent Supreme Court decisions dealing with the termination of judicial supervision. It then discusses practical issues that are likely to arise in such litigation. Forty years ago the Supreme Court issued its monumental decision in Brown v. Board of Education. 347 U.S. 483 (1954). The impact of that decision on American education, and society at large, have been enonnous. A direct consequence of Brown was Stephen J. Immelt is a partner in the law firm Hogan \u0026amp; Hartson. The views and opinions expressed in this article are strictly his own and are not attributable to other lawyers in the firm or its clients. B-1 \\\\\\BA - 80334/1005 - 0004201.01that it injected the Federal judiciary into the operation of public schools in a way that was unprecedented and far-reaching. Although the federal judges who presided over desegregation cases frequently expressed the hope that their involvement with the local schools would be limited and temporary, there was no clear sense of exactly what steps would be necessary to remedy the constitutional violations that were at the heart of Brown and its progeny or how long the process would take. The legal objective, as articulated by the Supreme Court, was disarmingly simple: the elimination of segregation, root and branch, from every facet of school operations. Green v. County School Board. 391 U.S. 430,435,438 (1968). Dismantling the dual school systems that were the product of de jure segregation in the South was a fairly straightforward task, at least legally. Much more complicated was the task nf eliminating the vestiges of those systems. The efforts to create a school system free of the influences of a prior dual system turned out to be a lengthy, frustrating. controversial, and elusive quest, embroiling federal courts in litigation that has often been measured by decades rather than years. This confused state of affairs was partly a function of the peculiar nature of desegregation cases themselves. Although such cases embody some of the most important conceptual principles underlying the Constitution, in practice they are extremely fact intensive. The geography and demographics of the particular community largely drive the legal analysis. To study desegregation cases is to read about routine B-2 \\\\\\BA - 80334/1005 - 0004201.01 operational decisions relating to school locations, school attendance zone boundaries, bus routes and the like. These are cases where the facts matter. These are also cases where the personality and outlook of the assigned judge has had a tremendous impact on the course of the litigation. A review of leading desegregation cases would reveal a wide variety of legal conclusions and remedial schemes in cases that seem ostensibly quite similar. Another important factor was the degree of acrimony that typically infused these cases, at least in their early stages. The issues that these cases present resonate so emotionally that it can be difficult to measure progress or even to agree on what criteria should be used. In many of the cases, the relations between the parties to the litigation have been characterized by a lack of trust and hostility of an intensity that took decades to develop. Also, the institutionalization of some cases (through the appointment of monitors, experts and the like) created a sense of inertia, perhaps even permanence, about judicial oversight. Despite these trends, some districts succeeded in obtaining a declaration that they had achieved unitary status, with the result that active judicial supervision of those districts ceased. In recent years the effort to achieve unitary status has accelerated. Not surprisingly given the history of these cases, the litigation over whether to terminate judicial oversight of desegregation efforts has reflected the same lack of consensus and uniformity that characterized the underlying proceedings. Although most B-3 \\\\\\BA - 80334/1005 - 0004201.01 cases described the legal inquiry in the termination phase as one focused on whether the school district had achieved unitary status, there was little agreement about exactly what was meant by that term or the analysis that should be undertaken to assess whether it had been achieved. There was also confusion about the legal effect of a unitary status determination. Did it mean that the case was over for good or just that active judicial supervision was being terminated? Did it mean that any orders issued in the course of the proceedings had no further force and effect? The answers to these questions had important practical consequences. In most cases the desegregation plans, which commonly dealt with student assignment, teacher assignment, building construction, transportation and related matters, were embodied in court orders. Did a declaration of unitary status and a dismissal of the case mean that those orders had no further application? Were districts then free to abandon or modify the very desegregation plans that had enabled them to achieve unitary status? For example, was a district that had been declared unitary free to return to a system of neighborhood schools even if the effect was to create racially identifiable schools? And if a district were to adopt such a course, what would be the legal standard that would be applied to evaluate its legality? Would the plaintiffs have to prove a fresh constitutional violation under Supreme Court decisions requiring proof of a discriminatory intent or would they be able to rely on the more relaxed standards that apply to districts under a court order? B-4 \\\\\\BA - 80334/1005 - 0004201.01For years the Supreme Court was content to allow the issues surrounding unitary status determinations to remain with the lower courts, notwithstanding the widespread confusion and inconsistency. Finally, in 1991, the Court took up the question of whether. and under what circumstances, a school district could be released from all constraints of a federal court order arising from an earlier finding of a constitutional violation. The case of Board of Education of Oklahoma City v, Dowell. 498 U.S. 237 (1991), arose from a long standing desegregation case in Oklahoma City. That case had a long and acrimonious history. The case had been filed in 1961, and there had been a finding in 1963 that the schools had been intentionally segregated. After voluntary efforts failed to address the problem, the district court entered an order in 1972 mandating a student assignment plan, known as the Finger Plan, that eliminated segregated schools by closing certain segregated elementary schools and converting them to fifth grade centers. Based on the successfill operation of the Finger Plan, the district court entered an order in 1977 declaring the district to be unitary, although the 1972 order was not vacated or modified. When the school district decided to abandon the Finger Plan in 1985, that action was challenged as violative of the 1972 order. The district court held an extensive evidentiary hearing and determined that, notwithstanding the resegregative effect of abandoning the Finger Plan, the school district continued to be unitary and that any segregation in student assignment was a product of demographic changes, not the action of the school district. The 1972 injunction was therefore dissolved. Furthermore, the district court held that the plaintiffs had failed to show that a fresh constitutional violation B-5 \\\\\\BA - 80334/1005 - 0004201.01 had occurred because there was insufficient proof that the system had acted with discriminatory intent. The Tenth Circuit reversed. It held that an equitable decree, such as the 1972 order, should remain in place unless there have been changes in circumstances such that the dangers that the decree was intended to address have become attenuated to a shadow. 890 F.2d 1483,1490 (10th Cir. 1989). Because, under that analysis, the school system had a continuing duty to desegregate, the effects of eliminating the Finger Plan required special scrutiny. The Supreme Court reversed. The Supreme Courts opinion in Dowell emphasized that injunctive decrees in school cases were never intended to be permanent. Once a decree had achieved its purpose of bringing about the transition from a state-sponsored segregated system to a racially nondiscriminatory school system judicial, supervision should cease. To evaluate whether that goal had been achieved, the Dowell Court identified two critical inquiries: 1) had the school system complied in good faith with the court decree since it was entered\nand 2) had the vestiges of past discriminatinn been eliminated to the extent practicable. With regard to the vestiges inquiry, the Court directed that consideration be given not only to student assignments, but to every facet of school operations  faculty, staff, transportation, extra-curricular activities and facilities. 498 U.S. at 250 (quoting Green v. New Kent County School Board. 391 U.S. 430,435 (1968)). Once a school decree was dissolved, the school districts future conduct would remain subject to B-6 \\\\\\BA - 80334/1005 - 0004201.01e Equal Protection Clause, but any such claim would need to establish a discriminatory intent if the moving party were to prevail. hl The Supreme Court soon returned to the issue of unitary status determinations in Freeman v. Pitts. 112 S.Ct. 1430 (1992), a case involving the school system for DeKalb Cormty, Georgia. Freeman reaffirmed the essential holdings of Dowell and embraced the principle that federal court supervision of a school system could be withdrawn incrementally\nin other words, the Court could withdraw supervision over student assignment issues while continuing to monitor other aspects of the system such as faculty assignments. The Freeman Court provided some further elaboration of the analytical framework for withdrawing court supervision. A court should examine whether: 1) the vestiges of past discrimination in a particular area of school operations has been eliminated\n2) the existence of full and satisfactory compliance with the existing decree with regard to those areas where supervision is to be withdrawn\n3) the need for ongoing judicial control over the area sought to be removed to bring about compliance in other areas\nand 4) the defendants good faith commitment to avoiding future violations of the type that gave rise to the original decree. 112 S.Ct. at 1446. In its current term, the Supreme Court is scheduled to hear State of Missouri v. Jenkins. That case, which will likely focus on the vestiges analysis, should provide even further guidance concerning the standards for withdrawing judicial supervision over school systems. B-7 \\\\\\BA - 80334/1005 - 0004201.01With that background in mind, let us turn to practical considerations. Assume that your client has been the subject of a desegregation order at some time in the past It is contemplating changes in some aspect of school operations, a change in attendance boundaries or the construction of a new school, that may be controversial because of a perceived racial impact You are asked to advise the district about the legal standards that would apply to these decisions. Alternatively, your client decides that it is tired of paying for high-priced Washington lawyers and that the time has come to terminate court supervision. You are asked whether that effort will be successful and what issues are likely to come up in the course of the case. Or your client is sued for actions based on their alleged racial impact What legal standard will apply to the determination of the school districts liability? If a party challenges the action of the school district, will they need to prove an intent to discriminate in addition to a racially disparate impact? The touchstone of this analysis will be whether the school district has achieved unitary status. If it has not, its actions will continue to be evaluated based on the impact of its actions in terms of race, regardless of the intent underlying the action. The application of this more rigorous standard may not preclude the school district from taking the desired action, but it will in all likelihood be necessary for the district to show that it has considered all reasonable alternatives and that there are compelling reasons for the chosen course. If, on the other hand, the District can show that it is no longer subject B-8 \\\\\\BA - 80334/1005 - 0004201.01 to judicial supervision, a less rigorous standard would apply and the burden of proof would shift to the party challenging the action. The starting point for addressing any of these issues is to undertake a thorough review of all prior court orders. Are there any orders that have been entered in the case that arguably were intended to terminate judicial oversight? If there has not been active judicial oversight in recent years, there is a good chance that such an order may exist. Whether the order uses the magic words unitary status is not definitive. Indeed, in r Dowell the Supreme Court cautioned against giving terms such as unitary constitutional stature. We think it is a mistake to treat words such as dual and unitary as if they were actually found in the Constitution.... Courts have used the terms dual to denote a school system which has engaged in intentional segregation of students by race, and unitary to describe a school system which has been brought into compliance with the command of the Constitution. We are not sure how useful it is to define these terms more precisely, or to create subclasses within them. 498 U.S. at 245-46. The critical issue was whether the district court has made a finding that the constitutional violation has been eliminated and done so in terms clear enough to put the parties on notice about the intended effect of the order. Since all unitary status orders entered prior to January 1991 were developed without the benefit of the Dowell case, one advocacy issue will be to develop arguments that the earlier order effectively complied with the criteria established in Dowell for dissolving a desegregation decree, even though the earlier order may not have used the B-9 \\\\\\BA - 80334/1005 - 0004201.01 exact language employed in the Dowell opinion. One of the attachments to this presentation is a copy of a unitary status order entered in 1977 that was subjected to a Dowell analysis (the 1977 Order). The issue in that case was whether the district in question had purged itself of any prior constitutional violations so that any new conduct had to be evaluated as a fresh constitutional violation. The plaintiffs argued that the 1977 Order did not use the precise criteria articulated by Dowell and that the School District itself had not considered the order to be definitive because it had continued to operate under the pre-existing desegregation plan. A particular deficiency noted by the plaintiffs was that the 1977 Order had not reviewed the Green factors nor had it made precise findings as to the elimination of vestiges with regard to each aspect of school operations. The School District prevailed on the issue by emphasizing the sweeping nature of the Courts declaration. Because the Court had expressly found that the constitutional violation had been eliminated, the plaintiffs were clearly on notice that the case was coming to an end. In this regard, the 1977 Order complied with the Dowell Courts observation that an order be sufficiently clear that the Plaintiffs could reasonably be expected to take an appeal if they were of the view that judicial supervision should continue. The lesson here is that, while improbable, your client may be unitary but not realize it. Read the .orders. B-10 \\\\\\BA - 80334/1005 - 0004201.01Assuming that there is no magic order hidden in some file cabinet, the next, and probably most critical, step is to conduct a unitary status audit. Counsel needs to sit down with the client and review various aspects of school operations with a view toward the Dowell/Freeman factors. This review must be objective and analytical. It must consider the history of litigation in your district and the likely attitudes and expectations of the presiding judge. Obviously, the Court records should be reviewed, paying particular attention to any reports submitted to the Court by the parties or outside experts or mo]\nors. The more active the level of judicial supervision has been, the more searching the unitary status inquiry must be. The threshold consideration is whether there has been good faith compliance with all court orders. Obviously, part of this inquiry relates to the history of the litigation itself. A district that has consistently resisted efforts to desegregate, that has taken an aggressive and combative approach to the litigation, or that has been ordered to take action because voluntary initiatives were ineffective is likely to encounter resistance and skepticism on this issue. A history of resistance is not necessarily fatal, however, for the Courts have recognized that attitudes change and, even more importantly, that the composition of school boards change. The advocacy issue in dealing with the issue of good faith compliance is to demonstrate that there is genuine commitment to operating a unitary system. As the Dowell Court observed, good faith compliance requires a finding not only that the school B-11 \\\\\\BA - 80334/1005 - 0004201.01 district was being operated in compliance with the commands of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, [but also] that it was unlikely that the school board would return to its former ways. 498 U.S. at 247. In this sense, the good faith compliance analysis does not consist strictly of a retrospective review of the school districts conduct in the litigation. There is also an important predictive element. In assessing the strength of your clients position on this issue, you must go beyond the professed attitudes and intentions of your client. The Courts have generally expressed skepticism about the credibility of self-serving pronouncements by school officials of their good faith intentions. Dowell v. Board of Education of Oklahoma City. 8 F.3d 1501,1513 (10th Cir. 1993). Actions are what matter. Voluntary actions that promote desegregation beyond the strict requirements of the decree may be particularly material to show a strong institutional commitment to operate a system free from unconstitutional conduct. Ii Part of the litigators role, therefore, must be to evaluate critically the evidence that may reflect your clients commitment to desegregate. You should review with your client any significant public controversies affecting schools during the last five years. Opening and closing schools, changing attendance boundaries. allocating resources among schools and the like are the types of issues that generate controversy and that pose a significant risk of creating adverse evidence concerning your clients intentions. Learn the details of these controversies. Transcripts or tapes of public hearings are a source of particular interest. You should also identify all programs that have a bearing on future plans or programs for the school district. The existence of B-12 \\\\\\BA - 80334/1005 - 0004201.01 programs designed to promote desegregation on a voluntary basis such as minority to majority transfers and magnet schools may be given significant weight in assessing a school districts commitment to operate constitutionally and may go a considerable distance to overcome problems of recalcitrance in the past. Some districts have adopted policies that address what actions they intend to take following a declaration of unitary status as a sign of their good faith intentions. The next step in the legal analysis is whether the vestiges of past discrimination in the school system have been eliminated to the extent practicable. This inquiry is central to the whole purpose of school desegregation litigation, for the Supreme Court in GlSSn imposed on school authorities the affirmative duty to take whatever steps might be necessary to convert to a unitary system in which racial discrimination would be eliminated root and branch. 391 U.S. at 439. Conironted with this issue, the logical question that any litigator would ask is what is a vestige? That is a simple enough question but the answer is far from straightforward. In common understanding, a vestige is a trace, in this case a remnant of the former unconstitutional school system. But what does that mean when applied to a constantly changing institution such as a school system? Perhaps the best framework for analyzing the existence of vestiges are the factors identified in Green: student assignment, faculty and staff assignments, transportation. extra-curricular activities and facilities. B-13 \\\\\\BA - 80334/1005 - 0004201.01Student Assignment  Have the districts student assignment policies been designed to foster desegregation and have those policies been successful? Faculty and Staff  Are faculty and staff assigned to schools on an equitable basis? Does the composition of faculty or staff identify the school with a particular race? If there were affirmative action provisions in the Decree, have those been successfully implemented? Transportation  Are the burdens of any mandatory busing for desegregation shared equitably among various racial groups? Extracurricular Activities  Does the District encourage participation in the entire spectrum of extracurricular activities by members of all races and ethnic groups? Facilities  Are the educational facilities available at any predominantly minority schools comparable to those at predominantly majority schools so that all schools are capable of providing a modem educational programs? Consideration must also be given to any factors that may have a bearing on the availability of equal educational opportunities. These would include student achievement, attendance and drop-out rates, student discipline, and placement in special programs such as Special Education or Gifted and Talented programs. Finally, to the extent that the district court in your case has previously identified specific harms attributable to segregation, you must assess whether those issues have been addressed to the extent practicable. Although all of these factors are important, the issue that historically has received the most attention is that of student assignment One of the hallmarks of the B-14 \\\\\\BA - 80334/1005 - 0004201.01 unconstitutional dual systems were schools that were identifiable on the basis of race. An obvious starting point, therefore, in considering whether vestiges remain is the degree of racial imbalance in the school district Freeman. 112 S.Ct. at 1437. But the fact that racial imbalances may exist does not end the inquiry. The Freeman Court emphasized that racial balance is not to be achieved for its own sake. 112 S.Ct. at 1447. The critical issue is whether the existing racial imbalance is attributable, causally, to the prior constitutional violation. Once the racial imbalance due to the de jure violation has been remedied, the school district is under no duty to remedy imbalance that is caused by demographic factors. Freeman. 112 S.Ct. at 1447. In Freeman, the Court held that jurisdiction over a school system could be withdrawn on an incremental basis. For example, student assignment issues might be returned to the schools while other issues. such as faculty assignments, continued to be supervised by the court. The Freeman Court recognized partial withdrawal as a possible outcome even though DeKalb County continued to operate a number of racially identifiable schools and the racial imbalance in some of those schools was becoming increasingly skewed. The Freeman case was remanded to give the school system an opportunity to show that broad population changes in the district, not school policies, were the cause of current racial imbalance in school populations. Another area of controversy relates to the issue of so-called educational vestiges. One of the undeniable legacies of dual school systems was the inferior educational opportunities afforded to minority children. Some of the disparities were quite obvious in B-15 \\\\\\BA - 80334/1005 - 0004201.01 terms of differences in resources and programs but other effects were pernicious precisely because they were so subtle. Assessing the elimination of educational vestiges that may manifest themselves in attitudes toward the capabilities of minority children is challenging and bound to be controversial. See United States v. Yonkers. 833 F.Supp. 214 (S.D. N.Y. 1993). The Supreme Courts decision this term in Jenkins v. Missouri is expected to provide additional guidance concerning the analysis of educational vestiges. Accompanying this presentation are copies of selected pleadings from recent litigation that help illustrate the way in which the educational vestiges issues are being approached currently. From a litigators perspective, the vestiges phase of the analysis requires substantial reliance upon experts. A demographer should be consulted early in the process in order to understand the patterns of student assignment. The fact that particular schools are experiencing increasing racial imbalance may reflect demographic forces that are well beyond the influence of the school system. Several cautions are in order, however, in assessing demographic trends and the relation of those trends to the vestiges analysis. First, it is important to examine whether the school system has taken any steps that counter the trend or, even more important, that exacerbate it. Efforts to avoid imbalance through voluntary programs such as minority to majority transfers would be a positive fact. On the other hand, allowing white students to leave a school through selective application of a transfer policy would be a problem. Second, it is important to explore whether there is evidence that might support an argument that the school B-16 \\\\\\BA - 80334/1005 - 0004201.01 districts policies have themselves shaped demographic trends. For example, in rapidly growing com muni ties there is often pressure from developers for school systems to commit to particular school sites in advance of the construction or the demonstrated need. The sites selected by developers may have the effect of creating racially imbalanced schools. If other sites existed that might serve the expanding school population while preserving better racial balance or if there was a failure even to consider alternative sites, the school district may have a harder time separating itself from demographic trends. The important point is that the attorney must understand the demographic facts early in the case. In many districts, this effort may be facilitated by the growing sophistication of the student information systems that have been developed and installed in many districts. Even before consulting an outside demographer, you should find out what information can be supplied from your own client Once you have gathered the demographic information you need to be in a position to analyze it. Spread sheet programs such as Excel or Lotus 1-2-3 are invaluable tools for analyzing student assignment information. With such programs you can organize school information based on a variety of factors such as student racial composition, faculty racial composition or geography. You can then plot the trends of this information over time. Another important step is to create maps of the district to address important issues such as the relationship between population growth and school expansion or the patterns of minority housing. Such exhibits can demonstrate graphically, and persuasively, the demographic trends that may explain current student assignment patterns. Again, the B-17 \\\\\\BA - 80334/1005 - 0004201.01 crucial legal issue is whether any existing segregation in the schools is the product of residential segregation resulting from private choices of individuals and reflecting economic and social forces over which the schools have no control or, instead, whether current residential patterns continue to be shaped by school policy. This is an intensely factual inquiry. Expert assistance may also be necessary in order to assess the issue of educational vestiges. Are there disparities in achievement affecting minority children that may be attributed to the past violations? As with student assignment, the question is not just whether there are differences but whether the past constitutional violation is the proximate cause of the differences. Other important educational issues may include an analysis of differences on the basis of race in areas such as disciplinary actions, special education referrals, or participation in honors programs and extra-curricular activities. An education expert can help assess the reasons for and significance of such differences. That expert can also provide an opinion regarding whether further efforts to address educational issues are practicable. The issue of practicability is one that is likely to be heavily influenced by the perception of your clients past efforts to deal with issues of race. There will likely be overlap here with the good faith compliance analysis described above. In the area of student assignment, has the district pursued policies that promote desegregation? Are there magnet schools or volimtary transfer programs? Where have new schools been built B-18 \\\\\\BA - 80334/1005 - 0004201.01 and what old schools were closed? Were there alternatives for locating those schools that would have had less impact in terms of racial balance. If so, what was the explanation for the decision that was made. Was there public controversy about these decisions? If so, is there evidence that might suggest that the school district surrendered to the racial attitudes of the community in making the decision? It is not a defense that a school district created segregated schools because that is what the public wanted. A similar analysis should be applied to the question of educational vestiges. Have issues been raised, for example, about minority achievement levels or discipline? If so. were these issues addressed in a serious way, even if the differences remained, or were the concerns dismissed as unfounded, without investigation. What resources have been brought to bear on student achievement? Has there been any recognition of the need for innovative approaches to address different learning styles. These issues require a vigorous review of the historical record and a searching analysis that does not accept your clients explanations at face value. One truism noted above is the crucial importance of the individual judge and that judges personal assessment of the importance and benefits of judicial supervision. What is a vestige to one judge may be a problem with no practicable solution to another. Nevertheless, the judicial latitude that may operate in these cases underscores the need for I I a thorough record. The course of the Dowell opinion on remand illustrates the point. In 1 1 the opinion that was ultimately reversed by the Supreme Court, the Tenth Circuit applied B-19 \\\\\\BA - 80334/1005 - 0004201.01a stringent analysis that reflected some skepticism about the actions of the Oklahoma City school board. Yet when the district court reinstated its findings following remand from the Supreme Court, the Tenth Circuit afiirmed the decision, in large part based upon the factual record and its deference to the lower courts fact finding process. Dowell v. Board of Education of Oklahoma City. 8 F.3d 1501 (10th Cir. 1993). That same circuit struck down a unitariness finding in the Topeka school case that produced the original Supreme Court decision in Brown because of a failure of proof concerning the Districts good faith and the absence of a causal relationship between the racial identifiability of Topekas schools and its prior practice of segregation. Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka. 978 F.2d 585 (10th Cir. 1993). The facts matter. Suppose, then, that you succeed in efforts to have your district declared unitary and all judicial authority with regard to the district ceases. The districts future actions will, of course, remain subject to the Equal Protection Clause. Under that analysis, however, the fact that a school districts actions affect the racial composition of its schools does not, without more, establish liability. The more in question is proof of intent As the Tenth Circuits most recent opinion in Dowell states: Plaintiffs must prove not only that defendants actions created or maintained racial imbalances in the schools, but also that those actions were motivated by segregative intent 8 F.2d at 1518. That case certainly demonstrates that the effect of a school districts actions are not determinative since the result of Oklahoma Citys abandonment of the Finger Plan was to B-20 \\\\\\BA - 80334/1005 - 000420t01 create a group of predominantly African-American schools that mirrored some aspects of the Citys school system before the case was brought in 1961. Although proof of segregative intent imposes a serious burden on any plaintiff, school systems would do well to approach with care and caution decisions that may produce significant differences in terms of their racial impact Determining whether a particular decision was motivated, in part, by segregative intent is an inquiry that depends on the analysis of circumstantial evidence. The same issues discussed above in connection with the vestiges analysis will come into play here. For example, there may be a close examinatinn of the stated basis for the decision, the availability of alternatives and the reasons why those alternatives were not chosen. Statements made by public officials in response to public sentiment may color those decisions. The outcome of these cases may depend in large part on the willingness of the school district to take advice firom counsel as part of the decision making process. (Copies of pleadings from a recent case in which a school system prevailed in a desegregation case through a summary judgment motion accompany this presentation.) Any system that considers itself immune to constitutional scrutiny should consider the recent experience of the Philadelphia, Hartford, and Rockford, Illinois school systems. Each of these systems is currently embroiled in desegregation litigation: a federal court recently found that the Rockford schools were being operated in violation of the Constitution with the result that sweeping relief may be granted\nin Philadelphia the B-21 \\\\\\BA - 80334/1005 - 0004201.01case is in a remedial phase. Although the Rockford case may run counter to the general trend toward releasing federal court supervision of schools, it demonstrates that race continues to be a central concern for American public education. School districts must understand their continuing duties under the Constitution. Counsel play a critical role in fostering decision making that will not subject their school clients to unnecessary litigation risks. Indeed, with a good appreciation of issues that have driven the school desegregation cases, school counsel are in a unique position to guide their clients toward conduct that will be not only defensible but likely to discourage the commencement of litigation at all. B-22 \\\\\\BA - 80334/1005 - 0004201.01?rS5SSiS:x Little Rock School District OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDENT July 12, 1995 Mr. Bill Mooney Office of Desegregation Monitoring 201 E. Markham, Suite 510 Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Mr. Mooney: I would like to extend to you an invitation to attend an exciting community briefing on Wednesday, July 19 at 5:00 p.m. in the Board Room of the Little Rock School District at 810 West Markham. The focus of this briefing is to provide a special report to community leaders regarding the progress of the strategic planning process and the current status of the desegregation plan. Following the special report to the community, a question and answer session will be held. This briefing session will be broadcast live on Channel 4 Cable TV. Thank you for your continued support of the Little Rock School District. Looking forward to seeing you on July 19th. Sincerely, Henry P. Williams Superintendent of Schools 810 West Markham Street  Little Rock, Arkansas 72201  (501)824-2000'd Uurl i7?:GT AVtl 6* . ' c^ei Fl L'Y .iU Kjv\nk. Arkansas 7-' 17\u0026lt; pi. J 5 (501)3!44 !4000 dNi'Pna 'Miwab asanp IT 08/03/95 18:49 *J I ) /\u0026gt; - 501 324 2023 I.RSD COMMUNICATI --- ODM @001/001 tj S' a''  ! i\u0026gt; August 3. 1995 ^^iw-irirFiinn .sftiak a (1 is Little Rock School District News Release For more information: Linda Young, 324-2112 The Strategic Planning Action Team Representatives will hold C rwuiitng Aciion )eam Hepresentatives will hold a breakfast R\u0026lt;* School OMfer. Board Room. School Board members have been invited to attend. ### Note.- A special meeting situation exists when members attend the same event two or more school board 1 810 West Markham Street  Little Rock, Arkansas 72201  (501)824-2000 4^ iSHULTS, RAY \u0026amp; KURRUS ATTORNEYS AT LAW 1600 boatmens bank BUILDING 200 WEST CAPITOL AVENUE UTTLE BOCK, ARKANSAS 72201-3637 ROBERT SHULTS THOMAS RAY H. BAKER KURRUS STEVEN SHULTS DEBORAH K. TRUBY TBLEPHONB (501) 375-2301 FACSIMILE (501) 375-0861 July 21, 1995 RECEIV^n Ms. Ann Brown Office of Desegregation Monitoring 201 East Markham Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Jill 2 4 1995 Office of Dese\nregiion idonitcriMg Mr. John W. Walker Attorney at Law 1723 Broadway Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 Dr. Henry Williams Superintendent Little Rock School District 810 West Markham Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Dear Ann, John and Hank: As you know, I am co-chairing the District's Long-Range Planning Committee which is attempting to come up with strategies to implement or modify the desegregation plan to achieve unitary status. At our last conunittee meeting, the members in attendance asked that I write to you and thank you for your work. The committee specifically asked that I congratulate you on the decision to meet and work cooperatively in an attempt to resolve the problems in our mutual best interests. From my own personal perspective, I believe it is increasingly important that we who are committed to public education pull together and demonstrate to our community that we can construct and operate a public school system which runs smoothly and delivers for everyone. I was very disappointed when I picked up today's paper and saw the articles which reported on the District's community update meeting held last evening. The principal purpose of the meeting was to report on the status of the various long- range planning teams. The general tone of the meetmg was upbeat and positive. The meeting was well attended. The Superintendent gave a nice talk in which heSHULTS, KAY \u0026amp; KUBKUS Ms. Ann Brown Mr. John W. Walker Dr. Henry Williams July 21, 1995 Page 2 spoke optimistically about the prospects for progress through cooperation. Instead of reporting on any of this, the Democrat-Gazette gave a rather mathematical report on the number of specific requirements contained in the desegregation plan. The tone of the article was pessimistic, even though the actual presentation on the desegregation plan focused on performance of feasible requirements, cooperation, advice and mutual consent to determine modifications, and other positive, upbeat developments in the case which benefit us all. I am ready, willing, and I hope able to assist you in any way I can. Please call on me if I can help in any way. Sincerely yours, H. Baker Kurrus HBK:rdbCG - MEMORANDUM DATE: TO: FROM: RE: CC: August 7, 1995 Strategic Planning Team #9 - Establish Financial Stability Organization and Policy Review Sub-Committee John Gardner, Co-Chairman Meeting Reminder Leon Modeste, Special Assistant to the Superintendent Linda Young, New Futures Liaison\nk9 \u0026gt;t3s7 U 'Z t i ir'Z AUG 9 1995 Office of Desegregation Mcniicring The next sub-committee meeting will be held from 5:00 p.m. until 8:00 p.m. on Monday, August 28, 1995, at the Little Rock School District, 810 West Markham, 1st Floor Lounge. \\Ne plan to finish our sub-committees findings and report at the August 28 meeting. Soon thereafter, both Action Team 9 sub-committees will meet to prepare for our final team report. We look forward to seeing you at the meeting on August 28.MEMORANDUM DATE: August 10, 1995 TO: Strategic Planning Team #9 - Establish Financial Stability Revenue and Expenditure Review Sub-Committee FROM:'(^red L. Smith, Manager, Support Services RE: CC: Meeting Reminder Leon Modeste, Special Assistant to the Superintendent Linda Young, New Futures Liaison 4UG / ] 1995 Office of Oesecigqpp'vi -Jnn a ivioniiofinj The next Revenue and Expenditure Review Sub-Committee meeting will be held from 7:30 a.m. until 8:30 a.m. on Tuesday, August 15, 1995, at the Department of Higher Education, 114 East Capitol Avenue, second floor conference room. We hope to finish our findings and report within the next three weeks, so I encourage all sub-committee members to attend future meetings if at all possible. We look forward to seeing you at the meeting on August 15.MEMORANDUM 0 a  u DATE: August 16, 1995 TO: AUG 1 7 1995 Office of Dsssgregaticn Moniiorir 'id Strategic Planning Team #9 - Establish Financial Stability - Revenue and Expenditure Review Sub-Committee FROM: Fred L. Smith, Manager, Support Services RE: CC: Meeting Reminder Leon Modeste, Special Assistant to the Superintendent Linda Young, New Futures Liaison The next Revenue and Expenditure Review Sub-Committee meeting will be held from 7:30 a.m. until 8:30 a.m. on Tuesday, August 22, 1995, at the Little Rock School District Board Room, 810 West Markham Street. We look forward to seeing you there.SHULTS, BAY \u0026amp; KUBRUS ATTORNEYS AT LAW 1600 boatmens bank BUILDING 200 WEST CAPITOL AVENUE LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 73SO1-3637 ROBERT SHULTS THOMAS RAY H. BAKER KURRUS STEVEN SHULTS DEBORAH K. TRUBY TELEPHONE (BOI) 375-2301 FACSIMILE (501) 375-6801 TO: August 25, 1995 RECEIV\"^ sc S' AUG 9 1995 ACTION TEAM 2 MEMBERS Office of Desegregation Monitoring Dear Friends, 4 I Enclosed are three Action Plans which have been compiled from the results of our previous meetings. The Action Plans are basically the result of the process which has been pursued throughout our previous meetings. The Action Plans will be the subject of our next meeting. Please come prepared to discuss these plans and make any changes which are necessary. Planning is sometimes frustrating because we all want to actually solve problems which we perceive. Please keep in mind that whatever plans we propose will, if adopted, require volunteer efforts. We as concerned citizens should be prepared to assist. It is very important that we have good attendance at our next meeting so that these plans can be given a fair review. If we settle on the plans and complete a cost benefit analysis of them, we will have completed our task. I do not know whether we will accomplish these things at the next meeting or whether one additional meeting will be required. If another meeting is required, it will be scheduled for September 7. Sincerely yours. H. Baker Kurrus HBK:rdb Enclosures cc: Mr. Henry Williams Mr. Leon Modeste Ms. Linda Young Mr. Russ Mayo Ms. Ann Brown Mr. John Walker ! I I 1 i Action Plan SPECIFIC RESULTS: # 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Implement Plan ACTION STEP (Number each one) Identify LRSD obligations Establish Timetable and Plan for Meeting Unperformed Feasible Obligations Develop Joint (LRSD, ODM, Knight and Joshua) Plan for Release/Recognition of Accomplished Plan Requirements Determine Plan Requirements which are no longer feasible or educationally sound Seek joint (LRSD, Knight, Joshua, ODM) plan modifications in order to meet goals and objectives Responsible: Assigned To: Strategy No, Plan No . Date: 2 1 8/31/95 Starting Date: Due Date: Completed Date: I IAction Plan Strategy No., Plan No .__ 2 2 SPECIFIC RESULTS: Date: 8/31/95 Establish Trust, Confidence and Good Faith it ACTION STEP {Number each one) .Assigned To: Starting Date: Due Date: Completed Date: 1. Publicly declare intention to cooperate with Joshua. Knight, ODM and reestablish working relationship 2. Schedule and follow-up on cooperative efforts outlined in Plan 1 3. Cultivate community and business support 4. Analyze and report on positive desegregative results 5. Publicize accomplishments 6. Identify problems and address them cooperatively Responsible:Action Plan Strategy No. Plan No .__ 2 3 SPECIFIC RESULTS: Date: 8/31/95 yVticulate Long-Range Plans for LRSD 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. ACTION STEP {Number each one) Complete Strategic Planning Process Reinvigorate Board of Directors Propose Joint Planning Sessions for Schools (Joshua, Kmght, LRSD \u0026amp; ODM) Complete Demographic Study and Facilities Use Study for planning for growth and change Outline Budgetary Needs\nExamine Millage\nOrganize commitments for millage Plan for facilities-expansion, reconstructions and new construction Assigned To: Starting Date: Due Date: Completed Date: 7. Demonstrate and exhibit to the community positive, cooperative approaches to problems Responsible:SHULTS, SAY \u0026amp; KURRUS ATTOBNBYS AT LAW leoo boatmens bank building SOO WEST CAPITOL AVENUE LITTLB ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201-3637 ROBERT SHULTS THOMAS RAY H. baKer kurrus STEVEN SHULTS DEBORAH K. TRUBY TELEPHONE (BOI) 37B-23O1 FACSIMILE (501) 375-0861 September 1, 1995 TO: ACTION TEAM 2 MEMBERS Dear Friends, Our meeting originally scheduled for September 7 has been rescheduled for September 11 at 6:00 p.m. Please make note of the new time. We want to start this meeting at 6:00 p.m. in the hope of completing our final review of the revised Action Plans which we worked on at our meeting last evening. Enclosed are revised plans. These revisions will provide a more narrow focus to our planning. Several of the other plans were determined last night to be within the purview of other planning teams. Please plan on attending the meeting September 11 at 6:00 p.m. Sincerely yours, H. Baker Kurrus HBK:rdb Enclosures cc: Mr. Henry Williams Mr. Leon Modeste Ms. Linda Young Mr. Russ Mayo Ms. Ann Brown Mr. John Walker f i Action Plan - TO IMPLEMENT THE DESEGREGATION PLAN AS MODIFIED Strategy No, Plan No .__ SPECIFIC RESULTS: Date\n9/11/95 2 1 Identification of LRSD desegregation plan obligations f # 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. ACTION STEP (Number each one) Classify and group plan obligations Isolate goals and objectives Determine and assign compliance/performance responsibility Determine monitoring responsibility Consult with and seek advice from all parties involved (ODM, Joshua Intervenors, Knight Intervenors) Plan regular meetings with ODM, Joshua Intervenors, Knight Intervenors Come to consensus among these groups on the desegregation plan Responsible: Assigned To: starting Date: Due Date: Completed Date:Action Plan - TO IMPLEMENT THE DESEGREGATION PLAN AS MODIFIED Strategy No., Plan No . 2 2 SPECIFIC RESULTS: Date: 9/11/95 Establish a timetable and plan for complying with all obligations # ACTION STEP (Number each one) Assigned To: Starting Date: Due Date: Completed Date: 1. Assign specific Staff to develop a proposed timetable 2. Deliver timetable to ODM, Joshua, Knight 3. Request acknowledgment from ODM, Joshua and Knight Responsible:I i I i Action Plan - SPECIFIC RESULTS: # 1. 2. 3. TO IMPLEMENT THE DESEGREGATION PLAN AS MODIFIED Strategy No, Plan No . Date: 2 3 9/11/95 Determine plan requirements/obligations which are not feasible or educationally sound ACTION STEP {Number each one) Consult ODM, Joshua Intervenors, Knight Intervenors Use professional educators familiar with LRSD obligations and the goals addressed in the desegregation plan Reinvigorate the desegregation plan with better, more effective programs which meet the goal and obligations Responsible: Assigned To: Starting Date: Due Date: Completed Date:Action Plan - TO IMPLEMENT THE DESEGREGATION PLAN AS MODIFIED Strategy No., Plan No .__ 2 4 SPECIFIC RESULTS\nDate:, 9/11/95 _____________Seek joint plan modifications and recognition of completed obligations through consultation with ODM. Joshua Intervenors. Knight Intervenors, all for the purpose of enabling the LRSD to achieve goals and objectives # ACTION STEP {Number each one) Bl Assigned To: Starting Date: Due Date: Completed Date: 1. 2. Advise and consult with all parties Consult with experts within the LRSD and outside resources to provide information about available educational programs to enhance goal achievement 3. Address the concerns of the Joshua Intervenors directly through consulting, advising, compromise, consensus Responsible:Action Plan - TO IMPLEMENT THE DESEGREGATION PLAN AS MODIFIED Strategy No, Plan No .__ 2 5 SPECIFIC RESULTS: Date: 9/1122S. Declare intention to cooperate with and establish working relationships with Joshua Intervenors. Knight Intervenors. ODM # 1. 2. 3. ACTION STEP (Number each one) Assigned To: Starting Date: Due Date: Completed Date: Establish trust, confidence and good faith among parties regarding Plan matters __________________________________ Identify Plan problems and invite parties to address them cooperatively Work together to create solutions that meet children's needs_________ Responsible\nt-acz SHTTLTS, RAY \u0026amp; KUBKUS ATTORNEYS AT LAW 1000 boatmen's BANK BUILDING 800 WEST CAPITOL AVENUE LITTLB ROCK, ARKANSAS 722O1-3Q3T ROBERT SHULTS THOMAS RAY H. BAKER KURRUS STEVEN SHULTS DEBORAH K. TRUBY TELBPHONB (801) 378-8301 FACSIMILE (801) 375-08Q1 September 15, 1995 Ms. Ann Brown Office of Desegregation Monitoring 201 East Markham Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Mr. John W. Walker Attorney at Law 1723 Broadway Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 SEP 1 6 1995 Office of Dessgreiiaiw \u0026gt;4^^ Hi tf Dr. Henry Williams Superintendent Little Rock School District 810 West Markham Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Dear Ann, Hank and John: Enclosed are the final Action Plans which have been developed by the Little Rock School District planning team which I co-chaired. 1 have been alarmed, but not surprised, by the dramatic decreases in the number of white students in the District for the 1995-96 school year. As I told Ann in the first correspondence which I sent to her in May of this year, great damage was being done to the Little Rock School District and its prospects for implementation of a desegregation plan by the negative publicity which occurred The fact that the major players were publicly and vigorously in the spring. questioning the motives and integrity of the others damaged the District greatly. I was involved in recruitment during this period, and the Little Rock School District lost many students because of the perception of endless turmoil. This type of activity has caused tremendous cumulative damage to the District. To make matters worse, when the initial \"olive branch\" was extended and cooperative meetings were scheduled, the first meetings were non-productive and actually caused additional negative pu\nThis project was supported in part by a Digitizing Hidden Special Collections and Archives project grant from The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation and Council on Library and Information Resoources.\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n\n "},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_744","title":"SWAT visits","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":null,"dc_date":["1993/1995"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System"],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","Little Rock School District","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","School facilities","Office of Desegregation Monitoring (Little Rock, Ark.)"],"dcterms_title":["SWAT visits"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Butler Center for Arkansas Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://arstudies.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/bcmss0837/id/744"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["Available for use in research, teaching, and private study. Any other use requires permission from the Butler Center."],"dcterms_medium":["documents (object genre)"],"dcterms_extent":["35 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\nDate: August 30, 1993 From: Horace R. Smith MEMORANDUM To: Subject: Ann Brown Observations on Facilities at McClellan High School Melissa and I visited McClellan on August 26, 1993 at approximately 2:00 p.m. Ive categorized our facilities observations based on the areas which were of concern in last years McClellan monitoring report. Modifications  Public address system now reaches all areas of the building and is fully operational. This modification was actually completed last year following the incident at Parkview.  Electrical outlets have been installed in I-Wing and A-Wing to support new computer equipment. General Building Condition  Where the building appeared \"grubby and unkempt\" according to last years report, McClellan now presents a very attractive and inviting appearance to visitors. The front entrance was painted and free of refuse.  Courtyard planters were freshly painted and some contained attractive perennials. Those which didnt contain flowering plants contained a single ornamental tree and the surrounding soil was free of weeds. The planters near the front entrance to the building were also freshly painted and free of weeds.  The open-air walkways were in excellent condition. During the summer all of the dirt, gum, etc. had been removed, the floors sealed, and finished with a substance which gives them a shiny appearance. Paint and clean floors have noticeably brightened these halls  The indoor hallways sport fresh paint which brightens their appearance. Missing and broken floor tiles have been replaced. The hallway near the drama department which had appeared to be an extension of the custodial closet has been cleaned up. No equipment or boxes were present in any hallway.  The condition of the business wing, which was of concern last year, has seen many improvements. The walls have been painted, carpeting added, and the new computer equipment installed.  The floors of both the original cafeteria and the addition were in good repair and had been recently waxed. The badly marred plexiglass in the cafeteria doors has been replaced by a clear thick glass. According to the assistant principal, the leaking where the original cafeteria joins the addition has been abated. New ceiling tiles have been installed to replace the spotted ones.  The open areas of the building were immaculate. Although the visit was near the end of the school day, not a single piece of trash was seen on the floor of any hallway. Trash receptacles were located at each corner of the two courtyards. Even these receptacles show evidence of being regularly emptied throughout the day.  The restrooms have been painted. The stalls have doors and each restroom was well stocked with paper towels and toilet paper. Even though we visited at the end of the day, no paper was observed on the floors of the restrooms. Other Comments  The appearance of the building indicates a custodial crew which is better organized and constantly working to maintain the buildings appearance throughout the day. In fact, we observed a very actively engaged crew of custodians during our visit.  The assistant principal shared with us that during an early writing assignment, students in one class had mentioned the attractiveness of the building as a source of pride and positive feelings this year at McClellan.Office of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown. Federal Monitor 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501)376-6200 Fax (501) 371-0100 August 30, 1993 Mrs. Estelle Matthis, Interim Superintendent Little Rock School District 810 West Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Estelle: As a follow-up to some of our monitoring activities and reports last year, ODM made informal visits to certain LRSD schools during the first days of this school year. .-We visited the two schools that had undergone new construction. King and Forest Heights, and two schools where we had previously expressed concerns about the condition of the facilities, Romine and McClellan. Because the impressions that students, staff, and parents gain during the first few days of school are so important and lasting, we paid close attention to the appearance, maintenance, and condition of the four buildings and their grounds. A short summary of our observations about each school is enclosed. Although we will not formally file or publish these observations at this time, we may eventually include them in a monitoring report. Our primary aim in this early and informal summary was to give you and the principals of the schools we visited the benefit of our first-of-school impressions. We were pleased to note many improvements at all the schools we visited. 1 hope the enclosed information will be helpful as the district continues to work toward making every LRSD school the best it can be. Sincerely yours, Ann S. Brown cc: Jodie Carter Richard Maple Sadie Mitchell Lionel WardODM School Opening Day Visit August 23, 1993 Forest Heights Junior High School The new building is an aesthetic triumph. A short report based on observations during the preschool tour for patrons and media follows the brief summary below of opening day observations. High points:  A school official was politely and helpfully directing traffic from Evergreen into the new driveway.  Students were orderly and exceptionally quiet.  LRSD plans to install a sprinkler system in order to maintain the new landscaping.  Computer labs were operable on the first day of school. Low points: Shelving and furniture for the library are not due to arrive until e first of September. Science lab equipment is not due until mid-September. Most classrooms had many vacant seats, suggesting that there may be a large number of students still to come. The single bulletin board in each new classroom is very small, and the concrete block walls make it difficult for teachers to hang posters, charts, student work, or wall decor. Numbering for new rooms was not yet installed. Work had not been completed on removing the old structures slated for demolition, although heavy equipment and workers appeared to be beginning this phase of the project. Some spaces in the old staff parking lot were unusable due to missing asphalt and deep holes. The ongoing construction work, barricades, and restricted building access presented a confusing and noisy backdrop for the east end of campus.Pre-school Visit to Forest Heights Junior High: August 5, 1993 The principal served as guide for a tour of the beautiful new 63,000 square foot addition to Forest Heights. Located immediately west of the original structure, the new building will house nearly all classes and all administrative offices. The construction project was divided into three phases. The first phase, which included new rooms for choir, band, reading lab, and business instruction, was completed during 1992. Phase two included the new building and renovation of the old gym, the cafeteria, and a few classrooms. The final phase, yet to be completed, includes demolition of some of the unused classrooms to create space for additional parking. The exterior of the new building is greatly enhanced by attractive landscaping. Large planters contain banks of junipers. Monitors noted many new trees and walks highlighted by clumps of liriope (monkey grass). Fresh sod covers the open areas. Despite the significant investment in plants, the district did not install an in-ground sprinkling system. Without such a system, it is difficult to keep new plants going. The Student Council donated $1800 for a new granite marker with the name of the school and its mascot, to be installed this fall. The project architects placed importance on aesthetic considerations and designed the building to accommodate teaching clusters, as part of school restructuring. Each new classroom is spacious and contains several windows with views of the surrounding woods. The halls included dramatic green and greige floor tiles set in a diamond pattern that varies in scale throughout the building. Lockers in a coordinating green line the new hallways. Deep yellow and green accents appear throughout the new building, approximating the green and gold school colors. Forest Heights is the only junior high school in the state with a full health clinic. A large part of the clinics operating budget is funded through grants. The clinic staff includes a full-time nurse, full-time social worker, part-time doctor, part-time nutritionist, and part-time dentist. In addition to a clearly-audible public address system, the school has a state-of-the-art communications network that directs all communications between the office and classrooms through telephones. This same system includes a Homework Hotline feature that allows students and parents to access a childs daily assignments. The phone system can provide computerized attendance reporting by phoning the home of each student who has missed school, logging the absence, and documenting any incorrect or changed phone numbers. The entire structure conforms to the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) standards. All entrances provide access for the handicapped and the interior includes an elevator for handicapped persons to use. The principal explained that all signs identifying room numbers and teachers names would include the same information in Braille.ODM School Opening Day Visit August 23, 1993 King Interdistrict Elementary School The exterior of the new building looks great, and landscaping is largely completed. The interior is visually plain with questionable color choices, but miraculously the school was finished, mostly furnished, and ready for the first day of classes. High Points:  All classrooms furnished with at least the basics.  Classroom displays up and rooms ready for students.  New playground equipment installed and in use on the elementary playground.  State-of-the-art kitchen with all new equipment.  Large cafeteria (to be decorated with attractive banners) served lunch to all students on the first day and gave snacks to four-year-olds.  Many special activity rooms: two large group counseling rooms, art room, music room, health room, multi-purpose room, conference rooms, and the like. Low points: No handicapped access to the playground. (A wheelchair-bound student and the teacher found it rough going down the rocky dirt slope to the playground.) Some over-crowded classrooms. For example, one second grade roster listed 28 students, meaning the class will have to be divided to remain within state standards. With school already underway and teaching assignments completed, choices for new teaching staff are now limited, meaning that Kings principal may have to select additional staff from less than the \"cream of the crop\" for this important new school. Library is small but will apparently be increased in size after other construction concludes. A serious-looking crack, in the north wall of the art room, extends 4-5 feet from the bottom of a window to the floor. Essentially sterile color scheme, with cold gray-toned white walls and similarly colored floors that are jarred, rather than relieved, by occasional splashes of intense and rather odd colors on some walls and other surfaces. The mix of \"accent\" colors lends to a sense of an uncoordinated color scheme. Play area designed for four-year-olds is surfaced entirely with concrete (ouch!). This area was not ready for students and was marked with ironic signs stating \"Do not play on the playground.\" Computer labs devoid of equipment with delivery of computers not expected for at least two weeks. Four-year-old students from PCSSD were not transported by PCSSD on the first day of school, but Bobby Lester promised to remedy the situation immediately. A monitor witnessed a third grade teacher loudly castigating one of her students in front of his class in the hallway because the student had apparently become lost. (A sad way for a young, new student to begin the new year, a new school assignment, and a new class.)King (continued) Monitors did not detect a sprinkler system for the new grass and plants. Some of the grass was already brown and lifeless and several plants were drooping. Without water, the new landscaping, which does not have an established root system, will not long withstand the late summer heat.ODM School Opening Dey Visit: August 23, 1993 Romine Interdistrict Elementary School The district made quite a few improvements to Romine during the 1992-93 school year. During May 1993, monitors observed new metal awnings and freshly painted exterior trim on the building. The district replaced unsightly portables with new portable classrooms and expanded the library. All corridors in the original building received new floor tiles, although the original cafeteria floor remains, as do the floors in the newer wing. High points: The school was clean. Workers were in the process of applying a new roof. The grounds were neat. Low points: The building interior has not been painted. The heating and air conditioning system has not been refurbished (or replaced if necessary).ODM School Opening Week Visits: August 26, 1993 McClellan High School The observations below are categorized according to the areas which were of concern in last years McClellan monitoring report. Modifications  Public address system now reaches all areas of the building and is fully operational. This modification was completed last year following the incident at Parkview.  Electrical outlets have been installed in 1-Wing and A-Wing to support new computer equipment. General Building Condition  Where the building appeared \"grubby and unkempt\" according to last years report, McClellan now presents a very attractive and inviting appearance to visitors. The front entrance was painted and free of refuse.  Courtyard planters were freshly painted and some contained attractive perennials. Those that didnt have flowering plants held a single ornamental tree and each container was free of weeds. The planters near the front entrance to the building were also freshly painted and weed free.  The open-air walkways were in excellent condition. During the summer, all of the dirt and gum had been removed and the floors had been sealed and finished with a substance that gives them a shiny appearance. Paint and clean floors have noticeably bnghtened these halls.  The indoor hallways sport fresh paint which brightens their appearance. Missing and broken floor tiles have been replaced. The hallway near the drama department that had previously appeared to be an extension of the custodial closet has been cleaned up. No equipment nor boxes were present in any hallway.  The condition of the business wing, which was of concern last year, has seen many improvements. The walls have been painted, carpeting added, and the new computer equipment installed.  The floors of both the original cafeteria and the addition were in good repair and had been recently waxed. The badly marred plexiglass in the cafeteria doors has been replaced by a clear thick glass. According to the assistant principal, the leaking where the original cafeteria joins the addition has been stopped. New ceiling tiles have been installed to replace the old spotted ones.  The open areas of the building were immaculate. Although the monitors visited near the end of the school day, not a single piece of trash was seen on the floor of any hallway. Trash receptacles, located at each comer of the two courtyards, appeared to have been emptied throughout the day.  The restrooms have been painted. The stalls have doors and each restroom was well stocked with paper towels and toilet paper. Monitors saw no litter on the restroom floors.McQellan (continued) Other Comments  The appearance of the building indicates a custodial crew which is better organized and constantly working to maintain the buildings appearance throughout the day. We observed a very actively engaged crew of custodians during our visit.  The assistant principal told us that during an early classroom writing assignment, one group of students had mentioned the buildings attractiveness as a source of pride and positive feelings this year at McClellan.n ij Little Rock School District September 10, 1993 RECEP S- SEP 1 5 1993 i 'if Mrs. Ann S. Brown Federal Monitor Office of Desegregation Monitoring 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Little Rock, AR 72201 Office of Desegregation ''Q Dear Ann: This communication is a response to your letter dated August 30, 1993, and received in my office on September 2, 1993. My tour of the schools on August 23, 1993, was very similar to yours. As we visited the same schools, except Romine, I was probably 15 minutes behind you and your staff. Our observations had some similarities, but my focus was a bit broader as I viewed some aspects of instructional programs. I have discussed and distributed copies of your letter to our support managers so that they may assist staff in addressing various concerns and issues. We were aware that some equipment would not arrive until September, but we do believe that, instructionally, youngsters needs were appropriately addressed by staff. The new constructions are becoming more physically appealing and attractive. Within the next few weeks, everything should be in place. Mrs. Mitchell and her interview team identified more than an adequate number of qualified teachers. The additional applicants were on standby, and we are able to employ capable teachers as the enrollment increased at King. We will continue to focus on and devote our energies to supporting the schools to have a successful school year. Information provided from a number of different perspectives is deemed helpful by me. I continue to believe that \"none of us is as smart as all of us.\" Thanks for your continued support. Sincerely, Estelle Matthis Interim Superintendent EM/lks 810 West Markham street  Little Rock, Arkansas 72201  (501)824-2000 Office of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501) 376-6200 Fax (501) 371 -0100 September 12, 1994 Dr. Henry Williams, Superintendent Little Rock School District 810 West Markham Little Rock. AR 72201 Dear Hank\nIt's become an ODM custom for us to make brief, informal visits to some schools during the first few days of the new academic year. Our observations during these visits are the same type which we feel parents, students, and staff would make as they enter the building to start the year. That's why we pay particular attention to the aspects of a school which are most likely to initially impress those entering it, such as the condition of the grounds, building upkeep and cleanliness, student behavior, and so forth. This year we dropped in on Franklin, Garland, Mitchell, and Rightsell Incentive schools\nChicot, Fair Park, Fulbright, and Woodruff Elementary Schools\nRomine Interdistrict School\nHenderson Junior High\nand McClellan High School. The notes we made on each of those schools are attached. As in the past, we will not formally file or publish our observations at this time, although it's possible that we might eventually include them in a monitoring report. Our intention with these early and informal comments is to give you, your administrators, and principals the benefit of our initial impressions. I hope the enclosed information is helpful. Please give me a call if you have any questions or comments. Sincerely yours, Ann S. Brown Enc. cc: Estelle Matthis Russ Mayo Doug Eaton Building principalsODM Visits to LRSD Schools, Opening Days 1994 Franklin Incentive School We were pleased to note that:  Brush had been cleared from the fenceline on the northern border of the school.  A new sidewalk had been installed at the entrance to the building.  The parking lot had been resurfaced.  A new parent center, which is attractive and comfortably-appointed, had been situated across from the office.  The school's new business parmer, the City of Little Rock, had installed two new picnic tables on the playground.  The entrance area had bright, attractive signs welcoming students and visitors.  Classrooms appeared well-prepared and ready for students.  Hallways were clean and decorated with bright, attractive displays and bulletin boards\nhall floors were waxed.  Hall rules posted throughout the building were expressed in positive terms.  Staff and students were friendly and helpful. We also noted some areas needing attention. On June 2, 1994, ODM filed a letter to the court regarding the condition of the Mitchell and Franklin facilities. Later in June, the LRSD responded to that letter, indicating that the problems cited in the letter had been addressed. However, as we visited Franklin during the opening week of school, monitors found some of the same deficiencies cited in the June 1994 letter. The problem areas now include:  Most of the walls throughout the building had paint that is splotchy and mis-matched\nsplashes and drips of misplaced paint mar the windows, baseboards, and bathroom fixtures.  Ceiling tiles throughout the building had been discolored and damaged by water stains.  The glass in many of the windows and exterior doors was dirty.  Several hall flooring tiles were broken.  A girls' restroom on the first floor contained only one fully operable sink (one sink had no water, and two other lacked water pressure sufficient for hand washing). All of the sinks were dirty, one was rusty, and all bore the remains of old paint, as did the toilet seats.  A boys' bathroom on the second floor contained a continuously running urinal.  The rocky hill on the northeast border of the school property remains a tempting danger zone. Continual erosion has exposed solid rock outcroppings whose slopes are covered wi small, sharp stones.ODM Visits to LRSD Schools, Opening Days 1994 Garland Incentive School We were pleased to note that:  The hallways were clean, bright, and decorated with posters and signs of welcome.  Classrooms were neat, attractive, and prepared for children.  All staff and students we encountered were welcoming, friendly, and polite.  Children were busily engaged in learning and play activities\nsome were quietly eating lunch in the cafeteria.  Many students were wearing the attractive school uniforms.  Bilingual signs were posted throughout the halls, showing sensitivity to the school's significant Hispanic population.  The staff is more racially balanced this year with the addition of five white teachers, two of whom are male.  Fresh St. Augustine sod recently had been installed near the building's entrance, and new stands of grass were evident on the playground. We also noted some areas needing attention:  The exterior doors on the north side of the building were badly faded, and had suffered considerable water damage which caused the wood to become separated and shredded.  The boys bathroom on the first floor smelled strongly of urine, and accumulated dust covered the eye-level tile border.  One sixth grade classroom had a ceiling leak.  Brackets for the televisions and VCR's had not been mounted on the walls, inhibiting progress toward theme implementation.  Hallways throughout the building were marred by numerous small patches of missing paint, apparently where tape had been removed.ODM Visits to LRSD Schools, Opening Days 1994 Mitchell Incentive School We were pleased to note that:  The interior of the building had been freshly painted in a blue and white color scheme that coordinated with the carpet installed during the spring of 1994.  The school's new creed was prominently displayed in the foyer.  New carpet had been installed in the second-floor hallway.  Students were well-behaved and friendly. We also noted some areas needing attention. ODM observed several of these same problems during our May 1994 visit to the school and documented them in a letter filed with the Court on June 2, 1994. The problem areas now include:  Exterior paint was peeling badly around the second floor windows.  Extensive roof leaks had caused great damage to the ceilings and carpet in both the reading and math labs. These leaks began over a year ago.  The library also had a serious problem with a roof leak that has left a gaping 4' x 3' hole in the ceiling.  Window screens were missing.  Exterior doors badly need repainting.  Florescent lights in the cafeteria were missing their covers.  Part of the campus fence was in such a poor state of repair that passersby had easy access to the school grounds.  Work that should have been completed before children returned to school was left unfinished. Painters still had work to complete during the first week of school, and the contractor had not begun work on the re-roofing.ODM Visits to LRSD Schools, Opening Days 1994 Rightsell Incentive School We were pleased to note that:  The school had a very orderly environment.  The new school creed was prominently displayed on a bulletin board near the main entrance.  All areas of the school were clean and free of litter. We also noted some areas needing attention:  Plaster and paint have continued to fail on the same section of basement wall that has been mentioned in every ODM report on the incentive schools. As has been noted before, the problem is caused by moisture from an improperly placed downspout.  The library ceiling suffers from several serious leaks.ODM Visits to LRSD Schools, Opening Days 1994 Chicot Elementary School We were pleased to note that:  The entire school was very clean, despite the mess created by the ongoing construction of the cafeteria.  The exterior of the new cafeteria harmonizes with the existing building in both design and materials.  Students were friendly and outgoing.  Bathrooms we visited were clean, stocked, and operational.  New floor tiles had replaced the dirty, worn carpet in the main corridor. We also noted some areas needing attention.  The new cafeteria was still unfinished when monitors visited during the second week of classes.  A serious drainage problem on the south side of the building resulted in cascades of water entering the building during rainstorms.  Carpeting throughout the building was stained, worn, and stretched fiom more than 15 years of use.  Some classrooms and the counselors' offices had serious leaks.ODM Visits to LRSD Schools, Opening Days 1994 Fair Park Elementary School We were pleased to note that:  The building was spotless.  Corridors were clean and well-lit.  Restrooms were clean and well-supplied.  Classrooms were attractively decorated with bulletin boards welcoming students.  The playground contained some new equipment.  Students were friendly and well-behaved. We also noted some areas needing attention:  Monitors noticed several teachers who were gruff or testy in their dealings wi students.  A third grade class walking down the hall was separated by gender.  The principal's office lacked a computer which could be used for all sorts of word processing, including contributions to the program budget document.  Eaves in one section of the exterior had been damaged by rain, and required repair, waterproofing, and repainting.  Trees at the rear of the building extended over the roof of the school.  A broken downspout was located at the rear of the building.ODM Visits to LRSD Schools, Opening Days 1994 Fulbright Elementary School We -were pleased to note that:  The students were very well-behaved and friendly.  The interior of the school was bright, cheery, and vibrant.  Well-designed, attractive teacher-made bulletin boards welcomed students back to school.  The PT A funded the construction of a retaining wall to eliminate erosion near the school entrance. We also noted some areas needing attention:  The wooden exterior trim needed re-staining and waterproofing.  The facade of the building was marred by a large diagonal crack in the mortar, which appeared to be due to settling.  The cafeteria was dark, in marked contrast to the other light, bright spaces of the school.  Counselors lacked office space. According to the principal, space problems will be solved when a portable building arrives from Williams. This portable classroom will be used to house the GT teacher and the space currently allotted to GT will be designated as the counseling area. Until that time, the counselor must scrounge around for space to hold private sessions.ODM Visits to LRSD Schools, Opening Days 1994 Woodruff Elementary School We -were pleased to note that:  The interior and exterior of the building were clean and attractive.  The entry received attractive, replacement windows which were in keeping with the school's period of construction.  Students were friendly and well-behaved.  The school contained several multicultural bulletin boards. We also noted some areas needing attention:  The roof leaked in the new early childhood wing of the building.  The paint has pealed and the plaster flaked on a basement wall near the library, probably due to an improperly placed downspout which drains next to the foundation of the building.  A clogged drain in an exterior stairwell causes flooding in the basement kindergarten classroom.  The cafeteria exit door jams, causing a serious safety hazard.ODM Visits to LRSD Schools, Opening Days 1994 Romine Interdistrict School We -were pleased to note that:  Romine now has a program specialist to coordinate the technology theme.  All hallways featured colorful and creative bulletin board displays.  Floors throughout the building were freshly waxed. We also noted some areas needing attention:  The cable hook-up between classrooms and the technology lab was not complete at the time of we visited.  The program specialist, though highly qualified and knowledgeable, was not hired until just before teachers returned to school, limiting the amount of advanced preparation possible for effective theme implementation.  Classroom doors and interior trim were unsightly.  Carpet in the early childhood wing was in poor condition.  The cafeteria light fixtures contained several bumed-out florescent tubes.  In one classroom, we noted the alphabet chart with \"I is for Indian.\" As we have noted in numerous monitoring reports, this chart treats a person as an object and portrays Native Americans in a stereotypical and offensive manner.ODM Visits to LRSD Schools, Opening Days 1994 Henderson Junior High We -were pleased to note that: * As visitors entered the building, a security guard met them and directed them to the office.  All the lockers were freshly painted.  Eighty percent of the school rules posted in the office were stated in positive terms.  Students were in their classrooms working and we saw no traffic in the halls during school hours. We also noted some areas needing attention:  The cafeteria showed evidence of both ceiling leaks and leaky windows.  The cafeteria also featured a rusted and corroded water fountain.  Wall paint throughout the main hallways was dingy, dirty, and unattractive.  In some areas of the building, floor tiles were dirty.  Seventy-five percent the hall rules (which were posted in the office, rather than the hall) were expressed in negative terms.  The two students who were waiting in the outer office when we arrived were still sitting in the same spots nearly an hour later, when we left.ODM Visits to LRSD Schools, Opening Days 1994 McClellan Community High School We -were pleased to note that:  The security presence was excellent, with friendly but firm security guards.  The campus was clean, litter-free, and well-lit.  Freshly painted walls and doors improved the appearance of the classrooms and corridors.  Administrators and staff were visible during class changes, and the students were orderly,  The courtyard near the office was enhanced by flowering plants.  Restrooms were generally clean and well-supplied.  Custodians were actively involved in cleaning during our visit.  The classrooms were attractively decorated with many bulletin board displays.  The media center contained a pleasant, homey area for quiet reading. We also noted some areas needing attention:  Several of the florescent lights in the English wing were burned out.  Exit lights throughout the building lacked illumination.  Some classrooms had been retrofitted with partitions that did not reach all the way to the floor, allowing noise to travel easily between classes.  We noted a display of \"Famous American Authors,\" which would have led an observer to believe that only European-Americans contributed to American Literature.  The picnic tables in the cafeteria courtyard were warped and broken.  The carpet in the media center was dirty and worn.SWAT MONITORING SCHEDULE AUG 22-25 Team Leaders - LRSD (Melissa*) NLRSD (Margie) PCSSD (Horace) Monday - 22 Mills HS (Full SWAT) Lakewood Elementary Mitchell Incentive School Rightsell Incentive School Clinton Interdistrict Magnet Tuesday - 23 Oak Grove HS (Full SWAT) Fair Park Elementary Romine Interdistrict Lynch Drive Elementary Indian Hills Elementary Wednesday -24 Jacksonville JHS-North (Full SWAT) Jacksonville JHS-South (Full SWAT) Baker Elementary (Full SWAT) Thursday - 25 Franklin Incentive School Garland Incentive School Lakewood Middle School NLR HS-East During week of Aug 22 - Ann is LRSD Team LeaderSzPC^ MEMORANDUM Date: November 28, 1994 From: Horace R. Smith To: Subject: All monitors SWAT Visit to Franklin Incentive School We will be gracing Franklin Incentive School with a SWAT visit on Wednesday, November 30, 1994. Melissa and I will arrive at 7:30 am in order to observe the arrival of children. If it is inconvenient for you to arrive at that time, please try to be at Franklin as soon as you can. There are certain areas of concern (such as the number of tardies) which require early observation. The first bell rings at Franklin at 7:50 am. The tardy bell sounds at 7:55 am. Please let me know if you will be able to go and what time you will arrive. The more the merrier! Other than Melissas observation of the Spanish Immersion class, we probably wont do in-class observations since our visit is unannounced. We dont want to cause a disruption. You can observe classes briefly through the classroom doors. The following list should serve as a guide for your observations while we are in the building. Regarding Tardiness:  Observe the arrival of students - where do they go? How efficient is supervision?  Note the number of students eating breakfast at any given time (e.g. is there a peak time? How many are just arriving as it nears time for the first bell? How many are still eating after the first bell? the second bell?)  Where do students go when the 7:50 am bell rings?  How many students do you note in the halls after the tardy bell at 7:55 am?  Are there still students arriving at school when the tardy bell rings?  From casual observation, what time does instruction seem to begin in most classrooms? Spanish Immersion  Number of students present - number of tardies  When does instruction begin?I  Classroom physical environment - visuals, equipment, etc.  Speak with the principal regarding when materials and equipment were ordered and when they actually arrived.  