{"response":{"docs":[{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_913","title":"''Status 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":["1992-09/1992-12"],"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","Educational law and legislation","Education--Evaluation","Educational statistics","School discipline","School employees","School enrollment","School facilities","School improvement programs","Student assistance programs","Gifted \u0026 talented","Student activities"],"dcterms_title":["''Status 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/913"],"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":["17 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   \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 "},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1394","title":"Report: ''Monitoring Report on the 1991-92 Little Rock School District Four-Year-Old Program,'' Office of Desegregation Monitoring, United States District Court, Little Rock, Ark.","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring (Little Rock, Ark.)"],"dc_date":["1992-07-31"],"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 improvement programs","School management and organization","Student assistance programs"],"dcterms_title":["Report: ''Monitoring Report on the 1991-92 Little Rock School District Four-Year-Old Program,'' Office of Desegregation Monitoring, United States District Court, Little Rock, Ark."],"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/1394"],"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":["38 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_984","title":"''Status 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":["1992-07/1992-09"],"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 discipline","School enrollment","School facilities","School improvement programs","Student assistance programs","Gifted \u0026 talented"],"dcterms_title":["''Status 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/984"],"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":["78 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  \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 "},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1526","title":"Court filings: District Court, notice of filing, Little Rock School District (LRSD) Academic Support Program; District Court, reply to response of Pulaski County Special School District (PCSSD) to Knight intervenors' motion to quash subpoena duces tecum","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":["1992-06-30"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System"],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","Little Rock School District","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","Educational law and legislation","Educational planning","Pulaski County Special School District","School management and organization","School improvement programs","Student assistance programs","School employees","School administrators","Educational statistics"],"dcterms_title":["Court filings: District Court, notice of filing, Little Rock School District (LRSD) Academic Support Program; District Court, reply to response of Pulaski County Special School District (PCSSD) to Knight intervenors' motion to quash subpoena duces tecum"],"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/1526"],"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":["5 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1114","title":"Little Rock School District of Pulaski County, Arkansas","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":["Little Rock School District"],"dc_date":["1992-06-30"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System"],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","Little Rock School District","Education--Arkansas","Education--Economic aspects","Education--Evaluation","Education--Finance","Educational statistics"],"dcterms_title":["Little Rock School District of Pulaski County, Arkansas"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Butler Center for Arkansas Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://arstudies.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/bcmss0837/id/1114"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["Available for use in research, teaching, and private study. Any other use requires permission from the Butler Center."],"dcterms_medium":["documents (object genre)"],"dcterms_extent":["140 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\nCombined financial statements and supplemental information with independent auditors' reports by Thomas and Thomas, certified accountants\nThe transcript for this item was created using Optical Character Recognition (OCR) and may contain some errors.\nTHE LifflE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS Combined Financial Statements and Supplemental Information (With Independent Auditors' Reports Thereon) June 30, 1992 CEFmr lEO i\"VBI.IC ACCOIJNTA '\"'J ,. l THE LimE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS Combined Financial Statements and Supplemental Information (With Independent Auditors' Reports Thereon) June 30, 1992 THE LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS Table of Contents June 30, 1992 INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' REPORT ON COMBINED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY SCHEDULES COMBINED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS Combined Balance Sheet - All Fund Types and Account Groups Combined Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - All Governmental Fund Types Combined Statement of Revenues and Expenditures - Budget and Actual - All Governmental Fund Types Notes to Combined Financial Statements SUPPLEMENTARY SCHEDULES Combining Schedule of Revenues and Expenditures - Special Revenue Funds Revenues of Salary, Operating and Debt Service Funds (Basis of Accounting as prescribed by Handbook II) Expenditures of Salary, Operating and Debt Service Funds (Basis of Accounting as prescribed by Handbook II) Reconciliation of General and Debt Service Fund Balances - Generally Accepted Accounting Principles and Handbook II Basis of Accounting Schedule of Long-Term Debt Reconciliation of Fund Equity - State Report and Financial Statements OTHER REPORTS AND SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION Independent Auditors' Report on Internal Control Structure Based on a Study and Evaluation Made as a Part of an Audit of the Basic Financial Statements Performed in Accordance with Government Auditing Standards and the Additional Tests Required by 0MB Circular A-128 1 4 6 8 12 30 31 32 33 34 37 39 THE LiffiE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS Table of Contents (Continued) June 30, 1992 Independent Auditors' Report on Compliance Based on an Audit of the Basic Financial Statements Performed in Accordance with Government Auditing Standards 43 Independent Auditors' Report on Compliance with General Requirements Applicable to Federal Financial Assistance Programs 44 Independent Auditors' Report on Compliance with Specific Requirements Applicable to Major Federal Financial Assistance Programs 45 Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs 47 Independent Auditors' Report on Schedule of Federal Financial Assistance 48 Schedule of Federal Financial Assistance 49 ~cvtd~ CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS Little Rock Office 201 E. Markham Suite 500  Little Rock, AR 72201 (501) 375-2025  FAX (501) 375-8704 Texarkana Office: 701 Arkansas Blvd.  Texarkana, AA 75502 (501) 773-2168  FAX (501) n4-72 INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' REPORT ON COMBINED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY SCHEDULES The Board of Directors The Little Rock School District of Pulaski County, Arkansas Little Rock, Arkansas We have audited the combined financial statements of The Little Rock School District of Pulaski County, Arkansas (the School District) as of, and for the year ended, June 30, 1992, as listed in the accompanying table of contents. The financial statements are the responsibility of the School District's management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audit. We conducted our audit in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards, Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the United States, and the provisions of Office of Management and Budget Circular A-128, Audits of State and Local Governments. Those standards require that we plan and perform an audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion. As described more fully in Note l(F) of the combined financial statements, the School District does not record the valuation base of its property, buildings, and equipment at historical cost in the general fixed asset group of accounts as required by generally accepted accounting principles. In our opinion, except for the effect of the failure to record the general fixed asset account group at historical cost, as discussed in the preceding paragraph, the combined financial statements referred to in the first paragraph present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the Little Rock School District of Pulaski County, Arkansas as of June 30, 1992, and the results of its operations for the year then ended in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles. 1 Members American Institute of Certified Public Accountants Private Compan,es Practice Section and S.E.C. Practice Sact,on The Board of Directors The Little Rock School District of Pulaski County, Arkansas Page Two Our audit was made for the purpose of forming an op1n1on on the combined financial statements taken as a whole. The supplemental information included at pages thirty through thirty-seven is presented for purposes of additional analysis and is not a required part of the basic combined financial statements. The information has been subjected to the procedures applied in the audit of the basic combined financial statements of the Little Rock School District of Pulaski County, Arkansas and, in our opinion, is fairly stated in all material respects in relation to the combined financial statements taken as a whole. November 20, 1992 Little Rock, Arkansas 2 ~ ef ~ Certified Public Accountants COMBINED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS 3 ASSETS AND AMOUNTS TO BE PROVIDED General Assets: Cash (Note 9) $ 2,198,349 Investments (Note 9) 7,967,389 Property taxes receivable (Note 2, 4 and 11) 2,789,594 Accrued interest and other receivables 156,799 Due from other governments (Notes 7 and 10) 8,471,471 Due from other funds 2,099,269 Inventories 445,366 Fixed assets (Notes 1 (Fl and 3) Prepaids and deferred charges 13,885 Total assets 24,142,122 Amounts to be provided for retirement of general long-term debt (Note 4) Total assets and amounts to be provided s 24,142,122 THE LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS Combined Balance Sheet - All Fund Types and Account Groups June 30, 1992 Fiduciary Governmental Fund TYJ!es Fund TYJ!e Account General Special Debt Capital Fixed Revenue Service Projects Agency Assets $ $ $ $ 119,128 $ l, 346,553 24,341,447 786,957 790,002 6,769 74,902 11,682 2,359,706 34,954 225,863 170,233 115,610 157,152,108 384,157 3,828,638 1,209,113 24,642,212 1,088,000 157,152,108 s 3,828,638 s 1,209,113 s 24,642,212 $___1_,_QJ38,000 s 157,152,108 The accompanying notes are an integral part of this financial statement. 4 GrOUJ:!S General Total Long-term (Memorandum Debt Only) $ $ 2,317,477 34,442,346 3,579,596 250,152 11,091,994 2,269,502 560,976 157,152,108 398,042 212,062,193 88,713,241 88,713,241 s 88,713,241 s 300,775,434 (Continued) LI'rrLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS Combined Balance Sheet - All Fund Types and Account Groups (Continued) June 30, 1992 Fiduciary Governmental Fund Tvt\u0026gt;es Fund TYl!e Account Grou11s General General Total Special Debt Capital Fixed Long-Term (Memorandum LIABILITIES AND FUND EQUITY General Revenue Service Projects Agency Assets Debt Only} Liabilities: Bank overdrafts (Note 9) $ $ 437,665 $ $ 189,553 s $ s s 627,218 Accounts payable 4,007,998 127,338 489,281 6,320 4,630,937 Accrued payroll taxes and withholdings 3,534,812 3,534,812 Accrued interest payable 74,000 33,048 107,048 Retainage payable (Note 3) 154,195 154,195 Estimated claims liability (Note 13) 230,295 230,295 Deferred revenues 643,181 643,181 Due to school activity groups and other agencies (Note 8) 1,081,680 1,081,680 Due to other funds 170,233 2,099,269 2,269,502 Notes payable (Note 11) 13,815,000 13,815,000 Long-term debt payable (Note 4) 88,713,241 88,713,241 Total liabilities 21,832,338 1,208,184 33,048 2,932,298 1,088,000 88,713,241 115 I 807 I 109 Commitments and Contingencies (Notes 3, 4, 6, 7, 10, 12 and 13) Fund Equity: Investment in general fixed assets (Notes l(f) and 3) 157,152,108 157,152,108 Fund Balance: Reserved for prepaids and deferred charges 13,885 384,157 398,042 Reserved for inventories 445,366 115,610 560,976 Unreserved: Board designated: Debt service 791,908 791,908 Capital projects 21,709,914 21,709,914 New Futures 245,834 245,834 Risk management (Note 13) 838,007 838,007 Food services and other 2,504,844 2,504,844 Undesignated 766,692 766,692 Total fund equity 2,309,784 2,620,454 1,176,065 21,709,914 157,152,108 184,968,325 Total liabilities and fund equity $ 24,142,122 $ 3,828,638 $ 1,209,113 $ 24,642,212 $ 1,088,000 $ 157,152,108 $ 88 I 713 I 241 $ 300,775,434 The accompanying notes are an integral part of this financial statement. 5 THE LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS Combined Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance All Governmental Fund Types REVENUES Local Sources: Property taxes (Notes 2 and 11) Tuition Interest Food sales Food services and other Magnet schools funding (Note 10) Total local sources State Sources: Minimum foundation programs (Note 7) Desegregation settlement (Note 7) Magnet schools funding (Note 10) Handicapped children aid Vocational aid Transportation aid Compensatory education Other Total state sources Federal sources: Elementary and Secondary Education Act Vocational Education Act Food services Energy conservation Other Total federal sources Total revenues s Year Ended June 30, 1992 General 49,462,903 337,261 559,379 860,839 51,220,382 27,971,570 8,637,482 824,870 1,187,062 2,645,763 858,743 1,993,962 44,119,452 9 385 9 385 95,349,219 s Special Revenue 28,813 85,146 1,382,381 1,210,367 3,205,253 5,911,960 6,943,921 795 781 7,739,702 4,039,242 362,342 3,981,422 191,146 666,004 9,240,156 22 I 891,818 The accompanying notes are an integral part of this financial statement. 6 Debt Capital Service Projects s 14,379,338 s 59,717 864,251 34,727 123,462 14,562,517 898,978 14,562,517 898,978 s Total (Memorandum Only) 63,842,241 366,074 1,568,493 1,382,381 2,105,933 3,328,715 72,593,837 27,971,570 8,637,482 6,943,921 824,870 1,187,062 2,645,763 858,743 2,789,743 51,859,154 4,039,242 362,342 3,981,422 191,146 675,389 9,249,541 133,702,532 (Continued) THE LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS Combined Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance All Governmental Fund Types (Continued) EXPENDITURES Instructional services: Basic programs Exceptional child programs Vocational-technical programs Adult continuing education programs Compensatory education programs Other instructional programs Total instructional services Instructional support services Pupil transportation services Operation and maintenance of plant School administration General administration Capital outlay (Note 3) Principal retirement of long-term debt (Note 4) Interest charges (Notes 4 and 11) Fiscal agent's fees Debt issuance costs (Note 5) Food services Community services Indirect and other (Note 10) Total expenditures Excess of revenues over (under) expenditures OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES) Contributed assets Proceeds of long-term debt (Note 4) Operating transfers in (Notes 2 and 10) Operating transfers out (Notes 2 and 10) Proceeds from refunding bonds (Notes 4 and 5) Payment to refunded bond escrow agent (Notes 4 and 5) Total other financing sources (uses) Excess of revenues and other financing sources over (under) expenditures and other uses Fund equity, beginning of year Fund equity, end of year Year Ended June 30, 1992 General $ 43,242,212 5,347,249 4,829,699 30,596 2,537,077 1,326,910 57,313,743 9,854,068 5,685,460 9,516,578 5,992,218 6,384,798 4,023,313 429,104 123,344 1,202,394 32,450 100,557,470 (5,208,251) 71,478 6,709,905 6,743,250 (6,184,919) 7,339,714 2,131,463 178,321 $ 2,309,784 Special Revenue $ 8,994,938 576,253 1,089,353 793,166 3,144,831 207,537 14,806,078 1,736,879 1,055,206 1,315,748 763,400 5,897,064 298,553 618,612 26,491,540 (3,599,722) 3,738,667 3,738,667 138,945 2,481,509 $ 2,620,454 The accompanying notes are an integral part of this financial statement. 7 $ Debt Service 5,541,372 4,966,579 65,518 405,834 10,979,303 3,583,214 2,446,252 (6,388,642) 7,499,000 (7,265,000) (3,708,390) (125,176) 1,301,241 $ 1,176,065 s Capital Projects 6,904,569 408,450 7,313,019 (6,414,041) 15,433,600 40,067 (394,675) 15,078,992 8,664,951 l3 I 044 I 963 $ 21, 709 I 914 Total {Memorandum Only) $ 52,237,150 5,923,502 5,919,052 823,762 5,681,908 1,534,447 72,119,821 11,590,947 5,685,460 10,571,784 5,992,218 7,700,546 11,691,282 5,541,372 5,395,683 65,518 937,628 5,897,064 1,500,947 651,062 145,341,332 (11,638,800) 71,478 22,143,505 12,968,236 (12,968,236) 7,499,000 (7,265,000) 22,448,983 10,810,183 17,006,034 $ 27,816,217 REVENUES Local Sources: Property taxes (Notes 2 and 11) Tuition Interest Food sales Food services and other Magnet schools (Note 10) Total local sources State Sources: Minimum foundation programs (Note 7) Desegregation settlement (Note 7) Magnet schools funding (Note 10) Handicapped children ai d Vocational aid Transportation aid Compensatory education Other Total state sources Federal Sources: Elementary and Secondary Education Act Vocational Education Act Food service Energy conservation Other Total federal sources Total revenues THE LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS Combined Statement of Revenues and Expenditures - Budget and Actual $ All Governmental Fund Types Year Ended June 30, 1992 General Fund Variance - Favorable Budget ,Actual (Unfavorable) 54,331,079 $ 49,462,903 $ (4,868,176) 300,000 337,261 37,261 700,000 559,379 (140,621) 814,936 860,839 45,903 56,146,015 51,220,382 (4,925,633) 28,118,907 27,971,570 (147,337) 8,637,482 8,637,482 629,752 824,870 195,118 1,174,485 1,187,062 12,577 2,983,190 2,645,763 (337,427) 874,311 858,743 (15 , 568) 2,022,134 1,993,962 (28,172) 44,440,261 44,119,452 (320,809) 668,744 9 385 (659,359) 668 744 9 385 (659,359) 101,255,020 95,349,219 (5,905,801) The accompanying notes are an integral part of this financial statement. 8 S11ecial Revenue Funds Variance - Favorable Budget Actual (Unfavorable) $ $ $ 28,000 28,813 813 62,240 85,146 22,906 2,216,066 1,382,381 (833,685) 628,568 1,210,367 581,799 3,149,037 3,205,253 56,216 6,083,911 5,911,960 (171,951) 6,887,705 6,943,921 56,216 115,538 795,781 680,243 7,003,243 7,739,702 736,459 4,111,426 4,039,242 (72,184) 344,945 362,342 17,397 3,656,587 3,981,422 324,835 191,146 191,146 753,316 666,004 (87,312) 8,866,274 9,240,156 373,882 21,953,428 22,891,818 938,390 (Continued) THE LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS Combined Statement of Revenues and Expenditures - Budget and Actual All Governmental Fund Types (Continued) Year Ended June 30, 1992 General Fund S~ecial Revenue Funds Variance - Variance - Favorable Favorable Budget Actual (Unfavorable) Budget Actual ~Unfavorable) EXPENDITURES Instructional services $ 58,590,221 $ 57,313,743 $ 1,276,478 $ 14,304,440 $ 14,806,078 $ (501,638) Instructional support services 11,104,163 9,854,068 1,250,095 1,842,200 1,736,879 105,321 Pupil transportation services 5,794,189 5,685,460 108, 729 Operations and maintenance of plant 10,453,402 9,516,578 936,824 1,140,670 1,055,206 85,464 School administration 5,804,622 5,992,218 (187,596) General administration 6,688,708 6,384,798 303,910 1,211,821 1,315,748 (103,927) Capital outlay (Note 3) 890,963 4,023,313 (3,132,350) 712,375 763,400 (51,025) Principal retirement of long term debt (Note 4) Interest charges (Notes 4 and 11) 429,104 (429,104) Fiscal agent's fees Debt issuance costs 123,344 (123,344) Food service 8,229,194 5,897,064 2,332,130 Community services 900,750 1,202,394 (301,644) 467,626 298,553 169,073 Indirect and other (Note 10) 636,437 32,450 603,987 478,143 618,612 (140,469) Total expenditures 100,863,455 100,557,470 305,985 28,386,469 26,491,540 1,894,929 Excess of revenues over (under) expenditures 391,565 (5,208,251) (5,599,816) (6,433,041) (3,599,722) 2,833,319 OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES) Contributed assets 71,478 71,478 Proceeds of long-term debt (Note 4) 4,500,000 6,709,905 2,209,905 Operating transfers in (Notes 2 and 10) 911,453 6,743,250 5,831,797 3,738,667 3,738,667 Operating transfers out (Notes 2 and 10) (6,407,083) (6,184,919) 222,164 Proceeds from refunding bonds (Notes 4 and 5) Payment to refunded escrow agent (Notes 4 and 5) Total other financing sources (uses) (995,630) 7,339,714 8,335,344 3,738,667 3,738,667 Excess of revenues and other financing sources over (under) expenditures and other financing uses (604,065) 2,131,463 s 2,735,528 (2,694,374) 138,945 s 2,833,319 Fund equity, beginning of year 634,842 178,321 2,725,577 2,481,509 Fund equity, end of year s 30,777 s 2,309,784 s 31,203 s 2,620,454 (Continued) The accompanying notes are an integral part of this financial statement. 9 REVENUES Local sources: Property taxes (Notes 2 and 11) Tuition Interest Food sales Food services and other Magnet schools and other (Note 10) Total local sources State Sources: Minimum foundation programs (Note 7) Desegregation settlement (Note 7) Magnet schools funding (Note 10) Handicapped children aid Vocational aid Transportation aid Compensatory education Other Total state sources Federal Sources: Elementary and Secondary Education Act Vocational Education Act Food service Energy conservation Other Total federal sources Total revenues THE LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS Combined Statement of Revenues and Expenditures - Budget and Actual All Governmental Fund Types (Continued) Year Ended June 30, 1992 $ 8,828,760 8,828,760 8,828,760 Debt Service Fund Actual $14,379,338 59,717 123,462 14,562,517 14,562,517 Variance - Favorable (Unfavorable) $ 5,550,578 59,717 123,462 5,733,757 5,733,757 $ The accompanying notes are an integral part of this financial statement. 10 Capital Projects Fund $ Actual 864,251 34,727 898,978 898,978 Variance - Favorable (Unfavorable) $ 864,251 34,727 898,978 898,978 (Continued) EXPENDITURES Instructional services Instructional support services Pupil transportation services Operations and maintenance of plant School administration General administration Capital outlay (Note 3) Principal retirement of long-term debt (Note 4) Interest charges (Notes 4 and 11) Fiscal agents' fees Debt issuance cost (Note 5) Food service Community services Indirect and other (Note 10) Total expenditures Excess of revenues over (under) expenditures OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES) Contributed assets Proceeds of long-term debt (Note 4) Operating transfers in (Notes 2 and 10) Operating transfers out (Notes 2 and 10) Proceeds from refunding bonds (Notes 4 and 5) THE LIHLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS Combined Statement of Revenues and Expenditures - Budget and Actual s All Governmental Fund Types (Continued) Year Ended June 30, 1992 3,457,525 5,254,171 6,500 8,718,196 110,564 Debt Service Fund s 5,541,372 4,966,579 65,518 405,834 10,979,303 3,583,214 Variance - Favorable (Unfavorable) s (2,083,847) 287,592 (59,018) (405,834) (2,261,107) 3,472,650 s Payment to refunded escrow agent (Notes 4 and 5) ____ _ Total other financing sources (uses) 2,446,252 (6,388,642) 7,499,000 (7,265,000) (3,708,390) 2,446,252 (6,388,642) 7,499,000 (7,265,000) (3,708,390) Excess of revenues and other financing sources over (under) expenditures and other financing uses Fund equity, beginning of year Fund equity, end of year s 110,564 110,564 (125,176) 1,301,241 $ 1,176,065 The accompanying notes are an integral part of this financial statement. 11 $ (235,740) Capital Projects Fund Budget 28,586,236 346,966 28,933,202 (28,933,202) 15,058,276 15,058,276 (13,874,926) 13,874,926 s 6,904,569 408,450 7,313,019 (6,414,041) 15,433,600 40,067 (394,675) 15,078,992 8,664,951 13,044,963 $ 21,709,914 Variance - Favorable (Unfavorable) $ 21,681,667 (61,484) 21,620,183 22,519,161 375,324 40,067 (394,675) 20,716 $ 22,539,877 THE Lli'l'LE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS Notes to Combined Financial Statements June 30, 1992 Note 1: Summary of Significant Accounting Policies The accounting policies of The Little Rock School District of Pulaski County, Arkansas (the School District) conform to generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) applicable to governmental units, except for the practice of recording various components of its general fixed assets at appraised values rather than at cost (Note l(F)). The following is a summary of the more significant accounting policies. (A) Fund Accounti.ng The accounts of the School District are organized on the basis of funds or groups of accounts, each of which is considered to be a separate accounting entity. The operations of each fund are accounted for by providing a separate set of self-balancing accounts which comprise its assets, liabilities, fund equity, revenues and expenditures. The following paragraphs describe the fund types and account groups used by the School District. Governmental Fund Types: - The General Fund is the primary operating fund of the School District. All general tax revenues and other revenues that are not allocated by law or contractual agreement to another fund are accounted for in this fund. The general operating expenditures, the fixed charges, and the capital improvement costs that are not paid through other funds are paid from this fund. The Special Revenue Funds are used to account for the proceeds of specific revenue sources, other than major capital projects, requiring separate accounting because of legal or regulatory provisions or administrative action. The Debt Service Funds are used to account for the accumulation of resources for the payment of principal, interest, and fees on long-term general obligation debt. - The Capital Projects Funds are used to account for financial resources segregated for the acquisition or construction of major capital facilities. Fiduciary Fund Type: The Agency Fund is used to account for the funds of school activity groups and other agencies. The assets in this fund are held by the School District in a fiduciary capacity. 12 THE LimE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS Notes to Combined Financial Statements (Continued) June 30, 1992 Note 1: Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (Continued) (A) Fund Accounting (Continued) Account Groups: - The General Fixed Asset Account Group is established to account for the fixed assets of the School District. - The General Long-Term Debt Account Group is established to account for the long-term debt that is guaranteed by the full faith and credit of the School District. (BJ Basis of Accounting The modified accrual basis of accounting is utilized by all funds. Revenues are recognized in the accounting period in which they become available and measurable. Expenditures are recognized in the accounting period in which the liability is incurred, if measurable, except for unmatured interest on general long-term debt which is recognized when the interest is due. Resources from special grants are generally recognized as revenues to the extent of expenditures made under the provisions of the grants. Significant funds received before the revenue recognition criteria have been met are reported as deferred revenue. (C) Budgetary Accounting Certain revenues and expenditures are budgeted in accordance with various legal .requirements which govern the School District's operations. The annual budget is submitted to the Arkansas State Department of Education (the State) for approval. Revisions by subsequent budget amendments, if any, are not submitted to the State. Budgeted revenues and expenditures were approved by the Board of Directors at their June 22, 1991 meeting. A final revision was adopted January 23, 1992. The budgets formally approved by the Board of Directors include the General Fund (salary, desegregation and other operating) and the Debt Service Fund, as required by the State (Handbook II), and certain construction and special revenue expenditures. The budgets of the School District utilized in its internal budgetary accounting systems and for financial reporting vary in some regards from those required by applicable state statutes to be formally approved by the Board of Directors. 13 THE Lli'rLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS Notes to Combined Financial Statements (Continued) June 30, 1992 Note 1: SUD1111ary of Significant Accounting Policies (Continued) (CJ Budgetary Accounting (Continued) The budgets approved by the Board of Directors are utilized in the preparation of the Combined Statement of Revenues and Expenditures - Budget and Actual. However, the approved budgets in some cases reflect beginning fund balance as revenue whereas these financial statements do not. In addition, certain budgeted items have been reclassified for financial statement presentation to facilitate comparison to the classifications required in reporting the related actual amounts. Such reclassifications relate primarily to operating transfers and proceeds of long-term debt. In addition, certain amounts (primarily property tax revenues and food service expenditures) are budgeted in accordance with accounting methods required by applicable state regulations with the related actual amounts being reflected in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. (DJ Investments Investments are stated at cost, which approximates market value. Investments consist of certificates of deposit, repurchase agreements, and treasury bills. (E) Inventories Inventories are stated at the lower of cost (first-in, first-out) or market (net realizable value). Inventories are recorded as expenditures when transferred to schools and departmental offices for utilization. (F) General Fixed Assets In the general fixed asset group of accounts, land is valued at historical cost. Certain other assets are stated at costs estimated by independent appraisers and by School District employees at various appraisal dates. Valuations of land improvements and buildings are intended to approximate fair market values at the latest appraisal dates (1965 and 1971, respectively)\nfurniture and fixtures are stated at appraisal values determined for insurance purposes in 1975. Additions since the date of the last appraisals are recorded at cost. The amount that such valuations vary from historical cost has not been determined. 14 THE LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS Notes to Combined Financial Statements (Continued) June 30, 1992 Note 1: Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (Continued) (G) Property Taxes Property taxes are recognized and recorded as current period revenues in accordance with the provisions of Interpretation 3 of the National Council of Governmental Accounting's (NCGA) Statement 1, which states that such revenues should be recognized when they become \"measurable and available.\" The School District defines \"measurable and available\" to mean property tax collections received by the School District within sixty days after its year end. (HJ Interfrmd Transactions Quasi-external transactions are accounted for as revenues or expenditures. Transactions that constitute reimbursements to a fund for expenditures initially made from it that are properly applicable to another fund, are recorded as expenditures in the reimbursing fund and as reductions of expenditures in the fund that is reimbursed. All other interfund transactions, except quasi-external transactions and reimbursements, are reported as transfers. Nonrecurring or nonroutine permanent transfers of equity are reported as residual equity transfers. All other interfund transfers are reported as operating transfers. (I) Accumulated Vacation and Sick Leave School District employees do not receive vacation pay as such. Certain employees receive additional compensation if they work more than their contracted days in any particular year. These employees are paid upon termination for any unpaid days accumulated in this manner. The School District's liability for this type of compensated absence is not considered material and, therefore, has not been recorded in the accompanying financial statements. Accumulated sick pay or personal leave days are not paid upon termination. Accordingly, the School District has not recorded a liability in the accompanying financial statements since payment is not probable and the amount of ultimate payment, if any, is not determinable. (J) Encumbrances Encumbrances for goods or purchased services are documented by purchase orders or contracts. Encumbrances outstanding at year end are not reported as expenditures for financial statement purposes as the related goods have not been received or the services performed. 15 THE LI'rrLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS Notes to Combined Financial Statements (Continued) June 30, 1992 Note 1: Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (Continued) (K) Total Columns on Combined Statements Total columns on the combined statements are captioned \"memorandum only\" to indicate that they are presented only to facilitate financial analysis. Data in these columns do not present financial position, results of operations, or changes in fund equity in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles. Neither is such data comparable to a consolidation. (L) Tax Exempt Status The School District is a tax exempt organization since its revenues are nontaxable under Section 115 of the Internal Revenue Code. Note 2: Property Taxes Pulaski County, Arkansas (the County) levies a property tax each February on the assessed value listed as of January 1 of the prior year for all real and personal property located in the County. Assessed values are established by the County Assessor's office. All taxes are due from property holders on an installment basis by October 10. Taxes to be levied upon January 1, 1992 assessment values are as follows: Rea,l Estate Personal property Utilities Valuation (Millions) $1,100 379 68 $ 1,547 Millage General Debt Fund Service 34.0 34.0 35.6 9.9 9.9 10.1 Property tax revenues of the Debt Service Fund totaling approximately $6,349,000 (the excess of funds necessary to meet current debt service requirements) have been transferred to the General Fund during the year ended June 30, 1992 as provided for under the statutes of the State of Arkansas. 16 THE LI'.l'rLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS Notes to Combined Financial Statements (Continued) June 30, 1992 Note 3: Fixed Assets The following is a summary of the major components of fixed assets of the School District: Balance Balance June 30, 1991 Additions Transfers June 30, 1992 Land s 2,861,085 s $ s 2,861,085 Land improvements 925,255 925,255 Buildings ll0,329,255 3,005,659 2,503,834 ll5,838,748 Furniture and equipment 28,841,397 4,595,568 33,436,965 Construction-in- progress 2,503,834 4,090,055 (2,503,834) 4,090,055 Totals s 145,460,826 s 11,691 c 282 s s 157,152,108 The School District has entered into contracts for the construction or renovation of various facilities as shown below. Retainage payable in relation to these contracts totaled approximately $154,000 at June 30, 1992. June 30, 1992 Balances Project Expended/ Co111R1itment Authorization Accrued Remaining Cloverdale Elementary and Junior High s 2,824,881 s 2,800,630 s 24,251 Forrest Heights Elementary 4,168,501 658,297 3,510,204 Other projects 1,114,369 631,128 483,241 s 8,107,751 s 4,090,055 s 4,017,696 The commitments shown above reflect only those balances for contracts that had been entered into as of June 30, 1992. The entire fund balance for the Capital Projects Fund is designated for renovations and additions to currently held fixed assets, as well as for acquisitions of new assets. 17 THE LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS Notes to Combined Financial Statements (Continued) June 30, 1992 Note 4: Long-Term Debt On September 24, 1990, the School District received $6,000,000 of desegregation loan proceeds from, and executed a promissory note to, the State of Arkansas. On March 10, 1992, the School District received an additional $4,500,000 of desegregation loan proceeds from the State of Arkansas (see Note 7). The principal of each note will bear interest beginning on the seventh anniversary of the date of the note at the rate of 3% per annum and is to be repaid in twenty equal annual installments beginning seven years after the execution of the loan. The notes are secured by liens in favor of the State on certain new and existing millages. Under terms of the desegregation settlement agreements, if at any time prior to December 31, 2000, the composite scores of the School District's black students (excluding special education students) on a standardized test agreed upon by the State and the School District are 90% or greater of the composite scores of the School District's white students (excluding special education students), any principal or interest payments previously paid on the desegregation loan will be repaid to the School District and any outstanding loan balances forgiven. A summary of all long-term debt transactions of the School District for the year ended June 30, 1992, is as follows: Balance at July 1, 1991 New debt issued: Construction school bonds - Capital Projects Fund Desegregation loan - General Fund Present value of capital lease obligations related to purchases of equipment and buses - General Fund Refunding school bonds (Note 5) - Debt Service Fund Total new debt issued Debt retired: School bonds principal payments Capital lease obligations Revolving loan Pulaski County, Arkansas Special School District (Note 7) Refunded school bonds (Note 5) Total debt retired Balance at June 30, 1992 18 $ 71,877,108 15,433,600 4,500,000 2,209,905 22,143,505 7,499,000 29,642,505 2,196,000 2,083,847 60,000 1,201,525 5,541,372 7,265,000 12,806,372 $ 88 I 713 I 241 - THE Lli'l'LE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS Notes to Combined Financial Statements (Continued) June 30, 1992 Note 4: Long-Term Debt (Continued) Long-term debt at June 30, 1992 is comprised of the following: School bonds, construction and refunding issues Pulaski County Special School District (Note 7) Arkansas State Department of Education revolving loan Arkansas State Department of Education desegregation loans Capital lease obligations, secured by transportation, computer and other equipment Principal Balance $ 64,475,150 8,750,798 120,000 10,500,000 4,867,293 $ 88,713,241 Interest Rates 3.25% - 7.2% 4.2% - 10% 9% 3% 6.6% - 8.9% Maturities Semiannually\nthrough 2020 Semiannually\nthrough 2003 Semiannually\nthrough 1994 Annually\n1998-2018 Various\nthrough 1995 The annual requirements to amortize all principal balances of long-term debt outstanding at June 30, 1992 are as follows: Year Ending June 30 Alllount 1993 s 6,230,799 1994 5,138,449 1995 4,983,375 1996 4,206,277 1997 4, 243,878 Thereafter 63 . 910,463 s 88,713,241 Total interest payable in the future on debt outstanding at June 30, 1992, excluding amounts for the desegregation loan, is approximately $54.2 million. Interest on the desegregation loans, assuming twenty year amortizations beginning in 1998 and 1999, would approximate $3 million. 19 II 11 THE LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS Notes to Combined Financial Statements (Continued) June 30, 1992 Note 5: Advance Bond Refunding On May 27, 1992, the School District issued $7,499,000 in refunding bonds to advance refund $7,265,000 of outstanding 1987 construction bonds (\"refunded bonds\"). The net proceeds of approximately $7,269,000 (after payment of underwriting fees, insurance, and other issuance costs) were used to satisfy the trustee of the refunded bonds, which were called on June 1, 1992. As a result of the advance refunding, the School District reduced its total debt services payments over the next 15 years by approximately $587,000, which resulted in an economic gain (difference between the present values of the debt service payments on the old and new debt) of approximately $386,000. The balance of unamortized deferred bond issuance cost related to the 1987 bonds of approximately $179,000 was written off resulting in a loss for financial statement purposes in that amount. Note 6: Retirement Plans Most School District employees are required by law to be covered by the Arkansas Teacher Retirement System (ATRS) except for certain bus drivers, cafeteria workers and janitors, who are covered by the Arkansas Public Employees Retirement System (APERS) . Effective July 1, 1991, all new employees of the School District, including part-time employees, must be members of the Arkansas Teacher Retirement System. Both systems are multiple-employer, cost-sharing public employee retirement systems which also provide death and disability benefits. Benefits for both systems are established by state statute. ATRS employees who retire under the system are entitled to a retirement benefit, payable monthly for life, equal to 1.95 percent of their final average salary for each contributory year of credited service and 1. 23 percent of their final average salary for each non-contributory year of credited service. APERS employees who retire are entitled to a retirement benefit, payable monthly for life, equal to 1.872 percent for contributory employees and 1.55 percent for non-contributing employees of average pay for each year of credited service, or a minimum of $150. Under both ATRS and APERS, benefits fully vest upon reaching 10 years of service. Employees electing early retirement receive reduced retirement benefits. 20 THE LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS Notes to Combined Financial Statements (Continued) June 30, 1992 Note 6: Retirement Plans (Continued) Contribution requirements are established by State statute for both systems. For the year ended June 30, 1992, employees covered by the system had the option to contribute a portion (generally 6%) of their salary. Federal funds of the School District were used to provide the matching contribution for all eligible ATRS employees who are paid through Federal programs, while the state provided the matching contribution for other ATRS employees. The School District provides for the matching for APERS employees. The payroll for employees covered by the ATRS for the year ended June 30, 1992, was approximately $85,000,000 and the payroll for employees covered by APERS for the same period was approximately $6,000,000. The School District's total payroll was approximately $91,000,000. For the year ended June 30, 1992, retirement and matching contributions for School District employees, and the related percentages of covered payroll, are as follows: $ In Thousands ATRS APERS Total Employee contributions $ 1,970 2.32% s 18 .30% $ 1,988 2.62% Matching Contributions: School District 230 3.83 230 3.83 State 9,634 11. 