{"response":{"docs":[{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1327","title":"Proceedings: ''Hearing''","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":["1994-09-16"],"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","School districts--Arkansas--Pulaski County","Education--Arkansas","Educational law and legislation","Educational planning","School board members","School management and organization","School integration","School improvement programs","Court records"],"dcterms_title":["Proceedings: ''Hearing''"],"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/1327"],"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":["legal documents"],"dcterms_extent":["279 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1632","title":"Court filings concerning majority to minority (M-to-M) transfers, District budgets, Stephens Elementary School, motion to release incentive school Kindergarten seats and four-year-old program seats, and reinstatement of ADE as defendant","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 Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit"],"dc_date":["1994-08-24/1994-08-31"],"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","Special districts--Arkansas--Pulaski County","Joshua Intervenors","Knight Intervenors","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","Education--Finance","Arkansas. Department of Education","Education, Elementary","Educational law and legislation","Educational planning","School improvement programs","School management and organization","School integration","Stephens Elementary School (Little Rock, Ark.)","Student assistance programs"],"dcterms_title":["Court filings concerning majority to minority (M-to-M) transfers, District budgets, Stephens Elementary School, motion to release incentive school Kindergarten seats and four-year-old program seats, and reinstatement of ADE as defendant"],"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/1632"],"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":["judicial records"],"dcterms_extent":["87 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"Court of Appeals, brief for appellee, Pulaski County Special School District (PCSSD); District Court, stipulation for proposed order on voluntary majority to minority (M-to-M) transfers; District Court, notice of filing, Pulaski County Special School District (PCSSD) revised budget for 1994-95; District Court, notice of filing, Little Rock School District (LRSD) program planning and budgeting process; District Court, order; District Court, status report regarding Stephens Elementary School; District Court, response to motion for extension; District Court, motion to release incentive school Kindergarten seats and four-year-old program seats; District Court, memorandum brief in support of motion to release incentive school Kindergarten seats and four-year-old program seats; District Court, order; District Court, Joshua intervenors' motion to supplement the basis for its prior motion to reinstate the Arkansas Department of Education (ADE) as a party defendant; District Court, notice of filing, Little Rock School District (LRSD) project management tool; District Court, Arkansas Department of Education (ADE) project management tool  The transcript for this item was created using Optical Character Recognition (OCR) and may contain some errors.  RECEIVED - AUG 2 41994 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT Office of Desegregation Morntonng LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT APPELLANT vs. No. 94-2070 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT APPELLEE Appeal From The United States District Court For The Eastern District of Arkansas Western Division Honorable Susan Webber Wright District Judge BRIEP FOR APPELLEB PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT Submitted by: M. Samuel Jones, III WRIGHT, LINDSEY \u0026 JENNINGS 200 West Capitol Avenue suite 2200 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-3699 (501) 371-0808 Attorneys for Pulaski county Special School District TABLE OP CONTENTS TABLE OF AUTHORITIES . . . . . . . . . . . . . SUMMARY OF THE CASE AND WAIVER OF ORAL ARGUMENT PRELIMINARY STATEMENT. STATEMENT OF THE ISSUES STATEMENT OF THE CASE. ARGUMENT CONCLUSION ADDENDUM . . . . . . . . . . . i ii 1 3 4 5 7 13 TABLE OF AUTHORITIES CASES: Appeal of Little Rock School District, 949 F.2d 253 LRSD v. PCSSD, 921 F.2d 1371 (8th Cir. 1990) ii Page 10 1, 7, 10 SUMMARY or THE CASE AND WAIVER or ORAL ARGUMENT on January 7, 1994, the PCSSD moved the District Court to require the LRSD to pay over to PCSSD approximately $167,000 which PCSSD claimed LRSD owed it pursuant to the Settlement Agreement. This appeal arises from the District Court's order of March 16, 1994, awarding a mone'T judgment to PCSSD based upon the District Court's interpretation and enforcement of the Settlement Agreement approved by this Court on December 12, 1990, as reported at LRSD v. PCSSD, 921 F.2d 1371 (8th Cir. 1990). That Settlement Agreement, among other more weighty matters, settled a dispute between the PCSSD and the LRSD concerning which district was entitled to receive certain state payments for majority-to-minority transfers pursuant to a stipulation originally entered into on August 26, 1986, and approved by the District Court and adopted as its order on February 27, 1987. To settle that disputed entitlement, the parties agreed to \"pool\" almost all state payments for interdistrict majority-tominority transfers. In addition to the pooling of the state payments, the PCSSD committed to contribute an additional $200,000 to the \"pool\" for the first five years of its operation. Because the payments received by the state include \"incentive\" or \"bonus\" payments above and beyond the cost of educating the transferring children, and because of the PCSSD's additional contribution of $200,000, the pool presently generates excess sums over and above the costs of educating these transferring students. 1 The PCSSD successfully moved the District Court for an order directing LRSD to pay PCSSD approximately $167,000 generated during the 1992-93 school year which LRSD had refused to pay. No hearing was sought by either party. This case presents the issue of whether or not the District Court abused its discretion in interpreting the parties' Settlement Agreement in favor of the PCSSD. PCSSD does not believe oral argument is necessary to resolve the issues presented on appeal. 2 PRELIMINARY STATEMENT The PCSSD agrees with the preliminary statement submitted by LRSD. 3 STATEMENT OF THE ISSUES I. THE DISTRICT COURT DID NOT ERR IN FINDING AS A MATTER OF LAW THAT LRSD'S OBLIGATION UNDER THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT TO POOL M-TO-M PAYMENTS IS INDEPENDENT OF PCSSD'S OBLIGATION TO EQUALIZE THE INSTRUCTIONAL BUDGETS OF INTERDISTRICT SCHOOLS BECAUSE LRSD CANNOT DEMONSTRATE AN ABUSE OF DISCRETION BY THE DISTRICT COURT. II. III. Appeal of Little Rock School District, 949 F.2d 253 LRSD v. PCSSD, 921 F.2d 1371 (8th Cir. 1990) THE 1989 DISPUTE BETWEEN LRSD AND PCSSD OVER THE ALLOCATION OF M-TO-M FUNDING WHICH LED TO THIS FEATURE OF THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT SUPPORTS THE DISTRICT COURT'S HOLDING IN FAVOR OF THE PCSSD. EVEN THOUGH NO HEARING WAS NECESSARY TO CONSTRUE THE MEANING OF AN AGREEMENT PREVIOUSLY APPROVED BY THIS COURT; NEVERTHELESS, LRSD WAIVED ANY OPPORTUNITY FOR A HEARING BY FAILING TO REQUEST ONE EITHER BEFORE OR AFTER THE RULING OF THE DISTRICT COURT. 4 1. STATEMENT OP THE CASE The Factual Background of Section II, 0(3} of the Settlement Agreement The LRSD correctly observes that the Settlement Agreement is dated March 1989 (as revised September 28, 1989). LRSD Brief at 5. Pursuant to the State's obligation to pay the entire costs of M-toM students, the parties entered into a stipulation with the State which detailed the method and manner by which the state would reimburse these costs. Ad. 5-7 (Majority-to-Minority Stipulation). However, as late as September 25, 1989, the LRSD and PCSSD were still in dispute concerning whether the receiving district for Mto- M students should receive the sending district's costs per average daily membership or its own costs per average daily membership. The difference was approximately $700 per student at that time. App. 73. This issue over allocation of money between the two districts was ultimately resolved as of September 28, 1989, by agreeing to the pooling arrangement. In addition to these state reimbursements for the actual costs of educating the students, the State agreed to provide incentive monies to encourage such transfers. Each sending district is reimbursed by the State for one-half of the regular state aid the district would otherwise receive had the student stayed in the home district. Ad. 6. These sums were likewise pooled. The incentive amount paid to PCSSO is almost double that paid to LRSD, but all is now pooled. 5 To finalize the Settlement Agreement, PCSSD further agreed to pay an additional $200,000 per year into the pool over and above its M-to-M payments. 2. The Dispute Between LRSD and PCSSD LRSD did not challenge the worksheet appended to the PCSSD motion dated January 7, 1994 (App. 64); neither did it seek a hearing either before or after the ruling of the District Court. LRSD's only argument is that because this paragraph of the Settlement Agreement contains a statement concerning the equalization of instructional budgets at interdistrict schools, and because it contends without any appropriate record support that this has not been accomplished, then the entire pooling provision fails. PCSSD contends, as endorsed by the District Court, that the equalization provision has nothing to do with the independent obligation to distribute the excess funds. App. 58 (Order, March 16, 1994), and that the Settlement Agreement should not be modified. 6 ARGUMENT I. THE DISTRICT COURT DID NOT ERR IN FINDING AS A MATTER OF LAW THAT LRSD'S OBLIGATION UNDER THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT TO POOL M-TO-M PAYMENTS IS INDEPENDENT OF PCSSD' S OBLIGATION TO EQUALIZE THE INSTRUCTIONAL BUDGETS OF INTERDISTRICT SCHOOLS BECAUSE LRSD CANNOT DEMONSTRATE AN ABUSE OF DISCRETION BY THE DISTRICT COURT. standard of Review. The LRSD goes to great lengths to reduce the Settlement Agreement to an ordinary contract in its effort to seek de novo review by this Court. (LRSD Brief at 5.) Significantly, however, LRSD ignores the clear holding of this Court in LRSD v. PCSSD, 921 F.2d 1371 at 1394, that: 8. The District Court is instructed to monitor closely the compliance of the parties with the settlement plans and the Settlement Agreement, to take whatever action is appropriate, in its discretion, to ensure compliance with the plans and the agreement, and otherwise to proceed as the law and the facts require. [emphasis supplied) This is precisely what the District Court did in this instance. Application of the Standard of Review. PCSSD filed its \"Motion to Enforce settlement Agreement.\" The District Court found noncompliance with the Settlement Agreement by LRSD and ordered LRSD to come into compliance. This is just the kind of discretion this Court decided to grant the District Court in enforcing compliance with the Settlement Agreement. Accordingly, LRSD's arguments that this Court should exercise de novo review are misplaced and are probably made only because LRSD knows it has no chance to prevail pursuant to the abuse-ofdiscretion standard. 7 At most, LRSD's argument is that there are two possible interpretations of the Settlement Agreement. However, LRSD has neither shown nor argued anything to demonstrate that the District Court's interpretation is arbitrary, capricious or unreasonable. on its face, and at a minimum, the District Court's conclusion is reasonable that: The Court agrees with PCSSD that the provision regarding the equalization of the instructional budgets has nothing to do with the PCSSD's entitlement to a distribution of the excess M-to-M funds generated by the interdistrict school transfers, and that these provisions \"simply happened to appear in the same section of the Settlement Agreement.\" App. 59. Lending ever more reasonableness to the Court's order is its finding that: As the PCSSD points out, the LRSD may itself be on the receiving end of an annual distribution of excess M-to-M funds once the mix of students changes over time. App. 59. In what is partly a finding of fact and partly a conclusion of law, the District court concluded by finding that: The PCSSD has honored its commitments and requirements under the terms of the Settlement Agreement as regards this motion, and the LRSD offers no valid reason for refusing to withhold the distribution of $167,113 that is owed the PCSSD by the LRSD. App. 60. Thus, LRSD's argument that PCSSD was in \"anticipatory breach\" of the Settlement Agreement (LRSD Brief at 9) was rejected by the District court as a matter of fact, and LRSD has offered this Court 8 no evidence to set aside the finding as either clearly erroneous or - constituting an abuse of discretion. 1 Not only is the District Court's interpretation of the Settlement Agreement neither an abuse of discretion nor clearly erroneous, it is entirely reasonable. Indeed, if LRSD has some real concern with the instructional budgets (beyond utilization of this statement to seek relief from its pooling obligation), then its clear remedy is to file a motion with the District Court to test that separate issue. LRSD has not done this. Even if this Court were to agree with LRSD's alternative argument that the Settlement Agreement could be found to be ambiguous, this would avail the LRSD nothing. Again, if the paragraph is susceptible to more than one reasonable interpretation, with any of the interpretations being plausible, then the District Court, in its discretion, may adopt any of the alternative interpretations. The issue of \"intent\" should be reached if and only if the agreement were subject to I1Q reasonable interpretations without receipt of extrinsic evidence. In its conclusion stated at page 10 of its brief, LRSD seeks to be released from its pooling obligation. This would be 1 Although LRSD contends at least twice in its brief that PCSSD had given LRSD notice that it would be \"impossible to equalize the instructional budgets of the interdistrict schools\" (LRSD Brief at 8-9), the only record support it offers for this assertion is the same statement contained in its own brief filed with the District Court. ~ App. 66. Even assuming that a \"notice\" had any relevance to the instant issue, LRSD neither sought a hearing to make proof on this issue nor did it tender any documentary evidence of this assertion in any of its filings with the District Court, nor did it move to \"enforce\" this provision. 9 tantamount to this Court's reversing the opinion it issued in LRSD v. PCSSD, 921 F.2d 1371 (8th Cir. 1990), where this Court approved the entire Settlement Agreement of which the paragraph before the Court today represents a part. In the 1990 appeal, Little Rock was one of the prominent proponents of the proposition that: \"Of course, the District court may suggest modifications, but ultimately, it must consider the proposal as a whole and as submitted. Approval must then be given or withheld.\" ~ at 1388. Indeed, in rejecting the District Court's conclusion in that instance that the parties had waived their right to object to court-imposed modifications, this Court stated: What they said was something quite different; that if differences of opinion as to the meaning of the Settlement Agreement arose in the future, they could be authoritatively resolved by the courts. ML. at 1389 n.14 (emphasis supplied]. That is precisely what happened in this instance. The District Court exercised its discretion and resolved a dispute between two parties as to the meaning of the Settlement Agreement. That which Little Rock now seeks would serve to emasculate the Agreement, eliminate a key condition which induced PCSSD to enter into it in the first instance and constitute a \"remedy\" foreclosed by this Court's 1990 decision. As this same panel observed in 1991 in Appeal of Little Rock school District. 949 F.2d 253 at 257: The District Court should proceed with that discretion and flexibility that characterizes courts of equity. Its decisions, whatever they are, are of course subject to review on appeal, but the review will be on an abuse of discretion basis, and we will give a healthy measure of 10 deference to reasoned choices made by the District Court. (emphasis supplied] This Court should simply do now what it said it would do in 1991: Give a healthy measure of deference to the reasoned choices made by the District Court. II. THE 1989 DISPUTE BETWEEN LRSD AND PCSSD OVER THE ALLOCATION OF M-to-M FUNDING WHICH LED TO THIS FEATURE OF THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT SUPPORTS THE DISTRICT COURT'S HOLDING IN FAVOR OF THE PCSSD. It is undisputed that because the PCSSD is a relatively poor district in terms of local resources and the LRSD is a relatively wealthy district in terms of local resources that PCSSD receives substantially more state aid per student than does LRSD. Pursuant to Section 13 c. of the M-to-M Stipulation: Each home district (sending district] shall receive from the State for each student who voluntarily transfers from his/her home district to a host district (the receiving district) one-half of the State aid (table rate) it would have received had the student remained in his/her home district. Ad. 6. Accordingly, by agreeing to pool all M-to-M monies, including these \"incentive\" monies, the PCSSD surrendered a financial entitlement that is much more valuable per student than is the same entitlement in the Little Rock District. Further, the PCSSD relinquished the claim it had asserted that it should receive from the State LRSD's cost per student, reasoning that since the PCSSD would be educating those same students, that same money should follow those students. Finally, for a period of five years the PCSSD agreed to contribute $200,000 a year to the pool to finalize the settlement. 11 Although it should be obvious, given the foregoing financial - details, this Court is entitled to infer that because this was the last issue resolved between the LRSD and the PCSSD, that it is an important one as respects the PCS SD' s agreement to fully and completely settle financial issues with the LRSD. Because the PCSSD surrendered significant financial claims and makes substantial financial contributions to the pool, such circumstances support the interpretations made by the District Court. III. EVEN THOUGH NO HEARING WAS NECESSARY TO CONSTRUE THE MEANING OF AN AGREEMENT PREVIOUSLY APPROVED BY THIS COURT; NEVERTHELESS, LRSD WAIVED ANY OPPORTUNITY FOR A HEARING BY FAILING TO REQUEST ONE EITHER BEFORE OR AFTER THE RULING OF THE DISTRICT COURT. LRSD does not contend it sought or desired a hearing on this issue. It simply observes that there was not one. The record developed in this case since its assignment to the current Judge indicates that hearings have been matters of routine and held with great frequency in this case. App. i-viii (Docket entries). Further, the PCSSD is hard pressed to understand how such a \"hearing\" could have amounted to little more than oral argument, a matter which is entirely discretionary with the District Court. Finally, the District Court does consider requests for reconsideration, but none was sought by LRSD in this instance and no post-ruling request for a hearing was made. 12 CONCLUSION The District court's order of March 16, 1994 should be summarily affirmed and the PCSSD should be awarded its reasonable costs, including attorneys' fees, for this appeal. O:dnl20l.030 Respectfully submitted: WRIGHT, LINDSEY \u0026 JENNINGS 200 West Capitol Avenue Suite 2200 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-3699 (501) 371-0808 By ~ J-J -~90---- M. Samuel/Jones III ,76060) Attorn~y~-~-~or Pula~i County Specia~l Distr'-fct 13 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL. vs. NO. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL, SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL. STIPULATION FOR PROPOSED ORDER ON VOLUNTARY MAJORITY TO MINORITY TRANSFERS PLAINTIFF INTERVENORS DEFENDANTS Plaintiff Little Rock School District (\"LRSD\"), and defendants Pulaski County Special School District (\"PCSSD\"), North Little Rock School District (\"NLRSD\"), and Arkansas State Board of Education (\"State Board\"), being in agreement on the voluntary majority-to-minority transfers, submit the following stipulations for the proposed order: 1. Beginning in the 1987-88 school year and continuing thereafter, LRSD, PCSSD and NLRSD will permit and encourage voluntary majority-to-minority interdistrict transfers. The three districts will cooperate in the development of programs to acquaint parents, guardians and students with interdistrict opportunities. The implementation of majority-to-minority transfer provisions is contingent upon the implementation of all other provisions of the remedy ordered by the Court. 2. Eligibility: ADD-1 a. Black students who are members of the racial majority at a school in any participating district which district is 50 percent or more black in its enrol l ment shall be eligible to transfer voluntarily to a school and district in any other participating district in which school and district they would be in the racial minority. b. White students who are members of the racial majority at a school in a participating district which C  district is more than 50% white in its enrollment shall be eligible to transfer voluntarily to a school and district in any other participating district in which they would be in the racial minority. Prior to the transfer of any student, the home district shall issue a statement that the transferring student is in good standing. If the student is not in good standing, the student may be permitted to transfer on a provisional basis. 3. Students wishing to transfer shall file applications with their home districts. Applications must be filed before May 1 of the preceding school year and a student may not transfer more than once in any school year. The home district will process all applications and forward copies to the host districts. The home district will furnish its complete file on each student with his/her application. 2 ADD-2 4. Transfer assignments will be made subject to av lability of space in schools and grade levels, and the host districts' ability to comply with state standards. 5. The host district shall honor the placement for the students as certified by the home district, which shall be communicated to the parent or guardian prior to transfer. If, during the first semester, testing, performance, remedial efforts, and consultation indicate that an adjustment of placement should be made, it shall be made after the first semester in consultation with the student's parent or guardian. 6. The commitment to accept a student shall be for the duration of the student's voluntary participation. Once a student exercises his or her right to participate, the student will continue in the initially selected school for at least one full school year or until the student graduates or affirmatively withdraws from participation as herein set out. Students will not have to transfer each year or exercise a transfer choice to remain in the host district. Students shall be encouraged to continue to participate at their initial school of choice. It is expected that the student will follow the pattern of assigned schools for the resident students in the school in which the transfer student first enrolls. 7. Students who have elected to transfer shall remain students of the host district until they choose to return to the district where they reside. 3 ADD-3 8. Host districts shall not have the authority to remand tr sfer students to the home district. Host districts shall have the authority to discipline, suspend or expel a transfer student using the same due process procedures applicable to resident students. 9. Once admitted, transfer students will be expected to meet the same general standards, academic and other, as applied to students of the host district. 10. Information about each district's academic and disciplinary policies and procedures will be made available to prospective transfer students on request. This should include information on pupil-teacher ratios, promotion and retention, counseling assistance, grading, student code of conduct, disciplinary action, and suspension and expulsion. 11. The host district shall respond to the educational needs of students without regard to their status as a transfer or resident student. Transfer students shall be eligible and encouraged to participate in all school programs funded and sponsored by the host district (academic, athletic, extra-curricular and other) and shall not suffer any disability or ineligibility because they are voluntary interdistrict transfer students. Participation in after-school activities will be facilitated by the provision where needed of extra-curricular buses or other forms of transportation which will be available to all such transfer students, the cost of which shall be borne by the State as provided in paragraph 12. 4 ADD-4 12. The State Board shall pay the full cost of tt isporting students opting for interdistrict transfers. However, the State Board shall have the 09tion of (1) ?aying the school districts for trans9orting the students o r (2) contracting for the services or (3) transporting the students with a state operated system. 13. The State Board shall pay the home and host districts in accordance with the following procedures: a. Each year school districts shall calculate and certify to the State Board of Education their cost per student in regular schools (grades K-12) including all add-ons for special education, TAG, vocational education and other purposes. The cost per student shall include all costs for instruction and support services minus student transportation, food service, and restricted federal program costs. (To the extent that the host district does not receive pro-rata increases in restricted federal program costs by hosting transfer students who are eligible to participate in federal programs, the cost per student shall be increased on a pro-rata basis for such transfer students.) The State shall pay the costs for full-time equivalent students who have been transferred to the host district. Payments made for the current year shall be based on costs for the 5 ADD-5 previous year. The host district shall report each transfer student on forms as required by the State Department of Education. b. Each host district shall estimate the cull-time equivalent of transfer students and transmit such estimate, along with the names of the students, to the State in September of each year when payment begins. A correction will be made in January of each year. Payments shall be made by the State monthly through forward funding to each district based upon the September estimate as corrected. The students transferred to the host district shall not be counted in the number used to calculate regular state aid for the district. c. Each home district shall receive from the State for each student who voluntarily transfers from his/her home district to a host district one-half of the State aid (table rate) it would have received had the student remained in his/her home district. Information about these students shall be reported on forms as required by the State Department of Education and shall be reported at the same time as the reports are made by the host district. The students transferred from the home district shall not be counted in the number used to calculate regular 6 ADD-6 state aid for the home district. All transfers of handicapped students shall be contingent on the availability of appropriate programs a~d resources, as identified in the IEP, at the hos: school. d. The provisions contained herein do not apply to magnet schools and programs. 14. All parties to this stipulation recognize that the present racial balance of the North Little Rock School District approximates that of the entire county and they are desirous of not upsetting that balance through the operation oE the Majority to Minority Transfer Program. The parties further recognize that any court approved student assignment plan by any party could be compromised if the Majority to Minority Transfer Program caused significant changes in student assignment plans. To avoid this result, all parties agree that any party may choose to include or not include said Majority to Minority transfer students for purposes of student assignment under any court order. Further, all parties recognize that substantial participation in the Majority to Minority program could have the result of creating technical departures from targeted student ratios at one or more schools. All parties agree that any such departure resulting from the lawful operation of the Majority to Minority program shall not give rise to a claim or contention that such departure from targeted ratios constitute 7 ADD-7 violations of any law or regulation and, specifically, shall ne ~ be urged or suggested as grounds for liability in this or similar litigation. Additionally, any such resulting departures from targeted ratios shall not require the districts affected to reconstitute or recompose the student body of any affected school. Agreed this 26th day of August, 1986. PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NOR DIS 2258L 8 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT ARKANSAS STATE BOARD OF ~ ADD-8 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE On August 23, 1994, a copy of the foregoing was mailed to: Mr. Christopher Heller FRIDAY, ELDREDGE \u0026 CLARK 2000 First Commercial Building 400 West Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. John Walker JOHN WALKER, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Steve Jones JACK, LYON \u0026 JONES, P.A. 3400 Capitol Towers Capitol \u0026 Broadway Streets Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Richard Roachell ROACHELL AND STREETT First Federal Plaza 401 West Capitol, Suite 504 Ms. Ann Brown Desegregation Monitor Heritage West Building, Suite 510 201 East Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201 Ms. Elizabeth Boyter ARKANSAS DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION 4 State Capitol Mall Little Rock, AR 72201-1071 O:dnl201.030 14 AUG 2 4 1994 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION Office of Desegregation t\\/lc:,: .. ,. LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF v. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL DEFENDANTS INT ERVEN ORS INTERVENORS NOTICE OF FILING Attached to this notice of filing is the revised PCSSD budget for 1994-95 as approved by the PCSSD Board of Directors on August 23, 1994. The court will note that the PCSSD proposes to balance this budget by, if necessary, closing school one or two days early. However, even though the PCSSD used this means as its - device to balance the budget, under all present revenue forecasts, sufficient additional state aid should be received by the PCSSD during the 1994-95 school year to enable it to operate a full school year. Respectfully submitted: WRIGHT, LINDSEY \u0026 JENNINGS 200 West Capitol Avenue Suite 2200 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-3699 (501) 371-0808 By on, M. S At s I (76060) u aski County istrict CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE On August ll, 1994, a copy of the foregoing was mailed to:. Mr. Christopher Heller Friday, Eldredge \u0026 Clark 200 First Commercial Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Mr. Stephen Jones Jack, Lyon \u0026 Jones 400 TCBY Tower Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Mr. John W. Walker John W. Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 Mr. Richard Roachell Roachell \u0026 Streett 401 West Capitol, Suite 504 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Ms. Ann Brown, Monitor Office of Desegregation Monitoring Heritage West Building 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Ms. Elizabeth Boyter Arkansas Department of Education 4 State Capitol Mall Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 ~~~\\J J:jlpl238 .030 2 AUG 2 4 i994 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT v. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL PLAINTIFF DEFENDANTS INTERVENORS INTERVENORS NOTICE OF FILING/PROGRAM PLANNING AND BUDGETING PROCESS The Little Rock School District (\"LRSD\"), for its Notice of Filing, states: 1. Attached hereto as Exhibit No. 1 is a true and accurate copy of the Program Planning and Budgeting Process document for the 1994-95 school year which will guide the development of the LRSD's planning and budgeting activities for the 1996 fiscal year. Ind.Iii 1 WHEREFORE, the Little Rock School District does hereby submit this Notice of Filing and requests that it be awarded any and all legal and proper relief to which it may be entitled. lnd.lil Respectfully submitted, FRIDAY, ELDREDGE \u0026 CLARK 2000 First Commercial Bldg. 400 West Capitol Street Little Rock, AR 72201 (501) 376-2011 2 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I certify that a copy of the foregoing has been served on the following people by depositing copy of same in the United States mail on this ~'iday of August, 1994. Mr. John Walker JOHN WALKER, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72206 Mr. Sam Jones WRIGHT, LINDSEY \u0026 JENNINGS 2200 Worthen Bank Bldg. 200 West Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Steve Jones JACK, LYON \u0026 JONES, P.A. 3400 Capitol Towers Capitol \u0026 Broadway Streets Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Richard Roachell Roachell and Streett First Federal Plaza 401 West Capitol, Suite 504 Little Rock, AR 72201 Ms. Ann Brown (hand delivered pursuant to the order of the Court) Desegregation Monitor Heritage West Bldg., Suite 510 201 East Markham Street . Little Rock, AR 72201-~~4 ~ ~ -~~c~yiJ? -~ ~ - Jerry L. Malone lnd.m 3 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT vs. No. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 1, ET AL MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL ORDER AUG 2 ~ 1994 DEFENDANTS INTERVENORS INTERVENORS Before the Court is the motion of the Joshua Intervenors for an extension of time within which to exchange documents they intend to offer as evidence as well as the names of witnesses they intend to call at the hearing scheduled for the week of September 12, 1994. The motion is granted. The time for exchanging documents and witnesses is extended until and including September 6, 1994. The parties and the State are reminded that they must provide the ODM with copies of the above material at the same time. SO ORDERED th i s _2.J/ day of August 1994. UNITEIY'STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 2 2 8 AUG 2 5 199.t LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT v. NO. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SC "},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1608","title":"Court filings: Court of Appeals, appendix for appellant, Little Rock School District (LRSD)","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 Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit"],"dc_date":["1994-07-14"],"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","School integration","School buses","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","Education--Finance","Education--Economic aspects","Educational planning","Educational law and legislation","Court records","School management and organization","Magnet schools","Student assistance programs","Education and state","School facilities","School improvement programs","Education--Standards"],"dcterms_title":["Court filings: Court of Appeals, appendix for appellant, Little Rock School District (LRSD)"],"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/1608"],"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":["legal documents"],"dcterms_extent":["125 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1219","title":"Little Rock School District Court Submission","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":["1994-04-15"],"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--Finance","Educational law and legislation","Educational planning","School improvement programs","School integration","Student assistance programs"],"dcterms_title":["Little Rock School District Court Submission"],"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/1219"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["documents (object genre)"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\nThe transcript for this item was created using Optical Character Recognition (OCR) and may contain some errors.\nLITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT  COURT SUBMISSION April 15, 1994 TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary Review Process For Program Development Business Cases: Category I - Incentive Schools Page No. 1 2 4 Franklin Incentive School Communications Technology Theme 6 Franklin Incentive School Spanish Program Implementation 16 Rockefeller Incentive School Alternative Room Specialist 22 Rockefeller Incentive School Spanish Instruction 25 Rockefeller Incentive School Computer Science Theme 30 Rightsell Incentive School Spanish Instruction 43 Rightsell Incentive School Career Awareness and Mass Media Theme 46 Mitchell Incentive School Foreign Language Program (Spanish Teacher) 60 Garland Incentive School Multimedia Technology and Educational Research 64 Garland Incentive School Multimedia Technology Theme - Phase II 70 Stephens Incentive School Spanish Teacher 80 Business Cases: Category II - DesegregatiQn Plan/ADE 82 English As A Second Language (ESL) Program 84 Language Arts and Mathematics 97 Applied Biology and Chemistry 106 Science Curriculum Revision 113 Foreign Language Program 118 Science Program 126 Business Cases: Category Ill - Related Desegregation/ADE 134 Science, Mathematics, and Reading: Statewide Systemic Initiative 136 Foreign Language K-12 Curriculum Articulation 144 Social Studies Department Secretarial Position 150 Romine lnterdistrict School Theme Specialist 156 Incentive School Immersion Spanish Program - First Grade Pilot Project 160 Executive Assistant for the Associate Superintendent for Desegregation 165 Student Assignment Office Reorganization 174 1990-95 Revenue and Expenditure Projection (Draft 1) 204 Schedule of Major Budget Adjustments 206 Proposed Deficit Reduction Measures 208 Appendix A 209 Appendix B 210 Appendix C 211 Appendix D 212 Appendix E 213 Appendix F 214 I TO: FROM: SUBJECT: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT WEST MARKHAM AND IZARD LIT1LE ROCK, ARKANSAS April 25, 1994 Board of Directors ' - He~~ndent Proposed April 15, 1994, Court Submission Provided for your review is a copy of our proposed April 15, 1994, Court submission. Included are the business cases for programmatic additions,@eletfo) or modifications that are reflected in the budget and major budget adjustments ind uding projected revenue increases, projected revenue restrictions, and proposed deficit reduction strategies and rationales that identify the steps and timelines the district will follow in the implementation process. ---- 1 I. II. Ill. IV. / REVIEW PROCESS FOR PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT Business Cases Process/Guidelines PROCESS START FINISH DATE DATE Initiate process for progq1m modiflcation/development@etioiD 11-15-93 11-19-93 Review procedures for program modification/development 12-06-93 12-16-93 @_letio~ with budget managers Remind program managers to submit business cases 01-04-94 01-05-94 Develop process for review of business cases 03-01-94 03-01-94 A. Develop Response Ratings Format 03-03-94 03-08-94 1. Mission Statement and Goal Support 2. Desegregation implementation support 3. Quality of need 4. Quality of recommendations 5. Funding category B. Establish schedule for review of business cases. 02-28-94 03-22-94 C. Identify presenters/notify presenters of date of 02-28-94 03-22-94 presentation D. Present Cases 03-09-94 03-24-94 E. Resubmission/Modification of cases, as needed 03-14-94 03-24-94 PARTICIPANTS Superintendent's Council Manager - Support Service /Budget Managers Superintendent Director - Planning, Research and Evaluation Director - Planning, Research and Evaluation Superintendent's Council Superintendent's Council Principals/Program Managers/Specialists Principals/Program Managers/Specialists REVIEW PROCESS FOR PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT Page 2 PROCESS F. Review for content and establish need for program addition/modification/deletion G. Review criteria for funding ,), 1 . Desegregation and State requirements 2. Non-desegregation/ADE but Essential to mission and goals of LRSD H. Establish priority for funding ~ 1. Required: Desegregation and ADE requirements . 2 . Not required: Essential to District V. Forward to Manager of Support Services for inclusion In first draft of proposed budget. VI. Submit council approved business cases to Board of Director for Review. VII. Advise presenters of status of proposed business cases VIII. Special Board meeting to review/approve business cases (program additio~ odificationl IX. Submit Board approved business cards to Court. - START FINISH DATE DATE PARTICIPANTS 03-09-94 03-29-94 Superintendent's Council 03-17-94 03-17-94 Superintendent's Council 03-17-94 03-29-94 Superintendent's Council 03-17-94 03-17-94 Superintendent's Council 03-29-94 (4-15-99 z/zB/111- s/zt/t'I Superintendent 04-14-94 04-18-94 .. Superintendent 03-29-94 04-15-94 Superintendent and Board of Directors 04-15-94 Superintendent and Attorneys 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. SCHOOL Franklin Rockefeller Rightsell Mitchell Garland Stephens =---- BUSINESS CASES CATEGORY I - INCENTIVE SCHOOLS (Required - Double Funding) ITEM Theme 1.0 Spanish teacher 1.0 Aide - Alternative Classroom Specialist 1.0 Spanish teacher Technology Theme Implementation .5 Spanish teacher Technology Theme Implementation .5 Spanish teacher .5 Spanish teacher Technology Theme Implementation .5 Spanish teacher No impact on Incentive School Budget 4 AMOUNT $40,000 25,000 12,000 25,000 75,000 (maximum) 12,500 75,000 (maximum) 12,500 12,500 75,000 (maximum) 12,500 ~ -  1/11, ~(J 0 SUPERINTENDENT'S RECOMMENDATIONS FOR 1994-95 PROGRAM ADDITIONS/DELETIONS/MODIFICATIONS LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT BUSINESS CASES - 1993-94 STATUS REPORT SCHOOL AND/OR PROGRAM MANAGER Franklin Incentive School - Franklin Davis BUSINESS CASE. _ ___\nT.\n.:\nhe=m:.:..e -=-I=mp:..:..l=em=e:.:..:nt:.:.at.::..:i..::\non:.:...._ ____________ _ PROGRAM STATUS: [il Addition D Deletion D Modification REQUIRED OR SUPPORTS DESEGREGATION PLAN: u) Yes O No REQUIRED OR SUPPORTS STATE REQUIREMENTS: Q Yes D No NOT REQUIRED BUT ESSENTIAL TO DISTRICT: 0 Yes O No REQUESTED LEVEL OF FUNDING _ ____\n:$...\n..40\"-\",~oo\n..\n.o __________ _  ' RECOMMENDED LEVEL OF FUNDING_...\n..$:....\n4..\n..0,,:..\n.0..\n..\n00'--___________ _ ) . i I ---- ,,,... , ,I 11 ' \"\n(  Submitted by 1 ,. _ _,/ / ,' / ~ \" 1 _, Superintendent HPW/lks/ST ARPT.BC 5 BUSINESS CASE FRANKLlN lNCENTIVE SCHOOL COl\\.11\\.fUNICATIONS TECHNOLOGY THEME EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The LRSD is committed to a comprehensive desegregation plan which focuses on the total learning environment for all students. The incentive schools are an integral part of that plan, and their success is directly related to the success of the District's long term desegregation plan. Each incentive school was required to develop and implement a school theme. In support of the desegregation plan and a commitment to the teaching and learning process, Franklin Incentive School identified a communications technology theme. In order to accommodate budget restraints, the communications technology theme implementation -should- be implemented in phases. A plan of action is required to implement the theme in a way that supports the desegregation plan and provides quality training and learning for teachers and students. This business case includes the first phase of implementation of the plan for Franklin Incentive School. BACKGROUND Franklin Incentive School parents, students, and staff were surveyed in the spring of 1993 to select a theme. Franklin has had a history of computer technology in the LRSD and was approved as a communications technology school. A theme specialist was hired in April and resigned from the position in August. A new specialist was hired to . help plan and implement an effective program that prepares Franklin students for present and future educational successes. A team of volunteers organized to form the Franklin Restructing ~ommittee. The Restructing Committee worked to define and guide th'e communications technology theme. Communications technology is defined as the science of utilizing tools, machines, materials, techniques and processes ~or the purpose of communicating. This includes, but is not limited to, computers, televisions, phone lines, and audio visual production. The purpose of this theme plan is to promote desegregation through the academic and social growth of students. Technology will be used as a tool to expand and refine the LRSD revised curriculum. Staff and students will focus on communication skills - listening, speaking, reading, and writing, as well as test-taking, study skills, and career awareness. Through the infusion of technology I I I I I I I I I I I I ' and the LRSD opportunities effectively. curriculum, to access PROBLEM DEFINITION students will be provided unlimited relevant information and communicate The Franklin Incentive School staff is aware that student needs and full potentials have not been realized. The Franklin population understands that the major goal of the theme plan is to desegregate the incentive schools. It is the goal of the Frankli~ Incentive School staff to play a major part in the desegregation effort by providing effective teaching methods, quality programs, and committed and caring personnel. The communications technology theme plan will aid in that effort. In a world in which technology has affected governmental and industrial operations, financial institutions, occupations, architecture, transportation, family roles, and leisure activities, it becomes further evident that one role of educators should be coaching students for present and future successes. Franklin teachers must equip students with tools that enable them to function and successfully compete in an ever-changing world. The program will begin with extensive staff development and maximum use of existing technology. Franklin will establish a  software and video library and be inserviced in computer, television, and video production literacy. Communication skills will be fully integrated . into the concepts and strategies of  the revised curriculum. Thematic units of study and planned activities will be developed that connect vocabulary, reading, li t _erature, listening, speaking, writing, editing, handwriting, grammar, mechanics, spelling, study, and vocational skills. Students will practice the skills of reading, writing, listening, and speaking through all subject areas and at each grade level. Tools of communication that will be implemented at each grade level are as follows: Pre-Kindergarten studen~s will use television technology to develop listening. speaking, and socialization skills. using situational role play. Regularly scheduled AETN early education programs such as \"Sesame Street\", \"Barney\", \"Shining Time\", and \"Lambchop\", help to teach these .skills. Interpersonal skills will be mastered based on the Arkansas Educational Television Network. Programs will be used to enhance the LRSD Early Childhood Education curriculum. An introduction to Spanish is taught through the use of picture-word association and family scenarios. Kindergarten and First grade students will continue to receive computer instruction in the Writing To Read Lab, as well as in the Jostens Computer Lab. Students will work to develop listening and speaking skills, letter-sound association, journal writing, math and reading skills. Television technology will be utilized for instruction using videos to support skills, classroom activities, 7 individual interests. The teacher maintains the role of decision maker, instructor, and monitor. Technology serves as a major tool and additional option for method of instruction. Students will view selected programs from the Arkansas Educational Television Network Instructional Television Program, Cable News Network, and other videos that enhance LRSD curriculum. Viewing will be used to introduce, reinforce, review or extend appropriate skills/lessons. Franklin will purchase blank video tapes and pay AETN $5.00 per tape to record the ITV program. Approximately 3 lessons can be recorded on each tape. Videos will be loaded from the Communications Technology Lab. Students will experience the alphabet, word picture associations, speech, handwriting, Spanish, French, communication skills, Language Arts, Social Studies, Science, and Math. -,- - -- -- The television monitor will also be used as a communication tool between the principal's office and the classroom. Students will announce morning and afternoon school news using a newscast format. Instructions and visitor introductions can be made via television monitor. Staff development will be needed. Second and Third Grade students will continue using the Jostens Lab as the resource room for computer education. Users will be tutored in reading and math skills. Additional time will be given in the lab to provide for practice in writing and editing. Student activities . are not separate, but they are an integral part of the LRSD curriculum. Television monitors will be used to introduce, reinforce, review and extend subject area skills in math computation and problem solving, Social Studies, Science, creative writing, spelling, literature, foreign language, grammar, and music. AETN ITV Curriculum will support LRSD curriculum through the use of pre-taped videos especially designed for classroom instruction. A description of the ITV database is provided. Other programs on AETN, CNN and other . stations will also be used to support student achievement. Student development wil1 -be needed. Fourth Grade students will receive instruction in the communication technology lab that will increase study skills, writing, keyboarding, and communicating with others by electronic mail. Instruction in the lab will be a direct outgrowth of the classroom. The classroom teacher and the theme specialist will collaborate to ensure that connections are made between the classroom and the lab. A liquid crystal display (LCD) panel will be used to project the computer screen so that all students can see what is being taught. Students will use the computer, the telephone line, and a modem to write and receive messages from other classrooms and schools across the nation and world through the use of electronic mail. In the communications technology lab each student will begin to develop a 8 computerized writing portfolio using a personalized diskette. Teachers and other specialists will emphasize communications skills through the use of Compton's Multimedia Encyclopedia Program in the Franklin Media Center and Jostens Computer Lab. Students will be able to check out laptop computers to be used at home. ITV resource database will support writing, communication, study and research skills in the classroom. Instructional Television programs support all areas of the LRSD revised curriculum. students will be exposed to many other topics through research and extension. The emphasis for Fifth Grade students will be on publications. students will use the communications technology lab to create newsletters, journals, literary works, and pamphlets to be distributed and shared throughout the school  and  community. A computerized writing portfolio will be continued at this level. Sixth Grade students will be immersed in video production in the communications lab. The process of producing a video strengthens the skills of writing, reading, listening, and speaking and provides activities at the synthesis and evaluation levels of learning. students learn to locate, use, and actually produce information. Instructional television will be used at all levels to support the revised curriculum. Videotapes from AETN will be carefully selected by teachers working with the theme specialist to ensure correlation with classroom units. Specialists and teachers will teach communication skills. Debate, public speaking, listening, creative expression, and communication etiquette will e modeled by staff members and practiced by students. Instruction in Spanish and Career Awareness will be included in the communications technology program. Staff development will be needed. A?lALYS'IS OF ALTERNATIVES Franklin School considered several alternatives in order to implement the theme plan. Options are: 1. implement the entire project at all levels 2. implement phase 1 of the project 3. buy no additional equipment, but provide staff development with teachers using resources that are already available. It was crucial that the most effective and efficient method be sought to meet the needs of the Franklin population. Even though Franklin has a large computer lab, the technelogy supports a networked system which can not be used to support telecommunications, extensive LOGO writer software, and other multimedia programs. The Media Center has a very limited number of 9 I I computers and television monitors, and is incapable of offering communications technology to the entire school population. The success of the Writing To Read program is dependent upon sufficient training of teachers. To best meet the needs of Franklin Incentive School students, the decision was made to implement phase 1 of the project. Phase 1 provides for the creation of a communications technology lab. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the district implement phase 1 of the Fra\n,P-_k~n Incentive School Communications Technology Plan during the 1993-'4 school year. The rationale for this recommendations is that this phase of the theme provides:  * A communications technology lab that houses 4 independent computer work stations with hard drives capable of networking, word processing and publication. A printer, telephone line, modem, and LCD panel, and software encourages students to develop listening, speaking, reading, and writing skills. * A video production lab that is a part of the communications technology lab. Students will use cameras, software, and a television monitor to begin the creation of their own videos and movies. They will use skills used to produce, develop, and edit their own film. This phase includes hardware and software, in addition to video equipment needed. * Staff development to support the Writing To Read Lab for Kindergarten and First Grade classrooms, a writing portfolio assessment for grades 4-6, and thematic units. To fully implement the communications technology theme plan within LRSD budget constraints, a two phase process is recommended. Jj\n.. ~recommended that the district implement phase 2 during the 19~=g~ school year. The rationale for this recommendation is that this phase provides: * A video distribution center that includes 35 television monitors in the classroom and specialist' areas, 3 video cassette recorders, multiplexor, cable, distribution amp, brackets, and a video library. * Staff development to support television technology, appropriate use of software, personnel hired after training. 10 OBJECTIVE The objective of this recommendation is to better support the LRSD' s desegregation plan by implementing Phase 1 of Franklin Incentive School's communication technology theme. This technology will assist students in accessing relevant information, connecting subject areas, fostering creativity, and developing listening, speaking, reading, and writing skills to become effective communicators. Evaluation Criteria Progress will be monitored by the following criteria: * Increase use of thematic teaching concepts.   * Increased use of ABACUS and other technology to manage student progress and improve instruction. * Increased recruitment of white students with the assistance of LRSD Recruitment Office. * Increased overall standardized test score in Language Arts. * Increased student interest in learning through the use of technology. * Parental attitude and interest toward the use of technology will be surveyed. IMPACT ANALYSIS Communications technology is a powerful tool that is designed to enhance teaching and learning. The LRSD revised curriculum focuses curriculum, but teachers and students will give it meaning. Technology helps to m1n1m1ze recordkeeping and consistently sequence learning. It serves as a tutor and as tool for selfassessment. The most powerful characteristic is that technology is a medium for communication between students. It ensures interest, creativity, sharing, and achievement. The development of communication skills is essential. This plan totally supports the requirements set forth in the desegregation plan referencing theme implementation. Court Order Implementation of this plan would allow the school and district to demonstrate compliance of court order to develop a new theme which does not duplicate any existing incentive school theme. 11 Political Factors The district can receive favorable responses from the court and schools if resources are provided to implement this theme. Risk The equipment and software provided by implementing phase 1 of this plan can be transferred if necessary. The additional funds requested for this phase and future phases will be viewed as a wise investment in technology. Should the distract decide not to support this system, an alternative plan will need to be developed ~or the communications technology component of Franklin's theme. Timing In order for the Franklin Communications Technology theme component to be in place by the beginning of the 1994-95 school year, the purchasing process should begin as soon as possible. It is necessary to bid, receive, and install before the next school year begins. RESOURCE ANALYSIS Provided . is a listing of hardware. and software that must be purchased__to implement phase 1 of the communications technology theme plan into Franklin School. Included is the projected budget for staff and student development and the need for additional personnel. PROJECTED BUDGET Communications Technology Lab 4 computers workstations desk/chairs printers Telecommunications system 3 9600 capacity modems 1 Phone Line 1 LCD Panel Video Productions 1 Camcorder Panasonic Camera/Recorder AG-185U Tripod 2 VCR Recorder/Player @420.00 each Sharp Professional Cassette Recorder TV Monitor Panasonic Video Monitor CT2083T Tape Recorder Califone Recorder 527DAV 12 $10,000.00 600.00 1,000.00 4,000.00 1,500.00 100.00 840.00 500.00 150.00 I Microphone Omni 839 APPLE IIe Computer VCR Companion Video Overlay Card for APPLE IIe Still Video Camera Furniture for Lab Staff Development TOTAL 13 150.00 900.00 100.00 400.00 1,800.00 3,000.00 15,000.00 $40,040.00 FORCE FIELD ANALYSIS Primary supporters will be students, staff, and patrons of Franklin Incentive School. Other supporters will be those in the community who want to see successful themes implemented in the incentive schools and those who feel that it is important for students to have access to state-of-the art communications technology. Primary detractors will be limited to those who feel that the expense of the communications technology theme may not be justified. Information should be provided to them that will allow them to see the advantages of commnication through various technologies and to see progress Franklin students make after implementation. GENERAL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN TIMELINE Date 3/94 4/94 4/94 5/94 5/94 6/94 6/94 6/94 Activity Person(s) Responsible Plan presented to Board Superintendent of Directors for Approval Bid for Hardware/Software Purchasing Opened Hardware/Software Ordered Purchasing Hardware/Software Installed Additional material/supplies ordered Staff Development begins on-going monitoring/assistance provided Evaluation c~ current theme implementation 14 Vendor Theme Specialist Theme Specialist Vendor The~e Specialist Principal Theme Specialist curriculum Supervisors Princioal Theme Specialist Teachers Cur!\"iculum Supervisors SUPERINTENDENT'S RECOMMENDATIONS FOR 1994-95 PROGRAM ADDITIONS/DELETIONS/MODIFICATIONS LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT BUSINESS CASES - 1993-94 STATUS REPORT SCHOOL AND/OR PROGRAM MANAGER Franklin Incentive School - Franklin Davis BUSINESS CASE_ __S. .\n...pa_n_is_h_T_e_ac_h_er_-_1_.0_F._T_.E_. ___________ PROGRAM STATUS: [il Addition D Deletion O Modification REQUIRED OR SUPPORTS DESEGREGATION PLAN: 0 Yes  No REQUIRED OR SUPPORTS STATE REQUIREMENTS: [il Yes  No NOT REQUIRED BUT ESSENTIAL TO DISTRICT:  Yes  No REQUESTED LEVEL OF FUNDING __ __,\n$_25-=,'--00_0--=-(a _v_er_a.,._ge_s_a_la _r-=-y'-) ______ RECOMMENDED LEVEL OF FUNDING $25,000 (average salary) f- -i-() 7/rJ .1 p f - ~,,~.,,...,-. Submitted by ______,.. ..-_v/ \\l_ .___, _ _ Superintendent Hf'WAks/STAR!'T.BC 15 BUSINESS CASE FRANKLIN INCENTIVE SCHOOL SPANISH PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION EXECtJ'l'IVE SUMMARY The LRSD is committed to a comprehensive desegregation plan which focuses on the total learning environment for all students. The incentive schools are an integral part of that plan, and their success is directly related to the success of the District's long term desegregation plan. Each incentive school, was required by the desegregation plan, to implement a spanish program. A plan of action is required to implement the spanish program in a way that totally supports the desegregation plan and provides quality training and learning for students and teachers. - BACKGROUND Franklin School began as an Incentive School prior to the beginning of the 1991-92 school year. Franklin Incentive School is currently serving 325 students in grades PK-6. The majority of the student population at Franklin Incentive School has not had the opportunity - to be exposed to any language other than standard English. Due to Franklin becoming an Incentive School in August 1991, a Spanish program was implemented to service interested students in grades 4-6 through the Extended Day program. The teacher was inserviced through the district and provided with Spanish teaching tapes. Franklin Incentive School was unable to provide Spanish instruction to all students due to the lack of a certified Spanish teacher. Many interested students were denied Spanish instruction due to the lack of specialized teacher training. In January of 1994, the LRSD provided Franklin Incentive School with a certified Spanish teacher to service only 1st grade students. Al though Franklin is considered the home base for this teacher, the teacher services all 1st grade students attending an Incentive school in the Little Rock School District. PROBLEM DEFINITION Although students in grades 4-6 Extended Day program are offered Spanish instruction, only a limited number of students are accepted due to a mandated student:teacher ratio. We currently have only one trained, but un-certified in Spanish, teacher working in the Extended Day program. 16 PROBLEM DEFINITION - continued Due to the LRSD providing only one certified Spanish teacher to travel between 6 school, our Franklin Incentive School students are receiving inadequate services. Many students are unable to receive Spanish instruction due to the lack of a certified Spanish instructor. ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES A survey was provided for certified personnel and parents of Franklin Incentive School students to determine  the interest and need of the Spanish program mandated by the LRSD's desegregation plan. Of the 28 certified teachers responding to the survey, 15 {54%) indicated that they felt Franklin Incentive School would benefit from the services of a Spanish teacher. 