Compare observations to other first grade classrooms Miscellaneous Observations  Evidence of theme implementation (Communication and Technology)  Parent Center - materials, documentation of use  General Facility - restrooms, paint, ceiling tiles, playground areas, etc.Office of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown. Federal Monitor 201 East Markham. Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock. Arkansas 72201 (501)376-6200 Fax (501) 371-0100 Date: January 10, 1995 To: From: Subject: Pat Price, Early Childhood Education Coordinator Little Rock School District Melissa Guldin,''Associate Monitor Monitoring Visits to Classes for Four-Year-Olds As you know, early childhood education is an area of great emphasis and importance in the LRSD desegregation plan. This school year marks the first time that the district has operated the full complement of early childhood classes. In order to monitor the program for four-year-olds, we will be visiting a number of early childhood classes. These drop-in visits will be informal, lasting no more than thirty minutes or so. During each visit, we will note areas such as curriculum and instruction, staffing, class size, racial balance, materials and equipment, facilities, and outdoor play areas. I am not publishing a schedule of visitations, but schools may expect a drop-in visit anytime after January 16,1995. Monitors will not require any special documentation or an interview with the principal or teacher(s). As always, monitors will check in with the office staff before going to classrooms. In addition, we will conduct an exit interview, if the principal requests one. If you have any questions or concerns regarding this monitoring, please contact me. Thank you. cc: Dr. Hank Williams Estelle MatthisDate: January 13,1995 From: Melissa To: Barry Subject: MEMORANDUM Visits to Classrooms for Four-Year-Olds Below is a schedule of our visits to classes for four-year-olds. I gave priority to schools with programs that have been added in the last two years. We will depart for each school around 8:30 and the visit should take no more than an hour or so. I will meet with you Tuesday to finalize details. If any of these dates pose a conflict, please let me know. Thursday, January 19 - Fair Park Friday, January 20 - Mabelvale Monday, January 23 - Wilson Tuesday, January 24 - Bale Thursday, January 26 - Baseline Friday, January 27 - Woodruff Monday, January 30 - Watson Tuesday, January 31 - Badgett Thursday, February 2 - Brady cc: Ann PollyOffice of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501)376-6200 Fax (501) 371-0100 February 22, 1995 Dr. Henry Williams, Superintendent Little Rock School District 810 West Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Hank: From time to time, my staff and I make unannounced, informal visits to schools for monitoring purposes. During this month and last, we dropped in on the district's junior high schools, including the Alternative Learning Center. Our observations focused primarily on the condition of the facilities, although we noted other facets of school life as well. The notes we made on each school are attached. We will not publish or file our observations at this time, although it's possible that we might eventually include them in a formal monitoring report. Our intention with these comments is to give you, the Board, administrators, and principals the benefit of our impressions. As you will read, we were pleased to make many positive observations about the schools. We were delighted, though not surprised, to find that on the whole, staff were cordial and very helpful, and students were fnendly and well-behaved. We also noticed many problems. We were particularly struck with the marked unevenness in the level of maintenance and cleanliness among individual schools, or even within various parts of one facility. We found considerable evidence to indicate that some custodial and maintenance crews are not performing to the level required to keep buildings and grounds in top shape. We are especially concerned that, too frequently, children do not have access to restrooms that are consistently clean and well-supplied, and in which all fixtures are completely functional. As adults, we expect to have an accessible, clean, private, and fully-supplied place in which to attend to the most basic of our bodily functions\nsurely, none of us expect less for children.Page Two February 23, 1995 We noted a few serious problems requiring immediate attention, such as the structural failings at Cloverdale, where that growing defect has remained unaddressed for many months. At several schools, we were alarmed to discover exterior entrances left open and unattended, making for easy unauthorized entry or exit from the building or campus. Especially at a time when security and discipline are consistently top issues, such laxness is potentially dangerous and, therefore, unacceptable. In most of the buildings, inadequate water drainage and moisture control continue to cause expensive damage, some of it serious. Preventing damage is invariably less costly than fixing it later, after harm is done and small problems have grown into big ones. Thus, we urge that the district intensify work to correct the many water drainage and leak problems, and to institute measures to prevent reoccurrences or new problems. I hope the enclosed information is helpful. Please call with have any questions or comments. Sincerely yours, Ann S. Brown Enc. cc: Board of Directors Estelle Matthis Building principals ALTERNATIVE LEARNING CENTER Date: January 27, 1995 We were pleased to find: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. The parking lot was newly resurfaced, lending a very neat and professional appearance. The exterior grounds looked well-tended and were almost litter-free. Sidewalks, which during our last visit had been covered with grass and brush, were clean and visible. The grass was neatly mowed and edged. American and Arkansas flags were in place on the pole. The courtyard and walkways were free of litter and looked well-tended. The three huge trees in the courtyard served to beautify the area and will provide welcome shade in the summer. A large eagle-adorned red, white, and blue banner was draped handsomely in the entrance way, bidding \"Welcome\" to all who entered. In the entryway, a neat bulletin board announced the schools mission. The reception area was spacious, allowing visitors and students to be in the area without feeling overcrowded. The hallways were very clean. The walls looked freshly painted and, although few in number, the bulletin boards in the halls were attractive. Plenty of strategically-placed large trash barrels helped to keep litter off the floors throughout the building. The kitchen area was clean and smelled of freshly baked cookies and bleach. The brightly painted lockers were somewhat age-battered, with some dents, scratched and chipped paint, and a few apparently sprung doors, but all were padlocked and free of graffiti. On the cold, misty day we visited, the temperature throughout the building was comfortable. 12. Most of the girls bathrooms were free of litter and had paper towels. 13. The few students we encountered were friendly and well-behaved. 14. 15. 16. 17. From classroom door windows, we could see most students participating in class discussions or otherwise focused on learning tasks. During class changes, students moved swiftly and with a minimum of noise. Teachers were present in the hallways and a security guard at the end of the hallway monitored the time for students to get to their classrooms. The principal and other staff we encountered were welcoming, friendly, and eager to answer questions and share information. The principal clearly takes pride in the building, its appearance, and its mission. Security personnel were on duty. Areas Needing Attention: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Only one of the two drinking fountains in the cafeteria worked, and only one of the twin fountains in the main hallway was operable. Most of the interior and exterior doors had chipped paint. Most of the windows on the classroom doors had tape residue. The cafeteria had two bulletin boards, but one was bare except for a tattered construction paper backing. The other contained only one or two few visuals, also on a slightly tattered and faded paper background. Both appeared to have been untended for some time. The library was locked and our observations were limited to those that could be made at the door windows. The carpeted room was tidy and clean. It contained only books and magazines. Page 16. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. and had no audio-visual, computer, or other technical equipment. In addition to the printed matter, the room contained only three small tables and a total of nine chairs. Four skimpy plants on the window ledge and a few posters were the rooms only decorative touches. An instructional aide served as the librarian/media clerk, and also doubled as the attendance clerk. According to the aide, the books, which were donations, were old and did not appeal to todays youth. The only current publications available to the students were through sporadic deliveries of some magazines. In parts of the building interior, sheaves of wires have been bundled and openly run overhead. The only recreational equipment we saw was a ping-pong table on the stage of the cafetorium and an exterior basketball goal. The principal explained that the school had no physical education program. During the school day, the students have access only to unorganized recreation during the recess time. A desk, apparently used by security personnel, in the entrance was unattended when we arrived. The nearby counselors office was dark and locked. One set of double doors to the rear of the building was not locked from the outside. The principal said the locks were broken and could not be secured without also preventing exit. Another set of twin exit doors was also accessible from the exterior, but these doors opened to an interior courtyard which also served the Hearing Office. One of these doors was propped slightly open by a chain, apparently to allow staff to enter and exit at will. One entire wing of the school is empty, except for the Hearing Office. This space could be used to expand the services of the ALC. The Hearing Office, located in the otherwise unused wing, appears newly constructed to accommodate the district hearing officer, who recently moved to the building from the LRSD Annex. Another office area in that same wing sits empty and unused. 13. The door to the computer room had a hole in it. 14. Paint on the exterior window frames was cracked, faded, and peeling. 15. The floor of the cafeteria was well-swept, but bore many scuff marks and looked as though it had not been scrubbed or waxed in quite some time. Girls Restrooms 16. One restroom, marked for the use of faculty women, contained five stalls, but only one had a roll of toilet paper. This seemed to be a regular pattern in the restrooms. Inadequate amounts of toilet paper, one bar of soap, if any, and skimpy supplies of paper towels were common in the restrooms for both students and faculty. None of the taps provided hot water, and some restrooms had no hot water taps at all. Other problems noted were burned out light bulbs, inoperable faucets, and graffiti on stall doors or mirrors. 11. The floor in one restroom needed mopping and waxing. The room had no stall for handicapped students. The wall in one restroom was marred by a large dark area that apparently once contained a heating or air conditioning unit. Boys Restrooms 18. The restrooms were relatively clean and odor free, but dimly lit. The rooms were stocked with paper goods, and the toilets were clean. The faucets were working, and soap was furnished. Page 2CLOVERDALE JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL Date: January 24, 1995 We were pleased to find: 1. 2. 3. 4, 5. 6. 7, 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. For the most part, the grounds and areas in front of the school were litter-free. The front courtyard was neat\nall of the bushes were trimmed and the evenly spaced crepe myrtle trees promised that the area would be very attractive during blooming season. Several benches near the front building provided an area where visitors could relax and enjoy the view. The main entrance to the building was clean and welcoming. School staff greeted the monitors cordially in the office and throughout the building. A list of honor roll students for each grade level was prominently displayed on the front glass panel at the entry to the main office. Bright art work of students greeted visitors in the main reception area. Prominently displayed were two posters touting volunteerism and a large VIPS poster encouraging parent participation. Security persoimel were visibly on-the-job throughout the building. When we spoke to students, they were cheerful, respectful, and very helpful. They changed classes in an orderly fashion. The hallways and courtyards were almost completely litter-free\ntrash receptacles were stationed at intervals along the exterior halls and in most of the interior halls. About a dozen trash cans were stacked upside-down against one wall in a courtyard. A custodian explained that these receptacles were used for leaf collection. The lockers were all graffiti-free. The paint on the lockers in the new wing was in excellent shape, marred by only a few smudges and pencil marks. On the older lockers in the exterior halls, the paint was faded and dull from exposure to the elements, but the lockers were largely free of extraneous marks and dirt. Except for one of the girls bathrooms, the walls had little or no graffiti. The carpet in the media center was clean and free of litter. Areas Needing Attention: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Shadowed exterior sidewalks had not been cleared of the ice and snow that remained from the weekend storm, nor had sand or similar material been applied to aid footing. One of these ice- encrusted areas was outside the exit at the north end of the new wing, and would have made for hazardous egress in case of an emergency. Another ice-covered area ran along the north parking lot, providing very shaky footing between cars and the building. No flags were hung on the flagpole. A small area of the grounds in front of the school, near the flagpole, was littered with cups and other paper. A janitor was picking this trash up as we left the campus just after 10:00 a.m. We were puzzled to see a banner, announcing the school as an \"Academy,\" hanging next to the permanent lettering that read \"Cloverdale Junior High School.\" One of the nine or ten large picnic tables in an interior courtyard was upended against a tree. Some boards and a large piece of cloth lay in a messy heap at the base of the table. Almost all doors, especially those in the older area of the schools, were scuffed and dirty and had tape residue and chipped paint both inside and out. Most of the office, security, and custodial personnel we encountered were of one race. Classrooms in the new wing were partially labeled with construction-paper lettering, much of which had fallen or been tom away, leaving the rooms unidentified. Page 39. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. One of the two bulletin boards in the new wing was decorated, but the other was mostly blank. Although we peeked into relatively few classrooms, we saw many bare walls unadorned with any pictures, maps, or other materials that would promote student learning or interest or allow observers to determine what subject was taught in the room. In contrast, some of the classroom walls were hung with colorful and engaging posters, maps, student work, and the like. Although we did not enter them, in some of the classrooms we noted that most of the students wore thick, heavy coats, giving the impression that the rooms were cold. The library area of the media center was well-ordered, but the office and storage areas were far from being neat and tidy, and appeared disorganized and unprofessional. One of the overhead lights in the main area of the library was not illuminated. In one comer near the entrance, an assortment of wires hung haphazardly along the wall and one dangled from the ceiling to the floor. A few computers were set up in the media center, but one bore a sign reading \"out of order.\" Several ceiling tiles were slightly raised or askew. The windows and doors had a considerable amount of unsightly tape residue. The school sported a profusion of wiring that was exposed to view and, therefore, easy access. In the exterior hallways, large bundles of wiring have been run overhead. In several places, where cut wires dangled from a wall or overhead source, we could discern no obvious intended connection nor past use. All of the fuse boxes for the air conditioning units on the east side have an open exterior lever for \"on\" and \"off.\" The large fuse boxes in the hallway next to the gym had no padlock and were easily opened. Such exposure of electrical controls invites pranks or outright vandalism. One of the pair of exterior doors at the north end of the new wing was open and could not be closed from inside. Only after hard, repeated shoving from the outside would the door close. Since district regulations require that unattended doors be closed to exterior access, this open door could lead to unauthorized entry into the wing. Throughout the building, we noted ceiling tiles that bore water stains, even a few in the new wing. A custodian explained that, although the roof had been patched with tar in some places, leaks were still a problem. Near an exterior exit on the north side of the building was stacked a motley collection that included a chair, a barbecue grill, two inverted trash cans, a hand truck, and a metal cabinet. Perhaps the school lacks adequate storage area. 18. Most of the water fountains did not work. Only one of the two units in the new wing was 19. 20. 21. 22. operational and just one of the two fountains in an exterior northwest hallway worked. The twin fountain unit near an exterior northeast exit did not work at all and, judging by the collection of dirt in its bowl, it had not afforded anyone a drink for some time. Only the classrooms in the new wing had windows in the doors to facilitate unobtrusive observation. From that vantage point, we noted a few file cabinets, but no built-in storage areas where teachers could organize and store materials. In some of the classrooms, newspapers, boxes, books, and the like were stashed or stacked haphazardly on the floor, giving the rooms a sloppy, unprofessional, and uncared-for look. In a room in the new wing, the chalk tray under the main chalkboard was full of chalk dust which had spilled over on the carpeted floor in a broad yellow band, indicating that the floor had not been vacuumed nor the chalk tray cleaned in some time. Some of the walls in the new wing hallways were scuffed and dirty, several pieces of tape hung in places. The floors were badly scuffed and appeared to need a good scrubbing and waxing. The foundation on the exterior east side of the building, and perhaps the north side as well, appears to be sinking, creating a serious, extended horizontal crack in the brick wall that is several inches wide in some places. At some points, the exterior wall is pulling away from the interior walls. On the west end of the exterior north wall, we noted a pronounced vertical crack Page 423. 24. 25. between the bricks, which could also signal structural problems. The custodian and principal said they had been trying unsuccessfully for several months to get the district to address these problems. A ramp, designed to permit access to the stage area for persons with disabilities, was used for storage of mats and chairs, which precluded easy access to the stage area. The floor in the cafeteria needed a good scrubbing. Several ceiling tiles were loose. During a class change, several dozen students sauntered singly or in pairs to class well after the tardy bell, even though a security guard was urging them to hurry on to class. A couple of the security guards blatantly flirted with some of the female students. We did not observe any female security guards on the campus. Girls Restrooms 26. 27. 28. 29. The restrooms near the front of the campus were locked during the initial part of our visit. The principal gave instructions to open them According to some students, with the exception of the new wing, most of the restrooms were locked during class time, but were reopened during class changes. Apparently, this arrangement is an effort to reduce graffiti and vandalism. For the most part, the restrooms in the original part of the building were free of excessive litter, but the sinks and countertops were dirty. None of the stalls had disposal receptacles for sanitary items. Apparent efforts to keep the walls graffiti-free had resulted in some very sloppy paint jobs. Quite a bit of paint had dribbled down the walls onto the ceramic tile. Also many of the tiles were chipped, cracked, and discolored. None of the bathrooms in the original part of the building had soap or paper towels. The ten classrooms in the new wing were served by one restroom, which had three stalls. The two stalls with dispensers for toilet paper had some paper, but the third stall had neither dispenser nor paper. One of the units for disposal of sanitary items was missing. Graffiti was abundant on the far stall wall. The two paper towel dispensers, which were both dirty, were empty and the room contained neither soap dispensers nor soap. The laminated area around the sinks was discolored. All three sinks had both hot and cold water and good water pressure. A dark substance covered much of the upper portion of the narrow wall next to the sinks\nit appeared as though black paint had been applied and attempts to remove it were unsuccessful. Boys Restrooms 30. 31. 32. One of the restrooms had a very foul order. The place was dirty and one of the commodes was broken. Gang signs were prevalent on the walls. The center restroom was cold and dirty. Only one of three sinks worked. One roll of toilet paper served several stalls. Two of the toilets were dirty. The one restroom serving ten classrooms in the new wing was fairly clean, but it contained only one roll of paper and no paper towels. Page 5DUNBAR JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL Date: February 1, 1995 We were pleased to note: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 1. 8. 9. 10. The U.S. and Arkansas flags were properly displayed on the exterior flagpole. The grounds around the school were nicely landscaped and free of debris. We saw two custodians picking up around the school as we arrived. The newly-paved parking lot added to the aesthetic appeal of the campus. A security guard was on duty at the front desk just inside the main entrance. The main doorway featured attractive, live plants. The terrazzo floors were in good condition and relatively clean. Various flags, visuals, and bilingual signs trumpeted the schools international studies magnet theme. The main floor hallway featured numerous bulletin board displays commemorating Black History Month. A display case at the entrance contained a large collection of African-American dolls (one owned by a former slave) representing different time periods. Another display traced the history of a black family through photographs. Student recognition was prominently displayed in the form of a \"Student of the Week\" bulletin board, which hung near the main entrance. The students we encountered were very polite and fiiendly. 11. Student lockers were generally in good shape and most were free of graffiti. 12. The pupil services wing was spacious. It included offices for the counselors and a health room. The nurse pointed out that the district had recently re-tiled the floor in this area. The counselors and nurse shared a common waiting area and the counselors had a separate room for group counseling. A rack in the waiting room had quite a few pamphlets relating to health issues. 13. The cafeteria was clean, the floors free of debris, and the tables and chairs looked like they had recently been cleaned. 14. Those girls bathrooms which were unlocked revealed plenty of paper products, a handicapped- accessible stall in each, and receptacles for sanitary products disposal in each stall. 15. The gymnasium was clean and the locker rooms for both sexes were fairly clean. In the gym, students were actively participating in a lesson. Areas needing attention: 1. 2. 3. 4, 5. 6. 7. The driveway between the gym and the main building has a serious drainage problem. The cement was badly eroded and crumbling in one area and water was standing in another area. The building has a serious problem with roof leaks. A teacher in one classroom had placed a container in the middle of the floor to catch drips\nthe classroom next door had serious water stains and damaged walls from leaks in the roof. In the media center, a recurrent roof leak has resulted in an area of damaged ceiling tiles. Quite a bit of trash littered the second floor, and the trash cans were small and relatively inconspicuous. Fire extinguishers were missing from their receptacles on the first and second floors. Some water fountains were not working. The boys locker room did not have a bathroom. A leak from the ceiling left a puddle in the middle of the floor. Graffiti filled the shower stalls and covered the walls. The showers obviously had not been used in some time. Page 68. According to one teacher, the buildings opaque windows have made it impossible to conduct 9. a science project involving plant growth. The clock on the second floor hall was turned on its side and was not working. 10. Other than the first-floor displays items relating to black history and a couple of bulletin board 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. displays in the basement, we saw almost no student work or other displays in the halls. We noted an obvious contrast between the lively and inviting first floor displays, which represented the international magnet theme, and the starkness of the second and third floors. Spot observations in several classrooms revealed that some had lots of student work and multicultural materials displayed, while others were bare to the point that it was impossible to determine what subject matter was taught in the room. One teacher pointed out that she had cleared her bulletin board in preparation for Black History Month, In several classrooms, teachers were late or altogether missing\nsome rooms had substitutes. In some classes, students were not on task and teachers were not teaching. In one classroom, the teacher was playing board games with the students. During a class change, we saw very few teachers monitoring the second floor in high traffic areas where a large number of students congregated, causing crowding and a high noise level. Numerous students remained in the halls weU after the tardy bell, yet no adults were encouraging them to hurry on to class. Girls Restrooms 17. 18. The restrooms on the second and third levels were locked. According to a couple of students, girls had to use the facilities on the first floor or in the basement. The two open restrooms had some graffiti, including racial slurs. Only one of the restrooms had a bar of soap. In the restroom which had two sinks, only one set of faucets was working. One restroom was littered with discarded tampon applicators. Numerous wads of toilet paper dotted the ceiling and upper walls. Boys Restrooms 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. None of the boys restrooms were truly handicapped-accessible. The odor of urine permeated the first floor restroom. None of the toilets appeared to have been flushed at all during the day, even though all of the toilets were functioning properly. Only one of the two sinks worked and water ran constantly in that one. While the room had no graffiti, quite a bit of trash was on the floor. The stalls lacked doors, and no paper towels or toilet paper were available. The second floor restroom featured a clean floor, very little graffiti, and functioning toilets and sinks. However, no paper towels or toilet paper were stocked, and the odor from the restroom was strong even in the hallway. The third floor restroom lacked toilet paper and paper towels. The stalls had no doors and one toilet was missing a seat. Neither sink functioned. The restroom floor was clean and the walls had no graffiti. The wood sill was missing from one of the windows, causing the surrounding plaster to erode. The basement level restroom was relatively clean and lacked graffiti, but neither toilet paper nor paper towels were in the room. All urinals and toilets functioned normally, but the sink faucets werent working, and none of the toilet stalls had doors. Page 7FOREST HEIGHTS JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL Date: January 28, 1995 We were please to find: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. The grounds in front of the building were clean, well-maintained, and litter-free, giving the school a well-groomed and inviting appearance. The reception area was amply staffed and the people serving the desk were friendly and helpful. The cafeteria was spacious and clean, designed to promote a smooth flow of traffic. The girls restrooms in the new building were very clean and well-supplied with paper products and soap. The girls restroom next to the entrance of the main building was spotless. Even in the older part of the building (including the girls locker room), we saw no graffiti or litter in the girls restrooms. The boys restroom on the main floor was clean, had paper towels, and hot and cold water. The boys restroom on the lower level was clean and had paper towels. AU of the lockers were free of graffiti and the areas around the lockers were clean and free of litter. Although it was a cold day, all of the areas we visited, including classrooms and bathrooms in the old buildings, were adequately heated. As a Partner in Education with the school, the Department of Health pays half the salary for the services of a full-time nurse. 10. The pupil services area was spacious, well-equipped, and had its own entry from the outside, which facilitates privacy. 11. During class changes, the students were exuberant, friendly, and orderly. 12. Students and faculty exhibited a lot of school spirit by wearing items with the school name or logo, or by wearing clothing representing the school colors. Areas needing attention: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. The old buildings not used for classrooms are being used as dumping groimds for surplus or discarded items from other LRSD schools. The old materials and equipment are strewn about the rooms in a haphazard and dangerous manner. Due to leaks in the roofs, some of the stored items had gotten wet and damaged. Also, some chairs and a large storage shelf were lying on the walkways between the old buildings. The old, unused buildings are still supplied with electricity and gas. Apparently, vandals can get in and out of these buildings at will. According to the principal, several break-ins had already occurred. On the day of our visit, we noted a lot of graffiti, including gang signs, on many of the bulletin boards in those buildings. The principal assured us that, as of the week before the visit, the boards were clean. If the district is not going to use these buildings productively for community outreach and services, the principal would like them razed for a parking area. The area between the old and new parts of the campus receives a lot of runoff from the roofs of the old buildings. When the water freezes, the walkways between the buildings become concrete-and-ice slides. In the music wing, we saw several mounds of paper and some boxed materials stacked against the walls. Perhaps the wing needs more storage space or some additional storage units. Although the cafeteria was clean, the windows were stained and marked by old masking tape residue. (The same was true for all of the windows in the old buildings, such as the tech wing.) Replacing the windows would make the facility a lot more attractive. Page 86. 7. 8. 9. 10. The floor in the gymnasium had some water damage, which the principal said had occurred during the remodeling. One of the sinks in the girls locker room was inoperable, and the sinks needed a good scrubbing. The personal hygiene product dispenser was empty, but the principal explained that the nurse dispensed such items free of charge. Although the showers appeared to be unused, the principal assured us that they were operable. The boys locker room was dirty and none of the showers worked. The facility had an odor that was foul, even for a locker room. Many of the classrooms had no significant displays of student-generated work or displays relating to a particular subject, making it difficult or impossible to determine the subject taught in the room. The media center had some computers, but the technology was outdated and the system lacked automatic cataloging and check-out. 11. The magazine shelves and some of the resource book shelves either had only a few or no 12. 13. materials on them. Infusion of multicultural materials in the classrooms was spotty at best. The few displays we noted were skimpy. Several teachers stayed in their classrooms during the class change, significantly reducing the number of adults in the halls to supervise students. Girls restrooms 14. The restrooms lacked receptacles for the disposal of personal hygiene products. Boys Restrooms 15. 16. 17. The restroom by room 703 had just one commode, and a foul odor permeated the room. It had toilet paper, but no paper towels. Even the boys restrooms that were clean had unpleasant odors, as did the staffs bathroom. The floor in the restroom by the gym was dirty and two bare wires were exposed. Page 9HENDERSON JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL Date: January 24, 1995 We were pleased to note: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. The large Henderson sign stood in a neatly landscaped planting area that included seasonal annuals U.S. and Arkansas flags were properly displayed. On the icy day when we visited, salt material had been spread in front of the building for ice control and safety in shaded areas. The main area of the media center was quite attractive. The neutral-colored carpet was clean and in good repair. Workers had repaired some ceilings leaks that we had noted during an earlier visit. A bulletin board in the office area contained displays both thanking current volunteers and appealing for additional workers. Lockers throughout the building were in good repair, neatly painted, and free of graffiti. Security guards and resource officers were visible throughout the building. Several halls were brightened by displays of student class work and projects. The LRSD mission statement and goals were posted in the entry area of the school. Areas needing attention: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7, 8. 9. A drainage problem was apparent. AU of the downspouts drain next to the building. On the south side of the facility, the water has eroded ruts down beside each of the steps. On the north side, rocks control some of the erosion, but the wash is still present. On both sides of the building, the water runs over sidewaUcs into the parking and drive area. In rainy weather, a pedestrian would have to walk through some deep water and in freezing weather, the area will stay iced. The areas north, east, and south of the building were marred by paper and cans. The loading dock area was surrounded by discarded equipment, chairs, paper, cans, and other miscellaneous refuse. In the west courtyard, paper, trash, cans, cartons, and a broken pot in the walkway were unsightly Major rust marred the window sills along the west side of the west courtyard. The paint over the south door and east upper wall in the west courtyard was chipped and cracked. Corridors and other areas of building showed evidence of overhead leaks and other moisture problems. We frequently spotted trash during walks down the hallways. While the floor tiles throughout the building were generally in good repair and free of debris, they did not appear to have been washed or waxed in some time. Staff members expressed anxiety about the schools wiring and ventilation. Ventilation was a concern to staff because a number of them had been experiencing respiratory problems. They have questioned the wiring because the bulbs in the AV equipment often blow out prematurely. 10. While the general appearance of the library was very neat and attractive, several adjoining areas needed attention. Library conference room #19 had damaged paint from a ceiling leak and room #12, which is the AV storage area, showed evidence that moisture had damaged the ceiling and one wall. 11. AU the waU and trim paint in the cafeteria or surrounding area was either grimy-looking or chipped. The downstairs haU area near the cafeteria included a battered table with a ratty, damaged formica top. 12. The areas around the cafeteria windows showed evidence of leakage problems. 13. Trash was present throughout the gym area. Page 1014. Paper, cans, discarded books, equipment, power cords, and broken chairs were strewn about the stage area of the gymnasium. The ceiling above both sets of bleachers showed evidence of major water damage, and some ceiling material was hanging down. 15. The hallway to the boys locker was piled with trash and dust mops. 16. A loose hand rail on the south side of the east end of the gymnasium needed tightening 17. The girls locker room area was very grim. Only the front half of the space was lighted, but the existing illumination revealed a very unkempt and unsanitary locker room. The bathroom area was filthy, and one of the commodes was stopped up, filled with waste and a sanitary pad, and smelled very bad. Apparently the shower area has not been used for a number of years. The showers were 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. dark, and the floor was littered with old clothes, boxes, and assorted trash. On the cabinet which contained the water pressure gauge, door latch was broken and the door stood open. The boys locker room was filled with graffiti, some gang-related. The floors were dirty and the toilet seats filthy. The showers, which didnt appear to have been used in recent years, were filled with various discarded items and equipment, such as coat hangers, a broken basketball goal, etc. The floor drain in the changing area was blocked with an unidentifiable substance. The temperature in the entire locker room area was cold. The students were extremely loud during class change. The halls echoed with the students shouts as they slowly made their way to class. We observed several adults in the hall, but they appeared to be changing classes also, and made no effort to ensure order. One female staff member did shout to the group to hurry on to class, but no one seemed to pay any attention. After the bell rang, quite a few unhurried students remained in the halls. Girls Restrooms The restroom near the office contained aU supplies, but it was messy. Paper towels littered the sinks and overflowed the waste basket. The walls were covered with obscene graffiti that had been scratched into rather new-looking paint. Some paint which was splashed on the sinks attested to prior efforts to paint to over the graffiti. Although it was not clean, the blue tile floor was in good condition. Both doors to the restroom located near the cafeteria were locked, denying students access. None of the restrooms had hot water. According to staff members, only the cafeteria and the nurses office had hot water for hand washing. Boys Restrooms The restroom at the west end of the south hallway was filled with graffiti. The veneer was broken off the door edge and bottom. Water, standing on the floor in front of all three urinals, extended approximately two to three feet from the wall. The vanity around the sinks was filthy and the restroom lacked toilet paper and paper towels. The stalls had doors, but they were badly bent. All three toilet seats were filthy and the area was permeated by a foul stench. There was no hot water, and lights above the toilet area werent functioning. The restroom at the east end of the south hallway was also replete with graffiti. The exit door was locked. Only two of the three toilets functioned properly. The front panel of the vanity had been removed and, with its nails exposed, was sitting near the toilet stalls. Although all three stalls had toilet paper, no paper towels were in the restroom. Page 11MABELVALE JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL Date: January 26, 1995 We were pleased to find: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. The exterior appeal of the school had been greatly enhanced by the newly constructed entrance and pavilion that have been centered in the front of the building. The structure and roofline of the pavilion pay visual homage to the traditional schoolhouse silhouette. The school was very clean. Breezeways, courtyards, and areas at the periphery of the campus were all free of litter. We noted trash barrels, neatly lined with plastic, every few yards along the length of each breezeway. No graffiti was present in or around the building. All bathrooms throughout the school were very clean, functional, open to students, and fully supplied. Most of the lockers looked neat and attractive due to a new coat of taupe paint applied by staff members during the summer of 1994, Security personnel were highly visible on the campus. The gym and locker rooms, while old and not particularly attractive, were well kept. All areas of the gym and locker rooms were clean. The main hallway included displays of student work, various trophies, and the academic honor roll. While the media center was not large, it included an extensive collection of books and displays of student work. Students and staff were helpful and friendly. All classrooms were clearly labeled with each teachers name and the room number. During the class change, all teachers were on duty and encouraged students to hurry to classes. Adults continually informed students of the time remaining for class changes, A couple of students who lagged behind responded politely to final warnings about tardiness and then rushed to their classes. Areas needing attention: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Neither the U.S. nor Arkansas flags were displayed from the flagpole. Some of the renovation completed this summer has not held up well at all. The skylights in the front passageway leak, causing deterioration of the ceiling material and trim paint. Newly installed metal bathroom fixtures appear corroded after only a few months of use. Major cracks run through the new concrete installed at the entry to the building. The district did not provide landscaping when they redesigned the entrance\nas a result, the entry looks rather barren. The principal said she was working to find funds to landscape the entrance area. The area behind the main building has a serious problem with runoff and drainage. During period of heavy rain, water cascades through exterior passage ways. Monitors saw a pile of sand bags at the ready in one hall. The district has worked to improve drainage, but the problem has not been alleviated. Two banks of lockers remain to be painted\ncompared to the other lockers with their fresh paint, these looked very grimy. The portable classrooms were not in the best of shape. Most needed some paint, and some had holes in the underskirts or outer walls. The principal reported that district workers were performing some maintenance on these buildings on the day of our visit. Some electrical wires were hanging rather low in the outdoor passageways, perhaps as a result of some roofing and electrical work that was in progress. However, these wires pose a hazard and should be safely secured as soon as possible. Page 12MANN JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL Date: January 30, 1995 We were pleased to find: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. The grounds were nicely landscaped, and a comer of one planter held a patch of blooming pansies. The office was neatly arranged, and a security guard was present at the front door. Visitors could see lists of \"Bear Cat Stars\" prominently displayed on a wall by the reception counter. The five school rules, three of which were stated in positive terms, were posted in several prominent locations in the hallways. The schools colors were evidenced all over the campus and the school mascot was displayed in several motifs. The student-created murals throughout the building were bright, colorful, and impressive. Two large display cases in the central hallway, and several smaller ones in other parts of the building, were filled with neat and attractive decorative or informational displays. Most of the glass enclosures were clean. Trash receptacles were stationed at various points about the campus. Although we entered no classrooms when class was in session, we briefly observed some from the windows in the classroom doors. We saw that many walls were brightly decorated with interesting displays, and most children were actively engaged in learning activities. Some of the teachers had done an exceptional job of decorating their rooms with materials and displays that focused on cultural and ethnic diversity. Students lockers throughout the building were generally in good shape, with some scratches, dents, marks, and paint streaks here and there. Several concrete benches offered pleasant seating along the walkways in the courtyard. The girls restroom near the main office was clean, contained paper towels and soap, and was free of graffiti. The counselors wing was spacious, contained a waiting area, and appeared to be well-supplied with college catalogues, fact sheets, and resource information. The spacious, well-lit media center was well-supplied with books and materials. On a west wing, the three exterior drinking fountains all worked. The cafeteria was clean and several attractive murals depicted positive scenes or promoted inspirational messages. A very pleasant aroma drifted from the kitchen. Throughout the building, the students and staff we encountered were friendly and helpful. Although a little slow in getting to their doors, teachers were visible in the passageways during class changes to supervise students. Areas Needing Attention: 1. 2. 3. 4, Recent warm weather had caused some grass against the building to grow tall and ragged in several places\nit needed trimming. Some paper litter detracted from the appearance of the grounds, both in front of the school and in the hallways. In the main office, the pale blue paint on the walls in the main office was chipping in several places (particularly where chairs had rubbed against it), revealing an ugly brown undercoat. A ceiling tile or two were stained with brown rings from water drainage. A few of the glass display cases in the hallways were dirty and one was marred with a small amount of graffiti. Page 135. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. Most of the doors to the hallways and classrooms had windows, most of which were very dirty\nmany of them also had ugly tape residue. Many of the rooms were very crowded with desks, file cabinets, student projects, etc. Although we did not look into many classrooms, most of those which we did see had dull, dirty floors. Throughout the building, we noticed several cracks in the concrete walkways and hall floors. In some places, the concrete had worn away, leaving ragged etches, jagged gaps between seams, or sizable holes. A large yellow mechanism, designed to wring out mop heads over a bucket, was very noticeable lying behind one of the benches in the courtyard. Paint on the underside of the building overhangs and walkway covers was badly peeling in many places. The building appeared to have no water drainage system to direct mnoff from the roof\nso, in several places, water from recent rains was running down I-beams and poles or dripping off the edge of the building. Metal signs hung at several spots around the building, admonishing visitors to obtain a pass from the principals office. All were badly msted and most were bent and battered. Throughout the building, gates were wide open and many exterior doors were accessible from outside, posing a risk of unauthorized entrance to the campus and buildings. At least one classroom door was unlocked. The health room was locked and dark. We learned that the nurse was not scheduled to be on campus the day we visited. The cafeteria floor was swept, but scuffed and dull. We noticed several water-stained ceiling tiles along the west wall of the cafeteria. The water fountain outside the cafeteria did not work. Near the art rooms, some ceiling tiles were ajar and several small tiles were missing. In a north wing, the back door to an area at the northeast, which houses electrical equipment, was standing open and was unattended. Several old school district books were stacked on a power plant, and boxes and other miscellaneous stuff had accumulated in this area. A car was backed up to the open door. A paint can was overturned on the ground near the door, the stump of a small tree or shrub was freshly painted with white paint, and the wet paint was splattered messily on the grass. 17. Some teachers were eager to tell us of their concerns about classrooms over-crowded with 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. students, and a custodial worker complained that the school needed more custodians. The media center was carpeted in an attractive, soft blue covering that, although free of spots, was Uttered with scraps of paper and needed vacuuming. A cover over one light fixture was lose and hung precariously, and one ceiling tile was ajar. On the walk between the main building and the English annex, a large area of concrete had deteriorated and held a big puddle of water. The water appeared to have overflowed from a drainage ditch which contained largely stagnant water. The ditch contained considerable plant Ufe, so it apparently held water at least much of the time. Twin tire ruts had been cut deeply into the wet lawn near this area. In the alley between the main building and English annex, a sizable section of the paving was crumbled and sunken and held a large puddle of standing water. Most of the exterior hall floors in the annex were dirty and gritty and needed sweeping. Several of the hall floors had sticky substances that looked like spilled soft drinks, and needed wetmopping. The exterior of one of the three main doors at the front of the English annex was badly peeled at the edge, and the paint on all three was faded. The windows in these doors were dirty. 23. The floors in the annex were dull and scuffed and some needed energetic scrubbing. Some floor tiles were broken, especially at structural joints in the hallways. Page 1424. 25. 26. 27. 28. In the annex, wiring (some of which appeared to be for computer links) was draped along the walls and ceilings. One wire, which extended from type of sensor, was missing part of its insulating covering. In the annex, we found two sets of twin water fountains, but only one head in each was hooked to a water source. Water pressure in one of the fountains was so low that it was impossible to drink from it. Classroom doors in the annex had metal air exchange vents on their lower half\nmost of these grills were badly bent and discolored. Several of the exterior doors in the annex (other than the three at the main entrance) could be opened from the outside. All of the door windows were dirty and several had tape residue. Outside the rear doors of the annex were two walls where chalkboard erasers had been clapped against them, leaving a white powdery residue. In this area, five student desks (with chairs attached) were arranged in a circle around cardboard boxes. The boxes contained empty soft drink cans, cigarette butts, and miscellaneous trash. A little further on, next to an exterior east wall was another desk-chair and a small pile of broken wood that apparently had been discarded there. The grass in this area was becoming overgrown. Girls Restrooms 29. 30. The condition and appearance of the restrooms, as well as their supplies, were uneven. Most of them needed a good scrubbing. Some of them had plenty of toilet paper, while others had little or none. All of the restrooms had paper towels. Some had no soap, but where it was funushed, it was restricted to only one bar. None of the restrooms had hot water, and in some cases, water pressure was inadequate, thereby reducing the likelihood that the one bar of soap would be used. A student in one restroom said she could not depend on the room having toilet paper, so usually brought some from home. Inadequate custodial care resulted in dirty mirrors, smeared cleanser residue, and bumed-out light bulbs or missing covers for light fixtures. Some of the stalls had graffiti on the walls, one stall had no door, and another bore an \"out of order\" sign due to damage. The use of strong cleaning compounds had badly discolored the countertops around some of the sinks, and in several cases, the caulking around the sinks had deteriorated or was completely missing. The cabinets surrounding some of the sinks were battered, and some were missing pieces of veneer or exhibited other signs of mistreatment. Boys restrooms 31. Except for the restroom used by the staff, which was kept locked, the restrooms were devoid of soap, paper towels, or toilet paper. A monitor described one of the restrooms as \"the worst ever\" of those weve monitored, which is a strongly negative assessment. The restroom near the cafeteria was locked. Foul odors, dirty floors, and the lack of general supplies made a trip to the restroom an act of desperation for male students. Page 15Date: PULASKI HEIGHTS JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL January 30, 1995 We were pleased to find: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 1. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. The U.S. and Arkansas flags were properly displayed on the flagpole. Some landscaping work was in progress along the west side of the building, while at the same time, workers in that area were applying sealant to the area around the cafeteria windows. The entry hall was filled with signs of school life. Monitors saw two signs praising volunteers, a notice about LRSD registration dates, a bulletin board on learning teams, PTA announcements, the honor roll, and a display of photographs highlighting a special scouting event. All drinking fountains were operating and had good pressure. The red tile corridors were clean and shiny. While student lockers were not immaculate, all were free of graffiti and in good repair. The white vinyl floors surrounding the media center were very clean and looked recently waxed. Bulletin boards in the hall near the media center featured displays related to each of the schools six learning teams. Each display was colorful, attractive, and promoted positive team spirit. The boys restrooms were clean, free of graffiti and litter, and the toilets and urinals were functioning normally. Besides being clean and free of odor, the restroom on the upper floor had good lighting and water pressure. The walls were clean and the floor condition was acceptable. The inside of the gymnasium was bright and attractive\nthe stands and court area contained only a small amount of paper and trash. During the PE session, the students were organized, dressed- out, and participated in the activity. Adults provided plenty of observation and supervision. The boys locker room on the lower level was open and in use. The painted areas were clean and free of graffiti, and the lighting was acceptable. During the class change, teachers were at their doors and students were orderly. Adults reminded stragglers to hurry up, and students cautioned each other about being late. School personnel propped the exterior doors open for the class change and closed and secured the doors immediately after classes resumed. Outside, most of the students were orderly during their walk to and from the portables. The exterior of the portable buildings appeared to be in good condition. We saw several students putting trash in the conveniently located barrels during the class change, Areas needing attention: 1. 2. 3. 4. The narrow, two-sided planter, which is parallel to the brick and concrete sign that bears the school name, has not been weeded in some time, as attested by the privet, seedling trees, and other weeds that grow there. The sign sits in the midst of a planted area that is partially set apart by plastic edging, much of which has worked up out of the ground. The bark ground cover in this area has broken down and shifted, exposing bare ground and the black plastic weed shield, which sticks up in unsightly tatters and shreds. The grass in much of the area on the west side has been trafficked away, leaving large patches of bare dirt. In the north parking area, a large water-filled hole was in the dirt area by the front drive, starkly contrasting with the landscape work on the other side of the drive. Entry rugs were trashy-looking and askew, and numerous pieces of paper and trash littered the floor. Page 165. 6. 7. 8. 9. Outside the main entrance, a large amount of trash cluttered the parking area and walkway, mainly paper, cups, food, and cans. Outside the gymnasium, the north and east areas were very trashy. The north was cluttered with beer bottles, paper, cups, and cans. A trash can was three-quarters full, and obviously had not recently been emptied, because refuse inside was wet from weekend rain. Both fence lines along the east were littered with paper, cans, cups, and assorted junk. The roof gutters and downspout on the east side empty onto the walkway, causing water damage around the buildings footing and the steps to the athletic field. The east basketball courts were littered with paper, cans, cups, and assorted junk. The areas around the dumpsters were littered with excessive trash and broken glass. Next to this area, an employee sat in a yellow district maintenance van and appeared to be asleep. 10. Some of the airflow vents under the gym were missing, leaving holes into the crawl space. 11. 12. 13. We noted some damaged interior plaster walls in the south end of the building. While the walls in the main building have undergone some repair work, several walls in the back section showed evidence of moisture problems resulting in peeling paint and flaking plaster. An archway near the in-school suspension area was in very poor shape, and the terrazzo floor below the arch had a wide crack. The area around the west door to the building was heavily cluttered with cigarette butts, an old broken wooden ladder, and a shoe. 14. The exterior west wall had a one-inch hole which needs patching to prevent additional water damage. Serious water damage exists on the area of the interior wall near the entrance to the cafeteria. The west wall also had one area of graffiti which needs to be removed immediately. 15. 16. 17. Trash lay all around the portable buildings. The steps leading to the cafeteria were pitched steeply, yet there were no non-skid runners or non-skid paint on the steps. Cookies and diced peaches were neatly placed on tables in the cafeteria\nhowever, neither staff nor students were watching over the food to assure that it remained free of contaminants until consumed. 18. Several fluorescent tubes were missing, adding to the oppressive mood of the cafeteria. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. In the auditorium, ceiling tiles were damaged by water leaks. In the balcony ceiling, a couple of damaged tiles were hanging threateningly over the seats. Throughout the auditorium, paint and plaster were peeling, particularly on the west wall. The auditorium was quite warm even though it was not in use. Additionally, several windows were open, and it appeared that they usually remain that way. The middle section of the balcony guard rail was missing. The stage appeared to be set up for choir rehearsal. Sheet music and trash were strewn aimlessly around the stage and on the risers. Two sets of mobile steps provided access to the stage from the front. However, both sets had loose molding on the edges of individual steps, which could lead to a serious fall since the steps didnt have rails. Trash was on the floor level of the auditorium-most of it around the trash barrel! The stage drapery was worn\nbackground drapes were literally tattered in places Four overhead lights in the auditorium were not functioning properly. The showers in the boys locker room had not been used for some time, judging from the dusty, undisturbed exercise mats and used equipment that were stored there. Only one teacher was standing outside watching the class change between the main building and the portables. Other than custodians dumping trash, we saw no other adults observing the class change outside. Several students were cursing loudly on their way to a portable. Page 1729. 30. 31. About 15 to 20 straggling students were still in the hall after the tardy bell sounded, but all appeared to be going slowly to class. In some hallways, tape loops were left hanging on the walls above the lockers. Throughout the building, a number of exit lights were not functioning. Girls Restrooms 32. The restrooms were usable, free of odors, and contained paper products, but most lacked soap. The third floor restroom had a large section of missing tiles, and all the tiled areas would benefit from a good scrubbing. All the toilets appeared clean. On the second floor, graffiti marred the plexiglass restroom window. The tile work in the second floor bore the remains of a sloppy paintjob. Boys Restrooms 33. The fourth floor and third floor restrooms lacked soap, toilet paper, and paper towels. Although each of the two restrooms had three sinks, one set of faucets in each room didnt work. Page 18SOUTHWEST JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL Date: February 2, 1995 We were pleased to find: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. The grounds in front of the building and along the driveway were nicely landscaped with several mature trees and shrubs. Several plots of pansies added color to the dull winter colors of the season. The e?cterior of the building was in good condition, and the grounds were fairly free of litter. The school had an ample number of water fountains and all of them worked. A student ambassador greeted us at the front entrance, but she thought we were from the superintendents office. The superintendent and some of his staff were scheduled to meet with some of the districts student leaders. A sign, proclaiming the Veterans Hospital as a Partner in Education, was prominently displayed in the entry way. Students had access to a very large field for sports and recess activities. The new lockers in the hallways helped to brighten the schools appearance, and the new science stations in the science rooms looked great. Also the hallways had been recently repainted, which helped divert attention from the brick wall surfaces that needed cleaning. The gym floor and bleachers were in good condition. Except for the floor, the surface areas such as tables and chairs in the cafeteria were clean, and a very pleasant aroma wafted from the kitchen area. For the most part, the girls restrooms had an adequate supply of paper products, and were free of graffiti. All the boys restrooms were fairly clean, and had doors on the stalls. Many of the classrooms had excellent displays of student work and multicultural materials. A brightly decorated bulletin board in the main hall enhanced the area. Many of the hall bulletin boards contained excellent displays of student work. Security was very visible in the halls both during class changes and while classes were in session. Adults were highly visible during class changes, and students moved rapidly and in an orderly fashion to their classes. The students we encountered were very pleasant, mannerly, and helpful. Areas needing attention: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. The beautifully landscaped area in front of the building is obscured by the many cars parked around the circular drive in areas not designed for parking. Several cars and trucks were double parked, blocking the driveway. Large pot holes, standing water, and uneven surfaces have kept staff members from using the schools unpaved parking lot. The flag pole was devoid of flags. Several small pieces of litter were scattered throughout the hallways. All of the halls had several broken floor tiles\nin some areas the damage was extensive. Some of the ceiling panels were missing or discolored. Some graffiti marred the paint as well as the brick surfaces in the halls. The building has many badly scratched plexiglass windows, which are unsightly and detract from an otherwise favorable first impression of the buildings exterior. The cafeteria, which has only one window, was poorly lit and looked gloomy and dull. Although we saw several waste baskets placed in the hallways, the containers were too small to hold the amount of trash placed in them, creating overflow and unsightly areas of litter. Page 197. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. One of the covered walkways had a ceiling that was falling in, due to severe water damage. In this same area, the light over the outside door was missing. The fire extinguisher was missing from its case in the technical classes wing. A tour of the gym revealed several deficiencies with the facility, such as: the absence of a door between the boys locker room and the gym floor\na lack of hot water in the bathroom\nand, even though the coach said he had two handicapped individuals, none of the stalls were handicapped- accessible. The missing door between the gym and locker created a situation where individuals in the bleachers or on the gym floor could catch glimpses of boys in various states of undress. In this regard, the coach acknowledged that the boys had to sprint across the locker room in order to avoid being seen partially dressed. The coach asserted that some boys did not care if they were seen semi-dressed. A water pipe running along the waU above the boys and girls locker rooms was very unsightly. Several sections of this pipe were missing insulation and, according to the coach, the pipe could become quite hot. Water leakage on the outside of the health room has created a large stain down the side of the wall, and algae is growing there. The floor of the cafeteria had a moderate amount of trash, including some dropped cookies and milk cartons. When we walked through 45 minutes later, a sticky residue (which appeared to be miUc) was still on the floor, along with the cookies. The counselors wing did not have space for group counseling and the faculty rest room was in the counselors wing. The counselors offices were very small\nwhen a counselor has a student and must close the door, the space becomes almost claustrophobic. No counseling or health pamphlets, resource materials, or other handouts were visible. The same area housed the health office, and the two facilities shared a common small waiting area. The nurse is in the building only three days a week, but was not in the office when we toured the building. Some classrooms had new science stations, but the addition of these labs has compromised space and created a storage problem. Many large items were crammed in the rooms, such as TV monitors and several large crates and boxes. The TV monitors need to be relocated, because the students could see them from their seats. The weather during our visit was warm, and the classrooms were uncomfortably warm and stuffy. Special education students attended class in a portable building that was not handicapped- accessible, nor did it have a covered walkway between it and the main building. The top wooden step on the stairs, which led to the classroom, was rotten and chipped. On another portable, which sat next to the special education unit, the paint and veneer on the door was peeling. Special education students are isolated from the main population for a large part of the day. We noted evidence of water damage to the concrete landing, which was in front of the door to the main building, that led to the portables. The landing was chipped and worn over a substantial area. The wooden frame around the landing door showed evidence of damage from termites or water. Several of the outside doors needed replacement because of serious damage and decay, such as broken-out bottoms. The prefab building, which housed two separate classes in algebra and learning foundations, had a ramp on only one end. As a result, students needing access to the class without the ramp had to go through the class with the ramp. Such a situation could be disruptive to the teacher and students in the ramp-accessible classroom. Page 2022, 23. A couple of rooms were unattended after the class change. In one of the rooms, the students were reading or talking quietly, but in the other, students were much louder and on the verge of being disruptive. In another classroom frill of students, all of whom were girls, the children were either doing nothing or chatting with one another. An adult male stood in the front of the room, doing absolutely nothing other than standing. When we observed the same room 15 minutes later, we saw the identical scene. 24. Classroom detention lists were displayed in the hall and on a classroom door. Such a practice violates a students privacy and could be viewed as a source of public humiliation. Girls Restrooms 25. 26. Most of the restrooms did not have any soap, had dirty sinks, lacked stalls for the handicapped, and needed painting. The restrooms lacked receptacles for sanitary products, and the waste baskets were inadequate for the amount of trash generated. One restroom had a very unpleasant odor. The counselors mentioned a persistent foul odor from another restroom, which was located in their wing. Apparently the restroom lacked an exhaust system. Boys Restrooms 27. The restrooms contained no toilet paper until it was noted that we were in the building\nthen a custodian put one roll of toilet paper and fewer than a dozen paper towels in the rack in the front restroom. One restroom had a handicapped-accessible stall, but it was devoid of toilet paper. Page 21\nThis project was supported in part by a Digitizing Hidden Special Collections and Archives project grant from The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation and Council on Library and Information Resoources.\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n\n "},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_766","title":"Teachers of Tomorrow Program","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":null,"dc_date":["1993/2000"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System"],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","Little Rock School District","Education--Arkansas","School management and organization","School improvement programs","School employees"],"dcterms_title":["Teachers of Tomorrow Program"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Butler Center for Arkansas Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://arstudies.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/bcmss0837/id/766"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["Available for use in research, teaching, and private study. Any other use requires permission from the Butler Center."],"dcterms_medium":["documents (object genre)"],"dcterms_extent":["79 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\nSECTION 2. School Participants. School Participants shall consist of local school districts maintaining programs designed with an emphasis on, but not limited to, men, blacks and other minority Arkansans to pursue teaching careers. In order to be eligible to participate in the Academy each School Participant agrees to: (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (0 Provide a teacher Academy recruiting program to attract students of various ethnic and socioeconomic backgrounds throughout the district into education careers\nAddress the acute need for teachers in the district, especially male and minority teachers, by attracting and nurturing at an early age those young people who demonstrate a desire or talent to become teachers through implementation of the teacher Academy\nSeek funding for the teacher Academy through grants, endowments, and foundations\nProvide the facilities and personnel for the teachers Academy, except for the Executive Director who may be provided through a grant, endowment or other foundation funding\nSeek collaborations with racial and ethnic community organizations to provide incentives in order to increase minority enrollment in the teacher Academy\nand Assure priority hiring for the teacher Academy graduates upon successful completion of college and certification by the Arkansas Department of Education. SECTION 3. University Participants. University Participants shall consist of local colleges and universities maintaining and providing programs designed to encourage Arkansans to pursue teaching careers. In order to be eligible to participate in the Academy each University Participant agrees to: (a) (b) (c) Provide scholarships through grants or other university funding for the districts students who graduate from the teacher Academy program and enroll in a University Participants College of Education based upon students unmet financial needs, high school preparation, and the availability of funds\nAssist and coordinate dissemination of information about higher education scholarships and grants for teacher Academy students\nOrganize seminars to introduce parents and students to teaching which will include, but not be limited to, educational career choices, scholarship information, and test taking skills\n-2-Teachers of Tomorrow Academy Organization And Operating Agreement i A TEACHERS TOMORROW \"Helping The Best Touch The Future\" A Joint Venture of Arkansas Universities and Secondary Education Institutions Recruiting Program Little Rock School District RECEIVED March 15, 1993 MAR 1 8 1993 Office of Desegregation Monitoring Mr. Horace Smith, Associate Monitor Office of Desegregation Monitoring 201 East Main Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Dear Mr. Smith: As per our conversation, please find the enclosed information concerning the proposed Teachers of Tomorrow Academy for your review. I am looking forward to meeting with you on Monday, March 22, 1993, concerning the Academy development and procedures for informing the Court of this minority recruitment design. If there any questions prior to our meeting, please call me at 324-2080. For Excellence in Education, Robert Robinson Recruiting Coordinator rr Enclosures cc: Mrs. Ann Brown 810 West Markham Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201  (501)324-2000(d) Award college credit as determined within the University Participants guidelines to each teacher Academy graduate who completes an approved teacher education course contingent upon the student earning a 3.00 average or better in each course equivalent to a full semester of college credit\nand (e) Submit existing college credit courses or design, if necessary, new courses for Board and University approval for the Academy. SECTION 4. Admission of New Participants. In order to become and remain a participant in the Academy program, an interested party must agree to provide and maintain the programs required of a School Participant or University Participant, as the case may be. Interested parties shall be eligible to participate in the program upon approval of not less than seventy-five percent (75%) of the Executive Board. SECTION 5. Expulsion of Participant. In the event a participant shall fail to provide those programs and level of assistance required for eligibility and such failure shall continue for a period of sixty (60) days following the participants receipt of Notice from the Executive Board of such failure, the Board, in its sole discretion, shall have power to expel a participant upon the vote of not less than seventy-five percent (75%) of the Executive Board to expel said participant. ARTICLE m. EXECUTIVE BOARD SECTION 1. General Powers. The affairs, activities and operation of the Academy shall be managed by its Executive Board. SECTION 2. Number. Tenure and Qualifications. The number of the Executive Board members of the Academy shall be ten (10). Each member shall hold office for so long as he or she is employed in the capacity listed below or until his or her successor shall have been appointed and qualified. The Executive Board shall consist of the seven (7) individuals employed in the following capacities: (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) The Superintendent of the Little Rock School District. The Superintendent of the North Little Rock School District. The Superintendent of the Pulaski County Special School District. The Dean of the College of Education or the Chairperson of Teacher Education at the University of Arkansas at Little Rock. The Dean of the School of Education at the University of Arkansas at Pine Bluff. The Dean of the College of Education at the University of Central Arkansas. The Dean of the School of Education at Henderson State University. -3-Organizational GuidelinesORGANIZATION AND OPERATING AGREEMENT OF TEACHERS OF TOMORROW ACADEMY (A Joint Venture of Arkansas Universities and Secondary Education Institutions) THIS ORGANIZATION AND OPERATING AGREEMENT executed and effective this 21st day of May, 1992, by and between the undersigned Arkansas Universities and Secondary Education Institutions in order to create a cooperative joint venture for the purposes hereinafter stated. ARTICLE I. PURPOSE AND PRINCIPAL OFFICE This TEACHERS OF TOMORROW ACADEMY (the \"Academy\") is organized as a cooperative joint venture whose exclusively educational purposes are described as follows: (a) To provide scholarships to students graduating from area high school magnet programs for teacher preparedness, create positions in participating universities teacher- related programs and provide seminars and assistance to teachers in the magnet program for teacher preparedness. (b) To receive and maintain a fund or funds of real and/or personal property, and subject to the restrictions hereinafter set forth to use and apply the whole or any part of the income therefrom and the principal thereof exclusively for charitable and educational purposes. (c) To have and exercise all powers, privileges and rights conferred by the laws of the State of Arkansas and all powers and rights incidental to carrying out the purposes for which this Academy is formed, except such as are inconsistent with the express provisions of any laws, rules or regulations otherwise governing the educational institutions participating in the Academy. (d) The principal office of the Academy in the State of Arkansas shall be located in the city of Little Rock, county of Pulaski. The Academy may have such other offices, either within or without the State of Arkansas, as the Executive Board may designate or as the business of the Academy may require from time to time. ARTICLE n. PARTICIPANTS SECTION 1. Participants. The Academy shall have two types of participants: School Participants and University Participants. -1-Preface The following pages contain organizational and fiscal responsibility guidelines for the Teachers of Tomorrow Academy, which is a consortium to recruit, support and develop outstanding minority and other students for the teaching professions. In greater Little Rock, as in most cities, the number of minority teachers is significantly out of proportion to the number of minority students in public schools. The shared vision for the Academy design is that it comprehensively and realistically assesses a number of elements in teacher development  high school curriculum, motivation, an ongoing support system, family investment in the young person - and takes reasonable and effective steps to address those concerns. We have a high level of enthusiasm and preparation for this challenge. We are not only familiar with the mechanics, but also the spirit and vision of the program.Dr. Lawrence A. Davis, Jr. University of Arkansas at Pine Bluff Post Office Box 4068 Pine Bluff, AR 71601 Dr. James Young University of Arkansas at Little Rock 2801 South University Little Rock, AR 72204 The undersigned on behalf of the founding participants, hereby state and certify that the foregoing is a true, correct and conformed copy of the Organization and Operating Agreement of TEACHERS OF TOMORROW ACADEMY duly adopted by the participants of said organization on the 19th day of August, 1992. _ Dr, C. Mac Bemd tudsei I Bobby G.^!