33 9,634 11. 33 Federal 417 ______,_j_2 417 ______,_j_2 $ 12,021 14.14% $ 248 4.13% $ 121269 18.27% The pension benefit obligation (PBO) is a standard disclosure measure of the present value of pension benefits, adjusted for the effects of projected salary increases and any step-rate benefits, estimated to be payable in the future as a result of employee service to date. The measure, which is the actuarial present value of credited projected benefits, is intended to help users assess each system's funding status on a going-concern basis, assess progress made in accumulating sufficient assets to pay benefits when due, and make certain comparisons. Neither ATRS or APERS make separate measurements of assets and PBO for individual employers, thus such information is not available as it relates to the School District. 21 THE LI'rfLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS Notes to Combined Financial Statements (Continued) June 30, 1992 Note 6: Retirement Plans (Continued) The total PBO, net assets available for benefits and funded status at June 30, 1991, the date of the latest actuarial valuation, is as follows. In Thousands ATRS APERS Total Pension benefit obligation $ 2,543,856 $ 1,263,582 $ 3,807,438 Net assets available for benefits 2,434,314 11516,777 3,951,091 Unfunded (overfunded) pension benefit obligation $ 109,542 $ (253,195) $ (143,653) Ten year historical trend information showing each system's progress in accumulating sufficient assets to pay benefits when due is presented in each system's June 30, 1991 comprehensive annual financial report. Note 7: Desegregation and Related Funding Issues During 1982, the School District brought litigation to consolidate the three school districts in Pulaski County, Arkansas. This was an interdistrict school desegregation case involving complex federal litigation in both trial and appellate courts. In relation to the remedy issues of this litigation, the Pulaski County Special School District (PCSSD) and the Little Rock School District entered into agreements, which were approved by the Courts, for the transfers of certain schools, buildings and related personal property between the districts. The Little Rock School District assumed approximately $14. 6 million in long-term debt (see Note 4) related to the properties transferred to them. The transfer of property also resulted in approximately $300 million in property assessment values being transferred to the Little Rock School District effective with the January 1, 1987 assessments. The litigation also resulted in the courts ordering the School District to initiate certain desegregation programs with the Arkansas Department of Education (the State) being liable for certain aspects of funding the programs. All major financial aspects of this litigation have been settled and accepted by the courts. 22 THE LlrrLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS Notes to Combined Financial Statements (Continued) June 30, 1992 Note 7: Desegregation and Related Funding Issues (Continued) Under the terms of the settlement agreements, the Arkansas Department of Education agreed to pay the School District a total of $71 million, net of $2 million in legal fees awarded the NAACP Legal Defense and Education Fund, Inc. This amount included approximately $57,130,000 for compensatory education and other desegregation programs and $13,870,000 for cash equivalent payments in lieu of formula guarantees. In addition, the State agreed to loan the School District up to $20 million between July 1, 1989 and July 1, 1999. The loan proceeds are to be used for desegregation purposes and are secured by liens in favor of the State on certain new and existing millages. As of June 30, 1992, $10,500,000 has been received in regard to the loan provisions of the agreement (see Note 4). During the year ended June 30, 1992, the School District recorded settlement proceeds of $8,637,482 in the general fund for compensatory education programs and other desegregation expenses. Included in this amount is a receivable of $4,889,954 due the School District on July 1, 1992 for reimbursement of desegregation expenditures made prior to year end. In addition, the School District received and recorded additional cash equivalent payments in lieu of Minimum Foundation Program Aid (HFPA) formula guarantees totaling $2,000,000 which are recorded as HFPA revenue in the general fund. Net amounts of future funding expected to be received under the above described agreements (excluding potential loan proceeds) at June 30, 1992 are as follows: MFPA Year Ending Desegregation Guarantees Total June 30, 1993 $ 8,926,606 $ 2,000,000 $ 10,926,606 June 30, 1994 8,094,112 2,000,000 10,094,112 June 30, 1995 6,042,591 2,000,000 8,042,591 June 30, 1996 3,829,942 1,870,114 5,700,056 Future years 683,125 683,125 Total $ 27,576,376 $ 7,870,114 $ 35,446,490 23 THE LITI'LE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS Notes to Combined Financial Statements {Continued) June 30, 1992 Note 8: Agency Funds As the School District serves only in a fiduciary capacity for the school activity funds and other agency funds, related transactions are not reflected in the combined statement of revenues, expenditures and changes in fund balance. A summary of transactions in these school activity and other agency funds during the year ended June 30, 1992, and the resulting change in amounts due to the school activity groups and other agencies, is as follows: Due to school activity groups and other agencies at June 30, 1991 Transactions during the year ended June 30, 1992: School activities and other agencies revenues Interest on investments School activities and other agencies expenditures Due to school activity groups and other agencies at June 30, 1992 Note 9: Cash and Investments s 1,008,865 3,587,373 37,043 {3,551,601) $ 1,081,680 Arkansas statutes authorize school districts to deposit their funds in any bank located in the State of Arkansas. In addition, they may invest in bonds of the United States of America, general obligation bonds of the State of Arkansas, and bank certificates of deposit or repurchase agreements from a bank or savings and loan that has pledged direct obligations of, or obligations which are fully guaranteed by, the United States of America. At June 30, 1992, the total \"carrying amount\" of deposits with financial institutions was $2,317,477 {exclusive of $627,218 reflected as bank overdrafts for financial statement purposes). The related \"bank balance\" was $3,596,590 and is categorized as follows: Amount insured by the FDIC Amount collateralized with securities held by the Federal Reserve Bank in the School District's name Uncollateralized Total bank balance 24 $ 151,884 1,300,000 2,144,706 $ 3,596,590 THE LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS Notes to Combined Financial Statements (Continued) June 30, 1992 Note 9: Cash and Investments (Continued) Investments of the School District (including Agency Funds) at June 30, 1992, are summarized below. Investments, which are all represented by specific identifiable investment securities, are classified as to credit risk by the three categories described as follows: Category l - Insured or registered, or securities held by the School District or its agent in the School District's name. Category 2 - Uninsured and unregistered, with securities held by the counterparty's trust department or agent in the School District's name. Category 3 - Uninsured and unregistered, with securities held by the counterparty, or by its trust department or agent, but not in the School District's name. Total Category Carrying l 2 3 Amount Certificates of deposit $ 150,000 $ 300,000 $ ..:. $ 450,000 Treasury bills 30,442,346 30,442,346 Repurchase agreements 3,550,000 3,550,000 $ 30,592,346 $ 300,000 $ 3,550,000 $ 34,442,346 Note 10: Maqnet School Funding As a part of its desegregation program (see Note 7), the Federal court directed the School District to participate in a \"Magnet School'' system and has vested control of these schools in a Magnet Review Committee (MRC). Six schools from the Little Rock School District are organized as a separate reporting group under the control of the MRC. During the year ended June 30, 1992, the approved funding level of these schools (\"the Magnets\") totaled $3,682 per average daily membership (ADM). The State contributes one half of the cost ($1,841 per ADM) with Pulaski County Special School District (PCSSD), North Little Rock School District (NLRSD) and Little Rock School District (LRSD) sharing the balance of the cost. The State pays its portion of the NLRSD and PCSSD contributions directly to the respective districts for subsequent remission to the LRSD. 25 II II II II I I I I I I THE LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS Notes to Combined Financial Statements (Continued) June 30, 1992 Note 10: Magnet School Funding (Continued) Average daily membership: LRSD NLRSD PCSSD Total ADM Contribution rate - local sources Total schools' contributions Less operating transfers from General Fund to Magnet Fund Total magnet revenue - local sources Total magnet revenue - state sources 2,304.2 508.0 959.6 3,771.8 $ 11841 $ 6,943,920 (31 7381667) $ 312051253 $ 6,9431921 The Little Rock School District accounts for the Magnet School's operating revenues and expenses within its Special Revenue Fund since these funds are restricted to the operations of the Magnets. The Little Rock School District's portion of the total costs consists of $3,738,667 recorded as an operating transfer from the General Fund with the balance of $503,365 being indirect administrative cost contributions. ' ~ In addition to the above discussed operating revenues, the School District is also reimbursed by the NLRSD and PCSSD for debt service payments for capital improvements to the Magnets. The total of such reimbursements (which are reflected in revenues of the Debt Service Fund) for the year ended June 30, 1992 are as follows: North Little Rock School District Pulaski County Special School District Total Note 11: Note Payable $ 34,954 881508 $ 1231462 On April 14, 1992, the School District issued $13,815,000 of tax and revenue anticipation promissory notes (TRANS). The TRANS were issued to provide moneys needed to meet the School District's anticipated operating cash flow needs. The principal, plus accrued interest at a rate of 4.125% per annum , is payable in full December 31, 1992. Security for the TRANS is a pledge of revenue of the School District for the year ended June 30, 1992. Total interest charges incurred on notes payable, including balances under previous TRANS, for the year ended June 30, 1992 were approximately $429,000. 26 THE LITrLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS Notes to Combined Financial Statements (Continued) June 30, 1992 Note 12: Other Litigation and Contingencies At June 30, 1992, the School District is a defendant in various legal actions. Several actions involve claims by former employees asserting discriminatory hiring practices. The School District intends to vigorously contest these claims. Management and legal counsel are of the opinion that the likelihood of an unfavorable outcome is small and, thus, no provision has been made in the financial statements for any potential liabilities. During the year ended June 30, 1991, judgments were entered against the School District totaling approximately $580,000 to be paid to the District's former attorneys for services performed on behalf of the School District in the Pulaski County school desegregation case. The School District estimated and recorded a liability and related expenditure for $580,000 in the June 30, 1991 combined financial statements. The School District appealed the judgement and in January, 1992 the courts reduced the judgement to approximately $267,000 plus interest. This resulted in a change in accounting estimate of approximately $293,000 which is reflected as a reduction in legal expense for the year ended June 30, 1992. Note 13: Risk Management The School District is exposed to various risks of loss related to torts\ntheft of, damage to, and destruction of assets\nerrors and omissions\ninjuries to employees and students\nand natural disasters. Effective October 1, 1990, the School District established a Risk Management Fund within the General Fund to account for and finance its uninsured risks of loss. Under this program, the Risk Management Fund provides coverage up to a maximum of $100,000 for each property damage, general liability or other covered claim. The School District purchases commercial insurance for claims in excess of coverage provided by the Fund and for all other risks of loss. Settled claims did not exceed loss fund or other commercial coverage during the past two fiscal years. The claims liability of $230,295 recorded in the General Fund at June 30, 1992 is based on the requirements of Governmental Accounting Standards Board Statement No. 10, which requires that a liability for claims be reported if information prior to the issuance of the financial statements indicates that it is probable that a liability has been incurred at the date of the financial statements and the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated. The claims liability includes an amount for claims that have been incurred but not reported. 27 I II I 11 I THE LlrrrLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS Notes to Combined Financial Statements (Continued} June 30, 1992 Note 13: Risk Management (Continued) Claims liability activity, by \"loss year,\" for the year ended June 30, 1992 is as follows: Loss Year 1990-1991 1991-1992 Total Claims liability, beginning of year $ 252,068 $ $ 252,068 Claims paid (183,516} (141,496} (325,012} Current year claims and changes in estimates (291885) 333,124 303,239 Claims liability, end of year $ 381667 $ 191,628 $ 2301295 28 - -- --- J 1, I II 11 II I I SUPPLEMENTARY SCHEDULES 29 Schedule 1 THE LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS Combining Schedule of Revenues and Expenditures - Special Revenue Funds Year Ended June 30, 1992 Total Federal Food Other Magnet (Memorandum Programs Service Programs Schools Only) REVENUES Local assistance $ 28,813 $ 2,280,718 $ 397,176 $ 3,205,253 $ 5,911,960 State assistance 795,781 6,943,921 7,739,702 Federal financial assistance 5,258,734 3,981,422 9,240,156 Total revenues 5,287,547 6,262,140 1,192,957 10,149,174 22,891,818 EXPENDITURES Basic programs 1,750 103,650 8,889,538 8,994,938 Exceptional child programs 300,055 276,198 576,253 Vocational-technical programs 316,806 199,873 572,674 1,089,353 Adult continuing education programs 92,640 700,526 793,166 Compensatory education programs 3,119,617 19,881 5,333 3,144,831 Other instructional programs 13,349 12,286 181,902 207,537 Instructional support services 667,046 1,069,833 1,736,879 Operation and maintenance of plant 4,792 1,050,414 1,055,206 General administration 83,344 25,014 1,207,390 1,315,748 Capital outlay 274,348 322,154 35,704 131,194 763,400 Food services 5,897,064 5,897,064 Community services 298,553 298,553 Indirect and other 115 I 247 503,365 618,612 Total expenditures 5,287,547 6,219,218 i ,096,934 13,887,841 26,491,540 Excess of revenues over (under) expenditures 42,922 96,023 (3,738,667) (3,599,722) OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES) Operating transfer in for LRSD portion of Magnet funding 3,738,667 3,738,667 Total other financing sources 3,738,667 3,738,667 Excess of revenues over expenditures and other financing uses $ $ 42,922 $ 96,023 $ 138,945 30 LI'ITLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS Schedule 2 Rev.enues of Salary, Operating and Debt Service Funds (Basis of Accounting as Prescribed by Handbook II) Year Ended June 30, 1992 REVENUE - LOCAL SOURCES Current taxes Delinquent taxes 40% pullback Excess treasurer's fee Depository interest Revenue in lieu of taxes Miscellaneous and rents Interest on investments Athletic receipts REVENUE - COUNTY SOURCES County General Severance tax REVENUE - STATE SOURCES MFPA Apportionment Vocational Handicapped children Early childhood Orphan children Transportation Compensatory education Incentive fund Adult education Desegregation settlement Desegregation loan REVENUE - OTHER SOURCES Total General and Debt Service Funds (Memorandum Only) Unadjusted Adjusted Handbook II Net Handbook II Budget Revenues Adjustments Revenues $ 38,196,979 $ 3,600,000 21,222,860 140,000 400,000 224,667 420,850 300,000 85,000 64,590,356 73,419 11,000 84 419 28,118,907 73,419 1,474,485 629,752 147,050 3,000 2,983,190 874,311 1,798,665 624,119 8,637,482 4, 500,000 49,864, 380 38,196,979 $ 4,250,186 21,081,833 140,858 241,476 224,667 458,044 356,198 100,857 65,051,098 73,419 15,350 88 769 27,264,460 73,426 1,513,699 824,870 147,050 3,000 2,379,879 858,743 1,770,486 697,589 8,637,482 21,422 21,422 265,884 4,500,000 ---- 48,670,684 ----=2=6-=-5,L..\n,8:....:8:....:4'- $ 38,196,979 4,250,186 21,081,833 140,858 241,476 224,667 458,044 377,620 100,857 65,072,520 73,419 15 350 88 769 27,264,460 73,426 1,513,699 824,870 147,050 3,000 2,645,763 858, 743 1,770,486 697, 589 8, 637,482 4,500,000 48, 936,568 Public Law 874 44,625 9,385 129,428 394,675 9,385 129, 428 2,800,860 2,9 39, 673 Transfer from federal grant 111,453 Transfer from bond account --~8~00~,~0~0-\"-0 956,078 533,488 2,406,185 2,406,185 Total revenues $115,495,233 $114,344,039 $ 2,693,491 $117,037,530 31 ..... LITI'LE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS Expenditures of Salary, Operating and Debt Service Funds (Basis of Accounting as Prescribed by Handbook II) Year Ended June 30, 1992 Schedule 3 Total General and Debt Service Funds (Memorandum Only) Unadjusted Adjusted Handbook II Net Handbook II Budget Ext\u0026gt;enditures Adjustments Ex~enditures Certified salaries $ 56,475,397 $ 56,324,205 $ $ 56,324,205 Non-certified salaries 16,616,953 16,867,007 16,867,007 Employee benefits 9,247,100 8,992,742 152,964 9,145,706 Purchased services 10,240,766 9,036,188 280,823 9,317,0ll Supplies and materials 5,805,355 4,010,761 4.010,761 Capital outlay 3,709,961 3,959,731 226,109 4,185,840 Debt service 8,718,196 7,950,100 2,442,525 10,392,625 Other objects 4,786,843 5,402,198 (441,726) 4,960,472 Contingency 388,163 Total expenditures $ ll5,988,734 $ 112,542,932 $ 2,660,695 $ ll5,203,627 32 I I I I I I I I I ..... LITrLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS Schedule 4 Reconciliation of General and Debt Service Fund Balances - Generally Accepted Accounting Principles and Handbook II Basis of Accounting June 30, 1992 Fund balances at June 30, 1991 - Handbook II Basis Handbook II revenues (Schedule 3) Handbook II expenditures (Schedule 4) Fund balances at June 30, 1992 - Handbook II Basis Adjustments to convert to generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP): Property taxes - debt services Property taxes - general fund Special revenue fund adjustments Fund Balances at June 30, 1992 - GAAP Basis General fund Debt service fund Total 33 $ 990,117 s $ s 117,037,530 (115,203,627) 2,824,020 4,886,537 {4,209,896) {14,812) 3,485,849 2,309,784 1,176,065 3,485,849 i I I I School Bonds: THE LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS Schedule of Long-Term Debt June 30, 1992 $4,485,000 December, 1965 Construction School Bonds\npayable in annual installments through 1995\ninterest at 3.25% to 3.6% $2,051,000 June, 1973 Construction School Bonds\npayable in annual installments through 1993\ninterest at 4.7% to 5.0% $6,482,700 June, 1977 Construction School Bonds\npayable in annual installments through 1996\ninterest at 4.25% to 5.1% $6,134,565 March, 1979 Construction School Bonds\npayable in annual installments through 1999\ninterest at 5.4% to 6.0% $4,889,200 March, 1980 Surplus Revenue Construction School Bonds\npayable in annual installments through 1994\ninterest at 5.75% to 6.0% $5,512,750 May, 1988 Construction School Bonds\npayable in annual installments through 2007\ninterest at 6.2% to 7.2% $3,371,000 June, 1988 Refunding School Bonds\npayable in annual installments through 1999\ninterest at 5.6% to 6.6% $8,164,100 September, 1989 Construction School Bonds\npayable in annual installments through 2008\ninterest at 6.1% to 6.75% $17,197,450 September, 1990 Construction School Bonds\npayable in annual installments through 2020\ninterest at 6.25% to 7.2% $15,433,600 October, 1991 Construction School Bonds\npayable in annual installments through 2020\ninterest at 6.1% to 7.0% $7,499,000 May, 1992 Refunding Bonds\npayable in annual installments through 2007\ninterest at 5.6% to 6.50% Total bonds 34 Schedule 5 $ 966,000 305,000 2,405,000 3,285,000 1,490,000 5,215,000 2,535,000 8,144,100 17,197,450 15,433,600 7,499,000 64,475,150 (Continued) THE LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS schedule of Long-Term Debt (Continued) June 30, 1992 Capital lease obligations: Lease payable in annual installments through September 1992, interest at 7.9% Lease payable in annual installments through October 1992, interest at 7.0% Lease payable in annual installments through April 1993\ninterest at 8.0% Lease payable in monthly installments through July 1993\ninterest at 7.8% Lease payable in semi-annual installments through July 1994\ninterest at 8.5% Lease payable in annual installments through February 1993\ninterest at 5.9% Lease payable in annual installments through April 1994\ninterest at 8.9% Lease payable in annual installments through October 1993\ninterest at 7.62% Lease payable in annual installments through October 1994\ninterest at 7.99% Lease payable in annual installments through March 1995\ninterest at 7.95% Lease payable in monthly installments through February 1994\ninterest at 7.42% Lease payable in monthly installments through July 1994\ninterest at 7.9% Lease payable in annual installments through July 1996\ninterest at 6.7% Lease pay.able in annual installments through July 1996\ninterest at 6.7% Lease payable in annual installments through July 1996, interest at 6.97% Total capital lease obligations 35 $ Schedule 5 (Continued} 24,105 6,698 20,852 58,783 450,471 1,007,820 29,917 100,038 903,651 71,085 62,123 66,226 981, 725 496,384 587,415 4,867,293 (Continued) Other: THE LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS Schedule of Long-Term Debt (Continued) June 30, 1992 Debt payable to the Pulaski County Special School District\npayable semi-annually through 2003\nvarying interest rates Revolving loan\npayable in semi-annual installments through January 1994 at 9% Desegregation loan\npayable in 20 annual installments beginning September, 1997\ninterest at 3% Desegregation loan\npayable in 20 annual installments beginning March, 1998\ninterest at 3% Total Long-Term Debt 36 Schedule 5 (Continued) $ 8,750,798 120,000 6,000,000 4,500,000 S 88,713,241 THE LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS Reconciliation of Fund Equity - State Report and Financial Statements June 30, 1992 Governmental Fund Tvpes Fund equity per State Report*: Salary, Operating and Debt Service Funds $ 2,321,666 Building Funds 22,156,036 Federal Programs 607,079 Student Activity Fund 25,084,781 Current period adjustments, net: Handbook II - revenues and expenditures (413,325) Handbook II - fund equity 315,335 Other 18,647 Fund balances not included in State Report: Revolving Funds 373,726 Food Service Fund 2,246,728 KLRE-FM/KUAR-FM Cumulative effect of prior years differences 190,325 Fund equity per financial statements $ 27,816,217 Due to school activity groups and other agencies per financial statements Schedule 6 Fiduciary Fund rypes $ 802,950 802,950 181,915 96,815 $ 1,081,680 * Unaudited financial report issued to the Arkansas State Department of Education on August 28, 1992 37 OTHER REPORTS AND SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION 38 ~and~ CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS Little Rock Office 201 E. Markham Suite 500  Little Rock, AR 72201 (501) 375-2025  FAX (501) 375-8704 Texarkana Office: 701 Arkansas Blvd. Texarkana. AR 75502 1501) 773-2168  FAX 1501) 774-7244 INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' REPORT ON INTERNAL CONTROL STRUCTURE BASED ON A STUDY AND EVALUATION MADE AS A PART OF AN AUDIT OF THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH GOVEllNHENT AUDITING STANDARDS AND THE ADDITIONAL TESTS REQUIRED BY 0MB CIRCULAR A-128 The Board of Directors The Little Rock School District of Pulaski County, Arkansas Little Rock, Arkansas We have audited the combined financial statements of The Little Rock School District of Pulaski County, Arkansas (the School District), as of and for the year ended June 30, 1992, and have issued our report thereon dated November 20, 1992. We have also audited the School District's compliance with requirements applicable to major federal financial assistance programs and have issued our report thereon dated November 20, 1992. We conducted our audits in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards\nGovernment Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the United States\nand Office of Management and Budget (OHB) Circular A-128, Audits of State and Local Governments. Those standards and OHB Circular A-128 require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the combined financial statements are free of material misstatement and about whether the School District complied with laws and regulations, noncompliance with which would be material to a major federal financial assistance program. In planning and performing our audits for the year ended June 30, 1992, we considered the School District's internal control structure in order to determine our auditing procedures for the purpose of expressing our opinions on the combined financial statements and on its compliance with requirements applicable to major federal financial assistance programs and to report on the internal control structure in accordance with OHB Circular A-128, and not to provide assurance on the internal control structure. The management of The Little Rock School District of Pulaski County , Arkansas is responsible for establishing and maintaining an internal control structure. In fulfilling this responsibility, estimates and judgments by management are required to assess the expected benefits and related costs of internal control structure polici es and procedures. The objectives of an internal control structure are to provide management with reasonable, but not absolute, assurance that assets are safeguarded against loss from unauthorized use or disposition, that transactions are executed in accordance with management's authorization and recorded properly to permit the preparation of combined financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and that federal financial assistance programs are managed in compliance with applicable laws and regulations. Because of inherent limitations in any internal 39 Members American Institute of Certified Public Accou ntants Private Companies Practice Section and S.E.C. Practice Section Board of Directors The Little Rock School District of Pulaski County, Arkansas Page Two control structure, errors, irregularities, or instances of noncompliance may nevertheless occur and not be detected. Also, projection of any evaluation of the structure to future periods is subject to the risk that procedures may become inadequate because of changes in conditions or that the effectiveness of the design and operation of policies and procedures may deteriorate. For the purpose of this report, we have classified the significant internal control structure policies and procedures in the following categories: 1. Accounting Controls - Cash - Fund balances - Revenues/receivables - Payrolls - Cash receipts - Fixed assets - Expenditures/payables - Investments - Cash disbursements 2. Controls Used in Administering Federal Programs General Requirements: Specific Requirements: Political activity Davis-Bacon Act Civil rights Cash management Federal financial reports Allowable costs/cost principles Drug-free workplace act Administrative requirements Types of services Eligibility Matching, level of effort, or earmarking Reporting Special tests and provisions For all of the internal control structure categories listed above, we obtained an understanding of the design of relevant policies and procedures and determined whether they have been placed in operation, and we assessed control risk. During the year ended June 30, 1992, the School District expended 89% of its total federal financial assistance under major federal financial assistance programs. We performed tests of controls, as required by the 0MB circular A-128, to evaluate the effectiveness of the design and operation of internal control structure policies and procedures that we considered relevant to preventing or detecting material noncompliance with specific requirements, general requirements, and requirements governing claims for advances and reimbursements and amounts claimed or used for matching that are applicable to each of the School District's major federal financial assistance programs, which are identified in the accompanying schedule of federal financial assistance. Our procedures were less in scope than would be necessary to render an opinion on these internal control structure policies and procedures. Accordingly, we do not express such an opinion. 40 The Board of Directors The Little Rock School District of Pulaski County, Arkansas Page Three We noted certain matters involving the internal control structure and its operation that we consider to be reportable conditions under standards established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants. Reportable conditions involve matters coming to our attention relating to significant deficiencies in the design or operation of the internal control structure that, in our judgment, could adversely affect the School District's ability to record, process, summarize, and report financial data consistent with the assertions of management in the combined financial statements or to administer federal financial assistance programs in accordance with applicable laws and regulations. FIXED ASSETS The School District does not have a complete inventory or detail subsidiary ledger of all fixed assets which can be agreed or reconciled to total general fixed assets as reported in the combined financial statements. The School District's fixed asset tracking system should be expanded to include all of its assets and to provide for a complete periodic physical inventory count of capital assets. The inventory should be used to determine that all assets purchased are still in possession of the School District and that assets are being utilized in an effective and efficient manner. In addition, the \"Common Rule\" issued by the Office of Management and Budget outlines equipment management guidelines for property purchased with federal funds having a useful life of more than one year and an original acquisition cost of $5,000 or more per unit. These guidelines require that a physical inventory of the property be taken and the results reconciled with the property records at least once every two years. INSURANCE PAYROLL WITIIlIOLDING Our review of the controls related to the payroll disbursements cycle revealed weakness in relation to the timely flow of information regarding notice of employee terminations from the personnel department to the payroll department. Due to the untimely exchange of information necessary to facilitate removal of terminated employees from insurance records and billings, premiums were inadvertently paid for persons who were no longer employees of the School District. We recommend that the School District implement procedures to facilitate a more timely exchange of information between departments to ensure accuracy of payroll records and the payment of billings for employee insurance premiums. 41 The Board of Directors The Little Rock School District of Pulaski County, Arkansas Page Four * * * * * * A material weakness is a reportable condition in which the design or operation of one or more of the internal control structure elements does not reduce to a relatively low level the risk that errors or irregularities in amounts that would be material in relation to the combined financial statements being audited or that noncompliance with laws and regulations that would be material to a federal financial assistance program may occur and not be detected within a timely period by employees in the normal course of performing their assigned functions. Our consideration of the internal control structure would not necessarily disclose all matters in the internal control structure that might be reportable conditions and, accordingly, would not necessarily disclose all reportable conditions that are also considered to be material weaknesses as defined above. However, we believe the reportable conditions described above are not material weaknesses. This report is intended for the information of the Board of Directors, management, and all applicable Federal and State agencies. However, this report is a matter of public record and its distribution is not limited. November 20, 1992 Little Rock, Arkansas 42 ~ {~o,oJ Certified Public Accountants !7/wma\u0026amp; tmd !7/wma\u0026amp; CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS Little Rock Office 201 E. Markham Suite 500  Little Rock, AR 72201 15011 375-2025  FAX 15011375-8704 Texarkana Office: 701 Arkansas Blvd. Texarkana, AR 75502 15011773-2168  FAX 1501) 774-7244 INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' REPORT ON COMPLIANCE BASED ON AN AUDIT OF THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH GOVERNHENT AUDITING STANDARDS The Board of Directors The Little Rock School District of Pulaski County, Arkansas Little Rock, Arkansas We have audited the combined financial statements of The Little Rock School District of Pulaski County, Arkansas (the School District), as of and for the year ended June 30, 1992, and have issued our report thereon dated November 20, 1992. We conducted our audit in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards and Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the United States. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. Compliance with laws, regulations, contracts, and grants applicable to The Little Rock School District of Pulaski County, Arkansas is the responsibility of the School District's management. As part of obtaining reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement, we performed tests of the School District's compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations, contracts, and grants. However, the objective of our audit of the combined financial statements was not to provide an opinion on overall compliance with such provisions. Accordingly, we do not express such an opinion. The results of our tests indicate that, with respect to the items tested, The Little Rock School District of Pulaski County, Arkansas complied, in all material respects, with the provisions referred to in the preceding paragraph. With respect to items not tested, nothing came to our attention that caused us to believe that the Scho\u0026lt;\n\u0026gt;l District had not complied, in all material respects, with those provisions. This report is intended for the information of the Board of Directors, management, and all applicable Federal and state agencies. However this report is a matter of public record and its distribution is not limited. November 20, 1992 Little Rock, Arkansas Certified Public Accountants 43 Members American Institute of Certified Public Accountants Private Companies Practice Section and S.E.C. Practice Section ~@d~ CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS little Rock Office 201 E. Markham Su ite 500  Little Rock, AR 72201 1501) 375-2025  FAX 15011375-8704 Texarkana Office: 701 Arkansas Blvd. Texarkana, AR 75502 1501 ) 773-2168  FAX 1501) 774-7244 INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' REPORT ON COMPLIANCE WITH GENERAL REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO FEDERAL FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS The Board of Directors The Little Rock School District of Pulaski County, Arkansas Little Rock, Arkansas We have audited the financial statements of the Little Rock School District of Pulaski County, Arkansas (the School District) as of and for the year ended June 30, 1992, and have issued our report thereon dated November 20, 1992. We have applied procedures to test the School District's compliance with the following requirements applicable to its federal financial assistance programs, which are identified in the Schedule of Federal Financial Assistance for the year ended June 30, 1992: Political activity Davis-Bacon Act Civil rights Cash management Federal financial reports - Allowable costs/cost principles - Drug-free Workplace Act - Administrative requirements Our procedures were limited to the applicable procedures described in the Office of Management and Budget's Compliance Supplement for Single Audits of State and Local Governments. Our procedures were substantially less in scope than an audit, the objective of which is the expression of an opinion on the School District's compliance with the requirements listed in the preceding paragraph. Accordingly, we do not express such an opinion. With respect to the items tested, the results of those procedures disclosed no material instances of noncompliance with the requirements listed in the second paragraph of this report. With respect to items not te sted, nothing came to our attention that caused us to believe that the School District had not complied, in all material respects, with those requirements. However, the results of our procedures disclosed immaterial instances of noncompliance with those requirements, which are des cribed in the accompanying Schedule of Findings and Questi oned Costs . This report is intended for the information of the Board of Directors , management, and all applicable Federal and state agencies. However, this report is a matter of public record and its distribution is not limited. November 20, 1992 Little Rock, Arkansas ~o./U ,J_ ~a.A) Certified Pu' bli c Accountants Members American Institute of Certified Pu blic Accountants Private Companies Practice Section and S.E.C. Practice Section 44 f?bma\u0026amp;cmd f7bma\u0026amp; CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS Little Rock Office 201 E. Markham Suite 500  Little Rock, AR 72201 (5011 375-2025  FAX (5011375-8704 Texarkana Office: 701 Arkansas Blvd. Texarkana, AA 75502 (5011773-2168  FAX (SQ\nJ 774-7244 INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' REPORT ON COMPLIANCE WITH SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO MAJOR FEDERAL FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS The Board of Directors The Little Rock School District of Pulaski County, Arkansas Little Rock, Arkansas We have audited the combined financial statements of the Little Rock School District of Pulaski County, Arkansas (the School District), as of and for the year ended June 30, 1992, and have issued our report thereon dated November 20, 1992. We also have audited the School District's compliance with the requirements governing types of services allowed or unallowed\neligibility\nmatching, level of effort, or earmarking\nreporting\nlevels of service\ncarryover of grant funds\nparent involvement\nprogram evaluations\nservices provided to children enrolled in private schools\ncommitment of funds\nand schoolwide projects that are applicable to each of its major federal assistance programs, which are identified in the accompanying schedule of federal financial assistance for the year ended June 30, 1992. The management of the School District is responsible for compliance with those requirements. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on compliance with those requirements based on our audit. We conducted our audit of compliance with those requirements in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards\nGovernment Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the United States\nand 0MB Circular A-128, Audits of State and Local Governments. Those standards and 0MB Circular A-128 require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether material noncompliance with the requirements referred to above occurred. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence about the School District's compliance with those requirements. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion. In our opinion, the Little Rock School District of Pulaski County, Arkansas complied, in all material respects, with the requirements governing types of services allowed or unallowed\neligibility\nmatching, level of effort, or earmarking\nreporting\nlevels of service\ncarryover of grant funds\nparent involvement\nprogram evaluations\nservices provided to children enrolled in private schools\ncommitment of funds\nand schoolwide projects that are applicable to each of its major federal financial assistance programs for the year ended June 30, 1992. 45 Members American Institute of Certified Public Accountants Private Companies Practice Section and S.E C. Practice Section The Board of Directors The Little Rock School District of Pulaski County, Arkansas Page Two This report is intended for the information of the Board of Directors, management, and all applicable Federal and state agencies. However, this report is a matter of public record and its distribution is not limited. November 20, 1992 Little Rock, Arkansas 46 ~~~~ Certified Public Accountants Program Various Federal Programs THE LITfLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs June 30, 1992 Findings/Noncompliance The \"Common Rule\" requires that detailed property records be maintained identifying pertinent information related to equipment purchased with federal funds. Also, a physical inventory of this equipment should be performed at least every two years and the results reconciled with the detailed records. The School District does not maintain detailed property records, nor has a physical inventory of the property been performed. Questioned Costs NIA There are no unresolved findings or questioned costs from prior audit periods. 47 !7lwma\u0026amp; and !7lwma\u0026amp; CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS Little Rock Office 201 E. Markham  Suite 500  Little Rock, AR 72201 1501) 375-2025  FAX 1501) 375-8704 Texarkana Office: 701 Arkansas Blvd.  