{"response":{"docs":[{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_312","title":"Compliance correspondence","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":null,"dc_date":["1998/2000"],"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","Education--Evaluation","Educational law and legislation","School administrators","Educational statistics"],"dcterms_title":["Compliance correspondence"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Butler Center for Arkansas Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://arstudies.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/bcmss0837/id/312"],"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":["correspondence"],"dcterms_extent":["341 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\nLITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT REVISED DESEGREGATION AND EDUCATION PLAN January 16, 1998 Section 1: Prior Agreements and Orders 1.1 Prior agreements and orders 1.2 Interdistrict Plan with PCSSD and NLRSD 1.3 Relationship with PCSSD and NLRSD Section 2: Obligations 2.1 Discrimination 2.1.1 Desegregation Expert 2.2 Staffing 2.2.1 2.2.2 2.2.3 2.2.4 2.2.5 2.2.6 2.2.7 Recruitment Increase numbers of minority teachers Uniform salary schedule Centralized hiring Notification Similar teaching staffs Mandatory reassignment 2.3 Student assignment programs 2.4 Special education 2.5 Student discipline 2.5.1 2.5.2 2.5.3 2.5.4 Fair and equitable Purge records Ombudsman Behavior modification plans 2.6 Extracurricular activities, AP, honors, and G/T 2.6.1 Teacher identification training 2.6.2 Programs 2.6.3 Transportation 2.7 Academic achievement 2.7.1 Assessment 2.8 Parental and community involvement2.9 Resource allocation 2.9.1 Assessment 2.9.2 Reporting 2.10 Facilities 2.11 Guidance and counseling 2.11.1 Equity 2.12 Learning environment 2.12.1 Prejudice reduction and cultural sensitivity training 2.12.2 Investigate and develop 2.13 Compliance 2.13.1 Responsiblility Section 3: Student Assignments 3.1 Attendance zones 3.1.1 3.1.2 3.1.3 3.1.4 Satellite zones Neighborhood schools Exceptions High schools 3.2 Voluntary student transfers 3.2.1 3.2.2 3.2.3 3.2.4 3.2.5 3.2.6 3.2.7 Desegregation transfers Racial isolation transfer Magnet program transfer Employees child transfer Special circumstances transfer Outside students Transportation 3.3 Magnet programs 3.4 Middle schools 3.5 Ninth grade schools 3.6 School construction/closing 3.7 Modification standard 3.7.1 Further desegregation or past discrimination 3.7.2 Benefits outweigh effects, no alternative, counteract adverse affects 3.8 Racial balance 3.9 Housing Page 2 Section 4: Interdistrict Schools 4.1 PCSSD interdistrict schools 4.2 LRSD interdistrict schools 4.3 Racial composition 4.4 Reserved seats 4.5 Recruitment 4.6 Students outside Pulaski County 4.7 Transportation Section 5: Student Achievement 5.1 Early childhood education 5.2 Reading/Language Arts 5.2.1 Primary grades 5.2.2 Intermediate grades 5.2.3 Secondary schools 5.3 Mathematics 5.3.1 5.3.2 5.3.3 5.3.4 5.3.5 Curriculum and teacher training Assessment Early intervention /Mgebra I and higher level courses By the end of 11grade 5.4 Computer literacy 5.5 Incentive schools: double funding, renamed and refocused, physical equality 5.6 Alternative education 5.6.1 Opportunities 5.6.2 Equity 5.7 Parental and community involvement 5.8 Scholarships Page 3 Section 6: LRSD Compliance Program 6.1 Reduce noncompliance 6.2 Oversight 6.3 Communication 6.4 Monitor 6.5 Report 6.6 Enforce 6.7 Correct and prevent noncomplinace Section 7: Plan Modification Process 7.1 Notice 7.2 Comment period 7.3 Recommendation and respond 7.4 Hearing Section 8: Continuing Jurisdiction 8.1 General rule 8.2 Process for raising compliance issues 8.2.1 8.2.2 8.2.3 8.2.4 8.2.5 8.2.6 Written notice Assessment Investigate and respond ODM facilitate District court intervention Implementation 8.3 Failure Section 9: Term Section 10: Transition Section 11: Unitary Status Page 4LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT REVISED DESEGREGATION AND EDUCATION PLAN January 16,1998 Section 1: Prior Agreements and Orders 1.1 Prior agreements and orders 1.2 Interdistrict Plan with PCSSD and NLRSD 1.3 Relationship with PCSSD and NLRSD Section 2: Obligations '2.1 Discrimination 1-2.1.1 Desegregation Expert u-2.2 Staffing ^2.2.1 - 2.2.2 \u0026gt;-2.2.3 ^2.2.4 -2.2.5 -2.2.6 ^2.2.1 Recruitment Hiring Uniform salary schedule Centralization Notification Similar teaching staffs Mandatory reassignment u2.3 Student assignment programs *'2.4 Special education 3 / v2.5 Student discipline / 4 3 \u0026lt;6 v2.7 ^2\n'8 -2.5.1 *^.5.2 *^.5.4 Fair and equitable Purge records Ombudsman Behavior modification plans Extracurricular activities, AP, honors, and G/T *^.6.1 T eacher training -2.6.2 Programs \u0026gt;-2:6.3 Transportation Academic achievement '^.7.1 Assessment Parental and community involvement 3 / 5 /\u0026gt;' \u0026gt;- Resource allocation 2.9.1 Assessment 2.9.2 Reporting v2.l0 Facilities .2.11 Guidance and counseling 12.11.1 Equity 3/ S?- ^.12 Learning environment .................. -2.12.1 Prejudice reduction and cultural sensitivity training Investigate and develop '2.13 Compliance 2.13.1 Responsiblility Section 3: Student Assignments 3.1 Attendance zones 3.1.1 Satellite zones 3.1.2 Neighborhood schools 3.1.3 Exceptions 3.1.4 Highschools 3.2 Voluntary student transfers 3.2.1 Desegregation transfers 3.2.2 Racial isolation transfer 3.2.3 Magnet program transfer 3.2.4 Employeeschild transfer 3.2.5 Special circumstances transfer 3.2.6 Outside students 3.2.7 Transportation 3.3 Magnet programs ^.4 Middle schools 3.5 Ninth grade schools t School construction/closing 3.7 Modification standard 3.7.1 Further desegregation or past discrimination 3.7.2 Benefits outweigh effects, no alternative, counteract adverse affects 3.8 Racial balance 3.9 Housing Paue 2Section 4: Interdistrict Schools 4.1 4.2 PCSSD interdistrict schools LRSD interdistrict schools 4.3 Racial composition 4.4 Reserved seats 4.5 Recruitment 4.6 Students outside Pulaski County 4.7 Transportation Section 5: Student Achievement vS-.l Early childhood education V5.2 Reading/Language Arts '^.2.1 Primary grades / Intermediate grades '^.2.3 Secondary schools '^.3 Mathematics ^.3.1 '5.3.2 ^5.3.3 '^.3.4 v5'\n3.5 Curriculum and teacher training Assessment Early intervention Algebra I and higher level courses By the end of 11' grade 2 y/L, y/ *5.4 Computer literacy / 5.5 Incentive schools: double funding, renamed and refocused, physical equality 5.6 Alternative education *5^6.1 Opportunities Equity 5.7 Parental and community involvement ^.8 Scholarships Page 3Section 6: LRSD Compliance Program 6.1 Reduce 6.2 Oversight 6.3 Communication 6.4 Monitoring 6.5 Report 6.6 Enforce 6.7 Correct and prevent Section 7: Plan Modification Process 7.1 Notice 7.2 Comment period 7.3 Recommendation and respond 7.4 Hearing Section 8: Continuing Jurisdiction 8.1 General rule 8.2 Process for raising compliance issues 8.2.1 8.2.2 8.2.3 8.2.4 8.2.5 8.2.6 Written notice Assessment Investigate and respond ODM facilitate District court intervention Implementation 8.3 Failure Section 9: Term Section 10: Transition Section 11: Unitary Status Page 4RECEsD JUN 8 1993 OftiCEOF SRESATION MONITORING 6-1-98 ARKANSAS STATE UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF EDUCATION POST OFFICE BOX 940 STATE UNIVERSITY, ARKANSAS 72467-0940 (TELEPHONE 501/972-3057 JONESBORO) (FAX 501/972-3828) Mr. N.W. Skip Marshall Associate Monitor, Office of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court, Eastern District of Arkansas 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Dear Mr. Marshall, As requested and on behalf of Dr. Dave Holman, Associate Professor of Education and Dr. Craig Jones, Professor of Psychology and Counseling, please accept this correspondence as our acknowledgment and support for your interpretation of the achievement disparity data we discussed and reviewed May 27th in Jonesboro. Your use, description, and interpretation of the percentage relationship appears to be valid with regard to the test score data evaluated. Your criteria of a change of 10 percent, however, appeared to be too arbitrary at this point in time, but such a criteria could be established by studying longitudinal data in this manner. If we can be of any further service or support, please dont hesitate to contact us. Sini Kent Associate Dean Attachment 4 1999-00 (DRAFT 2/7/00) Relationship Between Total Scores and Percent of African-American Students Correlations Total Score: 1999 Percent of African-American Students\n1999 Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) Total Score\n1999 Togo 48 -.046 .758 48 Percent of African-Americ an Students\n1999 7046\" .758 48 1.000 48 N 100  05 05 05 90 CD a  E     o 80  c      o c C3 o s  \u0026lt; c ro o 70' 60. 50 5 o  c. 40 4 30 20 30 40 50 60 70 \u0026lt; o  Q 0 3 C  o    a c  0  0 a a 0  C 3 c  Q  a s Total Score\n1999Attachment 3 1998-99 (DRAFT Relationship Between Total Scores and Percent of African Atmerican Students Correlations Total Score: 1998 Pearson Correlation Total Score: 1998 1.000 Percent of African-Americ an Students: 1998 TsF Sig. (2-tailed) N ,285 48 48 Percent of African-American Students: 1998 Pearson Correlation Sig. {2-tailed) N 100 .158 .285 48 1.000 48 CO CD cn 90   Q c C   to c CD o 55 z TO CD E \u0026lt; c s 80 70 60 a a 0   a B S  O o  a  c   \u0026lt; o c o E 0) CL 50. 40 30 Q  o   Q  40 a s  s  Q a Q 50 60 70 Total Score: 1998Attachment 2 Stringfield, S., \u0026amp; Ross, S.M. (1997). A reflection at time three of marathon: The Memphis restructuring initiative in mid-stride. School Effectiveness and School Improvement. 8. 151-161. Ross, S. \u0026amp; Smith, L.J. (1997). Improving the academic success of disadvantaged children: An examination of Success for All. Psychology in the Schools, 3 4. 171-180. Jayasinghe, M.G. Morrison, G.R. \u0026amp;. Ross, S.M. (1997). The effect of distance learning classroom design on student perceptions. Educational Technology Research and Development. 4 5, 5-20. Ross, S.M., \u0026amp; Smith, L.J. (in press). Improving school achievement and inter-group relations for children placed at risk. European Journal of Intercultural Education. Smith, L.J., Ross, S.M., McNelis, M., Squires, M., and others (1998), The Memphis restructuring initiative: Analysis of activities and outcomes that impact implementation success. Education and Urban Society, 3 0 (3), 326- 357. Stringfield, S., Datnow, A., Ross, S., \u0026amp; Snively, F. (1998). Scaling up school restructuring in multicultural multilingual contexts: Early observations from Sunland County. Education and Urban Society. 3 0 (3), 326-357. Ross, S.M., Smith, L.J. \u0026amp; Casey, J.P. (in press). Bridging the Gap: The effects of the Success for All Programs on elementary school reading achievement as a function of student ethnicity and ability level. School Effectiveness and School Improvement. Summary of Interests During the past ten years, I have worked extensively with school districts, both regionally and locally, to develop and evaluate programs for improving student achievement. The primary focus of these studies has been schools predominantly serving disadvantaged inner-city minority children. In 1992,1 was the lead researcher for the school equity study for the State of Alabama Financial Equity Case and am currently lead researcher on a comparable study in Louisiana. Additional ongoing research projects are studies of school restructuring designs as they are implemented in Memphis City Schools and Dade County (FL) schools and of professional development schools in seven national sites as part of the NEA Teacher Education Initiative (NEA-TEI).Attachment 2 HONORS AND DISTINCTIONS 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. NDEA Fellowship for graduate study at the Pennsylvania State Universitv 1971-1973. Graduate Student Associate, Southwest Regional Laboratory, Summer, 1971. Distinguished Teaching Service Award, University of Memphis, 1980. Phi Delta Kappa Professional Research Award, Memphis Chapter, 1983. Elected Fellow, Division 15, American Psychological Association, 1986. Visiting Scholar, National Center for Research on Improving Postsecondary Teaching and Learning. University of Memphis, 1987. Distinguished Research Award, University of Memphis, 1987. Distinguished Teacher Service Award, University of Memphis, 1988. (First eligibility since 1980\nno longer eligible) Memphis State University nominee, CASE Professor of the Year Award, 1989. 10. Superior Performance in University Research (SPUR) Award, University of Memphis, 1990,1991, 1992 11. Distinguished Research Award, University of Memphis, 1993. 12. Board of Visitors Eminent Faculty Award, University of Memphis (first recipient), 1993 13. Editor, Educational Technology Research and Development, 1993-present 14. Editorial Board, Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk, 1995- present 15. Editorial Board, Computers and Human Behavior, 1994-present SCHOLARSHIP Publications in Refereed Journals: Books Book Chapters Papers Presented at Professional Meetings 115 6 16 170 SELECTED RECENT PUBLICATIONS Ross, S.M., Henry D., Phillipsen, L., Evans, K., Smith, L., \u0026amp; Buggey, T. (1997). Matching restructuring programs to schools: Selection, negotiation, and preparation. School Effectiveness and School Improvement. 8, 45-71. Ross, S.M., Troutman, A., Horgan, D., Maxwell, S., Laitinen, R., \u0026amp; Lowther, D. The success of schools in implementing eight restructuring o designs: A synthesis of first-year evaluation outcomes. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 8, 95-124. Ross, S.M., Smith, L.J. \u0026amp; Casey, J. (1997). Preventing early school failure: Impacts of Success for all on standardized test outcomes, minority group performance, and school effectiveness. Journal for Research on Students Placed at Risk, 2, 29-54.Attachment 2 BRIEF VITA PERSONAL DATA Steven M. Ross EDUCATION Institution Pennsylvania State University Degree-Year BA. 1969 M.S. 1972 Ph.D. 1974 Undergraduate Major: Graduate Major\nPsychology Educational Psychology PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATIONS American Psychological Association, Fellow American Educational Research Association, Member Mid-South Educational Research Association, Member Association for Educational Communications \u0026amp; Technology, Member International Congress for School Effectiveness and School Improvements, Member EXPERIENCE Instructor, Continuing Education, 1973-74, Pennsylvania State University Instructor, Psychology, Spring Semester, 1974, Lock Haven State College Lock Haven, Pennsylvania Evaluator, Summer, 1974, Mitre Corporation, McLean, Virginia Assistant Professor, Educational Psychology, 1974-79, University of Memphis Associate Professor, Educationtd Psychology, 1980-1985 Professor, Educational Psychology, 1-985 - Present Senior Researcher, Center for Research in Education Policy, Univ, of Memphis, 1995-Present COURSES RECENTLY TAUGHT Theories of Learning (Undergraduate) Individual Differences and Learning (Graduate) Educational Statistics (Undergraduate and Graduate) Educational Research (Graduate) Computers in Education (Graduate and Undergraduate) Thesis Writing (Graduate) Educational Assessment (Graduate) activities designed to enhance the quality of the program and to maintain connections with psychology programs at schools in the southern California area. Assistant Dean, Student Services UCLA School of Social Welfare 1985 - 1993 Responsible for overall direction of student services including recruitment, admissions, retention, financial aid, student government, and coordination of both MSW and Ph.D. candidate programs. Supervisory responsibilities for student services assistant and student workers. Classroom teaching responsibilities included preparation and delivery of courses in cross-cultural awareness and group conflict and change. Director, Mental Health Services St. Helena Hospital and Health Center Deer Park, CA. 1975 - 1985 General administrative responsibility for seventeen bed acute care mental health unit. Duties included staffing, program development, budget allocation, staff development, quality control, coordination of ancillary services, and other related tasks. Served also as \"troubles-shooter\" for other units in the hospital providing assessment and consultation around changes in procedures and personnel. Lectured and led groups in Health Center programs including cardiac, alcohol, and pulmonary rehabilitation\nsmoking cessation\nweight management\nand eating disorders. Program Director, Social Work Pacific Union College Angwin, CA 1975- 1978 Responsible for development of social work curriculum and coordination of program within a behavioral science department. Instructor, Social Work Southern Illinois University Carbondale, Illinois 1972 - 1975 Taught courses and advised majors in undergraduate social work program. Los Angeles County Children's Service 1. 2. Staff Development Specialist: 1970 - 1972 Child Welfare Worker: 1967 - 1970Consultation services provided to: California Attorneys for Criminal Justice California Medical Center Cedars Sinai Hospital  Children's Bureau of Southern California ' Claremont Graduate School Cleveland College of Chiropractic Coca-Cola, Mid-Atlantic Division Crown City Medical Episcopal Diocese, Los Angeles Fairfield Community Hospital Heller, Ehrman, White \u0026amp; McAuliffe Internal Revenue Service, Los Angeles Kaiser Foundation King-Drew Medical Center, Los Angeles Los Angeles County Department of Children's Services o Oskar J's Sightseeing Tours, Inc. Pacific Union College Pasadena Community College Pasadena Tournament of Roses Pepperdine University Pomona College , Redwood Empire Central Service Association Riverside County Children's Services Department Santa Clara Valley Medical Center The Fielding Institute The March of Dimes Foundation TRW University of California, (Davis, Los Angeles, San Diego) Chair, Master's in Psychology Antioch University, Los Angeles 1993 - present :eing curriculum, coordinating student Responsibilities of the Chair include of the Uwversity, ftU Ldsuff mowed in the job description programs, creating and hiring and supervising :pi as well areAward commemorating twenty-fifth anniversary of \"Little Rock Nine's\" integration of Central High School in Little Rock, Arkansas. Southern Christian Leadership Conference Women Martin Luther King, Jr. \"Drum Major for Justice\" Award, 1995 Presented in Atlanta, Georgia. REFERENCES: Available upon request.Created training programs and materials for employees in the department. Participated in program delivery, evaluation and revision. Provided social welfare services to children and families in the child welfare division. CONSULTATIONXPSYCHOLOGICAL SERVICES General psychology and consultation practice office in Pasadena, Ca. Practice includes psychological assessment, psychotherapy for individuals, families, and groups, and psychological consultation to education, business and industry. MEMBERSHIPS: Member, American Psychological Association Board Member, African American Cultural Institute Board Member, Eisenhower World Affairs Institute Board Member, Economic Resources Corporation PUBLICATIONS: \"Managing Trial Stress,\" in Jonathan M. Purver, Douglas R. Young, and James J. Davis HI, Trial Handbook For California Lawvers. Bancroft-Whimey Co., 1987. \"Understanding Choice: Gateway to Sound Mental Health,\" Journal of Mental Health Administration. Vol.9. No.l. 1978. \"Social Welfare in Black America,\" in Cox, et al, eds. Introduction to Black America:A Cultural Perspective, Southern Illinois University Press, 1974. AWARDS: Spingam Medal, 1957 Annual award presented by NAACP to that person or persons making outstanding contributions to the area of human rights. Robert S. Abbott Memorial Award, 1958 Annual award presented to those who do most to extend the frontiers of democracy. Outstanding Teacher of the Year, College of Human Resources Southern Illinois University, 1974. NAACP Legal Defense and Education Fund, Inc. Award, 1982Attachment 1 VITAE TERRENCE J. ROBERTS, Ph.D. Clinical Psychology RECEIVED EDUCATION: APR 19 2000 OFrlCEOF desegregation MOHITORIHS Ph.D. MSW BA - Southern Illinois University, 1976, Psychology - University of California, Los Angeles, 1970 - California State University, Los Angeles, 1967 LICENSING AND CERTIFICATION: California State Licensed Psychologist, Lie. #PSY8892 California State Licensed Social Worker, Lie. #5600 EXPERIENCE: Chief executive officer for Terrence J. Roberts \u0026amp; Associates, a management consultation firm active in California since 1975. A dynamic group with a wide range of skills and professional abilities. Workshops and Seminars in the areas of: Stress Management Effective Communication Managing Human Relationships Employment Transition Team Building Management Skills Managing Racial and Ethnic Diversity Self Growth and Development Conflict Resolution Developing Multicultural Awareness Employee Evaluation Staff DevelopmentHERSCHEL H. FRIDAY (1922-1994) WILLIAM H. SUTTON. P A BYRON M. EtSEMAN. JR.. P.A. JOE D. BELL. P.A. JAMBS A. BUTTRY. P.A. FREDERICK S. URSERY. P.A. OSCAR E. DAVIS, JR.. P.A. JAMES C. CLARK. JR.. P.A. THOMAS P. LEGGETT. P.A. JOHN DEWEY WATSON. P.A. PAUL B. BENHAM III. P.A. LARRY W. BURKS. P.A. A WYCKLIFF NISBET. JR.. P.A. JAMES EDWARD HARRIS. P.A. J. PHILLIP MALCOM. P.A. JAMES M. SIMPSON. P.A. JAMES M. SAXTON, P.A. J. SHEPHERD RUSSELL HI. P.A, DONALD H. BACON. P.A. WILLIAM THOMAS BAXTER. P.A. BARRY E. COPLIN. P.A. RICHARD D. TAYLOR. P.A. JOSEPH B. HURST. JR,. P.A. ELIZABETH ROBBEN MURRAY. P.A. CHRISTOPHER HELLER. P.A. LAURA HENSLEY SMITH. P.A. ROBERT S. SHAFER. P.A. WILLIAM M. GRIFFIN III. P.A. MICHAEL S. MOORE. P.A. DIANE S. MACKEY. P.A. WALTER M. EBEL III. P.A KEVIN A. CRASS. P.A. WILLIAM A. WADDELL. JR.. P.A SCOTT J. LANCASTER. P.A. M. GAYLE CORLEY. P.A. ROBERT 8. BEACH. JR.. P.A. J. LEE BROWN. P.A. JAMES C. BAKER. JR.. P.A. HARRY A. LIGHT. P.A. FRIDAY, ELDREDGE \u0026amp; CLARK A LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP ATTORNEYS AT LAW 2000 REGIONS CENTER 400 WEST CAPITOL LITTLE ROCK. ARKANSAS 72201-3493 TELEPHONE 501-376-2011 FAX NO. 501-376-2147 April 18, APR 15 IlTiCi\nOf DESEfiRBii'CNMOMING SCOTT H. TUCKER. P.A. GUY ALTON WAOE. P.A. PRICE C. GARDNER, P.A. TONIA P. JONES. P.A. DAVID D. WILSON. P.A. JEFFREY H. MOORE. P.A. DAVID M. GRAF. P.A. CARLA GUNNELS SPAINHOUR. P.A. JOHN C. FENDLEY. JR.. P.A. JONANN CONIGLIO FLEISCHAUER. P.A. R. CHRISTOPHER LAWSON. P.A. GREGORY D. TAYLOR. P.A. TONY L. WILCOX. P.A. FRAN C. HICKMAN, P.A. BETTY J. DEMORY, P.A. LYNDA M. JOHNSON, P.A. JAMES W. SMITH CLIFFORD W. PLUNKETT DANIEL L. HERRINGTON K. COLEMAN WESTBROOK, JR. ALLISON J. CORNWELL ELLEN M. OWENS HELENE N. RAYOER JASON 8. HENDREN BRUCE B. TIDWELL CHRIS A. AVERITT KELLY MURPHY MCQUEEN JOSEPH P. MCKAY ALEXANDRA A. IFRAH JAY T. TAYLOR MARTIN A. KASTEN ROBERT T. SMITH OF COUNSEL WILLIAM J. SMITH B.S. CLARK WILLIAM L. TERRY WILLIAM L. PATTON. JR. H.T. LARZELERE. P.A. JOHN C. ECHOLS. P.A. WRITER'S DIRECT NO ItelVED (501)370-3323 Mr. John W. Walker John W. Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Sam Jones Wright, Lindsey \u0026amp; Jennings 2200 Worthen Bank Bldg. 200 West Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Steve Jones Jack, Lyon \u0026amp; Jones, P.A. 425 West Capitol, Suite 3400 Little Rock, AR 72201-3472 Ms. Ann Brown - Hand Delivered Desegration Monitor Heritage West Bldg., Suite 510 201 East Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Richard Roachell Roachell Law Firm P.O. Box 17388 Little Rock, AR 72222 Mr. Timothy G. Gauger Office of the Attorney General 323 Center Street 200 Tower Building Little Rock, AR 72201 RE: LRSD vs. Pulaski County Special School District No. 1, et. al.\nMrs. Lorene Joshua, et. al.\nKatherine Knight, et. al. USDC. Eastern District. Western Division No. LR-C-82-866 ______________ Dear Ms. Brown \u0026amp; Gentlemen: Enclosed please find a Motion to Substitute a Complete Copy of LRSDs Interim Compliance Report which we are filing today. As indicated in the motion, attachments 1 - 4 of LRSDs interim compliance report were inadvertently omitted during the printing process. We are enclosing attachments 1-4 which you can insert in the original copy of the report served on you. F '\u0026gt;HOME\\FENDLEY\\LRSD\\pcssd-brown et al h.wpd Office oi Desegregation Monitoring RLE COPYMs. Brown \u0026amp; Gentlemen April 18,2000 Page 2 If you would rather receive a second and complete copy of the report, please do not hesitate to call, and we will try to provide one. Sincerely, John C. Fendley, Jr. JCF/bgb enclosure(s) FAHOMPJrENDLEYXLRSDVpcssd-brown et ai h.wpdftpR 18 MS) IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF V. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL DEFENDANTS MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL INTERVENORS KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL INTERVENORS MOTION TO SUBSTITUTE A COMPLETE COPY OF LRSD'S INTERIM COMPLIANCE REPORT The Little Rock School District (LRSD) for its Motion to Substitute A Complete Copy of LRSD's Interim Compliance Report states: 1. On March 15, 2000, LRSD filed its Interim Compliance Report outlining the programs, policies and procedures implemented in accordance with LRSD's Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. 2 . Since that time, it has come to LRSD's attention that attachments 1 through 4 of the Interim Compliance Report were inadvertently omitted from the report during printing. 3 . A complete copy of the report, including attachments 1 through 4, are attached to this Motion. LRSD respectfully requests that this report be substituted for the one filed March 15, 2000. WHEREFORE, LRSD prays that the complete copy of LRSD's Interim Compliance Report attached hereto be substituted for the one filed March 15, 2000.Respectfully Submitted, LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT FRIDAY, ELDREDGE \u0026amp; CLARK First Commercial Bldg., Suite 2000 400 West Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201-3493 (501) 376-2011 BY: 2182) 2 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I certify that a copy of the foregoing has been served on the following people by depositing a copy of same in the United States mail on this 18th day of April, 2000. Mr. John W. Walker JOHN W. WALKER, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Sam Jones Wright, Lindsey \u0026amp; Jennings 2200 Worthen Bank Bldg. 200 West Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Steve Jones JACK, LYON \u0026amp; JONES, P.A. 425 W. Capitol, Suite 3400 Little Rock, AR 72201-3472 Mr. Richard Roachell Roachell Law Firm P.O. Box 17388 Little Rock, AR 72222 Ms. Ann Brown HAND DELIVERED Desegregation Monitor Heritage West Bldg., Suite 510 201 East Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Timothy G. Gauger Office of the Attorney General 323 Center Street 200 Tower Building Little Rock, AR 72201 3 EASTl U.S. i-snr icr lie Melissa Guldin Associate Monitor Norman Marshall Associate Monitor Horace Smith Associate Monitor Report on the Little Rock School Districts JAMES Preparations for Implementation of its Revised Desegregation and Education Plan August 11, 1999 Office of Desegregation Monitoring U.S. District Court Little Rock, Arkansas Ann S. Brown Federal Monitor ALi'd -I J COi.-RT 1393 -K CSEHK if Gene Jones Associate Monitor Margie Powell Associate Monitor Polly Ranier Office ManagerOffice 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) 3710100 Date: October?, 1999 To: Dr. Bonnie Lesley Dr. Kathy Lease Dr. Ed Williams From: N.W. Skip Marshall Subject: Draft Report on Achievement Disparity Between the Races in the LRSD Enclosed is a preliminary draft of the introduction, background, and findings sections of our report An tho n An, AX f ___ .1 * , on the achievement disparity between the races in the LRSD for 1991-1992 throuah 1998-1999. The copy we are providing is a draft and wiU be edited further for format and syntax, but the factual information is complete. Please read the report carefully, checking for accuracy. If you beheve any item is inaccurate or if some areas need clarification, please summarize your comments in writing by no later than 4:00 p.m. on Friday, October 8, 1999. Feel free to make your comments in the margins of the report, or you mav write them in a memo An ODM staff member wiU come by your office by 4:00 p.m. on Friday to pick up the draft and your written comments. If you do not furnish ODM with your written comments, your input wiil not be considered for our final report. I will contact you early next week to discuss of course, call our office earlier if you have any questions. any comments youve made. You may. Because this Is a draft, we ask you not to make copies of it or distribute it to others. ^er the review process is completed, the full report, including a summary and conclusions, will be filed with the Court. We will send you a copy of that complete report. We appreciate the cooperation of the Planning/Research \u0026amp; Evaluation staff, especiaUy that of Irma TmiAi* J._:__xl______,__ . r J Truett, during the monitoring process. Thank you for taking the time to review the attached draft.October 11,1999 Planning, Research, \u0026amp; Evaluation Instructional Resource Center 3001 S. Pulaski Little Rock, AR 72206 ?ISCaVED OCT 11 iS99 Mr. N. W. Marshall, Associate Monitor Office of Desegregation Monitoring 201 E. Markham Heritage West Building, Ste 510 Little Rock, AR 72201 OfRCEOf desegregation MOHITS Dear Mr. Marshall: It is our After careful review of the Office of Desegregation Monitoring report on Achievement there is one major concern that needs to be addressed. The statistical measure used in the report is the Normal Curve Equivalent (NCE). It is our onderstanding that both Dr. Doug Reeves, Arkansas Department of Education consultant, and Dr. Steve Ross, one or our Revised Desegregation and Education Plan X^nn !!:? measure the progress that our district is making in th^ Z!? ?^P- According to Dr. Ross, the consultants are meeting to discuss the use of multiple indicators to measure the progress of our district in decreasing the disparity between the races. consultants, In a recent conversation with Dr. Ross, he expressed grave concern about using NCEs for e purpose of measuring progress toward closing the achievement gap. He stated that the k tn^feii disadvantaged students are, the more likely the district H on norm-referenced tests. Since these tests are designed to insure Seaccurately reflect the growth of individual students. reasons that the Little Rock School District redesigned its testing program was to aX individual student regardless of gender, ethnicity, or afnw  th^ coHimitment, a criterion-referenced test was selected that will whTrpT'^'rH of rsetsupdeencttsto n trhme arettqeurired where they started on the learning continuum. Growth scores also allow us to develop students who are not growing at the expected rate. For many of must be certain that our curriculum and instruction mnnitnr faster than the national average. The only way that we can truly monitor this rate of learning is by using scaled scores, which measure growth. 2 I am confident that once our assessment experts, Dr. Reeves and Dr. Ross, complete their work on multiple criteria for measuring achievement, we will be able to have a much clearer picture of the true achievement of students in our district. In the interim, I encourage you to not rely solely on NCEs as a measure of the districts ability to close the achievement gap between the races. The use of scaled scores more accurately reflects the growth of our students. The following information is contained in the Raw to Scaled Score Conversion Tables of the Middle Level Benchmark ExaminationGrade 8 February 1999 Administration (p. 1): Scaled scores are used as a common comparison across different forms of a test, providing a useful measurement tool for various assessment programs. Scaled scores are used in numerous national testing programs. Perhaps the most widely known use of scaled scores is with the ACT and SAT examinations, which are typically part of the admissions process for colleges and universities. Scaled scores are also routinely used within many other statewide testing programs, providing the basis for long-term, meaningful comparisons of students results. According to the Stanford Achievement Test Series Technical Data Report (p 32) Scaled Farol ocnoriQlhi .iinkU X____ _ I. vr- scores [are] especially suitable for comparing results when different forms have been administered and for studying change in performance over  In a letter written on March 30, 1998, to Mr. Frank Anthony, ADE, from Thomas Manager of Applied Research at Harcourt Brace, Dr. Brooks stated: E. Brooks, The advantage that Scaled Scores would have over NCEs is that they offer finer distinctions among students whose percentile ranks are at the extreme end of the score range, i.e. either 1 or 99. If we were reporting data for a group that inr I iHoH amor .i ____i________x . _ . ... . included larger than usual numbers of students with very low achievement levels Scaled Scores could make finer distinctions and allow us to measure gams for students who score in the 1 percentile. Scaled Scores then only appropriate, but may also be a preferred measure for reporting dis-^*^^ aggregated scores for African-American and White students. In my opinion tho\\/ a cn oro ...uu i_________ r* they also are consistent with the language of the desegregation decree under whirn vni i oro  which you are operating. With the input from all of our experts, I would ask that ODM measure used to report our test results to the Court. Sincerely, reconsider the statistical Katherine R. Lease, Ed. D. Assistant Superintendent Cc: Dr. Les Gamine, Superintendent Dr. Bonnie Lesley, Associate SuperintendentGrade Race Black 02 White Percent* Black 03 White Percent* Black 04 White Percent* Black 05 White Percent* Black 06 White Percent* # Tested 1231 550 1143 507 1040 511 994 537 964 483 jS  Penenl is defined as biack student Little Rock School District 1997-98 Stanford Achievement Test Scaled Score, Percentile, Normal Courve Equivalent Comparisons for Total Reading, Total Math, Language Total Reading Scaled Score 531.9 571.3 93.1% 565.9 609.9 92.8% 593.7 637.6 93.1% 621.3 671.7 92.5% 636.6 676.2 94.1% Total Math Percentile Rank 32 60 53.3% 27 63 42.9% 20 57 35.1% 24 70 34.3% 27 66 40.9% Normal Curve 40.1 55.2 72.6% 37.1 56.9 65.2% 32.5 53.8 60.4% 35.5 61.3 57.9% 37.2 58.9 63.2% scones expressed as a percent of white student scores. # Tested 1263 560 1227 524 1068 514 O5S 1022 544 980 485 Scaled Score 518.3 545.9 94.9% 552.1 587.6 94.0% 595.1 634.5 93.8% 612.8 652.4 93.9% 630.3 665.1 94.8% Percentile Rank 25 53 47.2% 23 57 40.4% 30 66 45.5% 25 64 39.1% 32 67 47.8% Normal Curve 35.8 51.8 69.1% 34.2 53.5 63.9% 39.3 58.9 66.7% 35.6 57.6 61.8% 40.4 59.2 68.2% It.. # Tested 1250 556 RECBWD OCT 1 i i ,9 OFFIGLu, Scaled Score 551.1 583.6 1220 521 .L,. 1067 513 1018 543 980 485 94.4% 574.8 609.3 94.3% 601.0 617.5 97.3% 620.4 652.3 95.1% 629.4 656.1 95.9% Percentile Rank 31 63 49.2% 26 62 41.9% 37 51 72.5% 34 65 52.3% 37 62 59.7% Normal Curve 39.8 56.8 70.1% 36.2 56.7 63.8% 42.8 50.7 84.4% 41.4 57.9 71.5% 42.9 56.7 75.7%Grade Race # Tested 07 08 09 10 11 Black White Percent* Black White Percent* Black White Percent* Black White Percent* Black White Percent* 1074 447 1071 445 1065 445 1125 478 4\n. 932 463  Percent is defined as btack student Little Rock School District 1997-98 Stanford Achievement Test Scaled Score, Percenlile, Normal Courve Equivalent Comparisons for Total Reading, Total Math, Language Total Reading Scaled Score 647.3 690.2 93.8% 659.5 702.4 93.9% 675.1 713.5 94.6% 677.6 713.7 94.9% 692.2 727.3 95.1% Total Math Percentile Rank 25 68 36.8% 24 66 36.4% 31 70 44.3% 26 61 42.6% 33 71 46.5% Normal Curve 36.0 60.1 59.9% 35.4 58.5 60.5% 39.6 60.8 65.1% 36.3 56.2 64.6% 40.9 61.5 66.5% scores expressed as a percent of white student scores. # Tested Scaled Score Percenlile Rank Normal Curve ft Tested 1089 642.2 29 38.5 1077 450 1081 448 1072 444 1144 475 934 468 684.4 93.8% 646.2 686.4 94.1% 656.3 693.6 94.6% 656.8 690.9 95.1% 668.6 702.0 95.2% 71 61.9 448 40.8% 26 65 40.0% 28 66 42.4% 28 62 45.2% 35 69 50.7% 62.2% 36.7 58.2 63.1% 37.6 58.5 64.3% 37.6 56.3 66.8% 42.2 60.6 69.6% 1077 447\n5e. 1070 447 1143 475 i!\n940 472 Language/English Scaled Score 635.4 667.1 95.2% 646.1 676.3 95.5% 654.8 689.2 95.0% 681.9 710.3 96.0% 697.3 716.2 97.4% Percenlile Rank 31 63 49.2% 34 62 54.8% 37 67 55.2% 34 61 55.7% 42 61 68.9% Normal Curve 39.4 57.2 68.9% 41.2 56.7 121^^ 43.0 59.5 72.3% 41.1 55.8 73.7% 45.6 55.7 81.9%10 Black White Percent* 1067 467 677.0 717.0 94.4% 25 65 38.5% 35.8 58.1 61.6% 1066 468 677.0 704.0 96.2% 33 65 50.8% 40.9 57.9 70.6% 1066 471 657.0 697.0 94.3% 28 67 41.8% 37.7 59.4 63.5% * Percent is defined as black student scores expressed as a percent of white student scores. iSlUUUiSffiBSS Office of Desegregation Monitoring United Slates 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: October 15, 1999 To: From: Re: Bonnie Lesley Ann Brown Review of ODM Drafts I couldnt miss your frustration in our giving you little time to go over the draft of our report findings, most recently Skip s report on achievement. I know that your schedule is always full and can understand your consternation about another to do beina dropped on you. Let me explain the reasons behind our procedure and why it may not be as user-unfriendly as it seems. Since we first started producing reports, its been our practice to ask the individuals who gave us information for each report to review our findings for errors, misunderstandings, omissions, etc. W e know we re not perfect and appreciate help in producing documents that possible. are as accurate as But we learned that if we didn't attach a very limited time to this review process, the findings didn't get a timely examination and return. Without a tight deadline, folks just didnt get a round tuit.  Also, we learned not to set a date certain by which we promised delivery of the findings. First, we couldnt be precise about our own crowded schedules, which were constantly being modified by unexpected events. Secondly, we found that even if we tried to let the reviewers know in advance that the findings were on the way, that didnt seem to help, as their schedules were as crowded as ours and also subject to the same type of unforeseen events. In addition. felt a shorter lead time would promote the focused individual review that we desire, while 1, we deflecting any inclination toward orchestrating a mass reaction to the findings Now here s the part that may give you some consolation in the future: to compensate for the short lead time, we always allow more review time for anyone who asks for it. Which is what Kathy Lease did with our achievement report, and we were happy to comply with her request. We don t offer an extension of weeks, but were comfortable with a few days more. All one has lO do is ask. And of course, we 11 always provide adequate time for any discussion thats needed as part of the findings review process. 1 hope this explanation provides both some relief and reassurance. If youd like to talk it please give me a call. over,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 October 22, 1999 Katherine R. Lease LRSD Instructional Resource Center 3001 So. Pulaski Street Little Rock, AR 72206 Dear Dr. Lease: Thank you for the time you devoted to reviewing the draft findings of our monitoring report on the LRSD achievement disparity between the races. We especially appreciate your written comments. As we understand your response, your position is that using scaled scores, rather than NCEs, is a more appropriate method to measure the achievement growth of individual students. While scaled scores may be valid for the use you define, our report is not intended to measure the growth in the achievement levels of individual students\nrather, it is intended to measure the proportional differences between the achievement levels of groups of black students as compared to white students over time. Our current report conforms to the practice and precedent of basing our findings on Normal Curve Equivalents that we established in our first report on achievement disparity in the three county districts, which was published in June 1995, as well as in our second report on achievement disparity, which was on the Pulaski County Special School District, published in October 1998. For us to use other than NCEs in the upcoming report would be inconsistent with our established precedent. However, based reference to the position you have taken. on your comments, we did include within our report a Again, we appreciate your assistance and thank you for your efforts. Sincerely yours. N.W. Marshall Associate Monitor cc: Dr. Les Camine Dr. Bonnie Lesley II ACHIEVEMENT DISPARITY BETWEEN THE RACES IN THE LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OCT 2 6 1999 I October 26, 1999 JAMES W. McCORMACK, CLERK By:__________________ DEPTTERR Ann S. Brown Federal Monitor Office of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court Little Rock, Arkansas Norman W. Marshall Associate Monitor Polly Ramer Office Manager I i 1fa. '^1 lai 'S'' An Individual Approach to a World of Knowledge February 21, 2000 Ms. Ann Brown ODM 201 E. Markham, Ste. 510 Little Rock, AR 72201 rECBVED MM 1S) OHSESf____ Dear Ann: l am sending to you a bundle of recent LRSD publications that 1 know youll be interested in. Also, I hope youll share them with your staff. K-8 Refrigerator Curriculum (Grade-Level and Course Benchmarks for Parents) Middle School Curriculum Catalog Middle School Student/Parent Guide High School Curriculum Catalog High School Student/Parent Guide to Course Selection and Graduation Requirements Please call if you have questions or feedback for improvement. Sincerely, Bonnie A. Lesley, Ed.D /rem Cc\nJunious Babbs Brady Gad berry 810 W Markham  Little Rock, Arkansas 72201  www.lrsd.kl2.ar.us 501-324-2000  fax: 501-324-2032/'/'i-oc Office of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501) 376-6200 Fax (501) 371-0100 April 13, 2000 Dr. Bonnie A. Lesley Little Rock School District 810 West Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Bonnie: This note is to let you know that we received your Februaiy 21, 2000 letter and attachments (various LRSD curriculum guides and catalogs) on March 10, 2000. We thank you very much for sharing the documents and inviting our feedback. Well be glad to look them over. As you know, I was involved in a car accident on March 7. I returned to work for the first time yesterday, so please forgive me for just now acknowledging your correspondence. I havent found the bottom of my desk yet and am slowing working my way through the accumulated piles. Please give me a call when you can and lets schedule some time to spend together catching up Sincerely yours, Ann S. Brown I' icj at- 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: April 25, 2000 To: Bonnie Lesley From: Ann Bro\nRe: Feedback on LRSD Curriculum Documents I took you at your word when you invited our feedback on the various curriculum documents you kindly sent us last month. I asked my staff to look them over, and their responses are attached Their comnients ^e unvarnished and strictly FYI, so take them ofc, but please accept them in the spirit of collegiality in which we offer them. Listed below are the questions I asked the staff to use as their guide in reviewing the documents. By the way, weve have gotten several calls from frustrated parents wanting to know, Whats a  ----------------LU IVIUJW VV ildU  d Evidently that undefined phrase appears in a recent district publication on behalf of the millage, and perhaps elsewhere on parent-directed documents. We tell them a refrigerator cumculum enables them to leam how to fix their refrigerator, or in the alternative we say It s a cumculum their refrigerator can study in order to become a smart refiigerator. No, we dont! (Just kidding.) Actually, we have to tell them the truth: In-house education-speak is one of lifes continuing mysteries, and none of us at ODM know what a refiigerator curriculum is either. Another point of bewilderment has knows, maybe teachers too) are come to our attention. Many parents and students (and who very confused about the difference between standards and benchmarks. We think we know how to define those words, but maybe the district needs to take care to ditterenuate between the two terms and to widely broadcast definitions that will enable to work from the same understanding. everyone Review Questions 1. For which audience is the publication intended? 2. What is the stated purpose of the publication? 3. List the documents strengths in relation to its purpose. 4. List the documents weaknesses in relation to its purpose. 5. Overall, how well do you think the publication fulfills its purpose? Why? 6. What suggestions do you have for improving the publication so that it can better fulfill its purpose 7. Additional comments.Comments regarding LRSDs High School Student and Parent Guide to Course Selection and Graduation Requirements, 2000-2001 1. For which audience is the publication intended? The guide is directed at high school students and their parents. Though the document does not explicitly say so, it would be useful also to middle school students as they decide whether or not to take high school courses as 8* graders. For example, students who wish to take calculus in high school must take algebra I in grade 8 as explained in the guide. 2. What is the stated purpose of publication? A convoluted sentence on page 2 in a section captioned Where do I start? says the guide is intended to assist students and parents by providing information that will help them to plan next years courses, meet graduation requirements, and to know college admission requirements. 3. List the documents strengths in relation to its purpose. It is complete. Few details regarding student placement have been omitted. 4. List the documents weaknesses in relation to its purpose. The guide is not clear enough for its intended audience because the language is garbled and the layout is inconsistent. For example, the table of contents lists Purpose for Guide and indicates it is on page 1. No heading on page 1 says Purpose. Instead there is a two-paragraph section titled Where do I start? in which the first paragraph extols the quality of LRSD. The second paragraph contains three items, not parallel, in what could be called a statement of purpose. Language used in the curriculum discussions is often vague. For example, the Unconditional Admission section on page 2 does not state a requirement and then list the courses by number and title which could fulfill it. Instead, for example, the natural science admission requirement section says, Three units, with laboratories, chosen from Physical Science, Biology, Chemistry, or physics. Only one unit may come from a life science. Few students could complete the course selection sheet accurately from this information, and the guide is full of examples similar to this. Frequently, supplemental information is included with course requirement listings and is introduced by a question. Page five has the question, What may I take to satisfy the technology requirement? The first paragraph following explains that the keyboarding class will not count. The second paragraph explains that students can test out of keyboarding, and the third explains something else. Nowhere, in this section, is the question answered clearly.a The document is spnnkled with items enclosed in boxes but the boxes do not signify single and consistent purpose. Some enclose quotes while others enclose significant information in thumbnail fashion, but the reader cannot tell the difference without close reading. The layout should help the reader focus on the key elements quickly. 5. Overall, how well do you think the publication fulfills its purpose^ Why? because of the weaknesses described in section 4 above. As it is rewritten and republished the mistakes will be taken care of. 6. Suggestions! Clean up the language with clear declarative sentences that avoid ambiguity. Courses should be identified by name and number. The layout should help readers find information quickly and easily by using symbols consistently for information types. For example, if J  J- .\nLjyvo. i UI cAaniuic, 11 bold type indicates a particular meaning in one place, it should do the same in every place. Rhetorical questions used to draw attention to certain types of information should be answered directly and in sensible fashion. '5 7. Additional comments The guide is a useful publication that meets an important need. LRSD should be commended for the effort. J I IComments Regarding LRSDs High School Curriculum Catalog 1. For which audience is the publication intended' Apparently, the catalog is intended for staff use in assisting students with course selection. Some directives are clearly intended for staff, but students could use the catalog with little assistance fi-om staff members. 2. What is the stated purpose of the publication? The purpose is not explicitly stated, but its title, Curriculum Catalog, probably makes a statement of purpose unnecessary. 3. List the documents strengths in relation to its purpose. The catalog is detailed. It includes information for every circumstance imaginable from specialty courses in unique schools to correspondence courses available for dual credit, high school credit, or college credit. The only observable omissions are the regulations for administration. These omissions are explained in a foreword. 4. List the documents weaknesses in relation to its purpose. Other than the occasional typographical error or missed heading (Board Policy), the catalog appears to be accurate and to offer everything needed for general student assignment. It does not include special education student assignment procedures, but they probably should not be contained in this catalog. 5. Overall, how well do you think the publication fulfills its purpose? Why? The Curriculum Catalog fulfills its purpose completely. Except for the omission explained in the foreword, it contains everything the school staffs need for student placement. 6. Suggestions! The format could be spiffed up with illustrations or humor. 7. Comments! LRSD s instructional department is making good progress in formalizing its curriculum. The ill-defined courses and arbitrary student placements seem to be disappearing.LRSD 6'**, 7'^, 8\", Grade Standards, Benchmarks Audience: Parents or Guardians Purpose: To help parents or guardians to monitor student progress in learning and to help reinforce at home what the students are leamina at school. Strengths: Various guides are color coded. For parents with more than one child, this makes it easier to differentiate the guides. The general layout of the document makes it easy to use and attractive without being overly simplistic or juvenile. The explanatory cover memo from Bonnie is detailed enough to clearly state the purpose of the document, but also avoids excessive details which might lose the attention of the reader. For the most part, the benchmarks within subject areas are brief and relatively self-explanatory to even the reader with a very basic level of knowledge in various curriculum areas. Weaknesses: I may be confused, but where are the standards? Somewhere, the documents need to differentiate standards and benchmarks. Some benchmarks are not clearly expressed. In some cases, I got the impression that some benchmarks were condensed in order to keep the documents brief. However, condensing seems to have made some statements confusing or tremendously vague. Fulfills Purpose: Generally, these documents fulfill the purpose of being simple and informative. It is quite a task to write an informative document that will inform a broad spectrum of individuals without being either insultingly simplistic or confusingly pedantic. I feel that the writers avoided the extremes in most cases. Suggestions: Define and give examples of standards. Parenthetical examples would have helped clarify some of the benchmarks. Are the curriculum documents printed in any other language other than English? IA Parent and Student Guide to Learning in Middle School LRSD 2000-2001 Audience: Purpose: Middle school students and their parents To explain the progression of required and elective middle school courses. Strengths: The guide is less formally formatted than the curriculum answer arrangement should make the guide more user-friendly. catalog. The question and Weaknesses: The pages arent numbered! It seems that if you were discussing the content with a teacher or counselor, you would have difficulty with references. as it should be The guide should have followed the format consistently rather than varying off into sp^ific course desmptions. The more specific descriptions might have been more appropriate as a reference to the rear of the document. Also, the questions arent answered directly. Often, the real answer questions aren t comes only after a lengthy explanation. The document places the notice to non-English speaking parents at the end - and T? r ri T  .  UiUC in English. In addition, the notice only offers oral translation than a written version. as an option rather The guide deals less with the middle school it should. concept and environment than I thought Fulfills Purpose: The guide does fulfill the requirements. Im not so purpose of clearly describing course offerings and sure It IS students to make practical use of it. user-friendly enough for many parents and Suggestions: Although the guide does not claim to do so, I would still like to explanation of the benefits of middle school. see more of an The guide does give a description of interdisciplinary teaming, but it seems that the district should explain those explanations near the beginning of the guide rather than more and place near the end. Additionally, the guide should follow were visiting a school counselor and discussing the school. a conversational format fully as if the reader scheduling options. course requirements, and A minor visual suggestion - on the front cover, separate the title A Parem and Sludem Omde ta Learning in Middle School from LRSD with a space.Middle School (Grades 6-8) Curriculum Guide 2000-2001 Audience: LRSD staff I assume. However, I think I did school parent. receive a copy of this as a middle Purpose: A reference guide to the middle school mission, policies, structure, and curriculum. Strengths: One-stop shoppmg. This document includes all relevant info fairly quick reference. on middle schools for Weaknesses: Minor point, but why are the page number positions alternated? At first fnP hnnUjaf n/no __i___j  the booklet was only numbered on every other page. I thought Fulfills Purpose: ntembers-and possibly parents who know exactly th^p?^ imfonnation they are seeking or choose to use this as a supplement to the Parent and Student Guide to Learning in the Middle School.I Language Arts READING  Practice reading individually and in groups.  Recognize and determine main idea and details in reading selections.  Identify different purposes of reading and writing.  identify styles of authors.  Follow written directions.  Recognize difference between fact and opinion.  Use word-attack skills to read accurately and to understand information.  Determine word meaning from clues in reading material.  Use information from previously learned information to evaluate new information.  Use headings, italics, footnotes, and other printed features to sort and organize information.\" cxrJi  Identify and compare elements of reading such as setting and characterization.  Select reading materials representing a variety of cultures.  Read orally with expression and ease.  Increase vocabulary from reading.  Use reference aids such as a dictionary, thesaurus, and computer.  Select reading materials appropriate for reading for pleasure, finding information, and for use to helo in writing.  Use predicting, putting events in order, and skimming to increase understanding of reading material.  Use examples to support opinions and conclusions about reading material.  Use computers and library skills to find information.  Read graphs, tables, maps, and diagrams. WRITING  Write in personal journals for specific periods of time.  Write about real world, personal, and classroom experiences, a Writo hnmria+o _i__i?__  Write in complete sentences using vaned patterns^including simple, complex, and compound.  Use prewriting and beginning activities.  Explain through writing what is learned in all subjects by use of outlines, categorizing and writinq directions.  Create a first draft with paragraphs containing a topic sentence, supporting details and logical organization.  Use appropriate skills in mechanics, spelling, and usage in writing. * and ^PP'^^P^^te resources to correct spelling, grammar, punctuation,  Use computer and human resources to collect and organize information for writing.  Edit and correct error?? with .^noll Pha/'U onH i.________________ errors Spell Check and Grammar Check on computers.PHYSICAL SCIENCE  Investigate the effects of magnets on each other.  Know that the Earth is a magnet.  Understand the operation of a compass. .1  Use a coil of wire and an electric current to produce magnetism  Build a simple motor. : from using a coll of wire and a magnet List the matenals from which paper is made.  Describe properties of paper and how they relate to its use.  Make paper using the steps in papermaking.  Identify paper as a major renewable resource, nc4  Describe the steps in designing different types of paper. *  \"  V1 ni prcc^ucA,  P\u0026gt;--pc r , - LIFE SCIENCE  Describe the basic needs of plants.  Identify the things that affect plant growth.  Describe how plants reproduce.  Describe how light and gravity affect the growth of a plant  Plant and care for plants. . Confrol the environment and conditions when the seeds are planted and the plants are growing  Observe, measure, describe, and record changes in plant growth. EARTH SCIENCE  Understand that time can be measured using the natural cycles of the sun and moon.  Descnbe how shadows from the sun a day. can be used to measure and predict the passage of time during  Descnbe how the phases of the moon can be used to predict the passage of time during  I JnnarQTanri ____________ , . . 3 Understand that mechanical clocks can be constructed and used to time consistently. a month. measure specific intervals of Social Studies CITIZENSHIP  Describe political patterns in ancient civilizations.  Describe the development of Greek and Roman democracies.  Explain Greek and Roman citizenship and its significance. INTERDEPENDENCE  Explain the interdependence of ancient people with their environment  Locate and describe ancient and early civilizations in Africa and Asia.  Locate and describe life in ancient and early America.  Analyze the impact of trade in ancient/early civilizations.  Locate and describe the way of life in early Europe such as Greece, Rome and Russia  Analyze the structure of feudalism.  Explore current event issues in lands of ancient and early civilizations. * dvi^zati^'^^ rnethods and processes to explore the interdependence of people of ancient and early CONTINUITY AND CHANGE 4-.T  Explain hew the development of agriculture impaa^ andent and early people. Use various methods and processes to explore and explain changes in andent and eariv civilizations.  Describe the impact of the rise and fall of ancient and early civilizations such as Egypt Rome and Meso America.  Evaluate the impact of change over time.  Investigate how political events have affected the way people live, such as their literature and language. cJTetkCL ICULTURAL PERSPECTIVES iI . SmnTrP /nH r PP' transmitted their cultures Cornpare and contrast vanous and diverse cultures of ancient and early people tocation, place, region, and how they interacted with each other and their e Compare and contrast the ways ancient and early people met their basic ssociate ancient and early group leaders with places of origin and belie Uescnbe contributions of ancient and early groups and individual: environment with respect to needs.  Describe the roie of the church in early Europe. Msociety.\noixc cujTeri-V 5500 Read literature about people/events of ancient and early civiiizations. SCARCITY AND CHOICE  Describe and analyze the economic patterns of early people.  Analyze how ancient and early societies dealt with scarcity.  Relate factors associated with economic development, such resources. as technology, population growth, and COOPERATION AND CONFLICT  fnd Christians, and Christians aniong ancient and early groups 4 o Z Q 2 J \"512 7b \"T-* 37l5 lOlluzj Language Arts READING  Practice reading individually and in groups.  Gain information from reading.  Put material read into own words. Draw conclusions and make inferences in regard to reading material.  IIddeennttiiffyy ddiiffffAerre^nntt pniu irrnpro\u0026gt;scQesc of reading and writing.  Identify styles of authors.  Use logic to follow directions.  Use word-attack skills to read accurately and to understand information  Determine word meaning from clues in the reading material.  Use information from previously learned information to evaluate r i.  Use headings, italics, footnotes, and other printed features to sonrte awn dinformation. wLa -A ?  ,  reatures to sort and organize information. Identify and compare elements of reading such as setting and characterization.  Select reading materials representing a variety of cultures.  Read orally with expression and ease.  Increase vocabulary from reading.  Use reference aids such as a dictionary, thesaurus, and computer. wXg appropnate for reading for pleasure, finding information, and for use to help in  Use compare and contrast skills in reading.  Understand metaphor, simile, personification, and other figurative language techniques.  Use examples to support opinions and conclusions about reading material  RReeaadd garraapnhhss, ttaabhlleosc, mmaanpes, aannda daiiaagnrra-mm.s.. V \u0026amp; 10 I die'tion-ary 'lii II Social Studies CITIZENSHIP Descnbe the difference between democracy and other forms of world governments. ornpare and contrast the rights, privileges, and responsibilities of citizens in diverse political svstPm Analyze the characteristics of citizenship as it relates to different countries.  Identify and describe the qualities of citizenship needed to solve todays global problems and issues. INTERDEPENDENCE  and reference matenals to acquire, organize, analyze, andfnterpret geographic inrormation and issues. ____  Ampnr regions,(^^s and majordti1?i^ U.SJC'Canada Latin Amenca, Europe, Rj^ia, Southwest and East Asia, Africa, and Australia ~  Wentify continents by outlines and compare and contrast physical fe^res of continents.  Descnbe ways people and nations interact with each other and with ' Read, and a^lyze current event global issues and problems. the environment. CONTINUITY AND CHANGE  Describe and analyze the impact of human changes to the environment  an understanding of technological changes and the impacton how people  Re ate sn pvpnt m hic+no/ pn/-*!***! Relate an event in history with social change.  Use a variety of processes and appropriate methods and tools and change in the global society. live. to explore and understand continuity CULTURAL PERSPECTIVES  Describe the elements and factors that distinguish cultures.  Compare and contrast cultural features of regions.  Identify and describe the major cultural regions of the U.S.A. Canada Southwest and East Asia, Africa, and Australia. G_rec-s ? Latin America, Europe, Russia, Determ me ways that culture influences peoples perceptions of places and regions  Wentify and evaluate different viewpoints regarding the use of resources. famine the relationship between historical events and cultural development  Demonstrate  rocno/^+...IX._____ a respect for different cultural perspectives. C.c-r\\ tAO. zir coi'i'Vi\u0026lt;^ti ICOOPERATION AND CONFLICT Examine effects of prejudice and discrimination against racial, cultural, ethnic, and religious qrouos of the world.  Examine ways people attempt to combat world prejudice and discrimination.  Identify and explain reasons for conflict within and between regions and countries.  Give examples of global conflicts and cooperation.  Relate competition for resources to conflict and cooperation between regions and countries.  Draw conclusions about how regional differences or similarities may lead to cooperation and conflict. SCARCITY AND CHOICE  Explore how factors such as technology, population growth, and resources are related to economic development of nations.  Analyze the distribution of goods and resources among nations of the world.  Describe major industries and businesses in the United States.  Describe and compare the economic systems of the world.  Use various methods, tools, and resources to understand, explain, and analyze scarcity in the world. Arkansas Studies CITIZENSHIP  Identify and explain the purposes of Arkansas government.  Discuss and evaluate the concepts of good citizenship, and practice forms of civic participation.  Explain the historical and current-impact of American public policy on Arkansas racial, religious geographic, ethnic, economic, anttlinguistic diversiti^ ?  Know and understand the organization, function, and operation of local, county, and state governments, and examine methods of influencing policy in a democratic government.  Analyze the characteristics of effective leadership in Arkansas today and in the past  Analyze and compare opposing viewpoints in creating and effectively communicating solutions to public issues in Arkansas.  Describe and analyze the use, abuse, and limits of power and authority in Arkansas.  Demonstrate a sound knowledge of the geography of Arkansas as it relates to politics. SCARCITY AND CHOICE  Describe the various Arkansas institutions at local, state, and national levels that make up economic systems, such as households, business firms, banks, government agencies, labor unions, and corporations.  Examine existing data and research from various viewpoints showing how technology, population growth, resource use, and environmental quality are related to economic development within the state.  Describe the role that location, supply and demand, prices, incentives, and profits play in determining what is produced and distributed by Arkansas companies in a competitive market system.  Propose and evaluate alternative uses of environments and resources in Arkansas.  Analyze and explain how choices made with respect to scarcity in the past have profound influences on choices available today.COOPERATION AND CONFLICT 1 i  Demonstrate areas of inequity and discrimination based socioeconomic status in Arkansas. on race, sex, age, physical condition, and Examine the contnbution of the arts, literature, media, technology, and languages in fostering COODArafjnn anH in raneinn _______  a cooperation and causing conflict in Arkansas.  Analyze how disparities in power and economic status lead to conflict  Compare and contrast the causes and consequences of conflict within the world. state, the nation, and the  Identify, explore, and analyze conflict among individuals and groups as well as various methods used to resolve conflict.  Evaluate the role of technology in contributing to the creation and resolution of conflict in Arkansas. INTERDEPENDENCE  Analyze how decisions and events in Arkansas and the world affect each other. * interactions between the people of Arkansas and their environment  Relate the evidence of historical and cultural languages to the development of the state v -  Analyze and evaluate the history, causes, consequences, and possible solutions to presen?-dav issues and emerging global issues, such as health, security, resource distribution, economic development, and environmental quality.  Understand spatial relationships and locate places on Arkansas, U.S., and world maps.  Describe and evaluate the role of Arkansas in the global arena. CONTINUITY AND CHANGE  Investigate the processes and evaluate the impact of change over time in Arkansas. Explore and explain the changes in developments such as technology, transportation, agriculture and communications that affect Arkansas social and economic activity.  Investigate how political events, technological changes, and cultural diffusion have affected literature languages, and arts overtime in Arkansas.  Analyze continuity and change in concepts of individual rights (race, ethnic, and gender issues) and rp^nnncihilifiae ni/ar responsibilities overtime in the state. Explore, interpret, analyze, and evaluate various viewpoints within and across cultures related to events and issues. CULTURAL PERSPECTIVES  Examine information and developments in Arkansas and explain how they may be viewed differently bv people from diverse cultures.  Ariaiyze the historical perspectives that contribute to the development and transmission of Arkansas' cultures through language, literature, the arts, architecture, traditions, beliefs, and values.  Compare and contrast various cultures in Arkansas. Describe the ways family, religion, gender, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, and other qrouo -J-.. .^i____:_____________________ ... .. . S characteristics contribute to developing an appreciation of Arkansas heritage.  Identify and descnbe the various movements or periods of significant historical change within and across cultures.  Explore ways that Arkansas natural and built environments interact with culture.  Analyze and demonstrate the value of both cultural diversity and cohesion within and  Examine and explain belief systems underlying Arkansas traditions and laws. across groups.LIFE SCIENCE  Describe the major characteristics S' Classify animals using their characteristics.  Explain the differences between sexual and asexual reproductions.  ^pfein^h' ''\"h \" animal Explain how changes within animals help them  List the characteristics of plants. Describe the structure and function of egg-caterpiilar-butterfly and egg-tadpole-froq) survive on Earth (give specific examples). uie Siruciure and function of roots stems leav  Descnbe methods of reproduction in plants   Understand how plants m--a--k- e fWoWoMd UaInIMd oxygen through photosynthesis and  Classify plants based on their characteristics  Know how the ecology of the environment is organized such population\u0026gt;community\u0026gt;ecosystem\u0026gt;biosphere  Descrihp hni tho ._.k -x c____, use oxygen during respiration. as Describe how the amount of food, eat the , , I ------- III dll aicd UV Identify the different types of relationships between commensalism, parasitism).  Describe the process of color vision. PHYSICAL SCIENCE Understand time, distance, and displacement form  Distinguish between velocity and speed. Distinguish between velocity and acceleration.  Understand acceleration along curves.  Calculate the acceleration of a falling object.  DDsessncrriihboe projectile motion. Describe how a satellite is a projectile in free-fell.  Understand factors related to the  Describe the characteristics of organisms. plants and animals in an environment (such as mutualism. motion of a pendulum. waves.  eSh fee and longitudinal). Exp am the relationship between frequency, wavelength, and speed ii Explain constnjctive and destnjctive wave interference the basis for motion. in a wave.  1D1 eJs cribXe how sound waves are formed, transmitted, and received  Understand the Doppler Effect (such you). as how the sound changes as it comes towards Describe the waves caused by earthquakes.  dentifv hnix/ li/nhi you or goes away from Identify how light travels. Describe reflection and refraction of light Distinguish between physical and chemical Understand solutions and factors that affect Describe the properties of acid and base. Explain how a reaction between an acid and a base produces a salt. changes and properties, solubility. I I I Language Arts J READING  Practice reading individually and in groups.  Gain information from reading. Draw conclusions and make inferences in regard to reading material.  Judge, cntique, and defend opinions of reading selections.  Identify different purposes of reading and writing.  Identify styles of authors.  Identify kinds of literature and their purposes.  Follow written directions with increasing difficulty and complexitv  Use logic to follow directions.  Use word-attack skills to read accurately and to understand information  Determine word meaning from clues in the reading material. Use information from previously learned information to evaluate  Use headings, italics, footnotes, and other printed features to new information. -D'-  luuuiuBi. ano oinerpnnted features to sort and organize information  Identify and compare elements of reading such as setting and characterization.  oelect reading materials representing a variety of cultures.  Increase vocabulary from reading.  Use reference aids such as a dictionary, thesaurus, and computer hip h wning^ materials appropnate for reading for pleasure, finding information I, and for use to  Use compare and contrast skills in reading.  Use predicting, sequencing, and skimming to increase  Read graphs, tables, maps, and diagrams. understanding of reading. WRITING uOqI^I ill ICi ll?3i  l topics : beginning M. Create a first draft with a central idea and with details, and a closing sentence. paragraphs containing a topic sentence, supporting * onn organization and details concentrating on a central theme Use appropnate outlines and organizing methods to practice thinking and analyzing skills  Use appropnate skills in mechanics, spelling, and usage in writing  Vary sentence styles to include simple, complex, and compound  Proofread writing in peer groups and with teacher for information  Use a dictionary, thesaurus, and other resources to organization, and style. usage. correct spelling, grammar, punctuation, and . ProdX nSkh H ^atenals, and personal interviews to collect information oduce polished pieces of writing to be shared or published and collected in a writing portfolio  Express awareness of vaned cultures and universal issues in wnting. 1:  Relate elements, atoms, molecules, and compounds.  Explain the behavior of gases in terms of the particle theory of matter.  Find the relationships involving pressure, volume, and temperature of a gas.  Distinguish among metals, nonmetals, and metalloids.  List elements that are classified as metals, nonmetais, and metalloids and give their uses.  Recognize when chemical reactions have taken place.  Write word equations for reactions.  Describe how energy is involved in chemical reactions.  Classify energy resources as either renewable or nonrenewable.  Compare and contrast types of fossil fuels.  Describe the benefits and drawbacks of using different energy resources.  Describe the operation of a steam generator electric power plant. EARTH SCIENCE  Name conditions that define minerals.  List and describe identifying characteristics of minerals (such as hardness, color, streak, cleavage, and fracture).  Test minerals to identify them.  Descnbe the value of minerals.  Distinguish between a rock and a mineral.  Understand the rock cycle.  Identify rocks based on their characteristics. United States History Exploration to 1914 CITIZENSHIP  Explain the philosophy of government expressed in the Declaration of Independence.  Analyze foundations of the U.S. Constitution andiffssignificance.  Pynlain th a mainrHoKatac II____I____i2_--L Explain the major debates, compromises, and resolutions during the development of the Constitution.  Describe the development of the two-party system.  Outline the principles of federalism.  Compare and contrast powers in the U.S. Constitution given Congress, the President, the Supreme Court, and the states.  Explain the responsibility of a free press and give examples.  Practice the roles, rights, and responsibilities as participating citizens in a democracy.  Participate in a project designed to serve the community. 1r# r INTERDEPENDENCE f  aT' 3-n -'Oration associated wte, ,e grown, and  Interpret various timelines related to American/U.S. history. * documents and narratives of American/U.S. I.iou^.y uu lu  toentify, analyze, and interpret primary sources and historical and editorial  Summanze the Exploration and Colonization Periods . Describe the role of early ZC\" century U.S. in world and domestic affairs . Wentfy major events in American/U.S. history up to 1914 and evaluate the  Read, interpret, and analyze current events. history upto 1914. cartoons. causes, costs, and benefits. CONTINUITY AND CHANGE  Descnbe the impact of change on places and the movements of people and goods  UUnnddeerrSsttaanndri tthoep ttrraanncsffnorrmmtaattiiroinr, and r__e_s__p_o__n_s_e_. tor the Industrial Revolution.  Use various methods and tools to explore and understand changes in the nation over time. CULTURAL PERSPECTIVES ractors that influenced them.  Compare and contrast diverse cultures in American and U.S. history. Analyze the significance of the issue of slavery to society, politics, and economy  Outline the development and growth ofthe American education system. aSS* ntributions of diverse individuals and groups such as African Americans and women to Mrnsnc3n urs. COOPERATION AND CONFLICT  Analyze the causes and consequences of wars involving the U.S. to 1914.  Describe the critical developments during the Civil War and their impact  Outline the causes ofWorid War I. or Review of LRSD Elementary Standards and Benchmarks Document for Parents GRADE: K ALTDENCE: parents PLT\u0026lt;POSE: To explain the districts curriculum content standards. The district intends for this document to enable parents to check on their childs progress and reinforce skills at home. STRENGTHS: It is well organized, categorized by broad subjects and further subcategories, illustrations are super, and language has been simplified from that in the districts curriculum. The entire document is very professional looking. WEAKNESSES: There is a limit to the degree that the standards can be simplified. Some parents will not understand every item, but I think they did a good job avoiding jargon and insider terms. The problem is that it takes a certain level of learning to understand an. educational standard. FLLFILLS PURPOSE: It does as good a job as one can expect. This is a great document for a parent who wants to understand the standards and help their child in school. The document does not purport to answer all questions, but to serve as a basis for further parent/school communication. It does an excellent job. SUGGESTIONS: Under the geometry subsection, specify which geometric shapes In life science, specify which body parts In the citizenship subsection, define state symbol ADDITIONAL COMMENTS: This document, and all the others designed for grades 1-5, were distributed to parents in November 1999. I cant see what our feedback accomplishes at this late date. There is no mention of these guides being available in languages other than English. IReview of LRSD Elementary Standards and Benchmarks Document for Parents GRADE: First ALTDEENCE: parents PURPOSE: To explain the districts curriculum content standards. The district intends for this document to enable parents to check on their childs progress and reinforce skills at home. STRENGTHS: It is well organized, categorized by broad subjects and further subcategories, illustrations are super, and language has been simplified from that in the districts curriculum. The entire document is very professional looking. WEAKNESSES: There is a limit to the degree that the standards can be simplified. Some parents will not understand every item, but I think they did a good job avoiding jargon and insider terms. The problem is that it takes a certain level of learning to understand and educational standard. FULFILLS PL^RPOSE: It does as good a job as one can expect. This is a great document for a parent who wants to understand the standards and help their child in school. The document does not purport to answer all questions, but to serve as a basis for further parent/school communication. It does an excellent job. SUGGESTIONS: In the writing section, substitute a term such as commonly used words for high frequency words ADDITIONAL COMMENTS: none IReview of LRSD Elementary Standards and Benchmarks Document for Parents GRADE\nSecond AUDIENCE: parents PURPOSE: To explain the districts curriculum content standards. The district intends for this document to enable parents to check on their childs progress and reinforce skills at home. STRENGTHS\nIt is well organized, categorized by broad subjects and further subcategories, illustrations are super, and language has been simplified from that in the districts curriculum. The entire document is very professional looking. WE.AKNESSES\nThere is a limit to the degree that the standards can be simplified. Some parents will not understand every item, but I think they did a good job avoiding jargon and insider terms. The problem is that it takes a certain level of learning to understand and educational standard. FULFILLS PURPOSE: It does as good a job as one can expect. This is a great document for a parent who wants to understand the standards and help their child in school. The document does not purport to answer all questions, but to serve as a basis for further parent/school communication. It does an excellent job. SUGGESTIONS: Under the section on data, probability and statistics, define Venn diagram or use alternate language In earth and space science, place a list the steps of the water cycle in order, in parentheses Under citizenship, explain whetheridentify leaders means by such as president or proper name ADDITIONAL COMMENTS\nnone iReview of LRSD Elementary Standards and Benchmarks Document for Parents GRADE: Third AUDIENCE: parents PURPOSE: To explain the districts curriculum content standards. The district intends for this document to enable parents to check on their childs progress and reinforce skills at home. STRENGTHS: It is well organized, categorized by broad subjects and further subcategories, illustrations are super, and language has been simplified from that in the district s curriculum. The entire document is very professional looking. WEAKNESSES: There is a limit to the degree that the standards can be simplified. Some parents will not understand eveiy item, but I think they did a good job avoiding jargon and insider terms. The problem is that it takes a certain level of learning to understand and educational standard FULFILLS PURPOSE: It does as good a job as one can expect. This is a great document for a parent who wants to understand the standards and help their child in school. The document does not purport to answer all questions, but to serve as a basis for further parent/school communication. It does an excellent job. SUGGESTIONS: In the language arts section, the phrase large core of high frequency words will not have much meaning to parents. It needs to be translated to laymens terms. In the writing section, it is not clear what express cultural diversity in writing means. Does this mean that students are to spontaneously include characters from a variety of cultures in their writing or does it mean that they can respond in writing to an assignment such as, Write five important facts about Kwanza. Under mathematics, two items are confusing. Realize that fractional parts must be equal means? I guess this is in reference to common denominators, but Im not sure. Also, the item that talks about becoming familiar with grouping fractions with numerators of one and the same denominators needs a parenthetical example in order to be understood. In the life science subsection, the five main kingdoms of living organisms should be listed. In the citizenship subsection, list the three branches ofthe U.S. government. IReview of LRSD Elementary Standards and Benchmarks Document for Parents GR.WE: Fourth AUDIENCE: Parents PURPOSE\nTo explain the districts curriculum content standards. The district intends for this document to enable parents to check on their childs progress and reinforce skills at home. STRENGTHS: It is well organized, categorized by broad subjects and further subcategories, illustrations are super, and language has been simplified from that in the districts curriculum. The entire document is very professional lookina. WEAKNESSES: There is a limit to the degree that the standards can be simplified. Some parents will not understand every item, but I think they did a good job avoiding jargon and insider terms. The problem is that it takes a certain level of learning to understand and educational standard FULFILLS PURPOSE: It does as good a job as one can expect. This is a great document for a parent who wants to understand the standards and help their child in school. The document does not purport to answer all questions, but to serve as a basis for further parent/school communication. It does an excellent job. SUGGESTIONS: Under earth and space science, the rock cycle needs further explanation. The subsection on number sense states that, division notation represents a variety of situations. It is not at all clear what this means. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS: noneReview of LRSD Elementary Standards and Benchmarks Document for Parents GRADE\nFifth AUDIENCE\nParents PURPOSE\nTo explain the districts curriculum content standards. The district intends for this document to enable parents to check on their childs progress and reinforce skills at home. * STRENGTHS\nIt is well organized, categorized by broad subjects and further subcategories, illustrations are super, and language has been simplified from that in the district s curriculum. The entire document is very professional looking. WEAKNESSES: There is a limit to the degree that the standards can be simplified. Some parents will not understand every item, but I think they did a good job avoiding jargon and insider terms. The problem is that it takes a certain level of learning to understand and educational standard. FULFILLS PURPOSE: It does as good a job as one can expect. This is a great document for a parent who wants to understand the standards and help their child in school. The document does not purport to answer all questions, but to serve as a basis for further parent/school communication. It does an excellent job. SUGGESTIONS: The final item under the Social Studies subheading cultural perspective makes reference to demonstrating ways to interact with diverse cultures. Is demonstrate really the best verb' Wouldnt explain better describe the behavior expected of the child? ADDITIONAL COMMENTS: none ADDITIONAL COMMENTS\nnone 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_315","title":"Compliance hearing exhibits, 119-129","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":["1998/2000"],"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 law and legislation","Education--Evaluation","Educational statistics"],"dcterms_title":["Compliance hearing exhibits, 119-129"],"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/315"],"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":["exhibition (associated concept)"],"dcterms_extent":["104 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\nData Hams Membership Corporal Punishment Suspenslen-Out of School Eipulsion } Mental Retardation Serious Emotional Disturbance Specific Learning Disability H$ Diploma 1 HS Certincete ot Attendance er Completion In Need et LEP i Enrolled In LEP G\u0026lt;ned and Talented AP Maihemalics I J AP Science American IndlanZAIasIcan Native Number % AsiarUPacIflc Islander Number % ! i Male Female Total Male Female Total Male Female Total Male Female Total Male Female Total Male Female Total Male Female Total Male Female Total Male Female Total Male Female Total Male * Female Total Male Female Total Maie Female Total Male Female Total 261.403 250.365 511.040 4.178 952 5.120 25.133 12.060 37,213 1.114 321 1.435 3.739 2.025 6.564 4,095 1,161 5,256 25,724 12.429 36.153 10 128 10.766 20.892 214 250 472 39.085 35.920 75.005 33.561 30.060 64.421 11.966 12890 24.656 743 793 1536 951\" 1.012 1.963 057 0 54 1.11 1 14 0 26 1 40 0 79 0 36 1 17 1 26 0 37 1 64 0 59 0 45 1 04 096 0 27 1 23 0 93 0 4$ 1 38 042 0 44 006 0 40 0 49 0 09 1 20 1 10 2 30 1 17 108 2 25 0 42 0 45 0 07 0 24 026 OSO 031 0 33 0 65 967.626 909.064 1.678.690 545 . 141 686 45.637 15.148 60,765 1.538 302 1.840 6.846 5.112 11.958 3.884 1.235 4.919 29.132 12.651 41.783 58.826 58.460 115.266 984 979 1,963 247.466 209.657 457 123 223.080 169.212 412.292 90.541 96.706 167.247 19.406 Department of Education, Office for Civil Rights 1998 Elementary and Secondary School Civil Rights Compliance Report Projected Values for the Nation Hispanic Number % 2 to 3.540.501 199 3.356.212 4 00 6.904 713 0 IS 0 04 019 1 43 0 40 1 91 1 76 0 35 2 11 109 061 1 90 0 67 0 29 1 16 1 05 0 46 1 51 2 33 2 40 4 73 1 06 1 65 3 70 7 57 6 42 13 99 7 78 660 14 30 3 17 3 39 657 6 31 19.092 5.058 ____24i1^ 333.065 129 646 462.711 11 392 2.769 14.161 36.177 27.007 63.184 29.787 7 963 37.750 295.745 140.891 444,436 120.063 132.244 252.307 3 251 3.133 ____6 384 1.278.115 1.169.690 2.467813 1.109 860 1.036.566 2.146.446 117.954 128 239 246.193 10.353 10.445 6 00 ------10.403 37.853 19.496 18.705 38.201 1231 641 6 15 12 57 20.036 10.475 11.827 22 302 Black (non-Hlspsnic) Number % White (non-Hltpanlc) Number % Total Number % Disabled Number % Limited-Engllsh Pronclent 21-W%.TI(n \u0026gt;60%-Tlm Number % Number % Number % Number 7 71 3.990.703 730 3.007.526 15 01 7.606.229 0 69 14.037.124 0 45 13.907.401 5 23 1 39 682 1045 4 07 14 52 13 05 317 16 22 5 75 4 29 10 04 700 1 87 887 .10 67 537 16 04 4 92 5 42 10 35 6 13 5 91 12 04 39 11 36 40 75 51 38 72 36 16 2153. 4 14 4 50 0 63 3 37 341 6 77 3 45 3 89 7 34 99.358 36.165 135.523 600.299 359.923 1.040 222 19.710 7.314 27.024 124.536 03.292 207.629 86.794 25.600 114.602 342.575 169,372 511.947 140.056 178.280 316,316 0.913 0.551 17.464 40.088 35.480 75,566 35.990 32.204 68,194 104.717 134 999 239.716 9.123 12.192 21.315 7.884 11.493 19.377 17 14 20.024.605 3225 23.813.437 30 40 22.390.647 62 60 46.004,004 27 22 991 37 12 21 35 11 30 32 65 22 50 6 36 30 96 1960 13 24 33 04 20 86 606 26 92 12 36 6 11 10 40 574 7 23 1297 16 60 16 12 32 93 1.23 109 231 1,26 1 12 230 3 87 4 73 840 2 97 390 693 2 59 3 70 0 37 167.753 31,619 199.572 1.168.326 416.481 1,564.769 33.368 9.469 42.837 195,492 144.044 339.536 204.534 56 649 263,183 1.106,047 548,156 1.734,203 653.218 679.936 1,733.152 14,937 11.619 26,756 103.429 89247 192,670 93.794 01.259 175,053 1.050,065 1,095,279 2.154,144 110.741 107.287 226.008 110.875 111,490 222,165 45 95 8 72 54 67 36 67 13 07 49 75 3622 10 65 4907 31.08 22 90 S3 97 48 05 13.78 61 62 42 61 19 79 62 59 35 00 30 09 7109 28 16 22 20 5045 316 2 73 5.90 3 27 2 63 6 11 37 13 30 40 75 S3 38 01 34 66 73 49 3641 36 67 73 06 290.923 74.135 365,058 2.252.463 933.256 3,165,721 87,122 20.178 67,298 366.790 262.281 629.071 330.894 94.015 425,709 1.079.223 091.299 2.770.522 1.160.268 1.257.667 2.437,955 20.299 24.739 53.030 1,700.101 1.560.002 3.266,183 1,498.305 1.370,100 2.066.405 1.304.044 1.460.114 2.052,150 158,369 149.180 307.549 149.481 154.527 304,008 5133 48 67 100.00 79.69 20 31 100 00 70 70 29 30 100 00 76 89 23 11 100 00 56 31 41 69 100 00 77 73 22 27 100 00 67 83 32 17 100 00 48 41 51 59 100 00 53 36 46 64 100 00 52 27 47 73 100 00 52 20 47 60 10OO0 46 53 51 47 100 00 51 49 48 51 100 00 49 17 50 83 100 00 5.592.517 1.708.196 1.560,013 12 16 3.268,209 4.380 910 ____________5j27O__ 93.269 30.117 _________123.386 2.394 525 2.919 15.633 11.965 __________27,598 6.301 1.740 ___________SjO41_ 92,408 54.314 . 146,722 3,71 339 7.10 1.19 025 1.44 293 095 387 2 74 060 334 249 1 90 4,39 1 48 041 1 69 334 1 96 87.397 47.666 115,065 96.684 30.670 127.360 620.610 396.443  Use these numbers with caution due to large stalislical uncertainty In the estimate because the standard For eiample, if the eslimale Is 100 students and the standard error Is 28, the estimate will be flagged  Non-response rate it more than 10% but less than 20%.  Non-response rata is mere than 20% but less than 30%. U Non-response rate Is more than 30%. 93.910 56.811 150.729 12.335 7.271 19,606 145,539 70.066 223,605 119.096 64.076 183,974 30.020 15.122 45,142 1.758 1.171 2.929 1.953 1.432 3,385 3 05 2 33 0 18 23 26 13 71 36 97 445 2 39 0 84 4.16 2 24 042 1 05 0 53 1 50 0 57 0 30 095 064 047 111 23.279 22.762 46,041 5.30 1,217,053 10.71 758 18.29 22 71 7,21 29,92 29 62 14 31 43,93 109.488 03.987 193,475 06.953 27.239 114,192 742.051 347.538 1,009,589 17 40 190.509 1335 131,409 30.76 321.990 2043 147.037 6 40 37.200 26 02 105,117 2678 315.795 12 54 146.006 3933 462,601 error ol the estimate eiceeds 25 percent of the estimate. 0 62 080 1 61 30 20 51 34 8 43 5 16 Pt\u0026gt;e I i sExhibit No. 119: LI230-90 1998 Elementary \u0026amp; Secondary School Civil Rights Compliance Report Projected Values for the Nation-OCR 4\n1 I. I !)5A ,? V- i '} % i 5 It S'/\"/ Illi '.a i* V e9 'ft. Exhibit No. 120: LI230-90 1998 Elementary \u0026amp; Secondary School Civil Rights Compliance Report Projected Values for AR-OCR ^Illl s syl II I I ft 1 I 3 II Dat9 Items Membership Corporal Punishment Suspension-Out of School Expulsion Mental Retardation Serious Emotional Disturbance Specific Learning Disability HS Diploma HS Certificale ot Attendance or Completion In Need of LEP Enrolled in LEP Gifted and Talented AP Mathematics AP Science Male Female Total Male Female Total Male Female Total Male Female Total Male Female Total Male Female Total Male Female Total Male Female Total Male Female Total Male Female Total Male . Female Total Male Female Total Male Female Total Male Female Total American Indian/Alaskan Native Number 1,124 979 2.103 50 . 2  52  44 12  56 5 0 5 18  12 30 0  2  2  48  21 69 43 35 78 0 0 0 10  2 12  8  9  62 73 135 2  6 2 3 % 0 25 0 22 047 0 12 000 0 13 0 14 0 04 0 16 0 58 000 0 58 0 15 010 0 25 000 041 041 0 23 0 10 0 33 0 16 0 13 0 29 000 000 000 0 13 0 03 0 IS 0 11 001 013 012 0 15 0 27 0 08 015 0 23 0 03 006 009 AslanZPaciftc Islander Number 1.723 1.707 3,430 36  45  128 34 162 6 0 6 22 % Department of Education, Office for Civil Rights 1998 Elementary and Secondary School Civil Rights Compliance Report Projected Values for the State of Arkansas Hispanic Number % Black (non-Hispanic) Number % White (non-Hispanic) Number % Total Number % Disabled Number % LimHed-Engilsh Proficient Number % \u0026lt;21%-Time Number % 2V6O%-TimB Number % \u0026gt;60%-Time Number *_l 0 39 0 39 0 77 0 09 0 02 0 11 041 oil 0 52 0 69 000 069 009 009 0 18 1  021 0  000 21 6 27 99 128 225 5 11 16 459 435 694 436 424 660 265 264 529 33 39 72 39 37 76 14 0 21 0 10 0 03 0 13 0 37 047 0 84 1 69 3 73 5 42 5 75 5 44 11 19 6 07 590 11 97 0 53 0 53 1 08 1 27 1 50 2 77 1 17 1.11 2 26 6 485 5.853 12 338 462  78 538  389 69 478 25 0 25 64 37 __221_ 8  5  13  255 134 __389_ 160 142 302 5  6  13 3.577 3 194 8.771 3.244 2.872 8 116 354 . 371 . 725  6 13 10 7 17 1 46 1 32 2 78 1 13 0 19 1 32 1 25 0 29 1 54 2 89 000 2 69 0 69 030 099 1 66 1 04 2 69 1 20 0 63 1 84 080 0 53 1 12 1 69 2 71 4 41 44 77 39 98 64 75 45 16 39 98 85 13 071 0 74 1 45 0 23 0 27 050 030 0 21 0 51 50.905 50,158 101.061 7,350 3,070 10.420 8.505 4.079 12,584 300 77 377 3.235 2.111 5,346 11 49 11 32 2280 1801 7 52 25 53 27 38 13 13 40 50 34 64 8 89 43 53 28 55 17 32 43 67 166.672 157.373 324.245 24.937 4,819 29,756 13.681 4.108 17.789 358 94 452 3.900 2.767 6.667 37 65 35 51 73 16 61 10 11 81 72 91 44 04 13 22 57 26 41 34 10 85 52 19 32 01 22 71 54 71 84 4 17 39 32 4 6 63 116 4 24 02 3,278 1.372 4,650 2,586 3,273 5.859 19 15 34 63 49 112 31 31 ____6^ 4.694 5,673 10,387 248 336 586 282 445 727 1547 8 47 21 94 9 63 12 19 21 62 6 44 508 11.53 0 79 061 1 40 0 43 043 088 941 11 36 20 79 9 53 1299 2251 8 47 13 37 2184  Use these numbers wHh caution due to large atatlstical uncertainty in the estimate because the 247 4 51 14 102 4 21 12 349 4 72 26 227,110 218.067 443,177 32.636 7.975 40.611 22.747 8,321 31.086 695 171 668 7.246 4.937 12,165 341  142  5125 48 75 100 00 80 46 19 54 100 00 73 22 26 78 100 00 60 25 19 75 100 00 59 48 40 52 100 00 70 60 29 40 50,154 11 32 4,229 3.782 7,991 220  47  267  179 40 219 8 5  13 0 95 0 85 1 80 054 012 0.65 058 013 0.70 092 0 58 1 50 107 b 0 88 11.328 4 733 16,061 10.078 10.312 20.390 111 120  231 118 82 200 73 64 137 18 146 19.960 38.106 973 954 1.927 1.257 1,250 2.507 53 45 22 33 75 78 37 53 38 40 7593 37 63 4066 7831 1 48 103 250 102 0 69 191 36 39 4003 76 42 37 38 36 65 7403 37 77 37 56 75 33 483 4 10000 14.930 6.265 21,195 12.965 13.867 26.852 141 154  295 4,227 3,782 7,969 3,792 3,392 7,184 23,521 26,341 49,882 1.281 1.342 2403 1,589 1.739 3,326 70 44 29 56 100 00 46 26 51 72 100 00 47 80 52 20 10000 52 91 47 09 10000 52 78 47 22 1O0O0 47 17 52 83 100 00 48 44 51 58 10000 47 75 52 25 10000 64 8 171  9 8 0 8 9 8 163 8 84 8 247 8 0 53 1 40 1 86 000 168 0 77 0 40 1 17 1.185 758 1,943 9 73 6 22 1595 3.902 2.816 6,720 81 4 1877 40 4 6 28 121 4 25 05 6.023 2.855 8.678 2842 12 53 40,94 32 02 23 13 55.15 120 4 24 84 66 4 1368 188 4 36 51 2.192 1.372 3.564 1799 11 26 29 25 149 4 30.85 38  7 87 953 473 1.428 31 21 52 189 122 311 184 115 299 482 344 826 38  18 56  9 23  3 55 1 78 5 31 10 51 7 12 17 03 2 37 1 53 3 89 256 1 60 4 16 0 97 0 69 166 1 e6 0 69 2 15 0 42 0 27 089 283  275  538  0 53 0 55 106 FAra.amnU u Ik. i. J Z----------------------........u.e standard error of the estimate exceeds 25 percent of the estimate. For example, if (he estimate is 100 students and the standard error is 28. (he es(lma(e will be flaooed la Ik... \u0026gt;M\u0026lt; u..* 1________ 4 Non-response rale is more than 10% but less than 20%,  Non-response rate is more then 20% but less than 30%. O Non-response rale Is mors (han 30%. 7.962 3.207 11,169 37 66 15 13 52 79 187 4 38 72 965 407 1.392 4 65 1 92 6 57 PageExhibit No. 121: Year 2 Evaluation\nThe Effectiveness of the PreK-2 Literacy Program in the LRSD 1999-2000 and 2000-01. LI230-9 IT. I 5 I 1 I) I 5H, f -Ul, (I ill II I ll Year 2 Evaluation: The Effectiveness of the I PreK-2 Literacy Program in the Little Rock School District 1999-2000 and 2000-2001 Executive Summary Presented to the Board of Education Little Rock School District October 2001 Prepared by Dr. Bonnie A. Lesley Dr. Ed Williams Patricia Price Pat Busbea Ann Freeman Ken Savage Anita Gilliam Sharon KiilsgaardYear 2 Evaluation: The Effectiveness of the PreK-2 Literacy Program in the Little Rock School District 1999-2000 and 2000-2001 Executive Summary This report is one in a series of at least seven reports to the Board of Education over the past three years relating to the improvement of student achievement in PreK-2 literacy. The study is organized into ten sections, as follows: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Section I includes the Introduction, as well as a delineation of the Research Questions for the study and a description of the methodologies employed. Section II provides background information on the program design and its relationship to the Strategic Plan and the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. Section III describes the selection of appropriate assessments for grades K-2 and the processes by which readiness standards were established for each grade level for the Developmental Reading Assessment. It also includes information on national and local validation studies of the Observation Study and the Developmental Reading Assessment, as compared to the Achievement Level Test. The literacy plans design in relationship to the findings in national research studies on early literacy is described in Section IV. This section also includes an alignment of the research with the assessments selected by the District. Three major sections on data analysis follow. Section V is a description of each of the tables that was constructed from the data reports to assist the writers of this report and its readers in analyzing the results on the eight measurements: the five sub-tests on the Observation Survey (OS)\nthe Developmental Reading Assessment (DRA)\nand the reading and language usage sub-tests of the Achievement Level Tests (ALTs). Section VI is a detailed analysis of the data in each table and a comparison of 1999-2000 and 2000-01 data, by race. Additional data are provided in Section VII on the achievement gap among schools and on some statistical studies that were conducted relating to program effectiveness and the relationship between teacher participation in professional development and the achievement of their students. Following the data analysis is Section VIII that summarizes the program strengths and weaknesses and specifies the implications for instruction, with specific recommendations for improvements in 2001-02. Section IX is the Bibliography for the study. 10. Section X includes 87 tables of school-level data. Those interested in individual school performance or comparisons are encouraged to use the model in this report for data analysis at the District level to conduct similar analyses at the school level. 1The appendices A-E include copies of previous evaluation reports on the PreK-2 literacy program. In addition, a draft of a PreK-2 study was presented to the Board of Education for information in summer 2000 by the Plarming, Research, and Evaluation Department. The complete text of Section VIII, which includes the analysis of all available data and a set of recommendations for improvement in 2001-02, follows: VIII. Program Evaluation Findings and Recommendations for Improvement The research questions posed for this program evaluation are as follows: 1. Are the new curriculum standards/benchmarks, instructional strategies, and materials effective in teaching primary grade students how to read independently and understand words on a page? (See Section 5.2.1a of the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan and Strategy 2 of the Strategic Plan.) 2. Is the new program effective in improving and remediating the academic achievement of African American students? (See Section 2.7 of the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan.) 3. 4. 5. 6. Is there a relationship between teacher participation in professional development and student achievement? (See Policy IL expectation to examine cost effectiveness and Strategy 7 of the Strategic Plan.) Is there evidence of success in each of the four literacy models in use Early Literacy Learning in Arkansas (ELLA) only\nELLA and Reading Recovery\nSuccess for All\nand Direct Instruction? (See Section 2.7 of the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan.) What are the programs strengths and weaknesses? (See Policy IL.) Is the program cost effective? (See Policy IL and Strategy 3 of the Strategic Plan.) This section will provide answers to each of the six research questions, along with summaries of supporting data. 1. Are the new curriculum standards/benchmarks, instructional strategies, and materials effective in teaching primary grade students how to read independently and understand words on a page? (See Section 5.2.1a of the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan and Strategy 2 of the Strategic Plan.) When the program design committee published their plan for the PreK-3 Literacy Program, they included a section on Effectiveness (see pp. 12-14). Using the available 2data at that time, the 1997-98 and 1998-99 Grade 4 Literacy Benchmark results and the fall 1998 grade 3 SAT9 results, they noted that only approximately 30 percent of the students were achieving at an acceptable level. Another concern at that time was the achievement gaps that were evident. The committee wrote, These gaps are, of course, unacceptable and are indicators that current practice is not effective\" (p. 12). They also wrote, ... far too few students are becoming good readers by grade 3 (p. 13). To determine effectiveness of the new program components, the percent of students meeting the performance standard (readiness) on the Developmental Reading Assessment (DRA) was used since this measurement most closely approximates the type of measurement used on the grade 4 Literacy Benchmark. In summary, the standard for kindergarten is Level 2, for grade 1 it is Level 16, and for grade 2 it is Level 24. The percent readiness is the percent of students at each grade level who met the standard. (See Section III for a description of the DRA and the process used to establish performance levels or standards.) Tables 22 and 23 in Section V provide the data that are summarized here. The reader may also wish to review Tables 75-83 in Section X for school-level data. A summary of those results follows: Summary of K-2 Percent Readiness Data on the Developmental Reading Assessment All three grade levels improved in spring 2001. Grade 1 showed the greatest improvement. Grade Level 1999-2000 2000-2001 Change Kindergarten Grade 1 Grade 2 72.2 53.6 67.5 80.7 63.8 75.4 +8.5 +10.2 +7.9 More than 75 percent of the schools improved in spring 2001. Grade Level # Impr. % Impr. Kindergarten Grade I Grade 2 n 29 29 77% 83% 83% Both area and magnet schools did well. The five highest performing schools at each grade level for each year follow. McDermott Elementary was among the top five schools in 2000-2001 at all three grade levels. 3Grade Level 1999-2000 2000-2001 Kindergarten Grade 1 Grade 2 McDermott* Fulbright* Rightsell* Terry * Mitchell* Woodruff* Williams Wilson* Western Hills* McDermott* Rightsell* Williams Forest Park* Western Hills* Otter Creek* McDermott* Baseline* Fulbright* Gibbs Brady* Williams Carver McDermott* Booker Forest Park* Carver Williams Western Hills* Otter Creek* McDermott* Denotes area schools. Many schools improved dramatically in spring 2001. Schools improving 20 or more points were as follows. All are area schools, and most are high poverty schools. Stephens Elementary and Badgett Elementary were among the most improved schools at all three grade levels in 2000-2001. Grade Level 2000-01 Kindergarten Grade 1 Grade 2 Baseline (42.9)* Badgett (28.4)* Forest Park (27.1) Cloverdale (26.1)* Stephens/Garland (25J)* Wakefield (44.6)* Watson (41.9)* Baseline (41.2)* Stephens/Garland (27.5)* Western Hills (25.8) Chicot (24.4)* Badgett (20.6)*_________ Dodd (31.1) Badgett (31.1)* Stephens/Garland (30.1)* Pulaski Heights (29.3) McDermott (22.5) Denotes schools with 75% or higher eligible for free/reduced lunch. The Incentive Schools, in general, improved. With the exception of Mitchell and Rightsell at grade 1, a majority of the students performed at or above the readiness level, although significant gaps between the lowest and highest-performing schools are a concern. Franklin, Rockefeller, and Stephens had more than 50 percent of their students at or above readiness level at all three grade levels. 4Kindergarten School 1999-2000 2000-2001 Change Franklin Mitchell Rightsell Rockefeller Stephens 64.3 90.6 92.1 75.8 40.8 58.6 92.3 80.5 76.2 66.1 -5.7 1.7 -11.6 0.4 25.3 Grade 1 School 1999-2000 2000-2001 Change Franklin Mitchell Rightsell Rockefeller Stephens 57.6 25.0 35.7 76.3 23.5 58.9 25.0 41.7 65.2 51.0 1.3 0.0 6.0 -11.1 27.5 Grade 2 School 1999-2000 2000-2001 Change Franklin Mitchell Rightsell Rockefeller Stephens 81.2 48.6 94.7 71.4 31.3 83.6 50.0 70.5 84.2 61.4 2.4 1.4 -24.2 12.8 30.1 The Newcomer Centers improved, except for Terry at kindergarten and grade 2. All five schools had more than a majority of their students performing at or above the readiness level at the kindergarten level, all except one at grade 1, and all at grade 2. Second-language students scores are included in these results. Kindergarten School 1999-2000 2000-2001 Change Brady Chicot Romine Terry_____ Washington 76.9 56.1 66.7 91.9 81.2 93.4 70.9 86.4 86.7 84.1 16.5 14.8 19.7 -5.2 2.9 Grade 1 School 1999-2000 2000-2001 Change Brady Chicot Romine Tea_____ Washington 34.9 26.8 59.6 47.1 35.5 53.5 51.2 76.5 59.8 41.1 18.6 24.4 16.9 12.7 5.6 Gradel School 1999-2000 2000-2001 f haiigc Brady Chicot Romine Terry_____ Washington 70.8 38.6 68.8 81.2 63.3 79.6 52.1 81.6 67.1 81.4 8.8 13.5 12.8 -14.1 18.1 5 j iThere are seventeen (49 percent) elementary schools in the District where 75 percent or more of the students are eligible for ffee/reduced lunch. Many of these schools improved dramatically in spring 2001 and/or some performed in the highest range of scores (80 percent or higher). Kindergarten was the strongest performing grade with six of the 17 schools at 80 percent or higher. Sixteen of the 17 schools (94 percent) had the majority of their students at or above the readiness level at kindergarten, 11 of 17 ( 65 percent) at grade 1, and 15 of 17 (88 percent) at grade 2. First grade was the lowest of the three grades tested, but where the most growth occurred. Six schools improved 20 points or more. Kindergarten School 1999-2000 2000-2001 Change Badgett (94%) Franklin (90%) Stephens (90%) Chicot (87%)______ Baseline (86%) Woodruff (86%) Cloverdale (85%) Wilson (85%) Mabelvale (85%) Mitchell (84%) Watson (83%) Geyer Springs (83%) Rightsell (82%) Meadowcliff (81%) Wakefield (80%) Fair Park (78%) 21.6 64.3 40.8 56.1 51.1 69.2 56.4 66.7 61.0 90.6 56.4 85.1 92.1 77.4 46.8 68.3 so.o S8.6 66.1 70.9 94.0 46.2 82.5 80.0 73.3 92J 73.7 87.7 80.5 77.1 61.1 75.6 28.4 -5.7 25.3 14.8 42.9 -23.0 26.1 13.3 12.3 1.7 17.3 2.6 -11.6 -0.3 14.3 7.3 Grade 1 School 1999-2000 2000-2001 Change Badgett (94%) Franklin (90%)_____ Stephens (90%) Chicot (87%) Baseline (86%) Woodruff (86%) Cloverdale (85%) Wilson (85%) Mabelvale (85%) Mitchell (84%) Watson (83%)_____ Geyer Springs (83%) Rightsell (82%) Meadowcliff (81%) Wakefield (80%) Fair Park (78%) 5.9 57.6 23.5 26.8 29.6 84.2 28.4 82.9 50.8 25.0 24.7 46.8 35.7 70.0 22.0 62.5 26.5 58.9 51.0 51.2 70.8 61.5 33.9 53.8 60.5 25.0 66.6 38.6 41.7 66.6 66.6 72.7 20.6 1.3 27.5 24.4 41.2 -22.7 5.5 -29.1 9.7 0.0 41.9 -8.2 6.0 -3.4 44.6 10.2 6Grade 2 School 1999-2000 2000-2001 Change Badgett (94%) Franklin (90%) Stephens (90%) Chicot (87%)______ Baseline (86%) Woodruff (86%) Cloverdale (85%) Wilson (85%) Mabelvale (85%) Mitchell (84%) Watson (83%)______ Geyer Springs (83%) Rightsell (82%) Meadowcliff (81%) Wakefield (80%) Fair Park (78%) 11.8 81.2 31.3 38.6 47.1 78.3 57.9 60.4 43.4 48.6 54.4 72.5 94.7 57.9 40.0 62.9 42.9 83.6 61.4 52.1 60.5 86.5 45.1 61.4 63.0 50.0 51.2 66.0 70.5 75.0 54.4 67.7 31.1 2.4 30.1 13.5 13.4 8.2 -12.8 1.0 19.6 1.4 -3.2 -6.5 -24.2 17.1 14.4 4.8 Five of the seven Success for All (SFA) schools improved at the kindergarten and grade 1 levels in spring 2001, and six of the seven improved at grade 2. Some are now enriching the SFA program with ELLA strategies. Kindergarten had four schools in 2000-01 with scores at 80 percent or above, and grade 2 had two. All except one school had the majority of their students performing at or above readiness level at kindergarten, grade 1, and grade 2. Baseline posted high levels of growth at all three grade levels, especially kindergarten and grade 1. Kindergarten School 1999-2000 2000-2001 Change Brady Baseline Cloverdale Fair Park Meadowcliff Romine Woodruff 76.9 51.1 56.4 68.3 77.4 66.7 69.2 93.4 94.0 82.5 75.6 77.1 86.4 46.2 16.5 42.9 26.1 7.3 -0.3 19.7 -23.0 Grade 1 School 1999-2000 2000-2001 Change Brady Baseline Cloverdale Fair Park Meadowcliff Romine Woodruff 34.9 29.6 28.4 62.5 70.0 59.6 84.2 53.5 70.8 33.9 72.7 66.6 76.5 61.5 18.6 41.2 5.5 10.2 -3.4 16.9 -22.7 7Grade 2 School 1999-2000 2000-2001 Brady Baseline Cloverdale Fair Park Meadowcliff Romine Woodruff 70.8 47.1 57.9 62.9 57.9 68.8 78.3 79.6 60.5 45.1 67.7 75.0 81.6 86.5 Change 8.8 13.4 -12.8 4.8 17.1 12.8 8.2 Schools using both the ELLA strategies in grades K-2 and the Reading Recovery program in grade 1 performed well, especially in grade 2 evidence of the power of the grade 1 intervention. Eleven of the 12 schools (92 percent) had more than half of their students performing at or above the readiness level at grade 1, and all of them were over the 50 percent mark at grade 2. At grade 1, only two of the 12 schools (17 percent) had at least 80 percent of their students at or above readiness, and at grade 2 there were eight (67 percent). Grade 1 School 1999-2000 2000-2001 Change Booker Chicot* Dodd Franklin Fulbright** Geyer Springs Gibbs Jefferson** Otter Creek Pulaski Heights' Williams Wilson* 69.3 26.8 58.3 57.6 61.0 46.8 65.9 69.1 67.7 50.0 84.1 82.9 87.4 51.2 73.5 58.9 66.6 38.6 71.4 73.9 69.6 61.7 97.1 53.8 18.1 24.4 15.2 1.3 5.6 -8.2 5.5 4.8 1.9 11.7 13.0 -29.1 *2000-2001 was a training year. **Reading Recovery not continued in 2000-2001 due to loss of Title I funding. Grade 2 School 1999-2000 2000-2001 Change Booker Chicot* Dodd Franklin Fulbright' Geyer Springs Gibbs Jefferson** Otter Creek Pulaski Heights' Williams Wilson* 79.8 38.6 51.7 81.2 79.3 72.5 80.5 71.1 87.2 45.2 89.7 60.4 81.4 S2.1 82.8 83.6 88.7 66.0 82.9 85.0 90.5 74.5 92.6 61.4 1.6 13.5 31.1 2.4 9.4 -6.5 2.4 13.9 3.3 29.3 2.9 1.0 *2000-2001 was a training year. **Reading Recovery not continued in 2000-2001 due to loss of Title 1 funding. 8The number of schools with a majority of students performing below the readiness level declined, with the most improvement at grade 1. Grade Level 1999-2000 2000-2001 Kindergarten Grade 1 Grade 2 3 (9%) 13(37%) 8 (23%) 1 (3%) 6 (17%) 2 (6%) The number of schools with at least 80 percent of the students performing at the readiness level increased. Kindergarten was the strongest grade. Grade Level 1999-2000 2000-2001 Kindergarten Grade 1 Grade 2 15 (43%) 5(14%) 10(29%) 21 (60%) 5 (14%) 18(51%) The gap between the lowest and highest performing schools decreased. Grade Level 1999-2000 2000-2001 Change Kindergarten Grade 1 Grade 2 73.2 78.3 82.9 48.1 72.1 50.2 -25.1 -6.2 -32.7 Black students improved at every grade level and at a higher rate than non-black students. Grade Level 1999-2000 2000-2001 Change Kindergarten Grade 1 Grade 2 69.3 48.3 63.8 77.0 57.4 69.8 7.7 9.1 6.0 Non-black students also improved at every grade level. Grade Level 1999-2000 2000-2001 Change Kindergarten Grade 1 Grade 2 84.7 71.2 81.6 88.8 77.3 86.8 4.1 6.1 5.2 The achievement gap is much lower in grades K-2 now than in higher grade levels and is decreasing. It is lowest at kindergarten and highest at grade 1. Grade Level 1999-2000 2000-2001 Change Kindergarten Grade 1 Grade 2 15.4 22.9 17.8 11.8 19.9 17.0 -3.6 -3.0 -0.8 All of the data just cited are evidence that reading achievement improved in grades K-2 since fall 1999 when the new curriculum standards^enchmarks were implemented, along with new instructional strategies, materials, and assessments. In general, in some schools 9to a greater extent than others, but at all schools to some extent, students are performing at a higher level than they were in the pastboth black and non-black. So what can the District expect as these children move into higher grade levels? As discussed in Section III, it is too early to determine whether performance at the readiness level on the Developmental Reading Assessment (DRA) at grade 2 predicts proficient performance (or above) on the grade 4 Literacy Benchmark test administered by the state. The students who began the new curriculum in kindergarten in fall 1999 will not take the grade 4 Benchmark examination until spring 2004. If readiness on the DRA in grade 2 proves to predict only the basic level of performance (rather than proficient) in grade 4, then the new program would be expected to produce results that exceed the performance in 1997-9858 percent performing at or above the basic level. If readiness on the DRA in grade 2 predicts the proficient level of performance in grade 4, then the new program would be expected to produce results higher than 30 percent (the percent performing at or above the proficient level in 1997-98). Continued improvement on the grade 4 Literacy Benchmark test is anticipated since each year more teachers complete more training, and more students have more experience in the new program. It is important to remember, however, that test scores reflecting the performance of different groups of students each year do not necessarily go up every year- !ven with high levels of implementation. There will be some variances due to a number of different influences. In spring 2004, when the 1999-2000 kindergarten students will take the grade 4 Literacy Benchmark test, the District can more accurately calculate how performance on the grade 2 DRA predicts achievement on the grade 4 Literacy Benchmark. At that time, more accurate pronouncements of the effectiveness of the early literacy program can be determined. 2. Is the new program effective in improving and remediating the academic achievement of African American students? (See Section 2.7 of the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan.) As discussed in Section II, the District chose to emphasize the prevention of failure to every extent possible in its efforts to improve and remediate the achievement of African American students. The philosophy behind the Districts instruction program for early literacy development mirrors that of the International Reading Association in their position paper entitled Making a Difference Means Making It Different: Honoring Childrens Rights to Excellent Reading Instruction. The first principle in that document is that Children have a right to appropriate early reading instruction based on their individual needs (3). The position is that No single method or single combination of methods can successfully teach a child to read. Instead, each child must be helped to develop the skills and understandings he or she needs to become a reader (3). A major challenge to District staff was to design a total program that would take into account that 10Children of poverty are more likely than others to enter school without the knowledge and background necessary for learning to read and wnte. They are more likely to fail at school tasks, thus decreasing motivation. Reducing the impact of poverty will require instruction that is sensitive to the childrens own knowledge and background and consistent in supporting children as individual learners each with his or her own set of strengths and needs (13-14). The program design had to be one that would allow every child, regardless of prior knowledge and skill, to grow, to develop increasingly more complex knowledge and skills, and to be challenged and successfuland, at the same time, to accelerate the growth of children from poverty so that the gap narrowed over time. To determine the effectiveness of the new program in improving and remediating the academic achievement of African American students, the District used the performance results of the Observation Survey and the Developmental Reading Assessment. The basic criterion established in determining the program effectiveness for black students was that black student achievement would have to improve and then that growth over the two-year period of the programs implementation would need to be equal to, but preferably greater than, the growth of non-black students. A caution in interpreting the scores of some of the measures is that four of the five subtests on the Observation Survey have relatively low ceilingsfor at least two reasons. (See Section III for a description of the tests and the maximum scores for each.) The first is that they are designed so that all children can experience some measure of success in the assessment process, and the second is that they measure leaming-to-read skills, not higher-level comprehension skills foimd in many reading assessments for older children. For example, there are only 54 items on the Letter Identification test, which measures whether a child can recognize upper and lower-case letters. There are only 20 words to decode on the Word Test, and those words are the most frequently occurring words in the basal reader. There are only 24 questions on the Concepts about Print test, all relatively simple. And there are only 37 points that can be earned on the K-1 Hearing and Recording Sounds test and 64 points at grade 2. In most of the sub-tests the greatest growth for both black and non-black students occurs at the kindergarten level where the ceiling is less of a factor. One of the Observation Survey sub-tests does not have a ceilingWriting Vocabulary, where the child is asked to write, within ten minutes, all the words he/she can write. And, as one might expect, children who come to school with rich literacy experiences in their backgrounds do better on this test than those who come from poverty backgrounds. Also, students who come to school with substantial vocabularies have more to build upon, and they learn how to write the words they already know and how to wnte new words at a faster rate than those coming in with limited vocabulary. In fall 1999 the black kindergarten scores were only 62 percent of those of non-black students. The data will show, however, that even though this test concludes with a higher gap than the other sub-tests of the Observation Survey, the gap is considerably more narrow at the end of 11 grade 2 than it was in fail of kindergarten, and black students grew a great deal on this measurement over a two-year period. The Developmental Reading Assessment (DRA) has a maximum of 44 levels. Since this test was constructed to be used through grade 3 or even beyond for students who are still learning to read, the ceiling effect is not evident at the end of grade 2 in the LRSD. The DRA is the most difficult of the measurements used in K-1 since it does test comprehension and more complex cognitive operations. The Achievement Level Test at grade 2 has far less of a ceiling than any of the measurements used in K-2. Staff reviewed the data from various perspectives to determine program effectiveness, specifically for Afiican American students. They looked, for instance, for evidence that black students growth in the leaming-to-read skills was progressing at the same or higher amount than non-black students growth and that the percentage (ratio) of black performance to non-black performance was increasing from the fall pre-test to the spring post-test and from grade-level to grade-level. Scores were examined as well to determine the amount of summer regression and to determine the growth of two-year cohorts (kindergarten in 1999-2000 and grade 1 in 2000-01 and then grade 1 in 1999-2000 and grade 2 in 2000-01). Comparisons of black and non-black performance for each test administration and each grade level were made of the average scores on each sub-test, the percent of those averages of the maximum scores, and the percent of students achieving the readiness standard for each grade level. These detailed analyses for each sub-test are found in Section VI of this program evaluation, with references to the tables in Section V. The following findings based on Observation Survey, Developmental Reading Assessment, and Achievement Level Test results make it possible to conclude that the new early literacy program has so far been effective in improving and remediating the reading achievement of African American students, as well as all students. It is unusual in any District to find gains by both blacks and non-blacks over a two-year period on eight different measurements, as this study finds. Again, however, experts on program implementation advise that it takes approximately five years to determine program effectiveness, so this year 2 study at best establishes baseline and early trend data for comparisons in future years. Also, the Year 2 study does not include an examination of the variance in learning opportunities for students from school to school or an examination of the different forms of interventions. It is a look at the total program, including all its components. Letter Identification The gap was almost closed on Letter Identification by the end of kindergarten in 2000-01, and it was totally closed at the end of grade 1. 'The percentages in the following table represent the ratio of black to non-black scores for each testing administration. 12Letter IdentificationBlack to Non-Black Ratios Grade Level Kall 1999 Kindertarten Grade 1 Spring 2000 Fall 2000 Spring 2001 81% 96% 96% 100% 83% 99% 97% 100% i Black growth exceeded that of non-black students at both kindergarten and grade 1 in both 1999-2000 and 2000-01. The Letter Identification test is not given in grade 2. Letter IdentificationGrowth/Improvement Grade Level 1999-00 Growth 2000-01 Growth KinderBlack KinderNon-B Difference Grade 1Black Grade 1Non-B Difference 20.89 16.22 4.67 5.36 3.42 1.94 21.95 18.04 3.91 4.06 3.42 0.64 The ratio of the number of points of growth for black students as compared to non-black students over a two-year period (kindergarten in 1999-2000 and grade 1 in 2000-01) was 134 percentthe highest growth ratio on any of the sub-tests for this cohort. (See Table 7.) Ratios over 100 percent indicate that black students grew more points than non-black students. Letter IdentificationGrowth Ratios of Black to Non-Black Grade Level 1999-2000 2000-2001 Kinderearten Grade 1 Two-Year Cohort 129% 157% 122% 119% 134% Black students experienced no regression during the summer between kindergarten and grade 1 on this measurement, although non-black students did. Letter IdentificationSummer Regression Race Spring 2000K Fall 2000Gr. I Diff. Black Non-Black 48.48 50.30 48.95 49.66 +0.47 -0.64 In fall 1999 black kindergarten students achieved 51 percent of the maximum score of 54 on this measurement, as compared to 63 percent for non-black students. By the end of grade 1 in 2000-01, the black students scored 98 percent of the maximum, as did the non-black students. 