13 {46%) certified teachers indicated they did not believe a Spanish teacher would be -benefic:tal to the total school program. The majority of certified teachers favoring the Spanish program - indicated a 1/2 time Spanish teacher would be adequate to meet the - - -~ ~- needs of Franklin--i:ncentive School students in grades 1-6. Of the 70 .~arents responding to the survey 50 (71%) indicated that they felt -their Franklin Incentive School students would benefit from_ the services of a Spanish teacher. - The majority of parents also favored a 1/2 time Spanish teacher to service their students needs. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the LRSD implement the hiring of a 1/2 time certified Spanish teacher to service Franklin Incentive School students in 'grades 1-6. Due to the results of the survey provided to certified teachers and parents it has been determined that: *A 1/2 time certified Spanish teacher would be adequate to service all students in grades 1-6 with minimal additional pull-outs. *Every student in grades 1-6 will be introduced to the Spanish language and culture. 17 RECOMMENDATION - continued *The district will be in compliance with the court ordered Desegregation Plan with the hiring of the Spanish teacher. OBJECTIVE _The obj ec.ti ve of this recommendation is to better support the LRSD's desegregation plan by implementing the Spanish program at Franklin Incentive School. The district as well  as the school needs this program in preparing our students for the future. The Spanish program used appropriately will capture the minds of our students and provide exciting presentations to motivate and encourage students to learn and master the Spanish language. Evaluation Criteria  -----==- - '~ *Increased -student awareness of other cultures - *Increased number of students exposed to a foreign ~---=-- ~ language._ =_  --~- - =- ~_:-.=--=:.  ~ -- - - *A-quality foreign language program will have a positive __ --~ _impact on the recruitment of white students to --  _Franklin Incentive School. ..::. L-= =....:.a -=-In_c\n:reased parental involvement due to increased =--  - :\n_ - student interest. *Quality thematic units using cross cultural objectives. IMPACT ANALYSIS will open new doors for students at Franklin The potential for improving the goals of be enhanced by the implementation of a quality The Spanish program Incentive school. desegregation will Spanish program. Desegregation This plan totally supports the requirements set forth in the desegregation plan referencing the Spanish program. Court Order Implementation of this plan would allow the school and District to demonstrate compliance of court order to establish the Spanish program. 18 IMPACT ANALYSIS - continued Political Factors The district can receive favorable responses from the court and schools if resources are provided to implement this program. Risk Should the district decide not to support this program, the results can be very damaging as the district will be out of compliance with the court ordered plan. In addition to this, current  and future students of Franklin Incentive School will be deprived of an opportunity to develop a foreign language due to the absence of a Spanish program. Timing The hiring of a 1/2 time Spanish teacher should be made prior to the beginning of the 1994-95 school year. Plans must be complete in order to have a successful program in place. RESOURCE 1.NALYSIS Personnel Analysis-- The hiring of a 1/2 time Spanish teacher at Franklin In~entive School will have a positive impact on 200-250 projected stuaents in grades 1-6. The hiring of a 1/2 time Spanish teacher will not require the hiring of additional support staff. The LRSD Human Resources department along with the LRSD Foreign Language department will be instrumental in the recruitment of potential applicants to be interviewed by the Franklin Incentive School staffing committee. 19 FORCE FIELD ANALYSIS Primary supporters will be students, staff, and patrons of Franklin Incentive School. Other supporters will be those in the community who want to see successful foreign language programs implemented in the incentive schools and those who feel that it is important for students to have access to the benefits of foreign culture. Primary detractors will be very limited to those who feel that the expense of the foreign language program may not be justified, and -t-h i=c:: who fc:u:l hn nnni i nnl i:: mic:,n 1111 - 11 i= n,, ne\u0026gt; n r o,:: from the basis educational program. GENERAL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN Date 3/94 4/94 7/94 8/94 8/94 ongoing Activity Plan presented for approval Advertisement and Recruitment if Spanish teacher begins Final selection of Qualified Applicant Implementation of 1/2 time Spanish program Evaluation of Spanish Program 20 Person(s) Responsible Principal/ superintendent Human Resources Franklin Staff Committee Principal Spanish Teacher Franklin Staff Principal Vice-Principal Franklin Staff Monitors SUPERINTENDENT'S RECOMMENDATIONS FOR 1994-95 PROGRAM ADDITIONS/DELETIONS/MODIFICATIONS LITrLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT BUSINESS CASES - 1993-94 STATUS REPORT SCHOOL AND/OR PROGRAM MANAGER Rockefeller Incentive School - Anne Mangan BUSINESS CASE. ___ _\n_\nA:..:...\nlt=e.:...:.rn=a.:..:ti'--',\nve::....:.:.:Ro=o=m~S=pe=c.:..:a:i: ..:...l, .:..s:: ~t ___________ PROGRAM STATUS: [3 Addition D Deletion D Modification REQUIRED OR SUPPORTS DESEGREGATION PLAN: G) Yes D No REQUIRED OR SUPPORTS STATE REQUIREMENTS: [il Yes D No NOT REQUIRED BUT ESSENTIAL TO DISTRICT: D Yes D No REQUESTED LEVEL OF FUNDING $48,000 -------'-------------- RECOMMENDED LEVEL OF FUNDING $12,000 __ __\n__ ____________ }  r_1 07 f- ,,.. A S b  db -' J --(\n/ ,1 1 \u0026lt;Z- ,J I' L-- ~ .,,.,,_ u m1tte y----~~=----1:--../\\..,,'----- Superintendent HPW/lb/ST AIU'r.BC 21 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT ROCKEFELLER INCENTIVE SCHOOL 700 East 17th Phone 324-2385 Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 ROCKEFELLER INCENTIVE SCHOOL, I. BUSINESS CASE FOR ALTERNATIVE ROOM SPECIALIST A. BACKGROUND During the 1991-92 school year, Rockefeller established an alternative classroom setting where students with behavior problems would go for short term stays with continued instruction rather than be sent home. Teachers provided plans for the students, work was collected and grades were recorded during this period of time. An instructional aide manned this program. During the 1992-93 school year, the program was discontinued because we couldn  t spare the instructional aide and did not have anyone fully qualified to devote full time to this duty. Also, space for an alternative classroom was not available. I made a request for upstairs space to be finished out for classroom space but Doug Eaton\nDirector of Plant Services, did not recommend the change. That space is heated and cooled, equipped with intercom, and proper lighting but because an electrical panel was in that area, Mr. Eaton, did not think it was advisable. During the 1993-94 school year, an alternative specialist was not available. B. PROBLEM DEFINITION The learning process for all students and instructional process for teachers is interrupted by those students who choose to behave inappropriately. The behavior is disruptive and detrimental to the educational programs. A plan needs to be in place that will assure that nothing interferes with the teaching or the students learning. C. ALTERNATIVES 1) Make no changes in the school program and continue to handle discipline problems as presently done. 2) There are children who need additional assistance working through inappropriate behavior. The behavior exhibited in the classroom, hallways, lunch room, playground, or special activities prohibit the teacher from 22 teaching and/or the students from learning. This assistance could be provided by an alternative specialist. 3) Hire instructional aides instead of the specialist to assist with improving behavior and to work toward eliminating behavior sanctions. 4) Children who violate the Little Rock School District's guidelines for responsible behavior and who, by following the rules and consequences outlined in the handbook, would continue to be sent home or suspended. Children do not gain educationally when sent home as punishment for bad behavior. 5) Habitual offenders can be routed through the office of the LRSD hearing officer. 6) Allow a non-certified instructional aide to be in charge of a time out/alternative classroom and let it serve as a \"holding place\" for students to be until they decide that their behavior can be improved. 7) Hi re an alternative specialist who could serve in that capacity assisting students and teachers in establishing good/acceptable behavior. D. RECOMMENDATIONS Rather than hire a full or part time alternative specialist, the staffing committee recommends  hiring additional instructional aides (2 for primary and 2 for intermediate) so cla~ses will have additional aides with at least 60 hours of college credit. These persons will assist the regular classroom teachers with instruction and working with behavior problems. They will be available to work with the students in a time out setting when necessary. They would be required to go through behavioral management training such as positive discipline strategies, behavioral modification techniques. Social counseling/training would be desirable. They should demonstrate firm and fair  disciplinary skills. Staffing Committee: Delois Sykes - Joshua Intervenors Paula Grier - LRSD Representative Susan Hoover - Parent Charlotte Lee - Parent Marilou McMahan - 1st grade teacher Pat Holder - 2nd grade teacher Skip Gardner - 3rd grade teacher Francile Moore - 4th grade teacher Melvia Mathis - 5th grade teacher Judy Meier - 6th grade teacher Sharon Brooks - Assistant Principal Anne Mangan - Principal 23 SUPERINTENDENT'S RECOMMENDATIONS FOR 1994-95 PROGRAM ADDITIONS/DELETIONS/MODIFICATIONS LITTI..E ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT BUSINESS CASES - 1993-94 STATUS REPORT SCHOOL AND/OR PROGRAM MANAGER Rockefeller Incentiv.e School - Anne Mangan BUSINESS CASE_ __Sp ._a_n ,s__h Te_a_ch_e_r -_1_._0 F_T. _.E _._ ___________ PROGRAM STATUS: (3 Addition  Deletion  Modification REQUIRED OR SUPPORTS DESEGREGATION PLAN: w Yes  No REQUIRED OR SUPPORTS STATE REQUIREMENTS: w Yes  No NOT REQUIRED BUT ESSENTIAL TO DISTRICT: 0 Yes O No REQUESTED LEVEL OF FUNDING $25,000 (ave. teacher's salary) RECOMMENDED LEVEL OF FUNDING $25,000 (ave. teacher's salary) b J--,.p fl) LJ) / A , ~ /~J Submitted y F \\..,/ ,, '- ., ------=-su-p-en-:-.d-r-te-n-:-d-en_t ___ _ HPW /11:sJST ARPr.BC 24 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT ROCKEFELLER INCENTIVE SCHOOL 700 East 17th Phone 324-2385 Little Rock, Arkansas 7~\n?.06 ROCKEFELLER INCENTIVE SCHOOL I. BUSINESS CASE FOR SPANISH INSTRUCTION A. BACKGROUND Spanish is the foreign language selected by the Little Rock School District to be taught in incentive schools. This was proposed in the Desegregation Plan and approved by the court. In the past, Spanish has been offered at Rockefeller in a variety of ways. It has been taught by the auxiliary teacher during the regular school day .to all grade levels and also during extended day. Saludos and Amigos video recordings with clear directions and lesson plans have been used as guidelines for effective instruction. The current situation is that parents and students were given a survey with extended day offerings (Spanish being one of the offerings) and they choose what they want and/or what their child wishes to participate in during extended day. Those students signing up for Spanish are assigned to take the class during extended day. A classroom teacher conducts these lessons. This is dealt with much in the same way as junior high or high school students making a selection from the course offerings - an elective. . In addition, the Little Rock School District has hired one Spanish teacher with high school certification who rotates days with the six incentive schools. He comes to Rockefeller and teaches Spanish to first grade students on Mondays and Wednesdays. Fridays are left open for make-up sessions or to work in other grade levels. A consultant, Dr. Armstrong, from UALR, assists the teacher with lesson plans. The teacher demonstrates adequate knowledge but his experience has been on the high school level. B. PROBLEM DEFINITION A fully certified foreign language teacher who has training or experience with elementary students is needed to provide a quality Spanish instructional program. If all grade levels must receive instruction, a full time specialist would be required to be able to fit it in an already very tight schedule. We must follow the guidelines mandated by state requirements on the amount of time that must be spent on math, language arts (reading, writing, spelling), science, and social studies. In addition there are pull outs for art, music, and P.E. as well as computer instruction. Chapter I reading and math, gifted, resource, speech, family life, wellness\nrites of passage, and numerous things also have to fit into the schedule. At the present time, the Spanish teacher is in the building for 1st grade instruction only and instructs two days a week for thirty minutes for each class. This is for three classes this year but we have projected sixteen 1st - 6th grade classes for next year. To schedule that many classes there will be a difficult time scheduling without cutting into the large language arts blocks that are desirable. C. ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES 1) The staffing committee met to assess whether we need a full time or half time Spanish teacher. Representatives from Joshua Intervenors (Delois Sykes)~ District Staff Development Representative (Paula Grier), Parents (Susan Hoover and Charlotte Lee). One representative classroom teacher from each grade level (McMahan, Holder, Gardner. Moore, Mathis. Meier), administrators (Brooks and Mangan) made up the committee. 2) Identification of Alternatives: 1. Do nothing - leave Spanish instruction to extended day and student/parent choice for participation. 2. Require Spanish. offer during extended day. and rotate all students through the program for shorter periods of time. 3. Eliminate the requirement to include Spanish in the regular day curriculum by requesting a change through the court. 4. Offer Spanish to only one or two grade levels during the regular school day. 5. Hire full time Spanish instructor. Better able to work in with already full scnedule since more classes have been added since our first assessment. 6. Hire half time Spanish instructor. Very difficult to schedule when teacher is shared with another school and we are limited in having to squeeze it in on only selected hours and days. 7. Full time Spanish teacher teaching by grade levels reaching each group for 9 week periods of time. 26 D. RECOMMENDATION Action Recommended by the Staffing Committee: 1) The committee would first recommend that the district re-think the requirement to include Spanish in the curriculum. The district should ask the court to eliminate this requirement. The rationale is that the elementary students must build a strong foundation in reading, writing, and math in the primary grades with a continuous strengthening in those areas as well as science and social studies in the intermediate levels. The infusion of the Spanish component can be on each grade level. Interrogate learning experiences, where we use themes, can bring together the components of the core curriculum. The state is placing heavy emphasis on writing and comprehensive skills. The new testing program will reflect that as a focused area for measuring student success. Standardized test results reveal that students across the board have demonstrated a weakness in reading. 5th and 6th grade students already receive Latin instruction. Spanish is not an area in which children are tested. Teachers see results of more progress when they can spend the bulk of their time on the basics with the goal of raising self esteem, increasing academic improvement and reducing academic disparity. Adding another thing to the regular school day would cause the curriculum to be spread too thin. When surveys are returned very few parents and students select Spanish as their choice to participate in during extended day. We have to assign the students to that activity and, even then, we have had parents who_ have requested that it not be one of the activities assigned to their child. At the elementary level, most parents would prefer strengthening reading skills, love for reading library books, and comprehension of the written word. We fully respect the intent of the original recommendation for including Spanish in the incentive school curriculum. We fully support doing everything possible to prepare young children for the future and to pave the road toward present and future successes - especially being ready for a foreign language in junior high. However, we feel that data indicates that there is a far greater need for high levels of concentration on the basic skills. Offering a foreign language has not proven to be an effective desegregation tool. The Spanish curriculum has not yet been developed and to provide a foreign language for the sake of having one would only have a watered down version and not be the effective program that I know the district would insist upon having before it would be satisfied. 27 If this recommendation is not accepted by the district or the court, we recommend: 2) Hire one full time certified Spanish teacher with training and/or experience working with elementary students in order to offer Spanish to all grade levels (1st-6th). This recommendation meets the requirements as stated in the court approved desegregation plan. Budget must include money designated for curriculum development, training, materials, supplies, equipment, stipends for hired Spanish teachers to plan with one another and the Di rector of Language Arts/Foreign Language and last, ~stablishing a foreign language lab. If a certified Spanish teacher with elementary teacher training is not found and if a quality Spanish curriculum cannot be fully developed, it should not be offered as a part of the curriculum or offered only to the grade levels for which appropriate curri6ulum has been developed. 28 SUPERINTENDENT'S RECOMMENDATIONS FOR 1994-95 PROGRAM ADDITIONS/DELETIONS/MODIFICATIONS LITfLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT BUSINESS CASES - 1993-94 STATUS REPORT SCHOOL AND/OR PROGRAM MANAGER Rockefeller Incentive School - Anne Mangan BUSINESS CASE __T e_ch_n_ol_ o=gy_T_h_em_e_I_m.:_pl_e_me_n_ta_t_oi _n __________ PROGRAM STATUS: GJ Addition D Dele.tion D Modification REQUIRED OR SUPPORTS DESEGREGATION PLAN: [il Yes D No REQUIRED OR SUPPORTS STAIB REQUIREMENTS: [il Yes D No NOT REQUIRED BUT ESSENTIAL TO DISTRICT: 0 Yes O No REQUESIBD LEVEL OF FUNDING __ =$1=9.::...1,i.::.18=5=--------------- RECOMMENDED LEVEL OF FUNDING __,\n_$...\n.75..:...:...\n00...\n_0....:(=ma\n_x...\n.im...\n_um=)--------- ,} 1n/JY() u:\n' A, fi., it-.. Submitted by __\n- -,---~-~:------- Superintendent H'f'W,11.:st.ITARPT.BC 29 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT ROCKEFELLER INCENTIVE SCHOOL 700 East , 7th Phone 324-2385 Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 BUSINESS CASE FOR THEME INFUSION ROCKEFELLER INCENTIVE SCHOOL COMPUTER SCIENCE THEME EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Little Rock School District is committed to a comprehensive desegregation plan which includes the development and implementation of themes for all incentive schools. The incentive schools are vital parts of the total plan whose goals are to achieve academic success for all children, to decrease the disparity of achievement among the sub-groups, to create an environment conducive for learning, and to achieve a good racial balance within the school population. Rockefeller Incentive School has the theme of computer science and uses this theme as a tool for achieving the goals. A. BACKGROUND Computer Science was selected as the theme for Rockefeller during the 1986-87 school year. Rockefeller was one of four schools to pilot a full computer lab with 25 computers. In addition, one Commodore computer was installed in each classroom. A computer specialist was hired to oversee the total computer program. The first year this was a part time position and the next year it changed to full time. In 1990, the district made a decision to remove themes from the incentive school programs. During the 1992-93 school year, a theme committee was established to re-determine what the theme for Rockefeller would be. A survey went out to all parents, from early childhood to sixth grade. The staff was also surveyed to determine interest, expertise, and feasibility of all alternatives. The results of the surYeys overwhelmingly supported returning to the computer theme. The Writing to Read Lab was added inventory and was used vd th Kindergarten classes. Compton's Multimedia Encyclopedia media center. 30 to the school and first grade was added in the After the choice for the theme had been submitted to the district and approved, the committee met to establish short and long range plans. Goals and objectives were outlined. i-fl detail that would support the district's revised curriculum. The committee made decisions about necessary equipment needed for the second phase of implementation for theme enhancement. The Commodore computers that had originally been provided in the classrooms were no longer up-to-date but were to be used as long as they continued to function with the available software. They would be replaced once they could no longer function properly. At the end of the 1992-93 school year, a cross section of the staff was selected to work for an extended time for theme development and refinement. During this week, staff previewed school software presently in the building and matched up software with the revised curriculum objectives. The committee previewed new software and expressed desires for software needed to enhance learning o'n all  subject areas. Guidelines were developed to present to the total  staff with objectives that would be a part of the school improvement plan for the coming year. The plan for phases of the theme development was established. At the beginning of the 1993-94 school year, a three day (August 11, 12, 13, 1993) intensive inservice was held for the entire staff. Seventeen new IBM compatible computers, nine printers, and seven computer stations for the classrooms had been purchased from the school budget and installation was completed during the first quarter of the school year. The following activities have been developed to implement the Computer Science Theme: * A certified teacher has been hired as the school theme specialist. * The computer theme specialist provides training sessions twice a month for all staff members. * The theme specialist conducts classroom sessions and provides software for classroom computers that support the curriculum.  * The specialist catalogs software and maintains a library of available materials. * Repair and trouble shooting is included within duties of the specialist. Keeping up-to-date materials and supplies (ribbons, paper, etc.) in all classrooms and office is an added duty. * Reports are generated on the computer for Student Education Plans, Student Performance Profiles, and Home Communication Forms. 31 2 * Students are taught programming, keyboarding , graphic programs such as computer terminology. Instruction is word processing, Print Shop, and presentations are age appropriate. adapted so that * Computer Club is offered during the extended day. * A grade book program for teachers was developed. * Teachers offer an extension of the lessons taught and include projects, writing, development of bulletin boards, and use of software that supports the curriculum. * Specialists use computers to help them with reports and communication. , * Teachers use the computers to develop tests,~ home communication, recording grades for up-to-date grade averages.. ': * Instructional Assistants have received co~puter training and assist the teacher in monitoring students using the computer. B. PROBLEM DEFINITION In order to fully implement the Computer Science Theme at Rockefeller Incentive School and in order to further develop the theme, a comprehensive plan must be in place. The major goal is to use technology to enhance the revised curriculum, establish a new and exciting method of learning the  basics, as well as providing opportunities for enrichment in all subject areas. Children must be challenged and provided positive experiences that will prepare them for the wonderful world of technology in which they now live and in which they will be entrenched in the work place of the future. At the present time, students on all grade levels are scheduled to attend the computer lab twice weekly with an additional time planned for students identified in the Chapter I program. The sessions in the lab are 30 minutes long and are divided in half with reading and math instruction. In other words, students get no more than 30- 45 minutes per week of reading instruction and the same in math in the computer lab. Test results clearly reveal  weaknesses in reading which impact not only reading scores but damage or lower test scores on other subject areas that require reading mastery skills. To achieve maximum mastery results, it is believed that a concentrated effort must be placed on this weakness. Use of technology supports our theme and would serve as the tool to provide this high level of concentration. Positive results would be expected in all subject areas. 32 3 r propoTsoi ngf:u lly implement the Computer Theme, the school is Phase I: (1) At the beginning of the 1994-95 school year, the distributive method of providing computer instruction will include expanding the present reading and math program for 1st-3rd grades in the classroom setting. This wil_l allow 30 minutes per day on the computer (150 minutes per week) in reading and extended time on math. There will be six computers in each of the nine classrooms. Each room will have a printer. Every primary student will experience technology every day as an integral part of instructii\n,p. An extension of the current software will be added with an integrated language arts program.  (2) Writing to Read and Josten Computer labs will be continued for Kindergarten students during the 1994-95 school year. (3) An Early Childhood Software Program for 3 and 4 year old children will be implemented. Two student stations and a printer will be provided for each of the four early childhood classes. (4) Fourth, fifth and sixth grade students will continue computer instruction in the computer  lab with continuous software related to the curriculum used on classroom computers. ( 5) Four teacher presentation computer systems should be purchased. This technology approach is an exciting technique that lets the teacher use interactive, full-motion video, animation, sound, text and graphics to support and enhance instruction in the classroom. (6) A full time lab attendant should be reinstated. There will be an additional host/file server to man and since the primary classes will be working on the computers daily rather than twice a week, more reports will be generated. Whole class instruction such as keyboarding, word proc-essing and programming, by the teachers and the theme specialist will be conducted more frequently in the lab setting. This has not always been possible since the lab time was so tightly scheduled. Also, the classroom teacher could send a group of children to the lab to work on assignments, especially those using Compton's Multimedia Encyclopedia. The lab attendant would be available to assist small groups. ( 7) Staff Development for teachers and instructional aides will be provided. 33 4 f Phase II: ( 1) The Josten computer lab will be up-graded. The current hardware is old and slow. No more upgrades may be supported by the current system. ( 2) -1'he distributive method for providing computer instruction to Kindergarten will be added along with an integrated language arts program. This will consist of nine student stations and software. (3) Intermediate grades will continue in the computer lab for instruction. (4) The computer lab will also be used for ' large, group sessions for students and staff. (5) Two computers will upgrade/replace Compton's Multimedia Encyclopedia in the media center. . (6) Three additional teacher stations - hardware and f software systems would be purchased increasing the number to cover one system per grade level. (7) Six printers will be purchased. Phase III: ( 1 ). Early Childhood Software will be purchased to meet the needs of three and four year old students. (2) Equipment and related programs to support the computer theme and assist in instruction will be purchased. This will include software extensions for thematic units as well as third party software. (3) The library will be automated so that it will provide access for library materials for students and teachers. This will extend the computer theme and better prepare the students to be better library users. (4) Fourteen teacher stations will be added to provide each teacher one for their class. (5) Nine additional printers will be purchased which will complete the purchases for one for each classroom. C. ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES Consideration was given to a wide range of instructional possibilities that would support the computer theme and satisfy the essential component to increase achievement. Although most considerations were financially expensive, the gains of student mastery would make the investments worth the cost. The alternatives are: (1) We will make no changes in the way computer instruction is being delivered. Pro- Computer instruction will continue to be offered. Training of students/staff can continue. Con- Time spent on the basic learning system on reading is limited to 30 minutes per week. Children have to continue computer classes as a pull-out learning activity. 34s Making no change is not in the best interest of the children dn that it does not allow longer periods of time on identified weak areas. (2) Adopt the recommendation made in phases by beginning the process immediately. Pro- By phasing in the program, the proposal is financially more feasible. The expenses can be spread out over several years but still allow us to begin implementation immediately - by th~ beginning of the 1994-95 school year. The sooner it can begin, the greater the impact that can be expected to bring '' positive results. _  f Proof that we are making an honest effort to improve upon the theme and that the incentive school program is successful in making a difference. Con- Very expensive. (3) Implementation of Phase I only. Pro - Demonstrate that the district is working toward improvement of computer science theme. Students in first through third grades will receive more intensive focus on reading and math. The students will have at least 150 minutes per week on reading with the computer as opposed to the 30 per week they now receive. Time spent on math would be increased. The expected outcome for the change in computer use is increased academic achievement in the area of reading and all related subjects. Con - Limited -up-grading of the overall computer science theme does not result in total infusion of the selected theme. (4) Implement Phase I and the part of Phase II that at least up-grades the school lab. Pro- Primary students would receive increased time on the computer on reading and math. The full computer lab would be available for additional computer instruction of other subject areas/training of students in computer skills since it will free up the computer lab schedule. Training of staff in full lab setting will be possible. Equipment is up-graded in the lab. Equipment is seven years old and cannot be expected to last indefinitely. Less expensive than fu11 implementation. Con- Expense 35 \" (5) (6) Up-grade the computer lab only Pro- Replacement of equipment that is getting old and is slow. Allow us to run third party software. Use of lab for staff development. Con- Limited new technology introduced Students still have limited time on reading and math. It does not allow us time to schedule in adequate computer instruction for whole groups or third party software. Provide distributive method to all grade levels Pro - Discontinue pull-out for computer lab. Con- Difficult to schedule with intermediate classes who departmentalize. More expensive to purchase six computers for each classroom as opposed to up-grading _ the lab with 25 stations. D. RECOMMENDATION Rockefeller Incentive School requests that the Little Rock School District make provisions to up-grade the adopted theme. A solid foundation has been established. A full computer lab, Writing to Read Lab, computer lab stations with two computers and a printer in every classroom, beginning library of software, and the emergence of computer literate students and staff are already in the first stages of development. Computers at Rockefeller are already regarded as a friend and valuable tool. The recommendation of this business case includes: (1) We will implement the theme in three phases with the purchasing process to begin immediately. The overall proposal will provide capabilities to move computer instruction on the primary level from the lab to the classroom. As a result of this change, the larger computer lab will be made available for whole group sessions for the intermediate level classes using the Josten Basic Learning System as well as teacher training/staff development and for use with other software. The software will support the adopted Little Rock School District revised curriculum addressing primarily reading and math but not limited to those subject areas. (2) We will provide age appropriate software for three and four year old students. (3) We will expand and up-grade the existing reading/math software in the primary classrooms to include integrated language arts component. The benefits will include helping children build a strong foundation in the critical language skills that they will use for the rest of their lives: The experiences with interconnected language 3fi 7 r activities and emerging literacy will make learning fun and natural. (4) We will provide a new teacher presentation system that will allow teachers to use technology to help children meet learning challenges. (5) Security of the facility should be increased for maximum safety of the valuable equipment. At .the present time, continuing the distributive method to intermediate grades is not recommended for a number of reasons: . (1) A structured rotational use of centers in the classroom is not as frequently used on intermediate levels. (2) The desegregation plan requires departmentalizat-i.pn and strict rotation to computers every day would be r difficult to schedule. Each teacher teaches their own homeroom class reading in a 45 minute block and then the rotation by subject matter begins. This takes all day to complete. (3) Use of the distributive method would require a longer block of reading time than is recommended for intermediate students. If used, it would cut in to the required hours required by the state for each subject area. (4)Just as important, as a computer school, it is essential to maintain an up-to-date computer lab setting. This is necessary to achieve computer proficiency for students and staff. One of the major components of the school theme is to develop an interest, an understanding and a love for using technology. Instruction is far more effective if the students - no matter which sub group - can have hands-on capabilities in a lab. It is more meaningful and understandable when one can personally experience using the computer rather than just listening and watching a demonstration. E. OBJECTIVE I The objective of this recommendation is to support the Little Rock School Districts commitment to the desegregation plan by developing more fully the computer theme in innovative and creative ways. Evaluation Criteria: * Monitoring of student progress through technology using both the district's curriculum management system and the Josten Basic Learning System will be continued. * Up-to-date detailed computer printouts of student progress will be used to evaluate mastery and develop plans as needed. - 37 8 * Student achievement and mastery of reading skills will increase. as measured by the Stanford 8 test results. The year 1993-94 will serve as the baseline data. * There will be increased knowledge of co~puter technology for students and staff. . . ~ Teachers will increase use of technology which will increase teacher proficiency in instructional and administrative tasks. * Achievement results will attract parents and ~esult in positive recruitment efforts. ~\n. * The fact that Rockefeller is teaching and_ using technology  regularly for instructional purposes will be impressive and assist in recruitment. F. IMPACT ANALYSIS Desegregation This plan supports the requirements set forth in the desegregation plan requiring theme development and implementation Court Order The Little Rock School District would demonstrate good faith in complying with the court order to develop a theme and keeping it up-graded with current trends that will support the curriculum. Political Factors The Little Rock School District will benefit by establishing a valuable tool for recruitment and favor from the court by implementing the theme selected for the school. Risk If students are not exposed to technology at an early age, they will not be as prepared for the future that lies ahead for them in the work field or their chosen career/profession. Timing In order for the Computer Theme ~omponent to move to a higher level and make the necessary improvements by the i.\\,- 38 0 1994-95 school year, approval must be given by the Superintendent and cabinet and presented to the board~ After approval, the purchasing process must begin as quickly as possible so as to complete any bidding necessary, order selected equipment/materials, complete any necessary wiring, installation of equipment, and staff inservice training to be completed before the beginning of the 1994-95 school year. It would be essential to begin the program at the very beginning of the school year to obtain maximum results. The equipment in the computer lab is 7 years old and. although it has been no problem to us up to this date, it is understandable that the equipment cannot last indefinitely. Thus the request to up-grade the l~b -~s made. 39 REVISED PROPOSAL FOR THEME INFUSION FOR ROCKEFELLER INCENTIVE SCHOOL/COMPUTER. SCIENCE THEME MARCH 21, 1994 PHASE I - 1994-95 SCHOOL YEAR: Hardware 1 Unix File Server ....................... $20,816.00 Extra Enet Cards......................... 130.00 Lannet Repeaters. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  1 , 715. 00 Over 40/80/120 hardware ............... 1,617.00 10 Printers.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7,500.00 54 Student Stations for grades 1-3 .... 76,410.00 Sub-total for hardware ................. $108,188.00 Software .................... : .......... $70,997.00 Integrated Language Arts Software Staff Development Required Plant Services ........... Electrical Wiring Cables Personnel .............................. $12,000.00  Reinstate Full Time Computer .Attendant - one person o\"nlY ESTIMATE PRE TAX GRAND TOTAL-PHASE I .... $191,185.00 PHASE II - 1995-96 SCHOOL YEAR: Up grade the computer lab which will include: Hardware and Software 28 Student Stations: 25 Computers to up-grade computer lab 2 Computers for Compton's 1 Computer for Resource 4 Teacher Stations ESTIMATE PRE TAX GRAND TOTAL-PHASE II   $84,596.00 tlD PROPOSAL FOR PHASE III - 1996-97 SCHOOL YEAR 9 Student Stations for Kindergarten .. 3 Printers ......................... . 8 Student Stations-Early Childhood .. . Software Add-on Integrated Language Arts $13,500.00 2,250.00 12,000.00. Software-kindergarten ............ $10,800.00 Software for Early Childhood ......... 13,000.00 Staff Development.................... 5,000.00 3 Teacher Stations ................... 17,820.00 Required Plant Services Any additional electrical wiring/cables needed ESTIMATE PRE TAX GRAND TOTAL-PHASE III .... $74,370.00 PROPOSAL FOR PHASE IV - 1997-98 SCHOOL YEAR Automated Library PC for Inventory and Emulation Card .... $2500.00 4 Terminals@ 800.00 .................. 3200.00 2 Scanners @ 745.00 .................. 1490.00 Inventory. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1100. 00 Printer................................ 400.00  $8690.00 Plus Tax............................... 521. 40 Total ................................... $9211.40 *Conversion of Records ................. $6000.00 Plus Tax .......... ..................... 360.00 Total ..,. ............................... $6360. 00 * 12,000 volumes multiplied times$ .50 per record $9211.40 + $6360.00 = $15,571.40 4 Teacher Stations ................. $51,808.00 ESTIMATE PRE TAX GRAND TOTAL-PHASE IV ... $67,379.00 SUPERINTENDENT'S RECOMMENDATIONS FOR 1994-95 PROGRAM ADDITIONS/DELETIONS/MODIFICATIONS LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT BUSINESS CASES - 1993-94 STATUS REPORT SCHOOL AND/OR PROGRAM MANAGER _.: .:..Ri\n.,\nr.g.:.:.\nht=s=e1 :..:.1.....:I:.:.:n=ce=n..::..it: ..:.v.::..e- =S=ch=o-=-o1 :,__,--=S=ha=r=on~Da=v...\n..\ns\n..i BUSINESS CASE_ _ _ _S ....._p_an_i_sh_T_e_a..\n._ch--e_r -_._ S _F_.T _. ..\n..E ____________ PROGRAM STATUS:  Addition  Deletion  Modification REQUIRED OR SUPPORTS DESEGREGATION PLAN: [il Yes  No REQUIRED OR SUPPORTS STATE REQUIREMENTS: Q Yes  No NOT REQUIRED BUT ESSENTIAL TO DISTRICT:  Yes  No REQUESTED LEVEL OF FUNDING __$ --1_2._,5_00........:...(a_v_e._te_a...\n..ch--e_r--'s_s_a_la_r. .y...,._ _) ___ RECOMMENDED LEVEL OF FUNDING $12,500 (ave. teacher's salary) ----'---'--------...::...:...----- Submitted by h-0/u r.'--f L ~.,,._,,-. ------------------- Superintendent 42 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT RIGHTSELL ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 911 West 19 ..... Street Phone 324-2430 Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 RIGHTSELL INCENTIVE SCHOOL I. BUSINESS CASE FOR SPANISH INSTRUCTION A. BACKGROUND Spanish is the foreign language selected by the Little Rock School District to be taught in incentive schools. This was proposed in the Desegregation Plan and approved by the court. In the past, Spanish has been taught during extended day and during the Saturday program. Saludos and Amigos video recordings with clear directions and lesson plans have been used as guidelines for effective instruction. Currently Spanish is taught by the auxiliary teacher during the regular school day. Grades 2 - 6 received thirty minutes of instruction once a week. The Saludos and Amigos program was used for instruction. Spanish is also offered during extended day. In addition, the Little Rock School District has hired one Spanish teacher to work with first grade students in the incentive schools. This teacher comes to Rightsell on Tuesdays and Thursdays and works with each first grade class (2) thirty minutes session per week. Fridays are left open for make-up sessions, for work with teachers/programs and to work with other grade levels. A consultant, Dr. Armstrong, from UALR is assisting in program implementation. B. PROBLEM DEFINITION A fully certified foreign language teacher who has training or experience with elementary students is needed to provide a quality Spanish program for grades 1 - 6. C. ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES 1. The staffing committee met to assess whether we need a full time Spanish teacher. Representative from Joshua Inventors (Delois Sykes), LRSD Representative (Dr. Randy Glenn), Parent (Robert Cook), Classroom Representatives from primary, intermediate, (Rosalyn Zeigler), (Jackie Kesler), School Specialist (Phyllis Lamb), School Administrator (Sharon Davis). 2. Identification of Alternatives: 1. Do nothing leave Spanish instruction to extended day and to the auxiliary teacher who does not have foreign language certification. 3. Eliminate the requirement to include Spanish in the regular day curriculum by requesting a change through the court. 4. Hire half-time Spanish teacher that will be able to adequately implement a Spanish program that will benefit all students at Rightsell. 5. Offer Spanish to only one or two grade levels during the regular school day. 6. Hire full-time Spanish instructor which would ,require additional salary. RECOMMENDATIONS This committee recommends a part-time certified Spanish teacher with training or experience working with elementary students. RATIONALE FOR THIS DECISION 1. Half-time teacher will provide adequate instruction and exposure to language and culture without spreading the regular curriculum too thin. 2. Foreign Language program as outlined in the incentive portion of the Desegregation plan can be implemented effectively with a halftime teacher considering the size of Rightsell's population. 3. Other instructional methods can be employed to strengthen a foreign language program without taking more time from the regular curriculum. Some instructional methods identified were: Learning centers Integrating Spanish instruction in Music Class, P. E. Class and in Social Studies Classes Spanish Software 44 SUPERINTENDENT'S RECOMMENDATIONS FOR 1994-95 PROGRAM ADDITIONS/DELETIONS/MODIFICATIONS LITILE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT BUSINESS CASES - 1993-94 STATUS REPORT SCH 00L AND/0 R PROGRAM MANA G ER_ __:_:.R ,. :..\ni g~ht ::.:s.=..e1 :....:.1_ :I:..:.:.nc:::..::e:.:..:.nt::..:.i.:...\nve=-----=S=ha::.:..r=on.:....=Da:..:..v.:..:s:i '---- BUSINESS CASE __T .:..::e=ch=n=o1 .:..::o=gy.._.:..:Th=e=me::.....:.:,Im=p-'-\"e1= me=n,_,,_,ta::.l:t'-'--'io...,_.n __________ PROGRAM STATUS: G] Addition D Deletion D Modification REQUIRED OR SUPPORTS DESEGREGATION PLAN: Q Yes D No REQUIRED OR SUPPORTS STATE REQUIREMENTS: G] Yes D No NOT REQUIRED BUT ESSENTIAL TO DISTRICT: 0 Yes O No REQUESTED LEVEL OF FUNDING $125,732 ----'-------\"---'------------- RECOMMENDED LEVEL OF FUNDING- -$- 7-5,0-00- (-ma'xi-mu-m)- --'---------- ) : ~-,0 //'l (\n\" .-\nSubmitted by __ 11_- ____,, _,. _ ,_ _.-\u0026lt;_. _\u0026lt;- _/\\..,_..._ _ Superintendent HPW /ll:sf.IT ARPT.BC .. '  45 BUSINESS CASE RIGHTSELL INCENTIVE SCBOOL CAREER AWARENESS AND MASS MEDIA THEME EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The LRSD is committed to a comprehensive desegregation plan which focuses on the local learning environment for all students. The incentive schools are an integral part of that plan, and their success is directly related to the success of the District's longterm desegregation plan. Each incentive school was required to develop and implement a school theme. Rightsell Ipcentive School identified a theme of Career Awareness and Mass Media Technology. The career Awareness component has been in place since the beginning of the 1993-1994 school year. This business case addresses the first phase of implementation of the Mass Media component. A. BACKGROUND Parents, teachers, administrators and community volunteers selected the \"Career Awareness and Mass Media Technology Awareness\" theme to provide learning opportunities that would foster positive social growth and produce responsible and productive citizens. The building level theme development team reviewed the four core areas of the Little Rock School District curriculum and decided that Language Arts and Social Studies were areas that would support both the Career Awareness and Mass Media Technology. The following activities have been developed to implement the Career 'Awareness Component of the theme as follows: * Learner Outcomes for the Career Awareness Theme component were developed. * career Clusters were identified at each grade level. The cluster areas selected will create readiness for the Secondary-Level Applied Academics Program or occupational/Technical Specialty Area. our program, like the Arkansas Tech Prep Plan Establishes Higher Expectations of All Students by Integrating Academic and Vocational (Career) Education. The Rightsell Career Awareness curriculum offers a sequential program of study for all students. Our thrust is to eliminate the need for low-level unconnected academic and vocational courses. * social Skills Training, a skill development program, was designed to target behaviors that students need to be successful in areas such as responsibility, problem solving, goal setting, and decision making. The .-, .- 4 G I. \\.,' * * * counselor, classroom teachers, specialist, and resource speakers teach the skills 6n a daily basis and reinforce them continually throughout the year. Industry Site Visits, field trips, Industry Adoption Programs, and Youth leadership organizations/clubs were implemented. Equipment and related programs to support the Mass Media Technology component were implemented - Closed Circuit Television, Rightsell Channel 36, Cable in the Classroom Program-Storer Cable, Extended Day Newspaper-Using Aldus Pagemaker and Children's Writing and Publishing Center, and the Newspaper-In-Education Program. Career Planning/Educational Opportunity Research Activities were encouraged through campus site visits and mentor interviews to empower students to become active participants in their academic _planning and career preparation process. Advanced Mass Media Technology is the future, and usually not readily available to urban children in the home setting. A Laptop Computer Parent Loan Program is in place at Rightsell. We presently have 3 laptop computers. They are in constant use through the library /media loan program to classes, the Extended Day Class loan program and a 3-day Parent Loan Program. We must offer inner city school children the opportunity to learn about and become comfortable with this equipment and technology. The technological system we choose must be both state-of-the-art and capable of growing as new advancement become available. The Mass Media Technology Awareness component of the theme will be implemented throughout the Language Arts curriculum. Teachers will integrate specific media communication activities at each grade level with key basic skills in the Language Arts curriculum. Specific components of the theme will: * Show the relationship between basic skills taught in the classrooms and used in every day mass media communication in the \"real world.\" * Teach how technology enhances the communication process between people, businesses, and countries\nand teach how \"messages\" influence our lives. * Establish a student production studio (Rightsell Channel 36) and teach students how to communicate their ideas using communication technology. Student and teacher transmissions can play automatically or be controlled by the teacher via a remote unit. Rightsell Channel 36 programs can be presented to selected classrooms or displayed throughout the school. ........ 47 * Challenge students to explore communication possibilities that extend beyond their immediate family, friends, and community. Some of the existing communication systems include The Information Highway, FrEdMail, Internet and Distance Learning. * Introduce students to career opportunities related to Mass Media Communication. Learner Outcome for the Mass Media Technology Program The Learner outcomes for Mass Media Technology are linked directly to the LRSD Language Arts Program Outcomes. They ar,e: Ability to communicate effectively using appropriate standards of grammar. Using the writing process to convey thoughts/ideas/information. Using tools of technology at an effective, efficient, flexible and adaptable level. Model effective listening and speaking skills to communicate and to succeed academically, socially, and economically. Exhibiting a better understanding of self, others, and the world around them through positive listening, speaking, reading and writing. Ability to read with fluency attend to meaning of what is read. A theme specialist has been employed to assist in all phases of theme implementation, working with all staff, student and parents at the school. B. PROBLEM DEFINITION In order to fully implement Rightsell' s theme a plan has been developed to facilitate learning through the use of technology. Our theme requires that students advance to a higher level of literacy through technology by becoming proficient in communication skills and interpersonal skills. Technology is an integral part of our theme that will be used to improve literacy skills, to motivate students to achieve and to adequately prepare them for the twenty-first century. 48 To fully implement the Mass Media Technology Theme within the district's budgetary constraints, a five-phase process is recommended. Phase 1 Applied communication Technology Basic Skills Program Enhanc-ent Language Arts Skills that support the Mass Media Technology Theme will be identified. The Extended Day Program will be restructured and Enrichment Activities enhance the Mass Media Technology Theme will be developed. An interactive learning environment that promotes reading, writing and learning across the curriculum will be established. Using the distributive method, five computer stations will be installed in each primary classroom. An Integrated Language Arts Program at the Primary Level will be installed in each unit. This software will help students develop their emerging literacy and acquire the interconnected skills of reading and writing. Grades 4 - 6 will use the existing computer lab to assist in developing student proficiency in language, communication and selfdirected research skills. A laser-printer and appropriate software will be added to allow student work to be printed. Intermediate Writing Process Model that guides students through pre-writing, drafting, revising, editing and publishing will be implemented. The components of that model are as follows: Phase 2 Literature-Based Writing Program is designed to help students master the interconnected activities of reading, writing and thinking. The Writing Program integrates reading and writing instruction tn _realistic literacy tasks that encourage students to use language in meaningful contexts. Keys to Adventure (Keyboarding) teaches proper finger placement, and demonstrates correct reaches to the keys, shift keys and punctuation marks within the context of \"around the world\" activities. The Writing Processor combines the student-oriented word-processor with instruction in the five steps of the writing process. computer stations in the Pourth Grade Classrooms Five computer stations will be added to each fourth grade classroom, allowing for more integration of technology into the 49 curriculum. Building on the foundation skills established at the primary grades, software at this level will be an updated version of the math and reading software presently in use. The new software will also allow for increased connections between areas of the curriculum, supporting the district's emphasis on thematic units and the holistic approach to teaching~ The updated software has enhanced assessment capabilities that will allow for individualized lesson plans based on student deficiencies. Phase 3 Computer Stations in Xindergarten Classrooms and Fifth Grade Classrooms Five Computers Stations will be placed in each fifth grade and kindergarten classroom. At the fifth grade level students will use updated reading/math software with the capability of making curriculum connections. Kindergarten students will use integrated language arts software in the classroom. Emerging literacy skills will be developed in a literature-based, thematic approach that will help build a strong foundation in critical language skills. Phase 4 Computer stations in Sixth Grade and Pre-x Classrooms Five computer stations will be placed in each sixth grade classroom and three stations will be placed in the four-year-old (Pre-K) classroom. With this phase of implementation all students will utilize technology within the classroom setting. Software for sixth grade is an extension of the reading/math software in place for fourth and fifth grade. Thematic units will continue to be emphasized. Software for four-year-old will provide developmentally appropriate experiences for the young child. It will be built around a variety of multi-ethnic literature, science, and mathematics units. This early childhood and emerging literacy language program stresses that children grow into reading and writing with no real beginning or ending point, that reading and writing develop concurrently and interrelatedly and according to no one right sequence or order. Many of our students come to us deficient in language readiness skills. students in early childhood programs must be immersed in literacy experiences. In order to meet the first national educational goal set by the President and 50 governors in 1990: \"By the year 2000 all children shall start school ready to learn.\" 50 The potential for literacy exists within each child and given the right environment literacy is not just possible it is inevitable. Technology provides a vehicle that will motivate, captivate and engage the pre-school child. Phases career Deaonstration Lal\u0026gt; Teacher Resource Lab/Interactive Media Design and Development Center. Telecommunications Product Training/Production center Parent Training/Conference Center Due to the budgetary constraints of the LRSD, Rightsell School will take on the responsibility for implementing Phase 5. We will work to finance this Career Demonstration Lab through grant writing, corporate sponsorships and public donations. The lab will include student work stations that allow hands-on career experiences. A computer scanner retail center will be established to control inventory, sales and profits in the Rightsell Roadrunner Student Store. A simulated Hair care Center will be installed with monthly demonstrations from members of the Arkansas Board of Cosmetology, Arkansas Beauticians Association, local Barber and Beauty Colleges and Hair Care Product Industry Professionals,etc .... The Career Demonstration Lab will also house a Computer Based Interactive Training Lab for parents and teachers. The Lab will provide a state-of-the art computer lab featuring integrated multimedia, video, and presentation hardware as well as classroom furnishing designed specifically for high-tech instructional labs. The Computer Based Interactive Training Lab will allow parents, teachers and students to step into a classroom that bring remote lecturers, university libraries, as well as math and science networks to their desktops. This allows MultiMedia Communications /Telecommunications, Distance Learning, VideoTeleconferencing and a Computer Command Center that puts every computer, mouse and mo~i~or in the instructors control  In Phase Five we also recommend that the Computer Lab Attendant position be eliminated. With the inservice training that will be provided for the teaching staff and the instructional aides over the course of four years, there will not be a need for a computer lab attendant. In addition to the regular training, two instructional aides will receive all of the training provided for the district computer lab attendants as a back up. Our Theme specialist, who also has a technology background will provide technical assistance. The elimination of this part-time position will save approximately $7,346.60 yearly including salary and fringe benefits. 51 I I I I I C. ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES several alternatives were considered in planning for theme implementation at Rightsell. One alternative is to provide a television production studio by adding equipment to a closedcircuit television system already in place. However, television production skills must be built on the foundation of sound reading, writing, and oral communication skills. These skills should be thoroughly devel9ped first, before students move into the production phase. Another alternative considered was use of the existing computer lab for teaching and reinforcing literacy skills. The existing lab is five years old and slow by current standards. It will not support the state-of-the-art software needed for Rightsell students. However, continued use of this software for grades four through six will provide sufficient literacy reinforcement for another year or two. The Language Arts software in the existing program is designed to remediate and reinforce specific reading skills rather than immerse beginning readers in the interrelated elements of listening, speaking, reading and -writing. A third alternative is to provide computers in the classroom for the primary grades as the first phase of the Mass Media Technology Theme. Every primary student will then have access to technology every day of the week as an integral part of instruction and learning. D. RECOMMENDATION It is our recommendation that the district implement Phase I of the Rightsell Incentive School Mass Media Technology Theme during the 1993-1994 school year. The rationale for this recommendation is that this phase of the theme provides: * Five computers in each classroom and software for grades 1-3 that supports the LRSD revised curriculum and the school's theme. The software provides for a thematic approach to learning, while emphasizing the skills of reading, writing, and speaking. E. OBJECTIVE The objective of this recommendation is to support the LRSD' s Desegregation Plan by implementing Phase I of Rightsell Incentive School's Mass Media Technology Theme. Students at Rightsell need this technology to improve their literacy skills, including communication skills providing appropriate software and hardware in the classrooms will ensure that students have the tools they need to develop a sound foundation. 52 I I I Evaluation criteria student progress will be monitored through the following methods: ABACUS - Mastery of the Language Arts CUrriculum will be measured through the ABACUS using 1994 individual student mastery as a baseline. Stanford 8 - Student performance and grade performance will be measured using 1994 test scores as a baseline. Student Education Plans (SEP's) will be developed based on Language Arts needs of individual students. Each student will demonstrate 85% mastery of Language Arts identified skills listed in his/her SEP. Teacher observable checklist will be used to evaluate oral communication skills. Student work portfolios. will be utilized to demonstrate progress of written communication skills. Increased use of thematic teaching uni ts and concepts will be measured. Using the number of thematic uni ts taught in grades 1-3 in 1993-94 .school as a baseline. Increased teacher use of technology to enhance instructional effectiveness in integrating the core curriculum will be measured. CUrrent use of the computer lab, teacher inservice related to technology will serve as a baseline. Also an instrument will be in place in the fall to measure teacher attitude toward the use of Technology in the Classroom. The fall of 1994 results will serve as a baseline. Increased student interest and  attitude in learning related to technology and Language Arts will be measured. An instrument will be in place this fall. Parental attitude and interest toward the use of technology will be surveyed. Using Spring 1995 as a baseline.  F. IMPACT ANALYSIS Using a literature-based curriculum that is supported by technology will motivate and stimulate students as they progress through the developmental stages in understanding language. A strong foundation in literacy skills at the primary level is essential. 