Texarkana, AR 75502 1501 ) 773-2168  FAX 1501 ) 774-7244 INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' REPORT ON SCHEDULE OF FEDERAL FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE The Board of Directors The Little Rock School District of Pulaski County, Arkansas Little Rock, Arkansas We have audited the combined financial statements of The Little Rock School District of Pulaski County, Arkansas (the School District) as of and for the year ended June 30, 1992, and have issued our report thereon dated November 20, 1992. These combined financial statements are the responsibility of the School District's management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these combined financial statements based on our audit. We conducted our audit in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards, Government Audi ting Standards issued by the Comptroller General of the United States, and the provisions of Office of Management and Budget Circular A- 128, Audits of State and Local Governments. Those standards and 0MB Circular A- 128 require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the combined financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion. Our audit was made for the purpose of forming an opinion on the combined financial statements of The Little Rock School District of Pulaski County, Arkansas taken as a whole. The accompanying Schedule of Federal Financial Assistance is presented for purposes of additional analys i s and is not a required part of the combined financial statements. The information in that schedule has been subjected to the auditing procedures applied in the audit of the combined financial statements and, in our opinion, is fairly stated in all material respects in relation to the combined financial statements taken as a whole. November 20, 1992 Little Rock, Arkansas 'Tfv~cw 1 ~a.Al Certified Public Accountants 48 Members American Institute of Certified Public Accountants Private Companies PracUce Section and S.E .C. Practice Section MAJOR PROGRAMS U.S. Department of Education Passed Through State Department of Education: CHAPTER I Compensatory Title VI-B Handicapped Vocational Education Act (Carl Perkins): 7/01/91 - 6/30/92 7/01/90 - 6/30/91 U.S. Department of Agriculture Passed Through State Department of Education: National School Lunch Program Passed Through State Department of Human Services: National School Lunch Program - Commodities Total Major Programs OTHER FEDERAL PROGRAMS U.S. Department of Education Passed Through State Department of Education: EESA TITLE II Public Law 874 ECIA CHAPTER II CHAPTER I Handicapped Drug Free Schools and Communities Act of 1986 Adult Basic Education U.S. Department of Labor Passed Through State Department of Education: CETA/Vocational Job Training Partnership Act U.S. Department of Energy Passed Through Arkansas Energy Office: Institutional Conservation Program Institutional Conservation Program THE LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS Schedule of Federal Financial Assistance Year Ended June 30, 1992 Federal CFDA Number 84.010 84.027 84.048 84.048 10.555 10.555 84.164A 84.041 84.151 84.009 . 84.186A 84.002 17.250 17.250 81.052 81.052 49 $ Program or Award Amount 3,500,025 653,866 344,945 372,269 N/A N/A 100,671 279,862 63,615 274,469 92,893 47,938 114,013 623 ,854 196,120 Federal Funds Revenues Recognized Expenditures $ 3,248,136 $ 3,248,136 517,152 517,152 271,574 271,574 90,768 90 768 4,127,630 4,127,630 3,492,855 3,492,855 466,875 466,875 3,959,730 3,959,730 8,087,360 8,087,360 57,122 57,122 9,385 9,385 223,948 223,948 50,007 50,007 216,333 216,333 92,893 92,893 649,688 649,688 47,233 47,233 66,547 66 547 113, 780 113,780 108,760 108,760 82,386 82,386 191,146 191,146 (Continued) THE LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS Schedule of Federal Financial Assistance (Continued) Year Ended June 30, 1992 OTHER FEDERAL PROGRAMS (CONTINUED) U.S. Department of Agriculture Passed Through State Department of Education: Nutritional Education U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Passed Through State Department of Human Services: Child Care and Development Block Grant Developmental Disabilities Planning Council - Basic Support Grant Social Services Block Grant - Contract Social Services Block Grant - Vouchers Total Other Federal Programs Total Federal Financial Assistance Note: Medicaid reimbursements paid to providers are defined as contracts for services and not federal assistance\ntherefore, $128,263 of Medicaid reimbursements received during the year ended June 30, 1992 are not covered by the reporting requirements of 0MB Circular A-128. Federal CFDA Number 10.564 93.037 93.630 93.667 93.667 50 Program or Award Amount $ NIA NIA 3,500 44,475 NIA $ $ Federal Funds Revenues Recognized 21,692 29,165 1,750 4,442 22,255 57,612 1,033,918 9,121,278 Expenditures $ 21,692 29,165 1,750 4,442 22,255 57,612 1,033,918 $ 9,121,278\nThis project was supported in part by a Digitizing Hidden Special Collections and Archives project grant from The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation and Council on Library and Information Resources.\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\u003cdcterms_creator\u003eLittle Rock School District\u003c/dcterms_creator\u003e\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n\n "},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1429","title":"Report: ''1991-92 Incentive Schools Monitoring Report,'' Office of Desegregation Monitoring, United States District Court, Little Rock, Ark.","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring (Little Rock, Ark.)"],"dc_date":["1992-06-05"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System"],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","Little Rock School District","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","Educational statistics","School enrollment","School integration","School management and organization"],"dcterms_title":["Report: ''1991-92 Incentive Schools Monitoring Report,'' Office of Desegregation Monitoring, United States District Court, Little Rock, Ark."],"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/1429"],"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":["12 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1040","title":"\"Incentive School Monitoring Report,\" Office of Desegregation Monitoring, United States District Court, Little Rock, Ark","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":["1992-06-04"],"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","Office of Desegregation Monitoring (Little Rock, Ark.)","Education--Evaluation","Educational statistics"],"dcterms_title":["\"Incentive School Monitoring Report,\" Office of Desegregation Monitoring, United States District Court, Little Rock, Ark"],"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/1040"],"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":["60 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\nODM's presentation to St. Louis Education Monitoring and Advisory Committee\nThis transcript was created using Optical Character Recognition (OCR) and may contain some errors.\n, ............... OUl~ Office of Desegregation :Monitoring 201 East Markham, Suite-510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Phone: 501-376-6200 Fax: 501-371-0100 Ann Brown, Federal Monitor Melissa Guldin, Associate Monitor Connie Hickman, Associate Monitor Bob Morgan, Associate Monitor Margie Powell, Associate Monitor Horace Smith, Associate Monitor Polly Ramer, Office Manager LindaBryant, Assoc. Office Manager Jackie Banks, Recep-tionist - AGENDA TOPICS OCTOBER 28, 1992 Welcome, Introductions and Overview Districts Overview Planning and Priority Identification Break \u0026amp; Office Tour Monitoring and Reporting Process Construction Finance Site Visit Overview Wrap Up Ann Horace Polly Connie Connie Melissa Bob Melissa Tenns Office of Desegregation Monitoring (ODM): Created by order of the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals in December 1990. Functioning as an arm of the U.S. District Court, ODM is mandated to monitor all aspects of the five separate but interrelated desegregation plans that comprise the Settlement Agreement among six parties: three autonomous school districts (Little Rock, North Little Rock, and Pulaski County), the State of Arkansas, the Joshua Intervenors (for black children), and the Knight Intervenors (for the teachers.) ODM gathers information that indicates the degree of the parties' compliance with the desegregation plans and relevant court order. ODM monitors file their findings, conclusions, and recommendations to the District Court in written reports that become part of the case record. Monitor: The process of determining the degree of compliance with the provisions of a desegregation plan or court order. Monitoring the desegregation plans is the act of assessing the progress of the desegregation process in various ways: on-site observation of school district facilities and operations\ninterviews with district employees, students, parents, and others\nand reviewing relevant data to assess the level of compliance with the desegregation plans' provisions. Monitoring guide: Documents developed and used by ODM monitors as the basis for their monitoring activities. These instruments encapsulate the legal requirements of the desegregation plans and court orders. The guides may also contain \"compliance indicators,\" evidence that the districts' are fulfilling their legal obligations. These documents guide monitoring observations, interviews, data collection, and information disaggregation in order for the court to determine the level of compliance with legal requirements. Monitoring report: A summary of information, gathered during the monitoring process, that ODM submits to the court and shares with the parties and the community. The report may be broad or focus on a specific area or aspect of desegregation, such as a particular type of school, program, or operation. The report may be a status (short term or \"formative\") assessment or a long term (\"summative\") appraisal of the degree to which the parties are fulfilling the requirements of the desegregation plans and relative court orders. Implementation: The process of fulfilling a desegregation requirement to the degree, and within the timeframe, that satisfies the requirements of desegregation plans and court orders. Implementation considerations include the human, material, and financial resources and time schedules necessary to ensure that the desegregation process continues uninterrupted. Programmatic: Referring to a sequence of actions or operations designed to coordinate various resources and activities for attaining a desired goal. There are numerous programmatic requirements of the desegregation plans such as those pertaining to academic achievement, staff and student recruitment, parental involvement, etc. Community involvement: The desegregation plans include provisions for the participation of parents and other citizens in education through various activities and programs. Community involvement is encouraged and managed through a variety of both required and voluntary activities including parent-teacher conferences, parent-teacher organizations, biracial monitoring groups, school volunteer programs, and school-business partnerships. INCENTIVE SCHOOL MONITORING REPORT JUNE 4, 1992 OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS Melissa R. Guldin Associate Monitor Bob Morgan Associate Monitor Horace R. Smith Associate Monitor Ann S. Brown Monitor Connie L Hickman Associate Monitor Margie L. Powell Associate Monitor Polly Ramer Office Manager INTRODUCTION Mission of the Office of Desegregation Monitoring . The Office of Desegregation Monitoring (ODM) is an arm of the United States District Court which serves the Eastern District of Arkansas. The ODM was created by the Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit and ordered into law by the district court in a January 1991 decree that vested the Office with \"the authority to monitor the school districts' compliance with the settlement plans and settlement agreement, including any future modifications of, or additions to, such plans and agreement.\" Both professionally and personally, each ODM staff member values children and is committed to quality desegregated education as a vital component of a free and healthy society. The ODM staff has pledged to help build the essential partnership between our legal system, schools, and community in order to achieve the equitable education that is each child's constitutional birthright. The ODM staff are professionals with a broad range of educational, legal, financial, and business management experience among them. They are fully qualified to obseive and assess the rate of progress toward the desegregation goals. All ODM staff members willingly share their expertise with the school districts and, when requested, provide technical assistance in a cooperative spirit of support. ODM Monitoring Philosophy The ODM's monitoring is an ongoing process of collecting and analyzing information about the efforts being applied toward reaching the goals and objectives specified in the desegregation plans and court orders. Assessing the effectiveness of those efforts, both individually and collectively, to determine what's working and what needs work is also an important part of OD M's monitoring mission. The ODM assists the court in determining the parties' compliance with both the letter and spirit of the agreements they have made. It also collects and interprets information that keeps the entire community informed of the desegregation progress, providing reassurance that a vigilant watch is being kept. The ODM can uncover developing problems, point to where changes may be needed, and suggest corrective action to prevent falling short of the desegregation goals. The ODM also highlights the school districts' successes and joins the court and community in applauding progress. The Incentive Schools Monitoring Report Background This report focuses on the implementation of the desegregation plan in the Little Rock School District's seven incentive schools. These schools, which are attended predominately by black children, have many enhancements that include programs, activities, personnel, equipment, and a funding level that are found in none of the district's other schools. The Eighth Circuit Court has termed the incentive schools crucial to the success of the desegregation plan and, therefore, these schools and their programs have been given monitoring priority by the Office of Desegregation Monitoring. Monitoring Process ODM follows a systematic approach to monitoring based upon a process which is described below and illustrated with examples of the incentive school monitoring report that is the substance of this document: 1. Generic statistical information is identified, logged, and summarized. The \"Elementary School Monitoring Guide\" contains general school information such as student enrollment, staffing, standardized test results, retention and discipline, inservice training, community involvement, and so forth. This information, which comes primarily from the monitors' direct observation of school records and operations, provides an overall picture of a particular school community. 2. The monitors identify the legal obligations of the desegregation plan and assess the compliance status of each obligation. The provisions of the desegregation plan contain the substance of the legal obligations the school districts are required to fulfill. In this report, the provisions that specifically refer to the incentive schools have been concisely summarized and listed in each school's report under the title of \"Incentive School Monitoring Guide.\" A page number follows each provision summary in the Incentive School Monitoring Guide to identify where that provision is located in the desegregation plan. When monitoring of the incentive schools began in the fall of 1991, an appeal was still pending before the court on the parties' proposed revised desegregation plans, so the original 1989 settlement plans were still in effect. Each page of those 1989 plans had been assigned a sequential JDR 0oint Designated Record) number by the court. This is the plan reference number which is found in the Monitoring Guides. The JDR reference numbers are also used in the Updated Information that follows each school's Guides. Any references in this report to the page numbers of the April 29, 1992 revised settlement plans are noted as such. Monitors then determine the compliance status of each provision and note their findings. Through observations, interviews, and a review of all sorts of documents, the monitors assess the degree to which each plan provision is being implemented. (See \"Sources of Information\", below.) 3. Updated information is collected and added to the monitoring report. Monitors visited the incentive schools during October and November 1991. They collected follow-up information throughout the school year until May 27, 1992, including two more V1s1ts to each school in the spring. In order to document progress at each school, this updated information has been appended to each school's fall monitoring report according to the categories and provisions listed in the Monitoring Guides. 4. Preliminary draft reports are completed and shared with appropriate district personnel. Although monitors make every effort to be accurate in their reporting, mistakes can occur. To minimize factual or recording errors in ODM reports, the monitors have personally reviewed each school's monitoring report with that school's principal and asked for feedback on the accuracy of the data upon which the reports rest. Likewise, the draft reports have been shared with district administrators. This preliminary sharing process enhances report accuracy and completeness by uncovering data errors and allowing incorporation of any additional information that sharpens the monitoring picture. It also helps alleviate surprises that can contribute to the innately threatening nature of being monitored. Since ODM's purpose is not to \"catch\" the districts, but to help them be successful in meeting their desegregation goals, the monitors make every effort to operate fairly and in good faith with the school districts. Reviewing the preliminary reports with district personnel promotes the open communication and understanding that is basic to the desegregation partnership between the ODM and the school districts. 5. Completed monitoring reports are filed with the district court and distributed to all of the parties. The three county school districts, the Joshua Intervenors (on behalf of black children), and the Knight InteIVenors (on behalf of the county's teachers) receive copies of the Incentive School Monitoring Report as does each incentive school principal and staff. Sources of Information The incentive school monitoring reports are based upon three primary types of information: Site visits: Each incentive school was fonnally visited by an ODM monitoring team in October or November and twice again by monitors in the spring. Monitors obseIVed all areas of each campus and school building, including most classrooms. During some visits, monitors shared lunch and conversation with students and staff at noontime. During the course of the year, monitors also observed a variety of meetings involving district and school committees, boards, administrators, school staff, and parents\nattended training sessions\nand. participated in school and district special events. Interviews: During the school site visits, team members met at length with the principal and talked with some teachers and other staff members as well as a few students. Throughout the school year, there were occasional phone conversations and meetings between the monitors and the incentive school principals as well as numerous meetings, telephone conversations, and written communication among district administrators and the ODM staff. Written information: Information was gleaned from all manner of written sources including School Profiles, monthly Little Rock School District Desegregation Updates, Quarterly Reports, memoranda, letters, reports, budgets, fund balance sheets, agenda and minutes of various group meetings, district press releases, court submissions and exhibits, court orders, hearing transcripts, and the desegregation plans. Report Organization This report is organized into three parts, beginning with the introductory section. The second part is comprised of seven individual but parallel incentive school monitoring reports and updated information. Section three follows with an overall summary of the monitors' findings along with their conclusions and recommendations. The recommendations are offered as suggestions for achieving compliance with the legal obligations set out in the desegregation plans and for improving the services essential to meeting the desegregation goals . . OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING STAFF REPORT September 1991 MAJOR STAFF ACTIVITIES Meetings have included weekly staff meetings\nbreakfasts with Dr. Steele\nintroductory meetings 'Nith the senior administrators and principals of all three school districts\nintroductory meeting with the Joshua monitors\nmeeting 'Nith PCSSD representatives to discuss progress on construction of the Crystal Hill interdistrict school\nmeeting with John Walker and Gus Taylor regarding resolution of concerns\nnumerous meetings and an exit conference with the legislative auditor\nmeetings with an LRSD data processing official regarding payroll arrangements. Monitoring visits were made to all incentive schools and schools with new construction: Rockefeller, Rightsell, Franklin, Garland, Stephens, Mitchell, !sh, Geyer Springs, Western Hills, Cloverdale Elementary, and Cloverdale Junior High. Also, visits were made to LRSD Alternative School and the NLRSD Alternative School, Romine lnterdistrict Elementary School, College Station Elementary, and Fuller Junior High. Schools visited in September: LRSD: Rockefeller, Rightsell, Franklin, Garland, Stephens, Mitchell, lsh, Pulaski Heights, Romine, Terry, Geyer Springs, Western Hills, Woodruff, and Cloverdale Elementary, Cloverdale Jr. High, Central High, and the Alternative School. PCSSD: College Station Elementary, Fuller Jr. High, Mills High. NLRSD: Alternative School. Total schools visited in September: 21 Reports studied by the staff included the OMS preliminary monitoring report of October 1990, the Joshua monitoring report of July 1991, and recent LRSD status reports. Information requested and received from the districts included current enrollment data of each incentive school by class\nnumber of instructional aides at each incentive school\nresults from the third administration of the LRSD Minimum Performance Test. Baseline data to be provided ODM by the districts on a routine basis was identified. A provision audit of certain sections of the settlement plans to detennine baseline legal requirements and corresponding accountabilities and perfonnance indicators was conducted as a test to detennine the feasibility of this type of approach to monitoring.  Analysis of orders and hearing transcripts to identify specific court requests and directives has been completed. The parties will be notified regarding any action or infonnation which is due in compliance with court directives. - Notice of noncompliance with court orders regarding the number of instructional aides at the incentive schools was communicated to the LRSD. Financial auditing of the books by the legislative auditor was a tremendously time consuming task for the Office Manager as she provided detailed records for the auditor. The audit revealed no irregularities in bookkeeping process or financial balances. The auditor's report has been forwarded to the Legislative Audit Committee which will issue a final report in four to six months. Financial monitoring preparations continue in collaboration with the Arkansas Financial Group. A copy of the entire LRSD General Ledger for their desegregation budget has been obtained in print and on computer disc. Formats for financial comparisons and reports have been determined to enable identification of numerous variables, e.g., what \"double funding\" represents. Installing and customizing the word processing programs on the five new computers and wiring the printer sharing network among all offices has been largely completed with some \"debugging\" continuing. An accounting program has been purchased and installed on our powerful financial computer to enable the tracking of the districts' settlement expenditures. Court sessions attended by the ODM monitoring team included the Circuit Panel hearing on the parties' appeals of District Court orders and the swearing in our associate Connie Hickman as a new attorney at the Arkansas Supreme Court. Learning from the experiences of other monitoring agencies took some members of the ODM team to the Dallas Independent School District's Department of Desegregation and to several monitoring agencies in St. Louis: the Educational Monitoring and Advisory Committee, the Voluntary Interdistrict Coordinating Council, the Metropolitan Coordinating Committee for Vocational Education, and the St. Louis School District Desegregation Monitoring Office. Public information, relations, and service: The monitor was interviewed on the Channel 14 public affairs program \"Shaping the Future\" regarding the status and challenges of the desegregation plans, attended a reception to honor retiring LRSD Board member Skip Rutherford, chaired the September meeting of the Cornerstone Project's Board of Directors, attended the quarterly meeting of the Board of Directors of the National Assn. of Partners in Education (NAPE) in Seattle, and attended the quarterly meeting of the Arkansas Chapter of the National School Public Relations Association. An associate monitor served on the Proposal Committee for the Arkansas Department of Education's Homeless Education Project and helped to award state grants. Staff responded to various phone requests for information from parents and teachers.  Staff development was conducted by ODM staff in response to requests: \"Cultural Awareness\" for Pulaski Heights and Terry Elementary teachers\n\"Multicultural Education and School Desegregation\" for UCA pre-service teachers and education students\n\"Self-Esteem in Early Childhood\" for Arkansas HIPPY Coordinators and home visitors\n'Working With At-Risk Youth\" for the Central High faculty\n\"Helping With Your Child's Education\" for the Women's Project for parents, youth service workers, and ex-offenders. lnservice for ODM staff continues on the new computers and printing system. Consultation services were provided for Mills High at the school counselor's request for resolution of racial conflict among drill team members. Additional ODM staff support included making travel arrangements to the desegregation offices in Sc. Louis, the NAPE Board meeting in Seattle, and an upcoming training session in Mississippi\nhandling routine and special requests for information between ODM and the parties\ncompleting the transfer of written bookkeeping records to a computer accounting system\nfiling and indexing all court orders since December 1990 in a handy notebook system\norganizing the office for easy access to the new printer networking system\nobtaining a listing of Minority Vendors to ensure that minority businesses are included in our bidding processes. MAJOR ACTIVITIES PLANNED FOR OCTOBER -Finalize monitoring approach including identifying priorities, developing a school monitoring instrument, scheduling monitoring visits, and determining the reporting process and schedule. -Meet with Districts for orientation to monitoring guide, process, and scheduled school visits. -Begin monitoring visits to schools. -Continue follow up to determine district compliance with specific court requests and directives. -Identify schools out of racial compliance and follow up with districts. -Monitor special school and program situations, e.g. incentive school aide ratio, qualifications, and class size compliance. -Complete office personnel policies and administrative procedures and evaluation -Make information gathering trip to desegregation monitoring office in Cleveland. -Complete \"debugging'' of office computer system and printing network. OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORil'\n\"G STAFF REPORT September 1992 MAJOR STAFF ACTIVITIES Meetings have included staff meetings\nseveral informal meetings with Mac Bernd about various topics\ndiscussed Crystal Hill assignment and transportation concerns with PCSSD administrators\nattended the PCSSD monthly Board of Directors meeting and briefly addressed the board\nmet with LRSD administrators and their lawyer about the proposed Stephens School plan\nmet with LRSD's communications director about organizing community forums\nattended a reception hosted by Acting Governor Tucker to honor visiting cosmonauts and astronauts\nmet with all parties about cooperative aerospace magnet planning\ndiscussed desegregation plan constraints on the aerospace magnet with the school's grant writer: met with the MRC chairman about the impact oi LRSD budget cuts on magnet schools\nthree meetings with LRSD's new Asso. Supt. for Organizational and Learning Equities, Marie Parker (who replaced James Jennings), to discuss various aspects of the desegregation plan and monitoring priorities and procedures\nmet with Joshua representatives, NLRSD administrators and their lawyer about Joshua's monitoring approach\nmet with Joshua representatives and Marie Parker about Joshua's monitoring approach\nmet with PCSSD board president to discuss various desegregation issues\ninterviewed Estelle Mathis about the Stephens School Education Specifications Committee's activities\nattended a Women Lawyers Association meeting\nattended an Homeless Advisory Committee meeting\nmet with the Cornerstone Mentors Coordinator\nviewed a tape of LRSD's monthly Board of Directors meeting\nmet with LRSD's IRC incentive school specialist to discuss ODM's incentive school recommendations\nattended the PCSSD PALS inservice\nmeetings and informal discussions with school district officials to resolve several M-to-M transportation problems. ODM individual and team planning centered on developing this year's monitoring schedule. School open houses were attended in the LRSD: Fair Park, Pulaski Heights Elementary, Rockefeller, and Woodruff. School visits: PCSSD: Fuller and Bates Elementary, Fuller Junior High, Mills High. McClellan High School was monitored for compliance with its new magnet .program plan. Monitors wrote and began editing a status report on their findings and conc\nusions. Monitoring the NLRSD process for selecting cheerleaders and drill team was concluded, and report writing began. A report writing consultant, a U ALR technical writing professor, has been engaged to help refine ODM reports. Editing for clarity and completeness continued on the alternative schools and biracial committees monitoring reports. MRC responsibilities outlined in court orders and MRC reports were researched. ODM's site monitoring guide was revised, and revisions on the incentive school monitoring guide begun. An audit of the type and timing of data that the districts' publish was requested so ODM and the parties can coordinate information flow. Review of hearing transcripts continues in order to catalog the topics covered and to identify court directives. A summary of the legal events in the desegregation case was updated. Staff development for ODM staff: an associate attended the national conference of the Association for Counselor Education and Supervision in San Antonio\nthe office manager designed and conducted two workshops for staff on using Wordperfect computer programs. ODM conducted staff development in response to requests: a cultural sensitivity workshop for Cornerstone mentors and tutors\na session on ODM's monitoring process and priorities for PCSSD administrators with a separate session for all PCSSD counselors. Public information, relations, and service: the staff continued to respond to numerous letters and calls from parents and teachers about the impact of LRSD budget cuts\naddressed the NLR Rotary Club\nattended a meeting of the Future Little Rock Education Task Force\ncomplied with Cleveland and Saint Louis requests for copies of ODM's monitoring reports\nthe monitor attended the NAPE Board of Directors meeting in Boston, Massachusetts\nan associate counseled at length a PCSSD parent with a student assignment complaint\nan associate read alternative education and homeless grant proposals for ADE\nthe staff responded to routine requests for information and assistance from our local press, parents, school board members, school district personnel, and other citizens. Additional ODM staff support included managing the United Way appeal to ODM\nattending two Dun and Bradstreet computer workshops on DOS and desktop publishing\npreparing a planning process for the staffs computer workshops\ndesigning an \"expandable\" computer notebook for each staff member that includes glossary, tips, and step-by-step instructions\ndesigning data tables for the monitoring guide. l\\1AJOR ACTIVITIES PLANNED FOR OCTOBER -Complete and file monitoring reports on the McClellan magnet program, the alternative schools and biracial committees. -Meet with the Joshua monitoring team. -Chart each school's four year enrollment pattern. -Begin monitoring schools that are out of racial balance compliance. -Complete FY 1992-93 budget. -Installed an editing program (Grammatik) on each office computer. -Conduct a Grammati.k workshop for ODM staff. -Continue indexing all office library material. AREAS OF EMPHASIS Connie Community Involvement, Legal Information, District Policies special programs (e.g. Asset) student recruitment school volunteer programs school/community partnership programs New Futures public relations pa:ent education PTA/parent involvement programs community resources legal obligations and i!:sues policies ar1d procedures due process for staff and students incentive schools Horace Secondar\nEducation, Staffing, Staff Development, Student Activities and Achievement staff development multicultural curriculum and infusion secondary curriculum instructional practices - secondary library and media services athletics and extracurricular activities staff recruitment, hiring, and distribution student progress achievement disparity racial isolation/grouping of students computer assisted instruction new course offerings bi-racial committees incentive schools Finance and Computers settlement monies/financial accountability Financial accountability computer tracking of students and academic progress data processing Margie Special Programs, Student Support Services discipline, expulsions, and suspensions dropout prevention/statistics attendance safety and security e,-xtended day and year programs compensatory/remedial programs guidance and counseling special education gifted education alternative programs evaluation/testing/test scores federal programs vocational education incentive schools Melissa Early Childhood, Elementary Education, Student Assignments, Schools HIPPY and citywide ECE program early childhood and four-year-old programs daycare programs elementary curriculum instructional practices - elementary magnet, imerdistrict, and area schools incentive schools facilities and capacities new school construction and expansion desegregation transfers m-to-m transfers student assignment processes school racial balance transportation services United.States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT Nos. 91-2640EA, 91-2648EA, 91-2655EA, 91-2683EA Little Rock School District, Pulaski County Special School District No. 1, North Little Rock School District, and Mrs. Lorene Joshua,_ Appellants. * * * On Appeal from the United * States District Court * for the Eastern District * of Arkansas. * Submitted: September 4, 1991 Filed: November 14, 1991 Before A.~OLD, Circuit Judge, HEANEY, Senior Circuit Judge, and , WOLL'1AN, Circuit Judge. ARNOLD, Circuit Judge. On December 12, 1990, we approved a comprehensive settlement of the Pulaski County, Arkansas, school-desegregation case. Little Rock School District v. Pulaski Countv Soecial School District, 921 F.2d 1371 (8th Cir. 1990). We recognized, however, that the approved plans, which we shall call the 1989 plan or pians, would need some modification because of the passage of time. We remanded the case to the District Court with directions to adopt the plans with any necessary transitional changes. We also stated that the parties are \"free, by agreement, to modify the settlement plans by incorporating in them one or more provisions of the Tri-District Plan, subject, of course, to the approval of the District Court. 11 921 F.2d at 1393 n.15. be approved, but only {f the parties affir.natively establish goad reasons (not including the lack of funds) for them. It may be helpful far us ta state those elements of the 1989 plan that we consider crucial, and with respect to which no retreat should be approved. They are as follows: (1) double funding for students attending the incentive (virtually all-black) schools\n(2) operation of t~e agreed number of magnet schools according to the agreed timetable\n(3) operation of the agreed number of interdistrict schools according to the agreed timetable\n(4) intradistrict desegregation of PCSSD according to the agreed timetable\n(5) the agreed effort to eliminate achievement disparity between the races\n( 6) the agreed element.s of early-childhood education, at least in the incentive schools\nand (7) appropriate involvement of parents. For purposes of illustration, we will discuss a number of the proposed modifications, indicating which of them seem to us to concern require details mere details, and which of them, on the other hand, would substantive justification. Items we consider to involveinclude deciding whether Russian will be taught at Parkview\nfailing to include the 144-page appendix in the revised PCSSD May 1991 Plan\nchanging the plan's language with respect to a possible interdistrict school in Chenal Valley\nchanging the process to decide whether King Elementary School will be a Montessori school\nand eliminating Explorer memberships for students at incentive schools. 1 In contrast, changes we consider to be significant, requiring justification, include r _educing the number of inst::uctional aides in the incentive schools from one per classroom to t-..\no aides for every three classrooms\neliminating incentive-school themes\nand eliminating a full-time nurse at each 1students at the incentive schools, which are all on the elementary level, are too young to be Explorer Scouts. Joint Addendum (J.A.) 102. -5- ODM Monitoring Project Planning Process 1. Identify the project and its purpose. Get a handle on exactly what the project or activity is and what it is supposed to accomplish, stated in terms of action and outcome(s). Think about the purpose of your activity (investigation, communication, monitoring project) and what you want it to accomplish. The project and its purposes should fit into this statement: \"/ will (do what?) in order to or so that (what will be accomplished)\". 2. Determine project priority. Assign a \"1 \", \"2\", or \"3\" priority, with #1 being the most urgent. In determining priority, consider such things as court priorities and directives, other activities or projects related to or dependent upon this one, ODM critical success factors, etc. 3. Identify target project time span. Given the urgency of this project, the other matters related to or dependent upon it, and the other things you're responsible for, how much time do you need (and realistically have) to devote to this project? - 4. Determine information needs and sources. What do you need to know in order to carry out the project and achieve its goal? Consider possible sources and list specifically which ones you will need from the three main information categories, such as: a. written information Potential sources include provisions from plans and orders, reports, letters, schedules, minutes, district policies, letters, hearing transcripts, court submissions, court exhibits, hearing transcripts, newspaper reports, community complaint and concern logs, etc. b. interviews What categories of people are involved in or impacted by the project area? Whose experiences and perceptions are most relevant to the project and will most likely be able to help you reach your goal? What are the names of those you need to talk to? What do you need to learn from each of them? How will you ask for that information (questionnaire or survey, phone conversation, face-to-face interview, group discussion)? How will you record what you learn? c. observation What or whom do you need to observe (school buildings, playgrounds, classrooms, classes in session, meetings, events, etc.)? What exactly do you need to look for during the observation? Where will you observe? When? How long will you need to be there? How many times will you need to visit? How will you document what you observe (observation guide, pictures, diagrams, notes, check list, etc.)? 5. Identify any special or unusual resources needed. In addition to the above information, will you need special data that might take longer than usual to obtain such as research on legal history, certain books, national or state reports, demographic information, etc.? How much time will it take to get such data? Will you need special training, equipment, or other assistance of any kind? Whose help will you need in getting the special resources? 6. Choose documentation and collection methods. Do you need to develop a written guide (monitoring instrument) as part of your monitoring process? What does it need to address and include? Do you need to design, distribute, collect, and analyze a survey? Who should the survey target? 7. Decide who needs to be involved or informed. Who else will need to know about your project so you can coordinate efforts, plan to get their help, or inform for other reasons? Who needs to review your monitoring approach and/or guide with before implementing it? Before publishing it? 8. Visualize or anticipate the content and form of the final product. What will the final product look like? Will it be a letter? A short status report? A lengthy monitoring report? Who is the audience of the final product? How will the product need to be organized? What must it include (plan requirements, goals, program scope, curriculum and instruction, class size, racial balance of staff and students, parent involvement, staff development, facilities, budget, quality, evaluation, recommendations)? Will the information you've planned to obtain in steps 4 and 5 adequately cover all the areas your final product should cover? Can the product form be correlated with the design (content and sequence) of the monitoring instrument? Will charts, graphs, or diagrams help make information clear? 9. Schedule time and set deadlines. Assign each step the time you think will be required or available to complete it. Set intermediate and final deadlines and mark your calendar accordingly. 10. Ask for review and input. Go over your plan with someone else and be open to suggestions for changes that can contribute to completeness, accuracy, time conservation, etc. Where can the projects of others be combined or correlated with yours? 