13Letter IdentificationPercent of Maximum Score Grade Level Fall 1999 Spring 2000 Fall 2000 Spring 2001 KinderBlack Kinder-Non-B Grade 1Black Grade 1Non-B 51% 63% 88% 92% 90% 93% 98% 98% 51% 61% 91% 92% 91% 95% 98% 98% Word Test Although black students began kindergarten in fall 1999 scoring at only 57 percent of non-blacks, by the end of grade 2 in 2000-01 the black scores were 96 percent of non-black scoresvirtually closing the gap on this measurement in the second year of program implementation. This test includes only 20 of the most frequently occurring words, so it measures a very limited amount of decoding achievement. Word TestBlack to Non-BIack Ratios Grade Level Fall 1999 Spring 2000 Fall 2000 KinderEarten Grade 1 Grade 2 Spring 2001 57% 73% 89% 76% 92% 96% 83% 68% 91% 97% 94% 96% Even though black students did not grow as many points as non-blacks in kindergarten, they grew more than non-blacks in both grade 1 and grade 2 for both years, 1999-2000 and 2000-01. They also grew at a faster pace in kindergarten on this measurement than they did in either grade 1 or grade 2. Neither black nor non-black students grew much on this measurement in grade 2 since both groups were close to maximizing their scores by the end of grade 1. The larger gro3vth in the second year of the program at the kindergarten level may be an indication of teachers being more explicit in developing these necessary skills. The growth ratios indicate the more rapid improvement of black student achievement in grades 1 and 2. The higher growth ratios for black students may also reflect that non-black students had come close to maximizing the total possible score on this low-ceiling measurement. Word TestGrowth/Improvement Grade Level 1999-00 Growth 2000-01 Growth Kinder-Black KinderNon-B Difference Growth Ratio Grade 1Black Grade 1Non-B Difference Growth Ratio Grade 2Black Grade 2Non-B Difference Growth Ratio 9.58 16.22 -6.64 81% 11.12 10.45 0.67 106% 2.82 1.73 1.09 163% 12.03 13.73 -1.70 88% 11.52 10.04 1.48 115% 2.06 1.31 0.75 157% 14Black students grew more than non-black students during the two-year period of 1999-2000 kindergarten and 2000-2001 grade 1 (cohort 1) and during the 1999- 2000 grade 1 and 2000-2001 grade 2 (cohort 2). Cohort Growth Cohort I Cohort 2 Black Non-Black Difference Ratio 15.58 15.48 0.10 101% 12.31 11.02 1.29 112% Both black and non-black students regressed in their performance on this measurement during the summer between kindergarten and grade 1. There was slight regression for both groups between grade 1 and grade 2, but not nearly as much as the previous summer. In both cases, black students regressed less than non-blacks on this measurement. Word TestSummer Regression Race Spring 2000 Kinder Fall 2000 Grade I Diff. Spring 2000 Grade I Fall 2000 Grade 2 Diff. Black Non-Black 11.33 14.91 5.81 8.49 -5.52 -6.42 16.87 18.34 16.00 17.60 -0.87 -0.74 1 i In fall 1999 the black kindergarten students scored 9 percent of the maximum score of 20 on this measurement, as compared to 15 percent for non-black students. By the end of grade 2 in 2000-01, after two years in the program, black students scored 90 percent, as compared to 95 percent for non-black students. Word TestPercent of Maximum Score Grade Level Fall 1999 Spring 2000 Fall 2000 Spring 2001 KinderBlack KinderNon-B Grade 1Black Grade 1Non-B Grade 2Black Grade 2Non-B 9% 15% 29% 39% 81% 90% 57% 75% 84% 92% 95% 99% 7% 13% 29% 42% 80% 88% 67% 82% 87% 93% 90% 95% Concepts about Print Black students started kindergarten in fall 1999 scoring at 69 percent of non-black students scores. By the end of grade 1 in 2000-01 the ratio was 93 percent almost closing the gap on this measurement. Concepts about PrintBlack to Non-Black Ratios Grade Level Fall 1999 Spring 2000 Fall 2000 Spring 2001 Kindergarten Grade 1 69% 88% 81% 93% 72% 84% 87% 93% 15Just as in the Word Test, black kindergarten students did not grow as many total points as did non-black students in either 1999-2000 or 2000-01, although the growth was almost the same in 2000-01. But their growth did exceed non-black growth in grade 1 for both years. The highest amount of growth on this measurement was in kindergarten for both blacks and non-blacks. Teachers were clearly more effective in teaching the skills measured on this sub-test the second year of implementation. This test is not administered in grade 2. Concepts about PrintGrowth/lmprovement Grade Level 1999-00 Growth 2000-01 Growth Kinder-Black KinderNon-B Difference Growth Ratios Grade IBlack Grade 1Non-B Difference Growth Ratios 7.76 8.06 -.30 96% 5.65 5.21 .44 108% 10.07 10.11 -.04 100% 6.25 5.11 1.14 122% Black students grew more than non-black students in the two-year period of 1999- 2000 kindergarten and 2000-2001 grade 1. Cohort Growth Cohort 1 Black Non-Black Difference Ratio 13.22 11.72 1.50 113% Both black and non-black students experienced a slight regression in their performance over the summer between kindergarten and grade 1 on this measurement. The non-black students regressed a little more than did the black students. Concepts about PrintSummer Regression Race Spring 2000K Fall 2000Gr. I Dill. Black Non-Black 14.30 17.56 13.51 16.11 -0.79 -1.45 In fall 1999 the black kindergarten students scored 27 percent of the maximum score of 24 on this measurement, as compared to 40 percent for non-black students. By the end of grade 1 in spring 2001,, after two years of instruction, the black students scored 82 percent of the maximum, as compared to 88 percent for non-black students. 16Concepts about PrintPercent of Maximum Score Fall 1999 Spring 2000 Fall 2000 Spring 2001 KinderBlack KinderNon-B Grade 1Black Grade 1Non-B 27% 40% 58% 65% 60% 73% 81% 87% 25% 35% 56% 67% 67% 77% 82% 88% Writing Vocabulary The gap at the end of grade 2 on this measurement is the highest of any of the gaps on the five sub-tests of the Observation Survey, but it is still much smaller than the gaps that have been in existence in the past, especially those on the SAT9. This sub-test is the only one of the Observation Survey sub-tests that is without a ceiling. Black kindergarten students started in fall 1999 performing at only 62 percent of non-black scores. At the end of grade 2 in 2000-01, the ratio had improved to 87 percentan improvement of 25 points. Writing VocabularyBlack to Non-Black Ratios Fall 1999 Spring 2000 Fall 2000 Spring 2001 Kindergarten Grade 1 Grade 2 62% 87% 95% 66% 84% 82% 58% 80% 84% 71% 88% 87% Black Student growth lagged behind non-black growth in terms of numbers of points at all three grade levels on this measurement. This finding reinforces what teachers know as the power of prior knowledge. Students entering school already knowing much of what is measured on Letter Identification, Concepts about Print, and even the Word Test begin to amass vocabulary and spelling skills immediately, while those who come without that knowledge must take the time to learn them before they can perform well on a measurement such as the Writing Vocabulary sub-test. As on other measures, there was considerably more growth for all students the second year of program implementation. Also, the difference between the growth of black and non-black students lessened in year 2 at both grade 1 and grade 2. 17Writing VocabuiaryGrowlh/Improvement Grade Level 1999-00 Growth 2000-01 Growth Kinder-Black KinderNon-B Difference Growth Ratios Grade 1Black Grade 1Non-B Difference Growth Ratios Grade 2Black Grade 2Non-B Difference Growth Ratios 11.57 17.43 -5.86 66% 23.57 28.39 -4.82 83% 15.18 24.08 -8.90 63% 16.86 23.06 -6.20 73% 27.22 29.29 -2.07 93% 25.96 28.54 -2.58 91% Black students grew at a slower pace than non-black students in both cohort 1 (1999-2000 kindergarten and 2000-2001 grade 1) and cohort 2 (1999-2000 grade 1 and 2000-2001 grade 2) on Writing Vocabulary. Also, the results of this subtest reveal a widened gap over the two-year period, even though the number of points of improvement for both blacks and non-blacks was the highest^perhaps due to the test not having a ceiling. Cohort Growth Cohort I Cohort 2 Black Non-Black Difference Ratio 37.23 40.74 -3.51 91% 42.22 48.32 -6.10 87% Black students experienced only a slight regression on this measurement between kindergarten and first grade, and the regression for non-black students was about three times as many points. Both groups also regressed on this measurement over the summer between grade 1 and grade 2. Again, non-black students regressed more than black students. Writing VocabularySummer Regression Race Spring 2000 Kinder Fall 2000 Grade I Diff. Spring 2000 Grade I Fall 2000 Grade 2 Diff. Black Non-Black 14.50 22.13 12.94 16.15 -1.56 -5.98 37.11 44.04 29.80 35.43 -7.31 -8.61 18 I iHearing and Recording Sounds The gap almost closed (91 percent) on this measurement by the end of grade 2 in 2000-01, even though the black kindergarten scores in fall 1999 were only 54 percent of those of non-black students. The 46 percent in fall 2000 was the lowest beginning ratio of all the sub-tests on the Observation Survey. Hearing and Recording SoundsBlack to Non-Black Ratios Fall 1999 Spring 2000 Fall 2000 Spring 2001 Kindergarten Grade 1 Grade 2 54% 78% 86% 70% 91% 88% 46% 74% 87% 76% 92% 91% Black students did not grow as many points on this measurement as non-black students during kindergarten of either 1999-2000 or 2000-01. However, their growth did exceed that of non-black students in grade 1. It lagged only slightly behind non-black students in grade 2 during 1999-2000, but exceeded the non- black students in 2000-01, again indicating the growing effectiveness of the program. As seen on other measurements, the greatest growth or improvement for both black and non-black students was at the kindergarten level. This measurement, like Writing Vocabulary, reveals the importance of prior knowledge. Children cannot write down a dictated sentence without knowing Letter Identification and Concepts about Printinformation that many had not mastered at the kindergarten level. Black student growth at grade 1 and grade 2 are evidence that they have mastered the prerequisite knowledge and skills for good performance on this sub-test. Hearing and Recording SoundsGrowtb/Improvement Grade Level 1999-00 Growth 2000-01 Growth Kinder-Black KinderNon-B Difference Growth Ratios Grade 1Black Grade 1Non-B Difference Growth Ratios Grade 2Black Grade 2Non-B Difference Growth Ratios 13.44 17.71 -4.27 76% 13.62 12.13 1.49 112% 8.18 8.21 -0.03 100% 17.43 21.03 -3.60 83% 14.21 10.85 3.36 131% 6.10 4.34 1.76 141% The black growth exceeded non-black growth for cohort 1 (1999-2000 kindergarten and 2000-2001 grade 1), but it lagged slightly behind non-black growth in cohort 2 (1999-2000 grade 1 and 2000-2001 grade 2). 19Cohort Growth Cohort I Cohort 2 Black Non-Black Difference Ratio 28.12 27.74 0.38 101% 34.35 34.80 -0.45 99% Black students did not regress over the summer between kindergarten and grade 1, although non-black students did on this measurement. Both black and on-black students gained multiple points over the summer between grade 1 and grade 2 on this measurement. Hearing and Recording SoundsSummer Regression Race Spring 2000 Kinder Fall 2000 Grade I Diff. Spring 2000 Grade I Fall 2000 Grade 2 Diff. Black Non-Black 17.02 24.37 17.49 23.55 4-0.47 -0.82 30.87 34.11 45.50 52.44 4-14.63 4-18.33 In fall 1999 black kindergarten students scored 10 percent of the maximum score of 37 on this measurement, as compared to 18 percent for non-black students. By the end of grade 1 in 2000-01 black scores had improved to 86 percent, as compared to non-black scores at 93 percent. At the end of grade 2, black students in 2000-01 scored 81 percent of the maximum score of 64, as compared to 89 percent for non-black students. Hearing and Recording SoundsPercent of Maximum Score Fall 1999 Spring 2000 Fall 2000 Spring 2001 KinderBlack Kinder^Non-B Grade 1Black Grade 1Non-B Grade 2Black Grade 2Non-B 10% 18% 47% 59% 66% 77% 46% 66% 83% 92% 79% 89% 6% 13% 47% 64% 71% 82% 53% 69% 86% 93% 81% 89% Developmental Reading Assessment This test assesses significantly more complex xmderstandings and skills than does any one of the sub-tests on the Observation Survey. The Observation Survey provides information on each students leaming-to-read skills, while the Developmental Reading Assessment tests recall and comprehension. In spite of that, however, LRSD students, both black and non-black, made significant improvements in their performance over the past two years. Black kindergarten students in fall 1999 were scoring at only 35 percent of the level of non-black studentsthe widest gap seen on any of these K-2 assessments. But by the end of grade 2 in 2000-01, after only two years in the program, the black to non-black ratio was 80 percent. The staff members consulted for this program evaluation are confident that once students have been in the program for three years that the end 20of grade 2 ratio will be closer to 90 percentvirtually closing the gap in ensuring that all students learn to read independently by the end of grade 3. Developmental Reading AssessmentBlack to Non-Black Ratios Grade Level Fall 1999 Kindergarten Grade 1 Grade 2 Spring 20QQ Fall 2000 Spring 2001 35% 64% 74% 43% 68% 78% 41% 47% 70% 48% 71% 80% Although black students did not grow as many points as non-black students in kindergarten or grade 1 for both years of the test or during grade 2 in 1999-2000, they grew more than non-black students in grade 2 during 2000-01again evidence of the growing effectiveness of the program in the second year of implementation. Performance on this measurement again is evidence of the importance of prior knowledge. Children entering school with strong knowledge and skills learn to read much quicker than those who come without them, e.g., the rapid growth of non-black students in kindergarten and grade 1. Non-black children, in general (with some exceptions), are learning to read at grade 1, and black children, again in general (but with many exceptions), are learning to read at grade 2. Developmental Reading AssessmentGrowth/Improvement Grade Level 1999-00 Growth 2000-01 Growth Kinder-Black KinderNon-B Difference Growth Ratios Grade 1Black Grade 1Non-B Difference Growth Ratios Grade 2Black Grade 2Non-B Difference Growth Ratios 2.14 4.40 -2.26 49% 12.38 17.69 -5.31 70% 10.11 11.79 -1.68 86% 3.21 6.62 -3.41 48% 14.22 17.46 -3.24 81% 10.55 9.87 0.68 107% As on the Writing Vocabulary sub-test, non-black growth on the Developmental Reading Assessment surpassed black growth for both cohort 1 (1999-2000 kindergarten and 2000-2001 grade 1) and cohort 2 (1999-2000 grade 1 and 2000- 2001 grade 2). Cohort Growth Cohort I Cohort 2 Black Non-Black Difference Ratio 16.99 22.69 -5.70 75% 24.46 29.20 -4.74 84% 21Both black and non-black students slightly improved their performance over the summer between kindergarten and grade 1 on the DRA. Both also improved over the summer between grade 1 and grade 2. Developmental Reading AssessmentSummer Regression Race Spring 2000 Kinder Fall 2000 Grade I Diff. Black Non-BIack 3.09 7.12 Spring 2000 Grade I 3.72 7.95 Fall 2000 Grade 2 Diff. 16.67 24.37 18.20 26.01 + 1.53 +1.64 In fall 1999 black kindergarten students achieved 2 percent of the maximum score of 44 on the DRA, as compared to 6 percent for non-black students. By the end of grade 2 in 2000-01, after two years of instruction in the new program, the black students scored at 65 percent of the maximum, as compared to 82 percent for non- black students. Developmental Reading AssessmentPercent of Maximum Score KinderBlack KinderNon-B Grade 1Black Grade INon-B Grade 2Black Grade 2Non-B Fall 1999 2 6 10 15 40 55 Spring 2000 7 16 38 55 63 82 Fall 2000 1 2 8 18 41 59 Spring 2001 8 17 41 58 65 82 Achievement Level TestGrade 2 Reading The Achievement Level Test for grade 2 reading differs significantly from the Developmental Reading Assessment, although both are measurements of reading comprehension. The Developmental Reading Assessment is a one-on-one administered test that uses in its instructions to students the same language as the teacher used in the instruction of the students. Also, the teacher, using a rubric, scores the students responses, so the student is not distracted by having to manipulate a test booklet, plus an answer sheet and pencil and be moving back and forth between the test booklet and the answer sheet. The Achievement Level Test at grade 2 is the first experience that elementary students have with a group-administered examination that requires them to bubble in their responses to questions on a separate answer sheet. The directions to the students may or may not be in familiar language. So even though some of the same concepts are tested on these two measurements, they are tested in entirely different ways, and most early childhood experts advise against administering this kind'of test to students below grade 3. (See position statements by the International Reading Association and the National Associate for the Education of Young Children.) 22Black students scores were 93 percent of the national median in spring 2001, as compared to non-black students scores at 99 percent. The gap between the RIT scores narrowed from spring 2000 to spring 2001 by one pointfrom 13 to 12. Black students RIT scores improved two points from spring 2000 to spring 2001, as compared to only one point of improvement for non-black students. Achievement Level TestGrade 2 Language Usage This sub-test is the first test in language usage experienced by LRSD elementary students. The same issues as described for the ALT reading test exist for the language usage test relating to the unfamiliarity and complexity of the testing situation. In spite of these potential difficulties, performance improved from spring 2000 to spring 2001. Black students scores were 95 percent of the national median in spring 2001, as compared to non-black students scores at 102 percent. The gap between the RIT scores narrowed from spring 2000 to spring 2001 by two pointsfrom 14 to 12. Black students RIT scores improved two points from spring 2000 to spring 2001, as compared to no improvement for non-black grade 2 students. National Research on the Achievement Gap National research and other credible studies on the achievement gap between black and non-black students have been consistent in finding that black students test scores are lower than non-black students test scores. Educational Achievement and Black-White Inequality, just released in July 2001 by the National Center for Education Statistics (a department of the Office of Educational Research and Improvement), found the following in their analyses of educational achievement of children at various points between grades 1 and 12: Black-white gaps in mathematics and reading achievement appeared at every grade studied. Even for children with similar levels of prior achievement one or two grades earlier, mathematics and reading scores of blacks were generally lower than the corresponding scores of whites (p. xi). The black-white reading gap also differed in size across grades, but not in an entirely consistent manner\nit grew wider between grades within two elementary school cohorts, but was narrower in cohorts observed in grades 9 and 12 than in a cohort observed in grade 2 (p. xii). 23Within the same samples of children, the black-white reading gap increased by one-third between grades 1 and 2 and one-fifth between grades 3 and 5, while remaining the same between grades 7 and 9, and between grades 10 and 12 (p. xiv). These findings imply that black-white disparities in educational achievement can widen as students progress through elementary or secondary school. Possible explanations for these differences in achievement growth include differences in the school or home environments of children of different racial backgrounds that make it more difficult for blacks to acquire math or reading skills at the same pace as whites (p. xv). The black-white reading gap widened by one-third between grades 1 and 2, and by one-sixth between grades 3 and 5 (p. 37). Within each of the elementary school samples, black children acquired reading skills at slower rates than white children. Between grades 1 and 2, and between grades 3 and 5, blacks acquired reading skills at a rate onefifth slower than the rate of whites (p. 37). The existence of a smaller black-white reading gap in grade 12 than in grade 2 suggests that these gaps are not immutable, and that appropriately designed public policies can reduce the educational disparities between black and white children (p. 42). The results of two years of changes in the LRSD policies, programs, and procedures in grades PreK-2 indicate that both black and non-black children in the Little Rock School District are learning to read and are well on their way of reaching the district goal of all children being able to read independently by grade 3 (see Section 5.2.1 of the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan). The findings and analyses in this report indicate trends in the opposite direction of the national research findings cited above and of scores of other similar studies. Instead of black students growing at slower rates than non- blacks, in most of the measurements the LRSD results indicate higher rates of growth of black students than non-blacks. Instead of the gap widening between grades 1 and 2 as it does in national studies, it narrows significantly in the LRSD by every one of the eight measures (five sub-tests of the Observation Survey, the Developmental Reading Assessment, and two sub-tests of the Achievement Level Test). The black to non-black ratios on each of the measures are summarized below for each of the two years of testing: 24Kindergarten Black to Non/Black Ratios: Reductions in the Achievement Gap Sub-Test hall 1999 Spring 2000 Change hall 2000 Spring 2001 Change Letter Identification Word Test Concepts about Print Writing Vocabulary Hearing/Recording DRA 81% 57% 69% 62% 54% 35% 96% 76% 81% 66% 70% 43% -15 -19 -12 -4 -16 -6 83% 53% 72% 58% 46% 41% 97% 82% 87% 71% 76% 48% -14 -29 -15 -13 -30 -7 Grade 1 Black to Non-Black Ratios: Reductions in the Achievement Gap Sub-Test hall 1999 Spring 2000 Change h all 2000 Spring 2001 Change Letter Identification Word Test Concepts about Print Writing Vocabulary Hearing/Recording DRA 96% 73% 88% 87% 78% 64% 100% 92% 93% 84% 91% 68% -4 -19 -5 +3 -13 -4 99% 68% 84% 80% 74% 47% 100% 94% 93% 88% 92% 71% -1 -26 -9 -8 -18 -24 Grade 2 Black to Non-Black Ratios: Reductions in the Achievement Gap Sub-Test hall 1999 Spring 2000 Change h all 2000 Spring 2001 Change Word Test Writing Vocabulary Hearing/Recording DRA ALT Reading_____ ALT Lang. Usage 89% 95% 86% 74% 96% 82% 88% 78% 93% 93% -7 + 13 -2 -4 91% 84% 87% 70% 98% 87% 91% 80% 94% 94% -7 -3 -4 -10 Another prominent study on black vs. white achievement in reading is entitled, Does the Black-White Test Score Gap Widen after Children Enter School? by Meredith Phillips, James Crouse, and John Ralph, published in The Black-White Test Score Gap (1998) that was edited by Christopher Jencks and Meredith Phillips. That comprehensive studys major findings included the following\n... About half of the total black-white math and reading gap at the end of high school can be attributed to the fact that blacks start schools with fewer skills than whites. The other half can be attributed to the fact that blacks learn less than whites who enter school with similar initial skills. This does not necessarily mean that schools are a major contributor to the black-white test score gap. Although blacks may attend worse schools than whites, may be treated differently from whites in the same schools, or may be less interested in school than initially similar whites, it is also possible that blacks parenting practices, peer influences, summer learning opportunities, or beliefs about their academic ability could explain why 25they learn less between first asid twelfth grades than initially similar whites (p. 232). ... The black-white vocabulary' gap is about the same size at the end of the ninth grade as at the beginning of first grade (p. 233). ... Race appears to have a stronger negative effect on reading growth than on math growth (p. 248). ... Race also has more impact on vocabulary growth than on math growth during elementary school (p. 249). Our calculations imply that 56 percent of the math gap and 43 percent of the reading gap can be attributed to the fact that blacks start school with fewer skills than whites. It follows that 44 percent of the math gap and 57 percent of the reading gap is unrelated to racial differences in initial skills (p. 254). If equal educational opportunity means that black and white children should start school with the same basic skills, then we have yet fulfilled that ideal. The average black child starts elementary school with substantially weaker math, reading, and vocabulary skills than the average white child. Because these skill differences persist throughout elementary and secondary school, the average black child finishes the twelfth grade with weaker math, reading, and vocabulary skills than the average white child. Our results imply that we could eliminate at least half, and probably more, of the black-white test score gap at the end of the twelfth grade by eliminating the differences that exist before children enter first grade (pp. 256-257). Again, the results in the LRSD are, for the most part, in the opposite direction of these studies. Black students are making significant progress in catching up with their non- black peers through the Districts early literacy program, especially in the leaming-to- read skills that are tested on the Observation Survey. It is true, however, that the vocabulary gaps and the gaps on the more difficult measures, such as the Developmental Reading Assessment, while greatly narrowed, do still persistundoubtedly due to the much wider gaps that existed at the beginning of kindergarten. 3. Is there a relationship between teacher participation in professional development and student achievement? (See Policy IL expectation to examine cost effectiveness and Strategy 7 of the Strategic Plan.) The most expensiveand the most important-piece of the cost of any program implementation designed to improve student achievement is always the cost of professional development. The cost of student materials is a one-time expense, generally, but the cost of professional development is ongoing. New teachers have to begin their 26 initial training every year. Ineffective teachers have to be retrained. All teachers need on-going opportunities to refine and enhance their understandings and skills. Implementation has to be coached and monitored. And all are necessary if there is to be continuous improvement. Richard Allington summarizes the research literature as follows: In study after study, it is the quality of the teacher, not variation in curriculum materials, that is identified as the critical factor in effective instruction. That is not to say that materials are wholly unimportant, but that investing in teacher development has a better result than investing in curriculum materials (9). It is very important, therefore, for the District to know if there is a positive relationship between teacher participation in the LRSD training on early literacy and the achievement of their students. Patricia Busbeas Education Specialists thesis examined this question for a sample of kindergarten students. In her findings, she concluded, The current study strongly indicated Early Literacy Learning in Arkansas (ELLA) did influence the student outcomes of the ten students included in the study (p. 77). She added, It can be concluded that the teachers participation in the ELLA training did influence changes in the teachers classroom practices (p. 78). Another study relating to the black-white test score gap is also helpful here. Ronald Fergusons study, Teachers Perceptions and Expectations and the Black-White Test Score Gap was published in The Black-White Test Score Gap (1998), edited by Christopher Jencks and Meredith Phillips. He wrote the following: Simply cajoling teachers to raise their expectations for black childrenusing phrases such as All children can learnis probably a waste of time. However, good professional development programs can make a difference. Recall that some teachers in Oklahoma responded to the Great Expectations program with the assertion, My kids couldnt do that. If they had gone on teaching as they had always done, that judgment would have been correct. But when they changed their teaching methods, they learned that they were wrong. Similarly, Guskey shows that teachers can learn responsive teaching methods that weaken the link between past and future performance. Teachers who have been helped to improve their classroom practices can have seeing is believing experiences that challenge their prior biases (312). Other studies on the effectiveness of the ELLA training, as well as studies in general on the impact of professional development on teacher practice and student achievement would suggest a positive relationship, if the training is closely aligned with the curriculum standards and assessments, if the training is delivered well, if the training is followed by coaching and feedback, and if the training is in depthsufficient to build the new skills and understandings. Twelve days of ELLA training have been offered to LRSDs K-2 teachers during the past two years, in addition to the required training on the administration of the Observation Survey and Developmental Reading Assessment, and in addition to the days in the school-year calendar for professional development. In Section VII are summaries of two 27 studies conducted to determine, by program, the degree of teacher participation in professional development. The highest average number of days of participation has been among kindergarten teachers for the schools implementing ELLA strategies and for those implementing both ELLA and Reading Recovery. The greatest participation at all three grade levels has been among the teachers in schools implementing both ELLA strategies and Reading Recovery. These schools, perhaps, have the greatest degree of commitment to improved literacy, as evidenced both by the commitment of their Title I funds to literacy by funding Reading Recovery and by the teachers willingness to attend professional development sessions. Almost half of their grade 1 teachers have completed the entire 12 days of training. The following table indicates by school the participation level of teachers in ELLA training over the two-year period: Teacher Participation in ELLA Training, by School School # Kinder Tchers Kinder Days #Gr. 1 Tchers Grade I Days #Gr. 2 Tchers Grade 2 Days Total Days Total # Tchers Avg. # Days Badgett Bale Baseline Booker Brady________ Carver Chicot Cloverdale Dodd Fair Park Forest Park Franklin Fulbright_____ Geyer Springs Gibbs Jefferson King_________ Mabelvale McDermott Meadowcliff Mitchell Otter Creek Pulaski Heights Rightsell______ Rockefeller Romine Stephens_____ Terry________ Wakefield Washington Watson Western Hills Williams Wilson Woodruff Total Average Days 1 2 3 5 4 4 4 3 2 2 2 3 4 3 3 3 5 3 3 2 2 3 3 2 4 4 3 4 3 4 3 2 3 2 2 105 0 7 0 37.5 6 32.5 17 19 21 0.5 0 36 42 24 23 24 42.5 9 0 0 8 24 33 5 10.5 21 10 32.5 20 0 0 11 34 14 9.5 573.5 5.46 2 3 3 5 3 4 3 3 2 2 3 4 3 2 3 3 3 2 3 2 2 4 2 2 3 2 2 4 3 4 3 3 3 3 2 100 9 6.5 5 43.5 0 33 22 0 24 0 4.5 48 .42 9.5 22 25 16 12.5 0 0 2 38 0 0 18 0 15 20.5 16 7 3 6 22.5 27 0 497.5 4.98 2 3 3 5 4 4 6 2 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 5 3 3 2 2 3 2 2 2 3 2 5 3 4 3 2  4 3 2 105 0 3.5 0 47 0.5 10 24.5 12 36 0 4 36 18 14.5 22 13.5 7.5 17 13 0 1 11 10 5 0 0 2.5 22.5 17 7 0 0 3.5 24 0 372.6 3.54 9 17 5 126 6.5 75.5 62.5 31 79 0.5 8.5 120 92 48 67 63.5 66 38.5 13 0 II 73 43 10 28.5 21 27.5 73.5 53 14 9 17 60 65 9.5 1,443.6 5 8 9 15 1 12 13 8 7 6 8 10 10 7 8 9 13 8 9 6 6 10 7 6 9 9 7 13 9 12 3 7 10 8 6 310 Teachers designated as Special Education or other special programs were added to grade 2 to simplify the table. 1.8 2.1 0.6 8.4 0.6 6.3 4.8 3.9 11.3 .08 1.1 12 9.2 6.9 8.4 7.1 5.1 4.8 1.4 0 1.8 7.3 6.1 1.7 3.2 2.3 3.9 5.6 5.9 1.2 0.3 2.4 6 8.1 1.6 4.65 28From the table above, one can infer that implementation is, in general, still at a low level since the average number of days of ELLA training experienced by teachers is 4.65 of the 12 possible days available. Kindergarten teachers have the highest level of participation, then grade 1 and then grade 2. Kindergarten, probably not coincidentally, is the highest performing grade level. Interestingly, participation does not seem to vary as much within a school as it does across schools. In other words, for the most part, either every teacher at a grade level or in a school participates fully, or they participate minimally. For example, every teacher at Franklin has participated all twelve days, and the average number of days at Dodd is 11.3 days. Other high-participation schools include Booker, Fulbright, Gibbs, and Wilson. ELLA schools with two or fewer average days of participation include Badgett, Bale, Forest Park, McDermott, Mitchell, Rightsell, Watson, and Western Hills. The major obstacle the District has had in providing the 12 days of professional development to all teachers has been the lack of availability of substitute teachers. Too many times when District staff pull teachers out of class for professional development, the school is not able to secure a substitute, so a class is divided up and sent to other classrooms. In either case, even when a substitute can be secured, valuable instructional time is lost. The staff has attempted, therefore, to provide the training in the evenings, on week-ends, and during the summer, paying stipends to teachers for attendance rather than paying for substitutes. This strategy makes participation optional, and fewer teachers participate. The following table displays by quarter the number of classrooms where teachers were absent in 2000-01 and there were no substitutes available to cover their classes. The absences were for all possible reasons, not just for ELLA training, but the numbers indicate the extent of the problem in attempting to provide teacher training during school time. Teacher Absences without Substitutes, Elementary Schools, 2000-01 Quarter First Second Third Fourth Total Number 63 120 295 479 957 One can assume approximately half of those 957 teachers would be K-2 teachersor 478. The other half can be assumed to be 3-5 teachers. If there is an average of 20 students in the K-2 classrooms and given the mandated two and one-half hours daily for literacy instruction, then 23,900 student hours of literacy instruction were lost in 2000-01 in grades K-2 alone due to teacher absences and the lack of quality substitutes. The number of lost hours due to teacher absences covered with a substitute substantially increases this number. Given the necessity of teachers being out from time to time due to illness and the resulting loss of quality instructional time, it is clearly a major problem to 29 pull teachers out of classrooms for professional developmenteven when their participation in these activities results in improved sludesit achievement. The statistician in PRE conducted statistical analyses for each of the past two years to determine which of the four instructional approaches (ELLA only, ELLA plus Reading Recovery\nSuccess for All\nand Direct Instruction) was producing the most powerful results. For both years the most effective program was clearly the ELLA plus Reading Recovery, and the second most powerful program was ELLA only. In 2000-01 the Success for All schools did perform at a significantly higher level than they did in 1999- 2000, especially at grade 1. It is important to note that the schools implementing ELLA plus Reading Recovery were also the schools with the highest participation in professional development. 4. Is there evidence of success in each of the four literacy models in useEarly Literacy Learning in Arkansas (ELLA) only\nELLA and Reading Recovery\nSuccess for All\nand Direct Instruction? (See Section 2.7 of the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan.) When the early literacy program plan was developed, it allowed schools to implement either ELLA, ELLA plus Reading Recovery, or Success for All strategies. If a school wished to do something different, that school was required to submit a waiver request for approval. Only Washington Magnet did so. Their waiver application requested approval for them to continue the implementation of Direct Instruction, and it was granted. To establish evidence of success for each of these models, at least one school implementing each of the four models was examined. Except for Direct Instruction where there is only one school involved, there is, of course, more than one successful school implementing each model. One is reminded here, however, of an oft-repeated quotation from Ron Edmonds: How many effective schools would you have to see to be persuaded of the educability of poor children? If your answer is more than one, then I submit that you have reasons of your own for preferring to believe that basic pupil performance derives from family background instead of school response to family background. Ron Edmonds was the seminal researcher who established the first correlates of effective schools, i.e., those schools that were effective in teaching all students, regardless of economic or racial background. A Successful ELLA School Carver Magnet School is a good example of a school that has implemented the ELLA strategies. Although a magnet school. Carver has many students from poverty backgrounds and who enter kindergarten performing considerably below their more affluent peers. Because they have so many students from middle and upper-class 30 backgrounds, their average scores are usually among the highest in the District. Effective schools, however, are those schools with not only high average (mean) scores, but also high scores among each of their sub-groups. Carvers progress in improving the percent of their students performing at or above the readiness level on the Developmental Reading Assessment and in closing the black to non-black achievement gap is displayed in the following table. Without exception, both black and non-black students improved their performance at grade-level during the second year of implementation. And, without exception, the gap was considerably narrowed the second year of the program. Finally, the grade 2 gap in 2000-2001 is only about a third of what it was for kindergarten students. Improvements in Percent Readiness Developmental Reading Assessment Can er Magnet 1999-2000 2000-2001 KindergartenAll KindergartenBlack KindergartenNon-Black KindergartenGap Grade 1All Grade 1Black Grade 1Non-Black Grade 1Gap__________ Grade 2All Grade 2Black Grade 2Non-Black Grade 2Gap 80.5% 74.4% 91.7% 17.3 76.1% 64.7% 90.3% 25.6 81.8% 78.3% 94.7% 16.4 90.4% 83.8% 97.2% 13.4 91.8% 83.3% 100% 16.7 93.1% 91.1% 95.2% 4.1 An area school that has performed well in the last two years is McDermott Elementary. This school performed in the highest range at the kindergarten and grade 1 the first year of the new program and at all three grade levels in 2000-01. McDermott Elementary ranked in the top five schools on the DRA in 1999-2000 at kindergarten and grade 1 and at all three grade levels in 2000-01. McDermotts kindergarten class was the highest performing in the District both years, and McDermotts grade 2 was among the schools that improved the most in 2000-01. It is important to note, as well, that McDermott virtually closed the achievement gap in 2000-01 between black and non-black students at grades 1 and 2 on the Developmental Reading Assessment. 31Improvements in Percent Readiness Developmental Reading Assessment McDermott Elementan' 1999-2000 2000-2001 Kindergarten.All KindergartenBlack KindergartenNon-Black KindergartenGap Grade IAll Grade 1Black Grade 1Non-Black Grade 1Gap__________ Grade 2--A11 Grade 2Black Grade 2Non-Black Grade 2Gap 94.8 94.7 97.3 2.6 80.4 85.7 76.9 *8.8 67.1 62.8 86.4 23.6 94.3 86.4 100.0 13.6 87.9 87.5 87.9 0.4 89.6 89.5 89.7 0.2 A Successful ELLA, Plus Reading Recovery. School Dodd Elementary, a school with high percentages of minority and poverty, is an example of a successful school implementing both ELLA strategies and Reading Recovery. Because Dodd is very smalt and because it has high mobility, it is difficult to make valid comparison of scores from one year to the next. One child represents several percentage points in a small school, and the children who were in kindergarten last year are likely to be very different from the children in grade 1 this year. Nevertheless, the efforts of the Dodd faculty are making major differences in the literacy of the children who attend there. In the second year of the program implementation, both grade 1 and grade 2 improved significantly. The gap was virtually closed in grade 1, and that is the year of the Reading Recovery intervention for the lowest performing students. Improvements in Percent Readiness Developmental Reading Assessment Dodd Elementary' 1999-2000 2000-2001 KindergartenAll KindergartenBlack KindergartenNon-Black KindergartenGap Grade 1All Grade 1Black Grade 1Non-Black Grade 1Gap__________ Grade 2All Grade 2Black Grade 2Non-Black Grade 2Gap 86.5% 88.2% 85.0% *3.2 58.3% 60.0% 62.5% 2.5 51.7% 52.9% 71.4% 18.5 80.0% 76.5% 88.2% 11.7 73.5% 72.2% 73.3% 1.1 82.8% 73.7% 100% 26.3 Denotes that black students are higher performing than non-black students. A Successful Success for All School Baseline Elementary made such dramatic improvements in 2000-01 that they were selected as an example of a successful Success for All school. Baseline Elementary has 86 percent of its children eligible for the free/reduced lunch program and very few 32 non-black children, so their challenge is to overcome the effects of poverty and the disadvantages that go with it. The improvements at Baseline at the kindergarten and grade 1 levels are exemplary. Grade 2 did not perform as well, but black students did improve sufficiently to close the gap at that grade level. Improvements in Percent Readiness Developmental Reading Assessment Baseline Elementary 1999-2000 2000-2001 KindergartenAll KindergartenBlack KindergartenNon-Black KindergartenGap Grade 1All Grade 1Black Grade 1Non-Black Grade 1Gap Grade 2All Grade 2Black Grade 2Non-Black Grade 2Gap 51.0% 48.6% 100% 51.4 29.6% 30.2% 20.0% *10.2 47.1% 46.2% 57.1% 10.9 94.0% 92.5% 100% 7.5 91.8% 68.3% 85.7% 17.4 60.5% 60.5% 60.0% *0.5 Denotes a school where blacks scores are higher than non-blacks. A Successful Direct Instruction School Washington Magnet is the only school in the Little Rock School District implementing the Direct Instruction model. Their overall performances at kindergarten and grade 2 are strong, although the gap did increase at both grade levels in the second year. The gap at grade 1 nanowed, but the scores are low. Success is very mixed at this school, with few consistent patterns. Both sub-groups improved only at grade 2. Improvements in Percent Readiness Developmental Reading Assessment Washington Magnet 1999-2000 2000-2001 KindergartenAll KindergartenBlack KindergartenNon-Black KindergartenGap Grade 1All Grade 1Black Grade 1Non-Black Grade 1Gap Grade 2-All Grade 2Black Grade 2Non-Black Grade 2Gap 81.2% 81.8% 83.3% 1.5 35.5% 24.4% 55.2% 30.8 63.3% 61.7% 73.1% 11.4 84.1% 78.0% 95.7% 17.7 41.1% 36.8% 50.0% 13.2 81.4% 74.3% 88.6% 14.3 As demonstrated in the data under Research Question #1 and with the information in this section, the literacy programs are working well in a variety of school models and with both black and non-black students. 335. What are the programs strengths and weaknesses? (See Policy IL.) When a District chooses to implement a program that is already research-based, already tested with students of similar demographics, then the program itself does not require evaluation. Rather, it is the program implementation that requires scrutiny. Thus, in response to this question, the program evaluation team must consider the areas of strong implementation and the areas where the implementation has been weak. Program Strengths The elementary literacy programs (ELLA only, ELLA plus Reading Recovery, Success for All, and Direct Instruction) in the Little Rock School District are producing improvements in student achievement on every one of the eight different measurements examined in this program evaluation\nthey are producing improvements in every individual school, even if only at one grade level\nand they are narrowing and sometimes totally closing the achievement gap, even as non-black students are also improving. It would be impossible to determine which individual components of the new programs have had the most powerful effects since everything was implemented at once, without setting up controlled experiments. There tends to be a consensus, however, among teachers and reading specialists who have been asked that the designation of the two and one-half hour uninterrupted block of time for literacy instruction has made a major difference in the degree of emphasis given to literacy at every school. Also cited as important and powerful are the ELLA strategies that teachers are learning through the professional development program and the availability of the new materials in every classroom. Animated Literacy has made a difference in childrens mastery of phonemic awareness at the kindergarten level. Another definite strength is that teachers are using the assessment results to drive their instructionone of the staffs objectives in selecting the Observation Survey and the Developmental Reading Assessment with their rich sources of data and their tight alignment with the Districts curriculum standards and grade-level benchmarks. Teachers also cite the preponderance of children who now have access to the Districts pre-kindergarten program as another strength. More and more children are having an opportunity for another year of experiences that promote higher levels of literacy. Program Weaknesses Program weaknesses can be found in the examination of school-by-school performances.  There was in 2000-01 a narrowing of the achievement gap among the performance of the 35 elementary schools, but gaps still exist, the widest on the Developmental Reading Assessment., And at each grade level the gap widened in 2000-01 on one sub-testLetter Identification at grade 1 and Writing Vocabulary at kindergarten and grade 2. 34Another program weakness is in the variability of the amount of teacher training experienced from school to school. There is one school where not a single teacher has participated in the ELLA training\nand there are two where all the teachers have participated fully, with other schools somewhere in between. Teachers in the Success for All and Direct Instruction schools have had lower rates of participation in the ELLA training. Grade 1 is the lowest performing grade of the three grades tested, so that grade level requires attention in improvement efforts. There is likely a need for further intervention. Lack of a monitoring plan through classroom observations to document the level of implementation is a problem. This weakness not only resulted in a late identification of poor implementation in some cases, but it was also a weakness in evaluating the consistency of program implementation. Finally, more high quality parent involvement would likely improve results, especially to address the summer regression phenomenon, but also in general. 6. Is the program cost effective? (See Policy IL and Strategy 3 of the Strategic Plan.) The literacy plan was adopted in spring 1999, so the first purchases of classroom materials and the first professional development sessions designed to prepare teachers for implementation occurred in summer 1999. The District has invested over the two-year period $405,948 on materials for teachers and books for classroom libraries to support the implementation of the new program. The State provided a grant of $198,440 that was also spent on students instructional materials. During the two-year period the District spent $119,450 on the salary and fringe benefits for one teacher leader and approximately $12,000 on teacher stipends for inservice participation. Other professional development conducted during the school day at times required the cost of substitutes (paid by the Human Resources Department) and at times was absorbed by the school staff. One additional expense was the $29,500 cost for the Developmental Reading Assessment materials. In summary, the total investment over two years in this program has been as follows: Instructional materials Professional development Assessments Total $604,388* $131,450 $ 29,500 $765,338* *0f these amounts, $198,440 was funded by the State through a grant. The total cost to the District, therefore, was $566,898 for ELLA implementation. During the past two 35 years all ELLA training was conducted during the summer and after school hours. Teachers were not paid a stipend. One group of 35 teachers, however, was paid stipends for the training-of-trainers training for live days of pailscipalion in summer 1999. The schools implementing Success for All and Direct Instruction paid for their professional development and student materials from their Title I budgets. A reading specialist from the Elementary Literacy Department has been assigned to supervise the Success for All school programs, so her salary, travel, and benefits are costs to the District, not Title I. Reading Recovery costs were also funded through school-level Title I budgets. An average salary for a Reading Recovery teacher is $40,000, plus fringe benefits. The cost of six hours of graduate-level tuition for their training is approximately $1,000. And the cost of materials to use with students is about $3,000 per teacher. Schools have expended about $1,100,000 over the past two years in paying for training costs and salaries for their Reading Recovery teachersa total of eight. Are all these expenditures cost effective? It is really too early to make a determination. If the program results in virtually all children learning to read independently by grade 4 when they take the Benchmark examination, then this program is a bargain on that measurement alone. If only a few children become proficient enough to go to college and, as a result, earn a much higher salary than they would have had they not learned to read well, then the investment will be returned several times. If the District moves from only 30 percent of its students performing at or above the proficient level to even^O percent, then the investment will see incremental returns. The staff and the Board of Education must make a determination at this juncture as to whether the current results are encouraging enough to continue the course that has been set. The data indicate positive results at all three grade levels, even though the data also indicate that the teachers have received only about one-third of the training for full implementation. Ongoing investments, plus possible policy decisions, will be necessary to ensure that all teachers receive the minimum 12 days of training, with appropriate follow-ups and enhancements. Recommendations for Improvement are made for the consideration of The following recommendations for improvement District and building-level staff, as well as for the Board of Education. Instructional Recommendations Given the gap between black and non-black achievement in the fall kindergarten scores for both 1999-2000 and 2000-01, there is an indication that Letter Identification should be stressed more with black and other low-performing prekindergarten students. Schools should monitor their implementation of the balanced literacy program, including Animated Literacy implementation, to ensure that all kindergarten children learn their letters and sounds by the end of the kindergarten year. The National Research Council in Preventing Reading Difficulties in Young Children makes a similar recommendation: 36It is clear from the research on emergent literacy that important experiences designed to reduce the number of children with inadequate literacy-related knowledge (e.g., concepts of print, phonemic awareness, receptive vocabulary) at the onset of formal schooling would considerably reduce the number of children with reading difficulties and, thereby, the magnitude of the problem currently facing schools (317). Adams points out that it is not simply the accuracy with which children can name letters that gives them an advantage in learning to read, but it is the ease or fluency with which they can do so (p. 43). Therefore, if it takes two years of school just to learn the letters, then some time is lost in developing ease and fluency. She concludes, Thus the speed with which they can name individual letters both strongly predicts success for prereaders and is strongly related to reading achievement among beginning readers (43). Schools and teachers should assess why the 2000-01 grade 2 students, both black and non-black, performed lower on the Word Test than those in 1999-2000. One implication is that decoding development should be emphasized even more in grade 1. Adams notes that weaknesses in basic decoding skills may be the most common and can be the most serious source of reading difficulties (92). Acceleration of black students decoding skills in reading frequently occurring words is recommended in pre-kindergarten and kindergarten so that the black students performance on the Word Test catches up to non-black performance before grade 2. The gap closed in Letter Identification at grade 1 and for the Word Test in grade 2. Even though it is almost closed at the end of grade 1 for Concepts about Print, it is not quite, and instruction must continue in this area in grade 2 until the concepts are mastered for students who are low-performing. Adams points out that A lack of phonemic awareness ... appears to be characteristic of children who are failing or have failed to learn to read (57). The skills and knowledge that are prerequisite to high performance on Concepts about Print should be consciously and explicitly taught at the pre-kindergarten and kindergarten levels so that little remains to be done in this area by grade 1. This kind of acceleration is essential if the gap is to be closed on this measure. Schools must ensure the full implementation of the Pre-ELLA program at the prekindergarten level and the ELLA strategies at the kindergarten level. Even though both black and non-black students recorded their highest rates of growth on Writing Vocabulary, the achievement gap is highest on this measure at the end of two years than of any other sub-test. Even at that, the gap is only 13 points, with black scores achieving 87 percent of those of non-black students. There are implications here, again, for African-American students, who clearly 37 need even greater attention to vocabulary and spelling development and an accelerated program to bring their achievement to the level of that of non-black students. None of the measurements used in K-2 is a vocabulary test, per se. They all, however, test vocabulary, and as research indicates, higher-level, more standardized tests, such as the Achievement Level Tests, essentially measure students vocabulary, regardless of the subject matter being tested. Marzano, Kendall, and Gaddy report in their recent book. Essential Knowledge: The Debate Over What American Students Should Know, that their research indicates that vocabulary instruction should be the focal point of education, especially for students from more disadvantaged backgrounds (143). They continue as follows: Research indicates that even when there is no attempt to ensure that the words students are taught are ones they will need to know when learning new content, the effect on their achievement is substantial. Specifically, teaching vocabulary has been shown to increase students ability to understand new content by 12 percentile points (146-147). The effects of vocabulary instruction are even more powerful when the words selected are those that students most likely will need to know as they encounter new content. Specifically, research indicates that student achievement will increase by 33 percentile points when vocabulary instruction focuses on specific words that are important to what they are learning (147). The National Reading Panels findings indicate that vocabulary should be taught both directly and indirectly. Repetition and multiple exposures to vocabulary items are important. Learning in rich contexts, incidental learning, and use of computer technology all enhance the acquisition of vocabulary. Direct instruction should include task restructuring as necessary and should actively engage the student (p. 14). Adams encourages teachers to teach vocabulary explicitly: direct vocabulary instruction is generally shown to result in an increase in both word knowledge and reading comprehension (p. 29). Teachers should include in their lessons at least some degree of instruction on test wiseness. That is, since the ALT is the first test with the requirement to bubble answers that the students take, their lack of familiarity with the format and expectations may depress achievement. An excellent resource for teachers in ways to do this work effectively and ethically is A Teachers Guide to Standardized Reading Tests: Knowledge Is Power by Lucy Calkins, Kate Montgomery, and Donna Santman. 38Parent Involvement Recommendations Students who begin kindergarten knowing a lot about literacy learn faster than those who do not. They have the necessary prior knowledge to make meaning from grade-level instruction. A concern, therefore, is that while some black students take two years of school to master letter identification, non-black students had achieved 95 percent of the maximum score by the end of kindergarten. While many black students continued to master letter identification in grade 1, non-black students were, no doubt, moving forward in other areas, such as vocabulary development. Adams states, One interpretation impossible to avoid is that the likelihood that a child can succeed in first grade depends, most of all, on how much he or she has already learned about reading before getting there (p. 44). The poverty-related factors, therefore, that created the gap for children before they started to school continue after they start to school, even though the school programs may be highly effective. These findings have implications for public policy at the federal, state, and community level for pre-natal care and early childhood health care, parenting, cognitive development, and social development. It takes a village to teach children high levels of literacy. The schools and classroom teachers can do their best by seeking individual ways to accelerate student learning in pre-kindergarten and kindergarten so that grade 1 students can spend their time on more complex cognitive operations that are prerequisite to learning to read. Both black and non-black students at the end of both kindergarten and grade 1 lost significant Writing Vocabulary during the siunmer, indicating, most likely, little reinforcement of this skill during summer months. Along with summer reading and spelling lists that are sent home, teachers should also include exercises that allow students to maintain, at a minimum, and ideally to improve their Writing Vocabulary during the summer. Schools should organize, perhaps with the assistance of the HIPPY staff, a preschool PT A so that support and assistance can be provided to as many parents as possible in the development of early literacy experiences, from birth forward. For instance, parents need to know the research cited by Adamsthat the beginmng of phonemic awareness is seeded in childrens knowledge of nursery rhymes (p. 42). She continues\n... success in reading can be found in traditional rhymes and word games such as Baa Baa Black Sheep and Humpty Dumpty (p. 43). Adams also found that The single most important activity for building the knowledge and skills eventually required for reading appears to be reading aloud to children. In this, both the sheer amount of and choice of reading materials seem to make a difference (46). The staff should design appropriate reports and processes to keep parents well informed about their childrens performance on the early literacy assessments, as 39well as about ways that they can support higher achievement. The Student Academic Improvement Plan (SAIP) and the Parent-School Compact are two processes that address the need for close communication with parents. Schools should evaluate the effectiveness of their implementation of these processes. Rasinski summarizes the research on the effect of parental involvement on literacy as follows: For if you are talking about research-based information, we have it in the effects of community-home-school connections and student achievement in reading. Study after study has shown positive effects of parental involvement in the literacy education of their children. .. (161). District-level should collaborate with school-level staff in designing processes for effective communication of the results of K-2 assessments. Intervention Recommendations Given the amount of summer regression that is evident on several of the measurements, attention to these issues should be a priority for those children participating in the inter-sessions of the Extended Year Education (EYE) schools and for children participating in after-school programs and summer school. A concern of the Superintendents Cabinet for the past three years has been that several schools are no longer eligible for Title I funding due to changes in their demographic make-up. A school must have among its students at least 35 percent who are eligible for ffee/reduced lunch services in order to qualify. Both the staff in those schools and staff at the District level have noted that some of the Districts most economically-deprived children attend those schools, and there is now no funding for special services or support for them. The area schools without Title I funding are as follows: Forest Park, Fulbright, and Jefferson. Fulbright and Jefferson lost their Reading Recovery programs when Title I funds were no longer available, and Pulaski Heights lost theirs due to inadequate Title I funding. Not surprisingly, those very schools have some of the widest achievement gaps of any of the Districts schools. The District should continue to explore options for providing the necessary support services to these schools for the lowest-performing students. Otherwise, wide achievement gaps will continue to exist. The District should take all necessary steps to continue its efforts to secure external grant funding for additional support for individual schools. Funds are needed to provide more Reading Recovery teachers, especially in the lowest performing schools. Ideally, there would be one Reading Recovery teacher for every two grade 1 classrooms. This step, plus the addition of Literacy Coaches in every school, would greatly enhance the likelihood'of success. Schools with Title I funding should redirect their budgets to fund these effective interventions. 40Since grade 1 is the lowest performing grade of the three grades tested, attention must be devoted to improvement at this level. The National Research Council makes the following recommendations for students in grade 1 who still are having reading related difficulties: Additional instructional services in supplemental reading programs should be provided in the first grade. Instruction should be provided by a well-qualified reading specialist who has demonstrated the ability to produce high levels of student achievement in reading. Materials and instructional techniques should be provided that are well integrated with ongoing excellent classroom instruction and that are consistent with the findings, conclusions, and recommendations identified above in Reading Instruction in Kindergarten through Third Grade. Children who are having difficulty learning to read do not, as a rule, require qualitatively different instruction from children who are getting it. Instead, they more often need applications of the same principles by someone who can apply them expertly to individual children who are having difficulty for one reason or another (327). To these ends, the following recommendations are critically important for continued improvement: Expand Animated Literacy into grade 1 (or even grade 2) for students who need it or design another effective intervention\nEncourage schools to implement their own research-based interventions during after-school, tutoring, inter-sessions, and summer school. Reallocate Title I dollars to these high-quality interventions and away from the employment of aides and provide as many Reading Recovery and Literacy Coaches as possible through all sources of funds. Continue or expand teacher training in all components of Balanced Literacy for all teachers. These components include instruction in concepts about print, phonemic awareness and letter identification, phonics, language acquisition, vocabulary development, and emergent writing. Professional Development Recommendations Given the high positive correlation in national studies and in LRSD of the relationship between teacher participation in high quality professional development and the achievement levels of their students, it is evident that professional development should continue to be a high priority in the ongoing implementation refinements of the PreK-2 Literacy Program, including for 41teachers in the Success for All and Direct Instruction schools. Too, participation should not be optional, given the findings of the National Reading Panel: the results indicated that inservice professional development produced significantly higher student achievement (17). District staff should ensure that every LRSD teacher knows the skills that students must have to perform at least at the national median on the Achievement Level Tests. The publications available from the Northwest Evaluation Association delineate the specific skills and understandings that are needed to perform in various levels of each test. It is important that teachers ensure that those same skills and understandings are included in their lesson plans so that students are as well prepared as possible to perform well on the grade 2 ALTs. Schools Identified for Improvement at K-2 The following schools are identified for improvement. They are among the lowest performing schools in at least two of the three grade levels tested. According to the Districts Priority Intervention Procedures, the District should provide special assistance for improvement for the staff of the following schools: Badgett, Cloverdale, Meadowcliff, Mitchell, and Watson. Badgett, Mitchell, and Watson are ELLA schools, but with very low levels of teacher participation in professional development and, thus, low levels of program implementation. Both Cloverdale and Meadowcliff are Success for All schools, again with low levels of implementation in that program. Year 3 Program Evaluation Recommendations The District should design and implement procedures to document the quality of program evaluation in all K-2 classrooms. The District should add to the year 3 study an analysis of how the new literacy program has impacted the referral and placement of K-2 children for 504 or Special Education services. The District should add to the year 3 study an analysis of the impact of participation in the Districts pre-kindergarten program on early literacy achievement. The District should measure Effect Size as an alternative to the growth index in determining improvement. The District should examine the impact of the new literacy program on the retention rate. 42Section IX: Bibliography Adams, Marilyn Jager (1990). Beginning to Read: Thinking and Learning about Print. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press. Adams, Marilyn Jager (1990). Beginning to Read: Thinking and Learning about Print A Summary. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press. Allington, Richard L. (2001). Teaching Children to Read: What Really Matters. Preventing Early Learning Failure. Bob Somson, Ed. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Beaver, Joetta (1997). Developmental Reading Assessment. Parsippany, NJ: Celebration Press. Busbea, Patricia A. (2000). A Study of the Effects of the Professional Development Model. Early Literacy Learning in Arkansas (ELLAl on Changes in Kindergarten Teachers Instructional Practices and Students Outcomes. Little Rock, AR: University of Arkansas at Little Rock. Calkins, Lucy, Kate Montgomery, and Donna Santman (1998). A Teachers Guide to Standardized Reading Tests: Knowledge Is Power. Portsmouth, NH\nHeinemann. Celebration Press (1996). Preliminary Validation of the Developmental Reading Assessment. Parsippany, NJ: Celebration Press. Clay, Marie M. (1993). An Observation Survey of Early Literacy Achievement. Portsmouth, NH\nHeinemann. Compliance Committee (March 2000). Interim Compliance Report. Little Rock, AR: Little Rock School District. Compliance Committee (March 2001). Compliance Report. Little Rock, AR: Little Rock School District. Dom, Linda (1999). Partnerships in Literacy: School-Wide Design for Success. Little Rock, AR\nUniversity of Arkansas at Little Rock. Dom, Linda J., Cathy French, and Tammy Jones (1998). Apprenticeship in Literacy: Transitions Across Reading and Writing. York, Maine: Stenhouse Publishers. Edmonds, Ron (1979). Effective Schools for the Urban Poor. Educational Leadership. 37(1). 15-24. 43Ferguson, Ronald F. (1998). Teachers Perceptions and Expectations and the Black- White Test Score Gap. In The Black-White Test Score Gap edited by Christopher Jencks and Meredith Phillips. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press. 273-317. Flippo, Rona, Ed. (2001). Reading Researchers in Search of Common Ground. Newark, Delaware: International Reading Association. International Reading Association and National Association for the Education of Young Children (1999). Learning to Read and Write: Developmentally Appropriate Practices for Young Children. Newark, DE: International Reading Association. International Reading Association (July 1998). Phonemic Awareness and the Teaching of Reading. Newark, DE: International Reading Association. Jencks, Christopher and Meredith Phillips, Eds. (1998). The Black-White Test Score Gap. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press. Joint Committee on Standards for Educational Evaluation. James R. Sanders, Chair (1994). The Program Evaluation Standards (2\"*^ Edition): How to Assess Evaluations of Educational Programs. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications. Marzano, Robert J., John Kendall, and Barbara Gaddy (1999). Essential Knowledge: The Debate Over What American Students Should Know. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. National Association for the Education of Young Children (1990). Guidelines for Appropriate Curriculum Content and Assessment in Programs Serving Children Ages 3 Through 8. Washington, DC: NAEYC. National Association for the Education of Young Children (1987). Standardized Testing of Young Children 3 Through 8 Years of Age. Washington, DC: NAEYC. National Center on Education and the Economy and the University of Pittsburgh (1999). Reading and Writing Grade by Grade: Primary Literacy Standards for Kindergarten through Third Grade. Washington, DC: National Center on Education and the Economy. National Center for Education Statistics (2001). Educational Achievement and Black- White Inequality. Washington, DC: United States Department of Education Office of Educational Research and Improvement. 44National Reading Panel (2000). Teaching Children to Read: An Evidence-Based Assessment of the Scientific Research Literature on Reading and Its Implications for Reading Instruction. Washington, DC: National Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentNational Institutes of Health. National Research Council (1998). Preventing Reading Difficulties in Young Children. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. Neuman, Susan B. and David K. Dickinson (2001). Handbook of Early Literacy Research. New York: The Guilford Press. Phillips, Meredith, James Crouse, and John Ralph (1998). Does the Black-White Test Score Gap Widen after Children Enter School? in The Black-White Test Score Gap, edited by Christopher Jencks and Meredith Phillips. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press. 229-272. Rasinski, Timothy V. (2001). A Focus on Communication with Parents and Families. Reading Researchers in Search of Common Ground. Newark, DE: International Reading Association. 159-166. Reeves, Douglas (2000). Accountability in Action: A Blueprint for Learning Organizations. Denver, CO: Center for Performance Assessment. Reeves, Douglas (1998). Making Standards Work: How to Implement Standards-Based Assessments in the Classroom. School, and District. Denver, CO: Center for Performance Assessment. Strickland, Dorothy S. (2001). Early Intervention for Afncan American Children Considered to Be at Risk. In Handbook of Early Literacy Research. Susan B. Neuman and David K. Dickinson, Eds. New York: The Guilford Press. Wiggins, Grant P. (1993). Assessing Student Performance: Exploring the Purpose and Limits of Testing. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers. Williams, E. Jane (1999). Developmental Reading Assessment: Reliability Study. http://intranet.prenhall.eom/edtech/mcp/Docs/research/DRA.doc4/13/00 45Cb'') /i/ Year 2 Evaluation: The Effectiveness of the PreK-2 Literacy Program in the Little Rock School District 1999-2000 and 2000-2001 Presented to the Board of Education Little Rock School District October 2001 Prepared by Dr. Bonnie A. Lesley Dr. Ed Williams Patricia Price Pat Busbea Ann Freeman Ken Savage Anita Gilliam Sharon KiilsgaardTable of Contents Section I: Introduction Introduction Research Questions Methodology Outline of Program Evaluation Sections Outline of Appendices 1-6 1-2 3 3-5 5-6 6 Section II: Background on Program Design Background on Program Requirements: Design of the PreK-3 Literacy Program Background on Program Requirements: LRSD Strategic Plan Background on Program Requirements: Revised Desegregation and Education Plan 7-13 7-8 8 8-13 Section III: The Assessments The Assessments: Observation Survey The Assessments: Developmental Reading Assessment Definition of Readiness vs. Proficiency Reliability and Validity: National Study Reliability and Validity: LRSD Study Developmental Appropriateness of Testing Instruments The Assessments: Achievement Level Tests in Reading and Language Usage 14-25 14-15 15-21 16-19 19-20 20-21 21-23 23-25 Section IV: Alignment with National Research on Early Literacy 26-29 Section V: Description of Tables Table 1: Kindergarten, 1999-2000, Fall to Spring Black and Non-Black Performance Table 2: Kindergarten, 2000-01, Fall to Spring Black and Non-Black Performance Table 3: Grade 1, 1999-2000, Fall to Spring Black and Non-Black Performance Table 4: Grade 1, 2000-01, Fall to Spring Black and Non-Black Performance Table 5: Grade 2, 1999-2000, Fall to Spring Black and Non-Black Performance 30-42 31 31 32 33 33Table 6: Grade 2, 2000-01, Fall to Spring Black and Non-Black Performance Table I'. Cohort 1, Kindergarten Fall 1999 and Grade 1 Spring 2001 Table 8: Cohort 2, Grade 1 Fall 1999 and Grade 2 Spring 2001 Table 9: Grades K-2, 1999-2000, Fall to Spring Performance, All Students Table 10: Grades K-2, 2000-01, Fall to Spring Performance, All Students Table 11: Percent of Maximum Scores, Kindergarten Black Students Table 12: Percent of Maximum Scores, Kindergarten Non-Black Students Table 13: Percent of Maximum Scores, Grade 1 All Students Table 14: Percent of Maximum Scores, Grade 1 Black Students Table 15: Percent of Maximum Scores, Grade 1 Non-Black Students Table 16: Percent of Maximum Scores, Grade 1 All Students Table 17: Percent of Maximum Scores, Grade 2 Black Students Table 18: Percent of Maximum Scores, Grade 2 Non-B lack Students Table 19: Percent of Maximum Scores, Grade 2 All Students Table 20: Cohort 1All Students, Kindergarten Fall 1999 and Grade 1 Spring 2001 Table 21: Cohort 2All Students, Grade 1 Fall 1999 and Grade 2 Spring 2001 Table 22: Percent Readiness, DRA, Black and Non-Black Students Table 23: Percent Readiness, DRA, All Students Table 24: Grade 2 Reading, ALT, Black and Non-B lack Comparisons Table 25: Grade 2 Reading, ALT, All Students Table 26: Grade 2 Language Usage, ALT, Black and Non-Black Comparisons Table 27: Grade 2 Language Usage, ALT, All Students 34 35 35 36 37 37 38 38 38 38 39 39 39 39 40 40 41 41 41 42 42 , 42Section VI: Analysis of Results, 1999-2000 and 2000-2001 Letter Identification Word Test Concepts about Print Writing Vocabulary Hearing and Recording Sounds Developmental Reading Assessment 43-67 43-46 47-51 52-54 55-59 60-63 64-67 Section VII: Additional Data Achievement Gap Among Schools Impact of Professional Development 68-71 68-70 70-71 Section VIII: Program Evaluation Findings and Recommendations for Improvement Research Question 1Program Effectiveness Research Question 2Achievement Disparities Research Question 3Professional Development Research Question 4Four Literacy Models Research Question 5Program Strengths and Weaknesses Research Question 6Cost Effectiveness Recommendations for Improvement Instruction Parent Involvement Interventions Professional Development Schools Identified for Improvement Year 3 Program Evaluation 72-113 72-80 81-96 96-100 100-103 103-105 105-106 106- 107-109 109-110 110-112 112 112 112-113 Section IX: Bibliography 114-116 Section X: School-Level Data Letter Identification, Kindergarten Word Test, Kindergarten Concepts about Print, Kindergarten Writing Vocabulary, Kindergarten Hearing and Recording Sounds, Kindergarten Developmental Reading Assessment, Kindergarten 117-205 119-122 123-126 127-130 131-134 135-138 139-142 Letter Identification, Grade 1 Word Test, Grade 1 Concepts about Print, Grade 1 Writing Vocabulary, Grade 1 Hearing and Recording Sounds, Grade 1 143-146 147-150 151-154 155-158 159-162Developmental Reading Assessment, Grade 1 163-166 Word Test, Grade 2 Writing Vocabulary, Grade 2 Hearing and Recording Sounds, Grade 2 Developmental Reading Assessment, Grade 2 167-170 171-174 175-178 179-182 Cohort 1Letter Identification, Black and Non-BIack Cohort 1Word Test, Black and Non-BIack Cohort 1Concepts about Print, Black and Non-BIack Cohort 1Writing Vocabulary, Black and Non-BIack Cohort 1Hearing and Recording Sounds, Black and Non-BIack Cohort 1Developmental Reading Assessment, Black and Non-BIack 183 184 185 186 187 188 Cohort 2Word Test, Black and Non-BIack Cohort 2Writing Vocabulary, Black and Non-BIack Cohort 2Hearing and Recording Sounds, Black and Non-BIack Cohort 2Developmental Reading Assessment, Black and Non-BIack 189 190 191 192 Percent Readiness, Developmental Reading Assessment, K-2 Percent Readiness, DRA, Rank Order, K-2 Percent Readiness, DRA, Black and Non-BIack 193-195 196-198 199-201 Grade 2 ALT, ReadingAll Students Grade 2 ALT, Reading, Black and Non-BIack Grade 2, ALT, Language Usage, All Students Grade 2, ALT, Language Usage, Black and Non-BIack 202 203 204 205 Appendices A. B. C. D. PreK-3 Literacy Program Plan Section 5.2.1 of the Revised Desegregation and Education Plans March 2000 Interim Compliance Report Section 5.2.1 of the Revised Desegregation and Education Plans March 2001 Compliance Report Presentation to the Board of Education, January 2000 (update on program implementation and early results)E. Update on the Implementation of the PreK-3 Literacy Program Plan, Highlights of Grades K-2 Results: Developmental Reading Assessment, 1999-2000 and 2000-2001, and a copy of the slides for the June 2001 presentation to the Board of EducationYear 2 Evaluation: The Effectiveness of the PreK-2 Literacy Program in the Little Rock School District 1999-2000 and 2000-2001 Section I: Introduction Introduction During March 2000 the Little Rock School District provided to the Board of Education, the federal court, the Office of Desegregation Monitoring, and administrators an Interim Compliance Report, which included a status report on the implementation of the PreK-3 Literacy Program (pp. 93-105) relating to the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan (RDEP). In August 2000 the Planning, Research, and Evaluation (PRE) office provided to the Board and staff a draft copy of a program evaluation for the first year of implementation of the K-2 Literacy Program. At least two subsequent drafts were developed as more data became available, but these were not presented to the Board of Educationjust discussed among staff members. An implementation update was provided to the Board in January 2001 by the curriculum staff, on the status of program implementation and including an analysis of available data, along with an outline of next steps. Then in March 2001 the staff provided a summary evaluation in the Compliance Report (pp. 72-93) relating to the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan that was filed with the federal court and provided to members of the Board of Education. The Board of Education approved on second reading in March 2001 a new policy on program evaluation. Policy IL: Evaluation of Instructional Programs requires that the staff evaluate the instructional programs designated by the Board of Education in their annual approval of the program evaluation agenda. Each evaluation is to provide valuable insights into how programs are operating, the extent to which they are serving the intended purpose of increasing student achievement, the strengths and weaknesses, the cost-effectiveness, and directions for the future. In August 1999, 2000, and 2001, the Board of Education included the PreK-2 literacy program on its approved research agenda for the following year. An interim program evaluation was provided to the Board of Education in June 2001, the first analysis of the scores on the Developmental Reading Assessment in grades K-2 for 1999-2000 and 2000-2001. At that time the scores were reported as the percent of students at each grade level, by race, who met the standard for readiness, the level that would predict success at the next grade level (level 2 at kindergarten\nlevel 16 at grade 1\nand level 24 at grade 2), Copies of that report, plus the summary and the slides were immediately sent via e-mail to principals to use in their own analysis and to provide to 1teachers and parents. (See Appendix E.) Elementary principals used these materials in their August 2001 preschool inservice sessions. This Year 2 Evaluation of the Effectiveness of the PreK-2 Literacy Program in the Little Rock School District builds on the information provided in all earlier reports. It is intended to meet the requirements specified in Policy IL for the 2000-01 school year, as well as to fulfill the requirements in Section 2.7.1 of the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan for the PreK-3 Literacy Program Plan. The grade levels evaluated include only grades kindergarten through grade 2. Another report will include grades 3 through 5. The curriculum staff received from PRE on July 19, 2001, the report on the mean scores for K-2 students on both the Observation Survey and the Developmental Reading Assessment for 2000-01. Achievement Level Test data were available earlier, but they had not yet been disaggregated by race. This program evaluation, therefore, differs from, but builds upon, the evaluation report that was presented to the Board of Education in June. It includes a much more detailed analysis of data\nit includes the results of the five sub-tests of the Observation Survey\nand it includes the average performance scores for each school on each sub-testnot just the percent of students meeting the standard. It also includes the results of the grade 2 Achievement Level Tests in reading and language usage. The new data permit the staff to calculate and analyze the scores in a different way (mean performance vs. percent readiness), and they permit the calculation of a black to non- black student ratio so that the degree to which the achievement gap in narrowed can be measured, as well as how the gap has changed over the two years of program implementation. One caution in comparing the 1999-2000 and 2000-01 pre-test scores on the Observation Survey and the Developmental Reading Assessment is that some schools did not complete their fall testing by the deadline in 1999 and so their pre-test scores were higher than they would have been had the testing been done in a timely maimer. There were instances when there were several weeks difference in the test date, so this variance\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_319","title":"Compliance hearing exhibits, 48-64","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":["1998/2001"],"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 law and legislation","Education--Evaluation","Little Rock (Ark.)--History--21st Century","Educational statistics"],"dcterms_title":["Compliance hearing exhibits, 48-64"],"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/319"],"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":["exhibition (associated concept)"],"dcterms_extent":["52 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\nPartial List of Communication Mailed to John Walker DATE 2-10-98 ITEM 3-17-98 4-21-98 5-12-98 5-22-98 6-09-98 6-10-98 7-07-98 Magnet Review Committee Meeting Notification to Evelyn Jackson - Joshua Intervenors (minutes indicate Ms. Jackson was ______________in attendance)______________ Magnet Review Committee Meeting Notification to Evelyn Jackson - Joshua (minutes indicate Ms. Jackson was in _______________attendance)_______________ Magnet Review Committee Meeting Notification to Evelyn Jackson - Joshua (minutes indicate Ms. Jackson was in _______________attendance)_______________ Magnet Review Committee Meeting Notification to Evelyn Jackson - Joshua Invitation to 6-3-98 meeting for purpose of discussing process or standard for assessing the equitable allocation of resources Magnet Review Committee Meeting Notification to Evelyn Jackson - Joshua (minutes indicate Ms. Jackson was in ________________attendance)_______________ Notification that Terrance Roberts! Steven Ross have verbally agreed to serve as LRSD desegregation experts _____ Invitation / Reminder of weekly meetings to discuss equitable distribution of resources with date ! time ! location FROM Sadie Mitchell Sadie Mitchell Sadie Mitchell Sadie Mitchell Brady Gadberry Sadie Mitchell Dr. Gamine Brady Gadberry 9^-0 17-23-98 7-24-98 8-06-98 8-26-98 9-15-98 9-21-98 10-14-98 10-22-98 11-4-98 Response to 7-22-98 memo concerning __________selection of principals___________ Provide Information regarding process/timelines anticipated within restructuring of student assignment Revised Desegregation and Education Plan Magnet Review Committee Meeting Notification to Evelyn Jackson - Joshua (minutes indicate Ms. Jackson was in _______________attendance)_______________ Schedule / Review of School Board Policy Magnet Review Committee Meeting Notification to Evelyn Jackson - Joshua (minutes indicate Ms. Jackson was in _______________attendance)_______________ Invitation! Reminder to Mr. Walker / or staff to meet with LRSD committee working on equitable distribution of resources_ To Joy Springer Communication regarding Ombudsman Position Magnet Review Committee Meeting Notification to Evelyn Jackson - Joshua (minutes indicate Ms. Jackson was in _______________attendance)_______________ To Joy Springer Communication regarding not receiving her application for Ombudsman Sadie Mitchell Dr. Gamine Sadie Mitchell Junious Babbs Sadie Mitchell Brady Gadberry Junious Babbs Sadie Mitchell Junious Babbs I11-10-98 12-01-98 12-11-98 12-15-98 2-09-99 2-25-99 3-23-99 3-30-99 4-14-99 Magnet Review Committee Meeting Notification to Evelyn Jackson - Joshua (minutes indicate Ms. Jackson was in attendance) Magnet Review Committee Meeting Notification to Evelyn Jackson - Joshua (minutes indicate Ms. Jackson was in attendance) __ Special Called Magnet Review Committee Meeting Notification to Evelyn Jackson - Joshua (minutes indicate Ms. Jackson was in ______________attendance)______________ Magnet Review Committee Meeting Notification to Evelyn Jackson - Joshua (minutes indicate Ms. Jackson was in ______________attendance)______________ Magnet Review Committee Agenda (Notification to Evelyn Jackson - Joshua) To Joy Springer Response to 2-23-99 letter requesting LRSD response on compliance issues in question Magnet Review Committee Meeting Notification to Evelyn Jackson - Joshua (minutes indicate Ms. Jackson was in attendance) Response to 3-29-99 fax regarding concerns of Ms. Harris / Mrs. Thomas - Hall High Response to request for a meeting regarding Hall High Sadie Mitchell Sadie Mitchell Sadie Mitchell Sadie Mitchell Sadie Mitchell Junious Babbs Sadie Mitchell Junious Babbs Dr. Gamine4-20-99 4-20-99 4-20-99 4-26-99 4-26-99 5-6-99 5-06-99 5-14-99 6-01-99 6-15-99 6-17-99 6-18-99 Magnet Review Gommittee Meeting Notification to Evelyn Jackson - Joshua (minutes indicate Ms. Jackson was in _______________attendance)_______________ Response to request for scholastic information Response to 4-14-99 fax requesting correspondence from Dr. Terrence Roberts Response to 4-22-99 FOIA request regarding ______________Board Policies______________ Response to 4-23-99 request Guidance ________________Program________________ Response to FOIA Request 5-3-99 - Hall High Guidance Plan 4-29-99 - Griteria used Gum Laude Design. 4-27-99 / 4-29-99 - School computer / scholarship files ________4-12-99 Gompliance Issues________ Response to FOIA request regarding Policies Response to 4-12-99 letter regarding Fair ________________Principal________________ Magnet Review Gommittee Meeting Notification to Evelyn Jackson - Joshua (minutes indicate Ms. Jackson was in _______________attendance)_______________ Response to Hall High Information Request Magnet Review Gommittee Meeting Notification to Evelyn Jackson - Joshua Response to reorganization of Division of Instruction Sadie Mitchell Dr. Gamine Junious Babbs Dr. Gamine Dr. Gamine Junious Babbs Junious Babbs Sadie Mitchell Ghris Heller Sadie Mitchell Dr. Bonnie Lesley6-21-99 6-28-99 7-1-99 7-1-99 7-8-99 7-8-99 7-13-99 7-23-99 7-27-99 7-29-99 8-2-99 8-3-99 8-6-99 8-11-99 Special Galled Magnet Review Gommittee Meeting Notification to Evelyn Jackson - Joshua Draft of Reorganization for Division of _______________Instruction________________ Provided Gopy of Orange LRSD Gompliance _______________Handbook________________ Response to rumor - Hall High Gounseling ______________Dept. Director______________ Response to 7-7-99 regarding disciplining of _______________an employee_______________ Response to 7-6-99 FOIA request- __________Safety/Security Issues__________ Response to 7-6-99 FOIA request Glass Drops Provided documentation that Dr. Terrence Roberts presented during 7-22-99 LRSD ________________Inservice________________ Response to request regarding information on __________LRSDs Title I Program_________ Response to 7-22-99 request for correspondence received from Dr. Terrence Roberts ________ Letter regarding Komo Davis - Hall High _________________Student_________________ Response to 7-19-99 FOIA request regarding class rankings at Gentral! Parkview Response to 8-5-99 communication regarding Jasmine Graig - (Four-Year Program) Response to FOIA request - Hall High Sadie Mitchell Dr. Bonnie Lesley Junious Babbs Dr. Gamine Dr. Bonnie Lesley Junious Babbs Junious Babbs Junious Babbs Dr. Bonnie Lesley Junious Babbs Dr. Gamine Junious Babbs Junious Babbs Junious Babbs8-12-99 8-12-99 8-13-99 8-17-99 8-23-99 8-24-99 8-25-99 8-25-99 8-25-99 8-26-99 8-27-99 CERTIFIED 8-27-99 CERTIFIED 8-30-99 8-31-99 Response to 8-11-99 FOIA - personnel files Response to placement of Gayle Bradford Response to fax/letter regarding accusations concerning Mona Briggs Review of Proposed Policies / Administrative _______________Regulations_______________ Request for review / input in the development and procedures implemented in accordance ____________with revised plan.____________ Response to Walkers complaint of not ___________responding to FOIA___________ DRAFT ADM. REGULATIONS KF-R and KLG-R 8-20-99 Operations Division Compliance Plan Draft Procedures ________________8-23-99________________ Purple Compliance Plan ________________6-10-99________________ Guidelines for School Improvement Planning Draft Policies - Section G (RETURNED - NEVER CLAIMED) Transportation Issues Response to 8-25-99 requesting information on LRSDs compliance handbook To Joy Springer Response to 8-30-99 request for information about LRSDs committee regarding equitable allocation of resources Dr. Richard Hurley Dr. Camine Dr. Camine Dr. Bonnie Lesley Junious Babbs Dr. Richard Hurley Dr. Vic Anderson Dr. Vic Anderson LRSD Dr. Bonnie Lesley LRSD - Babbs Junious Babbs / Martello Junious Babbs Brady Gadberry8-31-99 CERTIFIED 9-1-99 9-1-99 9-2-99 9-2-99 CERTIFIED 9-3-99 SR\u0026amp;R Handbooks Compliance Handbook ________Policy - Visitors to Schools Response to 8-24-99 request regarding assistance and direction provided by _______________Ombudsman 1999-2000 Title I Plan Memo stating changes made in LRSDs Title I _________________program Response to request for meeting on _______________Ombudsman Copies of Proposed Policies and request for ________________feedback ______ Response to 8-31-99 requesting transportation of M-to-M student to Alpha Academy (PCSSD) LRSD - Babbs Junious Babbs Dr. Bonnie Lesley Dr. Gamine Junious Babbs Junious Babbs 9-8-99 CERTIFIED 9-14-99 9-14-99 9-15-99 9-17-99 9-17-99 Response to 8-30-99 requesting information __________on Incentive Schools__________ Magnet Review Committee Meeting Notification to Evelyn Jackson - Joshua (minutes indicate Ms. Jackson was in ____________attendance)______________ Response to 9-13-99 allegation by Lillian __________Glass regarding Dodd__________ Response to 9-14-99 regarding quality of education at Wakefield Elementary Response to alleged acts of inappropriate teacher behavior at PH Middle School ?? Junious Babbs Sadie Mitchell Faith Donovan Sadie Mitchell Junious Babbs Response to no book bag policy Junious Babbs9-17-99 9-20-99 9-23-99 9-28-99 9-28-99 9-28-99 8-31-99 10-6-99 10-11-99 10-25-99 10-26-99 Response to request for documents/ communication between consultants_ Response to 9-13-99 letter regarding FOIA ________________requests_________________ Meeting with John Walker ! Joy Springer - ______Draft - Magnet School Proposal______ Magnet Review Committee Meeting Notification to Evelyn Jackson - Joshua (minutes indicate Ms. Jackson was in _______________attendance)_______________ Request for review of Lab School Project _________________papers__________________ Response 9-28-99 regarding LRSD _______________Ombudsman_______________ To Joy Springer Response to 8-30-99 letter requesting info about LRSDs committee regarding equitable __________allocation of resources__________ To Joy Springer Invitation to serve on Governing Board for LR CPMSA Response to 10-6-99 request regarding staff ______________compliance______________ Invitation for Public Presentation! Question/Answer Session at Mitchell Elem. Magnet Review Committee Meeting Notification to Evelyn Jackson - Joshua (minutes indicate Ms. Jackson was in attendance) Junious Babbs Junious Babbs Phale Hale, Dr. Gamine, Sadie Mitchell __________\u0026amp; Linda Austin__________ Sadie Mitchell Linda Austin Junious Babbs Brady Gadberry Vanessa Cleaver Junious Babbs Dr. Gamine Sadie Mitchell10-27-99 Response to 10-27-99 for information from Dr. Lesley Anita Gilliam 11-1-99 11-3-99 11-5-99 Response to 10-29-99 FOIA request regarding _________________Mitchell_________________ Request for information on consulting services ! implementation of educational programs Response to 11-4-99 request - acknowledges receipt of FOIA request Junious Babbs Dr. Bonnie Lesley Junious Babbs 11-8-99 11-10-99 11-17-99 11-18-99 11-23-99 12-7-99 12-7-99 \u0026amp; 12-9-99 12-15-99 1-6-00 Response to 11-4-99 FOIA request - Mitchell _________________School ________________ Response to 11-5-99 FOIA request - Mitchell Request for review and feedback of drafts proposing new policy / regulations governing _____________Title I programs __________ Parent / Family Support and Community Partnerships Mtg. Agenda / Sign-in (Joy Springer in attendance) Response to request for Mitchell School ________________directory Magnet Review Committee Meeting Notification to Evelyn Jackson - Joshua (minutes indicate Ms. Jackson was in attendance) __ Kim Lockharts senior class placement __________Instructional Standards__________ Community / Parent Involvement Agenda (Joy Springer in attendance)_______ Junious Babbs Junious Babbs Dr. Bonnie Lesley Vanessa Cleaver Junious Babbs Sadie Mitchell Dr. Marian Lacey Dr. Bonnie Lesley Vanessa Cleaver1-11-00 1-14-00 1-18-00 1-20-00 2-8-00 2-21-00 2-22-00 Magnet Review Committee Meeting Notification to Evelyn Jackson - Joshua (minutes indicate Ms. Jackson was in _______________attendance)_______________ Position notice - Elem. Charter School Director Copy of email message from Hurley to Katherine Snyder Copy of letter from K. Snyder to Hurley Position notice - Director of Secondary _______English and Foreign Language_______ To Joy Springer Reminder for LR CPMSA Meeting for 2-8-00 _________________meeting________________ To Joy Springer LR CPMSA Sub-Committee Report Magnet Review Committee Meeting Notification to Evelyn Jackson - Joshua (minutes indicate Ms. Jackson was in _______________attendance)_______________ Recent LRSD publications for review - requesting questions / suggestions for ______________improvement______________ Magnet Review Committee Meeting Notification to Evelyn Jackson - Joshua (minutes indicate Ms. Jackson was in attendance) Sadie Mitchell Dr. Camine Vanessa Cleaver Vanessa Cleaver Sadie Mitchell Dr. Bonnie Lesley Sadie Mitchell2-28-00 3-21-00 4-25-00 5-9-00 5-22-00 5-23-00 7-14-00 7-27-00 9-7-00 9-7-00 To Joy Springer Follow up on communication with PCSSD on complaints and/or alleged raced based mistreatment. Magnet Review Committee Meeting Notification to Evelyn Jackson - Joshua (minutes indicate Ms. Jackson was in _______________attendance)_______________ Magnet Review Committee Meeting Notification to Evelyn Jackson - Joshua Magnet Review Committee Meeting Notification to Evelyn Jackson - Joshua Response to 5-9-00 request on transfers from ____________Dodd Elementary____________ Magnet Review Committee Meeting Notification to Evelyn Jackson - Joshua Magnet Review Committee Meeting Notification to Evelyn Jackson - Joshua (minutes indicate Ms. Jackson was in _______________attendance)_______________ Magnet Review Committee Meeting Notification to Evelyn Jackson - Joshua (minutes indicate Ms. Jackson was in _______________attendance)_______________ Request for Information for Joshua representative for LRSD Biracial __ To Joshua Intervenors Magnet Schools Assistance Program Grant Junious Babbs Sadie Mitchell Sadie Mitchell Sadie Mitchell Junious Babbs Sadie Mitchell Sadie Mitchell Sadie Mitchell Junious Babbs Sadie Mitchell9-12-00 9-20-00 9-28-00 10-05-00 10-9-00 10-10-00 10-23-00 10-24-00 Magnet Review Gommittee Meeting Notification to Evelyn Jackson - Joshua (minutes indicate Ms. Jackson was in _______________attendance)_______________ To Joy Springer\nLetter regarding information from Ray __________Gillespie / Dr. Gamine__________ To Joy Springer: Request asking for her to refer parent complaints about school related problems to him.____________________________________ Response to complaints that district officials failed to provide the Ombudsman with ___________necessary information__________ Response to 10-3-00 letter regarding ________cooperation of Ombudsman________ Magnet Review Gommittee Meeting Notification to Evelyn Jackson - Joshua (minutes indicate Ms. Jackson was in ________________attendance)_______________ Response to 10-19-00 request regarding oversight of principals relationships between ____________parents and students___________ Magnet Review Gommittee Meeting Notification to Evelyn Jackson - Joshua (minutes indicate Ms. Jackson was in attendance) Sadie Mitchell James Washington James Washingtion Dr. Gamine James Washington Sadie Mitchell Dr. Gamine Sadie Mitchell11-7-00 11-16-00 11-21-00 11-23-00 11-28-00 12-11-00 12-14-00 1-9-01 1-23-01 1-24-01 1-29-01 Magnet Review Committee Meeting Notification to Evelyn Jackson - Joshua (minutes indicate Ms. Jackson was in ______________attendance)_______________ To Joy Springer ______Response to CICs questions_______ To Joy Springer Response to Cloverdale Middle School ____________Discipline Issues____________ Provided copy of LRSD Safe Schools Grant _________submission_______________ Magnet Review Committee Meeting Notification to Evelyn Jackson - Joshua (minutes indicate Ms. Jackson was in ______________attendance)_______________ Provided copy of Draft Covenant _________Carnegie Grant Proposal_________ Magnet Review Committee Meeting Notification to Evelyn Jackson - Joshua (minutes indicate Ms. Jackson was in ______________attendance)______________ Members of WLR School Committee Request for presence at 2-5-01 meeting of WLR School Site Committee Notification / Invitation to 2-5-01 Research ___________Committee Meeting___________ Provided Copy of Covenant approved by LRSD Board Sadie Mitchell Junious Babbs James Washington Junious Babbs Sadie Mitchell Junious Babbs Junious Babbs Sadie Mitchell Baker Kurrus Dr. Kathy Lease Junious Babbs1-30-01 2-5-01 2-8-01 2-13-01 2-19-01 2-22-01 3-01-01 3-02-01 3-06-01 3-14-01 3-22-01 Magnet Review Committee Meeting Notification to Evelyn Jackson - Joshua (minutes indicate Ms. Jackson was in _______________attendance)_______________ Sign -In Sheet for Research Committee Meeting ________Joy Springer - in attendance________ Members of WLR School Committee Information regarding tour times/dates of sites _________________in WLR_________________ Magnet Review Committee Meeting Notification to Evelyn Jackson - Joshua Notification! Invitation to 2-26-01 Research ____________Committee Meeting___________ Request for attendance at Safe Schools/ Healthy Students Steering Committee Meeting ________________on 3-14-01________________ Members of WLR School Committee Notes on 2-23-01 driving tour of WLR sites Providing copies of Middle / High School Curriculum Catalogs and Middle! High _____School Student / Parent Handbooks Magnet Review Committee Meeting Notification to Evelyn Jackson - Joshua (minutes indicate Ms. Jackson was in _________attendance)_______________ Steering Committee Meeting Safe Schools / Healthy Students Meeting Magnet Review Committee Meeting Notification to Evelyn Jackson - Joshua Sadie Mitchell Dr. Kathy Lease Baker Kurrus Sadie Mitchell Dr. Kathy Lease Diane Vibhakar Baker Kurrus Dr. Bonnie Lesley Sadie Mitchell Diane Vibhakar Sadie Mitchell4-12-01 4-16-01 4-24-01 5-03-01 5-25-01 6-7-01 6-7-01 6-27-01 Monthly Every 2 months Yearly To Joy Springer Copies of Four Year Old Assignment Letters ______in response to telephone request______ To Joy Springer Copy of Four Year Old Application in _______response to telephone request_______ Invitation to attend two informal mtgs. - high school study groups Response to 4-24-01 allegations at Pulaski __________Heights Middle School__________ Athletic Task Force Report Findings To Joy Springer Response to request for desegregation files To Joy Springer Response to request for SRO Information To Joy Springer 2** Copy of 3-15-01 LRSD Compliance _________________Report_________________ Reminder of LRSD Biracial Meeting - __________Monthly________________ Provided copy of LRSD SRO Waiting List Provided copy of LRSD SRO Handbook Junious Babbs Junious Babbs Dr. Bonnie Lesley James Washington Junious Babbs Junious Babbs Junious Babbs Junious Babbs Junious Babbs Julie Wiedower Julie Wiedower\u0026gt; LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 501 SHERMAN STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72202 OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES Junious C. Babbs, Associate Superintendent Phone: (501) 324-2272 E-Mail: icbabbs@stuasn.lrsd.kl2.ar.us TO: Mr. Clay Fendley FROM: Junious Babbs SUBJECT: LRSD ! John Walker Communication DATE: April 25, 2001 Please find an attached communication log of items compiled that address ongoing correspondence with Mr. John Walker / Joshua Intervenors since inception of the Revised Desegregation Education Plan. Items recorded help to note specific documents on file, however, it is importaiit to also be mindful of an array of informal communication that lends itself to day-to-day inquity, response concerns posed. Additional communication via scheduled timeframes covered the following or areas that may include Joshua representation: 1. LRSD Board Agendas 2. Magnet Review Committee Meetings 3. LRSD Biracial Committee Meetings 4. Educational Management Team Meetings LRSD expectations have been that Joshua representatives provide and maintain updated report information to the attention of Mr. Walker. Joshuas insight and participation is recognized and appreciated. Information provided helps to support LRSD efforts and affirm continued connections. Additional division sources may be provided but for now, I will remain in a holding state and ask that upon your review, to get back if questions come up or additional information is needed. cc: Dr. Carnine Brady Gadberry Dr. Bonnie Lesley Sadie Mitchell Don Stewart Communication Mailed to John Walker DATE 2-10-98 * ITEM 3-17-98 4-21-98 5-12-98 6-09-98 7-23-98 7-24-98 Magnet Review Committee Meeting Notification to Evelyn Jackson - Joshua Intervenors (minutes indicate Ms. Jackson was in attendance)_ Magnet Review Committee Meeting Notification to Evelyn Jackson - Joshua (minutes indicate Ms. Jackson was in attendance) ,_ Magnet Review Committee Meeting Notification to Evelyn Jackson  Joshua (minutes indicate Ms. Jackson was in attendance)_____________ Magnet Review Committee Meeting Notification to Evelyn Jackson - Joshua Magnet Review Committee Meeting Notification to Evelyn Jackson - Joshua (minutes indicate Ms. Jackson was in attendance) Response to 7-22-98 memo concerning selection of principals Provide Information regarding process/timelines anticipated within restructuring of student assignment Revised Desegregation and Education Plan FROM Sadie Mitchell Sadie Mitchell Sadie Mitchell Sadie Mitchell Sadie Mitchell Sadie Mitchell Dr. Gamine8-06-98 8-26-98 9-15-98 10-14-98 10-22-98 11-4-98 11-10-98 Magnet Review Committee Meeting Notification to Evelyn Jackson  Joshua (minutes indicate Ms. Jackson was in attendance) Schedule! Review of School Board Policy Magnet Review Committee Meeting Notification to Evelyn Jackson - Joshua (minutes indicate Ms. Jackson was in attendance) _____________ To Joy Springer Communication regarding Ombudsman Position _____________ Magnet Review Committee Meeting Notification to Evelyn Jackson - Joshua (minutes indicate Ms. Jackson was in attendance)_ To Joy Springer Communication regarding not receiving her application for Ombudsman_ Magnet Review Committee Meeting Notification to Evelyn Jackson - Joshua (minutes indicate Ms. Jackson was in attendance) Sadie Mitchell Junious Babbs Sadie Mitchell Junious Babbs Sadie Mitchell Junious Babbs Sadie Mitchell12-01-98 12-11-98 12-15-98 2-09-99 2-25-99 3-23-99 3-30-99 4-14-99 4-20-99 .. Magnet Review Committee Meeting Notification to Evelyn Jackson - Joshua (minutes indicate Ms. Jackson was in __attendance)_______________ Special Called Magnet Review Committee Meeting Notification to Evelyn Jackson - Joshua (minutes indicate Ms. Jackson was in attendance)__ Magnet Review Committee Meeting Notification to Evelyn Jackson  Joshua (minutes indicate Ms. Jackson was in attendance)_ Magnet Review Committee Agenda (Notification to Evelyn Jackson - Joshua) To Joy Springer Response to 2-23-99 letter requesting LRSD response on compliance issues in question Magnet Review Committee Meeting Notification to Evelyn Jackson - Joshua (minutes indicate Ms. Jackson was in attendance) Response to 3-29-99 fax regarding concerns of Ms. Harris! Mrs. Thomas - Hall High Response to request for a meeting regarding Hall High ___________ Magnet Review Committee Meeting Notification to Evelyn Jackson - Joshua (minutes indicate Ms. Jackson was in attendance) Sadie Mitchell Sadie Mitchell Sadie Mitchell Sadie Mitchell Junious Babbs Sadie Mitchell Junious Babbs Dr. Camine Sadie Mitchell4-20-99 4-20-99 4-26-99 4-26-99 5-6-99 5-06-99 5-14-99 6-01-99 6-15-99 6-17-99 6-18-99 6-21-99 6-28-99 Response to request for scholastic information Response to 4-14-99 fax requesting correspondence from Dr. Terrence Roberts Response to 4-22-99 FOIA request regarding Board Policies_____________ Response to 4-23-99 request Guidance Program_ Response to FOIA Request 5-3-99 _ Hall High Guidance Plan 4-29-99 - Griteria used Gum Laude Design. 4-27-99! 4-29-99 - School computer / scholarship files 4-12-99 Gompliance Issues Response to FOIA request regarding Polices\" Response to 4-12-99 letter regarding Fair Principal_______________ Magnet Review Gommittee Meeting Notification to Evelyn Jackson - Joshua (minutes indicate Ms. Jackson was in attendance)__ Response to Hall High Information Request Magnet Review Gommittee Meeting Notification to Evelyn Jackson  Joshua Response to reorganization of Division of Instmction______________ Special Galled Magnet Review Gommittee Meeting Notification to Evelyn Jackson - Joshua Draft of Reorganization for Division of Instmction Dr. Gamine Junious Babbs Dr. Gamine Dr. Gamine Junious Babbs Junious Babbs Sadie Mitchell Ghris Heller Sadie Mitchell Dr. Bonnie Lesley Sadie Mitchell Dr. Bonnie Lesley7-1-99 7-1-99 7-8-99 7-8-99 7-13-99 7-23-99 7-27-99 7-29-99 8-2-99 8-3-99 8-6-99 8-11-99 8-12-99 8-12-99 8-13-99 8-17-99 Provided Gopy of Orange LRSD Gompliance Handbook_ Response to rumor - Hall High Gounseling Dept. Director_____ Response to 7-7-99 regarding disciplining of an employee______________  Response to 7-6-99 FOIA request- Safety/Security Issues Response to 7-6-99 FOIA request Glass Drops Provided documentation that Dr. Terrence Roberts presented during 7-22-99 LRSD Inservice Response to request regarding information on ________LRSDs Title I Program__________ Response to 7-22-99 request for correspondence received from Dr. Terrence Roberts___________ Letter regarding Komo Davis - Hall High _____________Student_________________ Response to 7-19-99 FOIA request regarding class rankings at Gentral! Parkview Response to 8-5-99 communication regarding Jasmine Graig - (Four-Year Program) Response to FOIA request - Hall High Response to 8-11-99 FOIA - personnel files Response to placement of Gayle Bradford Response to fax/letter regarding accusations concerning Mona Briggs_ Review of Proposed Policies! Administrative Regulations Junious Babbs Dr, Gamine Dr. Bonnie Lesley Junious Babbs Junious Babbs Junious Babbs Dr. Bonnie Lesley Junious Babbs Dr. Gamine Junious Babbs Junious Babbs Junious Babbs Dr. Richard Hurley Dr. Gamine Dr. Gamine Dr. Bonnie Lesley8-23-99 8-24-99 8-25-99 Request for review ! input in the development and procedures implemented in accordance with revised plan._ Response to Walkers complaint of not responding to FOIA_ draft ADM. REGULATIONS KF-R and KLG-R 8-20-99 Junious Babbs Dr. Richard Hurley Dr. Vic Anderson 8-25-99 Operations Division Compliance Plan Draft Procedures 8-23-99 Dr. Vic Anderson 8-25-99 Purple Compliance Plan 6-10-99 LRSD 8-26-99 8-27-99 CERTIFIED 8-27-99 CERTIFIED 8-30-99 Guidelines for School Improvement Planning Draft Policies - Section G (RETURNED - NEVER CLAIMED) Transportation Issues Response to 8-25-99 requesting information on LRSDs compliance handbook 8-31-99 8-31-99 CERTIFIED 9-1-99 To Joy Springer Response to 8-30-99 request for information about LRSDs committee regarding equitable allocation of resources_ SR\u0026amp;R Handbooks Compliance Handbook Policy - Visitors to Schools_______ Response to 8-24-99 request regarding assistance and direction provided by Ombudsman Dr. Bonnie Lesley LRSD - Babbs Junious Babbs / Martello Junious Babbs Brady Gadberry LRSD - Babbs Junious Babbs9-2-99 9-2-99 CERTIFIED 9-3-99 Response to request for meeting on Ombudsman_ Copies of Proposed Policies and request for feedback Response to 8-31-99 requesting transportation of M-to-M student to Alpha Academy (PCSSD)__ Dr. Camine Junious Babbs Junious Babbs 9-8-99 CERTIFIED 9-14-99 9-14-99 9-15-99 9-17-99 Response to 8-30-99 requesting information on Incentive Schools_________ Magnet Review Committee Meeting Notification to Evelyn Jackson - Joshua (minutes indicate Ms. Jackson was in attendance) Response to 9-13-99 allegation by Lillian Glass regarding Dodd_ Response to 9-14-99 regarding quality of education at Wakefield Elementary Response to alleged acts of inappropriate teacher behavior at PH Middle School Junious Babbs Sadie Mitchell Faith Donovan Sadie Mitchell Jiuiious Babbs 9-17-99 9-17-99 59 Response to no book bag policy' 9-20-99 9-23-99 9-28-99 Response to request for documents/ communication between consultants Response to 9-13-99 letter regarding FOIA requests____________ Meeting with John Walker! Joy Springer - Draft - Magnet School Proposal Magnet Review Committee Meeting Notification to Evelyn Jackson - Joshua (minutes indicate Ms. Jackson was in attendance) Junious Babbs Junious Babbs Junious Babbs Phale Hale, Dr. Camine, Sadie Mitchell \u0026amp; Linda Austin_ Sadie Mitchell9-28-99 9-28-99 10-6-99 Request for review of Lab School Project papers__ Response 9-28-99 regarding LRSD Ombudsman ___________ To Joy Springer Invitation to serve on Governing Board for LR CPMSA Linda Austin Junious Babbs Vanessa Cleaver 10-11-99 10-25-99 10-26-99 10-27-99 11-1-99 11-3-99 11-5-99 11-8-99 11-10-99 11-18-99 Response to 10-6-99 request regarding staff compliance ____________ Invitation for Public Presentation! Question/Answer Session at Mitchell Elem. Magnet Review Committee Meeting Notification to Evelyn Jackson  Joshua (minutes indicate Ms. Jackson was in attendance)_______________ Response to 10-27-99 for information from Dr. Lesley________ Response to 10-29-99 FOIA request regarding __ Mitchell_____ Request for information on consulting services ! implementation of educational programs Response to 11-4-99 request - acknowledges receipt of FOIA request_ Response to 11-4-99 FOIA request - Mitchell School_ Response to 11-5-99 FOIA request - Mitchell Parent / Family Support and Community Partnerships Mtg. Agenda! Sign-in (Joy Springer in attendance)_ Junious Babbs Dr. Gamine Sadie Mitchell Anita Gilliam Junious Babbs Dr. Bonnie Lesley Junious Babbs Junious Babbs Junious Babbs Vanessa Cleaver11-23-99 12-7-99 12-7-99 \u0026amp; 12-9-99 12-15-99 1-6-00 1-11-00 1-14-00 1-18-00 1-20-00 2-8-00 Response to request for Mitchell School directory___ Magnet Review Committee Meeting Notification to Evelyn Jackson  Joshua (minutes indicate Ms. Jackson was in attendance) Kim Lockharts senior class placement Instructional Standards____ Community ! Parent Involvement Agenda (Joy Springer in attendance)__ Magnet Review Committee Meeting Notification to Evelyn Jackson - Joshua (minutes indicate Ms. Jackson was in attendance)__ Position notice - Elem. Charter School Director Copy of email message \u0026amp;om Hurley to Katherine Snyder Copy of letter from K. Snyder to Hurley Position notice - Director of Secondary English and Foreign Language To Joy Springer Reminder for LR CPMSA Meeting for 2-8-00 meeting_ To Joy Springer LR CPMSA Sub-Committee Report Magnet Review Committee Meeting Notification to Evelyn Jackson - Joshua (minutes indicate Ms. Jackson was in attendance) Junious Babbs Sadie Mitchell Dr. Marian Lacey Dr. Bonnie Lesley Vanessa Cleaver Sadie Mitchell Dr. Gamine Vanessa Cleaver Vanessa Cleaver Sadie Mitchell2-21-00 2-22-00 2-28-00 3-21-00 4-25-00 5-9-00 5-22-00 5-23-00 7-14-00 Recent LRSD publications for review - requesting questions / suggestions for improvement ___________ Magnet Review Committee Meeting Notification to Evelyn Jackson - Joshua (minutes indicate Ms. Jackson was in attendance)__ To Joy Springer Follow up on communication with PCSSD on complaints and/or alleged raced based mistreatment._ Magnet Review Committee Meeting Notification to Evelyn Jackson - Joshua (minutes indicate Ms. Jackson was in attendance)_______________ Magnet Review Committee Meeting Notification to Evelyn Jackson - Joshua Magnet Review Committee Meeting Notification to Evelyn Jackson - Joshua Response to 5-9-00 request on transfers from Dodd Elementary_ Magnet Review Committee Meeting Notification to Evelyn Jackson - Joshua Magnet Review Committee Meeting Notification to Evelyn Jackson - Joshua (minutes indicate Ms. Jackson was m attendance) Dr. Bonnie Lesley Sadie Mitchell Junious Babbs Sadie Mitchell Sadie Mitchell Sadie Mitchell Junious Babbs Sadie Mitchell Sadie Mitchell7-27-00 9-7-00 9-7-00 9-12-00 10-05-00 10-9-00  10-10-00 10-23-00 10-24-00 Magnet Review Committee Meeting Notification to Evelyn Jackson - Joshua (minutes indicate Ms. Jackson was in attendance)__ Request for Information for Joshua representative for LRSD Biracial To Joshua Intervenors Magnet Schools Assistance Program Grant Magnet Review Committee Meeting Notification to Evelyn Jackson - Joshua (minutes indicate Ms. Jackson was in _____attendance)_____ Response to complaints that district officials failed to provide the Ombudsman with necessary information Response tol0-3-00 letter regarding cooperation of Ombudsman____ Magnet Review Committee Meeting Notification to Evelyn Jackson - Joshua (minutes indicate Ms. Jackson was in attendance)_ Response to 10-19-00 request regarding oversight of principals relationships between parents and students_ Magnet Review Committee Meeting Notification to Evelyn Jackson - Joshua (minutes indicate Ms. Jackson was in attendance) Sadie Mitchell Junious Babbs Sadie Mitchell Sadie Mitchell Dr. Camine James Washington Sadie Mitchell Dr. Camine Sadie Mitchell11-7-00 11-16-00 11-21-00 11-23-00 11-28-00 12-11-00 12-14-00 1-9-01 1-23-01 1-24-01 1-29-01 Magnet Review Committee Meeting Notification to Evelyn Jackson - Joshua (minutes indicate Ms. Jackson was in attendance) To Joy Springer Response to CICs questions_______ To Joy Springer Response to Cloverdale Middle School Discipline Issues___ Provided copy of LRSD Safe Schools Grant submission_ Magnet Review Committee Meeting Notification to Evelyn Jackson - Joshua (minutes indicate Ms. Jackson was in attendance) Provided copy of Draft Covenant Carnegie Grant Proposal Magnet Review Committee Meeting Notification to Evelyn Jackson - Joshua (minutes indicate Ms. Jackson was in attendance)__ Members of WLR School Committee Request for presence at 2-5-01 meeting of WLR School Site Committee_ Notification / Invitation to 2-5-01 Research __Committee Meeting___________ Provided Copy of Covenant approved by LRSD Board Sadie Mitchell Junious Babbs James Washington Junious Babbs Sadie Mitchell Junious Babbs Junious Babbs Sadie Mitchell Baker Kurrus Dr. Kathy Lease Junious Babbs1-30-01 2-5-01 2-8-01 2-13-01 2-19-01 2-22-01 3-01-01 3-06-01 3-14-01 3-22-01 4-12-01 Magnet Review Committee Meeting Notification to Evelyn Jackson - Joshua (minutes indicate Ms. Jackson was in attendance)___ Sign -In Sheet for Research Committee Meeting Joy Springer - in attendance ______ Members of WLR School Committee Information regarding tour times/dates of sites ________________in WLR_________________ Magnet Review Committee Meeting Notification to Evelyn Jackson - Joshua Notification! Invitation to 2-26-01 Research Committee Meeting Request for attendance at Safe Schools/ Healthy Students Steering Committee Meeting on 3-14-01 Members of WLR School Committee Notes on 2-23-01 driving tour of WLR sites Magnet Review Committee Meeting Notification to Evelyn Jackson  Joshua (minutes indicate Ms. Jackson was in attendance)_ Steering Committee Meeting Safe Schools / Healthy Students Meeting_________ Magnet Review Committee Meeting Notification to Evelyn Jackson - Joshua To Joy Springer Copies of Four Year Old Assignment Letters in response to telephone request_ Sadie Mitchell Dr. Kathy Lease Baker Kurrus Sadie Mitchell Dr. Kathy Lease Diane Vibhakar Baker Kurrus Sadie Mitchell Diane Vibhakar Sadie Mitchell Junious Babbs4-16-01 Monthly Every 2 months Yearly To Joy Springer Copy of Four Year Old Application in response to telephone request__ Reminder of LRSD Biracial Meeting - Monthly_ Provided copy of LRSD SRO Waiting List Provided copy of LRSD SRO Handbook Junious Babbs Junious Babbs Julie Wiedower Julie Wiedower4-12-01 4-16-01 4-24-01 5-03-01 5-25-01 6-7-01 6-7-01 Monthly Every 2 months Yearly ~ To Joy Springer Copies of Four Year Old Assignment Letters in response to telephone request To Joy Springer Copy of Four Year Old Application in response to telephone request_ Invitation to attend two informal mtgs. - high school study groups___________ Response to 4-24-01 allegations at Pulaski Heights Middle School_________ Athletic Task Force Report Findings To Joy Springer Response to request for desegregation files To Joy Springer Response to request for SRO Information Reminder of LRSD Biracial Meeting  Monthly______________ Provided copy of LRSD SRO Waiting List Provided copy of LRSD SRO Handbook Junious Babbs Junious Babbs Dr. Bonnie Lesley James Washington Junious Babbs Junious Babbs Junious Babbs Junious Babbs Julie Wiedower Julie WiedowerSubtest Letter Identification Word Test_________ Concepts about Print Writing Vocabulary Hearing/Recording DRA Subtest Letter Identification Word Test_________ Concepts about Print Writing Vocabulary Hearing/Recording DRA Observation Survey, 1999-2000 and 2000-01 Table 1: Kindergarten, 1999-2000 Fall to Spring Black and Non-Black Performance Black Students Non-Black Students BAV Ratio Fall 1999 27.59 1.75 6.54 2.93 3.58 .95 Fall 2000 27.43 1.38 5.95 1.96 2.16 0.35 Spring 2000 48.48 11.33 14.30 14.50 17.02 3.09 Change 20.90 9 59 7 76 11 58 13.44 2 13 Fall 1999 34.08 3.05 9.50 4.70 6.66 2.72 Spring 2000 50.30 14.91 17.56 22.13 24.37 7.12 Change 16 22 11 85 8.06 47:43\n17 71 4.39 Fall 1999 81% 57% 69% 62% 54% 35% Table 2: Kindergarten, 2000-01 Fall to Spring Black and Non-Black Performance Black Students Non-Biack Students Spring 2000 96% 76% 81% 70% 70% 43% BAV Ratio Change 129% 81% 96% 76% 76% 46% Spring 2001 49.38 13.41 16.02 18.82 19.59 3.56 Change 21.94 12 03 10 07 16.86 17 43 3.21 Fall 2000 33.02 2.59 8.30 3.36 4.66 0.85 Spring 2001 51.06 16.32 18.41 26.42 25.69 7.47 Change 18 04 iB\n73^ 10 11 23.07 21.03 6.62 Fall 2000 83% 53% 72% 58% 46% 41% Spring 2001 97% 82% 87% 71% 76% 48% Change 122% 88% 100% ^73%\n83%- 48% Subtest Letter Identification Word Test_________ Concepts about Print Writing Vocabulary Hearing/Recording DRA Subtest Letter Identification Word Test Concepts about Print Writing Vocabulary Hearing/Recording DRA Table 3: Grade 1,1999-2000 Fall to Spring Black and Non-Black Performance Black Students Non-Black Students B/W Ratio Fall 1999 47.44 5.75 13.81 13.54 17.25 4.29 Spring 2000 52.80 16.87 19.46 37.11 30.87 16.67 Change 5 36 11.11 5.64 23 57 13 62 12.38 Fall 1999 49.54 7.89 15.70 15.65 21.98 6.68 Spring 2000 52.96 18.34 20.91 44.04 34.11 24.37 Change 3.42 10.46 5 21 28 40 12.13 17 69 Fall 1999 96% 73% 88% 87% 78% 64% Table 4\nGrade 1, 2000-01 Fall to Spring Black and Non-Black Performance Black Students Non-Black Students Spring 2000 100% 92% 93% 84% 91% 68% B/W Ratio Change 157% 106% 108% 83% 112% 70% Fall 2000 48.95 5.81 13.51 12.94 17.49 3.72 Spring 2001 53.01 17.33 19.76 40.16 31.70 17.94 Change 4.06 11.53 6 26 27 21 14.21 14 23 Fall 2000 49.66 8.49 16.11 16.15 23.55 7.95 Spring 2001 53.08 18.53 21.22 45.44 34.40 25.41 Change 3 42 10.05 5.12 29 29 10 85 17\n4e Fall 2000 99% 68% 84% 80% 74% 47% Spring 2001 100% 94% 93% 88% 92% 71% Change 119% 115% 122% 93% 131% 82% Table 5: Grade 2,1999-2000 Fall to Spring Black and Non-Black Performance Black Students Non-Black Students BAV Ratio Subtest Fall 1999 Spring 2000 Change Fall 1999 Spring 2000 Change Fall 1999 Spring 2000 Change Lett^ Identification Word Test Concepts about Print Writing Vocabulary Hearing/Recording DRA Subtest Letter Identification Word Test_________ Concepts about Print Writing Vocabulary Hearing/Recording DRA 16.11 18.97 2.87 18.07 19.82 89% 96% 164% 35.09 42.16 17.81 Fall 2000 50.27 50.34 27.92 15.18 8 18 10.11 36.91 48.96 24.21 60.99 57.17 36.00 24.08 821 11.79 95% 86% 74% Table 6: Grade 2, 2000-01 Fall to Spring Black and Non-Black Performance Black Students Non-Black Students 16.00 29.80 45.50 18.20 Spring 2001 18.65 55.76 51.60 28.75 Change Fall 2000 Spring 2001 Change Fall 2000 2 64 17.60 19.05 1.45 91% 82% 88% 78% BAV Ratio Spring 2001 98% 25.96 6 10 10 54 35.43 52.44 26.01 63.97 56.78 35.88 28.55 4.34 9 87 84% 87% 70% 87% 91% 80% 63% 100% 86% Change 182% 91% 141% 107% Subtest Table 7: Cohort 1 Kindergarten, Fall 1999-2000 and Grade 1, Spring 2000-01 BAV Ratio Black Students Noil-Black Students Letter Identification Word Test_________ Concepts about Print Writing Vocabulary Hearing/Recording DRA Fall 1999 81% 57% 69% 62% 54% 35% Spring 2001 100% 94% 93% 88% 92% 71% Change 134% 99% 113% 91% 191% 75% Fall 1999 27.59 1.75 6.54 2.93 3.58 .95 Spring 2001 53.01 17.33 19.76 40.16 31.70 17.94 Table 8: Cohort 2 Grade 1, Fall 1999-2000 and Grade 2, Spring 2000-01 BAV Ratio Change 25 42 15.58 13.22 37 23 28.12 16.99 Black Students Letter Identification Word Test_________ Concepts about Print Writing Vocabulary Hearing/Recording DRA Fall 1999 96% 73% 88% 87% 78% 64% Spring 2001 98% 87% 91% 80% Change N/A 116% N/A 87% 99% 84% Fall 1999 47.44 5.75 13.81 13.54 17.25 4.29 Spring 2001 Change 18.65 55.76 51.60 28.75 12.90 N/A 42,22 34.35 24.46 Fall 1999 34.08 3.05 9.50 4.70 6.66 2.72 Spring 2001 53.08 18.53 21.22 45.44 34.40 25.41 Change 19 00 15 78 11 72 40 74 27 74 22 69 Noil-Black Students Fall 1999 49.54 7.89 15.70 15.65 21.98 6.68 Spring 2001 19.05 63.97 56.78 35.88 Change SMt 11.16 N/A 48,32 34.80 29.20Subtest Letter Identification Word Test_________ Concepts about Print Writing Vocabulary Hearing/Recording DRA Subtest Letter Identification Word Test_________ Concepts about Print Writing Vocabulary Hearing/Recording DRA Table 9: Grades K-2,1999-2000 Fall to Spring Performance, All Students Kindergarten Grade 1 Grade 2 Fall 1999 29.72 2.18 7.52 3.51 4.59 1.52 Fall 2000 29.05 1.81 6.67 2.42 3.00 0.52 Spring 2000 49.05 12.48 15.37 16.99 19.41 4.40 Change 19 33 10.29 7.84 13 48 14,82 2.88 Fall 1999 48.11 6.43 14/41 14.20 18.75 5.05 Spring 2000 52.86 17.34 19.91 39.30 31.89 19.11 Change 4 74 10 90 lSiSII 25.10 13 14 14 06 Table 10: Grades K-2, 2000-01 Fall to Spring Performance, All Students Kindergarten Spring Change 2001 49.79 14.29 16.75 21.07 21.42 4.80 20 74 12 48 10.08 18.65 18 42 4 28 Fall 2000 49.07 6.68 14.29 14.02 19.46 5.10 Grade 1 Spring 2001 53.02 17.67 20.21 41/72 32.48 20.24 Change 3.95 10.98 5.92 27,70^ 13.03 15.14 Fall 1999 16.76 35.71 44.34 19.85 Fall 2000 16.48 31.59 47.53 20.56 Spring 2000 19.27 53.80 52.51 30.50 Grade 2 Spring 2001 18.79 58.35 53.07 30.93 Change 2.50 1 18 09 8 16 10.65 Change 2 30 26,76 5 54 10 37 Table 11: Cohort 1AU Students Kindergarten, Fall 1999-2000 and Grade 1, Spring 2000-01 Subtest Fall 1999 Letter Identification Word Test Concepts about Print Writing Vocabulary Hearing/Recording DRA Subtest 29.72 2.18 7.52 3.51 4.59 1.52 Spring 2001 Change 53.02 17.67 20.21 41.72 32.48 20.24 23.30 15.49 12.69 38.21 27.89 18.72 Table 12: Cohort 2All Students Grade 1, Fall 1999-2000 and Grade 2, Spring 2001 Fall 1999 Spring 2001 Change Letter Identification Word Test Concepts about Print Writing Vocabulary Hearing/Recording DRA 48.11. 