\nster D] !unn Dr. Winfred Dr. T\u0026lt; t. Dr. James Young -10- 6lj^ A. SECTION 3. Annual Meeting. The annual meeting of the Executive Board shall be held on the 3rd Tuesday in the month of July in each year, beginning with the year 1992, at the hour of 10:00 a.m., for the purpose of electing Executive Board members and for the transaction of such other business as may come before the meeting. Annual meetings shall be held at the offices of the Academy without other notice than this Agreement. If a day fixed for the annual meeting shall be a legal holiday in the State of Arkansas, such meeting shall be held on the next succeeding business day. SECTION 4. Regular Meetings. The Executive Board shall meet bi-monthly or at such other regularly scheduled intervals as the Executive Board shall determine is necessary to conduct the Academys business. Notice of the time and location of such meeting shall be made in accordance with the provisions of Section 6 below. The Executive Board may provide, by resolution, the time and place for the holding of additional regular meetings without other notice than such resolution. SECTI0N5. Special Meetings. Special meetings of the Executive Board may be called by or at the request of the Chairperson or any two Board members. The Chairperson shall fix the place for holding any special meeting of the Executive Board. SECTION 6. Notice. Notice of any regular or special meeting shall be given at least three (3) days previously thereto by written notice delivered personally or mailed to each member at his\\her business address, or by facsimile transmission. If mailed, such notice shall be deemed to be delivered when deposited in the United States mail so addressed, with postage thereon prepaid. If notice is given by facsimile transmission, such notice shall be deemed to be delivered upon generation of the Proof of Transmission at die conclusion of the transmission. Any Board member may waive notice of any meeting. The attendance of a Board member at a meeting shall constitute a waiver of notice of such meeting, except where a Board member attends a meeting for the express purpose of objecting to the transaction of any business because the meeting is not lawfully called or convened. SECTION 7. Quorum. A majority of the number of Executive Board members fixed by Section 2 of this Article III shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of business at any meeting of the Executive Board, but if less than such majority is present at a meeting, a majority of the Board members present may adjourn the meeting from time to time without further notice. SECTION 8. Election of Executive Board. If the election of Board members shall not be held on the day designated herein for any annual meeting of the Executive Board, or at any adjournment thereof, the Executive Board shall cause the election to be held at a special meeting of the Executive Board as soon thereafter as may conveniently be held. SECTION 9. Manner of Acting. The act of the majority of the Board members present at a meeting at which a quorum is present shall be the act of the Executive Board. -5-Each of the three (3) charter School Participants, the Little Rock School District, the North Little Rock School District and the Pulaski County Special School District, shall have the right to appoint one (1) at large representative to the Executive Board. To be eligible to serve on the Board as an at-large representative the person shall be employed by the district(s) in one of the following capacities: Human Resources Coordinator or Personnel Director, Director or Associate Director of Secondary Education, or Director or Associate Director for Desegregation. The at-large representatives shall serve at the discretion of the respective School Participants appointing said representative. The initial Executive Board shall consist of the persons named below: Dr. C. Mac Bernd Superintendent Little Rock School District 810 West Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201 Bobby G. Lester Superintendent Pulaski County Special School District Post Office Box 8601 Little Rock, AR 72216 James R. Smith, Superintendent North Little Rock School District Post Office Box 687 North Little Rock, AR 72115 Dr. Charles Green, Dean School of Education Henderson State University Post Office Box 7636 Arkadelphia, AR 71923 Charles A. Green Associate Director Secondary Education Pulaski County School District Post Office Box 8601 Little Rock, AR 72216 Mable Bynum Assistant Superintendent Desegregation North Little Rock School District Post Office Box 687 North Little Rock, AR 72115 Dr. Calvin Johnson Teacher Education Chairperson University of Arkansas at Little Rock 2801 South University Little Rock, AR 72204 Dr. Jim Bowman, Dean College of Education University of Central Arkansas Post Office Box 5015 Conway, AR 72032 Dr. Walter Littlejohn, Dean School of Education University of Arkansas at Pine Bluff Post Office Box 4068 Pine Bluff, AR 71601 Robert Robinson Recruiting Coordinator Little Rock School District 810 West Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201 -4-9 SB Fiscal Responsibility SECTION 10. Vacancies. Any vacancy occurring in the Executive Board may be filled by the person accepting the employment position of the member creating the vacancy. If a vacancy shall occur other than by reason of the termination of the employment, for any reason whatsoever, of the Board member in the capacity described in Section 2 above, the member appointing such member or by whom such member is employed may appoint a successor to serve on the Executive Board. SECTION 11. Advisory Directors. The Executive Board may appoint one or more advisory directors who will not be members of the Board. Such advisory directors shall only act in an advisory capacity for the purpose appointed, shall serve at the sole discretion of the Board and shall have no power of final decision on any matters concerning the Academy. Advisory directors shall be selected from business, education and other civic leaders and parents of children attending school members institutions. ARTICLE IV. OFFICERS SECTION 1. Number. The officers of the Academy shall be a Chairperson, a Vice-Chairperson, a Secretary and a Treasurer, each of whom shil be elected by the Executive Board. Such other officers and assistant officers as may be deemed necessary may be elected by the Executive Board. SECTION 2. Election and Term of Office. The officers of the Academy to be elected by the Executive Board shall be elected annually by the Executive Board at its annual meeting. If the election of officers shall not be held at such meeting, such election shall be held as soon thereafter as conveniently may be. Each officer shall hold office until his/her successor shall have been duly elected and shdl have qualified or until his/her death or until he/she shall resign or shall have been removed in the manner hereinafter provided. SECTION 3. Removal. Any officer or agent may be removed by the Executive Board whenever in its judgment, the best interests of the Academy will be served thereby. SECTION 4. Vacancies. A vacancy in any office because of death, resignation, removal, disqualification or otherwise may be filled by the Executive Board for the unexpired portion of the term. SECTION 5. Chairperson. The Chairperson shall be the principal executive officer of the Academy and, subject to the control of the Executive Board, shall in general supervise and control all of the business and affairs of the Academy. He\\She shall, when present, preside at all meetings of the Executive Board. He\\She may sign, with the Secretary or any other proper officer of the Academy thereunto authorized by the Executive Board, any deeds, mortgages, bonds, contracts, or other instruments which the Executive Board has authorized to be executed, except in cases where the signing and execution thereof shall be expressly delegated by the -6-Participant appointing such representative. SECTION 3. Meetings. Meetings of the Committee may be called by or at the request of the Chairperson or any four Committee representatives. The Chairperson shall fix the place for holding any meeting called by them. SECTION 4. Notice. Notice of any meeting shall be given at least three (3) days previously thereto by written notice delivered personally or mailed to each Board member at his/her business address, or by facsimile transmission. If mailed, such notice shall be deemed to be delivered when deposited in the United States mail so addressed, with postage thereon prepaid. If notice is given by facsimile transmission, such notice shall be deemed to be delivered upon generation of the Proof of Transmission at the conclusion of the transmission. Any representative may waive notice of any meeting. The attendance of a representative at a meeting shall constitute a waiver of notice of such meeting, except where a representative attends a meeting for the express purpose of objecting to the transaction of any business because the meeting is not lawfully called or convened. SECTION 5. Quorum. A majority of the number of representatives fixed by Section 2 of this Article V shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of business at any meeting, but if less than such majority is present at a meeting, a majority of the representatives present may adjourn the meeting from time to time without further notice. SECTION 6. Manner of Acting. The act of the majority of the representatives present at a meeting at which a quorum is present shall be the act of the Steering Committee. SECTION 7. Vacancies. Any vacancy occurring in the Steering Committee shall be filled by the appointment of a successor by the member who appointed the representative creating the vacancy. ARTICLE VI. CONTRACTS, LOANS, CHECKS AND DEPOSITS SECnON 1, Contracts. Grants. Etc. The Executive Board may authorize any officer or officers, agent or agents, to enter into any contract, grant applications, or execute and deliver any instrument in the name of and on behalf of the Academy, and such authority may be general or confined to specific instances. SECTION 2. Loans. No loans shall be made by the Academy to its Executive Board members or officers. Any Executive Board members who vote for or assent to the making of a loan to a Board member or officer, and any officer or officers participating in the making of such loan, shall be jointly and severally liable to the Academy for the amount of such loan until repayment thereof in accordance with the provisions of the Arkansas Nonprofit Academy Act. No loans shall be contracted on behalf of the Academy and no evidences of indebtedness shall -8- be issued in its name unless authorized by a resolution of the Executive Board. Such authority may be general or confined to specific instances. SECTION 3. Checks, Drafts, etc. All checks, drafts or other orders for the payment of money, notes or other evidences of indebtedness issued in the name of the Academy, shall be signed by such officer or officers, agent or agents of the Academy and in such manner as shall from time to time be determined by resolution of the Executive Board. SECTION 4. Deposits. All funds of the Academy shall be deposited to the credit of the Academy in such banks, trust companies or other depositories as the Executive Board may select. ARTICLE Vn. FISCAL YEAR The fiscal year of the Academy shall begin on the first day of July and end on the last day of June in each year. ARTICLE Vm. AMENDMENTS This Agreement may be altered, amended or repealed and new amendments, revisions or substitutions may be adopted by the Executive Board at any regular or special meeting of the Executive Board. ARTICLE IX. FOUNDING PARTICIPANTS The names and addresses of the founding participants and their duly appointed representatives are as follows: Dr. C. Mac Bernd Superintendent Little Rock School District 810 West Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201 James R. Smith, Superintendent North Little Rock School District Post Office Box 687 North Little Rock, AR 72115 Bobby G. Lester Superintendent Pulaski County Special School District Post Office Box 8601 Little Rock, AR 72216 Dr. Winfred L. Thompson University of Central Arkansas Post Office Box 5015 Conway, AR 72032 Dr. Charles Dunn Henderson State University Post Office Box 7636 Arkadelphia, AR 71923 -9-Executive Board or by these Bylaws to some other officer or agent of the Academy, or shall be required by law to be otherwise signed or executed\nand in general shall perform all duties as may be prescribed by the Executive Board from time to time. SECTION 6. Vice-Chairperson. In the absence of the Chairperson or in event of his\\her death, inability or refusal to act, the Vice-Chairperson shall perform the duties of the Chairperson, and when so acting, shall have all the powers of and be subject to all the restrictions upon the Chairperson. The Vice-Chairperson shall perform such other duties as from time to time may be assigned to him/her by the Chairperson or by the Executive Board. SECTION 7. Secretary. The Secretary shall: (a) keep the minutes of the proceedings of the Executive Board\n(b) see that all notices are duly given in accordance with the provisions of these Bylaws or as required by law\n(c) in general, perform all duties incident to the office of Secretary and such other duties as from time to time may be assigned to him/her by the Chairperson or by the Executive Board. SECTION 8. Treasurer. The Treasurer shall: (a) have charge and custody of and be responsible for all funds of the corporation\n(b) receive and give receipts for monies due and payable to the corporation from any source whatsoever, and deposit all such moneys in the name of the corporation in such banks, trust companies or other depositories as shall be selected in accordance with the provisions of Article VI below\nand (c) in general perform all of the duties incident to the office of Treasurer and such other duties as from time to time may be assigned to him by the Chairperson or by the Executive Board. The Treasurer shall be bonded for the faithful discharge of his\\her duties in such sum and with such surety or sureties as the Executive Board shall determine. SECTION 9. Executive Director. The Executive Board shall have the authority to appoint an Executive Director to handle the day to day operations of the Academy and oversee its projects. The Executive Director shall perform such other duties as from time to time may be assigned to him/her by the Chairperson or by the Executive Board. ARTICLE V. STEERING COMMITTEE SECTION 1. General Purpose. The general purpose of the Steering Committee shall be to make recommendations to the Executive Board, to seek and make application for grants on behalf of the Academy following approval of the Executive Board, and to take such action as may be delegated by the Board from time to time. SECTION 2. Number. Tenure and Qualifications. The Steering Committee shall consist initially of fourteen (14) persons. Each member of the Academy shall have the right to appoint two (2) representatives to serve on the Steering Committee. Each representative shall serve at least one (1) year, after which that representative shall serve at the sole discretion of the -7-/=^/^ PCSSD PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT 1500 Dixon Road/P.O. Box 8601 Little Rock, Arkansas 72216 (501) 490-2000 RECEIVED May 6, 1993 MAY 1 0 1993 Office of Desegregation Mcniloring Mr. Sam Jones/Ms. Angell Whitten Wright, Lindsey and Jennings 2200 Worthen Bank Building 200 West Capitol Avenue Little Rock, AR 72201-3699 Dear Sam and Angell\nThank you for reviewing the video and other materials related to the Teachers of Tomorrow Program. A committee met on Friday, April 30, 1993, to discuss this program. The following attended: Charles Green, PCSSD Billy Bowles, PCSSD Charles Ferriter, Principal, Sylvan Hills High-PCSSD Michael Nellums, Coordinator for Teachers of Tomorrow Mable Bynum, NLRSD Jim Morris, NLRSD Robert Robinson, LRSD \" Jessie Rancifer, UCA It was the consensus of the Committee, in keeping with our m-to-m transfer policy, that white students from LRSD and NLRSD not be eligible to participate in this program in the 1993-94 school year. The rationale being that the program is housed at Sylvan Hills High, a PCSSD school. It was also the consensus of the Committee to ask the attorneys of the three districts and the Joshua lntervenors( Chris Heller, LRSD\nSteve Jones, NLRSD\nSam Jones, PCSSD\nand John Walker, Joshua Intervenors) to confer and advise us of any legal possibilities concerning these students participating in future years. 3. Expenditures. PCSSD shall pay such expenditures on behalf of the Academy as are approved by the Executive Board. Provided, however, for expenditures less than $500 the PCSSD may make payment thereof upon the approval of the Executive Director. Any expenditure in excess of $500 will require the countersignature or authorization of a voucher submitted for such signature executed by either the Chaiiperson, the Vice-Chairperson or the Treasurer of the Academy. 4. Reporting. PCSSD shall provide the Executive Board with monthly accounting of the receipts and expenditures of the Academys funds, including the integration of any funds held by University Participants. University Participants holding funds directly deposit^ with it shall provide monthly reports of the receipts and expenditures to the PCSSD within five (5) days following the end of each month. Additionally, the Academy shall make reports of the receipts and disbursements available to its Participants not less often than quarterly, or at such other interval as the Executive Board may determine is needed. 5. Audits. The PCSSD shall submit the Academys funds to an audit at such time, or times, as deemed necessary by the Executive Board. The PCSSD shall provide such assistance and information as reasonably requested by the auditors in reviewing the gross receipts and expenditures of the Academys funds. 6. Compensation For Services. Initially, the PCSSD shall receive no compensation for its services in handling the Academys funds. However, at such time as funds are available, the Executive Board, in its sole and absolute discretion, may award the PCSSD compensation to cover the additional administrative costs, if any, incurr^ in administering the Academys funds. In the event an independent agency or organization is engaged to handle the Academys funds, such agency or organization shall be entitled to receive such compensation as agreed upon by the Executive Board and such agency of organization. Provided, however, in no event shall the fee paid by the Academy for the administration of said funds exceed one percent (1 %) of the gross receipts of the Academy for any fiscal year. 7. Bond. The PCSSD and any University Participant handling Academy funds shall furnish proof of the existence of a fiduciary bond covering such employees handling the Academys funds in such amount or amounts as the Executive Board deems necessary and with a bonding company acceptable to the Executive Board. 8. Amendment and Modification. This Statement sets forth the fiscal responsibility policy adopted by the Executive Board effective as of the date of the Academys formation. As such, it constitutes a statement of policy and not a binding commitment of the parties. The Executive Board may, at such time or times as it deems appropriate, amend, waive, modify or extend all or any part of this fiscal responsible policy. gardaer | tMciupol -2-TEACHERS OF TOMORROW ACADEMY FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY POLICY This Policy adopted this 19th day of August, 1992 by the members of the Executive Board of The Teachers of Tomorrow Academy (the \"Academy\"), a joint venture of Arkansas universities and secondary education institutions created under an Operating Agreement dated May 21, 1992. WHEREAS, certain Arkansas universities and secondary education institutions have combined to form a cooperative joint venture whose exclusively educational purposes include scholarship assistance, the creation of university-teacher related programs, the recruitment of students from various backgrounds to pursue teaching careers\nand WHEREAS, the Academy anticipates applying for and receiving grants from public sources as well as funds from university and school sources\nand WHEREAS, the Academy desires to create a policy for the handling of such funds to provide for the administration of the funds in an efficient manner. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing reasons, the Executive Board hereby creates the following policies with respect to the fiscal management of the Academys resources: 1. Deposit of Funds. Except as otherwise provided in this statement, all funds for the Academy shall be deposited with the Pulaski County Special School District (the \"PCSSD\") so long as the PCSSD is a School Participant (as such term is defined in the Operating Agreement). The PCSSD shall hold and account for all Academy funds as a separate and segregated appropriated fund balance on its books and records separate and distinct from its general fund. In no event shall the Academys funds be obligated for, or subject to the payment of any obligation of the PCSSD or any claims of any creditors of the PCSSD. The PCSSD agrees to hold such funds and administer them pursuant to the provisions of this policy statement. Academy funds deposited directly with a University Participant may be held and administered by such Participant as a separate and segregated appropriated fund balance apart from the University Participants general fund. Such funds shall constitute a component part of the Academys funds and shall be accounted for and administered in the same manner as the funds held by the PCSSD as set forth herein. 2. Guidelines For Expenditures. The Academys funds shall be administered by the PCSSD in accordance with the guidelines currently used by the PCSSD. The foregoing notwithstanding, in the event the Academy should receive a grant or funds from a source which mandates guidelines different than those currently used by the School Participants, then to the extent such guidelines conflict with the School Participant guidelines, such specific guidelines shall be deemed controlling.Mr. Sam Jones/Ms. Angell Whitten May 6, 1993 Page 2 This letter is from my hand but written at the request of the committee listed above. Please inform us as soon as possible of your legal interpretation. Sincerely, Billy J\nBowles Assistant Superintendent for Desegregation ch c Mr. Bobby Lester Mrs. Ann Brown Mr. Chris Heller Mr. Steve Jones Mr. John Walker Members of CommitteeIN WITNESS WHEREOF, this policy was adopted by the majority vote of the Executive Board on the 19th day of August, 1992, TEACHERS OF TOMORROW ACADEMY BY: Secretary ATTEST: Chairperson gardner I iMcii.pol -3- PLERgs poer PLERSE poer POSmCW TITLE: QUAUFICATICtJS: REPORTS TO: JOB GOAL: PULASKI OOUNTY SPECIAL SOWL DISTRICT ctan'iETED poemcN rvmiart.e July 28/ 1992 FACTLETAIOR FOR TEACHERS OF TOC^ROW ACADEMY (ONE YEAR TEMPORARY POSITICN) Valid Arkansas secondary or K-12 certificate with certificaticn in one of the following areas preferred: Supervisor, Principal, Administrator. Minimum of Three (3) years' successful teaching experience at the secondary level Three (3) years' experience in planning and coordinating instructional programs Ooiputer literate in Word Processing, Spreadsheet and DeskTcp Publishing application. Building Principal/Executive Board for Teacher of Tanorrow Academy To serve as the leader in the attainment of the philosophy , goals and objectives of the Teachers of Tcmorrcw Academy, designed to attract and introduce students to teaching as a career. It is a collaborative project of the three Pulaski County School Districts and fcur institutions of hii^er education with a proposed opening of fall, 1993, at Sylvan Elills High School. PERFCRMRNCE RBSPONSTBTT.TTTES: 1. Plan, organize, and conduct planning phase of the Teachers of Tanorrow Academy. 2. To produce a curriculum and develop strategies for inplementaticn of the Academy. 3. Plan for stciff training activities which utilize college based personnel within the project and vhich offer staff develcpment opportunities for college/public school instructional teams. 4. Collaborate with university teacher educators and subject matter specialists in developing an innovative curriculum coipicnent which integrates canc^\u0026gt;ts and skills from Ehglish, social sciences, and professioned. teacher educaticn. 5. Ejplore options for alternative college course delivery at the- Academy. 6. Develop and irplement policies for recruiting and selecting students. 7. Establish introductory level courses at the secoidary level which will transfer to college. 8. Involve tusiness and community resources in planning and support to the Acadeny. 9. Organize site visits for personnel frcm institutions of hii^ier education and public schools to examine existing programs. 10. Provide inservice for the tearhers selected to teach the Acadeny curriculum. 11. Serve as liaison between the hone, public schools, and participating institutions of higher education.Facilitator for Teachers of Tororrow Academy con't. 12. Serve as ad hoc member of the steering camiittee. 13, Assist in the securing and allocation Academy budget, of funds that will be used to finalize the 14. Secure major funding through grant writing. 15. Implement the program within the guidelines of the District 's Desegregation Plan. TE35MS OF EMPIOYMEOT\nSalary Range: Teacher Salary Schedule Term of Contract: 202 days per contract EVALUATION: - Placement depends i^jcn education experience year. (TEMPORARY 1 yr.) and Performance of this job will be Board's policy on EvaluaSon 5 S?JSi SrS2?^ Provisions of the .^iPPLICATICW PROCEXJRE: Interest^ and qualified application form to: applicants should sumbit a cccpleted District Gary Miller ^istant Superintendent for Personnel Pul^ County Special School District Post Office Box 8601 Services Dittle Rock, Arkansas 72216 In-district applicants Office, Ext. 226. may activate their personnel file by calling the Personnel APPUCATICN DEAnr.TNP! August 11, 1992 I^^s THE POLICY OF THE FUIASKI COUNTY OPPORTONITTES WITHOUT REGARD SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT TO TO RACE, CDLOR, NATIONAL ORIGIN TXT TTTIO ______________f provide B3UAL S^yiCES, FINANCIAL AID, AND mpLOYMENT ^^MPPOy AND ADIVANCE WCMEN addressed To the director' - , RELIGICN, SSX, AGE, and ACTIVITIES, EDOCAncW TIT . DISIkICT WTT J, f\u0026gt;E\\KE SPBCTAT blacks and handicapped PERSONS OF DESEGREGATION. EF'IURTS TO B2UITY CCNCERNS MAY BEi I i ifs S'l? I IB ii ife 1 V.' ij if II li iiSi | ii liE'l !! Si 'sita\u0026amp;b w a R\nSi ( ''1 a it 106 The Dreamkeepers members and district administrators, or because they saw it as a way to ingratiate themselves with their superiors, her principals attempted to apply subtle forms of harassment. She received many of the students that no other teacher wanted. I suggested to Lewis that maybe these students were assigned to her because of a principals confidence in her ability to work with them, whereas her colleagues could not. Lewis gave me a look indicating that I might be out of touch with the reality of urban schools. In the spring of 1983 Lewis seriously rethought her decision to teach. She knew she still loved being in the classroom. Further, because of her reputation as an excellent teacher, many parents requested (and even demanded) that their children be placed in her class. Thus administrative attempts to stack her class with \"troublemakers were thwarted by these concerned parents who saw that Lewis offered a special intellectual opportunity for their children. But she was weary of her battles with the district and school board. She felt as if she were working two jobs\nand her night job was affecting her performance on her day job. One piece of good fortune for Lewis was a friendship with a colleague who had gone on to become an administrator in the district. Now a principal, her friend told Lewis about the Bay Area _U riting Project and suggested that Lewis and another tTacher^tal^ advantage of the seven-week program, which was offered at the University of California at Berkeley. Because none of her other colleagues were interested in giving up seven weeks of their summer, Lewis faced no competition for the scholarship offered. Today Lewis credits this experience with renewing her en- thusiasm for teaching\n1 cant tell you how that experience changed me. It's not so much that the philosophy was radical or revolutionary. In fact, it was kind of like a recognition that the way I thought about teaching was all right. It was the intellectual activity, you know, the thinking. Because I wasnt bombarding my kids with worksheets, I think some of the other teachers thought I wasn't working hard. But I was trying to get at their thinking, to remind them that they could think, that think-^fe * ^S. J f^^Gi n: 3.r. O' :k L^- *\u0026gt; 'V'- J?  \u0026gt; -^A^^''?^'-4i- '' ,\u0026lt; '  sfifi i .SMA ''^if\nri 1'^. v ,f \u0026lt;\n5':*- \u0026gt;.''**W. I nr. ^i5! FAizar\nS^-'.  jA'~-w.i..-\u0026gt;.:\n. o  '.\"=.^- 'W: -7^ }. i IHB  SsSS'fcsSS'sWi F?i' Dreaaikeepers 5 V y\nfi B\n2i E 'MS J,\"-?? -  t r ' ^- vi?\" \"\"Ij  f-4^1'^''' ^Pl '..'/! , S.' f^.'s.fir\n-.. , ?^Wa' jA'v'-di^?'\n'. .y* :y\u0026gt; 3-^ **\u0026gt; rii: ft-p 5 f!' i j Successful Teachers of\n^r ,A)-5.-:^'^-- 3?'5' African American Children -^'57?, GlorizX Ladson-Billings ^' J** ^^StWiSsS 5: Ss^SkS: WS ^Usvf i. r, *-',. 0?^-' i-' i- \u0026lt; ' V* . i'?.'jAv\n-..\ni-K :'i- \u0026amp; iWASsfet\u0026amp;^7 =1^ 9^ i y'-teS^-v c JOHN w. Walker, p.a. Attorney At Law 1723 Broadway Little Rock. Arkansas 72206 Telephone (501) 374-3758 FAX (501) 374-4187 REG ,0 JOHN W. WALKER RALPH WASHINGTON MARK BURNETTE AUSTIN PORTER, JR. OCI 1 5 October 14, 1993 Oliice ci DesegfegS'''^\" ' W,oniior\nri3 Mr. Price C. Gardner Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark 2200 Worthen Bank Building 72201 Little Rock, AR Dear Mr. Gardner: Your letter of October 11, 1993 is absolutely unacceptable. I plan for Dr. Betty Dickson to be present at all meetings of the Teachers of Tomorrow Academy as a representative of Joshua, irrespective of whether the meetings are labeled executive committee or steering committee. I also remind you that the Joshua Intervenors must be integrally involved in whatever planning or decisional activities that are undertaken the of pursuant to Desegregation Plan. I am at a loss to understand why there is such a big issue about excluding our presence at a program which was developed by our representative. Dr. Dickson, in the first place. Her participation, it would seem, would be invaluable were good seem. faith of the District evident. Because the District appears willing to spend large sums of money on this issue, as evidenced by your employment for purposes of writing this letter, would you kindly share your time billings and those of your co-counsel regarding this matter with me by return mail along with your anticipated charge for your work. you are unwilling to do so pursuant to this request, I will be happy to make the request under the Arkansas Freedom of Information If Act. May I hear from you today by return fax so that if necessary, there will be no delay by me in my pursuit of this Would you also tell me specifically matter before the court. whether Dr. Henry Williams concurs with your letter. Very truly yours n W. Walker JWW:js cc: All Counsel of Record Dr. Betty Dickson Dr. Henry Williams Ms. Ann Brown III1 1 Culturally Relevant Teaching 107 ing was allowed in school. I and totally restructured came back here in the fall , tny class around writing (and later literature) and I had the research to back it up. en rny study began, Lewis was in the seventh year of her ' Cl 1 m 1111 T*_ _i_  _ ' Sladen brought new permutations to her idea.s and her .nf.. .J S' kind of education the to her ideas and her thinking about the community required. sixth observations, I visited Lewiss - _ yade class regularly but randomly, that is. I went th^r. every randomly, that is, I went there week but at varied times. I felt that a^pe.iog at di different moods o{ the classroom. appearing at different times the studv^Jn 1? participation in Although \" week. Aitnougn Lewis s teaching schedule (of rZad ' J ^cumscribed by a predictable .... t^ath, science, and so on) literacy teaching was more likely in the that year: mornings. .Mv field notes describe my first visit ^^ived at the school at 8:45 on Thursday morning. The school grounds lawn was freshly were quiet. I noticed that the the school year. I stopped at the cut, a sure sign of the beginning of and speak to the principal. The that the principal was ' main office to sign in secretary informed me had been unable covering a class because they to get a substitute. As I walked through the inner courtyard I . pal talking with two black girls who looked about twelve years old. He seemed t^ b ing-or perhaps counseling-them. The noise ie he class next to Ann Lev^iss was high. Students noticed the vice princi- to be to be reprimandnoise level of r i. talking, the teacher was shouting. I noticed the trast when I walked into Anns class, which usually quiet. The students them read aloud. The class was were con- was un- were listening as one of studying Charlie Pippin by year old African American girl who attempts to win *1 [-rjLi\u0026gt;'v. SK 14 Ktifl w 4- 7 /- // -oa 6 s1IWSK^ $ Ws sate Culturally Relevant Teaching w Hold fast to dreams For if dreams die Life is a broken winged butterfly. ItsSi 'fe Langston Hughes J'M tern 'sSS3 Chapters Three through Five offered a look at culturally relevant teaching practices through teacher interviews and classroom obser-vations. In this chapter I offer more contextualized examination - , . , , ' --------v.vaiiiiiiamjii ot the activities of four classrooms, three in which culturally relevant teachin!o Will was practiced and one in which it was not. The con- ----- X AIV. V-tJll- text tor two of the classes is a reading lesson and for the other classes it is a math lesson.\n!,hm \"'Ts a ii 1 OjT^Foras on Literao^' One o[ the critical national indicators of educational progress (and national development) is the literacy rate. Amove and Graff assert 5t that national literacy campaigns are not unique to the twentieth on this page is from T/ie Panther and the Lash by Langsit on Alfred A ^nn'^951 by Langston Hughes. Reprinted by permission of fred A. Knopf, Inc. and Harold Ober Associates Incorporated. Pl 102 i f II fl Er- r! j: H tS lit a is a fit 'i' 4' 104 The Dreamkeepers and his two sisters attended. By the time my father was in what was considered to be fourth grade, he had learned as much as his older siblings who had stopped attending school to help with farming chores at home. In an attempt to escape the harsh discipline of his stepmother when he was about 12 years old, he and an older brother ran away from home to live with an adult sister in Philadelphia. By the time he arrived, school was but a distant memory. He kept up his reading with the newspaper every day and the Bible every night. When I reached junior high school, my father would thumb through my textbooks and read them as if he actually found them interesting. n B 1: The next section of this chapter describes culturally relev\nant Si 3: .V 'W' B C'S' 5\u0026gt;' ' ii' -Aii j. iEiSSas literacy instruction in Ann Lewiss and Julia Devereauxs class- rooms. They make literacy a communal activity and demonstrate ways to make learning to read and write a more meaningful and successful enterprise for African .American learners. Ann Lewis: -4 LitercEcy Revival In Chapter Three, I provided a \"snapshot view of Ann Lewis. To reiterate, Lewis is an Italian American woman in her midforties. Active in school and community politics, she has lived most of her life in the largely African American community where she teaches. Some of the older teachers and administrators in the district were her teachers. Lewis remembers herself as less than an ideal student: I grew up in the community and my greatest desire was to teach here, basically because I spent so much time with quality teachers and those teachers encouraged me to teach. As strict as those teachers were with me, they pushed me to do what was right. I was a difficult child in class and thats why I started teachingto give other so-called difficult children a real chance. w I, Wii til (51 I'Eir 1\npij'ji Lewis did not take a traditional route to teaching. Having married soon after high school, she began her adult life as a homes^ s? I\nv.' I Culturally Relevant Teaching 105 maker, mother, and wife. But the breakup of her marriage meant that she needed to work to support herself and her children. She secured a job as a teachers aide in a local elementary school. Her decision to work in the schools came in the early 1970s, at a time when schools and school districts described as economically disad- vantaged received additional state and federal funds to hire com- munity people, particularly parents, as paraprofessionals. Familiarity with both the school and the home culture made the teachers aides a special resource. Students and parents who were intimidated by the formality and cultural barriers between themselves and the school s more formal staff often sought out the teachers aides for assistance and support. Aware that teachers aides were an important resource and that turnover among the teaching staff was on the increase, the school district proposed and implemented a program to encourage the aides to attend the local community college, transfer to the state university, and then enroll in the universitys fifth year teacher crednation program. With a critical mass of teachers aides enroll- ac- ing in the program, the district, in conjunction with the community college, could offer courses in the school district so that the aides were able to keep their jobs. Lewis was among the first group of aides to take advantage of the program. Although many aides enthusiastically began the district- sponsored program, time and circumstances kept most from completing it. Lewis was one of the few who endured and completed it. She began as a certified teacher in the district in 1977. By 1983 Lewis had built a reputation in the school district for her assertive, even aggressive, advocacy of teachers rights. She had been elected president of the teachers association and was a self- appointed watchdog for the school board, attending every meeting and taking public issue with positions she felt were not in the best interests of the teachers. Not known for her diplomacy or tact, she often locked horns with board members and school administrators about what she perceived as violations of the teachers contract. This kind of behavior is risky in a small district such as Pinewood, where board members and district administrators can have an inordinate amount of influence on the day-to-day running of the school. Lewis felt that, perhaps because they shared the feelings of boardCA' Culturally Relevant Teaching 103 century, many charismatic leaders have used literacy campaigns for salvation, redemption, and re-creation. They suggest that in the twentieth century, especially since 1960, literacy has been seen as a process of consciousness-raising aimed at human liberation.' National literacy campaigns have been a part of the social and political fabric of such countries as Brazil, Cuba, and Guineau Bissau. However, the aim of literacy campaigns in the United States has been individual and personal advancement. Nightly public service messages on television exhort citizens to sign up at local libraries and schools for reading instruction. An explanation of this trend is presented by Ferdman: In a society tending toward homogeneity, It IS easy to think of literacy simply in terms of specific skills and activities. Given broad cultural consensus on the definition of liter- so IS acy, alternative constructions are either remote or invisible, and sc literacy becomes a seemingly self-evident personal attribute that is either present or absent.^ But Ferdman further contends that in a multiethnic society the cultural framework for literacy mustbe cons^d. thus in citing deCastell and LuESTT^TaTT^SiHS^ut that being literate has always referred to having mastery over the processes by means of which culturally significant information is coded. The following passage is central to Ferdmans argument: In a culturally heterogeneous society, literacy ceases to be a character- istic inherent solely in the individual. It becomes an interactive process that is constantly redefined and renegotiated, as the individual transacts with the socioculturally fluid surroundings. In the context of this study of culturally relevant teaching, the construction of literacy among African Americans is especially important. Gadsden contends\nFor African .American learners, in partkular, literacy has been an especially tenuous struggle, from outright demal during slavery, to limited access in the early 1900s, to segregated schools with often outdated textbooks well into the 1960s, tomany might arguemarginal acceptance of their culture i, in and capacity as learners even into the 1990s. 4 My father completed only about four years of formal schooling. His school was a one-room classroom that he, his four brothers, sit\nfi gir-Ei\n-r t: li! 114 The Dreamkeepers lesson and whether the students mastered those skills, she reviews some skills at the end of the story' review. its  ! w sa a J Si  ilhu One morning, Devereaux introduces the lesson by saying. Today were going to be reading about the first woman jockey. She directs the students attention to a word list on the board. The following words are there: influence, atmosphere, outlet, developing, demonstrate, concentrate, and \"'equestrian. The students first attempt to define the words in words of their own and then use their glossaries. As they pronounce the words, Devereaux reminds them to sound them out phonetically. own She then begins calling on the students in round-robin fash- ion to read the story aloud. They seem eager to get a turn. She tries to divide the reading selection up so that everyone gets a turn. Who havent I heard from today.? she asks. Two hands go up. She calls on these students next. The entire class reads the last graphs aloud in unison. Throughout the reading she asks of recall questions. The even boring. two paraa variety entire experience seems rather ordinary, I am anxious to talk to her about what shes doing. I know it seems old-fashioned but I believe the students benefit from the structure. Its as if it were important for them to know what comes next. I have children in here who other teachers told me could not read. Heck, they told me they couldnt read. But I look them squarely in the eye in the beginning of the school year and tell them, you will read, and you will read soon. I tell my entire class we all have to know how to read and its everybodys responsibility to make sure that everyone learns to read well. I pair up the better readers with the poorer ones and tell them that the pair gets a reading grade. They are allowed to do any number of things to help each other read. Although the school doesnt want us to do it I let them take their readers home. I also use some of those old, out-of-date basals as at-home readers for them. All stu- dents have a reading log in which they list what they read aloud to their parents the night before. The par-t- Ki Culturally Relevant Teaching 109 Ann: this? Do you know anybody who ever feels like 11 Ca/uin\nMe! Ann drew a Venn diagram to represent similarities and differences between Calvin and the character in the story. You have your own video of your entire life in your head. Every time you read, you can get an image of how the story connects with your life. Do you want to get back to the story? Yeah!, the class says in unison. A third boy began to read. When he finished, Lewis said, Close your eyes. Lets put on your video. She then re-read a section of the book describing the mother in the story. How can you relate this to your life? One of the African American girls commented \"Thats just like when I kiss my mom. Students took turns reading passages from the book. For some, this was the first chapter book theyd read in school. Some of these slower readers had trouble with some of the words. Lewis encouraged them and urged other class members to help. Remember, were all a team here. Weve got to help each other. When Charlene (an African American girl) asked a question about a dispute the main character had with her father, Lewis suggested the students roleplay to understand better. Two students struggled a bit with the role-play. Two others gave it a try and got a round of applause from the rest of the class. After the role-play Ann asked, What do we know about Charlies dad? The class erupted with excitementmany wanted to contribute. Lewis began to develop a character-attribute web on the board. As the students became more excited, she encouraged them to settle down by explaining which part of the brain they were using. Were not in the limbic [she pointed to a bulletin-board diagram of the brain], were in the cerebellum. Lets not deteriorate into rep- '.'S  !- i  U'\nI r r 1. itv s  l-t Li' 'LL tel II fiHi I I 'H? i ti f If. s I \u0026lt;1^' ifs,  1 SI Jii liil SSwi! \n\u0026gt;\u0026lt;! rt! 108 The Dreamkeepers the approval of her father, a decorated Vietnam War veteran who has buried all his feelings about the war within him. The girl feels alienated from her father and wants to find a way to reach him. Ann and her students were about twenty pages into the book. There were twenty-nine students in the class (twenty African Americans). When the student who was reading finished, an African American boy, Jerry, asked, Is she [the storys protagonist] going to stay eleven years old in this book? Lewis responded with a question, What about in Driving Miss Daisy? Did the main character stay the same age? Students (in unison): No. Ann: Jerry: How do you know? Because she was using one of those walkin things when she got old.\" Ann: A walker?  Jerry: Yeah, and then she was in the old folks home. Ann: Can you see without a video? I .tk'Sj ^1 Bi fi I f via R: 3!' Wife  Calvin (another African American boy): Yes, you can see when youre reading. So well see how old Charlie is in the book! Ann reminded the students about a previous discussion about connotation and denotation and said, Remember we said hungry makes you think one way but famished makes you think another way? Calvin asked if the discussion could go back to talking about the book and Ann encouraged him. She got feelings her dad doesnt understand and he got feelings she dont understand. I I Culturally Relevant Teaching 115 4 I i\n1. f ents sign the logs. I award prizes for completing the reading logs. You may have noticed how quiet things got when the reading lesson began. Im pretty easygoing about a lot of things, but I keep my reading time sacred. i] 1 t i ! Devereaux does a number of things to encourage reading. She has her own Book of the Month Club. Each month, Devereaux announces a book to read. Up to ten students may sign up to read it. She often purchases the books with her own money. The book club meets to talk about the book on their own time-at lunch with the teacher, in early-morning hours before school, or after school. No grades are given for participation in the club. Its reward is intrinsic. The proof of Devereauxs pudding is indeed in the tasting. She suggested that I select her most difficult student, Michael, look at his cumulative file, and then listen to him read. Michaels file was two inches thick. He had been in a series of foster homes. His natural mother was a drug addict and had neglected him. Every teacher from first grade on had recommended that he be placed in a special day class. Everyone agreed he could not learn to read\nhe lacked the requisite skills and needed remedial attention that no one had the time to give him. I asked Michael if he was willing to read something to me. His face lit up. He selected a book entitled The Trouble with Tuck from the shelf. It was a story about a girl and her dog. Although his reading was halting, Michael employed phonics skills and decoded the words that were not familiar. I asked him how long he had been such a good reader. Only since I been in Miz Devereauxs class. Why is that? I asked. I dont know, she just told me that I could read if I wanted to and she was going to help me want to. She said you cant stay in her class if you dont read. I want to stay. Michaels reading partner was Jabari. Devereaux selected him because she knew that Jabari was very competitive and would personally take on the challenge of helping Michael to read. She supplied the pair with a variety of high-interest books about sports I 1 f 1 - f 7.- t- I, 5 r R t i110 The Dreamkeepers st i! 'iSS' 1 ! R- 'S! ! a id 'iW II zbik IS II wi 11 B'Hl 3 y i| iBK?r tilian. Okay, you now have two minutes to talk with someone about other attributes of Charlies dad. When e two minutes were up, many students contributed to the attribute web. Ann filled the board with the student responses and shouted, That was perfect! Youre a perfect class. If youre perfect raise your hand! Twenty-nine hands were in the air. Over the course of the next several months, Charlie Pippin became the centerpiece for a wide range of activities. One group of students began a Vietnam War research group. One group member who assumed a leadership position was a very quiet Vietnamese girl whose relatives had fought in the war. She brought in pictures, maps, letters, even a family member to talk to the class about Vietnam. In the book, the main characterCharliehad made origami to sell to her classmates. Lewis taught her students how to make origami. She introduced them to Eleanor Coerrs Sadako and the Thousand Paper Cranes. A second group of students researched nuclear proliferation. They asked Lewis to rent the video Amazing Grace, which is about a young boys and a professional athletes stand against nuclear weapons. The entire study took place against the backdrop of an impending war between the United States and its allies and Iraq. Several of the students decided that, like Sadako, they could make paper cranes to symbolize their opposition to war. In a way, the students believed that their efforts might even prevent the war. Although Lewis gave them no extra time to make their cranes, they found many opportunities to do so. By January 15, the date that then-President George Bush had set to move into Kuwait, Lewiss class had folded and hung up in their classroom window 1,039 paper cranestiny paper birds that stood as a symbol of their commitment to peace. It is interesting to note that Lewiss reference to the parts of the brain, and later class discussions about learning taxonomies, grew out of her own experiences at that time\nShe was taking a graduate course and shared much of her learning and experiences with the students. She brought readings and the language from her graduate studies into her sixth-grade classroom. The students S II I'l -f 112 and speaking were III 'ill IWi 'fe xfi li M Qli! KO The Dreamkeepers , . , community activities that Lewis believed all students could participate inand they did. Julia Devereaux: \"Gimme that old-time [religion] teaching. would be closely matched teachers in -B 1:^ \u0026lt;i IlW i W!\nP ::U5i tc s fe \u0026amp; W- (S fi sa cP is w {fl \" controlled study Devereaux and Lewis on more variables than any other two my study. The two women are the same have lived in the school age and both community most of their lives. They at- tended the same state university (at different times) and mentary, junior high, and senior high school classmates. In 1988 Devereaux succeeded Lewis as president of the teachers were ele- Althoucxb presiaent ot the teachers association. Although weary of both the internal and external politics of the president. in her first term as The two obvious differences between the t.. ^ic unnor ..n. this d, *a, Devereaux is African American Lewis IS white and that Devereaux believes two that are impor- in direct reading instruc- whoir.\"\"'\"'' - committedTo whole-language approach to literacy. a Devereaux teaches . .  ^he district that has made commitment to training the teachers in a method espoused by a tv#n AC  , a iiiculuu espoused bv a b  i\" Chicago who esubliched her own school for inner-city students. It is a no-frills, approach to teaching and learning. This basic-skills phasizes phonics as the books in no-nonsense approach emappropriate way to teach reading. \"Classic the European and African American of the curriculum. Devereaux transferred because of its philosophy\nshe sent to Chicago to receive tradition are a part voluntarily to this school was one of eight teachers the school training in this pedagogical approach, evereaux s family has always been munity. Her parents worked hard to a mainstay of the com- raise family there. Her father 1 Ui ------ a laiiiliy L _ brought the family to California from Louisiana in the 1950s'He began work as a night custodian at a retail store and later became , ----------------------- OUW4C auu la a bail bondsman. Her mother began as a window dresser retail store and at another her fathPr assistant manager. Eventually father opened a grocery store where both parents worked. Later,'i 1- Culturally Relevant Teaching 113 he studied for and earned his real-estate license and today is a well- respected realtor in the community. Devereauxs family is active in the local Catholic church. Devereaux herself leads a Girl Scout troop. But her family is also known for a series of tragedies it has suffered. Both Devereaux and her sister were victims of violent crimes. Both have worked hard to put the trauma of the assaults behind them. During the three years of my study, Devereaux taught fourth grade, however, she has taught every grade from second to eighth. Her classroom is a beehive. Students always seem to be all over the place, except when it is reading time. Devereaux convenes the class for reading at 9:00 a.m. During the first twenty to thirty minutes of the day, the students may be involved in a variety of activities, including games, journal writing, handwriting, and spelling assignments, while Devereaux ties up loose ends, collecting monies for various projects or field trips, ordering books and materials, checking papers, or visiting with students. But, at 9 oclock all this activity comes to a halt. Each of the twenty-five students in Devereauxs class this semester pulls out a basal reader and places it on top of the desk. Twenty-one of the twenty-five are African American, four are Latino. There are fifteen girls and ten boys. Devereaux s reading lessons seem almost scripted. She begins with a phonics drill. A student goes to the front of the room, takes the pointer, and begins the drill by pointing to the chart above the chalkboard. The student points to the letter b-. Beating drum, beating drum, ba, ba, ba, she says. The class repeats in unison. She continues, B sounds, bound. What does bound mean? One student raises his hand and says, Bound means to leap. The drill leader continues the drill through the consonants. Although this is a fourth-grade class, the words and terms they are asked to define seem sophisticated: they include justice, kinsman, fatigue, depositor, lay waste, preserve, reunion, and veranda. There is a high degree of participation in the drill. The drill leader calls on many different students. At the conclusion of the drill, Devereaux thanks her and moves to the front of the room. She asks students to recap the last story they read. Depending on which skills were emphasized in theCulturally Relevant Teaching 111 seemed eager to hear about what she was learning and to enjoy the vision of her as a student and of themselves as \"graduate students. Thus during this year I witnessed a class of students engaged in reading, writing, and speaking activities with increasing levels of competence and confidence. One of the hallmarks of Lewiss class was the intellectual leadership demonstrated by the African American boys. Although most of them had had previous problems, including poor academic performance, truancy, suspensions, recommendation for special-education placement, and at least one threatened expulsion, Lewiss class represented an opportunity for a new academic beginning. One of Lewiss star students, a boy named Larry, had had a particularly troubling history. Although he was short and slightly built, he was the oldest child in the class. He had been left back several times and was thirteen in a class made up of eleven-year- olds. He had been traumatized by the drive-by shooting of a favorite aunt. Other teachers in the school referred to him as \"an accident just waiting to happen. None wanted him in their classrooms. Lewis referred to Larry as \"a piece of crystal. Hes strong and beautiful but fragile. 1 have to build a safe and secure place for him and let him know that wethe class and Iwill be here for him. The school has been placing him in the kitchen junk drawer. I want him to be up there in the china cabinet where everyone can see him. By the end of the school year, Larry had been elected president of the school's sixth grade. He was involved in peer-conflict mediation and was earning As and Bs in every subject. He was among the academic leaders of Lewiss class. While Larry represented a special example of accomplishment, the classroom was a special place for all the children, including the nine non-African Americans. (They were Latino, Pacific Islander, and Vietnamese.) The work was challenging and exciting. The students were presumed to have some level of literacy, which formed the foundation for increased competency. Reading, writing. 3 1 Si it 1\ni ! i. it: jf' 1. I- i-T^ K pj \u0026gt;1' J .a k I 1\nt\n!! 122 The Dreamkeepers students came from professional homes-the homes of doctors, torneys, accountants, college professors. atIt was my unofficial policy not to visit my student teachers on the same day that I visited the teachers participating in my study I w  tee!  Ml it It would be too easy to make unfair comparisons between the perts and the novices. However, on exone particular day visiting both could not be avoided. After observing Margaret Rossi. I headed across the freeway to visit Alex Walsh. Although the physical distance between the two schools was less than five miles, in resources-personnel, material, and stu-dents- they were worlds apart. Walshs school was in a district that performed at the ninety-fifth percentile on standardized tests while the teachers in my study were working in a district that performed below the tenth percentile. When I arrived in Walshs classroom, the students  *^'**  eidssiuuHi, me stuaents were working on mathematics. The cooperating teacher was working with a group of twelve or thirteen students. Six or seven other stu- ---------------- UlilCl dents were working independently at their desks, and Walsh working at a table in the back of the was room with four boystwo white, two Latino. As I settled into a chair near Walshs group I \u0026lt;5W* 'sHf CT ' WSa to- .could hear him trying to explain how to change an improper frac-tion into a mixed number. None of the students seemed to be paying attention to him. Iwo of the boys were poking each other with pencils\nanother was listening to his Walkman (although he denied about why he had his hat pulled down it when questioned over his ears). The fourth te PC 'tr a 1^5 hl 1*?^ [itj iW Lli-'tb''? Bte ff- , . ------ - xuc luurtn boy was staring out the window. After Walsh finished his explana-iinn pencil-pokers to solve a problem The boy seemed to have no idea what to do. When asked if anyone could tion, he called on help, none of the others responded. Walsh another try. gave his explanation This time he stopped many times to reprimand the boys for P aying, giggling, and not paying attention. At the end of his explanation, he gave the boys three problems to solve. None of them was able to solve the problems. This stuff is stupid! remarked boy. Im not doin this, said another as he pushed his pencil toward the center of the table. The other boys laughed. Walsh said Okay, lets try doing the first ex-one paper and one together.\" He began ex- i Culturally Relevant Teaching 117 from both teachers literacy programs. In sum, these tenets include the following: 4 1 1. Students whose educational, economic, social, political, and cultural futures are most tenuous are helped to become intellectual leaders in the classroom. Both teachers direct a lot of their pedagogy toward African American boys. In Lewiss and Devereauxs classrooms it is cool or def to choose academic excellence. The teachers make the students culture a point of affirmation and celebration. This means that they have to work actively against the constant and repeated denigration of Africa, Africans, and .African Americans. By disrupting the notion of African American males as social outcasts, the teachers provide academic support for these boys and at the same time give the other students a new view of their fellow students. 2. Students are apprenticed in a learning community rather than taught in an isolated and unrelated way. The mention of this tenet here is a restatement of the idea, which is presented in Chapters Four and Five. Both teachers treat their students as if they already know something. Rather than teach skills in an isolated, disconnected way, the two embed reading instruction within larger contexts. Even in Devereauxs more structured approach, the teaching of skills is contextualized. come 3. Students real-life experiences are legitimized as they be- part of the official curriculum. Even though both of these teachers select literature for their students, they depend heavily on the experiences of their students to make the literature come alive. They are not writing on blank slates\ninstead, they are challenging conventional scripts by importing the culture and everyday experiences of the students into the literacy learning. 4. Teachers and students participate in a broad conception of literacy that incorporates both literature and oratory. What counts as literarily worthy is broadly defined in both classrooms. The students are allowed to ask their own questions and search for their own answers. By building on the students knowledge, Lewis and Devereaux are able to teach complex ideas and skills without worrying that they are teaching above the students reading level. IKI r |w\n'I' SSI few 116 The Dreamkeepers and athletes, rap stars, Hollywood actors. Devereaux often found reading tasks for Michael, such as reading e daily bulletin, food labels, baseball cards, cookbook directions, the telephone directory, maps\nshe tried to help him see the purpose of literacy. Michael also learned to take advantage of Devereauxs passion for reading. He was quick to ask her if he could read instead of doing some other task and she usually permitted him to do so. After all, here was a kid that everyone said would never read.  pi. I ra SB! IS' J ^5 tes H In third grade I was selected to go to the Reading Teacher. As I described earlier, the Reading Teacher was the person who worked with the accelerated group. As members of the special read- ing group we became a part of a special reading incentive program. We were rewarded for the number of books we read. To prove that we had actually read the books we said we had, we had to sign up for a \"book talk with a teacher who had read the book. We scheduled these book talks during early mornings before school, at recess or lunchtime, or after school. It was exciting to sit down with an adult and talk about what we had read. We received certificates for reading twenty-five, fifty, or seventy-five books. If we read a hundred books we received a certificate and a pin. I did not rest until I got my certificate and pin. I reached that lofty plateau by the middle of fourth grade. i ifSU  121 SK  :?\u0026gt;} J J s i-fl i! i as H PI I Lewis Versus Devereaux On the surface Ann Lewis and Julia Devereaux employ very different strategies to teach reading. In some ways their differences represent the larger debate about literacy teaching, that of wholelanguage versus basal-text techniques. However, beneath the surface, at the personal ideological level, the differences between these instructional strategies lose meaning. Both teachers want their students to become literate. Both believe that their students are capable of high levels of literacy. More specifically, several overarching tenets may be culledCulturally Relevant Teaching 123 plaining the steps needed to change the improper fraction. The boys were not following. Walshs patience wore thin. Look! he shouted. Im trying to teach you guys how to do this and youre not even paying attention. Unsuccessfully, the boys tried to stifle a giggle. That was the last straw. Walsh sternly ordered them back to their seats and assigned them a page from their texts. The boys grumbled that they did not know how to do the problems, but Walsh ignored their complaints and told them he expected to see the problems before the math session was over. He glanced up at me. His face was red, perhaps from anger, perhaps from embarrassmentor both. During our postobservation conference, I began by asking. Tell me what you taught today. Walsh started telling me what he had intended and referred me to his lesson plan. Yes, I commented, You seem to have had a plan that fit your intent, but what did you teach? Once again, he began to explain his intentions. He told me about how he had thought out the plan and how the boys had subverted it. I could see that, Alex, I remarked. But what did you teach' He looked at me dejectedly and sighed. I guess I didnt teach anything, he said. I nodded in agreement. Right, now we can talk about what went wrong. Clearly, it is not fair to compare Alex Walshs abilities with Margaret Rossis. Rossis seventeen years of experience should make her more skilled at teaching than Walsh. She has had the opportunity to make mistakes and grow as a teacher. And I am sure she has also had times when she didnt teach anything. However, juxtaposing the two sessions illustrates just how different experts are from novices. If Walsh could have observed any of the teachers in my study, perhaps he might have learned some of the following: 1. When students are treated as competent they are likely to demonstrate competence. Culturally relevant teaching methods do not suggest to students that they are incapable of learning. These teachers provide intellectual challenges by teaching to the highest standards and not to the lowest common denominator. In Lewiss class, the students were expected to do more than read for literal meaning. Their responses to what they read were even more important than parroting back what the author had writ-ft Pl  w. -W 11 hl  U/ nt'  few- \u0026gt; iir is 118 The Dreamkeepers Using multiple teaching strategies ensures that every child develops his or her reading ability without being ridiculed or embarrassed. 5. Teachers and students engage in a collective struggle against the status quo. Both teachers help their students understand that societal expectations for them are generally low. However, they support them by demonstrating that their own expectations are exceptionally high. Thus they indicate that to prove the prevailing beliefs wrong, teacher and students must join together. 6. Teachers are cognizant of themselves as political beings. In the case of both Lewis and Devereaux, the political nature of their work is manifested in their teacher association activities. Both have developed a sociopolitical and cultural vision that they know they need to move away from cultural-deficit explanations for African American students low achievement levels and toward models of cultural excellence. They talk often with their students about the political nature of their work. The students are reminded that their progress toward cultural excellence is the mightiest weapon they possess to fight against a mediocre status quo. I I *' -! *\u0026gt; Si -'?fe I*j u: Math in a Culturally Relevant Classroom TO' .4.S we saw in Chapter Three, Margaret Rossi is an Italian .American woman in her midforties. She began her teaching career in the late 1960s, when she was a Dominican nun. She has taught in both private and public schools and in both wealthy white communities and low-income communities of color. When this study was being done, she was teaching sixth grade. She was identified by a group of African American parents as a very effective teacher. In an ethnographic interview Rossi revealed that she knew that her students characterized her as strict, but that she believed they respected her for being a demanding yet caring teacher. One morning, before an observation session, I met Rossi in the courtyard outside of her classroom. Although we exchanged pleasantries it was apparent that her mind was on the lesson she intended to teach. Earlier, she had talked to her students about the African origins of algebra\nthey had learned that the first definitive evidence of the use of algebra had appeared in the writings of Ahmes, an Egyptian mathematician who lived around 1700 B.C. or K if ii ill  I III: I- I, 120 The Dreamkeeper with students who seemed puzzled or nisfi: oiWi^ 2\ni deAlti ........ilii - u toC!' inC! In S^: I KB Bl 1 .......... tea a w! det ca\u0026amp;felif **sl 8 f traiS wE. i' me! it tea -Bis Aisftl Si ac it ftr '-' i 2. bK. fea. trafs:^!:: 3.i Wiite ft n confused. By asking a serie: of probing questions, she was able to help students organize theii linking about a problem and develop eir own problem-solving strategies. The busy hum of activity in her classroom was directec toward mathematics. Every so often, she would suggest a problen: and the students would work frantically to solve it. Each time sh\u0026lt; did this, a new set of questions and possible solutions came up. 1 was amazed at how comfortable the students seemed as the discussion proceeded. No one student or group of students dominated the session. Responses and questions came from all over the classroom. As I sat taking notes, I heard a student exclaim, This is easy! Others nodded their heads in agreement. Never missing an opportunity to make mathematics accessible to her students, Rossi used such expressions to make a comment that reminded them how intelligent and capable they were. At one point that morning, Rossi directed the students attention to a page in the pre-algebra textbook she had scrounged up for the class. Rather than assign pages in the text, she showed the students how the textbook representation of what they had been doing appeared different. Dont let it scare you, she urged. \"You know how to solve problems like these. Rossi was thus assuring them that the good work they were doing in her class would carry through to district and state assessments\nshe knew that her students would be required to perform on standardized tests and that their performance might prove to be a significant factor in their mathematics placement the following year when they went on to middle school. On another level Rossi may also have been reassuring her students that what they were doing was legitimate. Because so much of this work was not out of a textbook, students (and perhaps their parents) may have wondered if they were doing real algebra. By 9:59 it was time to prepare for recess. For almost an hour and a half Rossi and her students had been occupied with mathematical problem solving. She never once needed to stop to discipline or reprimand a student. The few instances in which students seemed to be off-task were quickly remedied when Rossi or another student posed a problem that brought their attention back to the discussion. Rossi told the students how proud she was of the way sa Culturally Relevant Teaching 121 they had worked. She also told them that they were doing work that some eighth graders couldnt. At 10 a.m., twenty-six happy sixth graders marched out to recess. Rossi smiled but she had a look of sadness in her eyes. She turned to me after the last student had left the room: Theyre so smart but so few teachers recognize it. Im so afraid they will meet the same fate as last years class. We work so hard to get them into algebra and then they go to the middle school where theyre treated like they dont know anything. Last years students were so bored with the math they hadit was actually arithmeticthat they started cutting math class to come back over here for me to teach them. When I explained that I couldnt teach them they just stopped going to math class altogether and failed for nonattendance. Telling Isnt Teaching I have described the classrooms of Ann Lewis, Julia Devereaux, and Margaret Rossi as examples of best practices. In this section, I describe a lesson carried out by Alex Walsh, one of my own student teachers. Walsh was a twenty-two-year-old white student enrolled in a prestigious teacher preparation program. His student teaching assignment was in an upper-middle-class, predominately white community known for its excellent public school system. Alex was looking forward to the experience. He had been assigned to a sixthgrade class. His cooperating teacher was active on many district committees and had requested a student teacher who was comfortable taking the initiative and working independently. The class would probably have been characterized as an open classroom. Students worked at their own pace and in cooperative groups. One student who had cerebral palsy was mainstreamed into the class\na full-time teachers aide worked with her. There were no African American students in the class but it was a culturally diverse class. The students represented several language groupsSpanish, Japanese, Chinese, Arabicbut all were fluent in English. Many of the Bl--------------w Culturally Relevant Teaching 119 earlier. They learned that, much later, the Greeks had contributed to the early development of algebra. Rossi felt that the setting of the context was important for motivating her students to learn algebra. She attempted to make them see that it had clear relations to their own heritage. There was no reason for them to think of it ,S as foreign. As she said to me, tongue-in-cheek, Its not Greek to them! Rossi gave her room key to one of her students and asked her to go in and take care of some housekeeping chores. When the bell rang the students filed noisily in. They settled down after they entered the room and took their seats. At 8:35 Rossi greeted them with a cheery good morning and the students responded in kind. What followed the good morning greeting was a whirlwind of activity. perhaps too complex to explain fully here. However, 1 will attempt to summarize what transpired. The entire time I observed her class that morning, Rossi and her students studied mathematics. Although they were engaged in problem solving through algebraic functions, no worksheets were handed out, no problem sets were assigned. The students, and Rossi, posed the problems. Observing from a pedagogical standpoint, 1 saw Rossi make the lesson. She contin- a point of getting every student involved in the lesson. She continually assured them that they were capable of mastering the problems. They cheered each other on and celebrated when they were able to explain how they arrived at their solutions. Rossi s time and energy were completely devoted to mathematics. Taking attendance, collecting lunch money, and all other tasks were handled by students in an unobtrusive, almost matter-of-fact manner that did not interfere with the mathematics discussion. Rossi moved around the classroom as students posed ques- and suggested solutions. She often asked. How do you know? to push the students thinking. When students asked questions, Margaret was quick to say, Who knows. Who can help him out here? By recycling the questions (and consequently, the knowledge) Margaret helped her students understand that they were knowledgeable and capable of answering their own questions and those of others. However, Rossi did not shrink from her own responsibility as teacher. From time to time she worked individually tions rShortage  Continued from Page 1A ucation statistics show that the state now faces a shortage of teachers because fewer college students are choosing teaching as a profession. said Suzanne Mitchell, project director for the Teacher Qual- : ity Enhancement Grant Council. The council is made up of representatives from the Higher Educa- I raiiauira iiuiii me riigiier isauca- tion Department, the state Department of Education, public and private colleges and universities and the Arkansas Education Association and legislators. As of December, the state's 18 colleges and institutions, graduated 1,459 students with bachelors degrees in education, about 300 fewer than in 1996. While only 760 Arkansas teach- ers SS, that Z^edS ft* number rose to 1.191 last year, and . n'p-p, 969 retired between July 1, 1999 and Dec. 31.1999. Donna Zornes. director of the state Education Department's professional licensure unit, said the state doesn't have data on exactly how man.v certified teaching openings there were at the beginning of school, or exactly where those openings were, but she knows that there were as many as 15 cies in some districts. vacan- I can tell you that as a general rule of thumb we credential about 2.000 new teachers a year, but at the same time we're looking to fill about 3.0(W vacancies.\" she said, i We anticipate that its going to be ! a tremendously problematic area ' for districts to staff those vacan- cies in the next few years. \"I don't want to say that it's going to be a crisis but it is going to be a problem.\" Karen Buchanan, superintendent of the Lee County School District. said that district neared crisis mode last fall. At the start of school. 12 of the district's 138 certified positions were unfilled. As many as eight of those positions were left by teachers who retired. Buchanan said, while the others moved away to take other jobs. I have an experienced staff, and I expect at least a third of my staff to retire in the next five years. she said. Buchanan said two teachers who retired in June 1999 agreed to come back for the 1999-2000 school year, temporarily filling vacancies in math and science. Theyll be gone next year, and those positions will have to be filled.\" she said. We don't have I any prospects yet.\" Principals have expected teacher shortages in areas of math, science, foreign languages and wiui uuie kocks most experi- special education  because thej eiiced teachers making $46871 51 have been tough to fill in the past. ' \" But now theyre concenicd about a Gadberiy said Little Rock i,s fairly competitive\" in other areas, with Little Rock's most experi- new problem. onl}' $10 a day below the eight cities' average and $44 a day befow the highest paying city, Memphis. Little Rock teachers in the highest . '.'s fall was the first time wo ...............  liad noticed shortages in areas like paid category make Lloiceusiioia ges 111 categoiy more than early childhood education.\" said their countei-parts in Baton Rouge. Cummins, the Education Depart- Oklahoma City. Tiilsa and Wichita . . . . ,  Richard Hurley, director of the In the Lee County district, three Little Rock School District's Hu- of the vacancies were for elenien- tary school teachers.  Establishing and emphasizing - .............. ................--vv.uuo uuii. tuiioKes programs like Future Teachers oY Finding new teachers is diffi- in smaller, cconomicall.v de- America and Teachers of Tomor- cult, according to Buchanan, be- pressed\" areas because teachere \"dddle, junior high and cause the district can't compete pay is better in Little Rock schools **8*' schools to help students un- with districts in neighboring states  than in districts in those area,s He  -------------  mat offer higher salaries and hir- i said district officials are looking ing incentives like free housing for into offering incentives similar to a limited time, low interest rates those offered b.v other states, in- on ear loans and signing bonuses. eluding signing bonuses and more We have gotten creative in credit on the pay scale for teaehina eluding signing bonuses and___ pa,v teaching experience brought to the district. The number of j ears of experience ----------------------------from other districts recognized on ing to let them live rent-free for at L-ittle Rock's pa.v scale is now some places, she said. Buchanan said the district recruited two new teachers by offerleast a year in part of a districtHurley said administrators are ___ also looking into offering tuition District administrators are also reimbursement for graduate stud- considering an arrangement with a ' local coniiiiiinity college to share a welding teacher. But the district's creativity is limited by state funding, she said. Im not sure that without some state inteiTention we're going to do anything else about this in the fu- At the stale level. Zornes said, ture,\" she said educators have been aware of a .lirady Gadberiy, special assis- I shortage crisis for lant to the superintendent of the Little Rock School District, said of- ficials in that district are looking at competing cities for recruiting strategies. Gadberiy has determined that the starting salaries of Little Rock teachers are lower than those in eight cities the Greater Little Rock Chamber of Commerce considers competitors of Little Rock in potential growth in industiy and economy. Teachers hired in Little Rock with bachelors degrees and no experience are paid $23,135. Gadber- rj said. Thats $4,800 less than \"TTiiit we lose ibem primarilv be a...-- ------- . cause theyre under-supported.\" she said. New teachers are typically given less desirable students and less desirable duties. We know Ihat bj^providing them with more starting teachers in Tulsa, the next lowest of the eight, and $9,000 less than in Austin. Texas, the highest of the group. Teachers in Baton Rouge, La.\nMemphis: Nashville. Tenn.\nOklahoma City: Shreveport\nand Wichita. Kan., also start their careens with more money than those in Little Rock, he said. The American Federation of Teachers estimates the average salaiy for a teacher with a bachelors degree and no experience in Arkansas is $21,000. the second lowest of 13 states in the southeast region of the countiy. Of those states, only Mississippi pays teachers less to start, with salaries set at $20,630. Beginning salaries for teachers in the Pulaski County Special and North Little Rock school districts are .$21,248 and $21.4.55. respectively. man Resources Department, said the district recruits from colleges depressed\" areas because teachere' than in districts in those areas. He capped at seven, he said. ies to teachers who accept emplov- ment in Little Rock. \"The more education you have, the more you make, so sooner or later they will want to go back to school and the tuition would be niore appealing to them.\" he said. a \"We have been planning for quite some time to combat the problem.\" she said. We did hear rumblings of the problem about five years ago. but we didn't expect it to happen so quickly.'' Districts not only have to re- ciuit more teachers to avert a crisis. but they have to find a way to keep teachers on the job once they are hired. Zornes said. Nationally, one half to one-third of all new teachers leave the profession in the first three to five years. Nationwide statistics show support we can decrease the num- ber of teachers who leave the fession.\" pro- A pilot mentorship program for new teachers will begin next fall in some school districts in Arkan- sas. pairing experienced teachers with ones new to the profession The mentors, who would be tiained and paid, would advise teachers in the fii-st three years of , their careers. The program would be Mitchell said she will speak about a model for the mentorship program when she shares prelimi naiy recommendations made b.v a task force formed in October to as sess teacher retention and recruitment with members of the legislative oversight committee Thureday, The task force's recommendations to attract people to the teaching profession include:  Raising salaries. derstand the importance of teach- ing as early as possible.  Creating a state teacher recruitment office to provide a central lo- cation in Arkansas for people looking for teaching positions anv- where in the state. The group also suggests finding ways to encourage paraprofessionals and teachers' aides to get teaching degrees. They obviousl.v are interested in the field already, and they stand to earn more mone.v with a teaching certificate.\" Mitchell said. At the same time more people are deciding against teaching in lieu of other more lucrative professions. state standards for becoming licensed to teach are becoming more stringent. Beginning in 2002. students giaduatiiig from college may only apply for initial licenses, good only for one to three years, rather than for pennanent one.s for six or 10. Witli an initial license, a teacher nia.v get a salaried job but must demonstrate classroom skills within the initial licensing period to qualify- for a standard certificate. Rich Nagel, associate director of the Arkansas Education Association. acknowledges that stricter licensing requirements might seem to worsen a shortage of teachers bv discouraging some people from entering the profession. But lowering standards just to fill positions would be counter-active to improving education, he said. That would be an awfullv short-sighted strategy to take with public education.\" Nagel said. \"You wouldn't want to do that with brain surgeons or with airline pi- loLs  wh.v would you want to do that with the people who educate3:  Culturally Relevant Teaching 125 numbers) taught them that instruction was not that important and that it could be used as a form of punishment. 4. Real education is about extending students thinking and abilities. At no point in my student teachers lesson did he assess what his students already knew. By building on some success starting with something they had already masteredhe may have been more successful in engaging the students in the skills he intended to teach. As it was, his students decided that what he was talking about had nothing to do with them and he was unable to make the necessary connections. In contrast, Lewis, Devereaux, and Rossi move their students to newer learning after establishing what they know and are able to do. Rather than a \"drill-and-kill approach to knowledge acquisition, their approach makes student learning a more contextualized, meaningful experience. 5. Effective teaching involves in-depth knowledge of both the students and the subject matter. The limited nature of the student teaching experience made Walshs ability to build the necessary relationships between himself and his students difficult. If they knew more about one another, the children would have developed a greater commitment to learning because of their commitment to their teacher. Lewis, Devereaux, and Rossi know their students well. They know which ones respond to subtle prodding and which ones need a more forceful approach. For them, good teaching starts with building good relationships. Rossi knew that one of her students was considered a candidate for special education. However, she believed that it was important to include him as a part of the class and hold him responsible for meeting high standards. To ensure that these expectations did not frustrate him, she spent more time with him, guaranteeing incremental success. Devereaux knew that Michael had a troubled home life. She knew that his poor reading ability was tied to the problems he confronted at home. So she worked to fill his school day with literacy experiences. By calling on him to readdirections, daily messages, and recreational materialsshe cemented her relationship with him while he built his knowledge base and skills. This chapter provided three examples of culturally relevant teaching in the basic skill areas of reading and math. Although each ii III ii 1111111'1 Illi..mmf 124 The Dreamkeepers ten. As they read books, Lewis asked what they thought the text meant and what connections they could make between the text and their own lives. Although Devereauxs reading class __ _ ou sutured, the intellectual challenge was still there. Devereaux expected all students to become literate and she provided a variety of vehicles through which the students could develop their literacy, decision to i  \" was more struc- Rossis use challenging mathematics to motivate and teach her students proved to be an excellent way to improve both their mathematical skdls and their conceptual skills. Doing algebra allowed them to build upon their competence and develop the confidence to meet even higher intellectual challenge:!S. 2. When teachers provide instructional scaffolding,\" dents can move hom what they know to what they need to know. In the classes of all three teachers, students are allowed (and encour-aged) to build upon their Stu- W own experiences, knowledge, and skills to move into more difficult knowledge and skills. Rather than chastise them for what they do not know, these teachers find ways to use the knowledge and skills the students bring to the classroom foundation for learning. The focus of the classroom as a must be instructional. Al- I-M though a classroom is a complex and dynamic place, the primary enterprise must be to teach. In culturally relevant classrooms, instruction IS foremost. Even when Lewis was reprimanding the students, she       i, in-ii was Si (O' P II h' ji  instructing (explaining different parts of the brain). Devereauxs insistence on a sacrosanct reading period is her way of letting the students know that the time cannot be violated, not even by her personal relationship with them. Rossis fast-paced, chai-lenging mathematics leaves behavior. The and students everyone. no room for off-task, noninstructional message that the classroom is a place where teachers engage in serious work is communicated clearly to Walshs students did not take him seriously. Perhaps his i: ability to be effective with them came in part from his status student teacher\nhowever, I have seen student teachers who are capable of managing a class. Walshs group of students set their sights on durupnng his lesson\nthey were learning not to learn. Walshs ecisions to send them back to their seats with assignments they could not do (such as changing improper fractions in-as a are cap-to mixed r\u0026lt;ir. \u0026gt;\u0026gt; K H Iii i-4 126 The Dreamkeepers iSiii (v.- J-'fS ft f. JijfJT 1 S-..-1 - 1 -?5..\\- ( 1 S ,1 ib-t! r 1 I -t \u0026lt; 1*^1 !\nii iSlHii -2. J.iiJd6!: : -tJ ''55t\u0026gt;U ffii i teacher has her own distinctive style, all share some essential qualities that were absent from the student teachers practices. Despite his seemingly more desirable school environment, which resembled his own background, his effectiveness was compromised by the combination of his inexperience and his more assimilationist teaching orientation. Like many novices, the student teacher struggled with organizing students for instruction, but he also struggled with what he considered teaching to be. In his mind, teaching was the same as telling, and he did not question the hierarchical relationship he was attempting to establish between himself and the students. He assumed that the relationship between the students and himself was a one-way relationship: He would instruct\nthey would learn. He failed to treat them as if they knew anything and showed little enthusiasm for the material. He could not situate the lesson in the students experience. For all of his efforts, his attempts to teach the students were futile. He gave up in frustration, believing the students had relinquished their privilege of being taught. In the next and final chapter I consider what may lie ahead for culturally relevant teaching. I examine ways in which it may become a part of education classes and help all teachers, regardless of their race or ethnicity, to become more effective teachers of African American students. V' {eiiJ 3\u0026lt; 111 1 'sea kci )l  i! i I' H I\n?3 JB ! \u0026gt;4 SO 5\u0026gt;' 'As: (1 V . 3 1 ii s Arkansas Democrat \"(CrtzcUe  TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 22. 2000  More teachers retiring than coming in School districts, education officials expecting serious shortages across the state \" BY KIMBERLY GILLESPIE ARKANSAS OitMtH RARiAZiii l l\nThe number of teachers retiring is going up each year and the number of students studying education is going down. It doesnt take a math whiz to know that equation adds up to a deficit. School districts across the nation are experiencing teacher shoitages, said Woody Cummins, deputy director of the state Departnient of Education, and Arkansas is no exception. With the age of the teaching population in our slate, its reasonable to project or anticipate a more serious shortage here as well, Cummins said. Its a little early at this time to say exactly when the major shortage will reach a higher level, but I think its fair to say that there is an existing shortage and we anticipate the shortage to increase in the next three to five years. Ill Pulaski Countys three public school districts, about 31 percent of the teaching force is expected to retire within the next decade. Thirty-two percent of the Little Rock School Districts 1,999 teachers are over 50, and in North Little Rock, 27 percent of the school districts 721 teachers are over 50. In the Pulaski County Special School District, 18.4 percent of the 1,386 teachers are over 50 years old. Arkansas Retired Teachers ASr sociation data show that the average age for teachers retiring from schools in the state was 61. The statewide average retirement ag$ for each year from 1994 to 19^ was 59, and from 1987-93, the ave^ age retirement age was State Department of Higher Ed- See SHORTAGE, Page 5A Teaching in Arkansas The number of teachers reaching retirement age is rising across the state, and there arefew^r college graduates stepping up to take their placed. Many who do enter the teaching pmfession leave within the first five years. Educators in the state ate looking into wa)s to prevent a statewide teacher shoilagefivm leaching crisis levels within the next 10 years. F Siumher ofhacctilaureute degrees in ediicaiinn awarded by .irkiinsas insiitiitiDiis of higher eihicaiinii. 