1. Project type and purpose 2. Project priority and why 3. Estimated project time span 4. Information needs and sources 5. Special resources 6. Documentation/collection methods 7. Who will be informed/involved 8. Final content and form 9. Schedule and deadlines 10. Review and input MONITORING PRIORITIES 1992-93 SCHOOL YEAR Parent and community involvement Incentive schools and double funding Special Education with emphasis on placement parity Discipline with emphasis on disproportionate disciplining of black students Extracurricular activities including participation equity and the selection process Academic achievement and efforts to close the gap between black and white students - School racial balance plan requirements and efforts to improve racial balance in out-ofcompliance schools Interdistrict schools with emphasis on Crystal Hill, Romine, Henderson, McClellan, King, Stephens, and the 67/ 167 school Early childhood education including developmentally appropriate curriculum and practices and its effectiveness as a desegregation tool Public relations and recruitment with emphasis on the interdistrict plan, cooperative efforts between the districts, and the impact on desegregation Finance including an examination to assure that settlement money is being used consistent with the plans and court orders and to determine if the districts are exercising fiscal responsibility so that they can fulfill their plan obligations MONITORING: AN ONGOING PROCESS OF COLLECTING AND ANALY2ING INFORMATION ABOUT THE EFFORTS BEING APPLIED TOWARD REACHING A GOAL EVAllJATION: ASSESSING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THOSE EFFORTS (INDMDUAL AND OVERALL) MONITORING TECHNIQUES: DATA COll.ECTION AND ANALYSIS OBSERVATION INTERVIEWS MONITORING lYPES: FORMATIVE (short tenn: ODM Status Report) SUMMATIVE Qong tenn: ODM Monitoring Report) e. MONITORING AL'tD REPORTING PROCESS MONITORING  Select topic based on plan compliance and/ or court directive  Identify plan provisions, court directives, and reasonable indicators \u0026amp; site references  Develop instrument for monitoring compliance  Review instrument with district staff members  Monitor compliance through site observation, interviews, data collection and analysis REPORTING  Write report  Individual edit - Grammatik  Team edit - structure, completeness, accuracy, clarity \u0026amp; efficiency, and grammar \u0026amp; spelling  Writing consultant reviews document  Review report with district to verify accuracy  Distribute report to the parties  File report with the court  Prepare for compliance hearing  - Dec. 12, 1990 Jan. 18, 1991 Jan. 25, 1991 Mar. 26, 1991 Apr. 22, 1991 May 1, 1991 Jun. 21, 1991 Jul. 2, 1991 Jul. 15, 1991 Jul. 19, 1991 July 22, 1991 Aug. 7, 1991 Sept. 4, _ 1991 Legal Events Related to Revised Desegregation Plans Circuit Court overturns Tri-District Plan, upholds settlement plans. Settlement plans and agreement ordered into law. OMS becomes ODM. State dismissed as a party. District Cou1t holds hearing on aerospace magnet school grant. Parties ordered to submit revised plans by March 30, 1991. Parties request and are granted an extension from the Mard1 30 due date to April 22, 1991 as the deadline for submission of revised plans. Parties request and are granted an extension from the April 22 due date to May 1 , 1991 as the deadline for submission of revised plans. Extensively modified plans, unsigned and uncombined, submitted to Court by the parties. Court rejects revisions as beyond the limits set by the Circuit Court and inconsistent with the orders of the District Court. Explicit guidelines for changes are set out and revised document ordered due by July 22, 1991 . Parties file brief, stipulation of facts, and motion asking court to reconsider the parties' revisions and the June 21 order. District Court denies the parties' moticn to reconsider June 21 order with one exception for NLRSD. The three districts and Joshua appeal the June 21 and July 15, 1991 orders of the District Court. The parties file a signed, consolidated document, apparently with revisions which include some provisions from the Tri-District plan, thre~year date extensions, but few, if any, \"transitional\" changes. District Court hearing on motion for partial stay. Circuit Court hearing on appeals. December 19, 1991 Continuation of the district court hearings on the districts' proposed modifications. January 21-23, 1992 Continuation of the district court hearings on the districts' proposed modifications. January 21, 1992 The district court issued an order requiring LRSD to revise their budget, submit long range revenue projections, and identify start-up costs. January 27-28, 1992 February 5, 1992 February 6, 1992 February 7, 1992 February 11, 1992 February 13, 1992 February 18, 1992 Continuation of the district court hearings on the districts' proposed modifications. PCSSD filed proposed changes to their May modifications. District court hearing on LRSD's \"Four-Year-Old Program LongTerm Plan.\" PCSSD filed a motion to modify the plan along with a brief in support of their modifications. District court hearing on LRSD and PCSSD's restorations. The district court approved LRSD's motion to establish magnet programs at Henderson Junior High and McClellan Community High School. The parties filed a joint motion and a brief in support of their motion requesting that the term \"magnet\" school be used in naming all future interdistrict schools. PCSSD filed a motion requesting authorization to hold a millage election on May 12, 1992. NLRSD filed a response along with a brief regarding PCSSD's motion to modify the plan. PCSSD filed an amendment to their motion seeking to hold the millage election on May 5, 1992. February 19, 1992 The Joshua Intervenors filed a response to PCSSD's motion to modify the plan. LRSD filed a response to PCSSD's motion to modify the plan. February 20, 1992 The Knight Intervenors filed a response to PCSSD's motion to modify the plan. February 21, 1992 The district court issued an order granting PCSSD's amended motion to hold a special millage election on May 5, 1992. March 5, 1992 The district court issued an order approving the designation of the Crystal Hill Interdistrict School as a magnet school, but deferred its ruling with regard to King and Stephens. March 9, 1992 March 16, 1992 March 17, 1992 March 30, 1992 March 31, 1992 April 10, 1992 April 13, 1992 The eighth circuit filed an order stating that the district court and its agent, ODM, is not a litigant in this case. PCSSD filed a reply to LRSD's response regarding PCSSD's motion to modify the plan. District court hearing regarding the King Interdistrict School site selection. The district court issued an order approving the Magnet Review Committee's budget and set guidelines for future requests. The district court entered an order approving LRSD's request to build the King Interdistrict School at Ninth and Pulaski Streets. PCSSD filed a special status report concerning budget cuts. The United States Supreme Court held that \"in the course of supervising a desegregation plan, a district court has the authority to relinquish supervision and control of a school district in incremental stages, before full compliance has been achieved in every area of school operations, and may, while retaining jurisdiction over the case, determine that it will not order further remedies in areas where the school district is in compliance with the decree.\" Freeman v. Pitts,_ S. Ct._, 1992. The parties filed a joint brief regarding the millage extension and ODM's budget. PCSSD filed a supplement to the special budget reduction status report submitted in March 1992. April 21, 1992 April 23, 1992 April 23, 1992 May 1, 1992 May 14, 1992 May 15, 1992 May 19, 1991 May 20, 1992 May 28, 1992 May 29, 1992 June 1, 1992 NLRSD filed the Second Quarter Status Report regarding NLRSD plan implementation in 1990-91. PACT filed a response to PCSSD's budget cuts. LRSD filed a motion for phased implementation of the McClellan High School Magnet Plan. The district court issued an order regarding the parties' plan modifications along with the revised plans. Motions for clarification or modification regarding the order were scheduled to be filed by May 14, 1992. LRSD filed a motion to extend the time until May 24, 1992 for filing motions concerning the May 1992 order. The district court granted an extension until May 18, 1992 for motions to be filed on the May 1992 order. The district court issued an order correcting an error in the May 1992 order on page 33. The Joshua Intervenors filed an objection to PCSSD's reorganization and requested a hearing. PCSSD filed a motion requesting an extension to file a response to the Joshua Intervenors' objections. The Joshua Intervenors released a Preliminary Educational Equity Monitoring Report concerning the three school districts. The district court held a hearing on PCSSD's motion to delay construction of the 67 / 167 interdistrict school and LRSD's motion to delay construction of the King and Stephens interdistrict school. The district court issued an order scheduling hearings on LRSD's incentive schools, LRSD's budget, and PCSSD's budget. The district court issued an order amending the May 1, 1992 order to reflect the correction of typographical errors in LRSD's desegregation plan. PCSSD filed a motion to remove the portables at Pinewood Elementary and replace them with eight permanent classrooms. June 5, 1992 June 5, 1992 June 15, 1992 June 16, 1992 June 17, 1992 June 24, 1992 June 25, 1992 June 30, 1992 July 1, 1992 July 2, 1992 July 10, 1992 July 15, 1992 The district court approved PCSSD's motion to replace portable classrooms with permanent classrooms at Pinewood Elementary. The district court denied LRSD's motion to delay interdistrict school construction and ordered the district to submit a written plan for the construction of Stephens by September 3, 1992. ODM filed the 1991-92 Incentive Schools Monitoring Report. The district court granted PCSSD's motion for additional time to respond to the Joshua Intervenors' objections to PCSSD's reorganization. PCSSD filed a motion seeking approval of a five year plan for portable replacement. PCSSD filed a response to the Joshua Intervenors' objection to PCSSD's reorganization. The Joshua Intervenors filed a brief and a motion to intervene and for a preliminary injunction regarding LRSD's cheerleader tryouts at Pulaski Heights Junior High School. PACT filed objections to PCSSD's budget reductions. LRSD filed a copy of the Academic Support Program in compliance with the May 1992 order. The district court held a hearing on ODM's Incentive School Monitoring Report. Continuation of incentive school hearing. District court hearing held on PCSSD's budget cuts. The court ordered PCSSD to restore positions eliminated in the instructional division that would impact PCSSD's implementation of the desegregation plan. The district court issued an order adopting .the ODM's recommendations outlined in the Incentive Schools Monitoring Report. The district court issued an order rescheduling a hearing on LRSD's budget process. The Joshua Intervenors submitted a proposed order regarding the Pulaski Heights cheerleader selection process for the court's consideration. July 17, 1992 July 23, 1992 July 29, 1992 July 30, 1992 July 31, 1992 August 3, 1992 The Joshua Intervenors filed a brief and a motion to intervene and sought a preliminary injunction to enjoin NLRSD from implementing the cheerleader and drill team selection results. John Walker filed a complaint against the LRSD Board of Directors requesting that the present board election zones be redrawn to create an additional majority African American school voting zone. NLRSD filed a response to the Joshua Intervenors motion to intervene and for a preliminary injunction, including a request that the court direct ODM to investigate allegations raised by Joshua. PCSSD filed a status report regarding restored staff positions and recommended staffing allocations for the 1992-93 school year which the school board approved. ODM filed a Monitoring Report on the 1991-92 LRSD Four-Year-Old Program. LRSD filed a motion and a supporting brief to dismiss Walker's complaint to redraw the school board election zones. LRSD also filed a motion to postpone the LRSD school board elections and to reform the election zones pursuant to state law. In addition, a copy of the district's revised budget projections was filed. The district court held a hearing on LRSD's budget and budgeting process. The eighth circuit reversed and remanded the district court with directions to correct its order and extend all of LRSD's, NLRSD's, and PCSSD's millages \"that would otherwise expire before or during the year 20007 .\" The court also directed the district court to afford the parties \"a reasonable opportunity to review future ODM budgets before they are given final approval, and to permit the appellants to promptly review, analyze, question, and make recommendations concerning or objections regarding the budget.\" (page 14) The district court issued an order reinstating the oral rulipg regarding PCSSD's restoration of positions eliminated in the instructional division. The order rendered the Joshua Intervenors' objections to the reorganization moot since PCSSD agreed to restore the Assistant Superintendent of Desegregation and Transportation. The court declined to grant PACT relief, finding that their position failed to show that the budget reduction would have a detrimental impact on the desegregation plan. August 4, 1992 August 17, 1992 August 19, 1992 September 1, 1992 September 2, 1992 ,.J The district court entered an order approving all of LRSD's proposed budget reductions, with the exception of the elimination of the seventh period at McClellan. The court further required the music teacher positions and the seventh period at Henderson to be restored for the 1993-94 school year. Walker and LRSD entered a stipulation agreeing to defer the LRSD school board election. The district court upheld the stipulation and ordered the current directors to remain in their positions until new elections are held. The Joshua Intervenors filed a motion for fees and costs for work on PCSSD's proposed administrative reorganization and budget cuts. The district court ordered PCSSD to supplement its motion for delay on the 67 I 167 interdistrict school construction with a comprehensive construction plan. LRSD and the Pulaski County Board of Education (PCBE) filed a motion to postpone the PCBE Zone 5 election until the time of the 1992 LRSD Board of Education election. PCSSD filed a response to Joshua's motion for fees and costs. September 4, 1992 The district court granted LRSD and PCBE motion to postpone PCBE Zone 5 election. September 8, 1992 LRSD filed the \"Stephens Strategic Plan\" pursuant to the district court's June 5, 1992 order. September 9, 1992 The Joshua Intervenors filed a response to LRSD and PCBE's motion to postpone the Zone 5 election and stated that the Intervenors had no objections to the September 1992 order granting the delay. September 17, 1992 The district court granted the Joshua Intervenors an extension up to and including September 21, 1992 to reply to PCSSD's response to Joshua's motion for fees and costs. September 18, 1992 Walker filed a complaint against LRSD seeking a temporary restraining order (TRO) to restrain the defendants from denying the minor plaintiff access to education. September 22, 1992 The district court granted the Joshua Intervenors an extension up to and including September 25, 1992 to reply to PCSSD's response to Joshua's motion for fees and costs. September 24, 1992 The district court issued an order finding that the County Board is the appropriate body to determine whether the election zones are out of compliance with the \"one man - one vote\" principle, and if they are, the board is charged with redrawing the election zones. September 25, 1992 The Joshua Intervenors filed a reply to PCSSD's response regarding Joshua's motion for fees and costs. September 28, 1992 The Magnet Review Committee (MRC) filed a letter with the court concerning LRSD's recent budget cuts at the six original magnet schools. October 2, 1992 The district court found Joshua's motion for a TRO regarding a bus route serving Robinson Junior High School moot and removed the motion from the docket. October 14, 1992 October 15, 1992 The district court directed the parties to file any responses they might have regarding the MR C's letter of September 28, 1992 within ten days. The district court found motions for partial stay filed on December 4, 5, and 9, 1991 moot because Crystal Hill opened for the 1992-93 school year. PCSSD filed a motion to amend their desegregation plan by deleting language regarding the ROTC program at pages 11, 12, and 83. LRSD filed their response to the MRC's letter of September 28, 1992. PULASKI COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICTS Little Rock School District North Little Rock School District Pulaski County Special School District [ ,J] r ,_\n.---...,..-----,\n~: :~~~\n. -,.,....._ .. )~ ___ p\n. --:i-\u0026lt;\u0026gt;-- -::-\n~ ~ .~ - \u0026lt; . .... ~-- .-- - ,..--:- ,......\n,_ . ... ...   ~----:\" :.- ..... \"\"' .... ,\n.-.,...\n:\n...='-  ~t~~\nf,\n=l~ ' ..:\n.-. if!.:.._\"T-..... rim :1-~~-:ift . - .. , --_,. - , r(...,. . . -J\n.:t...\n~c:~~~~~\n:.=.\n:::::::1 ~ .......  \u0026gt; ~.\n},:,} ' ._ . j ~ ~t \n-- ,. - . .::- ... ' f:~.\n~~ _--... ~_-\"\".. ~ .,.._ .a:_ ~:..:----.... ..----i i ~ ~i,. .. ,__'::-~:::----\n.~!-'-,~-::,...::\n...:..:\n....:.\n~:..1 ~J:~!~-lJ~ - f !~G- , ,. . ~..:.\n. ~-+---'-'-= fi -~.,,.,,,~,-- , _ ~(l.i' -. .a \"'--l ~ . ... ,12M Area Little Rock School District - 100 sq. mi. North Little Rock School District - 30 sq. mi. Pulaski County Special School District - 729 sq. mi. U.._ .__ --u ,...,, __ \"'-~~- =  GENERAL INFORMATION Pulaski County Schools LRSD NLRSD Enrollment 26,141 9,251 % Black 64% 48% # of Schools 51 25 # of Employees 4,306 1,292 Annual Budget $120 million $36 million Per Pupil Expenditure $4,400 $3,400 Millage Rate 43.9 36.3 Size/ Square Miles 100 30 Incentive Schools (located within the LRSD) Franklin Elementary Garland Elementary Ish Elementary Mitchell Elementary Rightsell Elementary Rockefeller Elementary Stephens Elementary Magnet Schools - the orginial six (located within LRSD) Booker Arts Magnet (Elementary) Carver Basic Skills/ Math-Science Magnet (Elementary) PCSSD 21,696 28% 37 2,724 $85 million $3,896 43.9 729 Gibbs Foreign Language/International Studies Magnet (Elementary) Williams Basic Skills Magnet (Elementary) Mann Arts and Science Magnet (Junior High) Parkview Arts and Science Magnet (Senior High) TOTAL 57,088 48% 113 $241 million 859 Additional Magnet Schools Crystal Hill Communications Magnet (Elementary) (located within PCSSD) Rockefeller Early Childhood Magnet (Elementary) Washington Basic Skills/ Math-Science Magnet (Elementary) Dunbar International Studies/ Gifted \u0026amp; Talented Magnet (Junior High) Additional Magnet Programs Henderson Health Science (Junior High) Central International Studies (Senior High) McClellan Business/ Communications (Senior High) Interdistrict Schools Romine Elementary (LRSD) Baker Elementary (PCSSD) PCSSD Specialty Programs College Station Elementary TAG Specialty (Talented and Gifted) Bates Elementary Project MAST (Mathematics and Science Together) Fuller Elementary Orchestra Specialty Landmark Elementay Fine Arts Specialty Fuller Junior High TAG Specialty SCHOOLS Bale Elem Baseline Eleni ' \u0026gt; : Booker Elem (M) ~r~clV. ~~~\n/ 1988-89 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT ENROLLMENT COMPARISON 1989-90 Enrollment 1990-91 % Black 1991-92 % 1992-93 % Black 76% 77% t...,,,---,,,-,.,.,,,,,,-...,,.,+,-...,,.,....,--.-Jl-'.====,,.,,,,.,77~\\JL\"'[''c':=\\:,c1\u0026gt; 1\"\"\"'==-:-,.,..,-i...,,..,,.........,,........it-,--.......,,---t--.,,...,...,....-.....Jlf,.,..,..-,-..,..-....,,.....f-..~-..........JI ~ :::.:::::~q::~~1.s::r:2221:::r.:..~::2.tjtllii:22~+:.:.~U.:.:...C::ZD:'.:ti:t+JLl:'..l:..2'.l..Jl.2tl:.lt2:t::~.:..:.!...!.~I 56%  69% Carver Elem (M) 55% Chicot ~i~M r: WS{ 00r0{02777rWSTTmt'SJEETIT?STTCTITIITWTT-1t:\nsssvv1B7ct'r7:7FST1tSSEI8ITITTJW177BV?IT1h7ITSTBIZ??::t .T/CT,, ,':765-%~. -.u Cloverdale Elem Fair Park Elem Forest.pJi~ g1i~t Franklin Elem (IS) Garland Elem (IS) SCHOOLS 1988-89 % 1989-90 % 1990-91 % 1991-92 % 1992-93 % Enrollment Black Enrollment Black Enrollment Black Enrollment Black Enrollment Black Mabelvale Elem 586 63% 535 58% 559 57% 505 53% 500 56% ) 62\"/4 .. / 511 . 509 54% Meadowcliff Elem 65% 427 440 66% Mitchell Ele~ (isf / 88% ~12 264 88% Otter Creek Elem 41% 52% Rightsell (IS) Romine Elem (ID) Terry Elem 44% 69% Washington (M) 519 98% 762 57% 841 57% 822 59% Watson Elem 465 65% 64% 51\u0026amp; 467 72% 451 74% Western Hills 332 64% 337 59% 339 60% 323 59% 335 62% .:?:'./:'.:\n,::::'. . 55% 75%  63% 89% SCHOOLS 1988-89 Enrollment Cloverdale Jr. 712 Dunbar Jr.(M) 741 Forest Heights Jr 770 Henderson Jr (M). 954 Mabelvale Jr. 581 Mann Jr.(M) 882 Pul Heights Jr. 694 .... Southwest Jr. 734 Sub Total-Jr. High 6,068 Central High (M) 2,070 Fair High 920 Hall High 1,268 McClellan (M) 1,191 Parkview (M) 847 Sub Total-High 6,296 Grand Toraj /{\\: /} .J26,.4a Key: IS Incentive School M Magnet ID lnterdistrict School % Black 60% 81% 64% 64% 56% 59% .. 62\"/o 70% 64% 57% 51% 50% 52% 58% 54% ..... ~% - 1989-90 % 1990-91 Enrollment Black Enrollment 731 64% 764 576 79% 663 808 67% 772 956 71% 902 609 61% 620 877 54% . 886 721 63% 722 .. 700 70% 655 5,978 66% 5,984 1,813 58% 1,580 911 56% 866 :-: 1,192 53% 1,212 1,081 59% 1,003 805 54% 804 5,802 56% 5,465 \u0026gt; \\L ?5,975 94% -. .  .. 2Si?SQ % 1991-92 % 1992-93 % Black Enrollment Black Enrollment Black 70% 745 71% 775 74% 64% 691 61% 705 58% 69% 765 71% 787 70% 75% 859 83% 914 75% 65% 665 65% 667 66% 58% 872 56% 849 59% 63% 761 62% 774 58% ... . 75% 704 74% 695 75% 67% 6,062 68% 6,166 67% 59% 1,721 60% 1,950 58% 58% 882 61% 886 63% . 57% 1,082 54% 976 57% 61% 980 65% 966 66% 54% 844 53% 854 57% 58% 5,509 59% 5,632 60% ..... 6$% . .)26,24 64% ... 26,141 64% NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT ENROLLMENT COMPARISON SCHOOLS 1988-89 % 1989-90 1990-91 % 1991-92 % Enrollment Black Enrollment Black Enrollment Black Enrollment Black Alternative 10 424 45% Baring Cross Indian Hills Elem Lynch Drive Elem Meadow Park Norlh Heights Seventh St Elem ..- ...-,\n.- .\n4~~ . 1992-93 Enrollment 20 390 230 447  277 210 243 % Black 70% 44% 36% 42% 62% 56% 44% 57% 45% 51% 41% 51% 48% 45% 49% 60% 54% 49% . ~0% SCHOOLS 1988-89 % 1989-90 % 1990-91 % Enrollment Black Enrollment Black Enrollment Black Alternative Baring Of~ r0J1~ Hl~h I 1ht/,.//tt1 NLRHS-East Sub Total-Sec 1991-92 % Enrollment Black 29 62% 1992-93 Enrollment 30 545 578 % Black 77% 71% . 46% 46% 51% 45% 44% 46% PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT ENROLLMENT COMPARISON SCHOOLS 1988-89 1989-90 % 1990-91 % 1991-92 % Bates Elem Cato Elem 1992-93 Enrollment % Black 4ZO   36% 390 18% 40% \u0026gt;\u0026lt;?3% 57% 27% 321 14% 469 . 24% Oakbrooke Elem 18% pih\nFd\ni~:~ !~ffi :: JJl _j_iJj\\ JI t 5:...:9.i _}f'-'+--=.\n..\n.......\n\"'-11JiJt!_?J~HJ?.:,t,_p\n-\n_\"':..:.\n.:.\n.\n.oi~-+---'----'--'--il:-\n\"\n:-\n~?\n:\n~r~i~:~::~:+.:....-\"----11--'---'-----'-+~-'-----'--i .? \u0026gt;2 0i Scott Elem 213 33% 203 37% 207 34% 205 34% 191 35% SCHOOLS 1988-89 % Enrollment Black Oak Grove High RQbinsori i / : Robinson High Sylvan Hills High Grand Total 21,871 Key: ID lnterdistrict School M Magnet 25% 1989-90 % 1990-91 % 1991-92 % Enrollment Black Enrollment Black Enrollment Black 21,607 26% 21,597 26% 21,062 27% 1992-93 Enrollment 569 12,473 21,696 % Black 24% 18% 26% 24% 28% 24% 28% 34% 22% 28% LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT ENROLLMENT TO CAPACITY COMPARISON 1991-92 % % AVAILABLE SCHOOLS Enrollment BLK CAPACI1Y FILLED SEATS Badgett 220 73% 237 93% 17 Bale 360 82% 396 91% 36 Baseline 337 77% 390 86% 53 Booker 634 55% 656 97% 22 Brady 420 68% 492 85% 72 Carver 601 54% 613 98% 12 Chicot 531 64% 558 95% 27 Cloverdale 392 78% 492 80% 100 Dodd 303 55% 328 92% 25 Fair Park 320 80% 348 92% 28 Forest Park 402 48% 396 102% 0 Franklin 507 84% 570 89% 63 Fulbright 506 46% 515 98% 9 Garland 279 94% 360 78% 81 Geyer Springs 254 71% 328 77% 74 Gibbs 339 56% 353 96% 14 Ish 200 94% 265 75% 65 Jefferson 484 43% 486 99% 2 Mabelvale Elem 505 53% 515 98% 10 McDermott 511 57% 492 104% 0 Meadowcliff 427 59% 442 97% 15 Mitchell 312 91% 360 87% 48 Otter Creek 356 45% 351 101% 0 Pu!. Heights 342 54% 351 97% 9 Rightsell 289 98% 360 80% 71 Rockefeller 403 70% 445 91% 42 Romine 357 84% 487 73% 130 Stephens 245 96% 335 73% 90 Terry 512 47% 492 104% 0 Wakefield 479 69% 492 97% 13 Washington 841 57% 979 86% 138 1991-92 % % AVAIIABLE SCHOOLS Enrollment BLK CAPACI1Y FILLED SEATS Watson 467 72% 492 95% 25 Western Hills 323 59% 328 98% 5 Williams 495 55% 517 96% 22 Wilson 394 73% 394 100% 0 Woodruff 225 64% 324 69% 99 SUBTOTAL .:. ,:.-,.-.,:t,,:...  I r . 65% (,:,,,//./c,  : ) . : )  :,.: t ? 14\n683\\ \u0026gt;\"'\"'\": ::r :t\\ ..................... f ,417: .......... . ... . ... . Cloverdale Jr. 745 71% 857 87% 112 Dunbar 691 61% 751 92% 60 Forest Heights 765 71% 733 104% 0 Henderson 859 83% 959 90% 100 Mabelvale Jr. 665 65% 594 112% 0 Mann 872 56% 935 93% 63 Pul. Heights 761 62% 692 110% 0 Southwest 704 74% 7(12 100% 0  SUB. TOTAL) ..... tt::::f/:::. ./: T \\ ~,6 ?t 6\u0026amp;% : t \u0026lt; \\ : [ :1\n..:.:: .-.:\n:::: -:, Central High 1,721 60% 1,891 91% 170 Fair 882 61% 904 98% 22 Hall 1,082 54% 1,216 89% 134 McClellan 980 65% 1,085 90% 105 Parkview 844 53% 991 85% 147  .,,,:,.:\n:-'t. . .. ......  . ,::. :,\n,:,:-:-::\n._::,\n::.::-::-:_::.-.. ..,. :-:::,:-,.:,:.:.=:.-:-:-:,\n::, t ,, M ,   ,l_  t\nf ........ .............. ::::::.:: /\\\" ,FJ' ! I / J77ll{ I: ? ) \u0026gt; :: : {:':\\: :\n.\n1: :\\: ::- ._ ......... ~   .. . ta-itX~BiomA!P t ....... ....... ...... }{::}: .,~.. .1.....:.~.. j } 64%j tt It H\u0026lt; b)iit t : NLRSD ENROLLMENT TO CAPACITY COMPARISON SCHOOLS 1991-92 % BLK CAPACITY % F1LLED AVAILABLE ENROLLMENT SEATS Alternative (Elem) 10 80% (Sec) 29 62% 227 17% 188 Amboy 424 45% 394 108% \u0026lt;30\u0026gt; Baring Cross (Elem) 14 64% (Sec) 31 74% 56 80% 11 Belwood 151 36% 124 122% \u0026lt;27\u0026gt; Boone Park 528 60% 589 90% 61 Central 382 52% 477 80% 95 Crestwood 241 41% 235 103% \u0026lt;6\u0026gt; Glenview 233 56% 315 74% 82 Indian Hills 433 44% 408 106% \u0026lt;25\u0026gt; Lakewood 290 47% 288 101% \u0026lt;2\u0026gt; Lynch Drive 257 47% 336 76% 79 Meadow Park 254 51% 240 106% \u0026lt;14\u0026gt; North Heights 410 47% 517 79% 107 Park Hill 213 46% 303 70% 90 Pike View 410 46% 427 96% 17 Redwood 240 60% 315 76% 75 Rose City 245 49% 171 143% \u0026lt;74\u0026gt; Seventh Street 348 53% 352 99% 4 ' ELEM SUB TOT AL 5,083 49% : I  NLRHS-West 1,267 40% 1,580 80% 313 NLRHS-East 1,336 43% 1,424 94% 88 Lakewood Jr. 578 45% 612 94% 34 Ridgeroad Jr. 551 45% 665 83% 114 Rose City Jr. 389 52% 591 66% 202 SEC. SUB TOTAL 4,181 44% TOTAL 9,264 47% PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT ENROLLMENT TO CAPACITY COMPARISON I SCHOOLS I 1991-92 I % I % : Enrollment BLK CAPACI1Y FILLED Adkins 352 39% 400 88% Arnold Drive 408 14% 420 97% Baker 268 25% 328 82% Bates 737 47% 768 96% Bayou Meto 611 2% 564 108% Cato 663 21% 676 98% College Station 310 34% 340 91% Dupree 431 24% 488 88% Fuller Elem 529 58% 676 78% Harris 605 34% 748 81% Jacksonville Elem 844 27% 850 99% Landmark 522 44% 624 84% Lawson 331 16% 444 75% Oak Grove Elem 515 13% 604 85% Oakbrooke 629 18% 636 99% Pine Forest 658 15% 658 100% Pinewood 631 27% 656 96% Robinson 443 23% 588 75% Scott 205 34% 280 73% Sherwood 443 26% 608 73% Sylvan Hills 755 17% 760 99% Taylor 423 26% 444 95% Tolleson 566 24% 570 99% .. : C  / SUBTOTAL f :11,s7.9 1_. 26% ... . :i Fuller Jr. 863 48% 1,015 85% Jacksonville North 626 27% 681 92% Jackson ville South 600 30% 723 83% Northwood 953 22% 938 102% AVAIIABLE SEATS 48 12 60 31 0 13 30 57 147 143 6 102 113 89 7 0 25 145 75 165 5 21 4 i : . ::.:  .-... ,... . _ ... 1,298} 152 55 123 0 199i--92 % SCHOOLS Enrollment BLI\u0026lt; Robinson Jr. 431 25% Sylvan Hills Jr. 953 21 % Jacksonville High 1,051 27% Mills High 639 46% North Pulaski 828 21% Oak Grove High 926 23% Robinson High 412 25% Sylvan Hills High 901 22%  SU:B TOT AL( GRAND TOTAL 21,062 27% % AVAILABLE CAPACI'IY F1LLED SEATS 511 84% 80 944 101% 0  ,::/,'//:\\cc:}/ cc::C.cc.:.C :/:::.{i/i:i::i{:: , c,,ic:i     ,x:\u0026gt;c{::i::C.::'c ?\"\"'v.,,. 1,233 85% 182 948 67% 309 963 86% 135 948 98% 22 569 72% 157 1,041 87% 140 2,582 A North Little Rock School District lRSl\u0026gt; SAT results   .  Slanford Achiovamenl lesl, Elghlh Ed11ion nalional porcenl1le rank (01s1r1ctw1do summary, 1992) Enviromnent Grade/ Number Tolal Tolal Soc. Complete race lesled readin malh Lang. Science science battery 1 TOTAL 2,094 42 48 41 37 39 0 1,330 35 40 32 27 31 w 697 63 70 63 59 64 2 TOTAL 1,883 39 57 49 43 45 Grade Race BLACK 1 WHITE TOTAL BLACK 2 WHITE TOTAL BLACK t--::-==-:-:---:-::-=-~~-...,,.,.----'--'--=-=---~--..:....::.-i 3 WHITE TOTAL B 1,173 29 46 39 32 33 w 672 77 70 65 70 3 TOTAL 1,783 58 50 43 46 B 1,131 46 38 30 35 w 632 76 70 67 67 53 : 10 TOTAL 1 602 49 37 48 45 43 llTOTAL 1,472 50 43 48 47 51 B 825 34 32 35 32 36 W 612 69 59 66 68 69 47 51 34 72 BLACK WHITE TOTAL BLACK 5 WHITE TOTAL BLACK 6 WHITE TOTAL BLACK 7 WHITE TOTAL BLACK 8 WHITE I I oata by race lor grades 4,7 and 10 are unavailable al this time  Al grades 1 and 2 lhe SCIENCE and SOCIAL SCIENCE objectives aro combined and rellected as ono score under ENVIRONMENT TOTAL MOTE: Totals may not add up because other category was om11ted. BLACK 10 WHITE TOTAL BLACK 11. WHITE TOTAL SOURCE: 'JLRSO Compl1l1 Lang, Social Buie Bau,ry Anding Math Arts Scltnct sc1,nc, B1n,ry 14 22 19 21 19 20 47 53 47 58 46 NA 51 25 34 30 37 29 32 17 20 26 26 21 19 50 48 54 56 55 NA 50 32 32 39 39 36 32 18 20 23 24 19 21 20 43 44 47 47 43 40 45 31 32 34 35 30 31 33 22 23 29 26 26 25 21 54 59 53 53 62 53 54 37 40 41 39 44 38 38 23 23 30 30 25 26 24 51 54 56 55 60 48 52 38 39 44 44 43 37 38 29 28 33 32 33 33 30 61 64 62 60 66 59 61 45 47 48 46 50 46 47 44 18 20 26 27 21 25 59 57 58 54 60 55 58 43 39 44 42 46 39 43 23 24 27 31 34 26 24 61 62 58 65 66 62 60 43 43 43 49 51 46 43 25 26 21 33 29 30 26 61 56 55 56 59 63 59 46 44 40 51 47 49 46 22 22 22 25 25 21 22 61 62 53 63 64 56 60 45 45 39 46 47 41 44 25 29 25 30 28 33 28 65 62 59 61 65 63 63 50 48 46 50 49 51 50 MICHAEL STOREY I A,kansa.t DomoaoHl,.urtne tanford Achievement Test scores\n- Pulaski County Special School District Grade Race Compltlt Lang. Soclal Buie Bat1try Rudi Math Arts Science Scteru Battery BLACK 25 24 33 28 19 26 2 WHITE 49 45 56 51 NA 44 49 TOTAL 39 37 47 44 37 40 BLACK 34 31 38 40 31 30 27 3 WHITE 53 51 56 56 52 57 53 TOTAL 46 44 51 51 46 49 47 BLACK 30 32 37 33 32 35 32 4 WHITE 55 58 54 57 55 60 55 TOTAL 48 51 51 51 49 53 49 BLACK 27 28 34 37 32 30 28 5 WHITE 51 52 56 61 48 59 52 TOTAL 45 45 57 55 43 52 46 BLACK 36 36 42 38 39 37 38 6 WHITE 63 64 67 62 62 67 63 TOTAL 56 56 60 56 55 59 56 BLACK 26 23 30 29 26 28 28 7 WHITE 51 51 50 51 46 54 51 TOTAL 43 43 44 44 40 46 44 BLACK 26 30 29 38 29 34 28 8 WHITE 50 54 49 56 50 55 50 TOTAL 43 46 42 50 44 48 43 BLACK 29 30 22 39 33 34 30 9 WHITE 51 51 41 58 53 54 50 TOTAL 46 45 36 53 48 48 45 BLACK 24 27 21 28 25 27 24 1.0 WHITE 54 59 44 56 53 56 53 TOTAL 46 50 38 49 45 48 45 BLACK 23 27 22 26 30 26 25 1.1 WHITE 49 50 42 47 51 50 47 TOTAL 40 44 36 41 45 42 40 URCE: Pesso ,10: Science at second grade reflects a combination or science and social studies jectives labeled environmenr MICHAEL STOREY/ Ariian.s.u {)ern,cratGutte  Minimum Perfarmance:.Testscares/(i, -_: . . . . - . . . . . ,, . Pulaski County Special School District 1992 School Total passed Total not passed Fuller Jr. 169 72.8% 63 27.2% Jacksonville North 145 80.5% 35 19.4% Jack.sonville South 144 86.7% 22 13.3% Northwood 265 91.6% 24 9.0% Oak Grove Jr. 119 79.3% 31 20.6% Robinson Jr. 99 85.3% 17 14.7% Sylvan Hills Jr. 212 87.2% 31 12.8% TOTAL 1,153 83.9% 223 16.2% North Little Rock School District 1992 Rose City Jr. 99 72.8% 37 27.2% Ridgeroad Jr. 183 86.3% 29 13.7% Lakewood Jr. 220 87.6% 31 12.4% TOTAL 502 83.8% 97 16.2% tRSD-1-992-MPT results:  .\n. . : . . ' . . - .. (Eighth grade summar\nJ ' All students Readinq Math llanq. Arts I Science Soc. Stud.I Tota~ No. tested 1,781 1,781 1,781 1,781 1,781 1,781: No. passed 1,505 1,523 1,435 1,110 1,172 1,369 Percent passed 85 86 81 62 66 77 Black males Percent passed 76 791 69 I 57 57 NA Black females 841 I Percent passed 81 81 47 57 NA White males I Percent passed 96 94 88 87 84 NA White Females Percent passed 98 95 95 I 83 85 NA Other Percent passed 97 921 86 I 81 81 NA 4 YEAR ENROLLMENT COMPARISON School: Data Summary: 1989-90 Black White Other Total 0 % Blk ?? 1990-91 Black White Other Total 0 %Blk ?? 1991-92 Black White Other Total 0 %81k ?? 1992-93 Black White Other Totat  0 %8lk . ?? Page 1 CLASS ENROLLMENT Grd Name Teacher Class Enrollment Total of Enroll- Teacher Black White Other Black White Other ment M F M F M F M F M F M F 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  Racial isolation is avoided (ODM 1991-92 Incentive Schools Monitoring Report Summary, page 11). Data Summary: % Blk ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? Page 2 STAFFING/ SCHOOL PERSONNEL BLACK WHITE OTHER % POSITION TOTAL BLACK M F M F M F Certified a ?? Non-certified a ?? I TOTAL I a I al al al al o I a I ?? I PERCENT ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? Data Summary: Page 3 CURRICULUM AND INSTRUCTION  Multicultural materials are available in the resource center in a range of interest and reading levels.  Bulletin boards, posters, charts, and other visual aids depicting cultural diversity are displayed throughout the school.  Equipment and materials are adequate.  An active learning environment is present (learning centers, displays, independent/ group work area).  Purchasing procedures meet supply needs in a timely manner (ODM, page 15).  Incentive school library resources have been compared with each other and other schools of comparable size to bring about parity of holdings through an' equitable purchasing policy. Library shelves have been purged of outdated and worn materials (ODM, page 15). Site Observations: Page 4 TEST DATA Summary: Page 5 STUDENT RETENTION GRADE BLACK WHITE OTHER I TOTAL I % LEVEL BLACK M F M F M F a ?? a ?? a ?? a ?? a ?? a ?? a ?? I TOTAL I al al al a I a I al a ?? PERCENT ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ??  School staffing teams develop a plan with the next grades' receiving teachers to address the learning deficits of retention candidates (ODM, page 33). Data Summary: Page 6 DISCIPLINE, SUSPENSION, EXPULSION BLACK WHITE OTHER % ACTIONS TOTAL BLACK M F M F M F Suspensions 0 ?? Expulsions 0 ?? Documentation: 0 ??  Short Form  Long Form 0 ?? Alternative School 0 ?? Referrals 0 ?? 0 ?? 0 ?? 0 ?? 0 ?? 0 ?? 0 ?? Data Summary: Page 7 SPECIAL SERVICES/ PROGRAMS ENROLLl\\lIENT BLACK WHITE OTHER % PROGRAM TOTAL BLACK M F M F M F Self Contained 0 ?? CBI 0 ?? 0 ?? 0 ?? 0 ?? 0 ?? LO Resource 0 ?? EMR Resource 0 ?? Speech 0 ?? Visually Impaired 0 ?? Hearing Impaired 0 ?? Gifted/ Talented 0 ?? Remedial/ Compensatory 0 ?? 0 ?? 0 ?? 0 ?? 0 ?? 0 ??  Special education referrals are consistent, objective, and made without racial or gender bias (ODM, page 18).  Gifted and talented education is tailored to challenge, exercise, and enlarge students' individual talents and intellectual aptitudes (ODM, page 18). Data Summary: Page 8 PARENT AND COMlVIUNIIT INVOLVEMENT  Parents and the community are welcome in the school (school maps, welcome signs, and posters).  There is a school volunteer program (school/ community partnership, volunteer sign-in sheets, work space, volunteers, and visible recognition).  There are parent involvement programs (parent sign-in sheets, PT A, and school committees).  Records of volunteer participation are sufficiently detailed to reflect an accurate picture of community involvement overall as well as at each school. Monthly documentation identifying the number of volunteers, their race and gender, the total hours they serve, and the types of services they provide is compiled (ODM, page 37).  Volunteer training including the type of training, when and where the trammg was offered, and session participants by race, gender, and school service site is documented (ODM, page 38). Data Summary/ Site Observations: Page 9 FACILITIES AND SECURITY  The campus and building are clean and free of debris and graffiti.  Hallways are clean and well maintained.  Facilities for special education and counseling are designed to meet the needs of the student served.  Playground equipment is appropriate and adequate.  Restrooms are adequate (cleanliness, number, supplies).  Classrooms are in good repair with adequate heating/ ventilation.  Kitchen facilities provide adequate ventilation, traffic patterns, and safety provisions.  School district safety procedures are evident. Site Observations: Page 10 FACILITIES AND SECURI1Y (continued) Court Adopted Recommendations (ODM, page 43)  Franklin: Repair or replace the roof on each level of the building. Replace all ceiling tiles damaged by water leaks. Repaint interior walls as needed. STATUS:  Garland: Determine the feasibility of adding bathrooms on the second floor of the building, increasing the size of the media center, and relocating the building's main entrance. STATUS:  lsh: Professionally evaluate the structural condition of the building and correct the many problems caused by the leaky roof. Since many attempts have been made in the past to patch the flat roof, it may be necessary to add a new sloped roof to the building. The unsightly classroom bathrooms should be repaired at once by those qualified to deal with asbestos. The exterior lighting should be repaired or replaced and the building's trim painted. Once the roof no longer leaks, the entire interior should be repainted. STATUS: Page 11  Mitchell: Correct the drainage problem and then replace the water-damaged carpeting in the GT room. Address the shortage of media center space, possibly by adding book shelves to the second floor hallway near the librarian's office which is located in a kiosk in that area. Consider adding more shelves to create storage space within the existing media center. STATUS:  Rightsell: Eliminate the moisture problem at the school. Professionals with restoration experiences should be involved to help solve the problems of a fine old building. The playground should receive major improvements including additional age-appropriate equipment. STATUS:  Rockefeller: Install a new heating and cooling system if the ineffectiveness of the present system is not corrected by the recently replaced room thermostats. STATUS:  Stephens: Install shades to cover the unsightly classroom skylights. Correct the CBI classroom shortcomings or move the class to a room where there is an indoor heated restroom with proper changing facilities. STATUS: Page 12  Modify building space to increase library capacities at Mitchell and Garland. At Mitchell, books most frequently used by the four-year-old program, kindergarten, and first grades could be permanently placed in the individual classrooms since those grades are all housed in structures that are detached from the main building, The space thus relinquished would create room in the main library for other use. STATUS:  All seven incentive schools would benefit aesthetically from the addition of attractive landscaping. Once plantings are installed, the custodial staff should be trained in proper plant care. Many LRSD schools have lost mature plantings to improper and overzealous pruning by district workers or to underwatering in times of summer heat and drought. STATUS: Page 13 INCENTIVE SCHOOL PROGRAM \"The purpose of the incentive school program is to promote and ensure academic excellence in schools that have been difficult to desegregate. It is believed that the incentive school program will not only compensate the victims of segregation, but the program will also serve as a tool for promoting meaningful and long-lasting desegregation in these schools and in the entire school district.\" (April 1992 revised desegregation plan, page 149)  A comprehensive long-range strategic plan has been developed for implementation of the incentive school program (ODM, page 20). 1. The incentive program is successful in desegregating the school (page 149).  Student assignment practices reflect an understanding of the importance of placement stability and its relationship to academic progress (ODM, page 2) .  Fifty percent of kindergarten seats are reserved for white students (May 1992 court order, page 28).  Kindergarten seats reserved for white students are held for a reasonable period of time and are released only if sustained recruitment efforts are unsuccessful (May 1992 court order, page 28). STATUS: 2. College scholarship incentives have been discussed by the parties and the possible use of a trust fund explored. The costs of implementing a scholarship program have been determined and feasibility of a trust fund has been assessed (page 149). STATUS: Page 14 3. The Incentive School Program Parent Council functions as a district-wide council of incentive school parents. Membership includes two parents from each incentive school and four appointed by Joshua. The Council monitors all activities related to the incentive school program and reports quarterly (page 151). STATUS: Page 15 INCENTIVE SCHOOL ACADEMIC PROGRAMS AND CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT 4. The four-year-old program uses High/ Scope or a comparable curriculum model and a parent component is incorporated into the program (page 152).  Four-year-old enrollment is limited to 18 children per class (ODM, page 10).  The Early Childhood Education Task Force is an avenue for parent, teacher, and community input (ODM, page 17). STATUS: 5. Writing to Read labs, or other instructional technology program, is in place for grades K-2 at each school (page 152). STATUS: 6. An Early Prevention of School Failure model is used in all kindergarten classes. There are regularly scheduled parent/ teacher conferences (page 152). STATUS: 7. Reading and oral expression are infused throughout all curriculum areas (page 152).  Reading comprehension and reading for meaning are stressed at ~very grade level (ODM, page 32).  STATUS: Page 16 8. Learning styles inventories are used in each school to assist teachers in varying their teaching styles to match students' learning styles (page 153). STATUS: 9. School themes are developed at the each school by parents and staff and are integrated into the curriculum (page 153).  Fresh imaginative themes are established based upon each school's unique strengths (ODM, page 20). STATUS: 10. Semi-departmentalization is the recommended organizational structure for grades 4-6 (page 153). - STATUS: 11. Instructional technology is present in labs and individual classrooms (page 153). STATUS: 12. Science labs (either mobile or permanent) with adequate equipment, materials, and supplies are available for students in grades 3-6 (page 153).  