6.43 14/41 14.20 18.75 5.05 18.79 58.35 53.07 30.93 N/A 12.36 N/A 44.15 34.32 25.88Little Rock ool District SCHOOL Districtwide Badgett Elementary Bale Elementary Baseline Elementary Booker Arts Magnet Elementary SY 99-2000 BenchMark Data General Population Math and Literacy Strands by Free and Reduced Lunch Enrollment as of 11-8-2000 Receiving FAR Yes No Total Yes No Total Yes No Total Yes No Total Yes No Total Below Basic 633 71.5% 286 36.4% 68.9% 31.1% 919 55.0% 9 50.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% 0.0% 9 42.9% 8 34.8% 2 15.4% 80.0% 20.0% 10 27.8% 12 50.0% 2 25.0% 85.7% 14.3% 14 43.8% 18 41.9% 9 18.4% 66.7% 33.3% 27 29.3% Literacy Strand Basic 140 15.8% 120 15.3% 53.8% 46.2% 260 15.6% 5 27.8% 1 33.3% 83.3% 16.7% 6 28.6% 8 34.8% 6 46.2% 57.1% 42.9% 14 38.9% 9 37.5% 5 62.5% 64.3% 35.7% 14 43.8% 15 34.9% 17 34.7% 46.9% 53.1% 32 34.8% Proficient 71 8.0% 157 20.0% 31.1% 68.9% 228 13.7% 4 22.2% 2 66.7% 66.7% 33.3% 6 28.6% 7 30.4% 5 38.5% 58.3% 41.7% 12 33.3% 3 12.5% 1 12.5% 75.0% 25.0% 4 12.5% 10 23.3% 23 46.9% 30.3% 69.7% 33 35.9% Advanced 41 4.6% 222 28.3% 15.6% 84.4% 263 15.7% 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% Total 885 785 1670 18 3 21 23 13 36 24 8 32 43 49 92 Page 1 of 8 DR311_01 Strands by FAR (Revised).xIs SCHOOL Brady Elementary Carver Magnet Elementary Chicot Elementary Cloverdale Elementary David O'Dodd Elementary Little Rock ool District SY 99-2000 Bench Mark Data General Population Math and Literacy Strands by Free and Reduced Lunch Enrollment as of 11-8-2000 Receiving FAR Yes No Total Yes No Total Yes No Total Yes No Total Yes No Total Below Basic 9 39.1% 7 31.8% 56.3% 43.8% 16 35.6% 12 42.9% 6 12.0% 66.7% 33.3% 18 23.1% 17 48.6% 7 58.3% 70.8% 29.2% 24 51.1% 26 63.4% 9 56.3% 74.3% 25.7% 35 61.4% 6 27.3% 5 50.0% 54.5% 45.5% 11 34.4% Literacy Strand Basic 11 47.8% 9 40.9% 55.0% 45.0% 20 44.4% 8 28.6% 12 24.0% 40.0% 60.0% 20 25.6% 15 42.9% 3 25.0% 83.3% 16.7% 18 38.3% 10 24.4% 3 18.8% 76.9% 23.1% 13 22.8% 12 54.5% 1 10.0% 92.3% 7.7% 13 40.6% Proficient 3 13.0% 6 27.3% 33.3% 66.7% 9 20.0% 8 28.6% 27 54.0% 22.9% 77.1% 35 44.9% 3 8.6% 2 16.7% 60.0% 40.0% 5 10.6% 5 12.2% 4 25.0% 55.6% 44.4% 9 15.8% 4 18.2% 3 30.0% 57.1% 42.9% 7 21.9% Advanced 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 5 10.0% 0.0% 100.0% 5 6.4% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 1 10.0% 0.0% 100.0% 1 3.1% Page 2 of 8 Total 23 22 45 28 50 78 35 12 47 41 16 57 22 10 32 DR311_01 Strands by FAR (Revisedj rls SCHOOL Fair Park Elementary Forest Park Elementary Franklin Incentive Elementary Fulbright Elementary Garland Incentive Elementary Little Rock ool District SY 99-2000 BenchMark Data General Population Math and Literacy Strands by Free and Reduced Lunch Enrollment as of 11-8-2000 Receiving FAR Yes No Total Yes No Total Yes No Total Yes No Total Yes No Total Below Basic 4 50.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% 0.0% 4 28.6% 3 15.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% 0.0% 3 5.3% 22 44.0% 2 20.0% 91.7% 8.3% 24 40.0% 6 40.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% 0.0% 6 10.2% 16 55.2% 1 50.0% 94.1% 5.9% 17 54.8% Literacy Strand Basic 3 37.5% 4 66.7% 42.9% 57.1% 7 50.0% 8 40.0% 4 10.8% 66.7% 33.3% 12 21.1% 14 28.0% 2 20.0% 87.5% 12.5% 16 26.7% 4 26.7% 9 20.5% 30.8% 69.2% 13 22.0% 10 34.5% 1 50.0% 90.9% 9.1% 11 35.5% Proficient 1 12.5% 2 33.3% 33.3% 66.7% 3 21.4% 8 40.0% 25 67.6% 24.2% 75.8% 33 57.9% 14 28.0% 6 60.0% 70.0% 30.0% 20 33.3% 4 26.7% 26 59.1% 13.3% 86.7% 30 50.8% 3 10.3% 0 0.0% 100.0% 0.0% 3 9.7% Advanced 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 1 5.0% 8 21.6% 11.1% 88.9% 9 15.8% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 1 6.7% 9 20.5% 10.0% 90.0% 10 16.9% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% Total 8 6 14 20 37 57 50 10 60 15 44 59 29 2 31 Page 3 of 8 DR311_p1 Strands by FAR (Revised).xIs SCHOOL Geyer Springs Elementary Gibbs Magnet Elementary Jefferson Elementary M.L. King Magnet Elementary Mabelvale Elementary Little Rock \u0026lt;ol District SY 99-2000 Bench Mark Data General Population Math and Literacy Strands by Free and Reduced Lunch Enrollment as of 11 -8-2000 Receiving FAR Yes No Total Yes No Total Yes No Total Yes No Total Yes No Total Below Basic 9 26.5% 2 25.0% 81.8% 18.2% 11 26.2% 2 14.3% 0 0.0% 100.0% 0.0% 2 4.9% 4 40.0% 4 8.5% 50.0% 50.0% 8 14.0% 8 36.4% 4 10.3% 66.7% 33.3% 12 19.7% 21 65.6% 6 35.3% 77.8% 22.2% 27 55.1% Literacy Strand Basic 16 47.1% 2 25.0% 88.9% 11.1% 18 42.9% 9 64.3% 4 14.8% 69.2% 30.8% 13 31.7% 4 40.0% 5 10.6% 44.4% 55.6% 9 15.8% 5 22.7% 19 48.7% 20.8% 79.2% 24 39.3% 7 21.9% 5 29.4% 58.3% 41.7% 12 24.5% Proficient 9 26.5% 3 37.5% 75.0% 25.0% 12 28.6% 3 21.4% 21 77.8% 12.5% 87.5% 24 58.5% 2 20.0% 33 70.2% 5.7% 94.3% 35 61.4% 9 40.9% 16 41.0% 36.0% 64.0% 25 41.0% 4 12.5% 5 29.4% 44.4% 55.6% 9 18.4% Advanced 0 0.0% 1 12.5% 0.0% 100.0% 1 2.4% 0 0.0% 2 7.4% 0.0% 100.0% 2 4.9% 0 0.0% 5 10.6% 0.0% 100.0% 5 8.8% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 1 5.9% 0.0% 100.0% 1 2.0% Total 34 8 42 14 27 41 10 47 57 22 39 61 32 17 49 Page 4 of 8 DR311_01 Strands by FAR (Revised).xlsSCHOOL McDermott Elementary Meadowcliff Elementary Mitchell Incentive Elementary Otter Creek Elementary Pulaski Heights Elementary Little Rock ool District SY 99-2000 BenchMark Data General Population Math and Literacy Strands by Free and Reduced Lunch Enrollment as of 11-8-2000 Receiving FAR Yes No Total Yes No Total Yes No Total Yes No Total Yes No Total Below Basic 4 22.2% 2 8.3% 66.7% 33.3% 6 14.3% 7 25.0% 2 25.0% 77.8% 22.2% 9 25.0% 18 56.3% 5 45.5% 78.3% 21.7\u0026lt; 23 53.5% 3 25.0% 1 2.9% 75.0% 25.0% 4 8.5% 4 20.0% 1 3.1% 80.0% 20.0% 5 9.6% Literacy Strand Basic 7 38.9% 5 20.8% 58.3% 41.7% 12 28.6% 11 39.3% 4 50.0% 73.3% 26.7% 15 41.7% 13 40.6% 1 9.1% 92.9% 7.1% 14 32.6% 7 58.3% 12 34.3% 36.8% 63.2% 19 40.4% 6 30.0% 3 9.4% 66.7% 33.3% 9 17.3% Proficient 7 38.9% 16 66.7% 30.4% 69.6% 23 54.8% 10 35.7% 2 25.0% 83.3% 16.7% 12 33.3% 1 3.1% 4 36.4% 20.0% 80.0% 5 11.6% 2 16.7% 19 54.3% 9.5% 90.5% 21 44.7% 10 50.0% 27 84.4% 27.0% 73.0% 37 71.2% Advanced 0 0.0% 1 4.2% 0.0% 100.0% 1 2.4% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 1 9.1% 0.0% 100.0% 1 2.3% 0 0.0% 3 8.6% 0.0% 100.0% 3 6.4% 0 0.0% 1 3.1% 0.0% 100.0% 1 1.9% Page 5 of 8 Total 18 24 42 28 8 36 32 11 43 12 35 47 20 32 52 DR311_01 Strands by FAR (Revisedj xls SCHOOL Rightsell Incentive Elementary Rockefeller Incentive Elementary Romine Interdistrict Elementary Terry Elementary Wakefield Elementary Little Rock ool District SY 99-2000 BenchMark Data General Population Math and Literacy Strands by Free and Reduced Lunch Enrollment as of 11-8-2000 Receiving FAR Yes No Total Yes No Total Yes No Total Yes No Total Yes No Total Below Basic 3 15.0% 1 7.1% 75.0% 25.0% 4 11.8% 7 22.6% 0 0.0% 100.0% 0.0% 7 14.3% 4 28.6% 0 0.0% 100.0% 0.0% 4 16.7% 5 35.7% 5 8.3% 50.0% 50.0% 10 13.5% 18 72.0% 5 62.5% 78.3% 21.7% 23 69.7% Literacy Strand Basic 10 50.0% 6 42.9% 62.5% 37.5% 16 47.1% 9 29.0% 3 16.7% 75.0% 25.0% 12 24.5% 7 50.0% 3 30.0% 70.0% 30.0% 10 41.7% 3 21.4% 17 28.3% 15.0% 85.0% 20 27.0% 5 20.0% 1 12.5% 83.3% 16.7% 6 18.2% Proficient 7 35.0% 7 50.0% 50.0% 50.0% 14 41.2% 15 48.4% 15 83.3% 50.0% 50.0% 30 61.2% 3 21.4% 6 60.0% 33.3% 66.7% 9 37.5% 6 42.9% 37 61.7% 14.0% 86.0% 43 58.1% 2 8.0% 2 25.0% 50.0% 50.0% 4 12.1% Advanced 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 1 10.0% 0.0% 100.0% 1 4.2% 0 0.0% 1 1.7% 0.0% 100.0% 1 1.4% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% Total 20 14 34 31 18 49 14 10 24 14 60 74 25 8 33 Page 6 of 8 DR311^01 Strands by FAR (Revised).xIs SCHOOL Washington Magnet Elementary Watson Elementary Western Hills Elementary Williams Magnet Elementary Wilson Elementary Little Rock \u0026lt;0! District SY 99-2000 BenchMark Data General Population Math and Literacy Strands by Free and Reduced Lunch Enrollment as of 11-8-2000 Receiving FAR Yes No Total Yes No Total Yes No Total Yes No Total Yes No Total Below Basic 15 34.1% 9 26.5% 62.5% 37.5% 24 30.8% 16 45.7% 4 28.6% 80.0% 20.0% 20 40.8% 9 36.0% 2 13.3% 81.8% 18.2% 11 27.5% 8 29.6% 2 3.2% 80.0% 20.0% 10 11.2% 15 62.5% 4 30.8% 78.9% 21.1% 19 51.4% Literacy Strand Basic 16 36.4% 9 26.5% 64.0% 36.0% 25 32.1% 11 31.4% 3 21.4% 78.6% 21.4% 14 28.6% 5 20.0% 3 20.0% 62.5% 37.5% 8 20.0% 14 51.9% 14 22.6% 50.0% 50.0% 28 31.5% 4 16.7% 4 30.8% 50.0% 50.0% 8 21.6% Proficient 13 29.5% 16 47.1% 44.8% 55.2% 29 37.2% 8 22.9% 7 50.0% 53.3% 46.7% 15 30.6% 11 44.0% 10 66.7% 52.4% 47.6% 21 52.5% 4 14.8% 45 72.6% 8.2% 91.8% 49 55.1% 5 20.8% 5 38.5% 50.0% 50.0% 10 27.0% Advanced 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% 1 3.7% 1 1.6% 50.0% 50.0% 2 2.2% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% Total 44 34 78 35 14 49 25 15 40 27 62 89 24 13 37 Page 7 of 8 DR311_01 Strands by FAR (Revised).xIsLittle Rock School District SY 99-2000 Bench Mark Data General Population Math and Literacy Strands by Free and Reduced Lunch Enrollment as of 11-8-2000 SCHOOL Receiving FAR Yes Below Basic Literacy Strand Basic Proficient Advanced Total Woodruff Elementary No 8 32.0% 3 42.9% 72.7% 27.3% 7 28.0% 3 42,9% 70.0% 30.0% 10 40.0% 1 14.3% 90.9% 9.1% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 25 7 Total 11 34.4% 10 31.3% 11 34.4% 0 0.0% 32 Page 8 of 8 DR311_01 Strands by FAR (Revised).xlsLRSD VIDEO PRESENTATIONS ON PUBLIC ACCESS CHANNEL (NOTE\nall of these videos ran many times. Each one was advertised in advance.) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. \"A Status Report: Student Achievement in Little Rock and a Design for Improved Performance\" - Public Hearing (1 hour, 30 minutes - 1997) \"Living The Vision\" - Dr. Camine reviews LRSD priorities of the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan for the staff and community. Topics covered include Technology, Campus Leadership, Financial plans. Academic Indicators and Results. (30 minutes - 1997) \"Revised Desegregation and Education Plan\" - The entire transcript was aired. (25 minutes - 1998) \"Brown Bag Meetings\" - Middle School Parent Update meetings. Three separate meetings were taped and aired. (1998) \"Ninth Grade High School Transition Meeting\" - for students and parents. (1998) \"A Positive Learning Environment\" - An in-depth documentary which looked at all aspects of the LRSD Desegregation and Education Plan as it effected students, parents and the community. (32 minutes - 1999) \"Total Quality Schools\" - An information video about the exciting educational climate within the Little Rock School District. Topics included Campus Leadership, Smart Start, Campus Accountability, Community/Business involvement and the plan's relationship to our children. (15 minutes - 1999) The New LRSD Comprehensive Assessment Plan\" - A complete look at LRSDs new assessment program that is measuring the district's increasing student achievement. (1 hour - 2000) \"LRSD Board Workshop on Capital Needs\" - (March, 2000) \"Covenant For the Future: Affirming the Covenant\" - A study of the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. Aimed at both staff and the community. Features interviews with Dr. Terrance Roberts and Dr. Steven Ross, consultants for the LRSD. (20 minutes - 2001) \"Little Rock Comprehensive Partnership for Mathematics and Science Achievement\" - Highlights the changes in LRSD's science and math studies based on the National Science Foundation grant that provides opportunity for all students. (10 minutes - 2001)13. Math Family Night\" - Parent information meeting on changes in LRSD's mathematics program. (One hour, 30 minutes - 2001) 14. \"School-Community Partnerships: Making Them Work for Youth\" - Public workshop featuring Karen Pittman. (One hour, 45 minutes - 2001) 15. Numerous video bulletin board announcements and news announcements. 16. Calendar announcements. M 17. 18. LRSD-TV airs videos daily on a multitude of district events. Past videos have included student, teacher and volunteer award programs, choir and dance performances, educational guests speakers, African-American history programs, bus information videos, registration information videos, student handbook information video, anti-drug and smoking programs, peer mediation videos, videos featuring aspects of the Gifted and Talented program such as Quiz Bowl competition and the Fifth Grade Challenge, videos highlighting magnet school programs such as the Piano education program and foreign language, LRSD news conferences, the Vital Links program. Employee Convocation meetings since 1997, PTA Luncheon since 1998, Sydney Moncrief video on the importance of staying in school. Superintendents meeting with youth on gun violence, holiday programs, the University School college credit program at Hall High School, Cultural Fairs, Science Fairs, an in-depth look at the ESL \"Newcomers\" program, LRSD Reading programs, the Central High School Commemoration Ceremony, the Stephen's Elementary Groundbreaking and Dedication Ceremonies, National Merit Scholarship presentations, and \"live\" Little Rock School District Board Meetings. LRSD-TV also airs many national satellite staff\" development programs such as advanced training for Exceptional Children teachers. Other examples of satellite programs include educational programs on science from HEB Televentures, Shamu-TV, the Prince William School District education series, Kennedy Center Arts Series and Department of Education teleconferences on subjects such as Spanish Speaking Families in Your Community, Federal Student Aid and Preschools as well as the monthly Satellite Town Meeting which covers a variety of education topics. We also are licensed to air NASA- TV and we offer their daily education feed for teachers and air live coverage of Space Shuttle missions and other NASA events. F\n\\HOME\\FENDLEY\\LRSD 2001\\des-unitary-videos-suniinary.wpd Page 2 of 2Clay Fendley - RE: Compliance Mtg. request Page 1 From: To: Date: Subject: \"BABBS, JUNIOUS\" \u0026lt;JCBABBS@STUASN.LRSD.K12.AR.US\u0026gt; \"VANN, SUELLEN\" \u0026lt;sevann@lrsdadm.lrsd.k12.ar.us\u0026gt; 7/16/01 1:55PM RE: Compliance Mtg. request We appear to look good here. . . THANKS for your timely response Junious C. Babbs, Jr jcbabbs@stuasn.lrsd.k12.ar.us Little Rock School District \u0026gt; \u0026gt; From: \u0026gt; Sent: \u0026gt; To: Original Message- \u0026gt; Subject: VANN, SUELLEN Monday, July 16, 2001 1:44 PM BABBS, JUNIOUS FW: Compliance Mtg. request \u0026gt; \u0026gt; Here is Dennis' list of videos that may relate to the areas in which you \u0026gt; are interested: \u0026gt; \u0026gt; Suellen \u0026gt; \u0026gt; \u0026gt; From: \u0026gt; Sent: \u0026gt;To: Original Message- \u0026gt; Subject: WALKER, DENNIS Monday, July 16, 2001 11:45 AM VANN, SUELLEN Compliance Mtg. request \u0026gt; \u0026gt; Here's what I came up with this morning. \u0026gt; \u0026gt; Dennis Walker \u0026gt; LRSD-TV \u0026gt; \u0026gt; LRSD video presentations relating to LRSD desegregation and education \u0026gt; plans, staff development, community information and \"good news\" events: \u0026gt; \u0026gt; (NOTE - All of these videos ran many times. Each one was advertised in \u0026gt; advance.) \u0026gt; \u0026gt; * \"A Status Report: Student Achievement in Little Rock and a Design \u0026gt; for Improved Performance\" - Public Hearing (1 hour, 30 minutes - 1997) \"Living The Vision\" - Dr. Carnine reviews LRSD priorities of the \u0026gt; Revised Desegregation and Education Plan for the staff and community. \u0026gt; Topics covered include Technology, Campus Leadership, Financial plans, \u0026gt; Academic Indicators and Results. (30 minutes - 1997) \"Revised Desegregation and Education Plan\" - The entire transcript \u0026gt; was aired. (25 minutes - 1998) \u0026gt; * \"Brown Bag Meetings\" - Middle School Parent Update meetings. 3 \u0026gt; separate meetings were taped and aired. (1998) \u0026gt; * \"Ninth Grade High School Transition Meeting\" - for students and \u0026gt; parents. (1998) \u0026gt; * \"A Positive Learning Environment\" - An in-depth documentary which \u0026gt; looked at all aspects of the LRSD Desegregation and Education Plan as it \u0026gt; effected students, parents and the community. (32 minutes - 1999) \u0026gt; * \"Total Quality Schools\" - An information video about the excitingClay Fendley - RE: Compliance Mtg. request \u0026lt; Ik Page 21 \u0026gt; educational climate within the Little Rock School District. Topics \u0026gt; included Campus Leadership, Smart Start, Campus Accountability, \u0026gt; Community/Business involvement and the plan's relationship to our \u0026gt; children. (15 minutes - 1999) \u0026gt; * \"The New LRSD Comprehensive Assessment Plan\" - A complete look at \u0026gt; LRSDs new assessment program that is measuring the districts increasing \u0026gt; student achievement. (1 hour - 2000) \u0026gt; * \u0026gt; * \"LRSD Board Workshop on Capital Needs\" - (March, 2000) \"Covenant For the Future: Affirming the Covenant\" - A study of the \u0026gt; Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. Aimed at both staff and the \u0026gt; community. Features interviews with Dr. Terrance Roberts and Dr. Steven \u0026gt; Ross, consultants for the LRSD. (20 minutes - 2001) \u0026gt; * \"Little Rock Comprehensive Partnership for Mathematics and Science \u0026gt; Achievement\" - Highlights the changes in LRSDs science and math studies \u0026gt; based on the National Science Foundation grant that provides opportunity \u0026gt; for all students. (10 minutes - 2001) \u0026gt; * \"Math Family Night\" - Parent information meeting on changes in \u0026gt; LRSDs mathematics program. (One hour, 30 minutes - 2001) \u0026gt; * \"School-Community Partnerships: Making Them Work for Youth\" - Public \u0026gt; workshop featuring Karen Pittman. (One hour, 45 minutes - 2001) Numerous video bulletin board announcements and news announcements. \u0026gt; Calendar announcements. \u0026gt; * LRSD-TV airs videos daily on a multitude of district events. Past \u0026gt; videos have included student, teacher and volunteer award programs, choir \u0026gt; and dance performances, educational guests speakers, African-American \u0026gt; history programs, bus information videos, registration information videos, \u0026gt; student handbook information video, anti-drug and smoking programs, peer \u0026gt; mediation videos, videos featuring aspects of the Gifted and Talented \u0026gt; program such as Quiz Bowl competition and the Fifth Grade Challenge, \u0026gt; videos highlighting magnet school programs such as the Piano education \u0026gt; program and foreign language, LRSD news conferences, the Vital Links \u0026gt; program. Employee Convocation meetings since 1997, PTA Luncheon since \u0026gt; 1998, Sydney Moncrief video on the importance of staying in school, \u0026gt; Superintendents meeting with youth on gun violence, holiday programs, the \u0026gt; University School college credit program at Hall High School, Cultural \u0026gt; Fairs, Science Fairs, an in-depth look at the ESL \"Newcomers\" program, \u0026gt; LRSD Reading programs, the Central High School Commemoration Ceremony, the \u0026gt; Stephen's Elementary Groundbreaking and Dedication Ceremonies, National \u0026gt; Merit Scholarship presentations, and \"live\" Little Rock School District \u0026gt; Board Meetings. \u0026gt; * LRSD-TV also airs many national satellite staff development programs \u0026gt; such as advanced training for Exceptional Children teachers. Other \u0026gt; examples of satellite programs include educational programs on science \u0026gt; from HEB Televentures, Shamu-TV, the Prince William School District \u0026gt; education series, Kennedy Center Arts Series and Department of Education \u0026gt; teleconferences on subjects such as Spanish Speaking Families in Your \u0026gt; Community, Federal Student Aid and Preschools as well as the monthly \u0026gt; Satellite Town Meeting which covers a variety of education topics. We \u0026gt; also are licensed to air NASA-TV and we offer their daily education feed \u0026gt; for teachers and air live coverage of Space Shuttle missions and other \u0026gt; NASA events. CC: \"LESLEY, BONNIE\" \u0026lt;BALESLE@IRC.LRSD.K12.AR.US\u0026gt;, \"GADBERRY, BRADY L\" \u0026lt;blgadbe@lrsdadm.lrsd.k12.ar.us\u0026gt;, \"STEWART, DONALD M.\" \u0026lt;DMSTEWA@lrsdadm.lrsd.k12.ar.us\u0026gt;, \"MITCHELL, SADIE\" \u0026lt;SMMitch@lrsdadm.lrsd.k12.ar.us\u0026gt;, \"'fendley@fec.net\"' \u0026lt;fendley@fec.net\u0026gt;Little Rock School District  Wednesday, September 15, 1999  Advertising Supplement  Arkansas Democrat Gazette  Pagel HELPmG STUDErfTS SUCCEED /I Progress Report on the little Rock School District Lf  1998-99 School Year /1 Superintendent's Message to the Community INSIDE: tudent Achievement... Page 2 \\ssessment........... \\ccompllshments . ....... Page 3 .. Pages 4-5 pd/cafors of Success .... Page 6 afe Schools -.. ooking Ahead Page 7 Pages The Little Rock School District is different! Were on the cutting edge of the nations education reform movement, and our teaching/learning model has the potential to revolutionize elementary and secondary education. Educators in Little Rock School District schools are making major efforts to ensure that we produce graduates who are not only technically skilled, but are also adaptable, systematic thinkers who possess critical-reasoning and information-handling skills. The factors that make the difference in Little Rock are the vision of academic excellence, a commitment to quality, infusion of technology, a global perspective and a dynamic learning environment. Successful,students are the result of the right mix of involved and supportive parents, challenging classes, caring faculty, staff and principals, and a positive learning environment. Were changing the way education operates because we know the educational process rnust be responsive to the ever-changing needs of society. We are working closely with business and industry as well as institutions of higher education to ensure that our students are fully prepared for the present as well as for the future. Our ultimate goal is student success! - Les Carnine Wednesday, September 15, 1999. Advertising Supplement to the Arkansas Democrat (J^azette Little Rock School District  Wednesday, September 15, 1999  Advertising Supplement  Arkansas Democrat Gazette  Page 2 Student Achievement Where the rubber meets the road Is my child learning? That is one of the most important questions that a parent can ask. In the Little Rock School District (LRSD) we focus on student achievement. The three major elements to a sound education are curriculum, instruction and assessment. During the 1998-99 school year the LRSD began the process of strengthening the curriculum, improving professional development for teachers, and revising its assessment program. Factors Guiding LRSD Changes I State Law-Act 999 was enacted L this year which establishes the \u0026gt; I Arkansas Comprehensive Testing, I Assessment and Accountability , p Prograin fACTAAP). Tins law * requires each school to develop ' academic improvernent plans, with special emphasis in elementary schools on reading, writing and mathematics. Act 769 requires a report on each schools performance to be sent to all parents. Strategic Plan Parents may wonder why the district is making these changes. Teachers, administrators, parents and other community residents spent thousands of hours studying the districts schools, academic programs and test results. That intensive review led to the development of the LRSD Strategic Plan which guides all aspects of the districts operations. Revised Desegregation Plan Additionally, the district prepared and received court approval of a Revised Desegregation and Education Plan which allows more flexibility in making changes to improve educational programs and makes schools more accountable for student performance. TT i Curriculum-the acor J detnic lessotts that we teach , [ children. Hye state reqidres 9 I i certain courses, and the district has additional requirements. IntStrtiClion-ibe manner . in wbtcfo the turrtcUlum is ^-4 tatight. Ibis includes teadi- L ing techniques and relies * heavily on ongoing profes- sional development for teachers. LRSD Revised Desegregation and Education Plan- Approved in the spring of1998, tifis plan outlines specific obligations related to such practices as hiring, discipline, academic progress and allocation of resources. 4 I State Law The Arkansas Legislature passed several laws relating to school improvement which specifically require that each school be held accountable for student achievement. These laws t 1 I Asscsstnant-iests and other petformance mea-^ sures used to determine'\"^ ------------------- J. - whether students are learn- ' infr the academic lessons LRSD Strategic Plan^fhis blueprint addresses all aspects of district/school operations including technology, instruction, hiring, finances and parent and community involvement. require each school to report its performance to parents and the community. Science and Matbematics Grant The $3.2 million National Science Foundation Grant that the LRSD received provides funds to initiate a new mathematics and science curriculum. The grant provides strict guidelines on student performance and assessment which fit well with the curriculum and assessment changes the district has adopted. AU of these developments have guided the changes that we are making, said Les Camine, LRSD superintendent. Were determined that we will increase student achievement by refocusing all of our efforts toward proven, research-based programs.Little Rock SchooLDistrict  Wednesday, September 15, 1999  Advertising Supplement  Arkansas Democrat Gazette  Page 3 Assessment is one yardstick... The following graph illustrates that the growth rate in lathematics from third grade through tenth grade losely mirrors the national growth rate. The same is :ue for reading growth. Growth in Math Scaled Scores, 1998-99 Stanford Achievement Test, Ninth Edition B 700 600 500 I 400 S 300 200 100 0 M ^5 gfeb Grades: scores National scores 3 566.6 580 5 624.4 637 7 652.6 667 LRSD = 8 662.9 675 National = 10 685.9 686 Growth in Reading Scaled Scores, 1998-99 Stanford Achievement Test, Ninth Edition (A 700 600 500 o 6^ 400 o qj a 300 200 100 0 Grades: LRSD scores National scores 1 3 584.5 592 5 639.4 649 7 661.1 674 LRSD= i^yaswMTO 8 675.2 689 National = 10 689.3 703 Through the 1998-99 school year the LRSD used the Stanford Achievement Test, Ninth Edition (SAT-9), as its primary tool to measure student performance and to determine how our students are doing compared with other students around the nation who took the same test. The Arkansas Department of Education requires students to take this test during September each year. Assistant Superintendent Kathy Lease says, We use the scaled scores from the SAT-9 across grades to see whether our students are learning at the same rate as students elsewhere. The good news is that our students are learning at a pace similar to that of students around the country. Unfortunately, many of our students begin school already behind their counterparts. Some students arrive for kindergarten without having had much previous instructionsuch as learning colors, shapes and letters. This means we must create positive ways for these students to catch up to their peers. W Changes in .elssessmenl This year the LSSD began to an ' improved assessment program-Benchmark exams, end-of-coufse exams and the Stanford Achievement Test (SAT-^. am, required by the Arkansas Depart- meat of Education. In addition to these assessment tools, the LRSD  will test students using ctiterion-refereuced tests, or GRTsi A GRT i designed to measure whether students are attaining the state and district standards. Hw does tiie ORT differ from the SAT-9? The SAT- 9 compares our students to what is called a norm- referenced group of Students across the nation who have taken the same tesp It does not take into ac- . count differing academic requirements between districts and states. By using both criteriQn-referenced tests and norm-referenced testsj. we can ensure.that students are learning what we pect them to learn based on district and state standards, but also measure their progress compared to students elsewhere. ILittle Rock School District  Wednesday, S^tember 15, 1999  Mvertising Supplement  Arkansas DemocratJ3azeHe _^ Paae_4 Accomplishments are another Individual Recognition ERSD Science Specialist Receives Presidential Award Science Specialist Rene Carson was selected as a Presidential Awardee for Excellence in Mathematics and Science Teaching in Secondary Education. Carsons exceptional talent, leadership abilities and dedication as a teacher were recognized by this prestigious award which included a National Science Foundation grant of $7,500. Caruth Wins Advanced Placement Award Phyllis Caruth, Advanced Placement (AP) Statistics teacher at Central, won the 1999 Advanced Placement Special Recognition Award. The program is sponsored by The College Board and recognizes outstanding contributions to institutional excellence through the AP Program. Caruth was one of 14 regional recipients from the states of Arkansas, Oklahoma, New Mexico and Texas. Caruth was lauded for having started the statistics class at Central and for the ongoing student success on the AP exams as a result of her instruction. Phillips Receives Prudential Certificate of Excellence Kyle Phillips, a student at Henderson Health Sciences Magnet Junior High, recently received a state-level Certificate of Excellence from the 1999 Prudential Spirit of Community Awards. Phillips was one of a small number of young people across the country to be recognized with this honor. The award is presented annually by the Prudential Insurance Company of America in partnership with the National Association of Secondary School Principals to honor young people for outstanding community service. 2 Central Seniors Named 99 Presidential Scholars Seniors Ross Glotzbach and Maribeth Mock of Central High School were selected by the Commission on Presidential Scholars as 1999 Presidential Scholars. This is the first time that both state scholars were selected from the same district or school. The Scholars were invited to National Recognition Week in Washington in June. A high point of the week was the presentation of ^e Presidential Scholars medallion to each Scholar, commemorating their designation. The selected Scholars all demonstrated leadership, scholarship, contribution to school and community, and exceptional accomplishments in the arts, sciences and other fields of interest. Teachers, Students Named Stephens Award Winners Four Little Rock students and six teachers received the 1999 Stephens Award, which provides $5,000 scholarships to outstanding students and similar cash awards to selected instructors. Teacher winners were Mary Cameron Becker, English teacher. Central High\nNancy L. Wilson, art teacher, Central High\nRobert Langford Palmer, social studies teacher, J.A. Fair High\nChristine Green, U.S. History teacher. Hall High\nPatricia A. Bilbrey, mathematics teacher, McClellan High\nDebbie Howell, drama teacher. Parkview Arts and Sciences Magnet High. Student winners were Thomas Deere, Central High\nRoss Glotzbach, Central High\nBrandy M. Gray, McClellan High\nand Paul Mendoza, Parkview Arts and Sciences Magnet High School. The scholarships and awards are provided by The City Education Trust, formed in 1985 by Jackson T. Stephens and the late W.R. Witt Stephens.  'I-  I Counselor of the Year Kay Coleman, a counselor at Henderson, was selected as the Counselor of the Year by the Central Region of the Arkansas School Counselors Association. was named the top business education the M-cCkUan High School BusinasiMarketing Department program in the nation bj the American Vocational Association, the onlj secondary school to be a repeat winner. Dyson, Purvis Receive State Art Educators Awards Carol Dyson, Art Specialist at Williams Basic Skills Magnet Elementary, was recently selected Elementary Art Educator of the Year by the Arkansas Art Education Association. Dyson has taught in Little Rock for 25 years. Susan Turner Purvis recently received the Governors Arts in Education Award for Excellence. Purvis has served as Arts Specialist at Gibbs Foreign Languages/International Studies Magnet Elementary for 12 years. She also is a past recipient of the State Elementary Art Teacher of the Year award. 1999 Duke Talent Search Recognition Twelve seventh grade students from the LRSD were recognized by the Duke Talent Search Program at state and grand ceremonies this summer. The students and their schools were: Anna Miller, Sunny Patel, Joel Simon, Abigail Wheeler, and Ke Xu of Dunbar Magnet Jr. High\nWilliam Barlow and Braden Cato from Forest Heights Jr. High\nMelissa Allen of Mabelvale Jr. High\nand Tyler Simpson, Emily Soderberg, Raksha Soora and John Spivey from Mann Magnet Jr. High. Donaldson Named GiftediTalented Administrator of the Year Mable Donaldson, LRSD Gifted Programs Supervisor, was selected as the Gifted/Talented Administrator of the Year by the Arkansas Association of Gifted Education Administrators. With apologies to the countless othet students and staff ipho excelled in 199d-99, space limitations prevent the listing of everyone who deserves recognition^ We: tnke pride in the success... and achievements of the entire family. ,Little Rock School District * Wednesday, September 15,1999 * Advertising Supplement  Ari\u0026lt;ansas^Democrat Gazette, 5 24 LRSD Students Named National Merit Semifinalists\n7 Named National Achievement Semiflnalists Twenty-four LRSD students were named National Merit SemifinaL ists during the 19.98-99 school year. Seven LRSD students were named .. Invention Competition for 1998 sponsored by the U.S. Patent Model National Achievement Semifinalists. These students competed for scholarships from the National Merit Scholarship Corporation and its business sponsors. The National Merit Semifinalists were Sarah Argue, Lauren Autrey, Laura Beaton, Lauren Carter. John Chamberlin, Thomas Deere, Amanda Dees, Evin Demirel, Ross Glotzbach, Elizabeth Holland, Shannon Keith, Patrick Kennedy, Katherine Laning, Maribeth Mock, Cynthia Nance, Courtney Nosari, Catherine Oswald, Carter Price, Kelli Roark, Elayna Wells and Christopher Wheat frpm Central High School\nand Mark Burling, Jami Harrison and Mark Thiedeman from Parkview Magnet High School. The National Achievement-Semifinalists were John Biddle, Kelsey Bobo, Kellie Hughes, Christopher Wheat and Victona Wilder from Central High school\nBaraka Smith from Hall High .School\nand Kasey Miller ftoracParkview Magnet High-School. Carver Student Named National Invention Winner Rebecca Ruth Stanley, a student at Carver Elementary, was named Fourth Grade National Winner in the National invent America! Student Foundation. Stanley received a U.S. Savings Bond and a certificate. Stanley's invention was a special bar code reader designed to be used by the visually impaired in grocery stores to determine product types and prices\nit can also be used in the home to determine ingredients as well as nutritional information. LRSD Odyssey of the Mind Teams State Champs Dunbars RatiOMetric Structure and Horace Manns Environmental Challenge Odyssey of the Mind (OM) teams took first place in state competition and travelled to Knoicville for world competition. Dunbars team members were coaches Julie Western and Joe Hodges and students Melissa Clark, Kate Donahue, Kristine Philips, Lex Sullivan, Whitney Tidwell, Ben Wells, and Blake Wicker. Manns team members were coach Donna Duerr and students Melissa Bandy, Ted Fleming, Sarah Hundley, Molly McGowan, Frederick McKindra, Rachel Seidenschnur and Sara Beth Wyatt. Competition SibbsArt Students Featured in Pentel Art Exhibition Seven students from Gibbs Magnet Elementary placed in the top 10 in the recent International Childrens Art Exhibition sponsored by entel. The students were among 800 U.S. youths who were honored n the competition for young artisans. The Gibbs students are\nFirst place Third place Third place Fourth place Fourth place Fourth place Sixth place Pentel Award Bronze Award Bronze Award Pentel Award Silver Award Gold Award Pentel Award Casey Wilson Rian Harper Nathan Kinne Christina Garrett Nicholas Jones Dustyn Wilson Carlea Angeles Speech/Debate Winners Little Rock Central captured top honors this year at the Arkansas Speech and Communication Association state tournament with five arst place awards. Central senior Clarke Tucker was voted championship speaker. Tucker and Central senior Chris Wheat also won the debate championship. Other first place winners were Sarah Tucker, Novice Speaker\nCandice Smith, Oratory\nJosh Rateliff and David Martinous, Duet Improvisational Acting. Dunbar Math Counts Team Places First in State The Dunbar MathCounts team won first place in the State MathCounts Competition held in March. The team members were teacher/coach Lenora Murray and students Toby Huang, Daniel Liu (captain), Ben Wells and Ke Xu. Huang, who came in second overall, made the national team, and Murray served as the official coach for the national team that competed in Washington. Athletics I State Championships LRSD schools showed they can compete athletically as well as academically in 1998-99. Three high school teams brought home state trophies as the LRSD established dominance in sports. Top-ranked teams were: J.A. Fair Track Team J.A. Fair Football Team Central High Basketball Team C\u0026amp;tral Student \\Pins 1999 Speedo:High Point Award Central High Junior Neka Mabry won the prestigious Speedo southeast Junior Championships High Point Award in Match. Mabrys time of 56.03 seconds in the backstroke race set a new national Speedo championship record, and she qualified for the 1999 Phillips 66 National Championships. At the Arkansas High School Swimming and Diving Championship Meet in February, Mabry set a State Record, a Pool Record, made All State, and was named an All American. McClellan Student Named Gatorade Athlete of the Year Tiffany Gunn of McClellan High School was featured by the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette as super at 16 for her success in track and field competition. Tiffany was Gatorade Athlete of the Year in 1998, Arkansas Girls Track and Field Athlete of the Year, featured in Sports Illustrated's October issue and aspires to participate'in the 2004 Olympics. She has maintained a 4.00 grade point average since first grade.Little Rock School District * Wednesday, Septemberl 5,1999 * Advertising Supplement * Arkansas Democrat Gazette * Page 6 I Indicators of Success... what are the measures of school success in addition to the use of test scores? There are many indicators that provide evidence of the success of our teachers and students. Among them are graduation rates, the number of scholarships accepted (as opposed to offered, which would increase the illustrated figures), and participation in activities. These statistics help to paint the picture of success among the Little Rock public schools. ^00% ^9/0,5 58%, s' \u0026amp; 9B% f 5*%/ f rfi  I 6' 90% ^996-97 s A ^998.9g i Flash: Community and Busitiess Suppoi^ Increa^ts Volunteer hotti'S in schools inct'eas4d'-:'27%'4n 199S-99, itp fMn 187i590 tit 1997-08 fh23Z5llt'J- At saMe tinte, the nuntherof Phrtnei's in Education shoieed a 21%  * increase, from ISO hi 1997-98 to 204 til 199^-90. In addition to classroom lessons, students benefit greatly from exposure to extracurricular activities. Students who are active in athletics and clubs feel more a part of the student body and generally reach higher levels of academic achievement. During the past year greater numbers of LRSD students have participated in athletic activities, with participation growing 28% in just one year. The transition to middle schools in 1999-2000 includes the encouragement of students to join their peers in such activities. Little Rock School Disirict  Wednesday, September 15,1999  Advertising Supplement  Arkansas Democrat Gazette  Page? crnd of Safe Schools V 1000 o _ 900 800 Dropout Comparison 3 o \"S -o E 2  Q 700 600 500 h H One of the tremendous success stories in the LRSD during the 1998-99 school year w'as the opening of the Accelerated Learning Center. This program allows high school students who are close to completion of their graduation requirements to attend a high- tech, self-paced classroom. They are able to move through the required material at a pace with which they are comfortable. Many 1997-98 1998-99 students who completed their graduation requirements at the Accelerated Learning Center said they probably would have dropped out of school had it not been for this program. The district dropout rate dechned 24.5% in 1998-99. Some of this reduction can be credited to the Alternative Learning Centers and intervention programs the district has established. Principals, counselors and teachers have made reduction of the dropout rate a high priority. Reportable Discipline Sanctions Students wi h Bji State /aut, schools are required to report specified offenses. These include acts involving drugs, assaults, alcohol, weapons or gangs. Only 2.4% of our students were involved in these types of offenses\nthis means, of course, that almost 93% of our students did not have a reportable offense. reportable discipline sanctions Students with no reportable discipline sanctions 0 25% ________ 50% % erf Students 75% 100% I fe How is the district maintaining safe schools?   Teachers receive classroom management training.  Securi^ officers provide a presence in oil secondarj) batldings. H,  Student handbook provides rules and sanctions\nteachers review this with students the first week - ' ' '   ^1-- ** of school and during the scpoolyear. *  School resource ojficers who are certified police officers work with secondary students and provide classroom education.  Alternative learningCenters provide a nontraditional setting for students with behavior problems. j?*- :-O\u0026gt;Little Rock School District  Wednesday, September 15, 1999  Advertising Supplement  Arkansas Democrat Gazette  Page 8 Looking Ahead I Parents, teachers, administrators, volunteers and business partners recognize the accom- : plishments of the past year, but there is much left to do. Some of the major areas the district will continue to address are: Revised Desegregation \u0026amp; Education Plan Campus Leadership Review and revise administrative regulations Refine and continue to implement compliance plan Technology Develop collective responsibility and incentive system : Provide training arid technical assistance Organize school cluster coordinating committee Revise principals evaluation system it Provide staff training Continue support and utilization of secondary labs Secondary direct grade entry/grade book Upgrade instructional/assessment software Operations Review management study recommendations  Seek approval of millage campaign Review constmction, maintenance and housekeeping Consider uses for Mitchell and Garland schools Prepare for opening of new Stephens School Special thanks to all the LRSD staff, students, parents and volunteers who made 1998-99 a wonderful school yeah. Instruction Implement K-12 curriculum standards and benchmarks Adopt/implement an instructional framework Provide new English-as-a-Second language services/programs Deliver professional development Prepafe/implement new program evaluation plan Enhance parent involvement programs Implement new assessment program 1998-99 LRSD Fast Facts Student population: 24,886 More than half the certified staff hold masters degrees More than half of our students qualify for the free/reduced lunch program  The LRSD 1998-99 budget was more than $170 millionr J1EW5 ViEW5 novEinsE? 2000 For and about employees of the Little Rock School District K\n, itP.' itSs' S IS 1 ( * * , A LRSD Wins Quality Award The Little Rock School District received the Arkansas Quality Commitment Award at the sixth annual Arkansas Quality Award banquet which was held at the Statehouse Convention Center on October 26. Governor Mike Huckabee hosted the awards ceremony which was attended by approximately 500 business and civic leaders from throughout the !: is^ r tsi? al \u0026lt;'t j t. [WijS.! -a state. The Arkansas Quality Awards are presented annually to Arkansas organizations that are committed to implementing and maintaining a high standard of quality in their business operations. During the ceremony Governor Huckabee recognized 33 organizations in four levels, listed in order of qualifications: the Governor's Quality Award, the Quality Achievement Award, the Quality Commitment Award and the Quality Interest Award. LRSD received the Quality Interest Award in 1999. The Arkansas Quality Award program was created through a special partnership between the State of Arkansas and the private business community. I Ml ^1i Deputy Commissioner William Halter of the U. S. Social Security Administration visited Little Rock on October 6 and announced that the local Disability Administration Office would donate computers to several LRSD schools. Students from Rightsell Academy, Wilson Elementary and Mabelvale Middle School attended the press conference at which Commissioner Halter made the donation to the district. School board president Dr. Katherine Mitchell accepts the Quality Commitment Award from Governor Mike Huckabee. giw Wh\u0026lt;f-s 8 \u0026lt;5^  0  Online pre-calculus ^^pi^lmic^^^ila^l a 'vi'-''' ^iW\n. 2 o Ef Public school hero at Bale Wb District Receives Carnegie Corporation Grant New Futures for Youth, Inc., in partnership with the Little Rock School District, has been named one often winners of the first phase of Carnegie Corporation of New York's Schools for a New Society Competition, a $40 million long-term initiative focused on urban high schools. The aim of Schools for a New Society is to support urban school district/community partnerships committed to citywide reform in secondary schools. The nine other winning cities are Boston, Chattanooga, Houston, Indianapolis, Portland (OR), Providence, Sacramento, San Diego and Worcester (MA). A team representing LRSD, New Futures for Youth and the Little Rock business community traveled to Washington, DC, to meet with other Carnegie grantees. The team members who represented Little Rock were Dr. Leslie Carnine, Dr. Marian Lacey, Linda Austin, Rudolph Howard, Robert Palmer, Xavier Heard, Bobby Roberts, Don Crary and Paulette Mabry. Ms. Mabry has been named project coordinator, and she will (Carnegie, page 3) Si'.....v..... 0 ^ales ofjhe Crypt\" ^-AlsGoniyyiisitsilbcalischools 'ii'w- if'-S' # W\n5^i? ^li SsOnline Instruction Available at Fair About 25 students at J.A. Fair  igh School are beta testing a web-based pre-calculus program that has been developed by the University of Arkansas at Little Rock. At a recent press conference UALR Chancellor Charles Hathaway described how the Instructor Lee Wilder helps students with their online studies. District to Pairticipate In \\ ijAr'V 'I 'kJ A \u0026lt; Cun^calam Dev^opment ..  -------------- 1,1 . ---------. cpmmittee''lf^4f' ritenion- Several,LRSD employees havetbeen-.invited to participate as metf^dri'fiirthe^developmenbofrthi^,A. rJk, ansas curriculum an().cr/teiaonyififj __________ _ Tk__________ S' A 1 ref^dp^d^sessipent Those enjplp^^es and th^aommittees pnWhi^s^hQY^ ^^i^Beth^rnold^ Pulaski He^ghS^EIemeni^ School, Social S^u^ies ,'' ^Mion ^Easter, Central High Seboolf 'Endtof Course' Reading 'I* j '^.^iohette Finney, IRC, Science Te)(tbookSelectionl'^ j, '^antisbeh, Chicot Elementar^i^hobl, Fourth Crack'Re^ing I^Le^l^nnedy Central High Schdol, Plannmg A^vrsory,Comrnittee'^^,^^^  kaiherjne Wright Knight, I jl^awrfili^od^ Bias Review 'll. !W on-line, individualized course was developed by the College of Information Science and Systems Engineering and the College of Science and Mathematics, with input from science teachers from the central Arkansas area. Dr. Hathaway emphasized the importance of students entering college ready for calculus instruction. Studies show that only one-third of high school students nationwide take a pre-calculus course (1998 figures). Instructor Lee Wilder is available to assist students who need help as they tackle real-world problems on the computer. This project was grant funded and is expected to expand beyond the pilot high schools. ( 54W Parkvi^w High En^^f^urse^-iRe^^^'^. McDermott Principal Is a Real Sweetie What our principals won't do for their kids! McDermott Elementary principal Virginia Ashley was so proud of the efforts of her students that it didn't matter to her if they didn't quite make their goal of $10,000 during a school fundraiser. When the final figure turned out to be $9,250, she honored her promise and let the kids turn her into an ice cream sundae anyway! And honor her promise she didtwice. Once was for the younger students, pre-k through 2nd grade, and the second time was for 3rd through Sth grade students. Amid chants of \"Ashley! Ashley!\", the intrepid principal emerged from her office ready for anything. Messy and gooey it was, with all that whipped cream and chocolate syrup, but Mrs. Ashley didn't seem to mind. She even applauded the students' efforts after the crowning glorya cherrywas placed on her head. This is not your average schoolbus... A The C-Span Schoolbus recently visited M. L. King Magnet Elementary School, and King students eagerly waited their turn to take a guided tour through the custom-made vehicle that travels all across the country. The bus, one of two the cable network operates, contains a full television studio capable of broadcasting live programs via satellite. The bus was in Little Rock for coverage of political campaigns and rallies. Your Information Source LRSD's web address has changed! www.lrsd.org Also, don't forget to check out our newly redesigned cable channel on Comcast Channel 4! You can continue to watch special events and get information such as announcements, school events and programs, class reunions and more. J page 2 News \u0026amp; Views www.Irsd.org Supenntendents Message by Dr. Leslie Carnine Enrollment haS grown for the third cbnsecUtive year: in the Little Rock School District. This is an indicator that the,community \u0026lt; . supports what we are doing in our\nschools. At the same time'we have t test results from both the state , AH ethnic groups improved on this benchmark exams and the Stanford 9 which indicate that our curriculum changes and intensive professional \u0026lt; development are paying off. \\  The grade 4 literacy results show that 25 of 35 elementary schools, improved in the numbers of-students who scored in the Proficient and Advanced categories\n.\nIn 12 schools at least 50% of the students were ' in the Proficient and Advanced Xt categories. All ethnic groups improved 'i  on this assessment .Sixteen schools had double-digit gains in student? in the Proficient/AdVanced levels. The grade 4 math results were   past year and the degree to which V elementary schools that improved in curricula and new the numbers ooff students who ssccoorreedd instructional in the Proficient and Advanced categories. Inifour schools at least\n6O%:of thestudents were in the. Proficient and Advanced categories. assessment -Twelve schools .had . , double-digitgains in students in the 'Proficient/Advanced levels On both the hteracy and math exams at grade -^.ohr oyerall growth ' in students who were m the Proficient/ Advanced categories outpaced the i. states growth in these categories I  encourage schools to celebrate gams that studSiits made and 1\no use these .results to Continue.to improve There is a correlation between fJiose schoofs that improved anif the amount of professional-development thattheir teachers participated in'during the strategies.:\n/ .\nWeareupdat-mg the technology plan m collaboration with the schools and.our technology consultants. -We will, soon begin to see new mvestments of technology in the schools. We .j.. , also have awarded several contracts for architects, to begin working with Campus Leadership Teams on scopes of work for buildmg renovations^ and repairs. This work will be phased with the most critical needs addressed first. The communitys approval of the millage mcrease will soon .translate into real assets at the schools. . ?\n' ' /Please enjoy a safe and Joyous holiday season also positive. There were 23 of 35 teachers have implemented the new Newly elected school board member Tony Rose (Zone 6J ivas sivorn in at the September board meeting. Also sworn in were reelected board members Carnegie Grant, continued from page 1 ludy Magness (Zone 3) and Sue Strickland (Zone 7). The Board also elected officers for the year\nDr. Katherine Mitchell was chosen as president, Baker Kurrus as vice president and ludy Magness as secretary. 1 ' coordinate community forums and small group discussions as well as provide support to the high school planning teams. Little Rock and the other nine cities are each awarded a 15-month planning grant of up to $250,000. Upon completion of their school reform plans, five of the 10 cities will be invited into the second phase of the initiative that will fund implementation of the plans. The Carnegie Corporation anticipates committing $40 million over five years for this endeavor. The momentum for high school reform in Little Rock is grounded in the district's recent successful middle school changes undertaken as a partnership between the school district and New Futures for Youth, a non-profit organization that works to improve outcomes for youth. \"Every student in America is entitled to attend a good high school in order to be prepared for the world of the 21st century,\" says Vartan Gregorian, president of Carnegie Corporation of New York. \"No student can be written off.\" Study circle groups will meet beginning early in 2001. Locations will be announced in December and will be posted on the district's web page (www.lrsd.org) and on Comcast Channel 4, LRSD's cable channel. If you are interested in participating or would like additional information, contact Diane Vibhakar at 372-1415. page 3 News \u0026amp; Views www.lrsd.org  United Way Contributions Increase Over 1999 Twenty district schools and departments achieved 80% or better participation in the 2000-2001 United Way fundraising campaign. The total amount of money raised was $59,067, an 8% increase from last year's total of $54,615. The total number of donors also increased from 1,442 last year to 1,852 this year. The amount of the contributions averaged out to $31.89 per donor, but when averaged among all district employees, the number drops down to $15.30. Our United Way campaign chairman Dr. Richard Hurley expresses his thanks and gratitude to all who contributed, especially to those areas that showed an increase in participation or Highest $ Amount - Secondary Highest $ Amount - Elementary . Highest $ per Donor - Secondary Highest $ per Donor - Elementary Highest $ per Employee - Secondary Highest $ per Employee - Elementary Greatest Increase in # of Donors - Secondary Greatest Increase in # of Donors - Elementary Greatest Increase in # of Donors - Non-School, Greatest Increase in $ Amount - Secondary Greatest Increase'in $ Amount - Elementary Greatest Increase in $ Amount - Non-School Central Franklin Eehttal Dodd Central Dodd Dunbar Chicot , Annex Central , Dodd Annex contribution from the previous year. The schools/departments listed in the box above received special recognition at the October school board meeting for their exceptional United Way drive efforts. In addition, the following schools and departments were recognized for achieving 100% participation in the United Way campaign: Badgett, Baseline, Brady, Chicot, Cloverdale, Franklin, McDermott, Meadowcliff, Stephens, Western Hills, Wilson, Woodruff, Administration Annex, IRC and Elementary Charter School. Race for the Cure a Success for All LRSD Staff Involved A record 440 entrants from the Little Rock School District (the largest entry from any school district in the state) ran or walked in the 2000 Race for the Cure, the annual event that has become synonymous with breast cancer awareness and research. The October 14 event marked LRSD's 3\"^ year of participation, and it was the district's best year yet: 440 participants and nearly $7,000 raised for the Susan G. Komen Breast Cancer Foundation. y-w aai TO' \u0026amp;'  w \u0026lt;vwrr  . :L'.*   he,, \"It's already become a tradition that we participate in this event,'/ y said Mary Lou Kahler, co-chair of LRSD's team, \"and the numbers get bigger every year.\" Ms. Kahler and Katherine Snyder did an extraordinary job of organizing the participants for this year's race. All race participants received a commemorative T-shirt, and the men who participated by cheering received hats and megaphones. \"The one thing we would wish for next year is that more men would ) hl S-fl come forward and cheer everyone on from the sidelines,\" said Ms. Kahler, who is already looking forward to next year's event. Teacher to Be A Charter Member of ISSA Vicki Stroud Gonterman, International Studies Specialist at Gibbs Foreign Languages/ International Studies Magnet Elementary, has been invited to be a charter member of the Advisory Council of the International Studies School Association (ISSA). The ISSA's first-ever Advisory Summit was held at the Center for Teaching International Relations (CTIR) at the University of Denver in October. Ms. Gonterman received her international studies training from CTIR and was one of the first 10 Arkansas teachers to be qualified to teach a global studies course. Gibbs was the first international studies school in the state and has utilized CTIR resources since it became an international magnet school 14 years ago. page 4 News \u0026amp; Views www.lrsd.org 4 the setwofs Students Qualify for Duke University Program Twenty-five seventh grade students at Forest Heights Middle School have been invited to participate in the annual Talent Search conducted by Duke University. These students will be given the opportunity to complete the SAT 1 Reasoning Test or the ACT Assessment, tests designed for collegebound juniors and seniors. While far too difficult for the average seventh grader, these tests have proven to be helpful in discerning the abilities of seventh graders who are already scoring at or above the 95* percentile on other standardized achievement or aptitude tests. The goal of the Duke Talent Identification Program is to assist young people who have excellent Art Class Goes Global How is art shaped by different world cultures? Check out Francine Skotko's International Studies class at Dunbar International Studies Middle School to learn the answer. Ms. Skotko's Crafts of the World class is an electric, hands-on learning situation where students take a global look at art, often page 5 mathematical, verbal or general intellectual ability by providing them with information about their ability and about educational options that may be beneficial to them. The students are: Zachary Barlow, Jeffery Bemberg, Tyler Bjornson, Mary Chilcote, Michelle Drilling, Benjamin Elliott, Kelsey Gadberry, Michael Garland, Lauren Hickman, Richard Holthoff, Andrew King, Reid Mason, Megan McQueen, Spencer Myatt, Pamela Palmer, Taylor Pennington, Kendall Polansky, David Polett, Armando Prather, Molly Robertson, Kayla Schatzman, Renee Sniegocki, Melissa Thoma, Allen Thomas and Anthony D. White. through the eyes of special guests. One such guest was Dr. K. Ito from Japan who taught students the fundamentals of the ancient art of calligraphy during her visit. The class's next project was making onionskin paper by hand. Students were thrilled to create and then show off their handmade works of art. News \u0026amp; Views Bale Teacher Is a Hero Lisa Cunningham, a second grade teacher at Bale, has been chosen as one of four Arkansas Public School Heroes by Arkansas Times and the Arkansas Chapter of the National School Public Relations Association. Mrs. Cunningham is a Great Expectations trainer each year for the Summer Institutes, and she was nominated for this honor by a fellow Bale teacher. The October 27 issue of the Times featured all four heroes. The Times reported that Mrs. Cunningham is \"the walking ideal of Great Expectations, which holds that you have to demonstrate a belief in kids' ability to learn?ft Southwest Parent Serves on National Council Versie Burgess, parent of two students at Southwest Middle School, is Vice Chair for Region VI of the National Title 1 Parent Advisory Council, a federally funded program geared toward providing resources to children who are performing below expected levels in math and reading. The region includes Arkansas, Oklahoma, New Mexico, Louisiana and Texas. \"As a committed parent volunteer in the district I have spent many, many hours working for the benefit of all our children,\" she said. \"My plans are to always represent our district in a manner that uplifts us as committed to parent participation.\" www.lrsd.org Al Gore Visits Jefferson Mr. Core shakes hands outside Jefferson Elementary. a It's not every day that you get personal visit from the Vice President of the United States. But that's just what happened to Bob and Mollie Goza on October 24 when Al Gore made a campaign stop in Little Rock. Vice President Gore paid a visit to the Goza family that morning and accompanied them as they took their children Ian, 6, and Olivia, 8, to school at Jefferson Elementary. Mr. Gore stopped to talk to parents, neighbors, teachers and schoolchildren outside Jefferson Elementary before being whisked away to prepare for a campaign rally at Riverfront Park later in the morning. Efhanks Economics Cwrriculum at Terry Is a Winner Three teachers at Terry Elementary have been recognized for their outstanding economics curriculum. Terry teachers Yvette Thompson (Sth grade), Beth Samler (2nd grade) and Katie Leavitt (3rd grade) were selected to receive second place honors in the open category of the Fifth Annual Bessie B. Moore Arkansas Awards Program, operated through the Arkansas Council on Economic Education. The teachers' program, called Tiger Paws for Economics, teaches students at Terry the basic economics concepts, principles and understandings. An awards ceremony is planned for December 1. Ghosts Come Alive at Mt Holly Cemetery For the sixth year students at Parkview Arts \u0026amp; Science Magnet High School managed to bring the dead to life. Not literally, of course, but in spirit. These students were part of Tales of the Crypt, a dramatic performance at Little Rock's historic Mt. Holly Cemetery, where actual inhabitants of the cemetery come back to lifeif only for the length of the performance. Tales of the Ii 2^ Parkview students Ben Carson and Heather Sayre portray historical figures Jeff and Ina Davis. Crypt originated with the Arkansas Historic Preservation Program (an agency of the Department of Arkansas Heritage) when they approached Susan Taylor, the head of Parkview's English Department, about doing a program similar to one in Mississippi. With collaboration from Fred Boosey and Judy Goss of the Drama Department, the program has been an astounding success: the first year, about 400 people were expected to attend and over 1,000 showed up. This year over 2,100 visitors went to Mt. Holly to hear the stories of long-departed Arkansans buried at the cemetery. For this project each drama student chose a person, researched his or her life, and wrote a dramatic monologue that was true to that person's life and character. The \"inhabitants' of the cemetery appeared in period costume by their gravesites and told their life stories to visitors guided by student ushers. Debbie Manire, a parent of Parkview graduates, did costumes. The Parkview students who portrayed Mt. Holly's Mt. Holly inhabitant David O. Dodd, portrayed by Dustin Alford, relates his life story to visitors. residents were: Sean Addington, Dustin Alford, Chris Bonner, Collin Brunner, Ben Carson, Lindsey Clark, Rani Cooksey, Brock Elliott, Gillian Glasco, Rance Hairston, Corneshea Halton, Katie Holland, Dylan Jackson, Christie Kirtman, Tashana Lewis, Robert McCain, Haley Mote, Rachael Motley, Marianne Price, Rachel Ringlaben, Heather Sayre, Dori Scallet, Justin Scheider, Ryan Stone, Byron Thomas and Natalie Toon. page 6 News \u0026amp; Views www.lrsd.org NEWS \u0026amp; VIEWS O ND ABOUT LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT EMPLOYEESS June 2000 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Voters say Yes for kids LRSD schools to be renovated and updated and computers upgraded Where will the money go? Its full steam ahead now that voters approved a five-mill tax increase for the Little Rock School District May 9. Plans have already begun to secure architects and construction managers to start work on the many improvements and additions to school buildings throughout the district. Accountability is an important issue with the passage of the tax increase. LRSD superintendent Les Camine said the public will know where every cent of their tax money is going for renovations. A system is leing put into place to track the cost if building repairs and renovations for each school, said Camine. Final approval was given to a plan that fired up oivJd6. \" '^Groundhog Job Shadow Day 2000 set Little Rook, School District students labiate with ideas about the future This spring, studentsAroughput Ae district vi^ted job sites of their Partners luBducationob other businesses tl^t agreed to yidw'Students to observ^ professionals in the workplace? Obe of. the stops on the rareer tour for ^estem Hills Elementary was the % w Y-MocaTOiii Grill chefA^nn ''a. demonstration of hL\\ .iii gives Western Hilbi smdents, establishes a timetable for reporting to the board and the public on how the tax revenue is spent on specific projects at each school later this month. We pledge to work hard to justify the publics trust in the Little Rock School District. We plan to provide learning opportunities and environments of which our entire community can be proud, Camine stated. A grassroots effort helped to get the word out to voters about the millage. A Yes for Kids campaign headed by Senator John Riggs IV, Bishop Steven Arnold and Board President Sue Strickland took the issues of building improvements and technology requirements to the Macaroni GrilL Western Hills principal Scott 1 Morgan and peer helper k sponsor Barbara Blame 11, t:ook(12 studepts to-lhe IfMacaroni GnlLkitchento ' Watch employees prepare klneals and qbs^ryehow' kthey ^edlairick yewfor l^coolahg.Ac the end.othe tjtour students enjoyed a  ' deifcious lunch preparedly uiclxa fiery siiiik'r distilny. iW^sk\u0026amp; _e \\M /_ac_a_roLn i GtiUJcLh efe, voters. One of the points stressed throughout the campaign was that for the cost of a value meal at a fast' food restaurant, Little Rock families could help improve technology and building facilities at LRSD schools. We pledge to work hard to justify the publics trust in the Little Rock School District. We plan to provide learning opportunities and environments of which our entire community can be proud.\" - LRSD superintendent Leslie Camine Early polling sites around the city also helped voter turnout. Ballots could be cast as early as April 24 at seven District schools. Voters were not required to live in the areas of the school in order to vote. Continued - Millage, Page 3 Inside Teacher of the Year Awards Banquet Page 2 Superintendents Message Page 3 J. C. Penney Golden Rule Award Winners Page 5 Page 2 www.lrsd.kl 2.ar.us Teachers shine at annual banquet The LRSD held its second annual Teacher of the Year Banquet May 2. Teachers from every school in the district were recognized by their peers for displaying outstanding educational achievements at their schools and demonstrating a strong dedication to teaching. Superintendent Les Carnine bestowed 69 teachers with specially designed awards that featured a crystal apple mounted on a plaque that denoted their selection as teachers of the year. Eva Maeweather, a second grade teacher at Pulaski Heights Elementary, was chosen as the LRSD Teacher of the Year. Her name will be sent to the Arkansas Department of Education to be included in the state ceremony of the same name. Teachers of the Year and their schools are: News \u0026amp; Views LRSD Teacher of the Year Eva Moeweather Billy Watson 0/ P ulashi Heights Elem. Kathy Holladay Eula Willis Gracie Mays Susan Flowers Judith Pickering Sue Maddison Christine Green Gladystine Watson Ann Neely Linda Soderling Fred Boosey Michael Tidwell Christy Jackson Walter Marshaleck Barbara Brandon Tina Jones Karisa Nichols Lisa Fore Dianne Taylor Carolyn Slater Antoinette Turner Rosalie Patton Dee Ann Holt Lorraine Johnson Treia Cook Jacqueline Hogg Colleen Ferguson Carol Overton Ann McLennan Carthoria Johnson Brenda Thomas Janice Wolfe Mayrean Johnson Becky Dugan Central Central Central Central J. A. Fair J. A. Fair Hall Hall Hall McClellan Metropolitan Parkview Parkview Parkview ACC Cloverdale Middle Dunbar Dunbar Forest Heights Forest Heights Henderson Henderson Mabelvale Middle Mann Mann Pulaski Heights Middle Pulaski Heights Middle Southwest ALC Badgett Bale Baseline Booker Magnet Booker Magnet Brady Betty Glenn Holly House Jeannie Wells Nanette Galyean Willie Vinson Barbara Kennedy Margaret Isum Marietta Hunt Sherry Campbell Olivia Caddie Sabra Shelby Najmah Muhammad Susan Branch Sandra Hoff Mary Zies Ira Betton Becky Rucker Emogene James Kathy Goodwin Gladys Anthony Debbie Flore Eva Maeweather Barbara Fincher Peggy Tucker Louise Phillips Margo Rowe Hazel Hick Darrick W illiams Cleon Staggers Mary Lawson Shirley Thomas Lynn Haney Kimberly Reeves LanaTygart Carver Carver Chicot Chicot Cloverdale Elem. Dodd Fair Park Forest Park Franklin Fulbright Garland Geyer Springs Gibbs Jefferson King King Mabelvale Elem. McDermott Meadowcliff Mitchell Otter Creek Pulaski Heights Elem. Rightsell Rockefeller Romine Terry Wakefield Washington Washington Watson Western Hills Williams Wilson Woodruff News \u0026amp; Views www.lrsd.k12.ar.us Page 3 ^uperisitendents Message IT r eal1l1y-. hUava/eJ nrvoito nhva d many mIooEamUez nf/-ts  lVait/e'lVy K tqo^ Vk iQcTki db tahciknV annKdni tihtink about our year together. I suspect most of you could echo the same thought, and deservedly so. We set a course which many thought to be unachievable. I think most staff members recognized that we had to reach two goals very quickly for the District to be successful over time. First, we needed to make major improvement in the learning climate, and we have made major inroads in this area. We continue to be committed to moving to the next level which, I think, is attainable during the next year. All the numbers on student behavior and dropouts are headed in the right direction, and you should take great pride in what has been accomplished. The annual report will be dedicated to you and your efforts to succeed beyond anyones reasonable expectations. Second, it is hard to improve the learning climate when some of the physical conditions in which we work leave a lot to be desired. In some instances it has been antiquated heating and cooling systems, while in others its just the general appearance of neglect\nbut that should be changing noticeably over the next several months. The improvements will cause some logistical nightmares for all of us, and for that I apologize\nbut the end really will be in sight as we start this work. Your efforts this year have been very much appreciated, and special thanks to those who put in extra work on the campus leadership teams to establish a grassroots foundation for success. Finally, I am energized by what I am hearing and seeing that teachers are accomplishing. I know that this has been difficult year with assessment and particularly with the States accountability plan of assessment. I am convinced the efforts we are making now will be important ingredients of the recipe for instructional success. As you know, we have had a good measure of individual success, but universal student success has been elusive. We believe we are poised to see major learning improvement throughout the city, and that is the bottom line for this district. Please take the next few weeks to get some much deserved relaxation with friends and family. I know for some individuals that your schedules will make relaxation difficult. Knowing that, I hope you will take pride in your efforts and a those of your colleagues. yj' -A, lift uled'as a^ LRSD^T^ con Stanford.-,^ \n|20\ni|s\nd-nuference day,fbrthe {n^annoUnc\u0026amp;jdate \u0026lt; SimthbcumculurIte: spectalwrat Ca^epMagnet ElMeh tarybas^bee^amed'prmcipyat ' Righteelli Aw^^ke school yeaTi^$l^ynlLreplace^HaTon BrooWwh^^eran^S^nncip^I of the new Staph\u0026amp;s,Elbmentarj ScipSl Millage (yjnnnued from page 1 The $115 million school improvement bonds will provide: parking lot repair and additional parking spaces\nmore than 100 new classrooms\na new school in west Little Rock\nroof replacements\nadditional restrooms and restroom renovations\nheating and air condition replacement\nexpansion to libraries, gymnasiums and computer labs\nadditional math and science labs\nAmericans with Disabilities Act improvements\ntechnology labs\nincreased technology knowledge for teacher and student usage\nand asbestos removal where required. The millage applies to both real and personal property and to assessments of cats and homes. The average cost of the millage to property owners wiU be approximately $6 per month or $72 a year. L  ffil \u0026amp; Si I It passed! MiHage wacA pam guests in the LRSD Board Room react to news that voters approved the five-mill tax increase. NEWS \u0026amp; VIEWS Weiys \u0026amp; Views IS published for the faculty and staff of the Little  Rock School Distdct.:A/Givs (S Wews\nIS published by\nSuellen- Vanni,:\nDirector of Gommunications,, and \u0026lt; Melody Thomas, Gommunications Specialist. ' ? - ' Communications Office ' ipatlantSTnitmwiu be^finni laf at l^tt^M^cademyfof Cl Hellas beenScnng prSicipi this i yeaii atthe^^^F Srnith'ipi\n^OTisly taughFaFRi41tse41\u0026gt;^demY S^OV^. Markham .S Little Rock, AR 72201 (501)324^2020 .^i iX' ?! K Page 4 ^satight squeeze at LRSD high schools Before the millage goes into effect, huge growth spurts within the Little Rock School District prompted the School Board to take action. Last month the Board authorized the sale of $6.37 million in second-lien bonds to pay for alterations at seven schools and to complete payments on Stephens Elementary School, still under construction. Amost $3.3 million will be used to complete Stephens, which is scheduled to open inJanuary. The second-lien bonds -will fond design work, the purchase and installation of security cameras and land clearing for expanded parking at ^^Parlo/iew Magnet High School. www.lrs(i.k12.ar.us I, ^n.rr.rw.n.^^-.rrm\n!^. -tt.. All LRSD high schools experienced increases in enrollment when they started to house ninth grade in addition to its tenth through 12th grade population. Conditions are especially cramped in the school cafeterias. Part of the estimated $2.9 million cost of the campus projects will expand Central, Hall and Parkview high schools eating areas to ease overcrowding. As it stands today, Central High will receive $592,000\nJ. A Fair $88,000\nHall $295,000\nMcClellan $812,000\nParkview $280,000\nand Cloverdale Middle School $50,000. Repairs district-wide will require another $160,000. Contingency funds totalling more than $621,000 will be utilized to cover other short term needs that may develop before funding from the millage campaign starts. ViPS announces partners The Volunteers in Public Schools program depends heavily upon the cooperation and input of local businesses. ViPS officially recognizes and salutes the following businesses for being Partners In Education during the months of February, March, April and May: ! Mkgpet Middle King ]t Johnson Controls Inc - Bank of tBie Ozarks pS I B s News \u0026amp; Views CONGRATtlLATIONS^ to received specia^H recognitiort^i . -SANdV BECKER!\n.. ..t:TinT^^ A..1 '.U'\n.\nitRSD \"Auditor - .  Y AppointedRegio^li-Vice President-Elect, for the South Central Region fof the Associationrbf Government Accountants jSs h??i LENORA MURRAY Dunbar Magnet MidSle School Selected by the Arkanas Council of Teachers of Matheniatics as its \u0026gt;  , r T ^r '  Junior High Teacher af the Year LAURA BETH ARNOLD Pulaski H^t^ts E!eTneTitar)i Received the Outstanding Educators v Award at the state AGATE Conference \" SUZANNE DAVIS Middle School Reading Specialist Promoted to Director of English, V Language Arts and Foreign Language iw 'W BARBA^ BRANDON Cloverdale Middle School  Promoted to Middle School Teacher leader for Reading/Wnting Workshop iW 'luffiet King Jr 'S , \" Kidsporg'^Fun. \u0026amp;. Fitness *  Si'l-.iClub jCPiP ColnmunrcatiOns, Iifc WnAWw C^teif-.^'-.d ^enuinaA^to-Parts'(NA^A- College,/ t laylM 't. ^^^x^{O^fe}4?f^*'TT?\\elfl5ia\u0026lt;^y^i!|5:ATcademy4i ll^S^'Gareer Getifer  I'\u0026amp;^Eastem CoUj^eof* Health Vocations A-rkm'! is r'l 'Uv lla'^-\\er- Vb. liir A'^n.iin n I\n-F !7*a ^Wel W^O-4 }\u0026lt; i ) fl -M ELEANOR COLEMAN NEA 'Director forArkansas: ei w H r iC Recijjient of the National Associfltidn..^, for Equal Opportiinity Higher Educations Distinguished^Alujnni ' Award A'?. - ty. -.'A V\" \u0026gt;.'i ,i DONT FORGET THAT CONVOCATION WILL BE AT 8 A.M. ON AUGUST 14 AT THE STATEHOUSE CONVENTION CENTER! V i\n^ iro^ K Iff ^laaatutw j , 18\u0026amp;(\u0026amp;CjawULaM3l/!*kMMuS^__      The ViPS office is always on the lookout for volunteers throughout the District to assist as tutors, clerical help, male mentors and bilingual tutor/ GBw v- Sriff fi tiSsuj translators. Call ViPS today at 324-2297 for more information or to volunteer. rPage 5 www.lrsd.k12.ar.iis News \u0026amp; Views TA names Carnine states best Getting parents involved in their childrens schools is a top priority for Dr. Leslie Carnine. In his role as u. Dr. Leslie V. Carnine t superintendent for the Little Rock School District, Carnine makes it his business to create and maintain a uuser friendly environment at the schools. Because of his personal efforts to establish a strong, nurturing bond among schools, parents and their children, the Arkansas Parent Teacher Associa- ^^ion (ARPTA) selected Carnine as the ^Administrator of the Year. Carnine lOccepted the award during the 75* Annual PTA Convention held recently in Fort Smith. The award is the highest honor that can be given to an administrator, in part because parents must nominate the recipient. Some of the reasons listed by parents who participated in the nominating process were Carnines implementation of the return to neighborhood schools\nestablishment of LRSD middle schools\nand his implementation of the Campus Leadership School Management Teams. This award belongs to the citizens of Little Rock, Carnine said. I am accepting it on their behalf. Carnine also said Little Rock is on the move to be a leader in student achievement by involving parents and the community. The Little Rock School District received more than 38 percent of all the awards presented during the convention. Jefferson Elementary accepted the Outstanding Local PTA administrator Unit Award for their Students Targeted to Achieve Reading Successfully (STARS) program. As recipient of the award, Jefferson Elementary will represent Arkansas at the National PTA Convention in Chicago in June. Central High School won one of ARPTAs three One Thousand Members Plaques. Cloverdale Elementary was awarded the Oak Leaf Award for being the local PTA unit with the largest increase in membership. Essie Middleton, a parent recruiter for the LRSD, received an anniversary plaque in honor of her work with children statewide. More than 500 PTA leaders met over a two-day period to discuss issues affecting public education and the welfare of children. PTA delegates also had the opportunity to attend workshops and gather ideas to take back to their respective communities throughout the state. J. C. Penney Golden Rule Award Winners I Anne Mangan (left), principal at Rockefeller Elementary, poses with (center) Vivian Mangan, Rockefeller's PTA president and J. C. Penney Golden Rule Award Winner, and Beth Foti, a teacher of 4-year-olds at Rockefeller. Rockefeller, Booker and Woodruff elementary schools recently :cepted honors at the Golden Rule ards recognition ceremony in Little Rock. Vivian Mangan, Rockefellers PTA president, accepted the Crystal Award and a $1,000 check for the school for her volunteer efforts. Rebecca Merin, PTA president for Woodruff Elementary School, was selected as a finalist in the recognition and received $250 for the school. Booker Arts Magnet also received $250. Mangans win of the Crystal Award at the local level makes her automatically eligible for the j. C. Penney National Golden Rule Award. A win at the national event could mean a $10,000 contribution for the school. The annual award, which recognizes, honors and rewards volunteer service, is sponsored by J. C. Penney and the United Way Volunteer Center. A panel of community leaders selected five adult winners (group or individual), one youth winner 18 years or younger and one education award for an individual or group involved in K-12 education. fe life IpJj 1 iS Woodruff Elementary princ\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_310","title":"Compliance hearing exhibits, 82-96","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":["1998/2001"],"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 law and legislation","Education--Evaluation","Educational statistics"],"dcterms_title":["Compliance hearing exhibits, 82-96"],"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/310"],"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":["exhibition (associated concept)"],"dcterms_extent":["10 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\nExhibit 82 11/19/01 hearing LRSD 1999-2000 Senior High School Student Handbook LI230-90 LRSD V. PCSSD Unitary Status 1999-2000 Senior High School Student Handbook Students '^1 iM Parents ctx o. Little Rock School District 810 West Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 (501) 324-2000 J 1 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT STANDARDS OF CONDUCT FOR EMPLOYEES All teachers, administrators and other District employees are expected to demonstrate respect for the rights and privileges of students and each other. Educators within the school environment shall deal considerately and justly with each student and seek to resolve problems, including discipline, according to the law and school District policy. SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL STUDENT HANDBOOK Adult employees within the Little Rock School District will model appropriate behavior when interacting with students and with one another. Inappropriate behavior, including but not limited to, demeaning or sarcastic comments, discriminatory remarks or behavior, sexual harassment, disciplining of students in a manner that is contrary to Little Rock School District Policy or physical or verbal abuse, are unacceptable. Adult employees who choose to engage in this type of behavior are reminded that they shall be subject to appropriate administrative and/or legal action. FOR PARENTS AND VISITORS Parents and all visitors to school campuses are expected to model appropriate behavior. Inappropriate behavior including, but not limited to, verbal abuse, threats, physical abuse or possessing a weapon on School District property will not be tolerated. Visitors who choose to engage in this type of behavior shall be subject to appropriate administrative and/or legal action. STANDARDS OF CONDUCT ARE IMPLEMENTED SUCCESSFULLY WHEN THERE IS A TRUE UNDERSTANDING AND ACCEPTANCE OF HIGH EXPECTATIONS FOR EVERYONE WHO WORKS AND INTERACTS IN THE SCHOOL COMMUNITY. i I Little Rock School District Little Rock, Arkansas REVISED: MAY, 1999 I LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS Larry Berkley, President Sue Strickland Vice-President Dr. Katherine Mitchell, Secretary Dr. Michael Daugherty Mike Kumpuris Baker Kurrus Judy Magness Dr. Leslie Gamine Superintendent of Schools Jo Evelyn Elston, Director Pupil Services Department Dr. Linda Watson, Assistant Superintendent Student Discipline Little Rock School District 810 West Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201 I (501) 324-2000 FORM #900405 REVISED 5-99 ii Message from the Superintendent Dear Students and Parents: We are pleased to welcome you to the 1999-2000 school ye^ in the Little Rock -i. T ___ __ I Dcn cr'Vzv\\lc \\/mi havf*. msne \u0026lt;in Wc iUC UlCaovU vu wvxvviiiv jwv* vw vkw -------------- - School District (LRSD). In selecting one of the LRSD schools, you have made an important decision regardmg education. ..- ------- rv  ' educational choices available to you, and we - as teachers counselors, librarians. We realize that there are many nxdl VllUivvo avoiiowiv VW jwv*, /  4.^ nurses, aaddmmiinniissttrraattoorrss,, ccuusstioodaiiaannss caunidu uowthceir staff members - appreciate your confidence in our ability to serve your needs. The 1998-99 school year was an exceptional year for our students, parents and sStiaafilf. WWCe lmUdaUdCe gKrievaati soturiiMdevas iuni owvu*xr schools in d---e--v--e--lro ping and implementinTg new programs, reducing the number of dropouts and training our staff so we can better meet your expectations. Students and parents sshhoouulldd bbee ffaammiilliiaarr wwiitthh tthhee eexxppeeccttaattiioonnss lfoorr sscuh.uouol. a\u0026lt;nu.du classroom behavior, which are outlined in this handbook. Students should make good decisions about their actions and understand their responsibility for their actions. Students should also know the consequences of their actions. We ex^t our students to respect the rights of others students and staff members so that everyone can get along while at school. Rules and laws make it possible for people to live and work together. They provide ways to settle differences and to protect the property, privacy md well-being ot people. Laws and rules are made by people and can be changed by people. This book covers the rules that all LRSD students must follow and the disciplinary iniS DOOK UUVC1\u0026amp; uic I UI VO uittvwn - --------------- ------- n li' aaVctUioUnlOs tUhiaati lmliaajyr buev uWs.3eWd. tVoW ensure ,p--o--s--i-t-i-v--e-- --b--ehavior. This information will help students, parents, staff and admimstrators to solve problems in school. lis year we will introduce improved mathematics and reading instruction, Thiigsh tyoeiahro owde schools and middle schools. We believe each of these chafes wll neigh[X)rhood scnoois ana miuuic bviiuuia. uvuvw vmvh w . v increase student achievement for our students. We encourage partners to be active ppaarrtmneerrss iUnI ecduuucvaatuiungg uouuir students. -P--a-r--e-n--t--s- -a--r-e---i-n--v--i-t-e--d-- t-o- visit our schools and talk with teachers throughout the year\nparents also are urged to volunteer at their child(ren)s school. Help us to celebrate the new school year and the improvements we have made to benefit our students. Sincerely, Leslie V Gamine Superintendent of Schools iii r ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS This is the tenth edition of the Senior High School Student Handbook since its adoption by the Little Rock School District Board of Directors in 1980. The list of individuals who participated in this revision includes students, parents, school administrators, and community representatives is so extensive and the contributions so valuable that it seems most useful to identify groups and/or organizations rather than individuals. Discipline Overview................................... Expectations for Student Behavior........... Teacher Authority and Student Discipline Student Responsibilities and Rights......... 1 2 3 4 It is with a deep sense of appreciation and gratitude that we acknowledge the participation and contributions of the following groups\nelementary, secondary and central office administrators\nparents\nteachers\nstudents\nthe Classroom Teachers Association\nand the Joshua Intervenors. Student Conduct Code Consequences For Breaking Rules.............. Category 1 Offenses, Disciplinary Actions Category 2 Offenses, Disciplinary Actions Category 3 Offenses, Disciplinary Actions .9 10 17 26 NON-DISCRIMINATION POLICY Discrimination based on race, age, sex, religion, disability, or national origin is a violation of federal law. Policies prohibiting discrimination apply to all public school services, facilities, activities and programs including school disciplinary policies and practices. I It is a denial of equal education opportunities whenever any class, program, or activity is denied one student or groups of students which is available to other students without valid reason for students being treated differently. Students may not be assigned to or excluded from any class because of race, sex, religion, national origin, or disability. Verbal and/or written civil rights complaints should be directed to the Equity Assurance Officer, 810 West Markham or 324-2011. 1 iv Disciplinary Actions/Procedures General Rules....................................................... Definitions Sent Home and Exclusion from Class.. .. School Detention and Saturday School. . . In-school Suspension.................................. Short-term Suspension................................ Long-term Suspension................................ Expulsion....................................................... Disciplinary Probation................................ Physical Restraint......................................... Emergency Removal.................................... Make-up Work During Suspension......... Loss of Academic Credit - Expulsion . .. Parent/Guardian Suspension Notification Student/Parent Reinstatement Conference Due Process Procedures and District Procedural Guidelines Short-term Suspensions Due Process Procedures.................................................... Appeals Procedure..................................................................... Long-term Suspension/Expulsion Recommendations Due Process Procedures.................................................... Appeals Procedures..................................................................... Board Hearing Procedures....................................................... Readmission from Expulsion/Long-term Suspension................ V 30 30 31 32 32 32 33 33 34 34 35 35 35 35 37 38 39 41 43 45TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 I I Alternative Education Program Program Description............................................................ Placement in Alternative Learning Center....................... Accelerated Learning Center.............................................. Accelerated Learning Center Student Eligibility Criteria Attendance Policy and Procedures School Attendance Responsibilities. Student Leave..................................... Tardy Policy....................................... School-Sponsored Programs/Activities Students with Disabilities....................... Programming..................................... Procedural Safeguards....................... Least Restrictive Enviromnent......... Disciplinary Action............................ Child Nutrition Program......................... Health Services......................................... Medications......................................... Special Health Needs....................... Immunizations.................................. Athletic Examinations....................... Transportation Regulations for Students School District Insurance Policy........... Student Assistance Program.................... Extracurricular Activities Extracurricular Activities Eligibility Requirements Citizenship Grading Guidelines................................ Student Government.................................................. Student Organizations................................................ vi 47 48 49 50 52 56 57 59 60 60 61 61 63 64 65 65 66 66 66 68 69 71 73 76 76 ! Student Rights and Responsibilities Dress Code.......................................................... Visitors on Campus............................................ Student Records................................................... School Assignments............................................ Drugs, Smoking, and Drinking....................... First Amendment - Freedom of Speech/Press Fourth Amendment - Search and Seizure.... Interaction with the Police................................ Appendices Appendix 1. Appendix 2. Appendix 3. Appendix 4. Appendix 5. Community/School Responsibilities Principals', Teachers', Students'..................... Parents Bill of Rights and Responsibilities Student Promotion and Retention................ Home Schooling.............................................. Age of Majority.............................................. Little Rock Adult Education....................... Appendix 6. Questions and Answers of Interest to Parents and Students Resource Directory Index vii 78 94 80 85 86 87 91 93 .95 .97 100 101 102 103 104 .108 113I DISCIPLINE OVERVIEW The Little Rock School District Board of Directors, administration, and building staffs are committed to assuring a school climate that is appropriate for students to learn and which ensures the safety and welfare of all who live and work in the school environment. I Because education is vital to the lifelong success of students and to the growth and development of society, all members of the school coiimiunny, parents/guardians, school staff, and students must be part of this effort. Disciplinary measures are intended to help students understand their obligations to others in the school setting and the role of law, rules, and school district policies in meeting these obligations. Discipline shall be directed toward developing skills necessary for youth to. 1. solve problems effectively\n2. 3. 4. 5. 6. develop positive relationships with others\nbecome productive citizens\nrecognize when personal actions are interfering with the rights of others\nrespect the property and rights of others\nunderstand and appreciate other races and cultures\n7. develop a sense of responsibility for his/her actions and 8. an awareness of possible consequences\nsucceed in school\n9. develop self-discipline\nand 10. feel free to discuss particular problems and/or needs with administrators, teachers and/or counselors. 1EXPECTATIONS FOR STUDENT BEHAVIOR IN THE LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT TEACHER AUTHORITY AND STUDENT DISCIPLINE Board of Directors of the Little Rock School Dishict believes that The Little Rock School District Board of Directors, by its authority, establishes the following student behavioral expectations. It is the intent of the Little Rock School District Board of Directors in establishing these behavioral expectations that they be taught to students as a necessary part of the learning process. These behavioral expectations are important as desirable learning outcomes, as well as being critical to the students' academic development. The Board of Directors of the Little Rock bcnooi uisuici ucncvca teachers are critical to the learning process and further believes that teachers must have the authority necessary to manage their classrooms in a mann^er that results in an effective learning climate. However, the responsibility for establishing and maintaining a positive school climate must be shared by all\na manner students, teachers, administrators, support staff and parents. Consequent!)^ All students shall: (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) (G) show respect to others and show respect for the rights of others\nrespect the authority of all school personnel\nbehave in a courteous manner\nlearn and demonstrate acceptable social behavior\nbring to school and to individual classes the necessary materials (books, pencils, paper, assignments) and actively participate in the learning process\nuse appropriate personal hygiene habits and dress in a manner that is not disruptive to the learning environment\nand adhere to all school rules and regulations. SlUUCilko, Lvaviivio, ------------- * teachers, as well as all other school staff, must confront, intervene, and report inappropriate student behavior whenever and wherever it occurs within the school environment. Therefore, we, the Board of Directors, do hereby notify students and parents, through this statement, that we are authorizing teachers and other certified staff to use appropriate disciplin^ measures to the degree necessary to maintain order and school control. This authority includes but is not limited to the following: (A) the removal of certain privileges that are normally associated with school, such as recess, field trips, school assemblies, and participation in classroom/building activities designed as a reward for appropriate behavior. (B) the requirement of a conference with parents as a step in an overall plan of interventions\n(C) the referral to an administrator and an exclusion from class when the student's behavior is intolerable to the learning process\nand utilization of before/after school (D) the institution detention halls\n(E) the utilization of an in-school suspension where conditions permit\nand (F) the right to file criminal charges when physically verbally abused. or 3 2 LSTUDENT RESPONSIBILITIES AND RIGHTS STUDENT RESPONSIBILITIES AND RIGHTS IN THE LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT EVERY RIGHT HAS A RESPONSIBILITY YOU HAVE THE RESPONSIBILITY TO: The rights of students are protected by the U. S. Constitution and by the due process of law (pages 36-46 of this handbook). Everyone has the responsibility to exercise individual rights carefully to preserve the rights of others. Students are responsible for the manner in which they behave and must accept the consequences for any actions they commit outside the boundaries of acceptable behavior. YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO: 1. Get an education in the public school system I. Do your job by - coming to school every day. - coming to school on time. - doing your homework every day. - doing your schoolwork in class. - having needed supplies. - trying to learn as much as you can. 2. Show self-control by - obeying all school rules. - using acceptable language. - talking about being angry\nnot acting angry. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. - in a classroom where you can learn. - regardless of sex, religion, nationality or handicapping condition. Say what you think if you - speak respectfully to others. - are willing to hear what others think. - do not make someone want to fight. - do not hurt someone's feelings so much that he/she wants to change classes or schools to get away from you. Disagree if you - respect others' right to do so. - mind the adult in charge when told and discuss it later with a teacher, principal, or parent. Make a request to ask for a change if you - talk to your teacher or another adult in charge first. - talk to your principal next. Be free from search unless - a school official has reasonable grounds to believe that the search will reveal evidence that the student has violated or is violating the law or a school rule. Protect the privacy of your school records by - having them released outside the school with your parent's permission. Protect your property by - taking care of your school supplies and personal belongings. - reporting the loss of property to an adult at school. Defend yourself by - knowing what rules you are accused of breaking. - giving your side of the story. - knowing disciplinary procedures to be followed (due process). 4 - not having temper tantrums. - helping to care for books, materials, and other school property. 3. Respect school workers by - being polite to all adults in the building. - obeying the adults in charge. (If you disagree, obey first, and discuss it with your teacher, principal or parent later.) 4. Respect other students by - speaking kindly to other students. - avoiding name calling, racial slurs, and obscene language. - talking about problems with students without insulting them. - avoiding fights. - treating other students in a way that will not hurt them. - llCdllllg UUIVI ciuuv.ivu V. ---------- - - asking for help from school staff to solve problems so that you will be fair with others. 5. Respect the property of others by - not taking their possessions such as lunch, money, pencils, etc. - turning in any items you find to an adult in charge. 6. Avoid - selling anything to another student. - playing games for money. - forming or joining a group which would interfere with the rights of others. 5STUDENT RESPONSIBILITIES AND RIGHTS STUDENT RESPONSIBILITIES AND RIGHTS IN THE LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT EACH RIGHT HAS A RESPONSIBILITY Student has the right to: Student has the responsibility to: Students rights are the same as those extended to any other citizen of the United States of America. Individual rights must be exercised carefully to preserve the rights of others. Students are responsible for the manner in which they behave. For any actions committed outside the boundaries of acceptable behavior, students must accept the consequences. All students are protected by due process of law. Expect a fair and impartial hearing and due process in the event of disciplinary action Be willing to volunteer information and cooperate with school officials in disciplinary cases Student has the right to: Student has the responsibility to: Assist in making school rules Assume that until a rule is changed, modified, or repealed that it should be supported and obeyed Attend school in the District in which the parent or guardian resides Attend school daily and on time and participate fully in all classes Be represented by an active student government selected in a democratic process Attend school until high school graduation at public expense Obtain all the education and training necessary to become a contributing member of society Take an active part in student government by running for office, voting, and making his/her problem known to the administration through elected representatives Express his/her opinion verbally or in writing Express his/her opinions or ideas in a respecttul manner so as not to olfend or slander others Make decisions freely and act according to his/her beliefs Accept the consequences of his/her behavior and actions Expect that school will be a safe place for all students to learn Know all school rules and regulations that govern student behavior and conduct himself/herself in accordance with them Expect that no student shall be allowed to disrupt the educational process within the schools Demonstrate respect for the school and actively work to make it a better place in which to learn and develop Use the appeal process when he/she disagrees with a school official regarding disciplinary action or rules Be willing to abide by the decision reached through the appeal process Dress in a way to express his/her personality Meet standards of decency, safety, health and good taste in dress and appearance 7 6 LSTUDENT CONDUCT CODE STUDENT CONDUCT CODE Beware Conduct not specifically mentioned might also call for disciplinary action if it is disruptive or harms others. Student Conduct Code applies to\n1. School activities on LRSD property. 2. Travel on school buses. 3. School-sponsored activities away from school. 4. Incidents which occur on the way to school or from school. 5. Criminal offenses or other serious offenses committed away from school but which may affect the school climate (this code applies to these kinds of offenses regardless of whether or not a student has been convicted in court of law). 6. Students who knowingly violate security by leaving doors open (i.e., putting blocks, etc., in the door that will keep them from locking from the inside) which would threaten safety and security. CONSEQUENCES FOR BREAKING RULES Failure to follow school rules while on school property, including buses, at school-sponsored events, or on the way to and from school may result in disciplinary action. The Little Rock School District Board of Directors and the administration have approved the following actions to be used by school personnel in dealing with students who break school rules: - Reprimand (warning), - Referral to other school personnel, - Parent conferences, - Probation (loss of privileges). - Sent home (24 hours), - Short-term suspension (exclusion from school 3-11) days), - Long-term suspension (exclusion from school for 11 or more days), - Expulsion (school board action to exclude for the entire school year or permanently), and - Referral for prosecution under municipal, state, and federal laws that apply to the behavior. Principals or  other authorized district personnel will decide the type of action to be used. Breaking the rules is never good, but sSimS^it is more serious than other times. The offenses and penalties. divided into three categories. In Category 1, which accompany them, are divided into three categories, in i. building principals will decide the type of disciplinary action to be used as a positive means of correcting unacceptable behavior. Categories 2 and 3 those defined under city and state law as cnmmal in nature and Students have the right to a free public education, but they are responsible for complying with rules and regulations of the District and the reasonable instructions of district personnel. offenses are------ which may result in suspension or expulsion. In addition to these district rules, each local school or building principal will develop additional rules and regulations that govern student behavior and discipline at his/her building. However, these local rules and procedures must be consistent with those established by the Board and the Superintendent. 9 8STUDENT CONDUCT CODE STUDENT CONDUCT CODE 1999-2000 SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL STUDENT HANDBOOK Rulel: Academic Dishonesty OFFENSES CATEGORY 1 Category 1 Offenses are considered minor in nature and should be dealt with by school building administrators and staff in consultation with the students' parents/guardians. Cheating on tests or copying the work of another student shall not be tolerated. For all offenses involving academic assessments, the student will receive a grade of zero on the assessment or test. Rule 2: Normally, disciplinary actions for Category 1 Offenses will become progressively more severe if minor rule infractions persist. However, the administrator may choose a more severe penalty, at any time, based on the student's past disciplinary record and may reduce disciplinary sanctions when warranted. When sanctions are imposed on a student, the parent/guardian should be notified. Failure or Refusal to Follow Reasonable Directives of School Staff and/or School Rules and Regulations. Failure or refusal to obey reasonable instructions from teachers, administrators, instructional aides, or any other authorized school district employee is prohibited. Rule 3: Possible disciplinary actions for Category 1 Offenses include: Horseplay/Minor Altercations 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. Warning Student, staff, administrator, and/or parent conference In-school Suspension Before-, Lunch-or After-School Detention Sent-home Behavior Support Plans Saturday School School-site probation/contracts Peer/Conflict Mediation Counseling * School-site Service (must have parental consent) Horseplay is defined as the act of pushing, grabbing, patting, etc., another child, playfully and with care not to harm the recipient of the physical conduct. Horseplay is forbidden because it can result in accidental injury or hurt feelings that lead to minor altercations and/or fights. All participants engaged in horseplay and/or minor altercations will be disciplined according to the degree of involvement of each student. Students must participate in Peer Mediation. Rule 4: Harassment Behavior or actions that violate a person's right to privacy is prohibited. *Optional A. B. Annoyance - To pick at or tease on a continual basis. Communication - Non-solicited oral or written communication offensive to the recipient. 10 11STUDENT CONDUCT CODE STUDENT CONDUCT CODE Rule 5: Leaving School Grounds/Class Without Permission/ Skipping/Cutting Class No student is to leave class without permission. No student is to miss attending a class without the permission of a school administrator. No student is to leave the school campus after arrival without being checked out by a parent or without the approval of a school administrator. Rule 6: Failure to Serve Detention A student who fails to serve detention when directed to do by a school administrator or other authorized school personnel will be disciplined. Rule 7: Using Verbally Abusive Language, Obscene Gestures, or Fighting Words Rule 9: Possession of Mace, Chemical Agents, Multi-fingered Rings, Fireworks or Drug Paraphernalia or other chemical agents that may The possession of mace, pepper spray cause irritation or physical discomfort and/or bodily harm, by students, on school district property is prohibited and will be confiscated by school district personnel. The possession of multi-fingered rings, fireworks and drug paraphernalia is also prohibited on school district property and will be confiscated by school district personnel. Rule 10: Failure to Follow Bus Rules and Regulations All school rules and regulations governing student behavior apply to conduct on the school bus and at bus stops. If a student misbehaves on a bus or bus stop, he/she will receive a disciplinary sanction as it is outlined in the Student Handbook. Profanity, inflammatory or verbally abusive language or obscene gestures are prohibited in the school environment. NOT PERMITTED Rule 8: Smoking or Use of Smokeless Tobacco Smoking or possession of tobacco products of any kind on school district property or on the school bus is prohibited. First Offense\nSecond Offense: Enrollment in, and completion of a smoking cessation program. Enrollment documentation is required. Three (3) days in-school suspension for failure to complete the program. Enrollment in, and completion of a smoking cessation program. Enrollment documentation is required. Three (3) days in-school suspension and probation. Eating and drinking on the bus Smoking Scuffling or fighting Playing radios, tape players, or band instruments Yelling at anyone on the bus or outside Throwing paper or any object on the floor of bus Putting hands, arms, or head out windows Tampering with any of the bus safety devices Defacing any part of a bus NOTE: or outside the window DAMAGE TO ANY BUS EQUIPMENT WIL L BF PAID FOR BY THE OFFENDER. Note: A student found in possession of liters, liter lluids and/or flaininable products on school buses will be required to attend a student/ paicnt/ administrator conference within twenty-four hours of the incident. These rules are set to ensure that the students riding a bus in the Little Rock School District are transported as safely as possible and are, at the same time, provided a pleasant trip to their destination. 12 13 LSTUDENT CONDUCT CODE STUDENT CONDUCT CODE EXCEPTION TO MINIMUM PENALTIES MEETING THE BUS 1. A student who possesses liters, liter fluids and/or flammable products, smokes, uses any tobacco product, or uses any illegal drugs on a bus, who physically or verbally abuses a bus driver, or commits an act of vandalism causing damage to a bus shall not be permitted to ride a school bus in the Little Rock School District for a minimum of nine (9) weeks. In addition, the parents of a student who damages a school bus shall be required to reimburse the District for the cost of repairing the damage before the transportation privilege is restored. In the event of a second offense of any one of the above, a student shall be denied transportation for the remainder of the school term. 2. As a last resort, the Transportation Department may discontinue a bus route when a large number of students who ride the bus refuse to obey the regulations. If it becomes necessary for school personnel to consider eliminating a bus route because of continued misconduct by students, except in extreme circumstances, parents will be contacted by letter or telephone to inform them of the situation. A meeting with parents and school personnel will be arranged to discuss the circumstances and to consider possible solutions. 3. All regulations and sanctions pertaining to student behavior and safety that apply during the school day are applicable to smdents while they are riding buses. WARNING: Continued misbehavior on the school bus will result in the loss of transportation privileges, temporarily or for the remainder of the semester or school year. Be at the bus stop 10 minutes before the bus is scheduled to arrive. Do not arrive earlier than 10 minutes. Be on the proper side of the road while you wait, even if you must cross the street to enter the bus. Before crossing a street to enter the bus, wait until the bus has come to a complete stop and the driver has given you directions. Respect the property rights of others while waiting for the bus. Do not litter or make unnecessary noise. Do not gather under carports, or porches, or on lawns without permission. Stand back at least 10 feet from the bus stop and do not approach the bus until it has come to a complete stop and the door is opened. If you miss the bus, do not attempt to (1) ride another bus, (2) walk to or from school, or (3) hitchhike. GETTING ON AND OFF THE BUS Enter and leave the bus quickly and in an orderly manner. Do not enter or leave the school bus by the back door except in the case of an emergency or unless directed to do so by the driver. If you must cross the street after leaving the bus in the afternoon, go to a point on the shoulder of the street ten (10) feet in front of the bus and wait until the driver or student patrol has signaled you to cross. If you drop any object while leaving the bus, do not attempt to retrieve the object until the bus has left the scene and the street is clear of other vehicles. 14 15STUDENT CONDUCT CODE STUDENT CONDUCT CODE RIDING THE BUS Ride only the bus to which you are assigned. Visitors are not allowed to ride buses unless permission is first obtained from the Director of Transportation. Obey the instructions and directions of the driver. Students are under his/her supervision. The driver will submit a written report of all bus violations to the school principal. Do not distract the driver or disturb other riders on the bus. Students must remain reasonably quiet while on buses. Remain seated while the bus is in motion or stopped, except as the driver directs. Legs and feet should not be in the aisle. Keep all books, lunches, coats, etc., out of the aisle of the bus. Knives, firearms, sharp objects, clubs, or animals are never allowed on a school bus. Note: Repeated violations of Category 1 Offenses will result in the student being charged under Rule 21, Category 2. OFFENSES CATEGORY 2 Generally, disciplinary actions for violation of a Category 2 Offense will move progressively though a defined schedule at each rule violation. Violations of Category 2 rules that are felony offenses or serious vm^ misdemeanors will be reported to the Little Rock Police Department (LRPP). Rule 11: Assault An act initiated by one or more persons that purposely or recklessly creates apprehension of imminent physical injury to another person such as a threatening or menacing gesture is prohibited. Police notification is required by law. First Offense: Long-term suspension recommendation Second Offense\nExpulsion recommendation Rule 12: Battery of purposely and/or recklessly causing physical injury to another * .. . ... 1. .,1 _______LL------io rkVOtklKlfAri The act oi --------------------j ------- person by beating or striking either directly or with an object is prohibited. Police notification is required by law. First Offense: Long-term suspension recommendation Second Offense: Expulsion recommendation 16 17STUDENT CONDUCT CODE STUDENT CONDUCT CODE Rule 13: Theft/Theft by Receiving Rule 15: Fighting Rule 13 A. The act of burglary and/or larceny will not be tolerated. To steal school property or property belonging to another person or to knowingly receive stolen property is prohibited. Items stolen valued in excess of $500 will require police notification. First Offense\nSecond Offense\nSuspension: *6-10 days. Student and/or parent/ guardian shall be responsible for making full restitution for any property stolen and for all damages to property caused by the student's actions. Long-term suspension recommendation. Restitution or compensation is required. Mutual combat in which participants intentionally inflict bodily injury to another person is prohibited. All participants in a fight will be disciplined according to the degree of involvement of the participants. First Offense: Second Offense: Third Offense: Suspension\n4 days Suspension: 6-10 days and probation Long-term suspension recommendation Rule 16: Sexual Misconduct The six (6) day minimum rule may be reduced by an administrator upon demonstration of special circumstances. Rule 16 A. The act of deliberately showing sex organs in a public place shall Rule 13B. Items stolen/received that are valued in excess of $500 is prohibited. not be tolerated. First Offense: First Offense\nLong-term suspension recommendation Second Offense\nSuspension: 6 days and required counseling sessions with school counselor/administrator. Long-term suspension recommendation Second Offense\nExpulsion recommendation Rule 14: Gambling Rule 16 B. To engage in or attempt to engage in a sexual act with another person or to touch in a sexually offensive manner on District property or at a school-related activity is prohibited. Playing a game of chance for something of value shall not be tolerated. First Offense: Second Offense: Suspension: 6 days and probation Long-term suspension recommendation First Offense: Long-term suspension recommendation and required counseling sessions with school counsel or administrator. Second Offense: Expulsion recommendation 18 19STUDENT CONDUCT CODE STUDENT CONDUCT CODE Rule 17: The Use of Profanity Directed To or About a Staff Person in a Non-threatening Manner. The use of profanity or slander directed to or about a staff person in a nonthreatening manner shall not be tolerated. First Offense: Second Offense: Third Offense: Suspension: 4-6 days and Conflict Resolution with teacher, if possible. Suspension: 10 days and probation Long-term suspension recommendation Rule 18: False Alarm The act of pulling or calling in an alarm of a fire, bomb threat, or other emergency without a lawful purpose is prohibited. Fire Marshall and/or Police notification is required. Rule 20: Breaking and Entering/Vandalism The act of breaking into property belonging to another person or belonging to the school district is prohibited. Rule 20 A. The act of intentionally destroying property, cutting, defacing, or otherwise damaging property belonging to another person or belonging o the school district is prohibited. Also, intentionally destroying, modifying, or abusing computer hardware or software, and computer files or accessing the computer files of others is prohibited. The parent/guardian shall be responsible for all damages to property caused by his/her child. An \u0026gt; ! It______________________tri tnP OT reduce disciplinary sanctions according to the value of administrator may the property. First Offense: Suspension: 6-10 days, probation and full restitution for damages to or destruction of property. Second Offense: Long-term suspension recommendation and full restitution for damages to or destruction of property. First Offense: Long-term suspension recommendation Second Offense: Expulsion recommendation Rule 206- The act of breaking into property belonging to another person or belonging to the school district that is valued in excess of $500 is prohibited. First Offense: Long-term suspension recommendation Rule 19: Loitering Second Offense: Expulsion recommendation Lingering on the grounds of a school or within 100 feet of the school. without good cause and permission of school administrator, is prohibited.  .. II 1 . 1 .a.  _11_______1 MrAnoHlI No suspended and/or expelled student is allowed on District property, for any purpose, while serving a suspension/expulsion without the permission of an administrator. Students from another school campus or non-students are not allowed on school property during school hours without permission from a school official. Rule 21: Repeated Violation of Category 1 Offenses Rule 21 A. Habitual or repeated violation of school rules and regulations shall not be tolerated. First Offense: Suspension: 4 days First Offense: Second Offense: Third Offense: Suspension: 4 days Suspension: 6-10 days and probation Suspension: Long-term suspension recommendation Second Offense: Suspension: 6-10 days Third Offense: Long-term suspension recommendation 20 21STUDENT CONDUCT CODE STUDENT CONDUCT CODE Rule 24: Harassing Communications Rule 21B. Repeated Violation of Category 2 Offenses A student who repeatedly violates Category 2 Offenses will be disciplined. 1. 