2.000 1.500 1.000 500 0 Current percentage of teachers iner SO. Little Rock I School District Over 50: 32% Pulaski Coimty Spectai School District Over 50: 18.4% North Little Rock School District Over 50: 27% 1J15 1^557 1,532 1,459 '94-95 '95-'96 96 '97 '97-'98 '98 99   fcjr'jiij'* - Stanher ol .Arkansas teachers who retired because of age or long-ierni ser\\ice. Figuivs are per fiscal year. July I - June JO. 1.200 925 000 864 776 760 1,191 969 I i I 400 0 ! SOUACE. Arkansas Relired Teachers Assoaalw '94-'95 '9S-'96 '96-97 '97-98 '98-'99 July 1, *99- Dec. 31, '99 i 1 Atkansas Oemocrai-GazetteTUESDAY, MARCH 16,1993  Program to recruit teachers will benefit three county districts BY DANNY SHAMEER Democrat-Gazette education Writer The Teachers of Tomorrow ! Academy has started to recruit interested students. The academy is a grow-your- own program to help the three Pulaski County public school districts find teachers, espe- ' cially minorities. The academy opens this fall at Sylvan Hilts High School. Pulaski County students may ap- ply by March 24 for the program, the first of its kind in the state. Because Sylvan Hills High is in the majority-white Pulaski County Special School District, ! black students will be the only eligible applicants from the Lit- tle Rock and North Little Rock districts. Whites from Little Rock and North Little Rock are ineligi\nble to transfer into the Pulaski County Special district under the majority-to-minority transfer plan. The transfer regulations are part of the Pulaski County school desegregation case. Michael Nellums, the acad- emys director, said the pro- gram wilt give students who are interested in becoming teachers an opportunity to earn college credit for education courses while still in high school. They will also get help finding scholarships and other grants to attend one of four public universities in Arkansas  the University of Arkansas at Little Rock, the University of Arkansas at Pine Bluff, the University of Central Arkansas at Conway and Henderson State University at Arkadelphia. In return, the students will make plans to work in one of the three districts for three or five years after they receive a bachelors or a masters degree in education. Nellums said that up to 85 students will be accepted into the program the first year  60 incoming sophomores and 25 i incoming seniors.  Two education courses will be available for incoming 10th- graders: Cultural Awareness and Issues in Education. Seniors will be able to take at least one course. Introduction to Education, and possibly an i education internship., ! 1 I I\nThis project was supported in part by a Digitizing Hidden Special Collections and Archives project grant from The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation and Council on Library and Information Resoources.\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n\n "},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1516","title":"Testing: Stanford Achievement Test comparative data, Little Rock School District","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":["Little Rock School District"],"dc_date":["1993/1998"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System"],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","Educational statistics","Education--Standards","School management and organization","School integration","Students"],"dcterms_title":["Testing: Stanford Achievement Test comparative data, Little Rock School District"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Butler Center for Arkansas Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://arstudies.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/bcmss0837/id/1516"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["Available for use in research, teaching, and private study. Any other use requires permission from the Butler Center."],"dcterms_medium":["documents (object genre)"],"dcterms_extent":["14 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_785","title":"Town hall meetings","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":null,"dc_date":["1993/1995"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System"],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","Little Rock School District","Education--Arkansas","School management and organization","Meetings","School employees"],"dcterms_title":["Town hall meetings"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Butler Center for Arkansas Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://arstudies.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/bcmss0837/id/785"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["Available for use in research, teaching, and private study. Any other use requires permission from the Butler Center."],"dcterms_medium":["documents (object genre)"],"dcterms_extent":["163 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\nLITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT COMMUNITY FORUMS ISSUES REPORT FALL 1993 Six community forums were conducted by Or. Henry Williams at 7:00 p.m. at LRSO Schools throughout the city. The approximate attendance at each forum is indicated in parentheses. CLOVERDALE \u0026lt;39! Octobor 11, 1993 PARKVIEW 1921 Oolobar EB. 1893 BALE (91) November 10. 1999 FOREST HEIGHTS 1401 Nowonibor 19. 1993 ROCKEFELLER I9BI Novambor 30. 1993 GARLAND \u0026lt;\u0026gt;2\u0026gt; Daoarrbar 6. 1993 BUCK er  oirplanation of budpat . osplanation of budget  atatua of budget planning lor tha  unogud budgala lor area and Incantiva achoda  tha need to out iranaportation ooela  diatriot'a aMty to rndnidn and operate eohoolo CURRICULUM ANO INSTRUCTION * toachara ahould hava acooaa lo a varlaty of Inolruollond matarida In afl oohoda - oompulor Etaracy for  axoaaahra paparwerk rapuliad of laaehari OeSEGREOATION DiscmiNE/sAErrY LEADERSHIP PARENT AL/COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT - amount apant on lawyaro' faaa by LRSD  dlstrlel'a aoeountp- bniy to rapafr and maintain proparfy Innor-dty, arnadar oparodng oohoda - look of mdntanonea upkaap at Garland  budoury eondtalnli  isachars ahould ubEts new inelnieliond atrategias - brvlomandnp tha LRSD Daaagrogatlon Plan . needed otudiee to datarmlna tha ellectivanaoa of tho many programo mandated In Iha Daaagragation Plan * WontIFv knplonMnt ourponoton - laechars should paiseis skllle noceeasrv lo manage tha discipline probloma which occur within the achoda - prinolpda oheuM modal offoodw Inatrvodenal praodcaa In Ihair loadorahip rolaa . oorrootlng tho miaoonoapllon Ihot 'orss* oohoda do net provida Iha asms quality of Inetruetion aa do tha *magna1' . prlrwlpda ahould ba haU oeoounlablo for tha growth and dovdopmant of thdr atalf . eommunlty Irrvclvamonl In Iha diatriot'a budnaoa and intareata . providing inatrueden at tha right lavd el dlffiouity lor giftod tludante  ohaok and bdanoe aystom and ramadlstion lor atudanta who are not lunotionirtg st Iha funlor Ngh lavd and bayend  LRSD'a raapondbllitiot to tha Inner-oily oommunldos where aohoda hava been doaad baoauaa of daaagiogalion afforts - unfair treneportabon burden ol Meek otudonta (or bringing about deiegragabon in LRSO . diowIng Uaok aludania lo use unfilled seats wNch have boon pravioualy raaarvod for white otudenis at incantiva aohoola - future dlrectiona for moving LRSD bayond tha Dstegragalion Plan . InIrooliona of bus apoading arxl not alopping at railroad  cdlbar of but drivaie In the dlatrici - tha use of oameraa and aides on buaaa lo aaaial in providing o oa(o onvironmom on tho  Inoraeaing Iha numbar of oonanunfly veluntaaro and pararda In aohoola  providing blaofc atudanta aooaaoibllily to iharrattonding oohoda wNoh ora outaida of Ihdr rdadva Innor-dly ndghborhoodo  rahabHItslian of cloaod aohoda In Uadi eommunitlaa lor uaaful purpoaaa  ouggaslion that LRSO beeome more proaedw in order to diasomlnate poddvs Informalion about ovsnts which are ooourring In the disirlol - the degree that Iha Suparlntandont piano to ba oaaaasabla and avdiabla to tha palrona of tha dlatrlcl - hilure dlrectiona (or LRSO_________ - knprovad eoonlinallon of voluntsara and paronts lor opdmd support and aaalslanoo for tha aohoda - the need lo taaoh studonto how to appraalata ethnic divordry and disabled otudonta - proapaots for Improving tha ourtam daaagrogatlon orlala  Integration of atudanta with handloapping oondidono with Iha mainalrsam population of atudanta - eeeurlty plana and meaauiaa al Ngh oehod lavd  avattabiUly of dtamadva prograrrw lor atudanta who ora bahador probloma at darTMntary lavd - ealiber of schod but - affaadvanoao of school - propar ctanapoftadon oara for atudoma arlth phyaloal dlaablidao for prfvolo oohoofo \u0026gt; knprovlng aooosolbBty eonddonaln aohod bubdlnpa (or atudanta withphyalod handio^  tha naad to hold psranta roaponalbls (or Ihdr ohMran's dlartrptiva behsdor - organliing a 'good news campaign' about Iha poarltvo ovsnts occurring In Iha LRSD  affiolant eparaden of tha EngNah aa a Saoond Languapa Propram lESU  uaafulnesa of Fwnlly Uta euniouium - an Induaronary ourrloulum whioh aupporta tha loocHtrp and appradatlon of all alhnlo preupa - oupport for Spoitfoh pookittg oBrdonu  ospanaion of Four-Yoat- Old Program at dl achoda - provision lor a ourrloulum vrhioh decrestea the disparity balwoen eihnia groups - eontara and laohndogy lo ambdtioh and Improvs ourrlorjium for non-EngllBh tpeaking - ln*l\u0026lt;mMi(atton of which Drill anouro that sR atudanta grow soodemloallv. aodally, and omotlonolly ortth omphada on bado akIHa and aoadamlo enrichment whRa dodng diaparltlao In aohiavamont  oompatioan of LRSD ourrloulum with nadonal and Intamational aduoottertd poala . aoold akHls taught and aupportad by  ohsngaa In Giftod and Tafonlad Enrlchmonl Program - tha diatriot'a futura bayond tha plan * dlaolpllno arrd ordar at Iha lunlor hlph ooheol  impiovlna tha imapt of aalaty In tha diatriet  Mfaty on ooftool buioo  oabbar of aohod but  Ineraasad aupordaion on buaaa  plat* by tho Suparbitandont to vfoft  params should bo hdd rsaponslblo for thdr ohMron'o bshsdor In Iha aohoda  apodal pradalorM by omployoto tor paronts who noad to mloa work for ochool eonforanooa - uoing vsriad moaouromoma lo asaoaa studant parformarwo and aohiovamarn  lack of swaronass by LRSO laaohara lo taaoh black atudoma apptoprlaldy . oKpandon of the Earty Childhood Program to other oohoolt baoauaa of tha auooeaa damenelrated al Rookafdlar - tho need lo offer offoetfvo and affMant Inatruotlon (or the Summer Sohool Program - Wook atudanta oncountar dllfloulty In anroHlttp In aohoda wharo a oartdn numbar of aaata hava boon raaarvod for whita atudanta duo to Plan compHanca - future rHroetions tor moving LRSD beyond the  maintaining diadn- iiKondva.' and *magnot* oohoda parpatuataa Iha Idea of 'aaparato but - Iha naad for atralogloa and piogrwna Io loaoh oonfHot raadution arrd prodom odvlng  tha naad far LRSD 10 addrooa tha problama of gang vidanoa and sotivlty at tha oohoda \u0026lt; tho noad to raduoo tha numbat of sludonta suapandod and/or axpallsd \u0026lt; davolopmant of a pubNo rotadena oampaipn paarad toward tha Ueda Rode Board of OIraolora and tho oomrrajnlty st lorpa  dsvalcpmsni of s bettor rdadonthip erlth tho madia  up^ado tho earo that la slvon to younpotara In tha CARE Propram  dodlootion Gbbo' poronta Io ouppon ond purport 0M pooltivo monnor by whioh that aohoof oporataa doHy - oncouragamant of paranld Invdvomant which kiyraota poaltivoly Iha oporadon of LRSO'a aohoda  oldot lor but Ortvon * rrdaboha^or of atudanta on buaaa - study lo raved spodflo biformstion oonoorNng trane- portstion In tho  Cnp Pfdfar aaaeeaibllity orltarla - oomrrftmont et Board to keep aohoda epen bi Uaek. innor-dty neighborhoods - atatua of rebuilding Stsphons  dodajornmaUnp preeaoa for aiooutJnp rapalra of aohoola - probabfUly of dcalng Garland -damogrsphlo atiidy Io datarmlna what oohoda ohouM ba doaad - oohoda naad voluntory aarMoao to hdp  Importanoo of oommuraty oupport  Chapter I training lor \u0026gt; Adult aduoation fot paronto to oupport lonpuapo okMaLITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT TOWN HALL MEETINGS REPORT FALL 1994 Seven Town Hall mccHngs were conducled by Dr. Henry Willianis at various locations llfrouehoul the city. Board of Directors allended Town Hall meetings in their precinct. Tbic rVwii.trill ic A simiiiiarv of ronmienls from Hie .......... Approximate attendance at each forum is noted in parentheses. tCRRT 06) Septeaber 15, 1994 UNIVERSItT PARS ADULT CIR \u0026lt; Septeaber 26. 1996 nilASXI REtCllfS (U) October 6. 1996 FUlRICHt \u0026lt;70) October 11. t994 HARTIH linREI RIHC (S\u0026gt; October 20, 1996 HcaElLlM (75) October 2*. 1W* suii castRjNin CIR (TO) Roveaber 1, 1996 ClMRianiM AUD laSTniciirM OtSCIPttMC AW SAfEtr lEMtEeSNIP OESEUEGAIICai PHEhlAl COMmitr IHVOmHEUI explarsatlon of the budget process concerns about the el imlnnt ion of some r.t rmiiirs at ptaevir focus on discipline and provide a climate conducive need for oddlllonal alternative schools and alternative ways to discipline the need for an efficient and safe bus system and security to be IRSP's niBber one priority probability of further school probability of laptemenlatlon of Biddle school -need for district to be Bore Inioreative explore possiblllly of IP ba^s for Junior High ard High School students possible iBplementallon of unifoms for all students in the district restructuring the school asslgment status of school increased parental involvenenl needed, particularly mates.  laprove the district's image elicit support of coamjnlly and businesses to promote the positive in IRSO explarxation of the budget the need lor the same duality of erfuration to be tsiight throughout the disKirt take the locus in athletics aw.ty from win at any cost\" of nobU* security unit to esslst with scorning trainlr*g needed for teachers to help annage discipline reopening of Stephens and school theme the rwed to provide discount CARE rates for alt students In the district probability of middle schools leplementation by 1995^96 prospect of returning to rselghborhood schools explanation of process used the need to require parental involvement Identify strategies to Increase parent Involvement explanation of budget planning lor the district Ixplament middle schools -cost of aioblle security unit r\u0026gt;eed for Increased staff -the Med foe $iwl(er the need to reevaluate the Standards used to deterBine plaremcnl into remedial program study k*y\u0026gt; Ie reoryenlte the seheot day the elementary level to Increase student achievement expansion of program that eepbasize basic skills___________ the need for uorkshops on legal mtters as they pertain to education, due to aafety and security problem that exist In the schools possibly reduce CPA requirements lor participation in athletic and other activities to ollminata discipline problem and delinquent behavior need for additional program and alternative ways to discipline possibility of Including parents on student hearing team changes to Student Handbook (conduct code) for 1994-9S appear less forceful the need for principals to coaply with recoamendatI on to pilot a Biddle school before dlstrlctulde Implementation possibility of reducing dcsegregetion cost and reallocate money for educational passible use of seme of the desegregation money to pay for additional alternative classes laprove the pcblio's perception el a lack of discipline In the schools need for Increased parent Involveoient expected budget cuts for the 1995^96 school year explanation of butfget process cease double tirdlng Incentive schools assurance that all schools receive furdir\u0026gt;g the need to retain the nursing Service the need to provide Interim reports to nil review 2.00 pa requirement for extracurricular activities -the need to remove atudente with continuous disciplinary problem concerns about professlortal behavior and explanation of differences in Middle School and Jcmior High -possible taplementatlon of Riddle Schools In 199$^96 accotmitebillly and performance of lawyers handlirtg the desegregation the need for Involvement the need for increased participation In athletic the need for safety on the the need for safety to be the districts top priority -status of Stephens -the rebuilding of Chicot Increased comiunity Involvement needed to support athletic program ID badges needed for students and eaployeea In the secondary Probability of white students bused (rots Vest little Rock to SW little Rock to enhance racial balance possibility of changes Io the school asslgment tone to achieve racial balance in SU little Rock planning far Chicot fundraiser the feeting that Inequity in the dual ley of education exists within the district the need to control discipline problem the rteed to enforce discipline guidelines as outllrted In the Rights and Responsibility Handbook -the need for par receive correct and consistent Information from district status of Metropolitan Vo-lech probability of a Magnet school In SU little Rock -the need for parents to know who at the Central Office to contact with problem and concerns03'14/94 14:25 501 324 2032 L R School Dlst 0D\u0026gt;I Please Post 003/003 LRSD Employees Please join the Superintendent for DISTRICT FEEDBACK SESSIONS Special sessions have been arranged for the purpose of providing feedback to all groups who participated in the District Dialogues. The sessions will be held in the Board Room at the LRSD Administrative Offices, 810 West Markham Street. Wednesday, March 16,1994 - 5:00 p.m. Tdesday, March 22,1994 - 5:00 p.m. ALL EMPLOYEES: The Feedback Session is designed to provide information relative to the planning and budgeting process of the Little Rock School District to the various groups who participated in the community forums and district dialogues. Every effort is being made to include all interested groups. 03/14/94 14:23 0501 324 2032 L R School Dlst ODM Please Join Us @002-003 Little Rock School District COMMUNITY FEEDBACK SESSIONS Special sessions have been arranged for the purpose of providing broad-based feedback to all groups who participated in the Community Forums. The sessions will be held in the Board Room at the LRSD Administrative Offices. 810 West Markham Street. Monday, March 21,1994 - 7:00 p.m. *Thursday, March 24,1994 - 6:00 p.m. (Viewed on LRSD Cable 4) PARENTS AND COMMUNITY MEMBERS : The Feedback Session is designed to provide information relative to the planning and budgeting process of the Little Rock School District to the various groups who participated in the community forums and district dialogues. Every effort is being made to include all interested groups. Oa/13/94 08:34 0501 324 2032 L R School Dist ODM 003/003 I: =s\u0026gt; Little Rock School District PUBLIC SERVICE ANNOUNCEMENT 30 Second Do you care about kids and the education they receive? Would you like to be more informed about our public schools? Share your ideas with LRSD Superintendent Henry Williams, at a Town Hall Meeting. Meetings will be held at 7 p.m. on the following dates at these locations:  Thursday, October 20 - Martin Luther King Jr. Elementary  Tuesday, October 25 - McClellan High School  Tuesday, November 1 - Southwest Community Center ### 09/13/94 08:34 501 324 2032 L R School Dlst ODM 121002/003 f Little Rock School District PUBLIC SERVICE ANNOUNCEMENT 30 Second Do you care about kids and the education they receive? Would you like to be more informed about our public schools? Share your ideas with LRSD Superintendent Henry Williams, at a Town Hall Meeting. Meetings will be held at 7 p.m. on the following dates at these locations:  Thursday, September 15 - Terry Elementary School  Monday, September 26 - University Park Adult Center  Tuesday, October 4 - Pulaski Heights Junior High  Tuesday, October 11 - Fulbright Elementary School ###RKEI'''\" SEP 2 9 1994 Office of Desegregation Monitoring LRSD Employees Please join Superintendent Williams for \"STRAIGHT TALK\" These special sessions are for the purpose of allowing employees free and open discussion with Superintendent Williams. Your ideas are important - come share them! Principals Tuesday, October 4,4 p.m. - Franklin Elementary Transportation Wednesday, October 12, 9:30 a.m. - Transportation Office Administration (Central Office Administation, Annex and IRC } Monday, October 24,5 p.m.- Administrative Board Room Classified Staff (Food Services, Custodians, Clerical} Monday, November 7,4 p.m. - Admin. Board Room Teachers Tuesday, November 8,4 p.m. - Central High Little Rock School District TOWN HALL MEETING! 20 Tuesday, October 4, 1994 Pulaski Heights Junior High School 401 N. Pine Hosted by Judy Magness, School Board Member, Zone 3 e ho co ho 30 on CVj C' o Are you interested in what your child is {earning? Do you have any ideas on safety and security? What is the new LRSD program called Great Expectations? What are your ideas for cost saving measures? on 4 4^ 4 Please join us for open discussion with Superintendent Henry Williams.. Your ideas area important - come share themi O Town Hall Meeting October 11, 1994 7 p.m. I Fulbright Elementary School 300 Pleasant Valley Drive CCT-'I t IW 0! Zone 4 AGENDA Introduction and Purpose of Meeting Leon Modeste Special Assistant to the Superintendent Opening Remarks John A. Riggs, IV Board Representative, Zone 4 Dr. Henry P. Williams Superintendent Little Rock School District 1. Budget Configurations n. Goals and Mission Statement Questions and Suggestions from Citizens Closing Remarks1994-95 LRSD Board Priorities Compiled at the Board Work Session on September 14, 1994  Safety \u0026amp; Security  Problem Solving at the Building Level  Quality Nursing Services  Alternative Means of Assessment  Alignment of Curriculum with Assessment  Staff Development  Parent Involvement  Collaboration between LRSD and City of Little Rock  Alternative Schools, including Alternative Learning Center (ALC)  Positive Discipline (Alternative Discipline Procedures)  Improved Relationship with MediaOur Pride is Showing at the Little Rock School District  The Little Rock School District has more course offerings than any other district or private school in the state.  There are 125 businesses that are Partners in Education with the LRSD,  LRSD leads the state with 84 counselors for its 50 schools.  LRSD offers 21 advanced placement courses in its high schools.  LRSD is an educational partner in the New Futures for Little Rock Youth initiative which is a $15 million grant from the Annie E. Casey Foundation. Little Rock is one of only five cities to receive this honor.  LRSD has more that 489,925 books in its school libraries\nthat's twice the state standard.  LRSD offers courses in five foreign languages: Spanish, French, German, Latin and Greek.  In 1994, LRSD seniors were awarded more than $3.3 million in college scholarships.  LRSD traditionally has more National Merit Scholars than any other district in the state.  LRSD offers an educational program for four-year-olds, allowing parents to begin their child's learning very early.  The LRSD has an Instructional Resource Center for teachers and parents with materials and services available to erfi^ance the educational experiences of all LRSD students.  In 1994 LRSD identified 1,856 seventh graders to take the SAT and ACT college entrance exams as part of the Duke University Talent Identification Program.  LRSD offers many educational options such as incentive, area, magnet, and interdistrict schools, each with specialties unique and different.  LRSD has a strong gifted and talented program.  LRSD students have access to the electronic encyclopedia through the library media centers and computer labs.  LRSD offers an extensive program of adult education to meet the needs of people in Central Arkansas with morning, afternoon, evening and summer programs.  More than 53% of LRSD teachers hold Master's Degrees or have more than 30 hours towards advanced degrees. } ! mi Please Join Us Little Rock School District COMMUNITY FORUMS All meetings are at 7 p.m. Monday Oct 11 Cloverdale Elementary School 6500 Hinkson Rd. Tuesday Oct 26 Parkview Magnet High School 2501 Barrow Rd. Wednesday Nov. 10 Bale Elementary 6501 W. 32iid St Taesday Nov. 16 V Tuesday Nov. 30 Forest Heights Junior High 5901 Evergreen _______ Rockefeller Incentive Elementary 700 E. 17th St PARENTS AJiP COMMUNITY MEMBERS\nYour ideas are important Join LRSD Superintendent Dr. Henry Williams in a discussion of issues and present your ideas for planning for the current year and beyond for the Little Rock School District YOU MAY ATTEND ANY FORUM^ VARIOUS WEEKNIGHTS WERE SELECTED FOR YOUR CONVENIENCE. 1 -\u0026gt;* . ?' i - J 16:20 Pl 02/02 -ii. / I i!=''\n':p SUPPORT SERVICES Fax :1-501-324-2032 Feb 21 95 .1 Jt* '' Little Rock School District V 7\u0026gt; \u0026lt;1^ News Release  February 21, 1995 For more information: Sue)ten Vann. 324-2020 I p- The Little Rock Schoo! District will hold Town Hall Feedback Sessions in the a. community to gather input from residents and provide information based on last fail's Town Hall meetings. The Feedback Sessions will be held for each of the school district zones as follows: Zone 4 John Riggs Wednesday. March 1. 6:30 p.m. Fulbright Elementary 300 Pleasant Valley Drive p-**  h! Zone 6 Zone 7 Patricia Gee 0. G. Jacovelli Tuesday, April 11, 6:30 p.m. Southwest Community Center 6401 Baseline Road Zone 2 Zone 5 Kevin OMalley Linda Pondexter J Zone 1 Zone 3 t ' 1 .t: Katherine Mitchell Judy Magness Tuesday, April 18. 6:30 p.m. University Park Adult, Center 6401 W. J2th Thursday, April 20, 6:30 p.m. Pulaski Heights Junior High 401 N. Pine School board members and district administrators will attend feedback sessions and discuss citizen concerns. The public is encouraged to attend. ### J 9 ri S' J 810 West Markham Street Little Roch, Arhans.ts 72201  (501)324-2000 I i I ^^1 - LriTLE Rock School District News Release (Revised Dates) March 8, 1995 For more information: Suellcn Vann, 324-2020 !I The Little Rock School District will bold Town Hall Feedback Sessions in the community to gather input from residents and provide information based on last falls Town Hail meetings. The Feedback Sessions will be held for each of the school district zones as  til follows: -I i  r i i Zone 6 Zone 7 Zone 2 Zone 5 Zone 1 Zone 3 Zone 4 Patricia Gee O, G. Jacovelli Kevin O'Malley Linda Pondexter Katherine Mitchell Judy Magness John Riggs Tuesday, April 11, 6:30 p.m Southwest Community Center 6401 Baseline Road Tuesday, April 18, 6:30 p.m. University Park Adult Center 6401 W. 12th Thursday, April 20. 6:30 p.m. Pulaski Heights Junior High 401 N. Pine Monday, May 1, 6:30 p.m. McDermott Elementary 1200 Reservoir Road School board members and district administrators will attend feedback sessions and discuss citizen concerns. The public is encouraged to attend. 1J Il 4 I? CO/cO'd kipf S6. 3' J\u0026amp;w ! L/f It# ft ' KiK-PZi-IiJS-ltxej $30If\\s.r. idCddf^.id*^ nr- ''T\" y v'- V  LP,Sr ADMIN. BULDING Oct 3 95 16:38 I P. 02/03 .-ri Fax:1-501-324-2032 Little Rock School District Public Service Announcement f 3 'J October 3,1995 For more information: Suellen Vann, 324-2020 Desegregation continues to be a major issue for the Little Rock School District. On Monday, October 16, school district officials will discuss the current status of desegregation in a Town Hall meeting. The meeting will be held at 6:00 p.m. in the Board R(X\u0026gt;m of the School District Administration Building at 810 West Markham. The meeting will provide information on the court's orders and how desegregation impacts our students. If you are interested in the future of our public schools, please plan to attend this important discussion. The meeting will be broadcast live on Comcast cable channel 4. -30- 810 West Markham Street * Little Rock, Arkansas 78201  (501)324-2000 Wi il li  I \u0026lt; f iiii ^*5 5'' 0 LRSD ADMIN. BOLDING Fax:1-501-324-2032 Oct 3 95 16:38 P.03/03 . ffe' 1 Mt- /pi ,i- Little Rock School District Media Advisory October 3,1995 For more information\nSueUen Vann, 324-2020 i Special Board Meeting The Board of Directors of the Little Rock School District will hold special meeting on Wednesday, October 4, 1995, at 5:30 p.m. The purpose of the meeting will be to hear student disciplinary appeals. Students may request that the appeals be heard In executive session. The meeting wlU be held In the Board Room of the Administration Building at 810 West Markham. a ### r- 810 West Markham Street  Little Rock. Arkansas 78801  (501}3a4-8000 ES LRSD ADMIN. BULDIN6 Fax:1-501-324-2032 Oct 18 95 13:49 P.03/03 Little Rock School District Public Service Announcement October 18,1995 For more information: Suellen Vann, 324-2020 Little Rock students have been in school for two months and will soon receive their first report card. School administrators would like to hear from parents about how the schools are performing, so the community is invited to a town hall meeting. The meeting will be held Tuesday, October 24, at 6:00 p.m. at Rightsell Incentive School. The school is located at 911 West 19th Street. Sch\u0026lt;X)i Superintendent Henry' Williams will provide an update on the status of the schools and ask for suggestions. If you are interested in our public schools, please plan to attend this important meeting at Rightsell Incentive Schcx)l, Tuesday, October 24, at 6:00 p.m. -30- S 810 W3i Markham Street * Little RoCk, Arkansas 72201  (5501)824-8000 IQiB \u0026amp; LRSD ADMIN. BULDING Oct 18 '95 13:48 P.02/03 r. Fax:1-501-324-2032 Little Rock School District Media Advisory ..1 H October 18,1995 For more information: Suellen Vann, 324-2020 Town Hall Meeting Community residents will have an opportunity to meet and visit with Little Rock School Superintendent Henry Williams during a Town Hall meeting on Tuesday, October 24,1995. The meeting will be held at at 6:00 p.m. at Rightsell Incentive Elementary School, 911 West 19th Street. The town hall meeting provides for discussion of current educational issues. It also allows for community suggestions and concerns to be voiced to school leaders. 1 Media Note: A special Board meeting situation exists if more than one Board member attends the same event. F 810 West Markham Street  LltUe Rock, Arkatisaa 78801  {501)8a4-S000  MiflWI BT 3 s' * LRSD ADMIN. BULDING Fax:1-501-324-2032 Oct 23 95 15:53 P. 02/02 I\" i Little Rock School District Media Advisory October 23,1995 For more information\nSuellen Vann, 324-2020 Town Hall Meeting Community residents will have an opportunity to meet and visit with Little Rock School Superintendent Henry Williams during a Town Hall meeting on Monday, October 30,1995. Dr. Williams will address security and transportation issues and request input from the community about other school concerns. The meeting will begin at 6\n00 p.m. in the Board Room of the Little Rock School District Administration Building, 810 West Markham, ### Media Note\nA special Board meeting situation exists if more than one Board member attends the same event. 810 West Markham Street  Little Rock. Arkan.a^ 78301 \u0026lt; r80n8M4M)00LRSD ADMIN. BULDING Fax:1-501 2032 15:53 P. 02/02 % Oct S3 95 1ss? %j*\nLittle Rock School District Media Advisory October 23.1995 For more information: Suellen Vann, 324-2020 Town Hall Meeting Community' residents will have an opportunity to meet and it with Little Rock School Superintendent Henry Williams during a Town hall meeting on Monday, October 30,1995. Dr. Williams will address security and transportation issues and request input from the community' about other school concerns. The meeting will begin at 6:00 p.m in the Board Room of the Little Rock School District Administration Building, 810 West Markham. 1 Media Note: A special Board meeting situation exists if more than one Board member attends the same event.  K jh 810 Weat Markhatn Street  Little Rock, ArkanAoa 72^01  (501)Ba\u0026lt;.daOO ^E2 SCB!?CBKaRE!9iHI9Hli0 4 2 1  inf'\\'iitj._iii lj.. LRSD ADMIN. BULDING Fax:1-501-324-2032 Oct 23 95 16:19 P.02/02 Little Rock School District Public Service Announcement October 23,1995 For more information: Suellen Vann, 324-2020 School transportation and security are two important concerns of parents when selecting a school. These issues will be discussed by Little Rock Superintendent Henry Williams during a Town Hall meeting on Monday, October 30,1995, at 6:00 p.m. Dr. Williams holds a series of meetings in the community to meet with parents and other community residents and to hear suggestions and concerns related to Little Rock schools. The nv/eting will begin at 6:00 p.m. on Monday, October 30, in the Little Rock School District Board Room, 810 West Markham. -30- 810 West Markham street.  Little Reek, Arkansas 72201  (501)824*2000LRSD ADMIN. BULDING Fax:1-501-324-2032 Oct 23 95 15:53 P.02/02 ....s I   Little Rock School District Media Advisory October 23.1995 For more information: Suellen Vann, 324-2020 Town Hall Meeting Community residents will have an opportunity to meet and visit with Little Rock School Superintendent Henry Williams during a Town Hall meeting on Monday, October 30,1995. Dr. Williams will address security and transportation issues and request input from the community about other school concerns. The meeting will begin at 6:00 p.m. in the Board Room of the Little Rock School District Administration Building, 810 West Markham. ### Media Note: A special Board meeting situation exists if more than one Board member attends the same event. 810 West Markham Street  Little Rock, Arkansas 72201  (SOI) 824-2000LRSD ADMIN. BULDING Fax:1-501-324-2032 Oct 26 95 12:38 P. 02/02 u Little Rock School District Public Sendee Announcement October 26. 1995 For more information: SueUen Vann, 324-2020 Parents of Little Ro(Uc school students will have a chance to meet and talk with School Superintendent Henry Williams during an upcoming Town Hall meeting. Dr. Williams will provide an update on the status of the scUiooIs and ask for suggestions. Some of the topics which may be discussed include the school district's financial status and safety and security issues. If you are Interested In our public schools, please plan to attend this important meeting at Williams Magnet Elementary School, Thursday, November 9, at 6:00 p.m. -30- 810 Weat Markham Street  Little Rock, Arkansas 73201  (501)324-2000II LRSD ADMIN. BULDING Oct 26 95 12:38 P.02/02 5! Fax:l-501~3242032 wimiinunniiH -issa^ Littlb Rock School District Public Service Axuiouncement October 26, 1995 For more information: Suellen Vann. 324-2020 vt. s5! }. ^SE: Parents of Little Rock school students will have a chance to meet and talk with School Superintendent Henry Williams during an upcoming Town Hall meeting. Dr. Williams will provide an update on the status of the schools and ask for suggestions. Some of the topics which may be discussed include the school district's financial status and safety and security issues. If you are interested in our public schools, please plan Lo attend this important meeting at Williams Magnet Elementary School, ITiursday, November 9. at 6:00 p.m. -30- P'  ( ( I t 810 West Markham Street  Little Rock, Arkaasaa 78301  (501)884-3000 a^ECS UMi!!b.iaB.weiMMBiir(JWUim.ui.w isnumsi! Kaisaac LRSD ADMIN. BULDING Fax:1-501-324-2032 Nov 10 95 9:34 P. 02/02 \" \"'5- I Liri'LE Rock School District Media Advisory November 10, 1995 For more information: Suellen Vann, 324-2020 Town Hall Meeting Community residents will have an opportunity' to meet and visit with Little Rock School Superintendent Henry Williams during a Town Hall meeting on Tuesday, November 14,1995. The meeting will be held at at 6:00 p.m. at Geyer Springs Elementary School, 5240 Mabel vale Pike. The town hall meeting provides for discussion of current educational issues. It also allows for community suggestions and concerns to be voiced to school leaders. Media Note: A special Board meeting situation exists if more than one Board member attends the .same event. 810 West Markham Street  Little Rock, Arkansas 72301  (301)324-2000 LRSD ADMIN. BULDINS Fax:1-501-324-2032 Nov 17 95 9:30 P. 02/02 Little Rock School District i! K J November 17, 1995 Media Advisory For more information: Suellen Vann, 324-2020 Town Hall Meeting Community residents will have an opportunity to meet and visit with Little Rock School Superintendent Henry Williams during Town Hall meeting on Tuesday, November 28 1995. The meeting will be held at at 6:00 p.m, at Cloverdale Elementary School, 6500 Hinkson Road. a  /. The primary topic of this town hall meeting will be the school district's desegregation plan. The current status of desegregation efforts will be pre.sented. The public is encouraged to attend and to participate in this meeting. Media Note: - A special Board mef i more than one Board member a: 810 West Markham Street  tion exists if ame event. Little Rock. Arkai'^as 72301 \u0026lt;501)824 3000 J I 1 1/20 95 18:39 I 501 524 2023 002/003 1, I U?sn COHMIMCATI --\u0026gt; ODM e LirriE Rock vSchool District I Media Advisory Clarification November 20, 1995 For more information\nDina Emfinger, 324-2020 Please be aware that the Town Hall Meeting which will take place at Hall High School this evening is sponsored by the Little Rock Task Force for Youth, A flyer distributed by the Task Force is attached. This meeting is not part of the Town Hall Meeting series currently hosted by the LRSD. Superintendent Henryk Williams and the LRSD Board members are not able to attend this event due to a previous commitment to attend a ioint board meeting of the LRSD and Little Rock City Boards. Ihe next LRSD Toum Hall Meeting will be held at 6:00 p.m. on Tuesday, November 28 at Cloverdale Elementary school. ### 810 West Markham Street \u0026lt; Little Rock, Arkansas 72201  (501)324-2000 SE^ 11/20/95 16\n40 501 324 2023 LRSD COMM!M CATT ODM ig]003 003 SU nww J tj SipS? 4'' I* Town Hall Forum wa?r*K ''fe by* /y\n5 \u0026gt;{\u0026amp; .''m! iWi^ , ' (i*a  K' -'W* I 22 I ?i  Is rI i 4  'Sa\n\u0026lt; \u0026lt; s ? Monday November 20 \u0026amp;30-3:^0 pm Hall Hl^h School 0patisan^ i?y: TTie Lfttilff ficick Task Force fof Youth I bfXiiBcx I ww i\u0026lt;wer qojwot J .'i' \u0026lt;j-.'iLvl.'\u0026gt;^3iJ^ '^. \u0026lt; r.* Ailcansas Democrat '^(gazette TUESDAY, OCTOBER 12, 1993  Williams shares ideas, seeks others at forum BY CYNTHIA HOWELL Democrat-Gazene Education Wnter Little Rocks new school SU perintendent shared a few of his ideas for improving district operations Monday night and asked for suggestions from others on how to use the $167 million the schools receive annually in local, state and federal money. Dr. Henry P. Williams made his remarks at the first of five community forums he will hold this year on budget priorities and program plans for 1994-95. .About 35 people attended the forum at Cloverdale Elementary School, but virtually all were administrators, school employees, school board members or journalists. We need to have a plan for increasing our funds, Williams said, suggesting the district could do more to win federal grants. In Syracuse, N.Y., where he previously worked, his 22,000- s^dent district received $40 million a year in federal money, compared with $6 million in Little Rock, a district of about 26,000 students. Williams said he is looking for people to help the district raise money. The chief financial officer's position in the district has been vacant since Gary Jones resigned during the summer. School board member Linda Pondexter suggested the district initiate a violence prevention program, beginning with the 4- year-old children in the early childhood program. Williams replied that young children are taught how to deal with their problems when they are home alone watching television: You kill it. And some children never learn to share toys, or dont even have toys to share, before they begin school, he said. They must be taught at school how to share or resolve their other conflicts, he said. Even though some children enter school not knowing how to identify shapes and colors, Williams said he is opposed to retaining children in the first grade. He said the children should be given academic help but not labeled as failures so early in their school years. Williams called the districts court-approved desegregation plan a good one, but said he has directed his staff to review the plan to make it more readable and understandable for the general public. The next forum is at 7 p.m. Oct. 26 at Parkview Magnet High School, 2501 John Barrow Road.Arkansas Democrat TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 1, 1994 Williams will host town halLsession Dr. Henry Williams, superintendent of the Little Rock School District, will host the seventh and final town hall meeting for the year at 7 p.m. today at the Southwest Community Center at 6401 Base Line Road. Little Rock School Board member Pat Gee will co-host the event, open to residents from across the city who want to express concerns or ideas about school district operations. IArkansas Democrat '^(gazette TUESDAY, APRIL 11. 1995 LR district to hold session on schools The Little Rock School District will hold a public forum at 6:30 tonight at the Southwest Community Center at 6401 Base Line Road to hear concerns from parents and other district I patrons. District administrators are conducting a series of what they are calling town hall feedback sessions to respond to concerns expressed at public forums earlier in the school year and to hear any new concerns. The forums are scheduled during the time of year administrators are developing the 1995-96 budget, expected to include adjustments and cuts of more than $9 million. Subsequent forums are planned for 6\n30 p.m. April 18 at the University Park Adult Center, 6401 W. 12th SL\n6:30 p.m. April 20 at Pulaski Heights Junior High, 401 N. Pine St.\nand 6:30 p.m. May 1 at McDermott Elementary School, 1200 Reservoir Road.I Arkansas Democrat lie j TUESDAY, OCTOBER 17, 1995 ____1^1 I WU B~\u0026gt;' Mo''''' CAnvF'B\"' .........- Anger flares at meeting for LRSD BY SUSAN ROTH Democral-Gazelle Education Writer Another Little Rock School District meeting broke out into argument Monda.v over the samej contentious issue that had officials screaming last week  desegregation. This time, it was a town hall  meeting at the district administration office in which officials ' discussed the status of the dis- efforts. desegregation tri cl's About 20 people, a mix of administrators and parents, attended the meeting. It was also broadcast on Cable Channel 4. Russ Mayo, associate superin-  lendent for desegregation, said the district need.s to rewrite its desegregation plan to eliminate ' jargon, provide more reasonable expectations and allow greater flexibility. For example, he said, the plan should not name exact types of programs, but allow district leaders lo follow certain parameters based on current trends and research and what works for kids. The district has presented about a dozen modifications for federal court approval\nnone has been approved. Monday'.s argument came during the meetings question-and- answer period, when school board President Linda Pondexter challenged parent Baker Kurrus, chairman of a strategic planning committee on desegregation. Pondexter felt Kurrus had criticized the process in which the parlies in the desegregation case have been meeting weekly to try to iron out their confiicts. Pondexter chairs those meetings. At one of those sessions last week, furious words flew between , Superintendent Henry Williams . and Frank Martin, executive director of the teachers union. If the meetings are nonproductive, why not discontinue them? Pondexter asked Kurrus. \"Youre the reason, or one of the reasons, theyre unproductive, he responded. You first have to dissociate yourself. You have a point of view. We need a moderator at those meetings. We need an independent person to do it. \"I was asked to do it, I didnt volunteer, Pondexter shot back. \"I try to keep order among the parties and I have the audacity to have a point of view. \"I thought we could get together and solve problems. But maybe we should go back to the process we had before. I was in favor of those meetings. I think theyre a great idea, Kurrus demurred. We look to you for leadership. Your point of\nview is vitally critical. But if you have a group who disagree and you give the chair to. one of those parties, youre. doomed lo failure. Pondexter then invited him,\nand the others, to attend the parties next meeting, set for Oct. 25,\nso you can get it firsthand.Arkansas Democrat gazette ( TUESDAY, OCTOBER 24, 1995 I H*\u0026lt; O/w\u0026gt;k In* LR superintendent sets public meetings Little Rock School District Superintendent Henry Williams is hosting a town-hall style meeting at 6 p.m. today at Rightsell Incentive Elementary School to address school district issues and concerns raised by the public. Williams will provide an overall status report on the district and will ask audience members for suggestions on improving the schools. Rightsell is at 911W. 19th St A second meeting, on school security and school bus transportation, is set for 6 p.m. Monday in the Little Rock School District Administration Building at 810 W. Markham St The superintendent will address any other issues raised by the public. IArkansas Democrat ^C^azcttc 1995 LR public invited to school meeting Little Rock residents will have an opportunity to ask questions and SS\" school Superintendent Henry wmi^s SmlntaX Sph  at Williams Basic Skills Magnet Elementary School, 7301 Evergreen SL\nThis project was supported in part by a Digitizing Hidden Special Collections and Archives project grant from The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation and Council on Library and Information Resoources.\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n\n "},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_688","title":"Uniforms","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":null,"dc_date":["1993/2000"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System"],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","Little Rock School District","Education--Arkansas","Educational planning","School discipline","Students"],"dcterms_title":["Uniforms"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Butler Center for Arkansas Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://arstudies.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/bcmss0837/id/688"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["Available for use in research, teaching, and private study. Any other use requires permission from the Butler Center."],"dcterms_medium":["documents (object genre)"],"dcterms_extent":["141 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\nROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT Rockefeller Incentive School 700 East 17th Phone 324-2385 Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 May 19, 1993 Dear Parents: Attached you will find the recommendations made for the school uniform that students at Rockefeller Incentive School will wear at the beginning of the 1993-94 school year. I wanted you to have the information early so you will have adequate time to prepare for the clothing needs for your child. We are very excited about this change and I want to extend my thanks to the parents and teachers for serving on the uniform committee. They met on several occasions and researched the many possibilities before making the final decisions. I hope that the \"Question and Answer\" part of material will be helpful and answer any questions you might have. The style show that we had showing how the students will look in their uniforms was a huge success. The students looked wonderful and having the children dressed in uniforms next year will be a welcome addition to the overall appearance of our school. Thank you very much for your cooperation. We have had such a good year with all children. of you and your very special Sincerely, Anne Mangan, Prine: rincipal LITTLELITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 1f a s Rockefeller Incentive School 700 East 17th Phone 324-2385 Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 ROCKEFELLER INCENTIVE SCHOOL 1993-94 STUDENT UNIFORM POLICY GIRLS: SKIRTS Colors Style CULOTTE SKIRT - Navy Blue Skirt or Plaid Skirt (plaid # 76 at Jack n Jill) Plaid selected is only one accepted. - Pleated (4 pleats #34, or knife pleats #32) Colors - Navy Blue or Plaid (#76 at Jack n Jill) .1 Style - Split Skirt POLO KNIT SHIRT (with collar) Colors - Solid white, light blue, navy blue Style OXFORD CLOTH BLOUSE Long or short sleeve, plain. no emblem Colors - Solid white or light blue Style TURTLE NECK KNIT SHIRT Long or short sleeve with a collar Color - Solid white, light blue, or navy blue Style - Turtle neck mock or rolled collar PANTS/SLACKS Color - Navy or Khaki Style - Pleated or plain front (side pockets optional) Belted or elastic waist SHORTS Color Navy Blue Style - Knee Length Walking Shorts(l\" above knee only) JUMPER Color Navy Plaid (plaid #76 selected at Jack n Jill) Plaid selected is only one accepted SOCKS Style - Drop waist with pleats (#95) or V cut top with pleated skirt (#62) Slight scoop neck with pleated skirt Color White or Navy Blue Style - Regular Short Length, Knee Length, or Tights SHOES Color Plain white or Navy Blue Black or brown leather Socks are required at all times OTHER OPTIONAL ITEMS OF CLOTHING Sweaters - Navy Blue or White Cardigan or V-Neck Sweat Shirt - Navy Blue plain with no emblem fI LITTLE 3 S ROCK SCHOOL DISTR ICT Rockefeller Incentive School 700 East 17th Phone 324-2385 Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 ROCKEFELLER INCENTIVE SCHOOL 1993-94 STUDENT UNIFORM POLICY BOYS\nPANTS/SLACKS Color - Navy Blue or Khaki Style Pleated or plain front with side pockets optional, belt or elastic waist. *Belt is required with pants having belt loops SHIRT Colors - White,'Light Blue, or Navy Blue Style - Polo Knit Shirt (with collar) or Turtle Neck mock or rolled collar Oxford Cloth shirts(white or light blue only) *Shirts must be plain with no emblems SOCKS Colors Style - White or navy blue - Regular Short Length or Knee Length *Socks required at all times. SHOES Colors Plain White or Navy Blue Black or Brown leather SHORTS Color - Navy Blue Style - Knee Length Walking Shorts(l\" above knee only) OTHER OPTIONAL ITEMS OF CLOTHING Sweaters - Navy Blue or White Cardigan or V-Neck Sweat Shirt - Navy Blue plain with no emblem rockefeller incentive SCHOOL uniform COMMITTEE MEMBERS: PTA EXECUTIVE BOARD \u0026amp; CHRISTOPHER ALLEN Awm c RFRRY (BF) MOTHER OF AMBER BERRY ANGELA BERRY, wnTUFR DF  aS( vSv \"fJanoile Aoore\n(SF) VH grade SARAH CLARK, (WF) 1ST CWE') MOTHER OF RYAN GIBSON ' _______rsriKiAl (BF) mother of TERRANCE STEVENSON ROY ANNE MANGAN, (WF) PRINCIPAL LARTER, (BF) ASSISTANT PRINCIPAL district uniform COMMITTEE: WHITNEY AND DEVIN ALBERT \u0026amp; LILLIE CARTER MoVhER of earl WILSON 1. WHEN WILL THE STUDENTS ANSWER: Students will begin begin wearing uniforms? wearing uniforms at the beginning of the 1993-1994 school year. 2. WHAT WILL THE UNIFORM BE FOR BOYS AND GIRLS? RECOMMENDED UNIFORM FOR GIRLS: skirt (4-pleat #34, knife pleated #32) Plaid (#76) skirt ( plaid (#76) culotte (split) skirt Navy blue (selected at Jack n Navy blue or . Navy blue pants/slacks Khaki pants A belt (black brown, or navy) required with A DeiU - skirt/pants w/belt ^op pleated Navy blue jumper (#95 Drop ''Jill) Plaid jumper (plaid.76 selected at Jack n Jli Pnlo knit shirt (white, light blue, y ?uJ?le n^k knit shirt(white,li9ht_blue,navy blue) Shirts must be plain i,_-. Oxford cloth blouse (white or with no emblems light blue) Regular Socks (white or navy blue) ReqUiar QU'-hs - -- - Knee socks or tights (white, navy blue) Plain white or navy blue Brown or black leather shoes Navy blue tennis shoes iacK ieairiei knee length walking shorts(l above kne ) white cardigan or V-neck sweater emblem) Navy blue or ---------- . nr, Navy blue sweat shirt (plain with no Socks are required at all timesrecommended UNIFORM FOR BOYS: Navy blue . Khaki pants/slacks pants/slacks with belt Belt (black. brown, or navy) is required with belt loops pants having oexu \"\"^^ok init shirtiwhite,light blue.navy Shirts must be plain with no emblems , cloth shirts (white or Anrks (white or navy blue) Plain white or navy blue tennis shoes black leather shoes knee length walking Turtle Oxford Brown or Navy blue navy blue) light blue) navy blue shorts(l\"above knee) V-neck sweater white cardigan or . with no emblem) Navy blue or -----_ navy 'w/l-u sweat shirt (plain Socks are required at all times Navy blue REQUIRED P.E UNIFORM FOR ALL BOYS AND GIRLS (GRADES 1-6) 3. shorts Navy blue gym T-shirt (plain with no pictures or writing) Site socks'and''white tennis shoes uiTi I THE STUDENTS BE ALLOWED TO WEAR SHORTS? WILL THE d to wear ANSWER: length gym During weather. physical education the shorter classes only. snorts i^i-'alloweo wear navy g hot weather, stuoents shorter than 1 walking f'the(ooler weather, the same walking :rerirn:th\"rh\nrts%a\"y%r:orn with knee socks if desired. blue 4. WHEN AND WHERE CAN I PURCHASE THE UNIFORM ? ANSWER: Uniforms may be purchased at any merchant who stocks specifications uniform pieces that established for meet the make the uniform you select a pattern specified in the requirements. Unless SpSiir of the plaid material, once supplier pieces may parent wishes to right as long as the plaid material. ctkirt is chosen, tnose . , choose to want them in your child you 5. WHAT the criteria or If a school uniform. it will be perfectly all and fabric color as we can find the the plaid jumper and be purchased if have to wardrobe. UNIFORM(S) AFTER MY CHILD LEAVES CAN I DO WI^\\UIRES A LARGER SIZE? rockefeller OR^SROWTH^REWUXRLo n At the end of each^tc^ether Clothing could be taken to answer: establish a way for clothing. sale where parents uniform pieces. another possibility. uniform or a sell outgrown resale outlet as we could have a and exchangemany pieces should I BUY? , ANSWER- It is recommended that you purchase at least 2 ' con vniir child will have enough to allow time or chiia wii children like to for washing and keeping clothing clean. Children change from day to day also. 6. HOW It is 3 changes so your have a 7. THE be asked to start wearing HHAT*-AGE WILL THE CHILDREN^--^.^-^^^ CHILDHOOD AT ...... UNIFORM IF THEY ATTEND THE EDUCATION PROGRAM? ANSWER: Children in the four year the uniform program want to participate in be ronin'red until a child enters old program may but it would not hope will renuired until a child enters Mnoergc^r ucu. It is our ?hat all children - Kindergarten throughi 6th gra comply with wearing th. uniform so there will throughout the . school. ___Since^^there^^^^^ Kindergarten. Kindergarten wearing the consistency ) so Since there be a we majority of parents supporting the wearing of expect all families to be cooperative in making this program a success. ***parents are encouraged to CLOTHING SINCE SO MANY and mark all LOOKS ALIKE. ITEMS THAT I PURCHASE A LAUNDRY MARKING PEN WILL HAVE CLOTHING THAT THIS IS ESPECIALLY IMPORTANT WITH CLOTHING SCHOOL SUCH AS SWEATERS, MIGHT BE REMOVED^T CRITICAL TURNED IN NEARLY and p.e. uniform. every-day. '^if^the hames^ofsS\u0026gt;ts were inside they could returned to the rightful owner. COATS, WE IF THE NAMES OF BEGIRLS JUMPERS SIZE 9-19 half ano teen TEEN HALF SPECIAL MEASURE GIRLS SKIRTS SIZE 9-19 half ano teen TEEN half EXTRA LONG special measure GIRLS BLOOMERS SIZE 9-19 EXTRA SIZE GIRLS TIES GIRLS BLOUSES SHORT S. 9-16 SHORT S BUST LONG S 9-16 LONG S BUST ladies knit GIRLS PANTS 9-6X TWILL 7-16 TWILL JR SIZE TWILL half size GIRLS SHORTS 9-6X TWILL 7-16 TWILL JR SIZE TWILL half size GIRLS CARDIGAN 9-6-8 lG-12-19 16-18-20 90 ANO UP GIRLS OXFORD SHORT SL 9-6X SHORT SL 7-19 SHORT SL BUST long LONG LONG SL 9-6X SL 7-19 SL BUST GIRLS CULOTTE i^S^BOX ^'^^-9818 BENTON AR 72015 UNIFORM PRICE LIST MARCH 1,1992 BOYS PANTS pleated SIZE 9-16 TEEN AND HALF SPECIAL MEASURE GIRLS VEST SIZE 9-16 $ 23.00 $ 29.00 $ 26.00 $ 29.00 S 21.00 $ 22.00 $ 29.00 $ 29.00 $ 27.00 $ s s s s 7.50 9.50 9.50 8.75 9.75 $ 10.50 * 12.75 $ 12.75 $ 15.00 $ 17.00 $ 19.00 $ 21.00 $ 12.50 $ 13.50 $ 15.50 $ 18.00 s 16.50 $ 18.00 $ 20.00 $ 25.00 $ 10.50 $ 11.50 $ 12.50 S 12.00 S 13.00 $ 19.00 $ 21.00 $ 23.00 $ 25.00 $ 21.00 9-7 SM-REG 8-16 SM REG HUSKY OR PREP MENS 33 UP BOYS PANTS PLAIN 9-7 SM-REG 8-16 SM-REG husky OR PREP MENS 33 UP BOYS OR GIRLS BELTS LEATHER BOYS SHIRTS 9-20 SHORT SL MENS SHORT 9-20 LONG SL $ 16.00 S 18.00 i 21.00 S 22.00 $ 19.00 $ 16.00 S 19.00 S 20.00 $ 5.00 $ 10.50 $ 19.00 $ 13.00 V NECK PULL OVER SWEATERS 9-6-8 10-12-19 16-18-20 SIZE 90 UP BOYS SHORTS 9-7 TWILL 8-16 TWILL husky PREP MEN 33 UP V NECK CARDIGAN 9-6-8 10-12-19 16-18-20 90 ANO UP BOYS OXFORD SHIRTS ' 9-7 SHORT SL 8-20 SHORT SL MEN LONG SL 9-7 LONG SL 8-20 MENS LONG trinity shirt MISS SELMA t 19.00 9 16.00 $ 18.00 $ 20.00 $ 13.50 $ 19.50 S 15.50 $ 17.00 S 16.50 $ 18.00 J 20.00 1 25.00 $ 10.50 t 11.50 $ 12.50 $ 12.00 $ 13.00 $ 19.00 S 12.00 $ 12.00/a/ PULASKI HEIGggS ELEMENTARY MAR 2 7 1996 March 26, 1996 Dear Parents, Teachers and Staff, Office of Desegregation Moniwnny Many of you at Pulaski Heights Elementary have expressed an interesl in school uniforms for our students. The PTA Board would like to assess the interest of aU parents, teachers and staff in our school. Please take a few minutes to read the following information and answer the questions on the attached page. Parents, we ask that you return the questionnaire to your childs teacher by Monday, April 1, 1996. Teachers and staff may return their questionnaires to school counselor, Jenifer Gentry, by the same date. Research shows that school uniforms: Improve behavior, discipline, self-esteem and self-respect\nRaise attendance and student achievement\nPut the focus on learning and away from fashion competition or distracting clothing\nEnhance school security by readily identifying students and non-students\nCreate unity by easing ethnic, economic and cultural differences\nPromote school pride and a sense of belonging. Several Little Rock public schools have implemented a uniform policy with great success. Preliminary investigation shows that school uniforms can be conveniently purchased in local stores at affordable prices. A uniform committee made up of parents, teachers and staff would make decisions regarding uniform style and color\ncompliance measures\navailability of financial assistance and procedures for applying for assistance\nmethods to recycle school uniforms within the school community\nand guidelines for outer-wear, shoes, headgear and optional attire. More information about a uniform policy will be presented at the next PTA meeting. The meeting will be held on Thursday, April 4, 1996, at 6:30 p.m. in the Pulaski Heights auditorium. Please plan to attend to give your input and have your questions answered. A vote of PHE parents will be taken within the next month and, if approved, the uniform policy will be presented to district administration for implementation to begin in the Fall. Again, please answer the questions on the following page and return by Monday, April 1st. If you have any questions, please feel free to call Drake or Melissa Hawkins at 666-7474. Thank you for your time. Sincere^, Pulaski Heights Elementary PTA Board Lillie Carter, Principal cc: Little Rock School Board Members Dr. Henry Williams Ann Brown John Walker (TO 5.:W 'JPulaski Heights Elementary Uniform Questionnaire 1. Parents, in the Fall, 1996, what grade will your child be tn at Pulaski Heights Elementary? If you will have more than one child at PHE, please circle as many grades as apply. K 1st 2nd 3rd 4th Sth 6th Not applicable Teachers/Staff, what grade do you teach/work with at PHE? Circle as many as apply. K 1st 2nd 3rd 4th Sth Sth All grades 2. Are you in favor of a school uniform policy for Pulaski Heights Elementary school? Yes No 1 need more information 3. Would you be interested in serving on the uniform committee? If yes, please complete the name/address section below so that we may contact you. Yes No Maybe Comments: Name (optional) Address Telephone # Please return this questionnaire by Monday, April 1, 1996.March 25,1996 received Ms. Ann Brown Office of Desegregation Monitoring 201 East Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 Otfice of Desegregation Monitonngi Dear Ms. Brown\nMany parents, teachers and staff at Forest Park Elementary School have expressed an interest in school uniforms for our students. It is our objective to conduct a feir and unbiased survey of any interest in a school-wide uniform policy. A committee is being formed to assess the information gathered. A tentative schedule and our intent have been outlined as follows: 1) April 1 - PTA meeting to be held at Forest Park at which the research data and the concerns of parents and faculty members regarding implementation of a uniform policy will be addressed. 2.) April 2 - Survey to assess the interest in or opposition to a School Uniform Policy to be sent to all parents. 3.) April 11,6:30 pm - Meeting to be held at Forest Park with open discussion concerning uniform policy and style show/presentation of possible uniform choices. 4.) April 15 - Official Ballot forms to be sent to all parents, including pre-registered parents, to be returned by April 18. 5.) April 25 - If approved by parental vote, committee members will request to come before the Little Rock School Board to present results and seek approval. If you have any concerns or recommendations, please contact Beth Munsey or Paige Rystrom. Thank you for your consideration of this matter. Sincerely, Paige Rystrom 666-5444 Beth Munsey 664-1936 2 9 cc\nKatherine Mitchell, Michael Daugherty, Judy Magness, John Rigss, Linda Pondexter, Pat Gee, Sue Strickland, Dr. Henry Williams, Virginia Ashley, Laura Doramus, Mim Hundley, John Walker05/11/2000 10:17 501-324-2281 L R S D SRO PAGE 01/01 ' LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT SCHOOLS WITH UNIFORMS 1999-2000 I i Alternative Learning Center (Middle School) Bale Baseline i Brady Clinton ( 1 Ooverdale Elementary Cloverdale Academy (Middle School) Crystal Hill Dodd Fair Park i Geyer Springs King \" . I MeadowclilT I Mabclvale Elementary Mitchell Rightsell I Rockefeller Terry I i Washingtod \"Watson Western Udis Williams I05/11/2000 09:46 501-324-2281 L R S n SRO PAGE 02/02 KEATHLEY, DEANA From: Sent\nTo\nKEATHLEY, DEANA Monday: May 08, 2000 11.30 AM WASHINGTON, JAMES: LUCKER, LIZjyil^M Subject: STEPHANIE DIVFRCITY team LUNCHEON \\Ne had a good group in April at the \"Divercity Team\" luncheon things came up. There were several that promised to come, but other we really need to have a large group at the May luncheon so Mr. Modeste can me know if you will able to attend by Friday 5-12^.________ MAYTO^RCITYteam LUNCHEON\" WHEN: Thursday, May 18, 2000 report our progress to others Please let WHERE: Clark's . 6805 Cantrell Rd. (Same shopping center as Steinmart) I TIME: Little Rock, AR 11:30 a.m. 1PULASKI HEIGHTS ,HMOR HIGH SCHOOL SCHOOL UNIFORM BALLOT The results from the school uniform survey are in: 83% of the parents responding voted in favor of developing a school uniform policy. As a result of the survey, the School I niform Committee has drafted procedures for implementation of the policy. Also enclosed are drawings of the proposed uniform. YOUR VOTE IS VTRY EVIPORT.ANT! For the implementation and success of a uniform policy, parents, teachers, and the school administration must support the policy. I. Are you in favor of a school wide uniform policy at PHJH? \\ es No H. Please indicate grade level your child is in now: 6th 7th Sth 9th in. In accordance with desegregation guidelines, please indicate your race: Please return this ballot to the PHJH in the enclosed envelope by May 16.1996. if additional information is needed, please contact Priscilla Alexander, Lally Brown. Melanie Bradford, or Selma Chandler at 671-6250.PULASKI HEIGHTS JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL UNIFORM POLICY All parents/auardians will sian a contract aareeing to the PHJH Uniform Policy at registration. If parents/auardians choose not\"to participate in the PHJH Uniform Policy, they may request a transfer to another Tumor hiah school from the Little Rock School District Student Assignment Office, Financial assistance for parents who cannot afford a uniform will be provided. Criteria tor assistance will be determined by PHJH Administration. Close monitorina of uniform compliance is imperative in order to have a successful uniform policy. Therefore, PHJH has adopted the following procedures: receive a document Students mav wear ONLY clothing stated on the uniform list. All other items will be confiscated and remrned to parents. Students who violate the uniform policy will: a) first violation: receive a document with parental notification, b) second violation: sent-home to change clothes c) third violation: sent-home for parent conference the following day. Parents must arrange for immediate pick-up of students sent ... .  \u0026gt; I ..*j_______till__p 'ini'finnc nt  Tn.crnnnl home, dl bevond the third violation students will be subject to increased sanctions ot In-school Suspension or \"Out-of-School Suspensions.\" PULASKI HEIGHTS JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL UNIFORM GIRLS Shirt . Color - white, forest (dark ) green (solid) . Style - lone or short sleeve polo type . Fabric - 100% cotton, polyester, poly cotton Color - khaki (solid) may be purchased at Toggery or sewn using Butterwick pattern #4159 View D Fabric - polv cotton mav be purchased at Hancock Fabric Stores Style - double pleat in front and back, must not be more than two inches above or one inch below knee with shirt tucked in Skirt B Color - plaid - e.xclusive for PHJH - may be purchased at Toggery locations only . Fabric - polv cotton , Style - double pleat in front and back, must not be more than two inches above or one meh below knee w'ith shirt tucked in Pants . Color - khaki (solid) . Style - pleated or plain front with side pockets optional, and must fit belted waist with shirt tucked in. . Fabric - twill, polyester, poly cotton, 100% cotton . In-home sewing - Simplicity pattern 7941 View 5 Shorts . Color - khaki (solid) , Style - pleated or plain front with side pockets optional no more than two inches above or one inch below knee, must fit belted waist with shirt tucked in . Fabric -twill, polyester, poly cotton, 100% cotton . In home sewing - Simplicity pattern 7941 View 3 (over)BOYS GIRLS BOYS/GIRLS SHORT SHORTS .1 SHORT SLEEVE POLO I 1 T 1 PANT PANT n \\ V. I LONG SLEEVE POLO PULASKI HEIGHTS JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL UNIFORM UlJ __ PLEATED SKIRT CREW NECK SWEATSHIRT I Arkansas Democrat J SUNDAY, APRIL 14. 1996 New uniforms suit three LR schools fine BY CHRIS REINOLDS DemocralGazeHe SlaI Wtrler Morgan Ibilladay ami Gaiy Anderson wake up each morning ami pull on navy liine pants ami white oxford shirts  their public school uniforms. Clinton has been touting school uniforms as a way to protect children from gangs and violence. If it means that teen-agers will slop killing each other over designer jackets, then our public schools should he able to require their Morgan, a bouncy third grader. students ttwo w..ve.a..r u..n...ir..o..r.m...s... be likes it. \"We liiiik niter limn other said in a ! ebruan. radio addrras. schools,\" .she says. Gary, a gangly sixtli-grader. hale.s it. When you I gel new clothes for Cbrislinas, you I ccaann 'tt wweeaarr tthheemm,,\"\" hhee egrrooluiSsCeSs.. Morgan, 9, and (Jary, 12, attend , Ilockefeller Elementary School in t cceennttrraa!! LUiititiliee kHoocckk,, oonnee ooif itnhrreeee . schools in the Little Hock School District that rc\u0026lt;|uire students to leave their jean.s at home. As a girl Morgan can also choose a plaki skirt or jumper. In his Slate of the Union message and on the slump, President Uniforms  Continued from Page 1A problems. Ilockefeller, an incentive school that made uniforms mandatory this school year, is one of the test cases. Uniforms are also required at Williams Magnet Elementary, In west Little Rock, which began phasing them in four years ago, and at the districts Alternative l\u0026gt;earning Center. Several other schools in the Little Rock district, including Forest Park and Pulaski Heights elementaries. are studying the issue. Little Rock school board member Mike Daugherty, a leading proponent, is pushing for more schools  including junior higjis  to adopt uniforms. In the Pulaski County Special School District, Crystal Hill Magnet Elementary started a voluntary uniform policy this school year, but most students dont follow it. Until recently, unifonns were most often associated with private schools. Catholic schools felt they helped poor students fit in with students from higher-income families. , At Rockefeller, they have Improved dlMtlpUne, HcconlliiB hi third-grade teacher Skip Gardner. Before the uniforms, children would fight over and criticize each other about their clothes. . . Normally, you think of private schools wearing them, but Id put my kids up against any of them, Gardner said. \"1 just feel like it helps their self-esteem and prepares them. But critics disagree with Gard- Ile promised then that the Education Department would dis- Iribule manuals to the nation's IG.IKX) school dislricls, advising them how to enforce a scliool-uni-form policy. Some parents love the idea. Others see it as a misguided government infringement on personal freedom. Critics, like the American Civil Liberties Union, argue that uniforms in public schools are just a Band-Aid for serious See UNIFORMS, Page12A Arkansas Detnocral-Gazetle/STEVE KEESEE Me nussdl, a lirsl-g,ader at Williams Magnel Elemenlaiy, loads her classinales in \"quiel mode\" alle, physical eduialion. ell. The Long Beach district agreed in February to provide uniforms for poor students and to allow a waiver for students who didnt want to wear them. And even Villa-McDowell concedes that, when It is well Implemented, a uniform policy has every possibility of leveling the playing field. In Long Beach, student drug cases, sex offenses, awault and battery cases, aanndd ffiigghhttss ddee-creased, according to the U.S. Department of Education. At Rockefeller and at Williams, the principals say no one has voiced serious objections to the il ir uniforms. , The implicit message Is its not quite church, yet it's not the ballpark, Williams Mary Menk-ing said. \"It's an integral part of the statement were making to children and the community. We feel the dress is part of the overall success of the school. Since its Inception, Williams has been known for Its strong emphasis on discipline and basic skills. It has always maintained a strict dress code, and four years ago parents voted to require uni-forms. Children in kindergarten AikBusas UemocKil-UwaHB/aievi: Khl.sn Ftarha Babbs keeps her unonhed kWergartnen In order attar physiral edncallen at Williams Magne! Elementag, Stbeol. The solutions to violence and poor school attendance and bad attitudes to education ... are much more complicated. James UeWinter, whose son attends Forest Park, was furious one a junior high student who graduated from Rockefeller, the other a 5-ycar old who just started through third grade now wear uniforms. Another grade will be mlih-d Infh yi'iir unlH every \"bl ner's perception. There are no studies that show uniforms create positive behavior, contends Rita Spillenger, executive director of the Arl^nsas ACLU chapter. . This is really a very cynical It s not American. when his PTA sent out a survey on parent interest in required let. there. , ,, Her older daughter doesnt wear uniforms, and the cost of the latest fashions hits Bledsoes wal-cial help from the school and the 1TA, which has a uniform resale every year. Uniform pieces can be found at most department stores and at discount stores such as dent is outfitted. Parents at Rockefeller must sign a parent contract that requires them to comply with that school's uniform policy. Parents who object can ask for a transfer to anollier school. No one has left the school because of the uni-sc forms. iitiifnrni\u0026lt;! EEvveerryyUthlilnllgg nneeww tUhioavt comes \"Mv child will wear what he out, she wants it,\" Bledsoe said. wanb\\o, UeWinter said. \"1 will 'f start uniforms in junior go to court for the freedom to decide what I want my child to wear. and superficial solution to a very complicated problem, Spillenger Some parents do say that uniat least easier on their said.  , They're trying to use a Band- Aid to patch a crumbling wall. wallets. .. Connie Bledsoe, an aide at Rockefeller, has two daughters  uui, a*ic wuiiio  If they start uniforms in junior high, shell be wearing them. Uniforms at Williams and Rockefeller cost about $50 for boys and $75 for girls. Prices would be higlier if specific collars or patches were required. Students whose parents cannot afford to buy uniforms get finan- Target and Kmart. wuus. , Nevertheless, cost was an issue Sixth-grade teacher Ann when laoiig Beach, Calif., in 1994 Larkowski said the uniforms have became the first district in tlie na- produced better-behaved chll-tion to require uniforms in all el- dren ellininaled infiu enieiitary and middle schools, eiice of the neighborhood s gang^ The ACLU and the Ugal Aid No more sagging jeans. No more Foundation of Long Beach sued short shorts. _ .. the district on behalf of 53 chil- \"rnsr tn dren who could not alTord them. Some families who were using rent money to buy unifonns were evicted from their homes, said stair attorney Terri Villa-McDow- ljniKUWni ., It, children and eliminated the infiu-ence It, suui to. , Prior to uniforms, it was obnoxious, Larkowski said, \"It teaches the kids to be themselves without outside means. They re dressed for school, they know it s business. It Arkansas Democrat ^(Sazcttc  TUESDAY, JUNE 11. 1996 Just another liberal plot I Re your call for opinions on the school uniform issue: This is a very simple, cut- and-dried situation. This is the very core, yes, the heart and soul of the liberal agenda When a social problem arises, they want to solve the problem by taking something away from the haves and giving it to the have-notsthus taking away from the have- nots the very incentives to succeed. The 1 iberals are only trying to keep their stranglehold on the public school systems by promising false solutions to the problems they have created. When I was a child, we were given instructions in the Greek classics, classical music, the arts. etc. Now these subjects have been pushed aside to make room for recycling, diversity, self-esteem, AIDS awareness ad nauseam. -Instead of admitting that theyre wrong, they promise to reform the American educational system by implementing even more of their inane ideas. Instead of punishing the thugs who kill their peers for sneakers and Starter jackets, they want to remove the temptation. We as a society need to wake up and tell these people, Weve seen what youve done\nwell take our chances with something else. This attempt at imposing school uniforms is only the latest ploy by the liberals to reward failure and penalize success. Do we want a cookie-cutter society? Do we want our children to follow the beat of the liberal drummer? What is the ultimate penalty wewill pay for trying to clone our children? Whats next if dressing all the children alike doesnt work? Maybe the next thing to try is shaving their heads and making them on this. I know that is the right thing for him to do. I will be proud of him for that RAMONA TILLER Perry waikbackward. frank DUFFY Rogers Rich, poor dressed alike .rbelieve all schools should require uni- forms. There are children who dont have money for clothes that the well-off have. My children went through a Catholic school where rich and poor dressed alike. I know firsthand about the well-off always wearing the pretty, expensive clothes. The rest of us couldnt. 'That does count. J hope President Clipton will get backing Uniform policy needed As a product of the Little Rock public schools, a parent and a patron, I would like to strong encourage a district-wide school uniform policy. The public schools I attended were quite different from the ones my children do and will attend. The district has problemssome real, some perceived. Enrollment is dropping at a steady rate and it seems no one can or will admit that the problem is really quite simple. Parents want, expect and deserve a safe and secure environment for their children to grow and learn in. They want stability m school assignments and solid leadership from the administration. Mandatory school uniforms linked with increased discipline, such as the zerotolerance policy, would be a giant leap forward in reclaiming our public schools. Numerous educators around the country with firsthand experience in public school uniform policies provide strong evidence of the positive effects. It has been shown that school uniforms can improve student behavior, reduce violence, increase attendance, foster school pride and a sense of belonging, improve safety by easily identifying who belongs on camp^, eliminate gang-related colors and clothing, diminish perceived economic differences, help put the focus on the business at hand, i.e. education, and be affordably obtained. Parents opposed to the idea of school uniforms seem to have one main concern\nthat school uniforms will stifle their childs individuality and creativity. Wouldnt we rather our children be known for their inner self and true individuality rather than by the cool clothes they wear? How sad to think that the only way our children have to express themselves is through the pair oftennis shoes they have . on, not by the way they conduct themselves or through their ideas and talente. School uniforms are an old idea with new and promising possibilities. DRAKE A. HAWKINS little RockArkansas Democrat (gazelle | THURSDAY, JUNE 13, 1996 , Emphasize self-esteem ' Let the schools allow self-esteem to be of utmost importance in their curriculums. When this happens, the thought that uniforms will solve our school problems will simply not be needed. JEAN WHITEHEAD Little RockArkansas Democrat (gazelle THURSDAY. JUNE 13, 1996. Letters School uniforms a bankrupt idea This year marks the 50th anniversary of the publishing of George Orwells Animal Farm. What a delightful and insightful hour or so of reading! Tlie reader could easily find it amusing on the surface and horrifying, upon further consideration, for its portrait of power gone mad. On the surface, mandatoiy school uniforms for virtually mandatory school attendance has a point, that being that the proliferation of muggings and sometimes killing of schoolchildren by schoolchildren because they were wearing a $100 pair of athletic shoes the perpetrator wanted... might be abated. This reminds me of the parent who told me of her 10-year-old daughters experience of having another student put his hand down the front of her dress on the playground during recess.,When the girl complained to the teacher on recess duty, she was told that if she would play in a different area of the playground, it probably would not happen again. TTie solution to crime is not to put public schoolchildren in uniforms. The solution would be for teachers, administrators, parents and persons of integrity to vigorously protest the sanction of envy.  Regardless of motive, school uniforms will only up the ante. School uniforms for public schoolchildren is a bankrupt idea. It displaces responsibility. It will inevitably place an increased tax burden on an already overtaxed population. It will, by policy, make a mockery of reason, evade principle, punish achievers through their children and communicate a perverted logic to any child who cares to reason for himself or\nherself. , Im sure cancer patients and their loved ones experience some sense of comfort when the Band-Aid is placed on the cancer\nat least something is being done. GEORGE T. SPENCE  ConwayArkansas Democrat (gazelle THURSDAY, JUNE 13, 1996, Not solution to problems a  believe that requiring school uniforms in public schools would put discipline and learning back in our schools I am neither for nor against uniforms. I think they are fine if that is what the school au^orities and/or parents want. A student killing another student over an article of clothing points to a deeper problem with that child than that of simply coveting a jacket ora pair of tennis shoes. This makes a terrible statement about our society. Children learn what they are taught at home. They learn from examples set before them by those who are supposed to love and care for them more than anyone else does. Their parents or guardians are the ones who teach little children what choices to make in their lives. Unfortunately, those who are taught to make bad choices are not the only ones who suffer the consequences of those choices. solution to our problems in public schools or any other place was as simple as requiring uniforms. I daresay tliat ^oimd enough uniforms to go J am sure that President Clinton is not naive or unwise enough to believe that this IS the solution to our problems in public schools. Hearts need to be changed. If we ever needed a nationwide change of hearts it IS now.  MARY E. BURT CrossettArkansas Demccraf^CiSjrtzelte ' 13, 2000 District will create dress panel 24 Ll\u0026lt; schools now use uniform policies BYCYNflllA HOWELL ARKANSAS I)EM(H'RAI-GAZEt Ui At Little Rocks Brady Elenien- Uniforms  Continued from Page IB school district would have to sign a petition requesting the ballot question. If voters approved the ballot uniforms. Additionally, provisions must be made for parents not financially able to purchase uniforms for their children. Board members did not discuss the uniform issue at length this week nor did they attempt to reach consensus on the direction the district should go on the matter. question, the district would be obligated to select an appropriate uni- ------------------------------ . . form and carry out a uniform policy, pointed out tliat several district The district must report to the schools allow so many different col- state Department of Education by or combinations that their uniform Nov. 17 the recommendation of its a Board President Sue Strickland tary School, pupils for the fiist time lUiy ociiuui, pupiio iMi viit. iiiov piiiiv 1 this year are wearing uniforms to class: navy or kliaki colored skills or polities are more like dress codes than uniform mandates. Board member Mike Daugherty vote. said he believes the uniforms can Brady Gadbeny special assis- contribute to a calmer learning en- tant to Caniine. told the School vironment. Board member Baker Board at a Thursday meeting that Kumis said there is a lack of scien- the Act 1301 of 1999 allows local tific research in the country on school boards to establish a policy whether uniform-clad pupils do bet- ..  ter in school. advisory committee, the board reaction anil the outcome of any public that gives schools the choice of repants, matched with shills of white, blue or gold. On Fridays, blue jeans and Brady school T-shirts are pennitted. Brady Principal Ada Keown said about 8.5 percent of the children routinely wear those uniforms. When they don't, she tries to remind them to do so. Next year, she will lake a slightly stronger stand, sending notc.s home to the parents of those who don't wear the specified clothing. T\\venty-four, or nearly half of the Little Rock School District school.s have put unifonu policies into place\neight schools this year alone. Most are elemenhiric.s but there are two middle schools and the Alternative Learning Center, a.s well. Since the early 1990s, the school district has left the question of instituting uniform policies to parents at each school. The district practice lias been to require a school to show that an ovci-whehning majority of parents support tlie implementation of a uniform policy. Now, in response to a 1999 state law, district officials will appoint a committee for the purpose of considering whether the district should adopt a unifonu dress code for students.\" Superintendent Les Canline said Friday that he hopes recommendations from an advisoi'y committee will move along the same lines  as llic cunent practice of allowing the school to decide the unifonu question for themselves. Hut, Caniine also said that eveiy practice can be improved upon and that the committee may have some ideas. School Board members agreed earlier this week that they will nominate two adults and one student from each of the seven school board election zones, plus a chainnan, to make up the committee. The board has the option to accept, reject or not act on whatever the advisoiy committee might recommend. If a committee recommends a uniform dress code and tlie board does not adopt one, then the issue could be placed on the ballot at the September school board election, according to the state law. But, to get the issue on the ballot, 5 percent of the qualified electors in the See UNIFORMS, Page 98 quiring unifomis. Keown said Friday that it is too He quoted a portion of the law soon to measure the effect of the that savs \"nothing ... shall be con- uniforms at her school, where as stilled to limit the ability of a school many as 95 percent of the parents district or a particular school within said in a sun'ey last year that they a district to adopt and implement a school uniform policy. Any school forms. district may implement a school uniform policy without submitting the issue to the electors of the district. wanted the school to require uniKeown did say that tlie dress policy has eliminated most talk among ____________________________ pupils about each other's clothing. Gadberry also pointed out to the She also said she has not had to i board that any unifoi-m policy must send anyone home this year behave some provisions for students to cause of shorts that are too shori or apply to opt out of the uniform re- sagging pants with low-riding quirement if there isn't any other waistbands. The absence of those reasonable placement for the stu-  .-i-...-~ dent. Parental consent is necessary factors has to contribute to a better to allow a student to opt out of the said. focus on learning, the principalI Arkansas Democrat'^(i^azcttc '  TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 11, 1997 Copyrlfihl  Little Rock Newspapers. Inc. Here are goals of schools I respectfully disagree with those citizens who favor school uniforms. I'm sure their intentions are good, but they are misguided. Forcing students to wear uniforms to school will not stop children from ridiculing each other. Instead of uniforms, lets double our effort to teach children tolerance and respect for everyone, regardless of their clothes, hairstyle, religion, rule or socioeconomic background. Schools need to be teaching tolerance, not taking away rights. When anyones rights are taken away, we all suffer. The goal of schools should be to produce intelligent, open-minded, clear-thinking, tolerant adults. That goal is impossible to achieve in an atmosphere that includes mandatory uniforms, urinalysis, random searches and curfew laws. Our children are being indoctrinated with the idea that individual rights can usurped by the needs of the government. This is a dangerous ideato be teaching tomorrows leaders. LYNDA ROGERS Bryanto o o CM co Proposal gives LR pupils a vote on uniforms o o o BY CYNTHIA HOWELL ARKANSAS DEMOCRAT-GAZETTE Little Rock high school students wont be wearing uniforms to school unless the students themselves  not their parents  vote to do so, according to a proposed policy and set of regulations pending before the School Board. Middle school students also would get some say in how they have to dress, according to the regulations, but their parents would get a vote as well. In the elementary schools, only parents would do the voting on uniforms. The Little Rock School Board is scheduled to cast an initial vote Oct. 24 on a school uniform policy that would become final only after a second vote, probably in November. Board members reviewed the proposal at an agenda-setting session Thursday during which they also authorized district staff to negotiate lease agreements with four churches  Bethel AME Church, 815 16th St.