53 Desegregation This plan totally supports the requirements set forth in the desegregation plan referencing theme implementation, academic programs (Reading Across the curriculum, Oral Expressions Across the curriculum and Instructional Technology) and the purpose of incentive schools. court order Implementation of this plan would allow the school and District to demonstrate compliance with the court order to develop a theme. The 1992-93 Incentive Schools Monitoring Report st~tes that: \"On May 1, 1992, the Court ordered the LRSD. to restore and fully implement themes at all incentive schools, but the district took nearly a full year to select themes and hire program Specialist for the six of the seven incentive schools. Thus, denying students the level of theme enhancement that the desegregation plan promised and the Court required. \"  At Rightsell, we have developed a theme that will enhance the core curriculum. The program will provide students with foundational skills that are required to be a successful student as well as skills that will allow them to compete with their peers in the future. The implementation of the theme will also help Rightsell in its recruitment efforts. Political Factors The district can receive favorable responses from the court and schools if resources are provided to implement this theme. Risk The equipment and software provided by implementing Phase I of this plan can be transferred if necessary. The additional funds requested for this phase and future phases will be viewed as a wise investment in technology. Should the district decide not to support this system, an alternative plan will need to be developed for the Mass Media Technology component of Rightsell's theme. Timing In order for the Mass Media Communication component of Rightsell's theme to be in place by the beginning of the 1994-95 school year, the purchasing process must begin as soon as possible. Installation of equipment, wiring, and staff training in the use of the software will take several months. If primary students are to be positively impacted from the beginning of the school year, it is critical that the procurement of hardware and software be begun at once. 54 G. RESOURCES ANALYSIS Provided is a listing of hardware and software that must be purchased to implement Phase I of Rightsell' s Mass Media Technology Theme. All costs are estimates and are subject to ~hange. 55 Cabling Wiring Phase 1 $3,000.00 $3,000.00 Phase 2 $1,000.00 $1,000.00 5G Phase 3 $2,000.00 $2,000.00 Phase 4 $1,000.00 $1,000.00 Glossary of Terms Distance Learning - Distance Learning increases instructional effectiveness through the use of interactive two way television with active response. Students can receive standard curriculum and special courses with the individual attention that distance learning can provide. Teachers and staff members can actively participate in product training sessions delivered by the most qualified presenters and instructors. Distance Learning can significantly reduce travel cost, extend the traditional classroom or training center to students at remote locations. FrEdMail - The FrEDMail Network is a growing, distributed and lowcost telecommunications network that helps teachers and students participate in a wide variety of learning experiences and exchange information freely and simply. FrEDMail motivates student to become better learners, readers, and writers. It also lets teachers share experiences with student assignments, distribute teaching materials, and curriculum ideas. Implementation of this program at Rightsell would allow our students to communicate with student at Franklin Incentive School, Garland Incentive, Crystal Hill Interdistrict Magnet School, and over 150 member school districts nation-wide. XlffERHET - The INTERNET is a global communications network that connects computers all over the world. Education, government, business, and academic organizations participate in the network. Electronic mail between all users can be accessed, providing communications capabilities with a wide variety of people. Access to libraries around the world and forums for discussions about a variety of subjects are available. Thematic Approach - A thematic approach is a framework based on a particular topic, idea, author, or genre. Each unit has outcomes or goals that specify what you want students to accomplish as a result of the unit experiences and lessons. These themes involve a number of curricular areas, such as science, art, music, or math, even though ,the focus of the unit is developing the ability to read and write. '  57 ADDENDUM TO PHASE I RIGRTSELL INCENT:rvE SCHOOL Business Case We have closely reviewed the implemetation of hardware and software at each Phase of our Business Case. We believe that Phasing in the Theme over a period of six years is not the best process for implementation. However, we do understand the financial crisis of the School District and recommend further reducing our cost as illustrated below. We recommend deferring the following items in Phase I to a later phase. PHASE I Estimated Pre-Tax Total $151,578.00 OPTION #1 Phase I Pricing Only with note that many of the cuts are being placed in later phases. Reduce Printers to two Reduce Teacher First Stations to one Reduce Software to $1,600.00 $6,000.00 $53,732.00 Phase I OPTION #2 Pre-tax total Saving Approximately $1.25,732.00 $25,846.00 Same as above except eliminate final Teacher First Station Phase I Pre-tax total Saving Approximately .. '.. 58 $115,943.00 $35,635.00 I I SUPERINTENDENT'S RECOMMENDATIONS FOR 1994-95 PROGRAM ADDITIONS/DELETIONS/MODIFICATIONS LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT BUSINESS CASES - 1993-94 STATUS REPORT SCHOOL AND/OR PROGRAM MANAGER _..\n_Mi....\nt=ch=e..\n_ll..\n_..\n..\nIn=c=en=t..\n..\niv=e....\nS\n..::.c.\n.\n..:ho\n..::.o..\n..1_ -_S\n_a_mu_e_l B_ra_n_ch BUSINESS CASE __ S_,_p_an_i...\n.,s..\n_h ..\n_Te=a=c=he\n.\n..r_-____\n_\nS_F....\n..\n_T \n_\nE=. __________ _ PROGRAM STATUS: 0 Addition  Deletion  Modification REQUIRED OR SUPPORTS DESEGREGATION PLAN: Q Yes  No REQUIRED OR SUPPORTS STATE REQUIREMENTS: 13 Yes  No NOT REQUIRED BUT ESSENTIAL TO DISTRICT:  Yes  No REQUESTED LEVEL OF FUNDING $12,500 (ave. teacher's salary) RECOMMENDED LEVEL OF FUNDING $12,500 (ave. teacher's salary) .,,1, ,- /-/'-/ . ..... r ~ . 1 1  ) ,1 /  . Submitted by \"  I/ .,, -- Superintendent HPW/lks/STARPT.BC 59 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY BUSINESS CASE FOREIGN LANGUAGE PROGRAM (SPANISH TEACHER) MITCHELL ELEMENTARY SCHOOL The Little Rock School District (LRSD) is committed to a quality educational program which provides equity for all students. Within this framework, the district seeks to create challenging school and classroom environments that foster academic achievement and develop each student to his/her maximum potential. The district demonstrates it's commitment by setting high expectations for student achievement, seeking brood-based community support, and providing necessary resources to achieve identified goals. Foreign language, as identified in the LRSD desegregation plan (page 156), is one method of helping children reach .their maximum potential. Adding Spanish to the Mitchell school curriculum will help equitably meet the needs of students as well as implement the desegregation plan. Consequently the Staffing Committee of Mitchell Elementary School proposes to hire a Spanish teacher and offer spanish to all students who are enrolled. BACKGROUND In 1989 the Little Rock School District designated seven ( 7) schools to provide an incentive school program. The purpose of the incentive school program was to promote and ensure academic excellence in schools that were difiicult to desegregate. The programs in these incentive schools were to serve as models of excellence for the county, state, and nation. The incentive school program was designed by a committee made up of administrators, teachers, community representatives and parents. Within the program, activities were designed to meet the cognitive, social, and emotional, interest needs of students. Foreign language (spanish) was one of the activities identif~ed as being important to the success of that program. Spanish was offered at Mitchell during the 1992-93 school year and during the first semester of the 1993-94 school year as an extended day activity. Spanish is being offered presently to all first graders at Mitchell. It is scheduled into the regular day. Spanish is offered to students in grades two through six as an extended day activity. PROBLEM DEFINITION Foreign Language, as defined in the incentive school program, is an important tool for implementing the LRSD desegregation plan. To date that part has not been fully implemented. As we look at the future of our students functioning in a global marketplace, it is clear that they will need to be able to use more than one language . .... \\. GO Coupled with the facts that students .who take a second language at the elementary level have less difficulty with that language in high school and that colleges are now requiring a second language for graduation in selected fields, the staffing committee felt it important to implement the foreign language curriculum at Mitchell. ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES The foreign language component of the Little Rock School District Desegregation Plan is not being successfully implemented with the present way it is being offered. Even though spanish is being offered to all first graders during the regular day an~ to other students during extended day, all students don't have access to spanish. We propose to hire one full-time spanish teacher to implement the foreign language program at Mitchell. RECOMMENDATIONS It is recommended that the district hire one full -time spanish teacher to implement the foreign language program at Mitchell Elementary School. The rational for the recommendation is that: . The LRSD Desegregation plan calls for a foreign language program at incentive schools . . Students who study a second language at the elementary level have less difficulty with that language when taking it as a course in high school . . Colleges are now requiring more Majors to take a second language as a graduation requirement: OBJECTIVE The Objective of this recommendation is to implement the incentive school academic program and the LRSD desegregation plan by offering spanish to all students at Mitchell Elementary School. IMPACT ANALYSIS  ' The implementation of a foreign language program at Mitchell will assist the LRSD in providing an equitable education for the students in the following ways. 1. Students who attend Mitchell will be more likely to select and be successful in a Spanish Course in high school. 2. Students will be more knowledgeable of another culture because of their language experiences. 3. Students who continue with spanish in high school will have the advantage of being able to communicate more effectively with another culture. 61 4. Students who continue on to college will be more successful in required foreign language college courses. RESOURCE ANALYSIS To implement the foreign language program at Mitchell the LRSD will need to employ one full-time spanish teacher. The cost for that individual will be at the first level on the salary schedule plus fringe benefits. Cost for materials is estimated to be $500 per year. . ., 62 SUPERINTENDENT'S RECOMMENDATIONS FOR 1994-95 PROGRAM ADDITIONS/DELETIONS/MODIFICATIONS LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT BUSINESS CASES - 1993-94 STATUS REPORT SCHOOL AND/OR PROGRAM MANAGER --Ga-rlan-d I-nce-nti-ve -Sch-ool -- -Rob-ert- Bro-wn - BUSINESS CASE __S_ ,_pa_n_is_h_T_e_ac_he_r_-_.5_F_.T_.E_ ____________ PROGRAM STATUS: [J} Addition D Deletion D Modification REQUIRED OR SUPPORTS DESEGREGATION PLAN: Q Yes  No REQUIRED OR SUPPORTS STATE REQUIREMENTS: Q Yes  No NOT REQUIRED BUT ESSENTIAL TO DISTRICT: 0 Yes O No REQUESTED LEVEL OF FUNDING $12,500 (ave. teacher's salary) RECOMMENDED LEVEL OF FUNDING $12,500 (ave. teacher's salary) 1 ~ - '  Submitted by J_ )_ j ,1_/\\_) _-/ f.lJ .1/_ _, _ _,, __-  ----=-'-----J __ _ Superintendent HPW ni:sr.rr ARPI'.BC 63 I I I I I I I ' I 'I I I I I I I BUSINESS CASE SPANISH TEACHER GARLAND INCENTIVE SCHOOL Multimedia Technology and Educational Research EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Little Rock School District has made an effort to comply with the language written in the 1989 Desegregation Plan as it relates to Spanish. In the past, the AETN Saludos and Amigos video cassette lessons were placed in the schools for the purpose of providing Spanish instruction. The Office of Desegregation Monitoring Team concluded that the above process was ineffective. This team recommended a full time Spanish teacher for each school. Some schools have included Spanish during the Extended Day period. Others have utilized the certified auxiliary  teacher to implement programs in their buildings. Other alternatives can be considered through the use of technr\n,logy and foreign language networks. The staffing committee's needs assessment concluded that a full time teacher was not needed. At best, a part time teacher would help but we believe an effective Spanish program can be provided through technology and a designated facilitator. I. BACKGROUND A. HISTORY From 1991-93 Spanish was offered at Garland School during the Extended Day Program. Students were allowed to sign up through a school wide survey. During the first year, three students received Spanish instruction from a fluent Spanish speaking teacher . Last school year, there was increased interest as demonstrated by the enrollment of nine students in the Spanish program. Additionally, significant interest was shown towards Spanish culture by classroom teachers and students. Fiesta, Three Kings Day, and Mayan Celebrations culminated our school's end of the year cultural festivities. B. CURRENT SITUATION The auxiliary teacher uses the Saludos and Amigos video tapes as a tool in the delivery of Spanish instruction. Viva Espanol, picture cards identifying words and names are utilized through a kinesthetic approach. First Start in Spanish contains 120 full color language development cards designed specifically for beginning Spanish as a second language and bilingual students. Conversational Spanish .. -. .. 64 Basic skills instruction would decrease Student needs at present require more focus on the basics Garland's Hispanic communities' input would be minimized Auxiliary teacher's contribution to instructional program decrease 2) Do not hire a Spanish teacher Pros- Auxiliary teacher maintains and strengthens current Spanish program Spanish CD ROM technology implemented with assistance from trained facilitators through multimedia technology Distance Learning Elementary Spanish program could be infused into multimedia theme implementation Exposure to Networking opportunities would increase staff's knowledge and ability to access information Student exposure to various information systems would increase critical thinking and problem solving experiences Minimal impact on budget for purchase of Networking rights School could serve as a repository for elementary foreign language learning outcomes impact and cataloging of technology materials Development of human potential in management of classroom logistics, cooperative planning, teaming, and performance evaluation Feedback and correction opportunities through on-air interaction provides unique learning experience Designated student access provided to instructional staff during class through a toll-free telephone number Decreased teacher work load in lesson planning Lesson planning provided by video staff Learning module provided with strategies planned to meet the six major desired learning outcomes Language capabilities can be extended to include French, Japanese, Latin and other languages Exploration of other language possibilities explored through satellite networking Uniqueness of school's theme significantly enhanced Enrichment available during Extended Day at no additional cost Teachers can use recorded lessons for self improvement Teachers can access on-line Spanish lessons for personal growth Cons- Deleted position impacts opportunity for certified person to pursue career interest Availability of interpreter for conferences diminished IV. RECOMMENDATION The staffing committee believes that the teaching of Spanish is important at Garland School. Spanish language emphasis has had a positive impact on the interpersonal relations between .the students. Hispanic students are able to provide expert assistance to students in the classroom on correct enunciation of words. The exchange in cultural studies has developed a mutual respect 'for diverse concepts and norms. The committee believes we can achieve better results through the various multimedia components at a reduced cost to the District. Therefore the staffing committee recommends that the District seek relief from the recommendation by ODM until the staff has had sufficient time to develop, implement, and evaluate it's projected foreign language through te.ohnology module.  If the District chooses to implement the Court's recommendation, a half-time Spanish teacher would be sufficient to meet the objectives of the plan. materials are used in a ditto format to enhance reading and interpretation of the Spanish language. A Spanish Heritage Club was formed during the first semester with 10 students. During the second semester, only one student signed up and the offering was terminated. Spanish speaking students' common phraseology is incorporated into the learning environment on a regular basis. The Geo Safari \"Learning Spanish\" through technology is used from Pre-K - 6th grade. Spanish courses from McCllelan Community High School have been completed by the auxiliary teacher with a certificate on file. The presence of twenty four Hispanic students and the high level of parental involvement from the Hispanic community makes the language a natural curricula infusion into the learning environment. II. PROBLEM DEFINITION Problem Statement - The recommendation supported by the Court strongly encourages the Little Rock School District to hire certified Spanish teachers for all incentive schools. The staff at Garland School, in response to a needs assessment, supported the present method of Spanish instruction as the most pref erred means of meeting the goals of the Desegregation Plan. The implementation of the school's multimedia technology theme (Foreign Language Lab) will include interactive Spanish CD ROM technology and Distance Learning Technology for Elementary Schools through TI-IN and Black College Satellite Education Networks. The implementation of these instructional options will enhance the District's ability to allocate resources more efficiently. ill. ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES 1) Hire a Spam.sh Teacher Pros- Children will learn a foreign language Children will be better prepared to compete in the future , Tolerance will be developed by learning a different culture The quality of one's education will be improved by learning Spanish A Spanish teacher could prove advantageous in conferences with Spanish speaking parents Cons- Inadequate facilities for a Spanish classroom Increased burden on the District's financial resources Increased administrative responsibility in monitoring and evaluation process Increased conflict with scheduling and State Standards 67 Tl. ~ 1~1:.11 ORK Free Equipment Use! If your school already has a television set and a VCR, free use of this equipmentpackage will provide all of the additional I equipment you will need to receive TI-IN's classes.  1.2 meter satellite receiving antenna  Non-penetrating roof mount that uses ballast principle. This tray mount contains eight concrete blocks to provide stabalizing ballast for the antenna and distributes a load of less than 1 0PSF.  Installation is engineered to withstand a minimum of 90 mph winds  Primary hook-up within 150' of the antenna location  Two additional standard hook-ups (within 100' of the primary hook-up/ same building)  Integrated Receiver/Decoder (IRD)  Service Representatives available for any equipment-related problems  Complete training on system use See your TI-IN Educational Consultant for complete details! PO Box 6229  San Antonio, TX 78209  800-999-8446 ., ! SUPERINTENDENT'S RECOMMENDATIONS FOR 1994-95 PROGRAM ADDITIONS/DELETIONS/MODIFICATIONS LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT BUSINESS CASES - 1993-94 STATUS REPORT SCHOOL AND/OR PROGRAM MANAGER. _ ___:G..:.a r--1-=-an:.:..:d_ _I ..:.n..:..:ce..:.nt.:...i..:.ve.:......:..Sc--h_ o_o --1_-_Ro_b_er_t_B_ro_w_n BUSINESS CASE __ __\n_Te =-=c=hn =o..\n..\n1o\n..,lg\"'-y ..:..T.:.:.:he:.:.:.\nm.::...e. .:.\nIrn:\n,\n,cp..:...1e ::.:.\n.m:.\n.\nen.:..:::t.::..at\n_\n_i ~on---_:...\nPh=a.::..:.se :\n_.::..:.II\n__ ______ PROGRAM STATUS: w Addition  Deletion  Modification REQUIRED OR SUPPORTS DESEGREGATION PLAN: [il Yes  No REQUIRED OR SUPPORTS STATE REQUIREMENTS: [il Yes  No NOT REQUIRED BUT ESSENTIAL TO DISTRICT:  Yes  No REQUESTED LEVEL OF FUNDING __$_ 1s_o..\n_,2_1_0._2_8- ---------- ' RECOMMENDED LEVEL OF FUNDING- -$ -75,0-00 -(ma-xim-um) --------- Jl\"D) i 1L : r,\" Submitted by ___L_ , _,_ \\.__,{__ L_ \"-_.,,.- _~\n.\n...., ___ Superintendent HPW/11:s/ST ARPT.BC 69 BUSINESS CASE GARLAND INCENTIVE SCHOOL MVLTIMEDIA TECHNOLOGY THEME PHASE II EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The LRSD is committed to a comprehensive desegregation plan which focuses on the total learning environment for all students. The incentive schools are an integral part of that plan, and their success is directly related to the success of the District's long-tenn desegregation plan. Each incentive school, was required to develop and'implement a school theme. In support of the desegregation plan and a commitment to total quality learning, Garland Incentive School identified a Multimedia Technology and Educational Research theme. Realizing the cost of technology and especially technology that's on the cutting edge, the multimedia technology theme implementation is to be phased in over a period of 3-5 years. A plan of action is required to implement the theme in a way that supports the desegregation plan and provides_ quality training and learning for students and teachers. This business case is for phase II of implementation of the total plan for Garland Incentive School. An estimated $150,000 savings in future cost can be realized by accessing the Distance Learning capabilities at another District School. Portions of the equipment for ph~e I is currently being installed with the final part to be shipped at the end of March 94 and installed in April 94. A. BACKGROUND Garland Incentive school serves a minority community with students being challenged outside of the school by drugs, violence, gangs and many other problems plaguing today's urban school districts. The school is considered a safe zone and its students are proud and secure within its walls. The school's theme has been historically centered on communication and basic skills\nhowever, with the revision of the desegregation plan, the school's theme was changed to Multimedia Technology and Educational Research. Multimedia Technology combines text, graphics, sound, animation and video to convey information. Educational Research deals with using this new technology to locate, evaluate, and use information with excitement, motivation, and creativity. Prior to 1992-93 school year, the school maintained a Mass Media theme though the theme concept was not being fulfilled. When the desegregation plan reintroduced the theme concept, the school's Mass Media theme evolved into Multimedia Technology and Educational Research. A new theme specialist has been hired with the responsibility of developing and creating the excitement necessary to recapture the minds of students and to create interest in desegregating the school. Parents, community members, teachers, and the school's principal, established the goals and objectives for the theme based on technology. The school's Total Quality Leaming (TQL) team worked after the regular school year to provide the basis for the program. 70 The Multimedia Technology and Educational Research Program is designed to enhance the current Little Rock School District (LRSD) curriculum. Technology will be infused into each classroom to enhance the teachers' instructional methods. The Library/Media Center will become a bub of information for the school providing technologically advanced resources providing exceptional research capabilities to include \"Your Educational Services\" (YES) satellite link network. Each grade level will focus on a technology theme to assist the teacher in technology infusion. This will include themes for Community Based Instruction (CBI) students as well as Gifted and Talented (GT). Pre-Kindergarten through Second Grade will focus on Emergent and Early Literacy through Technology. This program will be designed to provide a balanced reading, v.'T'iting, listening and speaking curriculum. It will allow teachers flexibility to incorporate music, math, art and science activities. It will also allow teachers to assess students using portfolio assessment tools. The technology will use a multimedia platform to generate excitement, encourage discovery, and meet the unique needs of every student. Third Grade students will focus on Researching America through Technology. This program will be the launching pad for future adventures in technology and learning. It will serve as an introduction to research techniques, resources and critical writing skills. Computer keyboarding will be an integral part of the program. Fourth Grade students will focus on telecomputing technology which will allow them to communicate around the world, through educational computer bulletin boards. Using programs offered through universities such as UALR, students will use programs such as FREDMail, to establish pen pals at other schools from Alaska to Maine and even foreign countries. They will explore other cultures and access information available only through the aid of technology. Fifth Grade students will use knowledge gained in third and fourth grades to produce news reports suitable for both a school paper and live broadcast to other students. Their theme focus will be Media Productions - The Living Textbook. Sixth Grade students will focus on Exploring the World through Technology. Their program will. ~ncompass the world using technology and previously learned skills. Included in this program will be the use of video cameras, video players and mixers, laser discs, CD-ROMs, and extended field trips. CBI students will experience technology through the use of computers and photography. Cameras will be made available to the students for them to take pictures of their activities. These pictures will then be used to develop both regular and computer scrapbooks for the students and the school. Each teacher will use their theme to infuse technology into the LRSD curriculum. Realizing technology represents a totally new concept in the way teachers teach, it should 2 71 be understood that the first year will be a developmental and familiarization stage and that expectations as far as hours of use will be such that teachers have adequate time to become familiar and confident with the new technological environment. B. PROBLEM DEFINITION The myriad societal problems within the local community and the projection of societal norms are concrete issues that must be addressed in the educational arena. To combat these problems, Garland must implement a plan that is dynamic and capable of capturing the young minds and preparing them for a future which is constantly moVlng in technological leaps and bounds. To accomplish this task within financial constraints of the desegregation budget, phases of implementation have been developed. The four phases of implementing this plan support the districr's present budget constraints. These phases can be accelerated provided additional revenue is made available. Phase I provides students and staff with the minimum hardware, software and trainin~ necessary tQ provide access to multimedia technology. This phase will include in~t ~1ation of three computers in each 1st grade classroom, one teacher workstation in each classroom 2nd through 6th grades, one computer in Pre-K, and K, and ar. - .:iditional five station lab for 2n!i through 6th grades with AppleTalk . Phase Il will install three additional computers in each 2nd, and 6th grade classrooms with ethemet network capability installed with linkage to ABACUS throughout the school. This phase will also include hardware, software, and installation of an audio/video lab with satellite capabilities microwave from Romine lnterdistrict School. Photographic and Video equipment will be purchased to support the visual portion of the theme. And a software library will also be established during this phase. Phase III will install three additional computers in each 3rd, and 5th grade classroom and 3 computers in Reading, Math, and Resource. This phase will also include hardware, software, and installation of an electronic library. Phase IV will complete installation for Pre-Kindergarten, Kindergarten, and 4th grade classes. This phase will also include additions to the software library and the construction of a new media center or the expansion and remodeling of the existing one. The cost of full implementation in the first or second year is cost prohibitive\ntherefore, this business case is written to address Phase II of the Multimedia Implementation Plan. The current task before us is to determine the best way to implement the theme in a way most effective for our students and staff. 72 C. ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES The Garland community considered several alternatives prior to developing this plan for implementing multimedia technology into the school: Laser Disc players, CD-ROM drives for current computer systems, networked drives, and portable drives. Though all are a part of multimedia, none can be purchased alone to provide the students with multimedia capabilities which would stimulate their creativity. In addition, the computer hardware presently at Garland ranges in age from three to seven years and will not support multimedia technology. It was decided multimedia computer systems which could stand alone or be networked would provide the best solution. With the approval of Phase I apd the purchase of Macintosh computer systems for our teachers and the Multimedia Lab we have established a standard in hardware for the school, however, evaluation of it's effectiveness cannot be presented at this time due to the time equipment has been available in the school. D. RECOMMENDATIONS It is reconunended that the District implement Phase II of the Garland Incentive School Multimedia Technology Plan during the 1993-94 school year. The rationale for this recommendation is that this phase of multimedia technology provides:  Microwave satellite link hardware will provide an essential educational asset to the school and community, while saving over $150,000.00 in longterm cost.  Software for grades K-2 that supports the LRSD revised curriculum. The software directly addresses the key concepts of reading, writing, listening, and speaking that are emphasized in the curriculum. An additional feature of the software is the use of thematic units to make connections between the various subject areas, making learning more relevant. Thematic units are a focus of the District's revised curriculum. This software will be available in all first grade classrooms with four computers each and in a lab setting for Pre-Kindergarten, Kindergarten, and Second grades.  Software for teachers of grades 3-6 that provides administrative assistance. The software has desktop publishing capability, but most importantly it provides portfolio assessment tools that allow teachers to collect, organize, and present student portfolio information. Portfolio assessment is encouraged by the District and this tool will enable teachers at Garland to implement this form of assessment. This software will be available through one station in each classroom.  A multisensory approach to learning that meets the auditory, visual and kinesthetic styles of students. 73 4  Presentation software for teachers 3-6. This software enables the teachers to produce multimedia presentations integrating video, audio, graphics, and text into classroom instructional units.  Software for students in grades 3-6 that provides opportunities for developing creativity and critical thinking skills through productions levied around the existing curriculum. This software will be delivered through a 6 station lab setting. E. OBJECTIVE The objective of this recommendation is to better support the LRSD's desegregation plan by partially implementing multimedia technology into the Garland Incentive School. The district as well as the school needs this technology in preparing our students and teachers for the future. The technology used appropriately can recapture the minds of our young people, save the staff many hours of manual labor and provide exciting presentations to the student~ which will encourage and motivate students to learn and master the curriculum. Evaluation Criteria  Monitoring of student progress through technology and Portfolio Assessment.        Increased teacher use of technology which will also increase teacher proficiency in instructional and administrative tasks including increased use of ABACUS. Increased use of Cooperative learning and Thematic teaching concepts  Increased student interest in multimedia technology and learning  Increased parental involvement due to increased student interest  Timely, detailed reports for conferences, administration, Board of Directors, and the Office of Desegregation and Monitoring. Ach\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_1577","title":"Court filings concerning school building construction, Arkansas Department of Education planning, Little Rock School District budget and planning, and King Interdistrict School magnet designation","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":["1994-04-05/1994-04-20"],"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","Arkansas. Department of Education","Little Rock School District","King Interdistrict Magnet Elementary School (Little Rock, Ark.)","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","Education--Finance","Educational law and legislation","Educational planning","School management and organization","School buildings","School improvement programs","School facilities","School employees","School integration","Student assistance programs","Magnet schools"],"dcterms_title":["Court filings concerning school building construction, Arkansas Department of Education planning, Little Rock School District budget and planning, and King Interdistrict School magnet designation"],"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/1577"],"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":["legal documents"],"dcterms_extent":["28 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1484","title":"\"Still Separate, Still Unequal: The Limits of Milliken II's Educational Compensation Remedies,\" by Joseph Feldman, Edward Kirby, and Susan E. Eaton, The Harvard Project on School Desegregation","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":["Orfield, Gary"],"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","United States, Maryland, 39.00039, -76.74997","United States, Michigan, 44.25029, -85.50033","United States, Michigan, Wayne County, Detroit, 42.33143, -83.04575","United States, Texas, 31.25044, -99.25061","United States, Texas, Travis County, Austin, 30.26715, -97.74306"],"dcterms_creator":["Joseph Feldman"],"dc_date":["1994-04"],"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","Education--Arkansas","Education--Standards","Educational law and legislation","Education and state","School management and organization","School improvement programs","School facilities","School enrollment","School integration"],"dcterms_title":["\"Still Separate, Still Unequal: The Limits of Milliken II's Educational Compensation Remedies,\" by Joseph Feldman, Edward Kirby, and Susan E. Eaton, The Harvard Project on School Desegregation"],"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/1484"],"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":["320 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1533","title":"Court filings concerning school construction, district status reports, state funding for Pulaski County school districts, and legal proceedings","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":["1994-02-01/1994-02-23"],"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","Arkansas. Department of Education","School districts--Arkansas--North Little Rock","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","Education--Finance","Education--Economic aspects","Educational law and legislation","Educational planning","School buildings","School management and organization","School improvement programs","School integration","School districts"],"dcterms_title":["Court filings concerning school construction, district status reports, state funding for Pulaski County school districts, and legal proceedings"],"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/1533"],"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":["legal documents"],"dcterms_extent":["26 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1541","title":"Court filings: District Court, Arkansas Department of Education's (ADE's) development plan","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":["1994-01-03"],"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","Arkansas. Department of Education","Educational planning","Educational law and legislation","School improvement programs","School management and organization","School integration","School facilities","School enrollment","School discipline","Student assistance programs"],"dcterms_title":["Court filings: District Court, Arkansas Department of Education's (ADE's) development plan"],"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/1541"],"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":["legal documents"],"dcterms_extent":["52 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1389","title":"Proceedings: ''The Arkansas Department of Education's Development Plan''","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":["1994-01-03"],"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","School districts--Arkansas--Pulaski County","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","Educational law and legislation","Educational planning","Arkansas. Department of Education","Education--Standards","Educational statistics","School enrollment","School improvement programs","School integration","School management and organization","Court records"],"dcterms_title":["Proceedings: ''The Arkansas Department of Education's Development Plan''"],"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/1389"],"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":["legal documents"],"dcterms_extent":["151 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_342","title":"Correspondence","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":null,"dc_date":["1994"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System."],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","Little Rock School District","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","School improvement programs"],"dcterms_title":["Correspondence"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Butler Center for Arkansas Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://arstudies.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/bcmss0837/id/342"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["correspondence"],"dcterms_extent":null,"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\nOffice of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501)376-6200 Fax (501) 371-0100 Date\nOctober 3, 1994 To\nRuss Mayo From\n,\u0026gt;Ann Brown Subject\nDistrictwide Recruitment Plan 1 was pleased to receive a copy of the districts newsletter News \u0026amp; Views, the first such publication in a long time. It was a newsy and interesting edition, and 1 look forward to reading the coming issues. The \"Desegregation Update\" section on the first page of the newsletter states that a districtwide recruitment plan has been written, and that the individual schools have put together strategies for action at the school level. The section goes on to say that the district and parent recruiters will work toward improving the image of the public schools to encourage voluntary student transfers. 1 was also glad to read that ODMs Incentive School Monitoring Report has provided further direction for recruitment efforts. Because recruitment and public relations are areas critical to desegregation, 1 salute you for having completed the plans that will support implementation of the activities referenced in the Update. Its a credit to you and your colleagues that the district has started the school year well prepared with road maps. Please help us get a head start on monitoring this years recruitment activities by sending me a copy of the revised districtwide recruitment plan that will be guiding you. In conjunction with that plan, I would also appreciate the information listed below. Brief answers, summaries, or copies of materials will do fine at this point. 1. 2. 3. Point out how this years districtwide recruitment plan differs from that of the previous year. State the districtwide goal of the recruitment plan in quantitative terms by race, i.e., the percentage increase in enrollment and the total number of students that percentage represents. State the school-based recruitment goal in quantitative terms by race for each school, i.e., the percentage increase by school and the target number of students you hope to recruit to each school according to the racial balance needs of each.October 3, 1994 Page Two 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. Forward the results of the evaluation (fast-track or otherwise) you did on the previous recruitment plan that enabled you to determine what changes needed to be made in the current plan based on the successes or failures of last years plan. The Court long ago required the LRSD to establish a tracking system that would enable the district to determine which recruitment efforts are successful and which are not. Indicate the status of the tracking system, when it was established, who is responsible for it, and how it works. Summarize what youve learned from the system, and also how youve used at knowledge to modify the elements of your new recruitment plan. Summarize the recruitment strategies that each school has put together for this year. Or, if it will be easier, just include copies of the school-based plans. The desegregation plans state that parents and Parent Recruiters, along with such groups as the PTA, recruitment teams. Incentive School Parent Recruitment Committees, speakers bureaus, and the Biracial Committee, will assist with recruitment. Indicate the role envisioned for such individuals and groups in the current districtwide and school-based recruitment plans. Include the timeline of e current districtwide recruitment plan. Indicate who is responsible for the major events on that timeline. Describe the plans of the district and parent recruiters for improving the image of the schools, the timeline of the plans, and the responsible personnel. Indicate how you factored in the elements of the Public Relations sections of the Interdistrict Desegregation Plan. 11. Describe or list those elements of ODMs Incentive School Monitoring Report that the district will be using in recruitment. Or, in other words, how has the district modified its current recruitment plan to incorporate elements of the incentive school report? ^3.H'. ^^Aikansas DEPARTMENT of EDUCATION FEDERAL PROGRAMS 4 STATE CAPITOL MALL  LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201-1071 . (501) 682-4475 GENE WILHOIT, Director, General Education Division October 3, 1994 OCT 71994 0/fic3 Dr. Henry P. Williams Superintendent of Schools Little Rock School District 810 West Markham St. Little Rock, AR 72201 oesegreg\nyoi Dear Dr. Williams\nThank you for your letter of September 29, 1994. The Chapter 2, ESEA, office iiss appreciative of your efforts to meet federal 1994. guidelines in cne expenaiture of your Chapter 2, ESEA, grant In your letter you have outlined some viable steps which agree will reduce the carryover balance at the end of the monies. we the expenditure of your Chapter 2, ESEA, fiscal year. Completion of the strategies mentioned in the letter will indeed guarantee that monies are spent in a timely manner. we are pleased to be able to approve the entire fiscal 1994 carryover of $39,354.59. carried into Completion of Therefore, mentioned This money is to be your fiscal 1995 project for expenditure in the current fiscal year. Sincerely, Bernadine Hoffman Program Administrator Chapter 2, ESEA BH:rjh cc: Ann Brown 1/ L board of EDUCATION: Chairman  ELAINE SCOTT, Little Rock  Vice Chairman  RICHARD C SMITH JR., Tillar Members: CARL E BAGGER R^ers . WLLIAM B. USHER, Paragould . JAMES M. LLEWELLYN, JR., Fort Smith  JAMES A McLARTY III, Newport  RAE RICE PERRY, Arkadelphia  SHERRY WALKER, Little Rock  NANCY M. WOOD, Little Rock An Equal Opportunity Employer  c TA Office of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501)376-6200 Fax (501) 371-0100 Date: October 5, 1994 To: Frank Martin From: i^Ann Brown Subject: Reassignment of IRC Personnel I enjoyed our chat today and look forward to talking with you further on October 18. Thanks for agreeing to look into the situation regarding Leola Scoggins and Pearl Jackson, two IRC aides whose reassignments have made these two CTA members very unhappy. They met with me before school started and I suggested that they talk with you to determine the status of their complaint. Heres a copy of what I received from Leola, which you may already have in your files. I appreciate your looking into the matter and letting Leola and Pearl Itnow what next steps to anticipate. They both feel pretty helpless, but perhaps the situation isnt hopeless. Although theres probably not much I can do, please let me know how I can help. Thanks very much.Little Rock School District Ann Brown, Monitor Office of Desegregation Monitoring 201 E. Markham St. Little Rock, AR 72201 October 6, 1994 RECEIVFD OCT 61994 Dear Ann: Office of Desegregation Monitoring Our discussion of my business case for a Director of Student Assignment was helpful. As you know, the proposal is to eliminate the Desegregation Facilitator position appearing in the desegregation plan. The money for that position will be used for a Director of Student Assignment. 1, and others as noted in the business case, will assume the responsibilities mandated by the plan for the Desegregation Facilitator. Since this is a plan modification, I am asking for your assistance with the modification process. The attached business case has been rewritten to Include all desegregation plan mandates for the Desegregation Facilitator, to clarify job responsibilities and accountability, to define a realistic job scope, and to correct some previous incongruities among sections of the business case. The Little Rock School District Board of Directors was presented the original business case by Dr. Henry Williams, Superintendent, on June 14, 1994. There were no objections. On or about July 18, Chris Heller, LRSD Attorney, sent copies of the business case to all parties and submitted it to the court v\\4th the budget document. No objections were heard from any of the parties at that time. At a later hearing. Judge Wright requested clarification of specifically who would address the mandates of the plan in addition to the Associate Superintendent for Desegregation. A chart responding to her request is included. Since this is a modification to the LRSD Desegregation Plan, the change should be reflected in the document for future reference. 1 suggest that the references to Desegregation Facilitator in the current plan be deleted. Again, thank you for your help with the business case. 1 look forward to hearing from you. Sincerely, C. Russell Mayo Associate Superintendent for Desegregation C: Dr. Henry Williams, Superintendent Chris Heller, LRSD Attorney 810 West Markham Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201  (501)374-3361Little Rock School District Director of Student Assignment A Business Case Addition  Modification Deletion October 6,1994Little Rock School District Director of Student Assignment Business Case Executive Summary The position of Associate Superintendent for Desegregation was established to insure implementation of our desegregation plan as well as to monitor the districts desegregation process. Historically, this has been done through careful oversight of the Student Assigrunent Office (SAO), generation of numerous statistical reports, and staying abreast of the latest desegregation obligations. Also included with these responsibilities has been oversight of Volunteers In Public Schools (VIPS) and responsibility for recruitment of students as described in the desegregation plan. This past year, the responsibilities of Communications and Transportation were added to this position. Transportation has over 340 employees. Also added this school year are additional reports and documents generated monthly and quarterly to monitor the districts progress in fulfilling its obligations under its plan. The Student Assignment Office is not receiving as much day-to-day supervision as it should to address the sensitivity of student assignments, their impact on the desegregation plan, and the needs of parents. The responsibilities of student assignment require moment by moment attention. Decisions about when to release waiting lists affect racial balance and recruitment of parents to the district. Careful and proper monitoring of racial balance and the student assignment process improves public confidence and maintains racial balance. Projecting demographic data and enrollments aids in planning for future marketing, recruitment, and school closings or construction. Executing plans for closing schools requires attention to patrons who are affected and the assurance of acceptable options. The supervision of SAO personnel requires meetings, planning, and periodic training. Meeting with parents who do not understand the student assignment process requires diplomacy, patience, and time. Meeting with the appeals committee requires time and diplomacy. These are examples of student assignment responsibilities requiring day-to-day, on-site attention. Currently the Associate Superintendent for Desegregation fulfills the role of the student assignment supervisor in addition to broader responsibilities. Though housed at the SAO, his responsibilities require his presence and attention elsewhere too often. This makes the day-to-day attention required by the student assignment impossible. This is a proposal to change the position of Desegregation Facilitator to Director of Student Assignment. Realign responsibilities so the new director assumes the primary responsibility for student assignment, and the Associate Superintendent for Desegregation assumes primary responsibility for desegregation and the duties previously done by the Desegregation Facilitator. This neither increases the costs of personnel nor ignores the responsibilities of the Desegregation Facilitator. Further, it gives the attention necessary to student assignment and allows for greater focus on the desegregation effort. This position will report to the Associate Superintendent for Desegregation. See Figure 1.Director of Student Assignment Business Case 2 Now, more than before, senior management is totally involved in the desegregation effort. The responsibilities of the Superintendent, the Deputy Superintendent, Associate to the Deputy Superintendent, Associate Superintendent for Desegregation, Director of Planning, Research, and Evaluation, and staff development personnel are all focused on the desegregation effort. The implementation of a planning and budgeting process has raised the effort to a new consciousness. Now monitoring of desegregation is more extensive them ever. Continuous discussions and analysis in meetings of the Superintendents Council have moved obligations to the forefront. The Program Budget Document and the Management Tool represent additional safeguards not previously used by the district. Therefore, the original intent of the Desegregation Facilitator has grown beyond a single individual into a way of life for senior management in the district. Addressing the need in the area of student assignment now becomes am important part of the solution. The responsibilities of the former Desegregation Facilitator will become the primary responsibility of the Associate Superintendent for Desegregation. He will be assisted by those persons listed in the chart below. Tasks 1. Work directly with building principals 2. Identification of problems or practices that impede the Implementation of quality desegregated education in each building 3. Providing technical assistance to building principals and their staffs for desegregation concerns_____________ 4. Working very closely with the remaining associate superintendents as needed______________________ 5. Allow the central office administration to have immediate feedback on the day-to-day activities in the schools^________________________________________ 6. Focusing on all aspects of desegregation implementation including, but not limited to achievement disparity, extracurricular activities, class assignments, guidance and counseling, staffing and staff interaction, student interactions, and parent Involvement. Person (s) Associate Supt. for Deseg. Assistant Supts. Assoc, to Deputy Supt. Assistant Supts. Assoc, to Deputy Supt. Dir. of Human Resources Dir. of Labor Relations Dir. of Student Assignment Assoc. Supt for Deseg. Dir. of Staff Development Associate Supt. for Deseg. Assistant Supts. Assoc, to Deputy Supt. Associate Supt. for Deseg. ' At present, only one Associate Superintendent exists. This reference is interpreted as other senior level administrators in the district. 2 This item is less of a task and more of a result. IO/64 DIRSAOZ.DOCDirector of Student Assignment Business Case 3 Currently, the position of Desegregation Facilitator is vacant because of a retirement. By modifying the position now, no adjustments are necessary for the person in the position. The position will be advertised as described herein. The new person will know what is expected before filling the position. An extended period of training will be necessary once a person is employed. Time for announcing the position and interviewing will be necessary. This should take no more than one month to complete once final approval is given. The busiest time of the year for student assignment is January through September. The sooner we can make this change\nthe sooner we can begin improving service to parents. The following are milestones for implementing this position modification. 1. 2. 3, 4. 5. 6. Milestone Date Person Meet with SAO staff. Director of Communications, the Coordinator of VIPS, and the Director of Transportation^ Present Business Case to the Superintendent for approval Present Business Case to the Board of Directors for approval Present Business Case to ODM to begin modification procedure Discuss this modification with all parties Submit plan modification to the Court for approval 7. Court approval 8. 9. Advertise the position Interview 10. Report for work 8/30/94 6/14/94 6/14/94 10/03/94 10/14/94 10/21/94 11/04/94 11/07/94 11/22/94 12/05/94 Mayo Mayo Williams Attorney Attorney Attorneys Williams Hurley Mayo Appointee Timely consideration of this modification is respectfully requested. Russ Mayo Associate Superintendent for Desegregation September, 1994 3 Though discussed in staff meetings with this group, a specific date was not reflected in an earlier edition of this business case. Another discussion was held updating this group on the progress of the business case. Therefore, the date appears to be out of sequence. 10/6/94 MRSAOZ DOCDirector of Student Assignment Business Case 4 Background The position of Associate Superintendent for Desegregation was established to insure implementation of our desegregation plan as well as to monitor the districts desegregation process. Historically, this has been done through careful oversight of the Student Assignment Office (SAO), generation of numerous statistical reports, and staying abreast of the latest desegregation obligations. Also included with these responsibilities has been oversight of Volunteers In Public Schools (VIPS) and responsibility for recruitment of students as described in the desegregation plan. This past year, the responsibilities of Communications and Transportation were added to this position. Transportation has over 340 employees. Also added this school year are additional reports and documents generated monthly and quarterly to monitor the districts progress in fulfilling its obligations under its plan. Problem Definition The Student Assignment Office is not receiving as much day-to-day supervision as it should to address the sensitivity of student assignments, their impact on the desegregation plan, and the needs of parents. The responsibilities of student assignment require moment by moment attention. Decisions about when to release waiting lists affect racial balance and recruitment of parents to the district. Careful and proper monitoring of racial balance and the student assignment process improves public confidence and maintains racial balance. Projecting demographic data and enrollments aids in planning for future marketing, recruitment, and school closings or construction. Executing plans for closing schools requires attention to patrons who are affected and the assurance of acceptable options. The supervision of SAO personnel requires meetings, planning, and periodic training. Meeting with parents who do not understand the student assignment process requires diplomacy, patience, and time. Meeting with the appeals committee requires time and diplomacy. These are examples of student assignment responsibilities requiring day-to-day, on-site attention. Currently the Associate Superintendent for Desegregation fulfills the role of the student assignment supervisor in addition to broader responsibilities. Though housed at the SAO, his responsibilities require his presence and attention elsewhere too often. This makes the day-to-day attention required by the student assignment impossible. Analysis of Alternatives The following alternatives have been considered: 10/6/94 D1RSAOZ.DOCDirector of Student Assignment Business Case 5 1. Add a new position to cover the responsibilities of student assignment and to assist the Associate Superintendent for Desegregation. This creates an additional position and personnel costs. 2. Allow things to remain as they are. SAO and parents will continue to receive less Associate Superintendent Organizational Chart I A\u0026gt;oclt 8upTtnt\u0026lt;ndnt | 3. DIrvctorof Transportation l\" I Director of Student Assignment and Desegregation Student Assignment Coordinator SAO Information Coordinator I than attention. adequate Change the position of Desegregation Facilitator to Director of Student Director of Communications I W Wecrutters | I PreyiUBT I I (8) Student Alonwnt nf [ Figure J Community OovolopmMit CoordkMitor I Staff I Assignment. Realign responsibilities so the new director assumes the responsibility primary for Student and the assignment, Associate Superintendent Desegregation for assumes responsibility primary for desegregation and the duties previously done by the Desegregation Facilitator. This neither increases the costs of personnel nor ignores the responsibilities of the Desegregation Facilitator. Further, it gives the attention necessary to student assignment and allows for greater focus on the desegregation effort. This position will report to the Associate Superintendent for Desegregation. See Figure 1. Now, more than before, senior management is totally involved in the desegregation effort. The responsibilities of the Superintendent, the Deputy Superintendent, Associate to the Deputy Superintendent, Associate Superintendent for Desegregation, Director of Planning, Research, and Evaluation, and staff development personnel eire all focused on the desegregation effort. The implementation of a planning and budgeting process has raised the effort to a new consciousness. Now monitoring of desegregation is more extensive than ever. Continuous discussions and analysis in meetings of the Superintendents Council have moved obligations to the forefront. The Program Budget Document and the Management Tool represent additional safeguards not previously used by the district. Therefore, the original intent of the Desegregation Facilitator has grown beyond a single individual into a way of life for senior management in the district. Addressing the need in the area of student assignment now becomes ein important part of the solution. The following are examples of responsibilities to be assigned to the new position: 10/6/94 DIRSAOZ EOCDirector of Student Assignment Business Case 6 a) Supervises and coordinates the day-to-day operation of the Student Assignment Office\nb) Keeps the Associate Superintendent informed and updated on progress made in performing responsibilities relating to student assignment and on any relevant information discovered in the performeince of these duties\nc) Assists with developmental planning in the areas of long-range student assignment policies, magnet school development, program placement, and equal educational opportunity planning, and proposal development by providing demographic information and other pertinent information\nd) Assists with monitoring and evaluating the districts desegregation plan\ne) Assists in identifying problems or practices that impede the implementation of quality desegregation in the student assignment process\nf) Provides immediate feedback on the day-to-day operations relating to student assignment\ng) Stays informed of current issues before the Board of Directors by attending Board Meetings\nh) Provides for the development, implementation, and evaluation of staff training for Student Assignment Office personnel\ni) Coordinates the appeals committee\nand, j) Performs other duties as assigned. The LRSD Plan defines the position of Desegregation Facilitator. Those tasks are found in the Educational Equity Monitoring section of the plan. The primary responsibility for the tasks described in the LRSD Plan will rest with the Associate Superintendent for Desegregation with this proposal. In the plan, the Desegregation Facilitator is defined as follows: Office of Desegregation A desegregation facilitator will be hired to work directly with building princip\u0026gt;als. The desegregation facilitator will be solely responsible for identifying problems or practices that impede the implementation of quality desegregated education in each building. The facilitator will also be responsible for providing technical assistance to building principals and their staffs, for desegregation related concerns. The use of a desegregation facilitator will allow the central office administration to have immediate feedback on the day to day activities in the schools. The desegregation facilitator will report directly to the Associate Sufjerintendent for Desegregation. However, the desegregation facilitator will work very closely with the remaining associate superintendents as needed. The desegregation facilitator will focus on all aspects of desegregation implementation. This includes, but is not limited to, achievement disparity. 10/6/94 MRSAOZ DOCDirector of Student Assignment Business Case 7 extracurricular activities, class assignments, guidance eind counseling, staffing and staff interaction, student interaction, and parent involvement. Timeline Develop Job Description Announce Position Hire Desegregation Facilitator March 1-15 April 1-15 May 30 The responsibilities of the former Desegregation Facilitator will become the primary responsibility of the Associate Superintendent for Desegregation. He will be assisted by those persons listed in the chart below. _______________________Tasks_________ 1. Work directly with building principals 2. Identification of problems or practices that impede the implementation of quality desegregated education in each building 3. Providing technical assistance to building principals and their staffs for desegregation concerns______ 4. Working very closely with the remaining associate superintendents'^ as needed__________________ 5. Allow the central office administration to have immediate feedback on the day-to-day activities in the schools^________________________________ 6. Focusing on aU aspects of desegregation implementation including, but not limited to achievement disparity, extracurricular activities, class assignments, guidance and counseling, staffing and staff interaction, student interactions, and parent involvement. ________Person(s)_______ Associate Supt. for Deseg. Assistcint Supts. Assoc, to Deputy Supt. Assistant Supts. Assoc, to Deputy Supt. Dir. of Humein Resources Dir. of Labor Relations Dir, of Student Assignment Assoc. Supt for Deseg. Dir, of Staff Development Associate Supt. for Deseg. Assistant Supts. Assoc, to Deputy Supt. Associate Supt. for Deseg. 