2. The violation of a single rule two (2) or more times, or The violation of a combination of rules two (2) or more times. Harassing communication on school property is prohibited. The use of the voice the telephone, telegraph, the mail. E-mail, Facsimile (Fax), or any other form of written, verbal, or electronic communication that intimidates, annoys, causes alarm, or threatens harm to another person, is deemed in violation of this rule. To knowingly allow another person to use a telephone or other electronic device First Offense\nSecond Offense: Suspension: 10 Days and probation Long-term suspension recommendation under your control for such a purpose, is a crime. To violate another person by using sexually explicit language or gestures is also prohibited. Rule 22: Disorderly Conduct/Hindering/lnterfering with a School Function The unauthorized use and abuse of the computer to visit sexually explicit web sites, or to access, store or distribute obscene pornographic or inappropnately suggestive material is prohibited. Inappropriate behavior that substantially disrupts or interferes with or is First Offense: Second Offense\nSuspension: 10 days and probation Long-term suspension recommendation likely to disrupt or interfere with any school function, activity, or school program is prohibited. Rule 25: Forgery or Falsification of Information First Offense: Second Offense\nSuspension: 10 days and probation Long-term suspension recommendation The act of falsifying teacher/administrator signatures or information on official school records shall not be tolerated. Rule 23: Failure to Permit a Lawful Search or Inspection by a School Official The act of preventing or impeding a school official from conducting a search or inspection authorized by this handbook is prohibited. First Offense\nSecond Offense: Third Offense: Suspension: Suspension: 5 days 10 days Long-term suspension recommendation Rule 26: First Offense\nSecond Offense\nSuspension: 10 days and probation Long-term suspension recommendation Possession/Use of Paging DevicesfBeepers), CeUular Phones and/or Other Electronic Communication Devices The use or possession of beepers or other electronic communication devices on a school campus or at school-related activities is prohibited, except when they are required for medical reasons. In such cases, medical documentation UIVJ aiv iVVJWilVV* *vz* ------------------------- ... .  J must be on file at the school building. Police notification is required. Violators will be prosecuted. First Offense: Second Offense: Third Offense: 22 Warning, confiscation of the device and parent conference. Suspension: 5 days and probation Long-term suspension recommendation 23STUDENT CONDUCT CODE STUDENT CONDUCT CODE Rule 27: Use of Fireworks The use of fireworks on a school campus or at a school-related activity is prohibited. First Offense: Second Offense: Suspension: 10 days and probation Long-term suspension recommendation Rule 28: Use and/or Possession of Alcohol, Controlled Substances or Unauthorized Drugs or Substances. The possession or use of nonprescribed narcotic drugs, hallucinogens, marijuana, or any unauthorized drug or substance is a violation of district policy. In addition to suspension, students must show proof of having enrolled in an approved drug/alcohol counseling program prior to reinstatement. Police notification required for possession of a controlled substance. First Offense: Suspension: 6-10 days with verification of enrollment in a required drug/alcohol counseling and/or treatment program. Failure to complete the prescribed drug/alcohol counseling plan will result in an expulsion recommendation. Second Offense: Expulsion recommendation Rule 29: Participation in Prohibited Clubs, Street Gangs, Fraternities, Sororities or Similar Organizations Students shall not participate in secret societies or organizations of any kind while on school property, at school-sponsored activities, or while on the way to or from school. Street gangs, hate groups, cults, or similar groups, whether organized in the community or in other settings, are prohibited on school grounds or at any school-sponsored activity. Behaviors such as the use of signs, signals, visible body markings/ adornments, verbal or written language that connotes street gang affiliations and/or membership in other prohibited groups/or organizations at school or at school-related activities are prohibited and will be considered to be in violation of this rule. First Offense\nSecond Offense: Third Offense\nMandatory parent/student conference and participation in the Student Assistance Program Suspension: 6 days and probation Long-term suspension recommendation 24 25STUDENT CONDUCT CODE STUDENT CONDUCT CODE OFFENSES CATEGORY 3 Rule 35: Possession of Firearm Students found guilty of Category 3 offenses shall receive an expulsion recommendation. The Little Rock Police Department shall be immediately notified and violators will be prosecuted to Ae fullest extent of the law. A calendar year expulsion is required, by law, for firearm and weapons violations. The act of possessing a firearm, on school district property or at a school- related event, whether loaded or unloaded, without written permission from a school authority is prohibited. Expulsion shall be for a full calendar year. A firearm as defined in the US Code means: Rule 30: Use of Multi-fingered Rings, Chemical Agents, or Laser Pin Lights The use of pepper spray, mace or similar chemical agents, laser pin lights or multi-fingered rings on school district property is prohibited. Rule 31: Arson The willful and deliberate burning of or attempting to bum school property is prohibited. Rule 32: Drug/Alcohol Sale or Distribution The sale or distribution of alcohol, marijuana, nonprescribed/ prescribed drugs, hallucinogens, or similar substances is prohibited. Students expelled for this violation shall be required to submit proof of the successful completion of drug/alcohol counseling and/or treatment program prior to petitioning the Board, for reinstatement. Rule 33: Physical Assault on Staff The act of striking or attempting to strike a teacher or other school personnel shall not be tolerated. - any weapon which will or is designed to or may readily be converted to expel a projectile by the action of an explosive\n- the frame or receiver of any weapon described above\n- any firearm or receiver of any weapon described above\n- any explosive, incendiary, or poison gas (1) bomb, (2) grenade, (3) rocket having a propellant charge of more than four ounces, (4) missile having an explosive or incendiary charge of more than one-quarter ounce, (5) mine, or (6) similar device\n- any weapon which will, or which may be readily converted to, expel a projectile by the action of an explosive or other propellant, and which has any barrel with a bore of more than one-half inch in diameter\n- any combination of parts either designed or intended for use in converting any device into a destructive device and from which a destructive device may be readily assembled. Rule 34: Verbal Abuse of Staff The use of violent, abusive, or obscene language or gestures addressed to a teacher or staff person in a threatening manner shall not be tolerated. 26 27STUDENT CONDUCT CODE STUDENT CONDUCT CODE Rule 36: Use of Weapon Rule 42: Robbery The act of using a weapon or firearm to cause injury or to threaten injury to another person is prohibited. Expulsion for a full calendar year is required by law. Rule 37: Possession or Use of Explosives The possession, use, or threat to use any explosives or other such devices capable of inflicting bodily harm are prohibited. Expulsion for a full calendar year is required by law. Rule 38: Extortion The violent taking of any goods, money or other valuable items from another person by force, threats or with a weapon shall not be tolerated. Rule 43: Terroristic Threatening The act of threatening to cause death or serious physical injury to another person or substantial damage to school property for the purpose of terrorizing another person will not be tolerated. NOTE\nStudents are accountable for their behavior throughout the school year. Any infraction of the rules on the last day of school shall be reviewed for disciplinary action at the opening of the following school term. Obtaining or attempting to obtain money or property from an individual by force or threat of force is prohibited. Rule 39: Unlawful Assembly When three or more students get together with the intent to commit an unlawful act will not be tolerated. Rule 40: Inciting to Riot An act or conduct which results in a riot or which urges others to commit acts of force and violence or participation in a gang fight or similar disturbance at school or at school-related activities is prohibited. Rule 41: Possession of Weapon or Facsimile Weapon The possession of a knife, box cutter, dirk, brass knuckle, martial arts implement, razor, ice pick, BB gun, pellet gun, pump gun, stun gun, blackjack, unauthorized tools, sword, spear in a cane, billie club, sap, facsimile weapon, or any other instrument that is specifically designed, made or adapted, or is capable of inflicting physical injury to another person, is prohibited at school or at any school-related activity. Expulsion for a full calendar year is required by law. 28 29DISCIPLINARY ACTIONS/PROCEDURES DISCIPLINARY ACTIONS/PROCEDURES STUDENT DISCIPLINE PROCEDURE Exclusion from Class General Rules Reduction of Sanction: The Superintendent, an Assistant Superintendent or the Principal may at any time reduce the sanction imposed against a student. Reduction of the sanction does not affect the student's right to appeal the lesser sanction. Time: Where a time period (e.g., 24 hours or 48 hours) is established for the taking of some action, Saturdays, Sundays and student holidays shall not be counted. Students 18 or Older\nStudents 18 years of age or older may act on their own behalf and shall not be required to be represented by a parent or guardian as otherwise provided in these rules. The District reserves the right to notify the parents of students 18 years or older so that they may participate in the discipline process. Record of Proceedings: No audio, video or stenographic recording of any kind shall be permitted for any conference or hearing except as provided for in these rules. Failure to Appear at an Appeal Hearing: The failure of the student and his parent or guardian to appear at an appeal hearing as provided for in these rules shall be considered a waiver of the student's right to appeal. The LRSD representative hearing the appeal shall determine if good cause exists and if an appeal hearing will be rescheduled. The Board agrees that all teachers have the right to exclude a pupil from class when his/her presence is intolerable to the learning process. Under such circumstances, the student will be referred to the principal. Within forty-eight (48) hours of the exclusion, a meeting will be arranged by the principal. Such meeting shall include: the principal, the teacher, the pupil's parents and any specialist deemed necessary by any of the parties. Following the meeting, the principal and teacher will make a joint decision on the disposition of the case. In the event the teacher and principal do not reach a joint decision, the matter shall be referred to the appropriate Assistant or Associate Superintendent. In a secondary school, if the student is excluded from the same class a second time, he/she may be dropped from that course for the remainder of the semester or school year. If the student continues to be disruptive to the learning process in his/her new environment, placement in an alternative setting or a recommendation for expulsion for the remainder of the year is in order. (PN Agreement, pp. 56-57) School Detention The principal or designee has the authority to assign students, with notification to the parent/guardian, to before or after school detention. Detention should not extend beyond two (2) hours before or after school. Transportation for students to serve detention is the responsibility of the parent or guardian. Saturday School Definitions Sent Home A sent home is used to establish contact with a parent/guardian to resolve problems that do not require suspension. It is used only for a short period of absence, not to exceed 24 hours, and its purpose is to have the parent come to the school for a conference with an administrator within 24 hours. Telephone conferences are acceptable at the discretion of the principal. The principal or designee has the authority to assign students to Saturday School, with notification to the parent/guardian, for repetitive misbehavior that has not been corrected by other sanctions. Saturday School may be assigned in lieu of detention hall or prior to an in-school suspension or short-term, out-of-school suspension. Transportation for students to serve Saturday School is the responsibility of the parent or guardian. 30 31 LDISCIPLINARY ACTIONS/PROCEDURES DISCIPLINARY ACTIONS/PROCEDURES In-School Suspensions An in-school suspension is usually issued to the student by the school for minor misbehaviors in lieu of or prior to a short-term, out-of-school suspension based upon the building principal's recommendation. Expulsion An expulsion is the exclusion of a student from school attendance for A. B. C. D. E. F. G. Each in-school assignment may be from 3-5 days. In-school suspension assignments should not exceed five (5) days for any one offense. In-school suspensions should not exceed 15 days per semester. Students may not attend in-school but twice for the same offense. The same process for imposing short-term suspensions are applicable to in-school suspensions. The building-level principal's decision is final in the appeal process governing in-school suspensions. Students are not allowed to participate in school-sponsored extracurricular activities while serving an in-school suspension. extremely serious violations of district policy. Expulsions are issued by the Board of Directors for the duration of the current school year and until reinstated by the Board of Directors. The student is also denied the right to take part in or attend any school function during the expulsion until reinstated by the Little Rock School District Board of Directors. Expulsions for handgun and weapons violations shall be for one calendar year. In lieu of being expelled from the District, students may be assigned to an alternative educational setting. Note: Students on a short- or long-term suspension, or expulsion, are not perniiilcd on school campuses or District-sponsored acti\\ itie\nduration of suspensions without the permission of a school admtntsirator. Disciplinary Probation s during the NOTE\nStudents must be reinstated on the following day after serving an in-school suspension. Students will then be eligible to participate in extracurricular activities. Any student who has been involved in a violation of school rules may be placed on disciplinary probation by the Board of Directors, the District s Hearing Official, the building principal, or his/her authorized designee in addition to or in lieu of suspension. Probation should be for a definite time period during which critical examination and evaluation of the student's behavioral progress shall take place. Short-term Suspension A short-term suspension is used to exclude students from school attendance for a period of 3-10 days for violations of classroom, building or transportation rules. Long-term Suspension A long-term suspension is the exclusion of a student from school attendance for serious violations of disciplinary policies for a period in excess of ten school days. In lieu of being long-term suspended, a student may be assigned to an alternative educational setting. Students may be placed on probation against the recurrence of the same offense or a combination of offenses that are injurious or disruptive to the school's operation. Students who violate their probationary status may be recommended for Long-term Suspension or Expulsion. Students who are placed on strict probation by the Board of Directors and who violate this probation will be recommended for Expulsion. During the probationary period, the student may be denied the privilege of participation in or attendance at all extracurricular activities. 32 33DISCIPLINARY ACTIONS/PROCEDURES DISCIPLINARY ACTIONS/PROCEDURES The parent/guardian and student will be notified by the Hearing Official and/or the building principal/designee prior to placing the student on disciplinary probation. The terms of probation, the length of the probation, and the consequences for violating the probation will be discussed in a formal conference with the student and the parent. Written documentation bearing the parent and student signatures will be kept on file as official verification of the probationary status and the probationary period. The student will be removed from probation if, at the completion of the probationary period, satisfactory adjustment has been made as outlined in the probationary agreement. Physical Restraint Any school employee may use such physical force as is necessary to restrain or control a student who poses a physical threat to another person or persons. This school employee upon such action shall\n(A) immediately, or as soon thereafter as possible, notify the principal of the incident\n(B) provide a written report of the situation indicating why such action was deemed necessary\nand (C) the principal or his/her designee shall inform the parent legal guardian of the incident via the appropriate disciplinary reporting form. Emergency Removal A building administrator may remove a student without an informal hearing if it is determined that the student's continued presence poses an immediate danger to persons or property or may substantially disnipt the school's orderly operation. A written notice shall be provided to the parent explaining the reason for the student being emergency removed from school. Whenever a student is removed under these conditions, a parent/guardian shall be notified when the informal suspension hearing will be held. This hearing will normally be provided within three (3) school days. Parent/Guardian Notification of Suspension/Sent Home Every reasonable effort will be made by school officials to notify the parent/guardian of a suspension and the reasons for the action before the student is sent home. In no case should a severely handicapped student be sent home before a parent/guardian contact is made. Parents should be informed that a student suspension includes a loss of opportunity to participate in any school-related activity. The student is also prohibited from entering any Little Rock School District school or other District properties without prior authorization of the principal or designee. Make-up Work During Suspension Classroom assignments and tests may be made up for the first suspension period, only. The work must be completed within five days following a short-term, out-of-school suspension. Parents may request and pick-up assignments during the suspension period. All assignments must be requested no later than 48 hours after the return from the suspension and work completed and submitted within five (5) school days of returning from the suspension. Since students on a short- or long- term suspension are not permitted on a school campus, make-up work referenced m this policy must be completed at the student s residence. Loss of Academic Credit - Expulsion A student shall lose all academic credit for the semester(s) in which the expulsion occurs. Student/Parent Reinstatement Conference A conference should be held with the parent and the student to seek resolution of the misconduct and to consider reinstatement following a short-term suspension. The parent and administrator should agree on a mutually satisfactory time for the conference. If the parent does not request a conference by the end of the suspension, the appropriate administrator shall initiate contact. The building administrator may select an alternative means for a reinstatement conference if the parent/guardian is unable to attend. 34 35DUE PROCESS PROCEDURES DUE PROCESS PROCEDURES The LRSD is committed to providing fair and equitable treatmem to Short-Term Suspensions students in academic and disciplinary matters. A section of the New Desegregation and Education Plan (1998) dealing with discipline states: LRSD shall implement programs, policies and/or procedures designed to ensure there is no racial discrimination with regard to student discipline. The principal of a school may suspend a student from school for a period of three (3) to ten (10) school days. Before a short-term suspension is imposed, the following process shall be followed: 1. LRSD shall strictly adhere to the policies set forth in the Student that all students are disciplined in a fair and Handbook to ensure equitable manner. 2. LRSD shall purge students' discipline records after the fifth grade and . ______ nrcrin Qnrl 3. offenses, arson and eighth grade of all offenses, except weapons robbery, unless LRSD finds that to do so would not be in the best 4. interest of the student. 5. LRSD shall work with the students and their parents to develop behavioral modification plans for students who exhibit frequent misbehavior. 6. Before leaving school, the student must be provided an informal conference to give his/her side and to hear the evidence upon which the administrator has based his/her decision for the suspension. During the informal conference, the Principal shall advise the student orally or in writing of the alleged offense(s). The informal conference need not occur before a student is removed from school, where circumstances justify emergency removal (see p.31). The LRSD has established the position of \"ombudsman\" who wdl serve as a parent/student advocate. The ombudsman will assist the District by ensuring that students are aware of their rights pursuant to the Student Handbook. The ombudsman will also act as an advocate on behalf of students involved in the discipline process by investigating parent and student complaints of race-based mistreatment and by attempting to achieve equitable solutions. It you need assistance, call 324-2014. 7, 8. 36 During the informal conference, the student is not entitled to an attorney, to have wimesses, or to cross-examine witnesses. If the administrator determines there is sufficient evidence to support a short-term suspension, the student must be given a written statement of the charge(s), and parents must be notified promptly. The administrator shall make every effort to notify the parent/guardian by phone, within 24 hours of the student being suspended. Written notice of suspension, the offense(s) and an explanation of the appeal process shall be mailed to the student's parent or legal guardian at the student's address of record, within 36 hours of the suspension. The notice must explain the procedure for the student s reinstatement. 9. If the student disagrees with the school's charge(s) and evidence, he/she may appeal the suspension to the Building-level Disciplme Hearing Committee. If the student is under 18, a parent or guardian must come with him/her to the conference. 37DUE PROCESS PROCEDURES DUE PROCESS PROCEDURES Short-term Suspension Appeals Procedure The process below shall be followed for the appeal of a short-term suspension\n10. The Student Hearing Office will schedule an appeal hearing as soon 1. Anv student who receives a short-term suspension and desires to appeal, must do so within twenty-four (24) hours after receiving the suspension. 2. The student's parent or guardian shall within 24 hours of the student as practicable, not to exceed 10 school days. 11 At the hearing, the Principal, Assistant Principal or his/her designee shall present to the Hearing Officer the evidence supporting the charge. The student shall be represented by his or her parent or guardian\nno attorneys will be permitted. Once the student or his behalf of the student, the 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. being notified of the short-term suspension, give notice to the parent/guardian has responded on Administration shall then have an opportunity to reply. principal, in person or by phone, of the student's desire to appeal the 12. Following the Administration's reply, the Hearing Officer shall render short-term suspension. his or her decision. Written notice of the decision shall be provided to A request to appeal beyond the building principal/designee should be made to the principal. The principal will notify the Building-level Hearing Committee of the parent's/guardian's request. The merits of the appeal will be determined by the Building-level Hearing Committee before a hearing conference is scheduled. If an appeal is granted, the student will be allowed to continue bus transportation and his/her regular educational program until the appeal process has been completed and a made by the Student Hearing Officer. A hearing shall be scheduled with the Building-level Hearing Committee, on appeals that are granted, within two school days of the A date of the suspension. final decision has been At the hearing, the Principal or Assistant Principal or his/her designee shall explain to the Building-level Hearing Committee the evidence to support the offenses. The student shall be represented by his or her parent or guardian\nno attorneys will be permitted. Once the student or his parent or guardian has responded on behalf of the student, the Administration shall then have an opportunity to reply. Following the Administration s reply, the Building-level Hearing Committee shall render a decision. 8. The written notice of the decision shall be provided to the student and the parent/guardian at the conclusion of the hearing and shall be provided to the Principal. 9. A request for an appeal beyond the Building-level Hearing Committee  ..XT T^nr\"\\ TT_-J...... i-Vto shall be made within 24 hours to the LRSD Heanng Officer, the Superintendent's designee. The parent/guardian should call 324-2170 to schedule an appointment. 38 the student's parent/guardian and the Principal at the conclusion of the hearing. The decision of the Hearing Officer is final. Long-term Suspension/Expulsion Recommendations Before a long-term suspension or expulsion is recommended, the following process shall be followed. 1. 2. The student shall be informed orally or in writing of the charges against him/her including a summary of the evidence upon which charges are based and be given an opportunity to give his/her side of the story. expulsion recommendation A copy of the long-term suspension or expulsion recommendation stating the offense(s) and an explanation of the appeal process shall be delivered or sent by certified mail to the parent or guardian at the student's address of record within 36 hours following the principals decision to recommend a long-term/expulsion. 3 The student's parent or guardian should within 24 hours, not to exceed 72 hours, of the student being notified of the long-term suspension/expulsion recommendation, give notice, in person or by phone, of the student's desire to appeal the recommendation to the LRSD Student Hearing Office {324-2170}. 4. A prompt hearing shall be scheduled by the Hearing Officer as soon as practicable, not to exceed 10 school ^ys from the date of the long- term suspension/expulsion recommendation. 5. The student is entitled to representation by a lawyer or lay counsel. 396. 7. 8. 9. DUE PROCESS PROCEDURES If the student will be represented by an attorney, written notice of representation must be provided to the LRSD Hearing Officer at least 48 hours before the hearing. The Administration reserves the be represented by an attorney at any hearing where the student will be represented by an attorney. If notice is not given, the AdministraUon shall be entitled to have the hearing rescheduled to a date and time when an attorney can be present on their behalf. A formal hearing shall be provided to the student by the Hearing Officer. The following guidelines must be adhered to: A A. A list of witnesses who will furnish information supporting the principal's recommendation, as well as those who will appear at the hearing, will be made available to the student by the building principal prior to the formal hearing at the Student Hearing Office. B. The Hearing Officer or his/her designee presides at the hearing. The student will have the factual basis for the alleged offense(s) read to him/her by the Heating Officer and will be asked if the facts are true. C. If the student admits to the truth of the factual allegations, the Hearing Officer or his/her designee will proceed with the hearing for determination of any disciplinary action. At the hearing, the principal or his/her designee shall present evidence of the events and circumstances to support the recommendaUon for long-term suspension/expulsion. The presentation will include statements, documents, and other evidence by and on behalf of the school from people who witnessed the alleged offense(s) and from others involved. Presentation of statements, documents, and other evidence by and on riCdCiuauuu ------------ , , behalf of the student may be presented if the student so desires. The student may testify and may offer the statement of others. However, the student may not be required to testify. The student may present witnesses on his/her behalf. 10. The Hearing Official may permit cross-examination of witnesses. The cross-examination may be limited if the Hearing Officer believes it is abusive or interferes with the conduct of an orderly heanng. The student or his/her representative can make any desired statement or present evidence which might influence the decision in his/her favor. 11. The Hearing Officer may ask questions. 40 DUE PROCESS PROCEDURES 12. Based on the written and oral evidence, the Hearing Officer determines the disciplinary action to be taken. Written notice of the decision shall be provided to the student's guardian and the school s administrator at the conclusion of the hearing. 13. A record of the hearing will be kept, and if a written request is made, the parent or legal guardian will be furnished a record of the hearing. 14. The student will be advised of his/her right to appeal the decision to the appropriate Assistant Superintendent. The Hearing Official will schedule the long-term suspension appeal with the Assistant Superintendent. The final level of appeal is to the Little Rock School District Board of Directors. 15. If the long-term suspension is upheld by the Assistant Superintendent, the student may appeal the decision, by giving notice, in person or by phone, to the Hearing Official within 24 hours of the Assistant Superintendent's decision. 16. If a long-term suspension is to be appealed to the Board, the student must give notice to the Hearing Official who will schedule the appeal for the next regularly scheduled meeting of the LRSD Board of Directors. 41DUE PROCESS PROCEDURES DUE PROCESS PROCEDURES Due Process Chart Suspension Length Short-term (3-10 days) Long-term (11 days or more, up to a semester) Expulsion (Balance of school year or permanently) Who Suspends The Principal has the authority to suspend for 3-10 school days School Principal recommends to Hearing Officer Recommendation from Principal and Superintendent to the Board of Directors Due Process (Student Rights) LONG-TERM SUSPENSION/ EXPULSION HEARING PROCEDURES Board of Directors 1. Principal or Assistant Principal 2. Building-level Discipline Committee for decision of Principal 3. Assistant Superintendent for decision of Hearing Officer 4. Notice of charges (written) 5. Right to present your side 6. Right to present evidence 7. Right to impartial hearing 8. Right to take your case to a higher power 9. Right to be present at Board of Directors hearing 10. Right to counsel 11. Right to observe evidence 12. Right to question wimesses 13. Right to present evidence 14. Appeal to judicial system Only the Board of Directors is authorized to expel a student from the Little Rock School District. All appeal hearings for students recommended for expulsion will be conducted by the Board. An expelled student loses all academic credit. 1. 2. 3. 4. You should understand what kind of behaviors make suspensions/expulsion recommendations possible, the difference between the two terms, your rights, and the procedure for appeal. Students should remember that the Board may consider prior disciplinary incidents in reaching a decision. Read the above chart carefully. 5. Notice of date, hour, and place where the School Board will consider and act upon the long-term suspension/expulsion recommendation shall be hand delivered or sent by certified US mail, to the smdent's parent or legal guardian. The hearing shall be conducted at the next regularly scheduled meeting of the LRSD Board of Directors. In cases where both the parent and the District representative agree, the hearing may be scheduled for another time. A list of wimesses who will furnish information supporting the principal's recommendation, as well as those who will appear at the hearing, will be made available to the student as soon as practicable, at least 24 hours prior to the Board hearing. The President of the School Board or his/her designee presides at the hearing. The student will have the factual basis for the alleged offense(s) read to him/her by the presiding officer of the Board, or his/her designee, and will be asked if the facts are true. A. If the student denies the truth of the factual allegations or is not present, the Board will proceed with the hearing for its factual determination. B. If the student admits the truth of the factual allegations,then the Board will proceed with the hearing for determination of any disciplinary action. The smdent is entitled to representation by a lawyer or lay counsel. Written notice of representation must be provided to the Superintendent's Office 48 hours before the Board hearing. If the student fails to provide notice, the Administration shall be entitled to have the hearing rescheduled. 42 436. DUE PROCESS PROCEDURES At the hearing, the principal or his/her designee shall present evidence or circumstances for the recommendation for expulsion. The procedure may include: A. Presentation of statements, documents, and other evidence by and ricacjuaiivii vi eiuivi.iv-.vu, ------------------------- , behalf of the District from people who witnessed the alleged on behalt or me uisinci num o ofTense(s) and others involved. Members of the Board and the student may ask questions. B. Presentation of statements, documents, and other evidence by and on behalf of the student, if the student so desires. Members of the Board may ask questions. C. The Board votes on the question of whether or not the student had committed the specified offense(s) and announces its decision. If the vote is the affirmative, the procedures continue. 7 The student may testify and may offer the statements of others. The student will not be required to testify during the hearing. 8. The presiding officer may permit cross-examination of witnesses. The cross-examination may be limited if the presiding officer believes it is VI ...y--------- * 1 I U  abusive or interferes with the conduct of an orderly hearing. 9. Factual determination by the Board of any punitive action to be taken. A. The student's records and disciplinary background can be made available to the Board members. B. The Superintendent makes a recommendation to the Board. C. The student or his/her representative can make any desired statement or present evidence which might influence the Boards decision in his/her favor. D The Board votes on any disciplinary action to be taken and announces its decision. The Board may go into executive session to discuss the evidence before making a decision. A record of the hearing is kept, and if a written request is made, a parent or legal guardian will be furnished a written record of the hearing. Note: The District may at any time during the discipline process decide to assign a student to an alternative educational setting in lieu of removing the student from the District. No formal appeal process exists for such a decision. 44 DUE PROCESS PROCEDURES Readmission from Expulsion or Long-term Suspension Long-term Suspension - All students who receive a long-term suspension  , -I J__X IT____PorAnfc nrp be reinstated through the Student Hearing Office. Parents are must be reinstated througn me aruucni nwiwg vuwv. . requested to call the Hearing Office to schedule a reinstatement conference prior to the beginning of the new semester -- student is eligible to return. A letter of reinstatement must be presented at the time the student seeks a school assignment and/or school enrollment. or the school year in which the Expulsion - Expelled students must petition the Little Rock School District Board of Directors for reinstatement to the Little Rock School District at the end of the expulsionary period. Students who desire to petition the Board for reinstatement must contact the Student Hearing Office to indicate that intent. NOTE: Students who have been long-term suspended or expelled for weapon violations and/or other violent-related offenses must con^letc a Conflict Mediation Training Program prior to being reinstated to the District. 452 1 DUE PROCESS PROCEDURES Seek help from counselor Go to Assistant Principal 3 Principals Office 4 6 ALTERNATIVE EDUCATION PROGRAM The Little Rock School District believes all students can leant and should Go to teacher Building Discipline Committee 5 Downtown Contact Student Hearing OtTicer (324-2169) 3 s What to do when things go wrong Call appropriate Assistant Superintendent (324-2000). 7 have the opportunity to reach their maximum potential. A safe, orderly, and supportive learning environment is imperative to provide this opportunity. The District also recognizes that some students' academic and leammg styles can best be met through placement in an alternative education program that provides differentiated academic, self-paced, and social skills instruction in order to facilitate student learning. Go outside the school system.... 9 8 VJ Preaant your caM to Board o( Dlractora ...the courts See Superintendent of Schools (324-2012). The District's Alternative Education Programs (Alternative Learning Center-ALC, and Alternative Learning Environments-ALE) provide alternative settings to meet various students' behavioral, social, academic, and personal needs, and are tailored to a varied population of students with different needs. A student shall be placed in an alternative program when it is reasonably believed that his/her presence in the regular classroom program presents a danger of physical harm to the student and/or other individuals, or when the student's pitjrotvui *ii**x** vv'  ------------------------------- _  4.U instructional and academic needs are not being met m the traditional classrooms. What to do when things go wrong The procedure for referring a matter to the Board is to address a letter to the Alternative Learning Center 1 lie UIUVVWUIV 4V/I *wxw****^ * ------- Board in care of the Superintendent of Schools. The followmg actions may DUdlU UI veuv VI UIV --------------------------------- -  J * 4 taken through the appeal process as outlined beginning with the step mdicated. Program Description 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Student/Teacher Problem Start at Step 1 and proceed through 8, if necessary. Student/Student Problem Start at Step 1 and proceed through 8, if necessary. Parent/School Problem Start at Step 4 and proceed through 8, if necessary. School Short-term Suspension Appeal Start at Step 4 and proceed through 6, if necessary. Citizenship Grade Appeal Start at Step 4 and proceed through 6, if necessary. The District provides a supervised disciplinary management and alternative setting for the student who violates the conduct codes in the Student Handbook or who is released from correctional or residential facilities. The Alternative Learning Center (ALC) is a structured program for 6-12th grade students designed to modify a student's behavior to comply with the District's handbook and to provide opportunmes for academic success. ALC is also designed to help students reach their full potential by providing a consistent and highly structured alternative instructional environment with the use of computer-based instructions, textbooks, and supplemental materials. This program provides students individual and group counseling. behavioral modification sessions, and other recognition opportunities. 46 47 ALTERNATIVE EDUCATION PROGRAM ALTERNATIVE EDUCATION PROGRAM The academic program for ALC focuses on the core curriculum. Courses of study will enable the student to perform at grade level and will include Enghsh, rnath, science, social studies, and physical education. Classes are limited in size and ^e designed to meet the student's individual needs. The student must comply with the terms of placement and meet individual behavior management and academic expectotions prior to returning to the home campus. A student placed at ALC is prohibited from attending or participating in school- sponsored or school-related activities. A student who committed a Category 2 Offense and was placed at the ALC, who has met all criteria for high school graduation at the end of the school year will be permitted to participate in the graduation ceremony. A student who has committed a Category 3 Offense will not be permitted to participate in the graduation ceremony. In addition, a student assigned to ALC shall not be allowed on other District property unless permission is granted by the individual school's administration. Placement in Alternative Learning Center Upon being assigned to ALC by the Student Hearing Office or by the Board of Directors, a student may be placed at ALC for a minimum of a semester and up to a year depending on the category of the violation. The parent/guardian and student are required to attend an intake conference with the Centers administration. The intake conference process will outline with the parent and child the required rules to be observed, the expected behavior and goals to be achieved, and the criteria needed to earn an exit conference at the end of an enrollment period. An exit conference will be granted to a student at the end of his/her enrollment period to determine placement for the next semester or next school year. A student's assignment to the setting may be extended if it is determined by the exit committee that the student's presence in the regular classroom or campus presents a danger or harm to the home school or if the Student has not demonstrated success with ALC's rules and expectations. A student may also be referred to the Student Hearing Office as outlined in procedural due process for repeated misbehaviors and serious violations. ACCELERATED LEARNING CENTER Program Description The Accelerated Learning Center (ACC) is an alternative high school program within the Little Rock School District. The purpose of the program is to address the learning needs of students who are potential high school dropouts. The ACC offers a non-traditional instructional program that combines text-based learning with computer-assisted instruction. This instructional model allows students to progress at an accelerated pace to complete graduation requirements. Instruction is individualized to address each student's learning needs. Students may earn a diploma based on demonstrating competency in a modified core curriculum, or earn a General Education Diploma by completing the GED course of study. The academic program offers core courses in English, Math, Science and Social Studies as well as Health, Physical Education, Communication, Keyboarding, and Fine Arts Survey. Students in the ACC also have the opportunity to participate in Metropolitan Career and Technical Center programs. Teachers act as facilitators of learning to assist students in completing graduation requirements. Class size is limited to enable teachers to work with students individually. Students are required to complete a full year of credit in 6 weeks. Student instruction and progress is self-paced. A flexible schedule is offered to allow students maximum opportunity for attending classes. A four (4) hour minimum time is required daily and students must attend five (5) days a week. Because certain apparel and accessories may endanger the safety and welfare of * .... 1 1 _1 J_________TT.ici others, the ALC does observe an additional and required dress code. The dress code has served to foster an attitude of respect for authority and minimized class disruptions while it promoted an atmosphere conducive to learning. Transportation to ALC is provided by the District and is coordinated at the alternative site during the intake process. 48 49 Lalternative education program ALTERNATIVE EDUCATION PROGRAM Accelerated Learning Center Student Eligibility Criteria The criteria for student admission include the following:  Classification as a high school sophomore, junior or senior  Not age appropriate for grade level and has not earned sufficient credits to graduate on time with his/her class  A discipline history of no category two or three offenses within one year of application for entry into the program  Has demonstrated one or more of the following characteristics\nPoor school attendance Failure of two or more courses Currently being pregnant or teen parent Economically disadvantaged Qualifying for services under IDEA or 504 Has not advanced from one grade level to the next in one or more school years  Attained a minimum of five (5) credits . Completed an application for program entrance  Signed a participatory contract upon acceptance into the program Students must complete an application and interview process prior to acceptance in the program. The ACC has open enrollment and open exit. anrUu fnr admi.ssion throughout the year. The interview Students can apply for admission process includes a number of questions directed toward the prospective ___ _____I rUrlrra fkia CfuHpnt student to gain further information and knowledge of the student. Academic records are reviewed to determine the program of study to be implemented. As students complete the program of study and satisfy graduation requirements, they may exit the program. Students enrolled in the ACC program, who complete graduation requirements, currently receive a diploma from the home school (i.e.. Central, Fair, Hall, McClellan, and Parkview). Students classified as seniors are able to participate in senior activities with the home school. Students are \u0026lt;UV CIVIV W HVi2-rMV*' *** wvr**.---  ------------ not allowed to participate in athletic programs or other student organizations. ACC students have the services of a GED/At-Risk Coordinator who is responsible for getting students ready for the GED course of study and test. This individual is also responsible for making home visits and addressing student issues, which may hinder progress in the classroom. career A Job Coordinator is also on staff to provide students with information. This individual schedules student seminars to enhance the employability skills of ACC students\nsupervises students involved in workstudy programs\nprovides prospective employment information\nand assists students with finding employment. The district does not provide transportation for students enrolled in the ACC. 50 51ATTENDANCE POLICY AND PROCEDURES ATTENDANCE POLICY AND PROCEDURES 7. When a student who is fourteen or older has missed more than seven (7) consecutive days without approval of the principal or assistant principal, the school attendance secretary shall notify the Arkansas Department of Finance and Administration (DF\u0026amp;A). DF\u0026amp;A rnay suspend the student's driver's license until the student provides satisfactory evidence that he or she is attending school or has reached age eighteen. WARNING\nThe District will count three (3) full-day absence. or more class absences as a Classes Missed for Participation in School Functions Students or groups of students who participate in school-sponsored activities that are approved in advance by the appropriate assistant superintendent and/or the building administrator will not be counted as absent during the class penods missed due to that participation. Absences Excused for Other Reasons guardians to observe religious Students may be excused from classes upon written request from parents or guaiuioio vv or specific holy days, which are not schoo - related. Such absences, if approved by the principal in advance, will not result in loss of credit. I 54 Students may be excused from classes for medical or dental appointments\nrequired court appearances upon presentation of documentation by the court\nabsences due to family emergency in cases of serious illness or death within the immediate family\nor other reasons acceptable to the principal. Absences for college or job interviews for seniors, with approval by the principal, may be excused. Absences Due to Disciplinary Sanction When a student is suspended from school or sent home pending a conference, the absence shall not be counted as an unexcused absence. The absence will be coded to reflect the type of sanction. If the student remams out of school for a period of time in excess of the number of days of suspension or sent home notice, those days will be unexcused absences. Make-Up Work Students may only make up work due to excused absences and the first short- llio IIMJ WlllJ liitxxxw Wjz ---------------------------- ------- out-of-school suspension. It is the student's responsibility to request make- term, suspension, it tne sruuenis icspuiiaiumijr ------ up assignments upon returning from excused absences. Teachers will determine a reasonable amount of time for the completion of make-up work following excused absences. If make-up woik is not requested within two (2) days of returning from an excused absence, the student forfeits the opportunity to make up work missed. 55r ATTENDANCE POLICY AND PROCEDURES ATTENDANCE POLICY AND PROCEDURES 1. 2. 3. STUDENT LEAVE TARDY POLICY Extended illness is considered an extenuating circumstance under the Little Rock School District's attendance policy. A student shall not be excluded from the school's education program, including any class or extracurricular activity, on the basis of marriage, pregnancy, childbirth, termination of pregnancy, or recovery from pregnancy, unless the student requests voluntarily to participate in a separate program or activity of the school. The school may require a pregnant student to obtain a physician's statement to certify that the student is physically and emotionally able to continue participation in the normal educational program or activities so long as the same requirements are made of all students for other physical or emotional conditions requiring the attention of a doctor. Whether or not a pregnant student leaves school is up to the student, her parents, and her doctor. After the birth of an infant, the student may return to school. However, it is recommended that she receive a physical checkup from her doctor before returning to make sure she is physically able to resume her normal school schedule. Students may be granted leave from school for a religious holiday upon presenting a written request from their parents. DEFINITION A student is tardy when he/she fails to be in the classroom or other assigned location by the time the tardy bell stops ringing. CONDITIONS 1. 2. 3. 4. There are generally no excused tardies. However, an exception will be made if the student is delayed due to official school business or for other reasons approved by the building administrator. Generally, school/class tardiness will not affect a student's citizenship grade. In those cases, however, when the persistent efforts of school personnel fail to eliminate tardiness or if the student refuses to accept an assigned sanction, the citizenship grade may be lowered by a building administrator. The tardy policy becomes effective one (1) week after the opening of each school year to allow students time to learn their schedules. Tardies shall accumulate on a semester basis, rather than on a nine- week basis. 56 57ATTENDANCE POLICY AND PROCEDURES SCHOOL-SPONSORED PROGRAMS/ACTIVI^S PROCEDURES Students with Disabilities 1. 2. 3. 4. On the first tardy, the teacher will record the tardy and warn the student. On the second tardy, the teacher will refer the student to the building administrator. The building administrator may elect one of the two following procedures, based on conditions existing in his/her school. A disciplinary sanction will be assigned from the following alternatives: A. Required parent conference. B. Early morning or afternoon detention. On third and subsequent tardies, a disciplinary sanction will be assigned from the following alternatives: A. Required parent conference. B. Early morning or afternoon detention. C. Short-term suspension. D. Saturday School. E. In-school suspension. The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act and Arkansas Act 102 students with disabilities a free, appropriate public education in the guarantee students with disabilities a tree, appropnaic puunv least restrictive environment. In discharging its responsibility to eiKure that students with disabilities are served appropriately, the Little Rock School District makes every effort to locate and identify all students, who may be disabled through Child Find Activities. Procedures consistent with state and federal regulations are utilized in referring, evaluatmg, and delivenng specialized instruction and related services to students with disabilities. To be eligible for special education, a student must have an identified disability which results in an adverse effect on educational performance and the corresponding need for special education. Appropriate services are provided for students with the following disabilities\nDeaf-Blindness Hearing Impairment Mental Retardation Multiple Disabilities Orthopedic Impairment Other Health Impairment Serious Emotional Disturbance Specific Learning Disability Speech or Language Impairment Traumatic Brain Injury Visually Impairment Autism Once eligibility has been established, a program is designed which meets the individual needs of the students. 58 59SCHOOL-SPONSORED PROGRAMS/ACTIVITIES rS SCHOOL-SPONSORED PROGRAMS/ACTIVITIES PROGRAMMING LEAST RESTRICTED ENVIRONMENT Programming consists of the development and review of an Individual Education Plan (lEP) for each student receiving special education and related services. It is the responsibility of the Educational Management Team to review all data compiled during the referral/evaluation process. The lEP must be completed prior to placement of smdents in special education and related services. During the process of programming for the placement of students with disabilities, the team must: the maximum extent appropriate, students LRSD policy ensures that, to the maximum extent appropriate, sruucius with disabilities are educated with students who are not handmapped^ A full continuum of services is available in the District. Determination of the least restrictive environment shall be made on an individual basis, taking into account both services(s) needed and the program placement which would be most conducive for learning to occur. Based on the programming team s recommendations of needed special education and related services, it shall be the responsibility of the special education administrator(s) to locate and 1. 2. provide special education and related services based on the student's lEP\nand, determine, at least annually, the need for continued placement in special education. place a student in the most appropriate school/site. Curriculum for students with disabilities must be designed to meet individual needs and to include appropriate sections of the general curriculum. Modifications in materials, methods of instruction, and/or curriculum must be made to assist the student with a disability. District policy has been developed regarding graduation requirements for students with disabilities. DISCIPLINING STUDENTS WHO ARE HANDICAPPED WITHIN THE INDIVIDUALS WITH DISABILITIES EDUCATION ACT (IDEA) GUIDELINES PROCEDURAL SAFEGUARDS The District recognizes there are times that students with disabilities will need to be disciplined as a result of inappropnate and/or unpredictable behavior which interferes with his/her personal or educational welfare or the welfare of others. Specific procedures have been developed and must be used when determining the type of disciplinary action(s) for these students and for students suspected of having a handicapping condition. Procedures are identified in Appraisal Guide for Special Education, Districts Guidelines for Students with Disabilities covered under Section 504 ot the There are a number of specific procedures written into the law and expanded in the regulations to protect the rights of students and parents. These safeguards include: due process, nondiscriminatory testing, least restrictive environment, native language, confidentiality, and the right to representation. For further information, refer to the District's Appraisal Guide for Special Education and Your Rights as the Parents under P. L. 94-142. Federal law and school district policies provide safeguards to ensure that smdents who receive special education services are appropriately placed. Parents are involved in all phases of the process. The District encourages full participation at all conferences in which the educational needs of the smdents are being considered. For further information, contact the Division of Exceptional Children, 324-2180. Rehabilitation Act Procedures Manual. of 1973, and the District's Disciplinary Policies and A student with disabilities who engage in misbehavior and disciplinary infractions is subject to normal school disciplinary rules and procedures so lone as such treatment does not abridge the right to a free and appropna e public education. Care should be taken that any disciplinary action does not in effect constimte a unilateral change m a smdent's receiptofspecKil student with disabilities, an exclusion from school tor education. For a ----------------------- more than ten (10) school days (long-term exclusion) constimtes a change in placement and is subject to procedural safeguards. The Individual Education Plan (lEP) team for a student with a disability will convene to consider whether a functional behavioral assessment and particular discipline procedures should be adapted for that individual student and included in his/her lEP. 60 61SCHOOL-SPONSORED PROGRAMS/ACTIVITIES SCHOOL-SPONSORED PROGRAMS/ACTIVITIES After a short-term suspension is imposed on a student with a disability, an immediate meeting of the student's lEP team should be held to determine a manifestation regarding the behavior with a view toward assessing (conducting a functional behavioral assessment) the effectiveness and appropriateness of the student's placement and toward minimizing the harm resulting from the exclusion. The team may need to develop a behavior management plan following the functional behavior assessment. If a long-term suspension or expulsion recommendation is being made, the team must complete a functional behavioral assessment and a manifestation determination before any disciplinary action can be completed. At this point, a special education supervisor must be involved in the process. At no time, may a student receiving special education services be terminated from services for more than ten (10) days in a school year. Contact the Department of Exceptional Children if assistance is needed (324-2180). DISCIPLINING STUDENTS WHO ARE HANDICAPPED WITHIN THE 504 GUIDELINES The school's administration must always consider the student's handicapping condition when applying disciplinary sanctions, especially those which could result in his/her exclusion from a program or activity. The school must conduct an evaluation prior to any action with respect to any significant change in the student's placement. In practical terms, this means that a school must conduct an evaluation of the student prior to administering a disciplinary suspension which constitutes a change in a placement or an expulsion. The primary purpose of the evaluation should be to determine if the student's behavior has any relationship to his handicapping condition. Where appropriate a 504 student should have as part of his/her accommodation plan, a component that addresses behavior. Contact the District's Section 504 Compliance Coordinator if assistance is needed (324-2190 or 324-2171). CHILD NUTRITION PROGRAM The LLiittttllee RRoocckk SScchhooooll DDiissttrriicctt pprroovviidaeess nnuutmriitiioouuss mmeeaaltss aainidu aa vyamr.iveutyj of choices for all students. School lunches provide well-balanced nutrition each day. The goal is to provide one-third of the recommended daily allowance of essential nutrients following these government guidelines: - 1/2 pint of milk, unflavored low fat milk, whole milk, or buttermilk as a beverage - 2 ounces of cooked, lean meat, poultry, fish, cheese, 2 eggs, 1 cup of cooked dry beans, 4 teaspoons of peanut butter, or any combination equal in quantity - 3/4 cup of two or more servings of a vegetable or fruit - 8 servings per week of bread or bread alternate made with wholegrain or enriched flour or 1/2 cup rice or enriched pasta products Each secondary school utilizes the \"offer versus serve\" lunch feeding pattern. This means that each student is offered choices of the following 5 components for $1.50 and must take at least 3 of these from the serving line. Students are encouraged to take all 5! 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Meat Fruit Vegetable Bread Milk Each day there are at least three choices of meats, fruits, and vegetables. the senior level, a free item offered with these services is a choice of a soft drink in addition to the milk offering. Several other food services are also offered on a cash-only basis at the senior high school: Salad Bars ($1.35 And $2.00) A La Carte (cost by the item) 62 63 L SCHOOL-SPONSORED PROGRAMS/ACTIVITIES SCHOOL-SPONSORED PROGRAMS/ACTIVITIES A breakfast program is provided at all schools. Students can purchase meals with money or receive free or reduced lunch cards if they qualify under USDA guidelines. Students not eligible for free or reduced-price meals may also purchase pre-paid lunch cards weekly or for an extended period of time. Applications for reduced or free lunch are distributed at each school all year. Applications are also available each year during registration. Parents are encouraged to apply at that time. Students must reapply each year for free and reduced-price meals according to USDA guidelines. Within 10 school days of receiving your application, the school will let parents know if you are eligible. If your parents/guardians do not agree with the school's decision, they may wish to discuss it with the school. The school's decision may be appealed to the Director, Pupil Services Department, 100 South Arch Street, 324-2162. A variety of nutritious food choices are a part of each student's day in the Little Rock School District. Please avail yourself of the opportunity to participate. Call the Food Service Department with any questions or suggestions at any time. HEALTH SERVICES Every school is assigned a professional nurse. The number of days the nurse spends at the school is determined by the size and level of the school. Parents are urged to inform the school nurse and teacher of any known health conditions a student may have. The nurses are responsible for routine assessment and screening programs. Parents are urged to keep students at home who have fever (above 100.4 degrees), are vomiting, or have any symptom of a contagious disease. Students who become ill or injured at school will be given care. If the administrator and/or health care worker deems it necessary to send a student home, the parent will be contacted before allowing the student to leave school. It is important that every parent provides the school with working telephone numbers. Working parents will need to plan possib e alternative care for their child if he/she becomes ill and the parent is unable to leave work. It is in the student's best interest that when he/she is sick or significantly injured, the parent will take the student home or to the doctor. The health room is for temporary care of students. Medications school or Senior high school students may carry their own prescription and nonprescription medications unless the school nurse /II UIVUIVWW -------------- make the recommendation that medication may not be administrator meoicaiioii uvi carried. In those instances, all medications kept at school in the office or health room must be brought to the school by the parent. The parent is to complete the Health Service Medication Permission Slip (HS 5). The parent and school employee must count and record the amount of medication on the Medication Permission Slip. Medications kept at school will always be under lock and key. The only exceptions to this will be Asthma Inhalers, Epipens, and other selected medications that the nurse and parent mutually agree would be safe for the student to carry. All medications must be in their original containers. When the nurse is present, he/she will administer the medications. The principal will designate \" school employee to administer the medications on days the nurse is not assigned to the building. This designated person will be a Certified Medication Administrator (CMA). a Parents and teachers may request additional screening any time they are concerned about a student. Special Health Needs The screening programs provided by the District include: Vision..................... Scoliosis - Females Scoliosis - Males . Blood Pressure . .. Grade 10 Grade 10 Grade 10 Grade 10 Parents of students with special handicapping conditions which necessitate consideration, such as transportation, classroom placement/adjustments or special procedures in the routine school schedule, should contact the pnncipal of the school, school nurse, or the Division of Exceptional Children. 64 65SCHOOL-SPONSORED PROGRAMS/ACTIVITIES SCHOOL-SPONSORED PROGRAMS/ACTIVITIES Immunizations Arkansas law requires that every student entering school for the first time be adequately immunized. This includes all students new to the district. The immunization record must include written proof of at least three (3) diphtheria, tetanus, and pertussis (DTP) immunizations\nthree (3) polio immunizations\nrubella\nand rubeola immunizations. The second rubeola immunization must be given before 7th grade. The last DTP and polio immunizations must be on or after the fourth birthday. Parents of students who have not provided adequate immunization records, will be referred to the municipal court. . If the student does not use their assigned stop for more than two weeks, the parent/guardian must notify their School Transportation Coordinator and Laidlaw Routing Department to prevent its deletion. . Any deleted stop will not be reinstated if an existing stop is within six (6) blocks or .375 miles of a student's address.  Only use the stop nearest to your residence unless written permission is obtained from the principal and provided to the bus driver. Athletic Examinations Special Needs Student Transportation It is mandatory that all students trying out or participating in Athletics (inter-scholastic sports), have a physical exam before any activity occurs. It is the parents' responsibility to see that this is provided. Several doctors and clinics in Little Rock are very supportive of the athletic program and cooperate with the school district Athletic Department and Health Services to provide physical examinations. Information concerning these physicals may be obtained from the principal, school nurse or coach. TRANSPORTATION REGULATIONS The goal of the Transportation Department of the Little Rock School District is to provide the safest, most efficient transportation possible for those students who are to be transported between their homes and schools. This process is the responsibility of the entire community and requires the cooperation of all students, parents, school personnel, and citizens who drive on the streets in the presence of the school buses. Students and parents are expected to read these regulations carefully. They must be followed if we are to provide safe, efficient transportation for the students of this District. . Parents/guardians of students who receive specialized transportation are to notify Special Needs Student Transportation when the student will not be riding the bus. . Students who have specialized transportation may be picked up or dropped off at locations other than the home bus stop upon written approval from the Division of Exceptional Children.  Students requiting constant care and supervision will not be left unattended when delivered to their homes in the afternoon. Parents or guardians will be responsible for providing the necessary supervision. who observes an incident jeopardizing The LRSD encourages any person . . the safety of the students on a school bus to report the incident to the LRbU Transportation Department. It is helpful when a person can identify the bus by its number when making such reports. Any recommendations that will assist the department in its operation are also encouraged. The telephone number of the Transportation Department is 570-4000. 66 67SCHOOL-SPONSORED PROGRAMS/ACTIVITIES SCHOOL-SPONSORED PROGRAMS/ACTIVITIES EMERGENCY PROCEDURES In an emergency, students should remain calm and quiet and listen for instructions from the bus driver. If the driver is unable to conduct emergency measures, the students should follow the procedures below in leaving the bus\n\"It is declared to be the public policy of the State of Arkansas that all counties municipal corporations, school districts, special improvement districts and all riiuiiiviH r ____ , .. . rnmiinft from liabihtv for other political subdivisions of the state shall be immune from hability for damages. No tort action shall lie against any such political subdivision because of the acts of their agents and employees.! If the exit is through the front door, students sitting in the front seat to the left of the aisle will move out first, followed by those in the right front seat and proceeding in this manner until all seats are emptied. If the exit is through the rear emergency door, those students sitting next to the aisle shall leave first, beginning with those students in the rear of the bus. Parents will be provided with an insurance brochure and application from wtoh 1 r .___, r thpir chi d he level of coverage for their child. The to review and select the appropriate level ot coverage tor tneir cniiu. . brochure will explain the types of coverage available and list the cost associated with each. Completed applications must be returned to the school no later than the third week following the start of school. If a rapid exit is necessary and it is possible to exit from both doors, students in the rear half of the bus should move out the back door, and those in the front half should move out the front door. In the event of an accident resulting in injury, persons injured should, if possible, be moved only under competent medical supervision. You are encouraged to take advantage of this outstanding offer, which provides quality coverage for your student at the very lowest cost to you. For more information on student accident insurance, contact a representative at your school or the Office of Risk Management at 324-2400. STUDENT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM If the bus should be overturned, students should evacuate through windows or through either door. The Student Assistance Program is a comprehensive primary prevention and Upon leaving the bus in an emergency, students are to move immediately off the roadway to a safe distance from traffic. They should not cross the road unless instructed by the driver. for secondary students, operating at all Little Rock  includes a early intervention program . School District middle and senior high schools. The program systematic effort to identify, assess, refer, and support studenta with substmce abuse problems and other high-risk behaviors which are interfering with their education and life development. In the event of a tornado or other natural disaster, students should follow the instructions of the bus driver regarding emergency procedures. Upon referral to the program, the student will be interviewed by trained staff n_______tn itivolvB the studcnt lu UH m-school educational Recommendations are made to involve the student in an in-: SCHOOL DISTRICT INSURANCE POLICY miiCIlUdiiuna (uv iii'v.T. --------- . group or a referral is made to a community resource. All contact with the student is kept confidential. Involvement in the program is completely voluntary. The Little Rock School District does not assume liability for accidental injuries sustained by school children on its campuses. Therefore, it is very important that our patrons be made aware of the School Injury Benefit Plan, which is an approved coverage offered through an independent agency. The LRSD does not assume liability for accidental injuries sustained by school children on its campuses. Arkansas School Law 21-9-301 states: 68 69i SCHOOL-SPONSORED PROGRAMS/ACTIVITIES EXTRACURRICULAR ACTIVITIES Services offered include: Screening - Referred students are interviewed by Student Assistance staff to determine the extent of the problem and then an appropriate referral to in school programs or outside agencies is made. Individual Education - The referred student is put in contact with a Student Assistance staff member who provides information and assistance regarding the student's problem(s) or concerns. Special Group - This small group is designed to provide specific education and assistance to those students who are minimally to severely involved in alcohol/drug abuse, experiencing academic problems, or exhibiting other stress-related behavior. Concerned Others Group - This small group is designed to meet the needs of those students who are concerned about or affected by someone else's use of alcohol or other drugs. Recovering Students Group - This group provides support for students who have returned from an inpatient alcohol/drug treatment program or who are currently involved in outpatient care. The major goal of the program is to support the student in his/her attempt to maintain a drug-free life style. Involvement with AA or other treatment plans is recommended. Parents, teachers, and other school staff, as well as students, themselves, may make referrals to the Student Assistance Program. A trained Student Assistance staff member may be contacted directly or contact may be made through a guidance counselor who will make the necessary referral. All referrals to the Student Assistance Program are strictly confidential. The Little Rock School District supports and maintains a comprehensive extracurricular activities program, which includes mtramurall and inte^holasttc for students who are legally enrolled in the athletics. These activities are District's schools and, generally, are not offered for academic credit. established eligibility requirements have an equal IS All students who meet----------  . . opportunity to participate in all activities. Eligibility for every activity based upon scholastic performance, conduct, interest and demonstrated performance in competition established for the activity. Eligibility Requirements Grade Point Average (GPA) Students who wish to participate in extracurricular activities must either: (1) have a cumulative GPA of 2.0, or have a 2.0 average for the semester -   which they participate in athletics and other proceeding the semester in extracurricular activities. No more than two correspondence courses may be used on a student's entire transcript for GPA purposes. Students transferring from other districts bring their eligibility status with them. They will then use their first full nine-week grades in the LRSD to meet LRSD GPA requirements. Parents who object to their child's participation in the Student Assistance Program must notify the principal or guidance counselor by the third week of school at the beginning of each school year. Physical Fitness of Athletics shall develop, maintain, and monitor a schedule by The Director of Athletics shall develop, mamiam, aiiu munnui a which all students interested in participating in athletic activities will receive a physical examination by a licensed health professional. The nature and degree UllyMcai ** --------------------- x . of student participation will depend upon the students physical fitness. 70 711 1. 2. EXTRACURRICULAR ACTIVITIES EXTRACURRICULAR ACTIVITIES TRANSPORTATION CITIZENSHIP GRADING Interscholastic athletes will be provided transportation to attend regularly scheduled conference games and post season competitions. Citizenship Grade of 0 an outstanding (0) citizenship grade if he/she Intramural athletes will be provided transportation to attend postseason competition that is of an intra-city nature. A student is eligible to receive------------------ , , - -. , , has not received more than 2 documents during a grading penod\nhowever, the documents may not result in a sanction for a 1 in citizenship. Citizenship Grade of 1 ADMISSION Participants (competing athletes. Little Rock School District bands, dance teams, drill teams and cheerleaders) who are scheduled to perform shall be admitted without admission charge to LRSD athletic events. A student becomes ineligible for an outstanding (0) citizenship grade upon the receipt of any Category 1 sanction resulting in a disciplinary sanction. except an in-school suspension. SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS FOR DRILL TEAMS, CHEERLEADERS AND PEP SQUADS Citizenship Grade of 2 A student becomes ineligible for a citizenship grade of one (1) upon receipt of any Category 1 sanction resulting in an in-school suspension. A. Eligibility Requirements: (Scholastic eligibility requirements shall become effective for cheerleaders, drill teams, and pep squads at the time of tryouts.) Citizenship Grade 3 A student becomes ineligible for a citizenship grade of two (2) upon: 1. All grade levels will be eligible for membership in cheerleaders pep squads. B. Selection of Officers: Being referred for disciplinary action from the classroom to a building administrator when he/she evidences an emerging pattern ot inappropriate behavior. Once the student is referred from the classroom or other assigned area to an administrator for disciplinary action, a citizenship grade of 3 will be assigned provided the allegation is IS Cheerleader/Drill Team: substantiated by the administrator, due process IS disciplinary action results in an out-of-school suspension. accorded, and the 1. 2. 3. Each squad, after being selected, will nominate its candidates for office. Nominees must meet requirements set forth in the group's constitution. Only squad members will be allowed to vote. The vote shall be by secret ballot. 2. Receiving an out-of-school suspension for violations on an offense in C. Summer Practices: No summer practices will be required for middle school students. 72 Category 2 of the student conduct code (pp. 17-25, Student Handbook.) Citizenship Grade 4 A student becomes ineligible for any citizenship grade, other than four (4), when he/she receives a long-term suspension or expulsion recommendation. 73EXTRACURRICULAR ACTIVITIES CITIZENSHIP GRADING GUIDELINES administrator assigned If a student receives a long-term suspension or expulsion recommendation, a citizenship grade of 4 will be automatically assigned provided the allegation is substantiated, the procedure has been followed, and due process has been accorded. 3 4 Any behavior that results in a short-term, out of school suspension. Any behavior that results in a long-term suspension or expulsion. A student has the right to appeal a citizenship grade using the procedures outlined in the Student Handbook (page 46). Usually these would fall in Category 2 Offenses, first offense. In the event that a student violates school rules or regulations while he/she is not under direct supervision of a classroom teacher (who would normally document the infraction and record the appropriate grade on the report card), the responsibility for handling the manner rests with the administration. Usually these would fall in Category 2, second and/or third offenses or Category 3 Offenses. The assignment of the appropriate citizenship grade for the report card will be recorded by the registrar at the direction of the administrator. Similarly, citizenship grades of 3 and 4 are to be recorded on the record card by the registrar at the direction of the administrator. The administrator will be responsible for identifying the classroom teacher who will record the citizenship grade 3 or 4 that is assigned during the grading period. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 0 CITIZEN GRADING GUIDELINES CLASSROOM TEACHER ASSIGNED 1 2 10. 11. 12. Theft/Theft by Receiving Gambling Fighting Sexual Misconduct Use of Profanity Directed to or About a Staff Person in a Non-threatening Manner Loitering Breaking and Entering/Vandalism Repeated Violation of Category 1 Offenses Repeated Violation of Category 2 Offenses Disorderly Conduct Hindering/ Interfering With a School Function Harassing Communications Forgery or Falsification of 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Assault/Battery Theft/Theft by Receiving Gambling Fighting Sexual Misconduct Use of Profanity Directed To a Staff Person in a Non-threatening Manner False Alarm Loitering Breaking and Entering/Vandalism A student may receive 2 documents during a grading period\nhowever, those documents may not result in a sanction for a 1 in citizenship. Any Category 1 sanction resulting in a disciplinary sanction, except an in- school suspension. Any Category 1 sanction resulting in an In-school suspension. Examples: Sent home Detention Hall Information 13. Possession/Use of Paging Devices (Beepers), Cellular Phones and/or Other Electronic Communication Devices 14. Use of Fireworks 15. Use and/or Possession of Alcohol, Controlled Substances or Unauthorized Drugs or Substances 16. Participation in Prohibited Clubs, Street Gangs, Fraternities, Sororities or Similar Organizations Saturday School 10. Repeated Violation of Category 1 or 2 Offenses 11. Disorderly Conduct/Hindering/ Interfering With a School Function 12. Harassing Communications 13. Forgery or Falsification of Information 14. Possession/Use of Paging/Electronic Devices 15. Use of/Fireworks Multi-fingered Rings/Chemical Agents/Laser Pins 16. Use/Possession/Sale of Alcohol/Drugs 17. Participation in Prohibited Clubs 18. Arson 19. Physical/V'erbal Assault of Staff 20. Possession of Weapon/Firearm/Explosives 21. Extortion/Robbery 22. Unlawful Assembly and Inciting to Riot 23. Terroristic Threatening J 74 75 LSTUDENT RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES STUDENT RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES DRESS CODE The dress code includes the following specific guidelines. Student dress and grooming are the responsibility of the student and his/her parent. When a student's dress or grooming disrupts the learning process, the principal or his/her designee has the responsibility to take action. The following guidelines are to be used in determining appropriate dress and grooming in the school environment. 1. Dress and grooming is to be in keeping with health, safety, and sanitary practices. A. Students may not wear clothing or hair styles that can be hazardous in educational activities such as lab, shop, physical education, or art classes. B. Shoes must be worn as required by law. Thongs, beach footwear, slippers, or other footwear that is inappropriate for school are not to be worn. |NOl-no tank tops or underwear may be worn as outer garments -no -no spandex shorts may be worn shorts may be worn if they are more than four (4) inches above the knee -no pajamas -no clothing with negative overtones that appear to be derogatory or discriminatory may be worn -no clothing or accessories that are profane, suggestive or inflammatory -no shirts and blouses tied at the midriff, clothing with bare midriff, or clothing not properly fastened are to be worn -no clothing or accessories of prohibited organizations or street gangs may be worn -no pants shall be worn that fall/sag below the waistline 2. Clothing and accessories are not to substantially disrupt the educational process. A. Students are not to wear clothing, buttons, patches, jewelry, or any other items with words, phrases, symbols, pictures, or signs that are indecent, profane, suggestive, or inflammatory, or that have negative overtones that appear to be derogatory or discriminatory. B. Students are not to wear suggestive or revealing clothing that diverts attention from the learning process or that may lead to a student being insulted, assaulted, or approached disrespectfully. C. Students are not to wear sunglasses, caps, coats, or hats in the building. Coats may be worn in breezeways or open areas of the building during inclement weather. D. Students are not to wear clothing, outer wear, pins, symbols, or insignia of prohibited organizations or street gangs while at school or at any school-related activity. It is suggested that students not wear expensive jewelry or other expensive accessories to school. It is difficult to recover such items when they are lost. The local school and/or the Little Rock School District are not responsible for replacing lost or stolen property. 78 79STUDENT RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES STUDENT RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES Each school must keep a register of all requests for and grants of access to a student's education records except disclosures to the student, his/her parents, or school officials\ndisclosures of directory information\nand disclosures pursuant to the parents' or eligible student's written consent. c release SYSTEM OF INFORMATION OUTSIDE OF THE SCHOOL with Authorized Access\nStudent health records will be\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_296","title":"Compliance hearing exhibits, 97-116","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":["1998/2001"],"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 law and legislation","Education--Evaluation","Educational statistics"],"dcterms_title":["Compliance hearing exhibits, 97-116"],"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/296"],"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":["exhibition (associated concept)"],"dcterms_extent":["131 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\nExhibit No. 97: LI230-90 Memos from Dr. Watson re: behavioral report deficiencies. ALITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM STREET LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201 OFFICE OF STUDENT HEARING TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Dr. Linda Watson, Assistant Superintendent Student Discipline Behavio^ Report Deficiencies DATE: Your l^avior Report(s) sent to the Student Hearing Office __dated__ 'arding 'the following deficiencies: Insufficient evidence to support recommendation Administrative Codes are absent or incomplete Due Process Hearing Section incomplete Parent Report Section incomplete Building principals signature missing Report was not received in the Student Hearing Office within the time frame prescribed in the Little Rock School District SRRH Student information Section I incomplete Other Comment/Disposition Please note the disposition and/or deficiencies identified above and return the corrected Behavior Report form immediately to the Student Hearing Office. Attachments(s) C: Associate Superintendent Assistant Superintendent lTSON, LINDA rrom: Sent\nro: Subject\nWATSON, LINDA Monday, June 04, 2001 1\n17 PM PHILLIPS, TABITHA Long-term suspensions Mrs. Phillips\nI am reading 5/11/01 and the student may return - -ion 1 noticed that the suspension began on 5/i /u losnua n. u\u0026lt;=y'=' may issue short-term suspensions for 10 day y , which violates taw. P nf the Board of Directors. A memo was - A .4 A ic an nd reouires a vote of the Boa  Anmmo states that anythmg^^ovei^^10 days s a Joshua R. Degter's suspension. short-term suspensions today, 6/04/01 State Law sent out earlier this year which stated that principals may expulsion and requires not suspend students for more than 10 days without it coming to my office. unless you send it through as a long-term suspension 1TO: FROM: SUBJECT: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201 October 28, 1998 Mary Menking, Principal Williams Elementary Magnet School Linda Watson\nAss!stant Superintendent Student Discipline Deficient Behavior Report On October 23, 1998, the Student Hearing Office received a Behavior Report from Williams Elementary Magnet School, dated October 22, 1998, recommending that Alex Martin be expelled. The Behavior Report did not have information marked in the Due Process Hearing section. Please complete this section and return to Student Hearing. If you have questions, feel free to contact me.TO: FROM\nSUBJECT: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201 October 28, 1998 Lionel Ward, Principal Garland Elementary School Linda WatsonjAssistant Superintendent Student Discipline Deficient Behavior Report On October 28, 1998, the Student Hearing Office received a Behavior Report from Garland Elementary School, dated October 27, 1998, recommending that Doncurian Ely be expelled. The Behavior Report did not have information marked in the Due Process Hearing and Administrative Action sections. Please complete these sections and return to Student Hearing. If you have questions, feel free to contact me.TO: FROM\nSUBJECT\nLITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201 October 28,1998 Vernon Smith, Principal Forest Heights Junior High School 0- 4U-' . Linda Watsotv Assistant Supenntendent Student Discipline Deficient Behavior Report On October 26, 1998, the Student Hearing Office received a Behavior Report from Forest Heights Junior High School, dated October 20, 1998, recommending that Brandon Mobley be expelled. The Behavior Report did not have information marked in the Due Process Hearing section. Mr. Smith was this student given due process? If so, please complete this section and return to Student Hearing. If this student was not given due process, he will be returned to Forest Heights. If you have questions, feel free to contact me.ir P.W/117 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MaRKHAM STREET LITTLEROCK, ARKANSAS 72201 huv - OFFICE OF STUDENT HEARING TO: FROM: Dr. Linda Wats6?^, Assistant Superintendent Student Discipline Assistant Superintendent subject\n: DATE: Beha^r Report Deficiencies / 7, ' y*' o the Student Hearing Office . xX, ( M _______ ^dated has the following deficiencies: lice Mg:yarding t Insuflicient evidence to support recommendation Administrative Codes are absent or incomplete Due Process Rearing Section iacomptete Parent Report Section incomplete Building principals signature missing Report was not received In the Student Hearing Office within the time frame prescribed in the Little Rock School District SRRH Student Information Section I incomplete Other Comment/Disposition Please note the disposition and/or deficiencies identified above and return the corrected Behavior Report form Immediately to the Student Hearing Office, Attaclimen(s(s) C\nAssociate Superintendent Assistant Superintendent LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM STREET LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201 TO:. zpmCEOEST ENT HEARING FROM: SUBJECT: Dr. Linda Watson, Assistant Superintendent Student Discipline Behayior Report Deficiencies DATE: I' our behavio/Report^) sent to the Student Hearing Offic^eMi Your behavio] xding hasTEe following deficiencies: / Insufficient evidence to support recommendation Administrative Codes are absent or incomplete u- Due Process Hearing Section incomplete Parent Report Section incomplete Building principals signature missing Report was not received in the Student Hearing Office within the time frame prescribed in the Little Rock School District SRRH Student information Section I incomplete Other Comment/Disposition Please note the disposition and/or deficiencies identified above and return the corrected Behavior Report form immediately to the Student Hearing Office. Attachments(s) C: Associate Superintendent Assistant SuperintendentTO: FROM: SUBJECT: DATE: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM STREET LITTLEROCK, ARKANSAS 72201 OFFICE OF STUDENT HEARING UtMLLUr ------------- - . hr. Linda Wats^M-ssistant Superintendent Student Discipline Behavior Report Deficiencies the Student Hearing Office bearding dated ice rgi h?s the following deficiencies: Insufficient evidence to support recommendation Administrative Codes are absent or incomplete Due Process Hearing Section incomplete Parent Report Section incomplete Building principals signature missing Report was not received in the Student Hearing frame prescribed in the Little Rock School District SRRH Student information Section I incomplete Other Comment/Disposition Ple.s. te the disposition and/or dendencies Identined aboveand retnrn the corrected Behavior Report term immedlalel, to the Student Hearing Office. Attachments(s) C: Associate Superintendent Assistant SuperintendentLITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM STREET LITTLEROCK, ARKANSAS 72201 OFFICE ORSTUDENT HEARING TO: FROM: Dr. Linda Wats^, Assistant Superintendent Student Discipline SUBJECT: DATE: Beha^or Report Deficiencies 4^ / Your behavior .6' sVsent to dated haS^he following deficiencies: Insufficient evidence to support recommendation Administrative Codes are absent or incomplete Due Process Hearing Section incomplete Parent Report Section incomplete Building principals signature missing Report was not received in the Student Hearing Office vdthin the time frame prescribed in the Little Rock School District SRRH Student information Section I incomplete Other Comment/Disposition Please note the disposition and/or deficiencies identified above and retnrn the corrected Savl Report form Immediately to the Student Hearing Office. Attachments(s) C: Associate Superintendent Assistant Superintendent LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM STREET LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: OFFICE OF STUDENT HEARING Dr. Linda WatsMf,%sisttht Superintendent Student Discipline Behavior Report Deficiencies DATE: Your behaviorReport(^seiU'^thi A ! S-4- lias the following deficiencies: le Student Hearing Office/regarding dated Insufficient evidence to support recommendation Administrative Codes are absent or incomplete Due Process Hearing Section incomplete Parent Report Section incomplete Building principals signature missing Report was not ir ece-i-v-e--d-- -i-n-- t-h--e-- -S--t udent Hearin-g O. ffice within the time otidu frame prescribed in the Little Rock School District SRRH. Student information Section I incomplete Other Comment/Disposition Please note the disposition and/or deficiencies identified above and return the corrected Behavior Report form immediately to the Student Hearing Office. Attachments(s) C: Associate Superintendent TO: FROM: Dr. Lind: SUBJECT\nDATE: little rock SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM STREET LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201 OFFICE OF STUDENT HEARING Student Discipline 7 Assistant^perintendent Behavior Report Deficiencies /X /Z n 4-n behavior Re^(^ sent to the Student Yo^ behavior Report(s) sent to t has the following deficiencies: Insufficient evidence to support recommendation Administrative Codes are absent or incomplete Due Process Hearing Section incomplete Parent Report Section incomplete Building principals signature missing Report was not received in the Student Hearing Office within the time frame prescribed in the Little Rock School District SRRH Student information Section I incomplete Other Comment/Disposition Please note the disposition and/or deficiencies identified above and return the corrected Behavior Report form immediately to the Student Hearing Office. Attachments(s) C: Associate Superintendent Assistant SuperintendentLITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM STREET LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201 OFFICE OF STUDENT HEARING TO: FROM: Dr. Linda Watson, Assistant Superintendent Student Discipline SUBJECT: Bieehhaayvjtoerr Report DDeeffiicciieenncciiee:s DATE: )U/behaviB^Mort(s) s - .eort(sent to the Student Hearing Office r\u0026amp; has the following deficiencies: di dated ! ree^djng^ n/ iqjSp Insufficient evidence to support recommendation Administrative Codes are absent or incomplete Due Process Hearing Section incomplete Parent Report Section incomplete Building principals signature missing Report was not received in the Student Hearing Office within the time frame prescribed in the Little Rock School District SRRH Student information Section I incomplete Other Comment/Disposition Please note the disposition and/or deficiencies identified above and return the corrected Behavior Report form immediately to the Student Hearing Office. Attachments(s) C: Associate Superintendent Assistant Superintendent LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM STREET little rock, ARKANSAS 72201 FROM: SUBJECT: DATE: OFFICE OF STUDENT HEARING Dr. Linda Watson, Assistant Superintendent Student Discipline BehayiM Report Deficiencies l\"^:!I   .  _ X7aot Your behayior Repprt(s) sent to the Student Hearing Office regarding dated_______ TO: \" the following deficiencies: Insufficient evidence to support recommendation Administrative Codes are absent or incomplete Due Process Hearing Section incomplete Parent Report Section incomplete Building principals signature missing Report was not received in the Student Hearing O^^ the time frame prescribed in the Little Rock School District SRRH Student information Section I incomplete Other Comment/Disposition Please--------- . Behavior Report form immediately to Attachments(s) C: Associate Superintendent Assistant SuperintendentTO: FROM\nDr. Linda SUBJECT\nDATE: little rock school distwct 810 WEST MARKHAM ST^ET little rock, ARKANSAS 72201 OFFICE OF STUDENT HEARING atson, Assistant Superintendent Student DiscipUne\ne regarding __dated ,the Student Hearing Office ha: le following deficiencies: Insufficient evidence to support recommendation Administrative Codes are absent or incomplete Due Process Hearing Section incomplete Parent Report Section incomplete Building principals signature missing not received in the Student Hearing Report was frame prescribed in the Little Rock School District SRRH Office within the time Student information Section I incomplete Other Conunent/Disposition Please note the disposition and/or deficiencies identified above and return the corrected Behavior Report form immediately to the Student Hearing Office. Attachments(s) C: Associate Superintendent Assistant Superintendent TO\nFROM: SUBJECT: DATE: little ROCK SC HOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM STREET LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201 F STUDENT HEARING Dr. Linda Watson, Assistant Superintendent Student Discipline Behaviw Report Deficiencies 'the following deficiencies: 5 Insufficient evidence to support recommendation Administrative Codes are absent or incomplete Due Process Hearing Section incomplete Parent Report Section incomplete Building principals signature missing Report was not received in the Student Hearing frame prescribed in the Little Rock School District SRRH Student information Section I incomplete Other Comment/Disposition Please note the disposition and/or deficiencies ies identified above and return the corrected Behavior Report lauuaivtMM ---------------- . form immediately to the Student Hearing Office. Attachments(s) C\nAssociate Superintendent Assistant Superintendent LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM STREET LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201 TO: OFFICE OF STUDENT HEARING FROM: SUBJECT: Dr. Linda Watson, Assistant Superintendent Student Discipline Behavior Report Deficiencies DATE: Yourr behaviorRepprt(s) the Allowing deficienci ,rt(s)/ent to the Student Hearing :he following deficiencies: Insufficient evidence to support recommendation Administrative Codes are absent or incomplete Due Process Hearing Section incomplete Parent Report Section incomplete Building principals signature missing Report was not received in the Student Hearing Office within the time frame prescribed in the Little Rock School District SRRH Student information Section I incomplete Other Comment/Disposition Please note Ihe dlspositlo. and/or derieiencles Identilied above and return the corrected rlvdbv UUlV V**V --------------- Behavior Report form immediately to the Student Hearing Office. Attachments(s) C: Associate Superintendent Assistant Superintendent little rock school ^strict 810 WWEESSTT MMAAKRiKsH-nA/vMi SoT. REET. little rock, ARKANSAS 72201 OFFICE OF STUDENT HEARING TO: FROM: Dr. Linda a^ats^,Assistant Superintendent SUBJECT: Student Discipline Behavior Report Deficiencies DATE: Your behayi it Hearing Offij dated ji4g the following Insufficient evidence to support recommendation Administrative Codes are absent or incomplete Due Process Hearing Section incomplete Parent Report Section incomplete Building principals signature missing Report was frame prescribed not received in the Student Hearing  ,he Little Rock School Dktnct SRRH Office within the time Student information Section I incomplete Other^______ _ Comment/Disposition SiXoSX\" and return the corrected Attachments(s) C: Associate Superintendent Assistant Superintendent 1 I1 little rock school district 810 west MARKHAM STREET LITTLEROCK, ARKANSAS 72201 FROM: SUBJECT: DATE: son, Assis nt Superintendent Student Discipline OFFIICCE,^F STUDENT HEARING Behavi^Report Deficiencies l/ . . . . H Your behavioiRepqrtj^sent to the Student Hearing Office dated TO: , Wthe followirig deficiencies: Insufficient evidence to support recommendation Administrative Codes are absent or incomplete Due Process Hearing Section incomplete Parent Report Section incomplete Building principals signature missing  1 lu .be Student Hearing Office within the time Little Rock School District SRRH Report was not received in the frame prescribed in the 1-------- Student information Section I incomplete Other Comment/Disposition Please note the disposition and/or deficiencies identified above and return the corrected Behavior Report form immediately to the Student Hearing Office. Attachments(s) C: Associate Superintendent Assistant Superintendent TO: FROM: SUBJECT: DATE: little rock SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM STREET LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201 OFFICE OF STUDENT HEARING I Dr. Linda Watsbfa', Assistant i Student Discipline Behavior Report Deficiencies Your behavior Report(s) sent to has the following deficiencies: the Student Hearing Office regarding dated______ Insufficient evidence to support recommendation Administrative Codes are absent or incomplete Due Process Hearing Section incomplete Parent Report Section incomplete Building principals signature missing Report no. received 1. .he SWden. Hewing *\u0026gt;  frame prescribed in .he Link Rock School D.s.r.c. SRRH Student information Section I incomplete Other_____ Comment/Disposition Behavior Report form immediately to Attachments(s) C: Associate Superintendent Assistant Superintendent TO: FROM: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM STREET LITTLEROCK, .ARKANSAS 72201 OFFICEJQF STUDENT HEARING Watson, Student Discipline Assistant Superintendent SUBJECTBehavi^Report Deficiencies DATE: Your behavioxJRepi sent to the Student Hearing Office. dated jM)\u0026lt;the following Insufficient evidence to support recommendation Administrative Codes are absent or incomplete Due Process Hearing Section incomplete Parent Report Section incomplete i v *. *XW**w*i-**'^- Building principals signature missing Report was not received in the Student Hearing Office within the time fra*m e prescribed in the Little Rock 1 Sch1 ool DistriCc'tT JS'DRTJRH Student information Section I incomplete Other Comment/Disposition Please note the disposition and/or deficiencies identified above and return the corrected Behavior Report form immediately to the Student Hearing Office. Attachments(s) C: Associate Superintendent Assistant Superintendent I i. Cj-\u0026gt;y-- LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM STREET LITTLEROCK, ARKANSAS 72201 Ar- Q 4i f OFFICE ORSTUDENT HEARING TO: FROM: SUBJECT: DATE: Dr. Linda Watsi Student Discipline ^,Assistant Superintendent Behauor Report Deficiencies 4x liii Your beha-vior haS^he foUo-wing Insufficient evidence to support recommendation Administrative Codes are absent or incomplete Due Process Hearing Section incomplete Parent Report Section incomplete Building principals signature missing Report was not received in the Student Hearing Office within the time frame prescribed in the Little Rock School District SRRH Student information Section I incomplete Other Comment/Disposition Please note the disposition and/or deficiencies identified above and return the corrected Behavior Report form immediately to the Student Hearing Office. Attachments(s) C: Associate Superintendent Assistant Superintendent LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM STREET LITTLEROCK, ARKANSAS 72201 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: OFnCE OF STUDENT HEARING Dr. Linda Watson, Assistant Superintendent Student Discipline BBeehhaavviiowr RReeppoorrtt Dueeifiicciieenncciieess Cr'S#ir Ill n r r* UCs. 0 I ^8 r *' DATE: Your behavior Reppr^sent to the Student Hearing Office regarding // dated--------------------- the following deficiencies: Insufficient evidence to support recommendation Administrative Codes are absent or incomplete Due Process Hearing Section incomplete Parent Report Section incomplete Building principals signature missing Report was not received in the Student Hearing Office within the time frame prescribed in the Little Rock School District SRRH Student information Section I incomplete Other Comment/Disposition Please note the disposition and/or deficiencies identified above and return the corrected Behavior Report form immediately to the Student Hearing Office. Attachments(s) C: Associate Superintendent Assistant Superintendent NOV 2 4 1998 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM STREET LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201 1 a ! (' t OFnCE OF STUDENT HEARING TO: FROM: Dr. Linda Watson, Assistant Superintendent Student Discipline SUBJECT: lehavlor Report Deficiencies DATE: Yourr behavior^eDprt(s) th^ollowing deficienci ,rt(s)2ent to the Student Hearing ihe tollowing deficiencies: Insufficient evidence to support recommendation Administrative Codes are absent or incomplete Due Process Hearing Section incomplete Parent Report Section incomplete Building principals signature missing Report was not received in the Student Hearing Office within the time frame prescribed in the Little Rock School District SRRH Student information Section I incomplete Other Comment/Disposition Please note the disposition and/or deficiencies identified above and return the corrected Behavior Report form immediately to the Student Hearing Office. Attachments(s) C: Associate Superintendent Assistant Superintendent Exhibit No. 98\nDiscipline reports used by Dr. Watson in conferencing with Hall High School. LI230-90 IDML008R2 Date: 1/09/01 School 002 HALL Dlsclplina Management System Action Summary Report 2000/08/21 2001/01/05 Page 1 11:53 AM hr, (\ng ?. fK' ACTION: PC PARENT CALLED Sch 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 Student __________ ____________ 930025 AMOS, CANDICE M^ 915665 BROWN, ERIC K. 923993 BRCWN, FRANKLIN J. 974900 CARROLL, KENNEIH W. 921026 CATO, WHITNEY J. 933666 CLAYBORNE, THOMAS W. 92B852 COATS, ARCHIE M. 927165 CYRUS, TERRELL C. 919723 DAVIS, JEFF. 919723 DAVIS, JEFF. 915910 DONAHUE, JESSICA M. 928810 DULANEY, VAMON. 930261 GREEN, CHRISTOPHE B. 916573 HARRIS, MICHAEL D. 923794 JAMES, QUINTON T, 992375 JOHNSON, EARVIN B. 919336 JOHNSON, TAURUS T. 922193 JONES, COREY D. 933051 JONES, SHANELLE L. 933051 JONES, SHANELLE L. 894448 LOWE, CORNELL D. 922360 MARSHALL, KENDALL E. 987741 MCMILLON, CHASE R. 919855 MORRIS, THURLON. 933035 MORTON, BRIAN E. 960701 NORRIS, LATOYA R. 919843 NOWDEN, SHAKITA. 908102 PATTON, MICHAEL C. PERRY, JASON L. PETERS, LATISHA S. 926747 TRUMBLE, STUART S. 935480 USSERY, BRYAN O. 962849 WADE, BRANDI L. 916864 WALKER, GERALD D. 929131 WILLIAMS, BRANDY L. 938569 WILLIAMS, CURTIS L. Data 9/12/00 9/21/00 10/27/00 9/18/00 11/08/00 9/14/00 8/29/00 9/21/00 10/27/00 12/07/00 9/22/00 9/12/00 9/19/00 8/28/00 8/29/00 9/01/00 8/24/00 12/04/00 9/08/00 9/22/00 8/30/00 9/12/00 9/14/00 11/10/00 9/15/00 9/12/00 11/08/00 8/29/00 11/08/00 9/12/00 9/28/00 10/25/00 11/09/00 12/04/00 12/11/00 9/13/00 9/12/00 Cl 09 10 09 09 12 09 09 09 09 09 12 09 09 12 10 12 12 10 09 09 11 09 12 12 09 09 12 12 12 12 09 09 09 10 09- 09 09 Eth 02 02 02 02 01 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 01 02 02 02 Sex F M M M F M M M M M F M M M M M M M F F M M M M M F F M M F M M F M In fraction________ _________ _- 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2090 NON-THREATENING PROFANITY AT 0 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 1060 FAILURE TO FOLLCW RULES OR DIR 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 1060 FAILURE TO FOLLOW RULES OR DIR 1070 REFUSE TO OBEY BUS RULES/REGUL 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 1050 LEFT SCHOOL/CLASS WITHOUT PERM 1060 FAILURE TO FOLLOW RULES OR DIR 1060 FAILURE TO FOLLOW ROLES OR DIR 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2110 DISORDERLY CONDUCT 1030 MINOR ALTERCATION 1060 FAILURE TO FOLLOW RULES OR DIR 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OB DIRECT 1030 MINOR ALTERCATION 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 1060 FAILURE TO FOLLOW RULES OR DIB 1050 LEFT 02----- F 02 02 F M ACTION: PF PARENT CONFERENCE SCHCKHi/CLASS WITHOlfT PERM 1060 FAILURE TO FOLLCW RULES OR DIR 1060 FAILURE TO FOLLCW RULES OR DIR 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2110 DISORDERLY CONDUCT 1062 REFUSE-TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY BULES OR DIRECT Inf Pate 9/08/00 9/15/00 10/10/00 9/14/00 11/08/00 9/12/00 8/29/00 9/13/00 10/27/00 12/01/00 9/22/00 8/31/00 9/19/00 8/28/00 8/29/00 9/01/00 8/24/00 12/01/00 9/07/00 9/22/00 8/29/00 9/08/00 9/14/00 11/10/00 9/12/00 9/08/00 11/08/00 8/29/00 11/08/00 9/12/00 9/25/00 10/25/00 11/09/00 12/01/00 12/07/00 9/08/00 9/08/00 //yo t Sch 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 Studant___________________ ___ 969383 ALBA, RAMON. 917218 EASON, KATRINA L. 926278 HALL, CORMELLA L. 916418 PAYNE, JOHN W. 918947 PETTUS, TERRILYN. 959550 POWELL, WALTER. 924679 REED, ANGELA R. 910466 BOUSE, TYRELL E. 917395 TUCKER, KDURTNEY C. Date 12/04/00 9/11/00 8/30/00 10/05/00 12/05/00 8/29/00 9/11/00 10/02/00 11/20/00 Cl 09 12 10 12 12 12 10 12 12 Eth 03 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 Infraction ii 1050 LEFT SCHOOL/CLASS WITHOUT PERM 1110 USE OF VERBAL ABUSE/FIGHTING W F F M F M F M M 3072 VERBAL ABUSE OF STAFF 1070 REFUSE TO OBEY BUS RULES/REGUL 1040 BEHAVIOR THAT VIOLATES A PERSO 1060 FAILURE TO FOLLCW RULES OR DIR 1110 USE OF VERBAL ABUSE/FIGHPING W 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 1060 FAILURE TO FOLLCW RULES OR DIR Inf Date 12/04/00 9/11/00 8/30/00 10/05/00 12/05/00 8/29/00 9/11/00 10/02/00 11/20/00 // DML008R2 Date: 1/09/01 School 002 HALL Discipline Management Systran Action Sunmary Report 2000/08/21 2001/01/05 Page 2 11:53 AM ACTION: SW STUDENT WARNED Sch 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 Student _______ ___________ 979010 ABDO, JON I. 974579 H,-0TAIBI, TUKKI T. 918699 ALEXAMDER, DERRICK D. 926887 ALLISON, CRYSTAL N. 936556 ANDERSON, JULIA M. 927271 ANDERSON, THEODIS. 922422 ANGLIN, ANTHONY D. 917188 ANTHONY, TAMMI D. 965739 ARNOLD, ANGELA M. 965739 ARNOLD, ANGELA M. 929840 ATKINSON, SHAKERRA L. 928073 AUSTIN, SHAKANA M. 928751 BEAVERS, CORTE L. 928906 BEULAH, RONNIE E. 928080 BLUEFER, SABRENDIA L. 928080 BLUEFER, SABRENDIA L. 935386 BRCWN, AMY Y. 929347 BROWN, BENJAMIN D. 927231 BROWN, ERIC L. 927231 BRCWN, ERIC L. 923993 BRCWN, FRANKLIN J. 923993 BRCWN, FRANKLIN J. 937002 BROWN, TANISHA R. 911925 BRYANT, ALEX C. 929848 BUCKNER, CEDRIC R. 933200 BUFORD, SHAUNICE L. 927878 BURSE, TONY D. 935483 CARTER, ARRIN T. 92BB52 COATS, ARCHIE H. 002- 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 922465 CRUTCHFIELD, SHANKA L. 927165 CYRUS, TERRELL C. 933180 DAVIS, NIKKI T. 300226 DAVIS, SHAUNTE. 932736 DIXON, ASHLEY N. 916444 DOSS, KENNETH W. 935451 DOWTHARD, ERNEST. 929843 DUHART, ALLYNNCIA S. 922858 DUHART, COURTNEY D. 928810 DULANEY, VAMON. 917218 EASON, KATRINA L. 935320 EVANS, ALICIA W. 923617 GILES, TYRONE D. 927578 GOODMAN, KEISHA N. 927578 GOODMAN, KEISHA N. 927576 GOODMAN, KEITH D. 927576 GOODMAN, KEITH D. 928297 GRAY, JENNIFER D. 992603 GREEN, TAKISHA S. 929523 GREENE, TRUDRELL L. 928418 GRIFFIN, LARON L. 921517 HADLEY, CHAUNCEY R. Date 10/16/00 9/07/00 9/18/00 1/05/01 12/06/00 9/20/00 11/16/00 9/12/00 9/05/00 9/08/00 12/05/00 9/07/00 9/11/00 9/14/00 9/19/00 1/05/01 12/07/00 9/19/00 9/01/00 10/25/00 8/29/00 12/07/00 9/22/00 12/01/00 8/30/00 9/11/00 10/05/00 9/07/00 11/21/00 10/30/00 8/29/00 12/07/00 12/05/00 10/26/00 11/09/00 10/17/00 10/06/00 9/01/00 9/18/00 9/01/00 9/20/00 11/16/00 9/12/00 11/06/00 8/31/00 9/12/00 10/24/00 11/20/00 9/07/00 8/31/00 10/24/00 Cl \"09 Eth 10 11 09 09 09 11 12 09 09 09 09 09 09 09 09 09 09 09 09 09 09 09 12 09 09 09 09 09 09 09 09 12 09 12 09 09 10 09 12 09 10 09 09 09 09 09 09 12 09 09 04 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02  02 02 02 02 02 02 02 . 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 Sex M 1 M M F F M M F F F F F M M F F F M M M M M F M M F M M M F M F M F M M F M M F F M F F M N F F M M M Infraction__________ __________  1133 REPEATED SCHOOL/CLASS TARDIES 1030 MINOR ALTERCATION 1062 REFUSE 10 OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 1030 MINOR ALTERCATION 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 2123 POSSESSION OR U3E/PA0ING DEVIC VERBAL ABUSE/FIGHTING W : TO FOLLOW RULES OR DIR 1110 USE OF  1060 FAILURE 1060 FAILURE TO FOLLCW RULES OR DIR 2123 POSSESSION OR USE/PAGING DEVIC TO OBEY BULES OR DIBECT : TO FOLLOW BULES OR DIR 1062 REFUSE : 1060 FAILURE 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 1060 FAILURE TO 1062 REFUSE TO ( ) FOLLOW RULES OR DIR OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 1030 MINOR ALTERCATION 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY BULES OR DIRECT 1060 FAILURE TO follow rules or DIR 1030 MINOR ALTERCATION 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIBECT 1060 FAILUBE TO FOLLOW BULES OB DIB 1030 MINOR ALTERCATION 1110 USE OF VERBAL ABUSE/FIGHTING W 1062 REFUSE TO 1062 REFUSE TO 1062 REFUSE TO Inf Date 10/16/00 OBEY RULES OR DIRECT OBEY RULES OR DIRECT OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 1060 FAILURE TO FOLLOW RULES OR DIR 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2090 NON-THREATENING PROFANITY AT O 1060 FAILURE TO FOLLCW RULES OR DIB 1030 MINOR ALTERCATION 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 2123 POSSESSION OR USE/PAGING DEVIC 1060 FAILUKE TO FOLLOW RULES OR DIR 1133 REPEATED SCHOOL/CLASS TARDIES 1060 FAILURE TO FOLLCW RULES OR DIR 1060 failure to follow RULES OR DIR 9/07/00 9/18/00 1/05/01 12/05/00 9/08/00 11/17/00 9/12/00 9/05/00 8/24/00 12/01/00 9/07/00 9/01/00 9/11/00 9/13/00 1/05/01 12/01/00 9/13/00 9/01/00 10/25/00 8/29/00 12/07/00 9/22/00 12/01/00 8/29/00 9/01/00 10/03/00 9/07/00 11/21/00 10/30/00 8/29/00 12/07/00 12/05/00 10/26/00 10/16/00 1030 MINOR ALTERCATION 1060 FAILURE TO FOLLCW RULES OR DIR 1070 REFUSE TO OBEY BUS RULES/REGUL 1030 MINOR ALTERCATION 1060 FAILURE TO FOLLOW RULES OR DIR 1030 MINOR ALTERCATION 1060 FAILURE TO FOLLCW RULES OR DIR 1060 FAILURE TO FOLLOW RULES OB DIR 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 1030 MINOR ALTERCATION 1060 FAILURE TO FOLLOW RULES OR DIR 1030 MINOR ALTERCATION __ 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY BULES OB DIBECT 10/05/00 9/01/00 9/15/00 9/01/00 9/14/00 11/16/00 9/12/00 10/01/00 8/31/00 9/12/00 10/18/00 11/20/00 9/07/00 8/30/00 10/19/00 DML008R2 Date: 1/09/01 Discipline Management System Action Summary Report School 002 HALL 2000/0B/21 2001/01/05 ACTION: SW STUDENT WARNED Page 3 11:53 AM Sch 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 . 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 Student________________________ _ 301168 HARRISON, BRANDON D. 301168 HARRISON, BRANDON D. 960268 HAYNES, DERRICK D. 907806 HENDERSON, REGGIN D. 928189 HINES, KEVIN L. 933953 HOLMES, HOY L. 933962 HORTON, TERRA N. 935758 HUMPHREY, AUBREY J. 998645 HYDE, MATTHEW K. 928805 IRBY, TAMARA D. 922193 JONES, COREY D. 922193 JONES, COREY D. 301942 LANKFORD, DAVID C. 917084 LEWIS, ANTON K. 896526 LONDON, TERRY D. 950865 LYTLE, JOSEPH D. 927425 MACK, REGGIE. 928083 MACKINTRUSH, KENDRA L. 933206 MANNING, ARTHUR L. 922360 MARSHALL, KENDALL E. 303251 MARTINEZ, ISAAC. 917390 MATLOCK, MARCUS L. 998332 MCCULLOUGH, LAJEAN M. 913332 MCDANIEL, ARIEL J. 974381 MCDANIEL, AVIVA M. 974381 MCDANIEL, AVIVA M. 993967 MCDANIEL, NELSON D. 980071 MCMULLIN, TOCABRA R. 984984 MEAD, KATBALIYA. 912898 MEITZENHEIMER, BRAIN M. 919344 MILLEN, SHADRICK L. 995504 MILLER, MARQUITA R. 306110 MILLER, PIERRE D. 929413 MINICK, MATTHEW D. 911864 MYERS, KEVIN G. 936111 NEELY, BRANDON M. 936111 NEELY, BRANDON M. 913208 NEELY, DEBECK M. 995351 PARKER, ADRIANE D. 934808 PARKER, HELEN A. 928457 PARKER, KINGSTON E. 916418 PAYNE, JCSN W. 933004 PHILLIPS, CALLIE J. 928088 PIERKOWSKI, DAVIN V. 959550 POWELL, WALTER. 300957 RODRIGUEZ, DANIEL. 990177 SANTIAGO, ROBERT L. ggom Santiago, boberi l. 935039 SCOTT, RODNEY D. 301899 SHELLY, JONATHAN W. 927458 SMITH, ALEXIS C. Date 9/15/00 11/16/00 12/07/00 11/03/00 1/05/01 9/12/00 9/13/00 11/06/00 9/18/00 9/01/00 9/29/00 10/27/00 11/08/00 12/11/00 9/25/00 10/06/00 11/21/00 8/30/00 9/19/00 11/17/00 9/07/00 9/22/00 9/19/00 9/01/00 9/19/00 9/25/00 10/17/00 9/19/00 9/01/00 10/09/00 10/02/00 12/05/00 11/17/00 11/20/00 9/22/00 8/30/00 11/08/00 8/29/00 11/10/00 10/25/00 9/05/00 9/12/00 11/15/00 10/31/00 8/28/00 9/21/00 9/29/00 10/06/00 8/31/00 9/05/00 9/07/00 Cl 09 09 09 12 09 12 09 09 12 09 10 10 09 12 10 09 09 09 09 09 09 12 09 12 09 09 09 09 12 12 12 12 09 10 12 09 09 10 12 09 09 12 09 09 12 12 09 09 09 09 09 Eth 01 01 02 02 02 02 02 02 01 02 02 02 01 02 02 01 02 02, 02 02 03 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 04 02 02 02 02 01 02  02 02 02 02 02 : 02 = 02 02 01 02 03\n06: 06 02  02 02 Sex M M M M M M F M M F H M M M M M M F M M M M F F F F M F F M M F M M M M H M F F M M F M M M M N M M F Infraction_________________________ __ failure to foIiLOw rules or dir 1060 1030 MINOR ALTERCATION 1030 MINOR ALTERCATION 1060 FAILURE TO FOLLOW RULES OR DIR 2123 POSSESSION OR USE/PA0IN6 DEVIC 1060 FAILURE TO FOLLOW RULES OR DIR 1030 MINOR ALTERCATION 1060 FAILURE TO FOLLOW RULES OR DIR 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY BULES OR DIRECT 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 1060 FAILURE TO FOLLOW RULES OR DIR 1133 REPEATED SCHOOL/CLASS TARDIES 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 1050 LEFT SCHOOL/CLASS WITHOUT PERM 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 1060 FAILURE TO FOLLOW RULES OR DIR 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 1030 MINOR ALTERCATICSi 1060 FAILURE TO FOLLOW RULES OR DIR 1060 FAILURE TO FOLLOW RULES OR DIR 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 1133 REPEATED SCHOOL/CLASS TARDIES 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 1060 FAILURE TO FOLLOW RULES OR DIR 1060 FAILURE TO FOLLOW RULES OR DIR 1060 FAILURE TO FOLLOW RULES OR DIR 1110 USB OF VERBAL ABUSB/FIGHTING W 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 1030 MINOR ALTERCATION 1100 USE OR POSSESSION OF TOBACCO 1060 FAILURE TO FOLLOW RULES OR DIR 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 1060 FAILURE TO FOLLOW RULES OR DIR 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY BULES OR DIRECT 1060 FAILURE TO FOLLOW RULES OR DIR 1060 FAILURE TO FOLLOW RULES OR DIB 1110 USE OF VERBAL ABUSE/FIGHTING W 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 1060 FAILURE TO FOLLOW RULES OR DIR 1060 FAILURE TO FOLLOW RULES OR DIR 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT Inf Date 9/15/00 11/16/00 12/07/00 11/03/00 1/05/01 9/12/00 9/13/00 10/27/00 9/18/00 8/30/00 9/29/00 10/27/00 10/06/00 12/11/00 9/14/00 9/29/00 11/21/00 8/30/00 9/18/00 11/17/00 9/07/00 9/22/00 9/15/00 8/30/00 9/14/00 9/14/00 10/17/00 9/08/00 9/01/00 10/09/00 10/02/00 12/05/00 11/16/00 11/20/00 9/22/00 8/30/00 11/01/00 8/29/00 11/10/00 10/25/00 9/05/00 9/12/00 11/14/00 10/31/00 8/28/00 9/21/00 9/29/00 9/26/00 8/31/00 men FiTT.iniB TO FOTlfM RHT.ES OR DIB---- 1060 FAILURE TO -F-O-L-L-O-W- -R-U-L-E-S- -O-R- -D-I-R---- 8/31/00 DML008R2 Date: 1/09/01 Discipline Management System Action Summary Report Page 4 11:53 AM School 002 HALL 2000/08/21 2001/01/05 ACTION: SW STUDENT WARNED Sch 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 Student______________________ 918316 SMITH, ANTRONE W. 933162 SMITH, TIMOTHY J. 931509 SPROUSE, KRISTIAN T. 952053 STARKS, GREGORY J. 922240 TATE, ASHLEY N. 936920 THOMPSON, BREON D. 926366 THOMPSON, JOHNNIE L. 923975 THOMPSON, LATOYA R. 923975 THOMPSON, LATOYA R. 960526 THORNTON JR,, CHESTER L. 915455 THORNTON, THEOTIS D. 927657 VEASEY, MARCUS D. 987863 VIDRINE, KYLE W. 930092 WADE, KEITH J. 930092 WADE, KEITH J. 928693 WADE, KRYSTAL L. 994416 WARREN, MARCUS S. 915680 WASHINGTON, KRISTOPHER K. 929183 WESTON, TRAVIS D. 922332 WHITE, KELLIE P. 929131 WILLIAMS, BRANDY L. 929131 WILLIAMS, BRANDY L. 929240 WILLIAMS, GREGORY J. 928737 WILLIAMS, LAMONT D. 968967 WILLIAMS, MARQUES A. 301849 WILSON, APRIL L. 916470 WIMBLEY, LOUIS G. Date 9/22/00 8/30/00 9/27/00 12/11/00 8/30/00 9/27/00 9/22/00 9/12/00 12/08/00 10/02/00 10/03/00 11/14/00 10/09/00 10/03/00 10/11/00 9/05/00 11/03/00 11/03/00 9/25/00 8/29/00 8/30/00 11/21/00 9/14/00 11/16/00 10/24/00 8/31/00 9/13/00 Cl 11 09 12 09 10 09 09 09 09 12 12 09 09 09 09 09 12 12 09 10 09 09 09 09 09 11 12 Eth 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 01 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 , 02  02 02 02 02\n02 : 02 , Sex M M F M F H M F F M M M M M M P M M M F F F M M M F M Infraction____________________ 1030 MINOR ALTERCATION 1060 FAILURE TO FOLLOW RULES OR DIR 1060 FAILURE TO FOLLOW RULES OR DIR 1030 MINOR ALTERCATION 1030 MINOR ALTERCATION 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT REFUSING TO FOLUW DIRECTIVES 1062 2105 1133 REPEATED SCHOOL/CLASS TARDIES 1060 FAILURE TO FOLLOW RULES OR DIR 1060 FAILURE TO FOLLOW RULES OR DIR 1030 MINOR ALTERCATION 1030 MINOR ALTERCATION 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2123 POSSESSION OR USE/PAGING DEVIC 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 1060 FAILURE TO FOLLOW RULES OR DIR 1070 REFUSE TO OBEY BUS RULES/REGUL 1060 FAILURE TO FOLLOW RULES OR DIR refuse to OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 1062 2105 1062 1050 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT left SCHOOL/CLASS WITHOUT PERM 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 1060 FAILURE TO FOLLOW BULES OR DIR 1050 LEFT SCHOOL/CLASS WITHOUT PERM Inf Date 9/22/00 8/30/00 9/27/00 12/11/00 8/30/00 9/27/00 9/22/00 9/11/00 11/21/00 10/02/00 10/03/00 11/14/00 10/09/00 10/02/00 10/10/00 8/31/00 11/03/00 11/03/00 9/22/00 8/29/00 8/30/00 11/21/00 9/14/00 11/16/00 10/06/00 8/31/00 9/13/00 ACTION: 01 IN-SCHOOL SUSPENSION Sch 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 Student_________________________ 979010 ABDO, JON I. 974579 AL-OTArai, TURKI T. 926887 ALLISON, CRYSTAL N, 933036 ALLISON, RICKY S. 933222 ANDERSON, DEMETRIA A. 936556 ANDERSON, JULIA M. 927271 ANDERSON, THEODIS. 965739 ARNOLD, ANGELA M. 928751 BEAVERS, CORTE L. 928451 BECKTON, SHANNON L. 986145 BENNETT, STEVEN R. 973698 BENRAHOU, IKRAM. 926906 BEULAH, RONNIE E. 928906 BEULAH, RONNIE E. 927432 BLUB, MIRANDA D. 002 931379 BROWN, CHRISTOLYN M. nf\u0026gt;2 020214 BRCWN ,_ LAMEATRIA S- . 002 929214 BRCAfN, LAMEATRIA S. Date 1/05/01 11/01/00 11/27/00 12/11/00 10/19/00 10/10/00 9/18/00 11/27/00 11/07/00 12/12/00 11/08/00 11/07/00 9/27/00 9/27/00 10/30/00 9/14/00 10/16/00 9/08/00 9/08/00 Cl 09 10 09 09 09 09 09 09 09 09 12 10 09 09 10 12 10 09 09 Eth 04 } 04 * 02 02\n02 02 02 02 02 02 . 