\nSouthwest Community Church, 7400 Lancaster Road\nFirst Presbyterian Church, 800 Scott St.\nand the Temple of Restoration Church, 12825 Interstate 30 West  for classroom space for middle school students suspended one to 10 days from their regular schools. The classrooms would be staffed during regular school hours with Little Rock School District teachers and aides so the students could continue their lessons despite their suspensions. The students parents would have the choice of sending the suspended child to the shortterm alternative program. 'The program is being funded with the federal Safe Schools grant that the district received earlier this year. Use of the churches hinges on the district being able to lease the rooms within the budget set in the grant. 'The uniform proposal stems from a 1999 state law requiring school boards statewide to establish committees of parents and students to consider whether their districts should adopt a uniform dress code. The Little Rock committee submitted its recommendations last month. Several Little Rock schools, mostly elementaries, already have long-standing school uniform policies. According to the proposed policy, each school would continue to have the option of adopting uniforms. Specific groups within a school would have to propose a uniform policy for a school vote. Nominating groups would include a parent committee appointed by the Parent Teacher Association or the schools campus leadership team. Twenty percent of parents at an elementary school could petition for a vote on uniforms. Parents or students could petition at the middle schools and high schools, where student councils could also propose a vote. Each schools campus leadership team would actually establish the uniform code. The proposed uniform would have to fall within the limits set in the districts overall dress code regulations in the students Rights and Responsibilities Handbook. To be adopted, the uniform would have to be approved by 80 percent of the eligible voters. A school could vote on a uniform code no more than once a school year, and it would have to be early enough in the spring that it could take effect the following fall. Students or their parents, depending on the students age, would have the ability to opt out of the required dress code without having to transfer to another school, according to the proposed regulations.Novembe r 1 7, 2 0 0 0 School uniform policy approved Board gives LR parents, pupils a say in whether clothes should look alike BY CYNTHIA HOWELL ARKANSA.S DEMOCRAT-GAZETTE The Little Rock School Bbard gave final approval Thursday to a dress-code policy that allows, but doesnt require, parents or students at individual schools to create their own school uniform rules. ' The new policy is accompanied i by regulations requiring 80 per- i cent of the parents of children in elementary school to approve the establishment of any uniform code. At the middle-school level, pupils will have some say in the way they dress, as 80 percent of the parents and the students must favor implementing a uniform policy at the middle grades. At the high school level, only an 80 percent supermajority of the students can vote uniforms into place. A student, the students parents or both  depending on the age of the student  can choose to have the student not wear the schools selected uniform. The student or the parent, however, must complete an opt-out form and submit it to school administrators before the student can be excused from the uniform code. Administrators should ask the family for a reason for opting out of the uniform policy, according to the regulations, but the family is not obligated to respond. If an opt-out form has not been completed, a student will be expected to comply with the school uniform code. The district regulations also include provisions on how a school would revoke a uniform rule. The School Board approved the dress policy, including the language on school uniforms, at the prompting of a requirement from the state that districts appoint citizen committees to consider school uniforms. More than a dozen of the Little Rock schools already operate with uniform policies that they put in place under earlier but less formal district regulations.\nThis project was supported in part by a Digitizing Hidden Special Collections and Archives project grant from The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation and Council on Library and Information Resoources.\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n\n "},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_235","title":"Enrollment, Little Rock School District (LRSD), North Little Rock School District (NLRSD) and Pulaski County Special School District (PCSSD), gender and racial count, school capacity, and transfers","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118"],"dcterms_creator":["Arkansas. Department of Education"],"dc_date":["1992-10-01"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System"],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Education--Arkansas","Arkansas. Department of Education","Educational statistics","Education and state","Little Rock School District","North Little Rock School District","Pulaski County Special School District","School attendance"],"dcterms_title":["Enrollment, Little Rock School District (LRSD), North Little Rock School District (NLRSD) and Pulaski County Special School District (PCSSD), gender and racial count, school capacity, and transfers"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Butler Center for Arkansas Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://arstudies.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/bcmss0837/id/235"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["Available for use in research, teaching, and private study. Any other use requires permission from the Butler Center."],"dcterms_medium":["documents (object genre)"],"dcterms_extent":["151 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\n\\ TO: FROM: SUBJECT: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARY-HAMST REET LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS October 22, 1992 OCT t. B 1992 Melissa Guldin, Office of Desegregation Monitoring Marie Parker, Associate Superintendent for Organizational and Learning Equity Revised October 1, 1992 Enrollment Report Please find enclosed the revised October 1, 1992 Enrollment Report. This report is a revision of the enrollment report sent to you last week. The format of the report has been changed to reflect gender. Should you have questions concerning ~1is report please contact me at 321,i.-2272. I \\ LITTLER OCKS CHOODLI STRICT OCTOBE1R, 1992 ENROLLMENT WHITE BLACK HISPANIC ASIAN/PACI.S LND AMER!. ND/ESK MAL~THEFERM ALE MALlOTA~EMALE SCHOOL/GRADE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FE 1ALE %BU, CENTRAL UNGRADED 10 130 149 221 246 0 0 13 1 1 0 365 396 61.37 11 120 142 181 210 2 1 8 16 0 1 311 370 57.42 12 99 121 109 166 0 0 7 5 0 1 215 293 54.13 SUBTOTAL 349 412 511 622 2 1 28 22 1 2 891 1059 58.10 KIND. 0 0 18 31 0 0 0 0 0 0 18 31 100.00 TOTAL 349 412 529 653 2 1 28 22 1 2 909 1090 59.13 rAIR UNGRADED 6 2 7 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 10 65.22 10 51 46 100 95 3 2 0 0 0 0 154 143 65.66 11 67 45 110 95 3 2 0 0 0 0 180 142 63.66 12 54 39 69 78 2 2 0 0 0 0 125 119 60.25 SUBTOTAL 178 132 286 276 8 6 0 0 0 0 472 414 63.43 KIND. 0 1 5 13 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 14 94.74 TOTAL 178 133 291 289 8 6 0 0 0 0 477 428 64.09 HALL UNGRADED 10 64 46 109 98 2 0 2 2 0 0 177 146 64.09 11 57 69 81 87 1 0 2 4 1 0 142 160 55.63 12 78 76 93 92 2 4 1 5 0 0 174 177 52.71 SUBTOTAL 199 191 283 277 5 4 5 1L 1 0 493 483 57.38 KIND. 6 4 5 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 7 44.44 TOTAL 205 195 288 280 5 4 5 11 1 0 504 490 57.14 MCCLELLAN UNGRADED 10 55 50 122 155 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 3 178 209 71.58 11 48 43 93 90 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 142 135 66.06 12 60 56 79 99 0 0 0 2 0 0 2 4 141 161 58.94 SUBTOTAL 163 149 294 344 0 1 2 3 0 0 2 8 461 505 66.05 KIND. 1 0 9 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 9 94.74 TOTAL 164 149 303 353 0 1 2 3 0 0 2 8 471 514 66.60 WIIIT[ [lLACK HISPANIC ASIAN/PACI.S LND AMERI.N D/ESK MAL~THFEERM ALE MALtOTA~EMALE SCHOOL/GRADE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEnALE q,UL/, PARKVIEW UNGRADED 10 63 65 76 104 0 2 0 1 0 0 139 172 57.88 11 43 70 53 98 0 0 1 2 0 1 97 171 56.34 12 49 68 75 79 1 2 0 1 0 0 125 150 56.00 SUBTOTAL 155 203 204 281 1 4 1 4 0 1 361 493 56.79 KIND. 1 0 9 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 7 94.12 TOTAL 156 203 213 288 1 4 l 4 0 1 371 500 57.52 SUBTOTAL UNGRADED 6 2 7 8 13 1D 65.22 10 363 356 628 698 5 5 16 4 1 3 1013 1066 63.78 11 335 369 518 580 6 3 12 23 1 2 1 872 978 59.35 12 340 360 425 514 5 8 8 13 1 2 4 780 900 55.89 KIND. 8 5 46 63 54 68 89.34 SR. HIGH TOTAL 1052 1092 1624 1863 16 16 36 40 2 3 2 8 2732 3D22 60.60 SR. HIGH TOTAL W/0 KINDERGART1E0N44 1087 1578 1800 16 16 36 40 2 3 2 8 2678 2954 59.98 WHITE IJLACK HIS?AMIC ASIA':/PAC.! Sli:J A:.:::R!. N u/ESK MAL2rnrnF EMALE l.l~LJOTAL::-1.'f..', SCIIOOL/GRADE MALE FE~1ALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MAL:': FEMALE r:tu F~.l'\\ALE 'I '- ~=- \\2~:. CLOVERDALE UNGRADED 7 59 19 98 112 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 159 132 72.16 8 28 30 87 93 2 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 117 127 73. 77 9 20 36 83 98 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 105 135 75.42 TOTAL 107 85 268 303 6 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 381 394 73.68 DUNBAR UNGRADED 7 35 52 64 72 0 0 1 0 1 0 2 0 103 124 59.91 8 52 42 74 71 0 0 0 3 0 0 2 1 128 117 59.18 9 54 48 64 65 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 119 114 55.36 TOTAL 141 142 202 208 0 0 1 3 1 0 5 2 350 355 58.16 FORESTH EIGHTS UNGRADED 1 5 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 6 45.45 7 24 42 92 103 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 118 146 73.86 8 37 41 100 99 1 0 4 1 0 0 0 0 142 141 70.32 9 42 28 72 83 0 1 2 1 0 0 0 0 116 113 67.69 TOTAL 104 116 268 286 1 1 8 3 0 0 0 0 381 406 70.39 HENDERSON UNGRADED 7 51 48 141 87 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 194 137 68.88 8 25 21 122 137 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 149 160 83.82 9 38 32 113 85 2 1 0 3 0 0 0 0 153 121 72.26 TOTAL 114 101 376 309 4 3 2 5 0 0 0 0 496 418 74.95 MABEVLA LE UNGRADED 6 7 3 3 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 10 10 30.00 7 31 49 84 67 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 117 116 64.81 8 39 35 79 72 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 118 107 67.11 9 22 37 63 67 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 85 104 68.78 TOTAL 98 128 229 209 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 330 337 t5.67 WHITE BLACK H!SPANl\\, ASI AN/PAC.I SLND AMERI.t D/ESK ~ THE MALtOTArEMALE SCHOOL/GRADE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FE'1ALE MALE FEr-iALE MALE FU\\ALE MAL FEMALE t!3Lh MANN UNGRADED 7 64 64 70 108 1 2 1 0 0 1 0 0 136 175 57.23 n 53 65 79 81 1 0 4 1 0 0 0 0 137 147 56.34 9 33 48 68 99 1 3 1 0 0 1 0 0 103 151 65.75 TOTAL 150 177 217 288 3 5 6 1 0 2 0 0 376 473 59.48 PULASKHI GTS. UNGRADED 2 1 11 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 2 80.00 7 71 58 76 60 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 148 119 50.94 8 38 58 82 85 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 121 143 63.26 9 33 58 78 59 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 111 117 60.09 TOTAL 144 175 247 205 0 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 393 381 58.40 SOUTHWEST UNGRADED 0 1 11 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 3 92.86 7 27 29 99 98 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 127 128 77 .25 8 23 24 90 79 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 114 106 76.82 9 31 31 70 74 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 101 105 69. 90 TOTAL 81 85 270 253 2 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 353 342 75.25 SUBTOTAL UNGR.ADED 9 14 29 7 1 39 21 60.00 7 362 361 724 707 6 5 7 2 1 2 2 1102 1077 65.67 8 295 316 713 717 6 8 10 6 2 1 1026 1048 68.95 9 273 318 611 630 5 6 3 4 1 1 1 893 960 66.97 JR. HIGHT OTAL 939 1009 2077 2061 17 19 20 12 2 3 5 2 3060 3106 67 .11 WIIITE IJLACK Ill SPA:I:C AS!,\\I /PAC. !SU:\n:\u0026gt; M'.ER. I JD/1::SK ~ ALe.T.: .i\u0026lt; FEF,ALE lOTA' SCIIOOL/GRAOE MALE FEMALE MAL[ FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FE1 ALE MALE FEtlALE '.1\\~\" I'E t'.AI. E - BADGETT UNGRADED 1 0 3 3 0 0 D 0 0 0 0 0 4 3 85.71 1 3 2 11 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 10 79.17 2 4 5 8 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 10 59.09 3 0 3 8 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 13 85. 71 4 5 0 8 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 8 76.19 5 1 3 14 17 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 20 88.57 6 4 3 19 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 23 13 80.56 SUBTOTAL 18 16 71 61 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 89 77 79.52 KIND. 4 3 8 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 7 63.16 FOURY RO LD 3 4 1 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 13 58.82 TOTAL 25 23 80 74 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 105 97 76.24 JfihfMED 5 2 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 3 41.67 1 4 2 20 9 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 25 11 80.56 2 0 4 15 10 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 16 14 83.33 3 4 1 15 14 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 19 16 82.86 4 3 3 8 21 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 24 80.56 5 5 2 25 20 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 31 23 83.33 6 7 1 18 22 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 28 23 78.43 SUBTOTAL 28 15 105 97 2 0 5 2 0 0 0 0 140 114 79.53 KIND. 7 3 17 20 0 i 0 1 D 0 0 0 24 25 75.51 i\"\"OUYRR 0 c.'.l 7 2 6 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 5 50.00 TOTAL 42 20 128 120 2 1 5 3 0 0 0 0 177 144 77 .26 BASELINE UNGRA[)Eu 1 7 5 21 26 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 29 31 75.00 / 8 7 19 21 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 27 29 71.43 3 7 2 15 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 22 18 77 .50 ~ 3 4 26 17 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 29 21 86.00 5 7 1 11 17 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 20 18 73.68 6 3 2 14 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 18 85.71 SJ3TOTAL 35 21 106 113 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 144 135 77. 78 Ki11'.l. 8 7 33 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 41 19 75.00 FOJ~ Y?. OLD TOTAL 43 28 139 125 0 0 0 0 185 154 77 .29 WHITE BLACK HISPANIC ASIAN/PACI.S LND AMER. IND/ESK MAL~THFEERM ALE MALtOTA~EMAI_E SCHOOL/GRADE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE %BU,, -- --- BOOKER UNGRADED 1 20 19 29 18 49 37 54.65 2 13 23 23 27 1 37 50 57.47 3 19 19 26 24 l 45 44 56.18 4 17 23 25 28 1 1 1 43 53 55.21 5 12 27 18 33 30 60 56.67 6 18 25 31 23 1 1 50 49 54.55 SUBTOTAL 99 136 152 153 3 3 1 254 293 55.76 KIND. 17 17 21 19 38 36 54.05 FOURY RO LD TOTAL 116 153 173 172 3 3 1 292 329 55.56 BRADY UNGRADED 0 1 5 0 5 1 83.33 1 12 8 21 13 2 1 35 22 59.65 2 8 9 26 18 1 34 28 70.97 3 8 7 18 26 1 1 27 34 72.13 4 8 2 20 14 28 16 77.27 5 9 7 20 18 1 29 26 69.09 6 5 2 24 22 2 29 26 83.64 SUBTOTAL 50 36 134 111 1 2 4 1 1 187 153 72.06 KIND. 12 13 11 19 2 1 _25 33 51. 72 FOURY R0 ~'.) TOTAL 62 49 145 130 1 2 4 3 2 212 186 69.10 CARVER UNGRAlJEu 1 15 16 16 23 31 39 55.71 I' 21 13 31 19 1 1 53 33 58.14 3 21 20 26 22 47 42 53.93 .\n25 17 22 29 2 1 49 47 53 .13 5 28 16 30 25 58 41 55.56 6 32 11 18 35 2 50 48 54.0b SUBTOTAL 142 93 143 153 3 4 288 250 55.0Z KIND. 16 11 16 17 32 28 55.01 FOURY RO LD TOTAL 158 104 159 170 3 4 320 278 55.0, WHIE llLACK IIISPAMIC AS!Ail/P,\\C. !Slti\n} /1!/\nrR. JN:}/ESK ~ Trc.~ lOTA' SCHOOL/GRADE MALE FEMIILE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE F[ 11\\LE -M- AL -F--El:,\\LE MAL FEMAI.E-CHICOT UNGRADED 4 3 5 5 9 8 58.82 1 13 14 30 29 43 43 68.60 2 18 13 38 19 1 56 33 64.04 3 12 11 19 24 1 1 1 33 36 62.32 4 10 11 14 27 1 1 25 39 64.06 5 10 9 20 20 1 30 30 66.67 6 12 14 25 21 1 38 35 63.01 SUBTOTAL 79 75 151 145 3 4 1 234 224 64.63 KIND. 17 6 31 23 48 29 70.13 FOURY RO LD TOTAL 96 81 182 168 3 4 1 282 253 65.42 CLOVERDALE UNGRADi::D 1 3 4 18 21 21 25 84.78 2 6 3 17 20 2 23 25 77 .08 3 4 5 17 18 21 23 79.55 4 4 3 22 24 1 26 28 85.19 5 5 5 27 17 32 22 81.48 6 3 4 22 21 25 25 86.00 SUBTOTAL 25 24 i23 121 3 148 148 82.43 KIND. 9 6 18 20 27 26 71. 70 FOURY Ru c.J 3 4 5 4 1 8 9 52.94 TOTAL 37 34 146 145 4 183 183 79.51 DODD UNGRAL'Eu 5 0 2 3 7 3 50.00 1 7 11 7 13 14 24 52.63 / 5 9 15 12 20 21 65.85 3 11 7 12 12 23 19 57.14 .\n10 6 12 10 22 16 57.89 5 7 7 15 21 22 28 72.00 6 8 8 12 18 20 26 65.22 SRTOTAL 53 48 75 89 128 137 61.89 ~~I~. J. 12 8 11 8 23 16 48.72 FO~:\u0026lt;Y KO L'.l TOTAL 65 56 86 97 151 153 60.20 WI!IT E llLACK III SPAtlCl ASI Ai,/PAC. ISLr:D /\\!,~R.l i~J/L~K tTIIEJ. :oTA~r~ E SCHOOL/GRADE MALE FE:1ALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE Fi::lALE MALE FE1\\ALE MAL FE:iALE\n.'.f.L. ~ - FAIR PARK UNGRADED 1 8 2 16 18 24 20 77 .27 2 4 3 15 14 19 17 80.56 3 2 4 16 9 1 19 13 78.13 4 1 2 13 16 14 18 90.63 5 6 3 11 15 17 18 74.29 6 3 1 9 14 12 15 85.19 SUBTOTAL 24 15 80 86 1 105 101 80.58 KIND. 6 4 13 13 1 20 17 70.27 FOUR YR OLD TOTAL 30 19 93 99 2 125 118 79.01 FORESTP ARK UNGRADED 1 18 20 21 14 39 34 47.95 2 22 23 13 12 1 36 35 35.21 3 16 19 6 7 1 23 26 26.53 4 17 14 10 11 1 28 25 39.62 5 15 24 21 24 36 48 53.57 6 10 13 16 15 26 28 57.41 SUBTOTAL 98 113 87 83 2 1 188 196 44.27 KIND. 11 20 18 10 1 29 31 46.67 FOUR Y\nl. u!..J TOTAL 109 133 105 93 2 1 1 217 227 44.59 FRANKLIN UNGRAUEu 1 0 7 2 8 2 90.00 1 5 2 32 35 1 37 38 89.33 / 1 4 25 20 26 24 90.00 3 1 1 30 18 31 19 96.00 ~ 3 1 24 21 27 22 91.84 5 0 0 16 10 1 17 10 96.30 6 2 0 22 25 2 1 1 27 26 88.6- S~J10TAL 13 8 156 131 3 l 2 173 141 91.4v :'.I :,:J. 2 3 19 19 21 22 88.37 Fi)Lj\nlY, RO LD 17 7 18 9 1 37 17 so.or ,OTAL 1? 1 R 1Q1 1 SQ 4 2 231 180 85.o,\nWll!T[ !LIICK IIISPMIIC IIS!IIN/PIIC.I SLND 111-'.[f{.r n:.J/lSK MIIL~rnrn FEl-iAL[ 10T1\\~ SCHOOL/GRADE MIILE FEMIILE MIILE FEMIILE MALE FEMALE MIILE FEt-11\\LE MIIL[ Ft!ll\\LE M/1L,_ _l\nli/11.[ - FULBRIGHT UNGRADED 2 3 1 1 3 4 28_ 1 21 14 14 11 1 36 25 40. 2 18 23 16 15 2 34 AO 41. 3 30 18 20 18 2 50 38 43. 4 30 19 15 12 2 47 31 34. 5 14 27 18 21 1 33 48 48. 6 27 15 19 20 1 46 36 47. SUBTOTAL 142 119 103 98 4 5 249 222 42. KIND. 16 19 12 12 28 31 40. FOUR YR OLD TOTAL 158 138 115 llO 4 5 277 253 42. \\ GARLAND UNGRADED 1 2 6 4 7 6 76. 1 2 0 22 15 24 15 94. 2 0 1 16 13 1 17 14 93. 3 1 1 18 11 19 12 93. 4 0 0 16 19 16 19 100. 5 2 0 ll 15 1 1 14 16 B6. 6 0 1 18 14 2 20 15 91. SUBTOTAL 6 5 107 91 4 1 ll7 97 92. KIND. 1 2 12 14 1 14 16 86. FOUR YR u!..J 2 1 6 3 8 4 75. TOTAL 9 8 125 108 5 1 139 117 91. GEYERS PRINGS UNGRADEu 0 0 3 0 3 0 100. l 5 9 19 8 24 17 65. I 9 11 12 13 21 24 55. 3 7 7 16 11 23 18 65. ~ 2 3 8 11 10 14 79. 5 3 6 9 7 12 13 64. 6 8 8 15 15 23 23 65. SU3TOT,\\,L 34 44 82 65 116 109 65. KIND. 11 7 7 14 i8 21 53. FOUR YR OLD 2 7 4 5 6 12 50. TOTAL 47 58 93 84 140 142 62. WHITE ()I.ACK ll!SPAIIIC ASIAN/PACI.S LN::J J\\!l\nER. IND/ESK eTHEK , JCJTA~. SCIIDOGLR/ ADE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALr MALE FEMALE MALE FEr1ALE MAI. ' FU\\AL[ M,,Lt. _lhAI.E - GIBBS UNGRADED 1 10 7 15 10 0 1 25 18 58.lL 2 14 5 12 14 26 19 57. 7t 3 13 7 12 12 0 0 0 1 25 20 53.3. 4 9 11 10 16 0 2 19 29 54.1. 5 11 8 11 17 0 2 0 1 22 28 56.0( 6 13 13 14 25 0 1 1 28 39 58.2. SUBTOTAL 70 51 74 94 0 6 1 2 145 153 56.3( KIND. 8 5 11 12 0 0 1 1 20 18 60.5c FOURY RO LD TOTAL 78 56 85 106 0 6 2 3 165 171 56.8~ !SH UNGRADED 0 0 2 3 2 3 100.0C 1 0 0 8 7 8 7 100. oc 2 0 0 18 13 18 13 100.0C 3 2 0 16 8 18 8 92.31 4 0 0 10 8 10 8 100.0C 5 0 0 7 16 7 16 100.0( 6 0 0 11 21 11 21 100.0C SUBTOTAL 2 0 72 76 74 76 98.6i KIND. 0 0 15 10 15 10 100.0( i\"OURY Ru ~J 1 2 4 5 5 7 75.0( TOTAL 3 2 91 91 94 93 97.3:: JEFFERSON UNGRAt:Eu 2 2 3 0 5 2 42.86 1 19 16 16 10 35 26 42.62 / 23 19 12 20 0 0 1 36 39 42.67 3 18 17 12 19 2 0 1 33 36 44.93 .\n25 11 14 18 0 1 39 30 46.38 5 18 21 9 16 0 0 1 28 37 38.4( 6 22 19 23 13 45 32 46. 7: SJgTQTAL 127 105 89 96 2 3 221 202 43.7~ Kl 'iD. 20 21 12 7 32 28 31,67 FOJR n OLD TOTAL 14 7 1 ?6 101 103 2 3 253 230 42.2~ liHITE ~LACK lllSPMllC ASlMi/PAC. lSU.::l A!,ER. It\n::l/ESK MAL~l'cF?.U ALE lOT!,~ , SCHOOL/GRADE MALE FE'1ALE MALE FEMA~E MALE FEMALE MALE FEIIALE MALE F [tt,\\LE :-'.:,L [hAI_E - MABVELA LE UNGRADED 2 1 4 3 6 4 70.0C 1 19 11 27 14 1 46 26 56.94 2 18 16 23 16 1 41 33 52.7C 3 8 20 18 24 26 44 60.0C 4 22 7 16 19 1 39 26 53.8: 5 18 19 22 17 40 36 51.32 6 21 10 27 15 48 25 57.53 SUBTOTAL 108 84 137 108 1 2 246 194 55.61: KIND. 16 11 19 14 35 25 55.0C FOURY RO LD TOTAL 124 95 156 122 1 2 281 219 55.6( MCDERMOTT UNGRADED 1 16 16 23 16 39 32 54.9:0 2 16 11 18 21 1 1 1 36 33 56.52 3 17 19 18 17 1 1 1 36 38 47 .3( 4 15 21 17 23 1 33 44 51.9: 5 10 16 24 24 2 1 l 38 40 61.Sl 6 16 16 21 25 1 1 38 42 57. SC SUBTOTAL 90 99 121 126 2 1 2 3 5 220 229 55.01 KIND. 13 18 15 13 1 29 31 46.6i FOURY RO ~J TOTAL 103 117 136 139 3 1 2 3 5 249 260 54.0~ MEADOWCLIFF UNGRAuEu 1 14 10 21 26 35 36 66.20 ,I 12 13 20 26 32 39 64. 79 3 15 i2 18 20 33 32 58.46 ~ 10 4 25 22 35 26 77 .05 5 16 8 23 18 39 27 62.L 6 6 8 15 17 21 25 69.57 SJ~TOTAL 73 55 122 129 195 185 66.0S Klti::l. 14 5 23 18 37 23 68.J~ FOURY RO LJ -:-CTAL ?.7 60 145 147 ?1? ?08 6/i. 31 WIIITE GL/\\CK I\\JSPMIIC /\\S1 /\\11/P/\\CI.S UHJ M~rn. Ji\nJ/t.SK e11.::, lu rt' SCIIOOL/GR/\\DE M/\\LE FE:1/\\LE M/\\LE FEl-1/\\LE M/\\LE FEMALE M/\\LE FE:-1/\\LE I /\\I.[ FEl1/\\LE M/\\~  - FEl1/\\LE :-:t.L 'ru:AI.[ - MITCHELL UNGRADED 1 0 5 3 6 3 88.89 1 3 4 17 12 2 20 18 76,32 2 1 1 18 25 1 19 27 93.48 3 1 1 19 14 20 15 94.29 4 2 3 15 14 1 18 17 82.86 5 3 1 22 14 25 15 90.00 6 0 0 11 11 11 11 100.00 SUBTOTAL 11 10 107 93 1 3 119 106 88.89 KIND. 1 1 14 9 15 10 92.00 FOURY RO LD 4 1 4 5 8 6 64.29 TOTAL 16 12 125 107 1 3 142 122 87.88 OTTERC REEK UNGRADED 1 12 13 12 11 1 1 25 25 46.00 2 21 13 9 14 30 27 40.35 3 16 18 5 8 1 22 26 27.08 4 21 11 14 6 1 35 18 37.74 5 15 13 16 7 31 20 45.10 6 12 16 15 11 27 27 48.15 SUBTOTAL 97 84 71 57 2 2 170 143 40.89 KIND. 11 11 9 6 1 1 1 22 1.8 37.50 FOURY :l.u ~J TOTAL 108 95 80 63 3 3 192 161 40.51 PULASKHI EIGHTS UNGRA~Eu 46.94 1 11 15 13 10 24 25 / 17 15 12 19 1 1 29 36 47.69 3 12 13 9 12 1 22 25 44.68 ~ 11 14 17 12 1 29 26 52.73 5 9 7 18 16 1 28 23 66.67 6 10 9 17 17 27 26 64 .15 Sv3TO,N.. 70 73 86 86 2 1 159 161 53.75 ~(I \\J. 17 13 12 14 1 2 30 29 44.07 c-ou~Y RO LD TQTAL 87 86 98 180 3 3 189 190 52.24 WHITE l!LACK ll!SPMl!C /,S l Atl/PAC. lSUiD A~!E\n\u0026lt;. l :\n:)/ESK eThc?. JOTA~ . SCHOOL/GRADE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE M,\\LE FEMALE \\ALE FEIIALE MALE FE \\/\\L~ MAL FEl'.,\\LE Ml,~~ [hf,1.E B~e~ldtbL 1 0 1 19 16 19 17 97. 2\n2 0 0 19 15 19 15 100.01 3 0 0 15 14 15 14 100.0 4 0 0 25 13 1 25 14 97 ,4\u0026lt; 5 0 0 20 13 20 13 100.0 6 0 0 17 21 17 21 100.0 SUBTOTAL 0 1 115 92 1 115 94 99.0, KIND. 1 1 13 10 14 11 92.0f FOUR YR OLD 4 2 7 2 11 4 60.0( TOTAL 5 4 135 104 1 140 109 95. 9, ROCKEFELLER UNGRADED 1 9 14 19 18 1 29 32 60.6 2 3 8 18 21 1 22 29 76.4 3 4 2 13 12 1 1 18 15 75. 71 4 2 6 14 17 16 23 79.4 5 2 2 19 16 21 18 89. 7, 6 1 4 17 13 18 17 85.7 SUBTOTAL 21 36 100 97 3 1 124 134 76.3 KIND. 16 9 14 14 1 30 24 51.8 FOUR n J!..J 10 12 10 15 2 22 27 51.0 TOTAL 47 57 124 126 5 2 176 185 69.2 ROMINE UNGRAlJEi1 2 0 12 1 14 1 86.6' 1 9 4 22 21 31 25 76. 7( I 3 2 20 20 23 22 88.8~ 3 1 1 29 13 2 32 14 91. Jr ~ 4 6 11 29 1 15 36 78.4 5 3 6 13 15 1 16 22 73.6 6 4 6 13 15 18 21 71. 7 SUBT O\n, .\\L 26 25 120 114 2 2 149 141 80.6 KPiD. 8 11 20 14 1 29 25 62. Q, rOUR YR OLD 3 1 3 6 1 3 7 10 52.9 ,OTAL. 37 37 143 134 4 s 185 176 69.2 WHITE [lL/\\Ci( IIISPMllC ASIAN/PAC. l '.\u0026gt;LN::J /1I.'.rn. I ,::J/E'.:.K 07'0:i{ Jul/\\~ SCHOOLG/ RADE MALE FEMALE M/\\LE FE'I/\\LE M/11.E FEM/\\LE t'.ALE FC:t1ALE M/11.E FEl1/\\LE M/\\Lt FEMALE I'./,L,. t,\nAI.E -- --- STEPHENS UNGRADED 0 0 5 l 5 l 100.0( l 2 0 9 21 11 21 93. 7( 2 0 l 16 17 16 18 97.0f 3 0 0 18 16 18 16 100.01 4 0 0 12 8 12 8 100.0( 5 0 0 12 4 12 4 100.0( 6 0 0 14 18 14 18 100.0l SUBTOTAL 2 l 86 85 88 86 98.2t KIND. 1 0 12 11 13 11 95.8: FOUR YR OLD 1 2 4 4 5 6 72.7: TOTAL 4 3 102 100 !:)5 103 96.6' TERRY UNGRADED 1 B 23 15 10 1 1 35 34 36. 2_ 2 25 16 12 18 2 2 39 36 40.0: 3 28 13 11 19 3 1 42 33 40.0: 4 19 24 19 17 38 41 45.S- 5 15 22 22 21 2 1 39 44 51.8- 6 15 22 23 20 2 38 44 52.4 SUBTOTAL 121 120 102 105 8 7 231 232 44. 7. KIND. 28 17 15 16 2 45 33 39. 7, i\"OUR Y~ Oc.:l TOTAL 149 137 117 121 10 7 276 265 43.9 WAKEFIELD U~GRAUEu 1 9 11 25 29 l 34 41 72 .Oi / 10 5 21 34 l 31 40 77 .4t 3 12 11 16 25 l 29 37 62.L ~ 15 15 32 14 47 29 60.5 5 14 10 22 24 36 34 65.7 6 8 10 38 25 l 47 35 76.t S-J3TOTA!... 68 62 154 151 2 3 224 216 69.3 ,' i I~ J  11 6 22 20 34 26 70.0 ::-JL~ YR OLD 7GTAL 79 68 176 171 2 3 258 242 69 _i\nWHITE eLACK IIISPMl!C ASIAN/PACI.S LND 1\\1-:ER1.1\n:J/ESK Pfrci\u0026lt; TCJTI\\~ SCHOOGLR/ ADE MALE FE~,ALE MALE FEMf,LE MALE FEMALE MALE F~l1ALE MALE F::r~r~LE M4Lt FUiALE 1'.f,L~ El\nI\\I_E-WASHINGTON UNGRADED 2 0 1 D 3 0 33.33 1 24 29 43 34 1 67 64 58.78 2 24 23 60 37 1 85 60 66.90 3 29 15 30 32 2 61 47 57.41 4 21 19 27 29 48 48 58.33 5 33 17 34 33 67 so 57.26 6 23 17 28 27 51 44 57.89 SUBTOTAL 156 120 223 192 3 1 382 313 59. 71 KIND. 23 15 31 19 1 2 55 36 54.95 FOURY RO LD 11 7 11 7 22 14 50.00 TOTAL 190 142 265 218 4 3 459 363 58.76 WATSON UNGRADED 1 10 8 27 27 1 38 35 73.97 2 7 8 27 26 34 34 77 .94 3 5 6 18 23 23 29 78.85 4 8 7 20 13 28 20 68.75 5 13 5 21 33 34 38 75.00 6 9 5 24 25 33 30 77.78 -SUBTOTAL 52 39 137 147 1 190 186 75.53 KIND. 12 8 15 22 1 27 31 63.79 FOURY Rv '-J 4 2 5 6 9 8 64.71 TOTAL 68 49 157 175 1 1 226 225 73.Gl WESTERHNIL LS UNGRMEu 1 9 12 11 17 20 29 57.14 / 9 10 14 12 23 22 57.78 3 4 10 15 19 1 19 30 69.39 .\n10 8 13 17 23 25 62.50 5 10 9 13 19 23 29 61. 54 6 11 6 18 17 29 23. 67.31 S:.J3TOTAL 53 55 84 101 137 158 62. 71 ,(j ','.). 7 9 13 11 20 20 60.00 FOt\nYR OLD TOfT,L 60 64 97 112 WHITE ~LACK l\\[SPMJIC ASIAN/PACl. ' .\u0026gt;LN::J At-'.EH. I :,J/ESK OT\"? ICJTf,lc SCHOOL/GRADE MALE FE:1ALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FcJ1ALE 1\\ALE F:' ALE 'l.~L t \" FE i1AEL 1-:t.L,. (1-\nf1..E - WILLIAMS UNGRADED 1 15 14 24 12 1 2 39 29 52.94 2 15 12 18 21 1 1 33 35 57.3: 3 13 16 22 15 1 35 32 55.22 4 14 17 24 17 38 34 56.9l 5 17 15 22 16 1 1 41 31 52.7E 6 16 26 23 29 1 40 55 54.7l SUBTOTAL 90 100 133 110 1 2 2 4 226 216 54.9F KIND. 14 14 20 12 34 26 53.3\nFOURY RO LD TOTAL 104 114 153 122 1 2 2 4 260 242 54. 7E WILSON UNGRADED 3 1 18 1 21 2 82.61 1 9 4 20 14 29 18 72.3l 2 7 4 12 17 19 21 72. 5( 3 6 12 17 18 23 3'.J 66.0l 4 5 2 20 20 25 22 85.L 5 1 4 15 21 16 25 87 .8( 6 5 2 26 14 31 16 85.1. SUBTOTAL 36 29 128 105 164 134 78.1. KIND. 12 5 15 8 27 13 57 .5: ,-ouR n 0~:\u0026gt; 3 5 5 4 8 9 52. 9- TOTAL 51 39 148 117 199 156 74.6' WOODRUFF U,lG~A\nEu l 12 2 12 16 24 18 66.6 / 5 7 6 5 11 12 47.8 3 3 5 8 4 11 9 60.0 ~ 5 4 6 10 11 14 64 .C, 5 4 9 12 12 1 17 21 63 .1 6 8 1 10 10 1 18 12 66.l su~-c,rr.L 37 28 54 57 l 92 86 62 .. I~ I \"' 10 l 15 13 1 25 15 70., '1 ,..,. FOL~ Y\u0026lt; C:..J 2 5 2 6 l 4 12 50.l T07 f,L 4q 14 71 76 2 121 113 62.tl WHITE BLACK HISPANIC ASIAN/PACI.S LND AMERI. tJD/ESK MALeTHEFREM ALE MALtOTA~EMALE SCHOOL/GRADE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE %13[ SUBTOTAL UNGRADED 31 15 B6 31 117 46 71.1 1 374 345 693 612 5 3 4 6 2 1 1078 967 63. t 2 367 340 674 649 3 7 7 10 1 1 1 1053 1007 64., 3 350 323 601 584 '4 4 13 10 2 1 971 921 62.( 4 356 298 604 610 4 8 6 3 1 1 972 919 64., 5 336 329 643 652 6 6 10 5 1 996 992 65. 6 342 298 687 680 3 4 9 7 2 1 1 1044 990 67., K 392 310 582 497 '3 4 7 7 4 1 1 98S 820 61. Four year Old 77 64 95 93 3 1 2 4 1 177 163 55. TOTALE LEM. 2625 2322 4665 4408 3li 37 58 52 12 4 5 2 7396 6825 63. TOTALE LEM. 2633 2327 4711 4471 31 37 58 52 12 4 5 2 7450 6893 64. Ii/HIGH SCHOOL KINDERGARTEN SPECIALS CHOOLS 28 15 15 ff 43 28 39. DISTRICTT OTALS 4644 4438 8381 8345 64 72 114 104 16 10 12 12 13,231 12,981 63. OCT 1 6 b92 Office of 0:i: ,grega ion Munitoring SENIOR HIGH: 10/1/91 10/1/92 INCREASE/DECREASE % ,JUNIOR HIGH\n10/1/91 10/1/92 INCREASE/DECREASE % ELEMENTARY: 10/1/91 10/1/92 INCREASE/DECREASE o, lo ({ Lo SPECIAL .SCHOOLS: ~ o 1,i 10/1/91 JC,? /I l 10/1/92 rP' SE/DECREASE o,\\' ~\n)' % I (1f DISTRICT TOTAL: 10/1/91 10/1/92 INCREASE/DECREASE % I-~I 1,rf!ER\u0026lt;J ART El,J: 10/1/91 10/1/92 INCREASE/DECREASE '% FOUR YEAR OLD: 10/1/91 10/1/92 INCREASE/DECREASE % [JISTF:IC~T TOTAL LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OCTOBER 1 ENROLLMENTC OMPARISON J 9 9 1 - ':1 : / l 9 :: 2 - 9 3 WHITE BLACK OTHER TOTAL %BLACK 2152 3 24 3 lliJ ~ :) ~~ 2131 3378 123 60 ( 21) 135 9 1 ') 'J \u0026lt;., _, (. 98%) 4. 2% 7.9% 2.2.% 1882 4112 68 ~ 68 1948 4138 80 67 6(. 26 12 104 3.5% .6'3% 17.7% 1.7% 4851 166 6 :, I\n819 190 6L.. ( 3 2) 24 (. 66%) 1L... 5% 40 2L1- 0 38 43 28 0 39 3 L.. 0 .5% 25% q,~~ 8925 16,753 3L1-8 26,026 64 8941 16,538 393 25,872 61.,. 1E, (215) I\n. 5 ( 154) .18% ( 1. 3%) 12.9% (. 6%) ',,/,3-3 694 1231 18 1943 E, 3 !)% 715 1188 27 1930 61 21 ( y. 3) 9 ( 13) 3% ( 3. 5%) 50% (. 69%) 120 163 9 292 56 141 /~~ 11 3/d-0 LY :,5 21 25 2 48 17. 5~,\n, 15.3% 22% 16.4% WITH FOUR YEAR OLDS: 10/1/91 901\n.5 16,916 ~, 357 26,318 64 10/1/92 9082 16 I 726,rcJ ,- 401\n. 26 I 212,'f/:\n61.,. INCREASE/DECREP,SE 37 ( 190) 47 (10E~) % .41% ( 1. 1%) r.,1l 13% (. 4%) ~t,rll 1l,  ~)/fl - --- SUMMARY OF OCTOBER 1 ENROLLMENT 1992-93 c\nRJiDE lr,'HITE BLJ\\ CJ~ ()'I'HEf.: TOTl\\L %DLACh K 715 1188 27 1930 6 :. 1 719 1305 21 2 (I lJ :., 63 2 707 1323 30 2060 61\n. r~,  t,73 1185 3/s. 1892 t. ,~, Is. 65/s., 12H 23 1891 6/s. 5 665 1295 28 1988 65 6 E,i,i.O 1367 27 2031,i. 67 \\JN Li 6 117 0 163 72 TOTAL ELEM 4-819 89% 190 11,i.,003 6 I\n. 7 723 11,i.31 2 :, 2179 6, 8 611 1430 ,..,' .) .) 2074- 69 9 591 121,i.1 21 1853 67 UN 23 36 1 60 60 TOTAL LTR HIGH 191\n.g l,i.138 80 6166 67 10 719 1326 31\n. 2079 61,i. 11 701,i. 1098 /,i 8 1850 59 12 700 939 l,i.l 1680 56 UN 8 15 0 ~, ..J. ,., \"' 65 TOTAL SR HIGH 2131 3378 123 5632 60 SPECIAL SCHOOLS l\n.3 28 0 71 39 FOUR YR. OLD Hl 188 11 3/s.O 55 DIS':.'F:ICT TOTAL 9082 16,72f., !\n.01\n. 26,212 61,i *SUMMARYO F STUDENTS LISTED IN \"OTHER\" CATEGORY: SPANISH - 135 E5KIMO/AMER. IND. - 22 ASIAN/PACIFIC ISLANDER - 227 OTHER - 20 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OCTOBER 1 ENROLLMENT 1992-93 SCHOOL/GRADE WHITE BLACK OTHER TOTAL %BLACK CENTRAL UNGRADED 0 0 0 0 ERR 10 279 467 15 761 61. 37% 11 262 391 28 681 57.42% 12 220 275 13 508 54.13% SUBTOTAL 761 1133 56 1950 58.10% KIND. 0 49 0 49 TOTAL 100.00% 761 1182 56 1999 59.13% FAIR UNGRADED 8 15 0 23 65.22% 10 97 195 5 297 65.66% 11 112 205 5 322 63.66% 12 93 147 4 244 60.25% SUBTOTAL 310 562 14 886 63.43% KIND. 1 18 0 19 94.74% TOTAL 311 580 14 905 64.09% HALL UNGRADED 0 0 0 0 ERR 10 110 207 6 323 64.09% 11 126 168 8 302 55.63% 12 154 185 12 351 52.71% SUBTOTAL 390 560 26 976 57.38% KIND. 10 8 0 18 44.44% TOTAL 400 568 26 994 57.14% MCCLELLAN UNGRADED 0 0 0 0 ERR 10 105 277 5 387 71.58% 11 91 183 3 277 66.06% 12 116 178 8 302 58.94% SUBTOTAL 312 638 16 966 66.05% KIND. 1 18 0 19 94.74% TOTAL 313 656 16 985 66.60% PARKVIEW UNGRADED 0 0 0 0 0.00% 1 0 128 180 3 311 57.88% 11 113 151 4 268 56.34% 12 117 154 4 275 56.00% SUBTOTAL 358 485 11 854 56.79% KIND. 1 16 0 17 94.12% TOTAL 359 501 11 871 57.52% /~ /Ot /d).\ni\u0026gt;-' ?//4 Page - 1 -- - - - - - - SCHOOL/GRADE WHITE BLACK CLOVERDALE OTHER TOTAL %BLACK UNGRADED 0 0 0 0 ERR 7 78 210 3 291 72.16% 8 58 180 6 244 73.77% 9 56 181 3 240 75.42% TOTAL 192 571 12 775 73.68% DUNBAR UNGRADED 7 87 136 4 227 59.91% 8 94 145 6 245 59.18% 9 102 129 2 2J3 55.36% TOTAL 283 410 12 705 58.16% FOREST HEIGHTS UNGRADED 6 5 0 11 4 5. 4 5% 7 66 195 3 264 73.86% 8 78 199 6 283 70.32% 9 70 155 4 229 67.69% TOTAL 220 554 13 787 70.39% HENDERSON UNGRADED 0 0 0 0 ERR 7 99 228 4 331 68.88% 8 46 259 4 309 83.82% 9 70 198 6 274 72.26% TOTAL 215 685 14 914 74.95% V.t.ABELVALE UNGRADED 13 6 1 20 30.00% 7 80 151 2 233 64.81% 8 74 151 0 22:\n67.11% 9 59 130 0 189 68.78% TOTAL 226 438 3 667 65.67% MANN UNGRADED 7 128 178 5 311 57.23% 8 118 160 6 284 56.34% 9 81 167 6 254 65.75% TOTAL 327 505 17 849 59.48% PULASKI HEIGHTS UNGRADED 3 12 0 15 80.00% 7 129 136 2 267 50.94% 8 96 167 1 264 63.26% 9 91 137 0 228 60.09% TOTAL 319 452 3 774 58.40% Page - 2 ---------------------- SCHOOL/GRADE WHJTE BLACK OTHER SOUTHWEST TOTAL %BLACK UNGRADED 1 13 0 14 92.86% 7 56 197 2 255 77.25% 8 47 169 4 220 76.82% 9 62 144 0 206 69.90% TOTAL J.56 523 6 695 75.25% BADGETT UNGRADED 1 6 0 7 85.71% 1 5 19 0 24 79.17% 2 9 13 0 22 59.09% 3 3 18 0 21 85.71% 4 5 16 0 21 76.19% 5 4 31 0 35 88.57% 6 7 29 0 36 80.56% SUBTOTAL 34 132 0 166 79.52% KIND. 7 12 0 19 63.16% FOUR YR OLD 7 10 0 17 58.82% TOTAL 48 154 0 202 76.24% BALE UNGRADED 7 5 0 12 41.67% 1 6 29 1 36 80.56% 2 4 25 1 30 83.33% 3 5 29 1 35 82.86% 4 6 29 1 36 80.56% 5 7 45 2 54 83.33% 6 8 40 3 51 78.43% SUBTOTAL 43 202 9 254 79.53% KIND. 10 37 2 49 75.51% FOUR YR OLD 9 9 0 18 50.00% TOTAL 62' 248 11 321 77.26% BASELINE UNGRADED 1 15 45 (' 60 75.00% 2 15 40 1 56 71.43% 3 9 31 0 40 77.50% 4 7 43 0 50 86.00% 5 8 28 2 38 73.68% 6 5 30 0 35 85.71% SUBT0TAL 59 217 3 279 77.78% KIND. 15 45 0 60 75.00% TOTAL 74 262 3 339 77.29% Page - 3 SCHOOL/GRADE WHITE BLACK OTHER TOTAL %BLACK BOOKER UNGRADED 1 39 47 0 86 54.65% 2 36 50 1 87 57.47% 3 38 50 1 89 56.18% 4 40 53 3 96 55.21% 5 39 :\u0026gt; 1 0 90 56.67% 6 43 54 2 99 54.55% SUBTOTAL 235 305 7 547 55.76% KIND. 34 40 0 74 54.05% TOTAL 269 345 7 621 55.56% BRADY UNGRADED 1 5 0 6 83.33% 1 2n 34 3 57 59.65% 2 1/ 44 1 62 70.97% 3 15 44 2 61 72.13% 4 10 34 0 44 77.27% 5 16 38 1 55 69.09% 6 7 46 2 55 83.64% SUBTOTAL 86 245 9 340 72.06% KIND. 25 30 3 58 51. 72% TOTAL 111 275 12 398 69.10% CARVER UNGRADED 1 31 39 0 70 55.71% 2 34 50 2 8 f, 58.14% 3 41 48 0 89 53.93% 4 42 51 3 96 53.13% 5 44 55 0 99 55.56% 6 43 53 2 98 54.08% SUBTOTAL 235 296 7 538 55.02% KIND. 27 33 0 60 55.00% TOTAL 262 329 7 598 55.02% CHICOT UNGRADED 7 10 0 17 58.8~% 1 27 59 0 86 68.60% 2 31 57 1 89 64.04% 3 23 43 3 69 62.32% 4 21 41 2 64 64.06% 5 19 40 1 GO 66.67% 6 26 46 1 73 63.01% SUBTOTAL 154 296 8 4 58 64.63% KIND. 23 54 0 77 70.13% TOTAL 177 350 8 535 65.42% Page - 4 SCHOOL/GRADE WHITE BLACK CLOVERDALE OTHER TOTAL %BLACK UNGRADED 1 7 39 0 46 84.78% 2 9 37 2 48 77. 08% 3 9 35 0 44 79.55% 4 7 46 1 54 85.19% 5 10 44 0 54 81. 48% 6 7 43 0 50 86.00% SUBTOTAL 49 244 3 296 82.43% KIND. 15 38 0 53 71. 7 0% FOUR YR OLD 7 9 1 17 52.94% TOTJi.L 71 291 4 366 79.51% DODD UNGRADED 5 5 0 10 50.00% 1 18 20 0 38 52.63% 2 14 27 0 41 65.85% 3 18 24 0 42 57.14% 4 16 22 0 38 57.89% 5 14 36 0 50 72.00% 6 16 30 0 46 65.22% SUBTOTAL 101 164 0 265 61.89% KIND. 20 19 0 39 48.72% 121 183 0 304 60.20% FAIR PARK UNGRADED 1 10 34 0 44 77.27% 2 7 29 0 36 80.56% 3 6 25 1 32 78.13% 4 3 29 0 32 90.63% 5 9 26 0 35 74.29% 6 4 23 0 27 85.19% SUBTOTAL 39 166 1 206 80.58% KIND. 10 26 1 37 70.27% TOTAL 49 192 2 243 79.01% FOREST PARK UNGRADED 1 38 35 0 73 47.95% 2 45 25 1 71 35.21% 3 35 13 1 4 S' 26.53% 4 31 21 1 53 39.62% 5 39 45 0 84 53.57% 6 23 31 0 54 57.41% SUBTOTAL 211 170 3 384 44.27% KIND. 31 28 1 60 46.67% TOTAL 242 198 4 444 44.59% Page - 5 SCHOOL/GRADE WHITE BLACK FRANKLIN OTHER TOTA\n%BLACK UNGRADED 1 9 0 10 90.00% 1 7 67 1 75 89.33% 2 5 45 0 50 90.00% 3 2 48 0 50 96.00% 4 4 45 0 49 91.84% 5 0 26 1 27 96.30% 6 2 47 4 53 88.68% SUBTOTAL 21 287 6 314 91.40% KIND. 5 38 0 43 88.37% FOUR YR OLD 24 27 3 54 50.00% TOTAL 50 352 9 411 85.64% FULBRIGHT UNGRADED 5 2 0 7 28.57% 1 35 25 1 61 40.98% 2 41 31 2 74 41.89% 3 48 38 2 88 43.18% 4 49 27 2 78 3'1.62% 5 41 39 1 81 48.15% 6 42 39 1 82 47.56% SUBTOTAL 261 201 9 471 42.68% KIND. 35 24 0 59 40.68% TOTAL 296 225 9 530 42.45% GARLAND UNGRADED J 10 0 13 76.92% 1 2 37 0 39 94.87% 2 1 29 1 31 93.55% J 2 29 0 31 93.5:5% 4 0 35 0 35 100.00% 5 2 26 2 JO 86.67% 6 1 32 2 35 91. 43% SUBTOTAL 11 198 5 214 92.52% KIND. J 26 1 JO 86.67% FOUR YR OLD j 9 0 12 75.00% TOTAL 17 233 6 256 91.02% GEYER SPRINGS UNGRADED 0 3 0 3 100.00% 1 14 27 0 41 65.85% 2 20 \"5 0 45 55.56% J 14 27 0 41 65.85% 4 5 19 0 24 79.17% 5 9 16 0 25 64.00% 6 16 30 0 46 65.22% SUBTOTAL 78 147 0 225 65.33% KIND. 18 21 39 53.85% FOUR YR OLD 9 9 0 18 50.00% TOTAL 105 177 0 282 62.77% Page - 6 SCHOOL/GRADE WHITE BLACK OTHER TOTAL GIBBS %BLACK UNGRADED 1 17 25 1 43 58.14% 2 19 26 0 45 57.78% 3 20 24 1 45 53.33% 4 20 26 2 48 54.17% 5 19 28 3 50 56.00% 6 26 39 2 67 58.21% SUBTOTAL 121 168 9 298 56.38% KIND. 13 23 2 38 60.53% TOTAL 134 191 11 336 56.85% ISH UNGRADED 0 5 0 5 100.00% 1 0 15 0 15 100.00% 2 0 31 0 31 100.00% 3 2 24 0 26 92.31% 4 0 18 0 18 100.00% 5 0 23 0 23 100.00% 6 0 32 0 32 100.00% SUBTOTAL 2 148 0 150 98.67% KIND. 0 25 0 25 100.00% FOUR YEAR OL 3 9 0 12 75.00% TOTAL 5 182 0 187 97.33% JEFFERSON UNGRADED 4 3 0 7 42.86% 1 35 26 0 61 42.62% 2 42 32 1 75 42.67% 3 35 31 3 69 44.93% 4 36 32 1 69 46.38% 5 39 25 1 65 38.46% 6 41 36 0 77 46.75% SUBTOTAL 232 185 6 423 43.74% KIND. 41 19 0 60 31. 67% TOTAL 273 204 6 483 42.24% MABELVALE UNGRADED 3 7 0 10 70.00% 1 30 41 1 72 56.94% 2 34 39 1 74 52.70% 3 28 42 0 70 60.00% 4 29 35 1 65 53.85% 5 37 39 0 76 51. 32% 6 31 42 0 73 57.53% SUBTOTAL 192 245 3 440 55.68% KIND. 27 33 0 60 55.00% TOTAL 219 278 3 500 55.60% Page - 7 -------------------------- SCHOOL/GRADE WHITE BLACK MCDERMOTT OTHER TOTAL %BLACK UNGRADED 0 0 0 0 ERR 1 32 39 0 71 54.93% 2 27 39 3 69 56.52% 3 36 35 3 74 47.30% 4 36 40 1 77 51.95% 5 26 48 4 78 61.54% 6 32 46 2 80 57.50% SUBTOTAL 189 247 13 449 55.01% KIND. 31 28 1 60 46.67% TOTAL 220 275 14 509 54.03% MEADOWCLIFF UNGRADED 1 24 47 0 71 66.20% 2 25 46 0 71 64.79% 3 27 38 0 65 58.46% 4 14 47 0 61 77.05% 5 24 41 1 66 62.12% 6 14 32 0 46 69.57% SUBTOTAL 128 251 1 380 66.05% KIND. 19 41 0 60 68.33% TOTAL 147 292 1 440 66.36% MITCHELL UNGRADED 1 8 0 9 88.89% 1 7 29 2 38 76.32% 2 2 l'.3 1 46 93.48% 3 2 33 0 35 94.29% 4 5 29 1 35 82.86% 5 4 36 0 40 90.00% G 0 22 0 22 100.00% SUBTOTAL 21 200 4 225 88.89% KIND. 2 23 0 25 92~ 00% FOUR YEAR OL 5 9 0 14 64.29% TOTAL 28 232 4 264 f':7.88% OTTER CREEK UNGRADED 1 25 23 2 50 46.00% 2 34 23 0 57 40.35% 3 34 13 1 48 27.08% 4 32 20 1 53 37.74% 5 28 23 0 51 45.10% 6 28 26 0 54 48.15% SUBTOTAL 181 128 4 313 40.89% KIND. 22 15 3 40 37.50% TOTAL 203 143 7 353 40.51% Page - 8 SCHOOL/GRADE WHITE BLACK OTHER PULASKI TOTAL %BLACK HEIGHTS UNGRADED 1 26 23 0 49 46.94% 2 32 31 2 65 47.69% 3 25 21 1 47 44.68% 4 25 29 1 55 52.73% .56 16 34 1 51 66.67% I 19 34 0 53 64.15% I SUBTOTAL 143 172 5 320 53.7:,% I KIND. 30 26 3 59 44.07% I TOTAL 173 198 8 379 52.24% I I RIGHTS ELL I UNGRADED I 1 1 35 0 36 97.22% I 2 0 34 0 34 100.00% I 3 0 29 0 29 100.00% I 4 0 38 1 39 97.44% I 5 0 33 0 33 100.00% I 6 0 38 0 38 100.00% I SUBTOTAL 1 207 1 209 99.04% I KIND. 2 23 0 25 92.00% I FOUR YEAR OL 6 9 0 15 60.00% I TOTAL 9 239 1 249 95.98% I ROCKEFELLER I UNGRADED I 1 23 37 1 61 I 2 60.66% I 11 39 1 51 76.47% I 3 6 25 2 33 75.76% I 4 8 31 0 39 79.49% 5 4 35 0 39 89.74% 6 5 30 0 35 85.71% SUBTOTAL 57 197 4 258 76.36% KIND. 25 28 1 54 51.85% FOUR YEAR OL 22 25 2 49 51.02% TOTAL 104 250 7 361 69.25% ROXINE UNGRADED 2 13 0 15 86.67% 1 13 43 0 56 76.79% 2 5 40 0 45 88.89% 3 2 42 2 1.: '.\n91. 3 0% 4 10 40 1 51 78.43% 5 9 28 1 38 73.68% 6 10 28 1 39 71.79% SUBTOTAL 51 234 5 290 80.69% KIND. 19 34 1 , 1 62.96% FOUR YEAR OL 4 9 4 17 52.94% TOTAL 74 277 10 361 76.73% Page - 9 SCHOOL/GRADE WHITE BLACK OTHER STEPHENS TOTAL %BLACK UNGRADED 0 6 0 6 100.00% 1I 2 30 0 32 93.75% 2 1 33 0 34 97.06% 3 0 34 0 34 100.00% 4 0 20 0 20 100.00% 5 0 16 0 16 100.00% 6 0 32 0 32 100.00% SUBTOTAL 3 171 0 174 98.28% KIND. 1 23 0 24 95.83% FOUR YEAR OL 3 8 0 7.1 72.73% TOTAL 7 202 0 209 96.65% TERRY UNGRADED 1 42 25 2 69 36.23% 2 41 30 4 75 4o.no% 3 41 30 4 75 40.00% 4 43 36 0 79 45.57% 5 37 43 3 83 51.81% 6 37 43 2 82 52.44% SUBTOTAL 241 207 15 4 63 44.71% KIND. 45 31 2 78 39.74% TOTAL 286 238 17 541 43.99% WAKEFIELD UNGRADED 0 0 0 0 0.00% 1 20 54 1 75 72.00% 2 15 55 1 71 77.46% 3 23 41 2 66 62.12% 4 30 46 0 76 60.53% 5 24 46 0 70 65.71% 6 18 63 1 82 76.83% SUBTOTAL 130 305 5 440 69.32% KIND. 17 42 1 60 70.00% TOTl-.L 147 347 6 500 69.40% WASHINGTON UNGRADED 2 1 0 3 33.33% 1 53 77 1 131 58.78% 2 47 97 1 145 66.90% 3 44 62 2 108 57.41% 4 40 56 0 96 58.33% 5 50 67 0 117 57.26% 6 40 55 0 95 57.89% SUBTOTAL 276 415 4 695 59.71% KIND. 38 50 3 91 54.95% FOUR YR OLD 18 18 0 36 50.0 ~ TOTAL 332 483 0 7 822 58.76% Page - 10 SCHOOL/GRADE WHITE BLACK OTHER TOTAL WATSON %BLACK UNGRADED 1 18 54 1 73 73.97% 2 15 53 0 68 77.94% 3 11 41 0 52 78.85% 4 15 :3J 0 48 68.75% 5 18 54 0 72 75.00% 6 14 49 0 63 77.78% SUBTOnL 91 284 1 376 75.53% KIND. 20 37 1 58 63.79% FOUR YR OLD 6 11 0 17 64.71% TOTAL 117 332 2 451 73.61% WESTERN HILLS UNGRADED 1 21 28 0 49 57.14% 2 19 26 0 45 57.78% 3 14 34 1 49 69.39% 4 18 30 0 48 62.50% 5 19 32 1 52 61. 54 % 6 17 35 0 52 67.31% SUBTOTAL 108 155 2 295 62. 71% KIND. 16 24 0 40 60.00% TOTAL 124 209 2 335 62.39% WILLIAMS UNGRADED 1 29 36 3 68 52.94% 2 27 39 2 68 57.35% 3 29 37 1 67 55.22% 4 31 41 0 72 56.94% 5 32 38 2 72 52.78% 6 I'. 2 52 1 95 54.74% SUBTOTAL 190 243 9 442 54.98% KIND. 28 32 0 60 53.33% TOTAL 218 275 9 502 54.78% WILSON UNGRADED 4 19 0 23 82.61% 1 1 ., 34 0 47 72.34% 2 11 29 0 40 72.50% 3 18 35 0 53 66.04% 4 7 40 0 47 85. 11% 5 5 36 0 41 87.80% 6 7 40 0 47 85.11% SUBTOTAL 65 233 0 298 78.19% KIND. 17 23 0 40 57.50% FOUR YR OLD 8 9 0 17 52.94% TOTAL 90 265 0 355 71.65% Page - 11 SCHOOL/C~ADE WHITE BLACK OTHER TOTAL %BLACK WOODRUFF UNGRADED 1- 14 2 0 42 66.67% 2 12 11 0 23 47.83% 3 8 12 0 20 60.00% 4 9 16 0 25 64.00% 5 13 24 1 38 63.16% 6 9 20 1 30 66.67% SUBTOTAL 65 111 2 178 62.36% KIND. 11 28 1 40 70.00% FOUR YR OLD 7 8 1 16 50.00% TOTAL !3 3 14 7 4 234 62.82% EASTER SEALS UNGRADED 9 6 0 15 40.00% TOTAL 9 6 0 15 40.00% ELIZ. MITCHELL UNGRADED 30 16 0 46 34.78% TOTAL 30 16 0 46 34.78% E. MITCHELL(DAY) UNGRADED 4 6 0 10 60.00% TOTAL 4 6 0 10 60.00% Page - 12 1992/93 Approved% Range for Black Enrollment NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT North Little Rock, Arkansas RACIAL COMPOSITION OF SCHOOLS Including Kindergarten October 1, 1992 Elem.: 37.9 - 63.l Middle: 35.9 - 59.b School Enrollment Black Non-Black % Alternative 20 (K - 6) Amboy 390 Baring Cross 14 (K - 6) Belwood 171 Boone Park 480 Central 496 Crestwood 241 Glenview 230 Indian Hills 447 Lakewood 277 Lynch Drive 210 Meadow Park 243 North Heights 403 Park Hill 210 Pike View 429 Redwood 238 Rose City 254 Seventh Street 363 Total Elem. 5,116 Alternative 30 (7 - 11) Baring Cross 31 (7 - 12) Lakewood Md. 545 Ridgeroad Md. 578 Rose City Md. 408 NLRHS-East 1,339 NLRHS-West 1,204 Total Sec. 4,135 Dist. Total: 9,251 14 172 5 71 295 279 105 131 200 141 85 124 193 94 209 142 137 177 2,574 23 22 248 266 207 602 524 1,892 4,466 70. 0 6 44.1 218 35. 7 9 41.5 100 61.5 185 56.3 217 43.6 136 57.0 99 44.7 247 50.9 136 40.5 125 51.0 119 47.9 210 44.8 116 48.7 220 59.7 96 53.9 117 48.8 186 50.3% 2,542 76.7 7 71.0 9 45.5 297 46.0 312 50.7 201 45.0 737 43.5 680 45.8% 2,243 48.3% 4,785 30.0 55.9 64.3 58.5 38.5 43.8 56.4 43.0 55.3 4 9 .1 59.5 49.0 52.1 55.2 51. 3 40.3 46.1 51. 2 49.7% 23.3 29.0 54.5 54.0 49.3 55.0 5 6. 5 ,, 54.2% 51.7% l'C:C-,~,!) ~\nN i(Ul.1,i'lt:l'l'l' (October 1, 1992) \\ill[\"':': BLI\\CK MISPANIC .'\\SIAN1P1\\C ISL- '..i(],r 01 -\" BOYS GTRL~~ nnvc: ,~rm ~ BOYS r iL.S BOYS GIRl,S l\\M. IND 1F.SKTMJ news GIRLS SCHOOL TOTAL ------1-~=-:..:--1__.\n=\"\"\"'\"-+-~......_~.u.u......,+--=- I j Adk\nn\"' 137 125 77 76 , 1 3 l 420 ~ Arnold Ori ve 161 14 9 3 6 3 3 4 1 o__:.::~=~~..:\n.._-+-~::...:::..-1--.:::-.=_\n:\n_+...-.::...,\na_-+-__::\n.\n_-+--,:.._-+-....\n....-+----+-_..:\n5c __--t--=---t----..--~-, .l l 3 9 0 ._ rlk!'\u0026gt;r 115 93 1:...3-----..-_...,\n.4...,\n. 2-f- +---t----,:\n---l--\n:\n--+---~---1---2\n.8\n.3\n..__i Rc.h,:.c:c 202 167 41 2 2 b80 ~ ..P... .._4,,1,~\":.uJ-\u0026amp;\"'--\"\"\"=it-~r.....__.J-__,3~4!-'o\"--~--=2'-'9..!.2\n.._~-I. ,_'J....__. ,_ _ _1_ ~ __ 1,___ ___1 ----+--:---+------+---\"'nc::a, 4-\"R'---1 2 7 1 2 3 9 Hr, f. 2 l l 6 5 0 Cr-\n1 1 .o.na \u0026lt;::t-\" 11 7 9 6 f. 2 2 3 2 6 'rystcll Hill 245 222 l6 1 _ l 1 776 ,_Dt_1_tp__.r___e___e_ _ l'-'8\"-9-\u0026lt;--+--4~.. l . ,,8'--if--...\n5\n...0____ 3 5 9 4 5 8 I Fullec ElP.m. 131 -.. 168 - 524 I H\narri\u0026lt;:o 160 l / 107 . .-i-. 2 l 546 t ,J'ville Rlem. ~l,ZJ 281 10~ 12g 4 2 1 l\nJ. 847 I Landrna ck ' 5 2 12 6 1 ? 1 1 1 q 518 i Lawsrn . J7 13 9 2 7 l 8 3 21 l Oak, -, 191 167 49 62 469 1 .1kb1 261 222 'i3 55 1 592\n_. t  rne ..\n.t=:-\":\":.'\"'. -'--- +--=l\n:-.:9~8=:-il--=::2-\n:1~6:-Jr-\"\"\".5\n:-:2\n::--t-~5:-:'2\n--i~-P--a,\n-\n:---lf----\n---+---:---l---::--+----+---+-~'i:...!1~8~.L~ , Pine\\ -'-~1'----\"-1~--=2:\n..\n\n8\n.\".-,-~+, ---=l..:.9..,\n.0~_ ..9... ..,0_-+ __ 9 8_- +'-l_0 __ +- __ 4_-4- __ 6~--1-___:3:...._-4- ___ +---1---..:..:''c..c_-:e::i~ f'J7a I Robi.n .. ,)n Ekm. 157 153 57 47 l 3 2 4~ 1 +-~\"\"7\"+--c:---+-~-t----+----+-~-+-...::..-1--- - I Scot I 7 4 4 9 ' I J 6 l - I Shen~~,.x.1 193 1- '' 73 l 1 ~----- \"\u0026lt; -::- '3 Cl ii \u0026lt; \u0026lt; a. ::- 0.. 0 - - - V' c:1 ~ ~1'} \u0026lt;[ ,v s:..: 0 gp c~ E .. 0 m ... V E ~ ~ S.HilJs Elem. 327 l. 1 t:,() 2 3 1 1 /..15 E Tdyl.01 l6:i 143 '~ 50 , l J. l 1 420 ~ .:\n_~ Tolle:::.,m ~2_2-\"o-+---'2:C..o:C_.... s , ..1..' ---+--6 .). .,.. .._ Asir,_'----+--.,.:\n1'---+---_-1--+--\"1'---+-\"\"----4-----+----'5-=6'-\"9~ ,.rt ~ \u0026gt;i\nS TOTAL FLfJ.1. 690 4 U4 1 177 1 6 1 2(, 19 13 13 l3 12,410 i\n\u0026lt;O ~ _...- . IJ ---t~ -o \u0026lt; ~-- -- ---+-----+-----.-- I ~ ~ Q_ -~ I .n ~-Al_t. L\n.cnt. ,t 16 q '.BdL ..c.J.. .c _.r_ _ .,_9__2_ _ 2_o_s _ 2_-i__1 _,__1_, ~ J'vil P North 243 215 11 1 101 O:-. J 'vil1e South 200 181 l 1 2 90 v1lle HiQh 356 371 1611 136 ~s l7 5 1 (, 14 6 l 3 3 urt:, Pulaski 34 9 29 L l l ....\n.N...:o.\n:.rt.\nhv\n.\n....\n~'-'-'---,......,..+----\"'3-'--71-.'-.J. -+-_.\n:\n3...o.1-\"-'7 uak Grove Hiqh 373 32,' ~J Rob. ,Tr. Hiqh 161 lt1() rt, Ro b. ~ r_._H_i..._qlh--+----'l..\n6_\n0--+--'l -~ii _d_l:,..._.\u0026lt;..r~ _-:--h---~1 \"\":\n~~\n:~:r::_-_.:...:. ~D..._,-~3~3\"--9+._-,-_L\n,.,k_., +- _,__ L..Z \u0026gt;~fT. - 8 ! 8 - - ' l 1 66 4 6 1 935 l 3 6S4 -'-__\nl,:\n.O.:___..L-~4 -4-----+--\n.\n.l_-+-_--'6\n..\n0\n..\n2:::.._-! 1,023 2 627 3 l 7 837 2 l l 1 1 915 411 408 l 2 932 1 874 }A 4 C,,223 4 l 34 I I 17 21,633\n\u0026lt;s1 I~ .~. . l l  l ')_: u: , * :f, ' :t * **: f. * ii:+:*:n :* ** * **-********** * ., P. 01 * * TRANSACTRIOENP ORT * OCT-29-9T2H U1 1:11 * * *  DATE START SENDER RX TI ME ~?uES TYPE NOTE * ---------------------------------- * OCT-291 1:l J ECl 4900483 1' 2211 1 o::-t I t. OK * ..,xtuJ\n*:u**:t* **:t::ucrn ::..:-.) \" * * :r. :\n: ', :t n *n: u:i *, ,:t rin::n:u:u::n*****************************  f I i I ':u'  ,'\n+'. P. 01 ' * \"'' NR EPR T OCT-20-T92U E1 0:19 E ff E:\nTYrE . OTE T c. I 1 i ~ 1 K. OCT 20 '92 09: 18 F'Lil CO SPL '::,:H DI'3T DATE\nTO: FROM: Pulaski County Special School District 925 E. Dixon Road/P. 0. Box 8601 Little Rock, AR 72216 501-490-2000 FAX 490-0483 October 20, 1992 Danny Shameer and Cynthia Howell, Arkansas Democrat - Gazette North Pulaski Leader Arnold Smith, Arkansas State Press North Uttle Rock Times Jennifer Bethea, The Spectrum Our Neighborhood Judy Gallman  Arkansas Times Maumelle Monitor Jacksonville Patriot KARK-TV - Channel 4 KATV-TV - Channel 7 KTHV-TV - Channel 11 KARN Radio Associated Press Office of Desegregation Monitoring PACT Susie Roberts, Administrator Information/Special Services NUMBER OF PAGES: 3 (including transmittal sheet) P.1/3 - : lS ,.. PULA I CO October 20, 1992 To ,vh,m it m\niy concern: y F'.2 3 OOL DISTRICT , n R 1.J.d\n-'_L) Box 8601 r \"\"' Ar,._ansas 72216 (50') 490-2000 We are providing you with a corrected copy of the a con t\u0026gt;TI'ing enrollment hgures for the Pula:.ki County Special 'k lh,trict a of Oc.tobez 1, 19) 2. I.w information released Friday, C ctober 16, contdtned c:o 1 u1.i-::curacie~,s o plea:.e rt\"ter to this new chart when repurting PCSSD enrollmeut We apolog1Le for ar.y inconvenience. Que tions concE-mmg PCSSD enrollment may be d.ire\u0026lt;..tedto th~ Office of Pvp!l Personnel c:1t 490-2000 .:.iincerely, ~ Ron St,mdridge Information Office er SCI-ICOL I f lk Lr\\S At r,o]d Dri.ve \\11II'\"E flOYS r.rm,::, Pl'SS. EN WI.I ti (Oclob_r ,, 1',,/\\CK UISN,M - ~Al/PN:.. I:'\u0026gt;r~ JIM IND ,r.,,., rM'l SCHOOL I r \u0026gt;rr, _LY)Y.., r:r, _ i l()'{S GIRLS BOYS GIRLS TOTAL ~~~.c.1.-1f.--'-'\"~---+-\"=,e..\n,\n,\n_+.--=.\n._+-===--+-~'-'=--f 137 125 77 1 , l 420 161 149 36 \\ \"i l l 390 ]15 CJ3 33 u 283 202 l67 166 ~41 2 2 680 ~_f ._R._:\n,,~,\"\".u\",._...,'.,..i~r..:...a_'\",'\n_\n.l,1-'- ~3~4..:,6'-+--~2\"-t'-')_2 =_--,..,,.___.._l_ ' 1 f. d R c- ~.. \" 2 7 l 2 J ) 2 1 l 6 5 0 r,-,.IJ.o~ C:t-\" 117 q, ./n ! ]26 r C'rys ta l Hi l1 Q,/.51-9-z\nu\ni. ~ P - rr ----- -::..L ---l---'~---+-----+---~1-----+----r-77~~~-e-\u0026amp;:t_.\n..\n~J/Oic I r .. '--- i r::-- - L,. k .,.-LI, I, Oi.lkhrnoJ. Pine I\u0026lt; , Pine,,,'( ~r, 189 14 a _ J s 9 4 ss ]J, ')\u0026lt;\nt l!O 524 16'1 167 ifl, lt)Q 2 1 .'146 -~J~2~3-+--~2~8~1,._..,_1~,.,_.,,.'~~J ,q'-l-......::.2_ _ ~_:4L....--1, ___ , 1 l 847 152 176 1?1 11q ~.f ___ 1_3__7_ _ 1'\"\"3_9_ 2 l 18 , 3 2. - () 1 __ ~l..::..6....\n7--1l, _4 6 2 4 6 9 222 l 1 592 2 l6 ,\n_ 518 _2_l_ 41_ _ 2\n.\n..3_\n.\n.._6 .\n_.-_,\n~. .. i-- J-:~:--i-....\n2--\n-.i\n-..-.\n::2--+--4~ __ !1----=-'-1----+-....\nl'e--+--!::6..:::8~2'----l hi 153 \"I 47 1 _ 2 420 , 74 4~ 36 191 --i+-,--, ,-, -,1---_ -7-q--1-~ _...,.__7_3-.1-,- ---+---.l--1---l--1-----+----- - _______ 4_9_0--1 L :s Elffl. ' ________ 3 __ 1._---+------~ l 735 5 1- --~ 4 137 l 733 23 ' 2'J2 205 231 I 243 215 8~ O h 200 181 112 ')0 356 371 160 136 ,__ _._ l 1 1 420 l l t 569 17 12 13 14 1,023 --'------1-- 1 ---- +-aa:.3 _4--____\n_.l_ +----+-~6 72-:::7--1 4 L 2 337 ---+-----=L-----+-'-'\"-'------1\"\"\"-----r--q-,-q-t - __ ,:\n__--4 __ _ _ _ __ 4 _1...__+--=l---+-~9:--1~5:'----l 4U - 408 I 2 932 \u0026gt; I 874 .i..-~__...?.c.t-1-~ ..... -~-_\n:4.___l--_.\n,4....._-+-_9_,,__\n2...\n:2.c\n.3--1 -L 18 21,523- ' OCT 16 '92 15: 36 PUL CO SPL SCH DIST DATE: Pulaski County Special School District 925 E. Dixon Road/P. 0. Box 8601 Little Rock, AR 72216 501-4902000 FAX 490-0483 October 16, 1992 P.1/2 TO: Danny Shameer and Cynthia Howell, Arkansas Democrat - Gazette North Pulaski Leader FROM: Arnold Smith, Arkansas State Press North Little Rock Times Jennifer Bethea, The Spectrum Our Neighborhood Judy Gallman - Arkansas Times Maumelle Monitor Jacksonville Patriot KAAK-TV - Channel 4 KATV-TV - Channel 7 KTHV-TV - Channel 11 KARN Radio Associated Press Office of Desegregation Monitoring PACT Susie Roberts, Administrator Information/Special Services NUMBER OF PAGES: 2 (including transmittal sheet) 0.. 1- 01 H 0 I u co _I (,L. ,, 0 u _J ::J 0.. j) ~ 1- u 0 I I t I I 1 ' I I I I I ' ! SG{OOL l\\.dkins Arnold Drive Rrlk,:,r 1'.c,,t-o.-- llrlvn11 ._\"\" t-n r~t-n  rn l l.o.-..o \u0026lt;::l-\n1 i Crvstal Hill Duoree Fuller Elem. u,.~~c, I ,J ville filaTI  Landmark I Lawson Oak Grove El. Oakbrooke Pine Forest I Pinewood I Robinson Elan. Scott Sherwood S.Hllls Elen. Taylor Tolleson TOTAl, ELEM. Alt. Learn.Cnt. Full\u0026amp; Jr. J'ville North J'ville South J. V hl.le Hioh Mills North Pulaski Northwood oak Grove Hiqt Rob. Jr. IHoh Rob. Sr. Hiqh S.Hills Jr. S Hills Hiah '1-nl'Af SPrl\"\"'f\\H) '1UfAL DIST_ ~-lllI \"'E BOYS GIRLS 137 125 161 149 115 93 202 167 346 292 271 23q 117 \u0026lt;)6 192 179 189 148 131 qs 160 167 323 281 152 126 137 139 191 167 261 222 198 216 243 236 157 153 74 49 193 179 327 271 165 143 220 205 4 662 4,137 14 H, 292 205 24 3 215 200 181 356 371 175 .167 349 291 371 319 373 322 161 140 160 134 355 339 ~~~ ~~ 3,363 2,99\n! ~(7\n)- ..ao~ 1--\u0026amp;,--0-z-5 _:\n.,.-0-3 9 kCPY 719.\n)- PCSSD ENROLLMENT (October 1, 1992) l3f.J\\CK HISPJ\\NIC n,w\u0026lt;:: r.T IJL\u0026lt;:: BOYS ~Tor~ 77 76 ,~a l 36 33 l'} 4 5 33 42 7S 166 14.l ~? F. 7 ~  I All c\ni\n/?,l. t:.7 A? 10'1 2 2 117 113 m..o l 1 50 54 Je\u0026gt;J\u0026gt;3/ 168 130 1~8' 107 1oq ',.jl (a 101 , \") q ~~--2 d l? I I 1 Q ~o 27 18 -'/5 49 62 II/ 53 55 ,or l 52 52 ,-OJ/. 91 101 /T~2 2 57 47 1oi/ l 31 36 t,11 43 73 II~ l 70 60 J,'1,0 2 3 58 50 10'6 l l 71 65 13~ 5 l 1.733 1-665 23 24 2~~g q 7 l'1 231 194 t~l l 83 101 18~ 5 3 112 90 :ic~.L 3 160 136 ~~i 146 133 ~~ 112 70 ~4 4 129 107 ::l3i9 l 99 116 ::,.1,S2 65 45 110 68 45 //~ 1 126 103 t~,s l 1//~2--rfl 7~ 11\u0026lt;1.\n,.,.I - ~ .568 -J:-:\n=3,,!1-5 ~ --r,a /#.St:: /\nJ\"\nj~ ~z--ff\n:\n.c\n.JP\u0026gt;/~ ~l j-\n1jl:0 -5-2- ~ g\n:f''j \u0026lt;7' 8-\u0026amp;8' ~D11 .ffd d'l-\n\\SJJ\\N/PN:.- ISL- JIM 1Nn OOYS GIRLS BOYS 3 l 1 2 2 1 2 l 5 2 1 7. l l i 4 2 3 l l 1 l l l 1 17 12 13 4 6 l l 3 10 4 2 1 l 3 l l 2 1 l 1 l 2 ,J,,,,,/ k?? xo -?-'7 -n- --5-- d!)-'/ ~/ 4- 4-- 3-9-- Ht- L.- -'II ~~ 17 /pCVJM'\") SCHOOL GIRLS TOTAL 420 390 283 680 648 1 650 326 603 9 458 524 546 1 847 518 321 469 592 518 1 682 2 420 l91 490 735 420 569 14 12.300 66 935 6S4 1 602 .l,023 627 7. 837 Q1.Q 1 915 411 408 932 (\"\"\\ 'i?\"Pf-~ -it- ..:\n. ,...,.,.._ti vi/ q _::,\n:}~ ?P ,~01 ~ 1\u0026gt; 45- ,. ~I ~. ,,. 'fi~ 3i 1~, 1 p 57 J/0 ~ i 7.,\n~ Jo 7 .. 7o 7o \u0026gt;{~ ,.,/ ~ /i\n,.o\n_'6 '\" '\" ,\n.S1  ?fa 7,.\nrt ,s\n_I., ~ fl) 7-, 70 7D J.,'61 u ,\nJl ~$ 7-\n'i/ 8 .1. 7.\n\u0026gt;,. 7b -.'/-- /7 o\n). 7 ~ .). 57, ~ ~ 7,\n) ~~ ?7, 7a .,#i\\ ~7t\u0026gt; ...'ztib -fr z,84 \nJ. i\n,a / .f\":__q_!_L~J_4 _ -- TO: FROM: SUBJECT: LITTLER OCKS CHOODLI STRICT 810 WESTM ARKHSATMR EET LITTLER OCKA, RKANSAS October 12, 1992 Board of Directors OCT 2 (: i ~, Office of Dese'gc.\u0026lt;g\u0026gt;a1t. o n Mon. ttoring Dr. Mac Bernd, Superintendent of Schools f{(#J Marie Parker, Associate Superintendent for Organizational and Learning Equity October 1 Enrollment - 1992-93 School Year Please find attached the October 1 enrollment statistics for the 1992-93 school year. The total district enrollment reflects a decrease of 106 students. However, it should be noted that 314 LRSDs tudents are enrolled at Crystal Hill Magnet School this year. cc: Cabinet LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OCTOBER 1 ENROLLMENT COMPARISON 1991-92/1992-93 WHITE BLACK OTHER TOTAL %BLACK SENIOR HIGH: 10/1/91 2152 3243 114 5509 59 10/1/92 2131 3378 123 5632 60 INCREASE/DECREASE ( 21) 135 9 123 % (. 98%) y,. 2% 7.9% 2. 2.% JUNIOR HIGH\n10/1/91 1882 4112 68 6062 68 10/1/92 191.,8 l.,138 80 6166 67 INCREASE/DECREASE 66 26 12 104 % 3.5% .63% 17.7% 1. 7% ELEMENTARY: 10/1/91 4851 9374 166 11.,, 391 65 10/1/92 4819 89% 190 11.,, 003 61., INCREASE/DECREASE ( 32) (380) 24 ( 388) % (. 66%) (4.1%) H.5% ( 2. 7%) SPECIAL SCHOOLS: 10/1/91 l,i.O 2/,i. 0 61., 38 10/1/92 1.,3 28 0 71 39 INCREASE/DECREASE 3 y, 0 7 % 7.5% 25% 10.9% DISTRICT TOTAL: 10/1/91 8925 16,753 3/,i.8 26,026 6q. 10/1/92 891.,1 16,538 393 25,872 64 INCREASE/DECREASE 16 (215) i.,5 ( 151.,) % .18% ( 1. 3%) 12.9% (. 6%) KINDERGARTEN: 10/1/91 691., 1231 18 1%3 63 10/1/92 715 1188 27 1930 61 INCREASE/DECREASE 21 ( 1.,3) 9 ( 13) % 3% ( 3. 5%) 50% (. 69%) FOUR YEAR OLD: 10/1/91 . 120 163 9 292 56 10/1/92 lq.1 288 11 31.,0 55 INCREASE/DECREASE 21 25 2 1.,8 % 17.5% 15. 3% 22% 16. 1.,% DISTRICT TOTAL WITH FOUR YEAR OLDS: 10/1/91 90q.5 16,916 357 26,318 61., 10/1/92 9082 16,726 i.,Oq. 26,212 61., INCREASE/DECREASE 37 ( 190) q. 7 (106) % .i.,1% ( 1.1%) 13% ( .!.,%) SUMMARY OF OCTOBER 1 ENROLLMENT 1992-93 GRADE WHITE BLACK OTHER TOTAL %BLACK K 715 1188 27 1930 61 1 719 1305 21 2045 63 2 707 1323 30 2060 6 4 3 673 1185 3 4 1892 62 4 6 54 1214 23 1891 64 5 665 1295 28 1988 65 6 640 1367 27 2034 67 UN 46 117 0 163 72 TOTAL ELEM 4819 8994 190 14,003 64 7 723 1431 25 2179 66 8 611 1430 33 2074 69 9 591 1241 21 1853 67 UN 23 36 1 60 60 TOTAL JR HIGH 1948 4138 80 6166 67 10 719 1326 34 2079 6 I,. 11 704 1098 48 1850 59 12 700 939 41 1680 56 UN 8 15 0 23 65 TOTAL SR HIGH 2131 3378 123 5632 60 SPECIAL SCHOOLS 43 28 0 71 39 FOUR YR. OLD 141 188 11 340 55 DISTRICT TOTAL 9082 16,726 401,. 26,212 64 *SUMMARY OF STUDENTS LISTED IN \"OTHER\" CATEGORY: SPANISH - 135 ESKIMO/AMER . .::ND. - 22 ASIAN/PACIFIC ISLANDER - 227 OTHER - 20 LI'rTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OCTOBER 1 ENROLLMENT 1992-93 SCHOOL/GRADE WHITE BLACK OTHER TOTAL %BLACK CENTRAL UNGRADED 0 0 0 0 ERR 10 279 467 15 761 61. 37% 11 262 391 28 681 57.42% 12 220 275 13 508 54.13% SUBTOTAL 761 1133 56 1950 58.10% KIND. 0 49 0 49 100.00% TOTAL 761 1182 56 1999 59.13% FAIR UNGRADED 8 15 0 23 65.22% 10 97 195 5 297 65.66% 11 112 205 5 322 63.66% 12 93 147 4 244 60.25% SUBTOTAL 310 562 14 886 63.43% KIND. 1 18 0 19 94.74% TOTAL 311 580 14 905 64.09% HALL UNGRADED 0 0 0 0 ERR 10 110 207 6 323 64.09% 11 126 168 8 302 55.63% 12 154 185 12 351 52.71% SUBTOTAL 390 560 26 976 57.38% KIND. 10 8 0 18 44.44% TOTAL 400 568 26 994 57.14% MCCLELLAN UNGRADED 0 0 0 0 ERR 10 105 277 5 387 71.58% 11 91 183 3 277 66.06% 12 116 178 8 302 58.94% SUBTOTAL 312 638 16 966 66.05% KIND. 1 18 0 19 94.74% TOTAL 313 656 16 985 66.60% PARKVIEW UNGRADED 0 0 0 0 0.00% 10 128 180 3 311 57.88% 11 113 151 4 268 56.34% 12 117 154 4 275 56.00% SUBTOTAL 358 485 11 854 56.79% KIND. 1 16 0 17 94.12% TOTAL 359 501 11 871 57.52% Page - 1 SCHOOL/GRADE WHITE BLACK OTHER TOTAL %BLACK CLOVERDALE UNGRADED 0 0 0 0 ERR 7 78 210 3 291 72.16% 8 58 180 6 244 73.77% 9 56 181 3 240 75.42% TOTAL 192 571 12 775 73.68% DUNBAR UNGRADED 7 87 136 4 227 59.91% 8 94 145 6 245 59.18% 9 102 129 2 233 55.36% TOTAL 283 410 12 705 58.16% FOREST HEIGHTS UNGRADED 6 5 0 11 45.45% 7 66 195 3 264 73.86% 8 78 199 6 283 70.32% 9 70 155 4 229 67.69% TOTAL 220 554 13 787 70.39% HENDERSON UNGRADED 0 0 0 0 ERR 7 99 228 4 331 68.88% 8 46 259 4 309 83.82% 9 70 198 6 274 72.26% TOTAL 215 685 14 914 74.95% MABELVALE UNGRADED 13 6 1 20 30.00% 7 80 151 2 233 64.81% 8 74 151 0 225 67.11% 9 59 130 0 189 68.78% TOTAL 226 438 3 667 65.67% MANN UNGRADED 7 128 178 5 311 57.23% 8 118 160 6 284 56.34% 9 81 167 6 254 65.75% TOTAL 327 505 17 849 59.48% PULASKI HEIGHTS UNGRADED 3 12 0 15 80.00% 7 129 136 2 267 50.94% 8 96 167 1 264 63.26% 9 91 137 0 228 60.09% TOTAL 319 452 3 774 \"58.40% Page - 2 SCHOOL/GRADE WHITE BLACK OTHER TOTAL %BLACK SOUTHWEST UNGRADED 1 13 0 14 92.86% 7 56 197 2 255 77.25% 8 47 169 4 220 76.82% 9 62 144 0 206 69.90% TOTAL 166 523 6 695 75.25% BADGETT UNGRADED 1 6 0 7 85.71% 1 5 19 0 24 79.17% 2 9 13 0 22 59.09% 3 3 18 0 21 85.71% 4 5 16 0 21 76.19% 5 4 31 0 35 88.57% 6 7 29 0 36 80.56% SUBTOTAL 34 132 0 166 79.52% KIND. 7 12 0 19 63.16% FOUR YR OLD 7 10 0 17 58.82% TOTAL 48 154 () 202 76.24% BALE UNGRADED 7 5 0 12 41.67% 1 6 29 1 36 80.56% 2 4 25 1 30 83.33% 3 5 29 1 35 82.86% 4 6 29 1 36 80.56% 5 7 45 2 54 83.33% 6 8 40 3 51 78.43% SUBTOTAL 43 202 9 254 79.53% KIND. 10 37 2 49 75.51% FOUR YR OLD 9 9 0 18 50.00% TOTAL 62 248 11 321 77.26% BASELINE UNGRADED 1 15 45 0 60 75.00% 2 15 40 1 56 71.43% 3 9 31 0 40 77.50% 4 7 43 0 50 86.00% 5 8 28 2 38 73.68% 6 5 30 0 35 85.71% SUBTOTAL 59 217 3 279 77.78% KIND. 15 45 0 60 75.00% TOTAL 74 262 3 339 77.29% Page - 3 SCHOOL/GRADE WHITE BLACK OTHER TOTAL %BLACK BOOKER UNGRADED 1 39 47 0 86 54.65% 2 36 50 1 87 57.47% 3 38 50 1 89 56.18% 4 40 53 3 96 55.21% 5 39 51 0 90 56.67% 6 43 54 2 99 54.55% SUBTOTAL 235 305 7 547 55.76% KIND. 34 40 0 74 54.05% TOTAL 269 345 7 621 55.56% BRADY UNGRADED 1 5 0 6 83.33% 1 20 34 3 57 59.65% 2 17 44 1 62 70.97% 3 15 44 2 61 72.13% 4 10 34 0 44 77.27% 5 16 38 1 55 69.09% 6 7 46 2 55 83.64% SUBTOTAL 86 245 9 340 72.06% KIND. 25 30 3 58 51.72% TOTAL 111 275 12 398 69.10% CARVER UNGRADED 1 31 39 0 70 55.71% 2 34 50 2 86 58.14% 3 41 48 0 89 53.93% 4 42 51 3 96 53.13% 5 44 55 0 99 55.56% 6 43 53 2 98 54.08% SUBTOTAL 235 296 7 538 55.02% KIND. 27 33 0 60 55.00% TOTAL 262 329 7 598 55.03% CHICOT UNGRADED 7 10 0 17 58.82% 1 27 59 0 86 68.60% 2 31 57 1 89 64.04% 3 23 43 3 69 62.32% 4 21 41 2 64 64.06% 5 19 40 1 60 66.67% 6 26 46 1 73 63.01% SUBTOTAL 154 296 8 458 64.63% KIND. 23 54 0 77 70.13% TOTAL 177 350 8 535 65.42% Page - 4 SCHOOL/GRADE WHITE BLACK OTHER TOTAL %BLACK CLOVERDALE UNGRADED 1 7 39 0 46 84.78% 2 9 37 2 48 77.08% 3 9 35 0 44 79.55% 4 7 46 1 54 85.19% 5 10 44 0 54 81.48% 6 7 43 0 50 86.00% SUBTOTAL 49 244 3 296 82.43% KIND. 15 38 0 53 71. 70% FOUR YR OLD 7 9 1 17 52.94% TOTAL 71 291 4 366 79.51% DODD UNGRADED 5 5 0 10 50.00% 1 18 20 0 38 52.63% 2 14 27 0 41 65.85% 3 18 24 0 42 57.14% 4 16 22 0 38 57.89% 5 14 36 0 50 72.00% 6 16 30 0 46 65.22% SUBTOTAL 101 164 0 265 61.89% KIND. 20 19 0 39 48.72% 121 183 0 304 60.20% FAIR PARK UNGRADED 1 10 34 0 44 77.27% 2 7 29 0 36 80.56% 3 6 25 1 32 78.13% 4 3 29 0 32 90.63% 5 9 26 0 35 74.29% 6 4 23 0 27 85.19% SUBTOTAL 39 166 1 206 80.58% KIND. 10 26 1 37 70.27% TOTAL 49 192 2 243 79.01% FOREST PARK UNGRADED 1 38 35 0 73 47.95% 2 45 25 1 71 35.21% 3 35 13 1 49 26.53% 4 31 21 1 53 39.62% 5 39 45 0 84 53.57% 6 23 31 0 54 57.41% SUBTOTAL 211 170 3 384 44.27% KIND. 31 28 1 60 46.67% TOTAL 242 198 4 444 44.59% Page - 5 SCHOOL/GRADE WHITE BLACK OTHER TOTAL %BLACK FRANKLIN UNGRADED 1 9 0 10 90.00% 1 7 67 1 75 89.33% 2 5 45 0 50 90.00% 3 2 48 0 50 96.00% 4 4 45 0 49 91.84% 5 0 26 1 27 96.30% 6 2 47 4 53 88.68% SUBTOTAL 21 287 6 314 91. 40% KIND. 5 38 0 43 88.37% FOUR YR OLD 24 27 3 54 50.00% TOTAL 50 352 9 411 85.64% FULBRIGHT UNGRADED 5 2 0 7 28.57% 1 35 25 1 61 40.98% 2 41 31 2 74 41.89% 3 48 38 2 88 43.18% 4 49 27 2 78 34.62% 5 41 39 1 81 48.15% 6 42 39 1 82 47.56% SUBTOTAL 261 201 9 471 42.68% KIND. 35 24 0 59 40.68% TOTAL 296 225 9 530 42.45% GARLAND UNGRADED 3 10 0 13 76.92% 1 2 37 0 39 94.87% 2 1 29 1 31 93.55% 3 2 29 0 31 93.55% 4 0 35 0 35 100.00% 5 2 26 2 30 86.67% 6 1 32 2 35 91.43% SUBTOTAL 11 198 5 214 92.52% KIND. 3 26 1 30 86.67% FOUR YR OLD 3 9 0 12 75.00% TOTAL 17 233 6 256 91.02% GEYER SPRINGS UNGRADED 0 3 0 3 100.00% 1 14 27 0 41 65.85% 2 20 25 0 45 55.56% 3 14 27 0 41 65.85% 4 5 19 0 24 79.17% 5 9 16 0 25 64.00% 6 16 30 0 46 65.22% SUBTOTAL 78 147 0 225 65.33% KIND. 18 21 39 53.85% FOUR YR OLD 9 9 0 18 50.00% TOTAL 105 177 0 282 62.77% Page - 6 SCHOOL/GRADE WHITE BLACK OTHER TOTAL %BLACK GIBBS UNGRADED 1 17 25 1 43 58.14% 2 19 26 0 45 57.78% 3 20 24 1 45 53.33% 4 20 26 2 48 54.17% 5 19 28 3 50 56.00% 6 26 39 2 67 58.21% SUBTOTAL 121 168 9 298 56.38% KIND. 13 23 2 38 60.53% TOTAL 134 191 11 336 56.85% ISH UNGRADED 0 5 0 5 100.00% 1 0 15 0 15 100.00% 2 0 31 0 31 100.00% 3 2 24 0 26 92.31% 4 0 18 0 18 100.00% 5 0 23 0 23 100.00% 6 0 32 0 32 100.00% SUBTOTAL 2 148 0 150 98.67% KIND. 0 25 0 25 100.00% FOUR YEAR OL 3 9 0 12 75.00% TOTAL 5 182 0 187 97.33% JEFFERSON UNGRADED 4 3 0 7 42.86% 1 35 26 0 61 42.62% 2 42 32 1 75 42.67% 3 35 31 3 69 44.93% 4 36 32 1 69 46.38% 5 39 25 1 65 38.46% 6 41 36 0 77 46.75% SUBTOTAL 232 185 6 423 43.74% KIND. 41 19 0 60 31. 67% TOTAL 273 204 6 483 42.24% MABELVALE UNGRADED 3 7 0 10 70.00% 1 30 41 1 72 56.94% 2 34 39 1 74 52.70% 3 28 42 0 70 60.00% 4 29 35 1 65 53.85% 5 37 39 0 76 51.32% 6 31 42 0 73 57.53% SUBTOTAL 192 245 3 440 55.68% KIND. 27 33 0 60 55.00% TOTAL 219 278 3 500 55.60% Page - 7 SCHOOL/GRADE WHITE BLACK OTHER TOTAL %BLACK MCDERMOTT UNGRADED 0 0 0 0 ERR 1 32 39 0 71 54.93% 2 27 39 3 69 56.52% 3 36 35 3 74 47.30% 4 36 40 1 77 51. 95% 5 26 48 4 78 61. 54% 6 32 46 2 80 57.50% SUBTOTAL 189 247 13 449 55.01% KIND. 31 28 1 60 46.67% TOTAL 220 275 14 509 54.03% MEADOWCLIFF UNGRADED 1 24 47 0 71 66.20% 2 25 46 0 71 64.79% 3 27 38 0 65 58.46% 4 14 47 0 61 77.05% 5 24 41 1 66 62.12% 6 14 32 0 46 69.57% SUBTOTAL 128 251 1 380 66.05% KIND. 19 41 0 60 68.33% TOTAL 147 292 1 440 66.36% MITCHELL UNGRADED 1 8 0 9 88.89% 1 7 29 2 38 76.32% 2 2 43 1 46 93.48% 3 2 33 0 35 94.29% 4 5 29 1 35 82.86% 5 4 36 0 40 90.00% 6 0 22 0 22 100.00% SUBTOTAL 21 200 4 225 88.89% KIND. 2 23 0 25 92.00% FOUR YEAR OL 5 9 0 14 64.29% TOTAL 28 232 4 264 87.88% OTTER CREEK UNGRADED 1 25 23 2 50 46.00% 2 34 23 0 57 40.35% 3 34 13 1 48 27.08% 4 32 20 1 53 37.74% 5 28 23 0 51 45.10% 6 28 26 0 54 48.15% SUBTOTAL 181 128 4 313 40.89% KIND. 22 15 3 40 37.50% TOTAL 203 143 7 353 40.51% Page - 8 SCHOOL/GRADE WHITE BLACK OTHER TO'rAL %BLACK PULASKI HEIGHTS UNGRADED 1 26 23 0 49 46.94% 2 32 31 2 65 47.69% 3 25 21 1 47 44.68% 4 25 29 1 55 52.73% 5 16 34 1 51 66.67% 6 19 34 0 53 64.15% SUBTOTAL 143 172 5 320 53.75% KIND. 30 26 3 59 44.07% TOTAL 173 198 8 379 52.24% RIGHTSELL UNGRADED 1 1 35 0 36 97.22% 2 0 34 0 34 100.00% 3 0 29 0 29 100.00% 4 0 38 1 39 97.44% 5 0 33 0 33 100.00% 6 0 38 0 38 100.00% SUBTOTAL 1 -207 1 209 99.04% KIND. 2 23 0 25 92.00% FOUR YEAR OL 6 9 0 15 60.00% TOTAL 9 239 1 249 95.98% ROCKEFELLER UNGRADED 1 23 37 1 61 60.66% 2 11 39 1 51 76.47% 3 6 25 2 33 75.76% 4 8 31 0 39 79.49% 5 4 35 0 39 89.74% 6 5 30 0 35 85.71% SUBTOTAL 57 197 4 258 76.36% KIND. 25 28 1 54 51. 85% FOUR YEAR OL 22 25 2 49 51.02% TOTAL 104 250 7 361 69.25% ROMINE UNGRADED 2 13 0 15 86.67% 1 13 43 0 56 76.79% 2 5 40 0 45 88.89% 3 2 42 2 46 91.30% 4 10 40 1 51 78.43% 5 9 28 1 38 73.68% 6 10 28 1 39 71.79% SUBTOTAL 51 234 5 290 80.69% KIND. 19 34 1 54 62.96% FOUR YEAR OL 4 9 4 17 52.94% TOTAL 74 277 10 361 76.73% Page - 9 SCHOOL/GRADE WHITE BLACK OTHER TOTAL %BLACK STEPHENS UNGRADED 0 6 0 6 100.00% 1 2 30 0 32 93.75% 2 1 33 0 34 97.06% 3 0 34 0 34 100.00% 4 0 20 0 20 100.00% 5 0 16 0 16 100.00% 6 0 32 0 32 100.00% SUBTOTAL 3 171 0 174 98.28% KIND. 1 23 0 24 95.83% FOUR YEAR OL 3 8 0 11 72.73% TOTAL 7 202 0 209 96.65% TERRY UNGRADED 1 42 25 2 69 36.23% 2 41 30 4 75 40.00% 3 41 30 4 75 40.00% 4 43 36 0 79 45.57% 5 37 43 3 83 51.81% 6 37 43 2 82 52.44% SUBTOTAL 241 207 15 463 44.71% KIND. 45 31 2 78 39.74% TOTAL 286 238 17 5.41 43.99% WAKEFIELD UNGRADED 0 0 0 0 0.00% 1 20 54 1 75 72.00% 2 15 55 1 71 77.46% 3 23 41 2 66 62.12% 4 30 46 0 76 60.53% 5 24 46 0 70 65.71% 6 18 63 1 82 76.83% SUBTOTAL 130 305 5 440 69.32% KIND. 17 42 1 60 70.00% TOTAL 147 347 6 500 69.40% WASHINGTON UNGRADED 2 1 0 3 33.33% 1 53 77 1 131 58.78% 2 47 97 1 145 66.90% 3 44 62 2 108 57.41% 4 40 56 0 96 58.33% 5 50 67 0 117 57.26% 6 40 55 0 95 57.89% SUBTOTAL 276 415 4 695 59.71% KIND. 38 50 3 91 54.95% FOUR YR OLD 18 18 0 36 50.00% TOTAL 332 483 7 822 58.76% Page - 10 SCHOOL/GRADE WHITE BLACK OTHER TOTAL %BLACK WATSON UNGRADED 1 18 54 1 73 73.97% 2 15 53 0 68 77.94% 3 11 41 0 52 78.85% 4 15 33 0 48 68.75% 5 18 54 0 72 75.00% 6 14 49 0 63 77.78% SUBTOAL 91 284 1 376 75.53% KIND. 20 37 1 58 63.79% FOUR YR OLD 6 11 0 17 64.71% TOTAL 117 332 2 451 73.61% WESTERN HILLS UNGRADED 1 21 28 0 49 57.14% 2 19 26 0 45 57.78% 3 14 34 1 49 69.39% 4 18 30 0 48 62.50% 5 19 32 1 52 61. 54% 6 17 35 0 52 67.31% SUBTOTAL 108 185 2 295 62.71% KIND. 16 24 0 40 60.00% TOTAL 124 209 2 335 62.39% WILLIAMS UNGRADED 1 29 36 3 68 52.94% 2 27 39 2 68 57.35% 3 29 37 1 67 55.22% 4 31 41 0 72 56.94% 5 32 38 2 72 52.78% 6 42 52 1 95 54.74% SUBTOTAL 190 243 9 442 54.98% KIND. 28 32 0 60 53.33% TOTAL 218 -275 9 502 54.78% WILSON UNGRADED 4 19 0 23 82.61% 1 13 34 0 47 72.34% 2 11 29 0 40 72.50% 3 18 35 0 53 66.04% 4 7 40 0 47 85.11% 5 5 36 0 41 87.80% 6 7 40 0 47 85.11% SUBTOTAL 65 233 0 298 78.19% KIND. 17 23 0 40 57.50% FOUR YR OLD 8 9 0 17 52.94% TOTAL 90 265 0 355 74.65% Page - 11 SCHOOL/GRADE WHITE BLACK OTHER TOTAL %BLACK WOODRUFF UNGRADED 1 14 28 0 42 66.67% 2 12 11 0 23 47.83% 3 8 12 0 20 60.00% 4 9 16 0 25 64.00% 5 13 24 1 38 63.16% 6 9 20 1 30 66.67% SUBTOTAL 65 111 2 178 62.36% KIND. 11 28 1 40 70. \u0026lt;)0% FOUR YR OLD 7 8 1 16 50.00% TOTAL 83 147 4 234 62.82% EASTER SEALS UNGRADED 9 6 0 15 40.00% TOTAL 9 6 0 15 40.00% ELIZ. MITCHELL UNGRADED 30 16 0 46 34.78% TOTAL 30 16 0 46 34.78% E. MITCHELL(DAY) UNGRADED 4 6 0 10 60.00% TOTAL 4 6 0 10 60.00% Page - 12 OCT 2 1 19Y2 OCTOBER 1st REPORTS 1992-93 Office of DesegregatioMn onitoring CONTENTS N.L.R.S.D. Enrollment, Excluding Kindergarten N.L.R.S.D. Enrollment, Including Kindergarten Group School Transfers Magnet Transfers Majority to Minority Transfers to L.R.S.D. Majority to Minority Transfers from L.R.S.D. Oak Grove Transfers to P.C.S.S.D. Oak Grove Transfers from P.C.S.S.D. Scott Student Transfers School Choice Transfers to P.C.S.S.D. School Choice Transfers from P.C.S.S.D. Teachers' Student Transfers Under Act 624 ., .. School Alternative ( 3 - 6) Amboy Baring Cross (K - 6) Belwood Boone Park Central Crestwood Glenview Indian Hills Lakewood Lynch Drive - Meadow Park North Heights Park Hill Pike View Redwood Rose City Seventh Street Total Elem. Alternative (7 - 11) Baring Cross ( 7 - 12) Lakewood Md. Ridgeroad Md. Rose City Md. NLRHS-East NLRHS-West Total Sec. Dist. Total: ! - 1992/93 Approved% Range for Black Enrollment Elem.: 37.9 - 63.1 Middle: 35.9 - 59.8 NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT North Little Rock, Arkansas RACIAL COMPOSITION OF SCHOOLS Excluding Kindergarten October 1, 1992 Enrollment Black % Non-Black % 19 13 68.4 6 31. 6 331 159 48.0 172 52.0 14 5 35.7 9 64.3 150 64 42.7 86 57.3 403 239 59.3 164. 40.7 430 227 52.8 203 47.2 210 91 43.3 119 56.7 201 112 55.7 89 44.3 386 180 46.6 206 53.4 244 126 51. 6 118 48.4 186 76 40.9 110 59.1 218 113 51.8 105 48.2 337 175 51. 9 162 48.1 178 88 49.4 90 50.6 371 191 51.5 180 48.5 202 112 55.4 90 44.6 215 117 54.4 98 45.6 315 141 44.8 174 55.2 4,410 2,229 50.5% 2,181 49. 5~ .. 30 23 76.7 7 23.3 31 22 71.0 9 29.0 545 248 45.5 297 54.5 578 266 46.0 312 54.0 408 207 50.7 201 49.3 1,339 602 45.0 737 55.0 1,204 524 43.5 680 56.5 4,135 1,892 45.8% 2,243 54.2% 8,545 4,121 48.2% 4,424 51.8% 1992/93 Approved% Range for Black Enrollment NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT North Little Rock, Arkansas RACIAL COMPOSITION OF SCHOOLS Including Kindergarten October 1, 1992 Elem.: 37.9 - 63.1 Middle: 35.9 - 59.8 School Alternative Enrollment Black 14 172 % 70.0 44.1 35.7 Non-Black % (K - 6) Amboy Baring Cross (K - 6) Belwood Boone Park Central Crestwood Glenview Indian Hills Lakewood Lynch Drive Meadow Park North Heights Park Hill Pike View Redwood Rose City Seventh Street 20 390 14 171 480 496 241 230 447 277 210 243 403 210 429 238 254 363 Total Elem. 5,116 Alternative 30 (7 - 11) Baring Cross 31 (7 - 12) Lakewood Md. 545 Ridgeroad Md. 578 Rose City Md. 408 NLRHS-East 1,339 NLRHS-West 1,204 Total Sec. 4,135 Dist. Total: 9,251 5 71 295 279 105 131 200 141 85 124 193 94 209 142 137 177 2,574 23 22 248 266 207 602 524 1,892 4,466 41.5 61. 5 56.3 43.6 57.0 44.7 50.9 40.5 51.0 47.9 44.8 48.7 59.7 53.9 48.8 6 218 9 100 185 217 136 99 247 136 125 119 210 116 220 96 117 186 50.3% 2,542 76.7 7 71.0 9 45.5 297 46.0 312 50.7 201 45.0 737 43.5 680 45.8% 2,243 48.3% 4,785 30.0 55.9 64.3 58.5 38.5 43.8 56.4 43.0 55.3 4 9 .1 59.5 49.0 52.1 55.2 51. 3 40.3 46.1 51.2 49.7% 23.3 29.0 54.5 54.0 49.3 55.0 56. 5 ., 54.2% 51.7% NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT Grouped School Transfers 1992-93 Non-black Black AMBOY ELEM. TO SEVENTH STREET ELEM. BELWOOD ELEM. TO CENTRAL ELEM. BOONE PARK ELEM. TO AMBOY ELEM. BOONE PARK ELEM. TO PARK HILL ELEM. CENTRAL ELEM. TO BELWOOD ELEM. CENTRAL ELEM. TO CRESTWOOD ELEM. CENTRAL.ELEM. TO LAKEWOOD ELEM. CENTRAL ELEM. TO PIKE VIEW ELEM. CRESTWOOD ELEM. TO CENTRAL ELEM. INDIAN HILLS ELEM. TO SEVENTH STREET LAKEWOOD ELEM. TO CENTRAL ELEM. PARK HILL ELEM. TO GLENVIEW ELEM. PIKE VIEW ELEM. TO CENTRAL ELEM. REDWOOD ELEM. TO NORTH HEIGHTS ELEM. ROSE CITY ELEM. TO MEADOW PARK ELEM. Total: 10/01/92 48 2 3 ELEM. 93 18 1 4 5 174 5 8 1 1 3 4 1 23 ELEMENTARY SECONDARY NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT MAGNET ENROLLMENT BY SCHOOL October 1, 1992 Non-Black Black Booker 55 48 Carver 60 46 Gibbs 23 30 Williams 41 24 Total: 179 148 Mann Arts 38 50 Mann Science 24 25 Parkview Arts 27 32 Parkview Science 8 14 Total: 97 121 Magnet Total: 276 269 Total 103 106 53 65 327 88 49 59 22 218 545 NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT MAJORITY-TO-MINORITY TRANSFER PROGRAM TO LITTLE ROCK October 1, 1992 ELEMENTARY Brady Chicot Geyer Springs McDermott Rockefeller Stephens Terry Washington Wilson Woodruff Total: SECONDARY 1 2 3 2 5 1 2 64 3 9 92 Cloverdale 1 Dunbar (M to M Magnet) 8 Henderson 1 Pulaski Heights 6 Central Central Hall J. A. Fair McClellan (M to M) (M to M Magnet) Total: Total M to M Transfers: 22 7 2 2 3 52 143 E\nLEMENTARY NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT MAJORITY-TO-MINORITY TRANSFER PROGRAM Black Students from Little Rock School District October 1, 1992 SCHOOLS Alternative Education 1 Amboy 10 Belwood 2 Boone Park 3 Central 7 Crestwood 16 Glenveiw 4 Indian Hills 24 Lakewood 32 Lynch Drive 4 Meadow Park 3 North Heights 9 Park Hill 4 Pike View 6 Redwood 10 Rose City 0 Seventh Street 3 Total: 138 MIDDLE SCHOOLS Alternative Education 0 Baring Cross 0 Lakewood 43 Ridge road 8 Rose City 8 Total: 59 HIGH SCHOOLS Alternative Education 0 Baring Cross 3 East Campus 43 West Campus 52 Total: 98 Total M to M Transfers: 295 - .... . ,, - NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT N.L.R. STUDENTS TO OAK GROVE 1992-93 RACE: Black GRADE NUMBER OF STUDENTS 7 1 8 8 9 10 10 13 11 10 12 15 TOTAL: 57 10-01-92 NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OAK GROVE STUDENTS TO N.L.R.S.D. 1992-93 RACE: White 10/01/92 GRADE 8 9 10 11 12 TOTAL: NUMBER OF STUDENTS 1 0 1 2 3 7 Rose City Middle School North - Total: GRADE 7 8 Little Rock High GRADE 9 10 Total: NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT STUDENT AFFAIRS OFFICE SCOTT STUDENTS October 1, 1992 # OF STUDENTS 6 12 18 School - East Campus # OF STUDENTS 5 3 8 Black Non-Black 2 4 4 8 6 12 Black Non-Black 0 5 1 2 1 7 NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT School Choice to Pulaski County Special School District October 1, 1992 Race: Black GRADE NUMBER OF STUDENTS 11 1 Total: 1 NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT STUDENT AFFAIRS OFFICE SCHOOL CHOICE TRANSFERS 1992-93 October 1, 1992 School Non-Black Amboy Elementary 2 Baring Cross (K-6) 1 Belwood Elementary 0 Boone Park Elementary 0 Central Elementary 3 Crestwood Elementary 4 Glenview Elementary O Indian Hills Elementary 10 Lakewood Elementary O Lynch Drive Elementary 0 Meadow Park Elementary 0 North Heights Elementary 3 Park Hill Elementary 0 Pike View Elementary 3 Redwood Elementary O Rose City Elementary 1 Seventh Street Elementary 3 Alternative Education Baring Cross (7-12) Lakewood Middle Ridgeroad Middle Rose City Middle NLRHS-East Campus NLRHS-West Campus Total: (7-12) 0 .o 13 2 1 20 15 81 Black NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT TEACHER TRANSFER ACT 624 October 1, 1992 STUDENTS OF LITTLE ROCK RESIDENT CERTIFIED EMPLOYEES ATTENDING SCHOOL IN THE NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT Total: 10 Non-Black 5 Black 5 ________________________________ (010) STUDENTS OF PULASKI COUNTY RESIDENT CERTIFIED EMPLOYEES ATTENDING SCHOOL. IN THE NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT Total: 28 Non-Black 21 Black 7 ________________________________ (011) STUDENTS OF BRYANT RESIDENT CERTIFIED EMPLOYEES ATTENDING SCHOOL IN THE NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT Total: 1 Non-Black 1 Black 0 ________________________________ (012) -STUDENTS OF CONWAY RESIDENT CERTIFIED EMPLOYEES ATTENDING SCHOOL IN THE NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT Total: 1 Non-Black 1 Black 0 __________________________________ (013) STUDENTS OF NORTH LITTLE ROCK RESIDENT CERTIFIED EMPLOYEES ATTENDING SCHOOL IN THE NORTH LITTLE ROCK ZONE WHERE THEY TEACH Total: 14 Non-Black 12 Black 2 ________________________________ (014) STUDENTS OF PULASKI COUNTY RESIDENT CLASSIFIED EMPLOYEES ATTENDING SCHOOL IN THE NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT Total: 3 Non-Black 3 Black 0 _______________________________ (021) STUDENTS OF NORTH LITTLE ROCK RESIDENT CLASSIFIED EMPLOYEES ATTENDING SCHOOL IN THE NORTH LITTLE ROCK ZONE WHERE THEY WORK Total: 11 Non-Black 5 Black 6 ~-:~ ____________________________ (024) GRAND TOTAL: 68 Non-Black 48 Black 20 PUPIL ENROLLMENT BY SCHOOL LEA #60-02-050 OCTOBER 1, 1992 CURRENT SCHOOL ASSIGNMENTS COUNTY: PULASKI DISTRICT: NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL: AMBOY ELEMENTARY - GRADE SPAN: K-06 WHITE BLACK HISPANIC ASIAN/PI AM IND/ALS NAT GRADE TOTAL M F M F M F M F M F K 59 21 25 7 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01 58 18 18 15 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 02 60 24 6 16 14 0 o 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 03 61 19 13 11 18 0 .. o 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 04 53 12 12 12 15 0 2 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 05 50 11 10 11 17 1 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 06 49 15 11 12 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  OOL 390 120 95 84 88 1 2 0 0 0 0 ALS 55.1% 44 .1% .8% .0% . 0% CHOICE 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PUPIL ENROLLMENT BY SCHOOL LEA #60-02-053 OCTOBER 1, 1992 CURRENT SCHOOL ASSIGNMENTS COUNTY: PULASKI DISTRICT: NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL: BELWOOD ELEMENTARY - GRADE SPAN: K-06 WHITE BLACK HISPANIC ASIAN/PI AM IND/ALS NAT GRADE TOTAL M F M F M F M F M F K 21 8 6 3 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01 25 6 9 2 7 1 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 02 26 7 5 6 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 03 20 3 11 2 3 0 . .0 0 0 1 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 04 29 7 10 8 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 05 24 7 6 4 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 06 26 4 8 5 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  OOL 171 42 55 30 41 2 0 0 0 1 0 ALS 56.7% 41.5% 1.2% .0% .6% CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PUPIL ENROLLMENT BY SCHOOL LEA #60-02-054 OCTOBER 1, 1992 CURRENT SCHOOL ASSIGNMENTS COUNTY: PULASKI DISTRICT: NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL: BOONE PARK ELEMENTARY - GRADE SPAN: K-06 WHITE BLACK HISPANIC ASIAN/PI AM IND/ALS NAT GRADE TOTAL M F M F M F M F M F J 30 5 4 10 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 K 77 11 9 34 22 0 1 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01 64 15 12 17 20 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 02 71 24 12 17 17 1 . -0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 03 56 9 5 23 17 2 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 04 61 12 10 21 17 1 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 05 58 11 11 11 24 0 1 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 c.\n63 13 16 22 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 SCHOOL 480 100 79 155 140 4 2 0 0 0 0 TOTALS 37.3% 61.5% 1.3% .0% . 0% CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PUPIL ENROLLMENT BY SCHOOL LEA #60-02-059 OCTOBER 1, 1992 CURRENT SCHOOL ASSIGN~..ENTS COUNTY: PULASKI DISTRICT: NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL: CENTRAL ELEMENTARY - GRADE SPAN: K-06 WHITE BLACK HISPANIC ASIAN/PI AM IND/ALS NAT GRADE TOTAL M F M F M F M F M F J 9 0 0 2 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 K 66 7 7 26 26 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PK 19 1 0 10 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01 58 14 11 19 14 0 - -0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 02 68 12 13 22 18 2 1 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 03 68 21 20 14 10 3 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 04 83 21 18 22 22 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 clrci 65 20 9 17 17 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 06 60 17 14 16 9 1 0 1 2 0 0 CHOICE 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 SCHOOL 496 113 92 148 131 6 2 2 2 0 0 TOTALS 41.3% 56.3% 1.6% .8% .0% CHOICE 3 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PUPIL ENROLLMENT BY SCHOOL LEA #60-02-055 OCTOBER 1, 1992 CURRENT SCHOOL ASSIGNMENTS COUNTY: PULASKI DISTRICT: NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL: CRESTWOOD ELEMENTARY - GRADE SPAN: K-06 WHITE BLACK HISPANIC ASIAN/PI AM IND/ALS NAT GRADE TOTAL M F M F M F M F M F K 31 7 10 9 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01 33 15 9 7 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 02 44 15 7 10 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 03 22 5 6 5 6 0 .-0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 04 34 11 5 7 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 05 41 10 14 7 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 06 36 8 13 7 7 0 0 0 0 0 1 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  OOL 241 71 64 52 53 0 0 0 0 0 1 TALS 56.0% 43.6% .0% . 0% .4% CHOICE 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PUPIL ENROLLMENT BY SCHOOL LEA #60-02-056 OCTOBER 1, 1992 CURRENT SCHOOL ASSIGNMENTS COUNTY: PULASKI DISTRICT: NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL: GLENVIEW ELEMENTARY - GRADE SPAN: K-06 WHITE BLACK HISPANIC ASIAN/PI AM IND/ALS NAT GRADE TOTAL M F M F M F M F M F K 29 4 6 9 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01 35 5 10 9 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 02 34 7 8 11 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 03 35 10 7 7 11 0 .-0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 04 34 7 7 8 10 0 1 0 1 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 05 34 5 9 11 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 06 29 7 5 7 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 eOOL 230 45 52 62 69 0 1 0 1 0 0 TALS 42.2% 57.0% .4% .4% .0% CHOICE 0 0 .0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PUPIL ENROLLMENT BY SCHOOL LEA #60-02-057 OCTOBER 1, 1992 CURRENT SCHOOL ASSIGNMENTS COUNTY: PULASKI DISTRICT: NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL: INDIAN HILLS ELEM. - GRADE SPAN: K-06 WHITE BLACK HISPANIC ASIAN/PI AM IND/ALS NAT GRADE TOTAL M F M F M F M F M F K 61 16 25 14 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01 64 17 14 15 18 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 02 60 9 14 17 20 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 03 62 14 18 13 17 0 . -0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 04 63 21 14 18 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 05 71 26 16 16 12 0 0 0 1 0 0 CHOICE 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 06 66 24 18 10 . 14 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  OOL 447 127 119 103 97 0 0 0 1 0 0 ALS 55.0% 44.7% .0% . 2% .0% CHOICE 9 2 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PUPIL ENROLLMENT BY SCHOOL LEA #60-02-058 OCTOBER 1, 1992 CURRENT SCHOOL ASSIGNMENTS COUNTY: PULASKI DISTRICT: NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL: LAKEWOODE LEMENTARY - GRADE SPAN: K-06 WHITE BLACK HISPANIC ASIAN/PI AM IND/ALS NAT GRADE TOTAL M F M F M F M F M F K 33 11 7 6 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01 44 6 17 12 8 0 0 1 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 02 44 5 15 10 13 1 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 03 45 11 4 13 17 0 .-0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 04 39 13 4 7 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 05 29 7 8 5 8 0 0 0 1 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 06 43 15 10 11 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  OOL 277 68 65 64 77 1 0 1 1 0 0 ALS 48.0% 50.9% .4% .7% .0% CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PUPIL ENROLLMENT BY SCHOOL LEA #60-02-060 OCTOBER 1, 1992 CURRENT SCHOOL ASSIGNMENTS COUNTY: PULASKI DISTRICT: NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL: LYNCH DRIVE ELEMENTARY - GRADE SPAN: K-06 WHITE BLACK HISPANIC ASIAN/PI AM IND/ALS NAT GRADE TOTAL M F M F M F M F M F K 24 7 8 5 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01 34 12 9 7 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 02 33 12 10 7 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 03 24 11 4 3 6 0 .0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 04 31 8 9 5 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 05 35 10 6 8 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 06 29 8 9 4 6 1 0 1 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  .OOL 210 68 55 39 46 1 0 1 0 0 0 ALS 58.6% 40.5% .5% .5% .0% CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PUPIL ENROLLMENT BY SCHOOL LEA #60-02-061 OCTOBER 1, 1992 CURRENT SCHOOL ASSIGNMENTS COUNTY: PULASKI DISTRICT: NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL: MEADOWP ARK ELEMENTARY - GRADE SPAN: K-06 WHITE BLACK HISPANIC ASIAN/PI AM IND/ALS NAT GRADE TOTAL M F M F M F M F M F K 25 11 3 7 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01 32 7 15 4 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 02 45 9 9 9 18 0 o 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 03 32 6 8 11 7 0 .-0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 04 31 11 6 5 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 05 44 11 9 14 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 06 34 8 6 10 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  OOL 243 63 56 60 64 0 0 0 0 0 0 ALS 49.0% 51.0% .0% .0% . 0% CHOICE 0 0 .0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PUPIL ENROLLMENT BY SCHOOL LEA #60-02-063 OCTOBER 1, 1992 CURRENT SCHOOL ASSIGNMENTS COUNTY: PULASKI DISTRICT: NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL: NORTH HEIGHTS ELEM. - GRADE SPAN: K-06 'WHITE BLACK HISPANIC ASIAN/PI AM IND/ALS NAT GRADE TOTAL M F M F M F M F M F K 66 19 27 11 7 0 2 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01 51 16 6 9 17 1 1 1 0 0 0 CHOICE 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 02 65 22 8 17 16 0 2 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 03 63 14 15 20 13 0 - -1 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 04 61 16 12 17 15 1 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 05 50 13 9 13 13 1 1 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 06 47 8 12 10 15 0 1 0 1 0 0 CHOICE 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  OOL 403 108 89 97 96 3 8 1 1 0 0 TALS 48.9% 47.9% 2.7% .5% .0% CHOICE 3 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PUPIL ENROLLMENT BY SCHOOL LEA 160-02-064 OCTOBER 1, 1992 CURRENT SCHOOL ASSIGNMENTS COUNTY: PULASKI DISTRICT: NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL: PARK HILL ELEMENTARY GRADE SPAN: K-06 - WHITE BLACK HISPANIC ASIAN/PI AM IND/ALS NAT GRADE TOTAL M F M F M F M F M F K 32\" 14 12 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01 38 12 12 8 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 02 24 5 4 9 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 03 37 8 7 12 10 0 .0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 04 28 9 6 7 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 05 22 3 5 5 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 06 29 8 11 4 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  OOL 210 59 57 48 46 0 0 0 0 0 0 ALS 55.2% 44.8% . 