4 At present, only one Associate Superintendent exists. This reference is interpreted as other senior level administrators in the district. 5 This item is less of a task and more of a result. 10/6/94 DIRSAOZ.DOC Director of Student Assignment Business Case 8 Recommendation Alternative 3 is recommended. 3. Change the position of Desegregation Facilitator to Director of Student Assignment. Realign tasks to make this position responsible primarily for student assignment. The responsibilities of the former Desegregation Facilitator will become the responsibility of the Associate Superintendent for Desegregation. This change neither increases the costs of personnel nor ignores the responsibilities of the Desegregation Facilitator. Further, it gives the attention necessary to student assignment. This position will continue to report to the Associate Superintendent for Desegregation. Objective Upon implementation of alternative 3, the Student Assigiunent Office will receive the day-to-day supervision necessary to address the sensitivity of student assignments, their impact on the desegregation plan, and the needs of parents. Achieving this objective will permit: 1. More efficient monitoring of progress of desegregation by the Associate Superintendent for Desegregation\n2. Greater focus and attention given to daily decisions relating to student assignment\n3. Thorough long-range planning for student assignment policies, magnet school development, program placement, equal educational opportunity planning, and proposal development by providing demographic information and other pertinent information\n4. Quicker response to parent inquires\nand, 5. Identification of problems or practices in the student assignment process that impede the implementation of quality desegregation. Impact Analysis Negatives 1. Student Assignment Personnel will have to adjust to a third supervisor within three years. 2. Parties in the case may be concerned that monitoring of the districts desegregation obligations will be compromised. 10/6/M DIRSAOZ.DOCDirector of Student Assignment Business Case 9 Positives 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. eliminate delays in decision-making and responses to parents in the cirea of student assignments. permit efficient monitoring of progress of desegregation by the Associate Superintendent for Desegregation\nbring more focus and attention to daily decisions relating to student assignment\nprovide more thorough long-range planning for student assignment policies, magnet school development, program placement, equal educational opportunity planning, and proposal development by providing demographic information and other pertinent information\nallow quicker response to parent inquires\nand, permit the identification of problems or practices in the student assignment process that impede the implementation of quality desegregation. Risks The risks of not implementing this solution are continued disorganization for the Associate Superintendent for Desegregation, complaints, limited complicince with our obligations, and continuation of a generally poor public image in the area of student assignments. Timing Currently, the position of Desegregation Facilitator is vacant because of a retirement. By modifying the position now, no adjustments are necessary for the person in the position. The position will be advertised as described herein. The new person will know what is expected before filling the position. An extended period of training will be necessary once a person is employed. Time for announcing the position and interviewing will be necessary. This should take no more than one month to complete once final approval is given. The busiest time of the year for student assignment is January through September. The sooner we can make this change\nthe sooner we can begin improving service to parents. Resources Analysis Personnei This is a position modification requiring no increase or decrease in the number of existing positions. 10/6/94 DIRSAOZ.DOCDirector of Student Assignment Business Case 10 Financial No increase will occur in the current level of funding for this position. Revenue Source Funding for this position will come from the current line item of the budget. Force Field Analysis Primary supporters of this modification are council members, SAO staff, Director of Communications, the Coordinator of VIPS, and the Director of Transportation. General Information Plan The following are milestones for implementing this position modification. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Milestone Date Person Meet with SAO staff. Director of Communications, the Coordinator of VIPS, and the Director of Transportation^ Present Business Case to the Superintendent for approval Present Business Case to the Board of Directors for approval Present Business Case to ODM to begin modification procedure Discuss this modification with all parties Submit plan rnodification to the Court for approval 7. Court approval 8. 9. Advertise the position Interview 10. Report for work 8/30/94 6/14/94 6/14/94 10/03/94 10/14/94, 10/21/94 11/04/94 11/07/94 11/22/94 12/05/94 Mayo Mayo Williams Mayo Attorney Attorneys Williams Hurley Mayo Appointee 6 Though discussed in staff meetings with this group, a specific date was not reflected in an earlier edition of this business case. Another discussion was held updating this group on the progress of the business case. Therefore, the date appears to be out of sequence. 10/6/94 DIRSAOZ.DOCB4101301 Date: October 13, 1994 To: Robert Glowers From: Bill Mooney Subj: Comments on the September LRSD Project Management Tool Robert, I thought I would send you a brief note of comments on the latest project management tool since I will not be able to talk to you about them for some time. If you have any questions, save them for my return. Task 6. As you know, the 6/30/95 finish date is not really correct. The needs assessment we are talking about in this section must be completed by the 12/15/94 finish date in Task 150. The problem is Task 153, which really belongs in the next cycle. Cycle III. I know the lawyers dont want two tools, but good planning and management says keep things separate so folks dont get confused. I guess lawyers dont get confused like the rest of us. Task 6. Last week we met concerning setting the format for the needs- assessment document. 1 would add a new task to cover that activity, and insert it in as Task 7. Task 71. There is no mention of the facilities committee which has been set up to help develop the facilities plan. I would put some tasking in this section to track their work, and show the world what all we are doing. Task 105. Adding the name of the school, once determined, is a good idea. It shows you are working your plan. Well done. Task 149. 1 dont understand why this finish date is so late? It would seem that they would want their input going into the Program Development decision-making back in January. April 28, 1995 is after the Proposed Budget has already been developed. I would think this date should be back in December/January. Task 154. This is the same problem we have in Task 6. 9/15/95 is not really the right timeframe. The inventory for this cycle should be completed by now. The killer is Task 160, which is really in the Cycle III timeline. Task 186 and Task 192. These tasks indicate that the Board has established and prepared a distribution list of their written priorities. By this note, I am requesting you send Ann Brown and myself a copy of these priorities as soon as possible. Thanks, in advance.Task 188 and Task 189. I understand why they wanted to extend these two, and I think this is a valid reason. What concerns me is the 0% progress. I fear folks will let this one slip again this year because of the hard decisions, and we will get hopelessly behind. Please watch the progress on this one. We need to start work on the known items last week. Task 203. This finish date is not correct. We know that this sub-process must be completed prior to starting on the next sub-process. Budgeting. This sub-process needs to finish by 2/28/95. The problem child is Task 216. If the district is planning on revisiting outsourcing, it should do so and make a decision not later than 2/28/95 so it can be properly included in the budget. To show a date of 6/30/95 replicates the problem we had this past budget\nwaiting too late for decisions. A decision at 6/30/95 is far too late for this budget cycle. Task 214. How can we have 40% of this task complete when the start date is 11/ 16/94? Task 250. I think this task will take more than one day. Think about this one. Task 253. This is the same task as Task 248, and this one can be deleted. Note\nI noticed that you did not include anything in the plan about the budget hearings which will surely occur. I would think about how to at least put a reminder in there. Being a manager and not an attorney, I would ask the Court to tentatively schedule those hearings as soon as possible giving consideration to the overall LRSD schedule. Task 364. One last comment about this. The cover letter for the August 3, 1994 filing, entitled LRSDs 1994-1995 Budget/July Project Management Tool (Corrected), addressed the tool for Cycle II, yet the actual tool submitted was for Cycle I. As I have said, I have been told the lawyers only wanted one tool at a time, but this is what can happen when one fails to clearly understand there are really two separate cycles overlapping. As we have discussed. Cycle I never was completely closed out. Rest assured there will be many more future interpretation errors if we continue to keep two cycles going in one tool. Enough said. Task 378, 379, 380, 381. This is a good idea and reminder for critical things to come. Task 382. This summary task is a good one for including in the tool, but the timing confuses me. It seems to me that these tasks relate to the 94-95 school year and the budget which we have just completed. These tasks were added to the tool after they were actually completed. It seems we have another \"two cycle\" problem. Since this cycle is focusing on 95-96 school year, it seems we should have May 95 dates in this tool.'/ 4- X( Little Rock School District \u0026lt;*15 ' October 20, 1994 eer 2 41994 Mrs. Ann Brown Office of Desegregation Monitoring Little Rock School District Oiiise of Oosegregaticn ktonii tiering Dear Mrs. Ann Brown, Enclosed is an invitation for everyone in your office, attached flyer) (See We would be honored to have you as our special guest. Love, Catherine 810 West Markham Street  Little Rock, Arkansas 72201  (501)324-2000 C^: A.'J^ 'f SfAsa) /r/^ Little Rock School District October 25, 1994 RSCEP'BP OCT 2 8 1994 Margie Powell Office of Desegregation Monitoring 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Ofiioa of D6segre'5aiicn Moriitering Little Rock, AR 72201 RE: Extended Year Program at Incentive Schools ( Attached you will find administration reports for the Extended Year Program for the incentive schools, sending these reports to you. I am sorry for the delay in If I can be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to call. Sincerely, Sterling Ingram Associate to the Deputy Superintendent Sl/adg- Attachments 810 West Markham Street  Little Rock, Arkansas 72201  (501)324-2000LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT SUMMER SCHOOL/SUMMARY REPORT 1994 GRADES 1 - 6 AND EXTENDED YEAR PROGRAM ROCKEFELLER ELEMENTARY 700 EAST 17TH STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72206 y C^yJ^L ,,^, .. r ....-ZXe. /yiaj.^ ..- -_______ \u0026lt; i /tJt, nopy Ti^u t, (?c  I illJWIIIItWjW' LmuE Rock School District OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDENT ^sn Memorandum OCI 5 1 1994 DATE\nOctober 27, 1994 Vyi 2tt'Cw 0*  TO: RE: Desegregation Monitoring Office - Ann Brown, Melissa Guldin Joshua Interveners - John Walker Knight Interveners - Eleanor Coleman, Frank Martin Pulaski County Special School District - Bobby Lester North Little Rock School District - James Smith LRSD Planning Team - Matthis, Ingram, Clowers, Mayo, Buchanan, Elston, Kohler, Eaton, Hurley, Schwartz of Schools ) / Magnet School/Development This memo is to invite your participation in a planning process leading to the submission of an application by the Little Rock School District to the federal Magnet Schools Assistance Program. An application for a 3-year program is being prepared for submission in early 1995. Program activity would begin later that year. LRSD seeks involvement of key community representatives to develop the most competitive application. Your involvement will help determine which schools will be targeted to become magnets, what magnet themes will be developed, how enrollment at the schools will be handled, and other issues. Please make every effort to attend or send a representative to a planning meeting on Thursday, November 3, from 2:00 to 3:00 P.M. in the Board Room of the LRSD Administration Building. At that session, you will be presented with some of the Districts preliminary concepts for magnet school development and an overview of the schedule and planning process we will follow for the coming months. Again, your participation in this planning process is strongly encouraged. Please call Marvin Schwartz, #324-2014, with any questions on this initiative or the planning meeting. I look forward to seeing you then. 810 West Markham Street  Little Rock, Arkansas 72201  (501)824-2000  I 1 C^X \u0026lt;^: ^r)f/,A. FOR CONSIDERATION OF SUSPENSION OF THE RULES AT OCTOBER REGULAR BOARD MEETING LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM STREET LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS October 27, 1994 TO: Board of Directors OCI 27 1994 FROM: Sadie Mitchell^^Xssistant Superintendent Samuel Branch, Principal .^^^Marvin Schwartz, Grants Writer Gliics 0, Ocseg\ney: itiOi' THROUGH: SUBJECT: Parent Involvement Program r P^k Element^ School has prepared an application to the state Department of Education for f establish a parent involvement program for grades K-3. The school will request $15,000 for a one-year program through the Division of Early Childhood Education e intent of the progrm is to involve parents in their chidrens education and prevent academic difficulties through high quality early childhood programs. The Fair Park program design involves developing language skills to bnng parents and children together through the use of books and computer equipment. Parent involvement in the school setting will be complemented by use of educational materials in the home. prevent academic 'O It is recoi^ended that the Board of Directors approve the administration to submit the proposal for the Fair Park parent involvement program.OFF. OF DESEG. MONITORING BANKS, JACQUELYN J - BROWN, ANN S vC BRYANT, LINDA F RECEPTIONIST FEDERAL MONITOR, 515 WEST 24TH STREET 1201 WELCH Sukf.o** 3002 ROMINE ROAD MELISSA R MOONEY, WILLIAM M /MORGAN, ROLAND R v'POWELL, MARGIE L '7rAMER, POLLY A ^fiMITH, HORACE R TANNER, CONNIE H ASSOCIATE FEDERAL MONITOR BUDGET SPECIALIST ASSOCIATE FEDERAL MONITOR ASSOCIATE FEDERAL MONITOR OFFICE MANAGER ASSOCIATE FEDERAL MONITOR ASSOCIATE FeDEBAfc-HONITOfr 6509 CANTRELL 21711 HENLEY LANE MCF 11411 KERRY DRIVE -4eeEECHwee\u0026amp; 0' Ci 72114 72202 72204 72207 72065 72209 TK95- I 758-1315 372-7458 224-7338 663-8177 888-6183 562-7698 ^e^soof- DATE: October 31, 1994 TO: All Principals, Directors, and Managers FROM: Dr. Ri^^ Hurley, Director Human Resources Department SUBJECT: Request for Personnel Directory Update Information Your help is needed in updating the information for your staffs name, address, and phone number for 1994-95 LRSD Personnel Directory. A copy of the current information from Human Resources is attached to assist you. Please have each employee in you division to check their address, zip code, and telephone number for accuracy. If the employee DOES NOT wish to have their address and/or number published, they must indicate so by lining through the information and initialing. All changes should be made on the attached sheet(s). Return your updated information to Human Resources by November 11.1994. vmai aJ i l=,J^ Ct/\u0026gt;\u0026gt;'\u0026lt;-i LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT STUDENT ASSIGNMENT 501 SHERMAN STREET LITTLE ROCK ARKANSAS 72202 / - October 31, 1994 Mr. Bill Mooney ODM Little Rock, Arkansas 72202 Dear Bill: Due to an error there were two pages in the LRSD Transportation Business Case with wrong calculations. Please replace pages 1 and 10 with the enclosed copies. Thank you for your help! Sincerely, Russ Mayo Associate Superintendent for Desegregation RM: elk Enclosure: (2) Little Rock School District Improving Student Transportation Business Case Executive Summary The intent of this business case is to explain the current transportation problems which resulted from an aging fleet and reduced personnel. Unfortunately, the cost of remedies proposed here is only a beginning. It will not fix the problem for the long term. For example, the new buses proposed will not arrive until the spring of 1995. Then too few wUl arrive to impact the long-term need. The personnel proposed can be hired immediately but will have continuous impact on the budgets from year to year, if this solution continues to be used. Additionally, large sums of money will have to be included in each succeeding budget to replace buses. A detailed explanation of the transportation problem follows with a temporary solution for this budget year. The cost to the district will be $1.3 million. Replacement buses will cost $1 million and additional personnel will cost approximately $0.3 million. Below is an itemized list of costs: Quan. Position CosP Quan.^ Item Cost 3.3 Trainers Mechanics 1.5 Helpers Clerks $87,100 $115,200 $62,400 $21,600 33 Buses $990,000 4 4 Total $286,300 Total $990,000 The money will come from the state desegregation loan fund. The following milestones for implementing this proposal are suggested and will be monitored by the Associate Superintendent for Desegregation. Milestone 1. Proposal presented to the LRSD Board of Directors and approved 2. Advertise for mechanics and trainers Date 7/14/94 9/1/94 Person Williams Hurley 1 2 Includes benefits Depends on whether or not we lease-purchase or purchase outrightImproving Student Transportation Business Case 10 Timing It is critical that the decision be made before the budget is final for 1994-95. If this solution is to be implemented, buses must be ordered and personnel recruited as soon as possible. Resources Analysis Personnel Several trainers and additional mechanics are necessary to implement this proposal. Financial The cost to the district will be $1.3 million. Replacement buses will cost $1 million and additional personnel will cost approximately $0.3 million. Below is an itemized list of costs: Quan. Position 3.3 Trainers Cost^ Quan.^ Item Cost 4 Mechanics 4 Helpers 1.5 Clerks $87,100 $115,200 $62,400 $21,600 33 Bxises $990,000 Total $286,300 Total $990,000 Revenue Source The money will come from the state desegregation loan ftmd. Force Field Analysis Primary supporters of this proposal will be those directly affected by the solution  patrons and administrators within the District. The Board of Directors and 3 Includes benefits 4 Depends on whether or not we lease-purchase or purchase outright. lO/SI/M BC.BU5Little Rock School District 810 West Markham Street  Little Rock, Arkansas 72201  (501)324'2000  r i iPF . 'J November 1, 1994 '5 1994 Office ot Oe\nKatherine P. Mitchell, Ph.D. 1605 Welch Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72206  '\"Iz  Dear Dr. Mitchell: I am writing asking that you work for and vote for the continuation of hiring registered nurses to provide health care to our school children. Many of our students receive no health care other than what is provided at their school site. Registered nurses are qualified to provide professional assessments, emergency care and referrals, health education. and the all important mental health care. are not qualified to act in such an independent role. Licensed practical nurses In my consultation with the Little Rock School District, I have become aware of countless cases where elementary, junior and senior high students as well as faculty members have not only received excellent health care and mental health/suicide prevention/intervention but are alive today as a result of the professional assessment, quick response and committment of the school nurses of the LRSD. district should be proud! They are certainly a group of winich the As our society becomes more complicated, so do the lives of our students and faculty and so do the health problems demanding professional nurses in our schools. Let's not sell our kids short. Please continue your support of our registered school nurses and giving our students the quality health care they deserve. Thank you very much. * Sincerely Mary Paal, M.S.N..,R.N. ,c. Certified Psychiatric Mental Health Nurse cc: Linda Poindexter Dr. Henry WilliamsOffice of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501) 376.6200 Fax (501) 371 -0100 Date: November 1, 1994 To: All Counsel of Record From: n S. Brown Subject: LRSD Proposal for Plan Modification: Desegregation Facilitator As you are aware. Judge Wright has asked me to coordinate the desegregation plan modification process for a specific proposal, which was prompted by a LRSD business case presented to the Court during recent hearings. That business case proposed to eliminate the Desegregation Facilitator, to distribute the Facilitators duties to other district administrators, and to create a new Director of Student Assignment position. In an October 24, 1994 Order, the Court directed me to \"work with the LRSD to identify any deficiencies in the business case and to address them in ways that preserve the intent of the desegregation plan when it provided that a Desegregation Facilitator would serve the staff and students of LRSD schools.\" 1 have met at length with Dr. Russ Mayo to discuss the business case. As a result of our discussions and my observations. Dr. Mayo has completed a revised business case. The revision addresses deficiencies in the original proposal, which had to do with\nincongruities within the business case, omitted plan mandates, the scope of the revised job description, possible neglect of plan-mandated responsibilities, and unclear accountability. In my opinion. Dr. Mayo has satisfactorily addressed those deficiencies through this revised proposal. Please review the revised business case, which is attached along with a letter from Dr. Mayo to me. If you have questions or concerns about the proposal, discuss them with Dr. Mayo and his attorney. Do your best to resolve any issues and determine whether the business case may need further revision. Let me know immediately the nature of any matters that remain unsettled or if you anticipate any additional changes in the proposal\n1 will serve as a resource to further facilitate the modification process if necessaiy. 1 wish to conclude this phase of the modification process as soon as possible, certainly no later than November 10, 1994. By that date or before, please indicate in writing to me either that you do not object to the plan modification as proposed in the revised business case, or that you object to the modification for reasons which you specify. 1 will forward your written comments to the Court along with copies of this memorandum and the enclosures. The Court will issue a ruling based on this information, any other filings you may wish to make, and the record of this case. Thank you for your cooperation. Please let me know if 1 may be of further assistance. Enc. Office of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501) 376-6200 Fax (501) 371 -0100 Date: November 2, 1994 To: From: Subject: Principals of Franklin, Garland, Mitchell, Rightsell, Rockefeller, and Stephens Ann Brown, Melissa Guldin, Bob Morgan, Margie Powell, and Horace Smith, ODM Monitoring Report on the Incentive Schools A draft copy of ODMs monitoring report is enclosed for your review. This report reflects the information we gathered during our visit to your schools this past spring. Please read the report carefully, checking for accuracy. If you find any statements that are inaccurate or if there are areas that need clarification, please summarize your comments and submit them to our office in writing, no later than 5:00 p.in. Tuesday, November 8,1994. One of the monitors will come to your school on that date to pick up the draft copy. If you have written comments and they are ready by the time a monitor arrives, you may send the comments back with him or her. If a monitor arrives before you prepare any response, you may bring it to our office later that same day. We will not accept any responses received after 5:00 p.m. on November 8. If you have questions or concerns about the report, please call our office and discuss those issues with a monitor. We make every effort to present fair, accurate information. Since this report is a draft copy, we ask that you do not duplicate it or share it with others. After the review process, we will file a completed report that includes an introduction, findings, summary, conclusions, and recommendations with the court. We will send you a copy of that final report. We very much appreciate your cooperation during the monitoring process and thank you for taking the time to review the draft. cc: Russ Mayo Pat Price Sterling Ingram4 oi^y J Office of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501)376-6200 Fax (501) 371-0100 Date: November 3, 1994 To: From: Subject: Bobby Lester, James Smith, Hank Williams A ^Ahn Brown ODM 1994-95 Monitoring Priorities and Procedures My staff and I have identified our monitoring priorities for the 1994-95 school year, which are attached. As in previous years, we identified our monitoring emphasis by reviewing the desegregation plans and mandates from both the circuit and district courts. We also noted court orders and directives issued during hearings that require ODM to review certain desegregation activities or to scrutinize specific provisions of the plans or court orders. It is possible that some of the attached desegregation topics will change depending upon unforeseen events that may develop, such as new court orders. I Some of our monitoring will be in the nature of a follow-up on previous reports, such as those on the alternative schools, racial balance in school enrollment, and the LRSD incentive schools. Other monitoring will be in areas we have not previously reviewed as a discreet topic, such as the secondary interdistrict schools in the LRSD, the specialty programs in the PCSSD, and the status of desegregation in the NLRSD schools. At die conclusion of each monitoring project, we will summarize our findings to the Court in some type of written report. Some of our reports will be brief and limited in scope, such as that on eliminating portable buildings in the PCSSD\nothers, such at that on the secondary interdistrict schools, will be more comprehensive and lengthier. You can expect our monitoring procedures to remain essentially unchanged from previous years, continuing to include review of records and other written information, interviews with principals and other administrators, and visits to schools. Our observations will be guided by a written monitoring guide, the same type of instrument weve used in the past. As usual, we will review the guide with your staff before beginning a formal monitoring project so youll know what we are looking for.Office of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501)376.6200 Fax (501) 371.0100 Novembers, 1994 Russ Mayo, Associate Superintendent for Desegregation Little Rock School District Student Assignment Office 501 Sherman Street Little Rock, AR 72202 Dear Russ\nAnn gave me a copy of the flow chart your staff developed to help explain the LRSD student assignment options. I know how confusing the many assignment options can be. Parents certainly need all the help they can get in making choices for their children. 1 really appreciate your efforts to make the assignment process more understandable to the Board, other educators, and the public. After reviewing the document, I have a few questions and comments regarding its content. I would like for us to meet and discuss the flow chart and other student assignment issues, after you have had time to review my comments. I will call your office by Tuesday, November 8, 1994 so we can set a time to discuss these matters. For whom was this flow chart designed? If the chart is for parents, or other individuals unfamiliar with the students assignment regulations, it may need more information presented in a clearer manner. How will the chart be used? If the flow chart is designed to demonstrate the various student assignment options, it needs some information regarding sending schools. The chart lists the various assignment options, but never indicates that the racial balance at sending schools is a factor. How much weight are you assigning to the racial balance at the sending schools? Has the district resolved the issue of sending school balance versus the need to reach maximum capacity at the magnet schools? Is the position on sending schools the same for all types of transfers (magnet, desegregation, incentive)?Where does the district stand on submitting a revised policy on the enrollment of LRSD white students in the interdistrict schools located within the district? This policy can make a dramatic difference in the options you have to offer to some parents. Why did you opt for the school classifications used on the flow chart? While King has full magnet status, its student assignments and racial balance are those allotted to an interdistrict school. The same is true for Washington, but both schools (along with Rockefeller) are listed with the original elementary magnets. Since the flow chart is trying to explain student assignment options, wouldn't it be more helpful to group schools with the same enrollment and racial balance guidelines together (such as the original magnets, interdistrict magnets, and so on)? I'll be talking to you soon. Sincerely, Melissa Guldin Associate MonitorLittle Rock School District OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDENT November 3, 1994 RECEIVED NOV 4 1994 Judge Susan Webber Wright U. S. Federal Court Eastern District of Arkansas 600 West Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 Oifici of Desegregation MoruOiii'.g Dear Judge Wright: Enclosed is a bound copy of the Pulaski County Desegregation Case foundation documents. Included are the Settlement Agreement, the Interdistrict Plan, the Court Order (May 1992) relating to plan modifications, and the LRSD Desegregation Plan. They (except the Court Order) have been reformatted, indexed, and line-numbered for easy reference. The Court Order has been summarized. That summary is found at the front of the Court Order section. No wording was changed. The indexing and line-numbering facilitates discussion and pursuit of our obligations. Though indexes may be grouped in an infinite number of ways, this one serves our purposes for quick reference. We will occasionally revise it as the need arises. Each member of the Board of Directors and key administrators in our district have copies. It occurred to me that you might benefit from it also. Sincerely, Henry P. Williams Superintendent of Schools Enclosure cc: Ann Brown, Federal Monitor Stephen W. Jones, NLRSD Attorney M. Samuel Jones, PCSSD Attorney John W. Walker, Attorney, Joshua Intervenors Richard W. RoacheU, Attorney, Knight Intervenors bjg 810 West Markham Street  Little Rock, Arkansas 72201  (501) 324-2000 Office of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501) 376-6200 Fax (501) 371 -0100 November 4, 1994 Henry P. Williams, Superintendent Little Rock School District 810 West Markham, Suite 510 Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Hank: As you know, the deadline for submitting the LRSD October 1 enrollment to ADE has passed. It is my understanding that the LRSD has already sent this information to ADE\nhowever, my office has not received it. It has always been the practice of aU three school districts to send the October 1 data to ODM at the same time they submitted it to ADE. In order for ODM to complete an enrollment comparison, my office needs LRSD's October 1 data as soon as possible. Polly Ramer, my office manager, has tried without success to secure a copy of your submission by talking to Deana Keathley in Russ Mayo's office. Bob Connelly in data processing, and Audrey Lee in Student Assignment. My office was told that this year the LRSD submitted the October 1 enrollment to ADE on computer disc. Since the October 1 enrollment is used as the baseline for obtaining an accurate year-to-year enrollment comparison, it is important that the information be reported in the same format as in years past. For this purpose, we have requested from the persons named above a breakdown of the October 1, 1994 enrollment by school, by grade, and by race. I would appreciate any help you might give me to expedite our receipt of the October I eiu-ollment breakdown. Thank you. Sincerely yours, Ann S. BrownOf'- Office of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501)376.6200 Fax (501) 371-0100 November 4, 1994 Dr. Henry P. Williams, Superintendent Little Rock School District 810 West Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Hank: Lately Ive been hearing the term \"Beacon\" schools used in reference to a subcommittee of the LRSD Board of Education and certain district schools. That is a term with which 1 am unfamiliar. Id appreciate your forwarding any information that can help me and my staff become better acquainted with the concept. 1 am particularly interested in specifically where and how you plan to implement and fund the Beacon idea in the LRSD. New programs or projects invariably have an impact on desegregation. When I am informed about the districts activities and potential new ventures, 1 am better able to answer any questions which members of the community or Judge Wright may ask me. Thanks for helping me keep up-to-date. Sincerely yours, Ann S. Brown Office of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501) 376.6200 Fax (501) 3710100 November 4, 1994 Dr. Henry P. Williams, Superintendent Little Rock School District 810 West Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Hank: Lately Ive been hearing the term \"Beacon\" schools used in reference to a subcommittee of the LRSD Board of Education and certain district schools. That is a term with which 1 am unfamiliar. Id appreciate your forwarding any information that can help me and my staff become better acquainted with the concept. I am particularly interested in specifically where and how you plan to implement and fund the Beacon idea in the LRSD. New programs or projects invariably have an impact on desegregation. When 1 am informed about the districts activities and potential new ventures, I am better able to answer any questions which members of the community or Judge Wright may ask me. Thanks for helping me keep up-to-date. Sincerely yours, Ann S. Brown Of 3 Office of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501)376-6200 Fax (501) 371-0100 Ms. Estelle Mathis Deputy Superintendent Little Rock School District 810 Markham St Little Rock, Arkansas November 7, 1994 Dear Estelle, The 1994-95 ODM Monitoring Priorities have been distributed and you probably noted that Computer Managed Instructional Technology is on the list. This is to inform you that I will be doing the monitoring review of the Abacus system. I intend to start this review immediately and ask for your cooperation and support. My understanding is that, at the onset. Abacus would be a tool to insure a consistent curriculum across the district and would help to improve achievement by identifying those areas that needed attention to realize a higher degree of mastery. The purpose of this review is to determine if the Abacus system is being used to its potential and, where appropriate, to make recommendations for improvement. My monitoring plan is to first interview Betsy Choate and Lucy Lyons at the IRC to get an overview of Abacus and then go out to schools to observe on-site use. Principals at the selected schools will be notified in advance, and I don't anticipate that there will be any interference with class activities. If you have any questions or concerns regarding the monitoring process, please do not hesitate to call our office. Thank you very much for your assistance. Sincerely, Bob Morgan Associate Monitor cc: Ann Brown Hank Williams11. os 94\n17  3t \\y' Li  i SI,. (y- ID- (' ' Jjj'ate. 1 ry  p^rtidpat OOI L JTi * I / .^ i \"-.J P.Ol TRANSACTION REPORT NOV-16-94 THU 14:19 JK X X X DATE START SEND^.. RX TIME PAGES a TYPE NOTE l^OV-10 14:18 50te46576 r 1'05\" 2 RECEIVE OK *Vi . X X X X ' X X X1 .N0V-10-*r^l5!10 SUSAN W WRIGHT FAX NO, 5013246576 P. 01 I DATE\nTO: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS U. S. DISTRICT JUDGE SUSAN WEBBER WRIGHT (501) 324-5422 'l FAX LINE (501) 324-6576 November 10, 1994 Polly/Ann '. i jJi J 11 J .'i FROM: Lucille DeGosti NUMBER OF PAGES INCLUDING COVER SHEET \u0026gt; 2 LOOK WHAT I FOUND!  \u0026gt; \u0026lt;' 4 ii. -c. / J |3' J .it\"' - lE Little Rock School District OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDENT 3 November 11, 1994 aS~i Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor Office of Desegregation Monitoring 201 East Markham, Suite 510 NOV 1 0 1994 Little Rock, AR 72201 Oiiics cf D! .y, liicn Mcniicnng Dear Ann, In collaboration with the City of Little Rock and New Futures for Little Rock Youth, the Department of Health, and the Division of Children and Family Services, the Little Rock School District has participated in the planning process for the Rock Beacon School Initiative. City of Little The Beacon Initiative of New York City, a highly successful program, has provided a framework to guide the local effort. need The fundamental principle of the Beacons Initiative is the for partnerships between schools and community-based organizations to meet the needs of youth in today's complex society. The Beacons Initiative seeks to link community-based youth organizations with schools to increase the presence of supports for youth to meet their needs and to assist them in building academic and social competencies. A Beacon School Program is managed by a community-based organization working collaboratively with the school district, local school principal, and their own community advisory council. The school facility is utilized for Beacon programming during the evening hours, on weekends, holidays, and in the summer. A Beacon Program offers children, youth and adults a mix of recreation, social services, educational enrichment and vocational activities, health education and referrals, and the opportunity for community meetings and neighborhood social activities. Cloverdale Junior High School has been recommended to the planning committee as the site for the first Beacon School. The new Stephens has been proposed as the second site. Funding for the Beacon Program will be provided primarily by the city of Little Rock. The school district will provide the space for the program. Further infoirmation will be provided to you as the planning process proceeds. Siicere^ H\u0026lt;n: P. Williams, SiiBerintendent of Schools 810 West Markham Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201  (301)324-2000 Little Rock School District November 15, 1994 M : NGV 1 b 1994 Ms. Ann Brown, Federal Monitor Office of Desegregation Monitoring Heritage VveSt Building, Room 510 201 East Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 ''iCij iii !Je53i i' arnig Dear Ms. Brown\nI would like to take this opportunity to welcome the participation of the Office of Desegregation Monitoring in future meetings of the Board of Directors of the Little Rock School District. As you will note on the November Agenda, you will have the opportunity to address the Board during the Presentations section of the meeting. Placement on the Agenda for ODM, as well as the Classroom Teachers Association, the Joshua Intervenors, the Knight Intervenors, and the PTA Council was approved by the Board at the October 27, 1994, meeting. I look forward to your input and look forward to seeing you. Sincerely, Linda Pondexter, President Board of Directors bjg 810 West Markham Street  Little Rock, Arkansas 72201  (501)824-2000di-: CEcrae Little Rock School District November 15, 1994 NGV 1 6 1994 Ms. Ann Brown, Federal Monitor Office of Desegregation Monitoring Heritage West Building, Room 510 201 East Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 'C^ Q: Uv\nih'jg Dear Ms. Brown\nI would like to take this opportunity to welcome the participation of the Office of Desegregation Monitoring in future meetings of the Board of Directors of the Little Rock School District. As you will note on the November Agenda, you will have the opportunity to address the Board during the Presentations section of the meeting. Placement on the Agenda for ODM, as well as the Classroom Teachers Association, the Joshua Intervenors, the Knight Intervenors, and the PTA Council was approved by the Board at the October 27, 1994, meeting. I look forward to your input and look forward to seeing you. Sincerely, Linda Pondexter, President Board of Directors bjg 810 West Markham street  Little Rock, Arkansas 72201  (501)324-2000i_(/^(_- /i y/' z \u0026lt;^4 c I \u0026gt; f- f'. . -Y. (.'r\u0026lt;^~ Cc'  X r. RcCEIV^O NOV 1 6 1994 Effies or Dcss^rog Z1 I. r 'I/- r -1^- r: t-c i \u0026lt;^ ,iJ.-^^ ~f~.  i l-r^ . ioo. -k \u0026lt; / -n I (^i-t^t'-' ii- ?y\\A ^n-C Office of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown. Federal Monitor 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501)376-6200 Fax (501) 371-0100 Date: November 16, 1994 From: Melissa Guldin, Ass Isociate Monitor To: Gwen Efrid, Little Rock School District Health Services Coordinator Subject: LRSD Nursing Staff Our office recently received some information from the Little Rock School District regarding possible budget cutting strategies. The list of budget reduction possibilities included the substitution of Licensed Practical Nurses (LPNs) for the Registered Nurses (RNs) currently working in the schools. I understand that there are important differences in training, experience, and qualifications between LPNs and RNs. Since the issue of RN versus LPN is sure to be debated in the months ahead, I would like some information on the current status of the LRSD nursing staff. This data should help me be better informed regarding the districts nursing program. Please send me a list of all LRSD schools that currently receive nursing services, the number of days (or hours) per week that each site is served by a nurse, whether that nurse is an RN or LPN, and each nurses race and gender. If you have any additional information that you think would be helpful or informative, I would welcome receiving that also. I would like to become more familiar with the scope of the nursing program, before the district makes budgetary decisions. When the monitors visited the incentive schools, we were impressed with the wellness clinics serving the students, staff, and patrons of the incentive schools. The clinics myriad of health services and eligibility for Medicaid reimbursement help ensure that area residents and LRSD staff have increased access to quality health care. In addition to the staffing information requested, would you please send me a list of all the schools with wellness clinics that have been approved for medicaid reimbursement. Thank you for your help in providing this information. Please call me if you have any questions or concerns.Ff (4* * /^/^ u LrrrtE Rock School District November 16, 1994 TO: FROM: RECEIVED NOV 2 3 iqpi Office of Desegregation Monitoring Ms. Edna M. Wiley, Teacher-Washington Magnet School chard Hurley, Director-Human Resources am in receipt of your letter dated November 15, which you request \"back pay\" due for your 1993-94 contract. I 1994 in I have previously advised you both orally and in writing that I believe you have been paid all the monies due to you. Please refer to my letter dated June 9, 1994. In that letter, I explained that I had discussed your salary concern with Mr. Mark Milhollen and I explained, in detail, how your salary calculations were done. If you need a copy of that letter, I'd be pleased to furnish it to you. Regarding your second issue (sick leave bank), you should mark on your Leave Accountability Report any discrepancies you feel need correcting and forward a copy of the marked Report to my attention. Your Report, and others similarly questioned, will be submitted to the Business office for review and correction, when appropriate. I trust this response will answer your request, please don't hesitate to contact me at your convenience, since you carbon-copied your letter to the below-listed persons, I am taking the liberty to copy them on my response to you. If not. Further, cc: As usual, Edna, it is nice to hear from you. Dr. Williams, Superintendent Ms. Coleman, President-L.R.C.T.A. Mr. Martin, Executive Director-L.R.C.T.A. Ms. Brown, Office of Desegregation Monitoring Ms. Pondexter, President-Little Rock School Board of Directors 810 West Markham Street  Little Rock, Arkansas 72301  (501)324-3000 Office of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown. Federal Monitor 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501) 376-6200 Fax (501) 371-0100 Date: November 17, 1994 To: Estelle Matthis, Deputy Superintendent, Little Rock School District From: Horace Smith, Associate Monitor, Office of Desegregation Monitoring Subject: Documentation Request I want to follow-up on our recent conversation regarding Academic Progress Incentive Grant documentation. I would like to receive the following information at our monthly meeting on November 22 if possible.  Copy of the 1993-94 APIG school program evaluation  1993-94 APIG data for each elementary and secondary school which includes - school, amount approved, date application was submitted, date application was approved, date of actual appropriation of funds, and the amount expended by the school Thank you for your cooperation. If you have questions or concerns, please dont hesitate to call. I: kfiyf) ar) Office of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor November 22, 1994 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501)376-6200 Fax (501) 371-0100 Dr. Henry P. Williams, Superintendent Little Rock School District 810 West Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Hank: Thank you for responding so quickly to my latest request for the LRSD October 1 enrollment by school, race, and grade. We have reviewed the enrollment report, but have found what appear to be some mathematical errors in the data, which I have noted below. Since we did not look at every calculation, the report may have additional errors not listed. Page 4 Chicot Total reported as 42~\u0026amp;e sum is 57 % black wrong Page 4 Cloverdale Elem Total reported as 106the sum is 57 Total reported as 52the sum is 50 % black wrong Page 4 Dodd 12345 6 Page 5 Geyer Springs Page 9 Watson Total reported as 53the sum is 50 Total reported as 105-the sum is 37 Total reported as 43the sum is 38 Total reported as 47the sum is 46 Total reported as 48the sum is 46 Total reported as 31the sum is 28 Total reported as 79the sum is 48 Total reported as 53the sum is 48 Total reported as 41the sum is 35 Total reported as 79-the sum is 49 Altogether missing from the report % black wrong % black wrong % black wrong % black wrong % black wrong % black wrong % black wrong % black wrong % black wrong % black wrong % black wrong K 1 2 345 1 When we find some apparent errors in a report, we can't help but question the validity of the entire report. Since the October 1 enrollment figures become part of the Court Record, we want to be sure that they are correct. Therefore, please send me an accurate October 1 enrollment count by school, grade, and race. Thank you. Sincerely yours, Ann S. Brown Little Rock School District MEMORANDUM 1 To: Becky Rather, Coordinator of Parent Recruitment From: Russ Mayo, Associate Superintendent Date: November 20, 1994 Subject: District-Wide Recruitment Responsibilities NOV 2 2 ,qpA GiiiCQ oi C' igrsgation Mo.nitc.'T.j As you may know by now, Jeanette Wagner has resigned as Director of Communications. Her last day will be November 30. Though the position is advertised, time will be required to interview and acclimate the new person. Currently, we are estimating that the new person will join us no later than January 16. Unfortunately, that person will begin in the middle of the busiest part of our recruitment season. Once in the position, that person will need time to learn policies and procedures of the district. Dina Tecigue will assume temporarily the responsibilities of the communications department and have no responsibility for recruitment beyond assisting in having materials printed. As a result, 1 am asking you to take full responsibility for implementing the LRSD District-Wide Recruitment Plan beginning immediately until further notice. You have the experience and were involved in writing the plan. Please include in your responsibilities the revising and writing of all printed materials noted in the plan. 1 suggest that you establish a tickler system for reminding you of what must be done when. 1 suggest also that you meet with Jeanette before she leaves to make the transition as smooth as possible. The recruitment plan is specific about when things are to be done. Please let me review anything you write or revise that will be sent to district employees or to our patrons. This includes any memoranda. One responsibility not in the recruitment plan is the bimonthly updating of the Bi-Racial Committee on incentive school recruitment. The next update is due at the January 10 meeting. Meetings are held the first Tuesday of the month, except January. With your experience in communications and in recruitment, 1 am confident that we can continue executing our recruitment plan without missing a step. Let me know if you meet obstacles or need me to speak to the topic in principals meetings, council meetings, etc. Deana Keathley will schedule a meeting soon which will include you and Dina Teague. The purpose of the meeting will be to discuss recruitment and communication concerns during the transition period. C: Dr. Henry P. Williams, Superintendent Superintendents Council Dina Teague, Communications Assistant Ann Brown, Monitor Chris Heller, LRSD Attorney\u0026lt;2P-\nS Little Rock School District OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT SUPERINTENDENTS November 21, 1994 RE? n Ms. Melissa Gul din ODM NOV 2 3 iqp4 Office of Desegregation Mon:i^.u.j Dear Ms. Gul din: I want to thank you for attending the Stephens School Steering Committee Meeting on Monday, November 14, 194. Your input is most valuable in the continued efforts of the planning for our new school. As a result of that meeting, the members of my subcommittee met on Wednesday, November 16, to review the recommendations and to make plans to implement the following\n1. Students in the seven target schools will take surveys home for their parents to mark their choice of the top two themes. Explanation of the two most popular themes will be attached to the ballot sheet. 2. Three community meetings are being scheduled to provide information on the progress of the Stephens School. Community people will be provided surveys at these meetings to vote on their choice of the top two themes. These community meetings are being scheduled at the following times and places:  Thursday, December 1 - 6:45 p.m. - Garland Elementary Incentive School 3615 West 25th Street Little Rock  Saturday, December 3 - 10:30 a.m. - First Baptist Church Highland Park 3800 West 18th Street Little Rock  Tuesday, December 6 - 6:45 p.m. - Fulbright Elementary School 300 Pleasant Valley Road Little Rock 810 West Markham Street  Little Rock, Arkansas 72201  (501)324-2000Stephens School Steering Committee November 21, 1994 Page 2 Our agenda for each meeting is to give an update on the progress being made in the planning process. Please mark your calendar for one or all of these meetings and contact any group of patrons whom you feel may be interested in attending these meetings. The Little Rock School Districts Communication Office is preparing flyers that will be delivered to various community groups prior to the above dates. Our next Steering Committee meeting is being scheduled for Monday, December 12 at 3:30 p.m. in the Board Room. Please make your calendar and plan to join us attEaffime. Again, thank you for your continued support and interest in the Little Rock School District. Sincerely, Margaret-'Gremillii Little Rock School District 810 W. Markham Street Little Rock, xArkansas 72201 RECEiVF^ Date: MEMORANDUM November 22, 1994 NOV 2 9 1994 jiiica Of Desegieg-t'O'! ini-j'. To: Through: Ann Brown, Office of Desegregation Monitorin' Dr. Russ Mayo, Associate Superintendent From: Dina Teagu^ ommunications Specialist Re: Public Relations Training Jeanette Wagner has advised me that you would like to observe one of the public relations training sessions that we provide for school level employees. I hope that you will accept my invitation to come to any of the following meetings scheduled this month: Garland Multi-Media Technology and Educational Research Elementary School Monday, December 5 3:03 - 3:20 p.m. Wilson Elementary School Wednesday, December 7 1:45 - 2:00 p.m. Western HiUs Elementary School Wednesday, December 7 2:45 p.m. By copy of this memo, I will let the principals of these schools know that you might attend their meetings. I am very encouraged by your interest and look forward to your comments and suggestions. cc Robert Brown Franklin Davis Scott Morgandr- Memorandum NOV 3 0 1991 Office of Oesegre^fi :9 DATE: November 30,1994 TO: Principals : Franklin Incentive Elementary. Bale Elementary, Cloverdale Elementary, Southwest Junior High, Cloverdale Junior High Margaret Gremillion - Stephens Magnet Planning Group FROM: Estelle Matti M, larvin Schwartz RECEIV^^ RE: CC: Magnet School application LRSD - Henry Williams, Russ Mayo, Sterling Ingram, Doug Eaton, Leon Modeste, Dena Teague, Sadie Mitchell \u0026gt; ODM - Melissa Guldin Attorney - Chris Heller, Jerry Malone Joshua Interveners - John Walker Knight Interveners/LRCTA - Frank Martin, Eleanor Coleman PCSSD - Billy Bowles, Bobby Lester, Bobby Altom NLRSD - James Smith This memo gives formal notice that the six schools identified below have been selected by the LRSD for application to the federal Magnet School Assistance Program for development as new magnet schools. The six schools include\nFranklin Incentive Elementary Cloverdale Elementary Cloverdale Junior High Bale Elementary Southwest Junior High Stephens Elementary A major administrative effort is underway to gather supporting data to develop the application. An amendment to the desegregation plan will have to be filed. Input from the six schools and their respective communities is also needed. Each school will need to identify the theme(s) for their new status as magnets. This preliminary theme identification is needed by December 9. Following the theme selections, the planning process will seek school input on curriculum development and staff training. Because of the extremely tight timeframe, it is suggested that meetings with school patrons and community members be limited to the core group at each school. School staff may conduct these meetings and gain input in any manner they believe appropriate. Several forms of assistance are available for this effort, including:  Community surveys forms  Listings of sample magnet themes  Examples of successful magnet themes/schools in other cities  Participation by the grants writer in local planning meetings Marvin Schwartz is serving as the central coordinator for this project. Please contact him with any questions or requests for assistance.UXUU.:*tpU-^ - P.Ol r DATE START SENDER DEC- 1 10:22 5013242032 X 444 4 44 4''4'44'4 44'44 44W'4^44'4 4'4'4'4 4'i t i  4 TRANSACTION REPORT DEC- 1-94 THU 10:23 RX TIME PAGES TYPE NOTE 46\" 1 RECEIVE OK * )|! * * )K j * X fA^ SB^asBaa'JBBK-a liaji '0 \u0026lt;Z1 m z I m LITlLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT QUIZiSSPLST _ STAFFIMGZ L  o GAI POSITIOK BLACK M F OF 11/10/94 WHITE M F OTHER M F TOTAL % BLACK o\u0026gt; X KI SUPPORT POSITIONS I CAFETERIA WORKER CUSTODIANS MEDIA CLERK SECRETARY NURSE \u0026lt; S(X\niAL WORKER r: f! INSTRUCTIONAL AIDES SUPERVISION AIDES OTHER 0 2 0 00 02 01 3 1 00 0 1 11 2 0 0 00 00 00 00 0 0 1 11 02 00 0 00 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01 10 3 311 11 16 31 100.00 100.00 00 00 00 100.00 81.25 66.67 100.00 T I \u0026lt;o to , SUBTOTAL SUPPORT POSITIONS -H 5 18 0 5 0 2 30 SUBTOTAL PERCENT 16.67 60.00 00 16.67 00 6.67 30 76.67 30 CO o a: o o o \u0026lt;Z) 1 i oi CjO II B I BiBSai IS: FROM : JOHN YORK PHONE NO. : 562 7722 Dec. 12 1994 09:56AM P2 To: Ann Brown Office of Desegregation Monitoring 201 East Markham # 510 Little Rock, AR. 72201 From: John York 7324 Knollwood Little Rock, AR. 72209 December 10,1994 Dear Ms Brown, 1 am writit^ to you in regards to the recent actions taken by Dr. Williams, and others concerning the rebuilding of Chicot School and the closure of Watson. I am not completely positive as to who started what and how. What I am positive about, is that the residents of the Fairfield Sub-Division were completely left out of the process which has lead to the current recommendations. Those recommendations being to close Watson School and merge ifs population into a new and expanded Chicot School. It is also my understanding that Dr. Williams made statements regardu^ the staff of Watson and the Fairfield residents to the affect that this issue was none of our concern, \" This is School Busmess\". It was not until I learned of the actions of die District and the Chicot PTA, and began to raise a ruckus, that die Fairfield residents were contacted regarding these plans. As of the date of this letter the District has failed to recognize the Fairfield Sub-Division. The Chicot School PTA did contact us regarding tins issue and invited us to attend a meeting scheduled for Dec 11, 2 p.m., at McQellan High School. This has been are only contact until board member Gee called me this evening. If my interpretation of the Desegregation Plans are correct Dr. Williams statements and actions are in direct contempt of die court ordered plan. Specifically sections 2.c., 3.c., and 3.d. listed under Parent involvement! Community linkages. And, sections 9.b, and 9.c., listed under Public Relations in the Inter District plan. The latter specifically instructs die District to \" immediately inform the public**, and to \" refrain from springing surprises*. I would greatly appreciate your opinion on this situation as well as copies of any court orders in support or opposition of my position, including the court order dated 11/4/91. It would probably be in the best interest of die community if Judge Wright was aware of the situation as well. Thank You for your time and interest FROM : JOHN YORK PHONE NO. : 562 7722 Dec. 12 1994 09:57At'1 P3 To\n.Ann Brown Office of Desegregation Monitoring 201 Fast Markham # 510 Little Rock, AR 72201 From: John York 7324 Knollwood Utfle Rock, AR 72209 December 11, 1994 Dear Ms Brown, After attending the meeting held at McClellan High School this afternoon, I felt that this supplemental to my letter dated DecembcrlO, 1994 was necessary in order to validate certain statements in that letter and statements made during the meeting. First of an I made statements in the letter, and at the meeting regarding the fact that residents of the Fairfield Subdivision were not contacted tn regards to planning process nor of the meeting that was scheduled for December 11th, and that it was the EHstricts respon-sibiJity to insure that all affected parties were notified. School Board President Tinda Poindexter vehemently denied that die District had anything to do with this committee or today's meeting. However, the committee's minutes as presented at the meeting as the \"Committee History\" indicated that District officials became involved as early as November 28th. I have received verbal information from what I believe to be a reliable source that District Officials met to discuss the closure of Watson at a closed meeting at a Board Members home shortly before Thanksgiving. Abscond source has indicated that the meeting did in fact occur but would not confirm the content of this meeting. Also noted in the committee's minutes is that on December 6th, Board Member Pat Gee \" requested\" that Dr. Williams approve flyers announcing the meeting be distributed through schools in Southwest Little Rock. Dr. Williams was asked to contact the principals of each school and ok distribution of the flyers to students. Statements made by Chicot PTA President Kevin McGuire to me during a telephone conversation and a fax transmission on December 6th indicated that District personnel were very much involved in file situation and intended to withhold information from file Fairfield residents and Watson parents. A copy of the fax transmission is attached.FROM : JOHN YORK PHONE NO. : 562 7722 Dec. 12 1994 09:58AM P4 Althou^ tniscommunicalion could be credited with portions of this situation, specifically between School Board members, and neighborhood groups. I still believe that there is suflheient evidence to support die theoty that School District .Administration took an active part in the organizational plan to close Watson as a public school, as well as concealing this action from the Fairfield Residents and Waterni Parents in direct violation of the Desegregation Plan and Federal Court orders. The fact that flyers were sent home from all of the affected schools with the exception of Watson and poswbly Mabelvale would tond to support the theory as well. There is the added consideration that would suggest that \"Administration\" may be playing both ends against the middle by supplying mis-information to Kevin McGuire and the Chicot PTA. During the meeting on December 5th, Doug Eaton conducted a short presentation where in he made numerous references to court approved formulas that were utilized in determining which schods should close and which should remain open based on attendance and capacities. When pressed by the Chicot parents to present and define the formula, Doug Eaton became evasive, commenting that it was a \"very complex lonnula\". He later admitted that there was no specific formula to make these determinations. Ihc inaccuracies and halt truths perpetuated during the meeting on December 5th are again in direct contempt of the Desegregation Plan. Specifically sectimi 9 of the Interdistrict Plan (Public relations) which deals with credibility and trust And section 3 which requires the District to H Continue to disseminate public information in ways the districts customarily employ, paying cardul attention to quality, accuracy, and a positive tone\". I recognize that you are not in a position to adjudicate these complaints but I also recognize your authority in investigating this matter, and in bringing these concem-s to the attention Judge Wright should they prove vahd. Sincerely, FROM : JOHN YORK PHONE NO. : 562 7722 Dec. 12 1994 09:59AM P5 SCHOOL CO.MMITTEE HISTORY FIRE AT CHICOT. CHICOT PARENTS MEET AT WATSON GYMNASIUM WITH DISTRICT OFFICIALS ON IMMEDIATE CONTINGENCY PLANS ON GETTING STUDENTS BACK TO SCHOOL.i QC.T^_23Ka  ADDRESS DR. PTA MEETING AT KcCLELLAH AUDITORIUM FOR PARENTS TO WILLIAMS AND SCHOOL BOARD - WILLIAMS QUOTED \"COMMITTEE MILL WOULD BE FORMED IN A WEEK\". NOY. DEMOGRAPHICS OF COST OF REBUILDING, COURT APPROVAL FOR REBUILDING, NEIGHBORHOOD AND RECOMMENDATIONS FROM WILLIAMS. BOARD DECIDED THEY WOULD NEED ALL THIS ILFCRMATIUN AND EE ABLE TO VOTE ON DECISION DEC. AGENDA MEETING. \"HE ENLARGED. CLOSED. i FINANCIAL INTENDS TO DR. WILLIAMS RECOMMEND THAT QUOTED BY CHICOT BE CYNTHIA HOWELL @ GAZETTE REBUILT AND POSSIBLY IF SCHOOL IS ENLARGED, ANOTHER SCHOOL IN SWLR WOULD BE BOARD MEMBERS AGREED THAT THEY WOULD HAVE AND DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION THE NECESSARY CHICOT ELEMENTARY BY EARLY DECEMBER, TO MAKE A DECISION ON Ni 'Tl' REPORT 0 SCHOOL ENTER INTO UPDATE BOARD, ON REBUILDING DISCUSSED 1 CHICOT. DOUG EATON GAVE HE HOPES DECISION ON WHETHER TO REBUILD' DAMAGE AND FACTORS THAT WILL SCHOOL, EATON STATES TO ADMINISTRATION DECEMBER, 1994. HAVE  TO TRY ENOUGH INFORMATION AND VOTE ON FOR THE BOARD AND THE FUTURE OF ANOTHER ITEM THAT WILL BE CONSIDERED CHICOT. BY MID TO COMBINE THIS WITH ANOTHER SCHOOL IN THS AREA. IS WHETHER NOY.,'LTIl - KEVIN McGUIEE WITH CHICOT PTA MEET WITH FOR PROGRESS ON RAILROAD OVERPASSES IN SWLR. XT IS AT THIS MEETING WE SPOKE WITH JOAN ADCOCK, CITY DIRECTOR\nB.J. WYRICK, CITY BOARD ELECT\nCONGRESSMAN RAY THORNTON AND HIS AIDE DEBBIE TABLERIOU\nJOA HUMPHRIES, SOUTHWEST UNITED FOR PRESIDENT. PAUL HOWELL ADDRESSED AUDIENCE OF PAUL HOWELL, SOUTHWEST UNITED XT IS RAILROAD OVERPASSES WITH JOAN PROGRESS TABLERIOV\nJOA HUMPHRIES, PAUL HOWELL AUDIENCE TO RE.' ILi DE ARKANSAS DEMOCRAT GAZETTE ARKANSAS SCHOOL DEMOCRAT GAZETTE ARKANSAS DEMOCRAT GAZETTE 'CHICOT PARENTS MAP CAMPAIGN \"DSCIS'Oh? ON CHICOT DUE INFROM : JOHN YORK' PHONE NO. : 562 7722 Dec. 1 1994 09:59AM P6 BUSINESS OWNERS, MERCHANTS. M.ElGH30RHC0D ASSOCIATION PRESIDENTS, ARD SKLR RESIDENTS ON STATUS OF CHICOT. BEFORE MEETING ADJOURNED, PTA DISCOVERED THAT SCHOOL BOARD FAILED TO COMMIT TO REBUILDING CHICOT A7 AGENDA MEETING HELD MINUTES EARLIER. IT IS THEN THAT THE GROUP PLEDGED THEIR SUPPORT, THORNTON'S OFFICE LOOKING FOR AIDE FROM WASHINGTON. ASKED ABOUT STATU NOTIFIED AS TO WHO IS OF COMMITTEE. PTA RESPONDED WK WE FREEDOM EXPRESSED CONCERN SERVING ON THE COMMITTEE OR WHEN CONGRESSMAN CITY LEADERS HAVE NOT BEEN THAT NO HAS OF INFORMATION ACT HAS BEEN INFORMATION REQUESTED TO MEET. THROUGH LARGER. PROPOSED SWLR SCHOOL CLOSURE MADE AVAILABLE AND DISTRICT NO INFORMATION IS QUESTIONED HOW THESE OR MERGERS IF CHICOT REBUILT RECOMMENDATIONS ARE BEING WE HAVEN'T HEARD AVAILABLE TO BASE THEM ON. MADE IF WITHOUT LEADERS. THS SCHOOL FROM DISTRICT DISTRICT AND SOON, HE WOULD WE AGREED THAT IF INVITE CITY TA^T MEETING AND COMMUNITY UmL-JATil - THEY HAVE I ELEMENTARY. COMMITTEE MEMBERS STARTED RECEIVING NOTICES THAT BEEN SELECTED TO SERVE ON COMMITTEE TO REBUILD CHICOT NOTICE MAILED NOV. 11, 1394 FROM DOUG EATON. NOY.