02 01 02 02 02 02 ' 02 02 t 02 * Sex M M F M F F M P M F M F M M F M F F F Infraction_________________________ 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY BULES OR DIRECT 1060 FAILURE TO FOLLOW RULES OR DIR 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 1030 MINOR ALTERCATION 1050 LEFT SCHOOL/CLASS WITHOUT PERM 1110 USE OF VERBAL ABUSE/FIGHTING W repeated SCHOOL/CLASS TARDIES 1133 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES SCHOOL/CLASS WITHOUT PERM 1050 LEFT SCHOOL/CLASS WITHOUT PERM 1060 FAILURE TO FOLLOW RULES OR DIR 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 1050 LEFT Inf Date 1/04/01 10/31/00 11/20/00 11/30/00 10/17/00 10/09/00 9/15/00 11/20/00 10/24/00 12/06/00 11/08/00 11/06/00 9/20/00 9/26/00 10/27/00 9/14/00 10/13/00 8/29/00 8/29/00DML00BR2 Data: 1/09/01 School 002 HALL Discipline Management System Action Summary Report 2000/08/21 2001/01/05 Page 5 11:53 AM ACTION: 01 IN-SCHOOL SUSPENSION Sch 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 Student 926897 BRCWN, SHARON M. 935060 BROWN, TAMEIKA D. 922147 BROWN, TYWAN D. 926918 BRUTON, BLAKE A. 928132 BUCKLEY, JOY J. 929848 BUCKNER, CEDRIC R. 927878 BURSE, TONY D. 916431 BUTLER, JEFF M. 921701 CAMPBELL, JARED L. 926574 CARPENTER, MATTHEW T. 975122 CARVAJAL, ADELA. 975122 CARVAJAL, ADELA. 950742 CLARK, DEITRA R. 928156 CLARK, SHAKITA V. 928831 CLEMMONS, MARCELL L. 928852 COATS, ARCHIE M. 927886 COLWYE, GREGORY J. 973904 CRAWFORD, ASHLEY A. 922465 CRUTCHFIELD, SHANKA L. 922465 CRUTCHFIELD, SHANKA L. 922465 CRUTCHFIELD, SHANKA L. 933260 CURLBTT, AYANA J. 924435 CURLEY, BRANDON S. 922171 DAVIS, CHRISTOPHE P. 933180 DAVIS, NIKKI T. 916474 DENNIS, GARRY C. 915910 DONAHUE, JESSICA M. 974302 EASON, BRITTANY. 974302 EASON, BRITTANY. 935320 EVANS, ALICIA W. 995769 FINN-SMITH, CLAIRE K. 992486 GAGE, ANTOINE B. 910120 GARDNER, MARYNTHIA R. 923617 GILES, TYRONE D. 916131 GLASPIB, CRYSTAL G. 321513 GOODMAN, KEISHA N. 927576 GOODMAN, KEITH D. 927576 GOODMAN, KEITH D. 928297 GRAY, JENNIFER D. 928297 GRAY, JENNIFER D. 930261 GREEN, CHRISTOPHE B. 930602 GREEN, KENYONE S. 992606 GREEN, MYISHA R. 916521 GRIDLEY, EBONY T. 928418 GRIFFIN, LARON L. 912510 GRIGSBY, NICOLE R. 936370 HAMPTON, CLIFTON E. 930547 HARDY, LAKESHIA L. 930547 HARDY, LAKESHIA L. 975070 HARRIS, YESMAN L. 91501Q HARRIS, YESMAN L. Date 11/16/00 9/20/00 11/16/00 11/15/00 11/16/00 11/14/00 11/07/00 9/11/00 11/30/00 10/26/00 10/18/00 11/30/00 11/06/00 10/30/00 10/17/00 10/03/00 12/11/00 10/13/00 9/08/00 9/08/00 11/15/00 11/29/00 10/06/00 11/20/00 9/14/00 12/07/00 10/24/00 10/10/00 12/08/00 12/11/00 12/04/00 9/14/00 10/20/00 10/10/00 11/09/00 9/22/00 9/21/00 11/14/00 9/07/00 12/04/00 9/22/00 9/27/00 10/16/00 10/06/00 9/15/00 10/12/00 9/14/00 11/06/00 12/08/00 9/25/00 11/06/00 Cl 10 09 10 10 09 09 09 12 09 10 10 10 10 09 09 09 10 09 09 09 09 09 09 09 09 12 12 09 09 09 10 12 12 10 12 09 09 09 09 09 09 09 09 12 09 12 09 09 09 09 09 Eth 02 02 02 01 02 02 02 01 01 01 03 03 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 , 02\n02 02 01 02 : 02 I 02 I 02  02 ! 02 J 02: 02\n02: 02 i 02  02 I 02 02 02 I 02 ' 02 I 02 02 , 02 Sex F F M M F M M M M M F F F F M M M P F F F F M M F M F F F F F M F M F F M M F F M M F F M F M F F M M Infraction _________ ____________ 1060 FAILURE TO FOLLOW RULES OR DIR 1110 USE OF VERBAL ABUSE/FIGHTING W 1080 FAILURE TO SERVE DETENTION 1050 LEFT SCHOOL/CLASS WITHOUT PERM 1133 REPEATED SCHOOL/CLASS TARDIES 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 1110 USE OF VERBAL ABUSE/FIGHTING W 1050 LEFT SCHOOL/CLASS WITHOUT PERM 1080 FAILURE TO SERVE DETENTION 1080 FAILURE TO SERVE DETENTION 1050 LEFT SCHOOL/CLASS WITHOUT PERM 1040 BEHAVIOR THAT VIOLATES A PERSO 1133 REPEATED SCHOOL/CLASS TARDIES 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 1050 LEFT SCHOOL/CLASS WITHOUT PERM 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 1040 BEHAVIOR THAT VIOLATES A PERSO 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 1133 REPEATED SCHOOL/CLASS TARDIES 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 1090 REFUSED TO SERVE DETENTION 1080 FAILURE TO SERVE DETENTION 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 1060 FAILURE TO FOLLOW RULES OR DIR 1050 LEFT SCHOOL/CLASS WITHOUT PERM 1050 LEFT SCHOOL/CLASS WITHOUT PERM 1090 REFUSED TO SERVE DETENTION 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 1090 REFUSED TO SERVE DETENTION 1030 MINOR ALTERCATION 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2105 REFUSING TO F(aiLOW DIRECTIVES 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 1050 LEFT SCHOOL/CLASS WITHOUT PERM 1110 USE OF VERBAL ABUSE/FIGHTING W 1110 USE OF VERBAL ABUSE/FIGHTING W 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 1133 REPEATED SCHOOL/CLASS TARDIES 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR-DIRECT Inf Date 11/15/00 9/18/00 11/15/00 11/14/00 11/06/00 11/14/00 10/27/00 9/11/00 11/30/00 10/25/00 10/17/00 11/29/00 11/01/00 10/16/00 10/14/00 9/28/00 12/08/00 10/12/00 9/07/00 9/08/00 11/09/00 11/01/00 10/05/00 11/17/00 9/13/00 12/07/00 10/24/00 10/09/00 12/07/00 12/08/00 12/01/00 9/14/00 10/20/00 10/09/00 11/09/00 9/21/00 9/20/00 11/14/00 9/07/00 11/29/00 9/21/00 9/22/00 10/13/00 10/06/00 9/14/00 10/12/00 9/06/00 11/01/00 12/07/00 9/19/00 11/01/00 DML008R2 Date: 1/09/01 Discipline Management System Action Sunmary Report Page 6 11:53 AM School 002 BALL 2000/06/21 2001/01/05 ACTION: 01 IH-SCHOOL SUSPENSION Sch 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 . 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 Student__________________________ 929217 HART, ALISA R. 935452 HAWKINS, DEREK T. 935453 HAWKINS, ERIC T. 923305 HAYNES, DERRICK D. 959119 HAYWCXJD, RICKEY L. 929312 HEARD, DIA M. 979726 HENDERSON, RICARDO. 928189 HINES, KEVIN L. 986526 HINTON, PRESTON R. 922119 HOLLOWAY, JACQUITA R. 929156 HOLLCWAY, QUINCY C. 933953 HOLMES, ROY L. 921853 BOUSE, LEANN M. 931927 HOWARD, JILNIAL A. 917030 HUMPHREY, NATHAN J. 998645 HYDE, MATTHEW K. 915968 JACKMAN, IRVING P. 915544 JACKSON, DANNY J. 923794 JAMES, QUINTON T. 993806 JANISZEWSKI, PATRYK L. 993806 JANISZEWSKI, PATRYK L. 923150 JEFFERSON, EARNEST E. 931020 JOHNSON, AMANDA D. 927431 JOHNSON, ANTOINETTE L. 927431 JOHNSON, ANTOINETTE L. 992375 JOHNSON, EARVIN B. 930877 JOHNSON, JEROME E. 928703 JOHNSON, LATASBA L. 919336 JOHNSON, TAURUS T. 994765 JONES, LATEASHIA M. 916512 JONES, MONTAYE D. 933051 JONES, SHANELLE L. 922041 JORDAN, TIFFANYE D. KENNEY, TALISHA L. 928409 KING, ANTWOIN D. 984289 LANGLEY, CRYSTAL H. 924076 LEE, JENNIFER L. 917084 LEWIS, ANTON K. 910356 LOVE, CARLOS D. 916005 LOVE, MARQUIIA k. 950865 LYTLE, JOSEPH D. 932666 MADISON, JEROME. 932269 MANNING, SCOTTIE G. 922360 MARSHALL, KENDALL E. 922360 MARSHALL, KENDALL E. 960036 MARTIN, JOHN E, 996454 MARTINEZ, YEFRI Y. 930020 MCCRAY, BRADLEY S. 998332 MCCULLOUGH, LAJEAN M. 913332 MCDANIEL, ARIEL J. 974381 MCDANIEL, AVIVA M. Date___ 10/18/00 12/08/00 10/13/00 1/04/01 12/11/00 11/27/00 12/07/00 1/03/01 11/10/00 10/18/00 12/13/00 12/01/00 11/16/00 11/07/00 12/05/00 10/12/00 10/12/00 10/09/00 9/14/00 9/22/00 9/22/00 11/10/00 11/29/00 9/05/00 11/30/00 9/05/00 9/27/00 9/28/00 9/08/00 9/14/00 11/09/00 9/06/00 9/28/00 10/18/00 11/06/00 10/12/00 10/25/00 10/12/00 10/05/00 9/27/00 10/10/00 11/15/00 11/27/00 9/18/00 11/15/00 9/22/00 12/05/00 12/07/00 10/26/00 9/14/00 10/31/00 Cl___ 09 10 10 11 10 10 12 09 10 10 10 12 09 10 12 12 12 10 10 12 12 10 09 10 10 12 10 09 12 12 12 09 10 10 09 12 10 12 12 11 09 09 09 09 09 09 10 12 09 12 09 Eth 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 01 02 06 01 02 02  02 01 , 01 ' 02 02 02 02 02 02 I 02 i 02 02 02 . 02 i 02 1 02 I 02 02 f 02 \u0026lt; 02 t 02 02 I 01  02 . 02 02 02 02 06  01 02 ' 02 02 Sex F M M M M F M M M F M M F F M M M M M M M M F F F M M F M F M F F  M F F M M F M M M M M M M H P F F Infraction__________ 1062 PKFUSS TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 1080 FAILURE TO SERVE DETENTION 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 1050 LEFT SCHOOL/CLASS WITHOUT PERM 1133 REPEATED SCHOOL/CLASS TARDIES 1050 LEFT SCHOOL/CLASS WITHOUT PERM 1110 USE OF VERBAL ABUSE/FIGHTING W 1080 FAILURE TO SERVE DETENTION 1080 FAILURE TO SERVE DETENTION 1060 1110 2105 FAILUBE TO FOLLCW RULES OR DIR USE OF VERBAL ABUSE/FIGHTING W REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 1080 FAILURE TO SERVE DETENTION 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 1110 USE OF VERBAL ABUSE/FIGHTING W 1080 FAILURE TO SERVE DETENTION 1060 FAILURE TO FOLLCW RULES OR DIR 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 1050 LEFT SCHOOL/CLASS WITHOUT PERM 1050 LEFT SCHOOL/CLASS WITHOUT PERM 1050 LEFT SCHOOL/CLASS WITHOUT PERM 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 1050 LEFT SCHOOL/CLASS WITHOUT PERM 1080 FAILURE TO SERVE DETENTION 1050 LEFT SCHOOL/CLASS WITHOUT PERM 1133 REPEATED SCHOOL/CLASS TARDIES 1050 LEFT SCHOOL/CLASS WITHOUT PERM 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 1090 REFUSED TO SERVE DETENTION 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 1050 LEFT SCHOOL/CLASS WITHOUT PERM 1080 FAILURE TO SERVE DETEOTION 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 1080 FAILURE TO SERVE DETENTION 1050 LEFT SCHOOL/CLASS WITHOUT PERM 1080 FAILURE TO SERVE DETENTION 1050 LEFT SCHOOL/CLASS WITHOUT PERM 1050 LEFT SCHOOL/CLASS WITHOUT PERM 1060 FAILURE TO FOLLOW RULES OR DIR 1133 REPEATED SCHOOL/CLASS TARDIES 1133 REPEATED SCHOOL/CLASS TARDIES 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 1050 LEFT SCHOOL/CLASS WITHOUT PERM 1050 LEFT SCHOOL/CLASS WITHOUT PERM 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 1133 REPEATED SCHOOL/CLASS TARDIES Inf Date 10/05/00 12/07/00 10/12/00 1/03/01 12/08/00 11/21/00 12/07/00 1/03/01 11/10/00 10/17/00 12/12/00 12/01/00 11/14/00 11/06/00 12/05/00 10/12/00 10/12/00 10/06/00 9/12/00 9/22/00 9/22/00 11/09/00 11/21/00 9/01/00 11/29/00 9/05/00 9/26/00 9/14/00 9/08/00 9/14/00 11/09/00 9/05/00 9/27/00 10/17/00 10/30/00 10/12/00 10/24/00 10/12/00 10/05/00 9/27/00 10/06/00 10/31/00 11/21/00 9/18/00 11/09/00 9/21/00 12/04/00 12/07/00 10/05/00 9/14/00 10/30/00DML008R2 Date: 1/09/01 Discipline Management System Action Summary Report School 002 HALL 2000/08/21 2001/01/05 ACTION: 01 IN-SCHOOL SUSPENSION Page 7 11:53 AM Sch 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 Student 918615 MCKINNBYr JAMES 980071 MCMULLIN, TOCARRA R. 984968 MEAD, DEBBIE D, 924732 MEDLOCK, CORINIHIA M. 912898 MEITZENHEIMER, BRAIN M. 936449 MENDEZ-WARD, DEONE M. 921659 MILLER, WILLIE M. 921659 HILLER, WILLIE M. 929413 MINICK, MATTHEW D. 922369 MOORE, JOHNATHON T. 928857 MOORE, LEANDER L. 929155 MOORE, WILLIE. 907380 MORGAN, FELTON T. 933516 MYERS, GERARD L. 911864 MYERS, KEVIN G. 936111 NEELY, BRANDON M. 305160 NORMAN, LADONNA A. 960701 NORRIS, LATOYA R. 931800 NORWOOD, GALON C. 931600 NORWOOD, GALON C. 931800 NORWOOD, GALON C. 919843 NOWDEN, SHAKITA. . 973702 ORTEGA, FRANK M. 928619 OWENS, ANTHONY D. 918601 PARKER, KORTNI D. 908102 PATTON, MICHAEL C. 916416 PAYNE, JOHN W. 916223 PENNINGTON, CEDRIC E. 935385 PHILLIPS, JEFFREY A, 928088 PIERKOWSKI, DAVIN V. 959853 PONCE, INGRID J. 972721 POSTELL, ALIYA C. 922663 POTTLE, KRISTIN J. 907726 PRIDE, LONZELL L. 936011 RATLIFF, THOMAS M. 928677 RAYFORD, OTIS. 926843 REED, ANDRE D. 933723 REED, SHASTA L. 993875 RBVUELTA, RIGOBERTO M. 919498 REYNOLDS, SEAN P. 919498 REYNOLDS, SEAN P. 928209 REYNOLDS, SHAUN K. 928209 REYNOLDS, SHAUN K. 931748 RICE, ARLO D. 931748 RICE, ARLO D. 928624 ROBERSON, JOHATHAN A. 932730 ROBINSON, TANEISHA L. 928766 ROSE, MALESA R. 929900 SCOTT, INDIA C. 935039 SCOTT, RODNEY D. 996909 SHERRER, CHRISTOPHE D. Date 9/01/00 12/12/00 11/30/00 11/08/00 10/24/00 10/25/00 9/22/00 11/09/00 11/13/00 9/28/00 12/01/00 12/04/00 9/21/00 9/08/00 12/11/00 10/13/00 9/28/00 11/27/00 9/28/00 9/28/00 12/04/00 11/03/00 9/11/00 9/15/00 12/07/00 11/03/00 11/03/00 11/16/00 11/16/00 12/06/00 11/15/00 10/03/00 12/07/00 9/27/00 12/11/00 9/18/00 11/07/00 9/28/00 1/05/01 11/10/00 1/04/01 9/13/00 11/10/00 10/24/00 10/29/00 10/17/00 11/06/00 10/09/00 11/30/00 9/13/00 12/05/00 Cl 10 09 10 09 12 10 12 12 10 10 10 09 12 09 12 09 10 09 09 09 09 12 12 09 12 12 12 10 09 09 10 09 12 12 10 09 10 09 09 12 12 09 09 09 09 10 09 10 10 09 12 Eth 03 02 03 02 02 02 02 02 01 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 03 02 02 02 02 02 02 01 03 02 01 02 02 02 02 02 03 02 02 , 02 : 02 02 02 02 t 02 ! 02 : 02\n02\n02 Sex M F F F M F M M M M M M M M M M F F M M M F M M M M M M M M F F F M M M M F M M M M M M M M F F F M M Infraction__________________ ________ 1060 FAILURE TO FOLLOW RULES OR DIR 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 1050 LEFT SCHOOL/CLASS WITHOUT PERM 1133 REPEATED SCHOOL/CLASS TARDIES 1050 LEFT SCHOOL/CLASS WITHOUT PERM 1060 FAILURE TO FOLLOW RULES OR DIR 1050 LEFT SCHOOL/CLASS WITHOUT PERM 1090 REFUSED TO SERVE DETENTION 1080 FAILURE TO SERVE DETENTION 1110 USE OF VERBAL ABUSE/FIGHTINO W 1040 BEHAVIOR THAT VIOLATES A PERSO 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 1050 LEFT SCHOOL/CLASS WITHOUT PERM 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 1090 REFUSED TO SERVE DETENTION 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 1050 LEFT SCHOOL/CLASS WITHOUT PERM 1133 REPEATED SCHOOL/CLASS TARDIES 1133 REPEATED SCHOOL/CLASS TARDIES 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 1050 LEFT SCHOOL/CLASS WITHOUT PERM 1110 USE OF VERBAL ABUSE/FIGHTING W 1110 USE OF VERBAL ABUSE/FIGHTING W 1090 REFUSED TO SERVE DETENTION 1133 REPEATED SCHOOL/CLASS TARDIES 1060 FAILURE TO FOLLCW RULES OR DIR 1080 FAILURE TO SERVE DETENTION 1030 MINOR ALTERCATION 2090 NON-THREATENING PROFANITY AT O 1080 FAILURE TO SERVE DETENTION 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 1050 LEFT SCHOOL/CLASS WITHOUT PERM 1050 LEFT SCHOOL/CLASS WITHOUT PERM 1060 FAILURE TO FOLLOW RULES OR DIR 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 1080 FAILURE TO SERVE DETENTION 1030 MINOR ALTERCATION 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 1070 REFUSE TO OBEY BUS RULES/REGUL 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 1133 REPEATED SCHOOL/CLASS TARDIES 1133 REPEATED SCHOOL/CLASS TARDIES 1050 LEFT SCHOOL/CLASS WITHOUT PERM 1050 LEFT SCHOOL/CLASS WITHOUT PERM 1060 FAILURE TO FOLLOW RULES OR DIR 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 1062 REFUSE TO oRgv RinES OB DTHgCT 1090 REFUSED TO SERVE DETENTION Inf Date 8/31/00 12/08/00 11/29/00 9/28/00 10/24/00 10/24/00 9/22/00 11/09/00 11/10/00 9/28/00 11/30/00 11/27/00 9/21/00 9/07/00 12/11/00 10/02/00 9/27/00 11/07/00 9/20/00 9/26/00 11/28/00 11/03/00 9/11/00 9/14/00 12/07/00 11/03/00 11/03/00 11/15/00 11/10/00 11/30/00 11/14/00 9/29/00 12/07/00 9/27/00 12/08/00 9/12/00 11/06/00 9/27/00 1/04/01 11/06/00 1/03/01 9/08/00 11/06/00 9/29/00 9/29/00 10/16/00 11/01/00 10/06/00 11/01/00 12/05/00 DML008R2 Date: 1/09/01 Discipline Management System Action Sunmary Report School 002 HALL 2000/08/21 2001/01/05 ACTION: 01 IN-SCHOOL SUSPENSION Page 8 11:53 AM Sch 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 Student 950190 SKAGGS, SARAH K. 917237 SLOAM, KATRINA A. 918316 SMITH, ANTRONE W. 929697 SMITH, ROCHELLE L. 932573 STEVENSON, SHEENA P. 917556 STEWART, TERRENCE D. 928366 THOMPSON, JOHNNIE L. 923975 THOMPSON, LATOYA R. 929683 TILLMAN, MONIQUE D. 951887 TURNER, ARIC D. 951776 lURNER, DEMARIO Q. 950645 USREY, JOHN C. 935480 USSERY, BRYAN O. 301051 VALENCIA, EDWIN L. 927657 VEASEY, MARCUS D. 962849 WADE, BRANDI L. 932913 WALKER, CHIKE A. 935777 WALKER, CYRUS A. 916864 WALKER, GERALD D. 937535 WARREN, BRANDON L. 916398 WHITE, EBONY S. 922332 WHITE, KELLIE P.  930035 WHITE, TAMEKA L, 952489 WHITE, TAWANNA J. 305192 WILKERSON, ASHLEY R. 305192 WILKERSON, ASHLEY R. 929863 WILLIAMS, AMBER. 928962 WILLIAMS, LASHIKKA S. 922782 WILLIAMS, RORY M. 990591 WILLS, KATY L, 301849 WILSON, APRIL L. 916470 WIMBLEY, LOUIS 6. 916470 WIMBLEY, LOUIS G. 996402 WIRGES, TRACEY A. 933054 WITHERS, BRIEN A. 933054 WITHERS, BRIEN A. 924669 WRIGHT, DOMONIC D. 927658 WRIGHT, RODNEY J- 937479 YOUNG, FANTASIA U. 910724 YOUNG, GERRY L. Date 10/31/00 12/07/00 9/29/00 11/07/00 9/18/00 10/06/00 9/28/00 9/18/00 12/12/00 11/01/00 10/27/00 12/06/00 9/08/00 12/05/00 11/09/00 10/19/00 10/10/00 10/30/00 12/08/00 10/24/00 10/12/00 9/12/00 12/11/00 9/28/00 9/13/00 10/13/00 12/08/00 11/27/00 12/11/00 10/20/00 10/12/00 10/24/00 12/01/00 9/22/00 11/08/00 1/04/01 10/26/00 12/04/00 10/13/00 9/26/00 Cl 09 12 11 10 09 10 09 09 09 09 09 09 09 09 09 09 09 09 10 10 12 10 11 09 09 09 10 10 09 12 11 12 12 12 09 09 10 09 09 12 Eth 01 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 06 02 02 01 02 03 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 01 02 02 02 01 02 02 02 02 02 02 Sex F F M F F M M F F M M M M M M F M M M M F F F F F F F F M 7 F H H M M M M M F M Infraction ___________ __________ _ 1133 REFITTED SCHOOL/CLASS TARDIES 1090 REFUSED TO SERVE DETENTION 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 1080 FAILURE TO SERVE DETENTION 1110 USB OF VERBAL ABUSE/FIGHTING W 1050 LEFT SCHOOL/CLASS WITHOUT PERM 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 1133 REPEATED SCHOOL/CLASS TARDIES 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 1050 LEFT SCHOOL/CLASS WITHOUT PERM 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 1110 USE OF VERBAL ABUSE/FIGHTING W 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 1050 LEFT SCHOOL/CLASS WITHOUT PERM 1050 LEFT SCHOOL/CLASS WITHOUT PERM 1050 LEFT SCHOOL/CLASS WITHOUT PERM 1040 BEHAVIOR THAT VIOLATES A PERSO 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 1050 LEFT SCHOOL/CLASS WITHOUT PERM 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 1040 BEHAVIOR THAT VIOLATES A PERSO 1133 REPEATED SCHOOL/CLASS TARDIES 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 1050 LEFT SCHOOL/CLASS WITHOUT PERM 1090 REFUSED TO SERVE DETENTION 1060 FAILURE TO FOLLOW RULES OR DIR 1050 LEFT SCHOOL/CLASS WITHOUT PERM 1050 LEFT SCHOOL/CLASS WITHOUT PERM 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 1030 MINOR ALTERCATION 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 1050 LEFT SCHOOL/CLASS WITHOUT PERM 1133 REPEATED SCHOOL/CLASS TARDIES 1050 LEFT SCHOOL/CLASS WITHOUT PERM Inf Date 10/20/00 12/07/00 9/26/00 11/06/00 9/15/00 10/05/00 9/27/00 9/15/00 12/12/00 10/31/00 10/26/00 11/30/00 9/05/00 12/04/00 11/08/00 10/10/00 10/09/00 10/27/00 12/07/00 10/20/00 10/12/00 9/11/00 12/11/00 9/25/00 9/11/00 10/10/00 12/07/00 11/21/00 12/05/00 10/20/00 10/12/00 10/24/00 12/01/00 9/22/00 11/07/00 1/03/01 10/25/00 12/01/00 10/12/00 9/26/00 ACTIONJ 02 OUT-OF-SCHOOL(NOT EXCEED 10 DY Sch 002 002 002 002 .002. 002 Student____________________ 979010 ABDO, JON I. 931439 ACOME, ERIC A. 931439 ACOME, ERIC A. 924232 ADROW, KANISHA L. onMft menu kwh b 916699 ALEXANDER, DERRICK D. Date 9/27/00 9/15/00 10/09/00 12/01/00 10/06/00 9/25/00 Cl 09 10 10 11 11 11 Eth 04 . 01 Oil 02 i 02 I 02 I Sex M M M F F H Infraction____________________ ________ 2040 MUTUAL COMBAT 2115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGOR 2115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGOR 2115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGOR 2110 DISORDERLY CONDUCT 2110 DISORDERLY CONDUCT Inf Date 9/27/00 9/15/00 10/09/00 12/01/00 10/06/00 9/25/00 DML008R2 Date: 1/09/01 Discipline Management System Action Summary Report Page 9 11:53 AM School 002 HALL 2000/08/21 2001/01/05 ACTION: 02 OUT-OF-SCHOOL(NOT EXCEED 10 DY Sch 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002  002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 . 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 Student 918699 ALEXANDER, DERRICK D. 915415 ALLISON, TYRONE J. 927271 ANDERSON, THEODIS. 927271 ANDERSON, THEODIS. 927271 ANDERSON, THEODIS. 922422 ANGLIN, ANTHONY D. 965739 ARNOLD, ANGELA M. 921515 BANKSTON, CANDACE L. 922165 BATTEN, RARICOS L. 928751 BEAVERS, CORTE L. 933541 BELL, MARTIESBA D. 924986 BELL, MICHAEL W. 924986 BELL, MICHAEL W. 986145 BENNETT, STEVEN R. 986145 BENNETT, STEVEN R. 973698 BENRAHOU, IKRAM. 927827 BERMAN, DAVID J. 928906 BEULAH, RONNIE E. 998630 BOUIE, DARREN 0. 969818 BRADSHAW, CJHRISTOPHE R. 969818 BRADSHAW, CHIRISTOPHE R. 969818 BRADSHAW, CHRISTOPHE R. 922174 BROOKS, VERNON J. 915814 BRCWN, ANTOINE L. 915665 BROWN, ERIC K. 927231 BROWN, ERIC L. 927233 BRCWN, FLOYD L. 927233 BROWN, FLOYD L. 927233 BRCWN, FLOYD L. 927233 BROWN, FLOYD L. 923993 BROWN, FRANKLIN J. 923993 BROWN, FRANKLIN J. 926897 BROWN, SHARON M. 935060 BRCWN, TAMEIKA D. 937002 BROWN, TANISHA R. 916450 BRCWN, TRACY. 916450 BRCWN, TRACY, 927878 BURSE, TONY D. 927878 BURSE, TONY D. 916431 BUTLER, JEFF M. 930151 BYRD, RICHARD A. 986332 CABALLERO, JUAN C. 931893 CALLOWAY, BRYAN M. 931893 CALLCWAY, BRYAN M. 921701 CAMPBELL, JARED L. 303894 CANTU, MICHEAL C. 974900 CARROLL, KENNETH W. 974900 CARROLL, KENNETH W. 923743 CARROLL, SCORPIO L. 923743 CARROLL, SCORPIO L. 935483 CARTER, ARRIN T. Date 11/29/00 10/13/00 9/29/00 9/29/00 11/01/00 10/20/00 10/12/00 10/06/00 11/10/00 11/07/00 11/10/00 9/22/00 11/09/00 11/17/00 11/17/00 11/27/00 11/07/00 9/01/00 10/09/00 9/19/00 10/11/00 10/27/00 9/29/00 9/01/00 9/19/00 10/10/00 9/01/00 9/13/00 9/21/00 10/03/00 9/11/00 11/10/00 11/20/00 _11/17/00 11/16/00 9/28/00 10/13/00 10/18/00 11/10/00 10/10/00 11/01/00 9/28/00 8/30/00 9/20/00 12/11/00 9/06/00 10/13/00 12/05/00 9/26/00 9/28/00 9/18/00 Cl 11 11 09 09 09 11 09 09 10 09 09 11 11 12 12 10 11 09 10 12 12 12 10 11 10 09 09 09 09 09 09 09 10 09 09 11 11 09 09 12 09 12 09 09 09 11 09 09 09 09 09 Eth 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 : 02 02 02  02 . 02 02 02 01 01 02 02 02 02  02 02 02 02 02 02 . 02  02 02 02 02 i 02 02 j 02 - 02 02 02 02 01 02  03 : 02 02 01 01 02 02  02 02 , 02 I Sex M~ M M M M M F F M M F M M M M F M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M F F F F F M M M M M M M M M M M M M M Infraction________________________ 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGOR 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGOR 2040 MUTUAL COMBAT 2115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGOR 2115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGOR 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OP CATEGOR 2115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGOR 2115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGOR 2115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGOR 2122 FALSIFYING SIGNATURE/INFOBMATI 2115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGOR 2090 NON-THREATENING PROFANITY AT O 2150 POSSESSION OR USE OF ALCOHOL O 3072 VERBAL ABUSE OF STAFF 2115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGOR 2115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGOR 2115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGOR 2090 NON-THREATENING PROFANITY AT O 2020 BATTERY 2115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGOR 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLCW DIRECTIVES 2150 POSSESSION OR USE OF ALCOHOL O 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2090 NON-THREATENING PROFANITY AT O 2115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGOR 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLCW DIRECTTIVES 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLCW DIRECTIVES 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 2040 MUTUAL COMBAT 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2040 MUTUAL COMBAT 2110 DISORDERLY CONDUCT 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLCW DIRECJTIVES 2090 NON-THREATENING PROFANITY AT O 2115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGOR 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGOR 2115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGOR 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLCW DIRECTIVES 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLCW DIRECTIVES 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLCW DIRECTIVES 2040 MUTUAL COMBAT Inf Date 11/28/00 10/13/00 9/27/00 9/27/00 10/27/00 10/20/00 10/12/00 10/06/00 11/10/00 10/24/00 11/09/00 9/22/00 11/09/00 11/17/00 11/17/00 11/27/00 11/07/00 9/01/00 10/09/00 9/19/00 10/11/00 10/27/00 9/29/00 9/01/00 9/19/00 10/10/00 8/31/00 9/11/00 9/21/00 10/03/00 9/07/00 11/07/00 11/17/00 11/16/00 11/16/00 9/27/00 10/13/00 10/13/00 11/10/00 10/10/00 10/27/00 9/28/00 8/29/00 9/19/00 12/11/00 9/06/00 10/12/00 12/04/00 9/26/00 9/26/00 9/15/00DML008R2 Date: 1/09/01 Discipline Management System Action Summary Report Page 10 11:53 AM School 002 HALL 2000/08/21 2001/01/05 ACTION: 02 OUTOP-SCHOOL(NOT EXCEED 10 DY Sch 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 Student 305238 CHANCE, JOHN M. 922361 CLARK, COURTNEY J. 928852 COATS, ARCHIE M. 928852 COATS, ARCHIE M. 928852 COATS, ARCHIE M. 928852 COATS, ARCHIE M. 927886 COLWYE, GREGORY J. 936876 CONNORS, DEANDRE A. 936876 CONNORS, DEANDRE A. 936876 CONNORS, DEANDRE A. 914146 CONNORS, KENYATTA C. 918458 CONWAY, RICKY. 926087 COTTON, KEVIN L. 926087 COTTON, KEVIN L. 934705 CRAIN, KENNETH. 934705 CRAIN, KENNETH. 922465 CRUTCHFIELD, SHANKA L. 924435 CURLEY, BRANDON S. 924435 CURLEY, BRANDON S. 927165 CYRUS, TERRELL C. 916550 DANIELS, CHRISTOPHE H. 919723 DAVIS, JEFF. 919723 DAVIS, JEFF. 933180 DAVIS, NIKKI T. 996430 DAVIS, RODIRQUES D. 996430 DAVIS, RODIRQUES 0. 930477 DEAN, RICKEY L. 915910 DONAHUE, JESSICA M. 928454 DUKES, BOBBY J. 928810 DULANEY, VAMON. 925512 ELLIS, GLENN D. 925512 ELLIS, GLENN D. 917083 FIELDS, AARON N. 927128 FIELDS, ARIANE N. 917026 FOSTER, COURTNEY R. 915901 FRAZIER, BRALON F. 915901 FRAZIER, BRALON F. 915901 FRAZIER, BRALON F. 992486 GAGE, ANTOINE B. 923617 GILES, TYRONE D. 923617 GILES, TYRCWE D. 927576 GOODMAN, KEITH D. 928297 GRAY, JENNIFER D. 928297 GRAY, JENNIFER D. 916963 GRAY, WILLIAM X. 985093 GRAYDON, CANTRELL. 985093 GRAYDON, CANTRELL. 985094 GRAYDON, CHRISTOPHE T. 930261 GREEN, CHRISTOPHE B. 930261 GREEN, CHRISTOPHE B. 930602 GREEN, KENYONE S. Date 9/08/00 9/26/00 9/08/00 10/24/00 10/24/00 12/01/00 12/11/00 9/12/00 9/27/00 9/27/00 9/22/00 11/01/00 9/26/00 11/14/00 10/18/00 11/30/00 9/27/00 10/09/00 11/10/00 11/13/00 9/19/00 10/05/00 11/29/00 11/07/00 10/27/00 11/08/00 10/17/00 10/27/00 11/10/00 12/11/00 8/29/00 10/06/00 9/13/00 9/21/00 9/26/00 9/15/00 11/01/00 11/27/00 11/17/00 10/11/00 12/12/00 12/06/00 11/30/00 11/30/00 8/30/00 10/31/00 11/17/00 9/28/00 10/05/00 10/13/00 11/21/00 Cl 11 10 09 09 09 09 10 09 09 09 11 10 10 10 09 09 09 09 09 09 11 09 09 09 10 10 10 12 09 09 10 10 10 10 12 12 12 12 12 10 10 09 09 09 11 09 09 09 09 09 09 Eth 01 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 . 01  02 02 02 02 02 02 02 i 02 02 02 02 i 02 1 02  02 ! 02 ' 02 02 02 j 02 02  02 02 02 02 02 02 02 ' 02 02 02 Sex M M M M M M M M M M F M M M M M F M M M M M M F M M M P M M M M M F M M M M M M M M F F M M M M M M M Infraction__________________________ 2115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGOR 2110 DISORDERLY CONDUCT 2040 MUTUAL COMBAT 2115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGOR 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGOR 2040 MUTUAL COMBAT 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2110 DISORDERLY CONDUCT 2090 NON-THREATENING PROFANITY AT O 2110 DISORDERLY CONDUCT 2110 DISORDERLY CONDUCT 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2150 POSSESSION OR USE OF ALCOHOL O 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2040 MUTUAL COMBAT 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2090 NON-THREATENING PROFANITY AT O 2115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGOR 2122 FALSIFYING SIGNATURE/INFORMATI 2115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATSGOR 2040 MITTUAL COMBAT 1030 MINOR ALTERCATION 2070 LOITERING OR CRIMINAL TRESPASS 1060 FAILURE TO FOLLOW RULES OR DIR 2115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGOR 2110 DISORDERLY CONDUCT 2110 DISORDERLY CONDUCT 2110 DISORDERLY CONDUCT 2115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGOR 2121 REPEATED VIOLATION - CATEGORY 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 2030 THEFT/THEFT BY RECEIVING 2115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGOR 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2110 DISORDERLY CONDUCT 2090 NON-THREATENING PROFANITY AT O 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2040 MUTUAL COMBAT 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES Inf Data 9/08/00 9/26/00 9/08/00 10/24/00 10/16/00 11/30/00 12/11/00 9/11/00 9/26/00 9/26/00 9/22/00 10/31/00 9/26/00 11/14/00 10/13/00 11/29/00 9/26/00 10/06/00 11/09/00 11/10/00 9/19/00 10/03/00 11/19/00 10/20/00 10/26/00 11/08/00 10/17/00 10/27/00 11/10/00 12/11/00 8/29/00 10/06/00 9/13/00 9/21/00 9/26/00 9/15/00 11/01/00 11/27/00 11/17/00 10/11/00 12/12/00 12/05/00 11/16/00 11/29/00 8/30/00 10/30/00 11/16/00 9/27/00 10/03/00 10/12/00 11/20/00DKL00BR2 Date: 1/09/01 Discipline Management System Action Sunanary Report School 002 HALL 2000/08/21 2001/01/05 ACTIONI 02 OUT-OP-SCBOOL(HOr EXCEED 10 DY Page 11 11:53 AM Sch 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 Student___________________________ 992606 GREEN/ MYISHA R. 922785 GREEN, TORIBIO M. 929523 GREENE/ TRUDRELL L. 967674 GRIMES, ELBERT K. 304489 GUERRA, RODRIGO. 921517 HADLEY, CHAUNCEY R. 936370 HAMPTON, CLIFTON E, 936370 HAMPTON/ CLIFTON B. 936370 HAMPTON, CLIFTON E. 936370 HAMPTON, CLIFTON B. 922689 HARRIS, CLABORN L. 956716 HARRIS, LIMZI R. 921978 HARRIS, MARCUS D. 921978 HARRIS, MARCUS D. 936192 HARRIS, WHITNEY A. 975070 HARRIS, YESMAH L. 300751 HARRISON, CHRISTOPHE L. 929217 HART, ALISA R. 935452 HAWKINS, DEREK T. 935453 HAWKINS, ERIC T, 960268 HAYNES, DERRICK D. 959119 HAYWOOD, RICKEY L. 959119 HAYWOOD, RICKEY L. 952255 HENSON, LUVENA A. 922204 HIGGINS, PATRICK L. 924461 HINTON, BOBBY R. 924461 HINTON, BOBBY R. 933962 HORTCI, TERRA N. 931927 HOWARD, JILNIAL A. 913129 HUDSPETH, LEIFKL. 913129 HUDSPETH, LEIFEL. 924404 HUDSPETH, RAFEL L. 979383 HUGHES, WILLIAM R. 917030 HUMPHREY, NATHAN J. 928805 IRBY, TAMARA D. 915968 JACKMAN, IRVING P. 935672 JACKO, MICHAEL A. 920733 JACKSON, ANTONIO D. 999416 JACKSON, DALE E. 922186 JACKSON, TERRENCE L. 923794 JAMES, QUINTON T. 923794 JAMES, QUINTON T. 923794 JAMES, QUINTON T. 305875 JIMENEZ, NESTOR S. 931020 JOHNSON, AMANDA D. 932313 JOHNSON, EARVIN B. 960639 JOHNSON, IVORY J. 930877 JOHNSON, JEROME B. 919336 JOHNSON, TAURUS T. 919336 JOHNSON, TAURUS T. 935764 JOHNSON, TYRONE. Date 12/06/00 11/08/00 11/16/00 11/07/00 11/21/00 10/06/00 9/28/00 10/16/00 12/04/00 12/12/00 9/06/00 9/19/00 10/19/00 1/04/01 11/27/00 8/30/00 9/19/00 12/05/00 11/01/00 11/01/00 10/06/00 10/25/00 12/12/00 9/18/00 8/30/00 10/31/00 11/01/00 9/21/00 10/02/00 9/18/00 10/09/00 10/09/00 11/16/00 12/06/00 9/29/00 12/12/00 11/01/00 9/11/00 10/18/00 10/09/00 8/30/00 9/20/00 11/16/00 11/10/00 10/25/00 9/18/00 9/19/00 9/29/00 10/02/00 10/30/00 10/30/00 Cl 09 10 12 11 09 09 09 09 09 09 10 09 10 10 09 09 10 09 10 10 09 10 10 11 10 09 09 09 10 10 10 10 10 12 09 12 11 10 11 11 10 10 10 10 09 12 10 10 12 12 09 Eth 02 02 02 02 03 02 * 02 02 02 02 02 01 02 02 02 02 01 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 i 02 i 06 02 ' 02 02 02 02- 02 j 02 i 02\n02 * 03 02  02  02! 02 i 02  02  02  Sex F M M M M M M M M M M F M M F M M F M M M M M F M M M F F M M M M M F M M M F M M M M M F M M M M M M Infraction____________________-___ _ - 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGOR 2115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGOR 2115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGOR 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2040 MUTUAL COMBAT 2110 DISORDERLY CONDUCT 2120 HARASSING COMMUNICATIONS 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF 2080 2090 VANDALISM (INTENTIONAL DESTRUC non-threatening profanity at O 2090 NON-THREATENING PROFANITY AT O 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2110 DISORDERLY CONDUCT 2040 MUTUAL COMBAT 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2090 NON-THREATENING PROFANITY AT O 2090 NON-THREATENING PROFANITY AT 0 2080 VANDALISM (INTENTIONAL DESTRUC 2115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGOR 2115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGOR 2040 MUTUAL COMBAT 2115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGOR 2090 NON-THREATENING PROFANITY AT 0 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2110 DISORDERLY CONDUCT 2090 NON-THREATENING PROFANITY AT O 2115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGOR 2110 DISORDERLY CONDUCT 2110 DISORDERLY CONDUCT 2122 FALSIFYING SIGNATURE/INFORMATI 2110 DISORDERLY CONDUCT 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGOR 1070 REFUSE TO OBEY BUS RULES/REGUL 2090 NON-THREATENING PROFANITY AT O 2040 MUTUAL COMBAT 2110 DISORDERLY CONDUCT 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2110 DISORDERLY CONDUCT 2090 NON-THREATENING PROFANITY AT 0 2090 non-threatening PROFANITY AT O 2020 BATTERY 2090 NON-THREATENING PROFANITY AT 0 2115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGOR 2115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OP CATEGOR 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT Inf Date 12/04/00 11/08/00 11/16/00 11/07/00 11/20/00 10/06/00 9/28/00 10/16/00 12/01/00 12/11/00 9/06/00 9/19/00 10/19/00 1/03/01 11/06/00 9/01/00 9/18/00 12/01/00 10/27/00 10/27/00 10/02/00 10/25/00 12/11/00 9/18/00 8/29/00 10/31/00 10/09/00 9/21/00 9/29/00 9/18/00 10/09/00 10/09/00 11/15/00 12/06/00 9/26/00 12/12/00 11/01/00 9/11/00 10/18/00 10/09/00 8/30/00 9/20/00 11/15/00 11/10/00 10/24/00 9/18/00 9/19/00 9/29/00 10/02/00 10/30/00 10/27/00 DML008R2 Date: 1/09/01 Discipline Management System Action Sunmary Report page 12 11:53 AM School 002 HALL 2000/08/21 2001/01/05 ACTION: 02 OUT-OF-SCHOOL(NOT EXCEED 10 DY Sch 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 Student_____________ 935764 JOHNSON, TYRONE. 933051 JONES, SHANELLE L. 933051 JONES, SHANELLE L. 937594 JORDAN, ERIC D. 937594 JORDAN, ERIC D. 916691 JORDAN, RICHARD M. 922041 JORDAN, TIFFANYE D. 913703 LANGFORD, TONY L. 924076 LEE, JENNIFER L. 919085 LEE, JESSICA Y. 919085 LEE, JESSICA Y. 896526 LONDON, TERRY D. 910356 LOVE, CARLOS D. 916005 LOVE, MARQUITA A. 916005 LOVE, MARQUITA A. 916005 LOVE, MARQUITA A. 950865 LYTLE, JOSEPH D. 921843 MALLORY, JONATHON L. 921843 MALLORY, JONATHON L. 932269 MANNINO, SCOTTIE G. 922360 MARSHALL, KENDALL E. 922360 MARSHALL, KENDALL E. 994417 MASON, DAVID C. 922196 MCCLENDON, EDDIE L. 998332 MCCULLOUGH, LAJEAN M. 974381 MCDANIEL, AVIVA M. 998793 MCKINNEY, STEPHEN W. 998793 MCKINNEY, STEPHEN W. 987741 MCMILLON, CHASE R. 987741 MCMILLON, CHASE R. 980071 MCMULLIN, TOCARRA R. 984984 MEAD, KATHALIYA. 924732 MEDLOCK, CORINTHIA M. 922751 MERRITT, TERRY L. 917577 MILLER, JOSHUA M. 952061 MOLES, JENNIFER M. 952061 M3LES, JENNIFER M. 922279 MONTGOMERY, CASEY A. 922369 MOORE, JOHNATHON T. 925376 MOORE, LASHONDA L. 923768 MORRISON, QUINCY Z. 923768 MORRISON, QUINCY Z. 933035 MORTON, BRIAN E. 933035 MORION, BRIAN E. 305128 MUNOZ, OSCAR A. 936111 NEELY, BRANDON M. 936111 NEELY, BRANDON M. 913208 NEELY, DERECK M. 924343 NORRIS, BRANDON L. 924343 NORRIS, BRANDON L. 924343 NORRIS, BRANDON L. Date 12/07/00 10/03/00 11/13/00 9/21/00 10/09/00 11/08/00 10/30/00 10/09/00 9/01/00 9/11/00 9/26/00 10/02/00 10/24/00 10/09/00 10/13/00 11/10/00 12/05/00 9/26/00 11/10/00 9/07/00 9/20/00 12/01/00 11/17/00 10/30/00 10/27/00 11/10/00 9/14/00 9/27/00 10/03/00 10/20/00 11/27/00 9/29/00 11/10/00 10/18/00 9/06/00 9/29/00 11/16/00 10/17/00 11/06/00 10/18/00 8/31/00 9/15/00 10/13/00 11/09/00 11/28/00 10/13/00 11/13/00 9/21/00 9/22/00 11/21/00 11/21/00 Cl___ 09 09 09 10 10 12 10 11 10 09 09 10 12 11. 11 11 09 10 10 09 09 09 11 10 09 09 11 11 12 12 09 12 09 11 11 10 10 11 10 11 11 11 09 09 10 09 09 10 09 09 09 Eth 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 01 02 02 02 02  02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 04 02  01 01 01 01 02 ' 02 02 02  02  02 02 03 02 1 02 02 02 02 02 I Sex M F F M M M F M F F F M M F F F M M M M M M M M F F M M M M F F F M M F F M M F M M M M M M M M M M M Infraction _. 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2090 NON-THREATENING PROFANITY AT O 2090 NON-THREATENING PROFANITY AT 0 2115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGOR 2110 DISORDERLY CONDUCT 2070 LOITERING OR CRIMINAL TRESPASS 2090 NON-THREATENING PROFANITY AT O 2110 DISORDERLY CONDUCT 1050 LEFT SCHOOL/CLASS WITHOUT PERM 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2150 POSSESSION OR USE OF ALCOHOL O 1050 LEFT SCHOOL/CLASS WITHOUT PERM 2110 DISORDERLY CONDUCT 2115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGOR 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGOR 2115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGOR 2122 FALSIFYING SIGNATURE/INFORMATI 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 2090 NON-THREATENING PROFANITY AT O 2115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGOR 2090 NCJ-THREATENINO PROFANITY AT O 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 1133 REPEATED SCHOOL/CLASS TARDIES 2115 VIOLATIONS OF CATEGOR 2115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGOR 2115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGOR 2115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGOR 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2040 MUTUAL COMBAT 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2110 DISORDERLY CONDUCT 2115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGOR 2040 MUTUAL COMBAT 2090 NON-THREATENING PROFANITY AT O 2115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGOR 2090 NON-THREATENING PROFANITY AT O 2115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGOR 2070 LOITERING OR CRIMINAL TRESPASS 2121 REPEATED VIOLATION - CATEGORY 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2122 FALSIFYING SIGNATURE/INFORMATI 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGOR 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 1110 USE OF VERBAL ABUSE/FIGHTING W Inf Date 12/01/00 10/03/00 11/10/00 9/21/00 10/09/00 11/08/00 10/27/00 10/09/00 9/01/00 9/05/00 9/26/00 9/29/00 10/24/00 10/09/00 10/13/00 11/10/00 12/01/00 9/25/00 11/09/00 9/07/00 9/20/00 11/29/00 11/17/00 10/27/00 10/27/00 11/09/00 9/14/00 9/27/00 10/03/00 10/20/00 11/10/00 9/29/00 11/09/00 10/18/00 9/06/00 9/29/00 11/15/00 10/17/00 11/01/00 10/18/00 8/31/00 9/15/00 10/12/00 11/07/00 11/28/00 10/02/00 11/09/00 9/21/00 9/21/00 11/20/00 10/26/00 DML008R2 Date\n1/09/01 School 002 HALL Discipline Management System Action Summary Report 2000/08/21 2001/01/05 Page 13 11:53 AM ACTION: 02 OUT-OF-SCHOOL(NOT EXCEED 10 DY Sch 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 Student_____________________ _____ 916325 NORRIS, ELDRIDGE B. 916335 NORRIS, ELDRIDGE B. 960701 NORRIS, LATOYA R. 931800 NORWOOD, GALON C. 931600 NORWOOD, GALON C. 959966 OLIVE, ROSHAWN L. 959966 OLIVE, ROSHAWN L 921453 OLIVER, TANESUA L. 928619 OWENS, ANTHONY D. 927451 CWENS, JASON M. 927451 CWENS, JASON M. 995061 PARKER, ANTHONY D. 928457 PARKER, KINGSTON E. 928457 PARKER, KINGSTON E. 928457 PARKER, KINGSTON E. 921885 PARKER, MILLICENT R. 921885 PARKER, MILLICENT R. 908102 PATTON, MICHAEL C. 975191 PATTON, MONTEZZ D. 916418 PAYNE, JOHN W. 916418 PAYNE, JOHN W. 916223 PENNINGTON, CEDRIC B.  916223 PENNINGTON, CEDRIC E. 301041 PERRY, CURTIS M. 907287 PETERS, LATISHA S. 935385 PHILLIPS, JEFFREY A. 926088 PIERKOWSKI, DAVIN V. 979139 POLANCO, CARLOS E. 959853 PONCE, INGRID J. 972721 POSTELL, ALIYA C. 972721 POSTELL, ALIYA C. 972721 POSTELL, ALIYA C. 959550 POWELL, WALTER. 907726 PRIDE, LONZELL L. 994525 RAMIREZ, ISAAC R. 928677 RAYFORD, OTIS. 928677 RAYFORD, OTIS. 928209 REYNOLDS, SHAUN K. 968177 RICHARDSON, GARY D. 925269 RIDEOUT, RICHARD C. 916491 ROBINSON, PETER H. 916491 ROBINSON, PETER H. 916491 ROBINSON, PETER H. 932730 ROBINSON, TANEISHA L. 965742 RODRIGUEZ, MARIA T. 926766 ROSE, MALBSA R. 910466 ROUSE, TYRELL E. 967852 SALERS, ROBERT D. 304665 SANDERS, EDWARD L. 304665 SANDERS, EDWARD L. 935039 SCCTT, RODNEY D. Date___ 10/09/00 10/19/00 10/09/00 10/05/00 11/01/00 11/01/00 11/07/00 9/13/00 10/09/00 9/19/00 10/17/00 9/15/00 9/28/00 10/09/00 11/15/00 10/05/00 10/13/00 11/30/00 10/26/00 9/22/00 11/06/00 10/02/00 11/01/00 9/05/00 10/25/00 9/11/00 12/05/00 10/31/00 11/27/00 10/10/00 10/20/00 11/09/00 10/13/00 11/16/00 9/29/00 11/10/00 11/29/00 10/09/00 10/11/00 12/04/00 10/06/00 11/15/00 12/12/00 11/20/00 11/28/00 11/17/00 11/17/00 10/12/00 10/19/00 12/06/00 9/18/00 Cl 10 10 09 09 09 10 10 11 09 11 11 11 09 09 09 10 10 12 10 12 12 10 10 09 12 09 09 12 10 09 09 09 12 12 11 09 09 09 09 10 11 11 11 09 10 10 12 10 11 11 09 Eth 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 01 01 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02\n02 ) 02 I 02 01 03 . 03 ! 02 02 02  02 J 02 I 03 02 02 02 02 02\n02  02 02 02 03 02 ' 02 01 02 02 02 Sex M M F M M M M F M M M M M M M F F M M M M M M M F M M M F F F F M M M M M M M M M M M F F F M M M M M Infraction _______ _ 2090 NON-THREATENING PROFANITY AT O 2115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGOR 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 1090 REFUSED TO SERVE DETENTION 2115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGOR 2040 MUTUAL COMBAT 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 2040 MUTUAL COMBAT 2115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGOR 2122 FALSIFYING SIGNATURE/INFORMATI 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2040 MUTUAL COMBAT 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2040 MUTUAL COMBAT 2040 MUTUAL COMBAT 1132 USB/POSS. DRUGS {1ST) 2090 NON-THREATENING PROFANITY AT O 1070 REFUSE TO OBEY BUS RULES/REGUL 2115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGOR 2090 NCW-THREATENING PROFANITY AT O 2110 DISORDERLY CONDUCT 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2090 NON-THREATENING PROFANITY AT O 2040 MUTUAL COMBAT 2090 NON-THREATENING PROFANITY AT O 2110 DISORDERLY CONDUCT 2122 FALSIFYING SIGNATURE/INFORMATI 2115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGOR 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2120 HARASSING COMMUNICATIONS 2115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGOR 2115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGOR 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2150 POSSESSION OR USE OF ALCOHOL O 2115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGOR 2115 repeated violations of CATEGOR 2110 DISORDERLY CONDUCT 2090 NON-THREATENING PROFANITY AT O 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2122 FALSIFYING SIGNATURE/INFORMATI 2090 NON-THREATENING PROFANITY AT O 1060 FAILURE TO FOLLOW RULES OR DIR 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGOR 2040 MUTUAL COMBAT 2110 DISORDERLY CONDUCT Inf Date 10/06/00 10/19/00 10/03/00 10/03/00 10/27/00 11/01/00 11/06/00 9/13/00 10/06/00 9/19/00 10/17/00 9/15/00 9/27/00 10/06/00 11/14/00 10/03/00 10/12/00 11/30/00 10/25/00 9/22/00 11/06/00 10/02/00 10/31/00 8/31/00 10/25/00 9/08/00 11/30/00 10/31/00 11/27/00 10/10/00 10/19/00 11/08/00 10/13/00 11/16/00 9/29/00 11/09/00 11/28/00 10/06/00 10/11/00 12/01/00 10/06/00 11/15/00 12/12/00 11/17/00 11/27/00 11/16/00 11/17/00 10/12/00 10/19/00 12/06/00 9/ie/oo  DML008R2 Date: 1/09/01 DiBcipline Management System Action Summary Report Page 14 11:53 AM School 002 HALL 2000/08/21 2001/01/05 ACTION\n02 OUT-OP-SCHOOL{NOT EXCEED 10 DY Sch 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 Student 924424 SHELLS/ KATHERINE N. 930946 SHELTON/ LATOYA S. 938606 SHINE/ RICKEY T. 905263 SIMMONS/ AARON G. 950190 SKAGGS/ SARAH K. 918316 SMITH/ ANTRONE W. 923826 SMITH/ PATRICE L. 933162 SMITH/ TIMOTHY J. 922323 SPENCER/ MICHAEL D. 922323 SPENCER/ MICHAEL D. 917556 STEWART, TERRENCE D. 917556 STEWART, TERRENCE D. 921290 STOKES, STEVEN A. 921290 STOKES, STEVEN A. 938719 STRIBLET, LA DON L. 938719 STRIBLET, LA DON L. 938719 STRIBLET, LA DON L. 938719 STRIBLET, LA DON L. 925024 STRICKLAND, MARQUITIA L. 998638 STROMAN, AMANDA M. 996638 STROMAN, AMANDA M. 922240 TATE, ASHLEY N.  921374 TAYLOR, BRIAN K. 916336 TAYLOR, JAMES X. 994915 TAYLOR, OZONE I. 936920 THOMPSON, BREON D. 304211 THOMPSCW, KANDACE M. 304211 THOMPSON, KANDACE M. 923975 THOMPSON, LATOYA R. 923975 THOMPSON, LATOYA R. 915455 THORNTON, THEOTIS D, 915490 TICEY, JAMES H. 915490 TICEY, JAMES H. 990231 TILMON, DONYA D. 971399 TODD, JEREMY T. 926747 TRUMBLE, STUART S. 926747 TRUMBLE, STUART S. 926747 TRUMBLE, STUART S. 951887 TURNER, ARIC D. 951776 TURNER, DEMARIO Q. 951776 TURNER, DEMARIO Q. 935480 USSERY, BRYAN 0. 935480 USSERY, BRYAN O. 935480 USSERY, BRYAN O. 927657 VEASEY, MARCUS D. 987863 VIDRINE, KYLE W. 962849 WADE, BRANDI L. 930092 WADE, KEITH J. 930092 WADE, KEITH J. 930092 WADE, KEITH J. 930092 WADE, KEITH J. Date 10/13/00 10/09/00 11/17/00 11/08/00 12/01/00 10/31/00 10/20/00 11/08/00 11/01/00 12/06/00 10/09/00 11/16/00 10/20/00 12/12/00 9/01/00 10/06/00 10/20/00 11/09/00 10/12/00 9/19/00 11/17/00 10/13/00 12/06/00 10/12/00 10/06/00 9/20/00 9/20/00 9/20/00 9/18/00 10/26/00 10/27/00 9/15/00 12/11/00 9/22/00 10/19/00 10/05/00 10/13/00 12/05/00 10/17/00 10/03/00 10/10/00 9/20/00 10/09/00 10/30/00 12/04/00 10/31/00 12/08/00 9/18/00 10/11/00 10/20/00 10/24/00 Cl 11 10 11 10 09 11 10 09 11 11 10 10 10 10 09 09 09 09 11 10 10 10 11 10 10 09 10 10 09 09 12 10 10 10 10 09 09 09 09 09 09 09 09 09 09 09 09 09 09 09 09 Eth 02 02 02 02 01 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 01 01 02 02 02 02 02 01 01 02 02 02 02 02  06 . 01 01 01 01 02 02 02 ' 02 : 02 - 02 . 02 01 5 02 02 02 02 02 Sex F F M M F M F M M M M M M M M M M M F F P F M M M M F F F F M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M F M M M M Infraction____________________ ______ 2040 MUTUAL COMBAT 2040 MUTUAL COMBAT 2115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGOR 2121 REPEATED VIOLATION - CATEGORY 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGOR 2115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGOR 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2110 DISORDERLY CONDUCT 2040 MUTUAL COMBAT 2115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGOR 2122 FALSIFYING SIGNATURE/IBJFORMATI 2115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGOR 2110 DISORDERLY CONDUCT 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2090 NON-THREATENING PROFANITY AT O 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2040 MUTUAL COMBAT 2080 VANDALISM (INTENTIONAL DESTRUC 2122 FALSIFYING SIGNATURE/INFORMATI 2040 MUTUAL COMBAT 2040 MUTUAL COMBAT 2110 DISORDERLY CONDUCT 2115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGOR 2115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGOR 2150 POSSESSION OR USE OF ALCOHOL O 2150 POSSESSION OR USE OF ALCOHOL O 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2110 DISORDERLY CONDUCT 2110 DISORDERLY CONDUCT 2090 NON-THREATENING PROFANITY AT O 2040 MOTUAL COMBAT 2110 DISORDERLY CONDUCT 2090 N\u0026lt;M\u0026lt;-THREATENING PROFANITY AT O 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2090 NON-THREATENING PROFANITY AT O 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2040 MUTUAL COMBAT 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2110 DISORDERLY CONDUCT 1070 REFUSE TO OBEY BUS RULES/REGUL 2040 MUTUAL COMBAT 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2110 DISORDERLY CONDUCT Inf Date 10/13/00 10/06/00 11/17/00 11/07/00 11/20/00 10/31/00 10/19/00 11/01/00 10/31/00 12/06/00 10/09/00 11/15/00 10/19/00 12/11/00 9/01/00 10/05/00 10/19/00 11/08/00 10/12/00 9/19/00 11/16/00 10/12/00 12/06/00 10/12/00 10/06/00 9/20/00 9/20/00 9/20/00 9/18/00 10/24/00 10/27/00 9/15/00 12/11/00 9/22/00 10/19/00 10/03/00 10/12/00 12/04/00 10/05/00 10/03/00 10/09/00 9/19/00 10/06/00 10/27/00 12/01/00 10/31/00 12/04/00 9/15/00 10/10/00 10/19/00 10/24/00 DML008R2 Date: 1/09/01 School 002 HALL Discipline Management System Action Suinniary Report 2000/08/21 2001/01/05 ACTIONS 02 OUT-OF-SCHOOL(NOT EXCEED 10 DY Page 15 11:53 AM Sch 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 Student___________________ 960119 WADE, RENALDO K. 960119 WADE, RENALDO K. 916864 WALKER, GERALD D. 937535 WARREN, BRANDON L. 911910 WARREN, WAYNE. 929183 WESTON, TRAVIS D. 922265 WHITE, ASHLEY D. 916398 WHITE, EBONY S. 922332 WHITE, KELLIE P. 922332 WHITE, KELLIE F. 952489 WHITE, TAWANNA J. 305192 WILKERSON, ASHLEY R. 305192 WILKERSON, ASHLEY R. 929131 WILLIAMS, BRANDY L. 929131 WILLIAMS, BRANDY L. 986647 WILLIAMS, CHRISTOPHE M. 938568 WILLIAMS, CURTIS L. 917010 WILLIAMS, DERRICK E. 929240 WILLIAMS, GREGORY J. 921571 WILLIAMS, LARRY M. 928962 WILLIAMS, LASHIKKA S. 897592 WILLIAMS, RODNEY E. 922782 WILLIAMS, RORY M. 933561 WILSON, GERALD A. 996402 WIRGES, TRACEY A. 996402 WIRGES, TRACEY A. 924669 WRIGHT, DOMONIC D. 924670 WRIGHT, JONATHAN L. 927658 WRIGHT, RODNEY J. Date 9/18/00 10/02/00 10/09/00 9/29/00 9/13/00 12/07/00 10/12/00 10/16/00 9/21/00 10/26/00 10/20/00 9/12/00 11/10/00 9/18/00 10/17/00 10/31/00 12/07/00 9/22/00 11/06/00 11/09/00 9/21/00 11/06/00 9/25/00 11/17/00 10/18/00 11/08/00 9/15/00 9/15/00 12/04/00 Cl 09 09 10 10 12 09 11 12 10 10 09 09 09 09 09 10 09 10 09 11 10 11 09 09 12 12 10 11 09 Eth 02 02 02 02 : 02  02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 01 01 02 02 02 Sex M M M M M M F F F F F F F F F M M M M M F M M M M M M M M Infraction________ ______________________ 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIBECTIVES 2110 DISORDERLY CONDUCT 2122 FALSIFYING SIGNATURE/INFORMATI 2040 MUTUAL COMBAT 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2040 MUTUAL COMBAT 1050 LEFT SCHOOL/CLASS WITHOUT PERM 2090 NON-THREATENING PROFANITY AT 0 2115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGOR 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIBECTIVES 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 1110 USE OF VERBAL ABUSE/FIGHTING W 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIBECTIVES 2090 NOH-THBEATENING PROFANITY AT O 2110 DISORDERLY CONDUCT 2040 MUTUAL COMBAT 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGOR 2110 DISORDERLY CONDUCT 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY BULES OB DIRECT 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIBECTIVES 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIBECTIVES 2115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGOR 2115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGOR 2110 DISORDERLY CONDUCT 2110 DISORDERLY CONDUCT 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY BULES OB DIRECT Inf Date 9/15/00 9/29/00 10/09/00 9/28/00 9/13/00 12/05/00 10/12/00 10/16/00 9/21/00 10/25/00 10/18/00 9/07/00 11/08/00 9/15/00 10/16/00 10/31/00 12/07/00 9/22/00 11/05/00 11/09/00 9/21/00 11/01/00 9/22/00 11/14/00 10/18/00 11/08/00 9/15/00 9/15/00 12/05/00 ACTION\n03 OOS (LONG TEBM)/EXPULSION RCMD Sch 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 Student_____________ 931439 ACOME, ERIC A. 927271 ANDERSON, IHEODIS. 923699 BELCHER, NATASHA Y. 922174 BROOKS, VERNON J. 927233 BROWN, FLOYD L. 927233 BROWN, FLOYD L. 927233 BROWN, FLOYD L. 923993 BROWN, FRANKLIN J. 923993 BROWN, FRANKLIN J. 931893 CALLOWAY, BRYAN M. 923743 CARROLL, SCORPIO L. 998621 CHERRY, ROLLY M. 912353 CLICK, LASHONDRA D. 928852 COATS, ARCHIE M. 936876 CONNORS, DEANDRE A. 927165 CYRUS, TERRELL C. 924086 DIXON, CLBAVONE M. Date 11/07/00 11/17/00 9/22/00 11/09/00 9/29/00 10/20/00 12/01/00 9/29/00 9/29/00 12/08/00 10/10/00 10/11/00 9/28/00 12/11/00 10/18/00 9/18/00 9/14/00 Cl 10 09 10 10 09 09 09 09 09 09 09 10 11 09 09 09 10 Eth 01 02 02 02 02 02 02 . 02\n02 02 02 01 02 ' 02 02 02 02 Sex M M F M M M M M M M M F F M M M M Infraction ______________ _ _________  3072 VERBAL ABUSE OF STAFF 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 3140 TERRORISTIC THREATENING 3072 VERBAL ABUSE OF STAFF 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIBECTIVES 2105 BEFUSING TO FOLLOW DIBECTIVES 2020 BATTEBY 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 3072 VERBAL ABUSE OF STAFF 2115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGOR 2010 ASSAULT 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 3072 VERBAL ABUSE OF STAFF 2020 BATTEBY 3090 POSSESSION OF WEAPON Inf Date 11/07/00 11/16/00 9/22/00 11/09/00 9/29/00 10/19/00 11/30/00 9/28/00 9/26/00 12/07/00 10/09/00 10/11/00 9/28/00 12/11/00 10/18/00 9/18/00 9/14/00 DML008R2 Date: 1/09/01 Discipline Management System Action Summary Report Page 16 11:S3 AM School 002 HALL 2000/08/21 2001/01/05 ACTION: 03 OOS (LONG TERM)/EXPULSION RCMD Sch 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 Student 925512 ELLIS, GLENN D. 917026 FOSTER, COURTNEY R. 928410 GRIFFIN, LARON L. 916573 HARRIS, MICHAEL D. 916573 HARRIS, MICHAEL D. 959119 HAYWOOD, RICKEY L. 918572 JAMES, KELVIN L. 923794 JAMES, QUINTON T. 923794 JAMES, QUINTON T. 992375 JOHNSON, EARVIN B. 982283 JONES, ANDREW D. 933051 JONES, SHANELLE L. 926653 KELSEY, WILLIAM P. 894448 LOWE, CORNELL D. 919352 MARTIN, SHELLY R. 988504 MCBRIDE, WILLIAM D. 922196 MCCLENDON, EDDIE L. 987741 MCMILLON, CHASE R. 923603 MORGAN, CAESER S. 933035 MORTON, BRIAN E. 933035 MORTON, BRIAN E. 928626 NORRIS, ARLANDRIS K.  931800 NORWOOD, GALON C. 973702 ORTEGA, FRANK M. 995061 PARKER, ANTHONY D. 967585 PATTON, DARLENE A. 973336 PETERS, TAKESHA R. 979139 POLANCO, CARLOS E. 990177 SANTIAGO, ROBERT L. 935039 SCOTT, RODNEY D. 924603 SIMPSON, CHRISTOPHE R. 931509 SPROUSE, KRISTIAN T. 932573 STEVENSON, SHEENA F. 938719 STRIBLET, LA DON L. 916336 TAYLOR, JAMES X. 951776 TURNER, DEMARIO Q. 935480 USSERY, BRYAN O. 930092 WADE, KEITH J. 960119 WADE, RENALDO K. 998679 WALKER, ALEXANDER D. 916470 WIMBLEY, LOUIS G. Date 11/13/00 10/09/00 10/16/00 9/26/00 11/17/00 9/06/00 8/31/00 10/10/00 11/15/00 10/17/00 9/28/00 9/12/00 11/13/00 11/01/00 12/05/00 10/31/00 1/05/01 11/10/00 9/21/00 12/01/00 12/11/00 9/18/00 12/11/00 10/18/00 10/31/00 9/28/00 10/27/00 10/01/00 10/10/00 11/07/00 9/12/00 12/07/00 11/13/00 12/01/00 11/16/00 11/18/00 12/01/00 12/05/00 10/27/00 12/11/00 12/06/00 Cl 10 12 09 12 12 10 10 10 10 12 09 09 09 11 12 09 10 12 09 09 09 09 09 12 11 09 11 12 09 09 10 12 09 09 10 09 09 09 09 09 12 Eth 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 . 02 02 02 03 02 02 02 03 06 02 02 02 02 i 02 i 02 02 02 02 02 01 02 ! J Sex M M M M M M M M M M M F M M M M M M M M M M M M M P F M M M M F F M M M M M M M M Infraction______________________________ 2020 BATTERY 2110 DISORDERLY CONDUCT 3072 VERBAL ABUSE OF STAFF 2020 BATTERY 2121 REPEATED VIOLATION - CATEGORY 2110 DISORDERLY CONDUCT 3072 VERBAL ABUSE OF STAFF 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 3072 VERBAL ABUSE OF STAFF 3072 VERBAL ABUSE OF STAFF 2020 BATTERY 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2100 SEXUAL MISC^DUCT/BEHAVIOR OR 3072 VERBAL ABUSE OF STAFF 2020 BATTERY 3072 VERBAL ABUSE OF STAFF 3072 VERBAL ABUSE OF STAFF 2115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGOR 3072 VERBAL ABUSE OF STAFF 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2020 BATTERY 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 3140 TERRORISTIC THREATENING 3072 VERBAL ABUSE OF STAFF 2010 ASSAULT 3071 PHYSICAL ASSAULT OF STAFF 3140 TERRORISTIC THREATENING 3072 VERBAL ABUSE OF STAFF 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 3072 VERBAL ABUSE OF STAFF 3140 TERRORISTIC THREATENING 3072 VERBAL ABUSE OF STAFF 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGOR 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2080 VANDALISM (INTENTIONAL DESTRUC 3092 POSS./WEAP KNIFE/CLUB/FACSIM.B Inf Date 11/13/00 10/09/00 10/16/00 9/26/00 11/17/00 9/06/00 8/31/00 10/10/00 11/15/00 10/17/00 9/28/00 9/12/00 11/13/00 11/01/00 12/05/00 10/31/00 1/05/01 11/10/00 9/21/00 11/30/00 12/11/00 9/18/00 12/08/00 10/18/00 10/31/00 9/28/00 10/27/00 10/01/00 10/10/00 11/07/00 9/12/00 12/07/00 11/13/00 11/30/00 11/16/00 11/17/00 11/30/00 12/04/00 10/27/00 12/08/00 12/06/00 ACTICW\n05 SENT HOME Sch 002 002 002 002 002 Student 301009 ALDACO, DALIA E. 923699 BELCHER, NATASHA Y. 973698 BENRAHOU, IKRAM. 925170 BOWMAN, KELION D. 915665 BROWN, ERIC K. Date 9/22/00 9/15/00 9/22/00 8/31/00 9/19/00 Cl 09 10 10 10 10 Eth , 03 : 02 01 02 02 Sex F F P M M Infraction_________________________ 1110 USE OF VERBAL ABUSE/FIGHTING W 1050 LEFT SCHOOL/CLASS WITHOUT PERM 1110 USE OP VERBAL ABUSE/FIGHTING W 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OH DIRECT 2020 BATTERY Inf Date 9/22/00 9/15/00 9/22/00 8/31/00 9/19/00 t LDML006R2 Date: 1/09/01 School 002 HALL Discipline Management System Action Summary Report 2000/08/21 2001/01/05 ACTION I 05 SENT HOKE Page 17 11:53 AM Sch 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 Student__________ _______________________ 926897 BROWN, SHARON M^ 305516 CAZARES, CARLA M. 913182 CLAY, DEWAYNE. 928852 COATS, ARCHIE M. 926087 COTTON, KEVIN L. 927165 CYRUS, TERRELL C. DEAN, RICKEY L. 922858 DUHART, COURTNEY D. 925512 ELLIS, GLENN D. 992486 GAGE, ANTOINE B. 923617 GILES, TYRONE D. 936370 HAMPTON, CLIFTON E. 936370 HAMPTON, CLIFTON E. 921820 HENDERSON, LATOYA T. 304729 HILLSMAN, MICAH D. 932577 IFABIYI-APOLABI, VICTORIA B. 924166 JOHNSON, IRVING A. 960639 JOHNSON, IVORY J. 960639 JOHNSON, IVORY J. 930877 JOHNSON, JEROME E. 930877 JOHNSON, JEROME E. 922041 JORDAN, TIFFANYE D. 919085 LEE, JESSICA Y. 896526 LONDON, TERRY D. 977402 LOPEZ, MARIA P. 921843 MALLORY, JONATHON L. 932269 MANNING, SCOTTIE G. 987741 MCMILLON, CHASE R. 922369 MOORE, JOHNATHON T. 323391 MORRIS, TREMIN M. 925476 NEAL, TERRANCE R. 959966 OLIVE, ROSHAWN L. 959966 OLIVE, ROSHAWN L. 959966 OLIVE, ROSHAWN L. 935385 PHILLIPS, JEFFREY A. 921330 PHILLIPS, TOMI J. ____91907^POINTER, JOSEPH E. 928677 RAYFORD, OTIS. 924679 REED, ANGELA R. 935039 SCOTT, RODNEY D. 935759 SMITH, SHASTA N. 936048 STEPHENS, CRAIG L. 938719 STRIBLET, LA DON L. 930092 WADE, KEITH J. 305192 WILKERSON, ASHLEY R. i 301074 YOUNG, AMANDA B. Date 9/26/00 9/22/00 9/15/00 9/08/00 8/31/00 8/31/00 10/16/00 11/15/00 11/08/00 11/10/00 12/11/00 9/28/00 9/28/00 11/01/00 10/10/00 10/06/00 8/31/00 9/19/00 10/10/00 9/21/00 12/05/00 8/31/00 9/05/00 11/01/00 9/22/00 8/31/00 9/01/00 11/09/00 9/26/00 8/31/00 11/16/00 11/01/00 11/01/00 Cl 10 09 11 09 10 09 10 10 10 12 10 09 09 10 09 09 10 10 10 10 10 10 09 10 10 10 09 12 10 09 10 10 10 Eth 02 03 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 . 02 . 02 02 02 02 02 02 : 02 02 . 02  02 02 02 03 , 02  02 ' 02 II 02  ACTION: 502 STODENT HEARING OHLY - 502 Sch Student 12/05/00,_____ 10 9/08/00 12/05/00 8/30/00 10/17/00 11/01/00 10/14/00 10/27/00 10/11/00 10/19/00 11/17/00 9/05/00 10/27/00 Date 09 10 11 09 10 09 09 09 09 09 09 11 Cl 02  02 02 i 02 i 02 I 02 : 02  02 1 02  02 02 01  02 i 02 02 02 01 . Sex F F M M M M M M M M M M M F M F M M M M M F F M F M M M M M M M M __ M M F M M F M F M H M F F Infraction 1110 USE OF  1110 USE OF  VERBAL ABUSE/FIGHTING W VERBAL ABUSE/FIGHTING W 1030 MINOR ALTERCATION 2040 MUTUAL COMBAT FAILURE TO FOLLCW RULES OR DIR 1060 2105 2122 refusing to follow DIRECTIVES FALSIFYING SIGNATURE/INFORMATI 1050 LEFT SCHOOL/CLASS WITHOUT PERM 2020 BATTERY 2115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OP CATEGOR 2115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGOR 3080 POSSESSION OF FIREARM 3072 VERBAL ABUSE OF STAFF 1090 REFUSED TO SERVE DETENTION 1030 MINOR ALTERCATION 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 2020 BATTERY 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 1133 REPEATED SCHOOL/CLASS TARDIES 1050 LEFT SCHOOL/CLASS WITHOUT PERM LEFT SCHOOL/CLASS WITHOUT PERM 1050 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 1080 FAILURE TO SERVE DETENTION 1110 USE OF VERBAL ABUSE/FIGOTING W 1060 FAILURE TO FOLLOW RULES OR DIR 1060 FAILURE TO FOLLOW RULES OR DIR 2115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGOR 1110 USE OF VERBAL ABUSE/FIGHTING W 2090 NON-THREATENING PROFANITY AT O 3140 TERRORISTIC THREATENING 2115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGOR 1090 REFUSED TO SERVE DETENTION 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 2040 MUTUAL COMBAT 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 1080 FAILURE TO SERVE DETENTION 1062 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECT 1030 MINOR ALTERCATION 1030 MINOR ALTERCATION 2090 NON-THREATENING PROFANITY AT O 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 1030 MINOR ALTERCATION Inf Date 9/26/00 9/22/00 9/15/00 9/08/00 8/31/00 8/31/00 10/16/00 11/15/00 11/08/00 11/10/00 12/11/00 9/28/00 9/28/00 11/01/00 10/09/00 10/05/00 8/31/00 9/19/00 10/10/00 9/21/00 12/05/00 8/31/00 9/05/00 11/01/00 9/22/00 8/31/00 9/01/00 11/09/00 9/26/00 8/31/00 11/16/00 11/06/00 11/01/00 12/05/00 9/08/00 12/05/00 8/30/00 10/17/00 11/01/00 10/13/00 10/27/00 10/11/00 10/19/00 11/17/00 9/05/00 10/27/00 Eth Sex Infraction Inf Date DML00BR2 Date: 1/09/01 School 002 HALL Discipline Management System Action Sunmary Report 2000/08/21 2001/01/05 Page 18 11:53 AM ACTION: 502 STUDENT HEARING ONLY - 502 Sch 002\" 002 002 002 002 002 Student ______________ 923993 BROWN, FRANKLIM J. 927165 CYRUS, TERRELL C. 916573 HARRIS, MICHAEL D. 959119 HAYWOOD, RICKEY L. 962283 JONES, ANDREW D. 913102 ORTEGA, FRANK M. Date 9/28/00 9/18/00 9/26/00 9/06/00 9/28/00 10/18/00 Cl 09 09 12 10 09 12 Eth 02 02 02 02 02 03 Sex M M M M M M Infraction________________ 2020 UATrEH? ' 2020 BATTERY 2020 BATTERY 2110 DISORDERLY CONDUCT 2020 BATTERY 3140 TERRORISTIC THREATENING Inf Date 9/28/00 9/18/00 9/26/00 9/06/00 9/28/00 10/18/00 ACTION: 503 STUDENT HEARING ONLY - 503 Sch 002 002 002 Student_____________________ 927233 BROWN, FLOYD L. 936B16 CONNORS, DEANDRE A. 924603 SIMPSON, CHRISTOPHE R. Date 10/19/00 10/18/00 9/12/00 Cl 09 09 10 Eth 02 02 02 Sex M M M In fraction__________________________ 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 3072 VERBAL ABUSE OF STAFF 3072 VERBAL ABUSE OF STAFF Inf Date 10/19/00 10/18/00 9/12/00 ACTION: 507 STUDENT HEARING ONLY - 507 Sch 002 Student_______________ 987741 MCMILLON/ CHASE Date 11/10/00 Cl 12 Eth 02 Sex M Infraction____________________________ 2115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGOR Inf Date 11/10/00 ACTION: 508 STUDENT HEARING ONLY - 508 Sch 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 Student______________________ 923743 CARROLL, SCORPIO L. 998621 CHERRY, HOLLY M. 912353 CLICK, LASHONDRA D. 924086 DIXON, CLEAVONE M. 917026 FOSTER, COURTNEY R. 928418 GRIFFIN, LARON L. 992375 JOHNSON, EARVIN B. 967585 PATTON, DARLENE A. 990177 SANTIAGO, ROBERT L. Date 10/09/00 10/11/00 9/28/00 9/14/00 10/09/00 10/16/00 10/17/00 9/28/00 10/10/00 Cl 09 10 11 10 12 09 12 09 09 Eth 02 01 02 02 02 02 02 02 06 Sex H F F M M M M F M Infraction_____  3072 VERBAL ABUSE OF STAFF 2115 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGOR 2010 ASSAULT 3090 POSSESSION OF WEAPON 2110 DISORDERLY CONDUCT 3072 VERBAL ABUSE OF STAFF 3072 VERBAL ABUSE OF STAFF 2010 ASSAULT 3072 VERBAL ABUSE OF STAFF Inf Date 10/09/00 10/11/00 9/28/00 9/14/00 10/09/00 10/16/00 10/17/00 9/28/00 10/10/00 ACTION: 512 STUDENT HEARING ONLY - 512 Sch 002 002 002 002 Student _________________ 923699 BELCHER, NATASHA Y. 918572 JAMES, KELVIN L. 923794 JAMES, QUINTON T. 928626 NORRIS, ARLANDRIS K. Date 9/22/00 8/31/00 10/10/00 9/18/00 Cl 10 10 10 09 Sth 02 02 ' 02\n02 Sex \"T\" M M M Infraction_________________________ 3140 TERRORISTIC THREATENING 3072 VERBAL ABUSE OF STAFF 2105 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 2020 BATTERY Inf Date 9/22/00 8/31/00 10/10/00 9/18/00DML008R2 Date: 1/09/01 School 002 HALL Discipline Management System Action Summary Report 2000/06/21 2001/01/05 ACTION: PC PARENT CALLED Black White Infraction_________ MINOR ALTERCATION M 1 P 1 M F Hispanic Asian Indian Total Students Total Infractions M F M F M F M 1 P 1 M 1 F 1 Page 19 11:53 AM Total Actions M 1 F 1 LEFT SCHOOL/CLASS WITHOUT PERMISSBON 2 2 2 FAILURE TO FOLLOW RULES OR DIRECTEVES2 1 5 3 5 3 5 3 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECTIVEa 12 12 12 5 1 5 5 5 REFUSE TO OBEY BUS RULES/REGULATIONS 1 1 1 NON-TgREATRHIMQ PROFANITY AT OR ABOUT STAFF X X .1 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 1 3 1 3 1 3 1 3 DISORDERLY CONDUCT 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Totals: 25 10 26 11 26 11 26 11 ACTION: PF PARENT CONFERENCE Black White Infraction Hispanic Asian Indian Total Students Total Infractions Total Actions BEHAVIOR THAT VIOLATES A PERSON'S RIGHTS M P 1 1 M F M P M P M F M F 1 M P 1 M F 1 LEFT SCHOOL/CLASS WITHOUT PERMISSION 1 1 1 1 FAILURE TO FOLLOW RULES OR DIRECTEVES I 2 2 2 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECTIVEa 1 1 1 REFUSE TO OBEY BUS RULES/REGULATIONS 1 1 1 USB GP VERBAL ABUSE/FIGHTING WORDS/GEaTURES 2 2 2 VERBAL ABUSE OF STAFF 1 1 1 1 Totals: 4 1 5 4 5 4 S 4 ACTION: SW STUDENT WARNED Black White Infraction_________ MINOR ALTERCATION Hispanic Asian Indian Total Students M 13 Total Infractions M 13 Total Actions M 13 M e F 8 M 3 P M 1 F M 1 F M F F 6 F 6 F e LEFT SCHOOL/CLASS WIISOUT PERMISSBON 3 3 3 FAILURE TO FOLLOW RULES OR DIRECTIVES1 1 1 1 29 12 30 12 30 12DML008R2 Date: 1/09/01 Discipline Management System Action Summary Report Page 20 11:53 AM School 002 HALL 2000/08/21 2001/01/05 ACTION: SW STUDENT WARNED Black White Infraction M REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECTIVM 14 M 4 F Hispanic Aslan Indian Total Students Total Infractions Total Actions M F M F M F M 23 F 14 M 25 F 14 M 25 F 14 REFUSE TO OBEY BUS RULES/REGULATIONS 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 USE OR POSSESSION OF TOBACCO 1 1 1 1 USE OF VERBAL ABUSB/FIGHTING WORDS/GE9TURES 2 2 2 2 2 2 REPEATED SCHOOL/CLASS TARDIES 2 2 1 3 2 3 2 3 2 NON-THREATENING PROFANITY AT OR ABOUTISTAFF 1 1 1 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 POSSESSION OR USE/PAGINQ DEVICE 3 2 3 2 3 2 3 2 Total*: 68 44 8 2 2 1 81 45 84 45 84 45 ACTION: 01 IN-SCHOOL SUSPENSION Black White Infraction_________ MINOR ALTERCATION M 2 F 3 M F Hispanic Asian Indian Total Students Total Infractions Total Actions M F M F M F M 2 F 3 M 2 F 3 M 2 F 3 BEHAVIOR THAT VIOLATES A PERSONSIRIGBTS 1 4 1 4 1 4 LEFT SCHOOL/CLASS WIIHOUT PERMISSION 11 5 3 1 2 28 16 29 16 29 16 FAILURE TO FOLLOW RULES OR DIRECTIVES 5 1 1 1 8 5 8 5 8 5 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECTIVM 17 1 1 29 18 30 18 30 19 REFUSE TO OBEY BUS RULES/REGULATIONS 1 1 1 FAILURE TO SERVE DETBNTICW 8 6 2 2 10 8 10 8 10 8 REFUSED TO SERVE DETENTION 6 4 6 4 6 4 6 4 USE OP VERBAL ABUSE/FIGHTING W0RDS/GE8TURBS 1 1 8 5 8 5 8 5 REPEATED SCHOOL/CLASS TARDIES 6 11 1 1 7 12 7 12 8 12 NON-THREATENING PROFANITY AT OR ABOUT STAHF 1 1 1 REFUSING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIVES 19 9 1 19 10 19 13 19 13 Total*: 100 74 12 6 4 2 120 85 122 88 123 89DML008R2 Date: 1/09/01 Discipline Management System Action Summary Report Page 21 11:53 AM School 002 HALL 2000/08/21 2001/01/05 ACTION: 02 OUT-OP-SCHOOL(NOT EXCEED 10 DY Black White P M P Hispanic Aslan Indian Total Students Total Infractions Total Actions M F M F M P M 1 P M 1 F M r Infraction_________ MINOR ALTERCATION M 1 1 LEFT SCHOOL/CLASS WITHOUT PERMISSION 3 3 3 3 FAILURE TO FOLLOW RULES OR DIRECTIVES 2 2 2 REFUSE TO OBEY RULES OR DIRECTIVES 3 9 3 9 3 9 3 REFUSE TO OBEY BUS RULES/REGULATIONS 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 REFUSED TO SERVE DETENTiai______.JI. 1 T .1 1 _____1 _ USB OF VERBAL ABUSE/FIGHTING WORDS/GESTURES 1 1 1 1 1 1 USE/POSS. DRUGS (1ST) 1 1 1 1 REPEATED SCHOOL/CLASS TARDIES 1 1 1 1 BATTERY 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 THEFT/THBFT BY RECEIVING MUTUAL COMBAT 16 11 21 13 21 14 21 14 3 1 1 1 LOITERING OR CRIMINAL TRESPASS 3 3 3 3 1 2 1 2 1 2 VANDALISM (INTENTIONAL DESTRUCTIOH/PROPERTY) 2 NON-OHREATENING PROFANITY AT OR ABOUT7STAEF 27 28 28 REFUSING TO FOLLCW DIRECTIVES 43 21 47 22 68 25 71 25 DISORDERLY CONDUCT 26 33 34 34 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGORY ISOFFBNSES 54 64 65 6 1 1 8 9 9 3 1 1 4 2 1 6 6 6 9 9 9 HARASSING COMMUNICATIONS 2 2 2 2 REPEATED VIOLATION - CATEGORY II OFFENSES 3 3 3 FALSIFYING SIGNATURE/INFORMATION 6 2 1 2 1 4 7 4 7 4 POSSESSION OR USE OF ALCOHOL OR DHUGS 1 5 1 5 1 5 2 VERBAL ABUSE OF STAFF 1 1 1 1 Totals: 195 63 20 224 74 257 79 261 80 8 6 2 1 1 ACTION: 03 OOS (LONG TERM)/EXPULSION RCMD Black White Hispanic Aslan Indian Total Students Total Infractions Total Actions Infraction M F M P M F M F M P H P M F M FDML00eR2 Date: 1/09/01 Discipline Management System Action Summary Report School 002 HALL 2000/08/21 2001/01/05 ACTION: 05 SENT HOME Black White Hispanic Asian Indian Total Students Total Infractions Page 23 11x53 AM Total Actions F Infraction MUTUAL COMBAT M 2 M F 2 M F 2 F M F M F M F M M 2 7 NON-TOBEATENINO PROFANITY AT OR ABOUT STAFF 2 2 2 3 1 REFUSING TO FOLLCW DIRECTIVES 3 1 3 1 3 1 REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGORY I4OFFENSES 4 4 4 FALSIFYING SIGNATURE/INFORMATION 1 1 1 1 1 VPPPIT. iwigg np STAgg. X J. 1 1 POSSESSION OF FIREARM 1 1 1 1 TERRORISTIC THREATENING 1 1 1 To tala: 36 36 15 36 15 36 15 ACTION: 502 STUDENT HEARING ONLY - 502 Black White Hispanic Aslan Indian Total Students Total Infractions Total Actions 9 3 3 M 4 F M F M F M F M F M 4 F M 4 F M 4 F Infraction BATTERY 1 DISORDERLY CONDUCT 1 1 1 1 TERRORISTIC THREATENING 1 1 1 6 Totals: 5 1 6 6 ACTION: 503 STUDENT HEARING ONLY - 503 Black White Hispanic Asian Indian Total Students Total Infractions Total Actions M F M F M F M F M 1 F M 1 F M 1 F Infraction______________ REFUSING TO FOLLCW DIRECTIVES M F 1 2 VERBAL ABUSE OF STAFF 2 2 2 3 Totals: 3 3 3 ACTION: 507 STUDENT HEARING ONLY - 507 Black White Hispanic Aslan Indian Total Students Total Infractions Total Actions M F M F M F M F M 1 P M 1 F M 1 P Infraction M F REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF CATEGORY IIDFFENSES Totals: 1 1 1 1 ACTION: 508 STUDENT HEARING ONLY - 508 innEioxsatiEQSisEr aurc OMlWS. IKE 1 o a. gaau (a sSJtBSHSKQ SWICTIONS HWi ___ lOGItR'----- Lf) CEHHE Dt (DE ff QIO-HKOr 8 o JKailt i Mtey  I 12 CBO 2 HK W KT 2 11 oi i Offl  I  cis 031) 2 W 33e2 2 IS P133' 3 \u0026gt;.! BBidt cue: \u0026lt; 3 a) C0 aBRSt ' nW B4 Ttr 1 HK *f TO SF WiT a4 ET aw w4 \u0026gt;p TOT Wff HK TS liHT TO 4 J 6 8 1 3 1 4 8 1 2 B 8 I 'I 3 1 3 2 3 1 1 1 1 K\u0026gt; in cy I CM 8 (O lisKnJ 2  7 11 RMjsy 2 1 1 6 3 13 1 12 1 X\u0026gt; 2 2 2 6 3 n 5 4 9 4 41 2 1 1 15 1 1 iij z Q.  3 a (/\u0026gt; Hs n ansn. I 1 1 4 1 5 8 S 1 2 1 1 2) 2 1 1 7 2 18 13 1 3 1 3 23 2 2 2 1 ? 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 4 1 1 1 4 1 1 1 1. I 1 3) 2 2 3 B 3 1a 1 1 2 U 1 i  1   I 1 g  3s**^n- i3a SrmS 5 2 1 1 2 3 1 3 1 1 axiLansE 41 1 2 1 1 1 13 1 3 I 4 14  8 M) 1 1 1 1 1 2 IB 2 5 T! 2 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 9 fS 3 1 1 ID 2 5D 16 1 3 Z 1 1 Q \u0026gt; 1 1 3 2 3 1 1 T a 2 1 3 10 1 4 1 a 1 1 2 2 4 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1\u0026amp; BB IjnffiKtK 3301.1! awfc Ca/LQOl BCE 6 8zazo g SMEL CO) aZ SAWCTXONS -Bffl33E- TEBC-offcraHOr in 'J aiE M, 032 B4 ff 8 Cl o (Z rt) iKsrff 1 (j\nS C6 33CBC. HESTf? 2 2 IJr ID aisw-D Tt^. 2  jirlMJ 2  ja2 3 Qj n aans. 1 I 1 1 2 1 1 2 SK VH Bf 1 1 WP EM ' Tcr BK W TX w ------- lOGHH-WT Bl ff 'HK S  TOt ff aK wr iDr CT 2 t 5. 1 1 1 2 3 5 1 1 t 3 ) 1 i 1 1 1 2 1 ) 1 1 11 T K m oI Cm O in rtsOrd 2 00 * 0/66 K aHttPt 2 gjULaHCSPL \" 8 ID 1 1 2 8 15 1 1 I 1 UJ  a z\n\u0026gt; 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I J 1 I 10 1 2 3 16 1 1 2 3 5 1 1 1 11 1 2 3 13 ijraEfaKaMKOsiKEr 3JB4C OLOatt BtF. 9 s SHJIi rffi fflRWHSDQi n cBafis lit  c lO 2 iW 2 0 ______ojicFsacQ\" ff HK Wl Td  SANCT'iCNS tXffilHJ-- -----'lOMr 1 1 7 Hdtiro 2 0 ' 1 1 \u0026gt; I j? m I St OsOnJ J\nc 3 2 !\u0026gt; 2 3 1 ojffi ffl aarsB rt OED CBD lefiaii 3 HOffif 3 Sittoq 3 a Th* 2 55 1 J.) z Xi 'Z. d 3 1 1 8 3 3 3 7 B 1 3 3 3 2 6 3 3 3 1 3 1 i 3 1 4 2 ( i, tffi IRHMF 2 W lati^D 2 BL? 3**^ m S 2 1 ? s a on ojg\n gaoR 1 3 5 1 3 5 2 3 1 3 24 1 I 2 3 1 1 1 3 3 3 3 6 3 5 6 0 3 1 1 9 SW w tr 3 ff HK M4 ET ------IQCTSM- OW i*5 H\" TOf HK 4 * Td ttff HK TT WI  i 1 2 3 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 4 8 2 1 1 1 3 3 3 1 1 ?. 3 1 4 1 1 1 3  3 3 3 2 3 7 3 3 3 3 C 3 3 3 1 2 3 6 5 2 3 1 3 3 3 1 36 3 o 1 3 8 itaw 3  SDK 3  lefib. 2 a tSdtin 2 MO MSB*? 2 .,. [istird 2 3^ Cffl 2 1 3 4 1 3 3 1 1 1 2 2 1 5 3 1 1 2 2 2 3 J 3 3 2 3 3 2 3D 1 3 4 2 3 30 3 3 3 3 3 a I 3 3 3 2 3 6 1 5 7 3 3 3 3 1 3 36 3 2 2 3 5 3 3aHItr OB Effl'-KnisrHO. iifU tax SHIL iiiaiwc sfl: wnmiEHfieaN^ KMIHE: a-f-i-S-y--U-) TDCfflE: IjWl n SANCTIONS OffCFSCHD:--------- ------TaGTO-- lA OtBlE Ui offi m SK KT m w wr Bl ff' w SK W W JT ii4 Bl TOT ff oo o 2 2 ZtrCHIB 2 115 122 121 13) 1 \u0026lt;d ro in oI CM (D l/y s UI Q. t-H 1=1 a=) UWGS 11 siast Riil Id) 1 HCKWF 2 CisGit) 2 9ne2 2 110 ca\u0026gt; w 115 121 OKS 12 3ECBt 3HlhaHnH\u0026gt; O/lifSl HK H4  IT Btr TO EiaUID-------- 'UMr- HIT HK MU TT U' 1 3 E. 4 Z4 1U a 5 1 6 1 1 10 1 fl 2 e 1 1 4 27 6 1 1 4 27 1 5 24 1 I 1 1 12 28 18 1 1 5 24 1 12 1 1 1 5 24 1B 4 9 1 2 9 UB 9 1Z7 IJXEEF iftK SJfllj [EEKT aaic (J/W- JKE 14 HQIDWI R/MD lAiwa gjQi\n(j2 (caawuwsHiL SANCTIONS ______nrcFsaoir g^lE B4' E ff HK W St' 3 IfiStaU I M o ERis 1 SEDsitB 1 133 \u0026lt;3 /CTUlt Bttay 2 {SO 2 C 2 MO 2 on UO K\u0026gt; Lf) O I 3 CM -.-4 O in Icte - mSKF 2 0 CisOnl 2 W I^IAd 2 IC 33e 2 2 M r(RIE 2 a VKS 3  rbW 3 OT S w\u0026gt; QJffi III z a 1=) a 4 8 4 2 i 3 7 9 3 1 1 TOf 7 8 5 3 1 3 ICT ff HK *4 IT tF ------KMSTaH-------- WK B4 ff  qpy id '\u0026gt;e ____ -TCBtr 2 2 z 14 21 12 21 1 1 1 1 WC HK WK TT IT 2 2 IB 1 1 5 2 7 4 IB 36 1 1 1 3 I 1 2 1 3 1 2 1 5 1 1 8 5 3 3 5 21 a 1 7 5 41 2 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 2 I 1 C6 aaapt e 5? iB i\u0026gt;g7K$3 T. 010  5 SitKiro } it Baillai 1 DC 1 1 4 1 1 5 12 3 1 15 1 1 1 334 1 7 8 S 3 3 5 21 22 1 7 6 44 2 2 2 1 1 6 MD 6 2 2 23 3 7 1 1 2 2 2 2 25 3 7 1 1 2 2 11 2 0 tlijtfq Iflita: - HaHef 2  DislDO 2 W (^rtVlD 2 115 0^ ID aBSUt 2 on \u0026amp; i  Kciis I 2 CO 2 on 1 4 2 1 5 7 2 3 3 1 U 4 4 2 5 J) (D M 34 5 1 1 2 1 1 1 5 5 1 1 2 7 1 V 1 I 1 8 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 q 1 2 2 1 2 1 2 1 1 1 1 7 12 2 3 q 15 1 1 1 11 2 1 6 4 1 2 5 59 80 5 1 1 2 7 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 ID 1 2 2 5 1 1 1 1 2 11 i 7 4 2 2 (\u0026gt; 20 99 5 1 1 2 1 I 1iiffiERiKswrrasiREr 3fC iEMtra?\nDBaaaEHCfaeNcnE aaco iDo^ i(W3i q2 3301: C92 hCaUUHlOSOQl SAUCTIONS Cm u aSrCFSKOr laGTHM-Cffiao\nn.1 (HE a5 s' HK ( XT Wf WiT IM X3' ff HK (H KF KT a/a IKT M BK W4 13 XT Bffi \u0026amp; TOHi- ff MT HK rr XT xr O o DisOld 2 M tetlfio 2 IK 3 Ml t 1 2 ? OKS 11 3HCB1 IB g 36 I 1 1 1 2 1 1 2 'I. 8 1 3 1 2 e13 er t) rtflaw. i BHT 1 ItfRjls 1 kilta\nKmi 2 2 XaSJD 2 CBD OO oe (W) (SO (W) ((ft !6 OWS 12 aHOM. 1 1 1 1 1 X 1 2 9 1 1 2 1 12 1 1 1 2 2 n 2 1 1 21 1 I2 11 2 1 I 2 1 11 2 11 UO bO T 3. Cm O SHn.aafE^ 149 a 230 C 2 35 6 2 1 1 2 17 2J9 Si IxJ z I a (/\u0026gt; L lUBF.ioKaHibasiBin aiMC (MU BS 2 hwim\n'695S^'won 8/ajro 3 3110\nOP iI\u0026gt;WB53HIl\u0026gt; SANCTIONS tjjrCFSMtlr IQGTHH- O3nJH\u0026gt;- -----Tinr 3 n 3- CHBtE nt, roE 05 a HK CT' W w CT 04 BF SK TiT S F wr 34 CT ff HK M I*' CT WP HK MS CT rt 3 Cffi  HBPe^ 1 ftullin 1 Tadits 1 74it 2  W 13 2  \"\u0026gt; SS 1 s Bsojri 2  HrQjffi 2 Hrdnin 1 7 1 2 1 1 1 1 9 1 2 1 3 11 1 7 D 6 4 I 4 3 12 1 11 I 2 I 1 3 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 a 1 2 .o n 7 Ar 2 12 2 ID 1 3 ffi 7 6 1 1 3 4 I 1 1 5 1 1 1 I? ) 1 B J ffl aBOfC M\u0026gt; 51 IC 9 1 n 5 a 1 3 6 Zi 1 2 1 1 9 1 2 1 1 4 32 V 31 1 101 ) 6 1 1 3 6 1 1 2 2 5 1 1 1 13 I 9 1 2 1 1 4 B 3 13 1 1C6 8 2 1 1 3 1 S2 wt ffllsy Helt 1 2  2 ro 2 PC 2 0 .ij z\nI .J 55 4 lldtinj IoIb: - I-fcrtiirf 2  BOW I IBKH) 2  i. li? ftptVSo 2 115 ^2 2 ta 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 4 1 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 3 I I 1 1 1 3 1 5 1 3 y) 4 12 2 13) VAS St 3 OB 15 4 U 21 1 4 1 4 2 3 19 4 13 2 1 4 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 I 1 2 2 19 1 1 1 4 1 5 1 1 1 1 I 5 1 10 sum iBftaJi 1  2  67 W SI 8 8 16 9 1 1 1 1 IP 1 1 I 1 3 1 1 2 13 26 1 4 1 5 1 1 a 1 1 1 2 3 6 1 1 IS 1 1 1 3 1 8 1 1 20 8 15 31 1 9 6 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 7 1 4 4 1  1 4 1 2 1 14 1utBEWKaoBi.asBn' aarc CBZOtli \\KF. gaiIHE: \u0026amp;az i./itt S CL aanv 0$ UILHQI^^ sanctions Deua)- .-nSr ___ iqgtbm------- om -ojrcs'sffio-\" (HBIE QL cn ff 8 Cl o iRsraF c \u0026lt;0 as ord 04 tttXfto I\n2 1. 8 i- S 2 XB Uf\u0026gt; 115 53 3 3 i IZL 11 sacftt- 1 1 5L itiiatJ ftfnis i ?e 1  to Lf) I a Cm 8 ttugai I 2 TO acarff 9 rm CisOIti KftViD (grrtw 3idc2 flrCRffi 1 X 1 1 X 1 X 3 LU 2 J li HK XN w 2 1 11 16 1 X 15 X 1. cm 2 UD 2 32 2 W ' r la 2 IS 3 OE 3 cm 3 MD I 1 1 X1 1 1 w 1 6 wr iM IT fT 0K 'ffT WIT Bl  ET HK IM TOC MIT HK Wff KT BS X 6 a 12 3EP6 oiaLSdaafl' If. 31 X 1 1 2 1 I 1  1 2 's : LX X X X 1 X 3 2 1 X ZE u 2 2 1 2 1 2 4 2 1 X 1 3 2 13 2 X 1 X I 2 X U X X X 2 ffi X X X 2 1 2 1 1 2 4 14 X 1 G n 1 3 1 9 1 9 f0 3X1 36 11 45 X 1 1 1 1 ^6 1 X 1 1 1 2 1 X 33 3flS  T -n 4 1 2 X 12 22 1 ?. \u0026gt; 1 2 a X X X 2 1 2 3 X 3 7 16 X 2 X 1 3 48 j2  a \u0026lt;f\u0026gt; School Short Term Suspension ANNUAL Name Central J.A. Fair Hall McClellan Metropolitan Parkview ALE ALC Cloverdale Dunbar Forest Heights Henderson Mablevale Mann Pulaski Hgts. Southwest Totals Badgett Bale Baseline Booker Brady Carver Chicot Cloverdale Dodd Fair Park Forest Park Franklin Fulbright Garland Enrolled 1855 757 790 935 %Blk 59 81 71 84 911 51 Long Term Suspension 622 771 648 724 506 858 767 510 10,654 233 362 323 597 372 596 537 512 224 248 430 464 495 271 89 57 69 86 75 52 57 83 59 92 73 83 52 63 52 69 92 65 76 48 92 48 93 BM 153 145 164 186 15 41 h____ 1 41 382 173 321 372 142 112 129 221 2,598 5 15 55 34 22 39 106 0 18 12 21 53 43 0 BF WM WF 1998 Student Hearing Office Expulsion Total 64 61 53 65 2 22 0 19 147 80 114 124 74 51 51 106 1,033 37 14 4 _____6 4 24 07 13 13 6 18 0 33 10 36 15 1 34 0 14, 32 67 81 43 23 36 19 25 469 0 2 66 5 7 22 07 3 2 3 20 14 68 11 0 18 0 __ 1 16 21 22 8 14 16 6 13 174 0 000 ___ 3 0 3 01 0114 0 TOTAL 264 222 261 277 18 115 ___ _ 75 577 341 538 547 253 215 205 365 4,274 8 24 75 44 36 50 155 0 33 28 37 63 67 0 BM ____2q 8 28 ____ 12 34 0 10 31 27 7 33 21 7 6 ____31 248 1 21 1 _____ 1j 1 7 01 0 _____q 1 _____ i_ 1 BF__ 13 9 5 __  ____ 1_ 0 0 3 13 9 13 8 13 13 ___12 104 ____ 1_ ____12 ____q 0 0 ____q 0 0 5 0 ____q ____q 0 WM 0 0 ___4 ___ 0 ___ 0 ___001 ___36311 ___ 1_ ___4 ___ 5 29 ___ 0 ___01 ___ 0 ___ 0 0 ___ 0 ___ 0 21 ___ 0 ___ 0 __  0 WF 01 0 01 0 0 02 30 20 00 2 11 00 0 00 0 1 0 0 00 10 0 TOTAL 33 18 ____ 37 ____ 13 _____ 5 4 0 14 ____ 45 ____ 23 44 35 _____ 9 13 ____ 50 392 _____ 2 _____ 34 _____ 1_ 1 _____ 1 _____803 6 _____ q _____ 2 _____21 BM 23 3 6 ____4 10 ____0 0 ____8 ____9 53 51 0 ____2 70 0 ____0 ____01 00 0 ____1_ 00 ____0 0 0 ___ 0 0 BF 1 1 0 00 00 02 32 1 6 0 3 2 21 0 0 0 0 0 00 00 00 00 1 WM ___ 2 ___ 0 ___010 ___ ___00 ___ 0 ___012 01 ___ 0 ___ 0 __ 8_ ___ 0 ___ a 0 ___ 0 0 ___ q ___ q ___q0 ___q0 ___ q ___q0 WF 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 01 0 0 0 00 0 1 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 _0 00 00 TOTAL ______ 26 _______ 4 _______ 6 _______ 5 _______ I _______ 1 _______ q 0 ______ 10 ______ 8 _______ 6 ______ 11 _______ 2 _______ 4 4 _______q _______ q 0 0 _______ q _______ q 1 _______ q 0 _______ q _______ q _______ q _______ q 1 #Blk 274 227 256 268 22 _____67 1 73 583 301 462 541 261 172 192 374 4,074 _____10 25 72 _____39 _____29 ____ 138 ______q 26 _____3q _____34 _____eq _____62 2 %Blk 85% 93% 84% 91% 100% 56% 100% 82% 92% 75% 81% 91% 87% 76% 87% 89% 84% 100% 93% 91% 87% 78% 86% 84% 0% 72% 88% 92% 92% 90% 100% Page 2 School Name Geyer Spgs. Gibbs Jefferson King Mabelvale McDermott Meadowcliff Mitchell Otter Creek Pulaski Hgts. Rightsell Rockefeller Romine Terry_______ Wakefield Washington Watson Western Hills Williams Wilson Woodruff Totals G Total 97/98 G Total 97/98 Difference Enrolled 316 311 513 658 407 477 332 242 328 464 249 450 328 511 373 660 493 315 479 362 284 14,216 24,886 24,986 100 % 75 52 44 54 73 57 79 92 46 55 94 59 63 46 86 53 89 70 52 82 71 65 67 66 1998 Student Hearing Office BM Short Term Suspension BF WM WF TOTAL Long Term Suspension BM BF Expulsion Total 7 97 30 55 12 22 8 16 37 16 28 6 39 23 12 93 18 1 42 _____9 913 3511 3,297 214 11 11 10 14 9 4 5 2 23 5 93 6 17 5 8 0 16 1 285 1318 1,320 -2 3 2 0 7 22 2 1 1 14 0 15 5 4 03 10 8 0 0 3 156 625 653 -28 1 0 066110 00 0211 00 4 0 000 36 210 216 -6 22 12 8 53 97 24 28 14 19 64 21 54 15 50 40 20 123 34 1 58 13 1390 5664 5,486 178 1 00 010 2 0 0103243 9 2 a01 1 48 296 319 -23 1 0 0 0100 1 0 0 00 0 0010 0 00 0 13 117 79 38 WM 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 0 51 0 0 0 0 16 45 41 4 WF ____000 0100 000 000100 10 00 0 5 16 14 2 TOTAL 2 0 0 1 3 0 2 1 0 1 0 3 4 7 3 15 4 0 0 1 1 82 474 453 21 BM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0\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_1689","title":"Court filings concerning LRSD's revised desegregation and education plan, districts' supplement to past and pending claims against the state defendants, and ODM report, ''1997-98 Enrollment and Racial Balance in the Pulaski County School Districts''","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":["United States. District Court (Arkansas: Eastern District)"],"dc_date":["1998-01"],"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":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","Little Rock School District","Office of Desegregation Monitoring (Little Rock, Ark.)","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","Education--Finance","Educational law and legislation","Educational planning","Educational statistics","School management and organization","School integration","School enrollment","School improvement programs","School facilities","Student assistance programs"],"dcterms_title":["Court filings concerning LRSD's revised desegregation and education plan, districts' supplement to past and pending claims against the state defendants, and ODM report, ''1997-98 Enrollment and Racial Balance in the Pulaski County School Districts''"],"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/1689"],"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":["filing"],"dcterms_extent":["111 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"District Court, order; District Court, joint motion of Little Rock School District (LRSD) and Joshua for approval of Little Rock School District's (LRSD's) revised desegregation and education plan; District Court, memorandum brief in support of joint motion of Little Rock School District (LRSD) and Joshua for approval of Little Rock School District's (LRSD's) revised desegregation and education plan; District Court, two orders; District Court, districts' supplement to past and pending claims against the state defendants; District Court, addendum to districts' supplement to past and pending claims against the state defendants; District Court, order; District Court, memorandum opinion and order; District Court, notice of filing, Office of Desegregation Monitoring report, ''1997-98 Enrollment and Racial Balance in the Pulaski County School Districts''; District Court, notice of filing, Arkansas Department of Education project management tool  The transcript for this item was created using Optical Character Recognition (OCR) and may contain some errors.  IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, * Plaintiff, * vs. * No. LR-C-82-866 * * FILED EA U.S. DISTRICT COURT STERN DISTRICT ARKANSAS JAN I 2 1998 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, et al., * RECEIVED Defendants, * * MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, et al. , * J.i\\i I } 3 1998 Intervenors, * * OFFICE OF KATHERINE KNIGHT, et al., * DESES.REGATICN MONITORlrJG Intervenors. * ORDER Before the Court is a motion filed by the Pulaski County Special School District - (\"PCSSD\") requesting that this Court grant summary judgment on the issue of the state funding formula. 1 The Arkansas Department of Education (\" ADE\") has responded to the PCSSD's motion.2 After carefully considering the motion and the response, this Court denies the PCSSD's motion for summary judgment on the issue of the state funding formula. Summary judgment is appropriate when \"the pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories, and admissions on file, together with the. affidavits, if any, show that there is no genuine issue as to any material- fact and that the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law.\" Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(c). This Court concludes that there are genuine issues of material fact in dispute regarding the state funding formula. 1 Docket No. 3042. 2 Docket No. 3051. 104 Previously, this Court entered Orders granting summary judgment on the issue of state funding for teacher retirement matching contributions, 3 granting summary judgment on the issue of health insurance, and denying summary judgment as to special education and loss funding. 4 Currently, several of these issues are on appeal to the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals. The Eighth Circuit has yet to rule, and therefore, these issues remain unresolved. These unresolved issues relate to the issues raised by the PCSSD in its current motion for summary judgment pending before this Court. Furthermore, although not of record in this case, recent newspaper reports indicate that certain aspects of the funding formula are still being litigated in Arkansas state court. See Cynthia Howell, Lawyers Seek to Delay Trial in School Funding Suit, Arkansas Democrat Gazette, Jan. 8, 1998, at 2B. Because there are genuine issues of material fact in dispute regarding the state funding formula, this Court denies the PCSSD's current motion for summary judgment. IT IS SO ORDERED THIS ff\\._day of January 1998. 3 Docket No. 2930. 4 Docket No. 2968. ~ ~,4t.1 UNITED STA ~ISTRICTJ GE fHfS DOCUMENT ENTERED ON DOCk:ET SHEET IN COUPUANCE ~ RULE 5e ANOOA 7'9(8) FACP ON 1//t;;. ~ . IV  l/l1 :_ 2 MICHAEL E. GANS - Clerk of Court UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT U.S. COURT \u0026 CUSTOM HOUSE 1114 MARKET STREET ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 63101 January 16, 1998 VOICE (314) 539-3600 ABBS (BOO) 652-8671 Is. wustt.edu/Sth.cir RECEIVED Mr. Jim McCormack Clerk U.S. DIS1RICT COURT, EASTERN ARKANSAS Room 402 600 W. Capitol Avenue Little Rock, AR 72201-3325 JAN 2 1 1998 OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORINQ Re : 96-2047EALR L.R. School Dist. vs. Servicemaster Manag. Dear Clerk: The mandate of this Court is enclosed together with a receipt. Will the clerk of the district court please sign, date and return the receipt to this office. w~~~rt.~ Michael E. Gans Clerk of Court led Enclosure( s) District Court Clerk-Re : Files _x_Enclosed please find : 1 vol. 1R {J)a-J.nor- ~~e_J\\ 'Wt/!(J,,:m,Jj;) ( LETIER FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY) cc: Christopher John Heller Joseph Steven Mowery John C. Everett Samuel Arnold Perroni William Henry Trice III Richard Wilson Roachell John W. Walker Robert Pressman Norman J . Chachkin Philip K. Lyon M. Samuel Jones III Nelwyn Leone Davis Tim C. Humphries Office of Desegregation Monitor Horace Alvin Walker Perlesta Arthur Hollingsworth Kenneth G. Torrence Otis Henr y Storey District Court/Agency Case Number(s) : 82-CV -866 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT ~Q~t l~Ti:llCT cfJRT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS 1 111 ~ D,S I RI T Ar- '\\, N~\u003clS WESTERN DIVISION JAN 2 1 1998 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT J,%1~S WM CORMACK, Cl r:-r:i:\u003c B;:: PLAmTIFF O::? C~~ .~ v. LR-C-82-866 RECEIVED PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL JAN 2 3 1998 DEFENDANTS MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL INTERVENORS OFFICE Of KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL DESEGREGATION MONITORING INTERVENORS JOINT MOTION OF LRSD AND JOSHUA FOR APPROVAL OF LRSD'S REVISED DESEGREGATION AND EDUCATION PLAN Plainti.,ff Little Rock School District (\"LRSD\") and the Joshua Intervenors (\"Joshua\") for their Joint Motion For Approval_ of - LRSD's Revised Desegregation and Education Plan state: 1. Joshua and LRSD move for tentative and, ultimately, fina l approval of LRSD's Revised Desegregation and Education Plan dated January 16, 1998 (attached hereto as Exhibit A). 2. On September 26, 1997, LRSD submitted and requested approval of LRSD's Revised Desegregation and Education Plan dated  September 18, 1997. Following submission, LRSD and Joshua engaged in extensive negotiations in an effort to develop a revised plan which both parties could support. Those negotiations resulted in LRSD's Revised Desegregation and Education Plan dated January 16, 1998 (\"January 16 Revised Plan\"). On that date, counsel for Joshua confirmed in writing Joshua's agreement to support approval of the January 16 Revised Plan. See Exhibit B. Also on that same date, the LRSD Board of Directors approved the Janua~y 16 Revised Plan and authorized submission of the plan to this Court for approval. 3. LRSD and Joshua stipulate to the following facts in support of this Motion: a. that the record in this case supports modification of LRSD's desegregation obligations; b. that the January 16 Revised Plan is an appropriate modification of LRSD's desegregation obligations; c. that the January 16 Revised Plan is constitutional, workable and fair to Joshua class members; and, d. that, if LRSD substantially complies with its obligations under the January 16 Revised Plan during its term and implements in good faith the programs, policies and procedures related thereto, LRSD will be unitary with regard to all aspects of school operations at the end of the 2000-01 school year. 4. As a part of the compromise and settlement between LRSD and Joshua, Joshua has agreed that they will request that the Court of Appeals for the Eighth circuit hold their two pending appeals in abeyance, and LRSD and Joshua have further agreed that they will attempt to resolve Joshua's past, present and future claims for attorneys' fees and costs by mediation. 5. LRSD and Joshua recognize that their compromise and settlement cannot be approved by this Court without notice to Joshua class members. ~ Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(e). Accordingly, LRSD and Joshua propose dissemination of the notice attached hereto as Exhibit c. This notice shall be published no less than thirty (30) days before a deadline established by this Court for Joshua 2 class members to submit written objections to approval of the January 16 Revised Plan. LRSD shall bear all costs associated with publication of the notice. LRSD shall cause the notice to be published in the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette; shall print and distribute copies of the notice to teachers; shall prominently post the notice at all. school; and shall cause the notice to be broadcast over the cable television channel controlled by LRSD. 6. In light of their agreement, LRSD and Joshua respectfully request that the hearing currently scheduled for the week of February 2, 1998 be cancelled.  7. LRSD and Joshua have prepared for the Court's consideration an Order (attached hereto) granting the relief sought in this Motion. WHEREFORE, LRSD and Joshua pray that this Court tentatively approve LRSD's Revised Desegregation and Education Plan dated January 16, 1997, pending the filing of objections filed by Joshua class members; that the notice attached hereto as Exhibit c be published at least thirty (30) days the deadline for Joshua class members to submit written objections; that the hearing currently scheduled for the week of February 2, 1998 be cancelled; and that this Court . finally approve LRSD's Revised Desegregation and Education Plan dated January 16, 1997 upon consideration of any objections filed by Joshua class members. Respectfully submitted, LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT THE JOSHUA INTERVENORS 3 FRIDAY, ELDREDGE, CLARK First Commercial Bldg., Suite 2000 400 West Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201-3493 (501) 376-2011 BY: John W. Walker, P.A. 1723 s. Broadway Little Rock, AR 72201 (501) 374-3758 BY: CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I certify that a copy of the foregoing has been served on the following pe?jes~ depositing a copy of same in the United states mail on this day of January, 1998. Mr. Sam Jones Wright, Lindsey \u0026 Jennings 2200 Worthen Bank Bldg. 200 West Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Steve Jones JACK, LYON \u0026 JONES, P.A. 425 w. Capitol, Suite 3400 Little Rock, AR 72201-3472 Mr. Richard Roachell Mr. Travis Creed Roachell Law Firm First Federal Plaza 401 West Capitol, Suite 504 Little Rock, AR 72201 Ms. Ann Brown - HAND DELIVERED Desegregation Monitor Heritage West Bldg., Suite 510 201 East Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Timothy G. Gauger Office of the Attorney 323 Center Street 200 Tower Building Little Rock, AR 72201 General 4 SBC'l'IOII 1: Little Rock . School District Revised Desegregation and Education Plan January 16, 1998 Prior Agreements and Orders. 1.1. This Revised Desegregation and Education Plan (\"Revised Plan\") shall supersede and extinguish all prior agreements and orders in Little Rock School District v. Pulaski County Special School District, U.S.D.C. No. LR-C-82-866, and all consolidated cases related to the desegregation of the Little Rock School District (\"LRSD\") with the following exceptions: a. The Pulaski County School Desegregation Case Settlement Agreement as revised on September 2 8 , 1989 (\"Settlement Agreement\"); b. The Magnet School Stipulation dated February 27, 1987; c. Order dated September 3, 1986, pertaining to the Magnet Review Committee; d. The M-to-M Stipulation dated August 26, 1986; and, e. Orders of the district court and court of appeals interpreting or enforcing sections a. through d. above to the extent not inconsistent with this Revised Plan. 1. 2. This Revised Plan does not affect the Joshua Intervenors' (\"Joshua's\") right to enforce the Interdistrict Desegregation Plan with respect to the Pulaski County Special School District (\"PCSSD\") and the North Little ' Rock School District (\"NLRSD\"). 1.3. Although this Revised Plan supersedes the Interdistrict Desegregation Plan, LRSD expects to continue to work cooperatively with PCSSD and NLRSD in the areas addressed by the Interdistrict Desegregation Plan. \"i' EXHIBIT I A SBCTXOH 2: Obligations. 2.1. LRSD shall in good faith exercise its best efforts to comply with the Constitution, to remedy the effects of past discrimination by LRSD against African-American students, to ensure , that no person is discriminated against on the basis of race, color or ethnicity in the operation of LRSD and to provide an equal educational opportunity for all students attending LRSD schools. 2.1.1. LRSD shall retain a desegregation and/or education expert approved by Joshua to work with LRSD in the development of the programs, policies and procedures to be implemented in accordance with this Revised Plan and to assist LRSD in devising remedies to problems concerning desegregation or racial discrimination which adversely affect African-American students. 2. 2. LRSD shall implement programs, policies and/ or procedures designed to ensure that LRSD hires, assigns, utilizes and promotes qualified African-Americans in ' a fair and equitable manner. 2.2.1. LRSD shall maintain in place its current policies and practices relating to the recruitment of AfricanAmerican teachers which have allowed LRSD to maintain a teaching staff which is approximately one-third African-American. 2.2.2. LRSD shall implement programs, policies and/or procedures designed to increase the number of African-American media specialists, guidance counselors, early childhood teachers, primary grade teachers and secondary core subject teachers, including offering incentives for African-American teachers to obtain certification in these areas, and to assign those teachers 2 to the LRSD schools where the greatest disparity exists. 2,2.3. LRSD shall establish a uniform salary schedule for all positions within the district, including a salary range for director and associate and assistant superintendent positions, designed to provide compensation in accordance with qualifications and to minimize complaints of favoritism. 2.2.4. LRSD shall implement a policy for the centralized hiring and assignment of teachers by the LRSD Human Resources Department designed to provide an equitable distribution of teaching resources and to prevent nepotism and preselection by a school principal. 2.2.s. LRSD shall implement a policy of promotion from within which shall include procedures for notifying district employees of open positions. 2.2.6. LRSD shall implement programs, policies and/or procedures designed to ensure that the teaching staffs at all LRSD schools are substantially similar with regard to average years of experience and percentage of teachers with advanced degrees. 2.2.7. LRSD sha,l l negotiate with the Knight Intervenors to establish a procedure for the mandatory reassignment of teachers as necessary to enable LRSD to meet its obligations under Section 2.2 of this Revised Plan. 2.3. LRSD shall implement student assignment programs, policies and/or procedures designed to ensure the desegregation of LRSD schools to the extent practicable, including but not limited to Sections 3 and 4 of this Revised Plan. 3 2. 4. LRSD shall implement programs, policies and/or procedures designed to ensure that there is no racial discrimination in the referral and placement of students in special education or in other programs designed to meet special student needs. 2. 5. LRSD shall implement programs, policies and/ or procedures designed to ensure that there is no racial discrimination with regard to student discipline. 2.5.1. LRSD shall strictly adhere to the policies set forth in the Student Rights and Responsibilities Handbook to ensure that all students are disciplined in a fair and equitable manner. 2.5.2. LRSD shall purge students' discipline records after the fifth grade and eighth grade of all offenses, except weapons offenses, arson and robbery, unless LRSD finds that to do so would not be in the best interest of the student. 2.5.3. LRSD shall establish the position of \"ombudsman\" the job description for which shall include the following responsibilities: ensuring that students are aware of their rights pursuant to the Student Rights and Responsibilities Handbook, acting as an advocate on behalf of students involved in the discipline process, investigating parent and student complaints of race-based mistreatment and attempting to achieve equitable solutions. 2.5.4. LRSD shall work with students and their parents to develop behavior modification plans for students who exhibit frequent misbehavior. 2. 6. LRSD shall implement programs, policies and/ or procedures 4 . I designed to promote participation and to ensure that there are no barriers to participation by qualified African-Americans in extracurricular activities, advanced placement courses, honors and enriched courses and the gifted and talented program. 2.6.1. LRSD shall implement a training program during each of the next three years designed to assist teachers and counselors in identifying and encouraging African-American students to participate in honors and enriched courses and advanced placement courses. 2.6.2. LRSD shall implement programs to assist African-American students in being successful in honors and enriched courses and advanced placement courses. LRSD shall provide transportation to students otherwise eligible for transportation to school to allow those students to participate in after-school activities required for participation in an extra-curricular activity. 2. 7. LRSD shall implement programs, policies and/ or procedures designed to improve and remediate the academic achievement of African-American students, including but not limited to Section 5 of this Revised Plan. 2. 7.1. LRSD shall assess the academic programs implemented pursuant to Section 2.7 after each year in order to determine the effectiveness of the academic programs in improving African-American achievement. If this assessment reveals that a program has not and likely will not improve African-American achievement, LRSD shall take appropriate action in the form of ( - 5 either modifying how the program is implemented or replacing the program. 2. 8. LRSD shall implement programs, policies and/ or procedures during each of the next three years designed to promote and encourage parental and community involvement and support in the operation of LRSD and the education of LRSD students. 2. 9. LRSD shall implement programs, policies and/ or procedures designed to ensure an equitable allocation and/or reallocation of financial, technological and educational resources to LRSD schools. 2. 9. 1. Within 60 days of the district court's approval of this Revised Plan, LRSD, after consultation with Joshua, will develop a process or standard for assessing the equitable allocation of resources. 2.9.2. Within 180 days of the district court's approval of this Revised Plan, LRSD shall report by school the results of its assessment of the allocation of resources. 2.10. LRSD shall implement programs, policies and/or procedures designed to ensure the equitable maintenance and repair of LRSD facilities. 2.11. LRSD shall implement programs, procedures designed to ensure that there discrimination in the services. provision of guidance policies and/or is no racial and counseling 2 .11. 1. Guidance counselors shall work with students in an effort to provide for more equity in academic honors, awards and scholarships. 6 2.12. LRSD shall implement programs, policies and/or procedures designed to ensure that every LRSD school provides its students a learning environment free from discrimination. 2 .12. 1. LRSD shall implement a training program through the United States Department of Justice, the Arkansas Department of Education and/or the National Conference of Christians and Jews in prejudice reduction and cultural sensitivity. 2.12.2. LRSD shall implement policies and procedures for investigating the cause of racial disparities in programs and activities and developing remedies where appropriate. 2.13. LRSD shall implement programs, policies and/or procedures designed to ensure LRSD substantially complies with its obligations  under this Revised Plan. 2.13.1 The LRSD Superintendent shall be responsible for overseeing LRSD's compliance with this Revised Plan in accordance Section 6. SECTION 3: Student Assignments. 3.1. Attendance Zones. While this Revised Plan does not require any sudden or drastic changes to the present student assignment plan, LRSD attendance zones may be redrawn in accordance with the following guidelines: 3.1.1. Satellite Zones. attendance zones where the impact LRSD may eliminate satellite would be to reduce the transportation burden on African-American students; 3. 1. 2. Neighborhood Schools. LRSD may assign students 7 to area1 elementary and junior high/middle schools based on reasonably compact and contiguous attendance zones drawn to create as many truly desegregated schools (from forty to sixty percent African-American) as reasonably practicable, except as provided in Section 3.1.3. below; 3.1.3. Exception. Where a reasonably compact and contiguous attendance zone will result in an elementary or junior high/middle school which is less than twenty percent AfricanAmerican, LRSD reserves the right to either: a. Draw the attendance zone at less than full capacity to allow for the voluntary transfer of African-American students to the school; or, b. Create one or more satellite attendance zones of primarily African-American students. If a satellite zone is established, it shall be of su'f ficient size to ensure substantial desegregation at the school. 3. 1.4. High Schools. LRSD may assign students to area high schools based on attendance zones drawn so that the percentage of African-American students at each high school shall be within plus or minus twenty percentage points from the percentage of African-American students for high schools as a whole and so that, to the extent practicable, a stable and predictable feeder pattern exists from LRSD junior high/middle schools. 3.2. Voluntary student Transfers. Beginning in the 1998-99 1The term \"area\" school shall refer to all LRSD schools except magnet and interdistrict schools. 8 school year, the following guidelines shall govern voluntary student transfers: 3.2.1. Desegregation Transfers. LRSD students whose race constitutes more than sixty percent of the population at their attendance zone school shall be permitted to transfer to another LRSD area school where their race constitutes le~s than forty percent of the student population subject to capacity limitations and to reasonable requirements established by LRSD; 3. 2. 2. Racial Isolation Transfer. LRSD students whose attendance zone school is a one race, African-American school (~ 90% African-American) shall be permitted to transfer to a racially balanced LRSD area school subject to capacity limitations and to reasonable requirements established by LRSD; 3.2.3. Magnet Program Transfer. LRSD students shall be permitted to transfer to another LRSD area school to participate in a designated magnet program subject to capacity limitations and to reasonable requirements established by LRSD; 3.2.4. Employees' ,Child Transfer. LRSD employees who reside in the LRSD may choose to have their children attend the same school or campus at which the employee works, not including Magnet schools, subject to capacity limitations and to reasonable requirements established by LRSD; 3. 2. 5. Special circumstances Transfer. Upon a showing of a special need arising out of circumstances unique to a particular student, a student may, at the sole discretion of LRSD, be permitted to transfer to another LRSD area school subject to 9 capacity limitations and to reasonable requirements established by LRSD; 3.2.6. outside students. LRSD schools shall be open to students who reside outside Pulaski County where the acceptance of the transfer will improve the racial balance of the district as a whole and of the school to which the student wishes to transfer and subject to capacity limitations and to reasonable requirements established by LRSD; and, 3.2.7. Transportation . LRSD shall provide transportation to voluntary transfer students with the following ,. exceptions: (i) employee's child transfers, (ii) special circumstances transfers, and (iii) transfers from outside Pulaski County. 3.3. Magnet Programs. The designated magnet programs at this time are the following: a. Rockefeller Early Childhood Program; b. King High Intensity Learning Program; c. Washington Math Science Program; d. Henderson Health Science Program; e. Dunbar International Studies/Gifted and Talented Program; ,. f. Central International Studies Program; and, g. McClellan Business Communications Program. LRSD reserves the right to modify or discontinue designated magnet programs and to establish new magnet programs. However, LRSD agrees that during the term of this Revised Plan it will not modify 10 or discontinue a magnet program which is successful. 3.4. Middle Schools. LR.SD shall establish a schedule for the orderly conversion of some or'all of its junior high schools to middle schools for grades six, seven and eight and move the ninth grade to high schools. As a part of this conversion, LRSD reserves the right to chan9e the grade level structure at all of its schools, including magnet schools. 3. 5. Ninth Grade Schools. Because of limited capacity at LRSD's high schools, it may be necessary as a part of the orderly conversion to middle schools to establish two or more schools composed entirely of ninth grade students. If so, LRSD shall assign students to the ninth grade schools based on attendance zones drawn so that the percentage of African-American students at each ninth grade school shall be within plus or minus ten percentage points from the district-wide percentage of ninth grade African-American students. 3.6. School Construction/Closing. LRSD shall construct at least two new area elementary schools, one in west Little Rock and one at the site of the former Stephens school. When the new Stephens Elementary opens, it shall receive additional funding as described in Section 5.5 of this Revised Plan and one or more of the schools identified in Section 5.5 will be closed. When a school identified in Section 5.5 is closed, LRSD shall exercise its best efforts to find a community or educational use for the property. Otherwise, LRSD sI+all not seek to close schools in African-American neighborhoods solely because of age or poor 11 maintenance except when a new school will be located in the same general area. 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 schools 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 discrimination to the extent practicable; or, past 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. 3.8. Racial Balance. This Revised Plan recognizes that the ,. desegregation of LRSD to the extent practicable does not require that every LRSD school be racially balanced. Accordingly, nothing in this Revised Plan shall be construed as requiring a particular racial balance at every LRSD school or as obligating LRSD to recruit students to obtain a particular racial balance in every LRSD school. 3.9. Housing. LRSD and Joshua co:mmi t to promote housing desegregation within segregated neighborhoods. They pledge to work together and use their best efforts to dismantle, and prevent 12  recurrence of, segregated housing patterns. SBC'l'IO 4: Interdistrict schools. LRSD and PCSSD shall operate Interdistrict Schools in accordance with the following: 4.1. PCSSD Interdistrict Schools. PCSSD shall operate Baker Elementary, Clinton Elementary, Crystal Hill Elementary and any new elementary school constructed in Chenal Valley as Interdistrict Schools; 4. 2. LRSD Interdistrict Schools. LRSD shall operate King Elementary, Romine Elementary and Washington Elementary as Interdistrict Schools; 4. 3. Racial Composition. The ideal composition at interdistrict schools shall be as close to 50%-50% as possible with the majority race of the host district remaining the majority race at the Interdistrict School; 4.4. Reserved Seats. PCSSD shall reserve at least 200 seats at Clinton Elementary and up to 399 seats at Crystal Hill Elementary for interdistrict transfer students from LRSD; 4.5. Recruitment. LRSD and PCSSD agree to implement programs at Interdistrict Schools designed to attract interdistrict transfers and to work cooperatively to recruit interdistrict transfers to Interdistrict Schools; 4.6. Outside Students. Interdistrict Schools shall be open to students who reside outside Pulaski County where the acceptance of the transfer will assist the Interdistrict School in achieving its ideal racial composition; and, 13 4. 7. Transportation. Transportation shall be provided by the home district for interdistric, t transfers from Pulaski County to Interdistrict Schools. \u0026BCTIOB s: student Achievement. 5.1. Early Childhood Education. LRSD shall implement an early childhood education program which shall include a HIPPY program and a four year-old program with no less than 720 seats. LRSD contemplates that the four yearold classes will remain at their present sites or in the same general location. 5.2. Reading/Language Arts. 5.2.1. Primary Grades. LRSD shall implement at least the following strategies to improve the academic achievement of students in kindergarten through the third grade: a. Establish as a goal2 that by the completion of the third grade all students will be reading independently and show understanding of words on a page; b. Focus teaching efforts on reading/language arts instruction by teaching science and social studies content through _ reading/language arts and mathematics experiences; c. Promote thematic instruction; 2The identification of specific goals in this Revised Plan is not intended to create an obligation that LRSD shall have fully met the goal by the end of the plan's term. LRSD's failure to obtain any of the goals of this Revised Plan will not be considered a failure to comply with the plan if LRSD followed the strategies described in the plan and the policies, practices and procedures developed in accordance with the plan. 14 d. Identify clear objectives for student mastery of all three reading cueing systems (phonics, semantics and syntax) and of knowing-how-to-learn skills; e. Monitor the appropriateness of teaching/learning materials to achieving curricular objectives and the availability of such materials in all classrooms; f. Establish uninterrupted blocks of time for reading/language arts and mathematics instruction; g. Monitor student performance using appropriate assessment devices; h. Provide parents/guardians with better information about their child's academic achievement in order to help facilitate the academic development of the students; i. Provide pre-kindergarten, kindergarten and first grade learning readiness experiences for students who come to school without such experiences; j. Train teachers to manage successful learning for all students in diverse, mainstreamed classrooms; k. Use the third and/or fourth grade as a transition year from focused reading/language arts and mathematics instruction to a more traditional school day; and, 1. Provide opportunities for students to perform and display their academic training in a public setting. 5. 2. 2. Intermediate Grades. LRSD intends to implement at least the following strategies to improve the academic achievement of students in grades four through six: 15 ,. ,. a. Adopt as a goal that by completion of the sixth grade all students will master and use daily higher level reading comprehension skills for learning in all subject areas, for making meaning in real life experiences and for personal growth and enjoyment; b. Promote thematic instruction; c. Establish uninterrupted blocks of time for reading/language arts, mathematics, science and social studies instruction;  d. Monitor the appropriateness of teaching/learning materials to achieving curricular objectives and the availability of such materials in all classrooms; e. Monitor student performance using appropriate assessment devices; f. Provide parents/guardians with better information about their child's academic achievement in order to help facilitate the academic development of the students; g. Train teachers to manage successful learning for all  "},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_952","title":"Discipline: ''Analysis of Disciplinary Actions, District Level,'' North 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":null,"dc_date":["1998/1999"],"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","School discipline","North Little Rock School District"],"dcterms_title":["Discipline: ''Analysis of Disciplinary Actions, District Level,'' North 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/952"],"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":["16 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\nThe transcript for this item was created using Optical Character Recognition (OCR) and may contain some errors.\nNORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT ANALYSIS of R SEP2 1999 Off\\C0 ~ITTO noI G DISCIPLINARY ACTIONS District Level 1998-99 Francical J. Jackson Director of Student Affairs 3f: DIS03Z ::ite: 6/02/99 ime: 15:13:07 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions DISTRICT LEVEL From AUGUST Through JUNE ------------------------------------------------------------------------------~------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 9 9 7 - 9 8 -----BM------ -----BF------- -----NBM----- -----NBF------ # REF PCT /TOT # REF PCT /TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU ... r.- STU # STU ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 9 S. A. C. 1801 5.3. 91/, 662 25.8% 547 16. 4~'. 132 .3 .. 9Y. 3:342 666 410 278 94 144.8 0 HOME SUSP. 511 67.9% 125 16.6% 104 13.8% 13 1. 7\"/4. 753 269 78 67 10 424 1 BOYS CLUB 515 65.8% 148 18. 91/. 112 14. 3\n. 8 1. or. 783 278 92 73 6 449 2 E. I. C. 0  1)% 0 . 0% 0 . or. 0 . 01. 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 EXPULSION 6 54. 51. 5 45.5% 0 . 01/. 0 . 01. 11 6 5 0 0 11 -------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------- 1 9 9 8 - 9 9 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU 9 S. A. C. 1450 52. 41/. 719 26. 0'1/. 460 16. 61/. 138 5, 01/. 2767 604 356 257 95 1312 (I HOME SUSP. 574 65.2% 150 17.0:t~ 135 1 S. 3i~ 22 2. Si~ 881 Z Q ':l ' ~ 90 71 14 468 1 BOYS CLUB 363 58. 5'1/. 148 23. 8'1/. 88 14. Z'l. 22 3. 5'1/. 621 207 97 68 16 382 2 E. I. C. 216 50.5% 106 29. 71/. 29 8. 1 '1/. 6 1 ~ 7~~ ':le\n'-, ._.w I 118 52 24 6 2(\n(i 7 EXPULSION 7 63. 6'1/. 2 18. 2i'. l 9. 1 'l. 1 9 ~ l i'. 11 7 2 1 1 11 =------------------------------------------------------------------------------ COMPARISON =------------------------------------------------------------------------------ -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NEF----- # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-)# REF PCT(~/-) # STU # STU # STU # STU ===---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 9 S.A.C. 351- 1s. 5-1. 143- 16.6-% 87- 15.9-1/. 6 4.5 \n. 575- 62- 54- 21- 1 136- 0 HOME SUSP. 63 12.3 1. 25 20.0 1/, 31 2S.B ., ,. 9 0 Cl ._, % 12.8 24 12 4 4 44 1 BOYS CLUB 152- 29.5-'I. 0 . o 1./ 2.4- 21.4-'I. 14 17'3.0 1. 162- 71- 5 5- 10 61- 2 E. I. C. 216 21600. 0 \"1: 106 lOEOO.O % 29 2900.0 '!. E, 600.0 1/. ~57 118 52 2.4 E z.oc 7 EXPULSION l 16.7 '1/. 3- 6 0. IJ-1/. l 100.0 '!. 1 100.0 '!. 0 1 3- l 1 0 tef: DIS032 Jate: 6/02/99 'ime: 15: 13: 25 Analysis of D1scipl1nary Actions HIGH SCHOOLS From AUGUST Throu2h JUNE 1 9 9 7 - 9 8 ------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------ ,9 S. A. C. 0 HOME SUSP. 1 BOYS CLUB _,,.,_ E. I.C. .7 EXPULSION )9 S.A.C. .0 HOME SUSP. .1 BOYS CLUB 2 E. I. C. 7 EXPULSION -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU 737 50. 5:,~ 397 2 7 6 2i~ 273 190 111 63. 4'1/, 3 , ~ 1 7. 7'1/. 43 14 221 7 2. o~-~ '\"\"\\\"'7 ..:, ( l ~ 1 ~I. 124 29 0 . Oi'. 0 . (Ii'. a (I l 16.7'1/, 5 83.31/. l 5 1 9 9 8 - 9 9 -----BM------ # REF PCT/TOT # STU 665 50. 6~1 265 91 65. 0% 47 122 58.4% 87 0 . 0% 0 C,J, 7 l. 4'/, C' J -----BF------ # REF PCTtTOT # STU 347 26. 4'/. 163 17 12. 1 1. 11 41 19. 6i'~ -,~ - ~ 0 . 01. C, l 14. '.ii~ 1 267 18. 3~-~ 58 4. o:-~ 131 44 2B 16. (I'/, r.:. ., 2. 9o/. 17 ,,., _ 48 15. 6 .,,. l . ,.:.,., .,. /,\n, 36 l 0 .. (!j~ (I . (1'1/. 0 0 0 . 0% (I ~ Oi~ (I 0 -----NBM----- -----NEF----# REF F~T/TOT # REF PCT/T0T # STU # STU 2.15 16. 2:'\"io 88 E,. 7'/. 115 ,\no 29 20. n. - L.. 1 ~/~ 14. 1 34 16. 3% 12 C 7 ., - . ,. 31 11 0 . (1 :'. I) . o,~ I) 0 l 14. 3,: 0 . Oi~ l 0 1458 S ..,,. .:,o ~75 7S 307 1 sc, (I 0 E, E, 1315 603 140 73 209 2.1:2: . 0 0 7 ., ( --------------------------------------------------------------------------===== COMPARISON ==------------------------------------------------------------------------------ -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT(+/-)# REF PCT(+/-)# REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCTc~,-l # STU # STU # STU # STU ===----------------------------------------------------------------------------- 19 S. A. C. 0 HOME SUSP. l BOYS CLUE .2 E.I.C. . 7 EXPULSION 72- 8- .20- 4 99- 37- (i (I 4 4 o o_., ... . ..... t, 44. 8-'-~ 400. 0 ,. 0- 7- 4- 3- 4 0 (I 4- 4- 10. B i .. . 0 i'. 52- 16- 1 14- 0 (I l l 3. S\n. 30 15 1- 11 10 ,:, C 144- 1100. (1 if: DIS032 ,te: 6/02./99 . me: 15: 13: 19 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions MIDDLE SCHOOLS From AUGUST Throu~h JUNE ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1 9 9 7 - 9 8 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NSF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU S.A.C. 985 55. 01. 455 25.4% 279 1s.s1. 72 4. o,. 1791 358 211 146 48 763 HOME SUSP. 101 64.3% 36 2 2. 91. 17 1 o. a1. 3 1 . 91. 157 46 19 9 3 77 L BOYS CLUB 294 61.8% 111 z3_31. 64 13.4% 7 1. 5/. 476 154 63 37 C, J 259 E. I. C. 0 . oo,~ 0 . 01. 0 .O 0 . 01. 0 0 0 0 0 11 1 EXPULSION 5 100. O\"/. 0 . O'f. 0 .0% 0 . O'f. 5 5 0 0 I) 5 l 9 9 8 - 9 9 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 9 S.A.C. 749 54. 3i'. 354 25. 7i'. 226 16. 4% 50 3.6% 1379 316 180 130 35 661 0 HOME SUSP. 100 64. 5i'. .2 3 14. 8i'. 29 18.7i'. 3 1. 9:1, 155 43 10 12. 1 66 l BOYS CLUB Z41 58. 5i'. 107 Z6.0'l. 54 13. li', 10 z. 4 ~,. 412 120 64 37 5 226 2 E. I. C. 0 . o~~ (I . Oi', 0 . Oi'. 0 .O'I. 0 0 0 0 0 (I 7 EXPULSION 2 50. Oi', 1 25.0% 0 . Oi'. 1 zs. o~~ 4 z l 0 l 4 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- COMPARISON =------------------------------------------------------------------------------ -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT(+/-)# REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # STU # STU # STU # STU ==-----------------------==---=----------------------------------------------~= 9 S.A.C. 236- '2.4. 0-'I. 101.- 22. 2-'f. 53- 19.0-% 22.- 30. 6-'/, 412- 42- 31- 16- 1. 3- 102- 0 HOME SUSP. 1.- 1.0-% 13- 26. 1-'I. 12 70.6 % 0 . ( \"I. i- 3- 9- 3 2- 11- 1 BOYS CLUB 53- 18. 0-i'. 4- 3. 6-\"/. 10- 15. 6-% 3 42.9 % E4- 34- l I) I) 33- 2 E. I. C. 0 . o , . 0 . 0 % 0 .0 \"I. 0 . (, i'. 0 0 0 0 0 I) 7 EXPULSION 3- 60.0-% l 100.0 i'~ !) .0 'I. 1 100.0 1/. 1- 3- 1 0 1 1- ef: DIS032 ate: 6/02/99 i me: 1 S: 13: 11 9 S.A.C. 0 HOME SlJSP. l BOYS CLUB 2 E. I. C. 7 EXPULSION Analysie of Disciplinary Actions ELEMENTARY K-5 From AUGUST Through JUNE 1 9 9 7 - 9 8 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU 79 85.9% 10 10. 9'/. l 1.1% 2 2. 2.. /.. 35 9 l 2 299 7L 0% 58 13. a\n. 59 14.0-/. C' .J 1 ') , .... ~\n... /-o 1-80 4 \".J' 41 5 0 . er,~ 0 . 0% 0 .0% t) . I)'/  0 (, 0 0 0 . O'!. 0 . O\"/ 0 .0% 0 . O~r. 0 0 0 0 0 . 01. 0 . 01/. 0 . O'!. 0 . O'I. 0 0 0 0 J. 9 9 8 - 9 9 s 2. 4.7 421 ,1_. .,.I ~' 0 0 0 0 0 0 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- --- -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/T0T # STU # STU # STU # STU ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 9 S. A. C. 36 49. 3 i', 18 24. 7'1/. 19 26. Oi'. (I (-)\" ,. 73 24 13 1::: 0 49 0 HOME SUSP. 381 6 S. 2i~ 110 18. 8 ., 77 13.2% 16 ,. -, 70,~ 584 ,:_. 202 69 45 l ') ~ 32B 1 BOYS CLUB -0 0% 0 Oi~ 0 . 0~'. 0 . o:,. 0 (I 0 0 (\n- (l 2 E. I. C. 216 60. 5i'. 106 29. 7i'. 29 8. ,., ~ ,. 6 l. '-:\"I l 1,,. 357 118 52 24 6 2(10 7 EXPULSION 0 .0% 0 . r 1111 \\.. 0 . O\", . 0 ( .... I ' (! 0 0 0 (I (I COMPARISON -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NEM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT(+/-)# REF PCT(+/-) # ~EF PCT(+/-)# REF PCTI+/-) # STU # STU # STU # STU =------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 9 S.A.C. 4 3-- 54.4-% 8 80. 0 1/. 18 1800.0 '/. 2- 100. \\~-/.. l ':-- 11- 4 11 2- ::. I) HOME SUS?. 82 27. 4 .,. 52 8'3. 7 \"\nI. 18 30.5 1. 11 220.0 ,. .i.. b.: 22 24 4 7 cc-, 'JI 1 BOYS CLUE I) . 0 % 0 . o i' ,,-,. .o ''J. 0  (_1 'I, I) 0 0 0 0 C 2 E. I. C. 216 21600. 0 ~I., 106 106-00.0 '!. 23 : 90!: . 0 'I. 6 00. : ., .... c: - ' :} ..,. I 118 52 - ~A E '--,:,c 7 EXPULSION 0 . I) % 0 . I) .. C, . ( .. ,. 0 ,, I, ., ,. 'J I) I) 1) 0 0 - ef: DIS032.S ate: 6/02/99 1me: 15: 13: 31 chool: 012 Analysts of Disciplinary Actions by School From AUGUST Through JUNE NORTH LITTLE ROCK HIGH SCHOOL - 11/12 1 9 9 7 - 9 8 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NSF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCTITOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU ------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------ 9 S.A.C. 153 49.8% 92 30.0o/ .. 47 15. 3i~ 15 4. 9~-~ 307 99 64 38 15 21S 0 HOME SUSP. 6 6 0 ~ C:i~ 3 30.0% l 1 0. O~-'. 0 . o.,.~ 10 2 2 l (I 5 1 BOYS CLUB 44 a 3 .. o~~ 5 9.4~'- 4 7. 5/~ ,-, ,_,  (l~t, 53 33 5 4 (I 42 -~ -\u0026lt;-, E. LC. (I . 0~1\n. 0 .0% (I . O?. (I . 0% (i 0 (I 0 0 0 7 EXPULSION 0 . Oi'. 0 . Oi~- 0 I o:/. 0 . Oi'. 0 0 (I 0 (I 0 l 9 5 8 - 9 9 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REf PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU 9 S.A.C. 139 49. E'I. E6 23.7% 63 22. 6% 11 - . 9.,, . 279 9Z 49 42. 10 193 0 HOME SUSP. 4 36. c~ 3 21. n 4 %. 4% 0 . O'/. 11 4 2 4 0 10 l BOYS CLUe ?3 58. 9' 1 13 2 3. 21. 9 l!:. 1-,,., 1 1. 8 ,, \" !3 6 2. 4 11 9 1 4': L\". E. I.C I) . c:\no!I 0 . Oo/, 0 . O\"l. 0 0~.' I) 0 0 0 I) C 7 EXPULSION 1 SO. Ci~ I) .0% l :: (). 01. I) . 01/. 2 l IJ l (I 2 COMPARISON ------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------ -----EM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NDF ----- # REF PCTC+/-1 # REF PCTl+/-1 # fiEF PCT1+/-) # REF PCT(+l-l # STU # STU # STU ~ ST~ ==-------------- -------------------------------------------------------------- 9 S.A.C. 0 HOME SUSP. l BOYS CLUB 2 E. I.(: .. 7 EXPULSION 14- 7- 2 11- 9- 0 0 1 l 3 3. 3 -i~ 26- 15- 0 (l 8 6 (I (! Cl 0 16 4 3 3 (, (\nl l 34. 0\n'., 300.C % l 0(!. (: ',-~ 4- 5- (I (I l 1 0 c, (1 r_, .1..COIi) .... ~ef: D!S032S )ate: 6/02/99 rime: 1 S : .t 3: 4 .t ,chool: 013 Analysis of D1scipl1nary Actions by Sclrnol From AUGUST Throuih JUNE NORTH LITTLE ROCK HIGH SCHOOL - 09/10 1 9 9 7 - 9 8 -------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------- -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NEF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU ----------------------------------------------------- -------------------------- )9 S.A.C. 583 SO. Si~ 307 26. 61/ .. 220 19~1~-~ ~4 3. 8~1 J.154 175 129 93 3 (I Jt --,~ .i.-:.:.., ,' LO HOME SUSP. 3 75. O~,~ 0 . Oi'o 1 25. O~.t: 0 . 