Children are able to execute long-term experiments and study .science in the fullest sense (ODM, page 15). STATUS: Page 17 13. Computer labs for remediation and enrichment have a minimum of 25 stations (page 153). STATUS: 14. Foreign language labs with appropriate equipment and materials are operative in each building (page 153). STATUS: 15. Foreign language instruction is incorporated into each school's curriculum using the foreign language lab and the \"total physical response\" method of instruction. Emphasis will be on basic vocabulary, conversation, and cultural materials (page 156). STATUS: 16. A computer loan program provides portable computers for loan to students in grades 4-6 for home use. Remediation as well as enrichment software is available (page 153). STATUS: 17. Parent Home Study Guides will be available by the 1993-94 school year (page 153). STATUS: Page 18 18. Computer Managed Instructional Technology is used to track student progress (page 153). STATUS: 19. Student education plans are developed, implemented, and monitored for each student. Parents are involved in each phase of development and monitoring (pages 153, 177, 186). STATUS: 20. Specialized programs, such as remedial, special education, and GT, are available during the core day with reinforcement activities during extended day, week, or year (page 154). STATUS: 21. Homework is assigned according to district policies (page 154). STATUS: 22. Computer generated criterion referenced tests are used for student assess\n1Ilent (page 154). STATUS: Page 19 23. Heterogeneous grouping is used at all grade levels and instructors alternate between whole group, small group, and individualized instruction. Every student will receive some individualized instruction every day (pages 154, 178, 188).  A combination of teacher-directed and learner-directed instruction is present (ODM, page 32). STATUS: 24. The Effective Schools model operates in each school, with training provided for implementation (page 154). STATUS: 25. African and African-American History programs are established in each school. The programs are sequential and include the study of cultures and history (page 154). STATUS: 26. A classics reading program is an area of emphasis and the basal is used to augment the classics (page 154). STATUS: 27. A Latin program, used to increase vocabulary and word attack skills, is incorporated into the fifth and sixth grade language arts program. Time for instruction is scheduled, materials and supplies provided, and student achievement documented (pages 154, 159-164). STATUS: Page 20 28. Physical Education/ Health is included in the total elementary curriculum with emphasis on: wellness, lifelong leisure skills, nutrition, and respect for those with disabilities/ handicaps (page 156). STATUS: 29. Social skills are taught, where appropriate, through the core instructional program. The total school staff serves as models of positive social interaction. Social skills instruction includes the following programs: Rites of Passage, Role Models, and Mentoring (pages 156-157). STATUS: 30. Academic reinforcement clubs and special interest clubs, such as Debate, Thespians,Math Club, Odyssey of the Mind, Great Books Club, Foreign Language Club, and sporting or arts related clubs, are developed to meet students' needs and are a part of each school's special activities. Students have the opportunity to serve as office monitors, library helpers, student council members, fire marshals, and the like. Parents will be informed of these options (pages 157, 175, 182, 184). STATUS: 31. Field trips are used to enhance learning and broaden cultural experiences through local, state, and national trips. Trips provide community access for incentive school students with other LRSD schools. Exhibits and performances are also brought to the schools, and students participate in shadowing experiences (pages 158, 173, 181).  STATUS: Page 21 INCENTIVE SCHOOL OPERATIONS \"The focus, function and guiding process of the Incentive Schools will be to provide excellence in an environment of academic support, individualized education and flexibility. These schools shall exemplify the close partnership between parents and the school community which is a motivational factor for students. The school program will address student success and development of potential from affective, skill based and academic perspectives\" (page 171). SUPPORT PROGRAJ.\"\\1S \"The following items will be components of every incentive school:\" (Page 171) 32. Homework centers operate at least three days a week with transportation provided. The centers are supervised by a certified teacher with additional aides and teachers proportionate to the number of students. Other options are explored for students who choose not to attend homework centers (pages 171, 180). STATUS: 33. Homework Hotline operates Monday - Thursday, 6:00 - 8:00 p.m. with rotated and compensated staffing (pages 171, 180).  Parents are aware of the phone service at the beginning of the year\nperiodic reminders are issued (ODM, page 26).  The relationship between the homework centers and the hotline has been evaluated and appropriate adjustments made (ODM, page 26). STATUS: 34. Peer tutoring: teachers and students are trained, tutoring is supervised by teachers, and tutors are compensated with coupons redeemable for goods (pages 157, 171, 180). STATUS: Page 22 35. Retired teacher mentors serve as tutors and club sponsors (pages 171, 180). - STATUS: 36. A Career Skills Development Program develops career choices using written information, guest speakers, films, and interest inventories (pages 172, 180). STATUS: 37. Extended year school includes summer remediation and enrichment options at all incentive schools at no cost to students. Summer courses are prescribed for students (pages 172, 180).  Extended year is a continuation of the regular school year (ODM, page 25).  Academic enhancements are evident (ODM, page 25).  Attendance is recorded by grade level, race, and gender (ODM, page 25).  Records indicate both host and guest school's participation in Saturday programs. The documentation is cumulative (ODM, page 25). STATUS: 38. Community Involvement includes Boy and Girl Scouting programs at each incentive school. students have access to community organizations and volunteer experiences .(pages 172, 173).  Membership lists include a category for race (ODM, page 39).  Records of troop meetings and activities are present (ODM, page 39). STATUS: Page 23 39. Special Skills Programs will be scheduled during the time designated for extended day activities. Scheduling for extended day will be set to meet the needs of students to include the homework center, special skills training, and leisure time activities. Students finishing activities early report either to the homework center, CARE, or leave the campus at the request of a parent or guardian (pages 173, 174, 181, 184).  A survey of parents and students has been conducted to determine the most appealing extended day activities (ODM, page 25).  Extended programs are based on information gleaned from SEP's, the school staff, parents, and students. The extended day program reinforces and extends the SEP to meet individual needs (ODM, page 25). STATUS: 40. Extracurricular programs allow students recognition, leadership experience, and a chance to be involved in school activities. Among these are future teachers programs, Just Say No Clubs, intramurals, office monitors (at recess or lunch time, not class time), library helpers, safety patrol, fire marshals, flag monitors, and student council memberships (pages 175, 184). - STATUS: 41. Attendance and behavior guidelines: Time-out rooms are staffed with trained personnel. Students receive help with problem solving. Students help develop school based management rules. Students and parents sign a contractual agreement for attendance (pages 175, 184).  Staff, parents, and students cooperatively design discipline policies (ODM, page 23).  Discipline policies/ procedures are well publicized and clearly indicate what is appropriate and inappropriate behavior. Consequences are clearly spelled out (ODM, page 23).  Enforcement of policies is fair and consistent (ODM, page 23).  Discipline data is collected and closely monitored to make modifications to the discipline program (ODM, page 23).  Classroom management approaches are appropriate for the work being done (ODM, page 32). STATUS: Page 24 COUNSELING/ SOCIAL WORK 42. Community services access: Compacts provide students access to community support programs such as volunteers and pre-professionals from colleges and universities, and assistance from social agencies (pages 175, 183).  Students have access to a wide spectrum of community-based programs (ODM, page 39).  Documentation of program use is provided (ODM, page 39). STATUS: 43. College/ post graduation awareness is promoted through a mentoring program which provides role models for work skills and college awareness (pages 175, 183). STATUS: 44. Study skills training enhances skills in test taking, listening, and studying. Students practice test taking (pages 153,176, 183).  Meaning and understanding is stressed in all academic instruction, keeping in mind the relationship between what is taught, learned, and tested (ODM, page 32).  Improvement in mathematics understanding is present (ODM, page 32).  Cultural infusion is evident in classroom materials (ODM, page 32).  Teacher-directed and learner-directed instruction coexist in the classroom (ODM, page 32).  Test taking skills are being taught (ODM, page 32).  Student test performance \"profiles\" (test data, length of attendance at school, discipline/ attendance records, participation in school progrl:lms) are present (ODM, page 32). STATUS: Page 25 45. Individual and group counseling is present and peer facilitators are utilized. Students are taught conflict resolution (pages 176, 184).  Written building guidance plans have been developed to address personal growth, social development, career awareness, and educational development (ODM, page 27).  The school collaborates with Departments of Human Services and Health (ODM, page 27).  A social worker needs assessment has been performed and social workers placed as needed (ODM, page 27). STATUS: 46. A wellness program is in place at each building. Students are screened for health and given information on various topics (self-esteem, nutrition, drug prevention, and first aid). Presentations are made to parents on similar topics (pages 176, 184).  Medicaid reimbursements are used at the local building (ODM, page 29).  Medicaid reimbursement funds are used to purchase services for non-Medicaid eligible students (ODM, page 29).  The school has developed partnerships with the Departments of Health, Employment Security, and Human Services (ODM, page 29). STATUS: 47. Camp Pfeifer: Students needing additional academic assistance have access to programs such as Camp Pfeifer (page 176, 185).  STATUS: Page 26 MONITORING AND EVALUATION 48. Verifiable monitoring of student growth measures student progress. There is training for monitoring teams (pages 176, 186). STATUS: 49. Regular tracking of student attendance, discipline/ behavior and achievement is systematic and assessed at least quarterly. Individual and class profiles are utilized. Individual student plans and interventions are based on needs determined through ongoing data review (pages 176, 186). STATUS: - 50. Quarterly reports and visitations are used to assess student progress, facility upkeep, and care of grounds and equipment. The monitoring team is composed of district and school staff, parents, and community representatives. The staff participates in writing school and personal goals. Students formulate achievement contracts. Goal achievement is evaluated (pages 177, 186). STATUS: 51. Student evaluators rate the school, its climate, and their educational experiences twice a year. Students are selected at random\nwith 5% involvement from each grade level, to help design questionnaires, analyze data, and reach conclusions. Students receive responses to issues they raise. Students, teachers, and parents complete a school climate survey annually (pages 177, 186, 187). STATUS: Page 27 52. Computerized student data is accessible at each school (pages 177, 187). - STATUS: 53. School site teams work to implement programmatic modifications with membership rotated each semester so that certified and non-certified staff, parents, and students have input (pages 178, 187). STATUS: Page 28 54. Additional items recommended in each incentive school (pages 178, 188,189).  uniforms for students, such as blue jeans and a white shirt  dress code for staff  student handbooks available at every building which reflect the building philosophy and program  a playground for PE purposes  additional compensation for teachers/ principals who work extra periods of time at the incentive schools  Saturday programs to enhance learning which include but are not limited to: -field trips ~nrichment activities -tutoring -parent/ child \"make \u0026amp; take\" sessions -book fairs -physical education activities STATUS: Page 29 INCENTIVE SCHOOL STAfflNG/ STAFF DEVELOPMENT STAFFING 55. The Incentive Schools Staffing Committee is composed of teachers, parents, supervisors, principals, other administrators and the Joshua Intervenors. The committee assesses staffing needs, sets criteria, assists in recruitment of quality staff, and determines hiring procedures (page 190).  Progress is being made toward racially balancing both the certified and non-certified staff. STATUS: 56. Staffing needs assessment bases staff selection upon the needs and interests of the student population. Factors to be considered include: number of students per grade level, race and gender, academic achievement needs and interests, disciplinary needs, social interaction needs, and health needs (page 190).  Staff development activities are evaluated through survey responses from each staff member (page 170). STATUS: Page 30 57. Recommended full-time positions include classroom teachers, counselor, media specialist, music, art, P .E., social worker, permanent substitute, reading (remediation), math (remediation), computer lab attendant, resource, speech, alternative classroom specialist, media clerk, instructional aides ( one per classroom), non-certified supervision aides, program specialist, principal, assistant principal (page 191).  Recommended positions to be filled or left vacant are based on the results of a current needs assessment of the school (May 1992 court order, pages 41-42).  There is a program specialist in place to support the thematic emphasis of the school (May 1992 court order, page 41).  An appropriate number of instrui\ntional aides (2:3 ratio if no K-6 class has more than 20 students - 1 :1 ratio if any K-6 classroom has more than 20 students) are provided (May 1992 court order, page 34). STATUS: 58. Staff recruitment involves ongoing nationwide recruitment strategies with emphasis on recruiting minorities. Recruitment files are current and include promising student teachers and participants in the Master Teacher Program (page 191). STATUS: 59. Staff selection involves the Incentive Schools Staffing Committee according to the plan provisions regarding selection criteria, job descriptions, and selection process. All staff are hired for on a one-year basis and involuntary transfer or other decisions are enacted at the end of the year, based on performance quality. (This also applies to aides, cleriGal, and custodial workers) (page 192). STATUS: Page 31 60. Staff commitment/ effectiveness monitoring involves ongoing informal review and semiannual formal conferences. These assess staff effectiveness based on student academic achievement as measured by formal test results and other forms of measurement (page 192). STATUS: STAFF DEVELOPMENT 61. The Staff Development Planning Committee at each incentive school is composed of teachers, an IRC specialist, parents, principals, and other administrators to plan staff development experiences (page 192).  A long-term strategy has been developed for meeting the plan's minimum staff development requirements (ODM, page 7).  The quality, relevance, and adequacy of present staff training programs have been evaluated (ODM, page 8).  Classroom utilization of inservice training is evaluated (ODM, page 8). STATUS: 62. A staff development needs assessment is coordinated by the Staff Development Committee. It examines the following: students per grade level, race and gender, academic achievement needs and interests, disciplinary needs, social interaction needs, health needs, attendance records, tardiness records, and program goals and curriculum of the incentive schools (page 193).  Staff development needs are individually assessed on an ongoing basis through clinical supervision and monitoring of Individual Improvement Plans (page 201).  School Profile data specifically reflects the amount and scope of each staff member's training (ODM, page 7). - STATUS: Page 32 63. Minimum Staff Development Requirements (pages 192-3) - PET (one cycle, refresher every 3-5 yrs.): TESA (one cycle): Classroom Management (one cycle): Effective Schools Training: Cooperative Learning/ Learning Styles: AT\u0026amp;T Human Effectiveness Training: Parent/ Educator Communication \u0026amp; Human Relations Skills: Mentor Teacher Program: Special Staff Development for Principal, Assistant Principal:  Staff has had inservice emphasizing active learning at all grade levels. (ODM, page 14)  Inservice is held for principals, teachers, parents, and aides emphasizing the developmental levels of pre-school children and developmentally appropriate activities (ODM, page 17).  Teachers are provided with comprehensive training in techniques for dealing with disruptive students (ODM, page 23).  Parents have access to special training in working with their children, assisting with homework, computer literacy, nutrition and human growth and development (page 174).  Staff receives training in working with youth at risk, working in an urban setting, and analysis and use of data for enhancing student achievement (page 174).  Training which helps teachers to facilitate active learning has been emphasized at all grade levels (ODM, page 14).  Gender/Ethnic Expectations and Student Achievement training has been considered (ODM, page 11). STATUS: Page 33 64. A Teacher Demonstration Program is planned by a districtwide Teacher Demonstration Program Committee to enable incentive schools to serve as laboratories and models for other schools (pages 193-4).  The principal monitors the Teacher Demonstration and identifies areas of strengths and concerns (page 203). STATUS: 65. A Master Teacher Program Committee plans a districtwide program to involve student teachers from state and local colleges and universities in the incentive schools. The program is monitored by the principal and college faculty representatives. A pool of perspective staff members is maintained from the student teachers assigned to incentive schools through the Master Teacher Program (pages 194, 204). STATUS: 66. Teacher assistance: An IRC specialist provides ongoing assistance to new teachers and those needing help. The specialist assists the Staff Development Planning Committee with training programs (page 194).  Teachers make full use of the resources and specialists available at the LRSD Instructional Resource Center (ODM, page 14). STATUS: Page 34 INCENTIVE SCHOOL PARENT INVOLVEMENT \"Surveys of teachers, principals, parents and students have identified five main types of parental involvement... The most basic involvement of parents is providing for their children's food, clothing, shelter, safety, health and general well being ... A second type of parental involvement common to all schools is communication from school to the home... A third and most commonly known type of parent involvement brings parents to the school building, usually in connection with parent volunteer assistance, parent audiences, and parent attendance at workshops ... A fourth major type of parent involvement is assistance with learning activities at home... A fifth type of parent involvement includes parents in decision making and activist roles in governance and advocacy groups... We expect the process of developing parental involvement activities to be ongoing. Some suggested activities are listed below\" (pages 205, 206). 67. An incentive school parent program will be established to equip parents with job skills necessary for employability at all levels within the school. Program objectives and activities include: designing and administrating a needs assessment to determine community interest and needs, adult education opportunities, a parent internship program to recruit and employ neighborhood parents as teacher aides and other positions, and teacher/ parent mentorships (pages 178,189,206, 207).  The parent internship program and parent/ teacher mentorships are implemented as outlined in the plan (ODM, page 39). STATUS: 68. A Parent Center provides resources and materials recommended by a parent/ staff committee for loan to parents. A parent has been trained to operate the center and the center is responsible for the development and distribution of a monthly communications packet (pages 206,208).  Parents' recommendations for resources to include in the Parent Centers are actively sought and as many of their suggestions as possible are incorporated. Parent use of the center and resources loaned are documented (ODM, page 39). STATUS: Page 35 69. A Parent program will assist parents in understanding and carrying out school expectations by: offering mini-workshops on topics such as study skills, discipline, time management, prereading skills, financial management, and developmental learning skills\nrequesting that parents pick up report cards at least twice a year\nand requiring principals to have direct parental contact through scheduled meetings and home visits (pages 206, 209).  Parent training activities are documented by topic, time, and location along with the number of participants by race, gender, and child's school. Participant's feedback on how well the session was conducted and their perception of the potential helpfulness of the training is regularly collected and analyzed (ODM, page 39). STATUS: 70. Parent recognition is used as a tool for community and parent involvement. There is parent/ community recognition at monthly PT A meetings, awards are displayed, school lunch vouchers are given, and students are involved in the selection process (pages 209-210).  Make parent and volunteer recognition an integral, ongoing, and highly visibly part of school life (ODM, page 38). STATUS: Page 36 71. Home and school communication is evident at each incentive school. Parents understand how to advance support and concern for the school, attend school activities and monthly school meetings, volunteer, receive a parent handbook and a monthly calendar, sign homework, receive monthly reports, and report absences. Early indicators and early intervention programs are formulated with alert and success cards to update parents on their child's needs and achievements. Staff members make at least two home visits. Meetings are scheduled at community locations, such as churches and homes, to forge neighborhood/ school partnerships. Parents have access to the school through identified pick up points within the school community. Each school has identified three key communicators and utilizes community role models and mentors (pages 157, 174, 176, 183, 184, 188,206, 210-211).  The number and date of visits to each student's home, along with who made the visit is documented to determine if each family is visited at least twice each year (ODM, page 38).  Complete documentation of all parent meetings and activities is maintained including sign-in sheets that reflect parents' race, gender, and the school their child attends (ODM, page 38).  Mechanisms are established at each school to ensure that 'parents regularly sign homework (ODM, page 38).  An intense mentor recruitment campaign is underway (ODM, page 29).  Individual school volunteer mentoring programs are coordinated with VIPS and all volunteers are screened and trained prior to being matched with students (ODM, page 29).  Mentors and their students are documented by race, gender, participation hours, and types of activities shared by the students and mentors. Records of training participants by race, gender, and classification (i.e. student, mentor, parent, teacher) are maintained (ODM, page 30). STATUS: Page 37 72. Parent contractual commitments are signed prior to enrollment (page 211).  Parents sign contracts when they register their children in the incentive schools. Follow up procedures to remind parents of the commitments made in the contract are in place (ODM, page 38). STATUS: 73. Home and school linkage is evident in parenting education classes, evening and Saturday math/ science classes, and the school is used as a community center (pages 206, 212). STATUS: 74. School and community trust is raised through a speakers bureau for community groups in school zones and a posted calendar of neighborhood events. Neighborhood pride is promoted through events coordinated by school staff (page 213). STATUS: 75. School improvement plans are developed by administrators, parents, and teachers to promote an open atmosphere, provide input into decision making, and create a sense of ownership through involvement (page 214). STATUS: Page 38 INCENTIVE SCHOOL PARENT RECRUITMENT \"Aggressive marketing and recruitment are essential to the overall success of the incentive school program. Careful marketing of the incentive school program is the first step toward an effective recruitment program... Recruitment will be an ongoing process ... to encourage voluntary assignments that will enable the incentive schools to comply with the desegregation requirements (page 215). 76. Community information is provided to special interest and community groups, including information sessions at churches and with other audiences, a telephone hotline, Saturday information booths at malls and neighborhood stores, special media coverage, and highlight sheets are given all elementary parents and placed in local businesses (pages 215, 218-219). STATUS: 77. Recruitment strategies include the use of brochures, PSA's, billboards, media blitz, videocassette recordings, flyers, open house, targeted neighborhood blitz, small group tours, ADE special designation, celebrity endorsements, and a speaker's bureau for each school. Meetings are held with NLRSD and PCSSD parents and PTA groups to encourage M-to-M transfers. Two parent recruiters have been hired to conduct recruitment activities (pages 215- 216, 220-222).  A strategic plan is based on the recruitment section of the desegregation plan and reflects a well thought-out, interrelated process (ODM, page 4).  A firm timetable is part of the recruitment plan and is strictly adhered (ODM, page 5).  Number and variety of specifically targeted recruitment activities are increased (ODM, page 5).  A tracking system to determine the success of particular awareness and recruitment efforts, especially with identified geographic areas and specific groups is established (ODM, page 5). STATUS: Page 39 78. The Biracial Advisory Committee, with the advise of marketing and advertising experts, serves as the steering committee for incentive school recruitment. The committee reviews bimonthly reports on the implementation and effectiveness of various recruitment strategies from the desegregation office. The committee evaluates the recruitment program each quarter and recommends to the Board of Directors changes needed in recruitment strategies and activities (pages 217, 223).  The committee's monitoring instrument includes recruitment assessment (ODM, page 5). STATUS: Page 40 ROCKEFELLER EARLY CHILDHOOD MAGNET SCHOOL \"The Rockefeller Early Childhood Magnet Program will be available to children from six weeks to four years old. The program will serve as a model for improving the academic achievement of disadvantaged students and attracting students to comply with desegregation requirements.\" (page 12). 1. The early childhood education program at Rockefeller is used as a desegregation tool and includes the early childhood program as an integral part of the whole school (pages 12, 13). STATUS: 2. The early childhood program receives the same attention and support as the grades K through six (page 13). STATUS: - 3. Rockefeller is designated as a Cooperative Early Childhood Education Demonstration Magnet between U ALR and other area colleges (page 12). STATUS: 4. The development of innovative early childhood education practices is emphasized and piloted at the school (page 12). STATUS: 5. Rockefeller is used as a demonstration site for college students, the county's teachers, and daycare workers (page 12). STATUS: Page 41 6. The advice of parents and educational professionals is incorporated in all aspects of the planning and implementation of the early childhood program (page 12). STATUS: 7. Students attending the three-year-old program are allowed to continue on into the school's four-year~ld program (page 13). STATUS: 8. Sibling preference is granted to the brothers and sisters of the early childhood education students (page 13). STATUS: 9. The development of a year-round, full day school for children from infancy through sixth grade has been explored. A biracial group of teachers, parents, administrators, and experts from local universities works with the district to assess the feasibility of such a program (page 13). STATUS: 10. An evaluation of the early childhood program has been conducted to determine its impact on desegregation. In addition, the parent committee routinely evaluates matters related to childcare policies and procedures (page 13). STATUS: Page 42 IN THE UNITED STA~ES DISTRICT COG~T .EA.STE..~~ DISTRICT OF AR.'l(.~~s~s WEST~ DIVISION LIT:':.E ROCK SCECCL DISTRIC':' v. LR-C-82-866 PGL\\S~: C~UN~Y S?ECIAL SCHOOL DISTR:c: NC. 1. I E\":' AL MRS. :.CRZ..'l'E JCSr:.uA, ET AL M._O'!'!ON FOR APPROVAL OF SCECOL C::JNSTRCCT!ON P.2 PL\\IN':'I:'F INTERV'ENCRS INTERVE...'i'ORS Fo= its ~otion, plainti:f Little Rock Scheel District (L..'C_SD) sta-tes: l. r.._qs~ seeks approval of ccnst=-uc--:.ion projects at eight scr..oo:s: Forest Heights Junior High School\nClove::-dale Junior High School\nCloverdale Elementary School\nRigh~sell Incentive School, Mitchell Incentive School, Geyer Springs Elementary School\nWoodruff Elementary School\nand Western Kills Elementary School. Each c~~s~::uc~ion project and its illlpact upcn LRSD's desegregation plan will be described below. 2. With the exception of Woodruff Elementary ~chool, the proposec ele!llentary capacity figures presented in this.motion are based upon ~-enty students per four year old class and the average nunber of st~dents per class required by Arkansas Department of Ed~cation regulations for the elementary grades. Those averages are: T\"Nenty students per kindergarten class\ntwenty-three students per class at grades l through 3\nt.enty-five students per F.3 class a: grades 4 through 6. Woodruff Ele?:e::tary School's capacity is calc~l~ted at twenty-tNO s~udents per c~ass fer grades l through 6 beca~se most of the classrooms for tr.e ~pper elementary grades a:::-e tea small to accoi:!!lodate mere than t.\nenty-t.\no studen\u0026lt;:s per class. The junior high school capaci ':.:.es are calculated in accorda::ce wit::. a fonnula which takes into account the size and use of each classroom as well as class schedul:ng re'i',lirements. 3 . The proposed projects which are t.':.e subject of this motion follow c~nstructicn and renovation projects at schools in east and centra: L.:.t-cle Rock which were then known as \"1:ajor enhanc~ent11 schools. T1:e largest of the 11:naj or enhan:::a:::ient\" projects w'as at Washing~:n sc~ool, with a - 198i-88 capacity of three hur.dred !ive (305), ~hich was completely demolished. ~ new Washington school was cor.s~ructed on the same site at a cost of $4,932,377.00. The capacity at Washington was increased by !ive hundred siny-one (561) st~dents to eight hundred sixty-six (866). 4. A new wing of ten classrooms\nas ac!ded to Franklin Incent:ve School and Franklin's cafeteria .as ramodaled in 1989. The cost of the Franklin project was $1,330,000.00. 5. Rockefeller, Righ-csell and Ish Incentive Schools were rencva1:ad, including rercofing, beginni:lg in 1988. .  Mitchell Incenti1e School was also renovated at t::e same time. Stephens Incent:.ve School received air conditioning, painting and carpeting, but was r.ot renovated to the extent of the 01:her buildings because of the plan to build a new Stephens school. The combined cost of the Rockefeller, Rightsell, Ish, Mitchell a::.d Stephens projects was ~ .-_ :.. C.- 2 P.-1 apprcx.::::.ately Six Hundred Sixty-Seven Thc~sa:-.d Dollars. Capital i:mprcve:::.ents cave also been made recent!.y at Garland Incentive Schoel a~ a cost, since 1988, in excess of $400,000.00. 6. T!:.e LRSD Board of Directors voted on ?-'..arch 15, 1990 to seek t= :~crease the LRSD ~illage rate by e:gh~ m~ls, five and onehalf m::s for maintenance and operation and t~o and one-half mils The debt service mLs were designated fer capi~a: i~provemen~ projec~s. LaSD coI!l!llitted to its patrons that capi~a: i.::1prcvement projects would be undertaken at Woodruff, Wester~ Hills, Cloverdale, Geyer Springs and Forest Heights if the millage passec. The millage was approved by the voters on April 19, 1990. 7. During the 1988-89 school year, L.~D prepared a desegrega~ion plan which proposed t~at a new King school and a new Stephens school be const=-ucted in t.1.e area ot Interstate 630 betwee~ University Avenue and Interstate 30. That desegregation plan w-as agreed upon :Cy all t.1.e parties but rejected by the distric~ cour:. The parties were ordered to imple!!lent a different desegregation plan, the Tri-District Desegregation Plan. 8. The Tri-District Plan called for ~e expansion of Woodruff Elex:er.~ary School, the expansion of Western Hills Elementary School and the elimination of portable classrooms t.,.ere, and the expansion of Cloverdale Elementary and Junior High Schools, The parties appealed. but did not seek to stay implementation of the TriDistrict Plar.. LRSD notified the associate metropolitan superv:.sors on July 26, 1990 that the \"building expansion projects 3 P.5 for Wccd.=\".lf:::,  Western Hills, and Cloverdale .,.ill continue\". 9. Arch!tects were hired dur!ng the su:mmer o! 1990 for the Cloveriale, Geyer Springs, Woodruff and *estern Hills projects. The ar:~!tec~ for the Forest Heights projec~ was hired in November, 1990. During Dece~er 1990 and January 19\n1, L.RSD advertised for bids, o~ened bids and hired ger.eral contrac~~=s for the Cloverdale, Wester:: Hills, Wocdruf!, and Geyer Springs projects. Work has begun o~ those projects. No contrac~or has been hired and no work has be~~~ on the Forest Heigh~s project. \u0026gt;.=chitects have net yet been hi=ed for the Rightsell and Mitchell projects. 10. The \"Interdistrict Desegregation Ean11 , whic:i was approved by t..\"1.e Court of Appeals on December 12, 1990, says that \" [ a) 11 schocl const:ruction shall be subject to tl:e cou...-t's prior approval and shall prc:ote desegregat!on\". Inte:-~!strict Plan, s J.D.R. 1723. T!'le recrui t:nent of st:Jdents to nc~-magnet, non-incentive schools is a part of LRSD' s desegregaticr, plan. Interdistrict Flan, 8 J.D.R. 1721-22\nLRSD Desegragaticr. Plan, 10 J.D.R. 2198. The propose\u0026lt;:. projects at Woodruff, Cloverdale, Gayer Springs, Wester.i Hills and Forest Heights will cont=:~ute to LRSD's ability to ac=~mplish t..~at goal. ll. The project at Wood.::uff would add six new classrooms to the sc=.col. WoodrJ.ff' s capacity would l::e increased from two hundred nine {209) to three hundred twenty-tour (324). Wit.~ the increased capacity, Woodruff could accot:1::cdate :forty-four ( 44) students per grade for grades 1 through 6, forty (40) kindergarten studen~s and t~enty students in the four year old program. 4 P.2 grar.d!at~a::r.\nprevision in t~a cu=rent plan, one hund:ad eighty I~(.,~ ( a o J s~-...dn~a who res:.1:a within tr..e Wes~ern Hill~ zone attend Wes~ar~ H.:.lls, cne hund=sa !:.!ty-fo~= (l~4) st~dents who resicQ outs:.c~ t:i.e Wester~ H.:.lls zona atten\u0026lt;:i Weste=~ Hills and one hund::-ad s~uden~s who reside within t~ Westar~ Hills Grandtat:iar:.::g will be phaseci out aeccrct::.ng t::: 1.RSC'a ouac\n:-egat::.c:-t ~lan (10 J.C.R, U98 \u0026amp; 21SS ) which allows st~dnts \"presently ~ss:.gnad\" to elementary sctccls to r~:iain in t.\"loH schools :b1.:.t requires that kir.der\nartan a~d new studen~s will be aasignad by attendance zone~. lS. All but onQ o! t.~a ~or~~~ls tuildinqs presently in USQ at Weta:n Hills are e.pproxi1nataly tventy yea::-s cl~. Or:s por-:al:la build::.ng is o~l t~o years old. l 7. Th p~ojact at Geyer Springs Ele:entary Schcc:1 consists ot building t.wal ve classrooms l:y a combina.tion ot new ccnat:-uction and the ccnve=sion cf some existi~g pace to classroom uaa. ~ortable buili:ings which hou3e eight classes will l:e ra:ov1d, tor a net increase at Geyer Sprin\ns o! tour classrooms. The . additional classroou wi:.l allow tha school to prov!.d.a tvo c:lu each at gra,:as K-6. ~ construction projec~ will also inc:-ease t.~e 1iza of the kitchen and create a na~ libra::y at Geyer Springs. l8. The capacity ct Geyer Spring Elementary School vould increase !:-om tiio hundred ti!ty-fiva {255) to thrae hundred t.wenty-eight (328). Th present enrollment at Geyu springs i.s t.ro 6 P.3 hunc.:-ec! saver. (207), although t\n.ro huncirac! sixte$n (216) students reside i~ the CQyar Springs attar.dance zone. !ig~ty-four students 1who resid i~ t.~a Gyr S~rinc\ns attancia~ca zcne a.ttand GeyQ!' Springs !l.e::ier.-:ary School, T::a ra:maining ~~ h1.:.ndred thirty-t-'c ( lJ 2) r..~so at-.:.c.ent.a who raaid in tl':.a Geyer Sprini\ns attandanca zone attanc! various ot.1ar L~O schools. Ona r.und.?\"sd thi:taCln { 113) lS. T~e presen~ racial composit:on ef Geyer Springs -,.1 Elemar.~a=y Sc~ccl is seventy-one percnt (~) ~l~ck. The racial compos~::.!.cn e! the st.:dants who resiaa i:l the Gayer springa grandfa~~ering is phased cut, tr..e school ~:ll ~!lect t.~a r~cial compcsi~:on o! the attanc~noa zcne. No chL~\n in th a.ssign::1ant c! s~~dent~ to ~-yer Springs, ho~aver, ~ill result trom ~~ 2 o. The utSD stucent.s whc ride in t~ Geyer springs attendar.ca zor.a woulc till Geyer Spring to sixty-six percant ( 156%) of capaci~y. T~e ra~aining capacity will ee fillec by rac:-uit~ent to the pulic schools of students who raside within. t..~e Geyar Sprin\ns ion a~d by t.i.a as:1igmnsnt ot ~'.:den-ea vno  cannot l:lQ acco~e~atad. a~ neiqr..::oring Wake!iela Elet:.enta.ry School which is P=sently oper~~ing at ninety-nine percant (99%) 0! capacity. See 10 J,D,R. 2198-99. 21. The p=oject at Cloverdala Elamanta::-y School ccnsiats of the c~nst~uc~ion of a new cafeteria, t!l.a a~dition of !iVQ ~--c- 7 F . ..1 class=:ccs i~ P-aCQ of ths old ca~etaria and c~a addit!on ot one class=cc: in ~-ace o! the old stage. Cr.e portatla claas:oom w~ll be 4-.:.=inatac: ar.d two exis\"ing clasa:-cc:=s will ~e convert9d to Elemar.~a=y Sc~ccl will thera!ore be t.~ae. 2~. The ca~~city ot c:ove~dale Elamer.~ary sc~ool will increase !rom ~\n~ to 4S2. Tha inc:aase i~ siza w~:1 allow LRSO to raplaca tta p:-\nsQnt ~~Qven grade ~tructU!\"e at Cloverdale (t.o class eac~ at gr?ces K, ~ and E\nth=ae classes eac~ a~\n=aces 2, 3, 4 an~ 5) with t~=ee clasas per grad~. 23. ~~a assig~~nt zone tcr Clcver~a:a ,ilamantary Sch~ol will net c~a~ge as a result of _this project. ~e praser.t ar.roll~ent is thrse t~r.drec. ~~::.ety-one ( J 9 l) S1!'..!der:t3. T~:-ta ht\nne2ed eighty-1!.h~ee (383) s~ude~t$ reside !n the Clovar:a. ~:emantary Scheel et.tenc!a:ice zone. Those studan1:s would till that school to SQVenty igh~ percen~ (i8%) ot proposed capacity. 24. Ona h'l.!l\"ldred eighty-five (185) st~~nta ~ho resida in t..~a Clovcar:i?.le ?lement.ary School at-:r.danca zor.fi a.ra praaently assigned to Clcve:dals Elementary Scheel. one hur.c.:sd ninety-eight (198) studen~s who rasida in t..~e Cloverdala ion, a.re asaign~ to va~icus c~her I..~SD el~entary schools. T\"o hund=~ seven (207) students who rside outa~d tha Cloverdal Elementa~! zone ara assigned to Clovercah. 25. The present racial composition o! Clcverrhle ilementary is sever.~y-t~o percent black. The racial ccmposition ot all LR.SO studen~$ who ras~d in thQ ClOVQrdale Elemr.~ary School attendanca 8 F.S zons :s also aeventy-t~o percent (72%) ~lack. 40, The ~roject at Clover~ale J~nior Hi\nh School involves the add~tic~ o! a new wing of ten per.nanent classroo:ua\nt.~ conversion c! the cld ca=ateria to !cur classrooms a~d t.~e conversion c! t~e old ata\ns tc or.a classroom. T~ose tifteen clasarcoms will provide p8r-:nar.a .. ~ spa:a tor eleven classes whic..~ are presently held in por1:.ab:: bui:c.ings fc:- a ne1: gain o: tou:::- classrooms. The preser:t sixty-s:x (76S ) studan~a wit.~ an er.:cllment ran~ ct sevan h'l.!nd:'ed thi::-ty-s~x ( 7 J 5 ) student2 to ei\nr.t huncirac. eiqhtaen ( 818) student.,. The ccr.s~:::uc~~en projc~ would yield an i:aal enrol~ent ct eight hundrec !ifty-saven ( 857-) 1t~dents at c:overc!ale Ji.:.nie:- Hiqh School, w:th a ran\ne ot eight h'.!J~drc t~elv1 (Sl,) to nine hu.~ci=ad t~c (9C~ ) st~:ents. 27. Sever. hund:-ad fcrty-nine (749} at~cier.t3 ara an:-ollsd at Clova:ri:a:s J'.!.\"\"l.:.or High Sc!lool t~is year. Tr.a racial c:ompesi tion 0! the 1ctocl is seventy pereant (70%) blaex. Six hundred thirtyseven (537) s~~~nta reside in the Clover:ala Junior High School attenca~ce zor.e. That group is seventy-or. percant (71%) black. Junior r.igh. sc=.eol stu~ant.s ara tr to t:::-ans!ar to a school outsica ~~i= a~tandanc zone 10 long ae t~ tr~ns!ar leave bot.~ tha send!ng an~ rciving actoola ~ithin t.~ aeceptuia range o! r~cial c=i:osi~ion. LRSD Desegregation Plan, 10 J.O.R. 2200. The phasing cut o! grandta.thering, theratora, w!ll not have th 1ame affect !:: t.'la j'llnior high schools \u0026amp;11 in tb.a alamanta:-y actools - because ~unicr high school students will have g:-eatar t:-eedom to 9 P.6 28, Tr.e six hundred ~~i:-ty-seven (53i) ~~dent$ who :aside wi-\n~i::. t~ Clcver~ala :un:cr High School at-:.er:r!ar.ce zone c:::nst.!.t'.lte seventy-!eu= percant (74%) of iaeal capac:::y follcw:!.nq the prc:\n:esed cons~=~c~ion projec~. Th nu.::be~ o! studor.ts who presently a~~ar.d Clove:-:ale !::-o::. within the Clcve::-dale Junie:- Hi.c\nh School attar.c.anca zone is !cur ~~~d:-sc seven~y-one (471). T~ nu-=4r cf attandance zone a~~~ants who pressntly at~and ether USO ju..~ior high schools i~ cr.e hunc:rec. six-:y-s:.x (He). ~ ncber of atu~anta from outsic.-. the C2.ove::-c.ale Jun:o:- High Schee:. att:ancfance zone who presen~:y a~t~d c:evordale is t~o hu.~cu-ec torty-savan (247). 2 s. '!'=.e prcpcsec ccns~!\"J.ct:ion prcj ac-: Junie: F.iqh Sc~ccl is designed to ~e compla~ad i:'l Forest Haiqhts 1~ two pha~as, The first pr.aae, w~ich conists o: renova~ing ~hose portions o! t.~e strJCt\"J.!'1 which will net be de:oliahed, i sc..,.edulec: ter ccz::.pletion in Aui\nust, 1991, Th second phase, which consists of the constrJc\"\nion o! a new classroot1 building, aainistration building and libr~ry/~ecia canttr ia 1\u0026lt;:.~adulec fer completion in Auguat, 1992. 3 o. The i:rcject at :'eras-: F.eight~ Jur:.!.or High School consists 0! builc.ing t.~ir:y-nine new clasa:rooms a..\"'ld renovating elaven existing class=-coms to replace thirty-six per::anant class:-co:m~ which w:ll be ~amolished and t.'lre port~:01 classrooms which will be removed, to~ a net gain 0! alaven classrooms. Five 0! those classroe-:a will be reserved to accommodata a total of not more than !crty s~~dents who rCsUi:a apecial aervicas, sue~ a~ students who 10 ' P.7 are p:-uently\" served. a~ ho!'