- LZIjaL - PTA NOTICES. CHICOT ADDRESSED LRSC SCHOOL THANKED SCHOOL BOARD. BOARD MEETING. CONFIRMED MR. McGUIRE, CHICOT COMMITTEE BOARD FOR APPOINTMENTS, REPRESENTATION AT SWLR CHRISTMAS MEET SOON POSSIBLE RECEIPT OF COMMITTEE AS AS MADE PARADE. BOARD WARE RECOMMENDATION TO REBUILD CHICOT. TO KAKE ASKED PLANS OF THAT FOR ~ CHICOT ELEMENTARY PTA ENTERS SOUTHWEST LITTLE ROCK CHRISTMAS PARADE WITH A FLOAT AND 150 WALKERS, WEARING \"CHICOT - UNITED TO REBUILD CHICOT\" T-SHIRTS. \"ALL WE WANT FOR CHRISTMAS IS OUR SCHOOL REBUILT'. THIRD PLACE AND WAS WELL RECEIVED BY SUPPORTERS ALONG ROUTE. family A FLOAT ARD CHRISTMAS IS OUR SCHOOL PA8ADE/FLOAT THEME. FLOAT WINS THE PARADE --ZZCii - CHICOT ELEMENTARY PTA HAS BEEN IN CONTACT WITH CONGRESSMAN THORNTON'S OFFICE\nSTATE REP PHIL WYRICK BOARD ELECT. B.J. WYRICK\nJOAN ADCOCK, CITY DIRECTOR\nSC5JOOL DISTRICT AND BOARD MEMBERS. THE PTA CALLS  THORNTON' PTA HAS STATE REP IN SCHOOL PTL MEETING FUR NOV. 28TH AT SOUTHWEST COMMUNITY CENTER. AS A AND CITY WELL AS SPECIAL I'UK MUV. zTH AT SOUTHWEST COMMUNITY CENTER. IT WAS FELT that if public RECORDS INDICATE THAT A DECISION ON CHICOT WOULD BL MADE AT DECEMBER SCHOOL BOARD AGENDA MEETING AND HAS YET TO CONVENE THE COMMITTEE TO REBUILD CHICOT PUBLIC RECORDS INDICATE THAT A the COMMITTEE TO REBUILD CHICOT. GET ORGANIZED NOW AND NOT WATT FOR THE SCHOOL DISTRICT, THE DISTRICT WE BETTER ilOY. 2Tli PTA ATTENDANCE CHICOT MET AT SOUTHWEST CITY BOARD PROGRESS\nPTA\nJOAN ADCOCK, CITY COMMUNITY CE.NTKR. IN ELECT\nJOA HUMPHRIES. PRESIDENT KELLY TUCKER, NEIGHBORHOOD DIRECTOR\nB.J. WYRICK, SOUTHWEST UNTIED FOR ALERT CENTER\nPAT GEE, LRSDFROM : JOHN 'tORK PHONE NO.\n56.:\n7722 Dec. 12 1934 10\n00l P7 BOARD MEMBKR. INVITED BUT NOT PRESENT\nLINDA JOYCE, CITY BOARD\nO.G. JACOVELLI. LRSD BOARD\nWATSON ELEMENTARY PTA. SPECIAL CALLED MEETING TO ANNOUNCE EORMATION OF A COMMUNITY BASED GRASS ROOTS COALITION UNITED IN AN EFFORT TO HAVE CHICOT ELEMENTARY REBUILT. TO SET PRECEDENT FOR COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT IN THE DECISION MAKING PROCESS TO DETERMINE THE FUTURE OF CHICOT ELEMENTARY AND THE DIRECT IMPACT IT WILL HAVE ON THE COMMUNITY. COMMITTEE APPOINTMENTS MADE. PLANS FOR DEC. IITH MEETING TO INVOLVE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS, SWLR SCHOOL PTA'S, PARENTS AND BUSINESS TO BE INVITED. DJiC__SJIh. - SOUTHWEST CHICOT COMMUNITY ELEMENTARY VISION COALITION MET CENTER. INVITED AND NOT PRESENT, ' AT LINDA JOYCE, CITY BOARD\nO.G. JACOVELLI SCHOOL BOARD\nWATSON PTA. SPECIAL GUESTS INVITED - DR. WILLIAMS. DOUG EATON, LEON MODESTE OF THE SCHOOL DISTRICT. THERESA COURTNEY, AND WILLIAM KETCHER OF WATSON ELEMENTARY. THE COMMITTEE EXPLAINED TO DISTRICT WHY WE MET SEPARATE FORM DISTRICT'S COMMITTEE. WE EXPRESSED THAT WITH A SCHOOL BOARD DECISION DUE WITHIN TWO WEEKS AND THE DISTRICT IS STILL TELLING US THAT THEY HAVE NO FURTHER INFORMATION TO SHARK WITH FELT IT US. THAT IT JUST WAS NOT AVAILABLE. THE VISION COMMITTEE N.ECESSARY TO GET BUSY AND PREPARE A BUSINESS PLAN OF OUR OWN THAT INVOLVES INPUT FROM ALL SOUTHWEST LITTLE ROCK. WE DID NOT FEEL THE DISTRICT TOGETHER IF THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO PUT A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN STILL DIDN'T HAVE FIGURES AVAILABLE OR THE COMMUNITY .INVOLVEMENT THAT WAS PROMISED. DR. WILLIAMS DISCUSSED WITH COMMITTEE: PARTNERSHIPS WITH SCHOOL THAT COULD MERGE CENSUS IN SWLR WITH CHICOT\nBUDGET DEFICIT OF 7 MILLION\nLOW DESEGREGATION NUMBERS. SCHOOLS\nPOTENTIAL COMMITTEE SCHOOL CLOSURES\nAND ASKED FOR OPINION FROM THERESA lOUBTKEY, WATSON ELEMENTARY PRINCIPAL, ON A PARTNERSHIP WITH CHICOT AND WATSON, AS DR, WILLIAMS PREVIOUSLY HAD BE CONSIDERED WITH OTHER SCHOOL IN SWLR IF CHICOT PROPOSED COULD WEEK REBUILT LARGER. MEETING. OF WEEK. committees then met to prepare FOR DEC. IITH COMMUNITY WILLIAMS SAID KE WOULD PROVIDE INFORMATION TO US BY END PAT GEE ANNOUNCING MEETING REQUESTED DR. WILLIAMS APPROVE FLYERS WAS ASKED TO DISTRIBUTION. IITH SOUTHWEST AUDITORIUM. BE DISTRIBUTED THROUGH CONTACT FLYERS\nVISION PRINCIPALS Of ENCOURAGE COMMUNITY MEETING AT SCHOOLS IN SWLR. EACH SCHOOL AND HE OK INVOLVEMENT MrCLELLAN HIGH IN DEC. SCHOOL JFROM : JOHN YORK PHONE NO. : 562 7?: Deo. 12 1994 10:01AM P8 D.fiC._aiH - BUSINESSES. fLYERS DISTRIBUTED - PRESS RELEASES TO MEDIA AND am. - FOLLOW INFORMATION REOUSST. MADE BOARD, AVAILABLE UNTIL UP ON THE OCTOBER 27TH FREEDOM DR. WILLIAMS NOTIFIED ME THEY WOULD AFTER IT WAS FIRST PRESENTED TO THE LRSD OCTOBER OF FIRST PRESENTED NOT BE -^SKRY MALONE denial of request.  attorney for LRSD ABOUT RECEIVED CALL FROM MR. MALONE wAKr. . - KIS CLIENT AND UNDERSTOOD MADE AVAILABLE ON TUESDAY, DEC 13TH D.EC. 9TH. AT 9:30 PK ON DEC. MATERIAL WOULD BE  MEMBERS RECEIVED NOTICE ? 00 '^SoKFSrSI!P\"^'^?rT?c rebuild CHICOT IS DEC, 13TII AT OKL WlfH ELLIS, MABELVALE PTA PRESIDENT ABOUT stated her CHILDREN DID NOT 1 r? A.BOU.r DEC, IITH MEETING, SHE WAS GOING TO CHECK OHT IF OIHER PARENTS RECEIVED NOTICES CHECK OUT COMMITTEE PM. ATTRNDINO CONFERENCE. WITH THAT THE FIRST REBUILD CHICOT IS DEC. 13TII ELLIS, MABELVALE COKE HOME COMMUNITY MEETING OF THE SOUTHWEST VISION -iBEriNG. McClellan Hrn.Tr .Sntnrsr annT-nnoTF.w V-lSlUM McClellan high school auditorium - 2:00 PK. 4\nFROM : JOHN YORK PHONE NO. : 562 7722 Dec. 12 1994 09:56AM Pl /'I 1/ '2^ FxRdEW\u0026gt;kl.jUUIJW.iJiUK:^^^^-i^WISani5yiULlMB2ML9Uimy^^ 9 1 FROM : JOHN AANSCO PHOtJE HO. : 563 T TEL 501-562 Cb o/\nDec. 12 1994 10:02fiH P9 12 :02 No .006 P.Ol 1 A/^.MSCO 9811 INTERSTATE 30 P 0 Box 190065 LATE: TO: COMPANY: LITTLE ROCK, AR (501) 562-3737 jg.- -Aws^, ye-ftK 72219-0065 FAX (501) 562-5389 (800) 221-S857 (AR WATS) FROM\nSg^. - KEVIN McGUIRE NUMBER OF PAGES INCLUDING COVER SHEET: NOTES: pV\\\u0026gt;L _____________________________________ X bJoOct^ k^\u0026gt;p gP\u0026lt;Hg.Utti Vexj I / ___ .. I I  CiKopk. T Kx. \u0026gt;NWitZh HAS fcRr6ibTHiAJfeS\u0026gt; Ip lUuCH- We^ ^KznctpATgb a itJ SV^Cfe IXap^l fcg\u0026gt; zSlcSopg roios/DgiAnoy\\-~/zjc[LC/z-'\u0026amp;. X imdou:^ P\u0026gt; !fUk ^rAfe.-TC\u0026gt; gv\nyfAaL kJfclAa- Cov^e N^trr MrnA,\u0026lt;AJ \"iSe ^t\u0026gt;u^ rr Gsvub gX^ev T\u0026lt;\\' -Fi^fepE/h ACfT QO/a^T^ (!('!\u0026gt; '^Q!^ LrneoJl- bcSTiticr faw\u0026lt;U5 ftx efeaAs^XTAXXO*-^ Woolh jiOWlei?' IF YOU DO NOT RECIEVE ALL OF THE PAGES, PLEASE CALL 501 562-3737. CVr\u0026lt;U?7\" f lei^ Office of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501)376.6200 Fax (501) 371.0100 Date: December 2, 1994 To: From: Subject: Marvin Schwartz. LRSD Grant Coordinator in S. Brown, Federal Monitor Magnet School Grant Application Schedule Thank you for the November 30, 1994 memorandum from you and Estelle Matthis regarding the districts intent to apply for magnet school grants. The memo read that questions or requests for assistance were to be directed to you, the central coordinator for this project. As 1 have previously expressed, 1 continue to have several concerns about the districts desire to designate six schools as new magnets, particularly when the current magnet schools are underenrolled by hundreds of students and at a time when the district is contemplating closing more schools. 1 have also told you, the superintendent, and Mrs. Matthis that the Court will need sufficient time to review the grant application, hear the comments of the parties, raise and resolve any questions which the Court herself may have, and to rule on any modification of the desegregation plan. Because the Court will likely hold a hearing on the matter, 1 want to plan now to work a hearing date into the Courts calendar, which fills very quicldy. Please send me your grant development schedule (including all critical events, such as parent input and review by Joshua and the other parties) so we can do our best to find a potential hearing date that will mesh with your timetable as much as possible. Keep in mind*that you will need time to adjust your application pending the outcome of any hearing, motion or objection of the parties, or a Court ruling. 1 understand that your schedule is tight. By factoring in now the period required for the Court review process, we should all be able to work from a timeline that will enable you to meet your deadlines. Thanks very much for your assistance. Please give me a call with any questions. CC: Hank Williams Estelle Matthis Chris HellerC/\"- Office of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501)376-6200 Fax (501) 371-0100 Date: December 2, 1994 To: Russ Mayo From: n Brown Subject: Filling Spaces in the Rockefeller Infants and Twos Program Through visits to Rockefeller Incentive School, I have become aware that Rockefellers Infant and Two-year-old Program has a number of openings for new children. School employees say that these openings have been available for quite a while, and that some of the waiting parents and staff are becoming very frustrated with the delays. 1 understand that a few of the waiting children are siblings of youngsters already enrolled at Rockefeller. The desegregation plan is clear that sibling preference is honored at Rockefeller. The plan also calls for evaluation of the schools early childhood education policies in terms of their impact on desegregation and educational goals. If the districts current placement policies and practices are causing delays in enrolling new early childhood students, its time to re-evaluate and change them so that classes are always at capacity. The success of Rockefeller is due to many factors, among them its fine early childhood education program. I know you share my desire for Rockefeller to continue to fulfill its desegregation role as a model for improving academic achievement and attracting a racially diverse student body. Please help me assess the assignment situation at Rockefeller by letting me know the following: 1. The capacity and number of current vacancies in the Infant and Two-year-old Program. 2. The length of time the vacancies have been open. 3. The timeline for filling the vacancies. 4. Why the Infant and Two-year-old Program has been running at less than capacity. 5. The current placement policies and practices. 6. How and when you will modify the policies and practices to expedite student placement. 7. The date as each of the current vacancies become filled. CC: Anne Mangan Pat Price \u0026gt; Olivetti FX 2100 date , TO\nTRO.'-I\nSS(^CE3?'s PHON: SD\u0026amp;.7SCT: spec\nAL s?d Diai\n12- 6-94 : S:29AM I LR SCHOOL DIST^ B^i n\"j.7 district S10 ?/6st Ma-Khem ^OGk, AR AX (501) 324.2032 n . DCtecUf. SchcAi ^^ST^uariQi^S: (ir.clud e Cover Sb ich\u0026gt;c//L 5013710100\n# 1 Phone Nuxb^s- 371b' f I J i ( j .'I '' '\u0026lt; ( '3. \u0026gt; 1Olivetti FX 2100 :12- 6-94 : 8\n29AM\nLR SCHOOL DIST-* 5013710100!# 2 TO\nPftOMi ifl R1 1\u0026lt;ITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT * MarJthaia Little Rock, AR 72201 Oeceajber 5, 1954 rederal Monitor - offio. Of Dceyresatlo\nF Ci ^X4inda Monitorin^f young, Rsstructuring Diraotor/K i rJ I $ Thank f- I Middle School steering V rutureg LiaiBon Coi\u0026amp;ai'ct.ee you for auggeetione. The first will be the your tijue today. I appreciate your ideaa and Ad Dec^VaV*? hool Planning Adainlatration Building. 4.15 p.. the Board roob of will notify you earlier froB this point forward* IOf'- 2^ Sc/i 6^11 n' Memorandum DEC 1 2 1004 December 6,1994 Oitice o5 Dssegr5ga\n0!'i TO: Ann Brown, Office of Desegregation Monitoring FROM\nMarvin Schwartz, Grants Writer X- THROUGH: RE: Henry Williams, Superintendent Magnet School applicationl/^^^^^^^ Thank you for your input and clarification of the court process regarding review of the magnet school application being developed for Little Rock schools. The LRSD application will include two schools - Franklin Incentive Elementary and Stephens Elementary. This plan replaces an earlier decision to develop six schools as magnets. In accordance with your December 2, 1994 memorandum, the District is requesting your assistance in scheduling a hearing date on the Courts calendar to initiate the application review process. We anticipate having a draft narrative and budget for the magnet school application available by January 16, 1995. Please schedule the court hearing for as soon as possible following that date. Your assistance is greatly appreciated in this process.c\u0026gt;c\ntEcras Little Rock School District k December 6,1994 to: From: Thru: Subject: MEMORANDUM Ann Brown, Federal Monitor Audrey Lee, Coordinator of SA information Dr. Russell Mayo, Associate Superintendent RHCEI .PW DK 1 5 igo^ Office of Oesegi Filling spaces in the Rockefeller infants and Two year program 1. The capacity and number of vacancies in the infant and Two-year old program are as follows: Infant capacity Two-year old 10 17 Current vacancies Current vacancies 2. The length of time the vacancies have been open are as follows: The Infant vacancy occurred in November 1994. The Two-year old vacancies occurred in September 1994 with seven vacancies, in October we enrolled (3) two-year olds and dropped (3). In November (2) seats were filled, in December (2) seats were filled and (11) two-year olds are currently enrolled. 3. The timeline for filling vacancies is as follows: Since the program is functioning on a 12 month cycle we are continuously offering seats from the waiting list on a monthly basis. Our goal is to keep the enrollment at capacity at all times. 4. Why Infant and Two-year-old programs have been running at less than capacity is as follows: The Infant and Two-year old Caucasian capacity is maximized . The remaining seats have been consistently offered to African American families from the waiting list. The cost has been the primary reason for these families declining the seats. The Department of Human Services offers assistance, but it is my understanding that the list has a two-year waiting period. 810 West Markham Street  Little Rock, Arkansas 72201  (501)324-2000 D  A 1 6 15. The current placement policies and practices are as follows\nFirst preference, is given to students who live in the attendance zone arid have sibling attending the school. Second, is given to students who live in the attendance zone. Third, is given to students who do not live in attendance zone but have sibling attending the school. Fourth, is staff preference. Fifth, is desegregation transfer. 6. HOW and when we will modify the policies and practices to expedite student placement is as follows\nStarting the month of December we have began to telephone parents and offer seats where vacancies exist. After the parent is called, a follow-up letter is sent to confirm the parent's response. 7. The date as each of the current vacancies are filled. Since we have started the telephone procedure we have filled the (1) infant seat and (5) two-year-old seats. These seats were filled 12/5- 12/8/94. 2Date: December 7, 1994 To: Chris Heller CONROeOiM. From: Subject: in Brown LRSD Board Member Request Youll recall that, a few weeks back, 1 told you that Katherine Mitchell had raised to me (in a televised Board of Education meeting) a question that she had put to judge Wright back during the summer hearings. She wants the Judge to tell the district when it has to involve Joshua and when it doesnt. When you and 1 discussed this subject, we agreed that it was not in the best interests of the district nor desegregation matters for the Judge to draw any such line. Nor is the Judge inclined to do so. At the last Board meeting, when my associate Melissa Guldin was addressing the board, Katherine once again threw down this same gauntlet. Doubtless she intends to continue doing so, as she evidently perceives that she has \"caught the Court in some dereliction of duty and she is revelling in rubbing it in. Katherine needs to understand that it is in everybodys best interests for her to drop this matter immediately. Please take care of this situation, Chris, and help Katherine see that the district is far better off not having the Court draw ever tighter the districts already limited circle of options. The December Board meeting is coming soon, and well be running the risk of embarrassing both Katherine and the LRSD by having to say in public what you and 1 know is better discussed in private. Please let me know your progress as soon as possible. Thanks.O* Little Rock School District OK 9 1994 December 7, 1994 Qfnee oi Desegrayaicn MonitGriPi Ann Brown, Federal Monitor, ODM Heritage West Building, Room #510 201 East Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Ann: On November 11th, Dr. Henry P. Williams, Superintendent of Schools, requested that you serve on a committee to assist the District in its course of action regarding the rebuilding of Chicot Elementary School. The first meeting of this committee will be December 13th, 1994, from 4:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m., in the Little Rock School District Board Room, 810 West Markham Street. The purpose of this meeting will be to update the committee on the actions that have occurred since the fire on October 13th to discuss the general process that the District must pursue in rebuilding the school, and to determine the interplay of the committee in this District's process. Should you not be able to attend, please contact me at 570-4020. incerely, Douglas C. Eaton DIRECTOR PLANT SERVICES DEPARTMENT DCE/rlh/cesc cc: Dr. Henry P. Williams, Superintendent Little Rock School District 810 West Markham Street  Little Rock, Arkansas 72201  (501)324-2000 I Little Rock School District 0 . QJS' December 9, 1994 OtC 1 Ann Brown, Federal Monitor, ODM Heritage West Building, Room #510 201 East Markham Street cysce c t*\nH kV Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Ann: This is to advise you that the Chicot Rebuilding Committee meeting originally set for 4:00 pm, tuesday December 13th. has been changed to 5:00 pm. tuesday December 13th, It will still be held in the Little Rock School District Board at 810 W. Markham st. room Siheerely, Director of Plant Services 810 West Markham Street  Little Rock, Arkansas 72201  (501)324-2000Little Rock School District MEMORANDUM To: Board of Directors Through: Dr. Heiuy p. Williams, Superintendent From: Russ Mayo, Associate Superintendent Date: December 10, 1994 Subject: Desegregation Update Since this months desegregation update includes a number of items in progress, I have attached a summary of those items. On occasions when items continue from a previous month and no new information is available to report, I will present the report orally to you. RHCSJVSD UN 2 7 1995 Office of Desegregation MonitoringLittle Rock School District Desegregation Update Board of Directors Meeting December 15, 1994 Program Budget Document (PBD) When the PBD was first implemented, many non obligation items were included. At the time, we were uncertain about the precise definition of an obligation. Extensive discussions were held at that time about what was and was not an obligation. We knew then that some cleanup would be necessary. Working with the document this past year has helped. The distinction between obligations and observations or procedures is clearer. We began the cleanup process in November. Program managers were asked to review their sections of the PBD and mark items they believed were not appropriate for the document. These were two types: 1) completed, one time obligations and 2) items that were not obligations but normal procedure within the program area or simply observations. Their responses were returned to the Office of Desegregation. They are being compiled. These items will be noted in the second quarter PBD and dropped from the third quarter copy of the PBD. Some items will transfer to other documents such as the job description for the program manager or the procedures record for the program area. A paper trail will be esublished for each item dropped from the third quarter PBD. None of the ongoing obligations will be dropped. This procedure applies only to the PBD. Audit of Obligations (Attachment) The purpose of the annual Audit of Obligations is to catalogue and merge into the Program Budget Document (PBD) all desegregation obligations incurred during the previous year. In October 1993, all previous obligations under the desegregation plans were researched and included in the PBD. This years audit is for the period from October of 1993 through October of 1994. All court orders, hearing transcripts, monitoring reports, and stipulations were reviewed for that period. The obligations were extracted from the documents and listed. The list was reviewed by the Superintendents Council, the Superintendent, LRSD Attorneys, and the LRSD Office of Desegregation. This year research on the audit includes an update on the status of each obligation. Responsible persons were asked to report on the status on their listed obligations. Responses were reduced to codes. Evidence of the status of each is maintained by the person responsible. A copy of the completed audit is included with this update. Original Magnets: Geographic Preference (Attachment) The issue of geographic preference is on the Magnet Review Committees table. Geographic preference refers to the practice of considering the racial balance impact on the area school by the transfer of a student to a magnet. This means that some students may not transfer to magnets because doing so will negatively impact the racial balance of their area school.Desegregation Update Board of Directors Meeting December 15, 1994 2 At a meeting of the MRC on November 19, I informed them that we use geographic preference in selecting students for magnets. Though this issue is being reviewed as if it is a new concept, it is not. It is protected by the Magnet Stipulation (February, 1987). It is also a practice in PCSSD since magnets were established. Attached is a memorandum presented to the MRC stating reasons for supporting the practice and encouraging their support. Desegregation Plan Modifications (Attachment) A number of sections of the plan are being reviewed with a eye toward modifying them. As you know, e process is time consuming. We hope to have a number of modifications before you by the board meeting in march. Any modifications must be approved by the Board of Directors before they are filed with the Court. Therefore, you will have an opportunity to review any modifications before they are final, illustration of the plan modification process. Attached is a graphic Registration Preparation for February registration is complete almost. The details of that information will be presented to the Board at the January meeting. Generally, the dates and activities are as they were last year. Director of Communications Interviewing for the position of Director of Communications has begun. Almost 200 applications were received. We hope to have someone in the position no later than midJanuary. Mayer, OecewU\u0026gt;erl2, 1994Desegregation Plan Amendment Process Students Patrons Teachers Committees AdministAtors Demographic Changes Failure of Deseg. Process Propose Change (in writing) Changes in Law Changing Circumstances I Office of Desegregation (LRSD) If approved 1. Initial Evaluation 2. When appropriate: Surveys \u0026amp; Public Meetings held Informal Consultation with Parties 3. Final Recommendation to Superintendent 4. Superintendent Recommends to Board Submit to Court Share with Parties If the Court approves, the plan shall be amended noting the approved date. Lillie Rock School District R. MayoLittle Rock School District MEMORANDUM To: From: Date: Subject: Magnet Review Committee Russ Mayo, Associate Superintendent December 12,1994 Magnet Selection: Geographic Preference Little Rocks original magnets are among the most successful schools in the area. Their reason should not be blurred by the thrill of success, however. They developed from the need to voluntarily desegregate all schools. So weighty is this goal in Pulaski County, that it has bound parties and patrons in a web of priorities punctuated by dilemmas. Too often, these dilemmas ignore the greater goal of educating students. The decision before the MRC is another dilemma. In short, it is the conflict between voluntary desegregation and extra funding. If geographic preference is prohibited in selecting students for magnet schools, a few more seats can be filled, drawing more funding. Area schools, however, will become more racially identifiable violating the intent of desegregation. If geographic preference is permitted, the prospects of desegregation are preserved, but some magnet seats will be empty without additional state funding. The position of the MRC is an important one. The success of voluntary desegregation will be inhibited or enabled by the decision. This decision will be a statement about the priorities of the MRC. By opposing geographic preference, funding becomes the priority. By supporting geographic preference, voluntary desegregation remains the priority. In weighing your decision, the following information may be helpful: 1. The position of the U. S. Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit, is clear on dilemmas involving the goal of desegregation and funding. In its 1991 decision concerning plan modifications, the Court stressed the following: .... We wish to dispel, in particular, any notion that an asserted lack of funds on the part of any of the three school districts would justify a reduction in their commitment to desegregation....' 2. Geographic preference was and is a standing policy in the Pulaski County Special School District, according to Billy Bowles, Assistant Superintendent for Desegregation\n3. The primary goal of the MRC is desegregation. The court order establishing the MRC requires that the MRC shall have as its primary objective the furtherance of effective desegregation. ..2 4. Geographic preference, applied to student selection, drives the desegregating process. It is permitted by the Magnet Stipulation as noted here: ' Appeal of Lillie Rock School Dislricl, Pulaski Courtly Special School Dislricl No. I, North Little Rock School District, 2 and Mrs. Lorene Joshua, 949 F.2d 253, 255 (Sth Cir. 1991). Magnet Review Committee Court Order (September 3, 1986), page 2.Magnet Review Committee Magnet Selection: Geographic Preference 2 SEAT ALLOCATION .... The three districts agree that each district will establish an open enrollment policy for magnet schools and will be permitted to determine how children will be selected for the magnet seats allocated to each district pursuant to that policy. This provision shall not prohibit the establishment of geographic preference areas where appropriate. 5. Regardless of the position taken by the MRC, every seat will never be filled unless the pool of white students requesting magnets increases dramatically. This condition is created by seat restrictions of race and grade level, two restrictions necessary to desegregation. The student selection practices of the Little Rock School District support geographic preference. We would appreciate your support of this practice. C: Dr. Henry P. Williams, Superintendent Chris Heller, LRSD Attorney 3 Magnet Stipulation (February 16, 1987), page 5.Little Rock School District MEMORANDUM To: Magnet Review Committee From: Russ Mayo, Associate Superintendent Date: December 12, 1994 Subject: Magnet Selection: Geographic Preference Little Rocks original magnets are among the most successful schools in the area. Their reason should not be blurred by the thrill of success, however. They developed from the need to voluntarily desegregate all schools. So weighty is this goal in Pulaski County, that it has bound parties and patrons in a web of priorities punctuated by dilemmas. Too often, these dilemmas ignore the greater goal of educating students. The decision before the MRC is another dilemma. In short, it is the conflict between voluntary desegregation and extra funding. If geographic preference is prohibited in selecting students for magnet schools, a few more seats can be filled, drawing more fimding. Area schools, however, will become more racially identifiable violating the intent of desegregation. If geographic preference is permitted, the prospects of desegregation are preserved, but some magnet seats will be empty without additional state fimding. The position of the MRC is an important one. The success of voluntary desegregation will be inhibited or enabled by the decision. This decision will be a statement about the priorities of the MRC. By opposing geographic preference, fimding becomes the priority. By supporting geographic preference, voluntary desegregation remains the priority. In weighing your decision, the following information may be helpful: 1. The position of the U. S. Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit, is clear on dilemmas involving the goal of desegregation and fimding. In its 1991 decision concerning plan modifications, the Court stressed the following: .... We wish to dispel, in particular, any notion that an asserted lack of funds on the part of any of the three school districts would justify a reduction in their commitment to desegregation....' 2. Geographic preference was and is a standing policy in the Pulaski County Special School District, according to Billy Bowles, Assistant Superintendent for Desegregation\n3. The primary goal of the MRC is desegregation. The court order establishing the MRC requires that the MRC shall have as its primary objective the furtherance of effective ,2 desegregation. 4. Geographic preference, applied to student selection, drives the desegregating process. It is permitted by the Magnet Stipulation as noted here: ' Appeal of Little Rock School District, Pulaski County Special School District No. I, North Little Rock School District, and Mrs. Lorene Joshua, 949 F.2d 253, 255 (Sth Cir. 1991). 2 Magnet Review Committee Court Order (September 3, 1986), page 2.Office of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor 201 East Markham. Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501) 376-6200 Fax (501) 371 -0100 Date: December 13, 1994 To: Members of the LRSD Board of Education and Dr. Henry Williams From: n S. Brown Subject: Data on Southwest LRSD Schools Enclosed are some charts which my staff has prepared for me in anticipation of todays meeting of the committee which is to consider rebuilding Chicot School. Dr. Williams has graciously asked me to serve on this committee. Im sharing these charts with that group and you because 1 think youll find them informative and helpful. The charts contain information about schools in Southwest Little Rock. Weve included more detailed information about Chicot and Watson because these two schools have recently been publicly discussed in tandem with rebuilding Chicot. It would probably be helpful to the district to have this level of detailed data analysis on all LRSD schools. Such infor\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_343","title":"Correspondence","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":null,"dc_date":["1994"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System."],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","Little Rock School District","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","School improvement programs"],"dcterms_title":["Correspondence"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Butler Center for Arkansas Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://arstudies.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/bcmss0837/id/343"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["correspondence"],"dcterms_extent":null,"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\nRECIEVED JAN 6 194 Office of Desegregation Monitoring LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLANNING, RESEARCH AND EVALUATION Date: January 4, 1994 To: Margie Powell, Associate Monitor Office of Desegregation Monitoring From: Sterling Ingra irector Planning, Research and Evaluation Re: Arkansas Minimum Perfoirmance Test, 1993 As requested in your telephone call today, we are enclosing copies of the school summary reports for the 1993 Arkansas MPT. information, please let me know. If we can provide any additional bjg cc: Jerry Malone Office of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501) 376-6200 Fax (501) 371 -0100 January 10, 1994 Mrs. Pat Higginbotham Woodruff Elementary School 3010 West 7th Street Little Rock, AR 72205 Dear Pat: Congratulations on 400 fight-free days at Woodruff! Thats a significant milestone to have reached, and 1 am so proud of you, your staff, and your terrific kids. As a former Woodruff parent, 1 know firsthand the importance you and your fine staff place on teaching children how to constructively handle their differences. As a result of his years at Woodruff, my son Jonathan left sixth grade last year with solid skills in decision making and conflict resolution that are serving him well now in junior high. By the way, 1 also want you to know how fondly Jonathan remembers Woodruff and his teachers. Every time we drive by the school, he heaves a sign and says, \"1 wish 1 were still there.\" Jonathan learned so much while he was at Woodruff. He was challenged and he was also cherished, feeling secure and well-guided by his concerned and loving teachers. As a result, he gained much selfconfidence and now approaches school with an \"1 can do it\" attitude. As a Mom, 1 thank you for all the wonderful things your school has given my son. As a monitor, 1 salute you for your superb vision, leadership, and know-how. You dared to set a lofty goal and then you provided the direction, resources, and support that have enabled all of you to achieve your goal together. Please share this letter with your terrific Woodruff colleagues and accept my enthusiastic congratulations on a job well done. Sincerely yours, irownOffice of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501)376.6200 Fax (501) 371-0100 Date: January 12, 1994 To: Hank Williams From: n Brown Subject: LRSD Communication Assistant Position 1 wrote you on December 3, 1993 regarding the status of the unfilled Communications Assistant position, but still have not received an answer to my letters inquiries. 1 will appreciate your early response to the questions 1 posed last month in my letter: By what date can the Court expect the Communication Assistants position to be filled? Also, will this position be part-time or will it be full-time? Thank you very much. LRSD SUPTS OFFICE 148 P01 JAN 19 4 17:16  LnTLE Rock School District OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDENT January 19, 1994 Mrs. Ann Brown, Federal Monitor Office of Desegregation Monitoring 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Ann: Dr. Mayo has been given my approval to fill the position of Communication Assistant. It is my hope, that after he has concluded his interviews, filled. the position will be I understand that he has narrowed his choices. and that filling this position is a priority. Sincerely, Henry P. Williams Superintendent of Schools /bjf 810 Wet Maridmin Street  Little Kock, Arkansas 72201  (501) 824-2000 eF.-/A'Lb Little Rock School District MEMORANDUM To\nFrom: Date: Subject: Ann Brown, Monitor Russ Mayo, Associate Superintendent February 2,1994 Meeting February 1,1994 FEB 7 10Q4 Onice of Di 'Qbv\u0026lt; Thank both you and Bob for your help yesterday with data about our students in and out of our attendance zones. As you know. Bob and 1 are meeting next week so 1 may benefit from the file he has built. Our meeting was beneficial to me and gave me insight into ways of approaching solutions to student assignment. From our meeting, 1 understand that you will request Incentive School capacities from Doug Eaton based on a maximum of 20 students per class, rather than the current capacities. We agreed that these would be more realistic. We did not agree, however, on the method for calculating range for area elementary schools. 1 understand clearly why you are interpreting the range to be fixed at 40% to 60%. As pointed out, our average percentage black is approximately 64%. This makes it mathematically impossible for us to bring all elementary schools into compliance. We have been using 40% for the bottom of the range and using the formula for secondary schools to figure the top. That way the top of the range moves with our percentage black. Chris Heller and 1 will try to work an agreeable solution. Also, 1 want to reiterate my response to your question about the assistant communication position. We have taken a while to fill this position because of the importance of any position when much is to be done. These are long term decisions, because they affect people's lives, as you know. We want to be careful to get the right people in the right places so they are both happy and productive. The apparent conflict between my testimony and reality is easily explained. When 1 testified that we were completing interviews on Friday, January 28, that was true. The following Monday, we realized that since the position was changed to full-time, it should be re advertised. It has been and will close early next week. This means that three to four weeks may pass before the person selected is actually on the job. This estimate includes the new hire's two weeks notice to their current employer. Again, thank you for your help. C: Dr. Henry P. Williams, Superintendent Chris Heller, LRSD AttorneyOffice of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501)376-6200 Fax (501) 371-0100 February 2, 1994 Mr. Doug Eaton Little Rock School District 810 West Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Doug: I understand that my associate, Melissa Guldin, spoke with you yesterday about the LRSD school capacity figures you sent us earlier this year. The numbers you had reported for the incentive schools were evidently taken directly from the incentive school capacity table which appears on page 147 of the LRSD desegregation plan. Those capacities are based on 18 children in four-year- old classes, 20 in kindergarten, 23 in grades one through three, and 25 in grades four through six. Although you are correct in citing the desegregation plan capacity figures, the Courts May 1, 1992 Order has resulted in the district aiming for a maximum class enrollment at the incentive schools of 20 pupils per classroom in grades K through six. Therefore, please fax me the capacity of each incentive school based on no more than 20 pupils per class in grades K-6 and the appropriate classroom maximum for the early childhood grades (which I understand is 18 in four-year-old rooms and, in the Rockefeller magnet program, 18 in the ree-year-old classes, 17 in the two- year-olds, and 10 for the infants and toddlers). 1 need this information no later than the end of the day on Friday, February 4, 1994. Thank you very much. Sincerely yours, Ann S. Brown cc: Russell Mayoyf A tt^'^\nOffice of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor Date: February 2, 1994 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501)376-6200 Fax (501) 371-0100 To: Interdistrict School Principals From: ODM Monitoring Team Subject: Request for documentation On October 26, 1993 we requested that copies of certain documents be available at our scheduled monitoring visit. To date, the following list of items have not been provided. In order to complete our report we ask you send these documents to us no later than Tuesday, February 8, 1994 by 5:00 p.m. Failure to provide copies of these documents by that time will result in a notation in the final report that your school failed to provide monitors with requested documentation. This report will be filed with the federal district court. Crystal Hill  1993-94 PTA total membership by race and gender  Total number of conferences each teacher held with parents (by race and gender) during the first semester for the 1993-94 school year. Romine  1993-94 PTA total membership by race and gender Washington  Documentation of 1993-94 school committees that includes parent or community representatives by committee name, a brief description of the committees mission, a membership roster (including race, gender,and position) agenda, and minutes  1993-94 PTA total membership by race and gender  1993-94 school/community partnership agreements  1993-94 volunteer program documentation including the number of volunteers by race and gender and the total number of hours served by month  1993-94 classroom enrollment  Discipline Report (first nine weeks) and the definition for SIPSn*  Tin  V? o c:-.  February 2, 1994 FE3 MS94 James L. Washington 0Siic3 ci ce -.3 Hall High School Vice Principal 6700 \"H\" Street Little Rock, AR 72205 Ms. Ann S. Brown Federal Monitor 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Ms. Brown: A few years ago-while serving the Little Rock School District as Student Assignment Officer- I was encouraged to apply for a position on your staff by a colleague. Unfortunately, I was discouraged after she allegedly visited informally with you about working in your office, solicit her assistance. unknown to me. I would like to note that I did not Being discouraged is not experience I have learned how to provide self-motivation. hard work, and sacrifice in order to accomplish my personal and professional goals. However, when we visited with Mr. Butterfield I was curious to confirm what was told to me about comments allegedly made by you in reference to what you heard about James Washington. I was particularly concerned about the terms \"rude\", \"disrespectful\", and \"discourteous\" being used to describe the way I conducted myself while serving our district patrons. The point to be made is that serving the public in a process that is very emotional professional liability. (student assignments) should not be a demonstrated that: When challenged in the past, it has been (1) no one has been willing to sit and state specifics, and (2) patrons frustrated with the assignment process or the system target the district's contact person. Out of respect for you and myself I won't list (nor necessarily discount) the belief that my race and gender are factors, other words, I was unfairly labeled. In You need not respond. I merely want to state that I hope what was told to me was a gross misunderstanding. Not speaking for me, it may be a disservice to our community if the best available talent is not utilized as a result of heresay. community deserves more. Our school I hope you and your staff continue to have a good year! Sincerely, ton jiic 'V\u0026lt;- c. ho.li cc^c^^eg^ Little Rock School District 4 Feb 1994 receiv Ms. Ann Brown Office of Desegregation Monitoring 201 East Markham St. Heritage West Building Otiice Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Ann\nFEB 1 1 1994 ot Desegregation UOituv. .'S Pursuant to your letter of 2 Feb 1994, contained herein are the capacities for the Incentive Schools. Elementary at Ms. Gulden's request. I have included Washington The Incentive school capacities are calculated on a maximum class size of 20 students in grades K thru 6 and 18 students in Pre-K. The special programs at Rockefeller Elementary are calculated using 10 students/class in Infant programs. old programs and 18 students/class in 3 yr. 17 students/class in 2 yr. old programs. The capacity of Washington Elementary is calculated using 20 students in K, 23 students in grades 1 thru 3, 25 students in grades 4 thru 6 and 18 students in Pre-K. The capacities listed are based on the number of class sections presently in effect during the 93-94 school year. School Franklin Elementary Garland Elementary Mitchel Elemenatry Rightsell Elementary Rockefeller Elementary Stephens Elementary Washington Elementary Capacity 434 258 298 258 469 198 836 sincerely. Doiigla\\ Eaton 810 West Markham Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201  (501)374-3361 5:^0 I 02/04 94 17:23 S'oOl 324 2032 L R School Dlst ODM LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 West Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 FAX (501) 324-2032 TO: FROM: SENDER'S PHONED SUBJECT: q: J, @001 002 SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS: Number of Pages (include cover page Speed Dial___________ Fax Phone Number zss^ssiags]! T' i222:^322a*3BS22^2SS3S\nfi32aS2C\n^2^:S2^a^aS^ai3SM 02fri4 94 1T:24 501 321 2032- i.:.M @002'002 I y AJt L 1\u0026lt; JcllOOl DI Si iwiri\" if j' - f' Rock School District February 4, 1994 Ms. Connie Hickman Tanner Office of Desegregation Monitorinjfg Heritage West Building, Suite 510 201 E. Markham Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Dear Connie, Thanks for offering an extension on the final copy of the Districtwide Recruitment Plan. I should be able to provide a copy of the comprehensive plan with its four components (one each for incentive, interdistrict, magnet and area schools) by the middle of next week. There will be a narrative attached. Sincerely, Jeanette Wagner Director of Communications 810 West Markham street  Little Rock, Arkansas 73301  (501)834-3000 _____________________________________ % _____________________________________ Office of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501)376-6200 Fax (501) 371-0100 Date: February 14, 1994 To: Russ Mayo From: Subject: In Brown Elementary Area School Racial Balance Range 1 want to correct an apparent misunderstanding that appears in your memo to me dated February 2, 1994 which 1 received on February 7, 1994. In that correspondence, you stated that I was interpreting the range for LRSD area elementary school at a fixed 40% to 60%. Actually, in figuring the target racial balance range for LRSD elementary area schools, my calculations are guided by the specific relevant language of the desegregation plans. Both the LRSD Desegregation Plan and the Interdistrict Plan provide for the racial balance of LRSD elementary schools to be calculated differently from that of the districts secondary schools. The plans state that the target racial balance at the elementary area schools is 55 percent black and 45 percent white with a variance of 5 percent. The LRSD plan refers to attendance zones that are drawn to establish this racial balance. The plans also state that white enrollment at an area school may not exceed 60%. Clearly, the desegregation plans do not provide for the target racial balance range of LRSD elementary area schools to fluctuate along with the districts black percentage. That you perceive it to be presently \"mathematically impossible\" to achieve the target range is not due to a matter of interpretation of a racial balance formula\nrather, it is due to the districts failure to do what the desegregation plans require of it: to recruit white students into the LRSD in numbers that will allow schools to be desegregated within the range the district set up itself. One effect of a fixed target range is to act as an incentive for the district to maintain white enrollment that is sufficient to achieve the racial balance that the parties agreed upon in their settlement. The challenge the LRSD is now facing is not in reinterpreting its desegregation plans, but in living up its solemn promises, including the tough recruitment job the district committed itself to do. cc: Hank Williams Chris HellerLittle Rock School District MEMORANDUM .-j V To: From: Date: Subject: Ann Brown, Monitor Russ Mayo, Associate Superintendent February 2, 1994 Meeting February 1,1994 FEB 7 1004 Oifica of Des^ Thank both you and Bob for your help yesterday with data about our students in and out of our attendance zones. As you know. Bob and 1 are meeting next week so 1 may benefit from the file he has built. Our meeting was beneficial to me and gave me insight into ways of approaching solutions to student assignment. From our meeting, 1 understand that you will request Incentive School capacities from Doug Eaton based on a maximum of 20 students per class, rather than the current capacities. We agreed that these would be more realistic. We did not agree, however, on the method for calculating range for area elementary schools. 1 understand clearly why you are interpreting the range to be fixed at 40% to 60%. As pointed out, our average percentage black is approximately 64%. This makes it mathematically impossible for us to bring all elementary schools into compliance. We have been using 40% for the bottom of the range and using the formula for secondary schools to figure the top. That way the top of the range moves with our percentage black. Chris Heller and 1 will try to work an agreeable solution. Also, 1 want to reiterate my response to your question about the assistant communication position. We have taken a while to fill this position because of the importance of any position when much is to be done. These are long term decisions, because they affect people's lives, as you know. We want to be careful to get the right people in the right places so they are both happy and productive. The apparent conflict between my testimony and reality is easily explained. When 1 testified that we were completing interviews on Friday, January 28, that was true. The following Monday, we realized that since the position was changed to full-time, it should be re advertised. It has been and will close early next week. This means that three to four weeks may pass before the person selected is actually on the job. This estimate includes the new hire's two weeks notice to their current employer. Again, thank you for your help. C: Dr. Henry P. Williams. Superintendent Chris Heller, LRSD AttorneyOffice of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501)376-6200 Fax (501) 371-0100 Date\nFebruary 16, 1994 To: Russ Mayo From: in Brown Subject: New LRSD Brochure 1 hope you could read my notes on my rough edit of your new brochure, which 1 faxed to you last evening. My handwriting is not always the clearest, so please dont hesitate to ask if something isnt legible. Russ, in my hasty comments 1 did not address every edit aspect of the brochure that its important to consider, from small things like the stray period that appears in the list of registration dates to major things like completeness of information and clarity of general purpose and content. You obviously intend for this brochure to be user friend-which is laudable-and 1 like the conversational tone. However, 1 still believe it is important for you to have a technical writer review and refine the brochure before it goes to press. It has been my experience that its worth the money to delegate a job like developing a new brochure to the pros who do that sort of thing for a living and are very good at it. There is one additional aspect of the brochure that I want to stress: in information designed to inform the public about various school options, I believe its critical to address and clarify the issue of eligibility. Parents are frequently upset when they perceive that they have options which we know are not open to them. For example, you may not be fully aware of the ire many parents expressed over King recruitment activities, when both the LRSD and PCSSD failed to make it clear that only certain parents need apply. Although I believe district officials do not mean to intentionally mislead the public, it still happens all too frequently because we fail to explain up front to Moms and Dads what we understand as a matter of routine. Office of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court  Eastern District ( Arkansas Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501)376-6200 Fax (SOI) 371-0100 February 18, 1994 Dr. Henry P. Williams Little Rock School District 801 West Markham Street Little Rock, .AR 72201 Dear Hank: Enclosed are a number of charts containing information which the Court asked ODM to provide the district. This information should be helpful as you consider a number of issues, particularly those relevant to the future of Stephens and a new LRSD interdistrict school. As the Court requested, the charts show the number of empty seats in the incentive schools, the number of empty seats at King, and the number of children who are enrolled in these schools. To show where LRSD children might most likely be targeted for recruitment to PCSSDs new Clinton Interdistrict School, we have prepared racial balance data on schools in various areas of town and also a chart on the Washington Attendance Zones illustrating the dispersement of children who live in that schools zones but attend elsewhere. We have also used the LRSDs data base and 1993-94 budget to generate additional information which is categorized according to the titles and subtitles of each document. For example, one chart contains information on per-pupil expenditures by elementary school. Earlier this month. Bob Morgan and I met with Russ Mayo and Chris Heller to review the charts in draft form and to stress that our calculations were all based on data given us by the LRSD. We also gave Russ a computer disc containing the student data base from which we developed our charts. We have attempted to make each chart self-explanatory through headings, footnotes, or a brief introduction. However, some of the data may not be as self-evident as we intended it to be. So, please dont hesitate to contact me if we need to be clearer about any aspect of the information. Sincerely yours, d Ou Ann S. B Brown cc\nJudge Susan Webber Wright Bobby Lester James Smith Russ Mayo All CounselLittle Rock School District MEMORANDUM To: Connie Hickman- Tanner, Associate Monitor Office of Desegregation Monitoring From: Russ Mayo, Associate Superintendent Date: February 20, 1994 Subject: District-Wide Recruitment Plan RECE3VEP FEB 24 1994' Oifica of Desegregation Monitoring Attached is a our district-wide recruitment plan. The cover narrative explains the document. We know that changes will occur as we experiment with ideas in the plan. We believe that all of our obligations are addressed in this plan. We are open to your suggestions for the document. C: Dr. Henry P. Williams, Superintendent Members of the Superintendents Council Jerry Malone, LRSD Attorney Chris Heller, LRSD AttorneyOffice of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor 201 East Markham. Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501)376-6200 Fax (501) 371-0100 February 22, 1994 Dr. Henry P. Williams Little Rock School District 801 West Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Hank: I have discovered an error in a footnote that appears on one of the charts I sent you last Friday. In the section entitled Enrollment in Downtown Elementary Schools, a note under the chart on the second page states that incentive school capacities are based on a 20-to-l or less student-teacher ratio. That statement is incorrect. The capacities we actually used in our calculations are those that appear in the April 1992 LRSD Desegregation Plan, which are higher than a 20-to-l ratio. A corrected chart is enclosed. I regret any inconvenience ODM's error may have caused. Sincerely yours, -K \"Ann S. Brown cc\nJudge Susan Webber Wright Bobby Lester James Smith Russ Mayo All CounselENROLLMENT IN DOWNTOWN ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS Prepared by ODM February 1994 For the purpose of this document, ODM has identified a downtown elementary school as any elementary school located within these boundaries: east of University, west of Adams Field, north of Fourche Creek, and south of Markham. These boundaries create a rectangular area encompassing the six incentive schools (Franklin, Garland, Mitchell, Rightsell, Rockefeller, and Stephens), three magnet schools (Booker, Carver, and Gibbs), two interdistrict schools (King and Washington), one area school (Woodruff), and the kindergarten classes at Central High School. By using the defined boundaries, some schools outside the downtown area have a few contiguous attendance zones that fall within the downtown area\nBale Elementary has four zones east of University, Fair Park has four zones and a partial zone south of Markham, and Pulaski Heights has one zone south of Markham. Woodruff, which is identified as a downtown school, has one zone north of Markham. However, for the purpose of this document, all zones within the defined boundaries are identified in the downtown area. A list of the zones defined for the purpose of this document as downtown attendance zones is provided. The information used to complete the last nine columns of this document is from the Little Rock School District (LRSD) student enrollment data base as of December 8, 1993. The second column is the October 1, 1993 enrollment reported to Arkansas Department of Education. The capacity figures in the third column are reported from LRSD as the current capacities. The fourth and fifth columns are results of calculations based on enrollment and capacity.Corrected 2-22-94 School Enrollment Oct 1 Capacity Franklin Incentive 345 544 LRSD DOWNTOWN ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS % Filled Available Seats Live downtown but attend outside downtown Live downtown and attend downtown Live outside downtown but attend downtown Total Black White Total Black White Total Black White 63 199 270 260 10 281 263 18 55 28 27 Garland Incentive 205 346 59 141 118 117 1 190 172 18 14 6 8 Mitchell Incentive 230 346 66 116 131 127 4 192 177 15 29 21 8 Rightsell Incentive 189 346 55 157 90 87 3 165 163 2 22 17 5 Rockefeller Incentive 340 425 80 85 74 72 2 238 192 46 142 62 80 Stephens Incentive Sub Total Incentive Schools 145 298 49 153 86 86 0 136 135 1 9 6 3 1,454 2,305 63 851 769 749 20 1,202 1,102 100 271 140 131 Booker Magnet 595 656 91 61 N/A N/A N/A 130 116 14 461 202 250 Carver Magnet 595 613 97 18 N/A N/A N/A 130 124 6 465 206 259 Gibbs Magnet Sub Total Magnet Schools 299 353 85 54 N/A N/A N/A 102 88 14 198 83 115 1,489 1,622 92 133 0 0 0 : 362 328 34 1,124 491 633 King Interdistrict 553 692 80 139 90 89 1 331 317 14 217 17 200 Washington Interdistrict Magnet Sub Total Interdistrict Schools 721 939 77 218 262 253 9 406 383 23 314 65 249 Woodruff (Area) Central Kindergarten Satellite Zones Contiguous Zones Grand Total 1,274 1*631 78 357 352 342 10 737 700 IB 1 531 82 449 236 324 73 88 17 15 2 156 113 43 75 33 42 50 50 100 0 N/A N/A N/A 46 46 0 4 4 0 N/A N/A 4,503 N/A N/A N/A 747 722 25 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 313 253 60 N/A N/A N/A 5,932 76 1,429 2,198 2,081 117 2,503 2,289 214 2,005 750 1255There are seven satellite zones in the downtown area wherein students are assigned and transported to schools outside the downtown area: Brady, Forest Park Jefferson, McDermott, Meadowcliff, Otter Creek, and Terry. However, all students in those satellite zones do not attend the targeted schools. For example, Terry has 138 students identified within the downtown satellite zone (all black) of which 25 attend Terry. The remaining 113 students are assigned to 29 different schools. There are no satellite zones for the downtown area that would result in students being assigned and transported to a school downtown. Targeted School Brady McDermott Forest Park Jefferson Meadow -cliff Terry Otter Creek Students in satellite zone 66 180 162 273 191 138 124 Students attending targeted school Students outside targeted school Number of schools students attending outside the targeted school 33 66 60 71 72 25 39 33 16 114 102 202 119 113 85 23 29 29 32 29 22(ff - (3'^/ LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 1 John L. McClellan Community High School 9417 Geyer Springs Road Phone 570-4100 Little Rock, Arkansas 72209 February 23, 1994 RWU i. r? Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor Office of Desegregation Monitoring 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 FcB 2 4 1994 Office ci Dessi Dear Ms. Brown\nI am writing to make you aware of a situation that we feel may be detrimental to our desegregation goals. Next month the Little Rock School District will print the brochure containing the 1994-95 course offerings for grades 9-12. (lam enclosing a copy of the 1993-94 brochure.) We have been notified by Estelle Matthis that approximately 25 magnet courses at McClellan High School will again not be included in this brochure. The reason given by Ms. Matthis is that \"there are too many courses for the districts course offerings brochure to include magnet programs. It is very voluminous and costly in its present format.