01/. 4 3 (I l 0 4 ll BOYS CLUB 177 6 9. 7i~ 32 12. 6~\n44 17. 3'1/. L' ~ 4 \",: 254 !.l. ' 24 32 1 148 l2 E. I. C. 0 . 0'1/. 0 . O~\"o (I # o~~ 0 .0% 0 0 0 (I 0 0 .7 EXPULSION l 16, 7% 5 83.3'.I. 0 .O 0 . (Ii~ E: l 5 0 0 6 ==------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------- : _________________1 _9_ _9_ e_ _-__9 _s_ ____________________________________ ________________ -----BM------ # REF PCT/TOT # STU -----BF------ # REF PCT/TOT # STU -----NBM----# REF PCT.tTOT # STU -----NEF----# REF PCT/TOT # STU ==------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 19 S.A.C. 506 5 0. !?'I. 272 27~31/. 140 1 -,,1.. l'i, 7. - I 7. 71/. 995 166 112 67 51 396 0 HOME SIJSP. 4 100.01. 0 . 01/. 0 .0% 0 .0% 4 2 0 0 0 1 BOYS CLUB 89 58. 2:~ 28 18. 'l .. , J ,. c...,.\".\n:6. 3% l.t 7. z..,,. 153 64 22 22 10 112 2 E. I.C 0 . t)/. I) . 01. 0 . 01. 0 . o-\n. ( 0 I} 0 I) c, 7 EXPULSION 3 75. 1)1/. 1 2.5. 01. (j . (11 ~ (~ 0 . 01o 4 3 l 0 0 4 ------------------------------------------------------------------------=-====- COMPARISON ===--------------------------------------------------------- ------------------ -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NEF----- # REF PCTC~/-l # REF PCT(+/-)# REF ?CTC+/-l # REF PCT+.-\u0026gt; # STU  STU # STU # STU ====----------------=--==========================-==--=---------------~======== 9 S.A.C. 0 HOME SUSF. l BOYS CLUB 2. E. I. C. 7 EXPULSION 77- 9- 1 J.- 88- 27- 0 (i .0 20(. Cl :~ 17- (1 (I 4- 2.- (! c, 4- 4- B0- 26- 1- 1- 1 ?- 10- I) 0 (J (' ., ~ ...:\n.. ,-:..,.,. - ,,, 33 ::.1 (I (I (\n( (: (' 1 .-,_. ,.'. . ..- 3C- ef: DIS032S Analysis of Disciplinary Actions ate: 6/02/99 by School ime: 15: 13: 45 From AUGUST Through JUNE ChQol: 020 ARGENTA ACADEMY 1 9 9 7 - 9 8 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU 9 S.A.C. 1 100.0% 0  O\"/, 0 . 01. 0 .0% 1 1 0 0 0 l 0 HOME SUSP. 186 64.1% 57 19.7\"!\n40 13.8% 7 2,. 4~~ 290 70 2 5 21 4 120 1 BOYS CLUB 0 .0% I) .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 E. I. C. 0 . 01. 0 . O'/. 0 . 01. 0 . 01. 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 EXPULSION I) .0% 0 .0% 0 . 01. 0 .0% 0 0 I) 0 0 0 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- l 9 9 8 - B 9 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU 9 S.A.C. 48 60. 0'1/. 14 l 7. 5i'. 18 22. 5'1/. 0 . 01/. 80 25 9 ll 0 45 0 HOME SUSF. 177 65. li~ 35 12.9% 54 19. 91. 6 2.. 2% 272 79 17 22 2 120 l BOYS CLUB 0 .0% 0 . 0'1/. 0 .0% 0 . Oi~ (l 0 0 0 (I (I 2 E.I.C 0 . 0'1/. (I .0% 0 . Oi'. 0 . Oi'. 0 0 (I 0 0 (I 7 EXPULSION l 100. o:-~ (I . o,~ 0 ,, o,~ (I . Oi'. l l 0 0 0 1 COMPARISON -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NEF----- # REF PCTl+/-) # REF FCTC+/-) # REF PCTl+t-l # REF FCTI+/-) # STU # STU # STU  STU 9 S.A.C. 47 4700.0 ., 14 1400.0 1. 18 1800.0 ., ,. ,. 0 .0 1/. 7S 24 9 ll 0 44 0 HOME SUS?. 9- 4.8-% 2. 2.- 38.6-1/. 14 3!:. 0 1/. 1- 14.3-i~ 18- 9 8- .'. . 2- 0 1 BOYS CLUB 0 .o % 0 .o 1/, 0 .0 % I) ' I) i'. 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 E. I. C. 0 .0 1/. 0 . I. .,, . 0  lj '/. 0 .c % 0 0 0 I) I) 0 7 EXPULSION 1 100.0 1. 0 .0 ,~ 0 .0 % 0 . (\n., ,. l Ill 1 0 0 0 1 ef: DIS032S ate: 6/02/99  i me: 15 : 1 3 : 5 2 chool: 024 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions by School From AUGUST Throuih JUNE RIDGEROAD MIDDLE SCHOOL 1 9 9 7 - 9 8 --------------------------------------------------------- --------------------- 9 S.A.C. 0 HOME SUSP. 1 BOYS CLUB 2 E. I. C. 7 EXPULSION -----BM------ # REF PCT/TOT # STU 416 55.tn 125 4 40. O\"/, 4 124 62. E'I. 62 0 . o\n, 0 2 100.0% 2 ------BF------ # REF PCT /TOT # STU 209 27. E- 80 3 o\no. o,: 3 41 2.0. 7% 28 I) . Oi', 0 0 ~ O. ,.~. 0 1 9 9 8 - 9 9 -----NBM----- -----NBF----# REF PCT/TOT # REF PCTITG1 # STU # STU 82 12. 2% 35 5.2% 43 2~ 2 20. 01. 1 1 :: .. 01o 2 l 29 14.6% 4 2. Gi. 16 2 0 . 0% 0 . 0~1. 0 0 0 . 0/. 0 ,. Oi~ 0 0 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU 756 271 10 lG 1se 108 0 !) 2 2 ----------------------------------- ------------------------------------------- 19 s. A. C. 229 56. 81/. 108 26. 8.% 5\n14. 1., I ? L ~ 2~-~ 403 98 ~6 35 8 197 0 HOME SUSP. 3 75. O~l. 1 2s ~ o,~ l) .0% (l 0% 4 .3 1 0 0 4 1 BOYS CLUB 122 63. Si\n46 24. 0 ., /, l? c., Qt - \" .... ' 5 2. ~ 6 ~~ 192 54 28 15 3 100 2 E. I.C 0 Oo/. 0 Oi~ 0 Oi~ (I . o\n: (! 0 0 0 f) (! 7 EXPULSION -. 66. 7.,, 1 33. 3i 1  .:. ,. 0 O'I. 0 . Oi~ \"' 2 1 (I (I '\n/ COMPARISON ----------------------------------------------------------- ------------------- 19 S.A.C. 0 HOME SUSP. 1 BOY:3 CLUB 2 E. I. C. 7 EXPULSION -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT\\+/-)# REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(~/-) h REF FCT\\, -I # STU # STU ~ STU ~ ST~ 187- 45. o-,~ 101- 27- 2:4- 1- 25. 0-i~ 2.- 1- .:.- 2.- 1. 6-i'. 5 8- 0 0 t) \"I. 0 0 0 0 . (' ,. 1 0 1 48. 3-1: E.1\n. 7-% l 2:. 2 'I. .0 -\n. 100.0 ,~ 35-- 32. 0-i', 8- 2.-- 100.0-% 1- (: I) 0 0 30- 1.- l . ,, .!. 1. ef: DIS032S ate: 6/02/99 ime: 15:13:55 chool: 025 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions by School From AUGUST LAKEWOOD MIDDLE SCHOOL l S 9 7 - 9 8 Thrc,u2h JUNE -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU ------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------ 9 S. A. C. 144 54.5% 74 28.0i', 40 15.2'1/. 6 2. .31)/,. 264 68 40 ,.,...,.. ,... ~\nC 141 0 HOME SUSP. 1 33. 3'1/. 1 33. 3% l 33., 3o/o (l . o~-~ 3 1 1 1 0 3 l BOYS CLUB 41 67. 21/. 16 26.2% 4 6. 6,~ 0 Oi~ 61 2S 9 3 0 ~':l\",' z E. I. C. 0 . O~I. 0 . 0~1 (I .0% 0 0% 0 0 0 (I 0 (I 7 EXPULSION 0 . Oi{. 0 . Oo/. 0 .. Oi~ 0 . Oo/, 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 9 9 8 - 9 9 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU 9 S. A. C. 129 54. 0'/4 ,. ' OJ. 25.5% 27 11. 3\"t~ 22 9.2% 239 64 32 21 11 128 0 HOME SUSP. 3 100. Oo/, 0 . 01. 0 . 0% 0 . 01, 3 3 0 0 0 3 1 BOYS CLUB 42 72.4% 16 27. s-..~ 0 '0% D '01/. 58 22 9 I) 0 31 2 E. I. C 0 . o,. !) .0% 0 . 01/~ 0 . 0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 EXPULSION 0 . Oi~ 0 .0% 0 . o,~ 0 . O\"',~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- : _________________C_O_M_PA_R_IS_O_N_ ______________________________________ _________________ -----SM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCTC+/-l # REF PCTC+/-) # REF PCT(+/-)# REF PCTl+/-l # STU # STU # STU # STU :=------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 19 S.A.C. 15- 10. 4 .- .,, . 13- 17.6-% 13- 32 .. 5-~/I! 16 266. 7 ~/,. 25- 4- 8- 6- 5 13- .0 HOME SUSP. 2 200.0 o/. 1- 100. 0-o/. 1- 100. 0-i~ 0 . 0 ,,, !. 0 2 1- 1- 0 (I 1 BOYS CLUB l 2.4 % Ci .0 1/. 4- 100. 0-o/. 0 0 '1/, 3- 3- 0 3- 0 ro - ') E. I. C. 0 . 0 ., 0 0 ~I., 0 0 ., '- 0 . 0 ~Ir. 0 ,. lo 0 (I 0 (I 0 .7 EXPULSION 0 .o '1/, 0 .0 % 0 0 % (! 0 ,, ,. (i 0 0 (! (I 0 ef: DIS032S ate: 6/02/99 1me: 15: 13: 59 chool: 026 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions by School From AUGUST Throu~h JUNE ROSE CITY MIDDLE SCHOOL 1 9 9 7 - 9 8 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- -------- -----BM------ -----BF------ -----N8M----- -----NEF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 9 S.A.C. 154 52 .. 21/ir 75 ZS. 4,~ 49 16.6% 17 5.8% 295 66 42 30 11 l4S 0 HOME SUSP. 2 66. 7'/. l 33. 3'l. 0 .0% 0 .0% 3 2 1 0 0 ~ 1 BOYS CLUB 78 63. 9'/. 28 23. 0'i'. 13 10.7% 3 2.5% 1 ,, ., LL 40 19 10 3 72 2 E. I. C. 0 . 0'i'. 0 . Oo/. 0 . 01/  0 . 01/. 0 0 0 (I (I 0 7 EXPULSION 0 (1% (I . 0'i'. 0 . o~~ 0  (J~~ 0 (J 0 0 0 0 =------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1 9 9 8 - 9 9 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -----SM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU ===----------------------------------------------------------------------------- 9 S.A.C. 134 49. 4\"/. 73 26.9% 56 20.TI, 8 ? . o~,. 271 62 42 30 6 140 0 HOME SUSP. 0 . 0~1. 0 . 0% 0 .0% I) . o-\n. I) 0 0 I) 0 0 1 BOYS CLUB 54 43. 21. 38 30.4% 28 22.4'/. C.,. , 4. 01. 125 30 21 17 z 70 2 E. I. C 0 . I)'/. 0 . 01. 0 .0% 0 . I)'/, 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 EXPULSION 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 . 01. 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 ===----------------------------------------------------------------------====-= COMPARISON ==----------------------------------------------------------------------------- -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NEF----# REF PCTI+/-) # REF PCTC+/-l # REF PCTl+/-l # REF FCT\u0026lt;~f-) # STU # STU  STU # STU ===---------------------=-=========-=======================------------======== 9 S.A.C. 20- 13.0-i: .::- 2. ~ 1 7 14. 3 ., 9- 52.9-,.c 24- I-,,, ,. 4- 0 (I 5- 9- 0 HOME SUSP. ., 100. 0-1/. 1- 100.0-i~ 0 ,C, ., .:.- 1, (! .. \\r. / 'I, ~ 2- l- 0 (! 3- l BOYS CLUB 24- 30. 8-i'. 10 35. 7 ., 15 115. 4 ., \" 66.7 ., ,., lo ,. .:. ,. 10- 2 \"i 1- 2- 2 E. I. C. 0 . o ., 0 .o i'. (i ~ 0 i 0 , . ., ,. . Ct '- ' 0 0 0 (\nC 7 EXPULSION 0 .0 ., 0 .0 ., (I . c, ., ,. ,. (! . C \" Cl I\n, 0 0 (I 0 0 II ef: DIS0-32S ate: 6/02/99 'ime: 15: 14: 08 ,chool: 030 ~nalysis of Disciplinary Actions by School From AUGUST Throu2h JUNE POPLAR STREET MIDDLE SCHOOL 1 9 S 7 - 9 8 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU .\n, \" STU -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT ,.r .. STU ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 19 S.A.C. 271 56. 9'l. 97 20 .. 41/o 98 20 ~ G'l. 10 2. 1 'l. 478 106 51 47 8 212 0 HOME SUSP. 10 83. 3% 2 16.7% 0 ,, 0~1. 0 . 0'1/. 12 '9 2 0 0 11 1 BOYS CLUB 51 53.7'l. 26 27. 4 .,, . 18 HJ. 9:-i: 0 . o,~ 95 3 (l 8 8 0 46 2 E. I. C. 0 . 0% 0 . 0'1/. 0 . 01/. 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 (I 7 EXPULSION 3 100. 01/. 0 . 01/. () . O~~ (I . 01/. 3 3 0 (I (l 3 1 9 9 8 - 9 9 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NSF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT /TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU ~------------------------------------------------------------------------------- l9 S.A.C. 229 53. 61/. 107 25. 1% 80 18.7% 11 .., \"- 6\"/ 427 88 so 42 10 190 .0 HOME SUSP. 0 .01/. l 100.01/. 0 . 1)1/. 0 . Oi~ 1 0 1 0 0 l 1 BOYS CLUB 23 62.Zi~ 7 18.9% 7 18. 9~'. 0 . 01/. 37 ,, 16 7 s 0 28 ... E. I.C 0 . O'l. 0 . 01/. 0 . 01/  0 . o\n. 0 0 0 0 I) I) .7 EXPULSION 0 01/. 0 . O'l. I) . o-a:~ l 100. O'l. l 0 0 0 1 l =------------------------------------------------------------------------------- COMPARISON ==------------------------------------------------------------------------------ -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NSF----- # REF PCT(+/-)# REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCTC+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # STU # STU # STU # STU ===----------------------------------------------------------------------------- j9 S. A. C. 42- 15. 5-i~ 10 10.3 ~I. .18- 18. 4-,'. 1 10.C /~ Q_ 18- 1- s- 2 2- LO HOME SUSP. 10- .100.0-i'. 1- 50.0-% 0 .0 .,\n, 0 .o .\n., l- 9- 1- (I 0 0- L1 BOYS CLUB 2.8- 5 4. 9-i'. 19- 7 3. 1-i'. 11- 61. 1-i'. 0 . (1 ., ' 8- . 14- l- 3- (! 8- .., E. I. C. 0 .o ., 0 . 0 '1/. 0 . 0 ., 0 .c ., '\"\" ,. 0 I :. 0 0 0 0 0 l7 EXPULSION 3- 100.0-i'. (I . (I .,,. 0 .o o/. 1 100.0  ,- I 3- 0 (I 1 2.- ,f: DIS032.S ,te: 6/02/99 lme: 15: 14: 11 ::hool: 031 Analysis of Disclpl1nary Act Lons by School From AUGUST Thrcuih JUNE AMBOY ELEMENTARY SCHOOL ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 9 9 7 - 9 B ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 9 S.A.C. 0 ~ Oo/. 0 ~ Oi: (I . O'.,~ 0 . (!~/0 (i 0 0 0 0 0 :J HOME SUSP4 33 68. 8i'. 5 l O. 4i~ 10 20#8~ .~. C , o:,~ d.\nV\n18 5 7 0 30 1 BOYS CLUB 0 . Oi~ 0 . Oi~ 0 . O~I. 0 . o:-: 0 0 0 0 0 (! 2 E. I.C. 0 ~ ()~~ 0 # o/o (I . Oi'. 0 . Oi'. 0 (I (I 0 (i 0 7 EXPULSION 0 . Oi~ 0 . o~~ 0 . o:,. (I . Oi'. 0 0 (I (I 0 (I 1 9 9 8 - 9 9 =------------------------------------------------------------------------------ -----BM------ -----BF------ -----N5M----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF FCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU ==------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 9 S.A.C. 0 . 0% 0 . 0% 0 . 01/. Ct . !)\"/  ,j I) I) 0 (: (1 0 HOME SUSP. 31 8 ,:: '-' 1 '!. 3 8. 31/. .2. 5. E:1/. 0 . Oi'. ?f 16 3 2 0 21 1 BOYS CLUB 0 . O\"/. 0 .0% I) . Oi'. rj , Oi~ 0 l) 0 0 0 L 2 E. I.C 0 . O'I. I) . I)% 0 . I)'/. 0 '04,', 0 I) 0 I) 0 !~ 7 EXPULSION 0 . Oi. I) . O'/. 0 . Oi1 .. (\n. o., 0 l) 0 0 I) c, ===----------------------- ---------------------------------------------------- COMPARISON ==--------------------------------------------------- ------------------------- -----BM------ -----2F------ -----NSM----- -----NSF----- # REF PCT(+/-)# REF PCT(+/-)# REF Per,~,-, REF PCT(T,-1 # STU ~ STU # STU # STU ==------------------------------------------------------------------------- --- 9 r A. C. 0 0 i', 0 r ., (I (J ..\n) 0 . _,\n, 0 0 C, (\n0 0 HOME SUSF. ,, L.- 6. 1 -,.., -... - 40. 0-i'. 8- 80. 0-!~ 0 ~ (! Jr ..!.2 - .-:.-. -. 5- c, ~ 9- l BOYS CLUB (I (I .. (I (! ~I,. 0 0 ., C, I ,. 0 0 (! C 2 E. I. C. 0 Cl ,, .,. 0 ') ~,. c, - ,'. 0 (I 0 (I (I C 7 EXPULSION (I 0 i'. 0 0 ..,. . [! (I ~,. C, (I (I 0 C - ef: DIS032S 6/02/99 15:14:11 ate: ime: chool: 032 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions by School From AUGUST Through JUNE LAKEWOOD ELEMENTARY SCHOOL ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 9 9 7 - 9 8 -----BM------ -----Bi:\n------ -----NBM----- -----NEF----- # REF PCT /TOT # REF PCT/TOT ft. REF PCT /TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU F. STU # STU # STU ------------------------------------R-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------- 9 S.A.C. 0 .O 0 .0% 0 . 01. 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 HOME SUS?. 6 85. 71. I) . O'I. 1 14.3% 0 . 01/. 7 s 0 1 0 6 1 BOYS CLUB 0 . 01/, 0 . O'!  0 ~ Oi~ 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 E. I. C. 0 . 0% 0 . 0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 EXPULSION 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 . O'I. 0 .. 01. 0 0 0 0 0 0 l 9 9 8 - 9 9 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT \",, REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 9 S.A.C. 0 .O'I. 0  (J~I 0 . Ct% 0 Oi'. 0 0 0 0 0 (I 0 HOME SUSP. 3 42~9r~ 0 . (lo/. 4 57. 1 .,,, 0 .0% 7 2 0 l 0 3 1 BOYS CLUB 0 . 0% 0 . Oi~ 0 . Oi', 0 . Oi: (I 0 (I 0 0 0 2 E. I.C 0 01/, 0 . (11/. 0 (Ii'. 0 CI\" 0 0 0 0 (I 0 7 EXPULSION 0 0 .,, . 0 01/. (I 0% 0 . O'I. 0 0 0 0 (I (I =------------------------------------------------------------------------------ COMPARISON -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NEM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-)# REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT\u0026lt;+/-) # STU # STU # STU # STU ==----------------------------------------------------------------------------- 9 S.A.C. 0 . o '!  0 .0 'I. I) . 0 1/. 0 .0 ,: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 HOME SUSP. 3- S0.0-'/. 0 .0 1. - 300.0 % 0 .0 '/. 0 _\n)- 0 I) n 3- 1 BOYS CLUB 0 .0 % I) .0 'I. 0 . I) ~1. 0 . 0 ~,. 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 E. I. C. 0 .o 1/, 0 . I) % 0 .0 1. 0 . 0 % I) 0 0 0 0 0 7 EXPULSION 0 . !) '/ . 0 .0 1/. 0 .0 'I. 0 .0 1/, 0 0 0 I) I) 0 ~ef: DIS0.32S \u0026gt;ate: 6/02/99 1me: 15:14:14 :chool: 033 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions by School From AUGUST Throu~h JUNE BOONE PARK ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 1 9 9 7 - 9 8 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NB~----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------~-------------------------------------------------------------------- ,9 S.A.C. 79 s s. e1. 8 9.0% 35 7 0 HOME SUSP. 46 76.7% 12 20.0% 24 6 1 BOYS CLUB 0 ' 0'/4 0 . O'\u0026lt;/ ,, 0 0 2 E. I. C. 0 .0% 0 . o~~ 0 0 7 EXPULSION 0 . 01/. 0 . 01/. 0 0 1 9 9 8 - 9 9 -----BM------ -----BF------ # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU 9 S. A. C. 3 60.01/. 1 20. Oo/. 3 1 0 HOME SUSP. 107 8 ,, L., ~,1\u0026gt;1 ~ l11 21 16. 2% 57 12 l BOYS CLUB 0 . Oi'. 0 . Oo./ 0 0 2 E. I.C 0 . 0~1. 0 . Oi', 0 (I 7 EXPULSION (I .0% 0 ~ o:.~ 0 0 1 1. n. 1 2 :3 .. 3~/4, 2 0 ,. 0% 0 0 .0% 0 0 . O\"/... 0 -----NBM----# REF PCT/TOT # STU 1 20. Cl'.!. l 0 ~ O~J,, 0 0 . Oi~ (I (I . Oi~ 0 0 . 01. 0 1 1. l\"!., 1 0 ~ Oi~ 0 0 . 01. 0 0 . 01/. 0 0 .O I) -----NBF------ # REF PCT/TOT # STU 0 .0% (i ,, 1 t=/ !. .l ., ,.\n/0 1 0 ,0% 0 0 . 01~ 0 0 .0% 0 89 44 60 32 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 5 130 70 (I (i 0 0 0 0 -------------------------------------~----------------------------------------- COMPARISON ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-)# REF PCT(+/-) # STU # STU # STU # STU -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 9 S.A.C. 76- 96.2-% 7- 87,5-% 0 . 0 1/ 1- 100. 0-% 84- 32- 6 0 1- 39- 0 HOME SlJSP. 61 132.6 '/4 9 75.0 % 2- 100.0-% 2 200.0 'l. 70 33 6 2- 1 3 8 1 BOYS CLUB 0 . !)  !) . 0 % 0 .0 o/. I) .0 % 0 0 0 I) 0 0 2 E. I. C. 0 .0 i~ 0 .0 ./4 0 . 0 \"/. I) .0 ~~ I) 0 0 I) 0 I) 7 EXPULSION 0 . 0 % I) .0 4/~ 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 0 I) 0 0 0 0 ef: D!S032S ate: 6/02/99 1me: 15:14:16 c::hool: 035 Analysis of D1scipl1nary Actions by School From AUGUST Throu~h JUNE SEVENTH STREET ELEMENTARY SCHOOL -------------------------------------~------------------------------------------ l 9 9 7 - 9 8 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # .STU ,_,.,,. STU ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 9 S. A. C. 0 . 0i', 0 . 01. 0 . 0i', 0 . 0i', 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 HOME SUSP. 22 81. 5i', 3 11.l'l. 2 7. 41/. 0 . O'l. 27 16 3 1 0 20 1 BOYS CLUB 0 . o.,~ 0 .0'I. 0 ,. o~~ 0 .. o:/ .. 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 E. I. C. (I ~ o~~ 0 . Oi'. 0 .. o~J .. 0 . (Ii'. 0 0 0 (I 0 0 7 EXPULSION 0 . Qj~ 0 . Oi', 0 . Oi'. 0 . Oi'. (I 0 0 0 0 0 =------------------------------------------------------------------------------ l 9 9 6 - 9 9 =------------------------------------------------------------------------------ -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NEF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF FCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT -U REF FCT/TOT TT # STU # STU # STU # STU ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 9 S.A.C. 1 100.0'I. 0 . o,~ 0 . 01. 0 . 0% 1 1 I) I) 0 1 0 HOME StJSP. 23 65. 71. 12 34.3'1. 0 .O'I. 0 .0% 35 13 11 0 0 24 1 BOYS CLUB 0 . o:~ 0 . O'l. 0 . 01. 0 .0% 0 0 I) 0 0 0 2 E. I.C 116 57. 7'1. 82 40.6'1. 3 1. 5,~ 0 . 0% 201 51 33 '3 0 87 7 EXPULSION I) . 0'1. 0 . 01. 0 .0% 0 . 0'I. 0 0 0 0 0 0 ==---------------------------------------------------------------------====-==- COMPARISON =----------------------------------------------------------------------------== -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT(+/-) # fi:EF FCT\u0026lt;+J-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT\u0026lt;~,-\u0026gt; # STU\n. STU # STU # STU ==-============================================================================ 9 S.A.C. 1 100.0 1/. 0 .0 i'. 0 0 ., ,. 0 . c 1/ 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 HOME SUSP. 1 4. 5 ., 9 300.0 ,. .,,. z- 100. 0-i~ 0 (I .,... s 3- 8 1- (l 4 l SOYS CLUB 0 0 i', 0 ,o % 0 0 ., ' 0 (, 1/. (l (l 0 C, 0 0 2 E. I. C. 116 0 '1/. 82 .o ., 3 (! ., 0 . 0 ., i, 201 ,. ,. 116 82 3 0 S7 7 EXPULSION 0 . 0 t. 0 .o ., (I .0 ., ,. ,. (I 0 'l. 0 0 0 0 0 (i   ef: DIS032S ate: 6/02/99 ime: 15:14:19 chool: 037 Analysis of Disc1pl1nary Actions by Sr.:hool From AUGUST Throuih JUNE LYNCH DRIVE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 9 9 7 - 9 8 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NSF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 9 S.A.C. 0 . 0% 0 . 0% 0 O\",~ 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 HOME SUSP. 26 74. 3% 7 20.0% 1 2.9% 1 2. 91. 35 19 7 1 1 28 1 BOYS CLUB 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 . O'l. 0 0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 E. I. C. 0 . 01/. 0 . 0'1/. 0 .. o~~ 0 . 1)% 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 EXPULSION 0 .0% 0 Oi'. 0 .0% 0 Oi', 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 9 9 8 - 9 9 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU 9 S.A.C. -0 . 01/. 0 . 01/. Cl .0% 0 . Oi'  (I 0 (I 0 0 0 0 HOME SUSP. 36 80. (Ii~ 6 13. 3~~ 2 4. 4% 1 2  2~o 45 27 5 2 l 35 l BOYS CLUB 0 . 0% 0 . Oi~ (I . 01/. 0 . 0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 E.I.C 64 72. 71/. 15 l 7. Oi~ 5 5.7\"1. 4 4 . 51/. 88 39 11 5 4 59 7 EXPULSION 0 . 01/. 0 . 01/. 0 . 01. 0 . Oi~ (I (J (J (I (I (I ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- COMPARISON -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT(+/-)# REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # STU # STU # STU # STU =------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 9 S.A.C. 0 .0  I) .0 % 0 .0  I) . l) 1. 0 0 0 0 0 0 .0 HOME SUSP. 10 38.5  1- 14.3- l 100.0 'I. 0 .0 1. 10 8 2- 1 I) 7 1 BOYS CLUB 0 .0 1/. 0 .0 'I, 0 .0 1. 0 . 0 1./ 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 E. I. C. 64 .o i'. 15 .0 1. 5 . 0 1/ 4 . ~) '!. 88 64 15 5 4 59 .7 EXPULSION I) .o i'. 0 . 0 \"!. 0 .0 ., ,. 0 .0 '/. 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~  D1S032S Analysis of Discipllnary Actions 6/02/99 by School 15:14:20 From AUGUST ThrOUQh JUNE 040 MEADOW PARK ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 1 9 9 7 - 9 8 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- S.A.C. HOME SIJSP. 1 BOYS CLUB E. I. C. EXPULSION 9 S.A.C. (I HOME SUSP. l BOYS CLUB 2 E.I.C 7 EXPULSION -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NSF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU 0 . 01. 0 . O'I. 0 . 0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 40 8 0. 01/. 2 4. o\n. 7 14.0% 1 2.0% 13 2 5 1 0 . 01. 0 . o\n. 0 . OJ~ 0 .. o,~ 0 0 0 0 0 .0% 0 . 0\"/4 I) .0% 0 . 0 i'. 0 0 0 0 0 . O'I. 0 . o\n. I) . 01/. I) . 01/. 0 0 0 0 1 9 9 8 - 9 9 -----BM------ -----BF--~-- -----NBM----- -----NPF----# REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU 0 . 0'1/. 0 . Oi', 0 . Oi'. 0 . O~~ 0 0 0 (I 47 73.4i~ 6 9. 4'/. 5 7. 8'1\nE, S.4% 23 6 -4 3 0 . Oi~ 0 .0% 0 . Oi~ 0 .0% 0 (I 0 (\n0 . o:: 0 . Oi'. 0 . o~.1. 0 . (lj~ 0 0 (I 0 0 . Oi', 0 . 0'1/. 0 . Oi'. (I (\u0026lt;'/ 0 0 0 0 COMPARISON -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NEF----- # REF PCT\\+/-) # REF PCTl+/-) # REF PCTl+/-1 # REF PCTl+/-l # STU # STU # STU # STU I) 0 50 21 0 0 0 G 0 0 (i 0 E, 4 3b 0 (i (\n0 (! (I =--------------------------------------------------------------------- -------- 9 S.A.C. 0 . I) 1. 0 .0 '/. I' .0 'I. 0 .0 'I. 0 I) 0 0 0 0 0 HOME SUSP. 7 17. 5 1/. 4 200.0 % 2- 2 8. E,-'. 1 5 ::oo.i:,. '.I. 14 10 4 1- 2 15 1 BOYS CLUB 0 ~ 0 .. ,. 0 . I) 1. 1)  (! % 0 ) 1/, I) 0 0 I) I) I} 2 E. I. C. 0 .0 ., I) . I) 1/. 0 . o .. ,. ,. I) % t) 0 I) 0 lj \\} 7 EXPULSION I) . I) 1/. I) .0 % 0 . (! .,,. 0 '1:, ,, C l) I) 0 (' .. ,.\nif\nDIS032S 1te: 6/02/99 . me: 15: 14: 21 :hool: 041 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions by School From AUGUST Throu2h JUNE NORTH HEIGHTS ELEMENTARY SCHOOL ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 9 9 7 - 9 8 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REP PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU ~ S.A.C. I) .0% I) .0% 0 . 01. 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 ) HOME SlJSP. ~r -.\u0026gt;o 69. 2.41. 0 .0% 14 2 6. 91. 2 3.8% 52 23 0 8 2 33 1 BOYS CLUB 0 , 04/ .. 0 . I)'/. 0 . Cl!. 0 . 0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 E. I. C. 0 . 01/. 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 EXPULSION 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 . 0% 0 0 I) 0 0 I) 1 9 9 8 - 9 9 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----N8M----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU .,..u STU ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 9 S.A.C. 0 . o~~ 0 .0% 0 . Oi', 0 . O'l. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 HOME SUSP. 28 50. Oi'. 2 3. 6i', 25 44. Si'. l l. 8% 56 16 2 18 l 37 l BOYS CLUB 0 .O (I . O\"' 0 . 01/. 0 . 01/. 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 E. I. C 10 35. 71/. 3 10. n. 14 SO. Oi', l 3. 6i'. 2B 9 2 10 l ..,.., .:...\u0026lt;.. 7 EXPULSION 0 . Oi'o 0 .0% 0 . o~~ 0 . Oi~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 COMPARISON ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCTC+/-) # REF PCTC+/-) # REF PCTC+/-) # REP PCTl+/-1 # STU # STU # STU # STU ==----------------------------------------------------------------------------- 9 S.A.C. 0 .o % 0 .0 % 0 .o 'I. 0 .o 1. 0 0 0 I) I) 0 0 HOME S1JSP. 8- 22. 2-'/. 2 200.0 1/. 11 78.6 '/. 1- 50. 0-i'. 4 7- 2 10 1- 4 1 BOYS CLUB 0 .0 1/, 0 .0 '/. 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 0 l) 0 0 0 0 2 E. I. C. 10 .0 1. 3 . 0 '/. 14 .0 % 1 .o '.I. 2.8 10 3 14 1 , , ~'- 7 EXPULSION I) . 0 1/, 0 .0 '!. 0 .0 % 0 .o 1/. 0 0 I) I) 0 0  ef: DIS032S s.te: 6/02/99 ime: 15: 14: 21 chool: 042 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions by School From AUGUST Throush JUNE CRESTWOOD ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 1 9 9 7 - 9 8 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NSM----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # P.EF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU -----NBF----- # REF PCT /TOT # STU ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 9 S.A.C. 0 . 01/. 0 . 01. 0 .O 0 .O 0 0 0 0 0 0 J HOME SUSP. 15 57.7 7 26.9% 4 15. 41/. 0 .O 26 11 7 2 0 20 1 BOYS CLUB 0 .O !) . o,~ 0 . O\"/. 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 E. I. C. 0 . Oi'. 0 .O 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 EXPULSION 0 .0% 0 . I) 0 . 0~'. 0 . 0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 =------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1 9 9 8 - 9 9 ==----------------------------------------------------------------------------- -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU =------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 9 S.A.C. 0 . Oi'. 0 . Oi'. 0 . O'l. (I 0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 HOME SUSP. 23 67.6i'. 7 20. 6i', 2 5. o, -. 5. 9 ., - /o .:,, ,. 34 16 5 2 ,-,. Z:3 1 BOYS CLUB 0 . Oi', 0 . Oi', 0 . 0'1/. 0 O'l. 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 E. r.c 0 . O'l. 0 . Oi'. (I . Oi'. 0 0'1. 0 0 0 0 0 (I 7 EXPULSION 0 .Oi'. (I . Oi'. (I .O'I. 0 O'l. 0 0 0 0 0 0 ===--------------------------=-----=------------------------=====--============ COMPARISON ===--------------------------------------------------------------------======-- -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NSF----- # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-1 # REF PCTC+/-l # REF PCTC~/-1 # STU # STU # STU # STU ==-------------------------------------------------=-=-=--------------========= 9 S.A.C. 0 .0 \"I. 0 . I) 'I. 0 . I) \"I  0 . I) 1/. 0 0 0 I) 0 ,-. 0 HOME SIJSP. 8 53.3 1/. 0 .o 1/. 2- 50. 0-1/. 2 200.0 ., ,. 8 5 2- 0 2 5 1 BOYS CLUB 0 .0  0 .0 \"/. 0 . 0 1/. I) . C .,,. C 0 0 0 0 I) 2. E. I. C. 0 .o 'I. 0 .0 % I)  '  0 . 0 1. 0 I) I) 0 0 I) 7 EXPULSION 0 .0 'I. I) .o 1/. 0 . I) 1. I) . I) 1/. 0 0 I) I) 0 0 ef: DIS032S ate: 6/02/99 1me: 15:14:22 chool: 043 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions by School From AUGUST Throuih JUNE PARK HILL ELEMENTARY SCHOOL -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 9 9 7 - 9 8 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU 9 S.A.C. 0 . 01. 0 .. 01o 0 .0% 0 . 0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 HOME SUSP. 33 54. 1% 12 19.7% 15 24.6% 1 Le 61 25 6 12 1 44 l BOYS CLUB 0 . O'I. 0 .0% 0 . ot. 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 E. I. C. 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 EXPULSION 0 .O'I. 0 . 0% 0 . 01. I) .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 9 9 8 - 9 9 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 9 S. A. C. (I . Oi~ 0 . O'l, 0 . 0'1/. 0 . O'l. (I 0 0 0 0 0 0 HOME SUSP. 52 41. 3'1/. 40 31. 7i~ 3 (I 23~8o/. 4 3. 2'1/. 1.2 6 24 15 12 4 c\nc v..J l BOYS CLUB 0 . (1'1/. 0 . 0'1/. 0 ,, O~,~ 0 . o~~ 0 (I 0 (I (I (! 2 E. I.C 21 50. Oi~ 6 l 7. l '1/. 7 20.0'I. 1 2. 9'1/, 35 15 5 6 1 28 7 EXPULSION 0 . 0'1/. 0 . 0'1/. (I . 0'1/. (I . 0'1/ 0 0 0 (I 0 0 =------------------------------------------------------------------------------ COMPARISON =------------------------------------------------------------------------------ -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NEM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # STU # STU # STU . rf STU ==--------------------------------------------------------------------- -------- 9 S.A.C. 0 . I) % 0 .0 % 0 . 0 1. 0 . I) % I) 0 0 0 0 0 0 HOME SUS?. 19 57.6 1/. 28 233.3 % 15 100.0 % 3 300.0 1/. 65 1- 9 0 3 11 1 BOYS CLUB 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 0 !) \"I  0 0 0 0 0 I) 2 E. I. C. 21 . I) '1/ 6 . I) 1/. 7 . l) % 1 .0 .,,. ~ c_\n)~ 21 6 7 l 28 .7 EXPULSION 0 .o t. 0 .0 '/4 0 . I) 1. 0 .o 1/, n 0 0 !) 0 0 II ef: DIS032S ate: 6/02/99 i me: 15: 14: 2 3 chool: 044 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions by School From AUGUST Through JUNE PIKE VIEW ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 1 9 9 7 - 9 8 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- #. , REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT rr STU # STU # STU -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # STU ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 9 S.A.C. 0 . 01. 0 .0% 0 .0% I) . 0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 HOME SUSP. 11 84.6% 1 7.7% 1 7.7% 0 .0% 13 9 1 1 0 11 1 BOYS CLUB 0 . 0% 0 .0% I) .0% 0 . O\"/ 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 E. I. c. 0 .0% 0 . O'I. 0 .0% 0 . 01/  0 0 0 0 0 0 7 EXPULSION 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 9 9 8 - 9 9 =------------------------------------------------------------------------------ -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT ,-,#. REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU =------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 9 S.A.C. 0 . o:~ 0 . 01/  0 . 01/. 0 . 0'1/. 0 0 0 0 0 (I 0 HOME SUSP. 17 7 3. 9'1/. ,, 8. 7~~ 4 17.4% 0 . 01/. 23 L., 12 z 2 (I Hi 1 BOYS CLUB 0 . O'I. 0 . o~~ 0 .0% 0 . 01/, 0 (I 0 0 0 0 2 E. I.C 4 100.01/. 0 . 0% 0 .0% 0 . o~~ 4 4 0 0 0 4 7 EXPULSION 0 . 0% 0 .0% 0 , O~~ 0 . Oi', 0 0 0 0 0 0 ==----------------------------------------------------------------------------- COMPARISON =------------------------------------------------------------------------------ -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCTC+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCTC+/-) # STU # STU # STU # STU ==----------------------------------------------------------------------------= 9 S.A.C. I) .0 % 0 .0 1/, 0 .0 % 0 .0 'I. 0 0 0 I) 0 0 0 HOME SIJSP. G 54.5 1/. 1 100.0 'I. 3 300.0 'I. 0 .0 '/, 10 3 1 1 0 5 1 BOYS CLUB 0 .0 % 0 . I) % 0 .0 % 0 .c % C, 0 I) 0 0 C 2. E. I. C. 4 . 0 1/. 0 . 0 ,~ 0 .0 'I. 0 . 0 1/ 4 4 0 0 0 4 7 EXPULSION 0 . 0 1/. 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 .0 'I. 0 0 0 I) 0 0  Ill H: DIS032S ,te: 6/02/99 ,me: 15:14:23 :hool: 048 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions by School From AUGUST Through JUNE BELWOOD ELEMENTARY SCHOOL ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------~--- 1 9 9 7 - 9 8 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCTITOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU S.A.C. 0 .0% 0 . I)'/. 0 , O'/. I) .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 ) HOME SUSP. s 83 ~ 3:.,~ 1 16.7% 0 . 0% 0 .0% 6 4 1 0 I) 5 l BOYS CLUB 0 . 01. 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .. 04\n~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 E. I. C. 0 . 01. 0 . O'I. 0 . 0% 0 . OY  0 I) 0 0 0 0 7 EXPULSION 0 . 0% 0 . 0% 0 . 01/. 0 . 0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 9 9 8 - 9 9 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU 9 S. A. C. 0 . 0'1/. (I . Oi1  0 .0% (I . 01. ( (I 0 0 0 C 0 HOME SUSP. 4 44. 4i~ 4 4 4. 4\n~ l 11. li~ 0 . (I'\n? l ., l (I 4 .. 1 BOYS CLUB 0 . 01/. 0 . o:/: 0 . Oi'. 0 .. Oi\"\" r, () (I (I (I (i 2 E. r.c 0 . 01/. (I . o~~ 0 . (1% (! ~ o~~ 0 (I (I (l 0 0 7 EXPULSION 0 . o~-~ 0 r1tt/  \\.J\u0026amp;, (I . Oi~ 0 .. (,/, 0 i) (I 0 0 I) COMPARISON =------------------------------------------------------------------------------ -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NEF----- # REF PCTl+/-) # REF FCTl+/-l # REF FCTl+/-1 # REF PCT(+/-) # STU # STU # STU # STU ==----------------------------------------------------------------------------- 9 S.A.C. 0 .0 1/. 0 .0 'I. 0 . I) % 0 .c \"I. 0 0 I) I) 0 0 0 HOME SUSP. 1- 20. 0-'l. 3 300.0 1/~ l lOO.O 'I. 0 .(! /. 3 3- l - 0 1- 1 BOYS CLUB 0 . I) .. I) .0 1/ lj .0 ., 0 : ., ,, ,. C lo 0 0 I) 0 ) 2. E. I. C. C . I) 'l, I) .C ~-'~ 0 .0 ., 0 I} ., ,. ,. (I 0 I) t) 0 C, 7 El{PULSION 0  I) ., ,. 0 ,o .,, , C . {: ~'- 0 0 'I. :) 0 I) 0 0 !)   ef: DIS032S ate: 6/02/99 ime: 15: 14: 23 chool: 046 Analysis of D1sc1plinary Actions by School From AUGUST Through JUNE GLENVIEW ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 1 9 9 7 - 9 B ---------------------------------------------------------------------- -------- -----BM------- -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NB!:\u0026lt;----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT /T')T # REF PCT/TOT r.ur REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU .,, STU # STU ff ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 9 s. A. C. 0 HOME SUSP. 1 BOYS CLUB 2 E. I. C. 7 EXPULSION 0 .0% 0 0 0 . 0~'. 0 . o,. I) 0 0 0 9 81.8% 2 18. 21. 0 \" ()~I. 0 .0% 6 2 0 0 0 .0% 0 . 01. 0 .. Oi~ 0 . 01. 0 0 I) 0 0 . O'l. 0 .0% 0 . 0'I. 0 .0% I) 0 0 0 0 .0% 0 . 01. 0 ~ o~/. 0 . (j'/, 0 0 0 0 1 9 9 8 - 9 9 -----EM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----# REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU 0 I) 11 8 0 0 0 () 0 I) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 9 s. A. C. 0 Oi'. 0 ( . ,., .. , 0 010 0 Oi~ 0 0 0 0 0 G (I HOME SUSP. 3 60. o~. 2 40. 0 ., ,. 0 o~~ (1 O'\nC., ., 3 z 0 0 5 1 BOYS CLUB 0 Q~/0 (I 0 .,,. 0 0~1. (I (I~-~ 0 0 0 0 0 ,, 2 E. I.C 0 01. 0 0i', 0 0 .,,. 0 01/, 0 (J 0 0 (I 7 EXPULSION 0 Oi'. 0 o~~ (I Oi'. 0 (lo/. C (I (I 0 0 0 COMPARISON -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT,+1-1 # REF PCTl~/-l  ~EF PCTI+/-) R REF PCT1~1-) # STU # STU # STU # STU )9 s. A.C. 0 0 % I) . 0 'l. !j I} \n. 0 . I) ., I, I) 0 0 (i 0 r: .0 HOME SUSP. 6- 6 6. 7--/. 0 . 0 \"I. (, . i) 1 () .,,, 6- 3- 0 0 () ,_ .1 BOYS CLUB 0 .o ,\n0  I) % 0 .'J ., ,. () ( o/. C 0 0 . ) 0 I) .2 E. I.C. 0 C ~-. 0 . I) \" i: :) ., 0 ,- ., ,. ,. ,.- ,, i) 0 I) 0 C ,.,, .7 EXPULSION 0 .o % 0 .0 o/, (i 0 ,. G !:i 'l.\n) I) 0 ::, 0 tj ,f: DIS032S Analysis of Disciplinary Actions 1te: 6/02/99 by School .me: 15:14:24 From AUGUST Through JUNE\nhool: 048 INDIAN HILLS ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 1 9 9 7 - 9 8 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -----BM------ -----BF------ # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU 3 S.A.C. I) .0% 0 . 01. 0 0 ) HOME SUS?. 17 68.0% 6 24. O\"/. 12 6 1 BOYS CLUB 0 .0% 0 . 0% 0 0 2 E. I. C. 0 .0% 0 .0% I) 0 7 EXPULSION 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 l 9 9 8 - 9 9 -----BM------ -----EF------ # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU -----NBM----# REF PCT/TOT # STU I) . o/4 0 2 8.0% 2 0 .0% 0 0 . 01. 0 0 .0% 0 -----NBM----- .u REF PCT/TOT \" # STU -----NSF----# REF PCT/TOT # STU 0 .0% 0 0 .0% 0 0 . 01. 0 0 .0% I) 0 .0% 0 -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # STU 0 0 25 20 0 0 0 0 0 0 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 9 S. A. C. 32 47. 8% 17 25.41. 18 26~9% Cl . Oi'. 67 21 12 11 (I 44 0 HOME SUSP. 7 50. 0~1 5 35. 7 .,,. 2 14. 3i'. 0 . O'l. 14 5 4 2 0 11 1 BOYS CLUB 0 . O~-~ 0 . O~t. 0 . (11/, 0 01 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 E. I.C 1. 100. Oi'. 0 . Oi'. 0 . Oi'. 0 . Oi'. 1 J. 0 (I 0 l 7 EXPULSION 0 O~I. 0 . Oi'. 0 0 .,. ., 0 .0% (I 0 0 0 0 0 ==----------------------------------------------------------------------------- COMPARISON -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT(+/-)# REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # STU # STU # STU # STU =------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 19 S.A.C. 32 3200.0 \"I. 17 1700.0 % 18 1\u0026amp;00.0 \"I. 0 .0 % S7 21 12 11 0 44 .0 HOME SUSP. 10- 58.8-% 1- 16.7-'I. G . I) 1/, 0 .o % 11- 7- 2- I) 0 9- .1 BOYS CLUB 0 .0 i'. I) .0 % I) .o ,~ 0 . I) ,. 0 0 0 I) 0 I) .2 E. I. C. 1 .0 1/. 0 .0 1/. 0 .0 'I. 0 .0 'l. l 1 0 0 0 1 L7 EXPULSION C, . 0 1. 0 . 0 1. I) .0 % l) .0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ II  lf: DIS03ZS ite: 6/02/99 tme: 15:14:25 :hool: 049 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions by School From AUGUST Through JUNE REDWOOD PRE-SCHOOL ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------4---------- 1 9 9 7 - 9 8 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NEM----- -----NSF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3 S.A.C. 0 . 01/. 0 . 01. 0 . 01. 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 u HOME SUSP. 0 . 0% 0 O'I. 0 .0% 0 . 01. 0 0 0 0 I) 0 1 BOYS CLUB 0 . O'I. 0 . 01. 0 . 01. 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 E. I. C. 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 . 01. 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 EXPULSION 0 .0% I) . 01. I) . I)'!. 0 . o\n. 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 9 9 8 - 9 9 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT ,-rU STU # STU # STU # STU ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 9 S.A.C. 0 . 0'1/. 0 0 ,. ., 0 . Oi~ 0 . 01/. (I (I 0 0 (I (I 0 HOME SUSP. 2 100. 01/. 0 , 01/. 0 .0% (I 0'1/. 2 2 0 0 0 .., ,:. 1 BOYS CLUB 0 .0% 0 o,~ (I .0% 0 0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 E. I.C 0 . 01/. 0 0.,, . (I . o~~ 0 , o,: 0 0 0 (I (I 0 7 EXPULSION 0 . 01/. 0 . Oi'. 0 . 01/, 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- COMPARISON =------------------------------------------------------------------------------ -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCTl+/-l # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-1 # STU # STU # STU # STU ==-------------------------==============================--=-------=--========= 9 S.A.C. 0 .o % 0 .0 % 0 .0 % I) .o % 0 0 0 I) 0 I) 0 HOME SUSP. 2 200.0 % 0 .0 % 0 .o 'I. I) .0 % 2 2 0 0 I) 2. 1 BOYS CLUB 0 .o % 0 .0 % i) .0 % 0 .0 ., ,. 0 0 I) I) l) 0 2 E. I. C. 0 . o 1/, 0 .0 '!. I) .0 % 0 .0 1/ 0 0 0 0 0 I) 7 EXPULSION I) .0 % 0 . t) % 0 .0 % 0 .0 ,~ I) 0 0 0 0 0 North Little Rock Public School,s Analysis of Disciplinary Actions SchooIYear1998-1999 GRAPHS         ii North Little Rock Public Schools Analysis of Disciplinary Actions District Level Action 09: S.A.C. BM BF NBM NBF -- --- ----- -- -- Ill 97-98 1801 862 547 132 --- --- ---- l'i'.l9 8-99 1450 719 460 138 Action 11: Boys Club II 97-98 fZl 98-99 600 ~------------~ 500 300 200 100 0 - - - BM -- 515 - 363 BF NBM NBF - -- 148 112 8 ------- 148 88 22 Action 10: Home Suspension 700 ~--------------, 600 1------------------, 500 400 300 200 100 - 0 II 97-98 [\\\\1 98-99 BM BF NBM NBF 511 125 104 13 574 150 135 22 Action 12: Alt School Susp (K-5) 250 ~------------~ 200 II 97-98 ii\nzJ9 8-99 50 0 BM 0 216 BF NBM NBF 0 0 0 106 29 6 North Little Rock Public Schools Analysis of Disciplinary Actions District Level Action 17: Expulsion 8 7 - 6 5 4 3 - 2 1 0 E97-98 I BM -I 6 98-99 7 North Little Rock Public Schools Analysis of Disciplinary Actions High School Level Action 09: S.A.C. 800 .-------------~ 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0  97-98 Bl 98-99  97-98 D 98-99 BM 737 665 BM 221 122 BF NBM - . NBF - 397 267 58 - 347 215 88 Action 11: Boys Club BF NBM NBF - - 37 48 1 - 41 34 12 Action 10: Home Suspension 120 ~-------------~ 100  97-98 ~ 98-99 60 20 0 BM BF NBM NSF -- - 111 31 28 5 91 17 29 3 Action 12: Alt School Susp (K-5) 0.8 1-----------------\u0026lt; 0.6 1---------------- 0.4 1------------------j 0.2 1------------------j 0\u0026gt;----------------' North Little Rock Public Schools Analysis of Disciplinary Actions High School Level  97-98 1!391 8-99 Action 17: Expulsion 6 ~---------~ 5 ,-__.....,.,....-- 4 3 0 BM 1 5 BF 5 1 NBM NBF - 0 0 1 0 North Little Rock Public Schools Analysis of Disciplinary Actions Middle School Level Action 09: S.A.C. 1200 ,--------------~ 1000 800  00 200 0  97-98 Im 98-99 BM r 985 l 749 BF - NBM N--BF 455 279 72 - --- 354 226 50 Action 11: Boys Club 350 ,--------------~  97-98 m 98-99 300 250 200 150 50 0 I J I BM I 294 i 241 ! BF NBM NBF - 111 64 7 107 54 10 -- Action 10: Home Suspension 120 ,---------------, 100 80 60 20 0 - BM BF -- NBM NBF I--- --- C-~  97-98 101 36 17 3 I~ 98-99 100 23 29 3 Action 12: Alt School Susp (K-5) 0.8 1---------------1 0.6 1---------------1 o.  1---------------1 0.2 1--------------- 0 '---------------- BM BF NBM NBF - - - - -  97-98 0 0 0 0 ~ ---- ---- 1198-99 0 0 0 0 North Little Rock Public Schools Analysis of Disciplinary Actions Middle School Level  97-98 - ~- 98-99 Action 17: Expulsion 6 ~---------~ 5 4 3 2 0 BM 5 2 -- BF - 0 1 NBM NBF - - 0 - 0 - 0 1 North Little Rock Public Schools Analysis of Disciplinary Actions Elementary Level  97-98 flJ 98-99  97-98 Ill 98-99 Action 09: S.A.C. ! BM BF NBM NBF I - -- 79 10 1 2 - --- ! 36 18 19 0 Action 11: Boys Club 0.8 -----------------! 0.6 ,-----------------\u0026lt; 0.4 0.2 t-------------- 0 '----------------' l BM i BF NBM NSF I - - I 0 0 0 0 I - I 0 0 0 0 Action 10: Home Suspension 500 ~------------~ 400 t-----===--------------1 300 200 100 0 BM BF NBM NBF - --- -- --  97-98 299 58 59 5 I! 98-99 381 110 77 16 Action 12: Alt School Susp (K-5) 250 ,------------------, 200 \u0026gt;------is., Tf-------------j 100 ---  97-98 0 98-99 50 1--j':q :c1:i---1,.:-,,\n,.iq---------1 0 1-----\"-=\"-----\"-'--\"'\"\"\"---\"-\"'\"-'=-~==-' BM BF NBM NBF - -- - - -- - - 0 0 0 0 - - - - ------- 216 106 29 6 - North Little Rock Public Schools Analysis of Disciplinary Actions Elementary Level  97-98 m 98-99 Action 17: Expulsion 0.8 1--------------J 0.6 1-------------1 0.4 1-------------l 0.2 1---------------l o,____ _________ ___, i BM BF - NBM II NBF- 0 0 0 0 ~ - r- - i 0 0 0 I 0 Nort.hL ittlieR ock Pub.UcS chools Analysis of Disciplinary Actions SchooIYear1998-1999 Six Year Comparison         North Little Rock Public Schools Disciplinary Actions 6 Year Comparison Action 09: Student Assignment Class (S.A.C.) C  2000 .::it:. rn I- 1500 (/) C 1000 0 - +-' 0 \u0026lt;( 500 - 4-- 0 0 :it: Ethnic Group/Gender BM - - - BF - - - -- NBM I NSF -- -  93-94 977 - 529 449 I 156 - --- - -- ---- - --- -- 11:!194-95 869 460 411 I 126 D 95-96 1052 - - 446 - - :\n~ - 4-- ~~ ----  96-97 1264 - -- 55 m 97-98 1801 - - -862 - - -- -547 -----1-- -- 132 ____  98-99 1450 - - - 719 -- --- 460 -1----138 ---- North Little Rock Public chools DisciplinaryA ctions 6 Year Comparison  93-94 IEI 94-95 D 95-96  96-97 111917 -98  98-99 Action 10: Home Suspensions C 700 ~------------------------, ~ 600 I-----.=--------------------, ~ 500 ---,~S:I~ ~ 400 f---t',!\u0026gt;ll:I .!: 300 1-------1\n}_ 200 - o 100 =t:t: 0 BM 231 236 162 591 511 574 Ethnic Group/Gender II North Little Rock Public Schools Disciplinary Actions 6 Year Comparison Action 11: Boys Club C 600 ~ 500 l---------lT7\"ll------------------------, ro ._.. 400 (/) 5 300 l----1 Ethnic Group/Gender BM - BF - _, ____ NBM ____ NBF ___  93-94 119 - 39 - - 39 9 +-- ----- ----- 11!:91 4-95 133 - - 44 - 31 8 -t-- --- -- ---- D 95-96 334 - - 82 - 72 ---- 12  96-97 357 -- 146 - 85 20 ~ ------ 1197-98 -- 515 - 148 - 112 8 - --- ---- --~ - .. - -----  98-99 363 148 88 22 North Little Rock Public Schools DisciplinaryA ctions 6 Year Comparison Action 12: Alt School Suspension (K-5)  93-94 In 94-95 D 95-96  96-97 fl 97-98  98-99 C 2000 r-------------------------, Q) .Y ~ 1500 1----------~ en  1000 1----- ......, u ~ 500 1-----, 4- 0 =it - -- BM 168 178 - 1563 -- 154 - 0 216 Ethnic Group/Gender -- --- BF -- NBM NSF 54 45 8 - - 68 58 5 - --- 492 510 --- 71 - - - -- 30 32 3 ------0 0 0 -- 106 29 6   Iii ii ii ii North Little Rock Public Schools DiscipHnaryA ctions 6 Year Cornpariso,n Action 17: C 8 0) ..:ii::'. ro 6 - I-en C 4 0 ~ 0 \u0026lt;l'.'. 2 4- 0 =tt 0 Expulsions Ethnic Group/Gender BM BF NBM --- ---- -  93-94 ------- 6 4 3 lilil9 4-95 ----- 7 0 1 D-- 95---9- 6 -- 2 1 0 ----- ----- --- ill 96-97 -------- 3 7 0 I-'l-l- 9--7-98 --------- --- 6 5 0  98-99 7 2 1 NBF 0 0 2 0 0 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_422","title":"Discipline, management report, First Semester","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":["1998/1999"],"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","Educational statistics","School discipline","School management and organization"],"dcterms_title":["Discipline, management report, First Semester"],"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/422"],"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":["reports"],"dcterms_extent":["124 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\nRECEIVED MAR A !9S9 - OfflCEGP-LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT KffiSREGATlON MONiTOftlMtf 1998-99 FIRST SEMESTER DISCIPLINARY MANAGEMENT REPORT LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 1998-99 FIRST SEMESTER DISCIPLINARY MANAGEMENT REPORT The following information represents the 1998-99 First Semester Disciplinary Management Report. The data is presented in three sections. Each section begins with a comparison of total disciplinary sanctions for the quarter/semester and concludes with . y ocwivuvua XVI uic qu\u0026lt;uicr/bemesier ana concludes with an Illustration of the increase or decrease in short and long-term suspensions and expulsions for the quarter/semester. Discipline Sanctions by Reason Codes, Original and Final Sanctions, and Recidivism reports are also included. Note: Negative numbers may appear enclosed in parenthesis, (1) or, may precede hyphens, -1.Section I 1998-99 FIRST SEMESTER DISCIPLINARY MANAGEMENT REPORT1998-99 FIRST SEMESTER DISCIPLINARY MANAGEMENT REPORT ANALYSIS During the first semester of the 1998-99 school year, there was a decrease in the suspension/expulsion rate when compared to the 1997-98 school year. A review of the data illustrates that 362 fewer suspensions were issued during the 1998-99 school year. The number of suspensions/expulsions decreased by 13.4%. The number of suspensions received by African American students showed a substantial decrease of 341 (12.6%) suspensions. The number of students expelled from the District decreased substantially to only one student for the first semester of this school year. The Recidivism Report indicates that 1712 students committed the 2344 suspensions for the first semester. This figure indicates that less than 7% of the total District s student population was involved in behaviors that resulted in suspensions.Little Rock School District 1998-99 First Semester Disciplinary Management Report Comparison of Total Sanctions Issued by Race/Gender Race f^rst SemesterjQtaf $\u0026gt;1997/99 vsi: 1998/99 Sex Black White Male Female Total Male Female Total Total Sanctions 1997/98 Count 1759 578 2337 294 75 369 2706 1998/99 %Susp 65%  21%  86%  11%' ___3%' 14% ' 100%  Count 1418 560 1978 277 ___89 366 2344 %Susp 60% 24% 84% 12% ___ 16% 100% Total student population as of October 1,1998\n25,070 Total Black Students Total White Students 67% 33% Summary The following is a summary of the suspensions/expulsions for the 1998/99 school year. Total Black Sanctions 84% of the suspension population. Total White Sanctions 16% of the suspension population. Compiled by Office of Student Hearing Page 1 ISchool Nams Central J.A. Fair Hall McClellan Metropolitan Parkview Alt Agency ALE Sr. ALC Alt Agency ALP Jr. Cloverdale Dunbar Forest Heights Henderson Mablevale Mann Pulaski Hgts. Southwest Totals Badgett Bale Baseline Booker Brady______ Carver Chicot Cloverdale Dodd Fair Park Forest Park Franklin Fulbright Garland Enrolled 720 785 871 926 15 23 70 27 52 618 740 762 606 500 838 757 413 10,595 213 373 334 612 399 591 553 504 268 229 417 526 508 277 Little Rock School District 1998-99 First Semester Disciplinary Management Report Short Term Suspension Long Term Suspension %Blk 57 82 __m 86 51 40 100 83 37 96 89 59 64 88 76 51 62 85 59 94 73 84 49 65 51 71 93 66 73 53 94 57 93 BM BF WM WF Expulsion Recommendation Total 65 23 54 67 3 ___22 0 ___22 36 0 0 125 58 148 144 60 29 99 60 1,015 3 4 13 13 7 4 51 0 2 4 3 11 4 6 27 10 32 34 ___2 11 0 0 10 0 0 55 19 78 56 32 22 36 27 451 2 3 1 1 1 2 12 0 0 0 3 2 1 2 17 5 23 6 0 18 0 0 8 ___0 0 12 21 49 13 15 10 7 19 223 0 1 1 4 1 0 1 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 7 1 5 4 0 22 0 1 0 0 0 5 4 11 4 5 3 0 8 80 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 116 39 114 111 5 73 0 23 54 0 0 197 102 286 217 112 64 142 114 1,769 _____5 8 15 ____18 9 7 ____65 0 3 6 6 13 5 8 BM BF WM WF Compiled by Office of Student Hearing 10 22 16 15 2 0 ___0 1 5 0 0 11 5 10 12 15 2 10 7 143 __0 0 1 0 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 2 4 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 2 1 8 3 2 1 3 8 39 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 5 1 1 3 0 1 20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 jO o' TOTAL ____14 24 20 22 2 1 1 1 6 0 0 14 8 24 16 18 7 13 16 207 ____0 0 1 0 1 0 ____2 ____0 0 ____0 0 0 ____0 0 BM BF WM WF Page 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 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 _0l 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2i 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 2i 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  0 TOTAL 0 0 0 0 ____0 ____0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 ____0 0 0 0 1 0 ____0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ____0 0 #SUSP 130 ____63 134 133 7 ____ 1 24 60 0 0 211 110 311 233 130 71 155 130 1,977 5 8 16 18 10 7 67 0 3 6 6 13 ____5 8  /.BIk 80% 90% 78% 90% 100% 45% 100% 95% 87% 0% ___0% 91% 75% 79% 92% 84% 76% 95% 78% 86% 100% 88% 94% 78% 90% 86% 97% 0% 67% 67% 100% 100% 100% 100%Little Rock School District 1998-99 First Semester Disciplinary Management Report School Name Geyer Spgs. Gibbs Jefferson King Mabelvale McDermott Meadowcliff Mitchell Otter Creek Pulaski Hgts. Rightsell Rockefeller Romine Terry______ Wakefield Washington Watson Western Hills Williams Wilson Woodruff Alt Agency Totals G Total 98/99 G Total 97/98~ Difference Enrolled 331 311 502 690 420 466 314 248 370 437 275 464 343 523 394 626 484 321 473 378 279 22 14,475 25,070 24,886 184 %Blk 78 50 45 52 69 59 78 95 46 55 96 56 62 52 87 52 94 73 52 86 78 18 65 68 66 BM Out of School Suspension BF WM WF Long Term Suspension 5 6 6 8 17 8 8 8 0 3 7 0 3 13 1 1 6 10 6 8 2 0 251 1266 1,600 -334 5 1 ___4 2 4 1 1 0 0 5 3 0 1 1 1 ___1_ 2 5 1 2 0 0 70 521 515 6 0 1 1 ___41 3 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 ___2 3 1 0 0 3 0 3 0 0 33 256 269 -13 0 __0 0 __1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 84 70 14 TOTAL 10 8 11 15 ____24 10 ____10 8 0 8 ____10 0 _____6 17 3 2 _____8 18 7 13 2 0 358 2127  2,454 -327  BM BF WM WF Compiled by Office of Student Hearing Expulsion Recommendation Total 0 0 0 ___0_ 1 ___1_ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 ___1_ 0 8 151 101 50 0 0 0 __0| 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 39 49 -10 0 0 0 __Oi 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 21 20 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 4 1 TOTAL 0 0 _____0 0 2  _____\u0026lt; 0  0  0  0  0  ____o' 0 ' 0 ' ____o' ____o' 0 ' 0  0  1' ____1__ 0 9  216  174 \" BM BF WM WF Page 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 58 -57 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 -14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 -5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 77 TOTAL _____0 _____0 0 ____0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ____0 0 ____0 0 0 ____0 0 0 0 ____o' ____0  1  78 -77  #SUSP io 8 n ____ ____26 11 ____W _____8 _____0 _____8 10 _____0 _____6 ____rr_ _____3 _____2 8 ____ _____7 ____14 ____3 0 367 ' 2344  2706 ' -362  %Blk 100% 88% 91% 67% 85% 91% 90% 100% ___0% 100% 100% ___0% 67% 82% 67% 100% 100% 83% 100% 79% 100% 0% 93% 84% 87% 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\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_435","title":"Equitable allocation of resources","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":["1998/2000"],"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","Education--Evaluation","Educational statistics","School integration"],"dcterms_title":["Equitable allocation of resources"],"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/435"],"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":["45 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\nAll Levels Correlations Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N % African American Students TE. RATIO ST A. RATI SQ.FT % Teachers with MA +9 TURNOVER # Students COMPUTER EXPENDIT VOLUNTEE DONATION EQUITY2 % African American Students TE.RATIO STA.RATI SQ.FT % Teachers with MA +9 TURNOVER # Students COMPUTER EXPENDIT VOLUNTEE DONATION EQUITY2 % African American Students TE.RATIO STA.RATI SQ.FT % Teachers with MA +9 TURNOVER # Students COMPUTER EXPENDIT VOLUNTEE DONATION EQUITY2 % African American Students 1.000 -.325* -.376** .120 -.183 .274 -.257 .122 -.085 -.404** .269 -.137 .024 .008 .417 .213 .059 .078 .408 .565 .004 .065 .352 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 TE. RATIO STA.RATI SQ.FT % Teachers with MA +9 TURNOVER # Students -.325* -.376** .120 -.183 .274 -.257 1.000 .826** -.554** .826** 1.000 -.455** -.554** -.455** 1.000 .468** .407** -.252 -.285* -.365* .241 .135 .453* .170 .468** .407** -.252 1.000 -.131 .020 -.285* .135 -.265 -.522** -.071 -.152 -.497** -.365* .453** -.226 -.561** -.135 -.239 -.552** .241 .170 .135 .281 -.056 .066 .435** -.131 .020 -.158 -.282 -.017 -.190 -.036 1.000 -.068 -.197 .149 -.061 .258 -.047 -.068 1.000 .088 -.091 -.133 -.222 -.038 .024 .008 .000 .417 .213 .059 .078 .000 .000 .000 .001 .001 .001 .004 .083 .049 .011 .099 .359 .001 .248 .001 .004 .083 .376 .892 .049 .359 .069 .000 .630 .302 .000 .011 .001 .122 .000 .362 .103 .000 .099 .248 .361 .053 .706 .657 .002 .376 .892 .284 .052 .909 .197 .806 .644 .180 .311 .682 .077 .751 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 .644 .553 .536 .368 .129 .798 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 Page 6All Levels Correlations COMPUTER EXPEND IT VOLUNTEE DONATION EQUITY? Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N % African American Students TE. RATIO STA.RATI SQ.FT % Teachers with MA +9 TURNOVER # Students COMPUTER EXPENDIT VOLUNTEE DONATION EQUITY2 % African American Students TE. RATIO STA.RATI SQ.FT % T eachers with MA +9 TURNOVER # Students COMPUTER EXPENDIT VOLUNTEE DONATION EQUITY2 % African American Students TE.RATIO STA.RATI SQ.FT % Teachers with MA +9 TURNOVER # Students COMPUTER EXPENDIT VOLUNTEE DONATION EQUITY2 .122 -.085 -.404** .269 -.137 -.265 -.226 .135 -.158 -.197 .088 1.000 .429** .175 -.046 .498** .408 .069 .122 .361 .284 .180 .553 .002 .235 .758 .000 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 -.522** -.561** .281 -.282 .149 -.091 .429** 1.000 .512 .195 .726** .565 .000 .000 .053 .052 .311 .536 .002 .000 .185 .000 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 *. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed). -.071 -.135 -.056 -.017 -.061 -.133 .175 .512** 1.000 .020 .502** .004 .630 .362 .706 .909 .682 .368 .235 .000 .894 .000 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 -.152 -.239 .066 -.190 .258 -.222 -.046 .195 .020 1.000 .228 .065 .302 .103 .657 .197 .077 .129 .758 .185 .894 .118 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 -.497* -.552* .435*' -.036 -.047 -.038 .498* .726* .502* .228 1.000 .352 .000 .000 .002 .806 .751 .798 .000 .000 .000 .118 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 Page 7High School Correlations Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N % African American Students TE. RATIO STA.RATI SQ.FT % Teachers with MA +9 TURNOVER # Students COMPUTER EXPENDIT VOLUNTEE DONATION EQUITY2 % African American Students TE. RATIO STARATI SQ.FT % Teachers with MA +9 TURNOVER # Students COMPUTER EXPENDIT VOLUNTEE DONATION EQUITY2 % African American Students TE. RATIO STA. RATI SQ.FT % Teachers with MA +9 TURNOVER # Students COMPUTER EXPENDIT VOLUNTEE DONATION EQUITY2 % African American Students TE. RATIO STA.RATI SQ.FT % Teachers with MA +9 TURNOVER # Students 1.000 -.541 -.548 -.249 -.735 .270 -.439 .538 -.560 .755 -.582 -.664 .346 .339 .686 .157 .661 .460 .350 .326 .140 .303 .222 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 -.541 -.548 -.249 -.735 .270 -.439 1.000 .996** -.564 .996** 1.000 -.593 -.564 -.593 1.000 .402 .347 .487 -.221 -.177 .004 .924* .942* -.599 .402 .347 .487 1.000 -.463 .190 -.221 .924* -.380 .045 .030 .054 -.159 -.177 .942* -.330 .058 -.014 .078 -.179 .004 -.599 -.449 .168 -.494 .508 .749 -.463 .190 -.845 .295 -.311 .362 .682 1.000 .164 -.035 -.716 -.135 .561 -.508 .164 1.000 -.350 -.208 -.032 .256 -.368 .346 .000 .322 .502 .721 .025 .528 .942 .962 .931 .799 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 .339 .686 .157 .661 .460 .000 .292 .567 .776 .017 .588 .927 .983 .901 .774 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 .322 .292 .502 .567 .405 .721 .776 .995 .025 .017 .286 .405 .995 .286 .448 .787 .397 .382 .145 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 .432 .759 .432 .759 .071 .629 .611 .550 .205 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 .793 .793 .956 .174 .829 1326 .383 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 .563 .737 .959 .677 .542 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 Page 2High School Correlations COMPUTER EXPENDIT VOLUNTEE DONATION EQUITY? Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N % African American Students TE.RATIO STA.RATI SQ.FT % Teachers with MA +9 TURNOVER # Students COMPUTER EXPENDIT VOLUNTEE DONATION EQUITY? % African American Students TE.RATIO STA. RATI SQ.FT % Teachers with MA +9 TURNOVER # Students COMPUTER EXPENDIT VOLUNTEE DONATION EQUITY? % African American Students TE.RATIO STA.RATI SQ.FT % Teachers with MA +9 TURNOVER # Students COMPUTER EXPENDIT VOLUNTEE DONATION EQUITY? .538 -.560 .755 -.582 -.664 -.380 -.330 -.449 -.845 -.035 -.350 1.000 .226 .205 -.598 -.328 .350 .528 .588 .448 .071 .956 .563 .714 .741 .287 .590 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 .045 .058 .168 .295 -.716 -.208 .226 1.000 -.511 -.122 .743 .326 .942 .927 .787 .629 .174 .737 .714 .379 .845 .151 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 **. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). .030 -.014 -.494 -.311 -.135 -.032 .205 -.511 1.000 -.766 -.665 .140 .962 .983 .397 .611 .829 .959 .741 .379 .131 .221 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 .054 .078 .508 .362 .561 .256 -.598 -.122 -.766 1.000 .320 .303 .931 .901 .382 .550 .326 .677 .287 .845 .131 .599 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 -.159 -.179 .749 .682 -.508 -.368 -.328 .743 -.665 .320 1.000 .222 .799 .774 .145 .205 .383 .542 .590 .151 .221 .599 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 Page 3Junior High School Correlations Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N % African American Students TE.RATIO ST A. RATI SQ.FT % Teachers with MA +9 TURNOVER # Students COMPUTER EXPENDIT VOLUNTEE DONATION EQUITY2 % African American Students TE.RATIO STA.RATI SQ.FT % Teachers with MA +9 TURNOVER # Students COMPUTER EXPENDIT VOLUNTEE DONATION EQUITY2 % African American Students TE.RATIO STA.RATI SQ.FT % Teachers with MA +9 TURNOVER # Students COMPUTER EXPENDIT VOLUNTEE DONATION EQUITY2 % African American Students 1.000 -.550 -.615 .531 -.641 -.726* -.704 .418 -.488 -.722* -.372 -.479 .158 .104 .176 .087 .042 .051 .303 .220 .043 .365 .230 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 TE.RATIO STA.RATI SQ.FT % Teachers with MA +9 TURNOVER # Students -.550 -.615 .531 -.641 -.726* -.704 1.000 .978** -.113 .978** 1.000 -.182 -.113 -.182 1.000 .403 .439 .108 .117 .170 -.148 .816* .868*' -.330 .403 .439 .108 1.000 .527 .548 .117 .816* -.144 .423 .481 -.030 .325 .170 .868** -.210 .438 .536 .134 .318 -.148 -.330 .250 .153 -.074 -.631 .093 .527 .548 -.170 .579 .634 -.151 .524 1.000 .155 -.431 .174 .390 .309 .266 .155 1.000 .059 .654 .700 .271 .621 .158 .000 .790 .323 .782 .013 .734 .296 .228 .944 .432 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 .104 .000 .667 .277 .687 .005 .617 .278 .171 .752 .443 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 .176 .790 .667 .798 .726 .424 .550 .717 .861 .093 .828 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 .087 .323 .277 .798 .180 .159 .687 .133 .091 .722 .182 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 .042 .782 .687 .726 .180 .714 .287 .680 .340 7457 .524 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 .051 .013 .005 .424 .159 .714 .890 .078 .053 .516 .100 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 Page 2Junior High School Correlations COMPUTER EXPENDIT VOLUNTEE DONATION EQUITY2 Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N % African American Students TE.RATIO STA.RATI SQ.FT % Teachers with MA +9 TURNOVER # Students COMPUTER EXPENDIT VOLUNTEE DONATION EQUITY2 % African American Students TE.RATIO STA.RATI SQ.FT % Teachers with MA +9 TURNOVER # Students COMPUTER EXPENDIT VOLUNTEE DONATION EQUITY2 % African American Students TE.RATIO STA.RATI SQ.FT % Teachers with MA +9 TURNOVER # Students COMPUTER EXPENDIT VOLUNTEE DONATION EQUITY2 .418 -.144 -.210 .250 -.170 -.431 .059 1.000 .123 -.198 -.097 .400 .303 .734 .617 .550 .687 .287 .890 .772 .638 .819 .327 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 -.488 .423 .438 .153 .579 .174 .654 .123 1.000 .932** -.133 .909** .220 .296 .278 .717 .133 .680 .078 .772 .001 .753 .002 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 * Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed). -.722* -.372 -.479 .481 .536 -.074 -.030 .134 -.631 .325 .318 .093 .634 -.151 .524 .390 .700 -.198 .932* 1.000 .056 .792* .309 .271 -.097 -.133 .056 1.000 -.030 .266 .621 .400 .909* .792* -.030 1.000 .043 .365 .230 .228 .171 .861 .091 .340 .053 .638 .001 .895 .019 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 I .944 .752 .093 .722 .457 .516 .819 .753 .895 .943 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 .432 .443 .828 .182 .524 .100 .327 .002 .019 .943 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 Page 3- Elementary School Correlations Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N % African American Students TE.RATIO STA.RATI SQ.FT % Teachers with MA +9 TURNOVER # Students COMPUTER EXPENDIT VOLUNTEE DONATION EQUITY2 % African American Students TE.RATIO STA.RATI SQ.FT % Teachers with MA +9 TURNOVER # Students COMPUTER EXPENDIT VOLUNTEE DONATION EQUITY2 % African American Students TE.RATIO STA.RATI SQ.FT % Teachers with MA +9 TURNOVER # Students COMPUTER EXPENDIT VOLUNTEE DONATION EQUITY2 % African American Students TE.RATIO STA.RATI SQ.FT % Teachers with MA +9 TURNOVER # Students 1.000 -.294 -.369* .114 -.120 .380* -.499* -.294 -.369* .114 -.120 .380* -.499** .015 .019 -.399* .358* -.050 .086 .029 .514 .494 .025 .002 .932 .915 .017 .034 .775 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 1.000 .927** -.642** .452** -.326 .335* -.289 -.714** -.187 -.238 -.688** .086 .000 .000 .006 .056 .049 .092 .000 .282 .168 .000 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 .927' 1.000 -.683 1** .448** -.426* .379* -.281 -.678** -.131 -.223 -.649** .029 .000 .000 .007 .011 .025 .102 .000 .452 .199 .000 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 -.642** -.683** 1.000 .452** .448** -.402* -.326 -.426* .278 .335* .379* -.315 -.402* 1.000 -.178 -.063 .278 -.315 .098 .395* .077 .181 .525** -.178 -.063 -.169 -.415* -.085 -.241 -.165 1.000 -.342* -.221 .183 -.089 .265 -.071 -.342* 1.000 .079 -.073 .034 -.283 -.005 .514 .494 .025 .002 .000 .000 .017 .106 .065 .577 .019 .658 .299 .001 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 .006 .007 .017 .307 .721 .331 .013 .628 .163 .342 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 .056 .011 .106 .049 .025 .065 .307 .044 .202 .294 .610 .124 .683 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 .721 .044 .652 .677 .847 .100 .976 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 Page 2Elementary School Correlations COMPUTER EXPENDIT VOLUNTEE DONATION EQUITY2 Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N % African American Students TE.RATIO STA.RATI SQ.FT % Teachers with MA +9 TURNOVER # Students COMPUTER EXPENDIT VOLUNTEE DONATION EQUITY2 % African American Students TE.RATIO STARATI SQ.FT % Teachers with MA +9 TURNOVER # Students COMPUTER EXPENDIT VOLUNTEE DONATION EQUITY2 % African American Students TE.RATIO STARATI SQ.FT % Teachers with MA +9 TURNOVER # Students COMPUTER EXPENDIT VOLUNTEE DONATION EQUITY2 .015 .019 -.399* .358* -.050 -.289 -.281 .098 -.169 -.221 .079 1.000 .537** .301 -.009 .629** .932 .092 .102 .577 .331 .202 .652 .001 .079 .959 .000 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 -.714** -.678** .395* -.415* .183 -.073 .537** 1.000 .482** .195 .706** .915 .000 .000 .019 .013 .294 .677 .001 .003 .261 .000 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 *. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed). -.187 -.131 .077 -.085 -.089 .034 .301 .482** 1.000 -.036 .494** .017 .282 .452 .658 .628 .610 .847 .079 .003 .836 .003 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 -.238 -.223 .181 -.241 .265 -.283 -.009 .195 -.036 1.000 .212 .034 .168 .199 .299 .163 .124 .100 .959 .261 .836 .221 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 -.688* -.649* .525*' -.165 -.071 -.005 .629* .706*' .494* .212 1.000 .775 .000 .000 .001 .342 .683 .976 .000 .000 .003 .221 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 Page 3File Information List of variables on the working file Name Position SCHOOL School Print Format: F8.2 Write Format: F8.2 1 Value Label 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00 8.00 9.00 10.00 11.00 12.00 13.00 14.00 15.00 16.00 17.00 18.00 19.00 20.00 21.00 22.00 23.00 24.00 25.00 26.00 27.00 28.00 29.00 30.00 31.00 32.00 33.00 34.00 35.00 36.00 37.00 38.00 39.00 40.00 41.00 42.00 43.00 44.00 45.00 46.00 47.00 48.00 Central J.A. Fair Hall McClellan Parkview Cloverdale Junior High Dunbar Forest Heights Henderson Mabelvale Junior High Mann Magnet Pulaski Heights Southwest Badgett Bale Baseline Booker Magnet Brady Carver Magnet Chicot Cloverdale Elementary Dodd Fair Park Forest Park Franklin Fulbright Garland Geyer Springs Gibbs magnet Jefferson King Mabelvale Elementary McDermott Meadowcliff Mitchell Otter Creek Pulaski heights Rightsell Rockefeller Romine Terry Wakefield Washington Watson Western Hills Williams Magnet Wilson Woodruff TE.RATIO / 2 Print Format\nF8.2 Write Format: F8.2 Page 1school 1 1.00 2 2.00 3 3.00 4 4.00 5 5.00 C:\\Program Files\\SPSS\\Milhollen.sav te. ratio sta.rati sq.ft teach 18.52 14.23 12.60 14.19 15.34 12.54 143.84 52.00 9.18 8.32 9.53 10.21 174.75 192.84 138.05 182.74 52.00 48.00 41.00 55.00 6 6.00 13.88 9.73 131.67 29.00 7 7.00 15.80 10.98 128.92 44.00 8 8.00 12.63 8.77 108.47 42.00 9 9.00 13.58 9.41 142.56 35.00 10 10.00 12.08 8.25 122.60 29.00 11 11.00 14.72 10.48 131.72 48.00 12 12.00 13.62 9.99 95.46 37.00 13 13.00 12.03 8.50 162.68 42.00 14 14.00 13.20 7.14 100.45 46.00 1-1turnover 1 15.00 2 12.00 3 18.00 4 14.00 CAProgram Files\\SPSS\\Milhollen.sav student# computer ex pendit donation 1855.00 757.00 790.00 935.00 .04 .07 .09 .30 59.34 57.73 55.58 120.94 4.84 1.19 6.76 .43 5 10.00 911.00 .11 262.20 3.79 6 4.00 622.00 .04 39.58 .00 7 16.00 771.00 .04 74.56 .00 8 10.00 648.00 .08 54.05 .00 9 7.00 724.00 .24 114.14 1.52 10 14.00 506.00 .07 54.98 1.81 11 14.00 858.00 .05 278.19 .87 12 15.00 767.00 .04 52.40 10.26 13 14.00 510.00 .05 54.47 .12 14 19.00 233,00 i 1-2 .01 68.07 .001 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 equity2 37.00 39.00 40.00 36.00 45.00 30.00 35.00 34.00 39.00 35.00 43.00 34.00 33.00 31.00 C:\\Program Files\\SPSS\\Milhollen.sav black 59.00 81.00 71.00 84.00 51.00 89.00 57.00 70.00 86.00 75.00 52.00 57.00 84.00 92.00 i free 19.00 26.00 27.00 29.00 10.00 58.00 35.00 45.00 42.00 26.00 25.00 26.00 63.00 79.00 1-3school 15 15.00 16 16.00 17 17.00 18 18.00 19 19.00 20 20.00 21 21.00 CAProgram Files\\SPSS\\Milhollen.sav te.ratio sta.rati sq.ft teach 14.03 15.40 13.42 17.44 15.20 17.07 19.59 7.75 7.80 9.37 9.78 9.33 8.48 11.59 \\ 92.89 156.21 124.84 97.47 103.52 111.15 64.97 55.00 53.00 48.00 67.00 42.00 44.00 49.00 22 22.00 12.95 7.47 208.54 47.00 23 23.00 15.25 7.85 116.40 63.00 24 24.00 18.70 11.32 74.22 44.00 25 25.00 10.74 5.30 147.63 26.00 26 26.00 17.19 9.54 135.14 48.00 27 27.00 11.61 5.35 142.55 17.00 28 28.00 16.73 8.26 132.22 53.00 2-1turnover 15 21.00 16 39.00 17 10.00 18 8.00 CAProgram Files\\SPSS\\Milhollen.sav student# computer expendit donation 362.00 323.00 597.00 372.00 .10 .01 .07 .11 74.93 77.89 212.17 69.33 9.32 4.80 .00 8.69 19 11.00 596.00 .06 243.28 .00 20 8.00 537.00 .28 107.68 3.98 21 9.00 512.00 .08 69.35 .00 22 .00 224.00 .06 66.18 .00 23 20.00 248.00 .00 82.12 1.01 24 5.00 430.00 .05 59.90 24.98 25 5.00 464.00 .16 252.18 16.38 26 6.00 495.00 .03 62.30 .11 27 20.00 271.00 .04 245.87 .37 28 17.00 316.00 .08 84.64 1 5.34 2-215 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 equityZ 41.00 37.00 42.00 40.00 42.00 44.00 29.00 43.00 35.00 37.00 48.00 39.00 37.00 41.00 i C:\\Program Files\\SPSS\\Milhollen.sav black 73.00 83.00 52.00 63.00 52.00 69.00 92.00 65.00 76.00 76.00 92.00 48.00 93.00 75.00 free 65.00 84.00 36.00 45.00 31.00 71.00 77.00 67.00 65.00 34.00 79.00 32.00 90.00 66.00 2-3 /29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 school 29.00 30.00 31.00 32.00 33.00 34.00 35.00 36.00 37.00 38.00 39.00 40.00 41.00 42.00 C:\\Program Files\\SPSS\\Milhollen.sav te.ratio sta.rati sq.ft teach 12.29 18.93 17.68 16.36 17.73 17.95 10.23 19.76 20.26 11.00 10.70 12.70 18.12 18.20 7.72 11.66 8.36 9.63 11.02 10.18 5.07 10.90 11.84 5.85 4.41 7.47 10.83 10.26 119.73 84.88 113.98 136.53 100.67 111.24 161.98 111.44 125.54 151.12 159.41 129.01 88.67 100.25 40.00 68.00 40.00 23.00 31.00 54.00 25.00 59.00 47.00 39.00 29.00 40.00 29.00 71.00 3-1turnover 29 4.00 30 9.00 31 9.00 32 7.00 33 15.00 34 12.00 35 31.00 36 4.00 37 11.00 38 13.00 39 18.00 40 14.00 41 6.00 42 11.00 CAProgram Files\\SPSS\\Milhollen.sav student# computer expendit donation 311.00 513.00 658.00 407.00 477.00 332.00 242.00 328.00 464.00 249.00 405.00 328.00 511.00 373.00 3-2 .26 .05 .00 .10 .03 .01 .07 .02 .08 .12 .25 .04 .02 .01 294.14 62.29 64.58 71.21 60.43 61.34 283.47 65.98 58.69 257.44 533.19 200.61 57.21 58.73 1.61 .63 .23 5.88 27.20 13.25 53.72 10.37 7.28 33.77 3.33 9.56 .00 8.8129 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 equity 2 49.00 36.00 38.00 36.00 33.00 33.00 42.00 36.00 32.00 50.00 50.00 44.00 31.00 34.00 C:\\Program Files\\SPSS\\Milhollen.sav black 52.00 44.00 54.00 73.00 57.00 79.00 92.00 46.00 55.00 94.00 59.00 63.00 46.00 86.00 I I i free 33.00 37.00 43.00 71.00 41.00 73.00 92.00 35.00 43.00 76.00 59.00 45.00 28.00 75.00 3-3 I43 44 45 46 47 48 school 43.00 44.00 45.00 46.00 47.00 48.00 C:\\Program Files\\SPSS\\Milhollen.sav te. ratio sta.rati sq.ft teach 13.03 17.64 18.42 15.40 14.89 14.04 4-1 7.58 10.45 10.75 9.16 8.98 7.72 136.06 109.22 64.64 98.54 102.42 133.80 34.00 39.00 52.00 63.00 76.00 30.00turnover 43 7.00 CAProgram Files\\SPSS\\Milhollen.sav student# computer expendit donation 660.00 .06 92.63 1.12 44 13.00 493.00 .15 77.43 2.55 45 .00 315.00 .10 67.20 .00 46 11.00 479.00 .09 237.38 .00 47 4.00 362.00 .09 60.03 3.57 48 27.00 284.00 .02 85.65 .00 4-243 44 45 46 47 48 CAProgram Files\\SPSS\\Milhollen.sav equity2 42.00 37.00 31.00 41.00 41.00 32.00 black 53.00 89.00 70.00 52.00 82.00 71.00 free 54.00 75.00 54.00 19.00 71.00 60.00 4-3f  Descriptives sqTT Mean 95% Confidence Interval for Mean Statistic 125.0756 Std. Error 4.4905 5% Trimmed Mean Median Variance Std. Deviation Minimum Maximum Range Interquartile Range % Students free lunch Skewness Kurtosis________ Mean 95% Confidence Interval for Mean 5% Trimmed Mean Median Variance Std. Deviation Minimum Maximum Range Interquartile Range Skewness Kurtosis__ Weighted SOTT Average(Definition % 1) Tukey's Hinges Students free lunch SQ.FT Lower Bound Lipper Bound 1 16.0419 134.1094 124.3022 125.1900 967.909 31.1112 64.64 208.54 143.90 41.4500 .419 .315 50.7500 .343 .674 3.1096 Lower Bound Upper Bound 44.4942 57.0058 50.5509 45.0000 464.149 21.5441 10.00 92.00 82.00 38.7500 .127 -1.161 .343 .674 Percentiles 5 69.1325 19.0000 10 88.2910 25.9000 25 101.1075 32.2500 101.5450 Percentiles 50 125.1900 75 142.5575 90 163.8870 95 188.2950 45.0000 71.0000 79.0000 87.3000 125.1900 142.5550 Page 2Extreme Values Highest 1 2 3 4 5 Case Number 22 3 5 2 13 Lowest 1 2 3 45 21 24 % Students free lunch Highest Lowest 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 ( 30 41 35 27 16 14 25 5 46 1 11 10 School Dodd Hall Parkview J.A. Fair Southwe st Western Hills Cloverd ale Element ary Forest Park Jefferson Terry Mitchell Garland Baseline Badgett Franklin Parkview Williams Magnet Central Mann Magnet Mabelva Ie Junior High Value 208.54 192.84 182.74 174.75 162.68 64.64 64.97 74.22 84.88 88.67 92.00 90.00 84.00 79.00 79.00 10.00 19.00 19.00 25.00 a. Only a partial list of cases with the value 26 are shown in the table of lower extremes. Page 3Equitable Allocation Worksheet School Score 1. Pupil/Teacher Ratio 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 (10.71) (11.54) (12.97) (15.5) (17.67) (18.72) (19.68) 2. Pupil/StafT Ratio 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 (5.17) (5.80) (7.76) (9.25) 3. (10.40) (11.34) (11.76) Percent of Students Receiving Free Lunch 2 1 3 4 5 6 7 (19.00) (25.90) (32.25) (45.00) (71.00) (79.00) (87.30) 4. Square Feet per Pupil 7 5 6 3 4 2 1 (69.13) (88.29) (101.11) (125.19) (142.56) (163.89) (188.29) 5. Percent of Staff with a Masters Degree, plus, Nine Years of Experience 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 (23.9) (28.7) (35.5) (44.0) (52.75) (63.4) (69.65) 6. Turnover Rate of Certified Staff 2 1 4 3 5 6 1 (1.80) (4.00) (7.00) (11.00) (15.00) (20.10) (29.20) 7. School Size / ! High School 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 (773) (911) (1395) 8. Middle School 2 (506) Elementary (231) (246) (538) (686) 5 (770) (315) (373) (495) 6 (596) 7 (658) Computer/Pupil Ratio 1 1 2 3 3 4 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 (.0062) (.0118) (.0351) (.0625) (.0981) (.2410) (.2695) 9. Per Pupil Expenditure 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 (53.14) (54.93) (59.93) (70.28) (180.69) (263.80) (289.34)10. Volunteer Hours per Pupil 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 (.3125) (.579) (1.90) (5.195) (12.10) (19.58) (27.73) 11. Donations per Pupil 1 (.00) 7 6 5 4 3 2 (.00) (.0275) (1.71) (8.34) (17.24) (30.81)High School Middle School Elementary School 42- McClellan 43 44- Central 45- J. A. Fair 46- Hall 47 48 49 50 51 52- Parkview 34- Cloverdale 35 36 37- Southwest 38- Forest Heights 39 40- Dunbar, Pulaski Heights 41- Mabelvale 42 43 44- Henderson 45 46 47 48 49 50- Mann 32- Cloverdale 33 34- Badgett 35-Western Hills 36- Meadowcliff, Woodruff 37- Pulaski Heights, Terry, Wakefield 38- McDermott 39- Baseline, Fair Park, Garland, Mabelvale 40- Watson 41- Jefferson, Otter Creek 42- Forest Park 43- King, Mitchell 44- Brady, Wilson 45- Bale, Fulbright, Geyer Springs 46- Washington 47- Booker, Chicot, Dodd 48- Carver, Romine, Williams 49 50 51-Franklin 52 53- Rightsell 54- Gibbs, Rockefeller1. Pupil/Tcacher Ratio Equitable Allocation Worksheet 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 (10.71) (11.54) (12.97) (15.5) (17.67) (18.72) (19.68) 2. Pupil/StafT Ratio 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 (5.17) (5.80) (7.76) (9.25) (10.40) (11.34) (11.76) 3. Square Feet per Pupil 6 7 5 3 4 2 1 (69.13) (88.29) (101.11) (125.19) (142.56) (163.89) (188.29) 4. Percent of Staff with a Masten Degree, plus, Nine Yean of Experience 1 1 3 4 5 6 7 (23.9) (28.7) (35.5) (44.0) (52.75) (63.4) (69.65) 5. Turnover Rate of Certified Staff 1 3 2 4 5 7 6 (1.80) (4.00) (7.00) (11.00) (15.00) (20.10) (29.20) 6. School Size High School 7 5 6 4 3 1 2 {713) (911) (1395) 7. Middle School 2 (506) Elementary (231) (246) (538) (686) (770) (315) (373) (495) 6 (596) 7 (658) Computer/Pupil Ratio 1 1 2 3 3 4 4 5 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 (.0062) (.0118) (.0351) (.0625) (.0981) (.2410) (.2695) 8. Per Pupil Expenditure 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 (53.14) (54.93) (59.93) (70.28) (180.69) (263.80) (289.34) 9, Volunteer Houn per Pupil 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 (.3125) (.579) (1.90) (5.195) (12.10) (19.58) (27.73) 10. Donations per Pupil 1 (.00) 7 6 5 4 3 2 (.00) (.0275) (1.71) (8.34) (17.24) (30.81)High School Middle School Elementary School 36- McClellan 37- Central 38 39- J. A. Fair 40- Hall 41 42 43 44 45- Parkview 30- Cloverdale 31 32 33- Southwest 29- Cloverdale 30 31- Badgett, Terry, Western Hills 32- Pulaski Heights, Woodruff 34- Forest Heights, Pulaski Heights 33- McDermott, MeadowclifT 35- Dunbar, Mabelvale 36 37 38 39- Henderson 40 41 42 43- Mann 34- Wakefield 35-Fair Park 36- Jefferson, Mabelvale, Otter Creek 37- Baseline, Forest park. Garland, Watson 38- King 39- Fulbright 40- Brady 41- Bale, Geyer Springs, Williams, Wilson 42- Booker, Carver, Mitchell, Washington 43-Dodd 44- Chicot, Romine 45 46 47 48- Franklin 49- Gibbs 50- Rightsell, Rockefeller 36-1 37-1 38 39-1 40-1 41 42 43 44 45-1 30-1 31 32 33-1 34-n 35-n 36 37 38 39-1 40 41 42 43-n 29-1 30 31-ni 32-n 33-n 34-1 35-1 36- HI 37- nil 38-1 39-1 40-1 41-nil 42- nil 43-1 44-n 45 46 47 48-1 49-1 50-1110/05/1998 14:59 5013240504 LRSD PAGE 02 Memo To\nFrom\nEquitable Allocation Workgroup Dr. Ed Williams, P. R, \u0026amp; E. RE. Total score correlation While I will provide you with the correlation matrices at the meeting tomorrow, I felt you would benefit from some data peeking. I correlated the percent of African American students in each school to total score and to each of the ten variables (c.g., turnover, donation, teacher/student ratio, etc.). For all levels combined and individually (i.e., high school, junior high, and elemeittary schools) there was no significant correlation between scores on the Equitable Allocation Worksheet and the percent of African American students. In addition to the correlation matrices, I will provide you with school scores on the EAW, and the data sheets.received MAY 2 6 1998 Little Rock School District OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING May 22, 1998 Ann Brown Desegregation Monitor Office of Desegregation Monitoring 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear TVnn: One of the elements of the \"Revised Desegregation and Education Plan\" is that within 60 days of its approval. the LRSD will develop process or standard for assessing the equitable allocation of resources. This letter is to ask you or members of your staff to attend a meeting at 1:30 p.m., Wednesday, June 3, 1998, in the LRSD Board room for the purpose of discussing that process. Skip and Gene were very helpful when we discussed this issue in the development of the revised plan. Mr. Walker has been invited to attend, also. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, Brady Gadberry Director of Labor Relations Leslie Gamine Clay Pendley 810 West Markham Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201  (501)324-2000 cc: aOffice 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: May 27, 1998 To: Brady Gadberry From: Ann Bro Re: Invitation to Discuss LRSD Equitable Allocation of Resources Thanks for your invitation to participate in a discussion of the process the LRSD will use for assessing the equitable allocation of its resources. Ill plan on being there, along with my one or two of my associates, on June 3, 1998 at 1:30 p.m. I look forward to seeing you then.  - - -^06/05/98 15:11 Q FRIDAY LAW FIRM @002 FRIDAY. ELDREDGE \u0026amp; CLARK HERSCHEL M. FRIDAY {ISJS-liSA) WILLIAM M. SUTTON. P.A. JAMES W, MOORE BYRON M. EI8CMAN. JR.. P-A. JOE 0. BELL. P.A. JOHN C. ECHOLS. P.A. JAMES A. BUTTRY, P.A. FREDERICK S. UR8CRY. P.A. OSCAR E. DAVIS, JR.. P.A. JAMES C. CLARK. JR., P-A. THOMAS P. LEGGETT, P.A. JOHN DEWEY WATSON. P.A. PAUL 8. BENHAM III. P.A. LARRY W. SORAS. F.A. A. WYCKLIFP M18ET, JR.. P.*- JAMES EDWARD HARRIS. R.A. A PARTNERSHIP OF INDIVIDUALS AND professional associations attorneys at law 2000 FIRST COMMERCIAL BUILDING 400 WEST CAPITOL AVENUE little rock. ARKANSAS 7220,-343 TELEPHONE 601-37-2011 FAX NO. 601-376-2147 scon J LAHCASTtft. I M GAYLt CORLEY. P.A ROBERT 8. BEACH. JR . P A J. PHILLIP MALCOM. P.A. JAMES M. SIMPSON. P.A. JAMES M. SAXTON. P.A, J, SHEPHERD RUSSELL III. P A. DONALD H. BACON. P.A. WILLIAM THOMAS BAXTER. P-A. WALTER A. PAULSON It. P.A. BARRY E COPLIN. P.A. RICHARD 0. TAYLOR. P.A. JOSEPH a. HURST. JR., P-A. ELIZABETH ROBBEN MURRAY. P.A. CHRISTOPHER HELLER. P A. LAURA HENSLEY SMITH, P.A. ROBERT S. SHAFER. P.A. WILLIAM M. GRIFFIN III. P.A. MICHAEL 8. MOORE. P.A. DIANE S. MACKEY. P.A. WALTER M. EBEL UI. P.A. KEVIN A. CRASS. P.A. WILLIAM A. WADDELL, JR.. P-A. VIA TELECOPY NO. 374-4187 Mr. John W. Walker June 5, 1998 J LEE BROWN. P.A JAMES C. BAKER. JR  P * marry a light. P SCOTT M. TUCKER. P.* JOHN CLAYTON RANDOLPH i A QUY ALTON WADE. P A PRICE C. GARDNER, P A. TONIA P. JONES. P.A, DAVID D. WILSON, P A JEFFREY H. MOORE. P.A. ANDREW T. TURNER. P A. OAVlO M. GRAf. P.A. CARLA GUNNELS SPAINhOUR. P.A JOHN C. FENOLEY. JR . P.A ALLISON GRAVES WARNER. P a JONANN C. ROOSEVELT K. CHRISTOPHER LAWSON GREGORY 0. TAYLOR TONY I WILCOX FRAN C. HICKMAN BETTY J. DEMORY BARBARA J. RANO JAMES W . SMITH CLIFFORD W. PLUNKETT DANIEL L. HERRINGTON ALLISON J. CORNWELL TOOO A. GREER ELLEN M. OWENS HELENE N. RAYDER JASON B. HENDREN SUSAN N. CHILDERS 0* COWM(l WILLIAM J. SMITH BS CLARK WILLIAM L. TERRY WILLIAM L. PATTON. JR H.T. LARZELER6. P A. VIA TELECOPY NO. 371-01011 Ms. Ann Brown  n.Tia-t OIRiC T MO. 16011 370-3323 VIA TELECOPY NO. 324-2146 Mr. Brady Gadberry RE: Equitable Allocation of Resources Dear Ms. Brown and Gentlemen: draft Notice of Process for Assessing Attached please find a the Equitable Allocation for is^an^roJ District court's approval ot Paragraph 2 of the Notice we would propose be a the final report within 180 days of the Revised Plan as provided in Ecc_2 Section 2.92. We would appreciate your file the Notice on June 9, you. comments and suggestions before we 1998. we look forward to hearing from We Sincerely, 3hn CV Pendley, Jr. John Pendley JCFjr/jcg Enclosure-06/05/98 15:12  FRIDAY LAW FIRM  003 u IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF V. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL DEFENDANTS MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL INTERVENORS KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL INTERVENORS 1H NOTICE OF PROCESS FOR ASSESgING__ EQUITABLE ALLOCATION OF RESOURCES The Little Rock School District (\"LRSD\") for its Notice of Process for Assessing the Equitable Allocation of Resources states: 1. Section 2.9.1 of LRSD's Revised Desegregation and Education Plan dated January 16, 1997 (\"Revised Plan\") provides: Within sixty (60) days of the district court's approval of this Revised Plan, LRSD, after consultation with, will develop a process or standard for assessing the equitable allocation of resources. 2. In compliance with Section 2.9.1, LRSD, after consultation with Joshua, has developed a process for assessing the equitable allocation of resources. UiSD, working with Joshua and the Office of Desegregation Monitoring (\"ODM\"), shall. (a) Identify the resources to be considered in assessing the equitable allocation of resources\nf:\\hom6\\fisoiiey196/05/98 15:13 FRIDAY LAW FIRM @004 (b) Develop standard or standards for assessing whether those resources are being distributed on an equitable basis\n(c) Assess the current allocation of resources based on the a standard or standards developed\nand, (d) Report the results of the assessment. 3. This process will be completed on a timeline consistent with the issuance of a final report within 180 days of this Court's approval of the Revised Plan as provided in Section 2.9.2 of the Revised Plan. Respectfully Submitted, LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT FRIDAY, ELDREDGE \u0026amp; CLARK First Commercial Bldg., Suite 2000 400 West Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201-3493 (501) 376-2011 BY: Christopher Heller (#81083) John C. Fendley, Jr. (#92182 r:MKMMeslby\\lnd'dB*-P\u0026lt;d.001 2 .06/05/98 15:13 FRIDAY LAW FIRM Q  005 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I certify that a copy of the foregoing following people by depositing a copy of same *  T^'***** lyyo  mail on this Sth day of June, Mr. John W. Walker JOHN W. WALKER, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Sam Jones Wright, Lindsey \u0026amp; Jennings 2200 Worthen Bank Bldg. 200 West Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Steve Jones JACK, LYON \u0026amp; JONES, P.A. 425 W. Capitol, Suite 3400 Little Rock, AR 72201-3472 Mr. Richard Roachell Mr. Travis Creed Roachell Law Firm First Federal Plaza 401 West Capitol, Suite 504 Little Rock, AR 72201 Ms. Ann Brown - HAND DELIVERED Desegregation Monitor Heritage West Bldg., Suite 510 201 East Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Timothy G. Gauger Office of the Attorney General 323 Center Street 200 Tower Building Little Rock, AR 72201 ftMuDvXfeatbyUndklM-pU.OOl has been served on the in the United States Christopher Heller John C. Fendley, Jr. 3Office 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\nJune 8, 1998 BY FAX To: Clay Fendley From: Ann Brow Re\nProposed Process for Assessing Resources Thank you for faxing me your draft of the proposed Process for Assessing the Equitable Allocation of Resources. Here are my observations and suggestions: 1. Correct the omission of the word Joshua in the fourth line of the first paragraph. 2. Item a: In the interest of clarity and accuracy, reword this sentence by eliminating the passive voice and one of the three verbs that cloud the meaning. What we really mean is: Identify the resources the district will assess for equitable allocation. (I trust this will include all resources, including human resources, since equitable personnel allocation is stressed elsewhere in the desegregation plan.) J. Item b: Again for clarity, change whether to read the extent to which those resources are being distributed on an equitable basis. 4. Item c: This sentence designates current resources for equity assessment, yet the language of the new plan implies ongoing assessment of resource allocation. This filing should do the same. 5. Item d: Report the results of the assessment to whom? The superintendent? The board? The parties? The court? The public? Who are the audience(s) who will receive the report? cc: John Walker RECEIV^n IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION JUN 9 1998 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OFFICE OF desegregation monitoring PLAINTIFF V. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL DEFENDANTS MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL INTERVENORS KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL INTERVENORS NOTICE OF PROCESS FOR ASSESSING THE EQUITABLE ALLOCATION OF RESOURCES The Little Rock School District (\"LRSD\") for its Notice of Process for Assessing the Equitable Allocation of Resources states\n1. Section 2.9.1 of LRSD's Revised Desegregation and Education Plan dated January 16, 1997 (\"Revised Plan) provides: Within sixty (60) days of the district court's approval of this Revised Plan, LRSD, after consultation with Joshua, will develop a process or standard for assessing the equitable allocation of resources. 2. In compliance with Section 2.9.1, LRSD, after consultation with Joshua, has developed a process for assessing the equitable allocation of resources. LRSD, working with Joshua and the Office of Desegregation Monitoring (\"ODM), shall: (a) Identify the resources the District will assess for equitable allocation\n(b) Develop a standard or standards for assessing the extent to which those resources are being distributed on an equitable basis\n(c) Assess the allocation of resources based on the standard or standards developed\nand, (d) Report the results of the assessment to ODM and Joshua. 3. This process will be completed on a timeline consistent with the issuance of a final report within 180 days of this Court's approval of the Revised Plan as provided in Section 2.9.2 of the Revised Plan. 4. In the above process, LRSD shall consult with the one or both of the desegregation experts retained by LRSD in compliance with Section 2.1.1 of the Revised Plan. Joshua has approved LRSD's retention of Terrance Roberts, one of the original \"Little Rock Nine,\" and Steven Ross, a professor at the University of Memphis, to assist LRSD in development of the programs. policies and procedures required by the Revised Plan. Respectfully Submitted, LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT FRIDAY, ELDREDGE \u0026amp; CLARK First Commercial Bldg., Suite 2000 400 West Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201-3493 (501) 376-2011 BY: Christopher Hell John C. Pendley, r. w92182 f:\\home\\fendley\\lred\\des-pld.001 2CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I certify that a copy of the foregoing has been served on the following people by depositing a copy of same in the United States mail on this 9th day of June, 1998. Mr. John W. Walker JOHN W. WALKER, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Sam Jones Wright, Lindsey \u0026amp; Jennings 2200 Worthen Bank Bldg. 200 West Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Steve Jones JACK, LYON \u0026amp; JONES, P.A. 425 W. Capitol, Suite 3400 Little Rock, AR 72201-3472 Mr. Richard Roachell Mr. Travis Creed Roachell Law Firm First Federal Plaza 401 West Capitol, Suite 504 Little Rock, AR 72201 Ms. Ann Brown HAND DELIVERED Desegregation Monitor Heritage West Bldg., Suite 510 201 East Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Timothy G. Gauger Office of the Attorney General 323 Center Street 200 Tower Building Little Rock, AR 72201 Christopher Hell^^ John C. Fendley, Jr. f:^facme\\feDdley\\lnd^de-ptd.001 3CP Little Rock School District JUL 8 jggg July 'll 1998 Ann Brown Desegregation Monitor Office of Desegregation Monitoring 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Ann: Thank you very much for your assistance and OfflCEOf that of your staff when we met about the equitable allocation of resources. This letter is to ask you or members of your staff to continue to meet with us as we prepare to meet the additional requirements associated with the equitable distribution of resources. We are scheduling a weekly meeting for each Thursday morning at 9:30. The meetings will start on August 6, 1998. Mr. Walker is being invited to attend, also. Thank you again for your assistance. Sincerely, Brady Gadberry Director of Labor Relations cc: Leslie Carnine Clay Fendley 810 West Markham Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201  (501)324-20004 pjl. Little Rock School District September 21,1998 RECS''^D SEP 2 2 1983 John Walker 1723 South Broadway Little Rock, AR 72206 CmCEOF DESEGREGATION MCNJTORIHQ Dear Mr. Walker\nThis letter is to remind you that you and/or members of your staff are invited to meet with the committee working on the equitable distribution of resources as we prepare to meet those plan requirements. We are continuing to meet each Thursday morning at 9:30 at the administration building. Ann Brown, Skip Marshall, and Gene Jones from ODM have been meeting with us on a regular basis and have been very helpful in helping us explore issues of equity. We have tried to examine models from other school districts that could give us some guidance in this project, and we have examined sample school board policies from the National School Boards Association. We have discovered that we are in relatively uncharted waters. I am enclosing some of the information that we have been using to try to gain some ideas about dealing with this complex issue. We are leaning toward the development of a matrix that shows how each school fares on a series of factors that have an impact on the equitable distribution of resources. However, please let me emphasize that nothing has been finalized. We have discussed a matrix and have begun the developmental process with a few initial drafts. We have not finalized the indicators that will appear on the matrix. Even after the matrix is developed, this is only an initial facet of the process. Before we can adequately decide what should be done to offset any imbalances that could have deleterious impact on students, we must thoroughly assess where we currently stand. The next phase will address the results of the assessment. If we find that we have problems that would necessitate a redistribution of resources or compensation of some sort to offset the inability to acquire resources, the next phase would address those issues. 810 West Markham Street Little RocR, Arkansas 72201  (501)324-2000The efforts of this group have been concentrated on those resources that are not covered by conunitments in other provisions of the plan, commitments are being and/or will be addressed, too. Obviously, those Thank you again for your assistance. Sincerely, Brady Gadberry Special Assistant to the Superintendent cc: Leslie Gamine Ann Brownd Clay FendleyI * *' received OCT 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT OTlKOF.- EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION I ' 7 P)' i\n- I LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT U.^ BY. Cl c CH I- A, L - PLAINTIFF V. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1,ET AL DEFENDANTS MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL INTERVENORS KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL INTERVENORS REPORT OF LRSDS ASSESSMENT OF THE EQUITABLE ALLOCATION OF RESOURCES Plaintiff Little Rock School District (LRSD) for its Report of LRSDs Assessment of the Equitable Allocation of Resources states: 1. LRSDs Revised Desegregation and Education Plan (Revised Plan) requires that LRSD assess the equitable allocation of resources in the district and report the results of this assessment within 180 days of the district courts approval of the Revised Plan. Revised Plan  2.9.2. The district court approved the Revised Plan on April 10, 1998. Docket No. 3144. Accordingly, LRSDs report of the assessment of the allocation of resources was to be completed on or before October 7, 1998. LRSD files this report in compliance with the Revised Plan. 2. LRSD assessed the allocation of its resources by way of a committee composed of district administrators and staff persons and representatives of the Office of DesegregationI Monitoring (ODM).* The committee first worked to determine what resources should be assessed. In this regard, the committee looked to available research in the area of school resources. Based on the available research and the committees collective education and experience, the committee decided to assess the equitable allocation of resources in the district by examination of ten factors: (1) pupil/teacher ratio\n(2) pupil/staflf ratio\n(3) square feet per pupil\n(4) percentage of staff with a masters degree and nine or more years of experience\n(5) the turnover rate of certified staff\n(6) school size\n(7) the computer/pupil ratio\n(8) per pupil expenditure\n(9) volunteer hours per pupil\nand, (10) donations per pupil. 3. Pupil/Teacher Ratio. Research indicates that smaller class sizes (15 or less to 1) may improve achievement of minority students. See, e.g.. Nye, B.A., Achilles, C.M., Zaharias, J.B., Fulton, B.D., Wallenhorst, M.P., Small Is Far Better, Paper presented at Mid-South Educ. Res. Assn, Knoxville, Tenn. (Nov. 13, 1992). The committee measured its pupil/teacher ratio using October 1, 1997 enrollment and certified staff at the school excluding administrators. counselors and librarians. The committee decided to exclude four-year-old classes, which have a smaller pupil/teacher ratio, because not all LRSD schools have four-year-old classes. 4. Pupil/Staff Ratio. The committee also wanted to include a measure which would recognize the importance of school administrators and other support staff at a school. In addition to certified teachers, this factor includes all other school based personnel with the exception of 1' The committee members were as follows: Dr. Victor Anderson, Associate Superintendent for Operations\nDr. Bonnie Lesley, Associate Superintendent for Instructional Services\nJunious Babbs, Associate Superintendent for Administrative Services\nSadie Mitchell, Associate Superintendent for School Services\nMark Milhollen, Manager of Financial Services\nBrady Gadberry, Special Assistant to the Superintendent\nDr. Ed Williams, Research Specialist and Statistician\nAnn Brown, Federal Desegregation Monitor\nSkip Marshall, Associate Federal Desegregation Monitor\nand. Gene Jones, Associate Federal Desegregation Monitor. 2federal and food service employees. As with teachers, a lower pupil/staF ratio is considered more favorable with the goal being equity in the staflBng formula. 5. Square Feet Per Pupil. The committee found that the school overcrowding can have a negative impact on student achievement. The Council of Education Facility Planning standards recommends 90 sq. ft. per pupil for elementary schools, 120 sq. ft. per pupil for middle schools and 145 sq. ft. per pupil for high schools. Using 3D Internationals 1995 Facilities Master Plan Study, the committee assessed schools based on the number of square feet per pupil with the assumption that the more space the better. Students in schools below the standard may not have adequate instructional space. 6. Percentage of staflT with a masters degree plus and nine. In a 1990 study. researchers found that Afiican-American student performance improved when teachers had strong language skills, nine or more years of experience and a masters degree or higher. Ferguson, R., Racial patterns in how school and teacher quality affect achievement and learning, In Challenge: A Journal of Research on Black Men (1990). Based on this study, the committee decided to measure the allocation of quality teachers by considering the percentage of teachers at a school with at least a masters degree plus nine years of experience. A higher percentage of being more favorable. 7. Turnover Rate of Certified Staff. Low turnover among certified staff plays an important role in building a strong and committed teaching staff and a strong base of parental and community support. High turnover, on the other hand, often results in an inexperienced teaching staff. See, e.g.. Newmann, F.M. and Wehlage, G.G., Successful School Restructuring (1995). The committee calculated the turnover rate by comparing the number of new teachers at a school 3( (both new hires and transfers) to the total number of teachers at a school. The schools were then ranked based on the percentage of new teachers with the assumption that low turnover was most favorable. 8. School size. Recent studies indicate that school size, like class size, may impact student achievement. See, e.g.. Howley, C.B., Synthesis of the effects of school and district size, What research says about achievement in small school and school districts, 41 Journal of Rural and Small Schools 2 (1989). Small schools promote better personal relationships between staff. students, parents and the community. Student morale tends to be higher because of a feeling of belonging. Teachers communicate better with each other and know students better allowing them to teach in a more individualized way. In assessing school size, the committee simply looked at the each schools enrollment and ranked the schools under the assumption that smaller was better. 9. Computer/Pupil Ratio. The committee developed the computer/pupil ratio as a proxy for assessing technological resources as provided for in the Revised Plan. LRSD has already begun implementation of its technology plan designed to bring the district in line with state and national technology standards. The ratio includes only network compatible computers in schools by September 22, 1998. A higher computer/student ratio was considered more favorable. 10. Per Pupil Expenditure. Pouring money into a school provides no guarantee of improving improved achievement. Even so, per pupil expenditure is perhaps the most commonly used factor for assessing the equitable allocation of resources. The committee calculated each schools per pupil expenditures based on the schools discretionary funds. This excluded expenditures for salaries, benefits, utilities and federal funding provided under Title I and for food 4service. To prevent outliers based on extraordinary expenditures, the committee used a three year moving average for expenditures. 11. Volunteer Hours Per Pupil. Volunteer hours per pupil indicate the degree of parental and community involvement at a school. Authorities recognize the importance of parental and community involvement in school success. See, e.e.. Graue, M.E., Weinstein, T., and Walberg, H.J., School Based Home Reinforcement Programs: A Quantitative Synthesis, 16 Journal Educ. Res. 351 (1983). Volunteer hours by school were obtained from the LRSD VIPS department. 12. Donations Per Pupil. Like volunteer hours, donations indicate the degree of parental and community involvement at a school. Donations may also fill in gaps left due to inadequate discretionary funding provided to a school by the district. Only donations accepted by the LRSD Board of Directors were considered. 13. Exhibit 1 contains the results of the committees assessment of each of these factors for each school in the district. 14. The committee also undertook to determine whether any relationship existed between the resources allocated to a school and the percentage of African-American students attending a school. The committee enlisted Dr. Ed Williams of LRSDs Planning, Research and Evaluation Department to determine if such a relationship existed. Using statistical measures. Dr. Williams combined the ten factors in order to assign each school a composite score. See Exhibit 2, Equitable Allocation Worksheet and Composite School Scores. Dr. Williams then compared each schools composite score to the schools percentage of Afiican-American students. See Exhibit 2, Correlations. Dr. Williams concluded that there was no significant 5relationship between the racial makeup of a school and the amount of resources allocated to the school. Respectfully Submitted, LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT FRIDAY, ELDREDGE \u0026amp; CLARK First Commercial Bldg., Suite 2000 400 West Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201-3493 (501)376-2011 BY\ne. istopher Heller (#81083) n C. Fendley, Jr. (#92182) 6CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I certify that a copy of the foregoing has been served on the following people by depositing a copy of same in the United States mail on this 7th day of October, 1998. Mr. John W. Walker JOHN W. WALKER, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Sam Jones Wright, Lindsey \u0026amp; Jennings 2200 Worthen Bank Bldg. 200 West Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Steve Jones JACK, LYON \u0026amp; JONES, P.A 425 W. Capitol, Suite 3400 Little Rock, AR 72201-3472 Mr. Richard Roachell Mr. Travis Creed Roachell Law Firm First Federal Plaza 401 West Capitol, Suite 504 Little Rock, AR 72201 Ms. Ann Brown - HAND DELIVERED Desegregation Monitor Heritage West Bldg., Suite 510 201 East Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Timothy G. Gauger Office of the Attorney General 323 Center Street 200 Tower Building Little Rock, AR 72201 7 CD LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT ALLOCATION OF RESOURCES 10-07-98 EQUITY INDICATORS 1. Pupil / Teacher Ratio Less Than 15 2. Pupil / Staff Ratio Less Than 9 3. Sq. Ft. / Pupil\nElem 90, Jr 120, Sr 145 4. 5. % of Staff w/ 9 yrs \u0026amp; Masters Degree Turnover Rate of Certified Staff 6. School Size 7. Computer / Pupil Ratio 8. Per Pupil Expenditure 9. Volunteer Hours / Pupil 10. Donations / Pupil X UI f H '\"Mtoi-jraNM ILITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT ALLOCATION OF RESOURCES 10-07-98 HIGHSCHOOLS ...... CENTRAL\" ....................... hall\" FAIR ...................................... McClellan \" ' '  ..... PARKVIEW TOTAL .................. .......... JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOLS......... DUNBAR  ................... FOREST HEIGHTS PULASKI HEIGHTS SOUTHWEST HENDERSON'\"........................ CLOVERDALE MABELVALE - . - MANN fOTAL .......  ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS BALE - ..... BRADY ............ BADGETT ....................................... McDermott baseline........................... FAIR park .............. forest PARK ...................... CHICOT .................. WESTERN HILLS ............. P/K K 34 7 0 0 35 is 31 35 36 35 41 0 OCTOBER 1,1997 ENROLLMENT 1-12 TOT TOT-P/K BL WH OTH TOT % BL % WH % OTH TOTAL F.T.E. TEACH F.T.E. PUP-P/K I STAFF PUP-P/K /teach 1821 783 '2935 911 '5207 771 648 767 510 72^ 622 506 858 5406 1855 \"790 '7F\u0026gt;1 \"935 '911 5248 1855 790 757 \"935 911 5248 1101 '561 612 790 464 3528 705 179 137 49 50 8 ' 121 \"24 403 1545 44 175 1855 '790 757 935 911 5248 59% 71% 81% 84% 51% 67% 38% 23% 18% 13% 44% 29% 3% 6% i% '3% 5% 3% 147.94 94.90 '82.50' '98.10 89.20 512.64 100.14 62.70 53.20 65.90 59.40 341.34 12.54 8.32 9.18 ' 9.53 10.21 10.24 18.52 12.60 14.23 14.19 15 34 15.37 JEFFERSON CLOVERDALE DODD\" MEADOWCLIFF KING GEYER SPRINGS 36 I 71 I 35 51 \"56 39' 54 54 \"36 57 '59 '39 58 72 24 \"40 92 40 276 298 '163 423 2234 176 '373 443 76 55 04 00 92 95 241 771 648 '767 5i\"6 \"'724\" 622 506 '858 5406 648 \"'767 '510 724 622 '506 858 5406 442 \"452 437 426 624 552 380 \"446 759 282 178 315 ....65 .....83 36 119 '375 1453 47 18 15 \"l9 17 34 7 37 194 771 648 \"'767 ''510 724 622 506 858 5406 84% 86% 89% 75% '52% 70/ 57% 27% '41% 13% 11% 6% 24% '44% 27% 6% 3% 2% 4% 2% 15% 'l% '4% 4% 70.20 73.90 \"76.80 60.00 '76.90 63.90 61.30 81.90 564.90 48.80 51.30 56.30 42.40 '53.30 44.80 ''41.90 58.30 397.10 .10.98 8.77 9.99 8.50 9.41 9.73 8.25 10.48 9.57 15.80 12.63 13.62 12.03 13.58 13.88 12.08 14.72 13.61 362 372 233 '477 323 248 430 537 315 513 512 224 332 658 316 '354 \"202 \"477 288 212 '430 \"502 '315 513 476 224 332 587 281 265 235 214 267 188 205 370 222 227 469 145 263 354 237 71 \"\"94 ..19 181 \" 38 50 219 \"121 91 279 30 74 57 279 66 26 43 23 18 10 6 46 2 7 13 5 12 25 13 362 372 233 aH 323 248 430 537 315 513 512 224 332 658 316 73% \"63% 92% 57% 83% 76% 48% 69% 70% 44% 92% 65% 79% 54% 75% 20% 25% 8% 38% \"12% 20% 51% 23% 29% 54% 6% 33% 17% I 42% I 21%! 7% i2% \"6% 5% 6% 4'% 1% \"9% 1% 1% 3% 2% 4% 4% 4% I '2:20 36.2_O '28.30 43.30 36.90 27.00 38.00 59.'2'0 29.30 44.00 41.10 30.66 32.60 70.22 34.00 23.30 20.30 15.30 26.90 18 70 13.90 23.00 29.40 17.10 27.10 24.30 17.30 18.50 40.00 16.80 7.75 9 78 7.14 11.02 '7.80 ' 7.85 11.32 8.48 10.75 11.66 11.58 7.47 10.18 8.36 8.26 14.03 \"17.44 13.20 17.73 15.40 15.25 18.70 17.07 18.42 18.93 19.59 12.95 17^95 14.68 16.73. l'ttle rock school district allocation of resources 10-07-90 PULASKI HEIGHTS ROMINE WASHINGTON WILSON .................. WOODRUFF MABELVALE TERRY FULBRIGHT OTTER CREEK WAKEFIELD WATSON franklin GARLAND MITCHELL ROCKEFELLER RIGHTSELL \" ' BOOKER CARVER GIBBS ........................ WILLIAMS TOTAL GRAND TOTAL ........ P/K 36 53 18 '34 '1'6 36 12 18 18 53 18 704 704 K 40 7'62 '83 ' \"54 46 54 7'5 69 '36 \"52 \" 73 ' \"34 ...'37 53 '39 '76 39 60 \u0026lt;884 OCTOBER 1,1997 ENROLLMENT 1-12 424 230 524 '290 '210 337 \"436 426 '292 '321 '384 315 j87 '299 TOT 464 7328 7660 3'62 284 192 _\"'521 536  \"419 11583 407 '\"511 495 ....328 \"'373 493 271 '_^'242 '465 '249 ''597 ' 596 '311 479 14171 TOT-P/K 464 292 \"607 344 ....... 250 7 391 .......5'11 495 ^328 373 Z_^^57  392 253 '224 352 -1231 597 .....' 596 ' .......3i'l ........479 '13467 BL 254 206 7352 237 201 299 235 240  151 322 44'1 7427 253 223 \"231 234 300 \"312 161 240 9335 WH 193 '213 \"53 75 92 243 246 167 32  4 0  24  3 ......9 138 ' 9 7261 259 'Y33 214 4151 OTH 17 ' 44 95 12 8 16 33 9 10 19  12 ...13 15 io 30 6 28 25 17 ' 17 685 TOT 464 ' 328 660 362 .....284 407 \"\"511 495 328 373 ' 493 464 \"271 \"242 405 249 ....597 596 311 479 14171 % BL 55% 63% '53% 82% 71% ' 73% 46% 48% 46% 86% 89% 92% 93% 92% 59% 94% 52% 52% 52% 52% 66% % WH 42% '24% '32% 7 15% '26% \"23% \"'48% ' 50% 51% '79% '8% \"5% \"4% \"34% '4% 44% 43% 43%  45% '29%  % OTH 4% __i3% 14% \"3% 3% 4% 6% 2/o 3% 5% 2% 3% 6% 4% 7% 2% 5% 4% 5% 4% 5% 1925 221'96 24825 _^21 16622 7149 1054 24825 67% 29% 4% TOTAL F.T.E. 39.20 39.10 TEACH F.T.E. PUP-P/K / \"oo.io  38.30 7' 32.40 .......40.60 ''47:26 51.90 30.10 7 36:37 4'3.75 73.90 .....47.30 44.20 79.90 39.50 63.70 63.90 40.30 52.30 1,576.34' 2653.88 22.90 23.00 46.60 23.10 17.80 7'23.90 28.20 28.80 16.60 20.50 '25.90 36.50 21.80 21.90 32.90 21.00 44.50 39.20 25.30 31.10 883.40 STAFF 11.84 7.A7 7.66 8.98 '7.72 9:63 10.83 9.54 .10.90 10.26 10.45 '5.30 '5.35 \"5.07 4.41 5.85 9.37 9.33 7.72 9.16 8.54 PUP-P/K /TEACH 20.26  12.70 13.03 14.89 14.04 16.36 18.12 17.19 19.76 18.20 17.64 10.74 11 61 10.23 10.70 11.00 13.42 15.20 12.29 15.40 15 24 1621.04 9.09 14.07 II ... L'TJLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT ALLOCATION OF RESOURCES . _ 10-07-90 ar'ea high schools-------- CENTRAL ---- ------------ haLl 7------------- FAIR  _ mcclella'n 7 PARKVfEW TOTAL ------------------------ Junior high'schools DUNBAR............. forest HEI'g'HTS  --------- PULASki hei'ghts ^UTHWEST HENDERSON cl_overdaLe_'..... mabeLvale_ MANN ...-------------- enroll 10-1-97 SQUARE footage SITE ACREAGE SQ FT/ ENROLL 1,055 '790 \"'7'57' ...935 ...911 5'240 266,023 152,346..... 132,266  129,606 7166,477  047,000  16.50 1^31.16 50.00 '\"2'9.'6'6 36.06 157.26 _ 143.04 '7 192764 _717'4.75\" 102.7'7 ''i6\"i740 ...... ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS bale --------------- BRADY'' ... BADGETT -------------------- McDERMotf baseline FqRjST_PARk CHICOT.......... wester'n'hills JEFFERSON'................................. CLOVERDALE bODb ------------------------- MEADOWCLiFF Ki^7..... ............. geye\u0026gt;'spr'ings PLiLAS'ki'H'EJGHTS .......... ROMINE.................. 77} '640 767 510 7 724 ' 622 \"566 050 '5,4O6 99.397 70,207 73,216 02,968 '' ld3.212* 01,097 '6'2,'63'6 113,013 606,020 5.00 rjs.oo 4.00 \"moo' ''4'6.'36\" 7 ^66 12.66 '12.29 1'43.65 120.92_ iO0'4Y '95'46 'l'6p'6_ '142756 131.67 122.60 131.72 '126.90 \"362 ~~'372 233  '^A77 ' 32'3  7'246   436  753'7' 315 '7' 513 ' 5'1'2 224 7332 '7650  '316  \"' 464 '' 320 33,626 7735.259 ' 23,404... 7'40.020 L30.455 ' 20,06'7  731,914 '\" ' 59,607 ' 7'10,911  _ 73 346  33,263 ' 46,712 736,931  75,000 ' 41,7'66 50,252 10.00 '6?26 'l'6?00 -'19 2.10 JO.'40 14.66 ^2^00 0.00 5.56 9.6O 4.56 4.'36 3'.o6 92.09  9747 16045 100^67 42.314 I 20.00 ___156.21 _ iio-^0 3'4.64 12 o^lpo -.._1 34.97 _200?54 ~ Hi.24 _ 1^3796 7 '13Z2'2 \"125.54 129761LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 'ALLOCATION OF RESOURCES 10-07-90 ENROLL WASHINGTON..... VyiLSON _ ..... WbobRUFF mabelvale\"' terry'^ FULBRIGHT ....... OTTER CREEK WAKEFIELD... ... WATSON franklin\"\"...... g'arland MitCHELL*-\" RbckEFELTER\"....' rightse'll ..... BookER.... CARVER ....... ' GIBBS.......................... WILLIAMS........... total ....... JO-1-97 \" 660 2^ 362 204 407 .......511 ...495 ' 320 373 493 .....464 -271 ~ 242 465 249 .....597 596 311 479 1'4 J 71 SQUARE FOOTAGE 09,000 37,075 30,66'0 55,568 .... .. I .^'O92 36,551 37,395 5'3,64'6 68,500 38,632 39,200 64,561 37,630 - ... ? 24,530 61,695 37,237 47,200 1.630,565 site\"' acreage' \" 5.96 zi'o 16.00  7 15.66 ' 13 00 8.90 y 2 ' ~ 0.20 '  \"IZ26 1060 22.7O  y 4.20 ........\"6.30 2.10 13 00 .. 1200 5.00  15.00 305'90 SQ FT/ 'enroll  i3'^06 72 102.42 2^ 133.00 2 J 0 ^5 3 00.67 \"'.135714 .7 iii 'i' ~_1O-25 109722  147.63 2142'.55_  lei.'g'o 7i 59^4'1  151'12 124.04 103.52 119.73 9054 '115^06 GRAND total 24,825 3,163,601 606.75 127.44 IHIGH SCHOOLS ...... CENTRAL...... ...... f'^r McClellan PARKVIEW total...................... JUNIOR 'HIGH SCHOOLS DUNBAR.......... forest'heTghts PULASKI'HEIGHTS....... southwest\" HENDERSON 2l?ver'dale ... MABELVALE MANN' ...... -T.P.'iAL ELEM EN'TA'rY'schools BALE b'rad'y BADGETT .... McDermott ba'selii^e fair park Fbj^ESf PARK ..' CHICOT......... weste'rn'hilTs JEFFl'RSbN' CLOVERDALE Do'bb............... ............. -----little rock school district  . ------Z^LLOCATION b'F RESOURCES  ------------------ 10-07-98 -------- 'enroll YO-1-^7\"' ...masters +'9 'teach 'F.tyE\n790' \"~757\" % 935 '\"911 \"5,'248' \"77? 64^- 707 ' 5'10 724 ...627 \"506 858 5\n4d6 I 362 2. 372 2'33 477 _ \"37\" J^a' 430 '\"315 51'3 \"224 ''512' 56 32 '^'30 '~29 '35 102 23 \" 23   J 22  '19 220 ' \"14 J \"id \"'30  \"16'4  ' 14 J 8 '9 'Ti 10 '11 14 'io 20 13 9 __l'07'i4 '66\n7d' \"2\"5'7.2j '7d\\'9O '365.34 52.80 54.30 '59.30 474'0 ''57.3 d 44.90' \"6Z3'0 424.10 25.30 '2Z30 '29.40 \"15.90 '25.dd 31.90 J9.'ld' 29.'6d' 27od 197o 1 -12% \" 41% '\"55% 50% 44% \"'47/\n7'7% 42% \"_''\"35% 2'9% ^24 8% ' 39% 2'55% ~07% ' '46%  SdJ/o '\"63/o '44% '44'% \"72% 68'% 49% \"47%I -___little rock school district ___....ALTOpATION OF RESOURCES....... ___________ 10-07-98 ............. _ ENROLL  ^masters + 9  TEACH MEADOWCLIFF\"... KING .---------------..  GEYER springs PULASKI HEIGHTS ROMINE -- WASHINGTON WILSON.....--------......... WOODRUFF MABELVALE terry FULBRrGHT ottercreek WAKEFIELD-----.......... WATSON franklin -- garland  -...- mitchell' R^_kef|ll|r rightsell BOOKER CARVER gib^s ---......... \\MLUAli^' TOTAL __grand TOTAL 10-1-97 332 658 316  464 328 eeo  362 284 467 ^sli 495 328  373   493'  ...464 _ 271  2 4 2  _2~'465   249  597* 596 2_'3il  479 147171 24.825 % 11 17 16 12 10 17 19 6 6 9 15 11 16 11 16 4 6 10 _ 23 18 l 1 2i 426 772 F.T.E. _2O75O' 43.00 _J878O 25.46  25.00 50.10 25.10 19780 25.90 30770 31.30 1860 \"22756 28740 38.50 2380 5'4% j40% ' 53% T7%  \"40% '34% 276% \" 36% '223%  29% 2223.90   342790  2^3.66 47756  ...42776  48% ....59%  71% ...39%  26% 2' 1'7%  25% 29% '39% 24'8%  42% -?,7-36  40% 33.50 962\n86 1,752.24 63% 44% 44%1997-98 SCHOOL CENTRAL HAL^ PARKVIEW ^ A. FaTr McClellan I .yTTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT ____OF RESOURCES __________ 10-67-98 .......\" ZE zrzEziz. --------jo.?dooas a % of total ... HENDERSON MANN .... d'unbar ....... rj??' PUEHGT^jr. SOUTHWEST mabelvaleJR. JR.' badcett ^^E^Z baseljne~ BRADY c^ver\" CHICOT ^lom^Rdale DODD ......... NEW Zl? jZ 7~ 10 M' 4 9 Zl 6 g' 'd' ~2 'd' 5? 4 \"e '9 5 2 5 T 2 d TOTAL 108 'ed 73 259 iT 382 58 66 5Z. 59 J 4 \"so\" 440 21 '28 '23 49 25 44 39\"' 23 '20 % \"15% 18% 10% 12% 14% 14% 7% '14% 16% \"Td%  15% ''l'4% 'ji% 14% 12% 19% 21%  '39% \" io%  \"8% 'm  ' 8%  9%  '0% ......little ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT ... allocation OF RESOURCES ' '\"16-07-90 1997-98  Teachers now to school a i:z' as a \u0026gt; of total fair park FOREST PARK FRANKLIN-........ Fulbright\" GARLAND G. SPRINGS GIBBS.............. KING............................ Jefferson'....... mabelvale MCDERMOTT .. MEAbowCLIFF mtchell .. otter CREEiT.... PUL. heights' .... rightsell ?P.77epeller ' ' ROMINE ..... terry .. WAKEFIELD WASHINGTON wa'tson ... wiTlLUs' WILUAMS wilso'n wdODRUpr'......... 4 -2  '5 4 ....1 \"4 2 3 0 .... '3 \"'3 -1 3 '\"3 Ji '''o~ 4 ... \"e 122 20 739 41 .7731 25\" ..... 23 20 45 . 33' 7 ~29 73 ....... 25 ' 77 26 \"23\" ..7 20 ' 24 -7739 * 21  32  27' 7'32' Z -. 35 ' 23' .....2^' ' ios'f 20% '5% \"......5% ......6% 20% \"\" 17% 4% 79% ........9% 7% \"'15% \"71'2% 31% \"\"4% 11% 13% ' '18% '14% \"6% \"'J1%  1% 13% 0% ..11% ' 4% '21% ' 12%.........SCHOOL DISTRICT ' ...._..ALLOCATIO'N of RESOURCiES ' HIGH SCHOOLS ........ CENTRAj. HALL 2. ........ ^^\"^1 1 McclelLan PARKVIEW......... total\" JUNIOR HIGH 'school^ DUNBAR forest HEiGHTS PULAS^kl HEIGHTS SOUTHWEST HENDERSON CLOVERDALE.......... mabeLvale ... MANN.............. ............... fOTAL....... en'rolL'  10-1-97 1,855 '790 P/K STUDENTS 757  _ _935 91 i 57248 elementary schools BALE.... BRADY ...... BADGETT ~2 McDermott ^aseline FAIR PARK.......... FORES'f PAI^k....... CHICOT........................... WESTERN HILLS......\" JEFFERSON CLOVERDALE ' DODD 10-07-98 ' adjusted' ''16-1 enrol'l  NETWORi^BLE  COMPUTERS.. PER/ 2 a'dj pupTl ' 1,855 _ 266 1 1\"  935\" 2\" gii 57248 75  ....2 56 2 1\"J77 99  578 2 6 03^' _676949 _0.296_3  071087 ....67iioi - 64^8 5^i6 '724 ''\"622 '566 'sse 5,406 11\\ ''648 767' \"516  7^24' 622 566' \"858 5,406 27 253 30 21 174 -22  35 414\" o.dsso'\" 6.0818 26-639i\" .. 6^0529 \"6.2463 26.0354 0.0692' _6\\O536' ^.oyeT ___362 372 233 2 47r\" 323 \" 35 is 'sT __2482 ~ 430 2 2_~537  1 513 2. 51'2 2~ 224 35 36 35 36 _ 221 -324 ' 2_2O2..... - ^2 288'  2 212 2'436 56'2 2 _ \"3i25' - '5l3' ' \" 47'6\" ' 224 33 \"6.1669 - 3 2 12  13  - -J 2 126 ' 139 \"  671162 2 0\"6l49j  2676252 6.6164  2 6.6047  6.646'5   672769 3i a6984 24 46 13 _O.'6468  0.0040'  0^0580 '........little rock school district .....allocation of resources *\" ENROLL  10-07-98 P/K MEADOWCLIFF KING ...............  GEYER SPRINGS ' '  PULASKI HEIGHTS....... ROMINE............... WASHINGTON ....... WILSON ...... .......... WOODRUFF MABELVALE TERRY ......... FULBRIGHT....... OTTER CREEK ....\" WAKEFIELD' ............ WATSON..... F_RAN'kLl'N7\"..... GARLAND ......... MITCHELL  ROCKEFELLER........' RIGHTSELL BOOKER T carver ' GIBBS'..... ................. WILLIAMS 2to't'al ........ ...... 22i 2ZZ. -Z^^NiyTOTAL ------------- _ _ fstUDENTS' T ADJUSfED _ 332 72 2858 316  7464* \"328  7 660 ' 7362  284  2 7467'  2 511  \"2'4os  \" '328'' 22 373'  _ 2?93'  2J84  y 271...... .....242 7 19.6 2'72'19 27597 7 596  _ 311 ' _ 3_9 '14,171' 24,825 JiEri/VdR'KABLE ' per/ - ----------------------rCR/ r-y?.?LL ___computers ADJ PUPir 71 35 36 53 '18 34 ie 36 \"ll \"\u0026lt;8 ' J 8  18   704* ....704 332 7 '587 _Z 26'l' 464 7 292 \"607  \"3\"44 2 \"25'6' ' ..391  .....'511  .....'495 '2_ 828 373   457 ' ' 392  7 \"253' ' 224 7 352 \" '231 \"'597 23'96  311' - 2 13'467 4 7' 2  23 ' .... 37  7  ' 12  .......''35  ..........5  .......38 2 '10 15 ' 7..5 3 67 61 ' 2 2 9 ' 15 7287 7 28 ' -3 2 2 \"34 \"'81... 2..43..... 1,048 _ 0.0120 6.0034  6.0'019 6.'67'97 0.0411 27o O5'77  7 6.0930\" \" o\"o2o6'  \"0.0972 276.6'196  \"2 2 6 0363  2_ 6 015'2 \" \" 0.0080' 2276 1^66 ' ' 0.1556 0.0356 0.0670 '6 2472 \"\"6.1212   '267673'7' \" 6.0576\" ' 7 6 2\"6\"O5 2 \"6.0898 '0.0778 \"24J2Y 2,040 0.0846 \".....LITT'-E rock school district -.-'^.kLOCATION OF RESOURCES.......... ' \"16-67-90........................ enroll Ei area high schools CENTRAL........ ........ HALL ......... FAIR McClellan .......... PARKVIEW total\" '  \" ~... id-i-'97 . JENROLL average ' 10-1-96 i6-i-95 expense '''97-90 JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOLS ~ '~ DUNBAR forest heights.......\" PULASKI HEIGHTS SOUTHWEST   .... \" HENDERSON  ............ CLOVERDALE mabelvale ........ MANN .................- TOTAL ......- ELEMENTARY'sCHbOLS  bale'2' ..................... BRADY  ...... BADGETT ----------- McDermott baseline :  FAIR park .............. forest PARK..................... CHICOT WESTERN HILLS\" ..... JEFFERSON ...... CLOVERDALE . ' *  DODD....................................... MEADOWCLIFF.... KING  ' ' ----------------- GEYER SPRINGS^ ....~ ' PULASKI HEIGHTS \".............. '\"1755 2 '\" 790 ....... ' 935 ' - ^11 5748 :__7712 _ 640 _ 3^67 510 ' '724 2 622 2566 ^Joso' 5.466' ~~ 36f __372 233 Aii ' 323 __2'I8' _ 430 537 315' 51'3 512 224 '33'r '6'5'8' ''3'16' '464 1777  023 ' 814... 926 _928' \" _9'05 964 ~ 1.741 '5.2'19'\"' 775  055 5,103 732  630 ' 759 705 594  \" 741 \"' ____639 _ - Jp o 054  5,^06 781 61'2   792  \"\"669 ' 491 847 expe'nse '96-97 \"'' expense ' ....95'-'96 \" avgerage PER PUPIL ' ... 847  '\"825 \" '\"'922 002 '5,21'7 7'59'  '\"679' 778' 572' ' \"752 623 408.... 853' .. -9.i23 ' \"5^565' \" 375 3712 _ \" 219 ' '\"439  - 1295 ' .... 2 '2 497 2 566 ' J42 '\" _8Z3 Z  622  'J347 ' 394 216 ' 407 11?'35.84  ' i 03,975.33 41,905 00 46,432.63 '52,900.12' ' i03?307.37 43,607,37 _ 46,'352.94 52,090.65 __1^1\n82477 2 75.585.60' 2 235.666^28 82?l216.24 567.946'26' 56,966.09 55.462.41' 47.079.25 47,643.65 li?j84.63 2i i i'.'468.23 -..V8j215J9 23i.16'9?5i ' 49\u0026lt;811.54 57.409.'34'' 54d,668?0i . 59.34 55.58 \"57.73 120.94 262.20 '103.64 4'5'4 \"2 2'76 2 -335  99^ _ 453 2531 2 ' 3io '406  2361 ' 379  \" 221 ' '484' ' '317 22258 438'  Z-5'2 - 3^ \"sor \" ?52 _J88'  '_312 441 '666^\u0026lt;nn 1- 87.409.34 2\"'5671975 4i'F6Ti? -- --- ---81976 \"36797:30  ..jOIJI _ 30.302.90 41.448.20 27.59373 99.000.60 27.060.92 33.266.51 '32.'611.43 03.409.06 23.210.63 1^082.63 ....25,72i\n42 236.746.63 28O.334.54' _553.692J7 582.185.6'2' 75.11'4.26' 23728.'47 ~ 26'.748.49 \" 186.065?6O ' 484,456'.6'7' -..?'.9'i'i.:9i 28.666 59'' U 27.378.97 25.556.'59 26.583.55 1'^-'9^^-74 16.544'22 33.611.51 29?i26.'53 .23.98O?o6 23.700.96\" __^.!l99.i3 ......21.783.16' _?O76977 96.22873 '2i75l'?56 23.541.58 32.236.53' '46.756.79 ..... 3f.i 57.22 05.068.00 24.672.01 26.85'6.65' ZZ237''295.59......' 539.911.39 ' ' \"\"''27.'676?2'5' 2^!?91:72_.. 26.277?6g 14420.27 ______________15.023741 j_____297'69702........ 247717.56.... .?.2.'550.5'6 21.158.93........... -??..583.6i 21226730.35 '' ' 88'62O.95 54.693.37....... ................... 20.990.08..........2ii07 25....... -8'l9?_?-9* ___26.416.39 33J28.'O3 35.366.67 36.637.67 i5.i59\nio \"  20,413.94 22,919.38 29'667.66 14.72^8'9 31,3'75'15 33,860.27 16,765.31 .-^9./?9O.48 40,24 3.05' --2^299^99^ 22,'59'3.16 '24.6'4'391  36529.64 ''27.7'79.'66 '22722.96 \"37,463.1'1....... 3'8,9\"85.81 26.795.54 '''26.466?i7' 24.350^67 25.900.89 74.56 '54.05 52.40 54.47 114.14 39.58 54.98 78.19 90.00 '74.93 69.33 60.07 '60.43 \"77.09 '02.12 59.90 107.60 \" Q7.22 6279 69.35 66.10 61.34 64.50 04.64 50.69... .yPLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT ___allocation OF RESOURCES 10-07-98 ROMINE ........ WASHINGTON WILSON\" WOODRUFF.............. MABELVALE ' . TERRY ..................... FULBRIGHT OTTER\"creek WAKEFIELD 7.... WATSON\" franklin\" garland........... MITCHELL.................... rockefeller....... righ\"tse\"lL\" ........ BOOKER...................... CARVER 7.......... GIBBS\" ..................... WILLIAMS\" total 'grand TOTA'l' '  ' 1'6-1-97' \" ___72. \"7_^660 \"' 362\" ENROLL _______ ENROLL A'VER'AG'E ' '\"' 10-1-96 16\" 1-95\"  ....-...... ' 284\" '*07 511 ''\"495 '7'328 ' ' 373' I' J93' ''_46'4 '7 271' 7242 /7 ^05 Z^-ig 597  596 LjJl 479\"' 'I4:'l7'i' 304 708 '362 268 '418 515 566 302 '656 '304 254 ' ' 24:625 - ' expense '- - 310 _' ' 4'36 479\"  J 32 ' ill  \" 262 7___436 ' 246 LJL 663 SCM 7 \"50'i ' '14,281 ~ \"24,986 460 \"'536 51'8 ' \"3'39 429 444 431 '2'55 \"2'57 ' 406 219 604 629 3'67' '508 '14,0'76' ___311 '6\"75' \"' \"369 '269 \"7'426 '5'21.... ''2'\"56\"4' 1-326 ' 413 ' __A12 4'49\" ' '\" '2'6'0 \"254 ' _ ^16 27 230  301 _ 7_ 310 ' 7_ \"\"'310 ... \" '496  ....1'4.174 24,876\" ' 24','B96  97-98 96-97 57.735^89 54':492':7'7' 69,699.60' __20,057.11 724:163.46 72 27,444.64 20,234.26 \" \" 31,602.51 '\"21:533.79 65,554.46 ''22,754.90  2'4',449:55 27'.'62O.1B 32,518 83' 33,937:51 20,296.58 -.-23.43^06 ' 26,16i?i 5 \"expens'e_ 95-96 average\" ...75,i 39.08 62,455\"91 52,835.39 23,699.36 ''\"20,399?2'3  36:441'.'73' '28:605.10 62,496.51 \"22,176:44 '23,01'6.75 30,502.18 29,786.06 -?3'632.57 31,417.53 2^635.10 23'16474'6' 21,488.49 '24,234.20 ---------- . ------ .- 33.049.80____40,511:8'5' \" \"' a^OOtOO.......\"\"36 547\"05 -.1?2J29^27 2iO7\n5627o '\"\"Tn^flB \"71,392.25 \" 7 7'0.763.37 249,49 too \"66,506.80 207,109.51 ..... - ----- -  vr 59,552.27 '_ ''6'5,810'97\" .?5.143.44 7^72298' ....71^906.60 '197.4'1'5.82' 58,'986.35 121.783.15 -t3?'193/87 2 170'340.05' 132,869:5'2 7.13'3,'799'.95 2,024,546.36 3,1'99','8B5767 69,936.75 '127,6'62.3'2 1.786^95.39 2,877J 26.67 217,976.65 ''221'627.82 58,318.66 7\" 53,065.76 7121:215.60' 5'o','746:24  ...\"91,025739 1:599 376.15 61.270.58 \"7127.586.14 -J.:* 326:53 '91.182 17 7'117.742.55 1.803.639.30 AVGERAGE PER PUPIL' 7 200:61 ,92.63 30.03 \"05.65 71.21 57.21 62.30 7_ '65.90 '\"50.73 \"77.43 '7 252.18 __ 245.87 2 283.47 .1 333.19 257.44 212.17 .7 243.28 7 294.14 237.38 127.25 2,575,644.36 '2.M4 2i'B'7n 115.85 II little rock school district ALLOCATION OF RESOURCES HIGH SCHOOLS CENTRAL HALL FAIR McClellan PARKVIEW TOTAL ......... 10-07-98 ENROLL 10-1-97 SERVICE HOURS HOURS/ ENROLL ' 1,855 790 757 935 911 5,248 6,743.75 1,476?6o 4,692.50 4,533.50 \" },277.75 10,723.50 JUNIOR HIGH'sCHOOLS DUNBAR ............ forest HEIGHTS..............' PULASKI HEIGHTS ..........\" SOUTHWEST ........................ HENDERSON ''..............  CLOVERDALE MABELVALE..... ~ MANN .................. total ............... ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS BALE............................................ BRADY............ ....- BADGETT ............' \" McDermott\" ........  baseline\"......... FAIRPARK ------------------ FOREST PA'rk ......''....... CHICOT ....... WESTERN hIlLS JEFFERSON cLoverdale ....... DODD'........... ............. MEADOWCLIFF ........ KING................. ......................... 77} _648 7Q7 510 ' 724 622 506 058 5,406 3,041.00 1,004.50 4.15'7'60 3 400.25 i,'016.25 1,019.00 19,285.00 3O,89TOO 3.64 '1.0'7 \"670 '4.85 1.40 3.57 4.98 1.67 5.42 6?96' iJo 2.01 22.48 5.71 362 372 ? 233 A77 '323 240 430 537 315 513 512 224 332 650 2,127.50 833.00 134.25 2'869.50 3,832.50 1,342.50 6,404.50 1,339.75 '1'77375 2,806.75 '291.50 1,276^00 475.50 8,00025 5.88 2.24 0.58 6.02 11.87 5.41 \"l\u0026lt;89 2'.'49 5.63 5.47 0.57 570 1'43 12.17LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT ALLOCATION OF RESOURCES GEYER SPRINGS PULASKI HEIGHTS  ROMINE WASHINGTON \" WILSON .................... woodruff MABELVALE ........... TERRY FULBRIGHT otter creek WAKEFIELD ................. WATSON FRANkUN garland '\"  .... MITCHELL ROCKEFELLER \" RIGHTSELL........... ' BOOKER CARVER.......................... GIBBS.................................. WHJJAMS ............ TOTAL ....... 10-07-90 ENROLL 10-1-97 316 464 320 \"660 362 204 \u0026lt;107 611 '65 320 \"......... 373 ..............493   464 ......271 242 '05 249 597 596 311 ........... 479 ......\"14.171 SERVICE HOURS 5,713.75 3,126.25 4,110.50 '2,701.75 ....... 121.50 i, 114.75 116.00 5,401.00 7,606.25 4,043.25 449.75 2,267.5'd \u0026lt;024.75 1,327.75 1,013.75 7,286.00 \"5,101.25 3,644.50 19,087.75 17,374 50 '9,329.75 137,16550 HOURS/ ENROLL ' 16.00 674 \u0026lt;2.56 _ '09 '_0.34 \"\u0026lt;93 0.29 10.73 15.37 14.77 21 4.60 \"\u0026lt;93 4.90 4.19 17.99 20.49 6.10 32.03 55.07 19?10 9.60 GRAND TOTAL 24,025 106,780.00 7.52 II .....little rock school district ALLOCATION OF RESOURCES HIGH SCHOOLS ..... CENTRAL .......... HALL\"\"'............................................ FAIR.........-----.............................. McClellan ........ PARKVIEW'-------.................. total\".......... ..... JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOLS DUNBAR   ..... forest HEIGHTS \" pula'ski heights^ SOUTHWEST ....... HENDERSON\"..-...................... CLOVERDALE\" ............... mabeLvaLe .... MANN \"....... -........ TOTAL ......... -.... elementary scHdoLs BALE\"' 2 ............. ....... BRADY BADGETT.... ....... m^ermott baseline.. ......... FAIR PARK FOREST PARK .....' CHicbt............................................... WESTERN HILLS ................. jeffe'rson ...-..... CLOVERDALE .......---- DODD ........... -...... 10-07-98 enroll\"\" 16-1-97  1,855 ....790 757 \" \" 935 \"\"\"911 5,248 771 648 767 510 724 _ 622 \"506 858 5,406 '\"'362 7372' \" '233 ' J 323 \" 248 430 \"537 \"315.. \"513 512 '224 donations 8,980.00 5,343.00 900.00 400.00 3,45000 19 073^00 A866.06 ' \"\"6O'.66\" 1,100.00 915.00 750.00 10,691.00 3,375.06 3,233.88 12,975.94 1,556.00 25O\no6 10,742.04 2,135^42 325.00 _ PER 'pupil 4.84 676 i.\"l'9 0.43 3.79 \"3.63 \"iofe\" \"\"6J2\" ...1.52 i.8i 0.87 1.98 9.32 869 27.20 J4.86\" i.oi 24?98 3.98\" 0.63I LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT ALLOCATION OF RESOURCES _____ 10-07-98 MEADOWCLIFF ............ KING ........... GEYER SPRINGS .......... PULASKI HEIGHTS......... ROMINE .............  WASHINGTON'....... WI^ON ................. ............ MABELVALE'.... ....... terry\"'.. FULBRIGH't ............... OTTER CREEK ....... WAKEFIELD...... WATSON .....----- fr'anklin ...... garland .......... MITCHELL ROC'keFELLER............ RIGHTSELL BOOKER carver gIbbs wil'lIams 'total grand tot al ENROLL  10-1-97 332 658 ....316 '64 328  ...... 660 362 284 407 '\"'5'il 495 ...........328 '373  '.....493 .......''464 271 242 - ZL_ ?65 249 ''' '259'7 '596 ZZ 511 _'179 '14,1'71 24,825 DONATIONS 4,400.00 150.00 1,686.94 3,377.16' 3,135^05 ' \"77O'.6o 1,'29\u0026lt;.6o 2'395.00 ... 55.00 3?46o.6o 3,285.60'' 2 1,'255'/66...... 7,600.00 100'50 13,066.00 1,356.00 8408.00 '  506.00 9O.745.'93 120,509.93 PER PUPIL \u0026lt;3.25 0-23 7'..5.34 1...'7.28 ........9.56 '\u0026lt;17 3.57 5.88 0.11 10.37  a.'a'i '^2.'55 16.38 6.37 '53?72  3^3 33.77 1.61 6.40 4.85. I 1. PupiVTeacher Ratio Equitable Allocation Worksheet 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 (10.71) (11.54) (12.97) (15.5) (17.67) (18.72) (19.68) 2. Pupil/Staff Ratio 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 (5.17) (5.80) (7.76) (9.25) (10.40) (11.34) (11.76) 3. Square Feet per Pupil 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 (69.13) (88.29) (101.11) (125.19) (142.56) (163.89) (188.29) 4. Percent of Staff with a Masters Degree, plus, Nine Years of Experience 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 (23.9) (35.5) (44.0) (52.75) (63.4) (69.65) 5. Turnover Rate of Certified Staff 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 (1.80) (4.00) (7.00) (11.00) (15.00) (20.10) (29.20) 6. School Size High School 7 6 5 4 3 1 (911) (1395) 1 Middle School 6 (506) 5 (538) 4 (686) 7 3 2 1 Elementary 7 6 7. (231) (246) 5 (315) (373) (495) (596) 1 (658) Computer/Pupil Ratio 4 3 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 (.0062) (.0118) (.0351) (.0625) (.0981) (.2410) (.2695) 8. Per Pupil Expenditure 1 2 3 4 5 6 2 (53.14) (54.93) (59.93) (70.28) (180.69) (263.80) (289.34) 9. Volunteer Hours per Pupil 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 (.3125) (.579) (1.90) (5.195) (12.10) (19.58) (27.73) 10. Donations per Pupil 1 2 3 (.00) (.00) (.0275) 4 5 6 2 (1.71) (8.34) (17.24) (30.81)  EXHIBIT IComposite School Scores 27- Cloverdale Elementary 28- 29- Terry 30- 31- 32- Cloverdale J.H., King, Pulaski Heights Elementary 33- Dunbar, McDermott, Western Hills 34- Pulaski Heights J.H., Jefferson, Wakefield 35- Central, Southwest, Meadowcliff 36- McClellan, Forest Heights, Mabelvale Elementary, Washington, Woodruff 37- Badgett, Forest Park, Fulbright, Watson 38- Otter Creek 39- Henderson, Mabelvale, Baseline, Booker, Carver Fair Park 40- 41- Mann, Garland, Williams 42- Hall, Brady, Chicot 43- J. A. Fair, Bale, Geyer Springs, Wilson 44- 45- Parkview 46- Romine 47- 48- Franklin, Mitchell 49- Dodd 50- Rockefeller 51- 52- Gibbs 53- 54- Rightsell 7 6  5  4  3  2  1  A A a 0 27.00 32.00 34.00 29.00 36.00 33.00 38.00 41.00 35.00 43.00 37.00 46.00 39.00 49.00 42.00 52.00 45.00 48.00 50.00 54.00 EQUITYComposite School Scores 27- Cloverdale Elementary 28- 29- Terry 30- 31- 32- Cloverdale J.H., King, Pulaski Heights Elementary 33- Dunbar, McDermott, Western Hills 34- Pulaski Heights J.H., Jefferson, Wakefield 35- Central, Southwest, Meadowcliff 36- McClellan, Forest Heights, Mabelvale Elementary, Washington, Woodruff 37- Badgett, Forest Park, Fulbright, Watson 38- Otter Creek 39- Henderson, Mabelvale, Baseline, Booker, Carver Fair Park 40- 41- Mann, Garland, Williams 42- Hall, Brady, Chicot 43- J. A. Fair, Bale, Geyer Springs, Wilson 44- 45- Parkview 46- Romine 47- 48- Franklin, Mitchell 49- Dodd 50- Rockefeller 51- 52- Gibbs 53- 54- RightsellGraph 7 6- 5 4 3 2 1 3 o O 0 27.00 32.00 34.00 36.00 38.00 41.00 43.00 46.00 29.00 33.00 35.00 37.00 49.00 52.00 39.00 42.00 45.00 48.00 50.00 54.00 EQUITY Page 1Correlations Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N % African American-' Students TE.RATIO STA.RATI SQ.FT % Teachers with MA +9 TURNOVER # Students COMPUTER EXPENDIT VOLUNTEE DONATION EQUITY % African American Students TE.RATIO ST Al RATI SQ.FT % Teachers with MA +9 TURNOVER # Students COMPUTER EXPENDIT VOLUNTEE DONATION EQUITY % African American Students TE.RATIO STA.RATI SQ.FT % Teachers with MA +9 TURNOVER # Students COMPUTER EXPENDIT VOLUNTEE DONATION EQUITY % African American Students 1.000 -.325* -.376\" .120 -.183 .274 -.257 .122 -.085 -.404\" .269 .120 .024 .008 .417 .213 .059 .078 .408 .565 .004 .065 .415 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 TE.RATIO STARATI SQ.FT % Teachers with MA +9 TURNOVER # Students -.325* -.376\" .120 -.183 .274 -.257 1.000 .826\" -.554\" .826\" 1.000 -.455\" -.554\" -.455\" 1.000 .468\" .407\" -.252 -.285* -.365* .241 .135 .453- .170 .468\" .407\" -.252 1.000 -.131 .020 -.285* .135 -.265 -.522\" -.071 -.152 -.638\" -.365* .453\" -.226 -.561\" -.135 -.239 -.696\" .241 .170 .135 .281 -.056 .066 .522\" -.131 .020 -.158 -.282 -.017 -.190 -.045 1.000 -.068 -.197 .149 -.061 .258 .097 -.068 1.000 .088 -.091 -.133 -.222 -.259 .024 .000 .000 .001 .049 .359 .069 .000 .630 .302 .000 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 .008 .000 .001 .004 .011 .001 .122 .000 .362 .103 .000 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 .417 .000 .001 .083 .099 .248 .361 .053 .706 .657 .000 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 .213 .001 .004 .083 .376 .892 .284 .052 .909 .197 .764 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 .059 .078 .049 .011 .099 .359 .001 .248 .376 .892 .644 .644 .180 .311 .682 .077 .511 .553 .536 .368 .129 .076 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 Page 2Correlations Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N % African American-' Students TE.RATIO STARATI SQ.FT % Teachers with MA +9 TURNOVER # Students COMPUTER EXPENDIT VOLUNTEE DONATION EQUITY % African American Students TE. RATIO STARATI SQ.FT % Teachers with MA +9 TURNOVER # Students COMPUTER EXPENDIT VOLUNTEE DONATION EQUITY I % African American Students TE.RATIO STARATI SQ.FT % Teachers with MA +9 TURNOVER # Students COMPUTER EXPENDIT VOLUNTEE DONATION EQUITY COMPUTER .122 -.265 -.226 .135 -.158 -.197 .088 1.000 .429\" .175 -.046 .429\" .408 .069 .122 .361 .284 .180 .553 .002 .235 .758 .002 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 EXPENDIT -.085 -.522\" -.561\" .281 -.282 .149 -.091 .429\" 1.000 .512\" .195 .655\" .565 .000 .000 .053 .052 .311 .536 .002 .000 .185 .000 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 * Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed). VOLUNTEE -.404\" -.071 -.135 -.056 -.017 -.061 -.133 .175 .512\" 1.000 .020 .403\" .004 .630 .362 .706 .909 .682 .368 .235 .000 .894 .004 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 DONATION .269 -.152 -.239 .066 -.190 .258 -.222 -.046 .195 .020 1.000 .335* .065 .302 .103 .657 .197 .077 .129 .758 .185 .894 .020 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 EQUITY .120 -.638\" -.696- .522- -.045 .097 -.259 .429\" .655\" .403- .335* 1.000 .415 .000 .000 .000 .764 .511 .076 .002 .000 .004 .020 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 Page 3File Information List of variables on the working file Name Position SCHOOL School Print Format': F8.2 Write Format: F8.2 1 Value Label 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00 8.00 9.00 10.00 11.00 12.00 13.00 14.00 15.00 16.00 17.00 18.00 19.00 20.00 21.00 22.00 23.00 24.00 25.00 26.00 27.00 28.00 29.00 30.00 31.00 32.00 33.00 34.00 35.00 36.00 37.00 38.00 39.00 40.00 41.00 42.00 43.00 44.00 45.00 46.00 47.00 48.00 Central J.A. Fair Hall McClellan Parkview Cloverdale Junior High Dunbar Forest Heights Henderson Mabelvale Junior High Mann Magnet Pulaski Heights Southwest Badgett Bale Baseline Booker Magnet Brady Carver Magnet Chicot Cloverdale Elementary Dodd Fair Park Forest Park Franklin Fulbright Garland Geyer Springs Gibbs magnet Jefferson King Mabelvale Elementary McDermott Meadowcliff Mitchell Otter Creek Pulaski heights Rightsell Rockefeller Romine Terry Wakefield Washington Watson Western Hills Williams Magnet Wilson Woodruff TE.RATIO 2 Print Format: F8.2 Write Format: F8.2 Page 1te. ratio 1 18.52 2 14.23 3 12.60 4 14.19 5 15.34 6 13.88 7 15.80 8 12.63 9 13.58 10 12.08 11 14.72 12 13.62 13 12.03 14 13.20 C\n\\Program Rles\\SPSS\\Milhollen.sav sta.rati 12.54 9.18 8.32 9.53 10.21 9.73 10.98 8.77 9.41 8.25 10.48 9.99 8.50 7.14 .. sq.ft 143.84 174.75 192.84 138.05 182.74 131.67 128.92 108.47 142.56 122.60 131.72 95.46 162.68 100.45 1-1 teach 52.00 52.00 48.00 41.00 55.00 29.00 44.00 42.00 35.00 29.00 48.00 37.00 42.00 46.00 turnover 15.00 12.00 18.00 14.00 10.00 4.00 16.00 10.00 7.00 14.00 14.00 15.00 14.00 19.00student# 1 1855.00 2 757.00 3 790.00 4 935.00 5 911.00 6 622.00 7 771.00 8 648.00 9 724,00 10 506.00 11 858.00 12 767.00 13 510.00 14 233.00 C:\\Program Files\\SPSS\\Milhollen.sav computer expendit voluntee donation .04 .07 .09 .30 .11 .04 .04 .08 .24 .07 .05 .04 .05 .01 59.34 57.73 55.58 120.94 3.64 6.20 1.87 4.85 4.84 1.19 6.76 .43 262.20 39.58 74.56 54.05 114.14 54.98 278.19 52.40 54.47 68.07 1-2 1.40 3.79 .00 .00 4.98 1.67 1.40 2.01 22.48 5.42 .96 .58 .00 .00 1.52 1.81 .87 10.26 .12 .001 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 equity 35.00 43.00 42.00 36.00 45.00 32.00 33.00 36.00 39.00 39.00 41.00 34.00 35.00 37.00 C:\\Program Rles\\SPSSWIilhollen.sav black 59.00 81.00 71.00 84.00 51.00 89.00 57.00 70.00 86.00 75.00 52.00 57.00 84.00 92.00 1-315 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 te.ratio 14.03 15.40 13.42 17.44 15.20 17.07 19.59 12.95 15.25 18.70 10.74 17.19 11.61 16.73 C\n\\Program Files\\SPSS\\Milhollen.sav sta.rati sq.ft teach turnover 7.75 7.80 9.37 9.78 9.33 8.48 11.59 7.47 7.85 11.32 5.30 9.54 5.35 8.26 92.89 55.00 21.00 156.21 124.84 97.47 103.52 111.15 64.97 208.54 116.40 74.22 147.63 135.14 142.55 132.22 2-1 53.00 39.00 48.00 67.00 42.00 44.00 10.00 8.00 11.00 8.00 49.00 47.00 63.00 44.00 26.00 48.00 17.00 53.00 9.00 .00 20.00 5.00 5.00 6.00 20.00 17.0015 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 student# 362.00 323.00 597.00 372.00 596.00 537.00 512.00 224.00 248.00 430.00 464.00 495.00 271.00 316.00 C\n\\Program Rles\\SPSSyVKIhollen.sav computer expendit voluntee donation .10 .01 .07 .11 .06 .28 .08 .06 .00 .05 .16 .03 .04 .08 74.93 77.89 212.17 69.33 243.28 107.68 69.35 66.18 82.12 59.90 252.18 62.30 245.87 84.64 5.88 11.87 6.10 2.24 32.03 2.49 .57 5.70 5.41 14.89 3.93 15.37 4.90 18.08 9.32 4.80 .00 8.69 .00 3.98 .00 .00 1.01 24.98 16.38 .11 .37 5.34 2-215 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 CiVrogram Files\\SPSS\\Milhollen.sav equity 43.00 39.00 39.00 42.00 39.00 42.00 27.00 49.00 39.00 37.00 48.00 37.00 41.00 43.00 black 73.00 83.00 52.00 63.00 52.00 69.00 92.00 65.00 76.00 76.00 92.00 48.00 93.00 75.00 2-329 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 te. ratio 12.29 18.93 17.68 16.36 17.73 17.95 10.23 19.76 20.26 11.00 10.70 12.70 18.12 18.20 C:\\Program Rles\\SPSS\\Milhollen.sav sta.rati sq.ft teach turnover 7.72 11.66 8.36 9.63 11.02 10.18 5.07 10.90 11.84 5.85 4.41 7.47 10.83 10.26 119.73 40.00 4.00 84.88 68.00 9.00 113.98 136.53 100.67 111.24 161.98 111.44 40.00 23.00 31.00 54.00 25.00 59.00 9.00 7.00 15.00 12.00 31.00 4.00 125.54 151.12 159.41 129.01 88.67 100.25 3-1 47.00 39.00 29.00 40.00 29.00 71.00 11.00 13.00 18.00 14.00 6.00 11.0029 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 student# 311.00 513.00 658.00 407.00 477.00 332.00 242.00 328.00 37 464.00 38 249.00 39 405.00 40 328.00 41 511.00 C:\\Prooram Files\\SPSS\\Milhollen.sav computer expendit voluntee donation .26 .05 .00 .10 .03 .01 .07 .02 .08 .12 .25 .04 .02 294.14 44.87 1.61 6229 64.58 71.21 60.43 61.34 283.47 65.98 58.69 257.44 533.19 200.61 57.21 5.47 12.17 .29 6.02 1.43 4.19 14.77 6.74 20.49 17.99 12.56 10.73 .63 .23 5.88 27.20 13.25 53.72 10.37 7.28 33.77 3.33 9.56 .00 42 373.00 .01 58.73 1.21 8.81 J 3-229 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 equity 52.00 34.00 32.00 36.00 33.00 35.00 48.00 38.00 32.00 54.00 50.00 46.00 29.00 34.00 C:\\Program FilesVSPSS\\Milhollen.sav black 52.00 44.00 54.00 73.00 57.00 79.00 92.00 46.00 55.00 94.00 59.00 63.00 46.00 86.00 J 3-3te. ratio 43 13.03 44 17.64 45 18.42 46 15.40 47 14.89 48 14.04 C\n\\Program Rles\\SPSS\\Milhollen.sav sta.rati 7.58 10.45 10.75 9.16 8.98 7.72 4-1 sq.ft 136.06 109.22 64.64 98.54 102.42 133.80 teach 34.00 39.00 52.00 63.00 76.00 30.00 turnover 7.00 13.00 .00 11.00 4.00 27.00. 1'   C:\\Program Fiies\\SPSS\\Milhollen.sav studentii computer expendit voluntee donation 43 660.00 .06 92.63 4.09 1.12 44 493.00 .15 77.43 4.60 2.55 45 315.00 .10 67.20 5.63 .00 46 479.00 .09 237.38 19.48 .00 47 362.00 .09 60.03 .34 3.57 48 284.00 .02 85.65 4-2 3.93 .0043 44 45 46 47 48 equity 36.00 37.00 33.00 41.00 43.00 36.00 C:\\Program Files\\SPSS\\Milhollen.sav black 53.00 89.00 70.00 52.00 82.00 71.00 J 4-34 ' FEB 1 4 2000 Data for Equitable Allocation of Resources Worksheet 1999-00 School Year nPQFPRFPinflM UflNITflHIWR /o New Score % Black Score % Black UCoCuntuHllunillgloHy^i^i^Qy^gl yeach/Pupll Staff/Pupil Sq. Ft. Per % Ma Teachers Enrollment Computer Money Volunteer Donate 1999 CENTRAL HALL FAIR McClellan PARKVIEW DUNBAR FOREST HEIGHTS PULASKI HEIGHTS SOUTHWEST HENDERSON CLOVERDALE MABELVALE MANN BADGETT BALE BASELINE BOOKER BRADY CARVER CHICOT CLOVERDALE DODD FAIR PARK FOREST PARK FRANKLIN FULBRIGHT GARLAND GEYER SPRINGS GIBBS JEFFERSON KING MABELVALE McDermott 1 2 8 12 5 7 9 10 11 13 15 16 3 19 17 22 6 18 21 28 31 32 23 24 25 48 26 37 27 30 35 46 20 1 1 1 tl 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 17.66 15.54 14.38 16.31 15.96 14.02 14.07 13.92 8.71 9.82 14.1 11.05 14.34 14.45 11.93 12.97 10.94 13.87 13.82 16.69 15.85 9.84 12.74 14.72 11.19 16.21 12.51 16.71 10.56 15.46 13.20 15.00 16.29 12.26 11.45 9.91 10.93 10.97 9.99 9.67 10.22 6.53 7.00 10.16 7.99 10.31 7.46 6.68 6.42 7.99 8.31 8.40 8.83 9.05 6.03 6.69 8.74 6.04 8.61 5.87 8.53 6.72 9.70 7.07 8.39 9.54 130.48 109.52 137,83 99.35 143.89 134.50 89.35 96.34 185.61 187.32 116.16 121.42 134.22 119.41 107.78 170.46 139.57 104.19 117.51 117.03 78.08 230.11 130.62 100.36 141.24 163.15 144.69 128.95 130.66 117.69 122.55 147.01 128.74 0.48 0.37 0.40 0.35 0.53 0.37 0.32 0.42 0.33 0.37 0.29 0.36 0.46 0.54 0.58 0.50 0.42 0.43 0.37 0.39 0.37 0.38 0.60 0.34 0.25 0.47 0.23 0.52 0.45 0.76 0.40 0.19 0.44 0.22 0.43 0.25 0.40 0.19 0.29 0.28 0.22 0.23 0.29 0.35 0.29 0.14 0.14 0.05 0.13 0.21 0.08 0.11 0.21 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.42 0.15 0.31 0.23 0.31 0.19 0.15 0.09 0.20 0.04 2045 1391 955 1192 1157 739 785 760 447 551 705 494 842 196 312 296 534 348 525 510 426 203 221 318 485 410 267 324 285 370 612 378 373 0.0704 0.0891 0.0932 0.2794 0.1201 0.0622 0.0841 0.0697 0.1051 0.3521 0.0837 0.0972 0.0867 0.0432 0.1403 0.0229 0.1498 0.1242 0.1467 0.3017 0.1128 0.1351 0.0215 0.1038 0.1763 0.0585 0.0723 0.1142 0.2842 0.1243 0.0240 0.1139 0.0617 58.07 45.91 63.45 252.21 258.25 76.69 45.66 52.87 64.53 265.43 41.28 52.36 284.92 69.73 77.05 75.49 294.76 71.34 256.03 105.84 75.86 76.45 86.10 67.16 221.61 68.80 240.02 79.03 526.14 67.94 70.37 67.82 69.57 1.97 4.36 2.98 3.70 4.16 9.89 0.16 11.85 2.06 5.70 3.06 0.76 4.71 5.12 5.23 16.64 16.43 3.87 39.33 3.50 3.43 14.05 8.32 22.77 6.85 16.66 7.06 10.61 34.38 38.93 16.35 0.56 40.00 4.15 1.94 0.00 4.74 0.00 3.62 0.00 11.57 0.00 2.18 0.00 0.00 7.65 0.00 3.63 2.76 9.02 0.00 0.00 0.93 0.00 20.99 5.20 39.33 0.41 28.78 3.00 1.27 0.00 1.11 8.17 1.44 19.60 29 25 34 36 44 38 23 36 45 56 25 34 46 45 58 57 57 43 47 39 35 69 60 40 49 43 50 42 62 47 46 36 47 1999 57% 71% 80% 89% 50% 60% 65% 60% 91% 77% 88% 73% 52% 91% 74% 85% 51% 71% 52% 67% 89% 65% 72% 44% 96% 41% 94% 82% 52% 39% 55% 74% 57% 1998 37 47 49 46 47 36 40 39 42 44 36 45 46 41 50 50 43 48 45 47 31 57 44 42 54 45 46 49 60 41 36 41 39 1998 59 81 71 84 51 89 57 70 86 75 52 57 84 92 73 83 52 63 52 69 92 65 76 48 92 48 93 75 52 44 54 73 57 DRAFT COPY 2/11/00 1Data for Equitable Allocation of Resources Worksheet 1999-00 School Year % New Score % Black Score % Black School#Level Teach/Pupil Staff/Pupil Sq. Ft. Per % Ma Teachers Enrollment Computer Money Volunteer Donate 1999 MEADOWCLIFF MITCHELL OTTER CREEK PULASKI HEIGHT RIGHTSELL ROCKEFELLER ROMINE TERRY WAKEFIELD WASHINGTON WATSON WESTERN HILLS WILLIAMS WILSON WOODRUFF 33 34 50 38 39 36 40 47 51 42 52 29 43 44 45 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 16.19 11.87 17.45 16.36 13.09 10.65 12.26 17.52 15.53 11.22 16.36 16.89 14.54 14.68 13.33 8.78 6.03 10.58 8.82 6.44 4.39 7.20 11.05 9.11 6.30 9.80 9.14 9.14 7.99 7.43 147.14 158.70 104.73 190.37 139.89 161.00 131.41 87.98 111.96 165.38 121.00 164.67 103.06 118.45 134.75 0.40 0.23 0.50 0.63 0.51 0.29 0.39 0.34 0.64 0.32 0.41 0.53 0.71 0.68 0.24 0.11 0.29 0.10 0.05 0.24 0.09 0.14 0.06 0.11 0.13 0.21 0.00 0.06 0.14 0.20 251 247 349 306 269 401 322 515 334 543 445 255 458 313 282 0.0398 0.0742 0.0544 0.1569 0.1416 0.3208 0.1042 0.0485 0.0180 0.1043 0.1834 0.1373 0.0961 0.1186 0.0363 67.07 281.03 60.25 67.36 242.78 483.03 173.45 60.30 69.83 104.40 74.61 69.50 286.99 61.47 84.10 2.39 9.60 11.44 21.44 20.68 49.97 15.97 19.75 0.68 11.42 1.95 9.43 18.62 0.33 6.22 0.00 0.00 3.44 26.14 0.00 5.91 6.72 4.50 19.37 0.00 0.45 20.75 37.51 0.00 0.00 37 51 35 61 59 65 55 31 40 50 38 55 53 41 42 1999 79% 97% 47% 57% 97% 61% 66% 46% 84% 61% 94% 75% 51% 89% 80% 1998 41 56 45 39 60 59 52 34 42 43 43 43 47 50 41 1998 79 92 46 55 94 59 63 46 86 53 89 70 52 82 71 DRAFT COPY 2/11/00 2P/K K ________________LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT __________________ALLOCATION OF RESOURCES _____________________________10-01-99_________ OCTOBER 1,1999 ENROLLMENT 1-12 TOT TOT-P/K BL WH OTH TOT % BL % WH % OTH TOTAL F.T.E. TEACH F.T.E. PUP-P/K /STAFF PUP-P/K /TEACH HIGH SCHOOLS CENTRAL HALL FAIR McClellan PARKVIEW TOTAL MIDDLE SCHOOLS DUNBAR FOREST HEIGHTS PULASKI HEIGHTS SOUTHWEST HENDERSON CLOVERDALE MABELVALE MANN TOTAL ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS BADGETT BALE BASELINE BOOKER BRADY CARVER CHICOT CLOVERDALE DODD FAIR PARK FOREST PARK FRANKLIN FULBRIGHT GARLAND GEYER SPRINGS 0 0 11 34 34 18 36 36 18 35 71 18 35 0 0 40 47 49 78 60 78 75 58 31 39 50 72 62 47 53 2045 1391 955 1192 1157 6740 739 785 760 447 551 705 494 842 5323 145 231 213 456 270 447 399 332 154 147 268 342 348 202 236 2045 1391 955 1192 1157 6740 2045 1391 955 1192 1157 6740 1167 981 760 1066 582 4556 843 306 179 108 538 1974 35 104 16 18 37 210 2045 1391 955 1192 1157 6740 57% 71% 80% 89% 50% 68% 41% 22% 19% 9% 46% 29% 2% 7% 2% 2% 3% 3% 166.80 121.50 96.40 109.10 105.50 599.30 115.80 89.50 66.40 73.10 72.50 417.30 12.26 11.45 9.91 10.93 10.97 11.25 17.66 15.54 14.38 16.31 15.96 16.15 739 785 760 447 551 705 494 842 5323 739 785 760 447 551 705 494 842 5323 447 507 457 406 422 617 360 435 3651 249 254 295 33 110 49 123 380 1493 43 24 8 8 19 39 11 27 179 739 785 760 447 551 705 494 842 5323 60% 65% 60% 91% 77% 88% 73% 52% 69% 34% 32% 39% 7% 20% 7% 25% 45% 28% 6% 3% 1% 2% 3% 6% 2% 3% 3% 74.00 81.20 74.40 68.50 78.70 69.40 61.85 81.70 589.75 52.70 55.80 54.60 51.30 56.10 50.00 44.70 58.70 423.90 9.99 9.67 10.22 6.53 7.00 10.16 7.99 10.31 9.03 14.02 14.07 13.92 8.71 9.82 14.10 11.05 14.34 12.56 196 312 296 534 348 525 510 426 203 221 318 485 410 267 324 185 278 262 534 330 525 474 390 185 186 318 414 410 249 289 179 231 253 271 247 274 344 381 131 160 139 466 169 250 267 16 66 41 249 75 229 85 21 68 58 172 11 233 3 44 1 15 2 14 26 22 81 24 4 3 7 8 8 14 13 196 312 296 534 348 525 510 426 203 221 318 485 410 267 324 91% 74% 85% 51% 71% 52% 67% 89% 65% 72% 44% 96% 41% 94% 82% 8% 21% 14% 47% 22% 44% 17% 5% 33% 26% 54% 2% 57% 1% 14% 1% 5% 1% 3% 7% 4% 16% 6% 2% 1% 2% 2% 2% 5% 4% 24.80 41.60 40.80 66.80 39.70 62.50 53.70 43.10 30.70 27.80 36.40 68.50 47.60 42.40 33.90 12.80 23.30 20.20 48.80 23.80 38.00 28.40 24.60 18.80 14.60 21.60 37.00 25.30 19.90 17.30 7.46 6.68 6.42 7.99 8.31 8.40 8.83 9.05 6.03 6.69 8.74 6.04 8.61 5.87 8.53 14.45 11.93 12.97 10.94 13.87 13.82 16.69 15.85 9.84 12.74 14.72 11.19 16.21 12.51 16.71P/K LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT __________________ALLOCATION OF RESOURCES 10-01-99 OCTOBER 1,1999 ENROLLMENT GIBBS JEFFERSON KING MABELVALE MCDERMOTT MEADOWCLIFF MITCHELL OTTER CREEK PULASKI HEIGHTS RIGHTSELL ROCKEFELLER ROMINE TERRY WAKEFIELD WASHINGTON WATSON WESTERN HILLS WILLIAMS WILSON WOODRUFF TOTAL 71 18 18 36 55 34 54 36 18 34 720 K 54 62 90 52 59 36 31 74 39 40 67 60 89 59 72 74 32 56 59 40 1984 1-12 231 308 451 308 314 215 198 275 267 193 279 228 426 275 417 335 223 402 236 208 9979 TOT 285 370 612 378 373 251 247 349 306 269 401 322 515 334 543 445 255 458 313 282 12683 TOT-P/K 285 370 541 360 373 251 229 349 306 233 346 288 515 334 489 409 255 458 295 248 11963 BL 147 146 336 278 213 198 240 164 173 261 245 211 238 282 332 420 191 233 278 225 8573 WH 127 218 253 95 134 52 5 178 127 6 148 73 238 28 143 19 61 209 27 54 3566 OTH 11 6 23 5 26 1 2 7 6 2 8 38 39 24 68 6 3 16 8 3 544 TOT 285 370 612 378 373 251 247 349 306 269 401 322 515 334 543 445 255 458 313 282 12683 % BL 52% 39% 55% 74% 57% 79% 97% 47% 57% 97% 61% 66% 46% 84% 61% 94% 75% 51% 89% 80% 68% % WH 45% 59% 41% 25%' 36% 21% 2% 51% 42% 2% 37% 23% 46% 8% 26% 4% 24% 46% 9% 19% 28% % OTH 4% 2% W 1% 7% 0% 1% 2% 2% 1% 2% 12% 8% 7% 13% 1% 1% 3% 3% 1% 4% TOTAL F.T.E. 42.40 38.13 76.50 42.90 39.10 28.60 38.00 33.00 34.70 36.20 78.90 40.00 46.60 36.67 77.60 41.75 27.90 50.10 36.90 33.40 1,539.65 TEACH F.T.E. 27.00 23.93 41.00 24.00 22.90 15.50 19.30 20.00 18.70 17.80 32.50 23.50 29.40 21.50 43.60 25.00 15.10 31.50 20.10 18.60 865.33 PUP-P/K / STAFF 6.72 9.70 7.07 8.39 9.54 8.78 6.03 10.58 8.82 6.44 4.39 7.20 11.05 9.11 6.30 9.80 9.14 9.14 7.99 7.43 7.77 PUP-P/K /TEACH 10.56 15.46 13.20 15.00 16.29 16.19 11.87 17.45 16.36 13.09 10.65 12.26 17.52 15.53 11.22 16.36 16.89 14.54 14.68 13.33 13.82 ALTERNATIVE SETTINGS 1 443 444 444 317 121 6 444 71% 27% 1% GRAND TOTAL 720 1985 22485 25190 24470 17097 7154 939 25190 68% 28% 4% 2,728.70 1,706.53 28.04 42.53School Name CENTRAL FAIR HALL McClellan PARKVIEW CLOVERDALE DUNBAR FOREST HEIGHTS HENDERSON MABELVALE MANN PULASKI HEIGHTS SOUTHWEST BADGETT BALE BASELINE BOOKER BRADY CARVER CHICOT CLOVERDALE DODD FAIR PARK FOREST PARK FRANKLIN FULBRIGHT GARLAND GEYER SPRINGS GIBBS JEFFERSON KING MABELVALE MCDERMOTT MEADOWCLIFF MITCHELL OTTER CREEK PULASKI HEIGHT RIGHTSELL ROCKEFELLER Data for Equitable Allocation of Resources Worksheet 1998-99 School Year School# Level Teach/Pupil Staff/Pupil Sq. Ft. Per % Ma % Nev/ Teachers Enrollment Computer Money Volunteer Donate Score % Black Students 1 8 2 12 5 15 7 9 13 16 3 10 11 19 17 22 6 18 21 28 31 32 23 24 25 48 26 37 27 30 35 46 20 33 34 50 38 39 36 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 18.52 14.23 12.60 14.19 15.34 13.88 15.80 12.63 13.58 12.08 14.72 13.62 12.03 13.20 14.03 15.40 13.42 17.44 15.20 17.07 19.59 12.95 15.25 18.70 10.74 17.19 11.61 16.73 12.29 18.93 17.68 16.36 17.73 17.95 10.23 19.76 20.26 11.00 10.70 12.54 9.18 8.32 9.53 10.21 9.73 10.98 8.77 9.41 8.25 10.48 9.99 8.50 7.14 7.75 7.80 9.37 9.78 9.33 8.48 11.59 7.47 7.85 11.32 5.30 9.54 5.35 8.26 7.72 11.66 8.36 9.63 11.02 10.18 5.07 10.90 11.84 5.85 4.41 143.84 174.75 192.84 138.05 182.74 131.67 128.92 108.47 142.56 122.60 131.72 95.46 162.68 100.45 92.89 156.21 124.84 97.47 103.52 111.15 64.97 208.54 116.40 74.22 147.63 135.14 142.55 132.22 119.73 84.88 113.98 136.53 100.67 111.24 161.98 111.44 125.54 151.12 159.41 52.00 52.00 48.00 41.00 55.00 29.00 44.00 42.00 35.00 29.00 48.00 37.00 42.00 46.00 55.00 53.00 48.00 67.00 42.00 44.00 49.00 47.00 63.00 44.00 26.00 48.00 17.00 53.00 40.00 68.00 40.00 23.00 31.00 54.00 25.00 59.00 47.00 39.00 29.00 15.00 12.00 18.00 14.00 10.00 4.00 16.00 10.00 7.00 ' 14.00 14.00 15.00 14.00 19.00 21.00 39.00 10.00 8.00 11.00 8.00 9.00 .00 20.00 5.00 5.00 6.00 20.00 17.00 4.00 9.00 9.00 7.00 15.00 12.00 31.00 4.00 11.00 13.00 18.00 1855 757 790 935 911 622 771 648 724 506 858 767 510 233 362 323 597 372 596 537 512 224 248 430 464 495 271 316 311 513 658 407 477 332 242 328 464 249 405 .0383 .0740 .0949 .2963 .1087 .0354 .0350 .0818 .2403 .0692 .0536 .0391 .0529 .0149 .1009 .0104 .0737 .1102 .0570 .2769 .0840 .0580 .0047 .0465 .1556 .0303 .0356 .0819 .2605 .0468 .0034 .0972 .0252 .0120 .0670 .0152 .0797 .1212 .2472 59.34 57.73 55.58 120.94 262.20 39.58 74.56 54.05 114.14 54.98 278.19 52.40 54.47 68.07 74.93 77.89 212.17 69.33 243.28 107.68 69.35 66.18 82.12 59.90 252.18 62.30 245.87 84.64 294.14 62.29 64.58 71.21 60.43 61.34 283.47 65.98 58.69 257.44 533.19 3.64 6.20 1.87 4.85 1.40 .00 4.98 1.67 1.40 2.01 22.48 5.42 .96 .58 5.88 11.87 6.10 2.24 32.03 2.49 .57 5.70 5.41 14.89 3.93 15.37 4.90 18.08 44.87 5.47 12.17 .29 6.02 1.43 4.19 14.77 6.74 20.49 17.99 4.84 1.19 6.76 .43 3.79 .00 .00 .00 1.52 1.81 .87 10.26 .12 .00 9.32 4.80 .00 8.69 .00 3.98 .00 .00 1.01 24.98 16.38 .11 .37 5.34 1.61 .63 .23 5.88 27.20 13.25 53.72 10.37 7.28 33.77 3.33 37 49 47 46 47 36 36 40 44 45 46 39 42 41 50 50 43 48 45 47 31 57 44 42 54 45 46 49 60 41 36 41 39 41 56 45 39 60 59 59 81 71 84 51 89 57 70 86 75 52 57 84 92 73 83 52 63 52 69 92 65 76 48 92 48 93 75 52 44 54 73 57 79 92 46 55 94 59 2/11/00 1Data for Equitable Allocation of Resources Worksheet 1998-99 School Year ROMINE TERRY WAKEFIELD WASHINGTON WATSON WESTERN HILLS WILLIAMS WILSON WOODRUFF 40 47 51 42 52 29 43 44 45 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 12.70 18.12 18.20 13.03 17.64 18.42 15.40 14.89 14.04 7.47 10.83 10.26 7.58 10.45 10.75 9.16 8.98 7.72 129.01 88.67 100.25 136.06 109.22 64.64 98.54 102.42 133.80 40.00 29.00 71.00 34.00 39.00 52.00 63.00 76.00 30.00 14.00 6.00 11.00 7.00 13.00 .00 11.00 4.00 27.00 328 511 373 660 493 315 479 362 284 .0411 .0196 .0080 .0577 .1466 .0984 .0898 .0930 .0200 200.61 57.21 58.73 92.63 77.43 67.20 237.38 60.03 85.65 12.56 10.73 1.21 4.09 4.60 5.63 19.48 .34 3.93 9.56 .00 8.81 1.12 2.55 .00 .00 3.57 .00 52 34 42 43 43 43 47 50 41 63 46 86 53 89 70 52 82 71 2/11/00 21999-00 (DRAFT 2/7/00) Relationship Between Total Scores and Percent of African-American Students Correlations Total Score: 1999 Pearson Correlation Total Score: 1999 1.000 Percent of African-Americ an Students: 1999 -.046 05 CD CD {Z\u0026gt; c CD n 55 c cn o e \u0026lt; c cn o \u0026lt; o c \u0026lt;u a D. Sig. (2-tailed) N .758 48 48 Percent of African-American Students: 1999 Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 30 40 50 -.046 1.000 .758 48 48 60 70 Total Score: 1999 N      a o       8 o       a      a   a Q  o    o    0    o o1998-99 (DRAFT 2/7/00) Relationship Between Total Scores and Percent of African American Students Correlations Total Score: 1998 Pearson Correlation Total Score: 1998 ToSo Percent of African-Americ an Students: 1998 .158 Sig. (2-tailed) N .285 48 48 Percent of African-American Students: 1998 Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N .158 .285 48 1.000 48 100 co o 90     a    (Z\u0026gt; c CD D 55 c CD O O E \u0026lt; c CD O 80 70     a  8 60.             \u0026lt; o c CD a CD CL 50 40 30  0     8 o  40 Total Score: 1998   8    50 60 70 }Composite School Scores (1998-99) 22- 23- 24- 25- 26- n- 28- 2)- 30- 31- Cloverdale 32- 33- 34- Terry 35- 36- Dunbar, Cloverdale MS, King 37- Central 38- 39- Pulaski Heights MS, McDermott, Pulaski Heights 40- Forest Heights MS 41- Badgett, Jefferson, Mabelvale, Meadowcliff, Woodruff 42- Southwest, Forest Park, Wakefield 43- Booker, Washington, Watson, Western Hills 44- Henderson, Fair Park 45- Mabelvale MS, Carver, Fulbright, Otter Creek 46- McClellan, Mann, Garland 47- Hall, Parkview, Chicot, Williams 48- Brady 49- JA Fair, Geyer Springs 50- Bale, Baseline, Wilson 51- 52- Romine 53- 54- Franklin 55- 56- Mitchell 57- Dodd 58- 59- Rockefeller 60- Gibbs, Rightsell DRAFT 2/7/00 Composite School Scores (1999-00) n- 23- Forest Heights MS 24- 25- Cloverdale MS, Hall 26- n- 28- 29- Central 30- 31-Terry 32- 33- 34- Mabelvale MS, JA Fair 35- Cloverdale, Otter Creek 36- McClellan, Pulaski HeightsMS, Mabelvale 37- Meadowcliff 38- Dunbar, Watson 39- Chicot 40- Forest Park, Wakefield 41- Wilson, 42- Woodruff, Geyer Springs 43- Brady, Fulbright 44- Parkview 45- Southwest, Badgett 46- Mann, King 47- Carver, Jefferson, McDermott 48- '49- Franklin 50- Garland, Washington -51-Mitchell 52- -53- Williams 54- 55- Western Hills, Romine 56- Henderson 57- Baseline, Booker./' 58- Bale, -59- Rightsell 60- Fair Park, 61- Pulaski Heights - 62- Gibbs 63- 64- ' 65- Rockefeller 66- 67- 69- DoddEquitable Allocation Worksheet: Individual and Total Scores 98 V. 99 High Schools Central Hall JA Fair McClellan Parkview Teacher/Pupil ratio Staff/Pupil ratio Square feet per pupil Percent of staff with masters, plus, nine years of experience Percent of new teachers School size Computer/pupil ratio Per pupil expenditure Volunteer hours per pupil Donations per pupil 1998-99 3 1 6 5 4 2 4 3 4 5 1999-00 1 1 4 5 4 2 3 1 2 6 1998-99 6 5 8 5 3 4 5 3 3 5 1999-00 3 1 2 3 1 3 4 1 3 4 1998-99 5 5 7 5 4 6 5 3 5 4 1999-00 4 2 6 4 2 6 4 2 2 2 1998-99 5 4 5 4 4 3 8 5 4 4 1999-00 2 1 1 3 1 4 8 1 3 6 1998-99 5 4 7 6 5 4 2 6 3 5 1999-00 3 1 6 1 4 5 6 7 3 2 Total 37 29 47 25 49 34 46 36 47 44 DRAFT COPY 2/7/00 1Middle Schools Dunbar Equitable Allocation Worksheet: Individual and Total Scores 98 V. 99 Forest Heights Pulaski Heights Southwest Henderson Teacher/Pupil ratio Staff/Pupil ratio Square feet per pupil Percent of staff with masters, plus, nine years of experience Percent of new teachers School size Computer/pupil ratio Per pupil expenditure Volunteer hours per pupil Donations per pupil 1998-99 4 3 5 1999-00 5 2 5 1998-99 6 5 4 1999-00 5 3 1 1998-99 5 4 3 1999-00 5 2 1 1998-99 6 5 6 1999-00 8 7 8 1998-99 5 4 5 1999-00 8 6 8 Total DRAFT COPY 4 3 2 4 5 4 2 36 3 2 4 2 5 5 5 4 5 4 5 2 3 2 2 2 3 3 1 1 2 4 4 3 4 1 5 6 5 3 3 3 1 6 7 4 4 5 4 2 3 3 2 3 6 5 2 2 2 3 6 3 6 5 3 4 3 2 5 8 7 4 5 38 40 23 39 36 42 45 44 56 2/7/00 2Equitable Allocation Worksheet\nIndividual and Total Scores 98 V. 99 Middle Schools Cloverdale Mabelvale Mann Teacher/Pupil ratio Staff/Pupil ratio Square feet per pupil Percent of staff with masters, plus, nine years of experience Percent of new teachers School size Computer/pupil ratio Per pupil expenditure Volunteer hours per pupil Donations per pupil 1998-99 5 4 5 3 1 4 4 1 1 2 1999-00 5 2 3 2 1 4 3 1 2 2 1998-99 6 5 4 3 4 6 5 3 4 5 1999-00 7 5 4 3 2 5 4 1 1 2 1998-99 5 3 5 5 4 2 4 7 1 4 1999-00 4 2 5 6 5 2 4 8 3 1 Total 36 25 45 34 46 46 DRAFT COPY 2/7/00 3Equitable Allocation Worksheet: Individual and Total Scores ton Wi 98 V. 99 Elementary Schools Badgett Bale Baseline Booker Teacher/Pupil ratio Staff/Pupil ratio Square feet per pupil Percent of staff with masters, plus, nine years of experience Percent of new teachers School size Computer/pupil ratio Per pupil expenditure Volunteer hours per pupil Donations per pupil Total DRAFT COPY 1998-99 5 6 3 1999-00 4 6 3 1998-99 5 6 3 1999-00 7 7 2 1998-99 5 5 6 1999-00 6 7 8 1998-99 5 4 4 1999-00 8 5 6 Brady 1998-99 4 4 3 1999-00 5 5 2 5 3 8 2 4 3 2 41 1 5 8 2 4 4 2 45 6 2 6 6 5 5 6 50 1 8 6 7 5 4 5 6 1 6 6 5 5 5 6 6 6 1 5 1 5 5 5 2 5 6 5 2 5 4 1 7 8 6 7 7 5 5 6 4 4 6 5 7 4 6 4 3 2 58 50 57 43 57 48 43 2/7/00 4Equitable Allocation Worksheet: Individual and Total Scores 98 V. 99 Elementary Schools Carver Teacher/Pupil ratio Staff/Pupil ratio Square feet per pupil Percent of staff with masters, plus, nine years of experience Percent of new teachers School size Computer/pupil ratio Per pupil expenditure Volunteer hours per pupil Donations per pupil Total DRAFT COPY 1998-99 5 4 4 1999-00 5 5 3 1998-99 4 5 4 Chicot 1999-00 1 4 3 Cloverdale 1998-99 2 2 1 1999-00 3 4 1 Dodd 1998-99 6 6 8 1999-00 8 8 8 Fair Park 1998-99 5 5 4 1999-00 6 7 5 4 5 3 4 6 8 2 45 3 6 1 7 1 8 2 47 4 5 3 8 5 4 5 47 4 4 2 8 6 3 4 39 5 5 3 5 4 2 2 31 2/7/00 3 8 3 5 4 2 2 35 5 9 8 4 4 5 2 57 4 8 8 6 5. 6 8 6 3 6 1 5 4 8 8 8 1 6 5 6 69 44 60 5Equitable Allocation Worksheet: Individual and Total Scores 98 V. 99 Elementary Schools Forest Park Franklin Teacher/Pupil ratio Staff/Pupil ratio Square feet per pupil Percent of staff with masters, plus, nine years of experience Percent of new teachers School size Computer/pupil ratio Per pupil expenditure Volunteer hours per pupil Donations per pupil Total DRAFT COPY 1998-99 3 3 2 1999-00 4 4 1 1998-99 1 1 6 1999-00 7 8 6 Fulbright 1998-99 4 4 5 1999-00 2 4 7 Garland 1998-99 6 7 5 1999-00 6 8 6 Geyer Springs 1998-99 4 5 5 1999-00 1 5 4 4 6 4 4 3 6 7 42 2 1 5 4 3 8 8 40 2 6 4 6 6 4 6 54 1 5 2 1 6 4 3 49 5 6 4 3 4 6 4 6 1 3 2 3 1 8 1 3 6 4 6 4 4 1 3 7 3 7 4 5 6 3 5 5 5 6 5 7 1 5 5 5 5 4 45 43 46 50 49 42 2/7/00 6Equitable Allocation Worksheet: Individual and Total Scores 98 V. 99 Elementary Schools Gibbs Jefferson King Mabelvale McDermott Teacher/Pupil ratio Staff/Pupil ratio Square feet per pupil Percent of staff with masters, plus, nine years of experience Percent of new teachers School size Computer/pupil ratio Per pupil expenditure Volunteer hours per pupil Donations per pupil 1998-99 6 6 4 4 1 6 7 8 8 4 1999-00 8 7 5 6 4 6 8 8 8 2 1998-99 2 2 5 1 5 3 4 4 5 4 1999-00 3 3 3 8 5 4 6 3 8 4 1998-99 3 5 4 4 5 1 1 4 6 3 1999-00 6 6 4 4 1 1 1 4 6 1 1998-99 4 4 5 1 6 4 6 5 1 5 1999-00 3 5 7 1 4 3 5 3 1 4 1998-99 3 3 3 3 4 4 3 4 5 7 1999-00 2 3 4 5 8 4 2 4 8 7 Total 60 62 41 47 36 46 41 36 39 47 DRAFT COPY 2/7/00 7Equitable Allocation Worksheet: Individual and Total Scores 98 V. 99 Elementary Schools Meadowcliff Mitchell Otter Creek Pulaski Heights Rightsell Teacher/Pupil ratio Staff/Pupil ratio Square feet per pupil Percent of staff with masters, plus, nine years of experience Percent of new teachers School size Computer/pupil ratio Per pupil expenditure Volunteer hours per pupil Donations per pupil Total DRAFT COPY 1998-99 3 4 4 1999-00 2 4 7 1998-99 8 8 6 1999-00 7 8 1 1998-99 1 3 4 1999-00 1 1 2 1998-99 1 1 5 1999-00 2 4 8 1998-99 7 6 6 1999-00 6 7 6 6 4 5 2 4 3 6 41 4 6 7 1 2 2 2 37 2 1 1 5 7 4 8 56 1 2 8 3 8 5 2 6 7 5 3 4 6 6 6 6 4 2 2 6 5 5 5 4 5 3 5 5 8 8 6 7 3 1 8 4 4 6 6 6 7 8 1 3 7 1 1 1 2 51 45 35 39 61 60 59 2/7/00 8Equitable Allocation Worksheet\nIndividual and Total Scores 98 V. 99 Elementary Schools Rockefeller Romine Teacher/Pupil ratio Staff/Pupil ratio Square feet per pupil Percent of staff with masters, plus, nine years of experience Percent of new teachers School size Computer/pupil ratio Per pupil expenditure Volunteer hours per pupil Donations per pupil Total DRAFT COPY 1998-99 8 8 6 1999-00 8 8 7 1998-99 6 6 5 1999-00 7 6 5 Terry 1998-99 3 3 3 1999-00 1 1 1 Wakefield 1998-99 3 4 3 1999-00 3 3 2 Washington 1998-99 5 6 5 1999-00 7 8 8 3 3 4 7 8 6 6 59 2 1 3 8 8 8 6 65 4 4 5 4 6 6 6 52 4 5 5 5 6 6 6 55 3 6 3 3 3 5 2 34 2/7/00 2 7 2 2 2 7 6 31 8 5 5 2 3 3 6 8 6 5 1 4 1 1 3 6 1 4 5 4 4 2 6 1 6 5 2 42 40 43 50 9Equitable Allocation Worksheet: Individual and Total Scores 98 V. 99 Elementary Schools Watson Western Hills Williams Wilson Woodruff Teacher/Pupil ratio Staff/Pupil ratio Square feet per pupil Percent of staff with masters, plus, nine years of experience Percent of new teachers School size Computer/pupil ratio Per pupil expenditure Volunteer hours per pupil Donations per pupil 1998-99 4 3 4 4 4 4 6 5 4 5 1999-00 2 2 4 5 4 3 8 4 2 4 1998-99 3 3 1 5 8 6 6 4 5 2 1999-00 1 3 7 1 8 7 6 3 5 8 1998-99 5 5 3 6 5 4 5 6 6 2 1999-00 4 3 2 8 7 2 4 8 1 8 1998-99 5 5 4 8 1 5 5 4 2 5 1999-00 4 5 3 8 5 5 6 2 1 2 1998-99 5 6 5 3 2 6 3 5 4 2 1999-00 6 6 5 1 4 7 1 6 4 2 Total DRAFT COPY 43 38 43 55 47 2/7/00 53 50 41 41 42 10Composite School Scores (1998-99) 22- 23- 24- 25- 26- 27- 28- 29- 30- 31- Cloverdale 32- 33- 34- Terry 35- 36- Dunbar, Cloverdale MS, King 37- Central 38- 39- Pulaski Heights MS, McDermott, Pulaski Heights 40- Forest Heights MS 41- Badgett, Jefferson, Mabelvale, Meadowcliff, Woodruff 42- Southwest, Forest Park, Wakefield 43- Booker, Washington, Watson, Western Hills 44- Henderson, Fair Park 45- Mabelvale MS, Carver, Fulbright, Otter Creek 46- McClellan, Maim, Garland 47- Hall, Parkview, Chicot, Williams 48- Brady 49- JA Fair, Geyer Springs 50- Bale, Baseline, Wilson 51- 52- Romine 53- 54- Franklin 55- 56- Mitchell 57- Dodd 58- 59- Rockefeller 60- Gibbs, Rightsell DRAFT 2/7/00 Composite School Scores (1999-00) 11- 23- Forest Heights MS 24- 25- Cloverdale MS, Hall 26- 27- 28- 29- Central 30- 31- Terry 32- 33- 34- Mabelvale MS, JA Fair 35- Cloverdale, Otter Creek 36- McClellan, Pulaski HeightsMS, Mabelvale 37- Meadowcliff 38- Dunbar, Watson 39- Chicot 40- Forest Park, Wakefield 41- Wilson, 42- Woodruff, Geyer Springs 43- Brady, Fulbright ' 44- Parkview 45- Southwest, Badgett 46- Mann, King 47- Carver, Jefferson, McDermott 48- 49- Franklin 50- Garland, Washington 51-Mitchell 52- 53- Williams 54- 55- Western Hills, Romine 56- Henderson 57- Baseline, Booker 58- Bale, 59- Rightsell 60- Fair Park, 61- Pulaski Heights 62- Gibbs 63- 64- 65- Rockefeller 66- 67- 69- Doddt * S U.' I (Friryy \u0026gt;----- te' ^Tpi^ LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 June 8, 1999 TO\nBoard of Directors FROM: Brady Gadberry, Special Assistant to the Superintendent Junious Babbs, Associate Superintendent, Administrative Services THROUGH: Dr. Leslie Gamine, Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Equitable Allocation of Resources The attached documents are presented for e Boards review. No action is required. The first document is a copy of the administrative regulations that were developed to ensure on going compliance with the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan requirement concerning the equitable allocation of resources. The second document is a copy of the court filing the district made as a status report in compliance with Revised Desegregation and Education Plan requirements. LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: GCBA-R EQUITABLE ALLOCATION OF RESOURCES The purpose of these regulations is to ensure that the financial, technical, and educational resources of the District are distributed in a fair and equitable manner. A committee comprised of the associate superintendents, the Special Assistant to the Superintendent, the Manager of Financial Services, and a District research specialist in compliance with the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan (Plan) will develop and implement a process for assessing the equitable allocation of resources. Members of the staff of the Office of Desegregation Monitoring, and representatives of the Joshua Intervenors will be invited to assist in the performance of the committees responsibilities. The allocation of resources does not have to be equal. It is probable that there could never be a totally equal distribution. The basis of the allocations must be equitable. The committee will determine which resources should be included in the factors being assessed for equity. Those factors will be analyzed and compared by school to establish District norms and possible standards or parameters to guide in the distribution of those resources. As part of its analysis the committee will determine whether a relationship exists between the resources allocated and the percentage of African-American students attending the schools. If the committee determines that the allocations are outside the acceptable parameters The that it has set, it shall determine what possible remedies are appropriate, implementation of those remedies will be the responsibility of the associate superintendent for the identified division. If budget or policy changes are required to implement appropriate remedies, the Superintendent of Schools will be notified so that action by the Board of Education can be initiated. The committee will serve an oversight function and ensure the following components are in place to assure equitable treatment\n1. Compliance standards and procedures reasonably capable of reducing the prospect of noncompliance\n2. Oversight of compliance with such standards and procedures by the Superintendent and the responsible officials\n3. Communication of compliance standards and procedures to all employees\n4. Utilization of monitoring and auditing systems reasonably designed to detect noncompliance\n5. Utilization of a reporting system whereby students, patrons, and employees can report complaints or noncompliance without fear of retribution:6. 7. 8. LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT (continuing) NEPNCODE\nGCBA-R Enforcement of compliance standards and procedures through disciplinary mechanisms when appropriate, including the discipline of individuals responsible for compliance and individuals responsible for any failure to report noncompliance\nand, After noncompliance has been detected, implementation of all reasonable steps to correct past noncompliance and to prevent further noncompliance, including modification of the compliance program as necessary to prevent and detect further similar noncompliance. Annual review of the compliance program for necessary revisions. 2IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT* EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS , - WESTERN DIVISION   I. little rock school district PLAINTIFF V. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1,ET AL DEFENDANTS MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL INTERVENORS KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL INTERVENORS REPORT OF LRSDS ASSESSMENT OF THE EQUITABLE ALLOCATION OF RESOURCES Plaintiff Little Rock School District (LRSD) for its Report of LRSDs Assessment of the Equitable Allocation of Resources states: 1. LRSDs Revised Desegregation and Education Plan (Revised Plan) requires that LRSD assess the equitable allocation of resources in the district and report the results of this I assessment within 180 days of the district courts approval of the Revised Plan. Revised Plan  2.9.2. The district court approved the Revised Plan on April 10, 1998. Docket No. 3144. Accordingly, LRSDs report of the assessment of the allocation of resources was to be completed on or before October 7, 1998. LRSD files this report in compliance with the Revised Plan. 2. LRSD assessed the allocation of its resources by way of a committee composed of district administrators and staff persons and represenutives of the OfBce of DesegregationMonitoring (ODM).* The committee first worked to determine what resources should be assessed. In this regard, the committee looked to available research in the area of school re\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_1138","title":"Magnet Review Committee: Budget","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":["1998/1999"],"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","Education--Finance","Educational statistics","Magnet schools"],"dcterms_title":["Magnet Review Committee: Budget"],"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/1138"],"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":["288 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\nThe transcript for this item was created using Optical Character Recognition (OCR) and may contain some errors.\nMagnet Review Co1111nittee 1900 North Main Street  Su ite 101 North Little Rock, Arkansas 72114 Donna Grady Creer Executive Director  ,,{,,, ,,._,p.4 - (50 11 753 -0156 December 1, 1998 The Honorable Susan Webber Wright Judge, U.S. District Court Eastern District of Arkansas 600 West Capitol Suite 302 Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Judge Wright: As you know, the Magnet Review Committee was est Circuit Court of Appeals at St. Louis. The Committee is monitoring, evaluating and recommending changes i schools, as well as recruitment for the six original maI rr,agnet s,,d1Qols. The Magnet Review Committee is al fli=fo-M transfer students between Little Rock School [ School District and is allocateq an annual budget of$ three districts contriouting $25,000 each fiscal year, \\/\\ the ADE. \\_l:!l-1 ..,0hu1\"\"? h'/ \u0026lt;- ..nl, ,(c -\np\u0026lt;J \u0026lt;1--f- ~A~~ rlt{JJ. Ct1~c c~u ~L ~ c__ lh1-P-J-\u0026lt;.d vl~t_ tr 1) Since its inception, the MRC has operated within this S 150,000 budget. ,/.,\u0026lt; \" 2) Fiscal Year 1998-99 budget in the amount of $150,000 was approved (Jr  .'~- (_, by the MRC on August 6, 1998.  _,\\kl r 1 , '\\~ I 3) To this point, the MRC has contained expenditures to remain within the )o ,.,1 J k i\nr- \\. initial allocation. o.:t of:,( ~ 4) Increases in cost of services has caused us to predict a deficit spending or a ~J--} Y. -1J reduction in services for the 1998-99 fiscal year. \\--\n, t ''~( ~J~\nqi~1\nd' 5) The MRC, by formal motion and vote, approved the increase at its ':,\"' ~ , \u0026lt;''\nJ' _:\n, . \\\"'.... October 22, 1998 meeting. I'-- \"' r\n., ~ ~ ,. O'- 0\\ / ' .i\\ We, therefore, are seeking your approval for an increase in the amount allocated. For your ~ c, review, we have attached data which speaks to the need for an increase. ',, At this time, we respectfully request that the Magnet Review Committee Office budget be increase :r-om- 000 to $185,000. This action would increase each district's proportional share b $~33.33-- 0 to $30,833.33) a,J.JM, .......... ~,e the State's MRC budget contribution , 00 ($75,000, plus dcitt-io1r7,,5I0 0). he $35,000 additional funding request reflects a 23% increase in the budgeted a n or the Magnet Review Committee. t ~ '\n,- \\ {'( /\\ 1\\.-.\u0026lt;- ~ I',\u0026gt; \\_.~ 1P Ov ..,\\' '?J' '- e\u0026gt; ,J,,u-J .,J \\..'~ \\ t , - _..\\, l\\C. 1 .Jg (, ., f ,\"'v\\Q ~ ~ \\ 0\\\" tie ~ \\\\ ,,,\u0026lt; \"'7 , .. 1lt\"\"' r t.,JY' 0~..1. .,...-7).:, '  :.\\-\"-t.l\u0026lt;r \" X-,,-. \\j:)\\ ~('I .. \u0026lt;'~\\\\J \\ ~'I t't r'j .,- V- ~.! (.,,... ti/ tr\u0026gt;~ J.. \\\\ ... --J~ ~ , D' I'\\ o\u0026lt; \\ic' I ,~, \\ .,, ,..l -,- \\ ~, \\\\\"\" i- \" \"\\ '-- - \u0026lt;\u0026gt;J' I \\\" (2 I 1 Q \\ I ~\\--,..- ~ Magnet Review Co1111nittee Donna Grady Creer Executive Director December 1, 1998 1900 North Main Street  Suite 101 North Little Rock, Arkansas 72114 RECEIVED The Honorable Susan Webber Wright Judge, U.S. District Court DEC 1 1998 Eastern District of Arkansas 600 West Capitol Suite 302 Little Rock, AR 72201 OfflCE OF DESEGRESAT!ON MONITORING (501) 753-0150 1 ,\n(\\~~i I Dear Judge Wright: ,  \\ '7 '1, r\" \\A,l As you know, the Magnet Review Committee was established in Jul'l.J:-~ ~ .-'\\ Circuit Court of Appeals at St. Louis. The Committee is charged--wifnthe responsibility of ,,,, monitoring, evaluating and recommending changes in the actual operation of magnet / \"\nschools, as well as recruitment for the six original magnet schools and nine interdistrict i\" tY: rr:iagnet scb.g.oJs. The Magnet Review Committee is also responsible for recruitment of 0 ., tr fl:.:fo-M transfer students between Little Rock School District and Pulaski County Special ~-rY l School District and is allocat~_g. an annual budget of $150,000. That amount is funded by the \\'i l\" three districts contriouting $25,000 each fiscal year, with the remaining $75,000 coming fr om,.,\\~~7\\i'~ . the ADE. \\_B'/ wh~11,7  /4' b .1,,,v' t- ,. o' L,, l) Since its inception, the MRC has operated within this S 150,000 budget. , ~J~ 1 v'c~ / 2) Fiscal Year 1998-99 budget in the amount of $150,000 was approved C} (1'-' t?...,.~ by the MRC on August 6, 1998:  -\\~'( r r{ 1 t 3) To this point, the MRC has contained expenditures to remain within the\n\u0026gt;c, 1 c. / ~ i\n,i'-:\ninitial allocation . .. or~JoJ,{ .n ~ 4) Increases in cost of services has caused us to predict a deficit spending or a ,\nh:?-\n,,\\-,.1  .v o' /. :.Y reduction in services for the 1998-99 fiscal year. t\u0026gt; ~\n:\u0026gt;'\n1:\n~.:-J\nqi~1\n 5) The MRC, by formal motion and vote, approved the increase at its '\n.,\"' t--~ !\"ii , (\\ J ~:\n \\t--c..... October 22, 1998 meeting. ,,f ,-\n, ,,.,_ 0 -- ~ ~o'- o\\\" \" \u0026lt;',,~ (} We, therefore, are seeking your approval for an increase in the amount allocated. For your i :\n,\nreview, we have attached data which speaks to the need for an increase. - l. t\" .-:,\u0026lt;- At this time, we respectfully request that the Magnet Review Committee Office budget be increase~em-$-l-SQ,000 to $185,000. This action would increase each district's proportional share b'f-:l._~33 .33 Oto $30,833.33) a e the State's MRC budget contribution ~, 00 ($75,000, plus deiHo- 1~7,5I0 0). he $35,000 additional funding request reflects a 23% increase in the budgeted a n or the Magnet Review Committee. i L,, '\n. h~~ .\\:1--... ~ r-.\"\n--J_A 1 ? ..,\\ \\\\c:_./ ri')_-, (, \"l -i7~0 (--- .,., \\ f I ,rl'/ '' ,,,0 -A fl' ~ \" ~  ~.,) ti...., t:. ..i.1-~\"' ,,~ :+() , . :)'-,...~ ~('vr,.. . \\1-:,_\"r~-1~ . tf N~\\ re! ~~'(.,,,.. 1il~J\u0026lt;..: u--? :.. \\\\\\'-- f ~ . ,.9' f'i''\" o\u0026lt; \\ r-/'\u0026amp; ~\\ ~ ,, t' \\ ~ \\\\ --1~  \\'\u0026gt;..,i' ?'- \u0026lt;?. 'e  1,7 Q \\~ . ~J\\\\\" ... I / If you or the parties should need any additional information, I will be happy to provide it. Sincerely, ~~II. Ch  erson Magnet Review Committee SM/DGC:sml Attachment EXPENDITURES FRINGE BENEFITS Includes Social Security, Medicare, Teacher Retirement, Life Insurance, Health Insurance and Dental 1997-98 ACTUAL 14,173 \"In the approved budget, this figure was _ , ? v input at a lower rate, due to the anticipated '{ ,_. \\ i-' ~ . changes in teacher retirement, insurance, '- t-  \\ ...._..,, t.. 1..! L, etc. The new figure most accurately _.,. r' -\n-- . , . -:\n, \" 1 -' ref/eds the costs for this line item. u--\\-.. 11 C 1 PROFESSIONAL \u0026amp; TECHNICAL SERVICES Utilization of persons or organizations to provide\nr,ecializeq_ser.vices.Jhis category includes costs 6f the lnterdistrict Magnet S..cbQQJ.s...E'lClluation.Aru:w.olReport, and the month! travel allowance orovided to the xecutive Director oflhe Magnet Review Committee. \"Because of additional professional services required as a result of providing updated recruiting ~oo/s (e.g., bq,churr\ns. ra~ ~ ... etc./ and the website mqstec ad design which re/led changes in magnet schools, including new principals, updated curriculum, and the middle school transition, an increase in this line item is expeded MAINTENANCE OF EQUIPMENT \u0026amp; VEHICLES l l,868 1,532 1998-99 APPROVED 12,800 12,000 1,400 1998-99 REVISED AMOUNT  20,900 :/ 1s,ooo , _:.1,soo --------~f1 This covers the costs of service contracts for the office copier, t_tie R~OAes5y~te~ and the IBM Personal Typing System in the MRC Office. \"Because of contract cost increases since the equipment ls over ten years old, an increase in expenses is ex eded _ _ -__ _ RENTAL OF LAND AND BUILDING Monthly rent for the MRC Office is $1, 188.00 (1,296 square feet) and will remain that amount. 14,256 I 14,256 SAME EXPENDITURES (Continued) TRAVEL OUT OF DISTRICT This line item is used to send MRC members to the International Magnet Schools of 1997-98 ACTUAL 6,012 America Conference and the NCSO 1 '? ~ :'\u0026gt; Conference each year. r~~I~  C)~..,. .x_\\,' ftn order to decrease line items in the - .. c-7 -\ni_c u approVi udget,.l[J!.vel was one item ~\n:Jj' ~~ 1: whic as lowered m iffort to remain tt. ,-r.' within t e , VO total. Now, Donna ' Grady Creer has been e eded MSA President-Elect, this, in turn, will require her to attend Board meetings several times a year. Although some of the cost is borne by the MSA, the amount for travel out of the distrid has been increased to a requested figure as shown. \u0026lt;=_____ - POSTAGE Includes postage necessary to respond to parent inquiries, bulk mailings for recruitment purposes, and all other mailouts as necessary for the operation of the MRC office. No change in amount is requested. TELEPHONE Includes monthly billings and long distance charges, Internet access monthly charges, and FAX expenses. The MRC Office has been using a *butldingowned* FAX machine and paying a *per page rate. A new FAX machine has recently been purchased and expenses are expeded to decrease in the FAX line item. However, the Internet access has been added and the costs will again go up in this catego,y. oil p.f- ~ or- ~I .__, P1 -1 (. ,,, '1- \u0026lt; r 1,575 3,921 Page 2 1998-99 1998-99 APPROVED REVISED AMOUNT ' 3,500 *6,000 2,500 SAME 3,500 *4,000 EXPENDITURES (Continued) ADVERTISING The MRC is charged with the responsibility for recruiting students to the original interdistrid magnet schools and M-to-M transfer. In recent years, the interdistrid magnets have also looked to the MRC for recruitment assistance. With new principals in place in several of the magnet schools, new curriculum information to be distributed, and the middle schools transitioa-.Jgking place, a reconfiguration roll advertising brochures, M-to-M flyers, videos'dnd any other materials requiring modtfication is necessary 1997-98 ACTUAL 31,502 Poge 3 1998-99 1998-99 APPROVED REVISED AMOUNT 23,595 *35,000 PRINTING AND BINDING 2,700 1,200 *4,000 This category ties in with advertising expense. Even though the MRC Office copies whatever possible, voluminous jobs, such as a~ation , I ?. forms, are handled by outside agencies. r  J ~r .  Again, this amount has been increased to handle large pro/eds related to advertising the changes in the schools' make-up, new principals, and curriculum changes. OTHER PURCHASED SERVICES 3,700 I Includes any outside help necessary to finish ,..\n... t\\\"- .It , gjob fgc the. M\"-C Office. This will also incluae v ,-\n, ,\n\", catering services, etc., when necessary. 1  1 Due to increased meeting adivities, Magnet fair expenses, and all other recruitment f undions, this amount has been increased 2,000 f :' . ,., I - *4,000 SUPPLIES Materials nee ssary for the operation of the Mag t Review Committee Office. This is a cootrgolled line item and can be ~ -t held to buagete'a figures. ~~/)-\\ yl \\0 '\n,i f ~ .j--h\"- , I\"'-:\n, ).\".., ,....1--': ~~c..- l ~jO\\..:) PERIODICALS ~Q. o+h~~ Used to purchase media materials of interest to the MRC and its adivities (e.g., Education Week. Arkansas Democrat-Gazette. Arkansas Times. Magnet Schools of America materials!. Also includes MSA yearly membership fee to obtain a reduced rate for the MSA Conference in the spring. *The amount requested has been increased slightly in order to expand ./ our subscription access to more education periodicals. CAPITAL OUTLAY This category is used for any major expense for equipment for the MRC Office, such as a copier, computer, or office furniture. 1,217 572 1998-99 APPROVED 1,500 500 500 Page 4 1998-99 REVISED AMOUNT SAME *595 *5.000 ,, c-t'i ' J '-'f ,~ ~' I I,,. ' I *With the approved 7998-99 budget in August, .- \\ 1--, .. ~ ~. - ,o the MRC was planning not to make any ma\nor _\\ ::i \\ -r-'\u0026lt; , -st\" 1 ,.:y , { tJ purchases for the office. However, the copy ~i-....( 1 .('\\-::,'\" X\\) ~i-\n( 1 ~' ~ ,,, machine is over ten years old, and the telephone __.,., , ..) ~ l c- r~ SJ! 7 1 system is also. Consequently, some expenses , -::. ~ :\u0026gt;  --\n~ Ii,, are anticipated for this category \\ ' .\\-:)  ,. ,\u0026gt;~' TOTAL BUDGET FIGURES SALARIES 79,251 70 749 .. 150,000 114,251 70 749 185,000 . ,, \\\"\\cl NOTE: Salary increases will be determined later in the year, after final negotiations are I I complet~d, and distrid salary increases are established. At that time, it will be ~ J' - / ermined if, and how much, an increase can be incorporated into the budget. \\ ,.. u' ~,v vt... ~! h ... y 7J'\nf'J')V-l- .,,~ r_ w,./-/v \n0t\u0026gt;- ) l(r-D -=,.- ? .,.-\\h.,. ,,~\\l -~~- u,)1.J4/Y\\. ,R{'r- --.....~.J~\"  /.1.,1\".\\' '\n)\"\"\u0026gt; ' 1(j ./\"if'' ~ 1,10 0(j-\n, Magnet Review Co1nn1ittee Donna Grady Creer Executive Director December l, 1998 1900 orth Main Street Suite l Ol North Little Rock, Arkansas 72114 RECEIVE The Honorable Susan Webber Wright Judge, U.S. District Court DEC 1 1998 Eastern District of Arkansas 600 West Capitol Suite 302 OlflCEOF DESEGREGATION rroRI Little Rock, AR 7220 l Dear Judge Wright: 501 758-01 SU As you know, the Magnet Review Committee was established in July, 1987 by the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals at St. Louis. The Committee is charged with the responsibility of monitoring, evaluating and recommending changes in the actual operation of magnet schools, as well as recruitment for the six original magnet schools and nine interdistrict magnet schools. The Magnet Review Committee is also responsible for recruitment of M-to-M transfer students between Little Rock School District and Pulaski County Special School District and is allocated an annual budget of $150,000. That amount is funded by the three districts contributing $25,000 each fiscal year, with the remaining $75,000 coming from the ADE. l) Since its inception, the MRC has operated within this $150,000 budget. 2) Fiscal Year 1998-99 budget in the amount of $150,000 was approved by the MRC on August 6, 1998. 3) To this point, the MRC has contained expenditures to remain within the initial allocation. 4) Increases in cost of services has caused us to predict a deficit spending or a reduction in services for the 1998-99 fiscal year. 5) The MRC, by formal motion and vote, approved the increase at its October 22, 1998 meeting. We, therefore, are seeking your approval for an increase in the amount allocated. For your review, we have attached data which speaks to the need for an increase. At this time, we respectfully request that the Magnet Review Committee Office budget be increased from $150,000 to $185,000. This action would increase each district's proportional share by $5,833.33 (from $25,000 to $30,833.33) and make the State's MRC budget contribution $92,500 ($75,000, plus the additional $17,500). The $35,000 additional funding request reflects a 23% increase in the budgeted amount for the Magnet Review Committee. . . . The Honorable Susan Webber Wright -2- December 1, 1998 If you or the parties should need any additional information, I will be happy lo provide ii. Sincerely, ~~II. Ch  erson Magnet Review Committee SM/DGC:sml Attachment cc: Ann Brown, Federal Monitor - ODM EXPENDITURES 1997-98 l 998-99 1998-99 ACTUAL APPROVED REVISED AMOUNT FRINGE BENEFITS 14,173 12,800 * 20,900 Includes Social Security, Medicare, Teacher Retirement, Life Insurance, Health Insurance and Dental *In the approved budget, this figure was input at a lower rote, due to the anticipated changes in teacher retirement, insurance, etc. The new figure most accurately ref/eds the costs for this line item. PROFESSIONAL \u0026amp; TECHNICAL SERVICES l l ,868 12,000 * 15,000 Utilization of persons or organizations to provide specialized services. This category includes costs of the lnterdistrict Magnet Schools Evaluation Annual Report, and the monthly travel allowance provided to the Executive Director of the Magnet Review Committee. *Because of additional professional services required as a result of providing updated recruiting tools /e.g ., brochures, radio/TV ads, etc./ and the website master ad design which reflect changes in magnet schools, including new principals, updated curriculum, and the middle school transition, an increase in this line item is expected MAINTENANCE OF EQUIPMENT \u0026amp; VEHICLES 1,532 1,400 *l,500 This covers the costs of service contracts for the office copier, the phone system and the IBM Personal Typing System in the MRC Office. *Because of contract cost increases since the equipment is over ten years old, an increase in expenses is expected RENTAL OF LAND AND BUILDING 14,256 14,256 SAME Monthly rent for the MRC Office is $1,188.00 (1,296 square feet) and will remain that amount. EXPENDITURES (Continued) TRAVEL OUT OF DISTRICT This line item is used to send MRC members to the International Magnet Schools of America Conference and the NCSD Conference each year. *In order to decrease line items in the approved budget, travel was one item which was lowered in an effort to remain within the $150,000 total. Now, Donna Grady Creer has been eleded MSA President-Elect\nthis, in turn, will require her to attend Board meetings several times a year. Although some of the cost is borne by the MSA, the amount for travel out of the dis/rid has been increased to a requested figure as shown. POSTAGE Includes postage necessary to respond to parent inquiries, bulk mailings for recruitment purposes, and all other mailouts as necessary for the operation of the MRC office. No change in amount is requested. TELEPHONE Includes monthly billings and long distance charges, Internet access monthly charges, and FAX expenses. *The MRC Office has been using a *buildingowned' FAX machine and paying a 'per page' rate. A new FAX machine has recently been purchased and expenses are expected to decrease in the FAX line item. However, the Internet access has been added and the costs will again go up in this category Page 2 1997-98 l 998-99 1998-99 ACTUAL APPROVED REVISED AMOUNT 6,012 3,500 *6,000 1,575 2,500 SAME 3,921 3,500 *4,000 EXPENDITURES (Continued) Page 3 1997-98 1998-99 1998-99 ACTUAL APPROVED REVISED AMOUNT ADVERTISING 31 ,502 23,595 *35,000 The MRC is charged with the responsibility for recruiting students to the original interdistrict magnet schools and M-to-M transfer. In recent years, the interdistrict magnets have also looked to the MRC for recruitment assistance. *With new principals in place in several of the magnet schools, new curriculum information to be distributed, and the middle schools transition taking place, a reconfiguration of all advertising brochures, M-to-M flyers, videos and any other materials requiring modification is necessary. PRINTING AND BINDING 2,700 1,200 *4,000 This category ties in with advertising expense. Even though the MRC Office copies whatever possible, voluminous jobs, such as application forms, are handled by outside agencies. *Again, this amount has been increased to handle large projects related to advertising the changes in the schools' make-up, new principals, and curriculum changes. OTHER PURCHASED SERVICES 3,700 2,000 *4,000 Includes any outside help necessary to finish a job for the MRC Office. This will also include catering services, etc., when necessary. *Due to increased meeting activ1Yies, Magnet Fair expenses, and all other recruitment functions, this amount has been increased EXPENDITURES (Continued) Page 4 1997-98 1998-99 1998-99 ACTUAL APPROVED REVISED AMOUNT SUPPLIES 1,217 1,500 SAME Materials necessary for the operation of the Magnet Review Committee Office. This is a controlled line item and can be held to budgeted figures. PERIODICALS 572 500 595 Used to purchase media materials of interest to the MRC and its activities (e.g ., Education Week. Arkansas Democrat-Gazette. Arkansas Times. Magnet Schools of America materials). Also includes MSA yearly membership fee to obtain a reduced rate for the MSA Conference in the spring. ~The amount requested has been increased slightly in order to expand our subscription access to more education periodicals. CAPITAL OUTLAY -0- 500 *5,000 This category is used for any major expense for equipment for the MRC Office, such as a copier, computer, or office furniture. ~with the approved 1998-99 budget in August, the MRC was planning not to make any maior purchases for the office. However, the copy machine is over ten years old, and the telephone system is also. Consequently, some expenses are anticipated for this category TOTAL BUDGET FIGURES 79,251 114,251 SALARIES 70 749 70 749 150,000 185,000 NOTE: Salary increases will be determined later in the year, after final negotiations are completed. and district salary increases are established. At that time, it will be determined if, and how much, an increase can be incorporated into the budget.  - I ., Magnet Review Co1111nittee Donna Grady Creer Executive Director December l, 1998 1900 North Main Street  Suite 101 North Little Rock, Arkansas 72114 RECEIVED The Honorable Susan Webber Wright Judge, U.S. District Court DEC 1 1998 Eastern District of Arkansas 600 West Capitol Suite 302 Little Rock, AR 7220 l Dear Judge Wright: OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MON!TORlNG As you know, the Magnet Review Committee was established in July, ] 987 by the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals at St. Louis. The Committee is charged with the responsibility of monitoring, evaluating and recommending changes in the actual operation of magnet 7-- schools, as well as recruitment for the six original magnet schools and nine interdistrict #'\" t)A-magnet schools. The Magnet Review Committee is also responsible for recruitment of 0 111 _ I' , M-fo-M transfer students between Little Rock School District and Pulaski County Special .r v School District and is allocated an annual budget of $150,000. That amount is funded by the -\u0026gt; bl,,,. three districts contriouting $25,000 each fiscal year, with the remaining $75,000 coming from f\n\\J the ADE. , 1 / }. Ir ~ c' l) ct'.., 2) 4) Since its inception, the MRC has operated within this S 150,000 budget. Fiscal Year 1998-99 budget in the amount of $150,000 was approved by the MRC on August 6, 1998. To this point, the MRC has contained expenditures to remain within the initial allocation. Increases in cost of services has caused us to predict a deficit spending or a reduction in services for the 1998-99 fiscal year. The MRC, by formal motion and vote, approved the increase at its October 22, 1998 meeting. r For your At this time, we respectfully request that the Magnet Review Committee Office budget be increase from $150,000 to $185,000. This action would increase each district's proportional share b $5,833.33 (frorn $25.,000 to $30,833.33) and make the State's MRC budget contribution $92,500 ($75,000, plus Hie additional 17,500)/ he $35,000 additional funding request reflects a 23% increase in the budgeted amount for the Magnet Review Committee. fl 1 The Honorable Susan Webber Wright -2- December l, 1998 If you or the arties should need any additional information, I will be happy to provide it. Sincerely, ~~II, Ch  erson Magnet Review Committee SM/OGC:sml Attachment cc: Ann Brown, Federal Monitor - ODM EXPENDITURES 1997-98 1998-99 1998-99 ACTUAL APPROVED REVISED AMOUNT FRINGE BENEFITS 14,173 12,800  20,900 Includes Social Security, Medicare, Teacher Retirement, Life Insurance, ~ Health Insurance and Dental *In the approved budget, this figure was input at a lower rate, due to the anticipated changes in teacher retirement, insurance, etc. The new figure most accurately ref/eds the costs for this line item. PROFESSIONAL \u0026amp; TECHNICAL SERVICES l l ,868 12,000  15,000 Utilization of persons or organizations to provide specialized services. This category includes costs of the lnterdistrict Magnet Schools Evaluation Annual Report, and the monthly travel allowance provided to the Executive Director of the Magnet Review Committee. *Because of additional professional services required as a result of providing updated recruiting tools (e.g., br_gg:w[.es, radj,gtJJ(_ ads, etc.) and the website..aJQ~ ad design which reffed changes in magnet schools, 0 including new principals, updated curriculum, and the middle school transition, an increase in this line item is expeded MAINTENANCE OF EQUIPMENT \u0026amp; VEHICLES 1,532 1,400 *l ,500 This covers the costs of service contracts for the office copier, the phone system and -\\ \u0026amp; )I the IBM Personal Typing System in the MRC ~ Office. t J \"- (' ~ 0 ~ :\nt *Because of contract cost increases since I 7 \"' the equipment is over ten years old, an increase in expenses is expeded RENTAL OF LAND AND BUILDING 14,256 14,256 SAME Monthly rent for the MRC Office is $1,188.00 (1,296 square feet) and will remain that amount. EXPENDITURES (Continued) TRAVEL OUT OF DISTRICT This line item is used to send MRC members to the International Magnet Schools of America Conference and the NCSD Conference each year. *In order to decrease line items in the approved budget, travel was one item which was lowered in an..effort to remain within the $150,000 total Now, Donna Grady Creer has been eleded MSA President-fled\nthis, in turn, will require her to attend Board meetings several times a year. Although some of the cost is borne by the MSA, the amount for travel out of the distrid has been increased to a requested figure as shown. POSTAGE Includes postage necessary to respond to parent inquiries, bulk mailings for recruitment purposes, and all other mailouts as necessary for the operation of the MRC office. No change in amount is requested. TELEPHONE Includes monthly billings and long distance charges, Internet access monthly charges, and FAX expenses. *The MRC Office has been using a 'bu11dingowned' FAX machine and paying a \"per page' rate. A new FAX machine has recently been purchased and expenses are expeded to decrease in the FAX line item. However, the Internet access has been added and the costs will again go up in this category. Page 2 1997-98 1998-99 1998-99 ACTUAL APPROVED REVISED AMOUNT 6,012 3,500 6,000 1,575 2,500 SAME 3,921 3,500 EXPENDITURES (Continued) ADVERTISING The MRC is charged with the responsibility for recruiting students to the original interdistrid magnet schools and M-to-M transfer. In recent years, the interdistrid magnets have also looked to the MRC for recruitment assistance. *With new principals in place in several of the magnet schools, new curriculum information to be distributed, and the middle schools transition taking place, a reconfiguration of all advertising brochures, M-to-M flyers, videos and any other materials requiring modification is necessary. PRINTING AND BINDING This category ties in with advertising expense. Even though the MRC Office copies whatever possible, voluminous jobs, such as application forms, are handled by outside agencies. *Again, this amount has been increased to handle large projeds related to advertising the changes in the schools' make-up, new principals, and curriculum changes. OTHER PURCHASED SERVICES Includes any outside help necessary to finish a job for the MRC Office. This will also include catering services, etc., when necessary. *Due to increased meeting adivities, Magnet fair expenses, and all other recruitment fundions, this amount has been increased 1997-98 ACTUAL 31,502 2,700 3,700 Page 3 1998-99 1998-99 APPROVED REVISED AMOUNT 23,595 *35,000 1,200 *4,000 2,000 *4,000 EXPENDITURES (Continued) SUPPLIES Materials nes ssary for the operation of the Magnet Review Committee Office. This is a controlled line item and can be held to budgetea figures. PERIODICALS Used to purchase media materials of interest to the MRC and its adivities (e.g., Education Week. Arkansas Democrat-Gazette. Arkansas Times. Magnet Schools of America materials). Also includes MSA yearly membership fee to obtain a reduced rate for the MSA Conference in the spring. *The amount requested has been ~ 1 increased slightly in order to ex122IJ.d our subscription access to more eaucation periodicals. CAPITAL OUTLAY This category is used for any maior expense for equipment for the MRC Office, such as a copier, computer, or office furniture. *With the approved 7998-99 budget in August, the MRC was planning not to make any ma\n'or purchases for the office. However, the copy machine is over ten years old, and the telephone system is also. Consequently, some expenses are anticipated for this category. 1997-98 ACTUAL 1,217 572 TOTAL BUDGET FIGURES SALARIES 1998-99 APPROVED 1,500 500 500 79,251 70 749 150,000 Page 4 1998-99 REVISED AMOUNT SAME *595 *5.000 114,251 70 749 185,000 Magnet Revieiv Cinn1nittee 1900 North Main Street  Suite 101 North Little Rock, Arkansas 72114 Donna Grady Creer Executive Director January 6, 1999  -The Honorable Susan Webber Wright Judge, U.S. District Court Eastern District of Arkansas 600 West Capitol Suite 302 Little Rock, AR 7220 l Dear Judge Wright: On Thursday, October 22, 1998, the Magnet Review Committee voted to adopt a y~a.d.L budget increase from $150,000 to $185,000. Four votes were in favor of the increase, with ffiese votes being cast by the State of Arkansas (~ve-~ ,  uo.d0cb.QQLDistrict, and the Joshua lntervenors. North Little Rock School o  t i om voting, anafhePtilaski County Special School District representativ was a sent. sis our custom, each Magne____ Review Committe_e me_mber discussed this issue wI I eir party. We are confident tho~ party supports this action. ~\n,.~~ .::vrf=/...-1- -(hp 7\nr)\"/,..~\u0026lt;.\n,-\"\", As you know, the Magnet Review Committee was established in July, 1987 by the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals at St. Louis. The Committee is charged with the responsibility of monitoring, evaluating and recommending changes in the actual operation of magnet schools, as well as recruitment for the six original magnet schools and nine interdistrict magnet schools. The Magnet Review Committee is also responsible for recruitment of M-to-M transfer students between Little Rock School District and Pulaski County Special School District and is allocated an annual budget of $150,000. That amount is funded by the three districts, with each district contributing one-sixth ($25,000) of the total amount and the State providing the additional three-sixths, or one-half ($75,000). (7 /.J, ~ l'v 11\n,C' :} '',,,,~ 2) Since its inception, the MRC has operated within this $150,000 budget. Fiscal Year 1998-99 budget in the amount of $150,000 was approved / \\ ~-.Y ,-?' ( }, .... by the MRC on August 6, 1998. ,\n.)- --\\ -\\ -'\":7.31 / ,V ...,,c....., ? .I,\\'/ J :') (iv\\./ /\\\"I\" Y ~ L,- / x 41 /.(t r.,t' C /X. To this point, the MRC has contained expenditures to remain within the initial allocation. Increases in cost of services have caused us to predict a deficit spending or a /\\/.)? reduction in services for the 1998-99 fiscal year. \\I \\\"' '1\n\"' J ?-l 1 .. / We, therefore, are seeking your approval for an increase in the amount indicated. For your '\" ,J ~ review, we have attached data which speaks to the need for an increase. r---\\\"-' \\' VJ _,\n-7-l,Q v {,./'5 \\'( \\ At this time, we respectfully request that the Magnet Review Committee Office budget be increased from $150,000 to $185,000. This action would increase each district's proportional share by $5,833.33 (from $25,000 to $30,833.33) and make the State's MRC budget The Honorable Susan Webber Wright -2- January 6, 1999 contribution $92,500 ($75,000, plus the additional $17,500). The $35,000 additional funding request reflects a 23% increase in the budgeted amount for the Magnet Review Committee. If you should need any additional information, I will be happy to provide it.  . Sincerely, ~ .  Sadie Mitchell, Chairperson Magnet Review Committee SM/DGC:sml Attachment cc: Ann Brown, Federal Monitor - ODM ~~-f,F/'\"'-:1-- , I -,--, ( N\" i. ~ . ._ C'V L-//\\ .. ' A.~r 197Y l\\f?il.ov~o -\u0026amp;,J+ ~ . }.__\"'-~~ y, L '~ .:e'\" 1,,+ EXPENDITURES FRINGE BENEFITS Includes Social Security, Medicare, Teacher Retirement, Life Insurance, Health Insurance and Dental 7 J /, j 'In the approved budget, this figure I  l'  7 was Input at a lo ale, due lo the l) ' 11 1-', }.\u0026gt; T anlicipat anges  teacher , I J retirement, ,n urance, etc. The new -, , ~ figure most accurately reflects the costs for this line item. PROFESSIONAL \u0026amp; TECHNICAL SERVICES Utilization of persons or organizations to provide specialized services. This category includes costs of the lnterdistrict Magnet Schools Evaluation Annual Report, and the monthly travel allowance provided to the Executive Director of the Magnet Review Committee. Because addilio 1 1 ~ professional services required /2! J..i as a res uh of providing updated P' \\ ?7 v recruiting tools /e.g., creative layout 4 ,,. \"\\ and design for brochures, l? )\"' .J( radio/TV ads, etcJ and the ,-r _:\n'' Website master ad design which , \\ \\' -\n,  .:71 . reflect changes in magnet schools, v-?' 1 '/ ,\n---'\" induding new principals, updated ? \\ curriculum, and the middle school \\ \\ transition, an increase in this line item is expected. MAINTENANCE OF EQUIPMENT \u0026amp; VEHICLES This covers the costs of service contracts for the office copier, the phone system and the IBM Personal Typing System in the MRC Office. Because of contrad cost increases since the equipment is over ten years old, an increase in expenses Is expected. ~ fil.!.QQfI 9,500 11,800 1,600 1997-98 ~ 16,925.68 733.45 1998-99 fil1QQ.E! 12,000 1,400 1s.ooo 1.650 MRC ExPENDINRES IContinuedl RENTAL OF LAND AND BUILDING Monthly rent for the MRC Office is $1,188.0011,296 square feetl and will remain that amount. TRAVEL OUT OF DISTRICT This line item is used to send MRC members lo the International Magnet Schools of America Conference and the NCSD Conference eoyea~r. ch 1 1 -The revised amou .1 ~ '\"' \"~' ' to bring travel fund ~ 1 1997-98 budgeted amount. e,, POSTAGE ~I-,, \"\"'l ),\\ \\ \"-, \\ Includes postage necessary to ~0 ~ r\u0026lt;'~~~ respond to parent inquiries, bulk ,,..,v rJ' mailings for recruitment purposes, 1 \\ 1..._ ... t '\\--:- and all other mailouts as necessary ' _  1_\n\\\"?' \\~'. for the operation of the MRC office. 1\\Y-J.. .,, ', vv\\\"- No change in amount is requested . {' TELEPHONE Includes monthly billings and long distance charges, Internet access monthly charges, and FAX expenses. -The Internet access has been added to the MRC's computer system. and the teleph0Relremmt1nicalion costswHl-g\u0026amp;- up ir:, this rolegery_ ..J- ---J2,_,\" ,s, D D\u0026lt;.J j) r -...,, ~ .. rt---r-t\u0026gt; ~of'o,... --fi-1 I\n:, 1997-98 fil.LQfilI 14,256 6,000 2,000 3,500 J 997-98 ~ 14,256 7,984.05 2,492.25 1998-99 .fil.!.QQfl 14,256 3,500 2,500 Page 2 1998-99 ID'.filQ AMOUNT 14,256 6,000 2,500 MRC EXPENDITURES IContinuedl ADVERTISING   The MRC is charged with the responsibility for recruiting students to magnet schools and M-to-M transfer. With new principals in place in several of the magnet schools, new curriculum information to be distributed, and the middle schools transition taking place, a reconfiguration of all advertising brochures, M-to-M flyers, videos and any other materials requiring modification is necessary. PRINTING AND BINDING This category ties in with advertising expense. Even though the MRC Office copies whatever possible, voluminous jobs. such as application forms for magnet schools for enrollment, are handled by outside agencies. Again, this amount has been increased to handle large proiecls related to advertising the changes in the schools' make-up, new principals, and curriculum changes. 1997-98 fil!QfilI 23,600 2,800 1997-98 AfJ!m 1998-99 BUDGET Page 3 1998-99 REVISED AMOUNT 25,658 .35 23,595 36,900 ~__./ .... ) L-,,7 (\n? \"\\01~ ~ r GYI I, (' I l ~/o 2,560 .25 l.200 3.200 _____.__/ .e\n./ ,, \u0026lt;\" ,._ MRC EXPENDITURES !Continued! CAPITAL OUTlAY This category is used for any major expense for equipment for the MRC Office, such as a copier, computer, or office furniture. TOTAL EXPENDITURES SALARIES TOTALS 1997-98 filLOOEI 1997-98 ACTUAL 733.45 1998-99 BUDGET 500 Page 5 1998-99 REVISED AMOUNT 3,700 81,972 96,437.77 79,251 114,251  68,028 70,749.00 70 749 70 749 150,000 167, 186.77-f, 150,000 185,000 ~ ,.\n-: I V h ' , l-- ... ., -,, 1,, e- :\nr,o''\": 1- -', /,N'/1. /l)C' 'o !?' '1,- NOTE: ,  r , I ( ~ .,. ,, , ' Salary increases will be determined later in the year, ofter final negotiations ore _. :\\J   \u0026lt;\n,( completed, and district salary increases ore established. At that time, it will be determined if, and how much, on increase con be incorporated into the budget. Donna Grady Creer Executive Director January 6, 1999 Magnet Review Committee 1900 North Main Street  Suite 101 North Little Rock, Arkansas 72114 The Honorable Susan Webber Wright Judge, U.S. District Court Eastern District of Arkansas 600 West Capitol Suite 302 Little Rock, AR 7220 l Dear Judge Wright: (501) 758-0156 On Thursday, October 22, 1998, the Magnet Review Committee voted to adopt a yearly budget increase from $150,000 to $185,000. Four votes were in favor of the increase, with these votes being cast by the State of Arkansas (two votes), Little Rock School District, and the Joshua lntervenors. North Little Rock School District abstained from voting, and the Pulaski County Special School District representative was absent. As is our custom, each Magnet Review Committee member discussed this issue with their party. We are confident that each party supports this action. As you know, the Magnet Review Committee was established in July, 1987 by the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals at St. Louis. The Committee is charged with the responsibility of monitoring, evaluating and recommending changes in the actual operation of magnet schools, as well as recruitment for the six original magnet schools and nine interdistrict magnet schools. The Magnet Review Committee is also responsible for recruitment of M-to-M transfer students between Little Rock School District and Pulaski County Special School District and is allocated an annual budget of $150,000. That amount is funded by the three districts, with each district contributing one-sixth ($25,000) of the total amount and the State providing the additional three-sixths, or one-half ($75,000). l I Since its inception, the MRC has operated within this $150,000 budget. 21 Fiscal Year 1998-99 budget in the amount of $150,000 was approved by the MRC on August 6, 1998. 3) To this point, the MRC has contained expenditures to remain within the initial allocation. 41 Increases in cost of services have caused us to predict a deficit spending or a reduction in services for the 1998-99 fiscal year. We, therefore, are seeking your approval for an increase in the amount indicated. For your review, we have attached data which speaks to the need for an increase. At this time, we respectfully request that the Magnet Review Committee Office budget be increased from $150,000 to $185,000. This action would increase each district's proportional share by $5,833.33 (from $25,000 to $30,833.33) and make the State's MRC budget t!.F ... ....1. .J.... ~ The Honorable Susan Webber Wright -2- January 6, 1999 contribution $92,500 ($75,000, plus the additional $17,500). The $35,000 additional funding request reflects a 23% increase in the budgeted amount for the Magnet Review Committee. If you should need any additional information, I will be happy to provide it. Sincerely, ~ .  Sadie Mitchell, Chairperson Magnet Review Committee SM/DGC:sml Attachment cc: Ann Brown, Federal Monitor - ODM EXPENDITURES 1997-98 1997-98 1998-99 1998-99 BUDGET ACTUAL BUDGET REVISED AMOUNT FRINGE BENEFITS 9,500 14,173.16 12,800 *20,819.94 Includes Social Security, Medicare, Teacher Retirement, Life Insurance, Heatth Insurance and Dental \"In the approved budget, this figure was Input at a lower rate, due to the anticipated changes in teacher retirement, insurance, etc. The new figure most accurately reflects the costs for this line item. PROFESSIONAL \u0026amp; TECHNICAL SERVICES 11,800 16,925.68 12,000 *15,000 Utilization of persons or organizations to provide specialized services. This category includes costs of the lnterdistrict Magnet Schools Evaluation Annual Report, and the monthly travel allowance provided to the Executive Director of the Magnet Review Committee. \"Because of additional professional services required as a result of providing updated recruiting tools /e.g., creative layout and design for brochures, radio/TY ads, etc./ and the Website master ad design which reffed changes in magnet schools, including new principals, updated curriculum, and the middle school transition, an increase in this line item is expeded. MAINTENANCE OF EQUIPMENT \u0026amp; VEHICLES 1,600 733.45 1,400 *1,650 This covers the costs of service contracts for the office copier, the phone system and the IBM Personal Typing System in the MRC Office. \"Because of contrad cost increases since the equipment is over ten years old, an increase in expenses is expeded. MRC EXPENDITURES IContinuedl Poge2 1997-98 1997-98 1998-99 1998-99 BUDGET ACTUAL BUDGET REVISED AMOUNT RENTAL OF LAND AND BUILDING 14,256 14,256 14,256 14,256 Monthly rent for the MRC Office is $1,188 .0011,296 square feetl and will remain that amount. TRAVEL OUT OF DISTRICT 6,000 7,984.05 3,500 6,000 This line item is used to send MRC members to the International Magnet Schools of America Conference and the NCSD Conference each year. \"The revised amount is requested to bring travel funds bock to the 7997-98 budgeted amount. POSTAGE 2,000 2,492.25 2,500 2,500 Includes postage necessary to respond to parent inquiries, bulk mailings for recruitment purposes, and all other mailouts as necessary for the operation of the MRC office. No change in amount is requested. TELEPHONE 3,500 3,418 .31 3,500 4,225 Includes monthly billings and long distance charges, Internet access monthly charges, and FAX expenses. \"The Internet access hos been added to the MRC's computer system, and the telephone/communication costs will go up in this category. MRC EXPENDITURES IContinuedl Page 3 1997-98 1997-98 1998-99 1998-99 BUDGET ACTUAL BUDGET REVISED AMOUNT ADVERTISING 23,600 25,658 .35 23,595 36,900 The MRC is charged with the responsibility for recruiting students to magnet schools and M-to-M transfer. \"With new principals in place in several of the magnet schools, new curriculum information to be distributed, and the middle schools transition taking place, a reconfiguration of all advertising brochures, M-to-M flyers, videos and any other materials requiring modification is necessary. PRINTING AND BINDING 2,800 2,560.25 1,200 3.200 This category ties in with advertising expense. Even though the MRC Office copies whatever possible, voluminous jobs, such as application forms for magnet schools for enroll-ment, are handled by outside agencies. \"Again, this amount has been increased to handle large pro/eds related to advertising the changes in the schools' make-up, new principals, and curriculum changes. MRC EXPENDITURES (Continuedl Page 4 1997-98 1997-98 1998-99 1998-99 BUDGET ACTUAL BUDGET REVISED AMOUNT OTHER PURCHASED SERVICES 3,000 5,025.68 2,000 *4,000 Includes any outside help necessary to finish a job for the MRC Office. This will also include the cost for our fiscal agent. *Due to increased meeting adivifies, Magnet Fair expenses, all other recruitment fundions, and contrad labor for incidental jobs, this amount has been increased from the 1991-98 budget. SUPPLIES 1,800 1,872.36 1,500 1.405.06 Materials necessary for the operation of the Magnet Review Committee Office. PERIODICALS 616 604.78 500 595 Used to purchase media of interest to the MRC and its activities (e.g., Education Week, Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, Arkansas Times, Magnet Schools of America materials). Also includes MSA yearly membership fee to obtain a reduced rote for the MSA Conference in the spring. *The amount requested hos been adjusted to keep in line with the 1991-98 adual expenses. MRC EXPENDITURES IConlinuedl 1997-98 1997-98 1998-99 BUDGET ACTUAL BUDGET CAP1T AL OUTLAY 1,500 733.45 500 This category is used for any major expense for equipment for the MRC Office, such as a copier, computer, or office furniture. \"With the approved 1998-99 budget in August, the MRC was planning not to make any major purchases for the office. The copy machine and the telephone system are over ten years old. Some expenses are anticipated for this category. TOTAL EXPENDITURES 81 ,972 96,437.77 79,251 SALARIES 68.028 70 749.00 70 749 TOTALS 150,000 167,186.77 150,000 NOTE: Salary increases will be determined later in the year, after final negotiations ore completed, and district salary increases ore established. At that time, it will be determined if, and how much, an increase can be incorporated into the budget. Page 5 1998-99 REVISED AMOUNT *3,700 114,251 70 749 185,000 Background Issues ODM Review of the MRC Budget Proposal Dated January 6, 1999 As explained in the MRC's cover letter, the MRC's office budget has been $150,000 since its inception, an amount ordered by the Court long years ago. The MRC is asking for a bigger budget ($185,000) to cover cost increases that have been rising and accumulating each year. While we believe the MRC does need more money, we'd like to see some changes in the budget and the budgeting process, which we' ll explain below. The MRC has never presented its office budget to the Court for annual approval. Rather, the MRC staff has reconfigured the dollar allotments within its budget every year, but always within the bottom-line $150,000. (The staff has carried over any money left from one year to the next in order to meet rising expenses while not disturbing the $150,000 bottom line.) Annual budget review and approval has been a function of the parties' representatives who comprise the MRC. Before the MRC submitted its final January 1999 version of its proposed 1998-99 budget, ODM worked with the MRC to refine the document, pointing out what we saw as problems and suggesting improvements. Our goal was that the MRC budget ultimately be: 1. clearly presented 2. easily understandable and defensible 3. aligned with the MRC's genuine financial needs for the year 4. a reflection of past expenditures and anticipated needs, rather than budgeting on past budget (the nefarious \"budgeting on budget\") The proposed budget was evidently prepared by the MRC Executive Director and her assistant, who don't have much experience or expertise in budget preparation. While they were willing to listen to our suggestions and adopted a few of them, they declined to make others, as explained below. We still believe the budget could be improved considerably. As submitted, the document isn 't clear, contains some budgeting on budget, and prompts many questions, which we will also point out below. It is important to understand the overriding concern of the MRC members that is driving their budget strategy: the committee does not want to risk changing, on an annual basis, the MRC budget total and thus the amounts contributed by the parties and the State. They fear that yearly budgetary changes could result in an increased budget total, thus providing an opening for the parties (especially the State) to raise objections and cause trouble. So this budget has been constructed (and padded) to cover an extended period of time, at least five years. Nevertheless, the budget document is labeled and offered as that for 1998-99. The MRC realizes that its budget must be offered and approved by its members on an annual basis, but the MRC doesn't intend to change the budgetary bottom line every year. 1 Document Critique In a nutshell, the MRC's strategy is to change the budget total this one time and stick to the new status quo for as many years as possible, thus minimizing the potential for making waves with the parties every year. We don't think this is the most useful or even honest way to construct a budget.  An amwal budget should be a tool, based on identified needs, for allotting adequate appropriations and guiding corresponding expenditures for one year's time. As needs and costs change, a budget must be realigned accordingly.  We don't object to a reasonable amount of cushion in a budget to provide flexibility and cover unexpected expenses, but an annual budget is just that: it has only a 12- month life span, because circumstances can change quickly and unexpectedly. Too much padding or number juggling destroys the budget's effectiveness as a planning and spending guide.  If the tvlRC inflates its budget to take care of outlying years in addition to the current 12 months, it will be taking in more money than it really needs, causing the parties to appropriate money they shouldn't have to. The tvlRC has no history of returning unspent monies to the parties who appropriate it, as does ODM. Yet, we do know that the tvlRC has squirreled away any unspent amounts to cover overspending as it occurs.  Some expenditures will probably rise each year (such as staff salaries, for example) but others could decline. Locking into a long-term budget removes some of the tvlRC's responsibility for managing public money in response to ongoing changes in circumstances and needs. The MRC is about to run out of money and overspend its budget or reduce its activities\nit needs a ruling as soon as possible. The cover letter, signed by MRC Chair Sadie Mitchell, admits that the NLRSD representative abstained from voting to approve the budget and the PCSSD representative was absent. Yet the Chair asserts confidence that each party supports the budget proposal. With one abstention and one absentee (one-third of the possible vote total), where does this confidence come from? The MRC approved the 1998-99 budget for the same old $150,000 last August, yet only five months later has made this request for more money. The appeal demonstrates that a budget designed to last for years at a time doesn't fit with the changing shortterm needs that obviously occur. (It probably also demonstrates that the MRC waited until it got into a tight financial corner to make its case for more money, perhaps hoping that a looming crisis - deficit spending or a reduction in services- would be sufficient to get a budget increase from the parties.) The Expenditures section presents many puzzles:  Fringe Benefits: The increase between 1997-98 Actual and 1998-99 Revised is 47%. This huge leap needs to be explained in terms of the salaries that are indicated later in the document. 2  Professional and Technical Services: The notation explains that additional professional services will be required, but the requested 1998-99 Revised amount ($15,000) is less than what was actually spent in 1997-98 ($16,925.68). This isn't sensible budgeting.  Maintenance of Equipment and Vehicles: The increase between what was spent in 1997-98 ($733.45) and that anticipated in 1998-99 ($1650) is 125%, a huge jump. Our contracts at ODM haven't fluctuated much (if any) due to equipment age. The notes claim that MRC equipment is over ten years old. In our book, that means the equipment is not only obsolete, it's about to break down. The Capital Outlay category does address the need for equipment purchases or upgrades, and provides for a significant sum. So why increase this category if you're going to buy new equipment? This is actually an example of budgeting on budget.  Travel Out of District: Travel in 1997-98 was almost $2000 more than revised for 1998-99. Yet the notes give no hint as to why this cutback is reasonable in light of past expenditures.  Postage: The amount allotted for postage remains unchanged and in line with the I 997-98 actual expenditures. Yet postage rates have increased. Moreover, we would expect that MRC mailings would increase in line with its new \"updated recruiting tools,\" some of which were necessitated by the LRSD's change to middle schools.  Telephone: The jump between the 1997-98 Actual and 1998-99 Revised is $806.67, which would allow more than $67.00 per month for Internet fees (which is what the notes say drove the increase.) That's an unrealistically high amount.  Advertising: The increase between 1997-98 Actual and 1998-99 Revised is $11 ,241.65, or 44%. This may be perfectly realistic, but how did they calculate the odd number of $36,900 (for 1998-99)?  Other Purchased Services: The amount spent in 1997-98 is over $ 1000 greater than in the revised budget for 1998-99. Yet notations cite increased meeting activities. This is another example of budgeting on budget rather than on expenditures and projected needs.  Supplies: The amount spent for supplies in 1997-98 was very near the budgeted amount, but the odd figure budgeted for 1998-99 ($1405 . 06) is almost $4 70 less than the previous year. How could they be sure they could cut supplies by 25% and arrive at this revised figure with such specificity?  Periodicals: The notes indicate that this line item for 1998-99 has been revised to be consistent with that of 1997-98, which was $604.78. How did they arrive at the odd new number ($595)?  Capital Outlay: This category as used here should really be entitled Equipment, as the Capital Outlay category is quite broad and Equipment is much more specific, according to the State's guidelines. evertheless, what's most significant here is that the revised numbers for 1998-99 reflect an increase of $3000 above the actual expenditures of 1997-98. Notes explain the increase will provide for replacing old equipment. Fine, but then the Maintenance category above surely doesn't warrant a 125% increase. 3 Potential Options  Salaries: Compensation for staff is expressed in a lump sum. It might be informative to indicate each employee's salary as ODM does. Further, a note explains that any salary increases will be determined later in the year. If salaries are indeed increased, where will the budget be modified to accommodate the raises?  Totals: The document indicates that the 1997-98 budget was $150,000, yet the amount actually spent that year was $167,186. Whence the money to cover the overspending? The document doesn't explain that the overspending was financed by carryover from previous years. Do they intend to persist in this pattern? 1. Approve the revised 1998-99 budget as submitted, but order the MRC to develop future budgets based on past expenditures and anticipated annual expenses. Order the state to pay 50% of the projected total and each district to pay 16.66%, as has been the practice. While this option would enable the MRC to most quickly get its cash flow problem under control, the districts have advanced the MRC some money, so it isn't in imminent danger of overdrawing its bank account. or 2. Order the MRC to submit within 10 (?) days a 1998-99 budget that is based on previous expenditures and anticipated annual expenses, instead of the flat amount of $185,000, along with justifications for each category. In any event, we think that it could be helpful for them to be required to model their budget format on that of ODM. We've spent so much time developing an easy-tounderstand budget and the parties are all used to it. It would be easy for the MRC to emulate our budget format to save them time and grief We will be glad to help them to get their revisions done quickly. 4 MAY-10-99 MON 13:28 SUSAN W WRIGHT FAX NO. 5013246576 P. 01 FILED U.S DISTRICT COURT ASTRN DISTRICT ARAANSAS IN THE UNITED ST A TES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION MAY' t O 1999 JAM~~W. M\\COAMACK. CLERK By: M , ~ U [\\ M ~ [\\,,...,- LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, Plaintiff, vs. PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL DISTRJCTNo. 1, et al., Defendants. .tvfRS . LORENE JOSHUA, et al., Intervenors, * *   *       * *  DI\n!' ci't:RII. No. LR-C-82-866 NATURE SAVER'\" FAX MEMO 01616 Dale l~ies  10 To Ii tJ ~ 'l.,.o t,..,,J From Co /Oeot. Co Phone# Phone, Fax\n'] 1,,-/.,, ..- ()1,, ITTi F .. , : . '----~--------------- KATHERINE KNIGHT, et al ., Intervenors, *  ORDER Before the Court is the request of the Magnet Review Committee (\"MRC\") to increase the MRC office budget from $150,000 per year to $185,000 per year effective with the 1998-99 school year. The proposal now under consideration was communicated to the Court by the chair of the MRC in a letter dated January 6, 1999 (attached). After reviewing the matter, the Court is inclined to approve the request. The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals established the MRC in 1987 to supervise the operations of the six magnet schools in the Little Rock School District (\"LRSD\"). The District Court later allocated $150,000 per year to fund the operations of the MRC and its office. The MAY-10-99 MON 13:29 SUSAN W WRIGHT FAX NQ 5013246576 P. 02 --::.., Court determined that the State of Arkansas, through the Arkansas Department of Education (\"ADE\"), should pay $75,000 of that allocation and each of the three Pulaski County school districts should pay $25,000. The MRC has never presented its office budget to the Court for annual approval\ninstead, the MRC staff has reconfigured line item allocations each year to total $150,000 and the MRC members have approved that budget each year. In the letter submission. the MRC chair explained that, over the years, normal inflation in the price of goods and services has strained the committee's $150,000 budget. Additionally, notes accompanying the budget explain that the restructuring of LRSD schools to accommodate the middle school initiative has required some substantial changes in the magnet schools. These changes necessitate an increase in advertising and recruitment costs, because brochures and other recruitment materials must be redesigned, printed, and distributed. The MRC further requests that the budget increase to $185,000 be shared by the ADE and the three districts in the same proportions as in the past, increasing the state's share (which is one-half) to $92,500 and each district's share (which is one-sixth) to $30,833.33. The letter submission asserts that four MRC members voted for the increase, one abstained, and one was absent. In August of 1998. the MRC approved a budget for the 1998-99 school year for the usual total of $150,000 in an apparent failure to foresee the need for increases in the same year. The need for additional funds to flow quickly to the MRC leads the Court to believe the request for a budget increase to $185,000 for 1998-99 should be approved. Accordingly, the Court is inclined to approve MRC's request for an increase in its 1998- 99 budget from $150,000 to $1-85,0{)0. The Court will allow the parties until and including May 2 MAY-10-99 MON 13:29 SUSAN W WRIGHT FAX NO. 5013246576 P. 03 24, I 999, in which to object to MRC's request. Should no objections be filed within the time allowed, the Court will enter an Order providing that within one week. each of the parties is to pay the MRC the amount of money that represents the difference between what the parties have already paid for the l 998-99 MRC budget and the expanded 1998-99 .\\'fRC budget hereby approved. IT IS SO ORDERED iliis /~ day of ,-:: 1999. m,~ ~ru7:r\"T UNITED STATES DISTRlCT COURT 3 NAY-10-99 NON 13:29 Donna Grady Creer Ex8C\\lllve Oi1'9C!or January 6, 1999 SUSAN W WRIGHT FAX NO. 5013246576 . - - . .... .., , Magtte0t  Review . Committee 1900 North Main Street Suite 101 North Little Rock, Ark.ansas 72114 The Honorable Susan Webber Wright Judge, U.S. District Court Eastern District of Arkansas 600 West Capitol Suite 302 Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Judge Wright: P. 04 (501 ) 758-0156 On Thursday, Odober 22, 1998, the Magnet Review Committee voted to adopt o yearly budget increase from $150,000 to $185,000. Four votes were In favor of the increase, with these voles being cost by the State of Arkansas (two votes), Little Rock SChocl District, and the Joshua lntervenors. North Little Rock SChool District abstained from voting. and the Pulaski t Coun1y Speclal School District representative was absent. As is our custom, each Magnet ~ Review Committee member d'ISCUSSed this Issue with their party. We are confident that each party supports this action.  As you know, the Magnet Review Committee was established in July, 1987 by the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals at St. Louis. The Committee Is charged with the responsibility of monitoring, evoluottng and recommending changes in the actual operation of magnet sthools, as well as recruitment for the six original magnet schools and nine inferdlstrict magnet school$. The Magnet RevieW Committee is also responsible for recruitment of M-to-M transfer students between Little Rock school District and Pulaski County Special school Distric\nt and is allocated\" annuQI budget of S 150,000. That amount iS funded by the three districts, with each distrkt contributing one-sixth ($25,000) of the total amount and the State providing the odditional three.sixths, or one-half ($75,000). 11 Since its Inception, the MRC has operoted within this $150,000 budget. 21 Fiscal Year 1998-99 budget in the amount of S 150,000 was approved by the MRC on August 6, 1998. ~) To this point, the MRC has contained expenditures to remain within lhe .J~\"-!al allocation. 41 fnaeases in cost of services hove caused us to predict a deficit spending or a reduction in services for the 1998-99 fiscal year. We, therefore, are seeking your approval for an increase In the amount indicated. For your review, we have attached data which speaks to the need for an increase. At this time, we rQspectfully request that the Magnet Review Committee Office budget be increased from $150,000 to S 185,000. This action would increase each dis1rid's proportional shore by $5,833.33 (from $25,000 to $30,833.331 and make the State's MRC budget MAY-10-99 MON 13:30 SUSAN W WRIGHT FAX NO. 5013246576 P. 05 The Honorable 5usan Webber Wright -2- January 6, 1999 contribution $92,500 {$75,000, plus the additional $17,500). The $35,000 additional funding request reflects a 231 increose ln the budgeted amount for the Magnet RevieW CommitteQ. If you should need ony addltlonol information, I will be happy to provide it. Sincerely, die , Magnet Review Committee SM/0GC:sml A1tochment CC: Ann Brown, ~deral Monitor - ODM =1 .-. ,-:, i NAY-10-99 NON 13:32 SUSAN W WRIGHT FAX NQ 5013246576 P. 01 EXPE~QITIJ~ES 1997-98 ]997-98 ~ illUi ~ ~ ~ ~ AMOUNT FRINGE BENEFITS 9,500 14,173.16 12.800 20.819.94 lndudes Sodol Security, Medicare, Teacher Reflfemenl, life Insurance, HQOl1h Insurance and Deotal rn the approved budge!, this flg11re was Input at a lower rate. dlle to the anfkipoled dlanges In teocJ,er retirement, lnsvronce. etc. 111a new l!gvre most occurafe/y relled.s the costs for this line Item. PROFES~IQI:::l~ !Ii TECHl::ll~ ~~Vl,E,:i 11,800 16,925.68 12,000 15,000 Utilization of persons or organfzolfons to provide sp@dalized services. This category Includes costs of the lnterdislricl Magnet Schools Evaluation Annual Report, and 1he monlhly travel allowance prO'lk:ied to the ElcflCUtive Director of the Magnet Review Committee. Because of additional professional services required as a re.suh of providing updated recruiting lr\u0026gt;Cls /e.g., creative layout and design for brochures. rad/o/TY ads, etcJ and the WebSJte mos/er ad design which reflect changes In mognet schools. indudlng new principals. updated currlcvltJm. and the middle school transition, on Increase in this fine item is expected. M~NTENAN'E QE fQUIPMENT i VEHICLES 1,600 733.45 l.400 1,650 This covers the costs of service contracts for the office copier. the phone system and !he ISM Personal Typing System in the MR.C Office. Because of con/rad cos! increases since the equipment is o.-er ten years old, an increase In expenses is expected. NAY-10-99 NON 13:33 SUSAN W WRIGHT FAX NQ 501 3246576 P. 01 MRC ExPENOOURE5 tContlnuedl Poge 2 1997.95 1991-96 li2.l-li )998-99 .au.Q!ill AQ!.!AL lill.O!'ill 1ill'!ili:2 ~Q!..!t:il RENTAL OF lAl':IIJ 61':!IJ ~~IL~ 14,256 14,256 14,256 14,256 Monthly rent for the MRC Office is Sl, 188.0011,296 square feel! and wiO remain !hot amount, TRAVEL Q!.!I Qf ~IEIQ 6.000 7,984.05 3,500 6.000 This rine item is used to send MRC members to the lntemo1lono1 Magnet Schools of America Conference and the NCSD Conference each year. The revised amount Is requested to bring !ravel funds bock to the 1997-98 blldgeled amount. PQSTAGE 2,000 2,492.25 2,500 2.500 lndudes postage necessary to respond to porent Inquiries. bulk maihngs for recruitment purposes, and oil other mollouts as necessary for the operation of the MRC office. No change in amount is reques1ed. re_~PHONE 3.500 3,418.31 3,500 4,225 lndudes rnonthly btlllngs and long dls1ance charges, Internet access monthly charges, and FAX expenses. The Internet access hos been added to the MRC's CO/\"fl/Wfer system, and the telephone/communication costs will go up in this category. NAY-10-99 NON 13:33 SUSAN W WRIGHT MRC ExPENDmJRE5 IContinuedl ~QVERTISING The MRC is charged with the responsibility for recruiting students lo magnet schools and M-lo-M transfer. wlftl new pr!l'lcfpals in place in seYeral of the magnet scho\u0026lt;\nls, new CUff/aJ/um informahon fo be distribuled, and the middle schools trons,lion toking piece. a reconfiguration of ol odYerlising brochures, M-ro-M flyers, videos and any other materials requiring modific:ation is necessary. PRINTING AND BINDING This category ties in with advertising expense. Even though lhe MRC Office copies whatever possible, voluminous jobs, such as application forms for mognet schools for @nrol\\. menl, ore handled by outside agencies. Again, this amount hos bean increased ro handle large pro\nects related To advertising the changes in Ifie schools' make-vp, new principals, and Cllrric/Jlum changes. ill2=il ~ 23,600 2,800 FAX NO. 5013246576 P. 02 Poge3 .l.2.2Z.:2a ~ 1998-99 ~ ~ REV15ED ~Q!..!~ 25,658.35 23,595 36.900 2,560.25 1,200 3.200 MAY-10-99 MON 13:34 SUSAN W WRIGHT FAX NQ 5013246576 P. 03 MRC EX?ENomJRES fConttnuedl Poge4 ~ 1997.98 1998-99 ill:..2.2 ~ ~ BUDGET ~ ~9!.!t::il OTHER PUR~HA5EC ~f\u0026amp;Yl!:~ 3,000 5,025.68 2,000 \"4,000 lndudes any outside help necessary to finish o lob for the MRC Office. This w,N also include the cos! for our fiscal agent. aue to Increased meeting octM/les, Mognel Fair expenses.. oH other recruitment functions. ond con/rod lobar for inddental\nobs, fhis amount hos been increased from the 1997-98 budge/. SUPPt.lES 1,800 1,872.36 1,500 1,405.06 Materials necessary for the operation of the Mognet Re1ew Commlt1ee Office. PERIQPICALS 616 604.78 500 595 Used to purchase media of interest to the MRC and its octiv~ies fe.g~ Education Week. Arkansas Democraf-Oa.zi:lt~ Arkansas rimes, Magnet Sd'loots of Amerlco moterlolsl. Also indudes MSA yearly membership fee to obloin o reduced rote for the rwsA Conference In the spnng. \"The amcvnt reqve$led hos been od/vsfed lo keep /fl Hne WJ/h the 1997-98 octuol expenses. MAY-10-99 MON 13:34 SUSAN W WRIGHT FAX NO, 5013246576 MRC EXf'ENDITURES IConttnuedl .l.22Z:il 1997-98 1998-92 IDJ.000 ~ ~ CAP!r AL QUJlAY l,500 733.45 500 This category ls used for any major expense for equipment for the MRC Office, such as a copier, computer, or office furniture. wn11 the approved 1998-99 budget in August. the MRC ww- plonnlng nol lo make any ma\no, purchases for the office. The copy madline and the telephone ~fem are c.-er fen yecrs o . Some expensas are anflclpaled for !his colegory. TOTAL EXPENDITURES 81,972 96,437 .77 79,251 SALARIES .2...Ql. 70,74900 ~ TOTALS 150.000 167,186.77 150,000 NOTE: Salary increases wiU be determined later In the year, after final negolio1ions ore completed, and distrld solory lncreoses ore established. At tha1 time, it will be determined if. and how much, on Increase can be incorporated in1o the budget. P. 04 PogeS ]996-99 REVISED AMQUt:i! 3,700 114.251 70749 185,000 MAY 11 1999 OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING IN THE UNITED ST A TES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, Plaintiff, vs. PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL DISTRICT No. 1, et al., Defendants. MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, et al., Intervenors, KA THERINE KNIGHT, et al., Intervenors, * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ORDER No. LR-C-82-866 FILED U.S. DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT ARKANSAS MAY 1 0 1999 JAMES1W. M\\CORMACK, CLERK By: \\ . , ~ U I\\ M D J\"\\.-,' OEP CLERK Before the Court is the request of the Magnet Review Committee (\"MRC\") to increase the MRC office budget from $150,000 per year to $185,000 per year effective with the 1998-99 school year. The proposal now under consideration was communicated to the Court by the chair of the MRC in a letter dated January 6, 1999 (attached). After reviewing the matter, the Court is inclined to approve the request. The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals established the MRC in 1987 to supervise the operations of the six magnet schools in the Little Rock School District (\"LRSD\"). The District Court later allocated $150,000 per year to fund the operations of the MRC and its office. The 3261 Court determined that the State of Arkansas, through the Arkansas Department of Education (\"ADE\"), should pay $75,000 of that allocation and each of the three Pulaski County school districts should pay $25,000. The MRC has never presented its office budget to the Court for annual approval\ninstead, the MRC staff has reconfigured line item allocations each year to total $150,000 and the MRC members have approved that budget each year. In the letter submission, the MRC chair explained that, over the years, normal inflation in the price of goods and services has strained the committee's $150,000 budget. Additionally, notes accompanying the budget explain that the restructuring of LRSD schools to accommodate the middle school initiative has required some substantial changes in the magnet schools. These changes necessitate an increase in advertising and recruitment costs, because brochures and other recruitment materials must be redesigned, printed, and distributed. The MRC further requests that the budget increase to $185,000 be shared by the ADE and the three districts in the same proportions as in the past, increasing the state's share (which is one-half) to $92,500 and each district's share (which is one-sixth) to $30,833.33. The letter submission asserts that four MRC members voted for the increase, one abstained, and one was absent. In August of 1998, the MRC approved a budget for the 1998-99 school year for the usual total of $150,000 in an apparent failure to foresee the need for increases in the same year. The need for additional funds to flow quickly to the MRC leads the Court to believe the request for a budget increase to $185,000 for 1998-99 should be approved. Accordingly, the Court is inclined to approve MRC's request for an increase in its 1998- 99 budget from $150,000 to $185,000. The Court will allow the parties until and including May 2 24, 1999, in which to object to MRC's request. Should no objections be filed within the time allowed, the Court will enter an Order providing that within one week, each of the parties is to pay the MRC the amount of money that represents the difference between what the parties have already paid for the 1998-99 MRC budget and the expanded 1998-99 MRC budget hereby approved. IT IS SC ORDERED this\n/--day of 1/ 1999. ~~ ~FJU G --,, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT fHIS DOCUMENT ENTERED ON DOCKET SHEET 1H XMPUA~ WOH \u0026lt;llf 58 ANDIOR ?8(1) FA0P )N !:J-I - ev .vt:' ~ 3 Donna Grady Creer Executive Director January 6, 1999 1900 North Main Street  Suite 101 North Little Rock, Arkansas 72114 The Honorable Susan Webber Wright Judge, U.S. District Court Eastern District of Arkansas 600 West Capitol Suite 302 Little Rock. AR 72201 Dear Judge Wright: (501) 758--0156 On Thursday, October 22, 1998, the Magnet Review Committee voted to adopt a yearJy budget increase from $150,000 to $185,000. Four votes were in favor of the increase, wltti\" these votes being cast by the State of Arkansas (two votes), Little Rock School District, and11lie Joshua lntervenors. North Little Roek School District abstained from voting, and the Pulas f County Special School District representative-was absent. As is our custom, each Magnet Review Committee member discussed this issue with their party. We are confident that ~a party supports this action. As you know, the Magnet Review Committee was established in July, 1987 by the Efghth Circuit Court of Appeals at St. Louis. The-Committee is charged with the responsibility of monitoring, evaluating and recommending cha~ in the actual operation of mag,,.t : \"\" schools, as well as recruitment for the six original magnet schools and nine interdistrict magnet schools. The Magnet Review Committee is also responsible for recruitment of:  M-to-M transfer students between little Rock School Oistcid and Pulaski County Special . School District and is allocated an annual budget of $150\n000. lhat amount ls funded-by the  three districts, with each district contributing one-sixth ($25,000) of the total amount ana ttfe  State providing the additional three-sixths, or one-half ($75,000). 1) 2) 3) 4) Since its Inception, the MRC. has operated within this $150,000 budget. Fiscal Year t99~-99 budget in the amount of $150,000 was approved . ~ . bythe MR on August 6, 1998. . , . ' To t~is point, fhe MRC has contained expenditures to remain Within the  :  , [.Nial allocation, \"'  ~ ~ in cost of services have caused us to-predict a deficit spending ar a ,- rEJd':JdiQn Jn serv~es for the 1998-99 fiscal year.  - : We, therefore, are seeking your approval for an increase in the amount indicated. ror your review, we have attached data which speaks to the need for an i\"'crease. , , At this time, we respectfully request that the Mognet Review Committee Office budget be_:-.:increased from $150,000 to $185,000. This action would increase each district's proportional share by $5,833.33 (from $25,000 to $30,833.33) and make the St~e's MRC qudg~t . _   The Honorable SUSon Webber Wright -2- January 6, 1999 contribution $92,500 ($75,000, plus the additional $17,500). The $35,000 additional funding request reflects a 231. lnaease in the budgeted amount for the Magnet Review Committee. If you should need any adcfrtional information, I will be happy to provide it. Sincerely, d~/f Magnet Review Committee SM/OGC:sml Attachment cc: Ann Brown, Federal Monitor - OOM EXPE~DITURES ]997-98 ]997-98 1998-99 1998-99 ~ ~ ~ ~ AMQ!.!NT FRINGE BENEFTTS 9,500 14,173.16 12,800 20,819.94 lndudes Social Security, Medicare, Teacher Retirement, Life Insurance, Health Insurance and Dental tn the approved budget, this figure was Input at a lower rate. due to the anticipated changes in teacher retirement, insurance, etc. The new figure rr,ost accurately reflects me costs for this line item. PRQF5SIQNAL ~ TE!:t:JNICAL SE~~!:ES 11,800 16,925.68 12,000 *15,000 Utilization of persons or organizations to provide specialized services. This category indudes costs of the lnterdistrict Magnet Schools Evaluation Annual Report, and the monthly travel allowance provided to the Executive Director of the Magnet Review Committee. Because of additional professional services required as a resuh of providing updated recruiting tools /e.g., creative layout and design for brochures, radio/TV ads, etcJ and the Website master ad design which reflect changes in magnet schools, including new principals, updated curriculum, and the middle school transition, an increase in this line item is expected. MAINTENAN~E OF EQ!.!IPMENT ~ VEHICL5 1,600 733.45 1,400 *l,650 This covers the costs of service contracts for the office copier, the phone system and the IBM Personal Typing System in the MRC Office. \"Because of contrad cost increases since the equipment is over ten years old, an increase in expenses is expeded. MRC ExPENOOURB {Continued! Page2 1997-98 1997-98 1998-99 1998-99 B.U.QQfI ~ 6.U.QQ.EI ~ AMQ!.!NT RENTAL QF LANO ANQ 6!.!ILQ!t:::IQ 14,256 14,256 14,256 14,256 Monthly rent for the MRC Office is $1,188.0011.296 square feet! and will remain that amount. TRAVEL OUT QF DISTRICT 6,000 7,984.05 3,500 6,000 This line item is used to send MRC members to the International Magnet Schools of America Conference and the NCSD Conference each year. The rerised amount is requested to bring travel funds bade to the 1991-98 budgeted amount. PQSTAGE 2,000 2.492.25 2,500 2,500 lndudes postage necessary to respond to parent inquiries. bulk mailings for recruitment purposes, and all other mailouts as necessary for the operation of the MRC office. No change in amount is requested. TELEPHQNE 3,500 3,418.31 3,500 4.225 Includes monthly billings and long distance charges. Internet access monthly charges, and FAX expenses. The Internet access has been added to the MRC's computer system. and the telephone/communication costs wil go up in this category. MRC EXPENDITURES IContinuedl Page3 1997-98 1997-98 1998-99 1998-99 ~ ~ fil.!QQfI R.EYIS.fQ AMOUNT ADVERTI~ING 23,600 25,658 .35 23,595 36,900 The MRC is charged with the responsibility for recruiting students to magnet schools and M-to-M transfer. with new principals in place in several of the magnet schools, new curriculum information to be distributed, and the middle schools transition taking place, a reconfiguration of all advertising brochures, M-to-M flyers. videos and any other materials requiring modification is necessary. PRINTING ANQ BINQ!NG 2,800 2,560.25 1,200 3,200 This category ties in with advertising expense. Even though the MRC Office copies whatever possible, voluminous jobs, such as application forms for magnet schools for enroll-ment, ore handled by outside agencies. *Again, this amount has been increased to handle large projects related to advertising the changes in the schools' make-up, new principals, and curriculum changes. MRC EXPENOOURES IConttnuedl Page4 1997-98 1997-98 1998-99 1998-99 ~ ~ 6.1.!00EI IDfilQ AMQ!.!NT QTHER PUR!:\nHASEQ ~ERVl!:\nES 3,000 5,025.68 2,000 4,000 lndudes any outside help necessary to finish a job for the MRC Office. This will also include the cost for our fiscal agent. *Due to increased meeting adMties, Magnet Fair expenses, all other recruitment fundions, and contrad labor for incidental jobs, this amount has been increased from the 1997-98 budget. S!.!PPLIES 1,800 1,872.36 1,500 1,405.06 Materials necessary for the operation of the Magnet Review Committee Office. PERIODICALS 616 604.78 500 595 Used to purchase media of interest to the MRC and its activities le.g .. Education Week. Arkansas Democrot-Goz~tt~. Arkansas Times. Magnet Schools of America materials). Also includes MSA yearly membership fee to obtain a reduced rote for the MSA Conference in the spring. *The amount requested has been adjusted to keep in line with the 1997-98 actual expenses.    