0% .0% . 0% CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PUPIL ENROLLMENT BY SCHOOL LEA #60-02-065 OCTOBER 1, 1992 CURRENT SCHOOL ASSIGNMENTS COUNTY: PULASKI DISTRICT: NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL: PIKE VIEW ELEMENTARY - GRADE SPAN: K-06 WHITE BLACK HISPANIC ASIAN/PI AM IND/ALS NAT GRADE TOTAL M F M F M F M F M F K 58 17 23 7 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01 71 18 8 19 26 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 02 57 20 14 11 11 1 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 03 68 13 14 14 26 0 -1 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 04 65 13 18 21 12 0 1 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 05 56 17 9 12 17 0 1 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 06 54 17 15 11 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  OOL 429 115 101 95 114 1 3 0 0 0 0 TALS 50.3% 48.7% .9% .0% .0% CHOICE 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PUPIL ENROLLMENT BY SCHOOL LEA #60-02-067 OCTOBER 1, 1992 CURRENT SCHOOL ASSIGNMENTS COUNTY: PULASKI DISTRICT: NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL: REDWOODE LEMENTARY - GRADE SPAN: K-06 WHITE BLACK HISPANIC ASIAN/PI AM IND/ALS NAT GRADE TOTAL M F M F M F M F M F K 36. 4 2 12 18 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01 38 5 9 8 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 02 34 5 15 5 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 03 35 8 3 12 11 0 .1 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 04 30 5 7 9 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 05 32 11 4 9 7 1 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 06 33 7 8 3 14 0 0 0 0 1 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - OOL 238 45 48 58 84 1 1 0 0 1 0 ALS 39.1% 59.7% ~8% .0% .4% CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PUPIL ENROLLMENT BY SCHOOL LEA #60-02-068 OCTOBER 1, 1992 CURRENT SCHOOL ASSIGNMENTS COUNTY: PULASKI DISTRICT: NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL: ROSE CITY ELEMENTARY - GRADE SPAN: K-06 WHITE BLACK HISPANIC ASIAN/PI AM IND/ALS NAT GRADE TOTAL M F M F M F M F M F K 39 8 11 9 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01 33 10 7 7 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 02 38 13 3 13 8 1 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 03 36 6 9 12 9 0 .0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 04 43 12 10 11 9 0 1 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 05 39 7 6 15 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 06 26 9 4 6 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  OOL 254 65 50 73 64 1 1 0 0 0 0 ALS 45.3% 53.9% .8% .0% .0% CHOICE 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PUPIL ENROLLMENT BY SCHOOL LEA #60-02-069 OCTOBER 1, 1992 CURRENT SCHOOL ASSIGNMENTS COUNTY: PULASKI DISTRICT: NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL: SEVENTH STREET ELEM. - GRADE SPAN: K-06 WHITE BLACK HISPANIC ASIAN/PI AM IND/ALS NAT GRADE TOTAL M F M F M F M F M F K 48 5 7 18 18 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 6 2 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01 36 8 5 11 11 0 0 0 1 0 0 CHOICE 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 02 74 12 20 21 21 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 03 44 19 8 9 8 0 . -0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 04 57 21 16 11 9 0 0 .o 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 05 47 12 13 12 9 1 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 06 57 17 21 9 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  OOL 363 94 90 91 86 1 0 0 1 0 0 TALS 50.7% 48.8% . 3% .3% .0% CHOICE 9 3 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ELEMENTARY WHITE BLACK HISPANIC ASIAN/PI AM IND/ALS NAT TOTALS M F M F M F M F M F ELEM 5127 1314 1174 1278 1304 22 20 5 7 2 1 clicE 48.5% 50.4% .8% .2% .1% 33 17 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PUPIL ENROLLMENT BY SCHOOL LEA #60-02-076 OCTOBER 1, 1992 CURRENT SCHOOL ASSIGNMENTS COUNTY: PULASKI DISTRICT: NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL: NLRHS-WEST CAMPUS - GRADE SPAN: 11-12 WHITE BLACK HISPANIC ASIAN/PI AM IND/ALS NAT GRADE TOTAL M F M F M F M F M F 10 19 4 1 9 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 607 185 142 138 135 0 4 0 2 0 1 CHOICE 9 5 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 12 578. 164 169 101 136 2 2 3 1 0 0 CHOICE 7 1 5 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 SCHOOL 1204 353 312 248 276 2 .. 6 3 3 0 1 TOTALS 55.2% 43.5% .7% .5% .1% CHOICE 16 6 8 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 - PUPIL ENROLLMENT BY SCHOOL LEA #60-02-070 OCTOBER 1, 1992 CURRENT SCHOOL ASSIGNMENTS COUNTY: PULASKI DISTRICT: NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL: LAKEWOOD - GRADE SPAN: 07-08 WHITE BLACK HISPANIC ASIAN/PI AM IND/ALS NAT GRADE TOTAL M F M F M F M F M F 07 259 79 60 62 56 1 0 0 0 0 1 CHOICE 7 4 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 08 284 71 83 64 65 0 0 1 0 0 0 CHOICE 6 4 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 09 2 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 SCHOOL 545 151 143 127 121 1 _.o 1 0 0 1 TOTALS 53.9% 45.5% .2% .2% .2% CHOICE 13 8 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - PUPIL ENROLLMENT BY SCHOOL LEA #60-02-075 OCTOBER 1, 1992 CURRENT SCHOOL ASSIGNMENTS COUNTY: PULASKI DISTRICT: NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL: NLRHS-EAST CAMPUS - GRADE SPAN: 09-10 WHITE BLACK HISPANIC ASIAN/PI AM IND/ALS NAT GRADE TOTAL M F M F M F M F M F 09 700 183 179 170 159 2 5 1 1 0 0 CHOICE 9 2 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 639 187 174 137 136 1 0 1 3 0 0 CHOICE 10 5 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 SCHOOL 1339 370 353 307 295 3 5 2 4 0 0 TOTALS 54.0% 45.0% .6% .4% .0% CHOICE 19 7 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - PUPIL ENROLLMENT BY SCHOOL LEA #60-02-072 OCTOBER 1, 1992 CURRENT SCHOOL ASSIGNMENTS COUNTY: PULASKI DISTRICT: NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL: RIDGEROAD - GRADE SPAN: 07-08 WHITE BLACK HISPANIC ASIAN/PI AM IND/ALS NAT GRADE TOTAL M F M F M F M F M F 07 288 79 58 83 65 0 2 0 0 1 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 08 290 94 72 73 45 3 1 1 0 1 0 CHOICE 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 SCHOOL 578 173 130 156 110 3 3 1 0 2 0 TOTALS 52.4% 46.0% 1.0% .2% .3% CHOICE 2 0 2 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 PUPIL ENROLLMENT BY SCHOOL LEA #60-02-077 OCTOBER 1, 1992 CURRENT SCHOOL ASSIGNMENTS COUNTY: PULASKI DISTRICT: NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL: ROSE CITY - GRADE SPAN: 07-08 WHITE BLACK HISPANIC ASIAN/PI AM IND/ALS NAT GRADE TOTAL M F M F M F M F M F 07 201 48 49 60 41 1 2 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 08 205 43 55 51 54 2 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 09 2 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 SCHOOL 408 92 104 112 95 3 - .2 0 0 0 0 TOTALS 48.0% 50. 7% 1.2% .0% .0% CHOICE 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LEA #60-02- COUNTY: PULASKI GRADE TOTAL K CHOICE 01 CHOICE 03 CHOICE 04 CHOICE 05 CHOICE 06 CHOICE 07 CHOICE  OOL ALS CHOICE 1 0 2 0 2 0 4 0 9 0 PUPIL ENROLLMENT BY SCHOOL OCTOBER 1, 1992 CURRENT SCHOOL ASSIGNMENTS DISTRICT: NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL: ALTERNATIVE CENTER GRADE SPAN: K-12 WHITE M F 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 BLACK M F 1 0 1 0 1 0 3 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 6 HISPANIC ASIAN/PI AM IND/ALS NAT M F M F M F 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - -0 0  0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PUPIL ENROLLMENT BY SCHOOL LEA #60-02- OCTOBER 1, 1992 CURRENT SCHOOL ASSIGNMENTS COUNTY: PULASKI DISTRICT: NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL: - GRADE SPAN: K-12 WHITE BLACK HISPANIC ASIAN/PI AM IND/ALS NAT GRADE TOTAL M F M F M F M F M F 07 ..-4-\"S 1 0 1 __..2/. 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 08 11 2 0 7 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 09 5 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 2 2 0 0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 7 2 0 2 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 SCHOOL ~30 7 0 15 ..::,--'? 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTALS 24 .1% .J..S-r9-%'\" .0% .0% .0% CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~.G7~ - PUPIL ENROLLMENT BY SCHOOL LEA #60-02-078 OCTOBER 1, 1992 CURRENT SCHOOL ASSIGNMENTS COUNTY: PULASKI DISTRICT: NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL: BARING CROSS CENTER - GRADE SPAN: K-06 WHITE BLACK HISPANIC ASIAN/PI AM IND/ALS NAT GRADE TOTAL M F M F M F M F M F 01 2 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ,\n'/,r, ) CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O C 02 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 g/\\ 04 5 2 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 g ~~~ 05 4 1 3 0 0 0 _.o 0 0 0 0 ? CHOICE 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 (.,4 1 06 ,~] 2~\ng 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ffi CHOICE ~o JO 0 0 0 0 0 0 07 5 2 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 08 3 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ca! 7 1 0 5 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 2 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~/ CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~d' t'IJ 12 12 1 2 6 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHOICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 111t\u0026gt; ? 45 1l-1 ~ SCHOOL 7 19 8 0 o 0 0 0 0 TOTALS 40.0% 60.0% .0% .0% .0% CHOICE 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0. ~ SECONDARY WHITE BLACK HISPANIC ASIAN/PI AM IND/ALS NAT TOTALS M F M F M F M F M F SEC 4124 1152 1042 979 905 12 16 7 7 2 2 - 53.2% 45.7% .7% .3% .1% CHOICE 51 22 27 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 - DISTRICT WHITE BLACK HISPANIC ASIAN/PI AM IND/ALS NAT TOTALS M F M F M F M F M F 9251 2466 2216 2257 2209 34 36 12 14 4 3 C.E 50.6% 48.3% .8% .3% .1% 84 39 43 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 - SCHOOL District 4 YEAR E.OLLM.ENT COMPARISON OCTOBER1 DATA STUDENTASR E IDENTIFIEDA S Bl.A.CIACN DN ON-BLACIC INCLUDINGK INDERGARTEN 1~: EXCLUDINGK INDERGARTEN 1989-90 Black I 4,218 1989-90 I Black I 4,061 White I 5,208 I White I 5,317 I Other I I I I Other I I Total I 9,426 I% Blk I 44.7 I . I Total I 9,378 I% Blk I 43.3 1990-91 I Black I 4 279 I 1990-91 I Black I 3,899 ! White I L,. Ql o:\nI White I I ! 4,507 i ! Other I Total I 9,194 I I I% Blk I 46.5 1991-92 I Black I 4,346 I I White I 4,918 I I Other I I Total I 9.264 l I% Blk I li6 g I i : Other i I ! Total I ! 8,406 I% Blk i I ! 46.4 I 1991-92 ! Black i I 4.022 ! White I l,. o:\nt,.1 I Other I I Total I 8,s6s % Blk I 47.0 1992-93 I Black I 4.466 1992-93 Black I 4,121 I White I ~.Z85 I I I Other I White I 4,424 I Other I I Total g. 2'l 1 I% Blk 48.3 I Total 18,545 I% Blk- I 48.2 5c - - --- -~-- ----- (Used to determine acceptable enrollment ranges) SCHOOL District (Elementary) 4 YEAR EIOLLM.ENT COMPARISON OCTOBERl DATA STUDENTAS RE IDENTIFIEDA S BLACIACN DN ON-BLACIC INCLUDINGIC INDERGARTEN EXCLUDINIGC INDERGARTEN 1989-90 Black I 2,496 1989-90 Black I 2,271 White I 2. 716 I I Other I White I I 2,644 I Other I I Total I s,212 I Total I 4. 915 I% Blk l 47.9 % Blk I I 46.2 1990-91 / Black I 2,s2s I I I 2 604 ! White i I ! Other I Total I s. 129 I I I I% Blk I 49.2 1990-91 I Black I 2,145 ' I I White i 2,196 Other ! I I Total l\n4,341 % Blk i ! 49.4 1991-92 I Black I 2,509 ! White 12.574 I Other I I Total 5,083 I I o/oB lk I 49.4 I 1991-92 ! Black i\n2,185 ! White 12.199 ! Other I I I I Total 14,384 I o/o Blk I 49.8 1992-93 I Black 12,574 I White 12,542 I I I Other I ! Total 5,116 I% Blk 50.3 1992-93 j Black 12,229 j White /2, 181 I Other I Total ~,410 % Blk- I 50.5 Sc (UseJ' to determine acceptable enrollment ranges) SCHOOL District (Secondary) 4 YEAR E.OLLM.ENT COMPARISON OCTOBERl DATA STUDENTAS RE IDENTIFIEDA S BLACKA NDN ON-BLACK INCLUDINGIC INDERGARTEN EXCLUDINKGI NDERGARTEN 1989-90 Black I 1. 722 1989-90 Black I 1,790 White I 2,492 White I I 2,673 Other I I Other I I Total I 4,214 \\ Totai\" I 4,463 I% Blk I 40.9 % Blk I I 40.1 1990-91 I Black I 1,754 I 1990-91 I Black I 1,754 I ! White I 2,311 I ' I l White I ! 2.311 i ! Other I I I I : Other I \\ Total I 4,065 I I ! Total i 4,065 ! I% Blk I I 43.1 I 1 % Blk I' 43.1 ! 1991-92 \\ Black I 1 837 I i 1991-92 ! Black\n1,837 ! White I 2 '),I.I, ! White I 2,344 IO ther I '! Other I Total I 4. 181 I ' I Total I 4. 181 % Blk I 43.9 I% Blk I 43.9 1992-93 I Black 11,892 1992-93 I Black I 1.892 I White ! 2  243 I i White I 2.243 I Other I Other I I Total 14. 135 Total 14.135 % Blk I 45.8 % Blk  I 45.8 5c I (Used to determine acceptable enrollment ranges) SCHOOL Amboy Elementary 4 YEAR .OLLMENT COMPARISON OCTOBER1 DATA STUDENTSA RE IDENTIFIED AS BLACKA NDN ON-BLACK INCLUDINGK INDERGARTEN EXCLUDINGK INDERGARTEN 1989-90 I Black I I 198 I I Black ! . 1989-90 190 ! White ! 234 I : I White ! 224 ! ! i Other I - i Other -- ! Total i 432 ~ I ! 1 Total i 414 \\ % Blk I 45.8 I i \\ % Blk !i 45.9 I I 1990-91 ! Black : 179 I 1990-91 i Black ' 163 ! White ' ! 228 I\nWhite I 174 : Other - I '. Other --\ni i Total !i 407 ! Total i I I 337 ! % Blk I 44.0 : % ~lk ' l 48.4 I 1991-92 : Black '' 189 I\n1991-92 ! Black 166 ! White i 235 I ! White i 186 \\ Other I I -- I ! Other I I - I Total I 424 i i Total i ! 352 I I i o/o Blk I 44.6 I I o/oB lk I 47.2 1992-93 ! Black I 172 j Black ' 1992-93 i 159 I \\ White I 218 I \\ White I 172 I I I l Other - I I ! Other I - ! Total l 390 I I ! ! Total I 331 I% Blk I 44.1 I% Blk I 48.0 I Sc I (Used to determine acceptable enrollment ranges) SCHOOL Belwood Elementary 4 YEAR .ROLLMENT COMPARISON OCTOBERl DATA STUDENTSA RE IDENTIFIEDA S BLACKA NDN ON-BLACIC INCLUDINGK INDERGARTEN EXCLUDINKGI NDERGARTEN 1989-90 Black I 66 I 1989-90 I Black i ! 69 White I 81 I \\ White II 79 I Other I - ! Other -- I Total I 147 I i ! Total i 148 I% Blk I 44.9 'I ! ! % Blk i 46.6 1990-91 I Black I 61 I I 1990-91 i Black l 56 i White I I 107 I : White l' 89 i I I \\ Other - I, : Other :: - l Total I 168 i i Total i \\ 145 I I 36.3 II \\ % Blk I i % ~lk i l 38.6 1991-92 J Black I 55 I\n1991-92 ! Black 49 i White I 96 I ! White i 78 \\ Other I - ! Other I I - I Total I 151 I i Total i! 127 I I I 36.4 i % Blk I ' I% Blk I 38.6 1992-93 1 Black I 71 1992-93 i Black I ! 64 I ! White I 100 I I ! White I 86 \\ Other I - ! Other I I - I Total I 171 I ! Total I 150 I% Blk I 41.5 I% Blk I 42.7 I Sc I I I I I I I I I I I I (Used to determine acceptable enrollment ranges) SCHOOLB oone Park Elementary 4 YEAR \u0026amp;oLLMENT COMPARISON OCTOBER1 DATA STUDENTS ARE IDENTIFIED AS BLACK AND NON-BLACK INCLUDINGK INDERGARTEN EXCLUDINKGI NDERGARTEN 1989-90 I Black I 315 I ! White I 205 I I Black\n1989-90 ?t:.t:. I White 197 i Other I - ! Other -- I ! Total I 520 I i Total M,1 I% Blk I 60.6 I \\ % Blk j 57.5 1990-91 j Black I 294 I I 1990-91 ! Black 235 : White I 195 I 'White 149 : Other II - t \\ Total I 489 I\\ ' I I% Blk Ii I I 60.1 '. Other - i Total 384 ! % Blk ' 61.2 ' I I\\ 1991-92 : Black 319 \\ White \\ 209 I 1991-92 ! Black\n269 : \\'vh ite i 181 \\ Other I - I ! Other I i -- \\ Total I 528 i : i Total i 450 ! I i 'YoB lk I 60.4 1' II S'f,8 I% Blk -46-\nt- 1992-93 \\ Black \\ 295 I i Black ' 1992-93 i 239 I White I 185 II I i White I 164 I I ' I I i Other - I \\ Total I 480 I I I I%Bl k I 61.5 I I \\ Other I I -- I ! Total I 403 I% Blk I 59.3 I Sc I I I I I (Used to determine acceptable enrollment ranges) SCHOOL Central Elementary *First year for this school ------------- ------ 4 YEAR .ROLLMENT COMPARISON OCTOBER1 DATA STUDENTSA RE IDENTIFIED AS BLACKA NDN ON-BLACK INCLUDINGK INDERGARTEN EXCLUDINGK INDERGARTEN 1989-90 \\ Black I \\ Black I 1989-90 I White I I I I I I Other I White I I ! Other \\ Total I I i ! Total i ! I% Blk I I ! % Blk i i i I 1990-91 I Black I ! Black I 1990-91 ' I I ! White 'White : i ! Other I I Other ! i i I I Total I ! i Total \\ I i ! % Blk I\nI ! % l3Ik I 1991-92 \\ Black II 197 I \\ White I ! 185 I ' 1991-92 ! Black 152 ' i ! White 178 \\ Other I - ! Other I i -- I Total 1 'tR? I\ni Total ! 330 I 1 % Blk l 51.6 I I% Blk I 46.1 1992-93 \\ Black I 279 i Black I 1992-93 i 227 ! White I 217 l I ! White I 203 I I I Other I - \\ Other I -- I \\ Total I 496 ! Total I 430 I% Blk l 56.3 I% Blk I 52.8 : 5c I I ! I I I I I I i I i I i I I I I I (Used to determine acceptable enrollment ranges) SCHOOL Crestwood Elementary . - - =--- --~ ..-.\n,,._ 4 YEAR AoLLMENT COMPARISON OCTOBER 1 DATA STUDENTSA RE IDENTIFIED AS BLACKA NDN ON-BLACK INCLUDINGK INDERGARTEN EXCLUDINGK INDERGARTEN 1989-90 \\ Black I 85 I 1989-90 \\ Black I ! 90 I White ! 111 I I ! White !  117 \\ Other I - I Other I -- \\ Total I 196 ! I i  Total I 207 ! I%Bl k I 43.4 i i ! : % Blk i 43.5 I Black I 1990-91 I I 80 I 1990-91 : Black I : 75 \\ White I I 143 I ' White I 122 i I ! Other I I i -  Other - \\ Total i 223 l ! I i  Total i 197 I i I% Blk ! 35.9 ' I : % ~lk i l 38.1 \\ Black I 1991-92 I I i 98 1991-92\nBlack 93 \\ White i 143 I I ! I : White I 122 \\ Other I - : Other I I -- \\ Total I 241 i i i Total ! 215 I I% Blk I 40.7 I I% Btk I 43.3 1992-93 Black I 105 1992-93 \\ Black ! 91 1 White I 136 I j White I 119 Other I - \\ Other I I - 1 Total I 241 I ! Total I 210 % Blk I 43.6 I% Blk I 43.3 I Sc I I I I - (Used to determine acceptable enrollment ranges) SCHOOL Glenview Elementary\n4 YEAR \u0026amp;oLLMENT COMPARISON OCTOBERl DATA STUDENTSA RE IDENTIFIED AS BLACKA NDN ON-BLACK INCLUDINGK INDERGARTEN EXCLUDINGK INDERGARTEN 1989-90 Black I 109 I I Black I 1989-90 ! 100 White I 122 I I White 133 Other I - ! Other - \\ Total I 231 , Total ! 233 I% Blk I 47.2 I ! o/o Blk : 42.9 1990-91 \\ Black I 138 'I 11\n1990-91 : Black 121 ! White I 106 I  White : 98 i I I I Other - I : Other -- I I Total I 244 I I I i j % Blk I 56.6 : Total 219  % Blk i 55.3 I I I 1991-92 Black ! 130\n1991-92 ! Black 111 \\ White I 103 I 'White i 96 \\ Other I - ! Other I i -- \\ Total I 233 I i Total . i 207 ! I I I I% Blk 55.8 i I% Blk I 53.6 1992-93 \\ Black I 131 I I 1992-93 I Black i 112 ! White I 99 I I ! White I 89 \\ Other I -- ! Other I I -- ! Total I 230 i I ! Total I 201 I% Blk I 57.0 I% Blk I 55.7 I Sc I I I I I (Used to determine acceptable enrollment ranges) SCHOOL 4 YEAR .OLLMENT COMPARISON OCTOBER1 DATA STUDENTSA RE IDENTIFIED AS BLACKA ND NON-BLACK Indian Hills Elementary INCLUDINGK INDERGARTEN EXCLUDINGK INDERGARTEN I j Black I ! 1989-90 157 1989-90 ' Black 163 ! ! White ! 318 : White 285 I i Other  Other I ! Total 475 Total 448 I \"-o Blk 33.1 I  % Blk 36.4 ll 1990-91 i Black 158 ii I 1990-91 Black 145 :I \\\".'hite 284 ii !I \\'Vhite II 234 !I i 1!I Other Other 1, :1 ii 11 11\nTotal 442 Total 379 ,I ii ,, I, 11 ., :1 i ':\"c Blk 35.7 j, ~o Blk 38.3 jl 1 I 11 I II :11991-92 '. Slack 190 11 1991-92 ' Black 182 I i ' \\ White 243 1\\ I  White 206 i Other II  Other I I II i Total 433\nTotal 388 I i \u0026lt;:-B~l k I 43.9 I.I' i '7-'o Blk 46.9 i 1992-93 ! Slack I 200 \\I 1992-93 : Black 180 I ,1 ! White 247 ii : White 206 I I I\\ I l Other : Other ! Total I 447 II ! Total 386 I I \\ I I% Blk 44.7 i % Blk 46.6 Sc (Used to determine acceptable enrollment ranges) SCHOOL Lakewood Elementary I I I i I I I I I I i ! i I I I i 4 YEAR .OLLMENT COMPARISON OCTOBER 1 DATA STUDENTSA RE IDENTIFIED AS BLACKA NDN ON-BLACK INCLUDINGK INDERGARTEN EXCLUDINGK INDERGARTEN 1989-90 j Black 98 I I ! White 142 I 1989-90 ! Black 102 ! : White 138 ! j Other - i Other - I Total 240  Total 240 I% Blk \\ 1.0.8 ' I : % Blk 42.5 I 1990-91 ! Black 96 I ' I 1990-91 Black 95 I '. White 146 I White 122  Other - II Other -- j Total 242 i ! Total 217 ! ~c Blk 39.7 I, . ~o Blk 43.8 I ii 1991-92\nBlack 135 I\nWhite i 155 I 1991-92 ' Black 126  White 130 I Other I I - I . Other -- II i Total l 290\nTotal 256 : i I ':'o Blk ! 46.6 i 'Yo Blk 49.2\n1992-93 \\ Black i I i 141 1992-93 : Black 126 i White I i 136 I 1 White 118 ' I : Other I - i Total I I 277 I ! Other ' -- i Total 244 I% Blk I 50.9 I I% Blk 51.6 5c i I ! I I I I I I I I I I I (Used to determine acceptable enrollment ranges) SCHOOL Lynch Drive Elementary I I \\ I I ! 4 YEAR .ROLLMENT COMPARISON OCTOBERl DATA STUDENTSA RE IDENTIFIED AS BLACKA NDN ON-BLACK INCLUDINGK INDERGARTEN EXCLUDINGK INDERGARTEN I I 125 I 1989-90 i Black ! I ! I : White 154 I ! Black I I 1989-90 111 I ! ! ! White 157 I I ' Other i -- I i I  Other i - I ' I I\nTotal I 279 I !\n% Blk Ii 44.8 I I  Total 268 I '!  % Blk 41.4 1990-91 ' Black : 118 i !I 1990-91 Black 109 I I White 143 I I Other - I, i\\ White :1 124 :1 Other -- ,i i I Total ! 261 I i !\ni o.,o Blk ! 45.2\n'I :j :1 Total 233 :1 . ~o Blk 46.8 !I 1991-92  Black 121 II I 1991-92 ' Black llO  White I' I 136 White ll9 ' I 1 Other I -- Other - '. Total j I\\ '! 257 i ':\"'c Blk i 47.1 11 : : Total l 229 i 'Yo Blk i l 48.0 1992-93 : Black i 85 1992-93 Black 76 I\nWhite 'I 125 I : White llO\nOther l ! - I : Other ! -- ! Total I i 210 I i Total 186 I i i % Blk 1 ! 40.5 I i % Blk 40.9 5c I I I ' I i i i I I I I I I I I I I I (Used to determine acceptable enrollment ranges) I SCHOOL Meadow Park Elementary ---  TF 4 YEAR. \u0026amp;oLLMENT COMPARISON OCTOBER1 DATA STUDENTSA RE IDENTIFIED AS BLACKA ND NON-BLACK INCLUDINGK INDERGARTEN EXCLUDINGK INDERGARTEN 1989-90 \\ Black 148 I 1989-90 I Black 136 ! White I. ! 135 ! White 129\nOther II  Other I II ! Total 283 \" Total 265 I \\ % Blk 523 :1 I! - % Blk 51.3 \" 1990-91 i Black 150 I1-1 1990-91 Black 128 \\ . White ii 145 II White 128 '! Other Other j Total jl 295 ii Total 256 i % Blk 50.8 Ii i\n% E\nllk 50.0 I I' 1991-92\nBlack 129 1I 1991-92 Black 114 ' i 1\\ \\ White 125 n White 111 I ! Other \\ II - Other I i Total I 254 I\\ i Total 225 i % Blk I 50.8 \\\\ I o/o Blk 50.7 i I r 1992-93 ! Black 124 11 1992-93\nBlack 113 'I j White I II 119 11  White 105 i : Other I I\\ i 1 Other ! Total I 243 \\\\ ! Total 218 I I% Blk I 51.0 II I% Blk 51.8 Sc ---- (Used to determine acceptable enrollment ranges) i\\ ii ,I ii ii - ----  ?C3FfflC\"?F:Ef:m't:ir - 4 YEAR .OLLMENT COMPARISON OCTOBER1 DATA STUDENTSA RE IDENTIFIEDA S BLACKA ND NON-BLACK SCHOOLN orth Heights Elementary INCLUDINGK INDERGARTEN EXCLUDINKGI NDERGARTEN i 1989-90 Black I 202 I i 1989-90 I Black 195 White i: 210 I I i White 190 \\ Other I i - : Other -- \\ Total i 412 !  Total 385 I%B lk Ii 49.0 I : % Blk 50.6 1990-91 I Black i 217 I 1990-91 Black 196 '\nI \\ White i 226 I VVhite 178 i : ! Other - I Other -- \\ Total i ! 443 I i\nTotal 374 'i i I ~o Blk l 49.0 II . ~o Blk 52.4 I I 1991-92 \\ Black I ' 194 I 1991-92 ' Black 180 ! White i 216 I White 176 \\ Other ' 'I - I Other -- \\ Total i 410 I !\nTotal l 356 i o/o Blk 'l I 47.3 i o/o Blk \\ 50.6 1992-93 \\ slack II 193 1992-93 , Black 175 I ! White I 210 I : White 162 I Other I - II I Total l 403 i I i\n'. Other - ' i Total i 337 ' I% Blk I 47.9 ' ' i % Blk I': 51.9 Sc ------------------------ - I i I ' ' i I I I I i I I I i i i i ' ' I I I (Used to determine acceptable enrolllllent ranges) \\ I -:r:m:m SCHOOL Park Hill Elementary 4 YEAR \u0026amp;oLLMENT COMPARISON OCTOBER 1 DATA STUDENTSA RE IDENTIFIED AS BLACKA NDN ON-BLACK INCLUDINGK INDERGARTEN EXCLUDINGK INDERGARTEN 1989-90 \\ Black 78 1989-90 \\ Black 86 \\ White I 147 i White 135 i Other ! Other ! Total I 225\nTotal 221 ! \":'o Blk 34.7 I ! % Blk 38.9 I 1990-91 ! Black 94 1990-91 Black 88 : : White 116 White 91 I Other I Other II i Total 210 i\\  Total 179 i % Blk 44.8 I!\n, : ~o Slk 49.2 'I I !I 1991-92 '. Black 98 11 1991-92 ' Black 90 ! White 11 115 I,'! i White 82 \\ Other I I ! Other I Total 1 i 213 I i Total 172 I I I i % Blk 46.0 i % Blk 52.3 1992-93 \\ Black I 94 l 1992-93 I Black 88 1 White I 116 I II i White 90 I \\ Other I I ! Other \\ Total I 210 ! ! Total 178 I I% Blk I 44.8 I% Blk 49.4 5c ----- --- Tfit:nrbosi (Used to determine acceptable enrollment ranges) SCHOOL Pike View Elementary 4 YEAR \u0026amp;oLLMENT COMPARISON OCTOBER1 DATA STUDENTSA RE IDENTIFIED AS BLACKA NDN ON-BLACK INCLUDINGK INDERGARTEN EXCLUDINGK INDERGARTEN Ii I I 212 I 1989-90 ! Black i 1989-90 \\ Black 198 \\ ! White I 244 I I I I : Other I i i - I I I i 456 i Total I I ! j I White 226 i Other - , Total 424 I ii I I % Blk I 46.5\n'% Blk 46.7 i 1990-91\nBlack ! 206 i I I ' 1990-91\nBlack 187 i l \\\\'hite ! 230 i White 193 I I Other -- I I  Other -- I I . Total 436 I I l Total 380 : \"'o Blk i i I 47.2 l! I  % f?lk 49.2 I : ' I 1\\ 1991-92 ' Black\nI 190 i '. White i 220 1, I, 1991-92 ! Black 168 : White 174 I Other I I - I : Other : -- ' I I : Total 410 I i Total j 342 i % Blk I 46.3 I \\ % Blk \\ 49.1 1992-93 i Black I 209 ! I\\ White I 220 I 1992-93\nBlack 191 : White : 180 ' I \\ Other - I\\ ! Total I t.29 I I Other i - j Total 371 I l % Blk I 48.7 I I% Blk 51.5 Sc ! I\n! I i I I I i I i i I I I I I I I I (Used to determine acceptable enrollment ranges) I I i :e\nrw-=- 4 A4\n. .. - - - ~-  v-#-ffiitr- }a-\ng..,\n--~:.....: .......- .,.:.\n..  _:. ~.~~r:s~-,-~\"),,,M-+\u0026amp; 4iii7SF+saS=4 25\nS\n#A#c ~ a ttr:i1iifriWiEtiM\u0026amp;\u0026amp;i%iYAinrrvfr:: SCHOOL Redwood Elementary 4 YEAR .ROLLMENT COMPARISON OCTOBERl DATA STUDENTSA RE IDENTIFIED AS BLACKA ND NON-BLACK INCLUDINGK INDERGARTEN EXCLUDINGK INDERGARTEN I i 164 !I 1989-90 I Black 'I 1989-90 i Black 134 ! White ! 114 Ii : Ii I! ! : 1 White 117 ' ! I j Other ' - !: Other - I i 278 :i I Total \" ! !i Total 251 l % Blk I 59.0 i I i !1  % Blk 53.4 1990-91 ! Black ' 162 ii I I 'I 1990-91 Black 114 '' I' :j : White ! 103 I' I White 96 Ii  Other : - I! Other --\ni j1\nTotal ! 265 ,I i H l i ~o Blk\nJ. l 61.1 !: Total 210 . % !3\\k 54.3 I Ii 1991-92 : Black ' 144 Ii ' l White ! 1! 96 ,: I 1991-92 Black 113 White 94 i Other ' Ii i - I\\ ' Other - I I j Total I 240 \\I : I i % Blk 60.0 II : Total i 207 ! : % Blk i ! 54.6 1992-93 i Black I 142 r 1! ' 1992-93 : Black I 112 i White I 96 ll I : White i\n90 '. \\ Other I - Ii I 238 ! ! Total i I I% Blk 159.7 I I i I Other ! - I j Total I I 202 ' I i % Blk I I 55.4 l Sc I I I I I i i I I i I I I I I I I I (Used to determine acceptable enrollment ranges) I I 4 YEAR .OLLMENT COMPARISON OCTOBER 1 DATA STUDENTSA RE IDENTIFIED AS BLACKA ND NON-BLACK SCHOOL Rose City Elementary INCLUDINGK INDERGARTEN 1989-90 \\ Black 93 ! White 126\nOther :, I Total 219 !! ___ ____.\n. ----':! I ii : 'o Blk 42.5 q 1990-91 ! Black 111 -------- ' White 104  Other\nTotal 215 i .,_,o Blk 51.6 ! 1991-92 : Black 119 '-,- -------1\\ \\ \\Vh ite 126 l: i Other \\\\ -----------'' \\ T t I 245 \\\n1 o a \\\\ i ':'o Blk 48.6 'i 1992-9 3 \\'-S. _la_c_k l_3_7_----'\\\\ ! White 117 \\\\ ! \\! I Other 1! \\ Total 254 I\\ --I 0-,~-B-lk_ _ 5__39 ----\n!i Sc (Used to determine =====!========,:acceptable enrollment 1989-90. _B _la_c__k_ 8__6_ :i ranges) EXCLUDINGK INDERGARTEN 1990-91 ! ,I : White 112 :  Other Tota I 198 --------:  % Blk 56.6 Black 97 -------- ' White 83 .,\n--------.\nOther Total 180 . % E\n31k 53.9 1991-92 '_ B_la_c_k ____1 04 , ,, . White 97 :\n Other ' I Total 201 i o/o Blk 51. 7 1992-93 : Black 117 \\'\\ ______ ...:1I \\ : 1 White 98 !\\ : Other 1 __ ------------li ! Total 215 I i % Blk 54.4 SCHOOL --57ii7Z% 4 YEAR .ROLLMENT COMPARISON OCTOBER1 DATA STUDENTSA RE IDENTIFIED AS BLACKA NDN ON-BLACK Seventh Street Elementary INCLUDINGK INDERGARTEN EXCLUDINGK INDERGARTEN I :1 I 1989-90 I Black 177 I. :1 1989-90 '. Black 132 I I !I I White 149 :: White 183 i Other :I\n\\ Other I :I I Total 326 \" Total 315 ij I !I \\ % Blk 54.3 !I  % Blk 58.1 1990-91 Black 194 1990-91 Black 140 i . White 160 i ! White 157 ., Other ,, :, Other : Total :1 354 ii Total 297 i i % Blk 54.8 r l: % f?lk 49.4\n1991-92\nBlack 184 1991-92 ' Black 142 i 1 White 164  White 163 ,. i ,, ! Other I\\ Other i\nTotal 348 Ii : Total 305 i '\n'o Blk 52.9 I! lj : % Blk 46.6 1992-93 i i Black 177 ii l! 1992-93 , Black 141 , ! White I, 186 !j : White 174 ' Ii I j Other I,i, ! Other I Total 363 I\\ ! Total 315 'i I % Blk 48.8 iI!. i % Blk 44.8 Sc (Used to determine acceptable enrollment ranges) i 1\\  4 YEAR ENROLLMENT COMPARISON OCTOBER l DATA STUDENTS ARE IDENTIFIED AS BLACK AND NON-BLACK SCHOOL NLRHS - West Campus INCLUDINGK INDERGARTEN EXCLUDINKGI NDERGARTEN I I :j 1989-90 I Black I, !I ' 1989-90 : Black ! White I Ii ! I! I While : I I\nOther ii J,  Other i I :I ' Total !I !I \\ % Blk I ii II i Total i I I % Blk I 'I 1990-91 ! Black 11 ! I I\n: White ,I ! 11 I II Other i: I ,, ! I I 1990-91 Black 443 I i White 737 I I I Other - I i :j\nTotal I., I :, I i % Blk\n1: ! !: I i I Total 1.180 I I % Blk ' 37.5 I I 1991-92 1 Black II i I ,. : White i 1! 1: I 1991-92 Black 507 White I 760 i Other I I II I ' : Other I i - i l Total I II ! ':'a Blk I II : Total i ! 1-267\n'3/oB lk I 40.0 1992-93 i! Black I I! 1992-93  Black I 524 I White I 1! ,, Ii I\nWhite l 680 ' I ll I l Other i I : Other I - ! Total I : I I I%Bl k I \\ I ! Total I 1.204 I% Blk I 43.5 I ~---------------------- - Sc I I I a r (Used to determine cceptable enrolllllent anges) I* First year as 11th and 12th I Grade School I I I I I SCHOOL NI.RBS - East Campus I I I I \\ 4 YEAR .ROLLMENT COMPARISON OCTOBER1 DATA STUDENTS ARE IDENTIFIED AS BLACKA ND NON-BLACK INCLUDINGK INDERGARTEN EXCLUDINGK INDERGARTEN 1989-90 j Black I I I 1989-90 ! Black I White I I I I Other I ' ' \\ White\ni Other j Total i l ! Total I% Blk I I : % Blk 1990-91 I Black I I 1990-91 . Black 605 '' I I \\ White White 767 i I I \\ Other I Other -- \\ Total I l I I\nI I% Blk ! I  Total j 1,372 . % E\n3Ik ' 44.1 ! Black I 1991-92 I l I 1991-92 : Black 578 ! White I I ' : White i 758 \\ Other I ! Other I - \\ Total I ' i Total \\ 1,336 l I% Blk I i I% Blk \\ ! 43.3 1992-93 \\ Black I 1992-93 \\ Black i 602 I White I I 'i White i 737 I Other I I I ! Other ! -- , Total l I I \\ Total I 1,339 I%Bl k I \\ % Blk I 45.0 l Sc I I ! i I i I I I I i l I I 1!\u0026amp;5 EM+? :S -F (Used to determine acceptable enrollment ranges) I I *First year as 9th and 10th Grade School SCHOOL Lakewood Middle School 4 YEAR .ROLLMENT COMPARISON OCTOBER1 DATA STUDENTSA RE IDENTIFIED AS BLACKA NDN ON-BLACK INCLUDINGK INDERGARTEN EXCLUDINGK INDERGARTEN 1989-90 Black I I I ' I 1989-90 'Black ' White I I ! I  White I Other I Other\nTotal I Total i i % Blk I  % Blk i I Black I I 1990-91 I 1990-91 Black ' 247 ! White I White i 320 \\ Other I Other I -- \\ Total I l i  Total I l 567 I i I% Blk I t . % Blk i ! 43.6 ! 1991-92 I Black I I I White I I 1991-92 Black 262 White I 316 I Other I Other I ! -- Total l\nTotal i! 578 % Blk I I\n% Blk 45.3 1992-93 Black I I 1992-93 Black I 248 White I I ' White I 297 Other I : Other I I -- I Total % Blk I i Total I \"\"-\" I i % Blk I 45.5 I Sc I I (Used to determine acceptable enrollment ranges) *First year as 7th and 8th Grade Middle School ~ YEAR .ROLLMENT COMPARISON OCTOBER1 DATA STUDENTSA RE IDENTIFIED AS BLACKA NDN ON-BLACK SCHOOL Ridgeroad Middle School INCLUDINGK INDERGARTEN EXCLUDINGK INDERGARTEN 1989-90 \\ Black I I 1989-90 ! Black I White I I I ! White\nI i Other I ! Other ! Total \\ : , Total I% Blk I I\n% Blk 1990-91 ! Black I I I 1990-91 : Black 231 ! White I I !1 i Other I I t I White 292 Other -- i I I j Total I !  Total 523 'j i I ~a Blk I 11 . % Blk 44.2 1991-92 ! Black I l I 1991-92 : Black 246 ! White I I : White 305 \\ Other I I \\ Total I I I i % Blk I I ! ' Other : -- i \\ Total i ! 551 I I% Blk \\ 44.6 1992-93 \\ Black I I ! White \\ I. 1992-93 i Black : 266 l White I I 312 \\ Other I I ! Other I i - I Total I I Total I I 578 I I% Blk I I% Blk I 46.0 : Sc I I I \\1 I I I I I I (Used to determine acceptable enrolllllent ranges) I *First year as 7th and 8th Grade Middle School 4 YEAR AoLLMENT COMPARISON OCTOBER l DATA STUDENTS ARE IDENTIFIED AS BLACK AND NON-BLACK SCHOOLR ose City Middle School INCLUDINGK INDERGARTEN EXCLUDINGK INDERGARTEN 1989-90 \\ Black I I ! White I I 1989-90 ! Black i : ! White ! i Other I  Other\n! Total I Total i i I% Blk I : % Blk i i 1990-91 Black I I 1990-91 Black 207 White I White 187 Other I Other -- Total I l I I ~a Blk i ! I I Total 394 . % Blk 52.5 1991-92 Black II I 1991-92 : Black 203 l White I I :  White ' 186 i ! Other I ' : Other I i - \\ Total I i Total i ! 38Q I i % Blk I I% Blk I 52.2 I 1992-93 ! Black I I ' 1992-93 i Black i 207 i White I I l White I I 201 I I I I \\ Other ! Other I I -- ! Total I ! Total I I 408 I I% Blk I I I% Blk I 50.7 I 5c I I I I I (Used to determine acceptable enrollment ranges) *First year as 7th and 8th Grade Middle School 4 YEAR .OLLMENT COMPARISON OCTOBERl DATA STUDENTSA RE IDENTIFIED AS BLACKA ND NON-BLACK SCHOOLA lternative Education Ctr. INCLUDINGK INDERGARTEN EXCLUDINGK INDERGARTEN I 1989-90 \\ Black I \\ ' 1989-90 ! Black \\ White I I I I ! White ! I Other I i I\nOther \\ Total I I I I i\nTotal l I I% Blk I i I ! % Blk i i 1990-91 Black I ii I I ! ' I White\nI i 1990-91  Black White Other I I I I, Other Total i I ii I % Blk i ! ii 'I : Total . % Blk ' I 1991-92 Black i ! I 1991-92 ' Black 26 White I l ' : White 10 \\ Other I I : Other\n' -- I Total I i\nTotal i 36 ! I l % Blk I l % Blk i! 72.17 1992-93 \\ Black I I ' 1992-93 I Black i 37 I I I j White\nWhite I l 13 I I ! Other I I i ! Other ! - I Total I ! Total I 50 I I%Bl k I I% Blk I I 74.O I Sc I I I I I I I I I I I I I l (Used to determine acceptable enrollment ranges) *First year of Program **Enrollment varies throughout the year. 4 YEAR \u0026amp;oLLMENT COMPARISON OCTOBER1 DATA STUDENTSA RE IDENTIFIED AS BLACKA NDN ON-BLACK SCHOOL Baring Cross E]emenrarv INCLUDINGK INDERGARTEN EXCLUDINGK INDERGARTEN 1989-90 Black I 11 I 1989-90 I Black I ' 11 White I 8 I White i I 10 Other I - l Other - \\ Total I 19 i Total iI 21 ! % Blk I 57.9 I I% Blk I i 52.4 1990-91 \\ Black I 8 i I I 1990-91 I i Black ! 7 ! White I I 9 I : White '\n9 \\ Other I I I - I : Other ! I - I \\ Total I 17 I I ! i , Total I l 16 II % i I Blk I 47.1 I i % Blk i ! 43.8 1991-92 \\ stack I 9 I I I White I 5 I\n1991-92 ! Black , 8 I ! White ! 4 \\ Other I - ! Other I - Total I 14 Ii i Total ! 12 % Blk I 64.3 I I I% Blk 66.7 1992-93 Black I 5 1992-93 i Black I 5 White I 9 I i ! White I 9 \\ Other I - \\ Other I I - \\ Total l 14 ! Total I 14 I% Blk I 35.7 I% Blk I 35.7 Sc I I (Used to determine acceptable enrollment ranges) .\n:gtg . 4 YEAR \u0026amp;oLLMENT COMPARISON OCTOBERl DATA STUDENTS ARE IDENTIFIEDA S BLACKA NDN ON-BLACK SCHOOL Baring Cross - Secondary INCLUDING KINDERGARTEN EXCLUDINKGI NDERGARTEN ! I 1989-90 Black ! 1989-90 Black I 3 \\ White I : i I Other i I White\n3 I i Other\n- I \\ Total I i I I i ! I i ! Total ! 6 i I%B lk I I I \\ % Blk i l 50.0 i ! Black I 1990-91 I I 1990-91 \\ Black 21 ! White I I I I \\ White I 8 i I Other I : Other -- I I i I Total ! I ! I j o/o Blk\nl i Total 29 i % ~lk i ! 72.4 I B1ack I 1991-92 I\nI 1991-92 ! Black 23 \\ White i l I' ! White i 8 \\ Other I \\ Other I I ! - I Total I I\nI Total i ! 31 \\ I% Blk I \\ % Blk I 74.2 1992-93 I Black I 1992-93 \\ Black I I 22 I White I \\ White I i 9 I Other I \\ Other I I ! - \\ Total I I ! Total I 31 I%Bl k I [ % Blk I 71.0 I Sc I I I I I I l (Used to determine acceptable enrollment ranges) Prepared by ODM 4/22/93 1992-93 PCSSD JUNIOR HIGH CAPACITIES Jr. High 1992-93 Enrollment 1992-93 % Available School Capacity Filled Seats B w Total %Blk Fuller 425 510 935 45% 1,037 90% 102 Jax. North 184 470 654 28% 722 91% 68 Jax. South 202 400 602 34% 764 79% 162 Northwood 236 703 939 25% 928 101% 0 Robinson 110 301 411 27% 530 78% 119 Sylvan Hills 229 703 932 25% 1,050 89% 118 Total 1,386 3,087 4,473 31% 5,031 89% 569\nThis project was supported in part by a Digitizing Hidden Special Collections and Archives project grant from The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation and Council on Library and Information Resoources.\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\u003cdcterms_creator\u003eArkansas. Department of Education\u003c/dcterms_creator\u003e\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n\n "},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1004","title":"Aerospace Technology Magnet School, updates","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":null,"dc_date":["1992-08/1994-07"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System"],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","Little Rock School District","Education--Arkansas","Educational planning","Education--Finance","Aviation Education Programs (U.S.)","Magnet schools"],"dcterms_title":["Aerospace Technology Magnet School, updates"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Butler Center for Arkansas Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://arstudies.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/bcmss0837/id/1004"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["Available for use in research, teaching, and private study. Any other use requires permission from the Butler Center."],"dcterms_medium":["documents (object genre)"],"dcterms_extent":["153 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\nArkansas Aviation Historical Society banquet programs (1992), Legal documents, correspondence, newspaper clippings, notes\nThis transcript was created using Optical Character Recognition (OCR) and may contain some errors.\nrrerns  N llIB!Il!.M. {BJ!UIPV Al3IJOS 1VJIBOlSIH NOilVIAV SVSNVmJV l311bNVH 3WV~ ~o 11VJI 1V11NNV Hl1 Aerospace Education Center :\\P)l::JOJJ '_M_ MOJpoo_M_ {JUOfOJ In this election year, during which so much attention has been focused on Arkansas, it is fitting that the Arkansas Aviation Historical Society has selected/or enshrinement in its Hall of Fame two individuals who, each in their own way, symbolize so much that is right about the United States. These two native Arkansans, each a major contributor both to aviation and to our nation's welfare, are perfect role models/or the graduates of that exciting new phenomenon on the Little Rock scene, the vitally needed Aerospace Education Center. The goal of the Historical Society, in concert with the Little Rock School District, has been to create in the AEC a unique new education method, one which spices the rigorous curriculum of an aerospace magnet high school with the rich history of air and space-a history that is still being made here by Arkansas' burgeoning aerospace industry. This aerospace industry is based on high standards of intellect and education, and it is to these standards that the students of the Aerospace Education Center will be held, amply qualifying them/or any career in any industry they choose. Stated simply, the Aerospace Education Center will raise the level of student achievement in science and mathematics, while at the same time raising the level of student ambition to new heights. This combination of new skills and new goals will inspire the students to seek more challenging work and to set higher standards for themselves. And this is the secret of the success of the individuals we honor tonight-they set high standards for themselves, secured the training to meet those standards, and then carved out careers that used the training to a maximum advantage. Our two honorees did it under the stress of the great depression and the second World War. As we honor them, we can be pleased to know that the Aerospace Education Center's innovative new training methods will inspire whole generations of students to achieve successful futures under any conditions that may arise. W1WAM NEWEU. SMAU.. was born in Little Rock on February 22, 1927. His family later moved to Malvern, and he graduated from Malvern High School in 1943. He attended the Admiral Farragut Academy in New Jersey prior to entering the United States Naval Academy at Annapolis, Maryland, where he graduated in 1948. Ensign Small entered the Naval Flight Program at Pensacola, Florida, where he was designated a Naval Aviator in November of 1949. He was assigned to a Night Attack Squadron, flying Grumman TBM Avengers, and later Grumman AF-2 Guardians, from escort carriers during the Korean Conflict, and later served in the first Navy squadron to deploy the new Douglas A4D Skyhawk. Promoted to Lieutenant Commander, Small served as a Navy exchange officer in command of a Cadet squadron at the new United States Air Force Academy at Colorado Springs. During the Vietnam War, Small commanded an attack squadron flying the new Grumman A6A Intruder from the USS Constellation, and later commanded the first training wing for A6- crews. He was promoted to Captain, and served as commanding officer of the USS Neosho, a fleet oiler, and the carrier USS Independence prior to promotion to Rear Admiral. Following service as the Battle Group Commander on the USS Midway, Small was promoted to Vice Admiral and assigned as Commander of the U. S. Sixth Fleet at Gaeta, Italy. Promoted to full Admiral in 1981, Small became the Vice Chief of Naval Operations, and a member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Later, he served as the Commander-in-Chief of NATO forces in Southern Europe, and as Commander-in-Chief of U. S. Naval Forces in Europe. Retiring from the Navy in 1985, Admiral Small now serves as a consultant to industry. He resides in Annapolis, Maryland. WOODROW W. CROCKETT was born in Texarkana, Arkansas and attended Dunbar High School and Junior College in Little Rock. He joined the U.S. Army as a private in August, 1940. During competition within his unit, the 349th Field Artillery, the first black artillery unit in the Regular Army, then-Sergeant Crockett was selected the Model Soldier of the Regiment, and subsequently assigned in August of 1942 to Tuskegee Army Air Field, Tuskegee, Alabama as an aviation cadet - becoming one of the legendary \"Tuskegee Airmen a and serving with the 332nd Fighter Group and/lying 149 combat missions during a 15 month tour of duty in Italy during World War II - a time when 50 missions normally constituted a tour of duty. Colonel Crockett was Radiological Safety Officer with the atomic bomb test teams in the Pacific in the early 1950s, and was airborne in a B-17 during each atomic blast. During the Korean Conflict, Crockett flew F-80 and F-86 jet fighters, and later became involved in the test program for the F-106 Delta Dart. Colonel Crockett is the holder of a \"Mach 2 Card, a having flown the F-106 at twice the speed of sound on June 2, 1959. A graduate of the U.S. Air Force Command and Staff College, Colonel Crockett was the recipient of the Distinguished Flying Cross, two Soldier's Medals (for his bravery in extricating pilots from burning aircraft), the Air Medal with four oak leaf clusters, the Meritorious Service Medal, the Army Commendation Medal, and the Air Force Commendation Medal. He attained the highest aeronautical rating in the military - Command Pilot - in March of 1958. In 1970, having attained the rank of Lieutenant Colonel, he retired from the Air Force after 28 years on flight status, 20 years in jets, approximately 5,000 hours of flying time, and 520 hours in combat. The Arkansas Aviation Historical Society and R.S.V.P. Card Enclosed Aerospace Education Center Committee cordially invite you to join them for the Arkansas Aviation Hall of Fame Banquet inducting Admiral William N. Small, United States Navy (Retired) and Colonel Woodrow W. Crockett United States Air Force (Retired) Thursday, the 15th of October Nineteen Hundred Ninety-Two at Six-Thirty in the Evening Central Flying Service Hangar8 Little Rock, Arkansas Business Attire Memo-Telephone TO: Date and time: YOU RECEIVED A TELEPHONE CALL   A VISIT FROM: OF: Telephone No. Please call D O Will call again { From the desk of MEMO --- l/L.-\\ 7)o Form SO Memo-Telephone TO: . D t and tim : - j. YOU RECEIVED A TELEPHONE CALL ~ 0 A VISI FROM: OF: elephone No. 7/ Please call D D Will call again MEMO  /4-Mt r1/2k:L,/ r LI! /.uA.. (~1) ~1 ~,~.A-.J @ _,,.__,._/hi,, From the ( ) Form 50 /4\u0026amp;-liuv~ 1\n(\n:, /Y'ld\nz\n:_, J\n- d . tf7\nJ /4~ ~- I r fflemoranJum Date ____ . - ~~ ~4 10:61) fr1 l)\"vvvrvt tit1~f~ s~ ft l D  0 ) ~)A, ~ {7~ ~ ,et} ~~~ FORM 48 From To ~ Date ~~~ V u ~~J ~ (Jak~ 5/5 FORM 48 Arkansas Aviation _ ____,, Histo~ical Society __ ____, Hall of Fame Banquet _ ______, Arkansas Aviation Historical Society Thirteenth Annual Hall of Fame Banquet At the Dais: Ho11orees Lt. Col. Woodrow W. Crockett (USAF, Ret.)  Adm. William Newell Small (USN. Ret.) Ho11orary Chairmen Ruth Rebsamen Remmel  Winthrop Paul Rockefeller Master of Ceremonies Lt. Gov. Jim Guy Tucker lnductio11 of Colonel Crockett Lt. Gen. William E. Brown foduction of Admiral Small William H. Bowen Chairman, Arkansas Aviatio11 Historical Society Richard N. Holbert President, Little Rock School Board 0. G. Jacovelli Preside11t Pro Tem, Arkansas Se11ate Sen. Jerry Jewell l11vocatio11 Rev. Geroy Osborne. Pastor, Mt. Zion Baptist Church Chairma11, Little Rock Airport Commissio11 Les Hollingsworth Former Director, Natio11al Air a11d Space Museum Col. Walter J. Boyne Be11edictio11 Msgr. James E. O'Connell, Director, St. John's Seminary Endowment Fund Lieutenant Colonel Woodrow W. Crockett (USAF, Ret.) A native of Texarkana, Arkansas who attended Dunbar High School and Junior College in Little Rock, Woodrow W. Crockett made aviation history as a pioneering member of World War II's famed Tuskegee Airmen. Enlisting as an Army private in August 1940, Crockett was later selected in competition to be Model Soldier of his regiment, and was subsequently assigned as an aviation cadet to Tuskegee Army Air Field, an isolated post near the town of Tuskegee, Alabama. In all, 966 black aviators were trained at Tuskegee. Crockett received his pilot's wings and commission as a second lieutenant in the Army Air Corps on March 25, 1943. Perhaps Crockett's greatest contribution to history was the part he and the other Tuskegee Airmen played in breaking the rigid pattern of racial segregation that prevailed in the U.S. military prior to and during World War II. While assigned to the 100th Fighter Squadron, 332nd Fighter Group, also known as the Red Tails, Crockett flew 149 combat missions in Italy during World War II. The men of the 332nd distinguished themselves by destroying enemy rail traffic, coast watching surveillance stations and hundreds of vehicles on air-toground strafing missions. Sixty-six of the group's pilots were killed in aerial combat, while another 32 were shot down and captured as prisoners of war. Crockett and many other black men and women remained in the military service to spearhead integration of the armed forces of the U.S. during the postwar years. In 1952 and 1953 he flew 45 combat missions in jet fighters in Korea. A graduate of the U.S. Air Force Command and Staff College, Crockett received the Distinguished Flying Cross, the Air Medal with four Oak Leaf Clusters, the Meritorious Service Medal, the Army Commendation Medal, and the Air Force Commendation Medal with one Oak Leaf Cluster. He was twice awarded the Soldier's Medal for bravery in extricating pilots from burning fighter aircraft. He held various command and staff positions, including those of squadron and group operations officer, flying safety officer, squadron commander and radiological safety officer on atomic bomb tests in the Southwest Pacific in 1951. He was the assistant test director for the F-106 Interceptor Category II and Category III Test Programs in 1959 and 1960. Colonel Crockett retired from the Air Force in 1970 following 28 years on flying status, with over 5,000 hours of flying time and 520 combat flying hours. Crockett and his wife, the former Daisy J. McMurray of Little Rock, reside in Annandale, Virginia. Admiral William Newell Slllall (USN, Ret.) William Newell Small, born in Little Rock on February 22, 1927, distinguished himself and his native state through 41 years of duty with the United States Navy, achieving the rank of admiral and culminating his career as Commander-in-Chief, Allied Forces in Southern Europe and of U.S. Naval Forces in Europe. A graduate of Malvern High School, Small attended Admiral Farragut Academy in New Jersey before entering the U.S. Naval Academy at Annapolis, Maryland. Upon his graduation in 1948, Ensign Small entered the Naval Flight Program at Pensacola NAS, Florida and was designated a Naval Aviator in November 1949. He was assigned to a night attack squadron flying Grumman TBM Avengers, and later Grumman AF-2 Guardians, from escort carriers during the Korean conflict, and later served in the first Navy squadron to deploy the new Douglas A4D Skyhawk. Promoted to lieutenant commander, Small served as a Navy exchange officer in command of a cadet squadron at the new United States Air Force Academy at Colorado Springs, Colorado. During the Vietnam War, Small commanded an attack squadron flying the new Grumman A6A Intruder from the USS Constellation and later commanded the first training wing for A6 crews. After promotion to captain, he commanded the USS Neosho, a fleet oiler, and the carrier USS Independence prior to his promotion to rear admiral. Following service as battle group commander on the USS Midway, Small was promoted to vice admiral and assigned as commander of the U.S. Sixth Fleet at Gaeta, Italy. Promoted to full admiral in 1981, Small became vice chief of naval operations and a member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Later, he served as commander-in-chief of NATO forces in Southern Europe and commanderin- chief of U.S. Naval Forces in Europe. Admiral Small received the Defense Department Distinguished Service Medal, the Navy Distinguished Service Medal (four awards), the Legion of Merit (three awards), the Navy Commendation Medal (two awards), the Air Medal, the Republic of Vietnam Order of Gallantry and variou theater and campaign service medals. Retiring from the Navy in 1985, Admiral Small now serves as a con ultant to industry. He resides in Annapolis, Maryland. J. Carroll Cone A native of Ashley County, Cone was a WWI flight instructor, the first pilot from Ari e the first Arkansan to shoot down an en y t ganized Arkansas Aircraft Company, ch lat , d-Aire, Inc. Cone joined Pan-American or d Airways in I 7, retiring as a vice president of Pan-Am in 1969. Nathan Gordon The only native Arkansan to win the Congressional Medal of Honor for his role in aerial combat, Gordon rescued 15 downed American flyers in the Pacific as pilot of a PBY Catalina, landing and taking off four times under enemy fire. He served as lieutenant governor of Arkansas from 1947 to I 967. James S. McDonnell, Jr. An Altheimer native, McDonnell staned McDonnell Aircraft at Lamben Field in St. Louis in 1939. His company built the world' first carrier-ba ed jet fighter, the Phantom. McDonnell Aircraft merged with Douglas Aircraft to create McDonnell-Douglas Corporation, one of the world's largest aerospace firms, in 1967. Charles M. Taylor A member of the original 154th Observation Squadron of the Ark. National Guard, Taylor was involved with Arkansas Aircraft Co., builders of the Command-Aire. A stunt pilot, he flew with Arkansas Air Tours staning in 1928. Won the Amateur Pilots Race from ew York to Cleveland during ational Air Races in 1932. Louise McPhetridge Thaden A native ofBentonville, Thaden won the first Woman's Air Derby from Santa Monica, California to Columbus, Ohio. After setting many altitude and endurance records, she entered and won the 1936 Bendix Transcontinental Air Race, the first year women were allowed to compete. Leighton Collins Operator of a flying school in El Dorado, Collins worked in aircraft factories and read u a t aircraft accidents. Moving to New Yo in n p lishing the monthly pocket- ize magazi Air ted analyzing aircraft accidents to promote sa ety. Air acts grew to an eventual circulation of over 20,000. Cass Hough Formerly of Rogers, Hough served a a colonel in the Army Air Force during WWII. He developed an auxiliary gas tank which effectively doubled the P-47' range. His idea led to the development of the \"Droop Snoot,\" a modified P-38 Lighming which carried two 2,000-lb. bombs at over 350 mph and 30,000 feet. Robert Snowden, Jr. A native of Memphis, Snowden moved to Little Rock in 1928 when he bought controlling interest in Arkansas Aircraft Co., renaming it Command-Aire, Inc. The company's popular biplane won second place in the Guggenheim International Safe Airplane Comest, and over 300 were sold. Command-Aire's \"Little Rocket\" won the Cirrus International Derby. Admiral John S. Thach Born in Pine Bluff and reared in Ford ce, Thach became one of the Navy's top pilots, J 1 n d  gh at Squadron.\" He developed exercise bat which proved invaluable in World ve o 'Thach Weave,\" a other later adopted by the Field E. Kindley Born near Pea Ridge and graduated from Gravette High School, Kindley was one of the first volunteer pilot in the Army's aviation branch. Assigned to the Royal Flying Corps, he went into action as a first lieutenant flying the Sopwith Camel. He ended WWI with 12 kill and a higher victories-to-missions ratio than Captain Rickenbacker's. Died during a crash in practice maneuvers at Kelly Field, Texas. Raymond J. Ellis Born in Perry County, Ellis founded Fayetteville Flying Service in 1940. Training aviation cadets during WWU, he provided flight training to ROTC students in postwar years. In 1953, Ellis founded Scheduled Skyways, which became one of the nation's outstanding commuter airlines. Claud L. Holbert Born in Texas in 1910, Holben moved to Little Rock as a young boy, where he soloed a Command-Aire in 1926. An early member of the 154th Observation Squadron of the Arkansas National Guard, he was active in the Air Tours of Arkansas in the late 1920s and early 1930s. He founded Central Flying Service, which became Arkan as' largest fixed-base operator, in 1939. Major General Earl T. Ricks Born in 1908, Ri   in East St. Louis i arks Air College r Arkansas' first rvation Squadron ba ed in Little R rst commanding general of the Air n, D.C. J. Lynn Helms Taking flight training in the Navy during WWII, Helms later served 14 years in the Marine Corps. Afterwards, Helms was with Nonh American Aviation, Bendix Corporation and the Norden Division of United Aircraft. He was president, chairman, and CEO of Piper Aircraft from 1974 until 1981, when he was appointed administrator of the FAA. Albert A. Vollmecke A native of Germany, Vollmecke came to the U.S. in 1927 representing Heinke! Aircraft. He soon joined Arkansas Aircraft, designing and supervising manufacture of Command-Aire biplanes. His \"Little Rocket\" design won the 1930 All-American Air Derby. He later served with the CAA and FAA, retiring in 1965. Brig. Gen. John D. Howe A Pine Bluff native, Howe flew Delta Air Lines' first passenger flight as its chief pi rkansas ANG in 1930, becoming A nt commander in 1940. Howe forme 1941 at Wright- Patterson Field an west Pacific Air Depot for wanime operation in Australia. After serving as commander of Wright-Patterson AFB, he retired in 1960. Maj. Gen. Winston P. Wilson Born in Arkadelphia and reared in Little Rock, Wilson enlisted in the National Guard in 1929 as an airplane mechanic, completing pilot training in 1940. Serving as special assistant to the Chief of the Air Force Division of the National Guard Bureau, he was appointed by the President in 1963 as Chief of the National Guard Bureau in Washington, D.C. Eddie Holland Born at Warren and reared at Rison, Holland flew 37 combat missions as a B-17 crew member before going to pilot training. He graduated as a fighter pilot at the top of his class of 22 cadets. He was appointed director of the state Depanment of Aeronautics by the late Gov. Winthrop Rockefeller and served through the subsequent administrations of Governors Bumpers, Pryor, White and Clinton. Brig. Gen. William T. Seawell A Pine Bluff native, Seawell commanded the Air Corps 401st Bomb Gp in Engla mmandant of the Air Force Academ y in 1963, he was v-p operations for . and American Airlines. He head o Rolls-Royce Aero Engines, then capped his career as president, CEO and later chairman of Pan-American World Airways. Gen. John Paul McConnell A Booneville native, McConnell graduated from West Point in 1932 as First Captain of Cadets. He later became chief of staff of the China-Bunna-lndia Air Force Training Command, and in 1944 became deputy commander of the Third Tactical Air Force. McConnell was named Air Force vice chief of staff in 1947. He was named chief of staff, the Air Force's top position, in 1965. Pierce W. McKennon Born in Clarksville and raised in Fort Smith, McKennon washed out of the Anny Air Corps flight school. He joined the Royal Canadian Air Force, winning his pilot wings in 1941 . After flying briefly with the RAF, he was transferred to the USAAF's Fourth Fighter Gp, where he logged over 500 combat hours, was twice shot down over enemy territory, escaping both times, and destroyed 20 Gern1an air,raft. Maj. Gen. Frank A. Bailey Little Rock native Bailey entered aviation cadet training after graduating from th nivetsity o .rl(ans in 1941. He spent WWII as a flight instructor. first a Turner Id, Georgia and later at Blytheville Ann ir r d ere c anded the Pilot Training Squadron. Joinin the rkalT as A after the war, he became deputy chief of staff in 1954, chief of staff in 1960 and commander of the Arkansas ANG in 1969. M. T. \"Cy\" Bond Bond learned to fly in 1928 while working as an engineer for the Arkansas Highway Dept. Later he ferried bombers until he was assigned to the 2nd Air Transport Squadron and sent to fly the Bunna Hump. After the war, he returned to Arkansas, becoming a flight instructor and airport engineer and building airports at Clarksville, Batesville and Petit Jean Mountain. Bond organized the Jacksonville Squadron of the CAP. Earl Rowland A Harrison native, Rowland learned flying at Kelly Field, Texas during WWI. He barnstonned after the war, becoming a test pilot for Swallow Aircraft in Wichita. Rowland later worked for Lloyd Stearman, then joined Clyde Cessna's fledgling company. With Rowland as his pilot, Cessna entered the 1928 \"On to Los Angeles\" race. Rowland won every lap, bringing Cessna great prestige and finances to help weather the depression. Maj. John H. White Kensett native White was one of the Arkansas' first WWII aces. Flying older Spitfir . he o cto during the Allied invasion of North Afnca, \"' nni g the istinguished Flying Cross with Oak Leaf Clu e for s1 glehandedly attacking lO Gennan fighters and downin uring1he AIIJed attack on the island of Pantelleria, White shot down four enemy fighters in two days. Lucien M. Taillac Flying B-l 7s in Italy during WWII, Taillac joined Delta Airlines after the war. Later, he sold Aero Commanders for Trans Air Corp., which brought him to Little Rock in 1964 as president of Little Rock Ainnotive. There he began customizing business aircraft. In 1973, Federal Express purchased Little Rock Ainnotive, moving it to Memphis. Taillac and his partners stayed, creating Arkansas Modification Center. Richard Collins Little Rock native Collins flew as a charter and corporate pilot following his Anny stint. In 1958, he oined his father at Air Facts magazine, where he 1ayed o 0 . or oining the staff of Flying magazine. Re in to 11 R kin 70,Collinsbecame senior editor while h erved Ar a eronautical Com-mission. He became e ,tor m chie o ying m 1977, then moved on to become senior vp of the AOPA publications division and editor in chief of AOPA Pilot magazine in 1988. Wendel A. Robertson Fon Smith native Robenson enlisted in the Anny Infantry Officer Candidate School at Fon Roots in North Little Rock in 1917. He was soon reassigned to the Signal Corps as an aviation cadet. He trained in lllinois before going to lssoudun, France for fighter pilot training. He saw his first combat in a Spad Jes than two months before the Annistice, but ended the war with seven victories. Capt. E. Scott McCuskey Born in Little Rock and raised near Stuttgart, McCuskey joined the Naval Reserve in 19 oil I issioned in 1939, ing. He won the est decoration, on two occasions. H r, down 14 Japanese aircraft and participated in the Baules of Midway, Coral Sea and the Philippine Sea. Sanford N. McDonnell Born in Liule Rock, McDonnell served a a stress engineer, aerodynamicist, design engineer and group leader of fighter plane projects for McDonnell Aircraft in the 1950s before moving into top management. He was chainnan and CEO of McDonnellDouglas Corp. for seven years before retiring in 1988 after 40 years of service. He is past national president of the Boy Scouts of America and is a director of the Ethics Resources Center, Inc. in Washington, D.C. Hon. John Paul Hammerschmidt A decorated pilot of WWII, Rep. Hammerschmidt flew missions for the 3rd Combat Cargo Group over the Hump in the China- Bunna-lndia Thea g  Flying Cross with three Oak Leaf Cl e four Oak Leaf Clusters, three Batt! orial Medal of the Republic of Chin , e  nous ice Award. As a congressman, he served on the House Comminee on Public Works and Transport and its Subcomminee on Aviation. Rear Adm. George M.\" kip\" Furlong, Jr. (USN, Rel.) Raised in Pine Bluff, Furlong graduated from the .S. aval Academy in 1956 and earned his avy Wings in 1957. He served as a carrier fighter pilot, test pilot. squadron commander, commander of the Carrier Air Group on the USS Enterprise and commanding officer -if the USS Independence. He has been chief of staff of the U.S. Sixth Fleet and deputy chiefof aval Education and Training. He few over 200 combat missions in Vietnam, and has over 4,500 hours and 930 carrier landings in avy tactical aircraft. Rear Adm. F. Taylor Bro,1n (USN, Rel.) During 36 years in the avy, Brown served in capacities as a carrier fighter pilot, test pilot, fighter squadron and air wing commander. He won the Bendix ph nff11111iNa1\ndl,al Air Races in 1948 and led fighters in t fi t onh Vietnamese forces in 1964. own became Vice President and prog gero alcon rp. in Linle Rock. managing modification and assembly of Falcon 20 aircraft acquired by the U.S. Coast Guard for maritime surveillance missions. Frederick W. Smith A graduate of Yale University, Smith was a Marine fighter pilot in Vietnam, winning the Siver Star. Smnh founded Federal Express, now the world's largest express transportation company. in Little Rock in 1973. He is chainnan, president and CEO of Federal Express and serves on the boards of the Air Transport Association, St. Jude Children's Research Hospital and the E. W. Scripps Company. With Appreciation to: The Alan Rothman Company Storer Cable Communications Central High School Jazz Band, Duane Barbour, Director Central High School Junior ROTC Delta Air Lines, Inc. Col. Walter J. Boyne In Recognition of Table Sponsors: First Commercial Bank J. Dan Baker/Avis Rent A Car Arkansas Aerospace, lnc. Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark, Attorney Rebsarnen Insurance Garver \u0026amp; Garver, P.A., Engineers Arkansas Aeronautics Commis ion Civil Air Patrol Arkansas Power and Light Company Nathaniel Curtis-Riddick-Heiple Falcon Jet City of Little Rock Central Flying Service Little Rock Airport Commission Arkansas National Guard Arkansas 99s Stephens, Inc. Vratsinas Construction Company Mr. and Mrs. Lucien Taillac Marion Burton Rollie and Ruth Remmel .J OIIN IV. WAI.K EH RALPH WASIII NGTON MAHI( HUR 1,\nrn-\n\"WILEY A. HHANTON, .JI(. Al lSTIN l'OHTEH. ,Jll .  Als,, 1d111 illd tu l'radwi m 1\nf~ir~1a \u0026amp; th\u0026lt;' l)i stric-l nf C'11l11rnh1a Mr. Dick Holbert JOIIN W. W ALKEll, P.A. ATI'OH Nl:Y Ar LA IV 172:~ BllOJ\\l l\\VAY L!Tl'LE !{O('I(. J\\l{l(ANSAS 72~11(i Tl~LEl'IIONI~ (fiOJ) :37,1-:37!'\"\u0026gt;\u0026lt;~ FAX (GO]) :n-1-,11 87 August 25, 1992 Little Rock Aerospace School and Museum Board of Directors Central Flying Service 1501 Bond Avenue Little Rock, AR 72202 Mr. David Harrington, AIDC One Capitol Mall Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. James Smith, Superintendent North Little Rock School District 27th \u0026amp; Poplar North Little Rock, AR 72114 Mr. Bobby Lester, Superintendent Pulaski County Special School District 924 Dixon Road Little Rock, AR 72206 Ms. Ann Brown Office of De8egregation Monitoring 201 E. Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 Dr. Mac Bernd, Superintendent of LRSD 810 West Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Sirs and Madam: AUG 2 8 1992 Oil ce of Dvsv\n:ireg:-if ,.1 M r .to ,ng I am enclosing for your information and as a reminder, the Stipulation and Consent Order Regarding Little Rock School District Aerospace Technology Magnet School. l am sending this to you because many of the terms of this stipulation and order obviously have not been met and because black children and parents and patrons, continually get excluded from information Page Two Mr. Dick Holbert Mr. David Harrington Mr. James Smith Mr. Bobby Lester Ms. Ann Brown Dr. Mac Bernd August 25, 1992 and participation regarding the development of these facilities. To Ms. Brown, I am requesting that her office inquire into these matters as a part of her monitoring responsibility so that the court will have appropriate information regarding the current status of the court approved plans. I am also specifically requesting the conference that has been planned by AIDC and the Arkansas Aviation Historical Society be rescheduled to a time after which assurances can be provided that the participation by invitees shall extend thoroughly into the black community including the low income echelons. I am also sending a copy of this letter for her information to Judge Wright. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Sincerely,  ~ ORIO!fiAL StONEO ~ BY UNOERSIGNEO caMSE'L John W. Walker JWW:lp Enclosure cc: Honorable Susan Webber Wright 08 / 28 / 1992 15:32 FROM JOHN W.WALKER P.A. TO 3710100 .1011.N W. WALKER R:\\LPH WASHINGTON MARK El\nRNETTf. w1u:v A. BRANTON. JR. AUSTIN PORTER. ,JR  .',I:., \"'lmit~ t,, l'1\"\"ti(-r in f\n, ot,i-,.i :t ,\u0026lt;\n: lht. llr'II IWL c,f ~ niu111lti11 Ms. Ann Brown Federal Monitor Office of Desegregation 201 E. Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Ann: JOHN W. WALKER, P.A. A11'URNf.Y AT LAW 1723 BKOADW A Y Ll'fl'LE RUCK. ARKANSAS 72206 TELEPHONE (501) 374-3758 FAX (501) 374-1187 August 28, 1992 P.02 AUG 2 8 19~2 Olfice of Desegregation Monitoring It is our belief that the Little Rock School District has failed to act in good faith regarding the Stipulation and Consent on the Little Rock School -District Aerospace Technology Magnet School. I say this because it is apparent that Mr. Holbert and his organization have taken a leadership role in the planning and development of this school. Again, I must most urgently request that your office inquire into this matter to ensure that black children, parents and patrons of this community are included in this process as agreed to by the court approved plans.  I hope that by Monday the Pulaski County districts will be able to provide this office with an accounting of the participants in the September 4th conference by race. At that time, I will definitely know whether the conference needs to be rescheduled. Thank you for your cooperation. JWW:lp cc: Mr. Dick Holbert Mr. David Harrington Mr. James Smith Mr. Bobby Lester Dr. Mac Bernd All Counsel of Record Sincerely, \u0026amp; -~ I _ti'Z. \u0026lt;R-- ,r~ri1. uMI ~t4/ 5/L 1-. - {? G $\u0026lt;11n, t':, ~~ l.. ,M....( (,,1 JOHN W. WALKER RALPH WASHINGTON MARK BURNETTE 'WILEY A. BRANTON, JR. AUSTIN PORTER, JR.  Also admitted to Practice in Georgia \u0026amp; the District of Columbia. Ms. Ann Brown Federal Monitor Office of Desegregation 201 E. Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Ann: JOHN W. WALKER, P.A. ATTORNEY AT LAW 1723 BROADWAY LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72206 TELEPHONE (501) 374-3758 FAX (501) 374-4187 August 28, 1992 IIUVERa\u0026gt;BY,AX\u0026amp;USMAl It is our belief that the Little Rock ' School District has failed to act in good faith regarding the Stipulation and Consent on the Little Rock School District Aerospace Technology Magnet School. I say this because it is apparent that Mr. Holbert and his organization have taken a leadership role in the planning and development of this school. Again, I must most urgently request that your office inquire into this matter to ensure that black children, parents and patrons of this community are included in this process as agreed to by the court approved plans. I hope that by Monday the Pulaski County districts will be able to provide this office with an accounting of the participants in the September 4th conference by race. At that time, I will definitely know whether the conference needs to be rescheduled. Thank you for your cooperation. JWW: lp cc: Mr. Dick Holbert Mr. David Harrington Mr. James Smith Mr. Bobby Lester Dr. Mac Bernd All Counsel of Record Sincerely, \\ CENTRAL ~LYING SERVICE TEL: 501-375-7274 Aug 31,92 7 :40 No .001 P.01 C CEtrl'KAL FL YING SEAVICE 1501 SONDSl'REET LITTLE ROCK Afll(AHSAS 72202 !SOI) JTS-3245 F,-,X (51137$-727  -- -.,  lfl\u0026gt;I.-J'\\ ,1'1i'\\. 01\\TE: cmrAAL FLYING SERVICE, nc\n15019-'.:tiD~ LITI'LE R:O\u0026lt;, MlWlSM 72202 (501) 375-3245 ~ (800) 888-5387 WA1'TS (501) 375-7274 FJ\\X TO: /4n 6rot..v\"- mc tmBER: 3 '71- D I QO TOrAL NDl3ER \u0026lt;R P}.GES DOU\u0026gt;Im a:NER SHEET: ~ ~= PERS:N SEN\u0026gt;ING ME.55.AGEt . . ' CENTR AL fL YING SERV ICE TEL: 501-375-7 274 Aug 31, 92 7 :40 No .001 P. 02 31 August 1992 Mr. John w. Walker Attorney At Law 1723 Broadway fERSONAL ~ CQNFIDENTIAI. Little Rock, AR 72206 Dear John: Thank you for the opportunity to meet with Mrs. Joshua and all the other fine people last Friday. Joy was a most gracious hostess. I thought it was an excellent meeting. I especially appreciate everyone's patience with my oftentimes tedious, long-winded explanations and stories. I left Friday afternoon feeling the vision for the Aerospace Education Center was enthusiastically shared by all. For that, I am grateful. John, I do have a couple of major concerns one of which I shared with the group, namely, that associating controversy with this project, however well meaning, would have a deleterious effect on the fund raising effort and, therefore, put the very future of the project in jeopardy. I received a mixed reaction to that. I could not convey my full reasoning to the group, however, because it concerns a legal interpretation of the Stipulation and Order (my other concern) which if I had shared with your clients without your presence would, I believe, have constituted a severe breach, if not of ethics, at least, of manners. Let me explain  further. Firstly, please consider the following opinion and analysis as one shared as a professional courtesy by one attorney to another. Insofar as I know, the following opinion is shared only by me and does not represent the views of anyone but me. It is offered in the full knowledge and appreciation of the fact that you will represent your clients in the manner which you deem best serves their interests. I believe the Stipulation and Order regarding the Aerospace Magnet School has lapsed because one of the essential contingencies, namely, that the LRSD receive a four million dollar magnet school assistance grant~did not occur. The grant application was turned down by the US Department of Education in August 1991. The order is clear in that \"If either of these contingencies does not happen, the LRSD will have no obligation (emphasis added) to build the school or implement the Aerospace Technology program described in Exhibit A.\" It would seem, therefore, that any effort to force the LRSD to do anything based upon the argument that the Order requires it would tail. The Arkansas Aviation Historical Society's efforts for the last year have been designed to keep the dream alive. We CENTRAL FLYING SERVICE TEL: 501 - 375- 7274 Aug 31,92 7 :40 No. 001 P.03 have offered, repeatedly, to use our best efforts to assist the LRSD in solving their very legitimate financial concerns about implementing this project. Quite frankly, notwithstanding Dr. Ruth Steele's public comments to the contrary, we saw little or no effort by the District to move forward. I believe Dr. Bernd is different. He must persuade the Board, however, that it is in the District's best interests to proceed with this project. The Board, as you know, has three new members since they endorsed the project in August 1990. If the February 4, 1991 Order is null and void and the LRSD has \"no obligation to build the school\" for the aforementioned reason, then it follows that the School Board will have to endorse any new effort to move forward, for example, a new Magnet School Grant Application. My question and my concern is: are we hindering the effort by attaching controversy to this project? Are we presenting Dr. Bernd a problem he can do without? Will the School Board be more or less likely to further embrace this project if given the opportunity, if it appears that it may be the target of controversy? Will potential donors to the museum be as receptive to the vision if they see the project cloaked in continuous conflict? I think the answer is certainly that in each case the project is less well served. The following scenario is the order in which, I believe, events will transpii\n:._e under ideal circumstances. Dr. Bernd willQ)e persuaded t o) recommend that a new Magnet School Assistance Grant be submitted by the December 15, 1992 deadline, The School Board will endorse the effort. The application will be submitted. Between May-July 1993, The us Department of Education will announce the awarding of a  grant. Ground will be broken immediately to assure the new facility will be open for classes the fall of 1994. I submit the following strategy to you for your consideration as the most likely to successfully implement the Aerospace Education Center: 1. Place the Aerospace Education Center off limits to any activity that would call negative attention to the project during the critical fund raising phase, 2. Express in a manner deemed appropriate the Joshua Intervenors enthusiastic support for the project, 3. Resolve any concerns about the implementation of the project through quiet diplomacy and avoid negative publicity wherever possible. We share the same vision. The Aerospace Education Center has the potential to be the benchmark educational achievement not only for Little Rock but also for the Nation. Through our shared vision, we can finally see a future that is different from the past. It is a future that places Little Rock squarely on the leading edge of the delivery of relevant education in this Country. I appreciate your CENTRAL .FLYING SERVICE TEL : 501-375 - 7274 Aug 31,92 7 :40 No .001 P.04 support and the support of the Joshua Intervenors in this magnificent endeavor. Respectfully submitted, ARKANSAS AVIATION HISTORICAL SOCIETY Richard N. Holbert Chairman of the Board JOI! W. W i\\LKE:R HALPH WASHINGTON MARK BURNET'Tt ' IVILE:Y i\\. BRANTON. ,JR. AUSTIN PORTER, .JH.  :\\lsn mhnilh'f'l ln Pr:wti,, 111 1\n._,,r-Ria \u0026amp; lht llistnrl or Cnlumh,a JOHN W. WALKER, P.A. J\\'ri'ORNEY AT LAW 1723 BROADWAY Lrrru~ ROCK, ARKANSAS 722llli TELEl'IIONE (501) 37 l-:l7\n), FAX (501) 37'1-'1 187 August 31, 1992 HAND DELIVERED The Honorable Susan Webber Wright U.S. District Court 600 West Capitol P.O. Box 3316 Little Rock, AR 72203 Dear Judge Wright: AUG 3 1 1992 Office o Doseg' gJ on M n,torm I am writing to request a prompt meeting with the Court and other interested parties regarding Little Rock School District's failure to proceed with the development of the Aerospace Technology Magnet School in good faith. We have brought these concerns to the attention of Ms. Ann Brown and her office. It is our feeling that court intervention will help bring these concerns to a more amicable resolution. Thank you for your attention to this matter. JWW: lp cc: Ms. Ann Brown Mr. Dick Holbert Mr. James Smith Mr. Bobby Lester Dr. Mac Bernd All Counsel of Record Office of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor August 31 , 1992 Mr. John Walker 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72206 Dear John: 201 East Markham, Suite 51 o Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501) 376-6200 Fax (501) 371-0100 Within the last few days, I have talked with you and several others who are involved with the new Aerospace Magnet School. It is apparent that there is some confusion about the role and relationship of the community and the parties regarding the school's development. 1 believe it will be helpful to meet informally with school district and aerospace representatives to discuss any concerns about plans for the aerospace school. The new facility promises to serve our community in bold and innovative ways\nit is in the best interest of the children that we resolve any questions about the planning process now so we can move foIWard to make the school's promise a reality. A member of my staff will contact you and our school district and aerospace colleagues to arrange a mutually convenient time for us to meet at my office. Very truly yours, ~ Ann B. Brown Federal Monitor cc: judge Susan Webber Wright Mac Bernd Bobby Lester James Smith Bill Bowen Dick Holbert All Counsel * P.01 * ** TRANSACTION REPORT * SEP- 8-92 TUE 13:30 * ** DATF START SENDER RX TIME PAGES TYPE NOTE ** * ---------------------------------- * * SEP- 8 11 372 4826 2' 3011 4 RECEIVE OK * *** ********ll*** '************************************************************************************* C/\\THERl:--:F. JOHNSON AND  ASSOCIATF FROM: Catherine Johnson r' Pages, including this cover Special Instructions: ~//_,/4 c\n,\n7 ~ \u0026amp;~~- PLEASE CALL 501-.'.}71-0331 IP A PROBLEM OCCURS DUR1NG TRA SMISSION. Aerospace Education Center Aerospace Technology M~gnet Program Plan\"lng Agenda September 21-24 s.p. .... 21 Partjdpants Iin.11 l)j ss,,i s.,lgn t Dr, Semd and 0811 Q,winn 8:30-9\n45 11m  Grant Requirements ~mlnlstr\n:itlon  Program/ ~1rse Sequenca B1.llldlng  Technolosy LAb 2000 Integrated ColTlp\\ltC!l\" fTadllt)' 2. Dr. Bemd, Dick Hdbe!i, 10:0012:U0 noa1  T)e.18n d Tochnolngy Lab 2000: CO'\\c::ept Gan Quinn, J11inas Durkin, Ad mint strati at for lntegr11tinS Appllod Mathen'lahcs and Almt Gambell d Cr9t1Vt B\\lllding Sdenc:1?, Cannl\\.ml cattoo Skills\nand Loarnitt8 Systerm, San Degq Ilng1ncc:rlng Technology al Junior High Apple ~uter Inst.ittng Lc:'Vel. [ Ncte-. Pticr to thts meettn\u0026amp; the ONler, l..RSP Fadlitlas the SlX j\\lnla- h1g1, srnods thould Manapr, Ciaylc.-d Nml'lrop ldentHy 4,000 - 5,000 89 dAIIQl\"CDT'() (ULAR), Jeen McBnllre (ADE} spa~ fcx- ttl'IOVatlm naar t'l'lodla cmitc.T.] 12:00-1:30 Lund, Dlsc1.1ssi~ TTUl)' oontlnl.lt 3. LR.SP Fadlltles Managtr, 2:00-3:15 pm  Junlcr- 1-itgh Schm 'J'our d Pr(F09ed Gall Quinn, James Durktn, Pulaski Hatghts Oassn.~'1ms to plan Tecl1nclogy Lab 2000 AJax GambOI. Apple 3:304:45 ln:ita11M!m Need~ and CCl'lt (Gt.mt Compul9t' Rapr~~t.ttives Jlo-Mt Helghb lJ\\aaget) (f)evek1pm01,t) (SN #2) 4. Or. Bemd, Ttm Hotplc, Ed 5:00-8,00 pm  Tcdmdogy Ulb 2000 .\\t the High Sc:hcd\nroddtc:k1 Ock Hdbert, Gall Admh,lslrillicn PlaMing the Pre-Engineering Lab for Q!Jinn1 Jamcg 0Jrk1n. Alex Ard'\\ited PlaM Gambao\nApple Comp1.1ter Repre1entat1ve (2) 9, A.(lllpac:e Eti\\1cation Center campaign Lca~ershtp S1ifai..t:wa24 10, Dr, Domd, IIstelle Matthl,, Chmne WCJOd, Dennis GIUSCMI, Bn,n.ti IAn\u0026amp;u-a lVtl Conaultm1t.s1 Program Jlvaluatlon Manager U , O,uck Stevens (UALR), Gaylcrd Ncrthrcp, (UALR), Jerry Rot:inscn (Henderaai State U), c UAl'B) 12. Dr. Bemd, Ed ruddlck, Tim Hcilple, Call Quinn 3:00-5:00 pm location? 8:30-11:30 iun AdmintstratlCll'I ih111dlng 1,00-2:30 pm 3:00-5:00 pm  Prcsentatla'\\ 01 Prq'\\~ Magnet 0-. Rernd and Gail Quinn  0.1rric-..11\\1m and Program Evaluatloo ~tsn - Revlaw Cour-ewtr\\(  Tedindogy !..ab 2000 lhtgr111tm! Facility Ccmputer U.S. r'\u0026gt;epl. of LAbor SCANS Knc,r,.y-How h,tegratim Into Acadr..mlc C.Q'e , - ~i5ning Program O'qectlves based oo Acadomic Achievemant, Job/Work Skill Comp\"tency Attalnmt:l\\t - Progrt11rn Retention and Competicn   Placomcnt into I!nLryLcvcl Ilmployment cr- HigC!' Educ:atioo - l'l't\"'JCBSS fer ma,ttcrlns tmpt ementatlon (f.crmattve ev~luatic.~ and usa d TQM Measure,)  De!li81'1ng the Arliclllalio, Agreement (2~ 2~2)  rtannlng a Ne\\AI High School (er 2,000 students based on Magnot Co.mies c:I ~udy :.1,d Htgh SdHxi Course, and R~9u1ran~.. , ts for Graduation, T~hno1o6)' Ltsb 2000 and oth\u0026lt;Jr oomp\\.tter faclliU~ 5, o. LRSD Fadlttles Manager, Gail Quinn, James Il.trk1n, Alex Gamboai Apple Canp~ter Rdpresentattves 0-. 131rnd Md aroup U:,\\ed tn #5 8cfllB i, 8:309\n30 all\\ So.Ith We:\nt 9:4/i-10:4!\nam, Fair 11 :00-12: oo nOOl'I, Mabelvale t:3O-2:3O pm Cloverdale 3:U0-5:00 pm S\n00-4\n00 pm Ad mini strati al Building 7. lndustry Repre:sent11t1ves: S\naO-10,)O mn Central F1Y,t\\8 Service  [lclc Lc:Qtlon? H01bart\nMldoout  Oary ou5g.rS\nFalcx,n Jet - E. '\\Ml uam Orr\nArkan~ Aarospaco  L. Omtcr Dl.lrwelt trt Rmr Jndulltri~  ? McO:lnnell Dou gt as  PAA  Byron Meltus (Plc:eso add to this list - thCMi pecpte reprent buatnNS cards I h1%Ve) 8. Dr. Bemd, Ann \u0026amp;a.vn, Gall Quinn, On1\u0026amp;  (Dr. Barnd a- Pat to schecMe meeting) 11:0012:00 no.Tl Ann Brem n's Offla,? t002:0Upn, Planning and Preparalim  Junior High School TOllr cf Prcpe60d C11'11srcc:m1.'i h') Plan Technology lab 2000 J1ulallotiCl1 Nc:cds a1'Cl Cost (Grant Budegt OoYckipment)  Cost DiSCUlllllOlt (1) Tedmdngy Lab 2000 (2) !1n51ne1tting Technol~y Canputer Facilities  Identifying Q1t1cal Occupatlooal Areas In Manufacturing Iin~nMrlng and Aviation for Training Swdents  Jcb Descrlpti011!1 ar1d Job Anfl1ysls  U.S. 08'j:.al1ment cl La'rxir SCANS Workplace Car,petcmcies\nRelevance to Job Analysis  Occ\"'f'.:\\tlonal Ccrtlflcation (HIii ollh  -.::...4~ Ncie: Regarding firsl lwo Items above, wlll nroct to have o:cup,1llalill areas where l'llr!ne and tralninS la eritlcal. Ploaso h\niv~ n-prosontatlvc.w: l:rlne in{onnalicn for lhese iwo Items. NCO I I .Cl a J .ie ut1mf!hl fill 1t1hM .i.e Lw9 liiHII. pecg::ail lbpih Mi.  Amendtnenl lo lnlerdislricl MASI'\\~ Desegregolion l\"lsn to Include six junior high SGhools, new high s~hoot as Am~ace Ma5net Program School, Aerospace Education Center Aerospace Technology Magnet Program Planning Agenda septembar 21-24 s..:---21 PN11dpants linll l)lww,1100 1. Dr. S..md and Galt Quinn 8\n309\n45 lln'I  Gra\"I Ro:.:iulrernes~ts Aumtnlstrati(ll,  l'rogriAm/ p,,.1rn Sequenea Butldlllg  'rechn\\-.itoay L,ib 2000 lnLegrated Cninp\\1t P11dllty ~' Dr, ~md, Dick Hdbert, 10: 00-12:UO TIOCI\"\\  r-is1\\ ci Toclmology Lab 2000: C0n01iflt G1U Quinn, Jiu,._ Durkin, Admlnl strat\\a) for lntegrfll\\t\\S Applied )vWhen'\\at1C:S and Alex Garnbo6 cJ Cteattve Bu\\ldini Selene.a_ Ca11municattoo Skills\nand toarnlng Systems, Safi Deg~ t:nslnecrlng Technology at Junior High ApPI eomputer tn,i-1\\ing L~~l. { Ncite: Prt~ to this meettng, the Dealer, LRSD Factlit!M the ~1:\u0026lt; Junlc.1' high sd'\\ocb shoutd }\\,,1ana8 Gayla-d Ncrthrop identity 4,000  5,000 1141 d,-_,.oc:m(II)  ('ULAR), Jean McRl'IUre (/\\DE) 1pace tix renovatlm near l\"ftadh1 contcr.l 12:00-t:30 Lunch DI scuSS1lXl may oonu1,ue 3, LP-SD J\nadUtl~ Manager, 2:00-3\n1! pm  Jimlcr High Sc.hen Tnur r:I PrCFOSCd Gall Quint\\, Jam~ Ourkln, rulukl Height:, Of!ssroom.11 to plan Techndogy Lab 2000 Alex Gan'l'lx:e. Apple 3:31H:4~ lnistall11\\ic-r, Need~ and Cast (G1ant Computer R.oprc:scntatl ves r,cres.t Haght!I liudget) ( l\"X'Vck~')l'l'\\enL) (S.- #'l) 4. Dr, Bumd, Tim Hllple, Ed 5:00-8:00 pin Todmolo3y I.ab 2000 at the Jilgh Schoel\nRiddt~, DI~ Hciberl, Gall Adinlnislrallcri Planning the Pr\u0026amp;-Eng1nNring Lab for QJlnn, )an\\CS Durkin. /'JetX Architect Pl.in$ Camt,ca, Apple O-Y11puter Rbpresentatl ve (2)  ----------- .. ----- --- -- .... ---- -- - M     11 I ,,,, 6. ,. LRSC FadUttes Manager, Gatl Qult'\\n, James O.trktn, Alex G..mbca, Apple Canputer P.espresentatt ves U'. 5-tlcj Md gra.tp Ust~ in #5 lnCSUttry RepreSentatlve: Central F1\u0026gt;'1\"S Service - Dck Holbert\nMldcout  Gary Ougpra\nP.llcion Jet  B. 'Mtltam Orr\nArkansas l\\et-ospace - L. Canter D.Jrwell ui Rmr Jndo11trli!!i - 7 McUYtnell Douglas - J?M  8yrcn MeH\\tll (l'lc.:te add to this list the,ie pcq,la repr-,t b\\.lsines:1 carr\nts I have) 8. Ur. Bernd, Ann BrCMm, Gail Quinn, Ouie  (Dr. Bernd a- Pit to :,chedult rncettng) 8:30-9:30 WT\\ Su.Ith West 9:45-10:45 am, f-alr 11:00-12:00 noon, Mabelvllle 1:30-2:30 pm Cloverdale :3:00-5:00 pm S.00-6:00 pm Mmlnistrattoo Bulldtng 8:l0-10\n~ ~ Lcattl on? 11:00-12:00 T1CC'r'I Ann BrCM1n1s Offlce? 1:002:00pm Flannins and PraparaUc,1  Juni1' High SchocJ Tour d Prq,aiet1 Oassr01.,m.~ to Plan Tech1u:fo8}' Lab 2000 lnslallal1m Needs and Cost (Grant Bud \u0026amp;el I)avalq,ment)  C.cst Discussion: (1) Technology I.ab 2000 , (iJ IlnslnNrtng Technology Canputer fadlitles  IdentHytng a-iucat Oreupauonal Areas In Man\\lf acturlng Ungineerl\"'S and Av!Mlc:,n lot Training St1.1dtt\\tt  Job De:,crtptlons and Job Arlelysts  U.S. Dep1utrnent cJ Labcf SCANS Wa-k place C'.a\"l,pete1'1cles\nRelevince to Job Analysts  OccupaUo,al CerUfieatlc.TI (.M .... ..,_ .-......4~ Note: Regarding fir:.l iwo Items above, wlll nood to hlilvc occupaticnal Meas wht1re htrini and training 1J tr!Uc.al. Plea~ h.ivo ruprusuntetivr.i~ !'.ring in(onn.:1lia, (or \\h~ two H~,ns. MA I l 3 .a eaMpla fill wh_. he L~g Bn:el: pt se\n, m:: :op: ueb.  Amend1na,l to It'llerdls:Lrict MA8nat Oc,e6regallon t'lan lo Include six\nunior hlSh school~ nc.W.' high school as A~{~pa~ Mag1,et Pro8l'am Sc.hods 9, Aertpaoe Educ.atton Center 3:00-S\n00 pin  Prcsent.