\" While it is true that the 1993-94 brochure did not include magnet courses from McClellan or Parkview, at least six magnet courses were listed from the other LRSD high school with a magnet program, Central. We ask you to look at the following factors and to consider requesting that all LRSD secondary courses be placed in the brochure. This brochure is the only document that students, especially 9th grade students, use when scheduling their courses. It is also a document seen by people considering entering the district. As such, we feel that every course available to secondary students in the Little Rock School District should be printed in the brochure. Students looking at the brochure would see interesting courses offered at Parkview or McClellan and then perhaps consider enrolling in those schools, possibly increasing white enrollment there. If this brochure is to be the districts course offerings brochure, then it seems fitting that all district secondary courses be included. The argument that Parkview is a true magnet school may seem to justify their omission from the brochure. After all, their counselors go to the junior high schools and register their own incoming sophomores. Even so, it seems that inclusion in this brochure would benefit Parkview as well as McClellan by spreading the word about the wonderful programs available at the two schools, especially at a time when enrollment at both schools is down. A Business/Communications Magnet 1 Ms. Matthis suggested that we have our own course offerings brochures printed\nshe offered to distribute these with the LRSD course offerings brochures. We see several problems with this plan. First, this second brochure would be costly\nwhy not apply this cost to the inclusion of the McClellan and Parkview courses in the district brochure? Second, students consider the LRSD brochure as the primary source of course information. They might look at the individual school brochures, but the district brochure will be the one they keep and use as a reference for decision-making. Third, assuming that the district removes the Central magnet courses from the new district brochure, 9th grade students will be given four different brochures-LRSD, Central, McClellan, and Parkview-to help them select their courses\nthis would be terribly confusing for them as well as their parents. Finally, we feel that inclusion in the district brochure gives credibility to the magnet courses at all three high schools. Inclusion in the brochure says to everyone that these magnet high schools are a viable choice for all students. We at McClellan feel that it is imperative that all courses be included in the district course offerings brochure. We appreciate your consideration in this matter. Sincerely, Steve Geurin Curriculum Coordinator Enclosure 'Of / Office of Desegregation Monitoring United Stales District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown. Federal Monitor 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501)376-6200 Fax (501) 371-0100 Date: March 11, 1994 From: To: Subject: Melissa Guldin, Associate Monitor Julie Wiedower, Student Assignment Coordinator Little Rock School District Shadow Zone Seats at Williams Magnet School As you may recall, the issue of Williams shadow zone seats came up yesterday during the meeting we both attended at the Student Assignment OfiBce. During that meeting I commented that the district had never met the requirement that 25% of the seats in Williams be reserved for students living in the shadow of the school. You said that the district assigned 15 neighborhood students to Williams for the 1993-94 school year and for the upcoming 1994-95 school year. If this is accuarte, 25% of the students entering the Williams kindergarten would be from the shadow zone. Your statement regarding the 15 shadow zone seats was not consistent with the information I received in a memo, dated 12/9/93, from Donna Grady Creer regarding the allotment of magnet seats. That document showed 10 seats allocated to LRSD white students. Since the vast majority of housing near the school is occupied by whites, I assumed and you later confirmed that the 10 white seats shown for LRSD represented the total shadow zone allotment. We discussed this issue during a meeting at your office on January 7, 1994. During that meeting I showed you the memo from Donna and you confirmed that it matched the magnet seat allocations you set for the 1993-94 school year. We even talked about the 10 shadow zone seats and the fact that 10 seats did not constitute 25% of the kindergarten classes. The figure of 10 was also mentioned at each of the recritmnet meetings held for Fair Park parents. In order to clear this up, I need some documentation regarding the LRSD policy on assignment of shadow zone seats to all magnet schools. Please furnish the following in writing:  Copy of the policy or procedures that govern allotment of shadow zone seats at each of the stipulation magnets  Definition of shadow zones  Number of seats allotted to shadow zone students during 1993-94 and for the upcoming 1994-95 school year As Russ Mayo said at the meeting, I think it is important that we all have accurate information. Thank you for your cooperation. cc: Russ Mayo______r- '-' ^SS^^tnci^r' FRIDAY. ELDREDGE \u0026amp; CLARK HERSCHEL H. FRIDAY, P.A. ROBERT V. LIGHT, P.A. WILLIAM H. SUTTON. P.A. JAMES W. MOORE BYRON M. EISEMAN. JR.. P.A. JOE 0. BELL. P.A. JOHN C. ECHOLS. P.A. JAMES A. BUTTRY, P.A. FREDERICK 8. 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 B. BENHAM III. P.A. LARRY W. BURKS. P.A. A. WYCKLIFF NISBET, JR., P.A. JAMES EDWARD HARRIS, P.A. J. PHILLIP MALCOM. P.A. JAMES M. SIMPSON, P.A. MEREDITH P. CATLETT. P.A. JAMES M. SAXTON. P.A. J. SHEPHERD RUSSELL III DONALD H. BACON, P.A. WILLIAM THOMAS BAXTER. P.A. WALTER A. PAULSON II. P.A. BARRY E. COPLIN. 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. ROBERT 8. SHAFER. P.A. WILLIAM M. GRIFFIN III. P.A. THOMAS N . ROSE, P.A. MICHAEL S. MOORE A PARTNERSHIP OF INDIVIDUALS AND PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATIONS ATTORNEYS AT LAW 2000 FIRST COMMERCIAL BUILDING 400 WEST CAPITOL LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201-3493 TELEPHONE 601-376-201 1 FAX NO. 601-376-2147 March 16, 1994 received DIANE 8. MACKEY. P.A. WALTER M. EBEL III, P.A. KEVIN 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. ROBERT B. BEACH. JR., P.A. J. LEE BROWN. P.A. JAMES C. BAKER. JR., P.A. H. CHARLES OSCHWEND, JR., P.A. HARRY A. LIGHT, P.A. SCOTT H . TUCKER JOHN CLAYTON RANDOLPH GUY ALTON WADE PRICE C. GARDNER J. MICHAEL PICKENS TONIA P. JONES DAVID 0. WILSON JEFFREY H. MOORE ANDREW T. TURNER JOHN RAY WHITE DAVID M. GRAF CARLA G. SPAINHOUR JOHN C. FENOLEY, JR. ALLISON GRAVES BAZZEL R. CHRISTOPHER LAWSON GREGORY 0. TAYLOR TONY L. WILCOX FRAN C. HICKMAN MAR 1 5 1994 Mr. John W. Walker John Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR COUNSEL WILLIAM J. SMITH WILLIAM A. ELDREDGE, JR., P.A B.S. CLARK WILLIAM L. TERRY WILLIAM L. PATTON, JR., P.A. VRITER'a DIRECT MO. 72206 Mr. Sam Jones Wright, Lindsey \u0026amp; Jennings 2200 Worthen Bank Building 200 West Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Steve Jones Jack, Lyon \u0026amp; Jones, P.A. 3400 Capitol Towers Capitol \u0026amp; Broadway Streets Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Richard Roachell First Federal Plaza 401 West Capitol Avenue, Suite 504 Little Rock, AR 72201 Mrs. Ann Brown Heritage West Building, Suite 520 201 East Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201 Re\nLRSD VS. PCSSD/Interdistrict School Assignment Guidelines Gentlemen and Mrs. Brown: Enclosed please find the LRSD's Notice of Filing/Interdistrict School Assignment Guidelines filed pursuant to the order of the Court.Attorneys and Mrs. Brown March 16, 1994 Page 2 Thank you for your attention to this matter. Sincerely, JLMzca Enclosure cc (w/enc): Jerry L. Malone LRSD Attorney Dr. Henry P. Williams, Superintendent LRSD Council Members IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION MAR 1 5 1994 Office of Oessgrogajj^ ^Qnitffrin^ LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF VS. No. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO\n1, ET AL DEFENDANTS MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL INTERVENORS KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL INTERVENORS Notice of Filinq/Interdistrict School Assignment Guidelines The Plaintiff, Little Rock School District (\"LRSD\" or \"District\"), for its Interdistrict School Assignment Guidelines, pursuant to the order of this Court, states: 1. By order filed and entered on February 4, 1994, this Court required the LRSD to develop and file specific guidelines regarding assignments to interdistrict schools in the LRSD. The order provided that the guidelines must be complete and filed within thirty (30) days from the date of the order. As such, the deadline was Sunday, March 6, 1994. 2. On Wednesday, March 2, 1994, counsel for the LRSD requested and was granted ten (10) additional days within which to file the required guidelines. Accordingly, the LRSD had through and including Wednesday, March 16, 1994.LRSD Interdistrict School Assignment Guidelines March 16, 1994 Page 2 3. Attached hereto as Exhibit 1 is the LRSD Interdistrict School Assignment Guidelines as developed by the District's Office of Desegregation and submitted through the Superintendent of the LRSD. 4. Counsel for the LRSD has been authorized by the administration of the LRSD to submit Exhibit 1 as its student assignment guidelines for interdistrict schools located in the LRSD. WHEREFORE, the Little Rock School District submits its Interdistrict School Assignment Guidelines. Respectfully Submitted, FRIDAY, ELDREDGE \u0026amp; CLARK ATTORNEYS AT LAW 2000 First Commercial Building 400 West Capitol Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-3493 (501) 376-2011 ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT B Y L. Malone Bar No. I. D. 85096 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Jerry L. Malone, do hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing Notice of Filing/Interdistrict School Assignment Guidelines has been mailed by First Class Mail, postage pre-paid on March 16, 1994, upon the following, except as otherwise indicated: Mr. John W. Walker John Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72206 Mr. Sam Jones Wright, Lindsey \u0026amp; Jennings 2200 Worthen Bank Building 200 West Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Steve Jones Jack, Lyon \u0026amp; Jones, P.A. 3400 Capitol Towers Capitol \u0026amp; Broadway Streets Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Richard Roachell First Federal Plaza 401 West Capitol Avenue, Suite Little Rock, AR 504 72201 Mrs. Ann Brown (Hand-delivered pursuant to the order of the Court) Heritage West Building, Suite 520 201 East Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201 Jerry L. Malone Little Rock School District Interdistrict School Assignment Guidelines It is the intent of the Little Rock School District (\"LRSD\") that LRSD interdistrict schools exist primarily to bring non-black students from surrounding school districts together with black students from the LRSD. LRSD non-black students may attend interdistrict schools in the LRSD as outlined in the Districts assignment guidelines. The guidelines below will apply to all interdistrict schools in the LRSD. 1. 2. The assignment guidelines are consistent with both the LRSD Desegregation Plan and the Interdistrict Plan with reference to the following sections: a) b) There will be established interdistrict schools which shall seek to obtain a ratio of between 60 percent and 40 percent of either race with the ideal goal of these interdistrict schools to be 50 percent black/white. Proposed interdistrict schools shall be phased-in to these ratios over time. (Interdistrict Plan, p.3) This plan will permit the treatment of interdistrict transfers (including the NLRSD) where students are moving from a situation where their race is a greater proportion of the total student body of a school to a school where their race is a lesser proportion of the student body of a school as Interdistrict Majority-to-Minority transfers under the Courts Order. (Interdistrict Plan, p. 11, Potential Interdistrict M-to-M Enhancements) The selection process will be as follows: a) Black students from the schools attendance zone will be assigned up to 51% of capacity at each grade level. If demand exceeds capacity, a lottery will be conducted to determine assignments. Students who cannot be assigned because of capacity will be assigned to the closest school with capacity which meets racial balance requirements. Their names will, however, be placed on a waiting list for the school. If the students closest school with capacity is an incentive school, that student may choose to attend that incentive school where such an assignment would not inhibit the initial reservation of seats for pre-kindergarten and kindergarten students. (However, these students still maintain their option to be assigned to an elementary area school in accordance with desegregation considerations.) These guidelines assume that interdistrict schools will be located in predominately black attendance zones.Interdistrict School Assignment Guidelines Page 2 b) c) d) Non-black students from the schools attendance zone will be assigned. Non-black students from Pulaski County Special School District (PCSSD) and beyond Pulaski County will be assigned through the Majority-to-Minority transfer process or appropriate State statutes. Seats will be reserved up to 49% of capacity as described by the LRSD Plan, page 147. After the winter pre-registration (normally held in or around February of each year), the number of seats reserved for PCSSD may be reduced to not lower than 40% of capacity or to that percent over 40% which is occupied by PCSSD students on that date. The remaining seats between 40% and 49% may then be made available for LRSD non-black students. However, LRSD non-black students will only be permitted to transfer to an LRSD interdistrict school where it does not cause the racial balance of the sending school to fall outside of acceptable racial balance. Children of staff members will be assigned after attendance zone and PCSSD students are placed. Transfers are subject to desegregation guidelines and the Interdistrict Plan, p. 141, Transfer of Children of Employees. 3. 4. Those LRSD students currently attending an LRSD Interdistrict school may remain until they matriculate out of the sixth grade. However, the siblings of those students may not be assigned to an interdistrict school unless such an assignment complies with these Interdistrict School Assignment Guidelines. In no event will non-black students from the LRSD, PCSSD or elsewhere be allowed to enroll in an LRSD interdistrict school where to do so would cause that schools enrollment to shift from being majority black (i.e. at least 50% -i-1) to majority white, thereby negatively affecting the interdistrict M-to-M funding status of that LRSD interdistrict school.-i-o _ . _ . _____ ac\nft berf r3\u0026gt;o-a ffj n 4 -f-i '/e-d- /a/ aa^c. D-f I toff 4 March 20, 1994 MAR 2 1994 Oifica of Oeoegregaiion Mcmloring Mrs. Ann Brown, Office of Desegregation and Monitoring 810 W. Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Mrs. Brown\nRecently, I was made aware of reoccurring accusations about my principal, Robert L. Brown, Jr. The accusations follow: 1. Mr. Brown does not want White children at Garland as evidenced by the uniforms that the students wear and the African nature of the instructional content. I would like to respond to this by saying that I disagree very much. Mr. Brown has done everything within his power to recruit White and Other children to Garland. I, a White female staff member, came to Garland first in 1987 as Dr. Cheryl Simmons' secretary. Our school colors have always been gold and black. Our uniforms are gold tops and black pants or white blouses and gold jumpers. Some do have African print trim along the edges. No student is required or pressured into wearing the African print. We have White children and Hispanic children who wear these uniforms. They are very pleased with them and look very cute in them. I would not mind having a jumper myself. In reference to the curriculum at Garland, each child is taught to be proud of who he is as an individual, whether it be Black, Hispanic, or White. I transferred last year to Rockefeller Incentive School. When I came back to Garland this year as Mr. Brown's secretary, I couldn't believe the difference in the attitude of the children at Garland. They had a sense of pride about themselves that I had never seen before. Our enrollment of Hispanic students has increased tremendously this year. I asked Mr. Brown about taking a couple of teachers and myself to the Landmark School Supplies Multi-Cultural Open House at the Holiday frm-Airport in February. He said that would be fine, but to let the teachers know that we would only be interested in materials for Hispanic students. Mr. Brown is intent on reaching students from their cultural perspective. Our curriculum is multi-culturally based with more emphasis being placed on cultures represented within our school population. I think Mr. Brown has the right idea in teaching about countries and their cultures from around the world, not just Black and White. 2. Mr. Brown has little or no regard for white staff members. To this I disagree, also. Mr. Brown expects all staff members to put 100% into their jobs. He believes the children deserve the best education they can get. Like in all places of employment, there are people who want to sit down and not do the job they are being paid to do. Some of these people are White and some are Black. It is true that Page - 1Office of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown. Federal Monitor April 5, 1994 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501)376-6200 Fax (501) 371-0100 Debbie Gross 18 Fair Oaks Little Rock, AR 72204 Dear Ms. Gross: I've received your recent correspondence expressing support of Garland Incentive School and your principal, Mr. Robert Brown. Because several of your fellow staff members also sent me similar letters on this subject, I hope you will not think me rude for mailing each of you this same reply which addresses your collective concerns. Many of the letters expressed fears that allegations of racial favoritism were circulating about Mr. Brown, along with rumors that he might be replaced as principal. I have not heard any comments or discussion, either \"on\" or \"off' the record, that give credence to such allegations and rumors. Adthough some of the letters were addressed directly to me, I want to explain that neither I nor Judge Susan Webber Wright, who oversees the desegregation case, make decisions about school district personnel. Those decisions are the responsibility of each district's Board of Directors, based on recommendations from the superintendent and input from others, which might include a staffing committee, for example. As you know, many factors affect personnel placement, and an employer has the right-as well as the obligation-to weigh those factors to determine where an individual can best serve the organization. At the same time. Judge Wright has made it clear to both Dr. Williams and the Little Rock School District Board that the Court will not tolerate reprisals against any district employee because of that individual's testimony in the desegregation case. This school year, Mr. Brown testified at Judge Wright's request during a hearing on the incentive schools. At that time, the Court directed the district to take no retributive action toward Mr. Brown due to his having testified. It is obvious from your letter that you care very much about Garland and Mr. Brown, and also that you take pride in the important job you are doing for children. I'm sure Mr. Brown's heart has been warmed by your endorsement and many positive comments about him. I have known Robert Brown for many years, and believe him to be a man of sincere conviction who earnestly wants the very best for co-workers and students alike. Thank you for speaking out on behalf of your school and, most especially, for all you are doing to make Garland a success. 'Fan i/t., Sincerely yours, Amn S. Brown f/fcj.' C-q// Qyf/a. Ah, ~ /Vlor'^ Srm'fA i /y- /4/A'lni* K) Little Rock School District March 21, 1994 Ann Brown, Federal Monitor Office of Desegregation Monitoring Heritage Building - West 201 E. Markham, Suite 510 Little Rock, AR 72201 0nic3 oi Dessgrc- ion Monstcnng Dear Ms. Brown: During a review of the School Profiles which were produced for the second semester monitoring report, it became clear that there might be a possibility of incorrect interpretation of the staffing information included in the reports submitted last fall. The computer program which generates the information counted every individual holding a unique position in the school. This method of calculation caused us to count some employees in the same school multiple times thus possibly causing the reported racial balances to be in error. This method of calculation has been altered in the new set of reports which are being submitted at this time. This change will become apparent when you compare staffing information for this semester with last semester. We feel, though, that this alteration in the program will more accurately reflect the true staffing picture in the schools. If you have any questions, please feel free to call. Sincerely, A 1 MAR 2 1 1994 Dr. Robert Glowers, Director Planning, Research and Evaluation cc: Dr. Henry Williams, Superintendent Estelle Matthis, Deputy Superintendent Jerry Malone, LRSD Attorney John Walker, Attorney r' 4 I 810 West Markham Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201  (501)324-2000 -['Ji J / / each LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 March 21, 1994 TO: Selected Employees FROM: Zj^Mark D. Milhollen, Manager of Support Services THROUGH: Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Blue Cross-Blue Shield Information Request The District has been notified by Arkansas Blue Cross-Blue Shield that recent federal legislation (Ommbus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993) requires an aimual reporting of employee health insurance plan information to the Department of Health and Human Services. It is very important that the information submitted to Blue Cross-Blue Shield be accurate and current. Therefore, please verify the accuracy of the attached printout generated by Blue Cross-Blue Shield and make any necessary corrections, sign the form (anywhere near the bottom of the form) and return by school mail to the Business Office by March 28.1994. Again, this information is very important in assisting employees with the processing of claims. Thank you for your help in this required reporting. MDMxa Attachment ANN 3 C0CC75 \\BCBS.mdm PLEASE POST PLEASE POST Little Rock School District March 21, 1994 TO: All Employees 4! FROM: Mark D. Milhollen, Manager of Support Services THROUGH: Hen: --------, vi kjujypvil OC iiy Sbp^rintendent'of's^i Schools SUBJECT: DISTRIBUTION OF APRIL 1, 1994 PAYCHECKS 1. Transportation Employees 2. Checks will be distributed at the Transponation Office Maintenance Employees on Friday, April 1, 1994. 3. Checks will be distributed at the Plant Services Office Substitute Employees on Friday, April 1, 1994. ChyCcks will be put in the U.S. mail in the same manner they are mailed each pay 4. All Other Employees Not Mentioned Ahove Adnunistration Bufldmg at 810 1 1994 Anv checks not picked up will be sent through the school mail - - -  a.m. and 3:00 p.m. on Friday, April 1, 1994, on Monday, April 4, 1994. MDM:ca \\checks.mdin 810 West Markham Street  Little Rock, Arkansas 72201  (501)374-3361MAR-31-94 THU 11:59 SUSAN W WRIGHT FAX noMo 13246576 P. 02 March 2S, 1994 CLAUDIA HOWARD 108 NORTH DEVON SHERWOOD, ARKANSAS 72X16 'J'::. 1 -i Ma. Sadie Mitchell, Principal Martin Luther King, Jr. Interdiatrict Elementary School ( ..'f  905 Martin Luther King, Jr. Drive Little Rock, Arkansas 72202 Dear Ms. Mitchell, Ma, Dovers, and Staff: I want to express my appreciation to all of you for the chili supper and talent  \"a effort But I am not writing this letter just because of one event at King Elementary. . . - . . '  ------- wKw wAciucuLai y My pUrpOS my-Child finally in a-school where consistently positive, upbeat, and eager. From what i can see when I am in King, is that you and the staff is a job. Appearances show that everyone is working together and eager and are happy with what is going on. time I set foot into King, see so Appearances show that person works. and eager. From what are not there just because it to do I felt that atmosphere the very first 1 am of the opinion that no matter how hard a if their attitude does not come across in a positive matter, it that begins to affect their job and relationships. being bright as they ara, pick up on I also believe, that children, our dispositions and carry it with them. On a personal note about my child (Lauren), . uirrerence in her even SaJ wL'tt'\" r Lauren has always made good grades, but aV waS _ s  1 .  to King. I can see a difference in her Now, she is xnterested, and she wants to do good and she tell what sho is doing at school. 3 me me she does not want to Lauren absolutely loves King Elementary and tells me She doeo not want to go back-because at King, she says, \"they let you learn ,  oh for art, because she knows she does not possess a talent It does not come easy for her. Even though it may not be the most important area in her curriculum, Lauren tells me this is one of things at King.  child from {That and computer lab.) her favorite To be honest with you, switching was -- r- uonesu wicn my our neighborhood school and taking her away from her friends there. the hardest thing I have ever done, school, I know _I ^d_ the right thing. But every time I step foot into your Thank you for your desire and determination to succeed with our children. Yours truly. Claudia Howard CH CC\nThe Honorable Sus an Webber Wright, U, s. District Judge Henry Williams, Ph.D., Superintendent, Little Hock School District Donna Brady Creer, Executive Director, Magnet Review Committee FPOM TO ^10100 P.05 A . LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM STREET LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS March 31, 1994 TO: Board of Directors FROM: Henr ^\n'intendent SUBJECT: Proposal Funding of Business Cases ^=5S5=: Per your request, attached are itemized listings of costs for implementing business cases as submitted for your review on March 29, 1994. '5 4 r I I I r- I r TOTAL P.05 nt* nn 04-04-199'-\nFROM TO 3710100 P.02 BUSINESS CASES CATEGORY 1 - INCENTIVE SCHOOLS (Required - Double Funding) a SCHOOL ITEM AMOU- 1. Franklin Theme 1.0 Spanish teacher $40,000 25,000 Rockefeller 1.0 Aide - Alternative Classroom Specialist 1.0 Spanish teacher Technology Theme Implementation 12,000 25,000 75,000 (maxirr' rn) 3 3. Rightseli .5 Spanish teacher Technology Theme Implementation 12,500 75,000 (maxintum) i 4- litchell .5 Spanish teacher 12.500 Garland .5 Spanish teacher Technology Theme Implementation 12,500 75,000 (maximum) 6 Stephens .5 Spanish teacher 12,500 n No impact on Incentive School Budget. o' 4 I ^1 h 1 1 - I ( M-,4-04-1994 11:17AM 1. 2. FROM TO Bb'SI.NESS CASES 3710100 CATEGORY II  DESEGREGATION PLAN/ADE (Required - Need Funding) P.03 p I 3. 4. 5, 6. DEPARTMENT English Math/l.ang. Arts Science/Voc. Ed. Science English/For. Lang. Science ITE.M AMOUNT English as a Second Language Math/Lang Arts Revision Applied Biology/Chemistry Science Revision For. Language Revision Hands-on Science Total S 75,880 21,100 93,000* 10,000 7,500 '5,000 $139,480 I Fund source - Carl Perkins (No LRSD funds) t11 1/ I 1^- J4-04-1994 11!17AM FROM TO 3710100 P.04 \nBUSINESS CASES CATEGOR Y III - RELATED DESEGREGATION/ADE (Not RequiredBut Essential) DEPARTMENT/SCHQGL ITEM AMOUNT I. 2. 3. 4. Science/Math (K-3) Foreign Language Social Studies Romine Foreign Language Science/Math Reading S 18,000 Foreign Lang. K-I2 Revision (UALR) Secretary- Theme Specialist For. Lang. Immersion Total 15,000 18,000 (use existing position in District) 3,000 $ 54,000 GRAND TOTAL S193,4\u0026lt;S0 I I !f \u0026lt;'-04-1994 11:15AM FROM TO 3710100 P.01 s I p Arkansas Democrat I Q^azettc i I FAX NUMBER: NEVJ3 ROOM: (501) 372-3908 DATE: - TO: FAX NUMBER\nNUMBER OF PAGES TO FOLLOW: MESSAGE\nhflj__ \u0026amp;ilivbcaiin_rOI ce. VO cnn A:/f fewi i__ C u MbjrA Fpxkfeil :JjrS 2 E 9i zm v CAPiTOL AND SCOTT  P.O. BOX 2221  LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72203-2221  (501) 378-3400 ns^ IM LnTLE Rock School District OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDENT gsw R  osH7:n. April 4, 1994 APR 5 1994 Office of Desegregation Monitoring Ms. Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor Office of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court 201 East Markham Street, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Ann: In keeping with your letter of March 14, 1994, in which you requested several documents, I have enclosed the following: The Community Forum Matrix The District Dialogue Matrix Fast Track Evaluations Business Cases (With Itemized Listings of Cost) The following items are being reviewed and will be sent to you upon completion: Program Inventory Report Student Assignment Audit Needs Assessment Report Instructions for Incorporating Additional Desegregation Obligations into the Program Budget Document. Sincerely, (? Henry P. Williams Superintendent of Schools HPW:nr 810 West Markham Street  Little Rock, Arkansas 72201  (501) 324-2000 Little Rock School District April 4, 1994 To: Principals, Directors and Supervisors Through: Dr. He: Superintendent From: Dr. Ric iurley, Director of Human Resources APR 0 1594 Office of DeocGcs luui'i iviOhiiuiiny Enclosed you will find an Employee Intention Report for your site. Please meet with your employees to determine their plans for the 1994-95 school year. Indicate on the space provided whether the individual will return or resign. If any of your employees intend to retire or resign, please remind them that a letter to that effect should be forwarded to the Human Resources Department as soon as possible. (The deadline for the Early Retirement Incentive is May 20, 1994.) If we have left anyone off your list, please add them to the bottom. This report should be returned to the Human Resources Department no later than April 12, 1994. 810 West Markham Street  Little Rock, Arkansas 72201  (501)824-2000Office of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor April 5, 1994 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501)376-6200 Fax (501) 371-0100 Debbie Gross 18 Fair Oaks Little Rock, AR 72204 Dear Ms. Gross: I've received your recent correspondence expressing support of Garland Incentive School and your principal, Mr. Robert Brown. Because several of your fellow staff members also sent me similar letters on this subject, I hope you will not think me rude for mailing each of you this same reply which addresses your collective concerns. Many of the letters expressed fears that allegations of racial favoritism were circulating about Mr. Brown, along with rumors that he might be replaced as principal. I have not heard any comments or discussion, either \"on\" or \"off the record, that give credence to such allegations and rumors. zAlthough some of the letters were addressed directly to me, I want to explain that neither I nor Judge Susan Webber Wright, who oversees the desegregation case, make decisions about school district personnel. Those decisions are the responsibility of each district's Board of Directors, based on recommendations from the superintendent and input from others, which might include a staffing committee, for example. As you know, many factors affect personnel placement, and an employer has the right-as well as the obligation-to weigh those factors to determine where an individual can best serve the organization. At the same time, Judge Wright has made it clear to both Dr. Williams and the Little Rock School District Board that the Court will not tolerate reprisals against any district employee because of that individual's testimony in the desegregation case. This school year, Mr. Brown testified at Judge Wright's request during a hearing on the incentive schools. At that time, the Court directed the district to take no retributive action toward Mr. Brown due to his having testified. It is obvious from your letter that you care very much about Garland and Mr. Brown, and also that you take pride in the important job you are doing for children. I'm sure Mr. Brown's heart has been warmed by your endorsement and many positive comments about him. I have known Robert Brown for many years, and believe him to be a man of sincere conviction who earnestly wants the very best for co-workers and students alike. Thank you for speaking out on behalf of your school and, most especially, for all you are doing to make Garland a success. (L- Sincerely yours, Ann S. Brown i\\m ry Boil a y /-.ted-,March 20, 1994 I f'\u0026gt;if '* t j?9 bC'^\n3\u0026gt;nj MAR 2 5 1994 C\n'C3 0} Oeosg:\nai!on Monitoring J' Mrs. Ann Brown, Office of Desegregation and Monitoring 810 W. Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Mrs. Brown\nRecently, I was made aware of reoccurring accusations about my principal, Robert L. Brown, Jr. The accusations follow: 1. Mr. Brown does not want White children at Garland as evidenced by the uniforms that the students wear and the African nature of the instructional content. I would like to respond to this by saying that I disagree very much. Mr. Brown has done everything within his power to recruit White and Other children to Garland. I, a White female staff member, came to Garland first in 1987 as Dr. Cheryl Simmons' secretary. Our school colors have always been gold and black. Our uniforms are gold tops and black pants or white blouses and gold jumpers. Some do have Afiican print trim along the edges. No student is required or pressured into wearing the .African print. We have White children and Hispanic children who wear these uniforms. They are very pleased with them and look very cute in them. I would not mind having a jumper myself. In reference to the curriculum at Garland, each child is taught to be proud of who he is as an individual, whether it be Black, Hispanic, or White. I transferred last year to Rockefeller Incentive School. When I came back to Garland this year as Mr. Brown's secretary, I couldn't believe the difference in the attitude of the children at Garland. They had a sense of pride about themselves that I had never seen before. Our enrollment of Hispanic students has increased tremendously this year. I asked Mr. Brown about taking a couple of teachers and myself to the Landmark School Supplies Multi-Cultural Open House at the Holiday Inn-Airport in February. He said that would be fine, but to let the teachers know that we would only be interested in materials for Hispanic students. Mr. Brown is intent on reaching students from their cultural perspective. Our curriculum is multi-culturally based with more emphasis being placed on cultures represented within our school population. I think Mr. Brown has the right idea in teaching about countries and their cultures from around the world, not just Black and White. 2. Mr. Brown has little or no regard for white staff members. To this I disagree, also. Mr. Brown expects all staff members to put 100% into their jobs. He believes the children deserve the best education they can get. Like in all places of employment, there are people who want to sit down and not do the job they are being paid to do. Some of these people are White and some are Black. It is true that Page - 1 ftPR- 0-94 TUE 12:31 FAX NO. 5013710100 P. 02 Office of Desegregation Monitoring UnKed Slates District Court  Eastern Disbict of Arkansas Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Flock, Arkansas 72201 (501)376-6200 Fax (SOI) 371-0100 Date: April S, 1994 To: Russ Mayo From: Irown Subject School Racial Balance and Student Assignment Guidelines As I stated during our joint staff meeting last month, 1 continue to disagree with some of the numbers which you are promulgating as racial guidelines for LRSD schools. Your February 2,1994 memorandum to me indicated that you and Chris Heller would try to work out 'an agreeable solution' regarding the racial targets. I responded in a memo, once again explaining that ODM calculations are based on what the desegregation plan sets forth as racial balance guidelines. I also emphasized that the most pressing need for the district was not to attempt to manipulate racial balance guidelines, but rather to recruit white students In numbers sufficient to desegregate the schools within the range the district set up for itself in the settlement agreements. That communication notwithstanding and without further discussion with me, you have recently published in the new LRSD Student Assignment Handbook for 1994-95 \"acceptable racial ranges* that are inconsistent with the desegregation plan. The Handbook reminds Student Assignment personnel and alt principals that titey will be held accountable for following what you have set forth as requirements. Im also disturbed by your March 17,1994 memo to principals of selected schools, evidently those having a racial balance below or veiy near the minimum \"acceptable\" percentage of black students. The directive states that you will reserve seats for black students and give white students alternate assignments or place them on a waiting list. Ive received numerous calls from distressed parents and district personnel who perceive the directive as counter to the spirit of the desegregation plan. Its obvious that we need to sit down together to talk over student assignment issues and to reach an understanding about what is reasonable, workable, and consistent with the goals of the desegregation plan. 1 think this kind of conversation will be preferable to asking judge Wright for an Immediate healing to sort out racial guideline and student assignment matters. HI talk with either you or Chris today (depending on wlilch of you I can find first) and arrange a time to get together this week. Thanks for your cooperation. cc Chris HellerAPR- 5-94 TUE 12:31 FAX NO. 5013710100 P. 03 Little Rock School District MEMORANDUM RECEIVED To\nFrom: Date\nSubject: /bin iSnown, Monitor Russ M:wo, Associate Superintendent February 2,1994 Meeting February 1,1994 FEB 7 Office of Desegregatioi'i Momtonng . Thank both you and Bob for your help yesterday witJi data about our students in and out of our attendance zones. As you know. Bob and 1 are meeting next week so I may benefit from the file he has built. Our meeting was beneficial to me and gave me insight into ways of approadiing solutions to student assignment. From our meeting, 1 understand that you will request Incentive School capacities from Doug Eaton based on a maximum of 20 students per class, ratlier than the current capacities. We agreed tliat tliese would be more realistic. . We did not agree, however, on the niediod for calculating range for area elementary schools. 1 understand clearly why you arc interpreting the range to be fixed at 4(^ to 60%. This mat^ it As pointed out, our average percentage black is approximately 64%. madiematically impossible for us to briiig all elementary scliools into compliance. We have been using 40% for the bottom of the range and using the formula for secondary schools to figure the top. That way the top of the range moves with our percentage black. Chris Hellet and I will try to work an agreeable solution. Also, 1 want to reiterate ray response to your question about the assistant comnjiunication position. We have taken a while to fill this position because of the importance of any position when much is to be done. These are long term decisions, because they affect people's lives, as you know. We want to be careful to get the right people in the right places so they are both happy and productive. The apparent conflict betw^n my testimony and. reality is Easily explained. When I testified that we were , ,, completing interviews on Friday, Januaiy 28, that was true. Tire following Monday, we realized that since the position was changed to full-time, it should be re advertised. It has been and will dose early next week. Tliis means that three to four weeks may pass before the Polson selected Is actually on the job. This estimate Includes the new hire's two weeks notice to their current employer. Again, thank you for your help. G Dr. Hejuy P. Williams, Superintendent Chris Heller, UtSD Attorney APR- 5-94 TOE 12:32 FAX NO. 5013710100 : L'ozvf. c^ P. 04 Office of Desegregation Monitoring United Slates District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501)375^200 Fax (SOI) 371-0100 Date\nFebruary 14, 1994 To: Russ Mayo From: Subject: Brown Elementary Area Scliool Racial Balance Range 1 want to correct an apparent misunderstanding that appears in your memo to me dated February 2, 1994 which f received on February 7, 1994. In that correspondence, you stated that I was interpreting the range for LRSD area elementaiy school at a fixed 40% to 60^ Actually, in figuring the target racial balance range for LRSD elementaiy area schools, my calculations are guided by the specific relevant language of the desegregation plans. Both the LRSD Desegregation Plan and tlie Interdistrict Plan provide for the racial balance of LRSD elementary schools to be calculated differently from that of the districts secondary schools. The plans state that the target racial balance at the elementary area schools is 55 percent black and 45 percent white with a variance of 5 percent. Tire LRSD plan refers to attendance zones that are drawn to establish this racial balance. The plans also state that Miite enrollment at an area school may not exceed 60%. Clearly, the desegregation plans do not provide for the target racial balance range of LRSD elementaiy area schools to fluctuate along with the districts black percentage. That you perceive it to be presently mathematically impossible\" to achieve the target range is not due to a matter of interpretation of a racial balance formula\nradier, it is due to the districts failure to do what the desegregation plans require of it\nto recruit white students into tlie LRSD in numbers that will allow schools to be desegregated within the range the district set up itself. One effect of a fixed target range is to act as an incentive for the district to maintain white enrollment that Is sufficient to achieve the racial balance that the parties agreed upon in their settlement. The challenge the LRSD is now fadng is not in reinterpreting its desegregation plans, but in living up its solemn promises, including the tough recruitment job the district committed Itself to do. cc: Hank Williams Chris Heller APR- -5-94 TUE 12:33 FAX NO. 5013710100 P. 05 Tn Desegregation Requirements/Acceptable Racial Ranges lF* The minixnum black percentage for each elementary attendance zone school will be 40 percent, The maximum black percentage for each elementary attendance zone school will be 12 1/2 percent above the district-wide black percentage at the organizational level. The minimuin black percentage for each secondary Ounior and senior high) attendance zone school will be 25 percent below the districvwidc black percentage at each organizational level. The maximum black percentage will be 12 1/2 percent above (he district-wide black percentage at each organizational, level. The minimum and ipaximum black percentages constitute the desegregation requirement (or acceptable range) for attendance zone schools. Student Idid all building prindpials will be hdd acieountabie for complying with desegregation requirements. Ip addition to complying with desegregation requirements, building principals will be expected to assign students to classes In an equitable manner, to the greatest extent possible. The building principal should not allow resegregation to occur in classrooms. School desegregation requirements and equitable classroom assignments will be monitored by the L^SD Offices of Desegregation. School based biracial advisory committees will also monitor compliance in these areas. The acceptable range is listed below: Elementary Junior High Senior High 40.00% . 73.75% 52.50% - 78.75% 49.25%  73.75% I 1 fiPR- 5-94 TUE 12:33 FAX NO. 5013710100 P. 06 TOs FROM! SUBJECT\nLITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT STUDENT ASSIGNMENT OFFICE 501 SHERMAN STREET LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72202 March 17, 1994 RSC. MAR 2 Q 1594 Office of Desejragascn f.^oniicring Principals of Selected Schools C. Russell Mayo, Associate Superintendent for tie segregation 1994-95 School Assignments I All students who pre-registered during the February preregistration period for entry level grades (kindergarten,7th and 10th) were assigned to their attendance zone school for the 1994-95 school year. As a result of these assignments, your' school's  racial balance is below or very near the minimum acceptable school year. percentage of black students. For that reason, all students who pre \"register on or after March 14 will be assigned by the Student Assignment Office. This procedure will apply to all grade levels. Basically, we will reserve vacant seats for black students while nonblack students will receive alternate assignments. Students who cannot be assigned will be placed on waiting lists. until further notice until further nutite, J am requesting that you allow parents of students in your attendance zone to complete the pre-registration paperwork at your school, enter the information on the database in the' \"NEW district and forward .the paperwork to the Student Assignment Office. If you have questions concerning this procedure, please call at 324-2271. meOffice of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501)376-6200 Fax (501) 371-0100 April 7, 1994 Ms. Debbie Milam Volunteers in Public Schools 810 West Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Debbie and Wonderful VIPS Colleagues: Thank you so much for the snazzy and eye-catching invitation to An Evening For The Stars, which came in todays mail. Sounds like you are gearing up for a terrific event where a great time will be had by all. 1 wish 1 could be there to enjoy the show, but 111 be in California on April 26, visiting my folks. 111 be thinking of you on that Tuesday though, and have my family save newspaper accounts of the evening so 1 can read all about it when 1 return. Best wishes for a star-studded good time! Love to all, Ann Brown ?\u0026gt; I I j? itaaa^vs^^. ..saiaw.-.-: Lhtle Rock School Dihikict OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDENT April 7, 1994 bl\n1 J APR 3 1994 Ms. Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor Office of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court 201 East Markham Street, Suite 510 Heritage West Building of DsSOGi'S^aVCri ^'tu' Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Ann: In keeping with your request of March 14, 1994, I have enclosed the Needs Assessment Report and the Program Inventory Report for your files. We are continuing to work on the Student Assignment Audit and the Instructions for Incorporating Additional Desegregation Obligations into the Program Budget Document. will be submitted to you upon completion. Additional documents Thanks for your patience. Sincerely He^y P. Williams Superintendent of Schools HPW:nr Encl. I 810 W'est Markham Street  Little Rock, Arkansas 2201 (501) 324-2000ren^ LnTLE Rock School District OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDENT April 7, 1994 AS iLaj:.0 APR 8 1994 Ms. Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor Office of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court 201 East Markham Street, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Cic3 oi Dsssgregalion Mcr,\nc\nh!g Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Ann: In keeping with your request of March 14, 1994, I have enclosed the Needs Assessment Report and the Program Inventory Report for your files. We are continuing to work on the Student Assignment Audit and the Instructions for Incorporating Additional Desegregation Obligations into the Program Budget Document. will be submitted to you upon completion. Additional documents Thanks for your patience. Sincerely e Y P. Williams Superintendent of Schools HPW:nr Encl. 810 West Markham Street Little Rock. Arkansas 72201 CAO 1)324-2000  w* t' -t ye' Office of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501) 376-6200 Fax (501) 371 -0100 To: From: Mark Milhollen, Director of Support Services \u0026lt;^^^olly Ramer, Office Manager Through: Brown, Federal Monitor Re: Additional Pay for Linda Bryant and Jackie Banks Date: April 8, 1994 During the supplemental pay period beginning March 7 and ending April 8, 1994, Linda Bryant (431- 88-8471) has worked five days more than her regular work schedule (one half day on March 8, 29, April 5, and 7 and one full day on March 22, 23, and 31). Please include Linda in your next supplemental payroll, with her check reflecting 5 days at $71.51 per day for a gross total of $357.55. Also during this same pay period, Jackie Banks (432-66-0119) worked 3 days more than her regular work schedule (March 14, 16, and 18). Please include Jackie in your next supplemental payroll, with her check reflecting 3 days at $46.04 per day for a gross total of $138.12. If you need additional information, please call. Thank you. Garland 3615W. 25th Little Rock. AR 72204 \"Simply Tran^ormational\" 4* jii'Jii!a-08-94 -\u0026gt; ^Incentive Mr. Robert L. Brown, Jr.. Principal Phone: (501)671-6275 eygsgjgA ^3 liini'ii ii! lai APR Ann Brown, Director Office of Desegregation 3 1994 201 E. Markham Little Rock, AR OffiCQ cf 72201 Dear Mrs. Brown: I suppose one can only conclude that I haven't been handling the I know I've got to get a grip on In reality, I haven't. pressure well. things and use better judgment in all areas of my life. Spring Break would give me some time to recuperate, but Dr. Glowers decision to instruct Mrs. Wagner not to use our comparative academic I thought performance on our brochures didn't help matters. Perhaps I will stop complaining and just allow events to unfold without any reaction on my part. I think that might be my only answer at this point, if I am to maintain a level perspective and focus my energies on the staff and students at Garland I didn't send the attached letter to Judge Wright, but since I wrote it. If you would I thought I would at least entrust it to your care. specifically note the February 18th entry, you will see what I documented hearing from Superintendent Williams. In our meeting on March 10, 1994, I told him I would take care of my own damage control. I had already informed my white staff members of the perceptions I didn't tell them where I had heard the allegations. shared with me. but I asked them to respond on my behalf. Any denial on my part When the Superintended met with them on would only be self-serving. March 11, 1994, he indicated he had no knowledge of the allegations or rumors XX J AAC iliVlxvi.xn.zKA c Naturally, his response left some stad^f members confused. Maybe I only thought I heard him say those things.Little Rock School District MEMORANDUM RECEIVCO To: Ann Brown, Federal Monitor From: Russ Mayo, Associate Superintendent Date: April 14, 1994 Subject: Our Meeting of April 8, 1994 APR 1 5 1994 Office of Dssegrsgation ivoriiiOrinfj This is a brief summary of our meeting last Friday, April 8, as I understood it. Tlie meeting occurred as a result of your letter dated April 5, 1994. The primary concerns expressed in your letter related to the upper range limit for area elementaiy schools and the memorandum I sent to principals of five schools projected to be out of range for 1994-95. Items discussed were as follows: 1. 2. 3. Four Year Old Filing ~ You expressed concern about the lateness of the filing, about the naming of Stephens and Badgett as sites, and about the ambiguous last sentence in the paragraph explaining Geyer Springs. You suggested that we consider space remaining in buildings and demand. You suggested that we consider Dodd or Meadowcliff as sites. You noted that these questions will delay the response to the filing. You would like to hear from me on these questions. Elementary Racial Balance - You said that ranges were guidelines and not quotas. You also said that ODM has never said that we were out of compliance. You said that ranges published in our Student Assignment Handbook are incorrect regardless of the method. Melissa will meet with Julie Wiedower and Sue Pedersen to address this and other errors in the handbook. You disagreed with our removing the numbers of the original six magnets when calculating the racial ranges. We agreed to base range calculations on October 1 figures. 1 explained the memorandum sent to five schools freezing their enrollment of whites. Projections show them out of the acceptable range. This does not prohibit attendance zone students from enrollment. You believed that this discourages whites from coming into the district. In support of this position, Chris said that the plan states that I can make no assignment that will knowingly put a school outside of the acceptable range. Magnet Shadow Zone Question - You said that you were glad that I corrected the method of calculating the number of seats for the shadow zone. The 25% Shadow Zone seats come from the capacity before allocating seats to districts. In the past, they were part of the LRSD allocation. 4. Dunbar Magnet-Nou emphasized that Dunbar is a magnet school, not simply a magnet program. Someone in the Student Assignment Office is treating it as a program. Central and Hendersen are clearly programs within a school. You expressed concern about the Gifted and Talented program being predominantly white. 5. Educational Park - You suggested that we consider an educational park involving Mitchell, Dunbar, and Gibbs. Their convenience to each other allows for such, you said. 6. Interdistrict School Policy Filing - You objected to the limited consideration for LRSD whites within this policy. Why a maximum of 9% seats for whites? I explained thatAnn Brown, Federal Monitor April 14, 1994 2 PCSSD has a responsibility for participating in the interdistrict schools by sending whites to help us. I also told you that the county students bring us money. You suggested that we consider submitting an amendment to the policy to permit more LRSD whites. 7. King Interdistrict School Magnet Status - You asked where we were on this and suggested that something be submitted soon. You implied that you thought it may grow more difficult to achieve the status if we wait too long. Chris said that he made a request for information of Principal Sadie Mitchell a few weeks ago. She submitted it to Estelle Matthis for approval. Chris has placed a reminder call. You reemphasized the need to file soon. I will call you by phone with responses to your concerns. C: Dr. Henry P. Williams, Superintendent Chris Heller, LRSD AttorneyOffice of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501)376-6200 Fax (501) 371-0100 Date: April 15, 1994 To: Russ Mayo From: Subject: Brown Comments on your summaiy of our April 8, 1994 meeting Today I received your memorandum summary of the April 8, 1994 meeting between Chris Heller, Melissa Guldin, Bob Morgan, you, and me. I want to clarify, below, some of the points you chose to address as your understanding of the discussion. However, I want to first point out that 1 do not intend for us to routinely engage in this type of post-meeting correspondence. Since we verbally summarized the \"to do\" points of our meeting at its conclusion, I fail to see the necessity for trading follow-up memoranda. On the other hand. your memo reveals some misunderstandings that trouble me. If necessary, I will make arrangements for a stenographer to be present in the future so a meeting transcription can speak for itself, leaving us time we can devote to something other than creating paper trails. Since you concluded your memo by saying that you will phone your responses to my concerns, I believe that verbal communication should ordinarily suffice for other types of information exchange as well. A. Concerns expressed in my April 5, 1994 letter were for the errors in both the lower and upper range of the racial balance guidelines for secondary schools printed in your Student Assignment Handbook, not only for the upper range for elementaiy schools as stated in your memo. B. During our discussion of the U^D filing to add four-year-old programs, 1 asked why certain schools had been selected (such as Badgett and Stephens) and others excluded (such as Dodd and Meadowcliff, although I acknowledged that limited space at Meadowcliff might made additions difficult there). I named these schools as examples, not an exhaustive list. My questions regarding Stephens were more specific, focusing on the incongruity of the proposal with ree highly relevant factors: (1) very low enrollment in the schools single four-year-old class\n(2) the districts intention to propose a motion that would essentially substitute Washington for Stephens to satisfy settlement terms\nand (3) uncertainty about the future of Stephens. I asked about the criteria the district used in naming the proposed sites for new or expanded four- year-old programs. You explained that someone else had made the placement decisions and that you were not certain why specific sites were selected.April 15, 1994 Page Two C. 1 strongly disagree with your characterization of my remarks regarding compliance with racial balance guidelines. 1 stated that the Circuit Court has termed racial balance ranges as guidelines, not quotas. 1 stressed that, therefore, ODM has avoided using the term \"out of compliance\" in regard to target racial balance. However, we have repeatedly pointed out that a large number of schools do not lie within the target range. Semantics in no way excuse the district from striving to operate its schools within the specific target ranges set forth in the plan and court orders. My concerns included that the LRSD Student Assignment Handbook (1) contains ranges for secondary schools that are either mathematically incorrect or based on unknown or faulty enrollment figures\n(2) that the Handbook range for elementary schools directly conflicts with that named in the desegregation plans. We discussed ODMs 1993-94 School Racial Balance Monitoring Report, filed January 12, 1994, to which the LRSD had not responded. The report is clear about how we calculated racial balance ranges based on specific plan provisions and October 1 enrollment figures. Yet the LRSD Handbook contains racial balance guidelines that conflict with those in the report. Part of my concern is that you are issuing directives about student assignments based on erroneous racial guidelines and, thereby, excluding children from their assignment zone schools. Im aware that the plan provides for the district not to make assignments that promote racial unbalance, but you continue to sidestep my primary point. My prevailing concern about your approach to student assignments remains is as 1 have repeatedly expressed it: manipulating ranges and freezing enrollment for certain groups of children amounts to taking the easy way out. Instead, the districts overriding obligation is to live by its espoused voluntary desegregation credo by consistently, energetically, and early-on carrying out the tough recruitment job to which the district has committed itself, but nevertheless continues to botch year after year. Recruiting to voluntarily move students in and out of schools is a big key to success. Another is returning children to their zoned schools after their families have moved, and 1 was pleased that you had issued a memo dealing with this assignment aspect. 1 also stressed the importance of your following through on the disaggregation of student assignment data that Bob Morgan had begun. 1 inquired about progress on the assignment study James Jennings is conducting, but received no clear answer about a finish date nor any indication of the \"who, what, when, and how\" of district plans for using this information to make important and pressing changes. D. Im pleased that you have modified some magnet school shadow zone assignments after Melissa Guldin brought a problem to the attention of Student Assignment. However, the issue concerning ODM was not the one you expressed in your memo. Melissa became aware that the district had been allotting less than 25% of kindergarten seats to shadow zone students at Williams. Although the district has now increased the number of kindergarten shadow zone seats to 15 at Williams, which is 25% of the available K seats, this number will not be sufficient to continue meeting the schoolwide requirement. SAO must also develop a system to add shadow zone seats at the first and fourth grades (when class size increases) and to place new shadow zone students in the school when others move out.April 15, 1994 Page Three E. The educational park idea stems from my suggestion that the district consider the feasibility of a new relationship between Dunbar, Gibbs, and Rightsell (not Mitchell as your memo stated), because the three schools are so close to each other. The federal government is significantly increasing magnet school grant dollars and the district needs to investigate how to take advantage of those new dollars. F. Regarding the filing on King intradistrict transfers, I have always understood PCSSDs responsibility for interdistrict desegregation, and am fully aware that M-to-M student transfers provide money for both the sending and receiving district. During the meeting, 1 hope Chris, my staff, and 1 clarified for you that funding for magnet school students is different from that of M-to- Ms, and that it does not \"cost you money\" in the M-to-M sense to \"lose\" a student from a magnet. Our concern was that the filing did not adequately take into account the issues raised in the Courts February 4, 1994 Order. Moreover, the districts new policy sets a highly restrictive precedent, severely limiting the number of white students you will allow yourself to place in your own interdistrict schools. Such a move cuts you off from a valuable tool for addressing racial balance challenges, such as burgeoning white enrollment in certain schools. The Court invited you to shape policies that would allow you to use voluntaiy intradistrict transfers to take advantage of the white enrollment in areas where you are now freezing white students out of their attendance zone schools. CC: Hank Williams Chris Hellerd/- 'T^ur'i /fr- 5 .LRSD,TRANS DEPT TEL:570-4009 Nov 2501 17:26 No .019 P.02 Little Rock School District Transportation Department April 19, 1994 Ms. Melissa R. Guldin Office of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court Eastern Division of Arkansas 201 E. Markham, Suite 510 LR, AR 72201 Dear Ms. Guldin, With regard, Mr. Montgomery has asked me to respond to your request for information. Whenever there is a new student or an address change for an M-to-M student, a request from the LRSD Student Assignment Office is sent to this department by means of phone, mail, and fax. It takes approximately 3 days before a stop goes into effect from the time this information is received in our office. Bus routes are given to the M-to-M Drivers to pass out to the students whenever there is a change in a particular route. This action is because some M-to-M Schools do not feel that it is their responsibility to get this information to the students. This office has always made every effort possible to get current route information to parents/students and will continue to do so. Please feel free to contact this office for any further information or assistance. Sincerely, Jayne Agnes Safety supervisor 810 West MarkJiani Street  Little Rock, .irkansas 72201  (501)324-2000LRSD TRANS DEPT TEL:570-4009 Nov 2501 17:26 No.019 P.Ol LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT Transportation Department 5400 Murray Street Little Rock, AR 72209 FAX (501) 57(M009 DATE TO FROM SENDER'S PHONE # SUBJECT  4GtiO_________________________ parhJnfn M nL COMMENTS Numbar of Pagoa (ineluda covar page) rax rhoM NwtMr .!i\"1l-6!0OOffice of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501)376-6200 Fax (501) 371-0100 Date: May 3, 1994 I To: Mark Milhollen, Director of Support Services Little Rock School District From: Polly Ramer, Office Manager Through: 4J in S. Brown, Federal Monitor Subject: ODM's 1993-94 Budget I have sent with previous correspondence a copy of ODM's 1993-94 budget and the court orders adopting that budget. You will note on page two that LRSD's share of our budget, after the 1992-93 credit, is $200,498.00. Our records indicate that from July 1, 1993 through March 31,1994, ODM salaries have totaled $351,492.72, resulting in a difference of $150,994.72 between LRSD's budget share and the amount the district has paid. Enclosed you will find a check for that amount. By the end of May, you will receive a check to reimburse ODM's April salaries, in June you will receive a check for ODM's May salaries, and in July, a check for our June salaries. When the 1993- 94 books are closed, please send me a year-to-date print-out of each ODM employee's salary, social security taxes, and benefits. For your information, I am including a breakdown of the enclosed check\nSalaries FICA Insurance Total Regular Payroll 321,682.56 21,853.67 6,181.95 349,718.18 Supplemental Payroll 1,648.44 126.10 1,774.54 Total 323,331.00 21,979.77 6,181.95 351,492.72 If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call. Thank you.Office of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501)376-6200 Fax (501) 371-0100 Date: May 5, 1994 To: Hank Williams From: Subject: in Brown Information on potential principal moves Yesterday, I asked Polly Ramer to contact you for a list of the principal changes you are contemplating. 