!le or at resi~~-=ial aattings, 31, The present ideal student pcpulat:cn tor Forest\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_924","title":"''Status 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":["1992-03/1992-06"],"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 law and legislation","Educational statistics","School discipline","School enrollment","School facilities","School improvement programs","Student assistance programs","Gifted \u0026 talented"],"dcterms_title":["''Status 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/924"],"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":["50 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  \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 "},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1523","title":"Court filings: District Court, proposed modifications; District Court, motion to modify desegregation plan; District Court, motion for approval of magnet programs; District Court, brief in support of motion to modify the Pulaski County intra-district desegregation plan; District Court, order; Court of Appeals, response; District Court, proposed modification","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":["Pulaski County Special School District"],"dc_date":["1992-02-05/1992-02-11"],"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","Pulaski County Special School District","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","Educational law and legislation","Educational planning","Education--Curricula","Educational statistics","School management and organization","School integration","School improvement programs","Magnet schools","Henderson Junior High School (Little Rock, Ark.)","McClellan Magnet High School (Little Rock, Ark.)"],"dcterms_title":["Court filings: District Court, proposed modifications; District Court, motion to modify desegregation plan; District Court, motion for approval of magnet programs; District Court, brief in support of motion to modify the Pulaski County intra-district desegregation plan; District Court, order; Court of Appeals, response; District Court, proposed modification"],"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/1523"],"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":["19 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1256","title":"Proceedings: ''Evidentiary Hearing,'' Volume III","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":["1992-01-21"],"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","Pulaski County Special School District","Education--Arkansas","Education--Finance","Educational law and legislation","Educational planning","Court records","School enrollment","Educational statistics"],"dcterms_title":["Proceedings: ''Evidentiary Hearing,'' Volume III"],"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/1256"],"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":["223 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1006","title":"Aerospace Technology Magnet School, grant","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":null,"dc_date":["1992/1993"],"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","Educational law and legislation","Magnet schools","Aviation Education Programs (U.S.)","Educational statistics","Education--Finance"],"dcterms_title":["Aerospace Technology Magnet School, grant"],"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/1006"],"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":["24 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\nThis transcript was created using Optical Character Recognition and may contain some errors.\n~ ~~Ct ~~ fJ 2-~ i -+- 'L-I 1/n 1 uu.~/{_ r t,\n}t 'NJJ c_ u~~rJJ {t\ntihf ?ti- ~a ft\\ 1 ~ J,\n'Jo C?~ \\~ -Ct Z.. - 3ID/ sc\nf-(\n1?3 .(U'/,tz ,Los- JJ a,4v:t'?)Q_ ( 1 \\0-,\u0026amp; ~~ 9tv( ~~ vvlCvt,1.- FRIDAY, ELDREDGE \u0026amp;. CLARK HERSCHEL H. FRIDAY , P.A. ROBERT V . LIGHT . P. A . WILLIAM H . SUTTON, P. A . JAMES W. MOORE A PARTNERSHIP OF INDIVIDUALS AND PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATIONS ATTORNEYS AT LAW BYRON M . EISEMAN. JR . , P. A . JOE 0. BELL , P.A. JOHN C . ECHOLS . P.A. JAMES A . IUTTRY, P. A . FREDERICK. 8 . URSERY . P. A . H . T. LARZELERE, P. A. OSCAR E. DAVIS , JR. JAMES C. CLARl, JR . , P . A . THOMAS P. LEGGETT, P. A . JOHN DEWEY WATSON , P.A. PAUL B . IENHAM Ill, P. A . LARRY W. IURlS, P.A . A . WYClllFF NISIET , JR. , P.A. JAMES EDWARD HARRIS , P. A . J . f\"HILLIP MALCOM. P. A . JAMES M . SIMPSON, P .A. MEREDITH P. CATLETT, P .A. JAMES M . SAXTON, P.A . J . SHEPHERD RUSSELL 111 DONALD H . IA.CON, P. A . WILLIAM THOMAS BAXTER , P. A . WAL TEA A. PAULSON II , P. A . BARRY E. COl\"LIN, P . A . RICHARD D. TAYLOR, P' . A . JOSEPH 8 . HURST, JR . , P . A . ELIZABETH J . ROBBEN, P. A . CHRISTOPHER HELLER , P. A . LAURA HENSLEY SMITH, P . A . ROBERTS. SHAFER, P.A. WILLIAM M . GRIFFIN Ill , P.A . THOMAS N . ROSE , P . A . MICHAEL S MOORE DIANE S MACKEY , P . A WAL TER M EB EL Ill . P .A 2000 FIRST COMMERCIAL \u0026amp;UILDINQ 400 WEST CAPITOL LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 722013413 TELEPHONE 1501-378-2011 FAX NO. 601-378-2147 December 7, 1992 The Honorable Susan Webber Wright United States District Judge Post Office \u0026amp; Courthouse 600 West -Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 DEC 9 1~2 IC.EVIN A. CRASS. P.A . WILLIAM A . WADDELL, JR . , P. A . CLYDE TA.  TURNER, P.A . CALVIN J . HALL, P. A . SCOTT J . LANCASTER, P.A . JERRY L . MALONE, P. A . M . GAYLE CORLEY . P. A . ROBET I . IEACH, JR .  P' . A . J. LEE IROWN, P . A . JAMEi C . IAI.ER, JR . , P' . A . H. CHARLES GSCHWEND, JR ., P.A . HARRY A . LIGHT, P'.A . ICOTT H . TUCKER JOHN CLAYTON RANDOLPH GUY Al TON WADE PRICE C . GARONER THOMAS F . MEElS J. MICHAEL PICKENS TONIA P. JONES DAVID D . WILSON JEFFREY H. MOORE T . WESLEY HOLMES ANDREW T . TURNER SARAH J . HEFFLEY JOHN RAY WHITE DAVID M. GRAF PAMELA D . CORKER CARLA G . SPAINHOUR JOHN C . FENDLEY , JR. COUNH WILLIAM J . SMITH WILLIAM A . ELDREDGE , JR. , P. A . 8 . S . CLARl WILLIAM L. TERRY WILLIAM L. PATTON , JR ., P. A . WII I TUI'  OUUCT NO. 15011 370 - 1506 D Re: LRSD v. PCSSD Office of Desegregation Monitoring Dear Judge Wright: I am writing to provide a status report concerning LRSD's efforts to secure a grant to establish an Aerospace magnet school. The LRSD Board of Directors has adopted a resolution to establish such a school subject to the following conditions: 1. That the district receives from the Magnet School Assistance Fund Grant a minimum of $8,000,000.00 over a two year term\n2. that funds to defray the cost of operating the school will be obtained from public or private sources for a period of five years beginning with the date the school opens. Construction will begin when the five year commitment of operating funds is identified\n3. that the district can demonstrate to the Court that the school will compliment its desegregation plan and receive approval from the Court to modify its plan to include the construction and implementation of the Aerospace school. Al though the board voted to pursue the grant subject to these conditions, several members made it clear that they would vote to reject the grant if, at the time the grant is announced, it appears that sufficient funds are not available for LRSD to effectively implement its desegregation plan, meet its other obligations and establish the Aerospace magnet school. Finally, I have been informed by grant writer Gail Quinn that the deadline for the grant application will probably be extended to early February. I do not yet have a final grant application to share with the Court and the parties, but I will provide one as soon as it is completed. CJH/k cc: All Counsel Ann Brown Gail Quinn *** ****************************************************************************************************** P.01 * * TRANSACTION REPORT * * ------- DEC- 8-92 TUE 14: 33 * ** DATE START SENDER RX TI ME PAGES TYPE NOTE ** * ---------------------------------- * * DEC- 8 14:31 501 324 2032 11 39\" 2 RECEIVE OK * * * ************** ***************************'************************************************************* 12 / 08 / 92 15:J  '6'501 324 2032 LR School Dist   OD~ ..-~ LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT DATE TO FROM SENDER'S PHONE# SUBJECT Special Instructions 810 WEST l\\1/\\RKHAM STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 FAX (501) 324-2032 ~ ~ 1 141001 / 002 Number of Pages (incluM cover page) j__ Fax Phone Number___ Speed dial r__..---- FOR COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE USE ONLY Transmitted By ---------Date --------Time ---- 12/ 08/ 92 15 : 44 '0'501 324 2032 LR School Dist  ODM December 8, 1992 TO: Ms. Ann Brown Mr. Dick Holbert Mr. Chris Heller FROM: Mac Bernd, Superintendent of School~ SUBJECT: MAGNET SCHOOLS ASSISTANCE GRANT FOR AEROSPACE SCHOOL l4J 00 2/002 To keep you updated on the status of the grant application, you need to know that we received a telephone call yesterday from Gail Quinn explaining that she is having problems getting the grant application printed and will possibly be required to re-format to another computer program. She was optimistic, however, that she would be able be overnight mail the grant last evening. We have not talked with her this morning and have not yet received the grant. cc: Board of Directors DEC 9 19Y2 Office of Desegregation Monitoring Little Rock School District Aerospace Technology Magnet Program Ahsb.-.t The Little Rock Schoo District's Magnet Schools Assistance grant applicatia, presents a dynamic plan fer implementation of a grade 7-12 Aera\npace Techndogy Magnet Program in three (3) junior high schoos and the new Aera\npace Educatia, Center. The Center combnes a museum of aviatia, histcry with a grade 7-12 Aera\npace Technology Schoo oo a 19.8 acre tract at the Little Rock Regirnal Airpai adjacent to the main terminal, Falcoo Jet, and Arkansas Aerospace. Collabcratively develc.ped with the Aerospace industnesi\u0026gt; and Campaign Leadershipb\u0026gt;, foor universitiescl and the U.S. Department ci Educatirn Federal Aviatia, Administratia, (FAA), this magnet program targets the readying of students fer immediate employment and/er postsecondary education in either engineering technology er aitway science. As illustrated belON, students are prCNided a wide range ci choices fer career develc.pment in ooe of nine areas at an entry, technician, er prdessiaial level: Aerospace Engineering Technology Aviation Airway Science ( FAA)  Manufacturing  Airway Canputer Science  Computer Science  Airway Science Management  Mechanical  Aircraft Maintenance  Electronics  Aircraft Systems  Professiooal Pilct Majer Arkansas aeraspace employers and the FAA have identified tec:hndogical ocaJpatioos and the skill base students need for future employment. LRSD has incrnpcrated the skill base into a highly integrated program/cairse sequence coosisting ci Academic lnstructioo, Work-Based Leaming, Wcrksite Experience, and Information and Guidance. All magnet students will take a a:mmrn academic ccre of sequenced cairses which include six years ci applied mathematics and science (mcre than required for graduation) keyed to prcxiuct engineering and flight/space ooncepts, two cr more years d a language significant to oor global a:mpetitive marketplace such as Japanese er German\nand Applied Canmunication. In c:anputer netwcrked laboratcries, students will access and a:ntrd content, applicaticns, and infamatirn in the areas ci rcbotics, bio astronautics, systems simulatioo, CAD/CAM, publishing, wcrd proces.sing, teleccmmunicatirns, material science, and aerodynamics. Students will produce presentatioo material by importing soond, graphics, digitized phctographs to hypercard er laserdisc stacks ci their c,,vn creatioo. In Scien~ students wilt cooduct hands-on investigatirns, manipulate scientific instruments, and cdlect/ analyze data a) Arkansas Aerospac~ Rohr Industries, Falcon Jet, Midcoast, Ce,tral Flying Servic:2 b) Membership attached c) l 'niversities of Arkansas at Little Rock and Pine Bluff, He,derson State University, Southern Arkansas University TECH. using the critical thinking skills d observatirn, canmunicating. cnmparing. a-deting. categotizing. relating. inferring. and applying. Specialized curricula related to each d the nine career cptia,s has been developed to meet ocrupation specific kno.vledge and emerging techndogy requirements. Students will be trained on the job throogh partidpatioo in industry and airpa-t-based internship programs. All students will be educated to higher levels than ever befae. The vehide for cx:::aipaticnal artificaticn is achievement d the U.S. Department of Labcr's SCANS (Secretary's Canmissicn d Achieving Necessary Skills) five workplace canpetendes, e.g. Resources, Interpersaial Skills, lnfa-mation, Systems, and Technology\nand the earning of c.ertificate3 d Initial Mastery (CIM). An assessment system based a, SCANS Kno.v-Ho.v and cumulative re3ume, which reports re3ults, will be the permanent reccrd ci genuine student attainment of CIM and future employment. In addition, program ccmpletion in a chosen cx:cupaticnal maja will enat:ie students to receive advance university credit and cootinuatia, of the engineering a airway science career track thrcugh associate ci science and baccalaureate degree programs. As ycu c:cnsider the fine merits of this highly cdlabJrative magnet progrc3Jl\\ please keep in mind the thcusands a students it will enable to gain state-of-the-art techndogical ski11s, enoourage to cootinue their education thraigh Artla.ilatta, Agreements, and to fill key manufacturing and FAA jd:ls so vital to the future a this nation to ccmpete in the wald market. Student Progression in the Aerospace Technology Magnet \"Linking the Curricular Path to Work\" Level 1- Aerospace Education Center Grades 7-12  Engineering Technology or  Airway Science \u0026amp; Professional Pilot Level II - Advanced \u0026amp; Specialized Training  Southern Arkansas University TECH - Associate of Applied Science Degree and/or Advanced Certificates (one year after Associate Degree) ..ar.. -Aviation Maintenance __,,..  UALR - Electronics Engineering Technology - Mechanical Engineering Technology Level Ill - Baccalaureate Programs  UALA - Manufacturing Engineering - Computer Engineering  Henderson State University .. - Aircraft Systems Management - Professional Pilot - Airway Science Management - Airway Computer Science Entry-Level Employment  Support Analyst  Quality Analyst  CAD Operator  Hazardous Material Specialist Technical Careers ,  Associate Engineer  Tool Designer  Quality Technician  Hazardous Material Team Leader Professional Careers  Production Engineer  Manufacturing Engineer  Liaison Engineer  Design Engineer  Quality Engineer  Environmental Engineer I. Background Information A. Greater Metropolitan Little Rock Greater Little Rock's four county Metropolitan Statistical area (MSA) is the center of the second fastest growing region in the United States. Its central location is within 550 miles of forty percent of the United States buying power and population. The $1.3 billion dollar Arkansas Navigation System, one of the nation's largest water development projects, is a 445 mile waterway providing year-round access to ports on the Arkansas River from the Mississippi River to Tulsa, Oklahoma. The 1,500 acre port with its industrial harbor Foreign Trade Zone -14, and the United States Customs Port of Entry are an indication of the increasing importance of Little Rock's linkage to ports worldwide. All are in close proximity to Adams Field, Little Rock's airport. The city's rich mixture of historic architecture and new development is attracting new residents. Little Rock is seeing growth and revitalization unparalleled in the city's history. Little Rock is on the move. Fueling this revitalization are the aerospace industries, the Arkansas Aviation Historical Society, the Governor's Aerospace Task Force, and institutions of higher education. Some of the world's most successful aerospace companies are located here: McDonnell Douglas, Rohr Inc., Arkansas Aerospace (a subsidiary of British Aerospace), Falcon Jet owned by the French-based Avions Dassaut Brequet Aviation, MidCoast, and Central Flying Service. Numerous private and corporate aircraft dealers such as Aero-Commander, Piper, Beechcraft, and Cessna have facilities at the Little Rock Regional Airport. Little Rock Airforce Base is home to the largest C-130 aircraft training and airlift facility in the world. A number of major educational institutions serve Little Rock's M.S.A. By far, the largest of these is the University of Arkansas at Little Rock (UALR), enrolling more than 11,000 students in seventy-five undergraduate and forty-two graduate degree programs including Associate, Bachelor and Masters of Science Degrees in Engineering Technology. The Graduate Institute of Technology (GIT) housed in the new Engineering Technology Center offers courses in mechanical, computer science, electrical and manufacturing engineering. Industries utilize GIT facilities for advanced research and graduate study. In 1991, the Arkansas Space Grant Consortium, under the leadership of GIT at UALR, received a four-year training grant award from the NASA National Space Grant College and Fellowship program. The primary purpose of the program is to educate and familiarize faculty and undergraduate and graduate students with aerospace fundamentals and NASA's research programs and opportunities. A secondary objective is to motivate K-12 students to excel in math and science courses necessary for entrance into aerospace programs at the universities and high tech positions in industry. Henderson University, in coordination 1 with Central Flying Service, conducts one of the few aviation degree programs in the nation. The University's Department of Aviation provides four-year programs in Airway Science Management, Airway Computer Science, Professional Pilot, and Aircraft Systems Management. The Arkansas Aviation Historical Society serves the entire state as the focal for the involvement of Arkansas' aerospace industries in community affairs, education, and economic development. In 1989, the Society, executives of aerospace companies, the Little Rock School District, and UALR came together to form the Aerospace Education Center Campaign Leadership. The unprecedented public/private partnership has planned an Aerospace Education Center. As the architect's drawing illustrates, the Center combines a museum of aviation history with an Aerospace Technology Magnet High School on a 19.8 acre tract at the Little Rock Regional Airport adjacent to the main terminal, Falcon Jet, and Arkansas Aerospace. The facility will cover 200,000 square feet, including common areas used by both the museum and high school such as the library, cafeteria, and theatre/ auditorium. The upper level of the museum will function as an educational resource for adult programs, and outreach for schools, state and nationwide through a satellite television uplink providea by the Arkansas Electric Cooperatives. The most comprehensive and largest technical and historical aviation and aerospace library collection outside of the Smithsonian's National Air and Space Museum was acquired for the Arkansas Museum of Aviation History. Virtually every civil and military aircraft, rotocraft, and spaceship designed and constructed throughout the world is represented in the collection by technical specifications, photographs, and historical descriptive information. There are well over 5,000 books, 50,000 journals, 200,000 photographs and transparancies, hundreds of rare collectable items signed by famous pilots and aviation personalities, original paintings, scale aircraft models, and unique aircraft parts. The Society has raised over five million dollars in gifts and pledges toward construction of the aviation history museum. The Little Rock School District has budgeted six million dollars for the construction of the Aerospace Technology Magnet High School from funds approved by voters at a property tax election in 1990. The Aerospace Education Center Campaign Leadership believes that Greater Little Rock's future rests on the vitality of its public education system. At all levels of the public education system, educators and industry must develop programs which give students the knowledge and skills that enable them to reach their full economic potential. While the Center will prepare students for aerospace careers, it will also focus the Central Arkansas community on commitment to excellence in education. In March 1819, Arkansas became a territory and the Arkansas Post, the state's first permanent settlement, became its capital. The little French village was soon deemed unsuitable mainly because of its location in the Mississippi Valley, far from the center of the territory. A year later the legislature moved the capital to Little Rock. Today with a metropolitan area spanning a seventy-mile radius, Greater Little Rock MSA is home to over 513,000 people. In the last quarter century, the Greater Little Rock MSA has almost doubled its population - approaching 1,200,000. Today, North Little Rock, the third largest community with a population of 62,000, and Little Rock are joined by the Arkansas River in Pulaski County. Twenty-seven percent of the MSA's population is under 18 years of age. Forty-four percent of the population is within the 18-44 age range. According to the 1990 Census, the population was ------percent Black, -----percent white. B. Little Rock School District The Little Rock School District, encompassing an area in excess of 100 square miles, is the largest school district in the state in terms of enrollment. Enrollment in the schools has increased from 25,975 pupils in 1989 to 26,212 pupils in October 1992. This increase is occuring at the junior high level. 16,538 pupils or 64% of the total district minority enrollment is Black. The percent Black student population exceeds the District 64% average in grades 5-9. The highest percent Black student enrollment is 69% in grade 8. Of the District's forty-nine (49) schools, thiry-six enroll pre-kindergarten or kindergarten through grade 6 students, eight enroll grades 7-9 students, and five enroll grades 10-12 students. Educational program/ school choices include elementary Incentive Schools, grade K-12 Interdistrict Magnet Schools, and elementary area schools. Chart A outlines the number and type of school programs. The text below Chart A defines each type of school and the rationale for selecting certain schools for this project. Chart A - The Organizational Plan for Little Rock Schools n = number of schools ~ie School andlor ucati on Pro IJ'llfll Bern mblry, ~es Pre-IC or -6 JwiorHi~, grades Hgh School~ grades m-1 n n n a.) Area. Md Feeder Schools 22 6 3 b) hcenti-.e Schools 7 NIA NIA c) lntetdistrict ~net Schools 6 2 2 d) h llerdistrict N onm~ net Schools 1 NIA NIA Total 36 8 s a) Area Schools - The elementary school that is the LRSD school for where a student lives is called an Area School. Each Area School feeds into a particular junior high and senior high school. The instructional program focuses on language arts, mathematics, science, and social studies. b) Incentive Schools - Incentive Schools are Pre K-Grade 6 elementary schools located within the immediate downtown area. The percent Black student enrollment for Incentive Schools ranges from 85% to 97%. These schools receive double financial resources to provide a teacher-student ratio of 1:20, additional instructional aides, permanent substitute teachers, and extended day-week-year learning opportunities. An individual learning plan is developed for each student based on the district K-6 core curriculum. Computer-assisted instruction, a student homework hotline, a parenting skills center, and a program for four-year olds are additional features that distinguish incentive from area elementary schools. c) Interdistrict Magnet Schools - As Chart A illustrates, Interdistrict Magnet Schools have been established at all three school levels - elementary, junior high, and senior high. Although operated by the Little Rock School District, students from North Little Rock School District and Pulaski County Special School District (PCSSD) are eligible for enrollment in accord with the desegregation plan. All Interdistrict Magnet Schools are racially balanced within the acceptable range of 55-59 percent black to 41-45 percent white. As Chart A illustrates, there are ten Interdistrict Magnet Schools. These schools provide, in addition to the regular core program, coursework based on a special curricular theme. The desegregation section found on page 8 further describes the purpose and thematic focus for these schools. Chart A indicates there are 31 area and feeder schools. Some of these area/feeder schools are located in racially isolated areas of the school district. This project will establish a new grade 7 -12 inter district magnet 4 of three junior high schools, and the new grade 10 - 12 Aerospace Magnet High School. Each of the three junior high schools exceeds the 64 percent district-wide average for black students. White students will be recruited from across district lines, primarily from North Little Rock and Pulaski County Special School Districts to racially balance the three junior high schools. The new Aerospace Magnet High School will begin magnet program operation for tenth graders the second year of the project. The grade 10 enrollment will consist of 300 grade 9 voluntary student transfers from this magnet's junior high enrollment who will be continuing the magnet curricular career path at the new Aerospace Magnet High School. This project, therefore, will establish the first Pulaski County Interdistrict Magnet continuation program in four secondary level schools consisting of grades 7-9 the first project year and grades 7-10 the second project year. In subsequent non-project years, the Aerospace Technology High School will add grade 11 in 1995-96 and grade 12 in 1996-97 through normal progession of the magnet's grade level enrollment each year. An Aerospace Technology Magnet has been designed in collaboration with the Aerospace Education Center Campaign Leadership, the Universities of Arkansas at Little Rock and Pine Bluff, Henderson State University, and Southern Arkansas University-TECH to attract this magnet's enrollment of 1,200 students. Students who attend each of the three junior high schools will also be eligible to participate in the magnet. The total grade 7 -10 aerospace magnet enrollment will be 2,797 pupils. The breakdown in enrollment is illustrated below: Incoming From outside of LRSD From within LRSD  270 grade 7-9 white students  630 grade 7-9 students  90 grade 10 white students  210 grade 10 students Subtotal: 1,200 Magnet students In-Attendance Enrolled in Magnet Junior High Schools  1597 grade 7-9 students Total: 2,797 students fl By the 1996-97 the Aerospace Magnet High School grade 10-12 enrollment will be at capacity which is 1,800 pupils. The high school enrollment coupled with the grade 7-9 junior high enrollment means the aerospace magnet has the potential to serve 4,597 pupils. The magnet enrollment will reduce black isolation in three junior high schools. C. Interdistrict and Intradistrict Desegregation Measures 1. Background Information on the Court Order The only image that some people have of Little Rock is the one formed in the Fall of 1957 when Governor Orval Faubus defied a federal mandate and tried to use the Arkansas National Guard to keep nine black students from entering Central High School. In Cooper vs. Aaron (1958), the Supreme Court stated that \"public opposition to desegregation of the races, no matter how deeply entrenched, could not be allowed to interfere with the full realization of the constitutional rights of black citizens.\" Twenty-four years later (1982), the Little Rock School District brought suit against North Little Rock and Pulaski County Special School District, claiming that the Constitution compelled the consolidation of the three districts into one governmental unit. This claim was rejected by the courts in 1985 and again in 1986\nhowever, the courts held that interdistrict constitutional violations had occured and must be remedied. Over the course of the next three years, various remedial orders were entered and further appeals were taken to court. Then, in 1988 and 1989, in a sharp departure from the adversary bitterness that had marked this controversy for over thirty years\nthe parties, including the Joshua intervenors representing the injured class of black schoolchildren and citizens, LRSD, the North Little Rock School District (NLRSD), the Pulaski County Special School District (PCSSD), and the State of Arkansas (Arkansas State Board of Education), agreed to settle the case. They submitted to the District Court four comprehensive agreements covering both interdistrict and intradistrict desegregation measures - agreements referred to by the parties as the \"settlement plans.\" They also submitted a separate but related document, called the \"settlement agreement,\" settling the financial liability of the State of Arkansas. The United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit reversed this judgement on June 27, 1989, and directed the District Court to adjust the boundary between the LRSD and PCSSD, to revise student attendance within each district to reflect the racial composition of the district, to maintain PCSSD's percent black student enrollment within the range of plus or minus 25% of the districtwide average of blacks by organizational levels\nand to limit busing, one-way, to forty-five minutes. 2. The LRSD Desegregation (Settlement) Plan (1989_) The following description is from the record of the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit: \"Eight of the 31 non-magnet elementary schools will be designated Incentive Schools. Initially they will be all black. These schools will receive compensatory-education programs and two times the level of funding for six years. The plan includes a detailed and volumous description of the kinds of programs that would take place at the Incentive Schools. A salient feature of these schools is a maximum effective student-teacher ratio of twenty to one. Twenty-two of the twenty-three remaining elementary schools will be called Elementary Academies. These schools will have projected student ratios of between 50 and 62 percent black. The other elementary school, Romine, would be an interdistrict school. Any white student can elect to attend an Incentive School, and a black student living in an Incentive School attendance area can opt to attend one of the Elementary Academies.\" 3. Interdistrict Desegregation Plan The Interdistrict Desegregation Plan is designed to achieve racial balance in the schools and districts of Little Rock, North Little Rock, and Pulaski Country Special School District through voluntary movement primarily to magnet prpgrams. Interdistrict schools are \"to obtain a ratio of between 60 percent and 40 percent of either race with the ideal goal of these schools to be 50 percent black/white.\" The Little Rock School District reports biannually the number and percent of students enrolled by racial background in each of the district's 49 schools. The above data is also sum~arized in terms of the total district (Pre-K-12). Interdistrict magnets are used to attract a specific student population from outside of the district and from within the original district to racially balance the school and district. Participation in a magnet is through student/parent choice. The Magnet Review Committee (MRC), created by the Eight Circuit Court of Appeals in September, 1986, oversees the implementation and operation of the interdistrict magnet schools. Comprised of representatives from each of the three districts, the Committee makes policy on issues such as magnet enrollment, transfers, building capacities, and operating funds. The Magnet Educational Team (MET) is the recruitment arm of the MRC, 7 and is responsible for public information and recruitment strategies and activities. In the Little Rock School District, six elementary schools, three junior high schools, and two high schools have magnet programs (refer to Chart A). Six (6) Interdistrict magnets (4 elementary, 1 junior high, 1 senior high) were created in Little Rock in compliance to the 1985 court opinion. Since 1987, five more interdistrict magnets have been established in the Little Rock School District. Magnets enhance the district's core curriculum. The specially designed curricula is the \"hook\" for attracting students across district lines. Individual interdistrict magnet school brochures provide a program description. Chart B summarizes the eleven interdistrict magnets in the LRSD by theme and number of schools participating at each school level. Chart B - LRSD Interdistrict Magnet Programs Theme School Level and # of Schools Elementary Junior High High School 1. Early Education* 1 2. Basic Skills 1 3. Basic Skills/Math-Science 2 4. Arts 1 5. Arts and Sciences 1 1 6. International Studies 1 1 1 Subtotal 6 2 2 Total Magnets -10  This is a Pre-K magnet housed in an Incentive School. The majority of LRSD Interdistrict. Magent Programs have been in operation since the 1986-87 school year. Magnet enrollment that year was 3,647 pupils. This year it is 7,250 pupils. The number of pupils enrolled in LRSD individual magnets has increased 50%. The Interdistrict Desegregaton Plan is more than just magnets. The Pulaski County M-to-M (Majority to Minority) Transfer allows a student to transfer from a district and school where his/her race is in the majority to a district and school where his/her race is in the minority. This means that black students in the LRSD may transfer to schools in North Little Rock and the Pulaski County Special School Districts, and white students in NLRSD or Pulaski County SSD may transfer to a Little Rock School District school. The Aerospace Technology Magnet will advance the voluntary desegregation efforts of the Settlement Plans. The district commits that it will \"maintain the facilities on a racially integrated basis into perpetuity.\" (Refer to 2/4/91 Amendment in Appendix.) The Little Rock School District Desegregation Plan, the Pulaski County Special School District Permanent Desegregation Plan, the North Little Rock School District Desegregation Plan, and the Interdistrict Desegregation Plan hold excellent promise for achieving unitary school systems in these three districts. (Exerpted from text of Settlement Plans - refer to Appendix.) 4. The Settlement Agreement The Settlement Agreement provided for payments by the State to the three school districts for desegregation purposes only. Under the agreement, the state makes payment to LRSD, NLRSD, and PCSSD totalling $107,723,175 over the next ten years. The state legislature and the Governor expended these funds without a court order. Moreover, the State also agreed to lend LRSD up to $20,000,000 over the next ten years. The loans are to be forgiven if at any time between the date of the agreement and December 31, 2000 the composite scores of LRSD black students (excluding special education students) on a standardized test agreed upon by the State and LRSD are 90% or greater of the composite scores of LRSD white students (excluding special education students). The settlement plans and the settlement agreement do not limit the District Court's ability to require the creation of additional interdistrict schools. They limit only how new schools may be funded. This funding may include payments by the State for majority-to-minority transfers, but it may not include the imposition on the State of a share of the capital costs of these new facilities. The agreement does not bar the creation of additional interdistrict schools\nit simply provides that, when created, they will not be funded in the same way as the six stipulation magnets. (Refer to entire text of Settlement Agreement in Appendix.) The District Court mandated the creation of the Office of Desegregation Monitoring staffed by a Monitor to supervise compliance to the four Settlement Plans and the Settlement Agreement. II. Needs Assessment The Little Rock School District, in conjunction with North Little Rock School District and Pulaski County Special School District, is implementing a court-monitored desegregation plan of which magnet programs and M-to-M transfers are a voluntary option to integrate the three individual school districts. Although Little Rock has achieved racial balance through the creation of interdistrict magnet programs in once racially isolated schools, there are still schools whose percent black to white enrollment exceed the 60%-40% ratio. The district wants to establish more across district voluntary movement of junior high students to bring racially-isolated schools within the balanced range. According to the 1992 LRSD Enrollment Survey, there are three junior high schools that meet this criteria. Three of the junior high schools have been targeted to attract white students primarily from school districts of the Interdistrict (Tri-District) Desegregation Plan, other school districts within close proximity of the Little Rock school districts, and private schools. This plan promotes desegregation. It increases the grade 7-9 white student enrollment at each grade level of three racially (black)-isolated junior high schools. The hook to attain this project's desegregation goals and objectives is the Aerospace Technology curriculum. Since 1900, the United States has become wealthy and powerful by exploiting the rapid changes taking place in technology, world trade, and the international political order. New developments in technology, international competition, demography, and other factors have altered the nation's economic and social landscape. There will be few jobs for those who lack adequate science/technical knowledge and who cannot read, follow directions, or use mathematics. Higher skill requirements of the economy suggest that schools must impove the preparation of the nation's youth in order to economically compete in the global marketplace. This can only be accomplished if the schools have excellence in technology education, communications, problem-solving, and scientific and technological literacy. This district believes it is absolutely necessary to help students understand their technological future if they are to function as responsible, productive members of a competitive society. This district also believes this endeavor must be a cooperative and concentrative effort with this area's prime employers, the aerospace/ aviation industry, the State Department of Education, the Universities of Arkansas, Henderson State University, and Southern Arkansas University-TECH. The aerospace technology education magnet has long range impact for desegregation in the Little Rock School District. First, it involves further voluntary movement of non-district white students to prevent the progressive, increasing isolation of predominantly black junior high schools. Second, this project has carefully planned for a new racially balanced high school to prevent racial isolation in the existing high schools. Between October, 1987 and October, 1992, the Black enrollment increased by 9% from a 51 % Black average to a 60% Black 10 average. The increase will continue due to the progression of the junior high enrollment (69% black average) through the grades. Finally, this district is confident that the aerospace magnet will attract and retain a new enrollment of 360 grade 7-10 white students while maintaining the current enrollment. These are the reasons: 1. \"Aerospace Technology\" is a statewide public education and economic development effort in accordance with the Arkansas Aerospace Task Force and its creation of the Arkansas Aviation and Aerospace Commission through passage of State Senate Bill 35. Their mission is to provide \"the knowledge and skills that will allow students to reach their full economic potential.\" 2. The Stipulation and Consent Order of February 1991 amended the LRSD Desegregation Plan to include the Aerospace Technology Magnet School(s) and their maintenance as racially integrated facilities. 3. The public and private contributions of funds for up to 6.5 million dollars to construct the aviation history museum which will implement curricular activities during and after magnet school hours in coordination with the magnet's specialized curriculum. 4. A successful millage campaign approved by voters for six million dollars to construct the Aerospace Magnet High School. 5. The Aerospace employment need for a skilled workforce is well known in Arkansas. Specially-trained employees are required to meet new contracts for aircraft and the employment vacancies listed by the Little Rock Airport Commission. Technology education is addressed in conjunction with the study of applied mathematics and physical science. More science and mathematics have been built into the existing curriculum. The academic and technology-integrated curriculum begins in grade seven to better prepare the minority student for future employment, college, and success in finding his/her niche in a technological society. Because of the strong aerospace industry and university linkage, and the hands-on problem solving approach used to learn the curricula, the district foresees the inclusion of some Little Rock elementary schools in the near future. Need 1: The Reduction and Prevention of Minority Group Isolation There is a need to establish a new interdistrict magnet at the junior high level to racially balance three schools. An end-of-project enrollment of 2,797 will enable each of the aerospace magnet schools and total magnet enrollment to reflect a 11 black/ white ratio of between 60 and 40%. The goal reflected by the% black figure in Table 1 is to reduce racial isolation by increasing the number of white pupils in three Little Rock junior high schools. This will bring the junior high school% black student enrollment in line with the Interdistrict Desegregation Plan goal of 50% black/white. TABLE 1 Reduce Now End of Project Receiving Schools % Black % Black 1. Cloverdale JH 73.7 50.0 2. Forest Heights JH 70.4 50.0 3. Southwest JH 75.3 50.0 The goal reflected by the percent black figure in Table 2 is fo prevent black group isolation in the new high school. This will be accomplished through voluntary movement of grade nine pupils from the three aerospace magnet junior high schools. The grade nine enrollment includes M-toM transfers from NLRSD, PCSSD, and other school districts not a part of the Interdistrict Magnet Desegregation Plan\nand LRSD pupils provided such movement does not negatively impact the racial balance of the sending junior high schools. This will racially balance the new high school in accordance with the Interdistrict Desegregation Plan. TABLE2 Receiving School New High School Now % Black 70.0* End of Project % Black 50.0 *based on the % black student enrollment average for the desegregated sending junior high schools located in the attendance area of the new high school. 