\\tlcn m Pr~~ Magnet - 0-. campaign Leadership L~tton? Bernd and Gail Qutt,n 5ep1t..aar a 10. Dr. lamd, ustelle Matthts, 8:30 11 :30 ftl'n  Currl~1\\um and Progra1n EvaluattO'\\ Dianne Wct\nsJ., Denni I Cluso.v I Ad1\"'1ni1tratl0'\\ Design in11Ulh Ulni\\1A8 Art \u0026amp;Yildlt'lg  Revlaw Cour~awd'k C-.. cnultt~~. Program - Tad'\\naogy t...t\u0026gt; 2000 lt\\tegr11tcd Jivaluatlon Manager P.11cility Ccmputat ll,S, Depl. or Laoot' SCANS Kna.v-He7N ll'ltegratia, Into Ar.adlffl\\lC Cae  f)eslgntng Program Objectlv based en Acadcmtc Achievemant, Job/Werk Sktll C..omp11tency Attainment - Prsr11m Reteonttor, and competim - 1'laC01nc1,t into ~nlry-Level Iiniployment a- Hig\u0026lt;\n,- Educallm - 1'n1ems fa- ma11tcring tmptementatlcn (I7amat1Ve avaluatim and use cJ TQM Me,uure1) ll, Onad( ~~ens (UALR), 1:00-2:30 pm  Peslg1,ing the Arlin.ii alien Agreement G.yla-d Ng-thtcp, (UAL!l.), (2-+ 2+-2) Jerry Rol:anaa\\ (Ha,dar-\"2' Slala U), UAPB) 12, Dr, Bernd, Ed ruc1dtck, nm 3:00-5:00 pm  r1.:\\nntng a New High SChoo1 fer 2,.000 Jietple, Gall QUtnn t\\1dliWltS based on Magnet CoorM11 d stucty and H1Sh Sd1cxi Cwrse, and ReK]uirmwnt9 fer Graduation, Technology L~b 2000 and nth~ r1niputer fadlllles JOHN W. WALKER, P.A. JOHN W. WALKER RALPH WASHINGTON MARK BURNETTE wILEY A. BRANTON, JR AUSTIN PORTER, JR  Also admitted to Practice in Georgia \u0026amp; the District of C.olumbia. Ms. Ann Brown Federal Monitor Office of Desegregation 201 East Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 A'ITORNEY AT LAW 1723 BROADWAY LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72206 TELEPHONE (501) 374-3758 FAX (501) 374-4187 September 10, 1992 Monitoring Re: Aerospace School Dear Ms. Brown: SEP 1 4 \\992 O!l.ic e i D cc\u0026gt;gegatici1 Monitoring O evv I Mr. Walker asked that I provide you and the other persons attending our meeting on Tuesday, September 8, 1992 a copy of the notes that I took. By copy of this letter to the other attendees, I am requesting that they along with yourself review my notes and advise me of any corrections thereof. Thank you again for hosting the meeting. JCS: lm cc: Dr. Mac Bernd Chris Heller, Esq. Mr. James Smith Ms. Mabel Bynum Stephen Jones, Esq. Mr. Bobby Lester Mr. Billy Bowles Sam Jones, Esq. Richard Roachell, Esq . Mr. Dick Holbert Mr. Bill Bowen John W. Walker, Esq. Ms. Debbie Parker Mr. Kirke Herman Re: Proposed Aerospace Magnet School and Museum Date: September 8, 1992 Persons Present: Ann Brown, Monitor Dr. Mac Bernd, LRSD Supt. Chris Heller, Esq. Mr. James Smith, NLRSD Supt. Ms. Mabel Bynum, Asst. Supt. Stephen Jones, Esq. Mr. Bobby Lester, PCSSD Supt. Mr. Billy Bowles, Asst. Supt. Sam Jones, Esq. Richard Roachell, Esq. (Representative) Mr. Dick Holbert, AR Aviation Historical Society Mr. Bill Bowen, Governor's Office John w. Walker, Esq. Ms. Debbie Parker, Joshua Mr. Kirke Herman, Joshua Ms. Joy C. Springer Purpose of Meeting as stated by Ann Brown: to communicate openly regarding the proposed Aerospace School. Ann Brown opened the meeting by stating she had talked at length with the Court regarding the stipulation dated February, 1991. It was the opinion of the Court that the stipulation was no longer binding because the contingencies had not been met. But, the Court also felt that the parties should continue with the spirit of the stipulation. The district attorneys (Jones, Jones and Heller) agreed with the Court that the stipulation was no longer binding because the contingencies had not been met. John Walker, Joshua's attorney disagreed that the stipulation was no longer binding because all parties were aware that LRSD would have to make several grant applications prior to receiving the funds. (He suggested that counsel, monitor and other parties review the transcript on the hearing regarding the Aerospace school) John Walker also commented that he felt the LRSD had not acted in \"good faith\" since their initial grant application because it had not actively pursued the idea of the Aerospace school. He also suggested that the District was not pursuing this endeavor due to lack of funds. A site has been selected for the school, yet a site selection committee was not formulated as required by the Court on other new school construction. Through Holbert's group, they had . . left the impression in the community that the school was strictly intended for gifted students, those of higher economic status. When in fact, the purpose of the agreement was to identify the children of lower economic backgrounds and provide them with greater educational opportunities. Walker also suggested that someone in the District be designated as the contact person regarding the school. Dr. Bernd voiced concerns regarding operating costs, There was some discuss~on regarding students who would attend the school. Stephen Jones suggested that if the student body would also consist of NLRSD, PCS SD and students from outside the Pulaski county districts, then requests for M to M money could be used to help offset the costs. Ann Brown stated that she felt comfortable with the parties meeting and developing plans of action for the school without her having to do so. There was no objection voiced by anyone present that the following should be done immediately: 1) LRSD take a leadership role in the planning and development of the school. 2) The parties need to meet promptly and determine the status of the grant application. 3) The parties need to meet with Ms. Gail Quinn, the grant writer to determine the status of the within the next couple of weeks. 4) The parties need to prepare a new stipulation with timelines included as necessary. The stipulation should not be much different from the original. 5) Joshua, NLRSD and PCSSD should be involved in the planning and development of the school and all related activities. 6) There should be open lines of communications to Joshua, NLRSD, and PCSSD regarding any new developments about the school about. 7) The grant proposal and new stipulation should be submitted to the Court well in advance of December 15th for her approval and other possible recommendations. I / . ~ 0,,tr(1 ~-m 11-/fJtC ~1~clb~~ . # MhhSl~~ ~~~ S' ~ lf9 :/~-p Mltf~~fl ~ 9:wf(U,1i l~ ~ ' I/,' Ob w 1-/ u uu. Sir W-nJ ~( '- jk-t 't/A4 r'v0,/c \u0026lt;ftu-rl /~ - .fifu1t~ ~ N~ ~ - l~ ti l(L -/2 /4- 1w1 tf/,r__, w\nuU,UA- /t::t!. ..e_ - t/lJln\u0026lt;(}u\u0026lt;.\n- (J-/ 5~ gz\nJ ~,.,._,{,!),- - ~--,,l~t\n(t_.r j,!- It~ -- ~ : ajifr\u0026gt;1-'1?\nffrf - ~-rFrPW/ 6] - 11fii.lv1 1s~i~W~J0v- 0$ ft?~ Su ~- ~~ ~ ~ o~~ ')D 7 /J i/4/ fV\\ ~do~~ Ctvt /~/\nt~\nF- s1~ l,t,~ o! ~~ ?17-~~ .____L\nI 7 :i- - Mr. Dick Holbert JOHN A. IUCGS. IV P,0 BOX 1388 LITTLE AOCK, ARKANSA~ 72203 November 25, 1992 Aerospace Education Center P.O. Box 7332 Little Rock, AR 72217 Dear Dick, I appreciate your comments, concerns, and dialog last night at our board meeting. ~ou and the members of the Aerospace Committee should be commended for your dedication to seeking ways to improve our pu~lic schools a.nd community, If only half oft.he parents of our students were as interested in their children's education as your group i~. we would have mo~e resources, fewer problem~, ~nd much better educated kids graduating from our schools. So that there is no rni~tinderstanding on my position on the vote taken last night, I feel it is appropriate this morning to reiterate my feelings on the Aerospace Magnet. Please realize that I speak as John Riggs, patron of the Little Rock Public School District and individual board mnmber and certainly do not speak foi the board a5 a whole. I believe that as I stated last night that the wholP. ided of business and education partnerships are inherently qood for a community. I believe this par Lnership is particularly good for our community because it does meet a business need for qualified employees to fill existing and future jobs, it fills the n~~d of our community for higher paid jobe, and la.::n:ly it al Lt:!1npts to meet the needs of a ~thnically balanced school system. I ~m concerned though abuut the neeJ for additional bri~k and mortar for our school sysL~n1. In my opinion that need ls simply not there. I also will absolutely not support any program no matleL how well intended Lhat will dr~ln resources from our area school~. So where do W8 go from here? I do not bcliHve our school supcrint~ndent 4,~ staff need to spend cxotl.J.i.tant amounts ot time trying to find money to justify this school. I fully expect thern to present to the board whaL reasonable means there are within the school distri~t's bag or tricks that will make this project vi~ble. Our supeL.i.ntendent and staff do not ~r. Dick Holbert ~ovember 25, 1992 E\u0026gt;age 2 have the resources or time to explore other avenues of financing such as lobbying the state legislature or the federal governm~nt for fund~ in ~upport of this endeavor. In my hwnble opinion, we as a school board have put the responsibility for finding innovative sources of funds squarely on your group's back. I believe our school administration will submit two scenarios for funding of this school~ (1) raising the milage rate by a healthy amount\nor (2) closing an cKisting school and draining some resourc9s from area schools. In my opinion nBither of this options is doable. So I ask again, where do we go from here? I would suggest that Mrs. Quinn ask the federal officials what would happen if we slightly changed our grant application and deleted adding a high school and resorted to using for the short term our existing plants. If it would bo possible to mako that slight (in my opinion sinee it has nothing to do with thg quality of aducation) correction after having received this grant, I believe that this proj8ct has more of a chance to be implemented after June 1st. Otherwise, I fear that when all the dust seLtle5 and we see what it will cost to administrate a new high school, the dre~ms of any aerospace program will fade for the foreseeable future. Dick, again I want to thank you for your efforts on behalf of our cchoolc, our community, and especially our kids. A lesser man would have given up long ago, called the dogs, and gone to the house. Let's not lose the dream of tha Aerospace ~ducation Center over issue of brick and mortar~the building and actual locat:.ion wht!rt: these kids are taught means so much less than the concept. Little Rock jr4 cc Dr. Bernd Sincerelr I . I /I // / I ' I _,/\"' ,.,,.-~-i...--- (J ohn\\ A. Riggs, lV P~liq School Doard PO'\u0026amp;! tion 4 Member Little Rock Public Schools Board of Directors \\ . ' , D G 111 S. Bedford St Suite 101 I Burlington, MA 01803 (817) 273-151\u0026amp;4 Fax: (817) 273-0390 901 N. Sttat1 S, Suite 801 Mington, VA 22203 (703) 276-TTO2 Fu: (703) 527-0823 City Naoonal Bank Plaza 606 Wilshire BNd Suite 706 Santa Monica, CA 90401 {310) 394-8599 Fax (310) 394-0034 DEFENSE GROUP INC. Corporate Office: 307 Annandale Road, Falls Church, VA 22042-2400, (703) 532-0802/Fax: (703) 5320806 Mr. Thomas F. McLarty 3 Greenbriar Rd Little Rock Arkansas 72207 Dear Mack\nAnnapolis, Maryland 23 December 1992 This letter has two purposes\nthe first is to thank you for the enormous task you have undertaken for the good of our Country as Chief of Staff to President Clinton. We have recently had several vivid examples of how critical this position is to both the wellbeing of the President and the routine functions of governance. Bill is to be congratulated for his acumen in making this outstanding selection, and you have our very best wishes for the coming years. The second purpose is to follow up on our brief conversation at the National Advisory Board meeting about the Arkansas Aerospace Education Center (AEC). I asked if you felt comfortable that this important project is on track, and you said that you were, given its current support by all involved. We have worked this project very hard here in Washington and have a significant degree of support within the Departments of Education, Transportation (FAA) and Defense (Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency(DARPA)) and at NASA. The AEC is seen as a pilot program that can be used by technology innovators to bring educational techniques and standards up to the requirements of the evolving workplace. These sponsors are, I believe, poised to bring interactive simulation systems, earth terminals for remote aerospace systems and new concepts of learning to Little Rock as the AEC concept develops. While I am certainly less attuned to the commitment of key players there in Little Rock than members of the leadership committee, I have an uncomfortable feeling that this entire project ultimately depends upon the enthusiasm and determined support of the Little Rock School Board and the educational system in Arkansas it represents. In my own discussions with several members of the board, I did not find the commitment necessary to make this program work\nthe issue is not whether or not Little Rock has enough high schools or whether the operating budget five years hence can support an \"An Equal Opportunity Employer\" . ' .. .. ' additional facility, the reality is that the present school system does not provide the education and training young people need to enter the workforce and survive in an increasingly changeable environment. The beauty of the magnet school program at the AEC is that it is not designed for geniuses, who will always find their way, but for a wide spectrum of motivated students, including the disadvantaged, which constitutes the basic resource of the Arkansas aerospace industry. Some of the discussions about the AEC in Washington may have been premature, but they were undertaken at appropriate levels within the Bush administration to avoid any connotation of a porkbarrel project brought here by the transition. The new team thus has a foundation on which to build and important continuity at the \"action officer\" level. The continued help of the Arkansas Congressional delegation should assure that the AEC concept will flourish and can perhaps be extended to meet similar needs elsewhere in our nation. None of this will happen, however, if the Little Rock School Board does not vigorously support the grant application in February to the Department of Education and the approval next June of the building plan. Strong support for the AEC by Dr. Mac Bernd, the School District Superintendent, is particularly critical and it appears, based upon the minutes of a recent meeting, lacking. I know I am catching you on this vital subject at the moment of your departure, but I also know that your stature and deep involvement in a variety of public matters there in Little Rock give your views weight that few others enjoy. Anything you can do to build consensus within the Board for the AEC will be greatly appreciated. Again, best wishes in your new responsibility. William N. Small 2878 Riva Road Annapolis, Maryland 21401 Most sincerely, \\ _-:, \\ \\) , L L W.N. Small LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 W. MARKHAM STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 FAX (501) 324 - 2032 DATE TO FROM ~i::::::c SENDER'S PHONE # 5, c/- di/()\nJ__ SUBJECT  ~~SU s~ SixmJnstructins Faz PhD N-,,,, _____ Spud Diat_L--_ FOR DATA PROCESSING OFFICE USE ONLY Transmitted By --------Date _____ Time __ _ R 03191 Fortune favors the P. O.Box 7332  Llctll! Roclc.Atkansu72217 501.371.0331 December 2, 1992 NadonaJ Advisory Board Or. Eddie Anderso~ Col. Walter J. Boyne LL Gen. Benjamin 0 . Davis Geo. Affi-ed G. Hansen Phillip S. Woodruff Hononuy Chairmen Herschel H. Frid.iy MayorSharonM. Priest As you probably know, last Tuesday the Little Rock\n\"'\":'o~P/~kefeller School Board passed a resolution to pursue a $8 million ac   rep eos Federal Magnet School Assistance Grant to fund a  new Litt1eRock5cboolDi tri ctaerospace magnet high school at Adams Field and programs at D,. ci1~:\n\"~~\n,'~B rnd three junior high feeder schools. Campaign Leadership Wllliam H. \u0026amp;wen Or.airman Richard N. Holbert Viu . Chairman Marion B. Burton Prtsidtnt J, Dan Baker J. W. Buddy\" Benafield 0. W:iyne Bennett W'tlllim C. Br.icas Henry A. Broach Rep. !rm.a Hunter Brown F. Taylor Bro\\Vl\"l David M. Clark F~ K. Darngh, Jr. Dennis 0. Davi:s Lee Frazier Charles I!. Harper Sen. Jrry Jw.U E.RayKemp John Lewellen Donn, K. Mel.arty \u0026gt;alldyS. McMath F'reduickJ. Menz ,dwvu M. Penick. Sr. b1lh Remmel ,dgar K. Riddick. Jr. a.mes R. Rodgers .ucicnM.Taillac :harles M. Taylor im Guy Tucker itace Acfvfsory Board Ir. G\u0026lt;raid P. Carr lathan Gordon :Obert A Gordon 'oLAibert Hart tr. William R Pogue ou~ L Ramsay lajor General James A Ryan I. M. ~ wia- Sanerfield,Jr. ol Charles ) . Wax evelopment Counsel On the surface, this resolution brings the concept of the Aerospace Education Center full circle, restoring the original plan for the museum to be built in conjunction with a high school serving grades 10 through 12. We are pleased that the resolution brought the high school facility back to the Adams Field location, and confirmed the commitment of up to $10 million in funds for construction of the school. However, we must also recognize that the project, and our work, is far from over. The Board made clear that there are many unanswered questions, and ut the burden on f nding most o _the answe.rs-OlL.U.S who have worked so hard and so long bringing this project from an ambitious idea to a point _.., where it is one step away from reality. Let us not b misle -- this last step is a long and difficult one.  -To k:eep. the progress toward construction of the Aerospace Education Center moving forward, we had compromised with the school administration to place the aerospace high school programs in an existing school and to change the plans for the on-site facility from a high school to a junior high. This was done to address one of the primary obstacles to moving the grant application (and thus the entire project) forward, namely the shortage of space in junior high schools in the District . However, the Board failed to accept the recommendation of the administration, and as an alternative voted four to two to pursue the Federal Grant application for the on-site facility as a senior high school. While we are pleased with the ultimate vote to restore the visionary concept of the Aerospace Education Center, many facts became clear during Tuesday's meeting. First and foremost, the Superintendent and a majority of Board members feel that they are under no obligation to follow through with the commitment to fund the $6 million . _construction cost of the aerospace high school facility, as passed by the voters in the 1990 millage election. While the Board members are unquestionably supportive of the concept of the Aerospace Education Center, they do not feel, as we do, that the voters mandated the construction of the aerospace high school. This is fundamental to understanding the perspective which the Board members and Dr. Bernd have toward this project. Much of our effort to date, including the assistance we have provided toward the Federal Magnet School Grant process, has been based on our resumption of this commitment. 'Ihe Board's actions last week made it clear tha e aerospace sc ool, in whatever form, must again prove its viability. Secondly, it is clear that some Board members fail to see the broader vision of excellence in education that the Aerospace Education Center represents, and see it as a competing interest which will only siphon resources away from what they see as higher priorities. This view of the community as \"competing interests\" is one of the major obstacles to creating any broad-based endeavor such as the AEC. Fortunately, we are confident that a majority of Board members do not fall in~o this category. However, ] we must be vigilant about this attitude, which could manifest in such actions as playing one school or one group (e.g~, teachers, parents from other schools) against another during budget deliberations. The Board and Administration is properly concerned about pending budget deficits, and is frightened by any activity which could adversely affect this problem. While they can clearly see (and identify) any potential cost associated with the aerospace magnet, they fail to fully realize its potential for obtaining new revenues which would positively affect the District's financial picture, including the Federal Magnet School Grant. Finally, the Board acknowledged that another millage election would soon be necessary. Previously, we were asked to support a millage because the construction funds for the aerospace magnet were included, and we worked tirelessly for its successful passage. We are now in a situation whereby the administration and the Board could require that we support yet another millage increase to fund the operations of the aerospace magnet. Although, requiring that we support an additional increase in order for the District to pursue the aerospace magnet is tantamount to asking for us to pay for something twice, it is a possibility that we must consider. Following the successful 1990 millage campaign, we were told that the funds were available for construction of the aerospace school. We set forth to meet our goal of $6.5 million for construction of the museum, and we are now within about $1 million of completing that campaign. As we drew near meeting our obligation, the District pointed out that they did not have operational funds for the school. Following the disastrous application f or _u4 J(J ct,.. rk(.I.H ~ I I 'l c I I u the Federal Magnet School Grant in 1991, we agreed to pay (through the g~nerosity of the Winthrop Rockefeller Foundation) for a qualified outside consultant (Gail Quinn) to write the 1992 grant application. The plan that Ms. Quinn developed in conjunction with the District's professional staff would provide for Federal funds to completely equip the aerospace high school and three junior highs with computers and other needs, and pay for the -training and salaries of the teachers for two years. Now, the District has charged us with the additional burden of either3,1 providing or identifying the source of funding for five years following the school's opening. Obviously, this is a serious obstacle to our efforts, an makes it clear that unless we make every effort to convince or compel them, pthaer tnDeirssthriipc.t can't, or won't, live up to their financial obligations to this In the past, you have given great assistance in bringing the Aerospace Education Center to existence. Now, we must c~ll er. you again not only fo~ advice as to how we should proceed, but to ask you to become more personally involved in whatever course we may take. ~ Your dedication to this project of your time and financial resources is deeply appreciated. Now we are moving into the final phase of the Center's dinevvoellvoepmmeenntt.. Critical decisions mu~ be made, and we want  and need your We have scheduled a meeting of \u0026lt;11ir Campaign Leadership for Friday, Di\nzember 11th at 10:30 a.m.in tn,z 4th floor board room of the First \u0026lt;tommercial Bank Building, C~ol and Broadway Streets in Little Rock. Your kttendence at this impo~t meeting can be confirmed by calling Catherine Johnson at 371-03,J- 1\\t the meeting, we will discuss our options, and the ~~~$- -we 11\\US.t--take to ensure that this vital project continues to move For mucb 'of our campaign, we have been patient with the Little Rock School Distrii(:t' s Qa.Ssiye role in these e\"grts~ Now, we must -t..a.ke. a ~\"!_uch .\ni\nere actl.Jl~.le to ensure that our dream of excellence in education i1, Arkansas wil.ll. t\nvthta co 'pass. forwaPrdl etaos es heeakineg eyvoeur yt heefnf.o rt to attend the meeting on December ilth, I look RNH/IJlj Sincerely, Richard N. Holbert Vice Chairman Aerospace Education Center 7 r MEMO TO: FROM: DATE: RE: Aerospace Education Campaign Leadership Catherine Johnson December 14, 1992 AEC December 11, 1992 Meeting Minutes Attending: Guests: Wayne Bennett F. Taylor Brown Marion Burton Nathaniel Curtis - Nathaniel Curtis Riddick \u0026amp; Heiple Jim Dailey -LR Vice Mayor Seth Ward LR Airport Commission Dr. Joe Calhoun Rev. Hero Donovan Bob Gordon Dennis Glasgow -LR School District Science Supervisor Willie Hamilton - LRSD Board Charles Harper Richard N. Holbert E.RayKemp John Lewellen Fred Menz Ed Penick, Sr. Ruth Remmel -~ . - , Ed Riddick -Twig Satterfield Charles M. Taylor II. Update on Recent Developments with Little Rock School District Robert Wilson LR Airport Commission Richard N. Holbert AEC Vice-Chairman _ ____________ ... - Mr. Holbert opened the meeting by stressing that the purpose of this and subsequent meetings was intense feedback. Beginning with the LRSD Resolution he outlined the points contained therein, noting the conditional terms for District commitment and support: 1. The $10 million allocated for construction, 2. Approval by the US District Court of the plan, and - 3. The AEC generate operating funds for the school for 5 years. Holbert defined operating funds as those costs incremental to running a high school, noting that a similar school would cost $4.5 million annually, but because this is a magnet school the costs would be off-set by \"M to M\" rransfer funds, grant monies and st.ate rurnback funds available for students outside the LRSD. Holbert also noted that according to the resolution, funding for the first year would be covered by the grant since the only grade would be the 10th. In 1995, funding should still not present a problem as only the 10th and 11th grades would be operational. By 1996, the full pipeline however, would require funding as grades 10-12 would be operational. The resolution, he noted, does not address the larger issue of what the district's \"needs\" are as verbally expressed in the November 24 LRSD Board meeting . Holbert said that between now and next June it is critical to instill in the LRSD Board members' minds exactly what the AE school vision TiiVmVes, it's goals and specific detm.itions of e motivating programs ffiat will be offered. \"If the program is successful,\" he said\" it will be the fore-runner for more public and private partnerships in the community, creating new sources of revenue and support for the District. Howev~r, if it is successful, it may require more \"Brick and Morta( after all.\" He further noted that if the District does not proceed with the AEC plans, even though District officials may operate the district properly, they will still be left with the same old district, one that shows gradual, inevitable deterioration. Holbert noted that over the last five years the LRSD lost over 1,000 students, while surrounding schools, both public and private, gained in attendance. In order to increase commitment and enthusiasm among the LRSD Board, Holbert suggested the AEC Leadership develop a strategy, and he proposed the following options: 1. Change the message to the LRSD Board: There is a certain probability that litigattt]on may force all members of the LRSD Board to sit in a special election between now and June of 93. Sourcing five years of funding may not become that big of an issue with the Board if new Board members are elected. 2. Find the Money: With Bill Clinton - an advocate of the AEC School/Museum - in the White House, there is greater probablility than ever before that the facility can be designated as a National Aerospace Education Center or Demonstration Project If that occurs, not only could the facility be eligible for operating expenses, but cost of equipment, construction costs and museum operating expenses. Congress could approve appropriations for the project, but likely not before October 1993. Keep in mind that our project timeline is June of 1993. Having Congress approve such appropriations is not unusual, Holbert explained, noting that a similar 16:06 '0'501 324 2032 I. R School Dist  DOM i4J 006 / 009 $20 million request was before FAA Director of Aviation Phil Woodruff last week, and that Senator Dale Bumpers just last year procured $2.5 million for an Aviation Science Building at Henderson State University in Arkadelphia, Arkansas. 3. Charter School concept: Minnesota recently passed a statute funding charter schools - hybrids between public and private schools with classes and criteria to meet public education standards and operations managed by private sectors. Holbert said there is hope that legislation will be drafted for presentation to the State Legislature in January that wil allow the AEC to operate the school itself. This holds particular appeal if the LRSD Board does not show enthusiasm and commitment to the project, provided that the AEC can raise the money. He urged the AEC to consider enacting some sort of mechanism to put this concept of a charter school into effect - if the School District won't embrace the project John Lewellen pointed out that the scope of the desegregation impact should be broadened to a statewide level Marion Burton echoed that thought, saying that what has not yet occurred to the LRSD is the impact this school would have on desegregation. Burton also emphasized that while the AEC Leadership believes the concept of aviation courses is advantageous, there is a larger reaon he and every other member is all involved in the project. That is to correct the number one obstacle to continued economic development in the community - the reputation of the Little Rock School District. Lewellen responded by urging all present to make it clear to the LRSD Board that this school~a mechanism that will greatly impact desegregation. LRSD Board , member .W.illie. Hamilton_agreed.thal.the_primary .value of this project.is..the impactit...will.hal'.e __ _ on desegregation and he believes it is important to push that point  Ill. Status Report Richard N. Holbert Requirements for LRSD Grant Application to US Dept of Education Holbert explained that because the Federal Guidelines were received late, the deadlinefor the grant application was extended to February 1, 1993, which gives the AEC and LRSD time to finetune the grant request He stated that Catherine Johnson and Gail Quinn are traveling to Washington DC this week to meet with the Department of Education in the first of several reviews on the grant Holbert reminded the AEC that the US District Court must also approve the application, as well as all parties involved the the lawsuit Ann Brown of the Office of Desegregation Monitoring has kept Judge Webber Wright abreast of the progress and all looks positive. Holbert noted one concern he has addressed with Mac Bernd, LRSD Superintendent - that if and when the US Department of Education calls the District offices seeking clarification on a particular passage in the grant application, an unimpressed, uninformed representative answers the call, the entire project could go down the drain. Holbert has encouraged Bernd to make certain that any such call is channeled to an advocate of the project - someone who shows enthusiasm and has a working knowledge of the project Holbert reiterated that a real champion for the school must be found within the District He said it is as though the District invited the AEC Leadership and AAHS to participate in...thfilgame, to plan to include a school with the planned museum. Then, when the AEC' s friend within the District (Reville) was unfortunately killed, the District began to change it's tune - acting as though the AEC was pushing the concept~ forgetting that it was the District who had reached out to the AEC and AAHS.  IV. Formation of LRSD Task Force Richard N. Holbert Holbert informed the AEC that he had sent out a letter to Bernd and the LRSD Board informing them that a Task Force is being formed to focus on the common issues relative to the creation of the Aerospace Magnet high school. The Task Force will be comprised of members of the following: V. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Office of Desegregation Mouitor Litigants to the Pulaski County Desegregation Case Representatives of the City of Little Rock, State of Arkansas, and LR Airport Commission Arkansas Aviation Historical Society Museum Committee Little Rock School District Superintendent Fundraising Report Ed Penick, Sr. Chairman  Capital Campaign Committee Penick noted that funds raised to date total $5,443,756.00 against the $6.5 million needed. However, he reminded the Board, that money must be raised that the April 13, 1993 in order to receive $500,000 challenge grant from the Mabee Foundation. Although that deadline may be extended, he noted that this leaves little time to complete the fundraising. He urged the  12 / 28 / 92 16:08 '5'501 324 2032 LR School Dist  ODM ~ 007 / 009 AEC members to sign up for the Capital Campaign committee to raise the funds, or to forward names of foundations not yet solicited. He asked that any such suggestions be forwarded quickly as many foundations meet on a quarterly basis, and we need to get a request in before the first quarter of 1993 passes. Penick said he favors the solicitation of major gifts rather than the timeconsuming task of randomly seeking $1,000 gifts- although if some such requests are in the works, don't tum them down! Penick reported that the Kresge Foundation had declined the AEC request, but added that Catherine plans to meet in Washington DC with contacts for foundations applicable to the AEC project. He further suggested that many local requests for major gifts remain at a \"no response\" stage. He said those contacts will be approached again soon. VI. Architecture Marion Burton Program Building Design Chairman - Architecture Committee Mr. Furton reported that the Architecture Committee had already had a number of meetings and discussions incorporating ideas into the ultimate design. Thankfully, he noted, now.that the LRSD has decided on a high school facility, the roadblock has been opened and the architects can focus on an appropriate design. Mr. Nathaniel Curtis of Nathaniel Curtis, Riddick and Heiple reported that a December 10th meeting on architecture resulted in d.\"awings that will allow for very reasonable cost estimates. Mr. Riddick expressed, however, a strong need to . receive input from LRSD on building-classroom use so as to detail the design plans. \"Right now,\".hCsSaid~'-our.knowl.ajge.,af. what n~_t9.be there consists_Q( ~tio_n fro~.!..._,__-- ___ _ schools and Gail Quinn, but every school's architecture needs spccializea input, and we need an  opportunity to meet with school district people on detail and design - not just on philosophy.\" He noted that the museum portion of the design has received a wealth of input and very exciting plans are developing, however, the architects must have the plans for the school done, bids in and pricing by June of 1993 in order to make the 1994 deadline. Board Member Hamilton said even though the School Board suffers from lack of enthusiasm , the recent job descriptions handed out at the District should alleviate the some of that. These job descriptions related to concerns of District staff, and Hamilton said he now believes the AEC will see improved results due to these definitions. Dennis Glasgow, Supervisor of Sciences at the district offered this explanation\nthat a lack of enthusiasm on the part of LRSD personnel may be due to lack of knowledge and involvement, saying that the information regarding AEC has not filtered down past the superintendent. He noted that he, too, attended the December 10 architecture meeting and retu.-ned to his staff with ideas on what needs are, and what courses could be offered in specific technology and arts\ni.e. if no competitive sports will be offered at the school, an alternative physical education program can be devised. Glasgow reported that Doug Eaton, the main contact inside the District for the architects, is most anxious to become involved in building design. He stated now that the high school bas been identified as the focus project, the LRSD staff will increase their production and input. Holbert noted that in the past the AEC Leadership bad offered to meet with various school district personnel to bring them up to speed and instill enthusiasm, however those offers were rebuffed. He said that maybe now is the time to try again, particularly since Bernd told Holbert after the November 24th Board meeting that he (Bernd) now felt as though he had his \"marching orders\" from the Board members. Riddick followed this thought by offering to Glasgow and Hamilton to host meetings for LRSD staff to discuss ideas, review presentations, and to notify the LRSD in general of meetings open for their attendance. Holbert underscored this idea of amplified input by saying the full AEC Leadership and appropriate LRSD parties will be given notice regarding Col. Walter Boyne's meeting on December 18, 1992 with the architects on exhibit structure and design (see irem X on Page 4 ). Further, he told Hamilton and Glasgow, when the LRSD holds meetings on other topics relating to the AEC project, i.e. curriculum discussions, the AEC would gladly send a representative so as to arrive at decision via a collaborative process. Mr. Curtis advised the AEC that recent conversations had been conducted with Dr. Bobby Roberts of the Central Arkansas Library System regarding the library construction. Glasgow noted that the library and its capabilities were of particular interest as the proposed curriculum called for a number of classes to meet in the library. Riddick reported that particularly with possible millage elections for the library system in the near future, a very real possibility existed that the city could operate the library, paying for it's costs. He warned that there would be considerable obstacles to cross before this occurred, but that it was doable. Marion Burton echoed that belief, adding that as the AEC library would serve three aspects - school library, public library and an archival library - the entire facility could be a great asset to the library system. Additionally for the library, Holbert reported plans are being laid to acquire artifacts and archives from Bell Aircraft, an exciting supplement to the already impressive collection being VIL Public Relations Effort Marion Burton Marion Bunon noted a vast blank exists under the Public Relations Committee on the Organization Chan for Committee Assignments. He urged anyone interested to volunteer for this imponant aspect of the campaign. He explained that this committee must bring professional educators (LRSD) and the general public up to speed on the Aerospace. school and museum. He offered that should anyone know of someone to chair this committee, to forward the name quickly as this committee's work will be imperative. vm. F. Taylor Brown, Chairman Procurement/Exhibit Design Museum of Aviation History Taylor Brown announced that he had volunteered to chair the committee to review the IMAX proposal and exhibit acquisitions. He said that Col. Walter Boyne and his vast knowledge of the Smithsonian exhibits and Admiral William Small's Naval museum knowledge would allow for great input, but Taylor also desires other contacts to be identified as sources for procurement. He further asked for volunteers and names of people locally who aren't afraid to get their hands dirty to work with him on this assignment Reg~g the!MAX~ Br~~-\naidth--\ni itsh~uldbe -a major pan of the Ac~space ficllliy'asTt'-\"---\u0026gt; ~,-----will be a big attraction, and the charge for viewing of the IMAX presentation will provide operating funds. He announced that a letter of intent will soon be signed with the IMAX manufacturers to lock in 1992 costs, yet it will not prohibit the AEC to back out of the deal should something go wrong. IX. Committee Structures Richard N. Holbert Holbert closed by noting that there are a lot of blanks on the Committee Assignment chart, and that tremendous work must be done between now and June. He urged everyone to identify an area in which they could assist and notify either the committee chairman or him, and then - roll up their sleeves. X. Mark Your Calendar5 The Architecture Committee meeting with Col. Walter Boyne on Exhibit Design is open to all interested parties. It is scheduled for Friday, December 18th at 1:30 p.m. in the offices of Nathaniel Curtis, Riddick and Heiple, 1600 First Commercial Bank Building at Capitol and Broadway Streets in Little Rock. Campaign Leadership Committee Assignments Aerospace Education Center r .., .., / National \"'I Honorary Chairmen Chairman Advisory Board 1 Herschel Friday William H. Bowen Dr. Eddie Anden\no~ Jack Stephens Col. Walter J. Boyn'e Win Rockefeller Lt. Gen. Benjamin 0. Davis '- Mayor Sharon Priest Gen. Alfred G. Hanr.en / \"'I Admiral William N. Small r State Advisory Board \"\" Vice Chairman Phillip S. Woodrutlf Richard N. Holben '-. Dr. Gerald P. Carr Hon. Nathan Gordon \\..\nRoben A. Gordon r '\\ 'I Dr. William R. Pogue Campaign Louis L. Ramsay Counsel \\ Ma~ -Gen. James A.:Piean Catherine Johnson i '- M. . \"Twig\" Sane 1eld \\.. ~ ,I.----'--- ., ' I ' I I I I ' / r \" 1 Capital .., r \"' r \" r .., r \"'I LRSD Little Rock Government Public Architecture Procurement Administration School Board ,campaign Funding Relations Chairman Chairman Chairman Chairman Chairman Chairman chairman Richard N. Holben Richard N. Holben Ed Penick, Sr. Catherine Johnson (interim) Marion Burton F. Taylor Brown Charles Harper Sen. Jerry Jewell Marion Burton RuthR..\"llllllel Rep. Irma Brown F.dRiddick Adm. Bill Small Carter Burwell Henry Broach Lucien Taillac Win Rockefeller Ge. Wm. Smith Rep. Irma Brown Caner Burwell Wayne Benneu Buddy Benafield Bobby Roberts Sid Wilson Herb Donovan Louis Ramsay Donna McLany Ruth Remmel Fr'ed Menz Sen. Jerry Jewell Frank White Jim Dailey Herschel Friday Bob Gordon Twilg J. Dan Baker sa1terfielc E.RayKemp i\n\\.. \\.. \\.. '-. '-. \\.. \\.. 1, I r \" Exhibit Design Chainnan F. Taylor Brown Bill Bracas Walter J. Boyne Bob Diffee Fred Menz Twig Satterfielc Dr. Joe Calhoun \\.. .... \"' \" \"0\"0 \"' ' \"\" a, ~ \"0 ' .\"0. \", \"\" r \"' \"Cl' :,- 0 .0.. . .0. . \"r't 0 0 \"' I] 0 0 \"'-' 0 0 \"' DEC-30-92 WED 11:58 US Disl Cl Lillie Rock FAX NO. 5013246096 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, VS, LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT KO. 1, ET AL., MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL,, MRS, KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL,, 0 R.D E_R P. 02 PLAINTIFF, DEFKNDA~\"I'S , INTERVENORS , INTERVENORS. Following telephone notice to counsel, a heartng is hereby scheduled for 9:30 a.m. on Monday, January 25, 1993, One issue to be addressed at the hearing is the Little Rock School District's ,----aerospace magn~ t~ppl ication. This Court's Order of May 1, 1992 rejected an earlier proposal to modify the settlement plan to eliminate language concerning the possible construction of a new junior high in the district, The Court, it that order, directed that the \"parties conduct a careful review of j1.mior high capacity and its immediate and long term impact on programmatic needs and/or intradistrict and M-to-M needs,\" Because of its interrelatedness to the aerospace magnet application, the second issue to be addressed at the hearing is the results of the study conducted pursuant to that Order. The parties are directed to provide the Court and the Federal ~ Honi tor with copies of the propos~appl ica.tion and the results of the junior high school study, together with copies of other DEC-30-92 WED 11:59 US Dist Ct Little Rock FAX NO. 5013246096 P. 03 proposed exhibits for the hearing and any briefs they feel are necessary, on or before 12:00 noon on Friday, January 15, 1993. It is so ordered this ____ _ day of December, 1992, United States District Judg= From : QUALITY CON ECTiml =ERVICES PHOl!E No. : 310 598 6773 FAX# Gail Quinn Quality Connection Services 5171 Lampson Ave. Los Alrunitos, CA 90720 Phone \u0026amp; FAX (310) 598-6773 Signed: ... ~ Jan.22 1993 6:25AM P0l From : QUALITY CONNECTIOl'-1 SERVICES PHOl'-IE No. 310 598 6773 Jan.22 1993 6:26AM P02 I. Background Information A. Greater Metropolitan Little Rock Gre.ater Little Rock')\nfuur 1.,\nounty Metropolitan Statistical area (MSA) is the center of the second fastest growing rei\niun ln the United States. Today with a metropolitan area spanning a seventy-mile radius, Greater Little Rock MSA is home to over 513,000 people. Jn the last quarter century, the Greater Little Rock MSA has almost doubled its population - approaching 1,200,000. North Little Rock, lhe third largest community with a population of 62,000, nnd Little Rock are separated by the Arkansas River in Pulaski County. Twenty-seven percent of the MSA 's population is under 18 years of age. Forty-four percent of the population is within the 18-44 ag~ range. According to the 1990 Census, the population was cent black, percent white. Little Rock's central location places it within 550 miles of forty percent of the United States buying JX)Wer and population. The $1.3 billion dollar Arkansas Navigation System, one of the nation's largest water development projects, is a 445 mile waterway providing year-round access to ports on the Arkansas River from the Mississippi River to Tulsa, Oklahoma. The 1,500 acre port with its industrial harbor Foreign Trade Zone - 14. and the United States Customs Port of Entry are indication of the increasing importance of Little Rock's linkage to ports worldwide. All are in close proximity to Adams Field, Little Rock's airport. The city's rich mixture of historic architecture and new development is attracting new residents. Little Rock is seeing growth and revitalization unparalleled in the city's history. Little Rock is on the move. Fueling this revitalization are the aerospace industries, the Arkansas Aviation Historical Society, the Governor's Aerospace Task Force, and institutions of higher education. Some of the world's most successful aerospace companies are located here: McDonnell Douglas, Rohr Inc., Arkansas Aerospace (a subsidiary of British Aerospace), Falcon Jet owned by French-based Avions Dassault Brequet Aviation, MidCoast, and Central Flying Service. Numerous private and corporate aircraft dealers such as Aero-Commander, Piper, Beechcraft, and Cessna have facilities at 01e Little Rock Regional Airport. Little Rock Airforce Base is home to the largest C-130 aircraft training facility in the world. A number of major educational institutions serve Little Rock's MSA, By far, the largest of U1csc is the University of Arkansas at Little Rock (UALR), enrolling more than 11,000 students in seventy-five undergraduate and forty-two graduate degree programs including Associate, Bachelor and Ma)\nters of Science Degrees in Engineering Technology. The Graduate Institute of Technology (GIT) housed in the new Engineering Technology Center offers course~ in mechanical, computer science, electrical and manufacturing engineering. Industries utilize GIT facilities for advanced research and graduate study. In 1991, the Arkansas Space Grant Consortium, under the leadership of GIT al UALR, received a four-year tl\"'d.ining grant From : QUALI TY CClt EC T IO~I '3ERl.) I CES PHONE No. 310 598 6773 Jan. 22 1993 6 :32AM PHJ from the NASA National Space Grant College and Fellowship program. The primary purpose of the progrnm is to educate and familiaru.e faculty and undergraduate and graduate srudent.s with aero~pacc fundamentals and NASA's research programs and opportunities. A secotldary objective is to motivate K-12 students to excel in math and science courses necessary for entrance into aerospace prognum\nat the universities and high tech positions in industry. Henderson University, in coordination with Ceut.rn.l Flying Service, conducts one of the few aviation degree programs in the nation. The University's Department of Aviation provides four-year programs in Airway Science.Management, Airway Computer Science, I\u0026gt;rofessiona1 Pilot, and Aircraft Systems Management The Arkansas Aviation Historical Society serves the entire state as the focal for the involvement of Arkansas' aerospace industries in community affairs, education, and economic development. In 1989, the Society, executives of aerospace companies, the Little Rock School District, and UALR came together to form the Aerospace Education Center (',ampaign Leadership and plan an Aerospace Education Center. As the architect's drawing illustrates, the Center combines a museum of aviation history with an Aerospace Technology Magnet High School on a 19.8 acre tract at the Little Rock Regional Airport adjacent to the main terminal, Falcon Jet. and Arkansas Aerospace. The facility will cover 200,000 square feet, including common areas used by both the museum and high school such as the library, cafeteria, and the auditorium. Part of the upper level of the museum will function as an educational resource for adult programs, and outreach for schools, state and nationwide through a satellite television uplink provided by the Arkansas Electric Cooperatives. The most comprehensive and largest technical and historical aviation and aerospace library collection outside of the Smithsonian's National Air and Space Museum was acquired for the Arkansas Museum of Aviation History. Virtually every civil and military aircraft, rotocraft, and spaceship designed and constructed throughout the world is represented in the collection by teclmical specifications, photographs, and historical descriptive information. There are well over 5,000 books, 50,000 journals, 200,000 photographs and transparencies, hundreds ofrare collectable items signed by famous pilots and aviation personalities, original paintings, scale aircraft models, and unique aircraft parts. The Society has raised over 5.4 million dollars in gifts and pledges for construction of the aviation history museum. 111e Little Rock School District has budgeted six million dollars for the construction of the Aerospace Technology Magnet High School from funds approved by voters at a property tax election in 1990. The Aerospace Education Center Campaign Leadership believes that Greater 1.ittle Rock's future rests on the vit.tlity of its public education system. At all levels of the public education system, educators and industry must develop programs which give students the k-nowledgc and skills that enable them to reach their full potential. While the Center will prepare students for aerospace careers, it will also focus the Central Arkansas community on commitment to excellence in e.ducation. 2 From: QUALITY CONNECTIOH SERVICES PHOHE No. 310 598 6773 Jar, . 22 1993 6: 31AM P0'3 @ ~15/185 @\n.la114 I @0/Y\\if @ ?--? B. School Districts in Pulaski County There are three school districts in Pulaski County - Little Rock, Pulaski County and North P ,, Little Rock- all of which are o~ti11g court-ordered desegregation plans. Because stttdent.s from these districts will be allowed to partlcipate in U1e Aerospace Technology Magnet Program, each of these districts will be describe\u0026lt;l below. The map on the opposite page shows the three school clistrict.11. l. I .ittle Rock School District The Little Rock School District, which wm opetate the lnterdistrict Aerospace Tech,1olosy Program, encompasses an area in excess of 100 square miles and is the largest. school district in the state in termA. of enrollment. Enrollment in the s~ools has increased frorfP2.5,856 pupils in October 1990 t~6.212 pupils in October of 1992. rhis increase has occurred at the junior and senior high levels and with the black student enrollment. The percent of black student population exceeds the District 64% average in grades 5 - 9. The highest percent black student enrollment is 69% in grade 8. Of the District's 50 schools, 36 enroll pre-kindergarten or kindergarten through grade 6 students, eight enroll grades 7 through 9 students, and five enroll grade 10 through 12 students.* Educational program/ school choices include Incentive Schools, intcrdistrict magnet schools for students in grades K-12, and elementary area schools. Chart A outlines the number and type of school programs. The text below Chart A defines each type of school and the rationale for selecting certain schools in this project Chart A - The Oraanlzatlonal Plan for Little Rock School Type School and/or Elementary, Junior High, High Sc:hool, Edusa1tfQ0 Pr~gram gr.ades@~~K\n~ K-6 SHiHjH 7 ~-9 . g[l:!~H lOlZ a) Area Schools 5 2 b) Incentive SchOols 7 NIA N/A c) lnterdistrict Magnet Schools @6 3 3 d) lnterdlstrlct Nonmagnet Schools 1 NIA N/A Total 36 8 5 a) Area Schools - Elementary schools which have a defined attendance zone arc called Area Schools. Dach Area School feeds into a panicular junior high and senior high school. The instructional program focuses on language arts, mathematics, science, and ~!~JiU~~iri~~~so~l~i!t We1[h1!}[!Jflml1 nnmr nf mnn mm ~n~nnl~ ~m \"'The unaccounted for school is the Metropolitan Vo-Tech Centec @s 3 M\"' ~,\nt l }r ,) I From : QUAL! TY COi 1NECTI mi SERIJ ICES PHCll'-1E No. 310 5'38 67-:'3 Jan. 22 1993 6 :30AM P08 b) In~ntiye Schools - Incentive Schools are Pre-K-Gmde 6 elementary schools locate.d ~thin the imme\u0026lt;Uate downtown area. The pcrccnl Black student enrollment for Jncentiw Schools ranges from 69% to 97%. These schools re\u0026lt;:eivc a\u0026lt;l\u0026lt;litional financial resources to provide te.acher-student ratio 1 :20, adililional instructional aides, permanent substitute teachers, and extended day-week-year learning oppurlunilies. An individual ICM1ing plan is developed for each student based on disU-ict K-6 core curriculum. Computetassisted instruction, a student homework hotline, a parenting skills center, and a program for tour-year olds are additional features that distinguish incentive from area elementary schools. c) Interdisajct MMoet Schools - As Chart A illustrates, interdistrict magnet schools have been established at all three school levels - elementary, junior high, and senior high. Although operated by the Little Rock School District, students from North Little Rock School District and Pulaski County Special Sch9Al District (PCSSJ)are eligible for enrollment in accordance with the desegregation pJ_a.W,f,A.11 interdistrict magnet schools are raciall~ balanced within the acceptable range o/635-~9 percent black to 41-45 percent white. )As Chart A illustrates, there are twelve interdistrict magnet schools. These schools provide, in addition to the regular core program, coursework based on a special curricular theme. The desegregation section found on page 8 further describes the purpose and thematic focus for these schools. d) Interdistrict Nonma~net Schools - This is an elementary school open to students who live in the attendance zone for Romine and PCSSD students who are eligible for a majority to minority (M to M) transfer. The school offers a special emphasis on computer science and the basic skills. 2. Pulaski County Spedal School District (PCSSD) PCSSD is comprised of24 elementary schools:7 junior high schools, and 6 high schools. In October 1992, these schools reported a total enrollment of 21,633 pupils and a racial composition of 28% black and 72% white which exceeds the court approved 60-40 range of either race. Three of the district's 24 elementary schools were established by the court order to aid desegregation. PCSSD recruits LRSD black students tor its magnet schools and promotes other voluntary majority to minority interdistrict transfers. Enrollment data indicates a one percent black increase each year since October 1990. '\u0026gt;f:' I 3. North Little Rock School District (NLRSD) In contrast to the Little Rock and Pulaski County School Districts, North Little Rock's studt!nt enrollment is composed of 8,545 pupils in If elementary schools and DJ secondary scho~ls. The percent black figures indicate a five percent increase over the past five years and a 48% black, 52% white ratio in October 1992. The NLRSD black/white ratio is approaching the i goal of 50% black / white. From QUALi TY CC r- -::CT I IJH SERVICES PHIJHE Ho. 310 598 6773 C . Interdistrict Aerospace Technology Magnet. Program Jan.22 1993 6:30AM P07 (. The project will establish o. new grade 7 through grade 12 interdistrict magnet program in four , schools of the LRSD. Three schools are junior high schools which exceed the 64 percent districtv..ide average for black students. These schools will begin program implementation in the first project year. The otJ1er school is the new Aerospace Magnet High School which will open the second project year. Because the Federal Magnet Schools Assistance Program funds a two-year project period, this magnet will operate in grades 7 through 9 of the three junior high schools both project years and in grade 10 of the new Aerospace Magnet High School the second project year. In subsequent non-federal project years, the LRSD will operate the program in grades 7 -10 as well as add the grade 11 portion of the program in 1995-96, and the grade 12 portion of the program in 1996-97. Full program implementation will therefore be achieved in 1996-97. In 1996-97 the Aerospace Magnet High School grade 10 - 12 enrollment will be at capacity which is 1321 pupils. The magnet enrollment will be composed of 1) white students recn1ited from North Little Rock School District, Pulaski County Special School District, and private schools in Pulaski County, 2) black students enrolled in the LRSD aerospace magnet junior high schools 3) white students enrolled in the aerospace magnet junior high schools\nand a limited number of white students from other LRSD junior high schools provided the school's racial balance is betweea'6o percent and 40 percent of either race and the withdrawal of these students does not negatively effect the range of balance. 5 !) From QUALITY CONNECTION 3ERIJICES PHONE No. 310 598 6773 Jan.22 1993 6:29AM P06 The breakdown in enrollment is illustrated below. Recruitr.11 prlnnuil) from NLRSD nnd PCSSD  520 e\u0026lt;ade 7-9 white StlldCOL\u0026lt;\n1NC0~1ING R1ir.r11lted prinu1rily from Within LRSl.l  ?A I grade 7-9 bl11ck ~t11dMt1\nin Cloverdale, Forc~t H\\:i.11hts, Southw\n,f\u0026lt;t  20 gl'!lde 7-9 LRSD white Rh1dent11 Suhtotxl: ................ ........... ............ .. .................. .............. .......... .................... ..... 1321 maiinet sn1dents CONTINUING to grade JO  264 hleck sn1dent11  176 white 1,ti1dent1\nSubtotal: ........................................ , .... ....................... .................... .................... 440 mttgnlf 1\u0026lt;tndent1. Total for Aerosp1t\u0026lt;(, M11gnct in 1994-9:-: , ........................................... 176] students D . lnterdistrict Measures and Intradistrict. Desegregation The only ima~ that some people have of Little Rock is based on Governor Orval Faubus' defiance in 1951 of a federal mandate to desegregate Central High School. In Cooper v. Aaron the Supreme Court stated that \"public opposition in the Little Rock School District to desegregation of the races, no matter how deeply entrenched, could not be allowed to interfere with the full realiwtion of the constitutional rights of black citizens.\" In 1982, twenty-four years after LRSD had been ordered to desegregate, the Little Rock School District bought suit against the other two school districts in Pulasl\u0026lt;l County (NLRSJ) and PCSSD) claiming that these districts had committed intcrdistr.ict constitutional violations. The suit sought consolidation of the three districts. The courtc\nheld that int.crdistrict constitutional violations had occurred and must be remedied, but refused to order consolidation. Eventually, the parties, including the other two school districts in Pulaski ('.ounty and the State of Arkansas, agreed to settle the case. TI1ey submitted to the District Court four comprehensive agreements covering both interdistrict desegregation measures - agreements referred to by the parties as the \"settlement plans.\" TI1ey also submitted a separate, but related document in which the State of Arkansas is to provide funding for various aspects of the desegregation remedy. 6 From QUALi TY CONNECT I ON SERV ICES PHONE No. 310 5'38 6773 Jan. 22 1993 6 :28AM P05 ,, ' ' 1. Tht= LRSD DescJ?\nre~ntion Settlement) Plain (1989) The LRSD intradistrict plan prom for the Jnccnlive Schools dcscrlbcd below Chait A on page . Specifically, it designated the schools will receive compensatory-education programs and two times the level of funding for six years. The plan includes \u0026lt;ldailed and volumous de.scription of the kinds of programs that would take place at the Jncent1ve Schook A salient feature of these schools is a maximum effective st:udent-tc.achcr ratio of twenty to one. ~., Twenty-two of th~ twenty-three remaining elementary schools \\'{,ere projec to have student ratios of between 50 and 62 percent black. The other elementary schoo1, Romine, , oul be an interdistrict school. Any white student ~ elect to attend an Incentive School, and a black student living in an Incentive School attendance area cotM pt to attend one of the other 22 elementary schools. 2. lntcrdistrict Dtisegregation Plan The lnterdistrict Desegregation Plan is designed to achieve racial balance in the schools and districts of Little Rock, North Little Rock, and Pulaski County Special School District through voluntary movement primarily to magnet programs. To accomplish this goal LRSD currently operates twelve interdistrict magnet programs: six at the elementary level, three at the junior high level, and three at the high school level. Interdistrict schools are \"to obtain a ratio of between 60 percen nd 40 percent of either race with the ideal goal of these schools to be 50 percent black/ w 1tl~e Plan does not limit the number of interdistrict magnets that may be created. The Aero!\u0026gt;-pacc Technology Magnet will advance the voluntary desegregation efforts of the Settlement Plans. The district commits that it will \"maintain the facilities on a racially integrated basis into perpetuity.\" (Refer to 2/4/91 Amendment in Appendix.) Magnets enhance U1e district's core curriculum. The specially designed curricula is the \"hook\" for attracting students across district lines. Individual interdistrict magnet school brochures provide a program description. Chart B summarizes the twelve interdistrict magnets in the LRSD by theme and number of schools participating at each school level, 7 Fram QUAL I TY CONNECT I ml '.3EP.V I CES PHi'lE No. 310 598 6773 Jan. 22 1993 6 :28AM P04 Chart B - LRSD lnterdlstrlct Magnet Programs Theme School Level\nin(I ff of Schools ___ _.e.. .1. ..._em=~otary Junior l:f l.gb High Schoof 1 . Early Education 2. Basic Skills 3. Basic Skills/ Math-Science 4. Arts 6. Arts and Sclanr.Rs 6. Madlr.al Health 7. International Stl1dies 8, eu~inoss Communications .S.ubtotal Total Maanets - 12 1 1 2 , 1 1 _ ____::,6c..__ _____ 3_ ____3  This Is a Prc-K ma9ne1 housed In an lncontlvo School. k1'\\ 'f-' Tht' n~of LRSD Interdistrict Programs have been in operation since the 1986-87 school year. In 1986-87, magnet enrollment was 3,647 pupils and has increased to 8,981 pupils in 1992-93. Nine i.nterdistrict magnet programs have obtained a ratio of between 60 percent and 40 percent of either race. Of the three schools whose racial balance lies outside of the approved court range, two began implementation in August 1992 and the third is an Early ~hildhood Magnet provided in an Incentive School, The lnterdistrict Desegregation Plan is more than just magnets. It also allows for majority to minority transfers between districts. Specifically, a student may transfer from a district and school where his/her race is in the majority to a district and school where his/her race is in the minority. This means that black students in the LRSD may transfer to schools1ir~oith Little Rock and the Pulaski County Special School Districts, and white students in NLRSD and PCSSD may transfer to a Little Rock School District school. The Little Rock School District Desegregation Plan, the Pulaski County Special School District Desegregation Plan, the North Little Rock School District Desegregation Plan, and the Interdistrict Desegregation Plan hold excellent promise for achieving unitary school systems in these three districts. 3. Monitoring of the Desegregat.ion Plans The Circuit Court mandated the creation of the Office of Descgregati011 Monitoring staffed by a Monitor to supervise compliance with the desegregation orders of the LRSD, PCSSD and NLRSD. 8 From : QUALi TY COt~NECT ICIH '.::,ERU I CES PHrnE Ho. 310 59:3 6773 Jan. 22 1993 6:27AM F\"03 II. Needs Assessment The Little Rock School District, in conjunction with North Little Rock School District and Pulaski County S~ial School District, is implementing a court-ordered desegregation plan of which magnet programs and M-to-M transfers are voluntary options to integrate the three individual school districts. Although Little Rock has achieved mcial balance through the creation of interdistrict magnet programs in a number of its racially isolated schools, there are still schools in LRSD that are not racially balanced. According to the October 1992 LRSD Enrollment Summary, there are five junior high schools - Cloverdale, Porcst Heights, Henderson, Mabelvale, and Southwest that meet this criteria. Accordingly pursuant to this proposal, Cloverdale, Forest Heights, and Southwest will be designated as int.erdistrict magnet programs with the goal of attracting white students from NLRSD, PCSSD, and Pulaski County private schools. The \"hook\" to attain this project's desegregation goals and objectives is the Aerospace Technology curriculum. Since 1900, the United States has become wealthy and powerful by exploiting the rapid changes taking place in technology, world trade, and the intcmational political order. New developments in technology, international competition, demography, and other factors have altered the nation's economic and social landscape. There wlll be few jobs for those who lack adequate science / technical knowledge and who cannot read, follow directions, or use mathematics. Higher skill requirements of the economy require that schools must improve the preparation of the nation's youth in order to economically compete in the global marketplace. This can only be accomplished if the schools have excellence in technology education, communications, problem-solving, and scientific and technological literacy. LRSD believes it is absolutely necessary to help students understand their technological future if they are to function as responsible, productive members of a competitive society. LRSD also believes this endeavor must be a cooperative and concentrative effort with this area's prime employers, the aerospace / aviation industry, the State Department of Education, the Universities of Arkansas, Henderson State University, and Southern Arkansas University - Tech. TI1e aerospace technology education magnet has long range potential for ass1stmg in desegregation in the Little Rock School District. First, it involves the potential for further voluntary movement of non-district white students to prevent the increasing isolation of Cloverdale, Porest Heights, and Southwest which are predominantly black junior high schools. Second, this project has carefully planned for a new racially balanced high school to prevent racial isolation in the existing high schools. Between October, 1987 and October, 1992, the black enrollment increased by 9%, from 51 % black to ro% black. This increase is expected to continue at the senior high level because the junior high schools in October, 1992 were 67% black. Finally, this district is confident that the aerospace magnet will attract and retain a new enrollment of grade 7-10 white students while maintaining the current enrollment 9 From : .QUALITY CON ECTIOl'-1 3ERVICES PHOHE Ho. 310 5'38 6773 Jan. 22 1993 6 :38HM P01 These are the reasons: l . \"Aerospace Technology\" is a statewide public education and economic development effort in accordance with the Arkansas Aerospace Task Force and its creation of the Arkansas Aviation and Aerospace Commission through passage of State Senate Bill 35. Their mission is to provide \"the knowledge and skills that will allow students to reach their full economic potential.\" 2. The public and private contributions of funds for up to 6.5 million dollars to construct the aviation history museum which will implement curricular activities during and after magnet school hours in coordination with the magnet's specialized curriculum. 3. A successful millage campaign approved by voters for six million dollars to construct the Aerospace Magnet High School. 4. The Aerospace employment need for a skilled workforce is well known in Arkansas. Specially-trained employees are required to meet new contracts for aircraft and the employment vacancies listed by the Little Rock Airport Commission. Technology education is addressed in conjunction with the study of applied mathematics and physical science. More science and mathematics have been built into the existing curriculum. The academic and technology-integrated curriculum begins in grade seven to better prepare the minority student for future employment, college, and success in finding his/her niche in a technological society. Because of the strong aerospace industry and university linkage, and the hands-on problem solving approach used to learn the curricula, the district foresees the inclusion of some Little Rock elementary schools in the near future. Need 1: '.111e Reduction and Prevention of Minority GI'OUJ) Isolation There is a need to establish a new interdistrict magnet program at the junior high level to racially balance Cloverdale, Forest Heights, and Southwest. An end-of-project enrollment of 1761 will enable each of the aerospace magnet schools and total magnet enrollment to reflect a ratio of between 60 percent and 40 percent of either race. ~ The goal reflected by the % black figure in Table 1 is to reduce racial isolation by increasing the number of white pupils in three Little Rock junior high schools. This will bring the junior high schools % black student enrollment in line with the Interdistrict Desegregation Plan goal of 50% black/ white for interdistrict schools. 10 From : QUALITY CONNECT IIJN SERlJ ICES TABLE 1 Receiving Schools Cloverdale JH Forest Heights JH Southwest JH PHONE t--lo. 310 598 6773 Reduce Racial Isolation October 1, 1992 % Black 73.7 70.4 75.3 Jan.22 1993 6 : 49AM P02 End of Project % Bleck 50.0*) ~ 01o 50.0* 50.0*  Maximum variation Is+ or - 10% of either race The goal reflected by the percent black figure in Table 2 is to prevent black group isolation in the new high school. This will be accomplished through voluntary movement of grade nine pupils from the throe aerospace magnet junior high schools. The projected gmde nine enrollment will include M-to-M transfers from NLRSD, PCSSD, and private schools in Pulaski County. In addition, LRSD pupils will be allowed to participate provided such movement does not negatively impact the racial balance of the sending junior high schools. This will racially balance the new high school in accordance with the Interclistrict Desegregation Plan. TABLE 2 Receiving School New High School Reduce Racial Isolation October 1, 1992 0/o Black 80.0 (a) End of Project % Black q'/ ~010 50.0 '--J (a) This is based on October 1, 1988 and 1989 % black figures for Dunbar which is located in the attendance area of the new high school. Program Goal 1: To reduce Q! pr~t racial isolation in the Little Rock School District Objective 1.a: Magnet School Cloverdale JH Forest Heights JH Southwest JH By September, 1993, the district will reduce racial isolation through recruitment of white students from out-of-district to aerospace magnet programs. The aerospace magnet program will be balanced when the percent black / white ratio is 50% or between 60% and 40% of either race. Reduce % Minority Before 73.7 70.4 75.3 % Minority After 50.0 ) fpt/fo 50.0 50.0 11 From : QUALITY CONNECT IIJN '3ERlJ ICES Objective 1.b: Magnet School New High School PHONE No . 310 598 6773 Jan. 22 1993 6 :49AM P03 By September, 1994 the district will racially balance the new high school throush voluntary transfers from the grade 9 continuing magnet enrollment. The new high school will reflect a 50% black/ white ratio. Reduce 0/o Minority Before 80.0(a) % Minority After 50.o 7 lt0111 (a) October 1, 1900 and 1909 % black flgurc,s for Dunbar which Is located In the attendance area of the new high school. Need 2a.l: Strenethenine the Knowledee of Academic Content For the past two decades in America, the low level of academic achievement in our secondary school has spelled disaster for our youth and for our economy. The statistics are alarming: a. Ninety-three percent of 17-year olds do not have the capacity to apply mathematical operations in a variety of problem-solving settings. An increasing number of the nation's studentc\nare ill-prepared for college courses or jobs that require technical skills. (National Assessment of Educational Progress 1988, p. #2) b. For generations traditional prejudices have encouraged mathematics achievement in only a portion of the student population - middle class white males. Females and minoritie~with the exception of Asian-American~ were perceived as both \"less capable\" of leaming mathematics, and \"needing\" it less. (Mathematics Education - Wellspring of U.S. Industrial Strength, December 1988.) c. In both participation and achievement, American students in science and mathematics are lagging behind previous years and other countries. (Science and Engineering Indicators, National Science Board, 1990.) d. Only about twenty percent of 10th graders believe that biology, chemistry, physics, or geometry are needed to qualify for their first choice occupation. Only twenty-eight percent believe they need algebra. (Longitudinal Survey of American Youth, 1988.) e. \"Schools must improve their science instruction to allow the nation to base its economy on high technology. New programs must be developed and strategies reexamined to achieve the sharp focus required.\" (The Triangle Coalition for Science and Technology Education, 1988.) According to the results of the National Science Foundation's nationwide study, students are not receiving enough hands-on laboratory experience. 12 From : QUALITY CO~lNECT I Ot--l SERVICES PHONE No. 310 598 6773 Jan.22 1993 6:50AM P04 f. The 1.25 gra_dclcvcl equivalent decline in the academic achievement of high school seniors lowered the nation's productivity by $86 billion in 1987 and will lower it by more than $200 billion annually by the year 2010 (Journal of Curriculum Studies, 1989). Studies demonstrate that competence in reading, writing, mathematics, science, and problem solving are strongly related to productivity in almost all jobs, At the historic \"education summit,\" September 1989, Ptaeeiide.!t A-ueh and the nation's governors agreed to six national performance goals in education to be achieved by the year 2000. These two important goals were among those adopted: BY THE YEAR 2000: U.S. students will he first in the world in science and mathematics achievement. The poor standing of U.S. students on international assessments of mathematics and science achievement is no accident, says a new ASCD task force report* It results from systemic problems in the quality of curriculum and instruction in the United States, the unequal opportunities afforded different students, and pervasive cultural beliefs that do little to support high mathematics and science achievement The ASCD task force report cites four major factors contributing to low U.S. student achievement in mathematics and science. These are: 1) Relatively few students take courses that include high-level content in mathematics and science. Fewer than half of students take a chemistry or algebra II course and fewer than one in five ever talce a course in physics, trigonometry. analysis / precalculus, or calculus. Moreover, the widespread tracking of students means many pupils - particularly minorities - are never required to learn high-level cont.enL 2) Mathematics and science curriculums, as well as the textbooks ftnd assessments linked to them, fail to reflect the \"frontiers of knowled~e\" about how children learn best. U.S. mathematics and science curriculums \"sacrifice depth for coverage, don't talce advantage of technologies ... fail to make connections among the disciplines, and generally ignore the real-life experiences and cognitive development of students.\" In general, students assume a passive role, with teacher talk, textbooks, and worksheets predominating. The National Center for Education Statistics study recently documented the percentage of 8th graders whose science teachers conducted scientific experiments. Science teachers in both Catholic and private schools surpassed public school science teachers on frequency\" On\nThis project was supported in part by a Digitizing Hidden Special Collections and Archives project grant from The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation and Council on Library and Information Resoources.\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n\n "},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1114","title":"Little Rock School District of Pulaski County, Arkansas","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":["Little Rock School District"],"dc_date":["1992-06-30"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System"],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","Little Rock School District","Education--Arkansas","Education--Economic aspects","Education--Evaluation","Education--Finance","Educational statistics"],"dcterms_title":["Little Rock School District of Pulaski County, Arkansas"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Butler Center for Arkansas Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://arstudies.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/bcmss0837/id/1114"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["Available for use in research, teaching, and private study. Any other use requires permission from the Butler Center."],"dcterms_medium":["documents (object genre)"],"dcterms_extent":["140 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\nCombined financial statements and supplemental information with independent auditors' reports by Thomas and Thomas, certified accountants\nThe transcript for this item was created using Optical Character Recognition (OCR) and may contain some errors.\nTHE LifflE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS Combined Financial Statements and Supplemental Information (With Independent Auditors' Reports Thereon) June 30, 1992 CEFmr lEO i\"VBI.IC ACCOIJNTA '\"'J ,. l THE LimE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS Combined Financial Statements and Supplemental Information (With Independent Auditors' Reports Thereon) June 30, 1992 THE LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS Table of Contents June 30, 1992 INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' REPORT ON COMBINED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY SCHEDULES COMBINED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS Combined Balance Sheet - All Fund Types and Account Groups Combined Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - All Governmental Fund Types Combined Statement of Revenues and Expenditures - Budget and Actual - All Governmental Fund Types Notes to Combined Financial Statements SUPPLEMENTARY SCHEDULES Combining Schedule of Revenues and Expenditures - Special Revenue Funds Revenues of Salary, Operating and Debt Service Funds (Basis of Accounting as prescribed by Handbook II) Expenditures of Salary, Operating and Debt Service Funds (Basis of Accounting as prescribed by Handbook II) Reconciliation of General and Debt Service Fund Balances - Generally Accepted Accounting Principles and Handbook II Basis of Accounting Schedule of Long-Term Debt Reconciliation of Fund Equity - State Report and Financial Statements OTHER REPORTS AND SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION Independent Auditors' Report on Internal Control Structure Based on a Study and Evaluation Made as a Part of an Audit of the Basic Financial Statements Performed in Accordance with Government Auditing Standards and the Additional Tests Required by 0MB Circular A-128 1 4 6 8 12 30 31 32 33 34 37 39 THE LiffiE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS Table of Contents (Continued) June 30, 1992 Independent Auditors' Report on Compliance Based on an Audit of the Basic Financial Statements Performed in Accordance with Government Auditing Standards 43 Independent Auditors' Report on Compliance with General Requirements Applicable to Federal Financial Assistance Programs 44 Independent Auditors' Report on Compliance with Specific Requirements Applicable to Major Federal Financial Assistance Programs 45 Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs 47 Independent Auditors' Report on Schedule of Federal Financial Assistance 48 Schedule of Federal Financial Assistance 49 ~cvtd~ CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS Little Rock Office 201 E. Markham Suite 500  Little Rock, AR 72201 (501) 375-2025  FAX (501) 375-8704 Texarkana Office: 701 Arkansas Blvd.  Texarkana, AA 75502 (501) 773-2168  FAX (501) n4-72 INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' REPORT ON COMBINED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY SCHEDULES The Board of Directors The Little Rock School District of Pulaski County, Arkansas Little Rock, Arkansas We have audited the combined financial statements of The Little Rock School District of Pulaski County, Arkansas (the School District) as of, and for the year ended, June 30, 1992, as listed in the accompanying table of contents. The financial statements are the responsibility of the School District's management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audit. We conducted our audit in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards, Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the United States, and the provisions of Office of Management and Budget Circular A-128, Audits of State and Local Governments. Those standards require that we plan and perform an audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion. As described more fully in Note l(F) of the combined financial statements, the School District does not record the valuation base of its property, buildings, and equipment at historical cost in the general fixed asset group of accounts as required by generally accepted accounting principles. In our opinion, except for the effect of the failure to record the general fixed asset account group at historical cost, as discussed in the preceding paragraph, the combined financial statements referred to in the first paragraph present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the Little Rock School District of Pulaski County, Arkansas as of June 30, 1992, and the results of its operations for the year then ended in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles. 1 Members American Institute of Certified Public Accountants Private Compan,es Practice Section and S.E.C. Practice Sact,on The Board of Directors The Little Rock School District of Pulaski County, Arkansas Page Two Our audit was made for the purpose of forming an op1n1on on the combined financial statements taken as a whole. The supplemental information included at pages thirty through thirty-seven is presented for purposes of additional analysis and is not a required part of the basic combined financial statements. The information has been subjected to the procedures applied in the audit of the basic combined financial statements of the Little Rock School District of Pulaski County, Arkansas and, in our opinion, is fairly stated in all material respects in relation to the combined financial statements taken as a whole. November 20, 1992 Little Rock, Arkansas 2 ~ ef ~ Certified Public Accountants COMBINED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS 3 ASSETS AND AMOUNTS TO BE PROVIDED General Assets: Cash (Note 9) $ 2,198,349 Investments (Note 9) 7,967,389 Property taxes receivable (Note 2, 4 and 11) 2,789,594 Accrued interest and other receivables 156,799 Due from other governments (Notes 7 and 10) 8,471,471 Due from other funds 2,099,269 Inventories 445,366 Fixed assets (Notes 1 (Fl and 3) Prepaids and deferred charges 13,885 Total assets 24,142,122 Amounts to be provided for retirement of general long-term debt (Note 4) Total assets and amounts to be provided s 24,142,122 THE LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS Combined Balance Sheet - All Fund Types and Account Groups June 30, 1992 Fiduciary Governmental Fund TYJ!es Fund TYJ!e Account General Special Debt Capital Fixed Revenue Service Projects Agency Assets $ $ $ $ 119,128 $ l, 346,553 24,341,447 786,957 790,002 6,769 74,902 11,682 2,359,706 34,954 225,863 170,233 115,610 157,152,108 384,157 3,828,638 1,209,113 24,642,212 1,088,000 157,152,108 s 3,828,638 s 1,209,113 s 24,642,212 $___1_,_QJ38,000 s 157,152,108 The accompanying notes are an integral part of this financial statement. 4 GrOUJ:!S General Total Long-term (Memorandum Debt Only) $ $ 2,317,477 34,442,346 3,579,596 250,152 11,091,994 2,269,502 560,976 157,152,108 398,042 212,062,193 88,713,241 88,713,241 s 88,713,241 s 300,775,434 (Continued) LI'rrLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS Combined Balance Sheet - All Fund Types and Account Groups (Continued) June 30, 1992 Fiduciary Governmental Fund Tvt\u0026gt;es Fund TYl!e Account Grou11s General General Total Special Debt Capital Fixed Long-Term (Memorandum LIABILITIES AND FUND EQUITY General Revenue Service Projects Agency Assets Debt Only} Liabilities: Bank overdrafts (Note 9) $ $ 437,665 $ $ 189,553 s $ s s 627,218 Accounts payable 4,007,998 127,338 489,281 6,320 4,630,937 Accrued payroll taxes and withholdings 3,534,812 3,534,812 Accrued interest payable 74,000 33,048 107,048 Retainage payable (Note 3) 154,195 154,195 Estimated claims liability (Note 13) 230,295 230,295 Deferred revenues 643,181 643,181 Due to school activity groups and other agencies (Note 8) 1,081,680 1,081,680 Due to other funds 170,233 2,099,269 2,269,502 Notes payable (Note 11) 13,815,000 13,815,000 Long-term debt payable (Note 4) 88,713,241 88,713,241 Total liabilities 21,832,338 1,208,184 33,048 2,932,298 1,088,000 88,713,241 115 I 807 I 109 Commitments and Contingencies (Notes 3, 4, 6, 7, 10, 12 and 13) Fund Equity: Investment in general fixed assets (Notes l(f) and 3) 157,152,108 157,152,108 Fund Balance: Reserved for prepaids and deferred charges 13,885 384,157 398,042 Reserved for inventories 445,366 115,610 560,976 Unreserved: Board designated: Debt service 791,908 791,908 Capital projects 21,709,914 21,709,914 New Futures 245,834 245,834 Risk management (Note 13) 838,007 838,007 Food services and other 2,504,844 2,504,844 Undesignated 766,692 766,692 Total fund equity 2,309,784 2,620,454 1,176,065 21,709,914 157,152,108 184,968,325 Total liabilities and fund equity $ 24,142,122 $ 3,828,638 $ 1,209,113 $ 24,642,212 $ 1,088,000 $ 157,152,108 $ 88 I 713 I 241 $ 300,775,434 The accompanying notes are an integral part of this financial statement. 5 THE LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS Combined Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance All Governmental Fund Types REVENUES Local Sources: Property taxes (Notes 2 and 11) Tuition Interest Food sales Food services and other Magnet schools funding (Note 10) Total local sources State Sources: Minimum foundation programs (Note 7) Desegregation settlement (Note 7) Magnet schools funding (Note 10) Handicapped children aid Vocational aid Transportation aid Compensatory education Other Total state sources Federal sources: Elementary and Secondary Education Act Vocational Education Act Food services Energy conservation Other Total federal sources Total revenues s Year Ended June 30, 1992 General 49,462,903 337,261 559,379 860,839 51,220,382 27,971,570 8,637,482 824,870 1,187,062 2,645,763 858,743 1,993,962 44,119,452 9 385 9 385 95,349,219 s Special Revenue 28,813 85,146 1,382,381 1,210,367 3,205,253 5,911,960 6,943,921 795 781 7,739,702 4,039,242 362,342 3,981,422 191,146 666,004 9,240,156 22 I 891,818 The accompanying notes are an integral part of this financial statement. 6 Debt Capital Service Projects s 14,379,338 s 59,717 864,251 34,727 123,462 14,562,517 898,978 14,562,517 898,978 s Total (Memorandum Only) 63,842,241 366,074 1,568,493 1,382,381 2,105,933 3,328,715 72,593,837 27,971,570 8,637,482 6,943,921 824,870 1,187,062 2,645,763 858,743 2,789,743 51,859,154 4,039,242 362,342 3,981,422 191,146 675,389 9,249,541 133,702,532 (Continued) THE LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS Combined Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance All Governmental Fund Types (Continued) EXPENDITURES Instructional services: Basic programs Exceptional child programs Vocational-technical programs Adult continuing education programs Compensatory education programs Other instructional programs Total instructional services Instructional support services Pupil transportation services Operation and maintenance of plant School administration General administration Capital outlay (Note 3) Principal retirement of long-term debt (Note 4) Interest charges (Notes 4 and 11) Fiscal agent's fees Debt issuance costs (Note 5) Food services Community services Indirect and other (Note 10) Total expenditures Excess of revenues over (under) expenditures OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES) Contributed assets Proceeds of long-term debt (Note 4) Operating transfers in (Notes 2 and 10) Operating transfers out (Notes 2 and 10) Proceeds from refunding bonds (Notes 4 and 5) Payment to refunded bond escrow agent (Notes 4 and 5) Total other financing sources (uses) Excess of revenues and other financing sources over (under) expenditures and other uses Fund equity, beginning of year Fund equity, end of year Year Ended June 30, 1992 General $ 43,242,212 5,347,249 4,829,699 30,596 2,537,077 1,326,910 57,313,743 9,854,068 5,685,460 9,516,578 5,992,218 6,384,798 4,023,313 429,104 123,344 1,202,394 32,450 100,557,470 (5,208,251) 71,478 6,709,905 6,743,250 (6,184,919) 7,339,714 2,131,463 178,321 $ 2,309,784 Special Revenue $ 8,994,938 576,253 1,089,353 793,166 3,144,831 207,537 14,806,078 1,736,879 1,055,206 1,315,748 763,400 5,897,064 298,553 618,612 26,491,540 (3,599,722) 3,738,667 3,738,667 138,945 2,481,509 $ 2,620,454 The accompanying notes are an integral part of this financial statement. 