MRC ExPf NDITURES IConttnuedl 1997-98 1997-98 1998-99 6.1.J.QQE! ~ fil.!OOfI CAPIT Al OUll.AY 1,500 733 .45 500 This category is used for any major expense for equipment for the MRC Office, such as a copier, computer, or office furniture. ~with the approved 1998-99 budget in August, the MRC was planning not to make any major purchases for the off,ce. The copy machine and the telephone system are over ten years old. Some expenses are anticipated for this category. TOT AL EXPENOOURES 81,972 96,437.77 79,251 SALARIES ~ 7Q,749.00 7Q 749 TOTALS 150,000 167.186.77 150,000 NOTE: Salary increases will be determined later in the year, after final negotiations are completed, and district salary increases are established. At that time, it will be determined if, and how much, an increase can be incorporated into the budget. Pages 1998-99 RfY!S..EQ AMO!,!NT 3,700 114,251 70,749 185,000 IN THE UNITED ST A TES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, Plaintiff, vs. PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL DISTRICT No. 1, et al., Defendants. MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, et al., Intervenors, KA THERINE KNIGHT, et al., Intervenors, * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ORDER No. LR-C-82-866 By Order dated May 10, 1999 [doc.#3261], this Court informed the parties that it was inclined to approve the request of the Magnet Review Committee (\"MRC\") to increase the MRC office budget from $150,000 per year to $185,000 per year effective with the 1998-99 school year. 1 The Court allowed the parties a period of time in which to object to MRC' s request, and stated that should no objections be filed within the time allowed, the Court would enter an Order providing that within one week, each of the parties is to pay the MRC the amount of money that 1 The proposal was communicated to the Court by the chair of the MRC in a letter dated January 6, 1999, which was attached to the Order. represents the difference between what the parties have already paid for the 1998-99 MRC budget and the expanded 1998-99 MRC budget hereby approved. The time for objecting to MRC's request has passed with no objections being filed. Accordingly, MRC's request is granted. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that within one week of the date of entry of this Order, each of the parties is to pay the MRC the amount of money that represents the difference between what the parties have already paid for the 1998-99 MRC budget and the expanded 1998- 99 MRC budget hereby approved. Dated this L/l ~y of ~ 1999. ~ UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT TrilS DOCUMENT ENTERED ON DOCKET SHEET IN ::~oMPL)i\nCE WITH RULE 58 A(/OR 79(a) FRCP ON Of 1.f,/1'7 BY~  7 2 IN THE UNITED ST A TES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, Plaintiff, VS. PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL DISTRICT No. 1, et al., Defendants. MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, et al., Intervenors, KATHERINE KNIGHT, et al., Intervenors, * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ORDER No. LR-C-82-866 By Order dated May 10, 1999 [ doc.#3261 ], this Court informed the parties that it was inclined to approve the request of the Magnet Review Committee (\"MRC\") to increase the MRC office budget from $150,000 per year to $185,000 per year effective with the 1998-99 school year. 1 The Court allowed the parties a period of time in which to object to MRC's request, and stated that should no objections be filed within the time allowed, the Court would enter an Order providing that within one week, each of the parties is to pay the MRC the amount of money that 1 The proposal was communicated to the Court by the chair of the MRC in a lener dated January 6, 1999, which was anached to the Order. represents the difference between what the parties have already paid for the 1998-99 MRC budget and the expanded 1998-99 MRC budget hereby approved. The time for objecting to MRC's request has passed with no objections being filed. Accordingly, MRC's request is granted. IT IS THEREFORE ORDEREO that within one week of the date of entry of this Order, each of the parties is to pay the MRC the amount of money that represents the difference between what the parties have already paid for the 1998-99 MRC budget and the expanded. 1998- 99 MRC budget hereby approved. Dated this [/j__ ~ay of ~ 1999. ~JV~)~ UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT -:-~is DOCUMENT ENTERED ON DOCKET SHEET IN ~OMP[)/Ji\nIA/ITH RULE 58 ArJOR79(a)FRCP ON 6\n~~ BY ~  2 (!: Ji,,,,.,...,._ Magnet Review Conz,nittee 1920 North Main Street, Suite 1 01  North Little Rock, Arkansas 72114 (501) 758-0156 {Phone} (501) 758-5366 {Fax} magnet@magnetschool.com {E -mail} June 30, 1999 The Honorable Susan Webber Wright Judge, U. S. District Court Eastern District of Arkansas 600 West Capitol Suite 302 Little Rock, AR 7220 l Dear Judge Wright: RECEI 0 .. :,:.:. 1 lS99 OFF!aEGF tl!SEGREGATION MONITORING At its June 22, 1999 special-called meeting, the Magnet Review Committee, by formal motion and 4-0 vote (North Little Rock and Joshua lntervenors representatives were not present), approved the interdistrict magnet schools' actual budget for the six original magnet schools for the 1998-99 school year (Draft l). FINAL 1998-99 STIPULATED ORIGINAL MAGNET SCHOOLS BUDGET. The total amount budgeted, $20,146,910, is based on a per pupil expenditure of $5,127 .00, calculated from an average third-quarter enrollment of 3,929 .86 students. This budget reflects an increase of $473.00 per student over the 1997-98 budget, with the third year of the five-year proposed program improvement plan included. This final 1998-99 budget reflects actual figures and takes into account the variables (teacher retirement and health insurance changes) that were uncertain when the proposed budget was submitted in June, 1998. As you know, in correspondence dated May 7, 1999, the Magnet Review Committee requested a change in the magnet school grade configurations beginning with the 1999- 2000 school year. As described in that May 7, 1999 letter, tl:le changes result in an additional 132 magnet school seats. At its June 22, 1999 meeting, the Magnet Review Committee approved the proposed budget for the l 999-2000 school year for the six original magnet schools which reflected costs associated with the additio~al seats (Draft 1). PROPOSED 1999-2000 STIPULATED ORIGINAL MAGNET SCHOOLS BUDGET: The total proposed budget for the 1999-2000 school year is $22, 941 ,363, which results in a per-pupil expenditure of $5,648 and an increase of $521 .00 per student over the 1998-99 actual budget. Salary negotiations are in progress, and it should be noted that these negotiations may have an impact on the 1999-2000 proposed budget. It is the intention of the Magnet Review CommitteE, therefore, to submit this budget with the recognition that some flexibility rnay be necessary. The Magnet Review Committee respectfully requests the Court's review and approval of the l 998-99 finalized budget, as well as the proposed 1999-2000 budget, both att ached herewith. \"Pursue the Po.,, ihilitin of ,\\ta KIi i' / School 1: nro/1111111I \" . . ' The Honorable Susan Webber Wright -2- June 30, 1999 The Magnet Review Committee is committed to maintaining the existing quality of the original magnet schools. We will continue to work with the host district as we exercise stringent oversight of the magnet schools' budget in an effort to achieve and ensure efficient management and cost containment to the greatest extent possible. Sincerely, ~ Sadie Mitchell, Chairperson Magnet Review Committee SM/DGC:sl Attachments - Actual 1998-99 Original Magnet Schools Budget (Draft l) Proposed 1999-2000 Original Magnet Schools Budget (Draft l) cc: Ann Brown, Federal Monitor - Office of Desegregation Monitoring - 1998-99 BUDGET PROPOSAL(DRAFT 1) \\ SUMMARY FOR MAGNET SCHOOLS CERTIFIED 01 Principal STAFF 02 Asst. Pnn. 03 Specialists 04 Counselors 05 Media Spec. 06 Art-Perf./Prod. 07 Music 08 Foreign Lang. 09 Vocational 10 Special Education 11 Gifted 12 Classroom 13 Substitutes 14 Other-Kinderqarten TOTAL CERTIFIED SALARY SUPPORT 15 Secretaries STAFF 16 Nurses 17 Custodians 18 Information Services 19 Paraprofessionals-Other 20 Other-Aides 21 Fringe Beneflts(20) TOTAL SUPPORT SALARY TOTAL (10-20) PURCHASED 22 Ut1lit1es SERVICES 23 Travel (30) 24 Maintenance Agreements 25 Other TOTAL (30) MATERIALS 26 Pnnc1pal's Office SUPPLIES 27 Reqular Classroom (40) 28 Media 29 Other TOTAL (40) CAPITAL 30 Equipment OUTLAY 31 Bu1ld1ng Repair, etc. (50) 32 Other TOTAL (50) OTHER 33 Dues and Fees (60) 34 Other TOTAL (60) TOTAL (30-60) TOTAL (10-60) TOTAL LINE ITEMS - (SECOND PAGE) GRAND TOTAL 97-98 97-98 ,,.  \"''\\,. 97 98, F.T'.E\nBudger  :::::: .. ?f\\'Actua_l \",.\"\"\"'  6.0 $376,587 10.0 $488,462 39.2 $1,343,119 12.4 $505,887 6.5 $253,085 1.0 $26,065 0.0 $0 0.0 $0 12.6 $343,817 8.7 $289,709 5.4 $199,275 177.9 $6,147,115 0.0 $165,000 13.0 $425,964 292.7 $10,564,086 20.0 $407,495 5.4 $163,262 29.0 $356,470 1.0 $22,415 6.0 $133,806 37.0 $285,102 xxxxxxxx $3,090, 046 98 4 $4,458,595 xxxxxxxx $15,022,681 $617,803 $27,000 $0 )0000000( $156,919 xxxxxxxx $801,722 )0000000( $2,500 xxxxxxxx $574,289 XXX)OOO()( $35,450 XXlOO(X)O( $17,632 xxxxxxxx $629,871 xxxxxxxx $281,692 xxxxxxxx $0 $0 $281,692 $11 ,213 xxxxxxxx $0 xxxxxxxx $11,213 xxxxxxxx $1 ,724,498 391.1 $16,747,179 XXlOO(X)O( $1,412,026 xxxxxx $18,159,205 D JUL 1 1999 OffiCEOF DESEGREGATION MONITOat $379,403 $486,343 $1 ,364,146 $505,804 $247,844 $26,065 $0 $0 $344,417 $302,121 $199,275 $6,202,291 $127,946 $425,964 $10,611 ,619 $408,913 $163,742 $366,991 $22,416 $169,737 $312,321 $3,070,261 $4,514,381 $15,125,999 $559,062 $37,886 $0 $142,241 $739,1 88 $0 $462,324 $42,498 $17,721 $522,543 $334,791 $0 $0 $334,791 $32,049 $0 $32,049 $1 ,628,571 $16,754,570 $1 ,404,824 $18,159,395 98-99 / .,,,, ... .,,,., 98-99 ,:,,\u0026gt; ,, 'FlT\nE\n) t.,}.Prowsedt 6.0 $405,002 10,0 $538,313 40.2 $1,573,736 12.4 $562,628 6.5 $285,649 1.0 $29,673 0.0 $0 0.0 $0 12.6 $362,514 8.7 $358,938 5.4 $224,300 177.9 $6,850,936 0.0 $130,000 13.0 $507,181 293.7 $11,828,870 20.0 $442,653 5.4 $199,997 29.0 ,$453,656 1.0 $49,635 6.0 $173,752 37.0 $364,471 )0000000( $3,601,089 98.4 $5,285,254 $17,114,123 $607,657 $46,000 $0 $164,009 )(XX)OO()()( $817,666 XXX)O(XXX $1 ,500 \u0026gt;0000000\u0026lt; $510,244 )OOOO(XXX $43,250 $26,700 $58,~ ,694 XXX)O(XXX $412,097 XXiOOOOO( $0 $0 $412,097 $21,900 $0 XXX)O(XXX $21,900 XXX)O(XXX $1,833,357 392.1 $18,947,481 xxxxxxxx $1 ,199,429 xxxxxx $20,146,910 Line Item Costs - 1 \u0026lt;  Budget ./\\. ?ft:tK\n..-.,..\n..., ... .,.. ....., .. , .:.::: fi'frl\n{p~iiW F \\:: ..... :::?}: ::j:/::\n:::::/::~ : 1997-98 1997-98 1998-99 Stipends $33,837 $26,635 $37,366 Other Obiects $0 $0 $0 Indirect Costs $1,284,189 $1,284,189 $1,075,563 Vocational $32,000 $32,000 $32,000 Athletics  $40,500 $40,500 $33,000 Gifted Programs $500 $500 $500 Plant Services $15,000 $15,000 $15,000 Reading $500 $500 $500 Science $0 $0 $0 Enqlish $1,500 $1,500 $1,500 Special Education $4,000 $4,000 $4,000 $0 $0 $0 xx:xxxx $0 $0 $0 xx:xxxx $0 $0 $0 Tofal Line Items $1 ,412,026 $1,404,824 $1,199,429 Per Pupi!Cost/ 1998-99 BUDGET PROPOSAL(DRAFT1} 97-98 97-98 .,r .\" ,\n,97-98 \" . V 98c..99} \" 98-99){ :I Booker Magnet School F.T.E. Budget )? /,:/ Acttiar ..:\"':'-  f'/LE/ \"'\u0026gt;-, Pro.pos~cl}\".:. CERTIFIED 01 Principal 1.0 $61 ,582 $61 ,582 1.0 $67,173 STAFF 02 Asst Pr1n 1.0 $43,757 $44,246 1.0 $56,872 03 Specialists 7.0 $268,408 $270,556 7.0 $293,535 04 Counselors 2.0 $76,155 $76,071 2.0 $85,862 05 Media Spec. 1.0 $42,653 $42,653 1.0 $46,975 06 Art-Perf./Prod. 1.0 $26,065 $26,065 1.0 $29,673 07 Music 0.0 $0 $0 0.0 $0 08 Foreign Lang. 0.0 $0 $0 0.0 $0 09 Vocational 0.0 $0 $0 0.0 $0 10 Specia l Education 1.3 $55,624 $55,624 1.3 $61 ,889 11 Gifted 1.0 $39,594 $39,594 1.0 $44,121 12 Classroom 30.2 $1,042,379 $1,067,326 30.2 $1,144,112 13 Substitutes 0.0 $30,000 $17,666 0.0 $21 ,000 14 Other-Kindergarten 4.0 $105,300 $105,300 4.0 $146,338 TOTAL CERTIFIED SALARY 49.5 $1,791,516 $1,806,681 49.5 $1,997,549 SUPPORT 15 Secretaries 2.0 $39,821 $40,661 2.0 $42,999 STAFF 16 Nurses 1.0 $33,050 $33,530 1.0 $36,169 17 Custodians 4.0 $53,033 $58,134 4.0 $61 ,704 18 I nformat1on Services 0.2 $3,736 $3,736 0.2 $8,273 19 Paraprofessionals-Other 0.0 . $0 $0 0.0 $0 20 Other-Aides 7.0 $56,973 $58,696 7.0 $68,802 21 Fringe Benef1ts(20) $519,779 $517,153 $589,205 TOTAL SUPPORT SALARY 14.2 $706,392 $711 ,910 14.2 $807,152 TOTAL (10-20) $2,497,909 $2,518,591 $2,804,701 PURCHASED 22 Util1t1es $81,480 $75,300 $74,250 SERVICES 23 Travel $2,000 $10,143 $10,000 (30) 24 Maintenance Agreements 25 Other $13,350 $19,065 $28,584 TOTAL (30) $96,830 $104,508 $112,834 MATERIALS, 26 Pnnc1pal's Office SUPPLIES 27 Re\u0026lt;:iular Classroom $105,498 $75,760 $72,000 (40) 28 Media $5,250 $6,038 $5,500 29 Other $3,372 $3,453 $5,000 TOTAL (40) $114,120 $85,251 $83,500 CAPITAL 30 Equipment $65,760 $78,372 $77, 833 OUTLAY 31 Building Repair, etc. $0 $0 -- $0 (50) 32 Other TOTAL (50) $65,760 $78,372 $77, 833 OTHER 33 Dues and Fees $250 $2,655 $1 ,000 (60) 34 Other TOTAL (60) $250 $2,655 $1,000 TOTAL (30-60) $276,960 $270,786 $275,1 67 TOTAL (10-60) 63.7 $2,774,869 $2,789,377 63.7 $3,079,868 TOTAL LINE ITEMS - (SECOND PAGE) $217,370 $213,446 $186,314 I GRANO TOTAL xxxxxx $2,992,238 $3,002,823 xxxxx.x $3,266,181 Line Item Costs. - . . .,., .. B u_dget .,,.. .. ,.,.,.,.,.,.,. ::\n-::. .. -:-.-:,::..-:-:-: i/i,\\ : 'efciiio.~~4it Booker ' '/? \u0026gt;} /} : ,:j 1997-98 1997-98 1998-99 Stipends $8,357 $4,434 $10,686 Other Objects Indirect Costs $205,499 $205,499 $172,114 Vocational $0 $0 $0 Athletics $0 $0 $0 Gifted Programs $153 $153 $153 Plant Services $2,400 $2,400 $2,400 Reading $80 $80 $80 Science $0 $0 $0 English $240 $240 $240 Special Education $640 $640 $640 xxxxxx xxxxxx Total Lrne Items $217,370 $213,446 $186,314 Per Pupfl Cost 3rd Qtr. ADM or Proj. 624.39 624.39 630.43 Total Costs $2,992,238 $3,002,823 $3,266,181 1998--99 BUDGET PROPOSAL(DRAFT1} 97-98 97 98 \\/c,  c ,\"' .. ,.97-98' . . \u0026gt; .. ,-98~9!\nh, \u0026gt;}C::C:t\\98'-99\\f\\c:  Carver Magnet School F.T.E. Budqet Actual F.T.E\n,.,. .. . Proi:\u0026gt;os\"ed CERTIFIED 01 Pnnc1pal 1.0 $57,650 $57,650 1.0 $63,061 STAFF 02 Asst. Prrn 1.0 $45,496 $45,496 1.0 $53,026 03 Speci alists 8.0 $285,971 $285,886 8.0 $315,292 04 Counselors 2.0 $70,795 $70,795 2.0 $74,292 05 Media Spec. 1.5 $54,248 $54,248 1.5 $61,288 06 Art-Perf./Prod. 0.0 $0 $0 0.0 $0 07 Music 0.0 $0 $0 0.0 $0 08 Foreign Lang. 0.0 $0 $0 0.0 $0 09 Vocational 0.0 $0 $0 0.0 $0 10 Special Education 1.5 $50,773 $50,773 1.5 $56,857 11 Gifted 1.4 $48,976 $48,976 1.4 $55,762 12 Classroom 24.3 $694,929 $723,844 24.3 $828,825 13 Substitutes 0.0 $25,000 $16,739 0.0 $20,000 14 Other-Kindergarten 4.0 $128,706 $128,706 4.0 $145,675 TOTAL CERTI FIED SALARY 44.7 $1 ,462,545 $1,483,113 44.7 $1,674,077 SUPPORT 15 Secretaries 3.0 $48,392 $48,392 3.0 $60,537 STAFF 16 Nurses 1.0 $24,383 $24,383 1.0 $28,366 17 Custodians 4.0 $43,692 $43,462 4.0 $71,278 18 Information Services 0.2 $3,736 $3,736 0.2 $8,273 19 Paraprofessionals-Other 0.0 $0 $0 0.0 $0 20 Other-Aides 11 .0 $87,419 $87,718 11 .0 $112,097 21 Fringe Benefits(20) $456,456 $449,541 $544,184 TOTAL SUPPORT SALARY 19.2 $664,078 $657,231 19.2 $824,735 TOTAL (10-20) $2,126,623 $2,140,345 $2,498,812 PURCHASED 22 Ut1l1t1es $81 ,653 $72,098 $83,707 SERVICES 23 Travel $9,000 $7 ,676 $10,000 , (30) 24 Maintenance Agreements 25 Other $8,560 $8,147 $1i,915 TOTAL (30) $99,213 $87,921 $106,622 MATERIALS 26 Pnnc1pal's Office SUPPLIES 27 Regula r Classroom $57,660 $71 ,813 $57,800 (40) 28 Media $5,500 $9,651 $10,000 29 Other $3,600 $2,725 $3,200 TOTAL (40) $66,760 $84.189 $71 ,000 CAPITAL 30 Equipment $56,167 $35,442 $36,430 OUTLAY 31 Buildinq Repai r, etc XII I .... (50) 32 Other ,. . TOTAL (50) I $56,167 $35,442 $36,430 OTHER 33 Dues and Fees $4,000 $8,287 $8,000 (60) 34 other TOTAL (60) $4,000 $8,287 $8,000 TOTAL (30-60) $226,140 $215,839 $222,052 TOTAL (10-60) 63.9 $2,352,763 $2,356,184 63.9 $2.720,864 TOTAL LINE ITEMS - (SECOND PAGE) $217,167 $217,159 $183,238 GRAND TOTAL xxxxxx SZ,569,930 $2,573,343 xxxxxx $2,904,102 Line Item Costs - Budget Actual Proposed Carver . 1997-98 1997-98 1998-99 Stipends $13,390 $13,382 $12,010 Other Objects Indirect Costs $200,352 $200,352 $167,803 Vocational $0 $0 $0 Athletics $0 $0 $0 Gifted Programs $149 $149 $149 Plant Services $2,340 $2,340 $2,340 Reading $78 $78 $78 Science $0 $0 $0 English $234 $234 $234 Special Education $624 $624 $624 xxxxxx xxxxxx Total Line Items $217,167 $217,159 $183,238 Per Pupil Cost 1997-98 1997-98 (( , 1998~99 .. 3rd Qtr. ADM or Proj. 608.75 608.75 616.33 Total Costs $2,569,930 $2,573,343 $2,904,102 Per Pupil Cost $4\n222 y$4\n221   .. / $4:112 1998-99 BUDGET PROPOSAL(DRAFT1} 97-98 97-98 \\/ ,, ,.,/'97-98 ?,, . 98-99:, . ./\\::-,,.sa-99'\\'c\u0026lt;\\ . Gibbs Magnet School F.T.E. B Udctet)/.00:,  / 00c\u0026lt;Actua1c :,:,F,LE/ :):) Proo6$t'!c\nf ? CERTIFIED 01 Principal 1.0 $50,354 $53,170 1.0 $62,256 STAFF 02 Asst Pr1n 1.0 $58,119 $55,200 1.0 $48,518 03 Specialists 5.8 $169,956 $170,916 6.8 $230,842 04 Counselors 1.0 $43,567 $43,567 1.0 $48,507 OS Media Spec. 1.0 $43,696 $43,569 1.0 $49,766 06 Art-Perf./Prod. 0.0 $0 $0 0.0 $0 07 Music 0.0 $0 $0 0.0 $0 08 Foreign Lang . 0.0 $0 $0 0.0 $0 09 Vocational 0.0 $0 $0 0.0 $0 10 Special Education 1.5 $50,753 $58,247 1.5 $74,622 11 Gifted 1.0 $31,047 $31,047 1.0 $35, 111 12 Classroom 15.0 $485,954 $477,552 15.0 $522,415 13 Substitutes 0.0 $14,000 $7,009 0.0 $14,000 14 Other-Kindergarten 2.0 $67,312 $67,312 2.0 $76,237 TOTAL CERTIFIEb SALARY 29.3 $1 ,014,757 $1,007,589 30.3 $1,162,334 SUPPORT 15 Secretaries 1.4 $22,339 $22,260 1.4 $29,288 STAFF 16 Nurses 0.8 $14,569 $14,569 0.8 $32,457 17 Custodians 3.0 $40,097 $39,684 3.0 $45,642 18 Information Services 0.2 $3,736 $3,736 0.2 $8,273 19 Para professionals-Other 0.0 $0 $0 0.0 $0 20 Other-Aides 5.6 $40,499 $47,870 5.6 $36,188 .. 21 Fringe Benefits(20) $303,473 $307,216 $369,681 TOTAL SUPPORT SALARY 11 .0 $424,712 $435,335 11.0 $521,529 TOTAL (10-20) $1,439,470 $1,442,923 $1 ,683,863 PURCHASED 22 Utilities $39,439 $36,305 .... ,.,..,.-,, $38,201 SERVICES 23 Travel $2,000 $9,268 :.-...\n.. $8,500  ,' (30) 24 Maintenance Agreements 25 Other $3,985 $5,957 $Hi,824 TOTAL {30) yy $45,424 $51,530 $62,525 MATERIALS, 26 Pnnc1pal's Office $1,000 $0 $1,000 SUPPLIES 27 Regular Classroom $49,625 $35,821 $39,1 41 (40) 28 Media $3,500 $2,510 $3,000 29 Other $1,260 $1 ,488 $3,000 TOTAL (40) $55,385 $39,820 $46,141 CAPITAL 30 Equipment $62,059 $65,272 $183,040 OUTLAY 31 Building Repair, etc. (50) 32 Other TOTAL (50) $62,059 $65,272 $183,040 OTHER 33 Dues and Fees $1,000 $4,493 $1,000 {60) 34 Other ~ TOTAL (60) $1 ,000 $4,493 $1,000 TOTAL (30-60) $163,868 $161 ,115 $292,706 TOTAL {10-60) 40.3 $1,603,338 $1 ,604,038 41 .3 $1,976,569 TOTAL LINE ITEMS - {SECOND PAGE) $106,558 $106,558 $89,919 GRAND TOTAL xxxxxx $1 ,709,895 $1,710,596 xxxxx:x $2,066,488 Line Item Costs - / :: : .. /.Budge( ? .\n::::::\n:::::.:::'.:'11 ,,-.:\"' : \"'/ !  - '::':'c'i::  t tirc$~t~~~ l Gibbs\\ ::., .~ \u0026lt;\u0026lt; ,,,::rtt 1997-98 1997-98 1998-99 Stipends $540 $540 $835 Other Objects Indirect Costs $104,236 $104,236 $87,302 Vocational $0 $0 $0 Athletics $0 $0 $0 Gifted Programs $78 $78 $78 Plant Services $1,218 $1,218 $1,218 Reading $41 $41 $41 Science $0 $0 $0 English $122 $122 $122 Special Education $325 $325 $325 xxxxxx xxxxxx Total Line Items $106,558 $106,558 $89,919 3rd Qtr ADM or Proj 316.71 316.71 324.80 Total Costs $1,709,895 $1,710,596 $2,066,488 . Pe?'\"piJpi(1\nost..- :. -:::::,:::::,:,:::\\\\ik)? .//\\kit . ,.~ ,.,., ,,.,.,.,,,.,.,,,.,.,.,.,  ,,\"'\"'\"'' ~- n, :,:,:,::::::::::,:\n:::::::::::::,:,i,_p,\n.,.9~:: 1998-99 BUDGET PROPOSAL(DRAFT1) 97-98 97-98 '\". '\u0026gt; \"' \" -i':97-98'''' 'i 9\u0026amp;\n'9m: :::::.:. ,,\u0026gt; 98-9'9 ,i'i/i Willi ams Magnet School F.T.E. Budget /}' Actual \"\". it ,,,F\nT\nE} .. , .  ,. Proposed.\\,, .. CERTIFIED 01 Principal 1.0 $66,662 $66,662 1.0 $72,770 STAFF 02 Asst Pnn 1.0 $44,837 $44,837 1.0 $47,761 03 Specialists 5.0 $201,181 $201,181 5.0 $223,133 04 Counselors 1.4 $51 ,530 $51,530 1.4 $57,763 05 Media Spec. 1.0 $31 ,151 $26,038 1.0 $36,985 06 Art-Perf./P rod. 0.0 $0 $0 0.0 $0 07 Music 0.0 $0 $0 0.0 $0 08 Foreign Lang. 0.0 $0 $0 0.0 $0 09 Vocational 0.0 $0 $0 0.0 $0 10 Special Education 1.1 $39,220 $44,138 1.1 $50,456 11 Gifted 2.0 $79,658 $79,658 2.0 $89,246 12 Classroom 20.0 $703,555 $703,414 20.0 $807,642 13 Substitutes 0.0 $20,000 $12,980 0.0 $20,000 14 Other-Kindergarten 3.0 $124,646 $124,646 3.0 $138,931 TOTAL CERTIFIED SALARY 35.5 $1 ,362,442 $1,355,084 35.5 $1 ,544,686 SUPPORT 15 Secretanes 2.6 $47,016 $47,016 2.6 $53,584 STAFF 16 Nurses 1.0 $39,749 $39,749 1.0 $44,854 17 Custodians 4.0 $47,750 $53, 006 4.0 $55,662 18 Information Services 0.2 $3,736 $3,736 0.2 $8,273 19 Paraprofessionals-Other 0.0 $0 $0 0.0 $0 20 Other-Aides 9.0 $31 ,968 $43,637 9.0 $62,177 21 Fringe Benef1ts(20) $397,919 $393,877 , $472,966 TOTAL SUPPORT SALARY 16.8 $568,138 $581 ,020 16.8 $697,515 TOTAL (10-20) $1 ,930,580 $1,936,104 $2,242,201 PURCHASED 22 Utilities $54,789 $49,789 ._._.,\n'.:.:::--.-.. $50,168 SERVICES 23 Travel $3,000 $4,233 $3,500 , (30) 24 Maintenance Agreements 25 Other $6,000 $4,267 .. $6,329 TOTAL (30) - $63, 789 $58,290 )()O()OOO(X $59,997 MATERIALS 26 Princ1pal's Office XXXXXXl\u0026lt;X SUPPLIES 27 Regular Classroom $66,090 $72,633 )OO()OO(XX $62,608 (40) 28 Media $5,000 $4,662 $5,000 29 Other xxxxxxxx $1,400 $1 ,502 $2,500 TOTAL (40) xxxxxxxx $72, 490 $78,797 )(XX)()(X)()( $70,108 CAPITAL 30 Equipment . $34,480 $32,834 $34,400 OUTLAY 31 Bu1ld1ng Repair, etc. XXXlOO\u0026lt;)()( (50) 32 Other $0 $0 )OO()O(X)O( $0 TOTAL (50) xxxxxxxx $34,480 $32,834 xxxxxxxx $34,400 OTHER 33 Dues and Fees xxxxxxxx $800 $3,315 XXXlOOO\u0026lt;X $3,900 (60) 34 Other )0000000( .. TOTAL (60) xxxxxxxx $800 $3,315 xxxxxxxx $3,900 TOTAL (30-60) )0000000( $171,559 $173,235 $168,405 TOTAL (10-60) 52.3 $2,1 02, 138 $2,109,339 52.3 $2,4 10,606 TOTAL LINE ITEMS - (SECOND PAGE) $172,794 $164,394 $146,494 GRAND TOTAL xxxx:xx $2,274,932 $2,273,733 x:xxxxx .$2,557,100 Line Item Costs - w111iains.\u0026lt; 1997-98 1997-98 Stipends $8,400 $0 $8,358 Other Objects Indirect Costs $161,631 $161,631 $135,373 Vocational $0 $0 $0 Athletics $0 $0 $0 Gifted Programs $120 $120 $120 Plant Services $1,888 $1,888 $1,888 Reading $63 $63 $63 Science $0 $0 $0 English $189 $189 $189 Special Education $503 $503 $503 xxxxxx xxxxxx Total Line Items $172,794 $164,394 $146,494 3rd Qtr. ADM or Proj. 491.10 491.10 486.93 Total Costs $2,274,932 $2,273,733 $2,557,100 1998-99 BUDGET PROPOSAL(DRAFT 1) 97-98 97-98  .  . 97 -98 \" ...  98~99 \n,:?, .. :,:,98~S9)/t., Mann Magnet School F\nT.E. Budget: . ?'.\n:: \\\n\\\\. Actual \\ .......... . / F,T,E~\\ .tt,,,,.Pr.6.6Q~cj:.:.,) CERTIFIED 01 Principal 1.0 $68,177 $68,177 1.0 $67,313 STAFF 02 Asst. Prin. 3.0 $134,985 $134,985 3.0 $150,847 03 Specialists 3.6 $94,123 $120,390 3.6 $137,303 04 Counselors 3.0 $122,979 $122,980 3.0 $138,140 05 Media Spec. 1.0 $44,702 $44,702 1.0 $49,770 06 Art-Perf./Prod. 0.0 $0 $0 0.0 $0 07 MUSIC 0.0 $0 $0 0.0 $0 08 Foreign Lang 0.0 $0 $0 0.0 $0 09 Vocational 5.6 $149,318 $149,686 5.6 $161,424 10 Special Education 1.3 $36,600 $36,600 1.3 $44,557 11 Gifted 0.0 $0 $0 0.0 $0 12 Classroom 47.8 $1,605,497 $1 ,609,447 47.8 $1,736,395 13 Substitutes 00 $36,000 $36,915 0.0 $30,000 14 Other-Kindergarten 0.0 $0 $0 0,0 $0 TOTAL CERTIFlffi SALARY 66.3 $2,292,381 $2,323,881 66.3 $2,515,749 SUPPORT 15 Secretaries 5.0 $98,328 $98,328 5.0 $111,209 STAFF 16 Nurses 1.0 $34,864 $34,864 1.0 $38,901 17 Custodians 6.0 $64,058 $66,190 6.0 $87,118 18 Information Services 0.2 $3,736 $3,736 0.2 $8,273 19 Paraprofessionals-Other 1.0 $33,763 $33,087 1.0 $25,957 20 Other-Aides 2.4 $37,240 $41,005 2.4 $46,059 21 Fringe Benef1ts(20) $657,749 $653,559 $738,034 TOT AL SUPPORT SALARY 15.6 $929,738 $930,770 15.6 $1 ,055,550 TOTAL (10-20) xxxxxxx:x $3,222,119 $3,254,651 $3,571,299 PURCHASED 22 Utilities $169,276 $143,189 $158,629 SERVICES 23 Travel $4,000 $2,1 24 $7,000 (30) 24 Maintenance Agreements $0 $0 $0 25 Other ... $61,474 $64,787 $58,878 TOTAL (30) $234,750 $210,100 $22,4,507 MATERIALS, 26 Princ1pal's Office $1,000 $0 $0 SUPPLIES 27 Regular Classroom $129,299 $112,426 $119,615 (40) 28 Media \" $7,000 $10,227 .... $10,550 29 Other $3,000 $3,128 $5,000 TOTAL (40) $140,299 $125,780 $135,165 CAPITAL 30 Equipment $19,790 $25,448 $16,450 OUTLAY 31 Building Repair, etc $0 $0 $0 (50) 32 Other TOTAL (50) $19,790 $25,448 $16,450 OTHER 33 Dues and Fees $1,500 $6,678 $4,000 (60) 34 Other TOTAL (60) $1,500 $6,678 $4,000 TOTAL (30-60) $396,339 $368,005 $380,122 TOTAL (10-60) 81 .9 $3,618,458 $3,622,656 81.9 $3,951 ,421 TOTAL LINE ITEMS - (SECOND PAGE) $339,350 $339,350 $286,111 GRAND TOTAL xxxxxx $3,957,807 $3,962,006 xxxxxx. $4,237,532 Line Item Costs - Budget Actual Proposed Mann 1997-98 1997-98 1998-99 Stipends $3,1 50 $3,150 $1 ,672 Other Objects Indirect Costs $296,283 $296,283 $248,150 Vocational $15,480 $15,480 $15,480 Athletics $19,592 $19,592 $15,964 Gifted Programs $0 $0 $0 Plant Services $3,461 $3,461 $3,461 Reading $115 $115 $115 Science $0 $0 $0 English $346 $346 $346 Special Education $923 $923 $923 xxxxxx xxxxxx Total Line Items  $339,350 $339,350 $286, 111 Per Pupil Cost ,., 3rd Qtr. ADM or Proj. 900.23 900.23 889.83 Total Costs $3,957,807 $3,962,006 $4,237,532 Per Pupil Cost $4,396 .- 1998-99 BUDGET PROPOSAL(ORAFT1) \\l7J.l8  ?,-\u0026lt; \u0026gt;i 97-98 i!Jt\u0026gt;?r r: tt.n,.gsJ::: {}\\}  98:-99/ ?}i\\:98f9$ i?}J): Parkview Magnet School F.T\nE\n:  ,. Budget\\) ::: . {\\:t: A-cttlat tt\u0026gt;  Jffl\\E~ : { Pf6Whlic[ ) CERTIFIED 01 Principal 1.0 $72,162 $72,162 1.0 $72,429 STAFF 02 Asst Prin. 3.0 $161 ,268 $161 ,579 3.0 $181,289 03 Speciali sts 9.8 $323,480 $315,218 9.8 $373,632 04 Counselors 3.0 $140,860 $140,860 3.0 $158,064 05 Media Spec. 1.0 $36,635 $36,635 1.0 $40,866 06 Art-Perf./Prod. 0.0 $0 $0 0.0 $0 07 Music 0.0 $0 $0 0.0 $0 08 Foreign Lang. 0.0 $0 $0 0.0 $0 09 Vocational 7.0 $194,499 $194,730 7.0 $201 ,089 10 Special Education 2.0 $56,739 $56,739 2.0 $70,559 11 Gifted 0.0 $0 $0 0.0 $0 12 Classroom 40.6 $1,614,801 $1 ,620,709 40.6 $1,811 ,547 13 Substitutes 0.0 $40,000 $36,638 0.0 $25,000 14 Other-Kindergarten 0.0 $0 $0 0.0 $0 TOTAL CERTIFIED SALARY 67.4 $2,640,444 $2,635,271 67.4 $2,934,474 SUPPORT 15 Secretaries 6.0 $151,599 $152,256 6.0 $145,036 STAFF 16 Nurses 0.6 $16,648 $16,648 0.6 $19,250 17 Custodians 8.0 . $107,841 $106,515 8.0 $132,253 18 Information Services 0.2 $3,736 $3,736 0.2 $8,273 19 Paraprofessionals-Other 5.0 $100,043 $136,650 5.0 $147,795 20 Other-Aides 2.0 $31,002 $33,395 2.0 $39,149 21 Fringe Benefits(20) $754,670 $748,915 $887,018 TOTAL SUPPORT SALARY 21 .8 $1,165,538 $1 ,198,115 21.8 $1 ,378,773 TOT AL ( 10-20) $3,805, 982 $3,833,385 $4,313,247 PURCHASED 22 Utilities $191,166 $182,381 \" $202,702 SERVICES 23 Travel $7,000 $4,441 ,.,.,,,,., .... ,,., -.. - $7,000 (30) 24 Maintenance Agreements $0 $0 $0 25 Other $63,550 $40,018 :i:.:.a I.\n~,_ $41,480 TOTAL (30) $261,716 $226,840 -  $25~, 182 MATERIALS, 26 Princ1pal's Office $500 $0 $500 SUPPLIES 27 Regular Classroom $166,117 $93,871 ~ $159,080 (40) 28 Media $9,200 $9,410 $8,200 29 Other $5,000 $5,425 $8,000 TOTAL (40) r $180,817 $108,706 $175,780 CAPITAL 30 Equipment $43,437 $97,423 $63,944 OUTLAY 31 Bu1ld1ng Repair, etc. (50) 32 Other TOTAL (50) r $43,437 $97,423 $63,944 OTHER 33 Dues and Fees $3,663 $6,621 $4,000 (60) 34 Other TOTAL (60) $3,663 $6,621 ' \" $4,000 TOTAL (30-60) $489,633 $439,590 $494,906 TOTAL (10-60) 89.2 $4,295,614 $4,272,976 89.2 $4,808,154 TOTAL LINE ITEMS - (SECOND PAGE) $358,787 $363,918 $307,353 GRAND TOTAL xxxxxx $4,654,401 $4,636,894 xxxxxx $5,1.15,507 Line Item Costs - /\\\u0026gt;: :\": .-,,\".Budget: .,,:,:.:. . . :,,,,: 1:::::,? :-''.-:\"' .. _. -- ,,:-::,:, :: :: rH=lt$i\u0026amp;~t JJ Parkview:\"', \u0026gt;.  , \u0026lt;tt 1997-98 1997-98 1998-99 Stipends $0 $5,130 $3,805 Other Objects Indirect Costs $316, 189 $3 16,189 $264,821 Vocational  $16, 520 $16,520 $16,520 Athletics $20,908 $20,908 $1 7,036 Gifted Programs $0 $0 $0 Plant Services $3,693 $3,693 $3,693 Reading $123 $123 $123 Science $0 $0 $0 English $369 $369 $369 Special Education $985 $985 $985 xxxxxx xxxxxx Total Line Items  $358 ,787 $363,918 $307,353 3rd Qtr. ADM or Proj . 960.71 960. 71 981.54 Total Costs $4,654,401 $4,636,894 $5,115,507 OCT-18-99 HON 11:11 SUSAN W WRIGHT FAX NQ 5013246576 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COLTRT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DMSION LIT1LE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, Plaintiff, vs. * * No. LR-C-82-866 P. 01 fjLED U.S. DIST~ICT COURT EASTE:R OISTRJCT ARKANSAS ocr t s 1999 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, et al., Defendants, * * * * Post-It\"' brand fax transmittal memo 7671 1-!RS. LORENE JOSHUA, et al., Intervenors, * * * : TD Co. Ocpt. From Co. Phone KATHERINE Th1GHT, et al., Intervenors. * ---------------- ORDER Before the Court is the request of the Magnet Review Committee (\"MRC\") for approval of the interdistrict magnet schools' final budget for the 1998-1999 school year. The YIB.C communicated the final budget to the Court in a letter dated June 30, 1999 (attached) The etter also contains a proposed budget for the 1999-2000 school year\nhowever, the Court will address the proposed budget in a separate Order. The Court will allow the parties to and including 10 days from entry of this Order to object to :MRC's final budget for 1998-1999. Should no objections be filed within the time aUowed, the Court will enter an Order approving the budget . .--ft'- IT IS SO ORDERED THIS /j DAY OF OCTOBER, 1999 CHIEF JUDGE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT rHIS DOCUMENT ENTERED ON DOCKET SHEET IN CO~PUAN~zwr~~ 56 ANDIOA 79(\u0026gt; FRCP ')llf / (j, I 5L . l!!V __ .tt::::: OCT-18-99 MON 11:11 SUSAN W WRIGHT FAX NO. 5013246576 M agli.t!9t Review C om.[~1ittee 1920 North Main Street, Suite 101  North little Rock, Arkansas 72114 (501) 758-0156 {Phone} (501) 758-5366 {Fax} magnet@magnetschool.com {E-mail} June 30, 1999 The Honorable Susan Webber Wright Judge, U. S. District Cour1 Eastern District of Arkansas 600 West Capi1ol Suite 302 Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Judge Wright: At its June 22, -1999 special-called meeting, the Magnet Review Committee. by formal motion and 4-0 vote (North Little Rock and Joshua lntervenors representatives were not present), approved the interdistrict magnet schools' actual budget for the six original magnet schools for the 1998-99 school year !Draft 1). FINAL 1998-99 STIPULATED ORIGINAL MAGNET SCHOOLS BUDGET: P. 02 The total amount budgeted, 520,146,910, is based on a per pupil expenditure of $5,127.00, calculated from an overage third-quarter enrollment of 3,929 .86 students. This budget reflects an increase of 5473.00 per student over the 1997-98 budget. with the third year of the five-year proposed program improvement pion included. This final 1998-99 budget reflects actual figures and takes into account the variables (teacher retirement and health insurance changes) that were uncertain when the proposed budget was submitted in June, 1998. As you know, in correspondence dated Moy 7, 1999, the Magnet Review Committee requested a change in the magnet school grade configurations beginning with the 1999- 2000 school year As described in that May 7, 1999 letter, the changes result in on additional 132 magnet school seats. At its June 22, 1999 meeting, the Magnet Review Committee approved the proposed budget for the 1999-2000 school year for the six original magnet schools which reflected costs associated with the additional seats (Draft ll. PROPOSED 1999-2000 STIPULATED ORIGINAL MAGNET SCHOOLS BUDGET\nThe total proposed budget for the 1999-2000 school year is $22,941,363, which results in o per-pupil expenditure of 55,648 and an increase of $521.00 per student over the 1998-99 actual budget. Salary negotiations ore in progress, and it should be noted that these negotiations may have an impact on the 1999-2000 proposed budget. It is the intention of the Magnet Review Committee, therefore, to submit this budget with the recognition that some flexibility may be necessary. The Magnet Review Committee respectfully requQsts the Court's review and approval of the 1998-99 finalized budget, as well as the proposed 1999-2000 budget, both attoched herewith. \"Pursue the Possibilities of,\",lagnet School Enrollment\" OCT-18-99 MON 11:12 SUSAN W WRIGHT FAX NQ 5013246576 P. 03 The Honorable Susan Webber Wright -2- June 30, 1999 The Magnet Review Committee is committed to maintaining !he existing quality of the original magnet schools. We will continue to work with the host district as we exercise stringent oversight of the magnet schools' budget in an effort to achieve and ensure efficient management and cost containment to the greatest extent possible. Sincerely, ~, . ~..--- Sadie Mitchell, Chairperson Magnet Review Committee SM/DGC:sl Attachments - Adual 1998-99 Orlginal Magnet Schools Budget (Draft 1) Proposed 1999-2000 Original Magnet Schools Budget (Draft l) cc: Ann Brown, Federal Monitor - Office of Desegregation Monitoring OCT-18-99 MON tt:13 SUSAN W WRIGHT FAX NO. 5013246576 P. 04 IN THE UNITED ST A TES DISTRICT COL1RT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DMSION LIT1LE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, * Plaintllf: * VS. * No. LR-C-82-866 * PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL * DISTRICT NO. I, et al., * Defendants, *  :MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, et al., * Inteivenors, *  KATHERINE KNIGHT, et al., * Intervenors. * :MEMO TO THE FILE FNLED us OIST/~ICT ccu\n.r EASTERN OIS'f\"RICT ARXANSAS 0('.-, t A I\"\"\" Jv f ~ r\"'J\"J'j JAMES 8'1: ----~~~JJL Defendant Pulaski County Special School District (PCS SD) requested an informal inchambers conference [docket no. 3291]. The Court granted PCSSD's request and held a conference on September 22, 1999, with all parties present. Accordingly, the Court requests that the Clerk make the necessary docket entry to remove PCSSD's request from the pending motions' list. Dated this 14th da of October, 1999 o-Jo Baldwin Law Clerk to Judge Wright f IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DMSION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, * Plaintiff, * 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 FILED U.S. DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT ARKANSAS NOV 2 'l. 1999 JAME~VV.M:!MACK,ClERK By: \\J ,~U f\\ M V f'---- oep CLERK IV NOV 2 3 1999 OiRCEOf Before the Court is the request of the Magnet Review Committee (\"MRC\") for approval of the interdistrict magnet schools' final budget for the 1998-1999 school year. 1 Without objection, the Court hereby approves the budget as submitted. ,J IT IS SO ORDERED THIS Jib DAY OF NOVEMBER, 1999 QZ~,~2 'tttfjgF JUDGE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 1 The MRC communicated the final budget to the Court in a letter dated June 30, 1999. For a copy of the letter, see docket no. 3303, attachment.\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   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n\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_604","title":"Ombudsman","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":["1998/2000"],"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 administrators","School management and organization","Educational statistics"],"dcterms_title":["Ombudsman"],"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/604"],"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":["43 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\nThe Office of Ombudsman was established during the 1998-1999 school term and the position filled by James L. Washington, who had been principal of Henderson Junior High from 1994-1998.\nJOHN W. Walker, P.A. Attorney At Law 1723 Broadway Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 Telephone (501) 374-3758 FAX (501) 374.4187 JOHN W. WALKER RALPH WASHINGTON MARK BURNETTE AUSTIN PORTER. JR. received AUG 7 \" 1998 August 6, 1998 OTGEOf Mr. Junious Babbs Associate Superintendent Little Rock School District 501 Sherman Little Rock, AR 72202 Re: Job Description for Ombudsperson Dear Mr. Babbs: Mr. Walker asked that a share a copy of Joshuas draft of the job description for the Ombudsperson with you and Dr. Carnine. Enclosed is a copy of same. Please give me a call if you have questions. JCS/ Enclosure cc: Ms. Ann Brown Dr. Leslie Carnine Mr. Chris Heller Joshua Intervenors DRAFT JOB DESCRIPTION FOR THE POSITION OF OMBUDSPERSON POSITION: Ombudsperson for the Pulaski County School Desegregation Case QUALIFICATIONS: 1. Minimum of a Bachelors Degree. 2. At least five (5) years experience in management or supervisory capacity. 3. Must possess or be able to obtain an Arkansas Teachers Certificate. 4. making. Evidence of successful experience with parent and staff involvement in decision 5. Evidence of a strong commitment to quality desegregated education. REPORTS TO: Class counsel for the Joshua Intervenors will provide reports to the Superintendents of the Pulaski County school districts of Ombudspersons findings. SUPERVISES: Staff as may be designated by Joshua class counsel. JOB GOAL: To investigate and assist in the resolution of complaints about policies, procedures, practices of the Pulaski County school districts. The goal of the office of the Ombudsperson is to also assist the Pulaski County school districts with the task of ensuring that students and their parents and/or guardians are aware of their rights pursuant to district practices, policies and procedures, the student rights and responsibilities handbook, and all other applicable state and federal laws to ensure an equitable education to class members. The Ombudsperson will act as anadvocate on behalf of students and their parents and/or guardian involved in the discipline process, investigate parent and student complaints of race-based mistreatment and other complaints by students and parents relating to equitable access to and delivery of necessary educational opportunities and services being offered by the District. To this end, the Ombudsperson will work with District officials, students and parents to achieve equitable solutions. To communicate, assist and be available to help students and parents and/or guardians understand District educational philosophies, goals and objectives. JOB RESPONSIBILITIES: 1. To investigate and assist in the resolution of complaints regarding practices, policies, and/or procedures. 2. Attend discipline hearings on behalf of students and their parents and/or guardians to serve as an advocate regarding the discipline appeals process. 3. Attend administrative and/or teacher conferences on behalf of students and their parents and/or guardians to ensure proper educational needs and placement of students through proper assessment and other evaluations. 4. Attend Emergency Management Team conferences on behalf of students and/or their parents and/or guardians to ensure proper placement of students regarding their educational needs through proper assessment and other evaluations. 5. To investigate student and parent complaints of race, gender and disability-based mistreatment and attempt to mediate equitable resolutions. 6. To investigate student and parent and /or guardian complaints of race-based discrimination and attempt to achieve equitable solutions. 7. To provide summative quarterly reports to class counsel for the Joshua Intervenors outlining the relationship of the complaints to desegregation plan provisions, a summation of findings and conclusions and recommendations to remedy recurrence. 8. To provide written and/or oral reports to the Board of Directors regarding student and parent concerns. 9. Monitor all aspects of school operations. 10. Other duties as assigned by class counsel of the Joshua Intervenors.SALARY: Negotiable5013744107 UfiLKER LRU FIRM 847 P04Z0\u0026lt;1  17 '90 10: I I Attorney At Law . 1723 Broadway Little Rock. Arkansas tzzm Tslephone (501) 37.4^58 i FAX (601) 3744187 i J0H.X W. W.\\LSR RALPH WASHINGTON MARK BURNETTE AUSTIN POSTER. UR, Via Facsimile - 324-2146 August 20, 1998 Dr. Leslie Carnine Superintendent of Schools Little Rock School District 810 West Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Dr. Carnine: I understand that Mr. Walker has already contacted you about my position as ombudsperson. School has started. I have started to receive telephone calls from parents and patrons of the District The first problem which I would like to bring to your attention for discussion is that of the elimination of the staff position of social worker at Rockefeller Incentive School. I refer to Rockefeller as an incentive school because the basic characteristics of the student population have not substantially changed since the approval of the revised plan. We believe that the social worker position is important and necessary for the school's ability to relate to community concerns and to the needs of the underprivileged children therein. The social worker position has been one which has bce.n regarded as successful for many years. It is my and Mr. Walkers understanding that programs that have been successRil in facilitating desegregation and remediating problems which are attributable to class status will be continued rather than eliminated. 1 would, therefore, like to visit with either you, Ms, Sadie Mitchell, Mr. Junious Babbs or the appropriate person who has responsibility for this area. Please let me hear from you as soon as possible. Sim JO OTua Josfiua Intervenors JCS/ cc: Mr. John W. Walker Mr. Julius Babbs Mr. Chris Heller 1 I02/10/1999 15:03 5013242090 lrsd human resourses RASE 02 Little Rock School District Job Description Job Title: Job Code\nDOT Code: Division: Department: Location: Reports To: Prepared By: Prepared Date: Approved By: Approved Date: FLSA Status: \"OMBUDSMAN\" Administrative Services Administrative Services Student Assignment Building Associate Superintendent - Administrative Services Associate Superintendent - Administrative Services 07/24/98 Director - Human Resources 10/22/98 Non-Exempt SUMMARY To serve as a student/parent advocate upon instances of conflict and/or concern within the student school experience while working to achieve equitable solution among all parties. ESSENTIAL DUTIES AND RESPONSTBIUTIES include the following. Other duties may be assigned. -Ensure that students are aware of their rights pursuant to the Student Rights and Responsibilities Handbook. -Act as an advocate on behalf of students involved in the discipline process. -Investigate parent and student complaints of race-based mistreatment and attempt to achieve equitable solutions. SUPERVISORY RESPONSIBILITIES This job has no supervisory responsibilities. QUALIFICATIONS To perform this job successfully, an individual must be able to perform each essential duty satisfactorily. EDUCATION and/or EXPERIENCE Bachelors degree (B. A.) is preferred from four-year college or university\nor one to two years related experience and/or training\nor equivalent combination of education and experience. LANGUAGE SKILLS Ability to read and interpret documents such as policy manuals and procedure manuals. Ability to write routine reports and correspondence. Ability to speak effectively before groups of customers or employees of organization. MATHEMAHCAL SKILLS Ability to work with mathematical concepts such as probability and statistical inference, and fundamentals of plane and solid geometry and trigonometry. Ability to apply concepts such as Page 102/10/1999 15:03 5013242090 LRSD HUMAN RESOURStS PAGE 03 fractions, percentages, ratios, and proportions to practical situations. REASONING ABILITY Ability to define problems, collect data, establish facts, and draw valid conclusions. Ability to interpret an extensive variety of technical instructions in mathematical or diagram form and deal with several abstract and concrete variables. PHYSICAL demands The physical demands described here are representative of those that must be met by an employee to successfully perform the essential functions of this job. Reasonable accommodations may be made to enable individuals with disabilities to perform the essential functions. While performing the duties of this job, the employee is regularly required to talk or hear. WORK ENVIRONMENT The work environment characteristics described here are representative of those an employee encounters while performing the essential functions of this job. Reasonable accommodations may be made to enable individuals with disabilities to perfoim the essential functions. The noise level in the work environment is usually quiet. Page 2Arkansas Democrat 7^(JjazcLk |  TUESDAY, DECEMBER 1, 1998  Henderson principal named LR school district ombudsman BY CYNTHIA HOWELL ARKANSAS DEMOCRAWJAZETTE James L. Washington, principal at Henderson Junior High School since September 1994, will become the Little Rock School District's ombudsman, a new position required by the districts recently revised desegregation plan. Superintendent Les Carnine said Monday that as an ombudsman, Washington will serve as an advocate for parents and students who have problems or conflicts with the school district. Much of the ombudsmans work is expected to be done on behalf of parents and students who want to appeal disciplinary  actions. A committee of parents and teachers will be formed soon to interview candidates for Hendersons principal. The schools enrollment is 603 this year, down from 724 ItJit year. The committees recommendations will be forwarded to the superintendent, who will endorse one candidate to the School Board. Carnine said he hopes to complete the selection process by the School Boards Dec. 17 meeting, and no later than early 1999, in time for student pre-registration for the next school year. It is during pre-registration, Jan. 25 to Feb. 5, that parents select the schools their children will attend in 1999-2000. Henderson is one of eight Little Rock junior highs that will become a middle school for grades six through eight. Because sixth- and seventh- graders will be new to Henderson next year. Gamine said parents from Hendersons feeder elementary schools will be included on the candidate screening committec. The primary feeders for Henderson are Terry, McDermott and Romine elementary schools in west Little Rock. Carnine said a new principal may assume duties at Henderson as soon as the second semester starts in January, but that will depend on the new persons current responsibilities. Washington will delay assuming his new job until the new principal can take over. Washington is a longtime district employee who has worked in the student assignment office and as assistant principal at Hall High. He has experience at both the elementary and secondary school levels. Carnine described the job change as a lateral move for Washington and said his salary will not change. The ombudsmans position will be included in the district's department of pupil serx'ices, headed by Jo Evelyn Elston. In addition to acting as a parent and student advocate, the ombudsman should ensure that students are aware of their rights in tile district and should investigate and resolve complaints of racebased mislreatiuent. The revised desegiegation plan was negotiated by representatives of the school district and tlie families of black students who intervened in the districts 1982 desegregation lawsuit.5013744187 WALKER LAW FIRM 777 P02Z02 AUG 26 99 13:46 John w. Walker, p.a. Attorney At Law 1723 Broadway Little Rock, .Arkansas 72206 Telephont (501) 374-3755 RLX (501) 374-4187 JOHN W. WALKER RALPH W.ASHINGTON MARK BURNETTE AUSTIN PORTER. JR. August 26,1999 Via Fax Dr. Les Carnine, Superintendent Little Rock School District 810 W. Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Dr. Carnine: So that there will be no possibility of misunderstanding about the duties of the ombudsperson for the next school year I respectfully request a meeting with your top level administrative staff regardmg tlie subject including his budget, his relationship to other administrators and to Joshua and his reponing responsibilities. I request that you be in this meeting along with Dr. Linda Watson. Mr. Junious Babbs, Dr. Marion Lacy, Dr. Bonnie Lesley and Ms. Sadie Mitchell. It is our view that the position was effectively diminished in status and responsibility when Mr, James Washington made the negative report regarding Ms. Gayle Bradfords administration and treatment of black students. It is clear by his retraction letter that he was taking orders from higher * 11wlMwiO XlViil iXl^XXwX authority' and that he is not in a favored position in this district by the nature of the expectations of his job. I believe that it is important that he directly report to you, Dr. Carnine, rather than to Mr. Babbs, and that his work be as required by the plan. He is not an agent of the district per se\nrather, he is an agent of justice and fairness for the students, as you are, and he is paid by the district. He is an extension of you. This inquiry will also delve into the responsibility for the assistant superintendent for the district because his duties are also unclear. I suggest that we meet on September 8,1999 at 10:00 a.m. for a meeting that I expect to last between one and two hours. I also request that Mr. Chris Heller and Ms, Ann Brown be present along with Mr. James Washington. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Sincerely, '. Walker JWW:lp To: James Washington Little Rock School District Fax Number: 5013242213 FAX BLAST TO ALL MEMBER OFFICES USOA FROM\nRuth Cooperrider Deputy and Legal Counsel, Iowa - Office of Citizens' Alde/Ombudsman Capitol Complex, 215 E. Seventh Street, Des Moines, Iowa 50319-0231 Phone: 515-281-3592: Fax: 515-242-6007 E-mail\nrcooper@leqis.state.ig.us I am the USOA's representative to an Ombudsman Committee of the American Bar Association (ABA) which has been working to develop recommendations regarding the establishment of ombudsman offices. (The latest USOA newsletter has an article about the Committee.) The Committee's work has focused on defining vrtio is an Ombudsman, including what are the essential characteristics of an Ornbudsman^The CdmwlgeeT8~gettingTdoaBTo~completing its-work on a-Resolution-and an accompanyjDg,.epoilthat-WiJI be submitted to the ABA'S House of Delegates. Action taken by the House of Delegates on these documents or issues becomes official ABA policy. The Resolution is attached. The full report is available at www.abanet.org/adminlaw/ombud^atlanta.html. The Committee is presently reviewing various concerns and issues, most of which relate to defining or describing \"independence and \"confidentiality\". These unfinished issues include: 1. Whether the Resolution by itself adequately set out the defining essential characteristics of an ombudsman. 2. should confidentiality be guaranteed in light of current requirements in laws on\nequal employment opportunity. Freedom of Information Act, archives and record-keeping requirements, anv other law or agency want to access the Ombudsman's confidential records? Relationships between the Ombudsman and the federal Inspector Generals\nwho has access to a) b) what between these two agencies. a) b) Placing the Ombudsman outside the entity under the Ombudsman's jurisdiction. Is it appropriate for an ombudsman to investigate those who appoint, confirm or have power to remove the ombudsman? c) d) e) 0 Ombudsman's access to information What are the ombudsman's fair procedures? Providing the ombudsman with independent counsel. Broad versus narrow jurisdiction and comment ,eelMdocumansaep.abtein P-dsentingourp^ionto 1) Do you------ to the three fundamental charactenstics of an ombudsman: independence, neutrality/impartiaiity and confidentiality? feel the report adequately supports the definition in communicabng a definition which might 2) Do you form the basis of US law? it this coming month? I NEED YOUR COMMENTS BY OCTOBER 13, 1999, 6:00 P.M. CDT. If you think something in either the Resolution or Report needs to be revised, please be specific and if possible, provide the suggested language change. You may respond to me by e-mail, fax, or postal mail.DRAFT RECOMMENDATION OF THE OMBUDSMAN COMMITTEE TO THE SECTIONS OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW AND REGULATORY PRACTICE AND DISPUTE RESOLUTION BE IT RESOLVED, That the American Bar Association supports the use of ombudsmen in the public and private sectors and further recommends the following principles for the establishment of ombudsman offices, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, That the American Bar Association recommends that only those individuals meeting these principles may legitimately call themselves ombuds-men , n ombudsman is authorized by an entity to  (1) receive complaints and inquiries about, and to address, investigate, and examine alleged acts, omissions, improprieties, and systemic problems within the jurisdiction specified by the entity m the law or written policy establishing the ombudsman s office (2) exercise discretion to accept or decline to act on a complaint or inquiry (3) act on complaints and inquiries on the ombudsmans own initiative t J J via 1---- , 1  ul (4) operate by fair procedures to aid in the just resolution of a complaint or problem (5) resolve issues at the most appropriate level of the entity (6) function by such means as: (a) educating .  . , (b) developing, evaluating, and discussing options available to affected individuals (c) mediating (d) investigating (e) conducting an inquiry and report findings, and VC) WUUUVWUJ5 *A*i^v**x^ --------------------- 1 t V (f) making recommendations for the resolution of a complaint or problem to those persons who have the authority to act upon them. B. An ombudsman must be provided with these essential characteristics at a minimum to discharge the duties of the office effectively  (1) independence from control by any officer of the appointing entity or person who may be the subject of a complaint or inquiry in structure, function, and appearance (2) impartiality and neutrality, and (3) confidentiality. C. An ombudsman does not  (1) accept or provide notice to the entity of an alleged violation (2) make, change or set aside a law, policy or administrative decision (3) conduct an investigation that substitutes for determining rights in administrative or judicial proceedings (4) make binding decisions or determine rights, or (5) compel an entity or any person to implement the ombudsmans recommendations.Little Rock School District 810 West Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 Phone: (501) 324-2014 Fax: (501) 324-2213 JAMES L. WASHINGTON OMBUDSMAN Introduction Ombudsman Monthly Report August 1999 Of Webster defines ombudsman as, \"...one who investigates complaints and assists in achieving fair settlements.\" The word itself is Scandinavian in origin and generally refers to someone who is a representative, agent, or authorized person who safeguards and serves the interest of a particular group. Today, the position of ombudsman in its various forms (client ombudsman and consumer ombudsman, for example) has the reputation as a fair-minded, neutral and powerful source of assistance to those coping with bureaucracy. Building trust and credibility is vital to the success of any business. Most of the time, problems and concerns are resolved through the normal chain of command. However, there are times when problems are not addressed in a satisfactory manner. Unfortunately, the problem does not disappear. It may grow until it contaminates the entire business relationship. Providing the services of an ombudsman to work with the people involved in the business can effectively demonstrate the commitment to everyone in a fair and equitable manner. Ombudsmen are institutions that are involved in doing impartial investigations of citizens' complaints. An ombudsman receives the complaint and then conducts a thorough and dispassionate investigation searching for points of law and proper procedure and questioning whether the district may have done an injustice to a citizen. At the conclusion of an investigation, the ombudsman makes a recommendation about how the case should be resolved. Although the ombudsman does not have the power to reverse decisions, he should use whatever political powers available to try to enforce the recommendations. The function may occasionally involve mediation. The mission of the organizational ombudsman is to provide a confidential, neutral and informal process which facilitates fair and equitable resolutions to concerns that arise in the organization. In performing this mission, the ombudsman serves as an information and communication resource, upward feedback channel, advisor, dispute resolution expert, and change agent. While serving in this role, the ombudsman should adhere to the following list knows as The Standards of Practice: 1. Adhere to The Ombudsman Association Code of Ethics. 2. Base the practice on confidentiality. 2.1 An ombudsman should not use the names of individuals without permission. Ombudsman Monthly Report August 1999 Page 2 2.2 During the problem-solving process, the ombudsman may make known information as long as the identity of the individual contacting the office is not compromised, unless necessary. 2.3 Any data should be scrutinized carefully to safeguard the identity of each individual whose concerns are represented. 2.4 Publicity about the office conveys the confidential nature of the work of the ombudsman. 3. Assert that there is a privilege with respect to communications with the ombudsman and resist testifying in any formal process inside or outside the organization. 3.1 Communications between an ombudsman and others (made while the ombudsman is serving in that capacity) are considered privileged. Others cannot waive this privilege. 3.2 Do not serve in any additional function in the organization which would undermine . the privilege nature of our work (such as compliance of officer, arbitrator, etc.) 4. Exercise discretion whether to act upon a concern or an individual contacting the office. The ombudsman may initiate action on a problem he or she perceives directly 5. Are designated neutrals and remain independent of ordinary line and staff structures. No additional role (within the organization) which would compromise this neutrality. 5.1 The ombudsman strives for objectivity and impartiality. 5.2 The ombudsman has a responsibility to consider the concerns of all parties known to be involved in a dispute. 5.3 Do not serve as advocates for any person in a dispute within an organization\nhowever, do advocate for fair processes and their fair administration. 5.4 Help develop a range of responsibility options to resolve problems and facilitate discussion to identify the best options. When possible, help people develop new ways to solve problems themselves. 5.5 The ombudsman should exercise discretion before entering into any additional affiliations, roles or actions that may impact the neutrality of the function within the organization. 5.6 Do not make binding decisions, mandate policies or adjudicate issues for the organization.Ombudsman Monthly Report August 1999 Page 3 6. 6.1 6.2 7. 8. 9. 10. Remain an informal and off-the-record resource. Formal investigations - for the purpose of adjudication - should be done by others. In the event that the ombudsman accepts a request to conduct a formal investigation, a memo should be written to file noting this action as an exception to the ombudsman role. Such investigations should not be considered privileged. Do not act as agent for the organization and do not accept notice on behalf of the organization. Do always refer individuals to the appropriate place where formal notice can be made. Individuals should not be required to meet with the ombudsman. Al! interactions with the ombudsman should be voluntary. Foster communication about the philosophy and function of the ombudsman's office with the people to be serviced. Provide feedback on trends, issues, policies and practices without breaching fidentiality or anonymity. Identify new problems and provide support for responsible systems change. con- Keep professionally current and competent by pursuing continuing education and training relevant to the ombudsman profession. Endeavor to be worthy of the trust placed in the ombudsman. Activities and Complaint Summaries: 1. The ombudsman was contacted by a LRSD parent whose child attended Crystal Hill in the PCSSD. Her complaint was that the child has numerous sanctions although he has been diagnosed with a handicap. The parent indicated that she told the school about the handicap. The school was contacted. The parent was referred to the appropriate assistant superintendent in the PCSSD and advised of her rights by the LRSD ombudsman. 2. 3. 4. 5. The ombudsman was contacted by grandparents seeking help with establishing guardianship while the parents moved to another city. The assignment office was contacted and the process was completed. The assignment office The ombudsman initiated the development of the LRSD Dropout Prevention Plan with assistance from the district's coordinator. A former student contacted the ombudsman for assistance in asking a school transfer so that he can continue his education to become a teacher. The visit to the admission officer was productive. Regular contact is maintained by phone. It was explained The parent of a student who had been recommended for expulsion during the previous school term contacted the ombudsman for reinstatement procedures, that the student was not eligible for reinstatement for one calendar year.Ombudsman Monthly Report August 1999 Page 4 6. The parent of a Hall High School student contacted the ombudsman to discuss transfer options. The student was experiencing attendance problems. It was explained that his attendance records would transfer with him and that changing schools would not solve the problem. They were referred to the assistant principal to develop strategies to improve his attendance. 7. The parent of a Hall student contacted the ombudsman for assistance with ...e pu.ein or a nail siuaenT contacted the ombudsman for assistance with getting her son transferred to Central. The process was explained to the parent and she was referred to the Student Registration Office. 8. The ombudsman was contracted by a parent about a recent change in guardianship. As result of the change, the child has a new address that justifies a school change. process was explained and they were referred to the Student Registration Office. The 9. A Henderson parent contacted the ombudsman for information about the -------------- -------- ...u magnet program\nspecifically, the course differences between magnet and non-magnet students. I, , ...... Wfl IIWII JIUUCHI3. Her questions were answered and she was referred to the principai for more detailed information. 10. A Hall- parent contacted the ombudsman to complain about her son's grade change from A ZK A I I_b _ - - *__ I I  . fl. the last school term. Inquires were made and it was discovered that the grade should have been changed. The assistant superintendent was notified and the grade changed. was a The process 11. The ombudsman was contacted for assistance with respect to getting M-to-M transfers to Clinton elementary in the PCSSD and transportation for her grandchildren. was explained and she was referred to the Student Registration Office for service. 12. A parent contacted the ombudsman because she could not get a L children to Jefferson. The school was contacted and a stop was established. courtesy bus stop for her 13. The ombudsman was contacted with a complaint about not being assigned to the school of her choice, Rockefeller. The assignment process was explained and her questions Z* M fl zJ * answered. were 14. The parent of a Central student appealed the assignment because of problems with students charged with crimes in the community. Her request was denied. A meeting arranged with the principal and her fears were addressed. was 15. The ombudsman was contacted by the guardian of a octumy officer at Henderson had consensual sex during the 1997-98 school year. The officer was student who alleged that a security transferred to Fair. The student was seeking a transfer to Fair. The ombudsman met with the guardian and a meeting was scheduled with the authorities. The meeting did not take place. Instead, they took the student to school and alleged that he fathered her child DNA test results proved that he did not father the child. 16. The ombudsman initiated talks to re-establish the Future 500 scholarship program for African-American students in the LRSD. 17. Dr. Terrence Roberts met with the ombudsman to discuss the role of the ombudsman in the district.Little Rock School District 810 West Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 Phone: (501) 324-2014 JAMES L. WASHINGTON OMBUDSMAN wi.5o, Fax: (501) 324-2213 wV A ~sasatesBt RSCS5VED Ombudsman's Monthly Report September 1999 JAN 2 i 2CC0 Introduction GiTiGSuF The ombudsman is a designated neutral or impartial dispute resolution practitioner whose major function is to provide confidential and informal assistance to students, parents, and administrators. When providing assistance, an ombudsman uses a variety of skills which include counseling, mediation^ information fact-finding, and upward feedback mechanisms that offer a range of options to those who contact the office. The ombudsman functions outside the ordinary line management structure and has access to anyone in the organization, including the superintendent. The ombudsman has a long and honorable tradition as the means of protecting against abuse, bias, and other improper treatment or unfairness. The LRSD ombudsman follows in this tradition by identifying and bringing forth such issues in a confidential and neutral environment. Guided by the requirement of terms of reference for the function, he also follows the code of ethics and standards of practice of the ombudsman's association. Activities/Summary of Complaints: 1. 2. 3. A parent contacted the ombudsman requesting information with respect to accessing the four-year-old program at Brady. The process was explained and the parent left satisfied. The parent of two students from McClellan contacted the ombudsman to discuss how she can get them into the ACC. They have had attendance problems and the mother wanted information about mentors, jobs, and work permits. The information was provided. The students decided to return to regular high school. A student and an adult met wit the ombudsman to discuss power-of-attorney documents and how it would impact the child. After the conference, they went to the Student Registration Office for the documents.James Washington, Ombudsman Month Report - September 1999 Page 2 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. The ombudsman met with the principal at Wakefield to discuss a student who transferred to Franklin. She reported that they might be victims of abuse. The principal at Franklin was notified and SCAN was contacted. The parent of students who were retained contacted the ombudsman to complain that the retentions were not justified. The principal was contacted and their situation was explained. There was no substance to the complaint. The ombudsman communicated findings to parent. The parent of a McClellan student contacted the ombudsman about the Youth Challenge Program. The phone number and a contact person were given to the parent. She felt that the program is what her child should attend rather than high school because of discipline problems. The ombudsman was contacted by the grandparent/guardian of a student who had been placed in an alternative education setting. She had some fears that were based on hearsay. She also requested assistance in getting him a job. The ombudsman calmed her fears by scheduling a visit to the school with the parent. Applications were also provided. A parent phoned to obtain information about assignment patterns and .information about Parkview. The Director of Student Registration provided the information. The ombudsman assisted the parent in the analysis. 9. A Pulaski Heights Elementary School parent phoned to request assistance in getting reimbursed for the student's electronic device that was confiscated .and then lost by school staff. She also complained about the lack of  supervision while students wait for the bus after school. The ombudsman served as mediator and assisted in accomplishing resolution. 10. The parent of a Henderson student phoned to complain about the process for assigning students to the magnet program. The ombudsman explained the process and recommended the parent visit with the principal and/or his designee for clarity and additional information. 11. The ombudsman made a follow-up phone call to the parent who requested Youth Challenge information. The student decided to remain in public school. 12. A parent asked for assistance in getting his child's bus stop moved to a corner closer to his home. The walk was acceptable. The Director of Transportation was contacted with the appropriate forms signed by the parent. He explained the situation. The parent was not satisfied.James Washington, Ombudsman Month Report - September 1999 Page 3 13. Two parents with children at Southwest complained about he assistant principal, teachers, and staff. Several meetings using \"shuffle diplomacy\" took place before both sides were asked to sit at the same table. Resolution was achieved. They withdrew their requests for M-to-M transfers. 14. A parent phoned to complain about the lack of books at Southwest. She also complained about the negative school atmosphere. The ombudsman visited with the principal and the school regularly. He immediately addressed the book issue. The ombudsman found no substance to the complain about the atmosphere. 15. The parent of children who transferred from Watson to Terry phoned the ombudsman for help with the bus stop. After completing the appropriate form, by phone, the stop was changed to an acceptable distance from the new address. 16. A parent from the Pulaski County School District phoned for assistance. After hearing his story, the parent was referred to the appropriate assistant superintendent in the PCSSD. 17. The parent of a student at Southwest who wanted to challenge his son's eligibility status for athletics because there was no written policy contacted the ombudsman. The student was eligible by AAA rules. There were several meetings between the parent and school administration. The students status did not change inspite of his circumstances. 18. The parent of a student at Henderson contacted the ombudsman because the child could not afford an instrument to play in the school band. The principal was contacted and offered recommendations to assist the parent. The student got the instrument. 19. The ombudsman was contacted by the parents of a student at McClellan who had been charged with disorderly contact at school. She was referred to Juvenile Court. The ombudsman went to the court on behalf of the student. The court ordered mediation and she was given probation. 20. A student at Washington was charged with possession of a weapon at school. The parent contacted the ombudsman for assistance. After attending the conference with the principal, the process was explained to the parent and student. The parent believed the process to be fair.James Washington, Ombudsman Month Report - September 1999 Page 4 21. The parent of a student at Central contacted the ombudsman about problems his child was experiencing at school. It was recommended that he contact the principal for assistance. 22. A grandparent of a Southwest student contacted the ombudsman because she believed that her child's bus stop was near the home of a known sex offender. The address and identity were confirmed by the ombudsman. The parent and ombudsman contacted Safety and Security then met with the principal. The stop was changed. 23. The parent of a Fair High School student contacted the ombudsman for help with her child who often leaves the campus without permission. She reported that the administration at school have been contacted and are aware of his behavior. She was referred to the juvenile authorities for FINS petition. 24. A parent at Henderson phoned for information about a school transfer because she was unhappy with the assignment. There were no other problems. She was encouraged to get involved with the school through the PTA and perhaps volunteer her time. Active participation will resolve any issues, concerns, or hearsay about the program. 25. The parent who wanted a bus stop moved visited the ombudsman for more information about the process for changing stops. His questions were answered. 26. A parent from the Pulaski County School District phoned about her child's problems. She was referred to the appropriate assistant superintendent in  her home district. 27. There was a follow-up phone call to the parent of the Southwest student whose stop was near the residence of a known sex offender. She reported no problems. 28. The parent of a student at Western Hills contacted the ombudsman's office for help in getting her child's bus stop moved closer to her home. It was explained that she lives within the two-mile radius and that stops provided are courtesy stops. The ombudsman contacted Laidlaw but the stop was not changed. 29. The parent of a student to soon be released from a center for troubled youth contacted the ombudsman for information. Her questions were answered and she was referred to her home school principal prior to placement to explain her situation.James Washington, Ombudsman Month Report - September 1999 Page 5 30. The lead counsel for Joshua was visited to discuss several complaints received by his office. They were noted. 31. The ombudsman appeared in court to testify on behalf of a student from Fair charged with disorderly contact. The student was placed on probation. 32. A community activist contacted the ombudsman with quotations about the job and the Joshua's role in the desegregation case. The role of the ombudsman was explained. Questions about Joshua were referred to the associate superintendent. 33. A parent from Mann contacted the ombudsman to complain about her daughter not being eligible to play football. The athletic director and AAA were contacted and the rules and rationale were explained to the parent. 34. A group of Parkview parents contacted the ombudsman for clarity with respect to working concessions at Quigley. The issue was who would collect . the receipts. They alleged that the athletic director told them that he would be responsible for their receipts. The athletic director was contacted and he met with the group to explain the process. 35. The parent of a student from Fair contacted the ombudsman to request assistance in getting a school transfer as the result of a fight her daughter had with other students. The assistant principal was contacted and he addressed the situation to the satisfaction of the parent. 36. The father of a King student contacted the ombudsman to ensure that the  school followed due process, suspension for threatening compromised. His son had been recommended for long-term another student. Due process was not 37. The ombudsman spoke at September. four PTA meetings during the month ofLittle Rock School District 810 West Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 Phone: (501) 324-2014 Fax: (501) 324-2213 JAMES L WASHINGTON OMBUDSMAN 'p Ombudsman's Monthly Report October 1999 JAN OfflCECF Introduction OESEGREttATiOJi MONITGRiNG The Office of the Ombudsman was established during the 1998-99 school term. He receives inquires and'complaints about the practices and services provided by the district. The ombudsman can investigate to determine if the district is being fair to the people it serves. The ombudsman is:  independent  responsible for making sure that practices and services of the district are fair, reasonable, appropriate and equitable  an officer of the district  able to conduct confidential investigations that are non-threatening and protect complainants against retribution  required to file regular reports The ombudsman is not:  an advocate for people  a defender of the actions of the district Who can complain? A student with parental participation, a teacher, and administrator, or anyone who feels that there has been unfair treatment that the ombudsman is authorized to investigate. Ombudsman Monthly Report October 1999 Page 2 What can the ombudsman do?  Advise you about what steps to take with the district  Refer you to available remedies.  Investigate your complaint.  Talk to anyone and see any documents or evidence a district staff member has in his/her possession.  Recommend that the district change a policy, practice, process, or guideline to make it fair.  Mediate a settlement or recommend a resolution. What can the ombudsman not do?  Make decisions for the district or reverse decisions it has made.  Reverse decisions of appeals. What can be investigated? A complaint that a decision\n Is unjust or oppressive  Discriminates against a person or group  Is unreasonable or arbitrary  Is based on wrong or irrelevant facts  Is based on the wrong interpretation of the policy. A complaint that an act:  Is done for an improper purpose  Is done negligently  Is done without adequate reasons. A complaint that a decision or act is unreasonably delayed. When you call the public body:  Have your questions and important facts ready.  Find out why and how the district made its decision  Make notes of your calls and the answers to your questions.  Ask about any review or appeal process you are entitled to.Ombudsman Monthly Report October 1999 Page 3 Complaint Summaries/Activities 1. The ombudsman transported a student to job interviews - Skate City and Schickel's Cleaners. His family is in great need of assistance. Social agency referrals were made. 2. A parent phoned to complain about an assistant principal's decision to suspend her from performing because of a fight she had before a football game. The process was fair and followed due process guidelines that were communicated to parent. 3. A parent contacted the ombudsman about his son who is in rehab for substance abuse. He is a former student from Hall. The young man was contacted and has regular meetings with the ombudsman as follow up. 4. The ombudsman met at McClellan with the Principal's Club as part of the intervention strategies for black males who are at-risk. Student rights were the topic of discussion. 5. A report was made at the monthly Biracial Committee meeting outlining the number of black and white families who have received services through the ombudsman's office. 6. A parent complaint about the principal's failure to follow due process when her daughter was suspended from McDermott. There was no substance to ' the complaint. The process was explained to the parent. 7. A Badgett parent and principal contacted the ombudsman's office to discuss the behavior problems of the male student. The ombudsman facilitated a meeting that led to an assessment conference for placement. 8. The ombudsman went to the home of a community activist to collect documents that she alleged are issues that the lead counsel for the Joshua Intervenors do not address. The documents were given to the lead counsel. The ombudsman does not engage in this type of activity. 9. The ombudsman made a home visit to assist the family with transportation. The student's brothers have been charged in a high profile murder case. He has been the victim of harassment. Discussed behavior alternatives to fighting.James Washington, Ombudsman Month Report - October 1999 Page 4 10. There was a follow-up visit at Badgett with the principal and the parents of the male student experiencing behavior problems to discuss sanctions. Original recommendation was modified, 11. The ombudsman arranged a meeting with the Director of the Division of Exceptional Student and the parent of a wheelchair bound student at Hall to discuss concerns about accessibility and participation. Concerns were noted. Plan of action developed. 12. Another meeting took place at Badgett involving the principal, counselor, teacher, and parent of the male student with behavior problems. The agreement was to initiate screening process. 13. The ombudsman, in his role as dropout prevention coordinator, provided training for teacher at Mann. 14. A parent contacted the ombudsman to discuss transfer options from area magnet (Washington) to King. Her options and process were explained. 15. The parent representative for a crossing guard at Meadowcliff was contacted with update on progress. The city is still trying to budget the money for the position. 16. A parent with a child receiving services at Southwest phoned to discuss her child's handicap. Charges are pending. The ombudsman explained how the conference should proceed and discussed the student's rights. 17. The ombudsman was contacted for additional assistance with having a courtesy bus stop added for her child at King. 18. An investigation was requested into the assignment process at Parkview. The allegations stated that preference was given to athletes and to students whose parents have influence. There was no evidence to support the complaint. 19. A foster parent contacted the ombudsman to assist in the reinstatement process. Agency representative met with the ombudsman and student. The process was discussed. The two were accompanied to the Alternative School and the student was permitted to re-enroll.James Washington Monthly Report - October 1999 Page 5 20. The parent of the child confined to a wheelchair at Hall was contacted with a progress report with respect to the school's efforts to accommodate her child. 21. The ombudsman held a group meeting for the \"Badgett Bunch.\" Appropriate behavior was the topic of discussion. 22. A Fair High School student was charge with disorderly conduct by the school's resource officer. The student has a handicap. The procedures wcr explained to the student and parent with respect to the school's procedures and those of the police officer. were 23. The parent representative from Meadowcliff contacted the ombudsman for an update with respect to the crossing guard. Still no word from City Hall. 24. A meeting was held with the parent of the student confined to a wheelchair at Hall for input into the accessibility issues that include getting on the stage for performances, drop-off and pickup area, and student parking. 25. A parent who lives within mile of Wakefield phoned for a courtesy stoo The ombudsman contacted Laidlaw with alternative routes and drove several routes from the home to the school. We were unable to assist the child within the guidelines of the transportation department. 26. There was a visit to the home of the Fair High School student with the disorderly conduct charge. A conference was held with the parent and student to discuss legal options and a plan of action in Municipal Court. 27. A parent (grandparent) contacted the ombudsman about an incident involving a staff person at Rockefeller's two years ago. The claim is that the ' ---------J J uy Vt J I IC CIO II i I Io LI IClL I child suffers emotionally as a result. The grandparent would like to know the outcome. 28. The principal at Central was notified of the pending investigation of the Mock Trial Team composition and selection process. 29. The Watershed Project was visited to get some cloths for a student in need at the Alternative School.James Washington Monthly Report - October 1999 Page 6 30. The Fair High School student with a disorderly conduct charge was contacted at home for her court appearance. He did not show for the meeting or court. 31. There was a visit to the Juvenile Court on behalf of the Southwest student with a disorderly conduct charge pending. The objective was to have the case moved to the court of a sympathetic judge. Plan was good and it worked. 32. 33. 34. A parent of a Rockefeller student complained about the fairness of her sanction for allegedly making a derogatory statement about a teacher. There was a meeting with the principal, assistant principal, counselor,'and teachers. The issue was resolved. Counseling will be provided if needed. A parent phoned about her son's sanction at Dunbar. The school did not violate due process procedures. This was communicated to the parent. A student was taken home from the Alternative School to avoid disruption. The parent and the ombudsman spoke with the child to calm him down. 35. The ombudsman served as an advocate during an EMT meeting for the student charged with disorderly conduct. The decision was to modify his sanction because there was a relationship between his behavior and his handicap. 36. The ombudsman met with the grandparent with concerns about the treatment of her grandson received at Rockefeller. Her issues were forward to the appropriate administrator who reported that he would meet with grandparent to answer her questions. 37. The ombudsman went to Municipal Court on behalf of the Fair student charged with disorderly conduct, the student failed to appear. A warrant was issued but it was explained that the charge would be dropped if the ombudsman can produce documentation about his being hospitalized. There was an effort to get those documents from the hospital. 38. The ombudsman visited the principal at Romine to clarify his role and answer questions. toJames Washington Monthly Report - October 1999 Page 7 39. The ombudsman went to Rockefeller to interview a student, at the parents request, about alleged mistreatment. The allegation was exaggerated. The situation was resolved. 40. A parent phoned to express her concern about the way her daughter was being treated at Henderson by a teacher. The principal was contacted and he addressed the concerns. 41. There was another visit to the hospital in an attempt to get documentation for the courts. Then, he went to the court to explain the student's status. 42. The ombudsman visited the home of the Wakefield student who lives in the walk zone in an attempt to find an acceptable route to walk. The route was established and the parent agreed. 43. There was a conference at the office of the lead counsel for Joshua to discuss several complaints received at his office. They were discussed and guidance for resolution was offered by the ombudsman. 44. there was a meeting at Rockefeller with the parent, administrators, counselor and teachers to resolve a dispute about alleged mistreatment and to address the child's potential problems. 45. The ombudsman met with the administrator responsible for transportation at . King to review the route sheets for a possible stop added for students who live within the walk zone. A stop was recommended. 46.The ombudsman met with the \"Badgett Bunch\" to work through some issues regarding their behavior. 47. A parent phoned to complain about her son's sanction after he made threat. There was a misunderstanding about the laws. The principal and parent came to an understanding. 48. The ombudsman met with the parent whose child faces disorderly conduct charged at Southwest to discuss a resolution. 49.There was an evaluation team meeting at Badgett for a student who may be eligible to receive additional services.Little Rock School District 810 West Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 Phone: (501) 324-2014 JAMES L. WASHINGTON OMBUDSMAN /J14. Fax: (501) 324-2213 cBIVso Introduction Ombudsman's Monthly Report - November 1999 -'ji\nUiiia ^tpigS^ JAN 2 i The ombudsman has the discretion to initiate action without waiting to receive a complaint or inquiry. The ombudsman also determines whether to accept or to act on a particular complaint or inquiry. This process is in contrast to the processes of the judiciary, mediators, or arbitrators. The ombudsman may determine that the complaint is without merit. Or, the ombudsman may receive a complaint or inquiry on a specific topic and conduct the inquiry on a broader or different.scope. The ombudsman may need access to all information relevant to a complaint or an inquiry so that the review is fair and credible. The ombudsman may make a formal or informal report of results and recommendations resulting from a review or investigation, in which case the ombudsman should:  consult with an individual or group prior to issuing a report critical of that individual or group, and will include their comments with the report\n 'communicate the outcome, conclusion or resolution of a complaint or an inquiry to the complainant and may also communicate with other concerned entities or individuals. The ombudsman uses the power of reason and persuasion to help resolve matters. Finally, the goal of the ombudsman's efforts is to provide an internal path to fairness and justice. Therefore, the ombudsman's quest is to seek the fair and just resolution of the matter undertaken.James Washington, Ombudsman Month Report - November 1999 Page 2 Complaint Summaries/Activities 1. 2. 3. On November 3\"*, the ombudsman received a complaint about the mock trial team at Central. The complaint was that the selection process favored white students whose parents work as lawyers, judges, etc. The principal acknowledged that the need to increase participation among black students exists. The school is developing strategies for improvement. Assistance is available from the Office of the Ombudsman. Jefferson Elementary has a no canned soda rule for lunch. A parent complained that the rule is not enforced for white students. The school was contacted. The rule is written in the school's handbook. The ombudsman visited the school and did not observe white students with canned sodas. The ombudsman visited the principal at Otter Creek Elementary to explain his role and to answer questions. 4. The ombudsman visited the principal at Geyer Springs Elementary to explain his role and to answer questions. 5. The ombudsman met with the principal and assistant principal at Southwest to follow-up with a handicapped student. There were several incidents reported about his behavior in the self-contained class. 6., There was a complaint reported by a parent at Bale Elementary. The parent reported that there was a serious incident and that a man that she did not know interviewed her daughter and that she was not notified. Because the incident involved a white student, she believed that the school attempting to cover the issue up. was The ombudsman discovered that the school followed the proper procedures. The mother was satisfied with the response. The principal had no knowledge of the incident. Efforts will be made to ensure parental notification in the future.James Washington Monthly Report - November 1999 Page 3 7. 8. 9. An ongoing dispute between Hall High School and a parent with a child who is confined to a wheelchair resulted in another meeting to discuss the school's efforts to comply with federal regulations. Progress has been made. It is anticipated that we will have addressed all of her issues by December 16. The grandparent of a former student has requested answers to an incident at Rockefeller involving her grandson and a food service worker. There was also an incident at Fair Park (all during the 1997-98 school year). Her request (written) was given to the Director of Labor Relations. No response as of today's date.  A parent complained about the lack of awards presented to black children in her son's class at Otter Creek Elementary. The principal was contacted and as a result of the conference, the parent was satisfied. 10. A Mabelvale Elementary School parent complained about the a appropriateness of halloween decorations in the schools. Some have frightened her child. The principal was contacted and the decorations in question were removed. The parent then complained about her perceived lack of concerns on the part of the school when her child was held out of school for ten consecutive days. It was the mother's decision not to send her child to school. She declined an offer to meet with the principal and the ombudsman for resolution. 11. The principal at Dunbar was visited to discuss the ombudsman's role and to answer questions. 12. The principal at Mabelvale Middle was visited to discuss a complaint about an assistant principal's alleged mistreatment of a student. The complaint had no substance. 13. A student was interviewed in response to his mother's complaint that his trial team supervising teacher made threatening remarks about whether he should attend band practice or team practice.James Washington Monthly Report - November 1999 Page 4 14. The lead counsel for the Joshua Intervenors was consulted about several calls. The ombudsman spoke with a parent about an issue at Romine. A meeting was scheduled with the principal. The principal was visited to discuss the complaint. The parent failed to attend the meeting. 15. The ombudsman had a session with the \"Badgett Bunch\" to discuss strategies to improve their reading skills. Activities were scheduled. 16. 17. 18. A parent phoned with questions about the magnet school assignment process. The ombudsman met with a representative from the Office of Civil Rights to discuss the job and activities. A parent contacted the ombudsman to complain about the lack of written guidelines that govern middle school athletics. He threatened to seek an injunction because his 6^ grade son was not permitted to participate in varsity athletics. He was told written guidelines exist. The athletic , director was contacted to respond to his specific concerns. 19. The aunt of a Henderson student phoned to express concerns about the principal's decision to change her class from regular to Pre-AP after a personal dispute with the teacher. The student was not able to achieve. The ombudsman intervened and the issues were resolved. She returned to . the regular class. 20. The \"Badgett Bunch\" was visited to discuss behavior issues at the school. 21. A parent phoned to complaint that due process was not followed when her child was suspended. The ombudsman reviewed the case and found no substance to the complaint.James Washington Monthly Report - November 1999 Page 5 22. The ombudsman contacted the Juvenile Court on behalf of a Southwest student with psychological and physical handicaps after he was charged by the school's Resource Officer. He was able to negotiate for mediation in lieu of a charge. The mediation was successful. No court charges were filed. 23. The principal at Bale was contacted about procedures ensuring parental notification when students are interviewed in her absence. 24. There was an lEP team meeting at Southwest for a student. The ombudsman served as an advocate for the fairness of the process. 25. There was a complaint from the guardian of a Western Hills student alleging that the teacher did not properly notify her about her child's decline in achievement at a meeting two weeks prior to interim reports. She also alleged that the teacher displayed inappropriate behavior in the classroom, ' and is guilty of making comments to her child that enforced her feelings about the teacher not liking her. The investigation confirmed the lack of notification. Other recommendations were made to resolve the issues. The school accepted the recommendations and they were implemented. Several meetings were required to resolve the issues. 26. The parent of a child confined to a wheelchair at Hall met with the Director of Plant Services for the purpose of resolving the parent's concerns. Resolution was achieved. 27. The ombudsman answered questions of concern at the NAACP meeting on November 13. Care was taken to ensure that only public known information was given. Confidentiality was maintained. 28. A parent phoned for information about transfer options.James Washington Monthly Report - November 1999 Page 6 29. The parents of a Dodd elementary student phoned to complain about the poor relationship between the home and their child's resource teacher. They also believe that the school and a staff member of the Division of Exceptional Children failed to act in their best interest. Several meetings were held and as a result, an acceptable recommendation was implemented. 30. A patron phoned for information about referral options to several social agencies for help with a foster child in our district. 31. The grandparents of a Western Hills student called to complain about letters being given to the parents of students asking for their written support to the ombudsman. As a result, their child has become the victim of harassment and threats of violence. An acceptable recommendation was implemented after the investigation. 3'2. The ombudsman volunteered to read at Terry Elementary School. Two books were read - wanted to start on No. 3. Ran out of time. 33. The ombudsman interviewed staff members with allegations of mistreatment of CBI students. The principal was present and contacted proper administrators and agencies. The teacher and staff members were interviewed by the principal and she outlined appropriate behavior. She reported that she will monitor the situation. 34. The ombudsman visited Hall to discuss the parking areas for busses with students confined to wheelchairs in response to a complaint about the inaccessibility. Parking for the handicapped was also reported to be inadequate. The complaints were found to be substantiated. The principal in cooperation with the Director of Plant Services initiated the proper correctives.James Washington Monthly Report - November 1999 Page 7 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. 44. The ombudsman met with the principal to follow-up on the allegation of mistreatment of CBI students at Forest Heights. The ombudsman attempted to attend the Senate Interim Committee on Education. District responsibilities took priority - late for meeting. The ombudsman participated in the court-ordered mediation between the resource officer at Southwest and a student with multiple handicaps. There was an incident at the end of the session that motivated the ombudsman to make a change in placement recommendation for the student. The recommendation was approved. The ombudsman met with the grandparents of the Western Hills child to discuss the final report of his investigation. The ombudsman made follow-up visits to Southwest and Dodd. A guardian contacted the ombudsman for an answer to her request for information about her grandson. A parent phoned for information about transfer options. The ombudsman attended an intervention activity for black male students at McClellan. The ombudsman met with Western Hills grandparents to implement transfer process as a result of problems at school, note investigation There were complaints received about a McClellan teacher's use of a racial slur. Complainants were interviewed. The complaints were substantiated. Recommendations were given to the principal. 45. The school security officer at McClellan was consulted about gang note delivered to a student that may cause unrest among students. 46. A parent phoned to follow up on her complaint about due process at Otter Creek with respect to her daughter's suspension.James Washington Month Report - November 1999 Page 8 47. The aunt of a Henderson student filed a complaint about a personal conflict between the child's teacher, the parent, and herself. It was noted and communicated that the situation had been addressed. 48. 49. 50. 51. A staff member phoned regarding an expulsion recommendation for student at Metropolitan for assistance. Due process was followed. a There was a teem meeting for a Southwest student for a change in placement. The change was approved. There was a meeting to finalize the transfer process for a Western Hills student. Parents were accompanied to transfer school to assist in the enrollment. The principal at Bale requested assistance with a parent who had failed to cooperate in an effort to have her child assessed for resource assistance. The parent agreed to proceed. 52. A parent phoned for transfer assistance for his son from Mitchell. He alleges that the school has not responded to his request for help in stopping boys from fighting his son. The principal was contacted and supported the transfer request. The request was granted as a result of the ombudsman's support. 53. A copy of an investigation request was received from the Joshua's lead counsel. It was reported to the ombudsman by an associate superintendent that the incident had been reported to the proper authorities. 54. A complaint was given to the ombudsman by a guardian who wanted the bus stop changed to the front of her home. The process was explained. The parent accepted the information. 55. Laidlaw was contacted about a complaint stating that a bus is late more often than not.Little Rock School District 810 West Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 Phone: (501) 324-2014 Fax: (501) 324-2032 JAMES L WASHINGTON OMBUDSMAN \u0026lt;Otpig^ Introduction Ombudsman's Monthly Report December 1999 RECEIVED a JAi4 212080 The Essential Characteristics of the Ombudsman OfflCECF OESKREGATiQN MONITORING The original 1969 American Bar Association resolution contained characteristics there were deemed essential for the ombudsman. 12 These characteristics have been distilled here and applied. The core qualities are independence, impartiality and neutrality, and confidentiality. The characteristics are:  Functional autonomous  Operationally independent from administrative branch  Legally established  Investigative specialist  Administrative expert  Non-partisan   Client centered, not anti-administration  Accessible and visible  High status  Serves everyone Summary of Complaints and Activities: 1. The ombudsman received an anonymous complaint about the alternative room teacher at Brady. According to the complainant, some staff report that he is guilty of mistreating the children. The results of the subsequent investigation revealed that there was no substance to the complaint. 2. A parent contacted the ombudsman to complain about his son's grade depending on the class fundraiser. The principal was contacted. There was no evidence to support the allegation.Ombudsman Monthly Report December 1999 Page 2 3. The ombudsman was contacted on behalf of the parent of a student at Mann who had been charged with possession of a weapon on school property. He wanted to ensure that the process was followed. The administration was contacted and the case was reviewed. Due process was followed. 4. The guardian of a foster child contacted the ombudsman for payment assistance. DHS was contacted and visited on 3 occasions. The foster parent received her payment. 5. The aunt of a student at Rightsell phoned to complaint about an alleged comment made by the principal. The aunt was offended by the racial overtone of the comment. The principal was contacted and she explained that the comment was not spoken as explained by the aunt. The aunt refused to meet with the ombudsman and principal to mediate the dispute. 6s There was an EMT meeting at Badgett for a student experiencing behavior problems. The parent asked the ombudsman to serve as an advocate. 7. The ombudsman was contacted to assist the parents of a Dunbar student who had been recommended for long-term suspension for use of profanity directed at staff. The disciplinary recommendation was modified because of a mistake in the due process. 8. The parent of a Southwest student contacted the ombudsman to complain about the alleged mistreatment of the student during the process when her child was recommended for a long-term suspension. The school was contacted and it was confirmed that she was not mistreated. The ombudsman explained the process. The school modified the suspension and the child returned. 9. The ombudsman accompanied the student from Hall and his parent to the interview for a placement at the ACC. Questions were answered and circumstances were explained. He was admitted to the program. 10. The ombudsman attended a meeting at Mitchell to offer his services during their efforts to keep the school open. A brief presentation was made. 11. There was a follow-up meeting with the former Hall student to monitor his progress.Ombudsman Monthly Report December 1999 Page 3 12. A parent phoned to complain about cruel and unusual punishment at the Step-One Alternative School. The principal was contacted and steps were taken to ensure that there would not be a repeat of the incident. 13. The principal at Romine was visited to follow-up with a complaint from the previous month. Things are in order. 14. The employer of two students involved in a car accident was contacted and the situation was explained. Rather than terminate the students they were placed back on the payroll. 15. The ombudsman was inaccurate in a letter mailed to a parent explaining the outcome of a recent inquiry. Accurate information was forwarded to the parent after a conference with the principal. 16. There was a meeting at Dodd to review the findings of a recent inquiry. Present were the teacher and principal. 17. The ombudsman provided information about school ID pictures to a parent in heed for her child to get a job. 18. The parent of a Forest Heights student complained about unfair treatment. The parent reported that her child was punished for his role in a fight but nothing happened to the other students. The allegation was false. A behavior manifestation meeting has been scheduled for her child. 19. The principal at McDermott met with the ombudsman to discuss mentoring five of her male students who were having behavior problems at school. There are no males in their lives and she believes the ombudsman can fill a void that could result in an improvement. 20. The ombudsman met with parents at Badgett and then with the principal in an attempt to have them come together and discuss their issues. 21. An administrator at Hall asked the ombudsman to provide assistance for a student and parent who would like to attend the ACC. The director was contacted to schedule a meeting after the holidays.Ombudsman Monthly Report December 1999 Page 3 22. The counselor at Badgett was contacted to discuss the progress of the \"Badgett Bunch.\" 23. The ombudsman met with the parent at Hall for an on-site visit to verify accessibility for her child in a wheelchair. 24. The principal at Badgett was met to discuss the issues and a complaint from the parents of one of her students. 25. The ombudsman investigated a complaint that alleged that the counselor at Badgett choked a student. 26. The \"Badgett Bunch\" met with the ombudsman to follow-up on reading strategies and behavior goals.JOHN W. WALKER RALPH WASHINGTON XLARK BURNETTE AUSTIN PORTER. JR. John W. Walker, P.A. Attorney At Law 1723 Broadway Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 Telephone (501) 374-3758 FAX (501) 374-4187 Deceived FEB 2 2 2000 OfflCECi- DBffiRE6AWHOSgJS Via Facsimile - 324-2281 February 18, 2000 Junious Babbs Associate Superintendent for Administrative Services Little Rock School District 810 West Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Mr. Babbs: J I have spoken with ?vlr. Billy Bowles of the Pulaski County Special School District and he has informed me that you all will be meeting sometime early next week to discuss whether Mr. James Washington may enter the Pulaski County School District to address complaints by m to m students from Little Rock. I also gleam from your letter to Mr. Walker dated February 17, 2000 that at this meeting you will be discussing the procedure for Mr. James Washington, the Little Rock ombudsman, to enter a PCCSD school. Mr. Bowles assured me that as it now stands, Mr. Washington can come to any Pulaski County school as a parent advocate if the parent so chooses him to do so. He further indicated, however, that Nir. Washington can not come into the Pulaski County as a Little Rock School District representative or ombudsman. I do not understand the latter statement by Mr. Bowles given the previous statement. As I recall both Districts plans, there is nothing in either plan regarding this, nor do I believe that allowing Mr. Washington to investigate complaints by Little Rock parents of mistreat in the County is contrary to each Districts commitment to cooperation and collaboration with one another. I look forward to hearing from you regarding the results of your meeting. Sincerely, /O (^y C. Springer On Behalf of Joshua Intervenors JCS/ cc: Mr. Billy Bowles Ms. Ann Brown Mr. James WashingtonLITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 501 SHERMAN STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72202 OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES Junious C. Babbs, Associate Superintendent Phone: (501)324-2272 E-Mail: icbabbs@.stuasn.lrsd.kl2.ar.us February 28, 2000 RECEIVED MAR 2 2000 Mrs. Joy Springer 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72206 OffICEOF iWBEGATlQN MONITORING Dear Ms. Springer: In an attempt to follow up on prior communication, Mr. Billy Bowles, PCSSD Associate Superintendent of Desegregation, and I met this afternoon to review procedures on investigation of complaints and/or alleged raced based mistreatment. Recognizing the role of Mr. Janies Washington, LRSD Ombudsman, it was agreed on that as students transfer between districts, appropriate policy is then enacted within the receiving district. While attempting to work cooperatively through issues that develop, I was assured of commitment toward prompt and fair resolution of complaints and/or instances of race based mistreatment. PCSSD policy was acknowledged that included resolution through appropriate staff, Mr. Bowles and/or respective PCSSD officials. Taking into account good faith, collaboration and cooperation with one another, we all share concerns of student mistreatment and will continuously work to remedy such instances that will help to assure fair treatment for ALL students. Sincerely, Jimious C. Babbs cc: Billy Bowles Ann Brown James Washington LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 West Markham UttleRock, AR 72201 Phone: (501)324-2014 Fax: (501) 324-2260 a JAMES L. WASHINGTON OMBUDSMAN I. Initial Callers Ombudsman Monthly Report Summaries August 1999 - June 2000 received SEP 6 2000 OfHCEOf oesesimojiiomG African/American Male 17 Female 153 White Male I 4 Other Male 1 Anonymous Female 4 Female 30 Male 0 Female 0 Out of District 10 Percentage of Callers by Race/Gender 80% 7 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 8% 70% 2% 0/Vrican/Mierican Male  African/American Female  White Male  White Female  Other Male 14% E1 Other Female  Anonymous Male 0% 0% 0% 2% 5%  Anonymous Female  Out-of-District 1 Ombudsman Monthly Report Summaries August 1999 - June 2000 Page 2 IL Information/Assistance Academics Agency Referrals Athletics Attendance Co-curricular Desegregation Case Discipline Extracurricular Guardianship Juvenile Court Magnet Program PCSSD Runaway Child Safety School Assignment/ Transfer Special Education Transportation 8 5 1 1 1 1 17 0 2 2 1 2 1 5 41 12 10 45 40 B Academics a Agency Referrals 35 30 5i5\u0026gt;J \\ 4 Tjl- 'V'''\" \"'  '................  .  Athletics  AtterxJance' 25 20 15 10 5 0 a Co-curricLdar M- B Desegregation Case w .X V-'X'sfcJ. -:,\nJ a Discipline j\u0026lt;HsS^Sw?WS i' SSj SB5 ' J'  Bctracurricular sa a Guardianship a Juvenile Court W1 . ______\n__i ,J 5*^ feij^A'eV^  Magnet R-ogram  PCSSD a Runaway Child  Safety  School Assignment/Transfer B Specal Education 1 a TransportationOmbudsman Monthly Report Summaries August 1999 - June 2000 Page 3 III. Complaints Substantiated Unsubstantiated 30 T 25 20 15 10 5 0 Academics Agency Referrals Athletics Co-curricular Discipline Extracurricular Guardianship Race Religion Safety School Assignment/ Transfer School Climate School Rules Special Education Staff Conduct Transportation Totals Elaine, AR -2 Hot Springs, AR - 2 PCSSD z 43^ z ja -6 1 0 2 1 5 1 0 2 1 0 4 0 0 0 17 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 5 9 13 1 43 3 1 6 4 24 0 66 j a Substantiated\na Unsubstantiated 4 z Z X s X*  z \u0026lt;3^ 5P' o'- O' 0 Z z .8^Ombudsman Monthly Report Summaries August 1999 - June 2000 Page 4 IV. Personnel Categories Principal Black Male 8 Black Female 8 White Male 4 White Female 14 Teacher Black Male 9 Black Female 8 White Male 2 White Female 12 StefL(Custodian, Secretary, Security Officer, etc.) Black Male 1 Black Female 2 White Male 0 White Female 0 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 *\u0026lt;v iii- L Black Male A 4s Black White Male Female 1 White Female E3 Principal  Teacher  Other StaffOmbudsman Monthly Report Summaries August 1999 - June 2000 Page 5 VIL Activities Agency Referrals Biracial Committee Circuit Court City Hall Conventions (National Ombudsman) Dropout Prevention Dr. Terrence Roberts Faculty Meetings Future 500 Scholarship Program Hearings Home Visits Intervention Activities Job Corps Advisory Board Joshua Intervenors Juvenile Court LULAC Mediation Meeting with Mitchell Parents Meetings with Principals Meetings/School Tours - Dir. Racial \u0026amp; Cultural Diversity Commission Municipal Court NAACP ODM Office of Civil Rights (Visit) Parent Conferences PCSSD PTA Meetings 1 3 2 3 1 4 1 1 1 5 6 11 2 16 7 3 7 1 83 3 4 4 3 1 243 3 4Ombudsman Monthly Report Summaries August 1999 - June 2000 Page 6 School Conferences (Parents \u0026amp; Staff) Senate Interim Committee Shadowing Experience Special Education Meetings Transported Students to Find Job Watershed Project 11 1 1 13 2 4\\ I Ombudsman Monthly Report Summaries August 1999 - June 2000 Page 7 f/ a Agency Referrals  Circuit Court a Conventions (National Ombudsman) a Or. Terrence Roberts a Future 500 Scholarship R'ogram  Home Visits a Job Corps Advisory Board a Juvenile Court a Mediation  Meetings w/R'incipals  Municipal Court  OOM a Parent Conferences  PTA Meetings a Senate Interim Committee a Special Education Meetings a Watershed Project a BIracial Committee  City Hall  Dropout R-evention  Faculty Meetings a Hearings a Internvention Activities a Joshua Intervenors BLULAC  Meetings w /Mtchell Parents  Meetings/School Tours - Dir. Racial \u0026amp; Cultural Diversity Commission  NAACP  Office of Civil Rights aPCSSD  School Conferences (Parents \u0026amp; Staff) a Shadow Ing Experience  Transported Students to Find Jobs5013744187 WALKER LAW FIRM 434 16:38 /r/t JOHN W. WALKER RALPH WASHINGTON MARK BURNETTE SHAWN CHILDS John w. Walker, P.a. Attorney At Law 1723 Broadway Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 Telephone (501) 374-3768 FAX (501) 374-4187 RECEIVE Via Facsimile - 324-2146 October 3, 2000 OCT 3 . 2000 Dr Leslie Carnine Superintendent of Schools Little Rock School District 810 West Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 CffICEOF DESEBMlOfl MONITORINS Re: LRSD Ombudsperson - Section 2.5.3 of Revised Desegregation Plan Dear Dr Carnine: I am writing on behalf of all parents in the District who seek to obtain the services of the Districts ombudsman. This office has received at least two complaints in the last two weeks from parents stating that school district officials have refused to provide the ombudsman information necessary for him to investigate their respective complaints. Your revised plan contemplates that district officials would give full cooperation to the ombudsman to ensure equitable solutions to student and parent complaints. May I suggest that you and/or Mr. Babbs have a conference with Mr. Washington to determine whether he believes that he has had the full cooperation of district administrators in the last several weeks regarding his investigations. May 1 also suggest that he identify specific instances whereby he believes that he did not have the full cooperation of your staff persons. If asked to do so, 1 will be happy to share the instances that I am aware of. By copy of this letter to Mr. Washington, I am requesting that he share a copy of his job description with this office including any other administrative directives, district polices and procedures which guide him in the performance of his duties as ombudsman. Since 1 am charged with monitoring the Districts good faith plan implementation of its revised plan, would please share with this office all documentation which supports the premise that Mr Washington has the full cooperation of your staff when investigating student and parent complaints. Thank you for your cooperation.5013744187 WALKER LAW FIRM 434 P03/03 OCT 03 00 16:39 merely, Springer On Behalf of Joshua JCS/ cc\nMr. James Washington Mr. Junious Babbs Ms. Ann Brown Mr. Gus Taylor 10/06/2000 16:44 501-324-2281 LRSD SRO RASE 01/01/ Little Rock School District OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDENT October 5, 2000 Mrs. Joy Springer 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Mrs. Springer: complaintsthadisWaoffi'XlsSto^Melh^Omtud *regarding attempt to assist a parent to view th*, ci does reflect a void resulting ir a parent to view the students Individual Education Plan (lEP). PP-Pnate follow up ,p pa^ep records, improved clarity and understand^^! confidentiality of student enacted tdat wit, help to provide the Ombudsman with necessary , dfto fte s mJ  I _I. . t  , and in an are In response to requested information under separate cover. your attention however, we enJouradTtS'SfJ^ 70u refer\ninquiry. exists and seek continued The compliance philosophy is based performance responsibilities of the r-fully expected to comply. | assure Employees are with the provisions and philosophy of the Revis^erf n co^niitment to compliance sopny or the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. on internalizing the Revised Plan through the respective organizational divisions Sincerely, Leslie V. Carnine, Superintendent of Schools cc: Junious Sabbs Ann Brown Gus Taylor James Washington 810 West Markhatn Street * Little Rock, Arkansas 72201  (SOI) J24-2012\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_968","title":"Report: ''School Monitoring Report,'' North 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":null,"dc_date":["1998/1999"],"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","North Little Rock School District","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","Educational statistics","School enrollment","School facilities","School principals","Office of Desegregation Monitoring (Little Rock, Ark.)"],"dcterms_title":["Report: ''School Monitoring Report,'' North 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/968"],"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":["reports"],"dcterms_extent":["104 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\nThe transcript for this item was created using Optical Character Recognition (OCR) and may contain some errors.\nThis project was supported in part by a Digitizing Hidden Special Collections and Archives project grant from The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation and Council on Library and Information Resoources.\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n\n "}],"pages":{"current_page":19,"next_page":20,"prev_page":18,"total_pages":48,"limit_value":12,"offset_value":216,"total_count":567,"first_page?":false,"last_page?":false},"facets":[{"name":"type_facet","items":[{"value":"Text","hits":567}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":16,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"creator_facet","items":[{"value":"Little Rock School District","hits":90},{"value":"Arkansas. Department of Education","hits":73},{"value":"Office of Desegregation Monitoring (Little Rock, Ark.)","hits":53},{"value":"United States. District Court (Arkansas: Eastern District)","hits":33},{"value":"North Little Rock School District","hits":6},{"value":"Arkanasas State University. Office of Educational Research and Services","hits":5},{"value":"Office of Education and Lead Planning and Desegregation","hits":5},{"value":"Center for Research in Educational Policy, University of Memphis, Memphis, Tennessee","hits":3},{"value":"Ross, Steven M.","hits":3},{"value":"William Gordon Associates","hits":3},{"value":"Area School Advisory Committee","hits":2}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"subject_facet","items":[{"value":"Educational statistics","hits":567},{"value":"Education--Arkansas","hits":561},{"value":"Education--Evaluation","hits":400},{"value":"Little Rock School District","hits":376},{"value":"Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","hits":351},{"value":"School integration","hits":176},{"value":"School improvement programs","hits":174},{"value":"Educational law and legislation","hits":173},{"value":"Education--Finance","hits":156},{"value":"School management and organization","hits":151},{"value":"Little Rock (Ark.)--History--21st Century","hits":144}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"subject_personal_facet","items":[{"value":"Wright, Susan Webber, 1948-","hits":1}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"event_title_sms","items":[{"value":"Little Rock Central High School Integration","hits":3}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"location_facet","items":[{"value":"United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","hits":566},{"value":"United States, 39.76, -98.5","hits":565},{"value":"United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","hits":555},{"value":"United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959","hits":486},{"value":"United States, Arkansas, Chicot County, 33.26725, -91.29397","hits":1},{"value":"United States, Massachusetts, Middlesex County, Cambridge, Harvard University, 42.377, -71.11666","hits":1}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"us_states_facet","items":[{"value":"Arkansas","hits":566},{"value":"Massachusetts","hits":1}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"year_facet","items":[{"value":"1994","hits":129},{"value":"1995","hits":120},{"value":"1996","hits":107},{"value":"1993","hits":98},{"value":"1997","hits":93},{"value":"1992","hits":85},{"value":"1998","hits":82},{"value":"1999","hits":81},{"value":"2000","hits":78},{"value":"1991","hits":77},{"value":"2001","hits":72},{"value":"2003","hits":62},{"value":"1990","hits":53},{"value":"2002","hits":53},{"value":"2004","hits":50},{"value":"2005","hits":47},{"value":"1989","hits":39},{"value":"2006","hits":31},{"value":"1988","hits":24},{"value":"2010","hits":21},{"value":"2008","hits":19},{"value":"2009","hits":17},{"value":"2007","hits":15},{"value":"2013","hits":15},{"value":"1986","hits":14},{"value":"2012","hits":14},{"value":"1987","hits":13},{"value":"2011","hits":9},{"value":"1984","hits":8},{"value":"1985","hits":8},{"value":"2014","hits":6},{"value":"1974","hits":4},{"value":"1975","hits":4},{"value":"1976","hits":4},{"value":"1977","hits":4},{"value":"1978","hits":4},{"value":"1979","hits":4},{"value":"1980","hits":4},{"value":"1981","hits":4},{"value":"1982","hits":4},{"value":"1983","hits":4},{"value":"1973","hits":3},{"value":"1950","hits":2},{"value":"1951","hits":2},{"value":"1952","hits":2},{"value":"1953","hits":2},{"value":"1954","hits":2},{"value":"1955","hits":2},{"value":"1956","hits":2},{"value":"1957","hits":2},{"value":"1958","hits":2},{"value":"1959","hits":2},{"value":"1960","hits":2},{"value":"1961","hits":2},{"value":"1962","hits":2},{"value":"1963","hits":2},{"value":"1964","hits":2},{"value":"1965","hits":2},{"value":"1966","hits":2},{"value":"1967","hits":2},{"value":"1968","hits":2},{"value":"1969","hits":2},{"value":"1970","hits":2},{"value":"1971","hits":2},{"value":"1972","hits":2},{"value":"2015","hits":1},{"value":"2016","hits":1},{"value":"2017","hits":1},{"value":"2018","hits":1},{"value":"2019","hits":1},{"value":"2020","hits":1},{"value":"2021","hits":1},{"value":"2022","hits":1},{"value":"2023","hits":1},{"value":"2024","hits":1},{"value":"2025","hits":1},{"value":"2026","hits":1}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":100,"offset":0,"prefix":null},"min":"1950","max":"2026","count":1641,"missing":0},{"name":"medium_facet","items":[{"value":"documents (object genre)","hits":282},{"value":"reports","hits":194},{"value":"filing","hits":49},{"value":"exhibition (associated concept)","hits":34},{"value":"agendas (administrative records)","hits":17},{"value":"handbills","hits":16},{"value":"minutes (administrative records)","hits":16},{"value":"correspondence","hits":3},{"value":"books","hits":2},{"value":"newspaper clippings","hits":2},{"value":"printouts","hits":2}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"rights_facet","items":[{"value":"http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/","hits":567}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"collection_titles_sms","items":[{"value":"Office of Desegregation Management","hits":566}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"provenance_facet","items":[{"value":"Butler Center for Arkansas Studies","hits":567}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"class_name","items":[{"value":"Item","hits":566},{"value":"Collection","hits":1}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":100,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"educator_resource_b","items":[{"value":"false","hits":567}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":100,"offset":0,"prefix":null}}]}}