12 Program Goal 1: To reduce or prevent racial isolation in the Little Rock School District Objective 1.a: By September, 1993, the district will reduce racial isolation through recruitment of white students from out-of-district to aerospace magnet programs. The aerospace magnet program will be balanced when the percent black to white figure is within the 60%-40% balanced range or is 50% black/white. Reduce % Minority % Minority Magnet School Before After 1. Cloverdale JH 73.7 50.0 2. Forest Heights JH 70.4 50.0 3. Southwest JH 75.3 50.0 Objective 1.b: By September, 1994 the district will racially balance the new high school through voluntary transfers from the grade 9 continuing magnet enrollment. The new high school will reflect a 50% black/white ratio. Magnet School New High School Prevent % Minority Before 70.0 % Minority After 50.0 Need 2a.1: Strengthening the Knowledge of Academic Content For the past two decades in America, the low level of academic achievement in our secondary school has spelled disaster for our youth and for our economy. The statistics are alarming: a. Ninety-three percent of 17-year olds do not have the capacity to apply mathematical operations in a variety of problem settings. An increasing number of the nation's students are ill-prepared for college courses or jobs that require technical skills. (National Assessment of Educational Progress 1988, p.# 2) b. For generations traditional prejudices have encouraged mathematics achievemmt in only a pcrtioo ct the student pq,ulatia, - middle class white males. Females and minaities with the exceptioo a Agan-Americans were 13 perceived as beth Niess capalie\" cf learning mathematics, and needing\" it less. (Mathematics Education - Wellspring cf U.S. Industrial Strength, December 1988.) c. In lxxh participation and achievement, American students in science and mathematics are lagging behind previous years and ether countries. (Science and Engineering Indictors, Natienal Science Board, 1990.) d. Only aboot twenty percent ct 10th graders believe that bidogy, chemistry, physics, er gecmetry are needed to qualify fer their first chcice occupatiert Only twenty-eight percent believe they need algebra ( Lengitudinal Survey ct American Yooth, 1988.) e. Schods must imprC1o1e their science instructim to allo.v the nation to base its ecmcrny en high technology. New programs must be developed and strategies reexamined to achieve the sharp focus required. (The Triangle Coolitien fer Science and Techndogy Education, 1988.) Acccrding to the results ct the National Science Foundatien's nationwide study, students are net receiving enoogh hands-a, labcratcry experience. f. The 1.25 grade-level-equivalent decline in the academic achievement cl high schod seniors to.vered the natien's productivity by $86 altien in 19'ir1 and will tower it by more than $200 altien annually by the year 2010 (Journal ct  Currio.ilum Studies, 1989). Studies demcnstrate that ccrnpetence in reading, writing, mathematics, science, and proolem solving are strongly related to productivity in alma\nt all j~ At the histcric education summit, September 1989, President Bush and the natim's gC1o1emors agreed to six national perlcrmance gools in educatim to be achieved by the year 2000. These two impcrtant goals were among those adq,ted: Goal IV - Science and Mathematics U.S. Students will be first in the wortd in science and mathematics achievement The pocr standing ct U.S. students en intematicnal assessments ct mathematics and sdence achievement is no accident, says a new ASCD task fcrce repcrt.  It results frcrn systemic proliems in the quality ct o.irric:ulum and instruction in the United States, the unequal cppcrtunities afferded different students, and peivasive o.iltural beliefs that do little to support high mathematics and science achievement The ASCD t~ fcrce repcrt dtes foor majcr factors a,nttibuting to lo.v U.S. student achievement in mathematics and science. These are: 1) Rdalivdy few :stadmls take uxases that indude high-tevd a..th:id in malhmaalics and sdence Fewer than half c:A students take a chemistry er algrel:ra n course and fewer than ooe in five Erv'er take a rourse in physics, trigonanetry, analysis/precalo.ilus, er calo.ilus. Mcreover, the  Aasl'i!'iCll fq 'i!$11'1Y11iw and Cynja,lwn Pevelq,nwtt. Raising Our Sights Jrrp-rovtng u.s. AchieYa'IW!t tn Mathematics and SdenC!f, DlarnlB' 1991, p. 6 14 widespread tracking a students means many pupils - partirularly minaities - are never required to learn high-level content. 2) Wlwaallcs and sdenm rmrimlmn\\ as wdl as the ledt-11:s and as!lll!S!IDr\"'l!lll!!lldslS tinted tollwm. fail torefted 811: '\"flu.tiers d knowledge\" about how ddl~ lean best. U.S. mathematics and sdence rurrirulums saa\nftce depth fer coverage, dm't take advantage c:J techndogies ... fail to make camectims amcng the disdplines, and generally ignere the real-life experiences and oognitive develq,ment of students. In general, students assume a passive rde, with teamer talk, textbooks, and worksheets predcrninating. The Natimal C.enter fer Educatim Statistics study recently documented the percmtage a 8th graders whose science teamers ronducted sdentific experiments. Bdh Catholic and private - other religious and ncn-religioos schods - science teachers sutpassed public sdlcds science teachers m frequency -- ance per day, and mce per week - fer prCNiding experimentatim in sdence (Educatim Weelc, September 1992). 3) lr.sbudi..a does Id reflect the need fir all stud1:11ts to llliti1lel c:hailengin\u0026amp; cudeiiL The training and suppcrt afferded teachers too aten fail to retlect the mallenge a delivering high-level cx:ntent Teamer preparatim and inservice suppcrt, dass size and teaming Iced, and teachers' oppcrtunities fer crllal:x:ration and dec:isicn making all hinder the delivery a pdent instruction. 4) Odtur.ai values and dher fa.tms antn\"bule to the belief._, fa many sludenls. high addc.:wtid in malh and sienm is not wafh slrMng for ats unallalnalJle. Except fer a small number a highly mctivated students, many pupils appear to be swayed by di~raging rultural attitudes toward math and science prctidency. In additim, the United States is ooe a very feN industrialized demcx:rades that does nct proode strmg incmtives (such as better jcb\n) to students who do well in tough high sdlcd math and science coorses. The Natimal Science Board and the ~D Panel urged that all students should be required to take math and science a full four years in grades 9-12. The Natiooal Crundl a Teachers a Mathematics, the Natimal Science Teachers' Assodaticn, and the American Associaticn fer the Advanament a Science also stated that math and science rurrirulums should cx:nnect learning to werk, integrate principles frcrn the two fields and other disciplines, and take better advantage a technologies. Similarly, grooping students by ability and tradcing shoold be eliminated. Natimwide research m tradcing suggests that being placed in a low ability track effectively slams the gate oo any passil:ility that a student can take ro.irses leading to cdlege (Natimal Educatioo Lmgitudinal Study a 1988). 15 Gaal III - Student Adtievement and Otizenship American students will leave grades foor, eight, and twelve having demcnstrated canpetency in challenging subject matter induding English, mathematics_ science, histcry, and geography\nand every schcxi in America witl ensure that all students team to use their minds wett so they may be prepared fa responsilie citizenship, further learning, and productive employment in our mcx1em ecmany. In respmse to Goal ni the Secretary ct Labcr's Canmissioo oo Achieving Necessary Skills (SCANS) issued its initial report, What Werk Reqires of Schools. This repcrt identified a three-part foundatioo - oosic skills, thinking skills, and personal q.ialities - that witl be at the heart ct jd:\u0026gt; pertcrmance both fa students gang directly to wak and those planning further educatioo. The SCANS three-part foondatioo and the ASCD panel's science and curriculum recommendations indudtng mere aedit hoors wilt be inarpcrated into the project design. In March 1992, representatives fran the fdlo.ving Arkansas educatioo and industry grrups met to discuss the knowledge and academic ampetendes that students shootd possess to sucx::eed in preparing fer aeraspace/aviatioo careers:  Aerospace industry executives  Aerospace Educatioo Center Campaign Leardership  Aviation Historical Society  State Department ct Educaticn Mathematics and Science Consultants, and the Associate Director fer Instructional Programs in Vocational and Technical Education  FAA Air Traffic Manager  LRSD Superintendent a Schods  UALR Schcrl ct Science and Engineering Essentially, the magnet witl strengthen the academic achievement ct magnet work-bamd or cr.itege-1::n.md students in mathematics_ science, techndogy, and ammunicatioo \u0026lt;D'llpetendes in oourses equivalent to cr.itege preparatcry curriculum. Aditions to rurrent typical faeign language oourse ctferings witt indude Russian, Japanese, and German. The planned magnet program ct studies wittt be based oo the Arkansas Plan fer Tech Prep, 2+4+2+2 (February, 1992). Industry represEntatives pointed rut that traditiooat oourses\" in general science and mathematics_ gecrnetry, algel:ra, trigooanetry, and English do nct emphasize enoogh practical applicatioos ct a:,ntent, especially these related to the high-tech 9know-how,  atility-t\u0026lt;Xio\" required in industry. It is imperative that industry and the public schods wcrk together to hlild strong, relevant science/math/ ammunicatioo/techndogy stand into the curriculum. Relevant curriculum 16 TABLE 3 - The Arkansas Minimum Perfcrmance Testing Pr~am - Grade 8 Basic Ski11s A. Mathematics Numeration  ldent. whole num. place value  Recog. whole num./word name  Round whole numbers  Recog. dee. word name/std. fm  Compare decimals Whole Numbers  Add whole numbers  Subtract whole numbers  Multiply whole numbers  Divide whole numbers  Solve Reading Problems B. Science Earth History  Define Earth History terms  Identify evidence which supports theory of plate tectonics Matter and Earth Materlala  Identify characteristics of matter, rock types, minerals  Identify particles of nucleus/energy levels of atom  Define pH Earth Process  Define earth processes terms  Identify agents of erosion 18 Rational Numbers  Change Fraction/equivalent  Add/subtract fractions  Change Fraction to Decimal  Add/subtract decimals  Multiply decimals  Divide dee. by whole number  Write percent as decimal Measurement  Select metric/custom meas  Determine line seg. length Geometry  Identify Shapes  Find perimeter ' Probablllty/Statlstlca  Inter. charts/tables/graphs Meteorology  Define meteorology terms  Identify major cloud types, layers of atmosphere/gases used, air pollutants and their sources, four types of precipitation  Identify weather instruments  Identify lightning causes  Interpret data from a temperature graph Oceanography and Watercycle  Define Oceanography terms  Identify water cycle  Identify causes of water pollution Universe/Astronomy  Define universe/astronomy terms Energy/Natural Resourc  Define environmental terms  Identify/classify natural resources as renewable/non-renewable means the ccnnectedness between wcrk and the magnet's specialized cunicula The magnet program must also articulate oourse ccntent and acareer ladder fran LRSD to UALR in Engtneertng Techndogy and LRSD to Henderscn State University in Aviattm. 1. State cl Arkansas Basic Skills Testing The Arkansas Minimum Performance Testing Program is the mandated state effa1 fer repcrting the number and percent of grade 3, 6, and 8 students displaying mastery in reading, mathematics, language arts, scien~ and sod al studies. LRSD minimum perfcrmance testing results fer all students and fer students categcrized by race (Black and White) dOCllment national mathematics and science findings locally, and also ccnfirm the opinion held ty industry on ccntent tested. Tal:ie 3, frund m the cppa\nite page, displays what basic skills are tested in mathematics and science An analysis a what is tested and how is indicated in the ccnduding statements below Table 3. This informattm is pcrtrayed to show the need fer a rigcroos mathematics and science linked program 17 Test items fer science and mathematics reflect kna.vledge and slcills typic.al of an upper elementary grade program Measurement and gecmetry is minimal. Testing ct physic.al science CX11cepts is limited. Test items indicated by' the werds recognize, identify, determine, select, define, ask students to recall infonnattcn, the la.vest level ct thinking per Ilcx:m's Taxcnomy. Conduding Needs Statements It interdistrict and district magnet students are, by the year 2000, to leavt. grade 8 having demcnstrated ccmpetency in challenging suqect matter, then this interdistrict magnet must provide the fdlowtng:  The applicaticn ct mathematic.al skills in science thrrugh a hands-en industry-relevant program which measures student ruta:mes thrrugh perfcrmance-based assessment.  Academic antent strengthened by' ccnnecting ooncepts fa earth, life, and physical sciences to engineering tedmdogy and aviattcn, and teaching fer a:nceptual understanding.  An instructiooal approach with 100% utilizaticn ct the science process slct11s and experimental design.  The use ct technology as an instructicnal tod in anjuncticn with ccmputer simulatioos and applicatioos fer rearding and interpreting data. TaHe 4 repats the percentage ct grade 8 students (ct the Aerospace Magnet junicr high schools) passing the Arkansas Minimum Perfamance Testing Program by race and gender catagaies as ccmpared to the percent ~ng fer all students in the district. TABLE 4 - The Arkansas Minimum Perfamance Testing Program - Grade 8 Academic Area Junior Hlah SchooUDlatrfct Percent Passlna All Students White Students BlackStudents SCIENCE Male Female Male Female District  Coverdale JH 64 95 79 70 48  Forest Heights JH 62 83 96 49 53  Southwest JH 46 n 33 46 35 MA THEMATICS District  Cloverdale JH 86 95 89 83 85  Forest Heights JH 80 87 93 70 81  Southwest JH 75 87 76 69 73 19 Results dearly sho.v there is a disparity in mathematics and sdence perfcrmance between white and 1:iack students. Major differences in the percent passing rate occur between 1:iack and white males in ooth sut\nect area5i and white and 1:iack females in sdenc:e. The wide race-gender perfcrmance gap substantiates the need to strengthen how sdence is taught to ensure equal aa:ess to.vard progress in the cxre curriculum 2. Stanford Achievement Test. Eighth Editim Students in the Little Rock School Ilstrict also take the Stanford Achievement Test each Spring. Stanford assesses achievement in all cxntent areas - Reading, :Mathematics, Language, Listening, Science, and Social Science. The Science Sllrtest reflects the natimal trend in science curriculum to.vard emphasizing a:ncepts ct science rather than isolated facts. HONever, Stanford uses the traditimal divisims - physical science, 1:idogical sdenc:e, and earth/space science as the vehicles fa testing skills and understanding ct basic oona?pts. The prqxrtims in which the area.5 a science are represented m the Sllrtest retied the emphasis each receives natimally. In mathematics, Stanford has three Sllqec:ts: Cmrepts a Number, :Mathematics Computaticn, and :Mathematics Applicatims. Special soores in using Jnfamation and Thinking Skills are derived fran an evaluatim ct responses students make to items embedded in several Sllrtests such as Mathemati~ Applicatims, Science, Scx:ial Science, Language, and Reading Canprehension. Grade eight and nine beio.v nam percentile scxres fa students enrdled in the three magnet junior high schods are sho.vn on the next page in Tatie 5 fa :Mathematics, Science, Using Jnformaticn, and Thinking Skills. Results are expressed as the percent ct students in q.iartiles me and two who scxred at a beiON a specified percentile scxre. Taal district percentile scxres are used as a basis fa cx:mparism to individual schod results. 20 G R A D E 8 9 8 9 8 9 8 9 Content Area by Quartiles DISTRICT N = 1669 N = 1625 SCHOOLS Cloverdale JH N =214 N = 199 Forest Heights JH N=205 N =210 Southweat JH N = 167 N = 183 TABLE 5 - Stanferd Achievement Test Spring 1992 Grades 8 and 9 Percentile Sa:res Mathematica Science Us~n Info. Pcentffe ecore Pcer1tlle ecore P  ecore 01 02 01 02 01 02 -  I 17 35 23 40 22 41 13 29 27 45 28 46 15 28 21 36 17 35 13 23 27 39 26 43 15 31 21 40 20 38 18 30 30 50 31 51 13 23 21 36 20 35 9 21 24 36 26 43 Quartile 2 - 50% cl students sccred at er beiow these sares Quartile 1 - 25~ cl students sccred at er beiow these sares Thlnklnff Skills Pcer111  ecore 01 02 20 40 23 41 17 34 21 55 15 35 22 43 17 28 20 36 Results indicate, e,ccept in a,e instan~ that prcposed magnet schods have sares lower than the district. In oontrast to the Arkansas Minimum Protidency Testing, students faired better in sdence than in mathematics. Spring 1992 was the first time the LRSD has given the Stanferd Achievement Test The percentile sares shown in Table 5 will serve as baseline data fer devEicping this magnet's student performance oojectives in the academics. Need 2a2: The Underrep-esentation cl Mincrities in Science and Math The Congres.5iaially estaliished Task Ferce a, Wanen, Mincrities, and the Handicapped in Science and Technology report, 0tanging Amaica: The New Face ct Science and Engineering, fwnd that Blacks, who romprise 12% ct the U.S. pqrulation, make up just 2~ ct all sdentists and engineers. The findings are especially 21 unsettling considering changing demographics. Prqectia,s indicate that by the year 2000, Blacks and Hispanics a:rnl:ined will make up 47% a the American students enrdlment. As a result it is imperative that the naticn and local school districts take extraordinary steps to prepare minorities fa- greater levels a partidpatia, in science, math, and engineering. The Quality F.ducatia, fa- Mina-ities Plan fa- improving sdence and mathematics instructia, nationally calls for q.iadrupling the number c:i mina'ity students receiving bachela-'s degrees in the sciences and engineering from 17,000 in 1987 tt, 68,000 ~ 2000 (F.ducatia, Week, April 1992). In the Little Rock Sd\\cxi Ilstrict 68% c:i the grade 7-9 enrollment is Black. This is a 7% inaease over 1987 figures. LRSD anticipates a:ntinued gains in the number/ percent a Black students. The aitical issue c:i underrepresented minorities, i.e. B1acks, and the need to 1:ring Blacks up to parity in perfa-mance and graduaticn rates, and in cdlege enrdlment is a goa1 a the LRSD as evidenced in the Pulaski County School Desegregation Case Settlement Plans and Agreement:  If any a the Incentive Schcrls remains rada11y identifialie (80% or ma-e Blade) after six years, LRSD has explicitly a:mmitted itself to cn1tinue pr~ viding a:rnpensata-y and enhancement funding (refer to page 4).  1t at any time between the date c:i this agreement and December 31, 2000, the a:rnfX]Site sares a LRSD Blade students (exduding special educatim students) a, a standardized test are 90% a- greater a the cxmpa\nite scores a LRSD white students (exduding special educatia, students), the esaONed funds will be paid to LRSD and any wtstanding loans wi11 be fa-given. The intent is that LRSD wi11 receive 20 millicn ddlars plus any accrued interest if its goa1 c:i in~ing student achievement is reached and that the State will be repaid in fu11 amwnt a all loans plus interest if the LRSD does nd reach its goal (September 1989). The magnet enrolls 1,571 Blade students. Curria.tlum focuses a, math/science cn1tent as related to careers in the Aera\npace industry. Additimally, the magnet provides the student with nine (9) career cpticns artiallated to university programs. This magnet was purposefully designed to lay the fwndation fa- later academic perfamance and interest in math and science related fields. Induded in the design is career cnmseUng. Career camseling will stress in the student selfworth, motivaticn, and a:rnmitment to accxmplish personal goals in learning and in Aera\npace career preparatirn. The sdlcxi district, industry, and higher educatim believe this ailaborative etfm to develcp a high tech, marketalie skills magnet wi11 a:nttibute significantly to raising Black student acheivement in mathematics and science, and to increasing the number a blade students receiving associate and 1:adlelor degrees in engineering tedmdogy and airway science. 22 Need 2h ~etc.ping Marketarie Technical Skills  America's on~axnmanding lead in the aitical techndogtes driving ea:nanic growth and natialal security is selwsly threatened by faeign ampetitas,  the Coondl al Competitiveness said in its repcrt Gaining New Grwnd: Technd~ Ptiatties fa America's Future. The term High-Tech is used to describe a wide variety c:i rosinesses and industry which indude: aercspace, a:mputers and software, telecx:1rn11unications, electralic compments, medical technology, instruments fa measuring and cxntrolling manufacturing proces.5es, energy, environmental, phctographic, lasers and cptical, and data processing services. The Natialal Center fa Advanced Techndogies (NCAn a the Aerospace Industries Asscx:iatial (AIA) Key Techndogies fa the Year 2000 Program have indentifted these high-priaity techndogies:  Ccrnputatialal Science  Satware ~elcpment  Advanced Metallic Structures  Advanced Composites  Superconductivity  tntra-Reliarie Electralic Systems  Artificial lntellegence  Airtreathing Prcpulsial  Rodcet Prcpulsion  Optical Information Processing  Advanced Senscrs These techndogies represent a shared view a U.S. technology requirements. Gitical technologies in Engineering Prcxiudial and. Electronic Canponents where the United States is falling behind a will net have a presence are represented in Tatie 6 al the next page.  U.S. Departmens of Comnerce anl W'ense\nW.te House Clflce of SdCIICe and Ta::hnology (Refer to Appendix for defintions anl list of CX\u0026gt;nlributing orgarizali0111.  23 TABLE 6: Tedmd~es in Which the United States is Weak, Losing Badly, er HAS LOST Engineering and Pnxbilc:n Tedmdqpes  Design for Manufacturing  Design a Manufacturing Processes  Aexilie Manufacturing  High-Speed Machining  Predsim Machining and Perming  lntegratim c:J Research, Design, and Manufacturing  Integrated Orwit Fabricatim and Test Equipment  Rolx)tiQ\nand Autanated Equipment  Tctal Quality Management Eediud~ G.up.ai.erds  Memory Cllips  Printed Orcuit Board Techndogy  Optical lnfcrmatim Sterage  Multichip Packaging Systems  Liquid Crystal Displays  Electro StatiQ\nSwrce: Ca.mdl m Canpetitiveness\npartial listing This infcrmation has implicatims fer the need a this magnet to - teach industrial relevant technology skills in state-of-the-art technology laooratories - place a heavy fcx:us m the application c:J scientific knowledge - use engineers and technicians fran industry as instructors - provide industry-msed learning experiences for students. Students in this magnet are primarily being trained as technicians. Technicians working with autcmated equipment must be familiar with lxth software and hardware used by a:,mputers and miaoprcx:es\u0026amp;rs. The development, design, installatim, calil:ratioo, manufacture, assembly, and fabrication processes using sophisticated equipment, tools, machines, and canputers require a roml:ination a knowledge and skills extending far beymd the simple fail-safe mechanical devices c:J a few decades ago The aera\npace industry and its array c:J suppliers and sub-cxntracters are among those that will increasingly require techndogically literate entry level werkers. The American Vocatimal As\u0026amp;x:iation (AV A) and the Center fer Oc:cupatimal 24 Research and I:evelcpment (CORD) pcint wt that technicians currently being prepared for entry in tana-row's werk ferc:e shwld possess several important characteristics. A fei.v ci these are highlighted belo.v because they have ramificatiais on the curriculum desaibed later. 1. , 3. 4. A BROAD KNOWLEDGE BASE: They must possess fundamental academic skills in reading, cxrnmunicating, computing, and applied science. COMPUTER LITERACY: Many high tech processes are cxrnputerized. Thus workers shwld pa\n~ a basic understanding ci a::mputers and their applicaticrts in manufacturing and management infamatia, systems. At base, students should have the kno.vledge necessary to ~ and use miaopr~s er intelligent computer terminals using cxrnmerdally available scitware packages. AWARENFSS OF A RAPIDLY CHANGING WORK ENVIRONMENT: Develq:,ments in CAD (cxrnputer aided design) and CAM (computer aided manufacturing) alaig with advances in telea::rnmunicatiais, integrated circuits_ laser/c:ptics and ether computer applicatims assure that techndogy will continue to grow and expand. Thus, technical werkers require a broad base in technical and mathematical kno.vledge so that they can learn nei.v techndogies and assimilate nei.v infa-matia, after they are employed. UNDERSTANDING OF A SYSfEMS ORIENTATION: Modern manufacturing techniques are cxrnprised ci a:mplex inter-related systems of electrical, electraiic, pneumatic, hydraulic, thermal, and q:\u0026gt;tical devices. People who werk with such equipment need a broad understanding ci such systems. Specialists in each ci these fields will still be required, but a grasp ci the overall systems ci produdia, will be impcrtanl This grasp calls fer an interdisciplinary approach to training. 'With the diversity a high technologies, the need fer new \u0026lt;XJJrses is great. This will require LRSD to integrate techndogies and new content into easting \u0026lt;XJJrses as well as aeate specialized \u0026lt;XJJrses a study. Some examples in this magnet are Computer-aided Design (CAD) Applications_ Lego Logo Rdxxics_ High Tech Presentatiais, Aitway Science Olrriculutl\\ and Quantitative Literacy fer ~ Althwgh LRSD has prepared \u0026lt;XJJrse desaiptions and wtlines (ref er to appendix), additicrtal a:Jltent outlining labcratcry and design prqects need to be develq:\u0026gt;ed with aera.pace/aviatia, representatives and the university. Hight and space cmcepts need to be infused into the new science curriculum thus aeating the aerospace science \u0026lt;XJJrse a study. In additia,, \u0026lt;XJJrse content needs to be incaporated into an assessment design that measures actual student performance in academic and werk-based learning requirements. 25 Need 2c Empl~t and Training Needs in the Aera\npace Industry Tcxiay in our country there is a aitical need for highly-skilled state-a-the-art technicians in the aeraspace industry. Aaxrding to testimeny by the Arlcansas Aerospace Task Face, Tue greatest chattenge is to aeate an educated workface able to rapidly meet the needs a the industry. Although there witt always be a need fa spedalized training, in the Ieng term mudl can be dene to better prepare students fa emplOjtnerlt Education is our largest investment in Arkansas and that investment prq,erty focused can be our ma\nt significant advantage CNer ether states. This statement parallels the disturting finding a the U.S. Labor IRpartment's Secretary's Canmission en Achieving N~ Skills (SCANS): Mae than half a all young peq,le leave schoo without the skills needed fa prcxiuctive empl~t. These young pEq)le witt face the tieak prospect a dead-end jdJ after dead-end jdJ interrupted only by periods a unemployment\" (Education Week, May t 992). Aax:rding to the Natienal Center en Educatien and the E\u0026lt;Dtany, the average skill level a graduates net lnmd fa cxilege is the functienal ecp.livalent a about a 7th a 8th grade achievement level. ~ at risk are students in the so-called general and vocational \"tracks. Because employers generally aren't interested in the oourses jdJ applicants have taken a the grades they have earned, these students have little inCEntive to take tough academic dasses a to earn high marks. As a result, high schod becanes a hdding tank fa tha\ne not gcing en to cxilege. Researdlers studying the wcrkface pcint to an aninous sign: gcx:x:i jct\u0026gt;s - the kind that ctfer reasonatie pay and the cppcrtunity to advance aleng a career ladder - are gradually being shut ctf to students fresh out a school. The ma\nt prominant explanation fa such findings is that while the skill and knowledge requirements fa entry and advancement in the wakf ace are rising, graduates are nd: being prepared to meet inaeased demands. New wakers must be aeative and respa-lsible proolem solvers and have the skills and attitudes on whidl employers can b.lild,  acxxrding to the SCANS Canmissicn \"Traditienal jct\u0026gt;s are changing and new job, are created everyday. High paying, b.lt unskilled jct\u0026gt;s are disappearing. What the Commissien calls '\"high-perfamance\" wakplaces are mae flexitie and rustaner aiented. Schcds must teadl the skills pocple need to be productive and adaptable wa-kers. A commitment to meet this challenge was adopted in a resolutia, by the Board ct Directa-s a the Oty a Little Rc:x:k to use ea:nanic develcpment funds to develq:\u0026gt; an Aerospace Museum and f:ducatien Center. Resduticns pertinent to the empl~t and training need fa this magnet are stated below: '\"Whe:eas. the dfy' d litlle Rak bas mailllained an eamanlc ceMqxueul fund so that the city Cilll enwmage .illld pUide lhe llliilllnlal3II d j~ and 26 'Whel zm dties and stales thmaghoat rm-naUcn cudinue lo me funds fa- eacn::ullc develcp:te4 to ptDde the amllon and ~ d ~ and \\\\k:ca. the d9 llwgh tis lmillDi~ Dewlqm.ad lbnd made availalJle S3 miOicn to fadlffale the aealim d mere than 3111 jdJs al Alkansash-iiifMI\n...t va...ca. dtiZl!IIS and bushrm have janm lcgellNS toplan fa ... ... ., .. e UliiSi:illll and the lit8e Rim Jtwg. iifMP \"fedmdogy Mag11et Sd1DCl (aflnfl'Ulty ti-. \u0026gt;en ,a e Cenlaj as part d the litOe Rim Abpn arm cnrp~ and \\WK.ca. the di wiD beudit .ind be slrmglhened by .. Jw-1 -,ae r..m11rtoaliitie rm- dtizms to be tralrel fajdJs in therelaled a,1-,:ae hdistrywhic:h is gt\u0026lt;Mingin little Ra:k.. Two SCANS repats outline the slcills students should be taught and what needs to be done to Effectively teach them. In additirn to the fourydatirn skills (refer to page 5), there is a set a five cx:mpetendes that are at the oore a jci:\u0026gt; pertcrmance. Acarding to SCANS these will be needed a all graduates, 1:xlth the cdlege-ba.md and those directly entering the wakfcrce. The five wakplace rompetendes are desaibed below:  Resam:es Fmployees need to be able to identify, organize, plan, and allocate resources (such as time, mrney, materials and facilities, and human resources).  hdapa50iwl stills. Employees should be able to wak effectively with ethers. F.xamples are theabilities to participate as a member a a team, teach ethers new slcills, serve dients or custaners, exercise leadership. negotiate, and wak with diverse people  lnfmmallm. Employees need to be able to acquir~ evaluate, interpret, and ccmmunicate informatirn, as well as to use amputers to process infcrmatia,.  Sy:stma. Employees must understand how social, aganizational, and techndogical systems wak and cperate effectively within them They must tllCllita and arred perfcrmance, improve the quality a prcx:1ucts and services in existing systems and develq\u0026gt; new a alternative systEms.  Tedwdcgy. Employees must be al:ie to judge which sets of prcx:edu~ tools, a machines, induding amputers and their programs, will prcx:1uce the desired results. They must be al:ie to set up and q,a-ate amputers and their programming systems as well as maintain and troubleshoot techndogy. 27 The Canmissirn's plan as detailed in America's Choice High Skills or Low Wages also reccmmends that: All students must meet a nalicnal slandard d educaticnal eca.tlena: by age 16 or SCDt themaftel'. Students passing a series d perfmnanm-based zu:\n:a:uls that reffed: the standard waild reaive a Certificale d Initial Maslesy. Nier t\u0026amp;Eiving the amfi~ sludmts waild diuaie to go to wak_ enter a ailegep1t, pttan, a study fa a tedmical or pde!liiicnal amfiClle. In this magnet's prqect design, the SCANS ccmpetencies will be inrotpcrated into the mathematics, science and technical crurses of study as well as the design for measuring student performance and the attainment d this magnet's program oqectives. The change this magnet envisions will require additirnal resoorces through the funding of this prgect. Amrng the most impcrtant will be investments in curriculum writing, teacrer training, technology and instructional material including oomputer-based and multimedia material. To address the employment and technical training needs, Little Rock's Aera\npace Campaign Leadership and Industry has turned to LRSD, UALR, and Hendersoo State University to develcp a better student. With the assistance of the United States Department of Educatirn and the Little Rod\u0026lt; Aera\npace Campaign Leadership and industries, LRSD beleives it can provide a state-a-the-art technology-driven Mathematics, Airway Science and Engineering Magnet Program which meets the purpa\nes, priaities, and special ccnsideratirns d the MSAP as well as addresses the natirnal imperative to maintain a wcrldwide canpetitive lead in techndogy. Progaan Goai 2 To strengthen the kno.vledge a Academic Crntent and to develcp marketable technical skills a students in project magnet schools. Oqective 2.a 1: Performance Assessment: Applied Science/Mathematics/Techndogy Integraticn with SCANS Wcrkplace Competencies and the Occupatioo Program Majors By the condusicn a the prqect period at least 80% of the grade 7-10 students enrolled in the magnet schoo program will have attained the Wcrk-Rea'f,Y Proficiency Levela en the LRSD-SCANS Perfamance-Based Assessment administered the first week d May. a What Wcrk Requires d School, a SCANS Report for America 2000, p. 24-29 (U.S. Department d Labor Secretary's Ccmmission rn A~ieving Necessary Skills. 28 b Perfamance Standards will be set the first prgect year when actual baseline data beccmes available. O1:-\nective 2.a2: Performance Assessment: Certificates ci Initial Mastery (CIM) By the a::nlusion of the prgect period in 1995, at least 90% ci the grade 10 students in the magnet program will have achieved a Certificate ci Initial Masterya as repaied on the student's Cumulative Resume and verified by the site magnet Assistant Principal. ac1M is defined as the attainment ci an overall standard. The overall standard will be estatiished by the end ci the first prgect year in relatirn to student ootcx:rnes repaied for d.Jjectives 2.a 1 and 2.b, and the Cumulative Resume. The Cumulative Resume will show prcticiency levels fcr the wcrkplace cx:rnpetencies and Aerospace Techndogy courses completed based on evaluatirn results reflected in Pcrtfdias and Perfa-man~Based Assessment materials. Leaming a Living: A Blueprint fcr High Perfcrmance. A SCANS Repcrt fcr America 2000, pages 60-68. Objective 2.b: Pcrtfdio Assessment By the ca,dusirn ci the project period, 80% ci the grade 7-12 students enrdled in the magnet schcxi program will scx:re at cr aoove an established competene,ya sare oo each ci foor ( 4) teacher and student selected SCANS Integrated Assignments. One repai cr assignment must be selected fran each of the four (4) major areas. The extent to which this d.Jjective is met will be determined by teacher records and verified by the site magnet Assistant Principal. aeanpetency will be defined as an average ci at least 2 on each report using the follCJNing scale: 4 Well beyond expec:tatirns fcr grade level\nextracrdinary. 3 Does better than expectatirns fcr grade level\ncx:rnpetent/fluent. 2 At level cr average performance fcr grade level\nappears cx:rnfaiable with demands ci prgec:t. 1 Approaching average pertcrmance for this grade level\nsome skill/ comprehensirn acquired. 0 Novice\nno evidence of relevant skill/ cx:rnprehension Computer Technology 1. Word Processing/ Keyboarding - Using proper keyboarding and editing skills to produce documents. 2. Graphic Design: Using the graphic program to produce graphics. 3. Communicatirns: Using speaking, writing, video cr hypermedia to 29 express an idea. 4. Programming: Being able to write a set d instruc:t:ioos in the hypermedia or LEGO/ LOGO environments. and Technology Lab 2000 1. 2. 3. 4. and Aeros_pace Science 1. Scientific Method - Experimental Design: Given a questicn er a prol::iem, students will fcrmulate a hypcthesis, design an experiment, observe and draw ca,dusions fran the data 2. Process Skills: Canparing, erganizing, categcrizing, relating, infening, applying. 3. Computer Technology fer Scientific Purpcses: Having a product that reflects the use ct computers, laser discs, VCR's, cala.tlators, and science equipment. 4. Self-Assessment/Self-Esteem: Student and teacher selected werk will be placed in individual student pcrtfdias. and Airway Science 1. 2. 3. 4. or Engineering Technology 1. 30 I 2. 3. 4. olective 2.d Program Effectiveness During June ci each prqect year, at least 80% ci the parents, students, and teachers will rate the fdlowing items \"effective\" oo a locally develc:ped survey:  breadth ci curriClllum  program qua! ity  parent training  teacher training  use of community resources  program ccntributions to career c:ptions  improved student achievement  pcsitive ccntributioo to student career plans By the conclusion of the project in 1995, the percent of Aerospace School students scoring in the second, third and fourth quartiles on the Stanford Achievement Test : in mathematics and science will exceed the percent of students scoring in the sec~nd, third and fourth  quartile~. in other LRSD schools_ in grades 8, 9 and 10. 31 I : Quality of Project Design The project includes the f dlowing topics: A OJerview: The Aera\npace Techndogy Curriwlum 1. Applied Science and Science Labcratay 2. Applied Mathematics 3. Computer Technology and the Canputer Tedmdogy Laboratay 4. Faeign Languages 5. Engineering Techndogy 6. Aviation 7. SCANS I\u0026lt;now-Ho.v 8. Work-Based and Wak-Site Leaming and Experience B. Aerospace Technology in Grades Seven and Eight (Junior High Level) 1. Content Knowledge in Mathematics 2. Content Knowledge in Sdence 3. Content I\u0026lt;no.vledge in Canputer Techndogy 4. The Techndogy Lab 2000 Cuniwlum Integrattoo c.enter 5. Infamatioo and Guidance  C Aerospace Technology in Grades Nine and Ten 1. Content I\u0026lt;no.vledge in Mathematics, Sden~ and Computer Technology 2. Content l\u0026lt;nONledge in Engineering Techndogy 3. The Techndogy Lab 2000: Scientific Uterac.y Center 4. Caltent Knowledge in Airway Science 5. Workplace Readiness and Industry/ Business Internships 0 . Instruc:ticnal Approaches and ft\u0026amp;essment a Student Perfamance 1. Learning in Caltm 2. Product Development Team.1/Cooperative Leaming 3. The Patfdio 4. Perfanance-Based Assessment E. Teacher and Student Organizatioo F. flexible Scheduling G. The Aviatiat Museum Educaticn Department Docent Program 1. Courses a Instruc:tioo 2. The Library 3. School Visitatiat Program 4. Planetarium 5. Imax Theater ! l The Aerospace Technology Curriculum ---------.... Applied Mathematica Aerospaoe Mathematics (7) Applied Mathematics I (8)  Applied Mathematics II (9) Oescnptive Geometry (10 Technical Algebra II (11) Ouant,tallve Literacy lot Aerospace (12) Technical Algebra I (8) Descriptive Geometry (9) Tecmical Algebra II (10) Advanced Algebra/ Trigonometry ( 11) Calcuus (12) Aviation Airway Science Intro AeronauticsA.ab (9) or General Aviation (9) or Machine Shop Technology (9) Programming Language (10) or Aircraft Systems Theory (10) or Powerplant Theory \u0026amp; Maintenance (10) Powerplant Theory (11) Of Electncal Circuit Analysis ( 11) Fortran..Cobol ( 11) or Av1at1on SaletyA..egislation/Air Transportation (11) Pnvate Pilot Cert.A.ab (12) Powerplant Systems (12) or Air Traffic Control\" (12) or Assembler Language \u0026amp; Operating Systems Internship I, II (11 , 12) Aerodynamics \u0026amp; Performance (12)  Classes w,11 be instructed ,n Museum of Aviation HistOfy - Comput Technology Integrated Software Applications and Logowriter Robotics (7) Hypercard.tiypermedia and Aerospaoe Pr9-CAO(8) HI-Tech Preeentationl (9, 10) Applied Comnulicallon (English) (12) I Foreign Language Japaneee or RuNian or~ or Spanish or German Magnet Course Sequences Grad 7-12 Title Ill  Magnet Schools Asaistance, Sec. 3003: Statement of PurJ)098 (2) - Courses of instruction to substantialy strengthen academe subjects and the tangible/ marketable vocational skills. --- Applied Science Aeroepaoe Science I (7) Aeroapece Science II (8) Aeroepace Biology (9) ~ Phyaical Science (10) I Chemistry (10) Aerodynamcs and Meteorology (11) Physics ( 11) Deea1)tive Mtro11omy \u0026amp; Physical Geology (12) Engineering Technology Intro. Concurent Ens\nneering (9) or km\u0026gt;. eon,,ue. Sc:lence (9) Coquer-Alded O.V, Appbtons (10) or Marulldwing E11gl11wtng Technology I, II (10, 11) E1ec:nl lice Engineer' ig TectuologyCAD I. II (10, 11) AdvMOed Con1)Ullr-Aided Design Applications (11) Progran'ln'ing tor Englneer:.ig Majors (12) Fabrication DNis,l Prqecta (12) or Mechanical Systems DP (12) or Manufacturing Design Project (12) Internship I, II (11, 12) - - H. The Staff Training Plan L The Aviation Museum Educaticnal Reswrce Center fer Teachers J. The Planning Canpcnent to Develc:p Aera\npace Tochndogy Magnet Curriculum fer the High Schoo K Bringing Students Fran Different Backgroonds Together L Staff Experience in and Knowledge d Curriculum Development and Desegregation Strategies M Addressing Educaticnal Needs Appropriate to Students Enrdled N. Parental Decisicn-Making and Involvement Each tc:pic is desaibed in detail after the averview to this secticn. A Overview What fdlows is a oomprehensive summary cl the Aera\npace Technology c:urridum As shown in the erganizaticnal chart below, the Aerospace Techndogy Magnet is erganized into two cxx:upatiooal program majers d nine career tracks and an interrelated academic and tedlndogy cxre of requirements ansisting of Applied Mathematics and Science, and Canputer Techndogy. The Aerospace Technology Curriculum Elective Elective Integration Core Integration Aviation Applied Engineering  Airway Science Science Technology Aitway Coml)IUf  Manufadl.ling Engineering Sa.nee Applied Technology A:lrway Science Mathematica Management * *  Electronics Engineering Alo-craft Systems Computer Technology Management Technology  Computer Engineering Aviation Maintenance Tedinology  Professional Pilot Foreign Language  Mechanical Engineering Tedinology A structured sequence ci courses has been specifically designed fcr each ci the three curricular canponents to enhance participants' prospects fcr immediate employment cr continued education following high school graduation. All magnet students in grades seven through ten will participate in applied mathematics and science, and a:mputer technology roursework each year. This means that magnet students will take one mere year d math and two more years of science than is required for high schoo graduation. All magnet students have the optirn of beginning f ereign language instructia, in grade 7, 8, er 9 in a,e language d their chcice. This allCMts for six years of c:x:ncentrated study d a global language. Magnet students will select ether the Aviatia, er Engineering Techndogy Occupational Magnet program majer and a career track within the selected occupatia,al area upa, entering grade nine. The magnet student will then fdlCMt the specialized course sequence throogh grade 12, thereby rompleting the program in his/her occupational program majer. The chart a, the cpposite page ootlines the curriculum by' a::rnprnents and grade levels fer the entire grade 7-12 aera\npace magnet. Grade 7-10 course sequences willl be implemented during the two year MSAP prqect period (1993-95). Grade 10 students will ccntinue the curricular path as eleventh graders in 1995-96 and as twelfth graders in 1996-97. The latter two years (1995-97) are not MSAP prqect years fer this particular application, theref er~ courses intrcx:iuced during these two years will be desaibed in the Canmitment and Capacity sectia, of this application. The magnet's articulated course sequences in Mathematics and Science, Aviation, and Engineering Techndogy are designed fer students to romplete in advance some requirements to.vard receipt a Federal Aviatirn Administration (FAA) certificates, and/ a Associate d Applied Science or Bachelcr a Science degrees. 