7 $ Debt Service 5,541,372 4,966,579 65,518 405,834 10,979,303 3,583,214 2,446,252 (6,388,642) 7,499,000 (7,265,000) (3,708,390) (125,176) 1,301,241 $ 1,176,065 s Capital Projects 6,904,569 408,450 7,313,019 (6,414,041) 15,433,600 40,067 (394,675) 15,078,992 8,664,951 l3 I 044 I 963 $ 21, 709 I 914 Total {Memorandum Only) $ 52,237,150 5,923,502 5,919,052 823,762 5,681,908 1,534,447 72,119,821 11,590,947 5,685,460 10,571,784 5,992,218 7,700,546 11,691,282 5,541,372 5,395,683 65,518 937,628 5,897,064 1,500,947 651,062 145,341,332 (11,638,800) 71,478 22,143,505 12,968,236 (12,968,236) 7,499,000 (7,265,000) 22,448,983 10,810,183 17,006,034 $ 27,816,217 REVENUES Local Sources: Property taxes (Notes 2 and 11) Tuition Interest Food sales Food services and other Magnet schools (Note 10) Total local sources State Sources: Minimum foundation programs (Note 7) Desegregation settlement (Note 7) Magnet schools funding (Note 10) Handicapped children ai d Vocational aid Transportation aid Compensatory education Other Total state sources Federal Sources: Elementary and Secondary Education Act Vocational Education Act Food service Energy conservation Other Total federal sources Total revenues THE LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS Combined Statement of Revenues and Expenditures - Budget and Actual $ All Governmental Fund Types Year Ended June 30, 1992 General Fund Variance - Favorable Budget ,Actual (Unfavorable) 54,331,079 $ 49,462,903 $ (4,868,176) 300,000 337,261 37,261 700,000 559,379 (140,621) 814,936 860,839 45,903 56,146,015 51,220,382 (4,925,633) 28,118,907 27,971,570 (147,337) 8,637,482 8,637,482 629,752 824,870 195,118 1,174,485 1,187,062 12,577 2,983,190 2,645,763 (337,427) 874,311 858,743 (15 , 568) 2,022,134 1,993,962 (28,172) 44,440,261 44,119,452 (320,809) 668,744 9 385 (659,359) 668 744 9 385 (659,359) 101,255,020 95,349,219 (5,905,801) The accompanying notes are an integral part of this financial statement. 8 S11ecial Revenue Funds Variance - Favorable Budget Actual (Unfavorable) $ $ $ 28,000 28,813 813 62,240 85,146 22,906 2,216,066 1,382,381 (833,685) 628,568 1,210,367 581,799 3,149,037 3,205,253 56,216 6,083,911 5,911,960 (171,951) 6,887,705 6,943,921 56,216 115,538 795,781 680,243 7,003,243 7,739,702 736,459 4,111,426 4,039,242 (72,184) 344,945 362,342 17,397 3,656,587 3,981,422 324,835 191,146 191,146 753,316 666,004 (87,312) 8,866,274 9,240,156 373,882 21,953,428 22,891,818 938,390 (Continued) THE LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS Combined Statement of Revenues and Expenditures - Budget and Actual All Governmental Fund Types (Continued) Year Ended June 30, 1992 General Fund S~ecial Revenue Funds Variance - Variance - Favorable Favorable Budget Actual (Unfavorable) Budget Actual ~Unfavorable) EXPENDITURES Instructional services $ 58,590,221 $ 57,313,743 $ 1,276,478 $ 14,304,440 $ 14,806,078 $ (501,638) Instructional support services 11,104,163 9,854,068 1,250,095 1,842,200 1,736,879 105,321 Pupil transportation services 5,794,189 5,685,460 108, 729 Operations and maintenance of plant 10,453,402 9,516,578 936,824 1,140,670 1,055,206 85,464 School administration 5,804,622 5,992,218 (187,596) General administration 6,688,708 6,384,798 303,910 1,211,821 1,315,748 (103,927) Capital outlay (Note 3) 890,963 4,023,313 (3,132,350) 712,375 763,400 (51,025) Principal retirement of long term debt (Note 4) Interest charges (Notes 4 and 11) 429,104 (429,104) Fiscal agent's fees Debt issuance costs 123,344 (123,344) Food service 8,229,194 5,897,064 2,332,130 Community services 900,750 1,202,394 (301,644) 467,626 298,553 169,073 Indirect and other (Note 10) 636,437 32,450 603,987 478,143 618,612 (140,469) Total expenditures 100,863,455 100,557,470 305,985 28,386,469 26,491,540 1,894,929 Excess of revenues over (under) expenditures 391,565 (5,208,251) (5,599,816) (6,433,041) (3,599,722) 2,833,319 OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES) Contributed assets 71,478 71,478 Proceeds of long-term debt (Note 4) 4,500,000 6,709,905 2,209,905 Operating transfers in (Notes 2 and 10) 911,453 6,743,250 5,831,797 3,738,667 3,738,667 Operating transfers out (Notes 2 and 10) (6,407,083) (6,184,919) 222,164 Proceeds from refunding bonds (Notes 4 and 5) Payment to refunded escrow agent (Notes 4 and 5) Total other financing sources (uses) (995,630) 7,339,714 8,335,344 3,738,667 3,738,667 Excess of revenues and other financing sources over (under) expenditures and other financing uses (604,065) 2,131,463 s 2,735,528 (2,694,374) 138,945 s 2,833,319 Fund equity, beginning of year 634,842 178,321 2,725,577 2,481,509 Fund equity, end of year s 30,777 s 2,309,784 s 31,203 s 2,620,454 (Continued) The accompanying notes are an integral part of this financial statement. 9 REVENUES Local sources: Property taxes (Notes 2 and 11) Tuition Interest Food sales Food services and other Magnet schools and other (Note 10) Total local sources State Sources: Minimum foundation programs (Note 7) Desegregation settlement (Note 7) Magnet schools funding (Note 10) Handicapped children aid Vocational aid Transportation aid Compensatory education Other Total state sources Federal Sources: Elementary and Secondary Education Act Vocational Education Act Food service Energy conservation Other Total federal sources Total revenues THE LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS Combined Statement of Revenues and Expenditures - Budget and Actual All Governmental Fund Types (Continued) Year Ended June 30, 1992 $ 8,828,760 8,828,760 8,828,760 Debt Service Fund Actual $14,379,338 59,717 123,462 14,562,517 14,562,517 Variance - Favorable (Unfavorable) $ 5,550,578 59,717 123,462 5,733,757 5,733,757 $ The accompanying notes are an integral part of this financial statement. 10 Capital Projects Fund $ Actual 864,251 34,727 898,978 898,978 Variance - Favorable (Unfavorable) $ 864,251 34,727 898,978 898,978 (Continued) EXPENDITURES Instructional services Instructional support services Pupil transportation services Operations and maintenance of plant School administration General administration Capital outlay (Note 3) Principal retirement of long-term debt (Note 4) Interest charges (Notes 4 and 11) Fiscal agents' fees Debt issuance cost (Note 5) Food service Community services Indirect and other (Note 10) Total expenditures Excess of revenues over (under) expenditures OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES) Contributed assets Proceeds of long-term debt (Note 4) Operating transfers in (Notes 2 and 10) Operating transfers out (Notes 2 and 10) Proceeds from refunding bonds (Notes 4 and 5) THE LIHLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS Combined Statement of Revenues and Expenditures - Budget and Actual s All Governmental Fund Types (Continued) Year Ended June 30, 1992 3,457,525 5,254,171 6,500 8,718,196 110,564 Debt Service Fund s 5,541,372 4,966,579 65,518 405,834 10,979,303 3,583,214 Variance - Favorable (Unfavorable) s (2,083,847) 287,592 (59,018) (405,834) (2,261,107) 3,472,650 s Payment to refunded escrow agent (Notes 4 and 5) ____ _ Total other financing sources (uses) 2,446,252 (6,388,642) 7,499,000 (7,265,000) (3,708,390) 2,446,252 (6,388,642) 7,499,000 (7,265,000) (3,708,390) Excess of revenues and other financing sources over (under) expenditures and other financing uses Fund equity, beginning of year Fund equity, end of year s 110,564 110,564 (125,176) 1,301,241 $ 1,176,065 The accompanying notes are an integral part of this financial statement. 11 $ (235,740) Capital Projects Fund Budget 28,586,236 346,966 28,933,202 (28,933,202) 15,058,276 15,058,276 (13,874,926) 13,874,926 s 6,904,569 408,450 7,313,019 (6,414,041) 15,433,600 40,067 (394,675) 15,078,992 8,664,951 13,044,963 $ 21,709,914 Variance - Favorable (Unfavorable) $ 21,681,667 (61,484) 21,620,183 22,519,161 375,324 40,067 (394,675) 20,716 $ 22,539,877 THE Lli'l'LE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS Notes to Combined Financial Statements June 30, 1992 Note 1: Summary of Significant Accounting Policies The accounting policies of The Little Rock School District of Pulaski County, Arkansas (the School District) conform to generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) applicable to governmental units, except for the practice of recording various components of its general fixed assets at appraised values rather than at cost (Note l(F)). The following is a summary of the more significant accounting policies. (A) Fund Accounti.ng The accounts of the School District are organized on the basis of funds or groups of accounts, each of which is considered to be a separate accounting entity. The operations of each fund are accounted for by providing a separate set of self-balancing accounts which comprise its assets, liabilities, fund equity, revenues and expenditures. The following paragraphs describe the fund types and account groups used by the School District. Governmental Fund Types: - The General Fund is the primary operating fund of the School District. All general tax revenues and other revenues that are not allocated by law or contractual agreement to another fund are accounted for in this fund. The general operating expenditures, the fixed charges, and the capital improvement costs that are not paid through other funds are paid from this fund. The Special Revenue Funds are used to account for the proceeds of specific revenue sources, other than major capital projects, requiring separate accounting because of legal or regulatory provisions or administrative action. The Debt Service Funds are used to account for the accumulation of resources for the payment of principal, interest, and fees on long-term general obligation debt. - The Capital Projects Funds are used to account for financial resources segregated for the acquisition or construction of major capital facilities. Fiduciary Fund Type: The Agency Fund is used to account for the funds of school activity groups and other agencies. The assets in this fund are held by the School District in a fiduciary capacity. 12 THE LimE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS Notes to Combined Financial Statements (Continued) June 30, 1992 Note 1: Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (Continued) (A) Fund Accounting (Continued) Account Groups: - The General Fixed Asset Account Group is established to account for the fixed assets of the School District. - The General Long-Term Debt Account Group is established to account for the long-term debt that is guaranteed by the full faith and credit of the School District. (BJ Basis of Accounting The modified accrual basis of accounting is utilized by all funds. Revenues are recognized in the accounting period in which they become available and measurable. Expenditures are recognized in the accounting period in which the liability is incurred, if measurable, except for unmatured interest on general long-term debt which is recognized when the interest is due. Resources from special grants are generally recognized as revenues to the extent of expenditures made under the provisions of the grants. Significant funds received before the revenue recognition criteria have been met are reported as deferred revenue. (C) Budgetary Accounting Certain revenues and expenditures are budgeted in accordance with various legal .requirements which govern the School District's operations. The annual budget is submitted to the Arkansas State Department of Education (the State) for approval. Revisions by subsequent budget amendments, if any, are not submitted to the State. Budgeted revenues and expenditures were approved by the Board of Directors at their June 22, 1991 meeting. A final revision was adopted January 23, 1992. The budgets formally approved by the Board of Directors include the General Fund (salary, desegregation and other operating) and the Debt Service Fund, as required by the State (Handbook II), and certain construction and special revenue expenditures. The budgets of the School District utilized in its internal budgetary accounting systems and for financial reporting vary in some regards from those required by applicable state statutes to be formally approved by the Board of Directors. 13 THE Lli'rLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS Notes to Combined Financial Statements (Continued) June 30, 1992 Note 1: SUD1111ary of Significant Accounting Policies (Continued) (CJ Budgetary Accounting (Continued) The budgets approved by the Board of Directors are utilized in the preparation of the Combined Statement of Revenues and Expenditures - Budget and Actual. However, the approved budgets in some cases reflect beginning fund balance as revenue whereas these financial statements do not. In addition, certain budgeted items have been reclassified for financial statement presentation to facilitate comparison to the classifications required in reporting the related actual amounts. Such reclassifications relate primarily to operating transfers and proceeds of long-term debt. In addition, certain amounts (primarily property tax revenues and food service expenditures) are budgeted in accordance with accounting methods required by applicable state regulations with the related actual amounts being reflected in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. (DJ Investments Investments are stated at cost, which approximates market value. Investments consist of certificates of deposit, repurchase agreements, and treasury bills. (E) Inventories Inventories are stated at the lower of cost (first-in, first-out) or market (net realizable value). Inventories are recorded as expenditures when transferred to schools and departmental offices for utilization. (F) General Fixed Assets In the general fixed asset group of accounts, land is valued at historical cost. Certain other assets are stated at costs estimated by independent appraisers and by School District employees at various appraisal dates. Valuations of land improvements and buildings are intended to approximate fair market values at the latest appraisal dates (1965 and 1971, respectively)\nfurniture and fixtures are stated at appraisal values determined for insurance purposes in 1975. Additions since the date of the last appraisals are recorded at cost. The amount that such valuations vary from historical cost has not been determined. 14 THE LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS Notes to Combined Financial Statements (Continued) June 30, 1992 Note 1: Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (Continued) (G) Property Taxes Property taxes are recognized and recorded as current period revenues in accordance with the provisions of Interpretation 3 of the National Council of Governmental Accounting's (NCGA) Statement 1, which states that such revenues should be recognized when they become \"measurable and available.\" The School District defines \"measurable and available\" to mean property tax collections received by the School District within sixty days after its year end. (HJ Interfrmd Transactions Quasi-external transactions are accounted for as revenues or expenditures. Transactions that constitute reimbursements to a fund for expenditures initially made from it that are properly applicable to another fund, are recorded as expenditures in the reimbursing fund and as reductions of expenditures in the fund that is reimbursed. All other interfund transactions, except quasi-external transactions and reimbursements, are reported as transfers. Nonrecurring or nonroutine permanent transfers of equity are reported as residual equity transfers. All other interfund transfers are reported as operating transfers. (I) Accumulated Vacation and Sick Leave School District employees do not receive vacation pay as such. Certain employees receive additional compensation if they work more than their contracted days in any particular year. These employees are paid upon termination for any unpaid days accumulated in this manner. The School District's liability for this type of compensated absence is not considered material and, therefore, has not been recorded in the accompanying financial statements. Accumulated sick pay or personal leave days are not paid upon termination. Accordingly, the School District has not recorded a liability in the accompanying financial statements since payment is not probable and the amount of ultimate payment, if any, is not determinable. (J) Encumbrances Encumbrances for goods or purchased services are documented by purchase orders or contracts. Encumbrances outstanding at year end are not reported as expenditures for financial statement purposes as the related goods have not been received or the services performed. 15 THE LI'rrLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS Notes to Combined Financial Statements (Continued) June 30, 1992 Note 1: Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (Continued) (K) Total Columns on Combined Statements Total columns on the combined statements are captioned \"memorandum only\" to indicate that they are presented only to facilitate financial analysis. Data in these columns do not present financial position, results of operations, or changes in fund equity in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles. Neither is such data comparable to a consolidation. (L) Tax Exempt Status The School District is a tax exempt organization since its revenues are nontaxable under Section 115 of the Internal Revenue Code. Note 2: Property Taxes Pulaski County, Arkansas (the County) levies a property tax each February on the assessed value listed as of January 1 of the prior year for all real and personal property located in the County. Assessed values are established by the County Assessor's office. All taxes are due from property holders on an installment basis by October 10. Taxes to be levied upon January 1, 1992 assessment values are as follows: Rea,l Estate Personal property Utilities Valuation (Millions) $1,100 379 68 $ 1,547 Millage General Debt Fund Service 34.0 34.0 35.6 9.9 9.9 10.1 Property tax revenues of the Debt Service Fund totaling approximately $6,349,000 (the excess of funds necessary to meet current debt service requirements) have been transferred to the General Fund during the year ended June 30, 1992 as provided for under the statutes of the State of Arkansas. 16 THE LI'.l'rLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS Notes to Combined Financial Statements (Continued) June 30, 1992 Note 3: Fixed Assets The following is a summary of the major components of fixed assets of the School District: Balance Balance June 30, 1991 Additions Transfers June 30, 1992 Land s 2,861,085 s $ s 2,861,085 Land improvements 925,255 925,255 Buildings ll0,329,255 3,005,659 2,503,834 ll5,838,748 Furniture and equipment 28,841,397 4,595,568 33,436,965 Construction-in- progress 2,503,834 4,090,055 (2,503,834) 4,090,055 Totals s 145,460,826 s 11,691 c 282 s s 157,152,108 The School District has entered into contracts for the construction or renovation of various facilities as shown below. Retainage payable in relation to these contracts totaled approximately $154,000 at June 30, 1992. June 30, 1992 Balances Project Expended/ Co111R1itment Authorization Accrued Remaining Cloverdale Elementary and Junior High s 2,824,881 s 2,800,630 s 24,251 Forrest Heights Elementary 4,168,501 658,297 3,510,204 Other projects 1,114,369 631,128 483,241 s 8,107,751 s 4,090,055 s 4,017,696 The commitments shown above reflect only those balances for contracts that had been entered into as of June 30, 1992. The entire fund balance for the Capital Projects Fund is designated for renovations and additions to currently held fixed assets, as well as for acquisitions of new assets. 17 THE LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS Notes to Combined Financial Statements (Continued) June 30, 1992 Note 4: Long-Term Debt On September 24, 1990, the School District received $6,000,000 of desegregation loan proceeds from, and executed a promissory note to, the State of Arkansas. On March 10, 1992, the School District received an additional $4,500,000 of desegregation loan proceeds from the State of Arkansas (see Note 7). The principal of each note will bear interest beginning on the seventh anniversary of the date of the note at the rate of 3% per annum and is to be repaid in twenty equal annual installments beginning seven years after the execution of the loan. The notes are secured by liens in favor of the State on certain new and existing millages. Under terms of the desegregation settlement agreements, if at any time prior to December 31, 2000, the composite scores of the School District's black students (excluding special education students) on a standardized test agreed upon by the State and the School District are 90% or greater of the composite scores of the School District's white students (excluding special education students), any principal or interest payments previously paid on the desegregation loan will be repaid to the School District and any outstanding loan balances forgiven. A summary of all long-term debt transactions of the School District for the year ended June 30, 1992, is as follows: Balance at July 1, 1991 New debt issued: Construction school bonds - Capital Projects Fund Desegregation loan - General Fund Present value of capital lease obligations related to purchases of equipment and buses - General Fund Refunding school bonds (Note 5) - Debt Service Fund Total new debt issued Debt retired: School bonds principal payments Capital lease obligations Revolving loan Pulaski County, Arkansas Special School District (Note 7) Refunded school bonds (Note 5) Total debt retired Balance at June 30, 1992 18 $ 71,877,108 15,433,600 4,500,000 2,209,905 22,143,505 7,499,000 29,642,505 2,196,000 2,083,847 60,000 1,201,525 5,541,372 7,265,000 12,806,372 $ 88 I 713 I 241 - THE Lli'l'LE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS Notes to Combined Financial Statements (Continued) June 30, 1992 Note 4: Long-Term Debt (Continued) Long-term debt at June 30, 1992 is comprised of the following: School bonds, construction and refunding issues Pulaski County Special School District (Note 7) Arkansas State Department of Education revolving loan Arkansas State Department of Education desegregation loans Capital lease obligations, secured by transportation, computer and other equipment Principal Balance $ 64,475,150 8,750,798 120,000 10,500,000 4,867,293 $ 88,713,241 Interest Rates 3.25% - 7.2% 4.2% - 10% 9% 3% 6.6% - 8.9% Maturities Semiannually\nthrough 2020 Semiannually\nthrough 2003 Semiannually\nthrough 1994 Annually\n1998-2018 Various\nthrough 1995 The annual requirements to amortize all principal balances of long-term debt outstanding at June 30, 1992 are as follows: Year Ending June 30 Alllount 1993 s 6,230,799 1994 5,138,449 1995 4,983,375 1996 4,206,277 1997 4, 243,878 Thereafter 63 . 910,463 s 88,713,241 Total interest payable in the future on debt outstanding at June 30, 1992, excluding amounts for the desegregation loan, is approximately $54.2 million. Interest on the desegregation loans, assuming twenty year amortizations beginning in 1998 and 1999, would approximate $3 million. 19 II 11 THE LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS Notes to Combined Financial Statements (Continued) June 30, 1992 Note 5: Advance Bond Refunding On May 27, 1992, the School District issued $7,499,000 in refunding bonds to advance refund $7,265,000 of outstanding 1987 construction bonds (\"refunded bonds\"). The net proceeds of approximately $7,269,000 (after payment of underwriting fees, insurance, and other issuance costs) were used to satisfy the trustee of the refunded bonds, which were called on June 1, 1992. As a result of the advance refunding, the School District reduced its total debt services payments over the next 15 years by approximately $587,000, which resulted in an economic gain (difference between the present values of the debt service payments on the old and new debt) of approximately $386,000. The balance of unamortized deferred bond issuance cost related to the 1987 bonds of approximately $179,000 was written off resulting in a loss for financial statement purposes in that amount. Note 6: Retirement Plans Most School District employees are required by law to be covered by the Arkansas Teacher Retirement System (ATRS) except for certain bus drivers, cafeteria workers and janitors, who are covered by the Arkansas Public Employees Retirement System (APERS) . Effective July 1, 1991, all new employees of the School District, including part-time employees, must be members of the Arkansas Teacher Retirement System. Both systems are multiple-employer, cost-sharing public employee retirement systems which also provide death and disability benefits. Benefits for both systems are established by state statute. ATRS employees who retire under the system are entitled to a retirement benefit, payable monthly for life, equal to 1.95 percent of their final average salary for each contributory year of credited service and 1. 23 percent of their final average salary for each non-contributory year of credited service. APERS employees who retire are entitled to a retirement benefit, payable monthly for life, equal to 1.872 percent for contributory employees and 1.55 percent for non-contributing employees of average pay for each year of credited service, or a minimum of $150. Under both ATRS and APERS, benefits fully vest upon reaching 10 years of service. Employees electing early retirement receive reduced retirement benefits. 20 THE LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS Notes to Combined Financial Statements (Continued) June 30, 1992 Note 6: Retirement Plans (Continued) Contribution requirements are established by State statute for both systems. For the year ended June 30, 1992, employees covered by the system had the option to contribute a portion (generally 6%) of their salary. Federal funds of the School District were used to provide the matching contribution for all eligible ATRS employees who are paid through Federal programs, while the state provided the matching contribution for other ATRS employees. The School District provides for the matching for APERS employees. The payroll for employees covered by the ATRS for the year ended June 30, 1992, was approximately $85,000,000 and the payroll for employees covered by APERS for the same period was approximately $6,000,000. The School District's total payroll was approximately $91,000,000. For the year ended June 30, 1992, retirement and matching contributions for School District employees, and the related percentages of covered payroll, are as follows: $ In Thousands ATRS APERS Total Employee contributions $ 1,970 2.32% s 18 .30% $ 1,988 2.62% Matching Contributions: School District 230 3.83 230 3.83 State 9,634 11. 33 9,634 11. 33 Federal 417 ______,_j_2 417 ______,_j_2 $ 12,021 14.14% $ 248 4.13% $ 121269 18.27% The pension benefit obligation (PBO) is a standard disclosure measure of the present value of pension benefits, adjusted for the effects of projected salary increases and any step-rate benefits, estimated to be payable in the future as a result of employee service to date. The measure, which is the actuarial present value of credited projected benefits, is intended to help users assess each system's funding status on a going-concern basis, assess progress made in accumulating sufficient assets to pay benefits when due, and make certain comparisons. Neither ATRS or APERS make separate measurements of assets and PBO for individual employers, thus such information is not available as it relates to the School District. 21 THE LI'rfLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS Notes to Combined Financial Statements (Continued) June 30, 1992 Note 6: Retirement Plans (Continued) The total PBO, net assets available for benefits and funded status at June 30, 1991, the date of the latest actuarial valuation, is as follows. In Thousands ATRS APERS Total Pension benefit obligation $ 2,543,856 $ 1,263,582 $ 3,807,438 Net assets available for benefits 2,434,314 11516,777 3,951,091 Unfunded (overfunded) pension benefit obligation $ 109,542 $ (253,195) $ (143,653) Ten year historical trend information showing each system's progress in accumulating sufficient assets to pay benefits when due is presented in each system's June 30, 1991 comprehensive annual financial report. Note 7: Desegregation and Related Funding Issues During 1982, the School District brought litigation to consolidate the three school districts in Pulaski County, Arkansas. This was an interdistrict school desegregation case involving complex federal litigation in both trial and appellate courts. In relation to the remedy issues of this litigation, the Pulaski County Special School District (PCSSD) and the Little Rock School District entered into agreements, which were approved by the Courts, for the transfers of certain schools, buildings and related personal property between the districts. The Little Rock School District assumed approximately $14. 6 million in long-term debt (see Note 4) related to the properties transferred to them. The transfer of property also resulted in approximately $300 million in property assessment values being transferred to the Little Rock School District effective with the January 1, 1987 assessments. The litigation also resulted in the courts ordering the School District to initiate certain desegregation programs with the Arkansas Department of Education (the State) being liable for certain aspects of funding the programs. All major financial aspects of this litigation have been settled and accepted by the courts. 22 THE LlrrLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS Notes to Combined Financial Statements (Continued) June 30, 1992 Note 7: Desegregation and Related Funding Issues (Continued) Under the terms of the settlement agreements, the Arkansas Department of Education agreed to pay the School District a total of $71 million, net of $2 million in legal fees awarded the NAACP Legal Defense and Education Fund, Inc. This amount included approximately $57,130,000 for compensatory education and other desegregation programs and $13,870,000 for cash equivalent payments in lieu of formula guarantees. In addition, the State agreed to loan the School District up to $20 million between July 1, 1989 and July 1, 1999. The loan proceeds are to be used for desegregation purposes and are secured by liens in favor of the State on certain new and existing millages. As of June 30, 1992, $10,500,000 has been received in regard to the loan provisions of the agreement (see Note 4). During the year ended June 30, 1992, the School District recorded settlement proceeds of $8,637,482 in the general fund for compensatory education programs and other desegregation expenses. Included in this amount is a receivable of $4,889,954 due the School District on July 1, 1992 for reimbursement of desegregation expenditures made prior to year end. In addition, the School District received and recorded additional cash equivalent payments in lieu of Minimum Foundation Program Aid (HFPA) formula guarantees totaling $2,000,000 which are recorded as HFPA revenue in the general fund. Net amounts of future funding expected to be received under the above described agreements (excluding potential loan proceeds) at June 30, 1992 are as follows: MFPA Year Ending Desegregation Guarantees Total June 30, 1993 $ 8,926,606 $ 2,000,000 $ 10,926,606 June 30, 1994 8,094,112 2,000,000 10,094,112 June 30, 1995 6,042,591 2,000,000 8,042,591 June 30, 1996 3,829,942 1,870,114 5,700,056 Future years 683,125 683,125 Total $ 27,576,376 $ 7,870,114 $ 35,446,490 23 THE LITI'LE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS Notes to Combined Financial Statements {Continued) June 30, 1992 Note 8: Agency Funds As the School District serves only in a fiduciary capacity for the school activity funds and other agency funds, related transactions are not reflected in the combined statement of revenues, expenditures and changes in fund balance. A summary of transactions in these school activity and other agency funds during the year ended June 30, 1992, and the resulting change in amounts due to the school activity groups and other agencies, is as follows: Due to school activity groups and other agencies at June 30, 1991 Transactions during the year ended June 30, 1992: School activities and other agencies revenues Interest on investments School activities and other agencies expenditures Due to school activity groups and other agencies at June 30, 1992 Note 9: Cash and Investments s 1,008,865 3,587,373 37,043 {3,551,601) $ 1,081,680 Arkansas statutes authorize school districts to deposit their funds in any bank located in the State of Arkansas. In addition, they may invest in bonds of the United States of America, general obligation bonds of the State of Arkansas, and bank certificates of deposit or repurchase agreements from a bank or savings and loan that has pledged direct obligations of, or obligations which are fully guaranteed by, the United States of America. At June 30, 1992, the total \"carrying amount\" of deposits with financial institutions was $2,317,477 {exclusive of $627,218 reflected as bank overdrafts for financial statement purposes). The related \"bank balance\" was $3,596,590 and is categorized as follows: Amount insured by the FDIC Amount collateralized with securities held by the Federal Reserve Bank in the School District's name Uncollateralized Total bank balance 24 $ 151,884 1,300,000 2,144,706 $ 3,596,590 THE LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS Notes to Combined Financial Statements (Continued) June 30, 1992 Note 9: Cash and Investments (Continued) Investments of the School District (including Agency Funds) at June 30, 1992, are summarized below. Investments, which are all represented by specific identifiable investment securities, are classified as to credit risk by the three categories described as follows: Category l - Insured or registered, or securities held by the School District or its agent in the School District's name. Category 2 - Uninsured and unregistered, with securities held by the counterparty's trust department or agent in the School District's name. Category 3 - Uninsured and unregistered, with securities held by the counterparty, or by its trust department or agent, but not in the School District's name. Total Category Carrying l 2 3 Amount Certificates of deposit $ 150,000 $ 300,000 $ ..:. $ 450,000 Treasury bills 30,442,346 30,442,346 Repurchase agreements 3,550,000 3,550,000 $ 30,592,346 $ 300,000 $ 3,550,000 $ 34,442,346 Note 10: Maqnet School Funding As a part of its desegregation program (see Note 7), the Federal court directed the School District to participate in a \"Magnet School'' system and has vested control of these schools in a Magnet Review Committee (MRC). Six schools from the Little Rock School District are organized as a separate reporting group under the control of the MRC. During the year ended June 30, 1992, the approved funding level of these schools (\"the Magnets\") totaled $3,682 per average daily membership (ADM). The State contributes one half of the cost ($1,841 per ADM) with Pulaski County Special School District (PCSSD), North Little Rock School District (NLRSD) and Little Rock School District (LRSD) sharing the balance of the cost. The State pays its portion of the NLRSD and PCSSD contributions directly to the respective districts for subsequent remission to the LRSD. 25 II II II II I I I I I I THE LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS Notes to Combined Financial Statements (Continued) June 30, 1992 Note 10: Magnet School Funding (Continued) Average daily membership: LRSD NLRSD PCSSD Total ADM Contribution rate - local sources Total schools' contributions Less operating transfers from General Fund to Magnet Fund Total magnet revenue - local sources Total magnet revenue - state sources 2,304.2 508.0 959.6 3,771.8 $ 11841 $ 6,943,920 (31 7381667) $ 312051253 $ 6,9431921 The Little Rock School District accounts for the Magnet School's operating revenues and expenses within its Special Revenue Fund since these funds are restricted to the operations of the Magnets. The Little Rock School District's portion of the total costs consists of $3,738,667 recorded as an operating transfer from the General Fund with the balance of $503,365 being indirect administrative cost contributions. ' ~ In addition to the above discussed operating revenues, the School District is also reimbursed by the NLRSD and PCSSD for debt service payments for capital improvements to the Magnets. The total of such reimbursements (which are reflected in revenues of the Debt Service Fund) for the year ended June 30, 1992 are as follows: North Little Rock School District Pulaski County Special School District Total Note 11: Note Payable $ 34,954 881508 $ 1231462 On April 14, 1992, the School District issued $13,815,000 of tax and revenue anticipation promissory notes (TRANS). The TRANS were issued to provide moneys needed to meet the School District's anticipated operating cash flow needs. The principal, plus accrued interest at a rate of 4.125% per annum , is payable in full December 31, 1992. Security for the TRANS is a pledge of revenue of the School District for the year ended June 30, 1992. Total interest charges incurred on notes payable, including balances under previous TRANS, for the year ended June 30, 1992 were approximately $429,000. 26 THE LITrLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS Notes to Combined Financial Statements (Continued) June 30, 1992 Note 12: Other Litigation and Contingencies At June 30, 1992, the School District is a defendant in various legal actions. Several actions involve claims by former employees asserting discriminatory hiring practices. The School District intends to vigorously contest these claims. Management and legal counsel are of the opinion that the likelihood of an unfavorable outcome is small and, thus, no provision has been made in the financial statements for any potential liabilities. During the year ended June 30, 1991, judgments were entered against the School District totaling approximately $580,000 to be paid to the District's former attorneys for services performed on behalf of the School District in the Pulaski County school desegregation case. The School District estimated and recorded a liability and related expenditure for $580,000 in the June 30, 1991 combined financial statements. The School District appealed the judgement and in January, 1992 the courts reduced the judgement to approximately $267,000 plus interest. This resulted in a change in accounting estimate of approximately $293,000 which is reflected as a reduction in legal expense for the year ended June 30, 1992. Note 13: Risk Management The School District is exposed to various risks of loss related to torts\ntheft of, damage to, and destruction of assets\nerrors and omissions\ninjuries to employees and students\nand natural disasters. Effective October 1, 1990, the School District established a Risk Management Fund within the General Fund to account for and finance its uninsured risks of loss. Under this program, the Risk Management Fund provides coverage up to a maximum of $100,000 for each property damage, general liability or other covered claim. The School District purchases commercial insurance for claims in excess of coverage provided by the Fund and for all other risks of loss. Settled claims did not exceed loss fund or other commercial coverage during the past two fiscal years. The claims liability of $230,295 recorded in the General Fund at June 30, 1992 is based on the requirements of Governmental Accounting Standards Board Statement No. 10, which requires that a liability for claims be reported if information prior to the issuance of the financial statements indicates that it is probable that a liability has been incurred at the date of the financial statements and the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated. The claims liability includes an amount for claims that have been incurred but not reported. 27 I II I 11 I THE LlrrrLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS Notes to Combined Financial Statements (Continued} June 30, 1992 Note 13: Risk Management (Continued) Claims liability activity, by \"loss year,\" for the year ended June 30, 1992 is as follows: Loss Year 1990-1991 1991-1992 Total Claims liability, beginning of year $ 252,068 $ $ 252,068 Claims paid (183,516} (141,496} (325,012} Current year claims and changes in estimates (291885) 333,124 303,239 Claims liability, end of year $ 381667 $ 191,628 $ 2301295 28 - -- --- J 1, I II 11 II I I SUPPLEMENTARY SCHEDULES 29 Schedule 1 THE LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS Combining Schedule of Revenues and Expenditures - Special Revenue Funds Year Ended June 30, 1992 Total Federal Food Other Magnet (Memorandum Programs Service Programs Schools Only) REVENUES Local assistance $ 28,813 $ 2,280,718 $ 397,176 $ 3,205,253 $ 5,911,960 State assistance 795,781 6,943,921 7,739,702 Federal financial assistance 5,258,734 3,981,422 9,240,156 Total revenues 5,287,547 6,262,140 1,192,957 10,149,174 22,891,818 EXPENDITURES Basic programs 1,750 103,650 8,889,538 8,994,938 Exceptional child programs 300,055 276,198 576,253 Vocational-technical programs 316,806 199,873 572,674 1,089,353 Adult continuing education programs 92,640 700,526 793,166 Compensatory education programs 3,119,617 19,881 5,333 3,144,831 Other instructional programs 13,349 12,286 181,902 207,537 Instructional support services 667,046 1,069,833 1,736,879 Operation and maintenance of plant 4,792 1,050,414 1,055,206 General administration 83,344 25,014 1,207,390 1,315,748 Capital outlay 274,348 322,154 35,704 131,194 763,400 Food services 5,897,064 5,897,064 Community services 298,553 298,553 Indirect and other 115 I 247 503,365 618,612 Total expenditures 5,287,547 6,219,218 i ,096,934 13,887,841 26,491,540 Excess of revenues over (under) expenditures 42,922 96,023 (3,738,667) (3,599,722) OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES) Operating transfer in for LRSD portion of Magnet funding 3,738,667 3,738,667 Total other financing sources 3,738,667 3,738,667 Excess of revenues over expenditures and other financing uses $ $ 42,922 $ 96,023 $ 138,945 30 LI'ITLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS Schedule 2 Rev.enues of Salary, Operating and Debt Service Funds (Basis of Accounting as Prescribed by Handbook II) Year Ended June 30, 1992 REVENUE - LOCAL SOURCES Current taxes Delinquent taxes 40% pullback Excess treasurer's fee Depository interest Revenue in lieu of taxes Miscellaneous and rents Interest on investments Athletic receipts REVENUE - COUNTY SOURCES County General Severance tax REVENUE - STATE SOURCES MFPA Apportionment Vocational Handicapped children Early childhood Orphan children Transportation Compensatory education Incentive fund Adult education Desegregation settlement Desegregation loan REVENUE - OTHER SOURCES Total General and Debt Service Funds (Memorandum Only) Unadjusted Adjusted Handbook II Net Handbook II Budget Revenues Adjustments Revenues $ 38,196,979 $ 3,600,000 21,222,860 140,000 400,000 224,667 420,850 300,000 85,000 64,590,356 73,419 11,000 84 419 28,118,907 73,419 1,474,485 629,752 147,050 3,000 2,983,190 874,311 1,798,665 624,119 8,637,482 4, 500,000 49,864, 380 38,196,979 $ 4,250,186 21,081,833 140,858 241,476 224,667 458,044 356,198 100,857 65,051,098 73,419 15,350 88 769 27,264,460 73,426 1,513,699 824,870 147,050 3,000 2,379,879 858,743 1,770,486 697,589 8,637,482 21,422 21,422 265,884 4,500,000 ---- 48,670,684 ----=2=6-=-5,L..\n,8:....:8:....:4'- $ 38,196,979 4,250,186 21,081,833 140,858 241,476 224,667 458,044 377,620 100,857 65,072,520 73,419 15 350 88 769 27,264,460 73,426 1,513,699 824,870 147,050 3,000 2,645,763 858, 743 1,770,486 697, 589 8, 637,482 4,500,000 48, 936,568 Public Law 874 44,625 9,385 129,428 394,675 9,385 129, 428 2,800,860 2,9 39, 673 Transfer from federal grant 111,453 Transfer from bond account --~8~00~,~0~0-\"-0 956,078 533,488 2,406,185 2,406,185 Total revenues $115,495,233 $114,344,039 $ 2,693,491 $117,037,530 31 ..... LITI'LE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS Expenditures of Salary, Operating and Debt Service Funds (Basis of Accounting as Prescribed by Handbook II) Year Ended June 30, 1992 Schedule 3 Total General and Debt Service Funds (Memorandum Only) Unadjusted Adjusted Handbook II Net Handbook II Budget Ext\u0026gt;enditures Adjustments Ex~enditures Certified salaries $ 56,475,397 $ 56,324,205 $ $ 56,324,205 Non-certified salaries 16,616,953 16,867,007 16,867,007 Employee benefits 9,247,100 8,992,742 152,964 9,145,706 Purchased services 10,240,766 9,036,188 280,823 9,317,0ll Supplies and materials 5,805,355 4,010,761 4.010,761 Capital outlay 3,709,961 3,959,731 226,109 4,185,840 Debt service 8,718,196 7,950,100 2,442,525 10,392,625 Other objects 4,786,843 5,402,198 (441,726) 4,960,472 Contingency 388,163 Total expenditures $ ll5,988,734 $ 112,542,932 $ 2,660,695 $ ll5,203,627 32 I I I I I I I I I ..... LITrLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS Schedule 4 Reconciliation of General and Debt Service Fund Balances - Generally Accepted Accounting Principles and Handbook II Basis of Accounting June 30, 1992 Fund balances at June 30, 1991 - Handbook II Basis Handbook II revenues (Schedule 3) Handbook II expenditures (Schedule 4) Fund balances at June 30, 1992 - Handbook II Basis Adjustments to convert to generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP): Property taxes - debt services Property taxes - general fund Special revenue fund adjustments Fund Balances at June 30, 1992 - GAAP Basis General fund Debt service fund Total 33 $ 990,117 s $ s 117,037,530 (115,203,627) 2,824,020 4,886,537 {4,209,896) {14,812) 3,485,849 2,309,784 1,176,065 3,485,849 i I I I School Bonds: THE LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS Schedule of Long-Term Debt June 30, 1992 $4,485,000 December, 1965 Construction School Bonds\npayable in annual installments through 1995\ninterest at 3.25% to 3.6% $2,051,000 June, 1973 Construction School Bonds\npayable in annual installments through 1993\ninterest at 4.7% to 5.0% $6,482,700 June, 1977 Construction School Bonds\npayable in annual installments through 1996\ninterest at 4.25% to 5.1% $6,134,565 March, 1979 Construction School Bonds\npayable in annual installments through 1999\ninterest at 5.4% to 6.0% $4,889,200 March, 1980 Surplus Revenue Construction School Bonds\npayable in annual installments through 1994\ninterest at 5.75% to 6.0% $5,512,750 May, 1988 Construction School Bonds\npayable in annual installments through 2007\ninterest at 6.2% to 7.2% $3,371,000 June, 1988 Refunding School Bonds\npayable in annual installments through 1999\ninterest at 5.6% to 6.6% $8,164,100 September, 1989 Construction School Bonds\npayable in annual installments through 2008\ninterest at 6.1% to 6.75% $17,197,450 September, 1990 Construction School Bonds\npayable in annual installments through 2020\ninterest at 6.25% to 7.2% $15,433,600 October, 1991 Construction School Bonds\npayable in annual installments through 2020\ninterest at 6.1% to 7.0% $7,499,000 May, 1992 Refunding Bonds\npayable in annual installments through 2007\ninterest at 5.6% to 6.50% Total bonds 34 Schedule 5 $ 966,000 305,000 2,405,000 3,285,000 1,490,000 5,215,000 2,535,000 8,144,100 17,197,450 15,433,600 7,499,000 64,475,150 (Continued) THE LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS schedule of Long-Term Debt (Continued) June 30, 1992 Capital lease obligations: Lease payable in annual installments through September 1992, interest at 7.9% Lease payable in annual installments through October 1992, interest at 7.0% Lease payable in annual installments through April 1993\ninterest at 8.0% Lease payable in monthly installments through July 1993\ninterest at 7.8% Lease payable in semi-annual installments through July 1994\ninterest at 8.5% Lease payable in annual installments through February 1993\ninterest at 5.9% Lease payable in annual installments through April 1994\ninterest at 8.9% Lease payable in annual installments through October 1993\ninterest at 7.62% Lease payable in annual installments through October 1994\ninterest at 7.99% Lease payable in annual installments through March 1995\ninterest at 7.95% Lease payable in monthly installments through February 1994\ninterest at 7.42% Lease payable in monthly installments through July 1994\ninterest at 7.9% Lease payable in annual installments through July 1996\ninterest at 6.7% Lease pay.able in annual installments through July 1996\ninterest at 6.7% Lease payable in annual installments through July 1996, interest at 6.97% Total capital lease obligations 35 $ Schedule 5 (Continued} 24,105 6,698 20,852 58,783 450,471 1,007,820 29,917 100,038 903,651 71,085 62,123 66,226 981, 725 496,384 587,415 4,867,293 (Continued) Other: THE LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS Schedule of Long-Term Debt (Continued) June 30, 1992 Debt payable to the Pulaski County Special School District\npayable semi-annually through 2003\nvarying interest rates Revolving loan\npayable in semi-annual installments through January 1994 at 9% Desegregation loan\npayable in 20 annual installments beginning September, 1997\ninterest at 3% Desegregation loan\npayable in 20 annual installments beginning March, 1998\ninterest at 3% Total Long-Term Debt 36 Schedule 5 (Continued) $ 8,750,798 120,000 6,000,000 4,500,000 S 88,713,241 THE LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS Reconciliation of Fund Equity - State Report and Financial Statements June 30, 1992 Governmental Fund Tvpes Fund equity per State Report*: Salary, Operating and Debt Service Funds $ 2,321,666 Building Funds 22,156,036 Federal Programs 607,079 Student Activity Fund 25,084,781 Current period adjustments, net: Handbook II - revenues and expenditures (413,325) Handbook II - fund equity 315,335 Other 18,647 Fund balances not included in State Report: Revolving Funds 373,726 Food Service Fund 2,246,728 KLRE-FM/KUAR-FM Cumulative effect of prior years differences 190,325 Fund equity per financial statements $ 27,816,217 Due to school activity groups and other agencies per financial statements Schedule 6 Fiduciary Fund rypes $ 802,950 802,950 181,915 96,815 $ 1,081,680 * Unaudited financial report issued to the Arkansas State Department of Education on August 28, 1992 37 OTHER REPORTS AND SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION 38 ~and~ CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS Little Rock Office 201 E. Markham Suite 500  Little Rock, AR 72201 (501) 375-2025  FAX (501) 375-8704 Texarkana Office: 701 Arkansas Blvd. Texarkana. AR 75502 1501) 773-2168  FAX 1501) 774-7244 INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' REPORT ON INTERNAL CONTROL STRUCTURE BASED ON A STUDY AND EVALUATION MADE AS A PART OF AN AUDIT OF THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH GOVEllNHENT AUDITING STANDARDS AND THE ADDITIONAL TESTS REQUIRED BY 0MB CIRCULAR A-128 The Board of Directors The Little Rock School District of Pulaski County, Arkansas Little Rock, Arkansas We have audited the combined financial statements of The Little Rock School District of Pulaski County, Arkansas (the School District), as of and for the year ended June 30, 1992, and have issued our report thereon dated November 20, 1992. We have also audited the School District's compliance with requirements applicable to major federal financial assistance programs and have issued our report thereon dated November 20, 1992. We conducted our audits in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards\nGovernment Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the United States\nand Office of Management and Budget (OHB) Circular A-128, Audits of State and Local Governments. Those standards and OHB Circular A-128 require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the combined financial statements are free of material misstatement and about whether the School District complied with laws and regulations, noncompliance with which would be material to a major federal financial assistance program. In planning and performing our audits for the year ended June 30, 1992, we considered the School District's internal control structure in order to determine our auditing procedures for the purpose of expressing our opinions on the combined financial statements and on its compliance with requirements applicable to major federal financial assistance programs and to report on the internal control structure in accordance with OHB Circular A-128, and not to provide assurance on the internal control structure. The management of The Little Rock School District of Pulaski County , Arkansas is responsible for establishing and maintaining an internal control structure. In fulfilling this responsibility, estimates and judgments by management are required to assess the expected benefits and related costs of internal control structure polici es and procedures. The objectives of an internal control structure are to provide management with reasonable, but not absolute, assurance that assets are safeguarded against loss from unauthorized use or disposition, that transactions are executed in accordance with management's authorization and recorded properly to permit the preparation of combined financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and that federal financial assistance programs are managed in compliance with applicable laws and regulations. Because of inherent limitations in any internal 39 Members American Institute of Certified Public Accou ntants Private Companies Practice Section and S.E.C. Practice Section Board of Directors The Little Rock School District of Pulaski County, Arkansas Page Two control structure, errors, irregularities, or instances of noncompliance may nevertheless occur and not be detected. Also, projection of any evaluation of the structure to future periods is subject to the risk that procedures may become inadequate because of changes in conditions or that the effectiveness of the design and operation of policies and procedures may deteriorate. For the purpose of this report, we have classified the significant internal control structure policies and procedures in the following categories: 1. Accounting Controls - Cash - Fund balances - Revenues/receivables - Payrolls - Cash receipts - Fixed assets - Expenditures/payables - Investments - Cash disbursements 2. Controls Used in Administering Federal Programs General Requirements: Specific Requirements: Political activity Davis-Bacon Act Civil rights Cash management Federal financial reports Allowable costs/cost principles Drug-free workplace act Administrative requirements Types of services Eligibility Matching, level of effort, or earmarking Reporting Special tests and provisions For all of the internal control structure categories listed above, we obtained an understanding of the design of relevant policies and procedures and determined whether they have been placed in operation, and we assessed control risk. During the year ended June 30, 1992, the School District expended 89% of its total federal financial assistance under major federal financial assistance programs. We performed tests of controls, as required by the 0MB circular A-128, to evaluate the effectiveness of the design and operation of internal control structure policies and procedures that we considered relevant to preventing or detecting material noncompliance with specific requirements, general requirements, and requirements governing claims for advances and reimbursements and amounts claimed or used for matching that are applicable to each of the School District's major federal financial assistance programs, which are identified in the accompanying schedule of federal financial assistance. Our procedures were less in scope than would be necessary to render an opinion on these internal control structure policies and procedures. Accordingly, we do not express such an opinion. 40 The Board of Directors The Little Rock School District of Pulaski County, Arkansas Page Three We noted certain matters involving the internal control structure and its operation that we consider to be reportable conditions under standards established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants. Reportable conditions involve matters coming to our attention relating to significant deficiencies in the design or operation of the internal control structure that, in our judgment, could adversely affect the School District's ability to record, process, summarize, and report financial data consistent with the assertions of management in the combined financial statements or to administer federal financial assistance programs in accordance with applicable laws and regulations. FIXED ASSETS The School District does not have a complete inventory or detail subsidiary ledger of all fixed assets which can be agreed or reconciled to total general fixed assets as reported in the combined financial statements. The School District's fixed asset tracking system should be expanded to include all of its assets and to provide for a complete periodic physical inventory count of capital assets. The inventory should be used to determine that all assets purchased are still in possession of the School District and that assets are being utilized in an effective and efficient manner. In addition, the \"Common Rule\" issued by the Office of Management and Budget outlines equipment management guidelines for property purchased with federal funds having a useful life of more than one year and an original acquisition cost of $5,000 or more per unit. These guidelines require that a physical inventory of the property be taken and the results reconciled with the property records at least once every two years. INSURANCE PAYROLL WITIIlIOLDING Our review of the controls related to the payroll disbursements cycle revealed weakness in relation to the timely flow of information regarding notice of employee terminations from the personnel department to the payroll department. Due to the untimely exchange of information necessary to facilitate removal of terminated employees from insurance records and billings, premiums were inadvertently paid for persons who were no longer employees of the School District. We recommend that the School District implement procedures to facilitate a more timely exchange of information between departments to ensure accuracy of payroll records and the payment of billings for employee insurance premiums. 41 The Board of Directors The Little Rock School District of Pulaski County, Arkansas Page Four * * * * * * A material weakness is a reportable condition in which the design or operation of one or more of the internal control structure elements does not reduce to a relatively low level the risk that errors or irregularities in amounts that would be material in relation to the combined financial statements being audited or that noncompliance with laws and regulations that would be material to a federal financial assistance program may occur and not be detected within a timely period by employees in the normal course of performing their assigned functions. Our consideration of the internal control structure would not necessarily disclose all matters in the internal control structure that might be reportable conditions and, accordingly, would not necessarily disclose all reportable conditions that are also considered to be material weaknesses as defined above. However, we believe the reportable conditions described above are not material weaknesses. This report is intended for the information of the Board of Directors, management, and all applicable Federal and State agencies. However, this report is a matter of public record and its distribution is not limited. November 20, 1992 Little Rock, Arkansas 42 ~ {~o,oJ Certified Public Accountants !7/wma\u0026amp; tmd !7/wma\u0026amp; CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS Little Rock Office 201 E. Markham Suite 500  Little Rock, AR 72201 15011 375-2025  FAX 15011375-8704 Texarkana Office: 701 Arkansas Blvd. Texarkana, AR 75502 15011773-2168  FAX 1501) 774-7244 INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' REPORT ON COMPLIANCE BASED ON AN AUDIT OF THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH GOVERNHENT AUDITING STANDARDS The Board of Directors The Little Rock School District of Pulaski County, Arkansas Little Rock, Arkansas We have audited the combined financial statements of The Little Rock School District of Pulaski County, Arkansas (the School District), as of and for the year ended June 30, 1992, and have issued our report thereon dated November 20, 1992. We conducted our audit in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards and Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the United States. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. Compliance with laws, regulations, contracts, and grants applicable to The Little Rock School District of Pulaski County, Arkansas is the responsibility of the School District's management. As part of obtaining reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement, we performed tests of the School District's compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations, contracts, and grants. However, the objective of our audit of the combined financial statements was not to provide an opinion on overall compliance with such provisions. Accordingly, we do not express such an opinion. The results of our tests indicate that, with respect to the items tested, The Little Rock School District of Pulaski County, Arkansas complied, in all material respects, with the provisions referred to in the preceding paragraph. With respect to items not tested, nothing came to our attention that caused us to believe that the Scho\u0026lt;\n\u0026gt;l District had not complied, in all material respects, with those provisions. This report is intended for the information of the Board of Directors, management, and all applicable Federal and state agencies. However this report is a matter of public record and its distribution is not limited. November 20, 1992 Little Rock, Arkansas Certified Public Accountants 43 Members American Institute of Certified Public Accountants Private Companies Practice Section and S.E.C. Practice Section ~@d~ CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS little Rock Office 201 E. Markham Su ite 500  Little Rock, AR 72201 1501) 375-2025  FAX 15011375-8704 Texarkana Office: 701 Arkansas Blvd. Texarkana, AR 75502 1501 ) 773-2168  FAX 1501) 774-7244 INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' REPORT ON COMPLIANCE WITH GENERAL REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO FEDERAL FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS The Board of Directors The Little Rock School District of Pulaski County, Arkansas Little Rock, Arkansas We have audited the financial statements of the Little Rock School District of Pulaski County, Arkansas (the School District) as of and for the year ended June 30, 1992, and have issued our report thereon dated November 20, 1992. We have applied procedures to test the School District's compliance with the following requirements applicable to its federal financial assistance programs, which are identified in the Schedule of Federal Financial Assistance for the year ended June 30, 1992: Political activity Davis-Bacon Act Civil rights Cash management Federal financial reports - Allowable costs/cost principles - Drug-free Workplace Act - Administrative requirements Our procedures were limited to the applicable procedures described in the Office of Management and Budget's Compliance Supplement for Single Audits of State and Local Governments. Our procedures were substantially less in scope than an audit, the objective of which is the expression of an opinion on the School District's compliance with the requirements listed in the preceding paragraph. Accordingly, we do not express such an opinion. With respect to the items tested, the results of those procedures disclosed no material instances of noncompliance with the requirements listed in the second paragraph of this report. With respect to items not te sted, nothing came to our attention that caused us to believe that the School District had not complied, in all material respects, with those requirements. However, the results of our procedures disclosed immaterial instances of noncompliance with those requirements, which are des cribed in the accompanying Schedule of Findings and Questi oned Costs . This report is intended for the information of the Board of Directors , management, and all applicable Federal and state agencies. However, this report is a matter of public record and its distribution is not limited. November 20, 1992 Little Rock, Arkansas ~o./U ,J_ ~a.A) Certified Pu' bli c Accountants Members American Institute of Certified Pu blic Accountants Private Companies Practice Section and S.E.C. Practice Section 44 f?bma\u0026amp;cmd f7bma\u0026amp; CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS Little Rock Office 201 E. Markham Suite 500  Little Rock, AR 72201 (5011 375-2025  FAX (5011375-8704 Texarkana Office: 701 Arkansas Blvd. Texarkana, AA 75502 (5011773-2168  FAX (SQ\nJ 774-7244 INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' REPORT ON COMPLIANCE WITH SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO MAJOR FEDERAL FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS The Board of Directors The Little Rock School District of Pulaski County, Arkansas Little Rock, Arkansas We have audited the combined financial statements of the Little Rock School District of Pulaski County, Arkansas (the School District), as of and for the year ended June 30, 1992, and have issued our report thereon dated November 20, 1992. We also have audited the School District's compliance with the requirements governing types of services allowed or unallowed\neligibility\nmatching, level of effort, or earmarking\nreporting\nlevels of service\ncarryover of grant funds\nparent involvement\nprogram evaluations\nservices provided to children enrolled in private schools\ncommitment of funds\nand schoolwide projects that are applicable to each of its major federal assistance programs, which are identified in the accompanying schedule of federal financial assistance for the year ended June 30, 1992. The management of the School District is responsible for compliance with those requirements. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on compliance with those requirements based on our audit. We conducted our audit of compliance with those requirements in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards\nGovernment Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the United States\nand 0MB Circular A-128, Audits of State and Local Governments. Those standards and 0MB Circular A-128 require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether material noncompliance with the requirements referred to above occurred. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence about the School District's compliance with those requirements. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion. In our opinion, the Little Rock School District of Pulaski County, Arkansas complied, in all material respects, with the requirements governing types of services allowed or unallowed\neligibility\nmatching, level of effort, or earmarking\nreporting\nlevels of service\ncarryover of grant funds\nparent involvement\nprogram evaluations\nservices provided to children enrolled in private schools\ncommitment of funds\nand schoolwide projects that are applicable to each of its major federal financial assistance programs for the year ended June 30, 1992. 45 Members American Institute of Certified Public Accountants Private Companies Practice Section and S.E C. Practice Section The Board of Directors The Little Rock School District of Pulaski County, Arkansas Page Two This report is intended for the information of the Board of Directors, management, and all applicable Federal and state agencies. However, this report is a matter of public record and its distribution is not limited. November 20, 1992 Little Rock, Arkansas 46 ~~~~ Certified Public Accountants Program Various Federal Programs THE LITfLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs June 30, 1992 Findings/Noncompliance The \"Common Rule\" requires that detailed property records be maintained identifying pertinent information related to equipment purchased with federal funds. Also, a physical inventory of this equipment should be performed at least every two years and the results reconciled with the detailed records. The School District does not maintain detailed property records, nor has a physical inventory of the property been performed. Questioned Costs NIA There are no unresolved findings or questioned costs from prior audit periods. 47 !7lwma\u0026amp; and !7lwma\u0026amp; CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS Little Rock Office 201 E. Markham  Suite 500  Little Rock, AR 72201 1501) 375-2025  FAX 1501) 375-8704 Texarkana Office: 701 Arkansas Blvd.  Texarkana, AR 75502 1501 ) 773-2168  FAX 1501 ) 774-7244 INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' REPORT ON SCHEDULE OF FEDERAL FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE The Board of Directors The Little Rock School District of Pulaski County, Arkansas Little Rock, Arkansas We have audited the combined financial statements of The Little Rock School District of Pulaski County, Arkansas (the School District) as of and for the year ended June 30, 1992, and have issued our report thereon dated November 20, 1992. These combined financial statements are the responsibility of the School District's management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these combined financial statements based on our audit. We conducted our audit in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards, Government Audi ting Standards issued by the Comptroller General of the United States, and the provisions of Office of Management and Budget Circular A- 128, Audits of State and Local Governments. Those standards and 0MB Circular A- 128 require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the combined financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion. Our audit was made for the purpose of forming an opinion on the combined financial statements of The Little Rock School District of Pulaski County, Arkansas taken as a whole. The accompanying Schedule of Federal Financial Assistance is presented for purposes of additional analys i s and is not a required part of the combined financial statements. The information in that schedule has been subjected to the auditing procedures applied in the audit of the combined financial statements and, in our opinion, is fairly stated in all material respects in relation to the combined financial statements taken as a whole. November 20, 1992 Little Rock, Arkansas 'Tfv~cw 1 ~a.Al Certified Public Accountants 48 Members American Institute of Certified Public Accountants Private Companies PracUce Section and S.E .C. Practice Section MAJOR PROGRAMS U.S. Department of Education Passed Through State Department of Education: CHAPTER I Compensatory Title VI-B Handicapped Vocational Education Act (Carl Perkins): 7/01/91 - 6/30/92 7/01/90 - 6/30/91 U.S. Department of Agriculture Passed Through State Department of Education: National School Lunch Program Passed Through State Department of Human Services: National School Lunch Program - Commodities Total Major Programs OTHER FEDERAL PROGRAMS U.S. Department of Education Passed Through State Department of Education: EESA TITLE II Public Law 874 ECIA CHAPTER II CHAPTER I Handicapped Drug Free Schools and Communities Act of 1986 Adult Basic Education U.S. Department of Labor Passed Through State Department of Education: CETA/Vocational Job Training Partnership Act U.S. Department of Energy Passed Through Arkansas Energy Office: Institutional Conservation Program Institutional Conservation Program THE LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS Schedule of Federal Financial Assistance Year Ended June 30, 1992 Federal CFDA Number 84.010 84.027 84.048 84.048 10.555 10.555 84.164A 84.041 84.151 84.009 . 84.186A 84.002 17.250 17.250 81.052 81.052 49 $ Program or Award Amount 3,500,025 653,866 344,945 372,269 N/A N/A 100,671 279,862 63,615 274,469 92,893 47,938 114,013 623 ,854 196,120 Federal Funds Revenues Recognized Expenditures $ 3,248,136 $ 3,248,136 517,152 517,152 271,574 271,574 90,768 90 768 4,127,630 4,127,630 3,492,855 3,492,855 466,875 466,875 3,959,730 3,959,730 8,087,360 8,087,360 57,122 57,122 9,385 9,385 223,948 223,948 50,007 50,007 216,333 216,333 92,893 92,893 649,688 649,688 47,233 47,233 66,547 66 547 113, 780 113,780 108,760 108,760 82,386 82,386 191,146 191,146 (Continued) THE LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS Schedule of Federal Financial Assistance (Continued) Year Ended June 30, 1992 OTHER FEDERAL PROGRAMS (CONTINUED) U.S. Department of Agriculture Passed Through State Department of Education: Nutritional Education U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Passed Through State Department of Human Services: Child Care and Development Block Grant Developmental Disabilities Planning Council - Basic Support Grant Social Services Block Grant - Contract Social Services Block Grant - Vouchers Total Other Federal Programs Total Federal Financial Assistance Note: Medicaid reimbursements paid to providers are defined as contracts for services and not federal assistance\ntherefore, $128,263 of Medicaid reimbursements received during the year ended June 30, 1992 are not covered by the reporting requirements of 0MB Circular A-128. Federal CFDA Number 10.564 93.037 93.630 93.667 93.667 50 Program or Award Amount $ NIA NIA 3,500 44,475 NIA $ $ Federal Funds Revenues Recognized 21,692 29,165 1,750 4,442 22,255 57,612 1,033,918 9,121,278 Expenditures $ 21,692 29,165 1,750 4,442 22,255 57,612 1,033,918 $ 9,121,278\nThis project was supported in part by a Digitizing Hidden Special Collections and Archives project grant from The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation and Council on Library and Information Resources.\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\u003cdcterms_creator\u003eLittle Rock School District\u003c/dcterms_creator\u003e\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n\n "},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1886","title":"Report: ''1991-1992 Incentive Schools Monitoring Report: Stephens, Summary''","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring (Little Rock, Ark.)"],"dc_date":["1992-06-05"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System"],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["School attendance","School integration","Students","Education--Evaluation","Education--Curricula","School superintendents","School districts","Teachers--Salaries, etc.","Educational planning","Magnet schools","Education"],"dcterms_title":["Report: ''1991-1992 Incentive Schools Monitoring Report: Stephens, Summary''"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Butler Center for Arkansas Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://arstudies.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/bcmss0837/id/1886"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["Available for use in research, teaching, and private study. Any other use requires permission from the Butler Center."],"dcterms_medium":["documents (object genre)"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null}],"pages":{"current_page":50,"next_page":51,"prev_page":49,"total_pages":362,"limit_value":12,"offset_value":588,"total_count":4341,"first_page?":false,"last_page?":false},"facets":[{"name":"educator_resource_mediums_sms","items":[{"value":"worksheets","hits":2},{"value":"bibliographies","hits":1}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":16,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"type_facet","items":[{"value":"Text","hits":4079},{"value":"StillImage","hits":389},{"value":"MovingImage","hits":1}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":16,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"creator_facet","items":[{"value":"Connor, Eugene, 1897-1973","hits":567},{"value":"South Carolina Council on Human Relations","hits":246},{"value":"Federal Bureau of Investigation","hits":186},{"value":"Arkansas. Department of Education","hits":112},{"value":"Little Rock School District","hits":106},{"value":"Scholarship, Education and Defense Fund for Racial Equality","hits":75},{"value":"McCain, James T.","hits":66},{"value":"United States. Federal Bureau of Investigation","hits":57},{"value":"Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (U.S.)","hits":52},{"value":"Mississippi Freedom Democratic Party","hits":50},{"value":"Huckaby, Elizabeth","hits":41}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"subject_facet","items":[{"value":"Education--Arkansas","hits":824},{"value":"Little Rock School District","hits":615},{"value":"Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","hits":575},{"value":"Birmingham (Ala.)--Officials and employees--Biography","hits":567},{"value":"Birmingham (Ala.)--Politics and government--20th century","hits":567},{"value":"Civil rights movements--Alabama--Birmingham","hits":567},{"value":"Politicians--Alabama--Birmingham","hits":567},{"value":"Civil rights workers","hits":507},{"value":"African Americans--Arkansas","hits":455},{"value":"Civil rights--Arkansas","hits":454},{"value":"Race discrimination--Arkansas","hits":454}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"subject_personal_facet","items":[{"value":"Connor, Eugene, 1897-1973","hits":567},{"value":"McCain, James T.","hits":259},{"value":"Huckaby, Elizabeth","hits":89},{"value":"Simpson, John Milton Bryan, 1903-1987","hits":89},{"value":"King, Martin Luther, Jr., 1929-1968","hits":79},{"value":"Davis, L. O.","hits":78},{"value":"Hayling, Robert Bagner","hits":74},{"value":"Bryant, Farris, 1914-2002","hits":52},{"value":"Phillips, Vel, 1924-2018","hits":42},{"value":"Stuart, Virgil","hits":39},{"value":"Mizell, M. Hayes","hits":35}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"name_authoritative_sms","items":[{"value":"Connor, Eugene, 1897-1973","hits":566},{"value":"Simpson, John Milton Bryan, 1903-1987","hits":89},{"value":"Davis, L. O.","hits":78},{"value":"King, Martin Luther, Jr., 1929-1968","hits":77},{"value":"Hayling, Robert Bagner","hits":74},{"value":"Bryant, Farris, 1914-2002","hits":52},{"value":"Phillips, Vel, 1924-2018","hits":42},{"value":"Stuart, Virgil","hits":39},{"value":"Ashmore, Harry S.","hits":34},{"value":"Brown, Robert R. (Robert Raymond), 1910-1994","hits":30},{"value":"Heiskell, John Netherland, 1872-1972","hits":30}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"event_title_sms","items":[{"value":"Little Rock Central High School Integration","hits":246},{"value":"Freedom Summer","hits":167},{"value":"Martin Luther King, Jr.'s Nobel Prize","hits":77},{"value":"Housing Act of 1961","hits":7},{"value":"Ole Miss Integration","hits":5},{"value":"Civil Rights Act of 1964","hits":3},{"value":"Freedom Rides","hits":2},{"value":"Integration of Clemson University","hits":2}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"location_facet","items":[{"value":"United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","hits":1644},{"value":"United States, 39.76, -98.5","hits":1603},{"value":"United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","hits":1212},{"value":"United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959","hits":1146},{"value":"United States, Alabama, Jefferson County, Birmingham, 33.52066, -86.80249","hits":567},{"value":"United States, Mississippi, 32.75041, -89.75036","hits":439},{"value":"United States, South Carolina, 34.00043, -81.00009","hits":409},{"value":"United States, Florida, 28.75054, -82.5001","hits":373},{"value":"United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, Dunbar High School, 34.73231, -92.28654","hits":206},{"value":"United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, Central High School, 34.73683, -92.29895","hits":189},{"value":"United States, Mississippi, Forrest County, Hattiesburg, 31.32712, -89.29034","hits":86}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"us_states_facet","items":[{"value":"Arkansas","hits":1728},{"value":"Alabama","hits":573},{"value":"Mississippi","hits":569},{"value":"South Carolina","hits":504},{"value":"Florida","hits":375},{"value":"Wisconsin","hits":84},{"value":"Georgia","hits":74},{"value":"New York","hits":42},{"value":"District of Columbia","hits":9},{"value":"Virginia","hits":9},{"value":"","hits":7}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"year_facet","items":[{"value":"1964","hits":957},{"value":"1963","hits":664},{"value":"1965","hits":513},{"value":"1962","hits":472},{"value":"1957","hits":462},{"value":"1960","hits":456},{"value":"1966","hits":444},{"value":"1961","hits":440},{"value":"1967","hits":440},{"value":"1995","hits":429},{"value":"1959","hits":420},{"value":"1994","hits":409},{"value":"1958","hits":401},{"value":"1996","hits":397},{"value":"1993","hits":384},{"value":"1969","hits":383},{"value":"1968","hits":359},{"value":"1992","hits":357},{"value":"1991","hits":355},{"value":"1999","hits":347},{"value":"1997","hits":344},{"value":"2000","hits":333},{"value":"1998","hits":326},{"value":"2001","hits":323},{"value":"1970","hits":319},{"value":"1990","hits":308},{"value":"1971","hits":295},{"value":"2002","hits":292},{"value":"1956","hits":278},{"value":"2003","hits":278},{"value":"1989","hits":277},{"value":"1972","hits":268},{"value":"1955","hits":259},{"value":"2004","hits":256},{"value":"2005","hits":237},{"value":"1954","hits":230},{"value":"1981","hits":225},{"value":"1974","hits":221},{"value":"1987","hits":215},{"value":"1988","hits":214},{"value":"1975","hits":205},{"value":"1973","hits":203},{"value":"1984","hits":203},{"value":"1986","hits":202},{"value":"1985","hits":201},{"value":"2006","hits":201},{"value":"1977","hits":197},{"value":"1980","hits":197},{"value":"1982","hits":197},{"value":"1983","hits":197},{"value":"1979","hits":195},{"value":"1976","hits":189},{"value":"1978","hits":189},{"value":"2007","hits":189},{"value":"1952","hits":158},{"value":"2010","hits":157},{"value":"1951","hits":156},{"value":"1953","hits":156},{"value":"2009","hits":154},{"value":"2008","hits":153},{"value":"2011","hits":153},{"value":"1950","hits":148},{"value":"2012","hits":144},{"value":"1948","hits":142},{"value":"2013","hits":142},{"value":"2014","hits":141},{"value":"1947","hits":139},{"value":"1945","hits":134},{"value":"1946","hits":134},{"value":"1944","hits":133},{"value":"1949","hits":133},{"value":"1943","hits":127},{"value":"1942","hits":121},{"value":"1934","hits":120},{"value":"1940","hits":120},{"value":"1932","hits":119},{"value":"1936","hits":119},{"value":"1937","hits":119},{"value":"1939","hits":119},{"value":"1933","hits":118},{"value":"1935","hits":117},{"value":"1941","hits":117},{"value":"1930","hits":116},{"value":"1938","hits":116},{"value":"1924","hits":113},{"value":"1931","hits":113},{"value":"1929","hits":99},{"value":"1921","hits":96},{"value":"1928","hits":93},{"value":"1923","hits":92},{"value":"1926","hits":92},{"value":"1927","hits":92},{"value":"1922","hits":91},{"value":"1925","hits":91},{"value":"1909","hits":89},{"value":"1918","hits":89},{"value":"1919","hits":89},{"value":"1920","hits":89},{"value":"1908","hits":88},{"value":"1911","hits":88}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":100,"offset":0,"prefix":null},"min":"1061","max":"2036","count":27224,"missing":0},{"name":"medium_facet","items":[{"value":"documents (object genre)","hits":4341},{"value":"correspondence","hits":288},{"value":"notes (documents)","hits":97},{"value":"lists (document genres)","hits":89},{"value":"memorandums","hits":84},{"value":"postcards","hits":56},{"value":"programs (documents)","hits":47},{"value":"reports","hits":39},{"value":"agendas (administrative records)","hits":38},{"value":"pamphlets","hits":38},{"value":"essays","hits":37}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"rights_facet","items":[{"value":"http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/","hits":1880},{"value":"http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/CNE/1.0/","hits":1168},{"value":"http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/","hits":654},{"value":"http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/UND/1.0/","hits":604},{"value":"http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/NoC-US/1.0/","hits":35},{"value":"http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-NC/1.0/","hits":5}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"collection_titles_sms","items":[{"value":"Office of Desegregation Management","hits":830},{"value":"Historical Manuscripts and Photographs","hits":764},{"value":"Theophilus Eugene ‘Bull’ Connor Papers, 1959-1963","hits":566},{"value":"Land of (Unequal) Opportunity: Documenting the Civil Rights Struggle in Arkansas","hits":454},{"value":"Butler Center for Arkansas Studies Documents Collection","hits":447},{"value":"Civil Rights Library of St. Augustine","hits":372},{"value":"James T. McCain papers, 1957-1972","hits":257},{"value":"New insights in the American civil rights movement: South Carolina Council on Human Relations records","hits":249},{"value":"Judy Richardson Papers 1963-2014","hits":92},{"value":"March on Milwaukee: Civil Rights History Project","hits":85},{"value":"Faith Holsaert Papers 1950-2011","hits":45}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"provenance_facet","items":[{"value":"Butler Center for Arkansas Studies","hits":1279},{"value":"University of Southern Mississippi. Libraries","hits":765},{"value":"Birmingham Public Library (Ala.)","hits":567},{"value":"University of South Carolina. Libraries","hits":549},{"value":"University of Arkansas, Fayetteville. Libraries","hits":454},{"value":"Proctor Library","hits":372},{"value":"South Caroliniana Library","hits":321},{"value":"Duke University. Library","hits":137},{"value":"Golda Meir Library. Special Collections","hits":85},{"value":"Stuart A. Rose Manuscript, Archives, and Rare Book Library","hits":49},{"value":"Valdosta State University. Odum Library. Archives and Special Collections","hits":15}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"class_name","items":[{"value":"Item","hits":4326},{"value":"Collection","hits":15}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":100,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"educator_resource_b","items":[{"value":"false","hits":4335},{"value":"true","hits":6}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":100,"offset":0,"prefix":null}}]}}