1. Applied Science and Sdence Lal:xratg:y Aerospace Science ccntent will be presented in ccnnectia, with its applicatirns in aviatioo/space, design and production technology, and envirrnment protection. This will be aa::omplished throogh the reaganization a the district's science curriculum and the aera\npace science applications (refer to Appendix) to themes. Themes are ideas that integrate the ccncepts of different scientific disciplines. Crnnecting the impatant science ccncepts between existing curriculum and aerospace science with science themes will improve students' ability to make more meaningful the relatirnships between science c:x:nc:epts and ether related disciplines. Amrng the maja themes that will be used are tha\ne discussed in Science Fer All Americans: * Chapter 11, Common Themes, p. 155. See Appendix.  Systems  Coostancy  Patterns c:i O,ange  Scale  Model  Evolution Table 1 represents a pattern fer a a:ntent matrix that will be filled in with a:ncepts and thematic ideas. Table 1 - A Pattern for a Content Matrix Grade 7 8 9 10 Phyalcal Science General Science Earth Science Aerospace Science LHe Aviatlorv Product erw, a 11 a El Science Spece Engln..,ing .... Unifying Concepts Theme(a) Subconcepts The magnet's science teacher specialists wi11 use the pattern fer a a:ntent matrix to design the sa:pe and sequence d the Aerospace Science curriculum (grades 7-8) Aerospace lidogy (grade 9) Aerospace Physical Science (grade 10) in cxnjunctia, with the district's General Science and lidogy airticulum. Building the matrix will require that magnet teacher specialists have a cxncentrated pericxi d time free from teaching respcnsibilities. This applicatim asks for cuniculum writing time during the summers and after school hrurs to develop the matrix in collabcratim with the universities and industry. Implementatim of the matrix will be enhanced by student investigatim and experimentatia, in a laboratory setting. This program also requires a science labcratcry at each magnet site for students to experience hands-a, activities keyed to the matrix. The lal::x:lratcry will be set-up to indude scientific equipment and materials, fifteen canputers and canputer interface boxes, probeware, and software pad\u0026lt;ages that will allow students to simulate experiences and use canputer utilities (spreadsheet, graphing programs, database, wcrd processing). The district is asking fer magnet program assistance to enable its 1:fack students and incaning white students to participate together in these specialty-designed experiences. The lab will be staffed by a prqect-hired science teacher specialist who will be a member ci a,e of the magnet's Science/Math/TECH instructirnal teams. This instructia,al team will direct each ci its four teams of 30 magnet students in the labcratcry per the flexible schedule desaibed a, page __ . To determine impcrtant aspects of lal:xratory implementatia, major goals have been established. These are student attainment ci: Manipulative and canmunicative skills to indude the manipulation of materials and equipment, and the cdlectioo/ organizatioo/ canmunication ci information fran lalx:ratcry experiments and activities Ratiooal and aeative thinking precesses throogh obsetving and ccnducting statistical procedures, through cdlecting, dassifying, and measuring oqects\nthroogh indentifying and ccntrdling variables in ccntrolled experiments This goal invdves students in learning the scientific precesses ci cbserving, canmuni~ting, canparing, crganizing, relating, and applying. The district envisioos the fdlowing scenario as to ooe way magnet students witl learn in the special science laboratory: The Aerospace science teacher specialist prOv'ides an interactive video disc presentation desaihng gravity as fcrce. Because it is hooked to a canputer program, the infcrmatioo on the disk will be accessed in a variety ci ways (e.g., noo-linear). Throughoot the viewing ci the video, students will disa.iss gravity and fcrmulate answers to fellow students' questions about gravity a, ether planets in oor sdar system. To protide them with additiooal infcrmatioo, the students will have acx:ess to 1) the Aerospace Educatioo Center films, 2) university programs, and 3) a variety d other infcrmaticn sources available throogh satellite canmunicatirns netwcrks. Werking in teams, students will use a variety d canputer programs to simulate gravity in various envirrnments, logging infamation aboot each envirrnment into a spreadsheet using the graphing fundioo. They will use a wcrd processcr to reard and analyze their observatirns. Students will use telec:cmmunicatirns sdtware to seek advice from a NASA scientist atout findings frcrn their simulation studies and the relationship between these simulations and actual NASA expeditirns. They will prepare a aief video presentatirn, desaiang their experiences, to help other students understand gravity. The skills to implement videcxiisc instructirn and authcring programs will be taught in the Integrated Scttware Applicatirns and Hypermedia ccmputer cuurses. 2. Applied Mathematics As displayed in the Applied Mathematics box of the chart on page---, all grade 7 magnet students wiJt take Aera\npace Mathematics. Beginning in grade 8, two cuurse sequmce routes are depicted: A Applied Mathematics I (8) Applied Mathematics II (9) Desaiptive Geomeay (10) Technical Algetra (11) Quantitative Literacy fer Aerospace (12) n Technical Algebra I (8) Descriptive Geaneay (9) Technical Algetra II (10) Advanced Algebra/Trigonanetry (11) Calculus (12) Ca.irse sequence A was devised fer learners who have generally an eighth-grade, pre-algetra mathematics a:mpetency level. Coorse sequmce B captures the student whose perfcrmance indicates readiness fer algetra in grade 8. Beth CDJrses antain required antent knowledge which is supplemented ~ engineering er aviatirn related skills and activities. The engineering and aviatirn applications have been develq:,ed with industry and university persamel, are relevant to careers emphasized in this program, and are linked to the Aerospace Science and occupational curriculum Coorse antent is desaibed rn pages __ . 3. Computer Technol~y and the Computer Techndogy Latoratay Course crntent in Integrated Scttware Applicatirns, Logo.vriter Rolxtics, Hypercard/ Hypermedia, Aerospace Pre-CAD, and Hi-Tech Presentatirn will give students the backgroond of knONledge and skills needed to be competent a:mputer users in the Engineering Techndogy and Airway Science COJrsewcrk\nin the Techndogy Lab 2000\nand at the wcrksite. Canputer COJrse content reflects a se::iuential program d skill development and task ccmplexity invdving the learning of sdtware applications, specific programs, and multimedia equipment. To implement the OJUrsewcrk, this magnet program requires a ccmputer labcratay at the individual magnet sites. Canputer cwrsewcrk will require ooe ccmputer per student in a class. To accanodate the typical grade 7-10 class size, 30 Macintosh LC Ifs, 3 Laserwriter Ifs and 2 Imagwriter Ifs, Telea:rnmunications hardware/scttware, a Macintosh Quadra file server system, and Appletalk Netwerk (Ethernet) hardware will be needed for each lab. All programs will be stered oo the Quadra fileserver. Printers, the Quadra file server, and individual Macintosh ccmputers will be c:a,nected together into a network system. Via the network, students will acces.s and c:a,trd cx:ntent, applications, and infamatioo in the areas ci systems simulattoo, wcrd processing, Lego Logq rd:xJti~ and publishing. They will produce their own presentatioo material by importing so.md, graphi~ digitized phctographs to hypercard or laserdisc stacks ci their CJINn creatioo, and receive suppcrting visual imagery oo adjacent video mooiters. The 1~ netwerk wilt allow teachers and students to share files, scitware, and printers. In additioo, dassrcx:ms within the school, the fair magnet schools, and the museum will be tied In together to the Prqect Directer's Office allowing for additional netwerk services like electronic mail and database sharing that will be widely utilized fer ccilalxrative prqects amo.ing the Aerospace Magnet Schcds. Educational benefits of the Aerospace Magnet Netwcrk include:  Group document editing and management (student and teacher prqects).  Screen sharing giving the Prqect Director and teacher the capaality to view any Macintosh mooiter oo the netwerk.  Central database fer scitware documents, and aerospace magnet information.  Calendaring fer magnet and museum events.  Electronic Mail to speed up ccmmunicaticn and reduce paper. Hypermedia, Hi-Tech Presentatioo cwrse hardware requirements indude an Apple One Scanner, Apple CD 150, Videodisc Player, Macreccrders, Video recorders, Cama:rders, Video Digitizer, Roster Opps Board, and speakers. This hardware will be erganized Cl'\\ teacher and student werkstations. The ccmputer curriculum goals and oojectives statements found en page ---, and project o.itlines located in the appendix illustrate hew students will apply knowledge/skills attained within the disttid and aerospace techndogy curriculum in multimedia, team projects. The lessoo design and project ootlines spell rut the suqect area concepts er skill extensioos, the scttware program and applicaticn, student team activities, and product. Fer example, students will use canputer applic.atirns in spreadsheets to answer \"What If?\" questirns, to test hypctheses, and to ca1struct famulas pertaining to mathematical and logic.al functirns. Students will e,cpress ideas via wcrd processing and create simulatirns cr variws situatioos using hypercard. In progamming, students will prcx:iuc:e output in text, graphics, and rdxt actioos. They will use numeric and variables, arithmetic operates, and design appropriate errcr tapping rwtines. Instruction in the canputer coorsewak and integrated rumcular team projects will cane fran a Canputer Techndogy Specialist who will be a TECH member cr the Science/Math/TECH lnstructa Team Canputer Techndogy Specialists will use a single canputer with a large TV as a derna,stratioo device. They will preplan lessons a, the canputer and will reccrd the Jessa, using the VCR The Jessa, will be presented to students to actively invdve them in disoovery learning. Lesson segments may be replayed cr stepped as needed for disrussia, and darificatiai. Video benetits students' conceptual understanding cl mathematics and science applicatioos. Real cbject or events can be sha.vn fran several angles. perspectives, aders cl magnification and pcints cl view, such as flipping and rctattng shapes in geanetry. Video animation 1~ and canputer graphics will especially be used to introduce, explain, a reinface ooncepts. Ptia lessen planning using the canputer, TV saeen, and VCR enable the teacher to better JT\\Cllita and adjust the teaming fa students and to give individualized help as needed during the Jessa,. The canputer techndogy instructiaial schedule will oonsist cl eight, 50-60 minute periods that will interface with the magnet block fJexibte schedule ootlined a, page ---. The cx:mputer labcratory will be cpened fa students to use befae schcd and at lunch. After schcd the a:mputer lab will be used fa parent education. The Madnt~ Product Registry (September 1992) p-ogram desaiptims, (in cx:x,sultatim with expert users), was used to identify software utility programs. All satware programs pia to purchase will be previewed by magnet teacher specialists in cx:x,junctfon with the Aeraspac:e Techndogy 0.1rrt0.1lum Scttware evaluatia, fains specially-designed for this p-qect will be a:rnpleted to dcx:ument 0.1rrt0.1tum relevance and prcblem-sdvtng capa}jlities. 4. Faeign LaniYap Japanese, Russian, German, French, and Spanish wilt be clfered beginning in grade 7. Currently, the CXJl\"e rurria.llum for grades seven and eight does net emphasize foreign language The high school a.miailum requires 2 years of the same language. The Aerospace Techndogy Currirulutl\\ thereta~ is providing students with the cppatunity to start a modern language early to  L ' ... ,. -  - ~ - -    \nI'  I ..., ... - ...... ,.\n I g I I w .\n:) u t,J tJ u\nl .:\u0026gt; f.Jt \\., I d I ll t:: :::\nLRSD Occupational Areas of Focus Computer-Aided Design/Drafting Product Engineering Environmental Quality Assurance Job Descriptions Product Engineering DefWllon: The llnplementalion ol all ~ of manufacturing  product and ll0ollng delign, COit, deCal P,odUCllon and ope,allan plant, ayatema and procedurNhnlthodt, qualty aaurance mlthodt, meteriall and procna apeclflcaliona, and problem rwoMion. Job Description: Production EnginMta adm.,..., tool Ind manufactlmg P,actlcN for. rna\no, projecl ~ ptOduc:t ..... At the tectinlcal level emphult It on dNlgn analytil, performance analyllt, 1Y11MM and p,ooedurN mlNI, geneaa1 problem lnvNlglon, and maleflalt and PfOCNa IIMeligldona. AJ. ll'le eriry lewl, .nons .. dlr9Cled to ad and con1n11 ~- ~ ...........  Produclan e...,  MlnllaclUtlng e...,  UlltanEnginNr Compuw Aided 0..lgn Appllcatlona Definition: Computer Aided DNigrl appl:1ll111 lndude the UM ot advanced computar tools to a.A Ille unique geomeay ol Ille product at W9I a lpeclal tool UN (CAE) to delannine the adequacy ol Iha deelgn ll'ldlr apecllc GDlldlbii. Job DNcrlpllon: CA0,4CAE Engineen utlllza OOffltMrlzed work1tallon1 to create unique daalgna of Of ueocillacl wlttl product geometry. TheN ltaff 1Mfflber9  uaually nilled clNign englnNrt who er ... the product claligll In ,_, time on the tyllaffl. The potltion tor !hit encry 1ew1 .non 11 '9lalad to copying or repaallng Hitting product datiglll Uling 1h11 181M workat.ion. The open,or wll allo ba trained In ttle UN ol a CAE tool to perform analyllt ot dNlgn a,1lclN and glllMt crltical dnlgn data. All or thil _,,. II under the dlrecllon ot aenlor dNign 919,_,. and IUbmlaed to ll'lern for approval. Entry...i  CAO e\u0026gt;p.alor Speciallat Tedlnlcal Profeaalonal  T~I Oeeipr  Dnlgn EnglnNr QuaUty Auuranc1 DefNllon: The degrM ol contormance by an item to governing crtena apec11caaoru, tellact company or oontractual Inspection ~tortpaefflc:,,..,._, pana, or atNmblN. Job DNcrtpclon: To provide manufacturing or englnMring aupport tulrt In accordance with customer, company, or pe,1w1 p,aduca qually apecllca\u0026amp;lona Ind requirements. ~  0ualty Engineer Environmental Definition: Compliance with i:.cs.,.,, - local, -,ct company NNty, healtl, and enwotlMfllal regulallont . Jab DNcr1plo... ~ Englnaart--. In dlwlopment of anvtrol..,... p,cuction prog,ama and Operalona U w.11 U anhancement of a,nployae and management awarenftl of ~-,... and objec:INN. They prowie lal90n for organizallonal ~ to the OClfflffll.llil and lncMtry on enwoi.,... aahllt!N. M the tac:fln6oll and antry 1eYe1 eflorta a,e dlrec:lad to plant-wide tl\u0026amp;nrdout wute handllng and aaodated documentation regantl119 tranaportlng, llorlng, 0111i1M111.a.c, clwlup n prOONlfng d haZlrdout w.  Hmfdcul Mlllrlal  Hazlrdout S9ecia1i11 Matertal TNm LNdlr  Enwoni'MIUII EngiMer enable them to achieve oral and written language fluency and proficiency 0v1er a period d six years. Magnet fcreign language cifetings will be scheduled as part d the eight class period day cxntained within the block schedule. An instructcr pod will be created among the university magnet partners. This magnet's fcreign language teachers will be selected fran the poo. 5. Engineering Technotqsy The Engineering Technology occupatirnal program majcr will prepare students for entry into tomcrrCM1s manufacturing engineering envirooment and postserondary programs. As the diagram a, the opposite page illustrates, four demand manufacturing engineering areas and the entry level technical and prctessiaial career path have been identified in rollabcration with state aerospace industries: product engineering, CAD, Quality Assurance, and Envirrnmental. Additonally, industry has defined jd:\u0026gt; titles and respa,sialities. These are also stated in the diagram The University ct Arkansas at Little Rock (UALR) and Scuthern Arkasas University TECH have aligned aitical cx:cupatia, needs with four engineering technology programs ct study - Mechanical, Manufacturing, Canputer, and Electrrnics. A a:mma, ccre ct engineering technology courses which pEmleate these fwr programs, and specialized courses pertinent to individual programs have been arranged into grade 9-12 CDUrse sequences. Students a:mpleting grade 9-12 course sequences with a graded C er better will receive up to 15 advance credits when a:ntinuing in one engineering technology program at UALR The Mechanical and Electraiics Engineering Technology Programs are two a fa.ir year progra~ fa which a student may earn either an Associate ct Science a- Bachelor ct Science degree. Manufacturing Engineering Technology and Canputer Engineering Technology are four-year Baccalaureate programs. Belo.v is a sample flo.v chart based a, the Arkansas Plan fa- TECH PREP, 2+4+2+2  which displays the Engineering Technology grade 9-12 sequence. The entire course sequence is sho.vn here tn relattrn to graduatia, requirements to facilitate a:mprehensicn a the entire program Pages --- desaibe a:ntent kno.vledge fa grades 9 and 10 coursewa-k. The Canmitment and Capacity secticn, page --, explains a:ntent knowledge fa- grades 11 and 12 coursewa-k. Grades 9 10 11 12 The Engineering Technology Flow Chart Courses= 1 unit unless shown as .5 unit m = Aerospace Technology Magnet Academic Core* Mechanical, Electronic, Manufacturing Eng. Tech. Math (m) Science (m) World History Intro. to Concurrent Engineering English Physical Ed. (.5) Health (.5) Math (m) Science (m) Computer-Aided Design (CAD) Applications or Government (.5) Manufaduring Eng. Tech. I or Global Studies (.5) Electronics Eng. Tech . .CAD I English Wor1\u0026lt;place Readiness (.5) Fine Arts (.5) Math(m) Advanced CAO or ' Sdence(m) Manufacturing Eng. Tech. II or American History Electronics Eng. Tech . .CAD II English Internship I Foreign Language (m) Math (m) Science (m) Fabrication Design Project or Applied Communica- Manufaduring Design Project or lion (m) Mechanical Systems Design Project Foreign Language (m) Internship II Speech Elective Computer Eng. Tech. Intro. to Computer Science Computer-Aided De-sign Applications Electronics Eng. Tech . .CAD I Programming for Engineering Majors  Arkansas State Board of Education standards for Accreditation (1984) state that students will take 3 units of science and 2 units of mathematics or 3 units of mathematics and 2 units of science to meet high school graduation requirements. ' There are three requirements with this COJrsewcrk: a) Students must take the engineering techndogy rourses related to their engineering program majer, i.e. manufacturing, computer, mechanical, electrrnics. b) Ca.trses must be taken in the sequence shown oo the flo.v chart. c) Foor units (years) each cf mathematiQi and science are mandated fer attainment of Engineering Technology perfcrmance standards. This magnet will reflect current practices used in industry, including tha\ne cf emerging techndogies. Th~e indude ccmputer numerical contrd (CNQ machinery, cx:rnputer-aided drafting and manufacturing( NCCAD/ NCCAM) software, todtng, robotics systems, printed circuit bead equipment, scanners, and plotters. The goal is fer students to wak in teams and e\u0026lt;perience real productioo, ooe which requires them to plan for, design, and produce a product, inccrpcrting the elements cf quality and envirooment prctectirn. A netwaked CAD labcratory cf 30 Madnta\nh Quadras, three Laserwriter II printers, three platers, and two scanners will be set-up in a specially-designed facility that also includes drafting tables with track drafting mechanism\n. The manufacturing and electrrnics facilities will each house fifteen (15) netwaked Macintosh Quadras, 2 Laserwriter printers, a scanner, and an integrated manufacturing cell of NC equipment and robotic systems with a::mputer link-ups. Additional instructional materials and equipment requirements include industrial measuring instruments, pnaimatic and hydraulic ccmpooents, and mechanisms trainers. Ccntent knCM'ledge is described in the next sectirn .. Engineering Technology instructers will ccme fran the program's university partners, industry, the schcd district, and the Metrcpditan Vocatirnal-Technical F.ducation Center. These instructors will also be assigned to a l\\1ath/ Science/TECH Instructa Team and will teach classes per the bloc:k schedule desaibed on page---. 6. Aviation The Aviation program majas will be implemented in cdlabaation with Hendersa, State University, Southern Arkansas University TECH, the Federal Aviairn Administratioo, and Central Aying Service. There ae five artiwlated, curricular paths depicted a, page --- and delineated in the grade 9-12 flON chart shown a, the oppa\nite page: The Aviation Flow Chart Program Major g 10 11 12 1. Aviation  General Aviation  Powerplant  Electric Circuit  Powerplant Maintenance  Machine Shop Theory \u0026amp; Analysis Systems and Technology Maintenance Components 2. Airway  Introduction to  Programming  Fortran/Cobol  Assembler Computer Aeronautics + Language Language and Science Lab Operating Systems 3. Airway Science  Introduction to  Programming  Aircraft Systems  Air Traffic Control Aeronautics + Language Theory lab 4. Aircaft Systems  Introduction to  Aircraft Systems  Aircraft  Aerodynamics + 5. Aeronautics + Theory Powerplant Performance lab Theory , Professional  Introduction to  Aircraft Systems  Aircraft  Private Pilot Pilot Aeronautics + Theory Powerplant Certification \u0026amp; Lab Theory lab  All students take the same math, science, a::mputer techndogy oore as the Engineering Techndogy program students.  Students ccntinue Aviatic::n Maintenanc:2 a.mirular path at Sa.lthem Arkansas University- TECH. Cwrsewak for all ether Aitway Science and Professic::nal Pilct program majas ccntinue at Hendersc::n State University.  All students will take a c::ne year Aviatic::n course regarding Aviation Safety I Legislati en/ Trans.portation.  All students will have flight training ccnduded by certificated flight instrudas under the guidelines c:i Federal Aviatic::n Regulatic::ns, parts 141 and 61.  All Aviation coorsework will be taught at the Museum c:i Aviatioo History ~ Southern Arkansas University TECH and Hendersoo State University instrudas in a:xrdination with Central flying Servic:2 and the Federal Aviatioo Administratic::n. Instrudas will share the same students as members c:i Math/Science/TECH Instructor teams.  Students will receive advance credits from the two universities for canpleting the Aviatic::n Magnet program. Cooditions and stipulations faadvance credit receipt are outlined in Artirulatic::n Agreements. This program has an infcrmation and guidance romprnent that will be implemented with industry, the universities, and the Aera\npace Technology career camselcrs. Through a camseling team made-up d professirnals frcrn each crganizatirn, students wilt be advised CJ the eca,omic and educaticnal benefits related to the engineering technology and avi atia, career path. This witl enable students to make soond career decisirns aoout which area to select as a program major. A six week, four hoor summer session wilt be held at the three magnet junicr high schods in 1994, and in all magnet sites in 1995. Any student attending the Aerospace Magnet site during the regular school year, inc:cming distic:t seventh graders to the magnet sites, and oot-CJ-district white students will be targeted fer Summer Schad enrollment. Summer magnet site enrollment will be within the 60 (~ack) - 40 (white) 'oa}anced range. Summer magnet enrollees will be required to sign an agreement c.cncurring with attendance stipulatirns. 7. SCANS Know-Hew SCANS America 2000 cxrnpetencies (as desaibed rn pages 27-28) will be integrated aC\"OSs the Aeraspace Technology curriculum and aligned with the Accountal:ility System CJ measures and standards ot performance fer this magnet program. Students will learn the SCANS Know-How throughout mathematics, science, cxrnputer, and occupatirnal c.cntent\nand in the more specialized oontexts a the technology laboratories and industry-oosed wcrk. Every student, therefcr~ will ccrnplete the magnet junior high school with an intrcx.1uc:tirn to wcrkptace Know-How. By age 16, magnet students will attain initial mastery in the SCANS Kna.v-Ha.v and be sufficiently praicient upa, canpletirn a this magnet program in grade 12. The instructional strategy employed fer attaining praidency is learning c.cntent while solving realistic proolems. Students and teachers will learn and apply kna.vledge in real-life situatirns, for exampl~ by participating in this magnet's industry internship program .. From: QUALITY CONNECTION SERVICES PHONE No. 310 598 5773 ,o, 'tv\\o.c... ~ d, ~n 9-,v-ow'r'\"\"'I Q Lc..-\\L \\--te \\ ~ y Dec.10 1992 2:12PM P01 M. e...,s ::, ,\"---1-e. \\ K'e~W\\-0\\.~ r  (.,} } r, ~-1.--t C.ar/1~ P\"-Je,, o.,f~.. .. e.e  \\kfA \"\"I K,.~ 9   Dec. 10 1992 2 : 12PM P02 bm : QUALITY CONNECTION SERVICES PHONE Mo. 310 598 6773 ~~ 1996-97 the Aerosp~l\u0026lt;l.i\\ll\"et l-ligh School gcade 10-12 enrollment wlll be n.l capaclly which is ~pupils. The high s~houb\u0026lt;.?nrollmcnt c-uupleU with the grade 7-9 junior high enrollmen'Fe'!.'?.s the aerospace magnet has the potential lo serve 4,597 pupils. The magnet enrollment will reduce black isolation in three junior high schools. C. Interdistrict and Intradistrict Desegregation Measures 1. Background Information on the Court Order The only image that some people have of Little Rock is the one formed in the Pall of 1957 when Governor Orval Paubu!S defied a feut!ral manuatt! a1,d tried to use the Arkansas National Guard to keep nine black students from entering Central High School. In Cooper vs. Aaron (1958), the Supreme Court stated that \"public opposition to desegregation of the races, no matter how deeply entrenched, could not be allowed to interfere with the full realization of the constitutional rights of black citizens.\" Twenty-four years later (1982), the Little Rock School District brought suit against North Little Rock and Pulaski County Special School District, claiming that the Constitution compelled the consolidation of the three districts into one governmental unit. n,is claim was rejected by the courts in 1985 and again in 1986\nhowever, the courts held that interdistrict constitutional violations had occured and must be remedied. Over the course of the next three years, various remedial orders were entered and further appeals were taken to court. Then, in 1988 and 1989, in a sharp departure from the adversary bitterness that had marked this controversy for over thirty years\nthe parties, including the Joshua intervenors representing the injured class of black schoolchildren and citizens, LRSD, the North Little Rock School District (NLRSD), the Pulaski County Special School District (PCSSD), and the State of Arkansas (Arkansas State Board of Education), agreed to settle the case. 'they submitted to the District Court four comprehensive agreements covering both interdistrict and inttadistrict desegregation measures -- agreements referred to by the parties as the \"settlement plans.\" They also submitted a separate but related document, called the \"settlement agreement,\" settling the financial liability of the State of Arkansas. The United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit reversed this judgement on June 27, 1989, and directed the District Court to adjust the boundary between the LRSD and PCSSD, to revise student attendance within each district to reflect the racial composition of the district, to maintain PCSSD's percent black student enrollment within the range of plus or minus 25% of the districtwide average of blacks by organizational FRIDAY, ELDREDGE \u0026amp; CLARK HERSCHEL H. FRIDAY. P .A . ROBERT V. LIGHT, P.A. WILLIAM H. SUTTON, P.A. JAMES W. MOORE A PARTNERSHIP OF INOIVIOUALS ANO PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATIONS ATTORNEYS AT LAW BYRON M . EISEMAN, JR., P . A . JOE 0. BELL , P .A. JOHN C . ECHOLS, P.A. JAMES A . BUTTRY, P.A. FREDERICKS. URSERY, P . A . H . T. LARZELERE, P .A. OSCAR E. DAVIS, JR . JAMES C. CLARK, JR . . P.A. THOMAS P . LEGGETT. P.A. JOHN DEWEY WATSON, P . A . PAUL 8. BENHAM Ill, P . A. LARRY W. BURKS, P . A. A. WYCKLIFF NISBET, JR., P.A. JAMES EOWARO HARRIS, P.A. J. PHILLIP MALCOM. P .A. JAMES M. SIMPSO N , P .A. MEREDITH P. CATLETT, P . A . JAMES M , SAXTON, P .A. J. SHEPHERD RUSSELL Ill DONALO H. BACON, P .A. WILLIAM THOMAS BAXTER, P .A. WALTER A . PAULSO N II, P.A. BARRY E. COPLIN, P.A. RICHARDO. TAYLOR, P . A . JOSEPH B . HURST, JR., P .A . EL I ZABETH J . ROBBEN, P.A. CHRISTOPHER HELLER, P.A. LAURA HENSLEY SMITH, P . A . ROBERTS. SHAFER , P.A . WILLIAM M . GRIFF IN 111 , P. A. THOMAS N. ROSE , P.A. MICHAELS . MOORE DIANE S. MACKEY, P.A. WALTER M . EBEL Ill, P.A. Mr. Sam Jones 2000 FIRST COMMERCIAL BUILOINO 400 WEST CAPITOL LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201-3493 TELEPHONE 601-378-2011 FAX NO . 601 -376 - 2147 December 9, 1992 DEC 1 0 \\992 01.. o' -uo~er,.-r.aticn Monitoring ('.Ctl I .,., ~~ cl Mr. Steve Jones WRIGHT, LINDSEY \u0026amp; JENNINGS 2200 Worthen Bank Bldg. JACK, LYON \u0026amp; JONESt P.A. 3400 Capitol Towers 200 West Capitol Capitol \u0026amp; Broadway Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. John Walker JOHN WALKER, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72206 Ms. Ann Brown Heritage West Bldg., Suite 510 201 East Markham street Little Rock, AR 72201 Re: Grant Application Dear Counsel and Ms. Brown: Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Richard Roachell MITCHELL \u0026amp; ROACHELL, P.A. 1014 West Third Little Rock, AR 72201 .:EVIN A . CRASS , P. A . WILLIAM A . WADDELL . JR., P.A. CLYDE TAB TURNER, P. A. CALVIN J . HALL. P . A . SCOTT J. LANCASTER, P .A. JERRY L. MALONE, P . A . M . GAYLE CORLEY, P . A . ROIERT I .  EACH , JR., P .A. J. LEE IJROWN , P . A . JAMES C. I.A.KER , JR ., P. A . H . CHARLES GSCHWENO, JR .. P.A . HARRY A . LIGHT, P . A . SCOTT H . TUCKER JOHN CLAYTON RANDOLPH GUY ALTON WAD E PRICE C. GARONER THOMAS F. MEEKS J . MICHAEL PICKENS TONIA P. JONES DAVID D. WILSON JEFFREY H. MOO RE T . WESLEY HOLMES ANDREW T. TURNER SARAH J . HEFFLEY JOHN RAY WHITE DAVID M . GRAF PAMELA 0. CORKER CARLA G. SPAINHOUR JOHN C. FENDLEY, JR. COUNIH WILLIAM J, SMITH WILLIAM A. ELDREDGE, JR., P .A. B.S. CLARK WILLIAM L. TERRY WILLIAM L. PATTON. JR., P . A . WRITER'S DIRECT NO. (501) 370-1506 370-1506 I have enclosed a copy of the grant application I received today from Gail Quinn. CJH/k Enc c-v DEC 1 0 1~2 Office of Desegregaiion Monitoring Little Rock School District Aerospace Technology Magnet Program Absbad The Little Rock Schoo District's Magnet Schools Assistance grant applicatia, presents a dynamic plan fer implementation of a grade 7-12 Aerospace Techndogy Magnet Program in three (3) junior high schoos and the new Aeraspace Educatirn Center. The Center combnes a museum of aviatirn histcry with a grade 7-12 Aerospace Technology Schoo a, a 19.8 acre tract at the Little Rcx:k RegirnaJ Airpcrt adjacent to the main terminal, Falca, Jet, and Arkansas Aerospace. Collabcratively develcped with the Aerospace indusmes-1\u0026gt; and Campaign Leadershipb\u0026gt;, foor universitiescl and the U.S. Department ci Educatia, Federal Aviatia, Administratirn (FM), this magnet program targets the readying of students fer immediate employment and/er pa\ntsecondary education In either engineering technology er airway science. As illustrated belc,.v, students are prooded a wide range ci choices fer c.areer develcpment in a,e of nine areas at an entry, technidan, er prdessirnaJ level: Aerospace Engineering Technology Aviation Airway Science (FM)  Manufacturing  Airway Canputer Science  Computer Science  Airway Sciente Management  Mechanical  Aircraft Maintenance  Electronics  Aircraft Systems  Protessiaial Pilct Majer Arkansas aerospace employers and the FM have identified techndogical occupatia,s and the skill base students need for future empl~ent. LRSD has inoorperated the skill base into a highly integrated program/ ca1rse sequence ccnsisting ci Academic lnstructicn, Work-Based Leaming, Werksite Experience, and Information and Guidance. All magnet students will take a CXJTlmal academic cxre of sequenced a,.irses whidl include six years ci applied mathematics and science (mere than required for graduation) keyed to prcx:1uc:t engineering and flight/space cmcepts, two er more years ci a language significant to our glcbal arnpetitive marketplace sudl as Japanese er German\nand Applied Canmunication. In CXlllpUter netwerked laooratcri~ students will access and a:rttrd oontent, applicatirns, and infcrmatia, in the areas ct robotics, bio astrooautics, systems simulatia,, CAD/CAM, publishing, werd pr~ing, teleccmmunicaticns, material science, and aercx:1ynamics. Students will produce presentatia, material ~ importing soond, graphics, digitized phctographs to hypercard er laserdisc stacks ci their c,.vn creatiai. In Science, students will ccnduct hands-on investigatia,s, manipulate scientific instruments, and cdlec:t:/ analyze data a) Arkansas Aer~ Rohr Industries. Falaxt Jet, Midmast. Ca,tral Flying Service b) Membership attached c) l'niversities of Arkansas at Little Rock and Pine Bluff, Hatderson State University, Southern Arkansas University TECH. using the critical thinking skills d cbservatioo, canmunicating, comparing. crdering, categorizing. relating. inferring. and applying. Specialized curricula related to each ci the nine career cpticns has been developed to meet OCOJpation specific kno.vledge and emerging tec:hndogy requirements. Students will be trained on the job throogh partidpatioo in industry and aitpcrt-based internship programs. All students will be educated to higher levels than ever betae. The vehide for OCOJpattcnal certiftcattai is achievement ci the U.S. Department of Labcr's SCANS (Seaetary's Canmissia, ci Achieving Necessary Skills) five workplace ccmpetendes, e.g. Resources, lnterperscnal Skills, Infamation, Systems, and Technology\nand the earning of C.ertificates ci Initial Mastery (CIM). An assessment system based en SCANS Kno.v-Ho.v and cumulative resume, which reports results, will be the permanent recxrd a genuine student attainment of CIM and future employment. In addition, program c:anpletion in a chosen cxx:upatiaial majcr will enatie students to receive advance university aedit and ccntinuatia, of the engineering a airway science career track throogh associate a science and baccalaureate degree programs. As yoo cx:nsider the fine merits a this highly cx:ilabcrative magnet program, please keep in mind the thoosands a students it Will enable to gain state-of-the-art techndogical skills, en~rage to ccntinue their educatim thra.agh Articulatia, Agreements, and to fill key manufacturing and FAA jc:bs so vital to the future ct this nation to c:anpete in the wald market. I. Background Informati_on A. Greater Metropolitan Little Rock Greater Little Rock's four county Metropolitan Statistical area (MSA) is the center of the second fastest growing region in the United States. Its central location is within 550 miles of forty percent of the United States buying power and population. The $1.3 billion dollar Arkansas Navigation System, one of the nation's largest water development projects, is a 445 mile waterway providing year-round access to ports on the Arkansas River from the Mississippi River to Tulsa, Oklahoma. The 1,500 acre port with its industrial harbor Foreign Trade Zone - 14, and the United States Customs Port of Entry are an indication of the increasing importance of Little Rock's linkage to ports worldwide. All are in close proximity to Adams Field, Little Rock's airport. The city's rich mixture of historic architecture and new development is attracting new residents. Little Rock is seeing growth and revitalization unparalleled in the city's history. ' Little Rock is on the move. Fueling this revitalization are the aerospace industries, the Arkansas Aviation Historical Society, the Governor's Aerospace Task Force, and institutions of higher education. Some of the world's most successful aerospace companies are located here: McDonnell Douglas, Rohr Inc., Arkansas Aerospace (a subsidiary of British Aerospace), Falcon Jet owned by the French-based A vions Dassaut Brequet Aviation, MidCoast, and Central Flying Service. Numerous private and corporate aircraft dealers such as Aero-Commander, Piper, Beechcraft, and Cessna have facilities at the Little Rock Regional Airport. Little Rock Airforce Base is home to the largest C-130 aircraft training and airlift facility in the world. A number of major educational institutions serve Little Rock's M.S.A. By far, the largest of these is the University of Arkansas at Little Rock (UALR), enrolling more than 11,000 students in seventy-five undergraduate and forty-two graduate degree programs including Associate, Bachelor and Masters of Science Degrees in Engineedng Technology. The Graduate Institute of Technology (GIT) housed in the new Engineering Technology Center offers courses in mechanical, computer science, electrical and manufacturing engineering. Industries utilize GIT facilities for advanced research and graduate study. In 1991, the Arkansas Space Grant Consortium, under the leadership of GIT at UALR, received a four-year training grant award from the NASA National Space Grant College and Fellowship program. The primary purpose of the program i:\nto educate and familiarize faculty and undergraduate and graduate students with aerospace fundamentals and NASA's research programs and opportunities. A secondary objective is to motivate K-12 students to excel in math and science courses necessary for entrance into aerospace programs at the universities and high tech positions in industry. Henderson University, in coordination with Central Flying Service, conducts one of the few aviation degree programs in the nation. The University's Department of Aviation provides four-year programs in Airway Science Management,Airway Computer Science, Professional Pilot, and Aircraft Systems Management. The Arkansas Aviation Historical Society serves the entire state as the focal for the involvement of Arkansas' aerospace industries in community affairs, education, and economic development. In 1989, the Society, executives of aerospace companies, the Little Rock School District, and UALR came together to form the Aerospace Education Center Campaign Leadership. The unprecedented public/private partnership has planned an Aerospace Education Center. As the architect's drawing illustrates, the Center combines a museum of aviation history with an Aerospace Technology Magnet High School on a 19.8 acre tract at the Little Rock Regional Airport adjacent to the main terminal, Falcon Jet, and Arkansas Aerospace. The facility will cover 200,000 square feet, including common areas used by both the museum and high school such as the library, cafeteria, and theatre/ auditorium. The upper level of the museum will function as an educational resource for adult programs, and outreach for schools, state and nationwide through a satellite television uplink provided by the Arkansas Electric Cooperatives. The most comprehensive and largest technical and historical aviation and aerospace library collection outside of the Smithsonian's National Air and Space Museum was acquired for the Arkansas Museum of Aviation History. Virtually every civil and military aircraft, rotocraft, and spaceship designed and constructed throughout the world is represented in the collection by technical specifications, photographs, and historical descriptive information. There are well over 5,000 books, 50,000 journals, 200,000 photographs and transparancies, hundreds of rare collectable items signed by famous pilots and aviation personalities, original paintings, scale aircraft models, and unique aircraft parts. The Society has raised over five million dollars in gifts and pledges toward construction of the aviation history museum. The Llttle Rock School District has budgeted six million dollars for the construction of the Aerospace Technology Magnet High School from funds approved by voters at a property tax election in 1990. The Aerospace Education Center Campaign Leadership believes that Greater Little Rock's future rests on the vitality of its public education system. At all levels of the public education system, educators and industry must develop programs which give students the knowledge and skills that enable them to reach their full economic potential. While the Center will prepare students for aerospace careers, it will also focus the Central Arkansas community on commitment to excellence in education. In March 1819, Arkansas became a territory and the Arkansas Post, the state's fir\nThis project was supported in part by a Digitizing Hidden Special Collections and Archives project grant from The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation and Council on Library and Information Resoources.\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n\n "},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1525","title":"Court filings: District Court, Little Rock School District (LRSD) proposed magnet programs for Henderson Junior High School and McClellan Community High School; District Court, order; Court of Appeals, order","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":["Little Rock School District"],"dc_date":["1992-01"],"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","Education--Arkansas","Little Rock School District","Education--Evaluation","Educational law and legislation","Educational innovations","Educational statistics","Magnet schools","School management and organization","School enrollment","McClellan Magnet High School (Little Rock, Ark.)","Henderson Junior High School (Little Rock, Ark.)","Educational planning"],"dcterms_title":["Court filings: District Court, Little Rock School District (LRSD) proposed magnet programs for Henderson Junior High School and McClellan Community High School; District Court, order; Court of Appeals, order"],"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/1525"],"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":["69 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null}],"pages":{"current_page":37,"next_page":38,"prev_page":36,"total_pages":48,"limit_value":12,"offset_value":432,"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}}]}}