1 realize both the tentative and sensitive nature of this information, so I assure you that I will neither release nor discuss the names on your list until such time as you make them public yourself. Im weary of the rumors and will appreciate having solid information from you. Thanks very much./ /Cs a Office of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501)376-6200 Fax (501) 371-0100 Date: May 10. 1994 To: Russ Mayo From: n Brown Subject: Registration Information Now that the LRSD has completed its main thrust of pre-registration for the 1994-95 school year, please immediately forward to me the total number of children (whether new students, M-to-Ms, desegregation transfers, or magnet assignments) currently registered by school, race, and grade level (including kindergarten and the four-year-old program). Because 1 had not received a 1994-95 registration brochure, we called your office today to ask for one. Sue Pedersen said that the brochures are still being printed but did not know a delivery date. Please let me know when you expect to receive the brochures and also send me a few copies as soon as you get them. Thanks. FRIDAY, ELDREDGE \u0026amp; CLARK i Ti J, MCRSCHEU H. FRIDAY. P.A. ROBERT V. LIGHT, P.A. WILLIAM M. SUTTON. P.A. JAMES W . MOORE SVRON M. EISEMAN. JR., R.A. JOE 0. BELL. r.A. JOHN C. ECHOLS, P.A. JAMES A. BUTTRV, R.A. FREDERICK 8. URBERY. R.A. H.T. LARZELERE. P.A. OSCAR E. DAVIS. JR., R.A. JAMES C. CLARK, JR., P.A. THOMAS r. LEGGETT. P.A. JOHN DEWEY WATSON. P.A. RAUL B. BENHAM III. R.A. LARRY W. BURKS. P.A. A. WYCKLIFF NISBET, JR.. F.A. JAMES EDWARD HARRIS, R.A. J. RHILLIP MALCOM. P.A. JAMES M. SIMPSON. P.A. MEREDITH P. CATLETT. P.A. JAMES M. SAXTON. P.A. J. SHEPHERD RUSSELL III, P.A. DONALD H. BACON. P.A. WILLIAM THOMAS BAXTER. P.A. WALTER A. PAULSON II, P.A. BARRY E. COPLIN, P.A. RICHARD 0. TAYLOR. P.A. JOSEPH B. HURST. JR.. P.A. ELIZABETH J. ROBBEN. P.A. CHRISTOPHER HELLER. P.A. LAURA HENSLEY SMITH. P.A. ROBERT 8. SHAFER. P.A. WILLIAM M. GRIFFIN III. P.A. THOMAS N. HOSE. P.A. MICHAEL 8. MOORE. P.A. DIANE 8. MACKEY. P.A. WALTER M. EBEL III. P.A. A PARTNERSHIP OF INDIVIDUALS AND PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATIONS ATTORNEYS AT LAW 2000 FIRST COMMERCIAL BUILDING 400 WEST CAPITOL LITTLE ROCK. ARKANSAS 72201*3413 TELEPHONE 601*370*2011 FAX NO. 601*376*2147 May 20, 1994 KEVIN A. CRABS. P.A. WILLIAM A. WADDELL. JR . P A CUyOE 'TAB* TURNER. P.A CALVIN J. HALL. P.A. SCOTT J. LANCASTER. P.A. JERRY L. MALONE. P.A. M. GAYLE CORLEY. P.A. ROBERT B. BEACH. JR.. P.A. J. LEE BROWN. P.A. JAMES C. BAKER, JR.. P.A. H. CHARLES GSCHWENO. JR.. P.A. HARRY A. LIGHT. P.A. SCOTT H. TUCKER. P.A. JOHN CLAYTON RANDOLPH. P.A GUY ALTON WAOE. P.A. PRICE C. GARDNER J. MICHAEL PICKENS TONIA P. JONES DAVID 0. WILSON JEFFREY H. MOORE ANDREW T. TURNER JOHN RAY WHITE DAVID M. GRAF CARLA 0. SPAINMOUR JOHN C. FENOLEY.JR. ALLISON GRAVES BAZZSL JOHANN C. ROOSEVELT R. CHRISTOPHER LAWSON GREGORY 0. TAYLOR TONY L. WILCOX FRAN C. HICKMAN BETTY J. OEMORY received COUMBIk WILLIAM J. SMITH WILLIAM A. ELOREOOE. JR.. P.A B.8. CLARK WILLIAM L. TERRY WILLIAM L. PATTON. JR.. P.A VNiTIH'S OIRiCT HO. (601) 370*1606 Mr. Michael E. Gans Clerk of the Court United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit U.S. Court \u0026amp; Custom House 1114 Market Street St. Louis, Missouri 63101 MAY 2 1994 Oihce of Desegregation Monitoring RE: Little Rock School District v. Pulaski County Special School District - No. 93-3592 Dear Mr. Gans: The referenced appeal is one of three consolidated appeals concerning the Pulaski County desegregation litigation. The Little Rock School District and the Joshua Intervenors are appellants. Our reply briefs are due today. I have reviewed the briefs and deteirmined that there is no need for me to file a reply brief in this matter. Appeal No. 93-3592 raises the issue of whether the district court properly rejected a certain site as the location for the construction of a new interdistrict school. On April 20, 1994 LRSD filed a motion in the district court which could have an impact upon the issue on appeal. LRSD contends in its motion that it has already constructed the required number of interdistrict schools and that it should not be required to build another interdistrict school. If the district court agrees, the issue in Case No. 93- 3592 could become moot or could become intertwined with an appeal of a district court order finding that the required interdistrict schools have been constructed. For your convenience, I have enclosed a copy of LRSD's motion and brief in the district court.The other consolidated appeals are not affected by this situation. I am open to suggestions from you and the parties as to how to make the most efficient use of the Court's time in Appeal No. 93-3592. Yours ver' tru Christopher Heller CJH/k Enc cc\nM. Samuel Jones John W. Walker Steve Jones Richard Roachell Ann BrownBCC: Henry Williams Russ Mayo Jerry MaloneTO: 9t\" C^: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM STREET LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS JUL 1 9 1994 May 26, 1994 Office oi Desesfegaion M\u0026amp;riiwing /r/. a/-/ REC^--^^^ Forest Height Jr. High School Principal Interview 'ommittee Members FROM: He Estelle Matthis, Deputy Superintendent SUBJECT: Principal Interviews Thank you for accepting our invitation to participate in the selection process for the principal of Forest Heights Jr. High School for the 1994-95 school year. The interviews will be held in the Little Rock School District Board Room, 810 West Markham Street, on June 8, 1994, from 1 to 4 p.m. Your assistance and cooperation are appreciated.Ca^/ Office of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501) 376-6200 Fax (501) 371 -0100 Date: June 1, 1994 To: From: Doug Eaton, Director of Plant Services, Little Rock School District Melissa Guldin ^ssociate Monitor Subject: LRSD Facilities Studies Members of our office staff met with LRSD Deputy Superintendent, Estelle Matthis, yesterday. During our meeting she mentioned that the Junior High Capacity Study is nearly ready for publication. As you are aware, the court has been concerned about this study for quite some time. The capacity study is an essential element of the districts long-range planning. I would greatly appreciate it if you could send me a copy of the information you have prepared for the Junior High Capacity Study and any other facility study your department may have made. The deputy superintendent also indicated that the district had studied the feasibility of closing Baseline. If you have information on a facilities study related to closing of Baseline, or any other school, please forward that to me too. While I realize how busy the end of school is for all district employees, I do need copies of these reports by Friday, June 3,1994. Please do not prepare any special reports for our office. I will gladly accept the information in any format. If none of the reports are currently available, please let me know when we can expect their completion. Thank you for your cooperation./^z^c't/ZVf^ LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 West Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 FSCSn/iD Date: June 14, 1994 JUN 1 4 1994 To: Board of Directors Offics of Oessgrogsiic.n Mi :cr\nng From: :e: :ams, (eimtendent Re: Great Expectations Pilot Project Great Expectations Teaching Model is an instructional model based on Je concepts implemented by Marva CoUins at the Westside Preparatory Srnnnl tn r*hi*zorTz\\ 'TTia j ..  . . School in Chicago. The belief that all children can learn is transformed to all children wiU learn. Teachers accept the responsibility to find a ..... ... every child and to believe in the childs ability to learn. The model seeks enhance self-esteem through academic achievement. a way to reach to an effort to support and strengthen instruction in our schools, we have ^entified Mitchell and Rightsell as potential pilot sites for the Great i^ectations Teaching Model. Each school staff has received a brief overview of the model in anticipation that we would be able to establish a oilot program for the 1994-95 school year. Great Expectations Summer Institutes will be conducted during June 20-25 Md July 25-29,1994, at Northeastern State University, Tahlequah, Oklahoma. A major emphasis of e inservice is the integration of curriculum areas. We believe these sessions provide an excellent opportunity to provide support for , P - * ----------rr'** ouuuui L lUi dehvery of our current curriculum. At least six teachers from each school have been identified as the core group who wiU receive the initial training We expect to build within the District the ability to support the model through existing personnel. Information relative to the basic concepts of the model is attached.cr LRSD Guidelines for News Media R JUN 1 1 1994 Oif!C3 cf ii3ssgrsg: iiion iVwiiiw''''j The main goal of the Little Rock School District is to provide a quality education for all of our students. To that end, we must make every effort to minimize distractions during regular classroom instruction and to ensure the rights of privacy of oiu students, most of whom are under the age of 18. We also want to foster a mutually beneficial relationship between all media personnel and the LRSD staff. We ask for your assistance in reaching our goals and provide the following guidelines for yoiu: information: School level activities: Each Monday morning during the regular school year, the Office of Communications distributes a list of events and photo opportunities to central Arkansas media outlets. This news release serves as an invitation for all media to cover the events. The coordinators of these special events have planned for media coverage and will welcome the publicity for the LRSD. When planning a story around an event or person that is not included in the weekly release, please contact the Office of Communications and speak to the Director or the Communications Specialist for clearance to enter a school. Your contact in Communications will coordinate your visit through the appropriate personnel at the school level. If you choose to go directly to the school, you may be asked to wait outside the school until such clearance is obtained through the central office. Interviews, photography, and filming of teachers or students must be scheduled before school, during lunch, or after school when at all possible. We cannot give permission to interrupt classroom instruction. At times, a release form signed by a students parent or guardian may be required. The communications personnel will direct you in such cases. When reporting on a physically or emotionally challenged student (i.e. special Olympics, academic support programs) parental consent must be obtained. Further, no students may be interviewed or photographed in relation to the school health clinics. They are protected by physician-patient confidentiality rights. Clinic and administrative personnel are available to discuss these LRSD services. Administrative Offices: If you need information on the school district, please route your questions through the Office of Commimications. If the answers to your questions are not readily available, the appropriate personnel will be contacted on your behalf and your call will be returned. When planning to interview or photograph personnel in the administrative offices, please call the Office of Ci nmications ahead of time. This will allow the communications personnel to collect the information you need and to assist you in locating the correct person. If you choose to go directly to the administrative offices, you may be asked to wait until your subject's schedule permits your visit. Other Media opportunities: Board Meetings: All media representatives are invited to attend the monthly agenda meetings and regular meetings of the Little Rock School District Board of Directors. These meetings are usually scheduled on the second and last Thursdays of the month respectively. Notification of Special Board Meetings will be made by fax in accordance with Arkansas FOI requirements. These notifications will include the scheduled agenda items of the meetings. Meeting agendas and special seating are available at the media table in the front of the board room. Personnel from the Office of Communications are available at these meetings to answer questions or provide additional information. News Conferences: Special situations may require the scheduling of a news conference. Central Arkansas media will be notified by news release of the date, time and content of the news conference. The LRSD is committed to upholding the policies outlined in the Arkansas Freedom of Information Act. If at any time you feel that your request for information has not been granted in accordance with the Arkansas Freedom of Information Act, please notify the Director of Communications.^i^prci-e, Cji^' \u0026lt; ' -y' * \u0026gt; ? B. LriTLE Rock School District OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDENT 7? _ -1 M  2 1. June 21, 1994 JUN 2 4 1994 Mrs. Ann Brown, Federal Monitor Office of Desegregation Monitoring 201 East Markham Street, Suite 520 Heritage West Building urncs of usss^rs^i lion iwi. J Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Ann: I have enclosed for your perusal and records a copy of a document that was forwarded to me by Mr. Eaton in response to your partial report on the physical condition of particularly Mitchell and Franklin. the incentive schools, The report provided by Mr. Eaton seems to suggest that the buildings are not being neglected and are on a regular maintenance schedule and obviously do receive special consideration when circumstances warrant special attention. It might be a good idea, Ann, for us to meet with Doug regarding the incentive schools so that you and your people are aware of what the capital plans call for with regard to the repairs of all District facilities. Should you require additional information on the incentive schools. please let me know, and I'll get it for you. In the meantime. please consider the possibility of scheduling a meeting with Doug to look at all of the facilities. Sincerely, Hl P. Willicuns HPW:nr Encl. Superintendent of Schools 810 West Markham Street  Little Rock, .4ri\u0026lt;ansas 72201  (501) 324-2000 4, Office of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501) 376-6200 Fax (501) 371 -0100 Date: July 1, 1994 To: Jeanette Wagner From: Subject in Brown Incentive School Brochure Review Thanks for sharing your mock-ups of the new incentive school brochures. I didnt find much that I ought you might want to think about changing, but I put a few comments down. Take them or leave them. Youve done a good job on these. Ill be glad to see them all done-and 1 know you will be too!B0708941 Date\nJuly 11, 1994 To: Robert Glowers From: Bill Mooney Subj\nJune Project Management Tool I have reviewed e June Project Management Tool and have a few items to offer for consideration. There are also several items I thought of which would impact the Cycle n Project Management Tool. Since we were not able to meet this week, I just wanted to write down these thoughts and offer them to you. Task 7. For Cycle II, I would consider including the following data reports in the needs assessment: * Report from the blue ribbon committee on safety and security * The report of the NASE/NCAC Curriculum Audit performed in 1990. * The Coopers Lybrand report. Task 80. I would recommend dropping this task into the Cycle II tool since it really has nothing to do with Cycle I. It also prevents you from closing out the Needs Assessment (Task 7), which makes you look way behind (Nov 4, 94). Task 98. I would recommend dropping this task into the Cycle II tool for the same reason. Tasks 99-116. The Community Forum tasks belong in the needs assessment section since they represent perceptual needs data. I would recommend leaving them where they are for Cycle I, but moving them into the Needs Assessment for Cycle H. Tasks 117-130. The District Dialogue tasks also belong in the needs assessment section for the same reasons. Same recommendation. Tasks 154-155. These tasks are critical input for the budget sub-process. In Cycle n, don't forget to follow-up with actions to gather data. Mark should start working on shortfall strategies as soon as they are identified and have the analysis ready by the December timeframe. The data does not have to be fresh in most cases. Get this work done so it will be available when you really need it. Task 168. The Program Development sub-process is the place for lining up all of your new, modified, or cut programs and preparing them for the budget development. Be sure to include tasking for any program changes in this sub-process. Initiatives like the changing to middle schools should be cranked into the program development sub-process right off so that everyone knows they must be planned for. In fact, I recommend not only including middle schools in the program development sub-process but also requiring the project leader to set up a separate, detailed project management tool for just managing that big project. Some other program development items need to be picked up\nsee task 210 below. Task 185. For Cycle 11, I recommend including a whole sub-set of tasking on contract negotiations within the budgeting sub-process. This critical item needs to be completely tasked out and put under watchful eyes. Some of the tasks are already included in the Cycle I tool. Task 191. Somewhere after task 191, Mark needs to include an additional task or tasking for budget preparation. This tasking should deal with analyzing actual expenditures, projecting them for the rest of the year, and basing the proposed budget on those actuals rather than budgeting on budget. If this is not clear, give me a call and we can talk about it. Tasks 193, 205, 238, 241. Last year, the district generated a proposed budget document, a tentative budget document, and a final budget document. The Cycle I budget sub-process was set up with this same progression in mind. However, this year's actual practice is not real consistent with the design. A proposed budget was generated for task 193. There never was a tentative budget generated for task 205, even though it shows 100% complete. Tasks 238 and 241 call for what appears to be the final budget, although it does not specifically say \"final.\" For Cycle II, I recommend defining \"proposed budget\", \"tentative budget\", and \"final budget.\" Mark, you. Bob and I need to get together and have this clearly defined, and work out the timing for next year. You might be able to save some time and work if this is done before you finish the Cycle n \"gray book revision and the Cycle II tool. Tasks 210, 214-232. These tasks aU belong in the Program Development sub-process instead of the budgeting sub-process. I recommend not worrying about it now, but move any of them into Program Development if they are carried over into Cycle H. Task 225. This task calls for business cases in January, 1995. This is a Cycle II item, and should be moved. Otherwise, your Cycle I will not end until January. Task 351. This task should not be 100% until all Cycle I tasks have been completed and aU reports for the Cycle I have been submitted. I recommend getting the Cycle II under control as soon as possible. The district is already slipping behind for the next budget year, and will soon be farther behind an our late start last year. I stand ready to help you in any way I can\njust give me a call. You and Marjorie have done a good job of bringing the project management process along. The district will be far more successful if it will learn how to maximize the benefits of this project management tool and use the fruits of your labor. Well done.LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT Planning, Research and Evaluation 810 W. Markham Little Rock, AR 72201. received July 12, 1994 Ms. Margie Powell Office of Desegregation Monitoring 201 E. Markham Street Suite 510 Little Rock, AR 72201 JUL 1 5 1994 Offiea oJ Oasesrasanai^ iojtoinfl Dear Ms. Powell: Per your request, please find enclosed the results of the 1993-94 Arkansas Minimum Performance Test. We have included a copy of the comparative five year district summary for the sixth and eighth 94. grade students and individual school summaries for the years 1990- Also, included is a matrix of those schools that will require a school improvement plan. Please let me know if you have any questions. Sincerely, Dr. Robert Glowers Director RLC:it cc: Dr. Henry Williams, Superintendent (?zcf\u0026lt;*c//'A/eZ? LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT STUDENT ASSIGNMENT OFFICE 501 SHERMAN STREET LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201 received JUL 1 9 1994 Oltice of Desegregation Moniionng TO: All LRSD Personnel FROM: ^I^Russ Mayo, Associate Superintendent for Desegregation SUBJECT: Reorganization of the Student Assignment Office DATE: July 15, 1994 Effective July 18, 1994, the Student Assignment Office will be undergoing a change. This change will include:  Personnel  New Telephone Equipment and Numbers This transition will require time to train personnel on the new equipment and Student Assignment polices and procedures. Attached is a copy of the Student Assignment Timeline. Indicated are dates we will be involved in special training. We realize that the transition will be difficult, patience during this critical time. and we are requesting your The services which the new system will provide will be beneficial to each of us. Beginning July 18, 1994, all district personnel will be able to reach Student Assignment through the district system by using *44. This special number will connect you directly. All previous private numbers have been changed, therefore you must use *44 to reach Student Assignment personnel, use the published number, 324-2272. information will be heard by the caller, routed to a Student Assignment Assistant. The public will continue to A taped message with pertinent and the call will be The taped messages will be changed periodically to keep announcements current. Thank you in advance for your cooperation. RM:dk cc: Dr. Henry P. Williams, Superintendent Superintendent's CouncilSTUDENT ASSIGNMENT TIMELINE DATE EVENT July 12 - 18 July 21 Telephone Installation Telephone Etiquette Training 9:00 a.m. July 22 Completion of equipment installation. July 28 - August 5 August 1 August 2 5 Student Assignment Office will NOT accept paperwork during this time period so that assignments can be made prior to registration. This is done annually. Print Pre-Printed PIF forms August 4 Student Assignment personnel will be unavailable due to training on the new phone system and office procedures and policies. Registration Inservice Secretaries / Registrars August 8 and August 9  Incentive /Magnet - 9:00 a.m.  Area'Schools - 11:00 a.m.  Secondary -2:00 p.m. Registration All Schools 10:00 a.m. 7:00 p.m.1 0 e 5OS2 West 56 Little Rock, street Arkansas 72209 Thursday July 14. 1994 Mrs. Ann Brown Office of Desegregation Monitoring JUL f 8 1994 201 East Markham Heritage West Building Suite 510 Little Rock, Arkansa: 72201 Office of Dcjogre.jaiic.'i .V.: ., Dear Ann, Ai promised in our recent telephone conver letter and a sample of the writing of the Advisory perceive the Council to become. sation. here i Council as I my I realise that ample could be changed a\nome of the might tend to met and the p ee changed. per the need tipulations reflected in thi or desire ubiic is served. As long as the childrens of your office chool need must be changed. Whatever it takes. I am not alarmed if are ome of the wording least two I am a firm believer in advisory boards. uch board\nthe best of either world. and then Having served on at erving on governing boards. opinionated advisory board of true purpo\ngiddy governing board all to pieces! But I am fully aware that a strong, Ive seen and perseverance beat\na The crux of the matter i and read?/ to work - would. that\nuch a Council - once approved or hould give the hungering chool-house crowd the truest picture of whats going on in the citys public chools, because the Neighborhood Association would ee to that. and the Council itself It would be easier to send information down or back to the Neighborhoods from those persons vein of interest than to read it in the erving in that particular newspaper and much more truthful in content than the newspaper - while at the same time reach more honestly interested folk than the papers can, or do daily reach. We might even be able to reach into parents main interest children - and nurture the PTAs back into existence again. - their a new direction just over the horizon... but right in their own backyard. Thank you for your time and effort and your here in the city: we are each and everyone of u gratitude to your offices for the excellent way you Again, Ann. thi maze of if there i glad to do what I can.  interest in us Landing in out ee to our people. an?/thing I can do to help in any manner in chool business, all you need do i let me know. Ill be Sincerely. \u0026gt;a Stafford-Humphrey. Chairperson Southwe\nLittle Rock United for Progre\nLITTLE ROCK PUBLIC SCHOOL BOARD ADVISORY COUNCIL With the consent and advise of the Little Rock Public School Board, herein notated a\nLRPSB, and the Superintendent of chool and the Little Rock Neighborhood Associations, an inclusive Council shall be established, each with equal representaion on the Council. personnel, The little Rock School District, it the Community a\nshall be utilised for the pupils. a whole, environs and it\ntheir parents and for commonly referred to herein a\nthe Public. (14)member The Advisory Council shall comprise not le and not more than ixteen member than fourteen (16). The Superintendent hall have two (2) designated appointees to the Advisory Council. Two (2) persons from each designated ward. or district, shall have appointment to coincide with the LRPSB member geographic locale. Each appointee shall provide a resume coincidental with the wishe of the Board, the Superintendent, Each appointee to the Council and the wishe of the Public. hall have a two-third vote from the three (-3) entities: the Little Rock Public School Board, the Superintendent, together with the approval of the (2/3) Neighborhood A:ssociation from whence the appointee i ma.jority vote where the appointee lives\nbut the Neighborhood recommended by a A: ociation hall have the actual and final vote to approve each appointee The term of office for the appointee shall be two (2) years. In the case of resignation or the death of an installed appointee, Neighborhood Association from whence came the appointee shall have the jurisdiction for appointing another erson to fill the vacancy. If the appointee should die within the time-frame of election to installation. person to fill the vacancy. the Neighborhood Association shall recommend another by the Neighborhood A\nociation. Any other vacancy hall be filled likewise or by the LRPSB, or by the Superintendent from whichever the vacanc?/ occur (30) time-frame from the time of the vacancy. , within a thirty-day Installation of each and every appointee shall occur at the first Little Rock Public School Board meeting following the appointment of the member, or the election of the Little Rock School Board members, whichever come: first. extended to the member unless the press No installation hall be and called the Public hall be addressed. he people otherwise either by mail or by telephone calling attention to the installation and an invitation issued to same. No busine: of any nature hall be conducted unless the press and the public shall have been notified and invited either by mail or by telephone from the three entities(3). the Little Rock Public School Board, from the Associations. uperintendent office, and from the Neighborhood The Neighborhood Association(s) receive material other i wherea\nPublic tated entitle: and/or information hall have due right to consistent with legalities to pertaining to the Freedom of Information Act\neach Neighborhood Association is intended as an arm of the and\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_470","title":"Incentive Schools: Monitoring","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":["1994/1995"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System."],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","Little Rock School District","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","School improvement programs"],"dcterms_title":["Incentive Schools: Monitoring"],"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/470"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["documents (object genre)"],"dcterms_extent":null,"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\nIncludes ''1994-1995 Incentive School Monitoring Guide,'' Office of Desegregation and Monitoring\nr I Revised Timeline for 1995 Incentive School Monitoring Report Task Dates Person(s) Responsible Review 94 guide for possible revision Dec. 27-28 Melissa Discuss revisions Jan. 4 all Redistribute reporting chores Jan. 4-11 Horace, Margie, Melissa Complete revised guide Jan. 4-11 Polly and Melissa Schedule orientation for new principals Jan. 6-9 Melissa Schedule visits after other dates firm up all 4- their calendars Write letter to principals Feb.1-3 Melissa Hold orientation, distribute guide, letter, and schedule Melissa, Polly, Linda Visit the schools Feb. 22-Mar. 3 Melissa, Horace, Margie, Barry, and ? Write the report Mar. 6-27 Horace, Margie, Melissa, and Barry Polly Edit March 28-April 7 Polly Incorporate Pollys changes April 10-11 all writers Anns review of report April 12-19 Ann Incorporate Anns changes April 20-21 all writers Review by district April 24-25 ? Incorporate comments April 26-27 Horace and Melissa will do Margies share since she will be in Denver (we have her OK, if it is OK with Ann)Report to the printer May 1 Polly File the report May 4* PollyReview of the Incentive School Monitoring Guide for 1995 Current page # Topic Rec. for 95 3-5 \"Etirru 6-17-------------- 78-33------------- 24-29/A\u0026lt;^'(g\u0026gt;^ 36^4------------- 33-36 Enrollment section Staffing section----- Test data-section Discipline section GT section----------- Facilities section keep -----------(due to update)drop (if published before June 95)drop keep jj-ju \u0026gt; raciuncs ick-uuu , . r- , Programs ana Operations -u drop? keep 37-48--------------- 38------------------- 38-40 46-41--------------- 41-46 )-lor-C\u0026lt;C 474-8 Hcxacc 50-------------------- 56-51-------\n-------- 51-52^^'^''^ 52-53 53-54\u0026gt;^^^'^ 54-55 56-57/Vlat'giC. 57-60 ^Aargi L. 60-66-------------- Quarterly report-------------- Long-range strategic plan high Scope and other ECE Reading/ oral language----- Themes Science labs Foreign language dfop keep ----drop? keep keep keep 66-67 67-70 70-73 Parent Home Study Guides CMIT (due to status report) Classics reading------------------ Leisure skills Social skills Field Trips Career skills development Extended Day Saturday Program Summer School Compacts----------- (if published by June) Study skills-A' dan+ Counselingorvibini- ail ic drop -drop keep 7 keep 7 keep keep drop -drop keep keep Parent and Communitv Involvement 74-77 Moraca- Il-19 'garr'g 79-80 'gjo.rtTu 80-81 ^t=82------------- 82----------------- 83-84 Parent Centers Parent Workshops Volunteer recognition Home visits (2 rec.) Home/school communication Signing homework Role models/ mentors # \u0026lt;OK\u0026gt; 84-85/^\u0026lt;7r^fet-'^\u0026lt;A._ parent contract (1 rec,, but sort of OK) 85-86 Key communicators / 'Su.rta.o. 86-87 f4\u0026lt;xac\u0026lt; \" 2 Parent Council 87-89 (Horace.' Parent Recruitment 90-93 Biracial Committee Entire section drop? keep keep keep drop drop  keep drop keep keep keep keepRockefeller Early Childhood Magnet 94-101 Entire section, except demo, desig. (p 96), keep Double Funding 102-104 Entire section keepOffice of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor / A? ,/:r 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501)376.6200 Fax (501) 371^)100 Date: February 9, 1995 From: To: Subject: Ann Brown, Melissa Guldin, Margie Powell, Horace Smith, and Barry Ward Sterling Ingram, Associate to the Deputy Superintendent Incentive School Monitoring As you are aware, ODM soon will begin our annual monitoring of the incentive schools. While most of the documentation we need can be obtained from the building administrators, we will need the following information from the districts central administration. Please furnish the following documentation by February 24, 1995. Copy of the Spanish curriculum currently in use in the incentive schools. Description of the incentive school parent program, including program goals, objectives, timelines, and the person responsible for this program. Documentation of parent workshops including the topic, date, time, location, evaluation results, and the number of participants by race, gender, and childs school. Volunteer documentation including the number of volunteers by race, gender, and the number of hours volunteered at each school. Documentation of mentor program including a brief description of the types of activities shared by mentors and students, the number of participants by race and gender, and the number of hours volunteered. Records of training the district conducted for mentors. List of community meetings including time, location, and copies of sign-in sheets. List of identified parent pick-up points for school functions, and an explanation of how the district publicizes this service to parents.Incentive School Monitoring Information (Cont.) Membership roster for the Parent Council with members identified by race, gender, and the organization each represents. Copies of the Parent Council monitoring instrument, meeting minutes, and quarterly reports. List of the Biracial Committee members by race, gender, and address. Copies of the Biracial Committee meeting minutes, monitoring schedule, and monitoring instrument. Copies of the 1994-95 Planning, Research and Evaluation quarterly reports of the Biracial Committees monitoring visits. A list of all recruitment activities planned and implemented for the 1994-95 school year, including copies of any printed material distributed, lists of meetings held, tours conducted, the persons responsible for each recruitment activity, cost of individual activities, and an explanation of how you are tracking the results of all recruitment efforts. cc: Dr. Russ MayoOffice of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown. Federal Monitor 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501)376-6200 Fax (501) 371-0100 Date: February 9, 1995 To: From: Subject: Incentive School Principals Ann Brown, Melissa Guldin, Margie Powell, Horace Smith, and Barry Ward Monitoring the Incentive Schools Enclosed you will find a schedule of our upcoming visits and a draft copy of the incentive school monitoring guide. The guide has changed very little since last year. During our visit, we will need to interview you and conduct classroom observations. We will need a workspace and a copy of the following 1994-95 records. Staff development activities held specifically for Instructional and Supervision Aides Teacher inservice sessions regarding the use of instructional aides Theme implementation plan Discipline, Suspension, and Expulsion by race and gender Building-level discipline plan Field Trips Pre-professionals Individual student test profiles Building-level counseling plan Parent Center Committee by race, gender, and position (e.g. parent, teacher) Parent Center recommendations and an indication of the suggestions incorporated into the center The name, race, gender, and position of the parent trained to operate the center Monthly communications packets distributed by the Parent Center List of parent meetings including topic, time, location, and sign-in sheets The total number of home visits conducted as of February 1995 A description of the mechanism designed to ensure that parents regularly sign homework List of community meetings and activities by topic, time, location, and sign-in sheets List of three key communicators by race, gender, and position The number of signed contracts and a description of follow-up proceduresSpeakers Bureau roster by name, gender, race, and position, along with a list of speaking engagements including the time, location, and participant sign-in sheets Recruitment Team roster by race, gender, and position Recruitment Plan, including a list of all recruitment strategies implemented and planned Extended Day schedule Extended Week schedule If you have any questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to call our office.Date Schedule of ODM Monitoring Visits to the Incentive Schools School Wednesday, February 22,1995 Rightsell Tuesday, February 28,1995 Franklin Thursday, March 2, 1995 Garland Friday, March 3,1995 Rockefeller I Tuesday, March 7,1995 Mitchell1994-95 INCENTIVE SCHOOLS MONITORING GUIDE Office of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court Heritage West Building 201 East Markham Little Rock, Arkansas Ann S. Brown, Federal MonitorEnrollment  The incentive program is successfully desegregating each incentive school. (LRSD Plan, pg. 149) Discipline, Suspension, and Expulsion  Disaggregate data related to student discipline and review student data to address issues of racial disparity. (Interdis. Plan, pg. 27)  Carefully collect discipline data and closely monitor the discipline program to make modifications that are indicated by formative, as well as summative, information. The district would be wise to analyze the factors that contribute to some schools having fewer overall discipline problems and less disparity in discipline between black and white students. Identifying and emulating these factors and closely scrutinizing progress should result in interventions that reduce the number of students suspended or expelled, as well as the disproportionate number of black students referred for disciplinary action. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 23)  Attendance and behavior guidelines include time-out rooms that are staffed with trained personnel. (LRSD Plan, pp. 175,184)  Students help develop school-based management rules and receive help with problem solving. (LRSD Plan, pp. 175, 184)  Staff, parents, and students cooperatively design discipline policies. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 23)  Discipline policies and procedures are well publicized, clearly indicate what is appropriate and inappropriate behavior, and spell out consequences for infractions. Policy enforcement is fair and consistent. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 23)  Classroom management approaches are appropriate for the work being done. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 32) Facilities  The district will provide clean and safe facilities and make all repairs fundamental to maintain the incentive schools. (LRSD Plan, pg. 129)  All seven incentive schools would benefit aesthetically from the addition of attractive landscaping. Once plantings are installed, train the custodial staff in proper plant care to prevent loss of plantings to improper pruning or under-watering. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 43) Programs and Operations  The four-year-old program uses High Scope or a comparable curriculum model and incorporates a parent component into the program. (LRSD Plan, pg. 152) Four-year-old enrollment is limited to 18 children per class. (ODM 1992 Report, pg, 10)  The Early Childhood Education Task Force is an avenue for parent, teacher, and community input. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 17)  Parents and staff at each school develop school themes which are integrated into the curriculum. (LRSD Plan, pg. 153)  Fresh, imaginative themes are established based upon each school's unique strengths. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 20)  Students in grades 3-6 have access to either mobile or permanent science labs with adequate materials that allow children to execute long-term experiments and study science in the fullest sense. (LRSD Plan. pg. 153\nODM 1992 Report, pg. 15)  Each building operates foreign language labs with appropriate equipment and materials. (LRSD Plan, pg. 153)  The curriculum at each school incorporates foreign language instruction using the foreign language lab and the \"total physical response\" method of instruction. Emphasis is on basic vocabulary, conversation, and cultural materials. (LRSD Plan, pg. 156)  Parent Home Study Guides in each core subject area for each grade (1-6) will be available by the 1993-94 school year. (LRSD Plan, pg. 153)  Physical education (PE) and health are included in the total elementary curriculum with emphasis on wellness, lifelong leisure skills, nutrition, and respect for those with disabilities. (LRSD Plan, pg. 156)  Social skills are taught, when appropriate, through the core instructional program. The total school staff serves as models of positive social interaction. Social skills instruction includes such programs as Rites of Passage, Role Models, and Mentoring. (LRSD Plan, pp. 156-157)  The schools use local, state, and national field trips to enhance learning and broaden cultural experiences. Trips provide community access and racially desegregated experiences and activities for incentive school students together with other LRSD students. Exhibits and performances are also brought to the schools, and students participate in shadowing activities. (LRSD Plan, pp. 158, 173, 181\nInterdis. Plan, pg. 4)  The schools use a Career Skills Development Program to develop career choices using written information, guest speakers, films, and interest inventories. (LRSD Plan, pp. 172, 180)  The schools schedule Special Skills Programs during the time designated for extended day activities. Scheduling for extended day meets the needs of students and includes 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. (LRSD Plan, pp. 173, 174, 181, 184) Page 2 The district surveys parents and students to determine the most appealing extended day activities. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 25)  The extended day program, which is based on information gleaned from SEP'S, school staff, parents, and students, reinforces and extends the SEP to meet individual needs. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 25)  Cumulative records document both host and guest school's participation in Saturday programs. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 25)  Saturday programs will be developed to enhance learning. These programs will include but shall not be limited to field trips, enrichment activities, tutoring, parent/child make-and-take sessions, book fairs, and physical education activities. (LRSD Plan, pg. 179)  Study skills training enhances skills in test-taking, listening, and studying. Test-taking skills are being taught and students practice test-taking. (LRSD Plan. pp. 153, 176, 183\nODM 1992 Report, pg. 32)  Regular tracking of student attendance, behavior, discipline, 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. (LRSD Plan. pp. 176, 186)  Disaggregate test results to enable an assessment of the short- and long-term correlation between test performance and such variables as how long a student has been enrolled at a particular school behavior and attendance records, and participation in such programs as early childhood and extended day, week, and year. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 32)  Students receive individual and group counseling and are taught conflict resolution. The school uses peer facilitators. (LRSD Plan, pp. 176, 184)  The staff has developed written building guidance plans to address personal growth, social development, career awareness, and educational development. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 27) Parent and Community Involvement  A Parent Center in each school provides resources and materials, recommended by a parent and staff committee, that can be loaned to parents. A parent has been trained to operate the center, which is to be the source of a monthly communications packet that is distributed to parents. (LRSD Plan, pp. 206, 208)  The schools actively seek parent recommendations for resources to be housed in the Parent Centers, incorporating as many of their suggestions as possible. The school documents the degree to which parents use the center and its resources. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 39)  The schools offer parent workshops to assist parents in understanding and carrying out school expectations. The workshops include such topics as study skills, discipline, time management, Page 3 pre-reading skills, financial management, and developmental learning skills. (LRSD Plan, pg. 209)  Document parent training activities by topic, time, and location along with the number of participants by race, gender, and the child's school. Regularly collect and analyze participants' feedback on how well the session was conducted and their perception of the potential helpfulness of the training. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 39)  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 1992 Report, pg. 38)  Develop and expand the parent volunteer programs and school/business partnerships. (LRSD Plan, pg. 132)  Recognition is used as a tool for community and parent involvement. The school recognizes parents and the community at monthly PTA meetings, displays awards, gives school lunch vouchers to award witmers, and involves students in the recognition selection process. (LRSD Plan, pp. 209-210)  The school makes parent and volunteer recognition an integral, ongoing, and highly visibly part of school life. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 38)  Require at least two or more home visits. (LRSD Plan. pp. 206, 211)  The staff documents the number and date of visits to each student's home, along with who made the visit, to determine if each family is visited at least twice yearly. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 38)  Each school provides community role models and a mentoring program. (LRSD Plan, pg. 157)  The district has mounted an intense mentor recruitment campaign. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 29)  Individual school volunteer mentoring programs are coordinated with VIPS and aU volunteers are screened and trained prior to being matched with students. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 29)  The school maintains mentor-student records that include the race, gender, participation hours, and types of activities shared by the mentors and their students. Records of training participants by race, gender, and classification (i.e. student, mentor, parent, teacher) are also maintained. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 30)  Parents sign contractual commitments prior to enrolling their child in an incentive school. (LRSD Plan, pg. 211)  The schools have follow-up procedures to remind parents of the commitments they made in the contracts they signed at registration. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 38)  A speakers bureau on education issues for community groups exists in school zones. Each school has identified three key communicators. The school staff coordinates events to promote Page 4neighborhood pride. These strategies work together to raise the trust level between the school and the community. (LRSD Plan, pp. 210, 213)  The Incentive School Program Parent Council functions as a districtwide 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 to the LRSD Board of Directors and the Joshua Intervenors. (LRSD Plan, pg. 151)  The districtwide Biracial Committee, whose members represent various geographic areas of the community, will monitor the incentive schools quarterly. (LRSD Plan. pp. 224,225)  The Biracial Committee will furnish copies of their monitoring reports to the incentive school principals and various district officials. The Office of Planning, Research and Evaluation (PRE) will prepare quarterly reports that summarize aU monitoring visits. The superintendent will share the PRE document with the Board of Directors at their regularly scheduled meetings. The Associate Superintendent for Desegregation is responsible for eliminating any noted deficiencies in a timely manner. (LRSD Plan. pg. 225)  The Biracial Advisory Committee, with the advice of marketing and advertising experts, will serve as the steering committee for incentive school recruitment. The committee will review bimonthly recruitment reports from the desegregation office, evaluate the program quarterly and recommend needed changes to the Board of Directors. (LRSD Plan. pp. 217, 223)  Before July 1 of each year, the district will convene a committee to revise the instrument used to monitor the incentive schools, ensuring that it conforms with the expectations set for the program. The review committee shall consist of\nincentive school principals, the superintendent's senior management team, specialists from PRE, and six members of the Biracial Committee (two of whom must be Joshua appointees). Any resulting revisions must be submitted to the LRSD Board and Joshua by August 15. (LRSD Plan, 225)  The Biracial Committee's monitoring instrument will include a recruitment assessment. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 5) Parent Recruitment  The district will inform the community about the incentive schools and their special features by providing informational sessions to special interest and community groups, including churches. Additional strategies will include conducting Saturday information booths at malls and neighborhood stores, securing special media coverage, and developing an incentive school telephone hotline. The district will distribute highlight sheets to all elementary parents and local businesses. (LRSD Plan, pp. 215, 218-219)  Recruitment will be an ongoing process with each incentive school establishing a parent recruitment team to encourage voluntary assignments that enable the schools to comply with desegregation requirements. (LRSD Plan, pp. 132, 135, 215\nInterdis. Plan, pg. 57) Page 5 The district's recruitment strategies will include public service announcements, billboards, a media blitz, videocassette recordings, flyers, open houses, targeted neighborhood blitzes, small group tours, a special designation from the Arkansas Department of Education (ADE), and celebrity endorsements. Each school will establish a speakers bureau and help the district develop a brochure highlighting their school. Meetings will be held with NLRSD and PCSSD parents and PTA groups to encourage M-to-M transfers. (LRSD Plan, pp. 215-216,220-222)  Parent recruiters will focus on recruiting white students to desegregate the incentive schools and conduct recruitment activities. (LRSD Plan, pp. 216, 222)  All parties have made firm commitments to assist the LRSD in desegregating the incentive schools. (May 1992 Order, pg. 29)  The LRSD will establish a strategic plan, based on the recruitment section of the desegregation plan, that reflects a well-thought-out, interrelated process\npresent a firm timetable in its recruitment plan and strictly adhere to it\ndevelop a tracking system to determine the success of particular awareness and recruitment efforts, especially with identified geographic areas and specific groups\nincrease the number and variety of specifically targeted recruitment activities. (ODM 1992 Report, pp. 4, 5) Rockefeller Early Childhood Magnet School  The Rockefeller Early Childhood Magnet Program will be available to children from six weeks to four years of age. The program will serve as a model for improving the academic achievement of disadvantaged smdents and attracting white students to comply with desegregation requirements. (LRSD Plan, pg. 12)  The early childhood program is an integral part of the whole school, not a separate or \"add-on\" program. It receives the same attention as to supervision, support, staff development, resource allotment, accountability, monitoring, and evaluation as grades K through six. (LRSD Plan, pg. 13)  The LRSD designated Rockefeller as a Cooperative Early Childhood Education Demonstration Magnet between UALR and other area colleges. The district works cooperatively with local colleges and universities to enhance and support the program. (LRSD Plan, pg. 12)  At Rockefeller, the district gives special emphasis to developing and piloting innovative approaches to the education of young children. (LRSD Plan, pg. 12)  The county's teachers, administrators, aides, HIPPY (Home Instruction Program for Preschool youngsters), and daycare program workers use Rockefeller as a demonstration center for training. (LRSD Plan, pg. 12)  Parents and educational professionals from UALR and other area colleges advise the school and district staffs on all aspects of planning and implementation of the early childhood program. (LRSD Plan, pg. 12) Page 6 Evaluate Rockefeller's early childhood education policies in terms of their impact on desegregation and educational goals. The parent committee on early childhood education is to evaluate policies (including private pay rates, lunch charges, vacation days, enrollment age, and sick days) for their impact on the early childhood program's viability as a desegregation tool, its competitiveness with private schools and daycares, and its ability to retain both its private paying and Title XX students. (LRSD Plan, pg. 13)  The district allows students who attend the Rockefeller program for three-year-olds to continue on into the program for four-year-olds and the grades beyond. Siblings of students already in the early childhood program may attend Rockefeller in order to help retain children in the school. (LRSD Plan, pg. 13)  Explore developing Rockefeller as a year-round, full-day school for children from infancy through sixth grade. A biracial group of teachers, parents, administrators, and experts from local universities and colleges works with the district to assess the feasibility of such a program. (LRSD Plan, pg. 13) Double Funding  Funding for the incentive schools shall be set at two times the level for the elementary area schools to ensure that the children who are in racially-isolated settings are provided meaningful opportunities for desegregated experiences and activities. (Interdistrict. Plan, pg. 4)  The Little Rock School District Board of Directors is committed to improving educational quality and student academic performance in ail schools and doubling the financial resources in schools identified in the Court-approved desegregation plan as incentive schools. (LRSD Plan, pg- 1) Page 71994-95 INCENTIVE SCHOOLS MONITORING GUIDE Office of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court Heritage West Building 201 East Markham Little Rock, Arkansas Ann S. Brown, Federal MonitorEnrollment  The incentive program is successfully desegregating each incentive school. (LRSD Plan, pg. 149) Discipline, Suspension, and Expulsion  Disaggregate data related to student discipline and review student data to address issues of racial disparity. (Interdis. Plan, pg. 27)  Carefully collect discipline data and closely monitor the discipline program to make modifications that are indicated by formative, as well as summative, information. The district would be wise to analyze the factors that contribute to some schools having fewer overall discipline problems and less disparity in discipline between black and white students. Identifying and emulating these factors and closely scrutinizing progress should result in interventions that reduce the number of students suspended or expelled, as well as the disproportionate number of black students referred for disciplinary action. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 23)  Attendance and behavior guidelines include time-out rooms that are staffed with trained personnel. (LRSD Plan, pp. 175,184)  Students help develop school-based management rules and receive help with problem solving. (LRSD Plan, pp. 175, 184)  Staff, parents, and students cooperatively design discipline policies. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 23)  Discipline policies and procedures are well publicized, clearly indicate what is appropriate and inappropriate behavior, and spell out consequences for infractions. Policy enforcement is fair and consistent. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 23)  Classroom management approaches are appropriate for the work being done. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 32) Facilities  The district will provide clean and safe facilities and make all repairs fundamental to maintain the incentive schools. (LRSD Plan, pg. 129)  All seven incentive schools would benefit aesthetically from the addition of attractive landscaping. Once plantings are installed, train the custodial staff in proper plant care to prevent loss of plantings to improper pruning or under-watering. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 43) Programs and Operations  The four-year-old program uses High Scope or a comparable curriculum model and incorporates a parent component into the program. (LRSD Plan, pg. 152) Four-year-old enrollment is limited to 18 children per class. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 10)  The Early Childhood Education Task Force is an avenue for parent, teacher, and community input. (ODM 1992 Report, pg, 17)  Parents and staff at each school develop school themes which are integrated into the curriculum, (LRSD Plan, pg, 153)  Fresh, imaginative themes are established based upon each school's unique strengths, (ODM 1992 Report, pg, 20)  Students in grades 3-6 have access to either mobile or permanent science labs with adequate materials that allow children to execute long-term experiments and study science in the fullest sense. (LRSD Plan, pg. 153\nODM 1992 Report, pg. 15)  Each building operates foreign language labs with appropriate equipment and materials, (LRSD Plan, pg, 153)  The curriculum at each school incorporates foreign language instruction using the foreign language lab and the \"total physical response\" method of instruction. Emphasis is on basic vocabulary, conversation, and cultural materials. (LRSD Plan, pg. 156)  Parent Home Study Guides in each core subject area for each grade (1 -6) will be available by the 1993-94 school year, (LRSD Plan, pg, 153)  Physical education (PE) and health are included in the total elementary curriculum with emphasis on wellness, lifelong leisure skills, nutrition, and respect for those with disabilities. (LRSD Plan, pg.156)  Social skills are taught, when appropriate, through the core instructional program. The total school staff serves as models of positive social interaction. Social skills instruction includes such programs as Rites of Passage, Role Models, and Mentoring, (LRSD Plan, pp, 156-157)  The schools use local, state, and national field trips to enhance learning and broaden cultural experiences. Trips provide community access and racially desegregated experiences and activities for incentive school students together with other LRSD students. Exhibits and performances are also brought to the schools, and students participate in shadowing activities. (LRSD Plan, pp. 158, 173, 181\nInterdis. Plan, pg. 4)  The schools use a Career Skills Development Program to develop career choices using written information, guest speakers, films, and interest inventories. (LRSD Plan, pp, 172, 180)  The schools schedule Special Skills Programs during the time designated for extended day activities. Scheduling for extended day meets the needs of students and includes 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. (LRSD Plan, pp. 173, 174, 181, 184) Page 2 The district surveys parents and students to determine the most appealing extended day activities. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 25)  The extended day program, which is based on information gleaned from SEP'S, school staff, parents, and students, reinforces and extends the SEP to meet individual needs. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 25)  Cumulative records document both host and guest school's participation in Saturday programs. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 25)  Saturday programs will be developed to enhance learning. These programs will include but shall not be limited to field trips, enrichment activities, tutoring, parent/child make-and-take sessions, book fairs, and physical education activities, (LRSD Plan, pg. 179)  Study skills training enhances skills in test-taking, listening, and studying. Test-taking skills are being taught and students practice test-taking. (LRSD Plan, pp. 153, 176, 183\nODM 1992 Report, pg. 32)  Regular tracking of student attendance, behavior, discipline, 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. (LRSD Plan, pp. 176, 186)  Disaggregate test results to enable an assessment of the short- and long-term correlation between test performance and such variables as how long a student has been enrolled at a particular school, behavior and attendance records, and participation in such programs as early childhood and extended day, week, and year. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 32)  Students receive individual and group counseling and are taught conflict resolution. The school uses peer facilitators. (LRSD Plan, pp. 176, 184)  The staff has developed written building guidance plans to address personal growth, social development, career awareness, and educational development. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 27) Parent and Community Involvement  A Parent Center in each school provides resources and materials, recommended by a parent and staff committee, that can be loaned to parents. A parent has been trained to operate the center, which is to be the source of a monthly communications packet that is distributed to parents. (LRSD Plan, pp. 206, 208)  The schools actively seek parent recommendations for resources to be housed in the Parent Centers, incorporating as many of their suggestions as possible. The school documents the degree to which parents use the center and its resources. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 39)  The schools offer parent workshops to assist parents in understanding and carrying out school expectations. The workshops include such topics as study skills, discipline, time management. Page 3 pre-reading skills, financial management, and developmental learning skills. (LRSD Plan, pg. 209)  Document parent training activities by topic, time, and location along with the number of participants by race, gender, and the child's school. Regularly collect and analyze participants' feedback on how well the session was conducted and their perception of the potential helpfulness of the training. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 39)  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 1992 Report, pg-38)  Develop and expand the parent volunteer programs and school/business partnerships. (LRSD Plan, pg. 132)  Recognition is used as a tool for community and parent involvement. The school recognizes parents and the community at monthly PTA meetings, displays awards, gives school lunch vouchers to award winners, and involves students in the recognition selection process. (LRSD Plan. pp. 209-210)  The school makes parent and volunteer recognition an integral, ongoing, and highly visibly part of school life. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 38)  Require at least two or more home visits. (LRSD Plan, pp. 206, 211)  The staff documents the number and date of visits to each student's home, along with who made the visit, to determine if each family is visited at least twice yearly. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 38)  Each school provides community role models and a mentoring program. (LRSD Plan, pg. 157)  The district has mounted an intense mentor recruitment campaign. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 29)  Individual school volunteer mentoring programs are coordinated with VIPS and all volunteers are screened and trained prior to being matched with students. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 29)  The school maintains mentor-student records that include the race, gender, participation hours, and types of activities shared by the mentors and their students. Records of training participants by race, gender, and classification (i.e. student, mentor, parent, teacher) are also maintained. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 30)  Parents sign contractual commitments prior to enrolling their child in an incentive school. (LRSD Plan, pg. 211)  The schools have follow-up procedures to remind parents of the commitments they made in the contracts they signed at registration. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 38)  A speakers bureau on education issues for community groups exists in school zones. Each school has identified three key communicators. The school staff coordinates events to promote Page 4 neighborhood pride. These strategies work together to raise the trust level between the school and the community, (LRSD Plan, pp, 210, 213)  The Incentive School Program Parent Council functions as a districtwide 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 to the LRSD Board of Directors and the Joshua Intervenors, (LRSD Plan, pg, 151)  The districtwide Biracial Committee, whose members represent various geographic areas of the community, will monitor the incentive schools quarterly, (LRSD Plan, pp, 224,225)  The Biracial Committee will furnish copies of their monitoring reports to the incentive school principals and various district officials. The Office of Planning, Research and Evaluation (PRE) will prepare quarterly reports that summarize all monitoring visits. The superintendent will share the PRE document with the Board of Directors at their regularly scheduled meetings. The Associate Superintendent for Desegregation is responsible for eliminating any noted deficiencies in a timely manner. (LRSD Plan, pg. 225)  The Biracial Advisory Committee, with the advice of marketing and advertising experts, will serve as the steering committee for incentive school recruitment. The committee will review bimonthly recruitment reports from the desegregation office, evaluate the program quarterly and recommend needed changes to the Board of Directors. (LRSD Plan, pp. 217, 223)  Before July 1 of each year, the district will convene a committee to revise the instrument used to monitor the incentive schools, ensuring that it conforms with the expectations set for the program. The review committee shall consist of: incentive school principals, the superintendent's senior management team, specialists from PRE, and six members of the Biracial Committee (two of whom must be Joshua appointees). Any resulting revisions must be submitted to the LRSD Board and Joshua by August 15, (LRSD Plan, 225)  The Biracial Committee's monitoring instrument will include a recruitment assessment, (ODM 1992 Report, pg, 5) Parent Recruitment  The district will inform the community about the incentive schools and their special features by providing informational sessions to special interest and community groups, including churches. Additional strategies will include conducting Saturday information booths at malls and neighborhood stores, securing special media coverage, and developing an incentive school telephone hotline. The district will distribute highlight sheets to all elementary parents and local businesses. (LRSD Plan, pp. 215, 218-219)  Recruitment will be an ongoing process with each incentive school establishing a parent recruitment team to encourage voluntary assignments that enable the schools to comply with desegregation requirements, (LRSD Plan, pp, 132, 135, 215\nInterdis, Plan, pg, 57) Page 5 The district's recruitment strategies will include public service announcements, billboards, a media blitz, videocassette recordings, flyers, open houses, targeted neighborhood blitzes, small group tours, a special designation from the Arkansas Department of Education (ADE), and celebrity endorsements. Each school will establish a speakers bureau and help the district develop a brochure highlighting their school. Meetings will be held with NLRSD and PCSSD parents and PTA groups to encourage M-to-M transfers. (LRSD Plan, pp. 215-216, 220-222)  Parent recruiters will focus on recruiting white students to desegregate the incentive schools and conduct recruitment activities. (LRSD Plan, pp. 216, 222)  All parties have made firm commitments to assist the LRSD in desegregating the incentive schools. (May 1992 Order, pg. 29)  The LRSD will establish a strategic plan, based on the recruitment section of the desegregation plan, that reflects a well-thought-out, interrelated process\npresent a firm timetable in its recruitment plan and strictly adhere to it\ndevelop a tracking system to determine the success of particular awareness and recruitment efforts, especially with identified geographic areas and specific groups\nincrease the number and variety of specifically targeted recruitment activities. (ODM 1992 Report, pp. 4, 5) Rockefeller Early Childhood Magnet School  The Rockefeller Early Childhood Magnet Program will be available to children from six weeks to four years of age. The program will serve as a model for improving the academic achievement of disadvantaged students and attracting white students to comply with desegregation requirements. (LRSD Plan, pg. 12)  The early childhood program is an integral part of the whole school, not a separate or \"add-on\" program. It receives the same attention as to supervision, support, staff development, resource allotment, accountability, monitoring, and evaluation as grades K through six. (LRSD Plan, pg. 13)  The LRSD designated Rockefeller as a Cooperative Early Childhood Education Demonstration Magnet between UALR and other area colleges. The district works cooperatively with local colleges and universities to enhance and support the program. (LRSD Plan, pg. 12)  At Rockefeller, the district gives special emphasis to developing and piloting iimovative approaches to the education of young children. (LRSD Plan, pg. 12)  The county's teachers, administrators, aides, HIPPY (Home Instruction Program for Preschool youngsters), and daycare program workers use Rockefeller as a demonstration center for training. (LRSD Plan, pg. 12)  Parents and educational professionals from UALR and other area colleges advise the school and district staffs on all aspects of planning and implementation of the early childhood program. (LRSD Plan, pg. 12) Page 6 Evaluate Rockefeller's early childhood education policies in terms of their impact on desegregation and educational goals. The parent committee on early childhood education is to evaluate policies (including private pay rates, lunch charges, vacation days, enrollment age, and sick days) for their impact on the early childhood program's viability as a desegregation tool, its competitiveness with private schools and daycares, and its ability to retain both its private paying and Title XX students. (LRSD Plan, pg. 13)  The district allows students who attend the Rockefeller program for three-year-olds to continue on into the program for four-year-olds and the grades beyond. Siblings of students already in the early childhood program may attend Rockefeller in order to help retain children in the school. (LRSD Plan, pg. 13)  Explore developing Rockefeller as a year-round, full-day school for children from infancy through sixth grade. A biracial group of teachers, parents, administrators, and experts from local universities and colleges works with the district to assess the feasibility of such a program. (LRSD Plan, pg. 13) Double Funding  Funding for the incentive schools shall be set at two times the level for the elementary area schools to ensure that the children who are in racially-isolated settings are provided meaningful opportunities for desegregated experiences and activities. (Interdistrict. Plan, pg. 4)  The Little Rock School District Board of Directors is committed to improving educational quality and student academic performance in all schools and doubling the financial resources in schools identified in the Court-approved desegregation plan as incentive schools. (LRSD Plan, pg- 1) Page 71994-95 INCENTIVE SCHOOLS MONITORING GUIDE Office of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court Heritage West Building 201 East Markham Little Rock, Arkansas Ann S. Brown, Federal MonitorEnrollment  The incentive program is successfully desegregating each incentive school. (LRSD Plan, pg. 149) Discipline, Suspension, and Expulsion  Disaggregate data related to student discipline and review student data to address issues of racial disparity. (Interdis. Plan, pg. 27)  Carefully collect discipline data and closely monitor the discipline program to make modifications that are indicated by formative, as well as summative, information. The district would be wise to analyze the factors that contribute to some schools having fewer overall discipline problems and less disparity in discipline between black and white students. Identifying and emulating these factors and closely scrutinizing progress should result in interventions that reduce the number of students suspended or expelled, as well as the disproportionate number of black students referred for disciplinary action. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 23)  Attendance and behavior guidelines include time-out rooms that are staffed with trained personnel. (LRSD Plan, pp. 175,184)  Students help develop school-based management rules and receive help with problem solving. (LRSD Plan, pp. 175, 184)  Staff, parents, and students cooperatively design discipline policies. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 23)  Discipline policies and procedures are well publicized, clearly indicate what is appropriate and inappropriate behavior, and spell out consequences for infractions. Policy enforcement is fair and consistent. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 23)  Classroom management approaches are appropriate for the work being done. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 32) Facilities  The district will provide clean and safe facilities and make all repairs fundamental to maintain the incentive schools. (LRSD Plan, pg. 129)  All seven incentive schools would benefit aesthetically from the addition of attractive landscaping. Once plantings are installed, train the custodial staff in proper plant care to prevent loss of plantings to improper pruning or under-watering. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 43) Programs and Operations  The four-year-old program uses High Scope or a comparable curriculum model and incorporates a parent component into the program. (LRSD Plan, pg. 152) Four-year-old enrollment is limited to 18 children per class. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 10)  The Early Childhood Education Task Force is an avenue for parent, teacher, and community input. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 17)  Parents and staff at each school develop school themes which are integrated into the curriculum. (LRSD Plan, pg. 153)  Fresh, imaginative themes are established based upon each school's unique strengths. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 20)  Students in grades 3-6 have access to either mobile or permanent science labs with adequate materials that allow children to execute long-term experiments and study science in the fullest sense. (LRSD Plan, pg, 153\nODM 1992 Report, pg. 15)  Each building operates foreign language labs with appropriate equipment and materials. (LRSD Plan, pg. 153)  The curriculum at each school incorporates foreign language instruction using the foreign language lab and the \"total physical response\" method of instruction. Emphasis is on basic vocabulary, conversation, and cultural materials. (LRSD Plan, pg. 156)  Parent Home Study Guides in each core subject area for each grade (1 -6) will be available by the 1993-94 school year. (LRSD Plan, pg. 153)  Physical education (PE) and health are included in the total elementary curriculum with emphasis on wellness, lifelong leisure skills, nutrition, and respect for those with disabilities. (LRSD Plan, pg.156)  Social skills are taught, when appropriate, through the core instructional program. The total school staff serves as models of positive social interaction. Social skills instruction includes such programs as Rites of Passage, Role Models, and Mentoring. (LRSD Plan, pp. 156-157)  The schools use local, state, and national field trips to enhance learning and broaden cultural experiences. Trips provide community access and racially desegregated experiences and activities for incentive school students together with other LRSD students. Exhibits and performances are also brought to the schools, and students participate in shadowing activities. (LRSD Plan, pp. 158, 173, 181\nInterdis. Plan, pg. 4)  The schools use a Career Skills Development Program to develop career choices using written information, guest speakers, films, and interest inventories. (LRSD Plan, pp. 172, 180)  The schools schedule Special Skills Programs during the time designated for extended day activities. Scheduhng for extended day meets the needs of students and includes 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. (LRSD Plan, pp. 173, 174, 181, 184) Page 2 The district surveys parents and students to determine the most appealing extended day activities. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 25)  The extended day program, which is based on information gleaned from SEP'S, school staff, parents, and students, reinforces and extends the SEP to meet individual needs. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 25)  Cumulative records document both host and guest school's participation in Saturday programs. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 25)  Saturday programs will be developed to enhance learning. These programs will include but shall not be limited to field trips, enrichment activities, tutoring, parent/child make-and-take sessions, book fairs, and physical education activities. (LRSD Plan, pg. 179)  Study skills training enhances skills in test-taking, listening, and studying. Test-taking skills are being taught and students practice test-taking. (LRSD Plan, pp. 153, 176, 183\nODM 1992 Report, pg. 32)  Regular tracking of student attendance, behavior, discipline, 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. (LRSD Plan, pp. 176, 186)  Disaggregate test results to enable an assessment of the short- and long-term correlation between test performance and such variables as how long a student has been enrolled at a particular school behavior and attendance records, and participation in such programs as early childhood and extended day, week, and year. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 32)  Students receive individual and group counseling and are taught conflict resolution. The school uses peer facilitators. (LRSD Plan, pp. 176, 184)  The staff has developed written building guidance plans to address personal growth, social development, career awareness, and educational development. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 27) Parent and Community Involvement  A Parent Center in each school provides resources and materials, recommended by a parent and staff committee, that can be loaned to parents. A parent has been trained to operate the center, which is to be the source of a monthly communications packet that is distributed to parents. (LRSD Plan, pp. 206, 208)  The schools actively seek parent recommendations for resources to be housed in the Parent Centers, incorporating as many of their suggestions as possible. The school documents the degree to which parents use the center and its resources. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 39)  The schools offer parent workshops to assist parents in understanding and carrying out school expectations. The workshops include such topics as study skills, discipline, time management. Page 3 pre-reading skills, financial management, and developmental learning skills. (LRSD Plan, pg. 209)  Document parent training activities by topic, time, and location along with the number of participants by race, gender, and the child's school. Regularly collect and analyze participants' feedback on how well the session was conducted and their perception of the potential helpfulness of the training. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 39)  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 1992 Report, pg.38)  Develop and expand the parent volunteer programs and school/business partnerships. (LRSD Plan, pg. 132)  Recognition is used as a tool for community and parent involvement. The school recognizes parents and the community at monthly PTA meetings, displays awards, gives school lunch vouchers to award winners, and involves students in the recognition selection process. (LRSD Plan, pp. 209-210)  The school makes parent and volunteer recognition an integral, ongoing, and highly visibly part of school life. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 38)  Require at least two or more home visits. (LRSD Plan, pp. 206, 211)  The staff documents the number and date of visits to each student's home, along with who made the visit, to determine if each family is visited at least twice yearly. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 38)  Each school provides community role models and a mentoring program. (LRSD Plan, pg. 157)  The district has mounted an intense mentor recruitment campaign. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 29)  Individual school volunteer mentoring programs are coordinated with VIPS and all volunteers are screened and trained prior to being matched with students. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 29)  The school maintains mentor-student records that include the race, gender, participation hours, and types of activities shared by the mentors and their students. Records of training participants by race, gender, and classification (i.e. student, mentor, parent, teacher) are also maintained. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 30)  Parents sign contractual commitments prior to enrolling their child in an incentive school. (LRSD Plan, pg. 211)  The schools have follow-up procedures to remind parents of the commitments they made in the contracts they signed at registration. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 38)  A speakers bureau on education issues for community groups exists in school zones. Each school has identified three key communicators. The school staff coordinates events to promote Page 4 neighborhood pride. These strategies work together to raise the trust level between the school and the community. (LRSD Plan, pp. 210, 213)  The Incentive School Program Parent Council functions as a districtwide 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 to the LRSD Board of Directors and the Joshua Intervenors. (LRSD Plan, pg. 151)  The districtwide Biracial Committee, whose members represent various geographic areas of the community, will monitor the incentive schools quarterly. (LRSD Plan, pp. 224,225)  The Biracial Committee will furnish copies of their monitoring reports to the incentive school principals and various district officials. The Office of Planning, Research and Evaluation (PRE) will prepare quarterly reports that siimmarize all monitoring visits. The superintendent will share the PRE document with the Board of Directors at their regularly scheduled meetings. The Associate Superintendent for Desegregation is responsible for eliminating any noted deficiencies in a timely manner. (LRSD Plan, pg. 225)  The Biracial Advisory Committee, with the advice of marketing and advertising experts, will serve as the steering committee for incentive school recruitment. The committee will review bimonthly recruitment reports from the desegregation office, evaluate the program quarterly and recommend needed changes to the Board of Directors. (LRSD Plan, pp, 217,223)  Before July 1 of each year, the district will convene a committee to revise the instrument used to monitor the incentive schools, ensuring that it conforms with the expectations set for the program. The review committee shall consist of: incentive school principals, the superintendent's senior management team, specialists from PRE, and six members of the Biracial Committee (two of whom must be Joshua appointees). Any resulting revisions must be submitted to the LRSD Board and Joshua by August 15. (LRSD Plan, 225)  The Biracial Committee's monitoring instrument will include a recruitment assessment. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 5) Parent Recruitment  The district will inform the community about the incentive schools and their special features by providing informational sessions to special interest and community groups, including churches. Additional strategies will include conducting Saturday information booths at malls and neighborhood stores, securing special media coverage, and developing an incentive school telephone hotline. The district will distribute highlight sheets to all elementary parents and local businesses. (LRSD Plan, pp. 215, 218-219)  Recruitment will be an ongoing process with each incentive school establishing a parent recruitment team to encourage voluntary assignments that enable the schools to comply with desegregation requirements. (LRSD Plan, pp. 132, 135, 215\nInterdis. Plan, pg. 57) Page 5 The district's recruitment strategies will include public service announcements, billboards, a media blitz, videocassette recordings, flyers, open houses, targeted neighborhood blitzes, small group tours, a special designation from the Arkansas Department of Education (ADE), and celebrity endorsements. Each school will establish a speakers bureau and help the district develop a brochure highlighting their school. Meetings will be held with NLRSD and PCSSD parents and PTA groups to encourage M-to-M transfers. (LRSD Plan, pp. 215-216, 220-222)  Parent recruiters will focus on recruiting white students to desegregate the incentive schools and conduct recruitment activities. (LRSD Plan, pp. 216,222)  All parties have made firm commitments to assist the LRSD in desegregating the incentive schools. (May 1992 Order, pg. 29)  The LRSD will establish a strategic plan, based on the recruitment section of the desegregation plan, that reflects a well-thought-out, interrelated process\npresent a firm timetable in its recruitment plan and strictly adhere to it\ndevelop a tracking system to determine the success of particular awareness and recruitment efforts, especially with identified geographic areas and specific groups\nincrease the number and variety of specifically targeted recruitment activities. (ODM 1992 Report, pp. 4, 5) Rockefeller Early Childhood Magnet School  The Rockefeller Early Childhood Magnet Program will be available to children from six weeks to four years of age. The program will serve as a model for improving the academic achievement of disadvantaged students and attracting white students to comply with desegregation requirements. (LRSD Plan, pg. 12)  The early childhood program is an integral part of the whole school, not a separate or \"add-on\" program. It receives the same attention as to supervision, support, staff development, resource allotment, accountability, monitoring, and evaluation as grades K through six, (LRSD Plan, pg. 13)  The LRSD designated Rockefeller as a Cooperative Early Childhood Education Demonstration Magnet between UALR and other area colleges. The district works cooperatively with local colleges and universities to enhance and support the program. (LRSD Plan, pg. 12)  At Rockefeller, the district gives special emphasis to developing and piloting innovative approaches to the education of young children. (LRSD Plan, pg. 12)  The county's teachers, administrators, aides, HIPPY (Home Instruction Program for Preschool youngsters), and daycare program workers use Rockefeller as a demonstration center for training. (LRSD Plan, pg. 12)  Parents and educational professionals from UALR and other area colleges advise the school and district staffs on all aspects of planning and implementation of the early childhood program. (LRSD Plan, pg. 12) Page 6 Evaluate Rockefeller's early childhood education policies in terms of their impact on desegregation and educational goals. The parent committee on early childhood education is to evaluate policies (including private pay rates, lunch charges, vacation days, enrollment age, and sick days) for their impact on the early childhood program's viability as a desegregation tool, its competitiveness with private schools and daycares, and its ability to retain both its private paying and Title XX students. (LRSD Plan, pg. 13)  The district allows students who attend the Rockefeller program for three-year-olds to continue on into the program for four-year-olds and the grades beyond. Siblings of students already in the early childhood program may attend Rockefeller in order to help retain children in the school. (LRSD Plan, pg. 13)  Explore developing Rockefeller as a year-round, fiill-day school for children from infancy through sixth grade. A biracial group of teachers, parents, administrators, and experts from local universities and colleges works with the district to assess the feasibility of such a program. (LRSD Plan, pg. 13) Double Funding  Funding for the incentive schools shall be set at two times the level for the elementary area schools to ensure that the children who are in racially-isolated settings are provided meaningful opportunities for desegregated experiences and activities. (Interdistrict. Plan, pg. 4)  The Little Rock School District Board of Directors is committed to improving educational quality and student academic performance in all schools and doubling the financial resources in schools identified in the Court-approved desegregation plan as incentive schools. (LRSD Plan, pg- 1) Page 71994-95 INCENTIVE SCHOOLS MONITORING GUIDE Office of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court Heritage West Building 201 East Markham Little Rock, Arkansas Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor ENROLLMENT REQUIREMENT The incentive program is successfully desegregating each incentive school. (LRSD Plan, pg. 149) School Enrollment Summary Year Black White Total %Blk Franklin 1989-90 364 84 448 81 1990-91 343 68 411 83 Garland Ish Mitchell Rightsell 1991-92 1992-93 1993-94 1994-95 1989-90 1990-91 1991-92 1992-93 1993-94 1994-95 1989-90 1990-91 1991-92 1992-93 1993-94 1994-95 1989-90 1990-91 1991-92 1992-93 1993-94 1994-95 1989-90 1990-91 1991-92 1992-93 1993-94 1994-95 428 352 300 268 211 262 233 181 157 142 188 182 220 183 285 232 215 194 191 282 239 184 79 59 45 17 29 17 23 24 7 4 12 5 19 24 27 32 15 17 2 7 10 5 507 411 345 285 240 279 256 205 164 146 200 187 239 207 312 264 230 211 193 289 249 189 84 86 87 94 88 94 91 88 96 97 94 97 92 88 91 88 93 92 99 98 96 97 Six Year Comparison: 1989-90 to 1994-95  in total enrollmenl  in white enrollment  in black enrollment Two Year Comparison: 1993-94 to 1994-95  in total enrollmenl  in white enrollment  in black enrollment Six Year Comparison: 1989-90 to 1994-95 . ^^n total enrollment  ^in white enrollment  in black enrollment Two Year Comparison: 1993-94 to 1994-95  in total enrollmenl  in white enrollment  in black enrollment Note: LRSD closed Ish Incentive School after the 1992- 93 school year. Six Year Comparison: 1989-90 to 1994-95  in total enrollment  ^in white enrollment  ^in black enrollment Two Year Comparison: 1993-94 to 1994-95  in total enrollment  in white enrollment  in black enrollmenl Six Year Comparison: 1989-90 to 1994-95  in total enrollment  ^^n white student enrollment  in black enrollment Two Year Comparison: 1993-94 to 1994-95  in total enrollmenl  in white enrollment  in black enrollmentSchool Enrollment Summary Year Black White Total %Blk Rockefeller 1989-90 215 35 250 86 1990-91 195 76 271 72 1991-92 1992-93 1993-94 1994-95 282 250 240 121 111 100 403 361 340 70 69 71 Stephens 1989-90 1990-91 1991-92 1992-93 1993-94 1994-95 225 190 235 202 141 1 12 10 7 4 226 202 245 209 145 99 94 96 97 97 Total 1989-90 1,643 180 1,823 90 1990-91 1,455 215 1,670 87 1991-92 1992-93 1993-94 1994-95 1,962 1,690 1,261 273 247 193 2,235 1,937 1,454 88 87 87 Six Year Comparison: 1989-90 to 1994-95  in total enrollment  in white enrollment  in black enrollment Two Year Comparison: 1993-94 to 1994-95  In total enrollment  ^in white enrollment  in black enrollment Note: LRSD closed Stephens Incentive School after the 1993-94 school year. Six Year Comparison: 1989-90 to 1994-95*  in total enrollment  in white enrollment  in black enrollment Two Year Comparison: 1993-94 to 1994-95*  in total enrollmenl  in white enrollment  in black enrollment * Note: These totals do not include Ish School, which closed alter 1992-93, and Stephens School, which closed alter 1993-94. Page 2DISCIPLINE, SUSPENSION, and EXPULSION REQUIREMENTS  Disaggregate data related to student discipline and review student data to address issues of racial disparity. (Interdis. Plan, pg. 27)  Carefully collect discipline data and closely monitor the discipline program to make modifications that are indicated by formative, as well as summative, information. The district would be wise to analyze the factors that contribute to some schools having fewer overall discipline problems and less disparity in discipline between black and white students. Identifying and emulating these factors and closely scrutinizing progress should result in interventions that reduce the number of students suspended or expelled, as well as the disproportionate number of black students referred for disciplinary action. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 23)  Attendance and behavior guidelines include time-out rooms that are staffed with trained personnel. (LRSD Plan, pp. 175,184)  Students help develop school-based management rules and receive help with problem solving. (LRSD Plan, pp. 175, 184)  Staff, parents, and students cooperatively design discipline policies. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 23)  Discipline policies and procedures are well publicized, clearly indicate what is appropriate and inappropriate behavior, and spell out consequences for infractions. Policy enforcement is fair and consistent. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 23)  Classroom management approaches are appropriate for the work being done. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 32) School Short-term Suspensions Black White Long-term Suspensions Black White Expulsions Black White Sent-Homos Black White Franklin Garland Mitchell Riqhtsell Rockefeller Page 3 M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M FFACILITIES REQUIREMENTS  The district will provide clean and safe facilities and make all repairs fundamental to maintain the incentive schools. (LRSD Plan, pg. 129)  All seven incentive schools would benefit aesthetically from the addition of attractive landscaping. Once plantings are installed, train the custodial staff in proper plant care to prevent loss of plantings to improper pruning or under-watering. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 43) Page 4PROGRAMS AND OPERATIONS REQUIREMENTS  The four-year-old program uses High Scope or a comparable curriculum model and incorporates a parent component into the program. (LRSD Plan, pg. 152)  Four-year-old enrollment is limited to 18 children per class. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 10)  The Early Childhood Education Task Force is an avenue for parent, teacher, and community input. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 17) School Teacher's Name Class Enrollment Franklin Garland Mitchell Riqhtsell Rockefeller  Parents and staff at each school develop school themes which are integrated into the curriculum. (LRSD Plan, pg. 153)  Fresh, imaginative themes are established based upon each school's unique strengths. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 20)  Students in grades 3-6 have access to either mobile or permanent science labs with adequate materials that allow children to execute long-term experiments and study science in the fullest sense. (LRSD Plan, pg. 153\nODM 1992 Report, pg. 15)  Each building operates foreign language labs with appropriate equipment and materials. (LRSD Plan, pg. 153)  The curriculum at each school incorporates foreign language instruction using the foreign language lab and the \"total physical response\" method of instruction. Emphasis is on basic vocabulary, conversation, and cultural materials. (LRSD Plan, pg. 156) Page 5 Parent Home Study Guides in each core subject area for each grade (1-6) will be available by the 1993-94 school year. (LRSD Plan, pg. 153)  Physical education (PE) and health are included in the total elementary curriculum with emphasis on wellness, lifelong leisure skills, nutrition, and respect for those with disabilities. (LRSD Plan, pg-156)  Social skills are taught, when appropriate, through the core instructional program. The total school staff serves as models of positive social interaction. Social skills instruction includes such programs as Rites of Passage, Role Models, and Mentoring. (LRSD Plan, pp. 156-157)  The schools use local, state, and national field trips to enhance learning and broaden cultural experiences. Trips provide community access and racially desegregated experiences and activities for incentive school students together with other LRSD students. Exhibits and performances are also brought to the schools, and students participate in shadowing activities. (LRSD Plan, pp. 158, 173, 181\nInterdis. Plan, pg. 4)  The schools use a Career Skills Development Program to develop career choices using written information, guest speakers, films, and interest inventories. (LRSD Plan, pp. 172, 180)  The schools schedule Special Skills Programs during the time designated for extended day activities. Scheduling for extended day meets the needs of students and includes 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. (LRSD Plan, pp. 173, 174, 181, 184)  The district surveys parents and students to determine the most appealing extended day activities. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 25)  The extended day program, which is based on information gleaned from SEP'S, school staff, parents, and students, reinforces and extends the SEP to meet individual needs. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 25)  Cumulative records document both host and guest school's participation in Saturday programs. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 25)  Saturday programs will be developed to enhance learning. These programs will include but shall not be limited to field trips, enrichment activities, tutoring, parent/child make-and-take sessions, book fairs, and physical education activities. (LRSD Plan, pg. 179) Page 6 Study skills training enhances skills in test-taking, listening, and studying. Test-taking skills are being taught and students practice test-taking. (LRSD Plan, pp. 153, 176, 183\nODM 1992 Report, pg. 32)  Regular tracking of student attendance, behavior, discipline, 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. (LRSD Plan, pp. 176, 186)  Disaggregate test results to enable an assessment of the short- and long-term correlation between test performance and such variables as how long a student has been enrolled at a particular school behavior and attendance records, and participation in such programs as early childhood and extended day, week, and year. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 32)  Students receive individual and group counseling and are taught conflict resolution. The school uses peer facilitators. (LRSD Plan, pp. 176, 184)  The staff has developed written building guidance plans to address personal growth, social development, career awareness, and educational development. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 27) Page 7PARENT AND COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT REQUIREMENTS  A Parent Center in each school provides resources and materials, recommended by a parent and staff committee, that can be loaned to parents. A parent has been trained to operate the center, which is to be the source of a monthly communications packet that is distributed to parents. (LRSD Plan, pp. 206, 208)  The schools actively seek parent recommendations for resources to be housed in the Parent Centers, incorporating as many of their suggestions as possible. The school documents the degree to which parents use the center and its resources. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 39)  The schools offer parent workshops to assist parents in understanding and carrying out school expectations. The workshops include such topics as study skills, discipline, time management, pre-reading skills, financial management, and developmental learning skills. (LRSD Plan, pg. 209)  Document parent training activities by topic, time, and location along with the number of participants by race, gender, and the child's school. Regularly collect and analyze participants' feedback on how well the session was conducted and their perception of the potential helpfulness of the training. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 39)  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 1992 Report, pg.38) 1994-95 Volunteers School BM BF WM WF Unidentified Total Hours Franklin Garland Mitchell Riqhtsell Rockefeller TOTAL  Recognition is used as a tool for community and parent involvement. The school recognizes parents and the community at monthly PT A meetings, displays awards, gives school lunch vouchers to award winners, and involves students in the recognition selection process. (LRSD Plan, pp. 209-210)  The school makes parent and volunteer recognition an integral, ongoing, and highly visibly part of school life. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 38) Page 8 Require at least two or more home visits. (LRSD Plan, pp. 206, 211)  The staff documents the number and date of visits to each student's home, along with who made the visit, to determine if each family is visited at least twice yearly. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 38) School 1994-95 Enrollment 1994-95 Home Visits Franklin Garland MHchell Riqhtsell Rockefeller TOTAL  Each school provides community role models and a mentoring program. (LRSD Plan, pg. 157)  The district has mounted an intense mentor recruitment campaign. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 29)  Individual school volunteer mentoring programs are coordinated with VIPS and all volunteers are screened and trained prior to being matched with students. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 29)  The school maintains mentor-student records that include the race, gender, participation hours, and types of activities shared by the mentors and their students. Records of training participants by race, gender, and classification (i.e. student, mentor, parent, teacher) are also maintained. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 30)  Parents sign contractual commitments prior to enrolling their child in an incentive school. (LRSD Plan, pg. 211)  The schools have follow-up procedures to remind parents of the commitments they made in the contracts they signed at registration. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 38)  A speakers bureau on education issues for community groups exists in school zones. Each school has identified three key communicators. The school staff coordinates events to promote neighborhood pride. These strategies work together to raise the trust level between the school and the community. (LRSD Plan, pp. 210,213) School Key Communicators Franklin Garland Mitchell Rightsell Rockefeller Page 9 The Incentive School Program Parent Council functions as a districtwide 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 to the LRSD Board of Directors and the Joshua Intervenors. (LRSD Plan, pg. 151)  The districtwide Biracial Committee, whose members represent various geographic areas of the community, will monitor the incentive schools quarterly. (LRSD Plan, pp. 224, 225)  The Biracial Committee will furnish copies of their monitoring reports to the incentive school principals and various district officials. The Office of Planning, Research and Evaluation (PRE) will prepare quarterly reports that summarize all monitoring visits. The superintendent will share the PRE document with the Board of Directors at their regularly scheduled meetings. The Associate Superintendent for Desegregation is responsible for eliminating any noted deficiencies in a timely manner. (LRSD Plan, pg. 225)  The Biracial Advisory Committee, with the advice of marketing and advertising experts, will serve as the steering committee for incentive school recruitment. The committee will review bimonthly recruitment reports from the desegregation office, evaluate the program quarterly and recommend needed changes to the Board of Directors. (LRSD Plan, pp. 217, 223)  Before July 1 of each year, the district will convene a committee to revise the instrmnent used to monitor the incentive schools, ensuring that it conforms with the expectations set for the program. The review committee shall consist of: incentive school principals, the superintendent's senior management team, specialists from PRE, and six members of the Biracial Committee (two of whom must be Joshua appointees). Any resulting revisions must be submitted to the LRSD Board and Joshua by August 15. (LRSD Plan, 225)  The Biracial Committee's monitoring instrument will include a recruitment assessment. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 5) Page 10PARENT RECRUITMENT REQUIREMENTS  The district will inform the community about the incentive schools and their special features by providing informational sessions to special interest and community groups, including churches. Additional strategies will include conducting Saturday information booths at malls and neighborhood stores, securing special media coverage, and developing an incentive school telephone hotline. The district will distribute highlight sheets to all elementary parents and local businesses. (LRSD Plan, pp. 215, 218-219)  Recmitment will be an ongoing process with each incentive school establishing a parent recruitment team to encourage voluntary assignments that enable the schools to comply with desegregation requirements. (LRSD Plan, pp. 132, 135, 215\nInterdis. Plan, pg. 57)  The district's recruitment strategies will include public service announcements, billboards, a media blitz, videocassette recordings, flyers, open houses, targeted neighborhood blitzes, small group tours, a special designation from the Arkansas Department of Education (ADE), and celebrity endorsements. Each school will establish a speakers bureau and help the district develop a brochure highlighting their school. Meetings will be held with NLRSD and PCSSD parents and PTA groups to encourage M-to-M transfers. (LRSD Plan, pp. 215-216, 220-222) Requirement Rnding Comments Informational sessions held with\nspecial interest groups community organizations churches Saturday information booths at malls Special media coverage School telephone hotline Highlight sheets___________________ Parent recruitment teams established Public service announcements Billboards Media blitz Videocassette recordings Flyers Open houses Targeted neighborhood blitzes Small group tours Special designation from ADE Celebrity endorsements Speakers bureau Individual school brochure Page 11 Parent recruiters will focus on recruiting white students to desegregate the incentive schools and conduct recruitment activities. (LRSD Plan, pp. 216, 222)  All parties have made firm commitments to assist the LRSD in desegregating the incentive schools. (May 1992 Order, pg. 29)  The LRSD will establish a strategic plan, based on the recruitment section of the desegregation plan, that reflects a well-thought-out, interrelated process\npresent a firm timetable in its recruitment plan and strictly adhere to it\ndevelop a tracking system to determine the success of particular awareness and recruitment efforts, especially with identified geographic areas and specific groups\nincrease the number and variety of specifically targeted recruitment activities. (ODM 1992 Report, pp. 4, 5) Page 12ROCKEFELLER EARLY CHILDHOOD MAGNET SCHOOL REQUIREMENTS  The Rockefeller Early Childhood Magnet Program will be available to children from six weeks to four years of age. The program will serve as a model for improving the academic achievement of disadvantaged students and attracting white students to comply with desegregation requirements. (LRSD Plan, pg. 12) II  The early childhood program is an integral part of the whole school, not a separate or \"add-on' program. It receives the same attention as to supervision, support, staff development, resource allotment, accountability, monitoring, and evaluation as grades K through six. (LRSD Plan, pg. 13)  The LRSD designated Rockefeller as a Cooperative Early Childhood Education Demonstration Magnet between UALR and other area colleges. The district works cooperatively with local colleges and universities to enhance and support the program. (LRSD Plan, pg. 12)  At Rockefeller, the district gives special emphasis to developing and piloting innovative approaches to the education of young children. (LRSD Plan, pg. 12)  The county's teachers, administrators, aides, HIPPY (Home Instruction Program for Preschool youngsters), and daycare program workers use Rockefeller as a demonstration center for training. (LRSD Plan, pg. 12)  Parents and educational professionals from UALR and other area colleges advise the school and district staffs on all aspects of planning and implementation of the early childhood program. (LRSD Plan, pg. 12)  Evaluate Rockefeller's early childhood education policies in terms of their impact on desegregation and educational goals. The parent committee on early childhood education is to evaluate policies (including private pay rates, lunch charges, vacation days, enrollment age, and sick days) for their impact on the early childhood program's viability as a desegregation tool, its competitiveness with private schools and daycares, and its ability to retain both its private paying and Title XX students. (LRSD Plan, pg. 13)  The district allows students who attend the Rockefeller program for three-year-olds to continue on into the program for four-year-olds and the grades beyond. Siblings of students already in the early childhood program may attend Rockefeller in order to help retain children in the school. (LRSD Plan, pg. 13)  Explore developing Rockefeller as a year-round, full-day school for children from infancy through sixth grade. A biracial group of teachers, parents, administrators, and experts from local universities and colleges works with the district to assess the feasibility of such a program. (LRSD Plan, pg. 13) Page 13INCENTIVE SCHOOL DOUBLE FUNDING REQUIREMENTS  Funding for the incentive schools shall be set at two times the level for the elementary area schools to ensure that the children who are in racially-isolated settings are provided meaningful opportunities for desegregated experiences and activities. (Interdistrict. Plan, pg. 4)  The Little Rock School District Board of Directors is committed to improving educational quality and student academic performance in all schools and doubling the financial resources in schools identified in the Court-approved desegregation plan as incentive schools. (LRSD Plan, pg. 1) Page 14Little Rock School District Audit of Obligations October 1993-October 1994 o S o O o o C3 iia y o Cz4 bii P o - ^J1 r-i 1 cn o I ! i I  I 1   r ) -J J I 1 E I November 22, 1994 tz\u0026gt;l ittle Kock School District Audit of Obligations October 1993-October 1994 The purpose of the annual Audit of Obligations is to catalogue and merge into the Program Budget Document all desegregation obligations incurred during the previous year. In October 1993, all previous obligations under the desegregation plans were researched and identified. By February 1994, they were added to the Program Budget Document. That Program Budget Document represents all incomplete obligations of the district through October, 1993. This years audit is for the period from October of 1993 through October of 1994. All court orders, hearing transcripts, monitoring reports, and stipulations were reviewed for that period. The obligations were extracted from the documents and listed. The list has been reviewed by the Superintendents Council, the Superintendent, LRSD Attorneys, and the LRSD Office of Desegregation. This year research on the audit includes an update on the status of each obligation. Responsible persons were asked to report on the status on the listed obligations. Responses have been reduced to codes. The audit is included here in chart form for easy reference. Evidence of the status of each is maintained by the person responsible. The chart is divided according to the documents from which the obligations were drawn. In the far left column, each obligation or recommendation is numbered in sequence for easy reference. The date of the document, type of document, page, obligation, person responsible, and the date the obligation was completed (if completed) is included. Codes appear along the right side of the chart. They indicate the status of the obligation. Their legend appears at the bottom of each page. Those without a code cannot be attempted until other events occur. They are found in the section on the Stephens Stipulation. Final written comments from Judge Wright concerning the Stephens Stipulation are expected. Document types from which obligations came are coded as follows\nMR = Monitor's Report TR = Transcript COxxxx = Court Order ST = Stipulation A copy of (his audit will be sent to the following locations and people\n1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Filed with the U. S. Federal Court, Eastern District of Arkansas (Judge Susan Wright and all parties)\nMembers of the Little Rock School District Board of Directors\nThe Superintendent of LRSD\nMembers of the Biracial Committee\nMembers of the Parent Council\nMembers of the Superintendents Council Each Program Manager affected (to be included in the Program Budget Document for monitoring unless they are completed, one-time obligations)\nThe Director of Planning, Research, and Evaluation as custodian of the Program Budget Document\nand. The LRSD Office of Desegregation. Russ Mayo, Associate Superintendent for Desegregation1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 DATE 12/09/93 12/09/93 12/09/93 12/09/93 12/09/93 12/09/93 12/09/93 12/09/93 12/09/93 12/09/93 12/09/93 12/09/93 12/09/93 12/03/94 DOC MR MR MR MR MR MR MR MR MR MR MR MR MR Pg 5 5 12 12 13 15 15 15 15 22 22 22 27 LRSD Audit of Obligations October, 1993 to October, 1994 INCENTIVE SCHOOL MONITORING REPORT (1992-93) RECOMIVIENDATION _____________________ Make recruiting white students to the incentive schools among district priorities, focusing the energy and resources necessary to ensure that the incentive schools become fully desegregated.________ Identify the facts that are working to make Rockefeller a desegregated school and adopt or adapt them for the other incentive schools. Establish goals and objectives for racially balancing each incentive school staff as part of comprehensive long-range strategic plan for implementing the incentive school features. a Exempt incentive schools from being forced to accept any employees that have not been interviewed and recommended by the principal and the school's staffing committee.___________ ODM makes no new recommendations\nthe district remains obligated to follow all court orders and to fulfill the commitments in its desegregation plans. Requirement: 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 recruiting quality staff, and determines hiring procedures (LRSD Plan, pg. 190)_____________________________________________________________ Institute staffing needs assessments as an annual process in the incentive schools.______ Develop a comprehensive guide for assessing staffing needs which incorporates the factors listed in the plan as well as other relevant archival and anecdotal data._______________ Train principals and staffing committees in procedures for effective assessing staffing needs. Involve the LRSD Human Resource Department as an integral part of the assessment process. Develop specific, comprehensive job descriptions for instructional and supervision aides. Make sure all aides receive a thorough orientation to their individual job along with comprehensive, ongoing formal training in areas such as child development, supervision and classroom management, learning styles, and discipline techniques. _________________________ Provide teacher inservice training in the effective use of instructional aides that include team-building activities for teacher and aide teams. _____________ ODM makes no new recommendations\nthe district remains obligated to follow all court orders and to fulfill the commitments in its desegregation plan. Requirement: The parties shall have as a high priority the elimination of educational achievement disparities between black and white students, and recognize that eliminating disparity may place greater demands on the black students in racially identifiable school than on others. (Interdis. Plan, pg 6) - Needs to be done + In progress PERSON Mayo, Wagner Matthis Hurley Hurley Hurley Asst. Supt. Matthis Matthis Woods Matthis Asst. Supt. Hurley Woods Woods Matthis DONE I + + 8-94 8-92 11-93 11-93 + + * Completed14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 LRSD Audit of Obligations, November 1994 -------------------------------------------------_ Page 2 DATE 12/09/93 12/09/93 12/09/93 12/09/93 12/09/93 12/09/93 12/09/93 12/09/93 12/09/93 12/09/93 12/09/93 12/09/93 12/09/93 12/09/93 12/03/94 DOC MR MR MR MR MR MR MR MR MR MR MR MR MR MR Pg 30 34 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 40 41 41 41 41 RECOMMENDATION ODM makes no new recommendations\nthe district remains obligated to follow all court orders and to fulfill the commitments in its desegregation plan. Requirement: Disaggregate data related to student discipline and review student data to address issues of racial disparity. (Interdis. Plan, pg. 27)___________ Increase the amount of time the gifted and talented program specialists spend in the incentive schools so they can fully implement the G/T program and spend more time identifying the children whose needs can be met through the program.____________________ Continue to repair roof leaks at Franklin as they occur. Once a leak is corrected, repair or replace water damaged ceiling tiles and carpet._________________________________ Repair or replace the leaky roof in Mitchell's reading room Replace the loose floor tiles in Mitchell's hallway. Develop a schedule of carpet repair or replacement for Rockefeller, Mitchell, and Rightsell.__________ Repair the floor and wall in Rightsell classroom 3-B, and then replace any damaged carpet._________ Take steps to correct the remaining drainage problems at Rightsell, including relocation of any down spout draining toward the foundation._________________________________ Make sure all incentive school principals are aware that district funds are available to improve landscaping at their schools if a parent, teacher, or community organization will take maintenance responsibility for plantings._____________________________________ ODM makes no new recommendations\nthe district remains obligated to follow all court orders and to fulfill the commitments in its desegregation plans Requirement\nThe incentive school program promotes and ensures academic excellence in schools that have been difficult to desegregate. The incentive school program compensates the victims of segregation and serves as a tool for promoting meaningful and long-term desegregation in these schools and in the entire school district. (LRSD Plan, pg. 149)______ Create job descriptions for council members that clearly identify the district's expectations of the council, membership responsibilities, and the amount of service time involved._______ Outline the council's organizational structure and its working and reporting relationship to the school board, district administrators, the incentive schools, and other monitoring entities._____________ Provide a comprehensive orientation for the council at the beginning of each school year so all members will understand their role, district policies and procedures, communication channels, and what district resources and support are available. Develop and carry out a specific plan for meeting council obligations that includes goals and objectives, tasks, timelines, persons responsible, and evaluation criteria that addresses the council's desegregation plan obligations. - Needs to be done + In progress PERSON Roberson Donaldson Eaton Eaton Eaton Eaton Eaton Eaton Eaton Matthis Mayo, Buchanan Mayo, Buchanan Mayo, Buchanan Mayo, Buchanan DONE 8-94 9-94 7-94 7-93 7-92 1-94 6-94 6-94 6-94 * Completed + + +28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 LRSD Audit of Obligations, November 1994 -------------------------------------------------- Page 3 DATE 12/09/93 12/09/93 12/09/93 12/09/93 12/09/93 12/09/93 12/09/93 12/09/93 12/09/93 12/09/93 12/09/93 12/09/93 12/09/93 12/09/93 12/03/94 DOC MR MR MR MR MR MR MR MR MR MR MR MR MR MR Pg 41 41 41 43 43 43 45 45 46 47 47 48 48 49 RECOMMENDATION ____________________ Develop a monitoring instrument for council use that correlates specifically with desegregation plan and court order requirements. Such an instrument and the information it elicits will facilitate an ongoing assessment of how well the district is complying with its obligations._____________________ Help the council develop monitoring and reporting procedures, guideline, and schedules that provide members clear direction for their monitoring tasks. ____________________ Coordinate monitoring activities with other internal monitoring groups including the district biracial committee, school biracial committee, and the Department of Planning, Research and Evaluation. Such coordination will help avoid monitoring gaps and duplication and also help ensure more effective use of time and other resources. Include as a member of the Early Childhood Education Task Force at least one instructional aide or teacher from each school having a four-year-old program.____________________________________ Increase the involvement of area colleges and universities by naming active higher education representatives to the task force.________________________________________________________ ODM makes no new recommendations\nthe district remains obligated to follow all court orders and to fulfill the commitments in its desegregation plan. Requirement: Writing to Read labs, or another instructional technology program, are in place for grades K-2 at each school. (LRSD Plan, pg. 152) Base staff development on activities on areas of demonstrated need.___________________________ Utilize Teacher Assistance Plan (TAP) for those teachers who need the help available through the TAP approach._________________________________________________________________________ Encourage principals and assistant principals to attend subject area in service meetings so they, too, are well informed and understand the new curriculum_____________________________ Ensure that each school develops and executes a plan for fully implementing its theme by the opening of the 1993-94 school year.______________________________________________________________ Provide equal treatment for Stephens Incentive School by providing full support for a school theme. Children at Stephens are entitled to every incentive school feature guaranteed them by the Settlement Plans, unless the district should seek, and the Court grant, permission to temporarily deviate from a particular plan provision._________________________________________________________________ Establish a schedule of regular meetings among the incentive school program specialists so they can discuss effective theme implementation strategies, share ideas, and review experiences._________ Encourage interaction among the incentive school program specialists and those specialists assigned to the magnet schools. Capitalizing on in-house expertise and encouraging cooperation among the schools will help strengthen the district's programs.______________________________ Schedule science inservice training for teachers who need or want help improving their science instruction. Principals should be able to determine which teachers are not fully using the science labs and steer them to staff development sessions devoted to enlivening science in the classroom. - Needs to be done + In progress PERSON Mayo, Buchanan Mayo, Buchanan Mayo, Buchanan Price Price Price Woods Parker Asst. Supt. Asst. Supt. Asst. Supt. Grier Grier Glasgow DONE 3-94 6-94 10-94 8-93 * Completed + + + + +42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 LRSD Audit of Obligations, November 1994 --------------------------------------------------Page 4 DATE 12/09/93 12/09/93 12/09/93 12/09/93 12/09/93 12/09/93 12/09/93 12/09/93 12/09/93 12/09/93 12/09/93 12/09/93 12/09/93 12/03/94 DOC MR MR MR MR MR MR MR MR MR MR MR MR MR Pg 49 51 51 51 51 52 53 55 56 57 58 61 61 RECOMMENDATION ___________________________ Ensure that the materials needed for all science experiments are available to school staff and make sure teachers are aware of procurement procedures._____ Capitalize on the district's resident expertise and experience to assist the incentive schools in establishing a foreign language program as an integral part of the overall school program._________ Place as many qualified foreign language teachers as needed to provide Spanish instruction to incentive school students as part of the regular school day instructional program. Encourage the Spanish teachers to develop a series of Spanish \"mini-lessons\" for each grade level to help the regular classroom teachers reinforce foreign language instruction across the curriculum. Increase the amount and improve the quality of Spanish language materials available in each school. ODM makes no new recommendations\nthe district remains obligated to follow all court orders and to fulfill the commitments in its desegregation plans. Requirement: Parent Home Study Guides in each core subject area for each grade (1-6) will be available by the 1993-94 school year. (LRSD Plan, pg. 153)__________________ Provide sufficient training and support to enable all schools to fully implement Abacus during the 1993- 94 school year.________________________________________ ODM makes no new recommendations\nthe district remains obligated to follow all court orders and to fulfill the commitments in its desegregation plans. Requirement: The Effective Schools model operates in each school, with training provided for implementation. (LRSD Plan, pg. 154)______________________________ ODM makes no new recommendations\nthe district remains obligated to follow all court orders and to fulfill the commitments in its desegregation plans. Requirement: The school emphasizes a classics reading program and uses the basal reader to augment the classics. (LRSD Plan, pg. 154)__________________________ ODM makes no new recommendations\nthe district remains obligated to follow all court orders and to fulfill the commitment in its desegregation plans. Requirement: A Latin program, used to increase vocabulary and word attack skills, is incorporated into the fifth and sixth grade language arts program. The staff schedules time for instruction, provides materials and supplies, and documents student achievement. (LRSD Plan, pp. 154, 159-164)_______ Incorporate leisure time activities, which students can pursue throughout their lifetime, as part of the physical education curriculum._______________________________ Strengthen efforts to recruit mentors for the students. Having at least one special friend, coach, and encourage can be so important to a childs development that every student who needs or wants a mentor should have one.______________________________________ Consider a trainer of trainers program or similar means to equip principals or other school staff to train volunteer mentors. - Needs to be done + In progress PERSON Glasgow Grier, Parker Grier, Parker Grier, Parker Grier, Parker Matthis Woods Woods Asst. Supt. Grier, Parker Matthis Milam Milam DONE 8-94 8-93 * Completed + + + + + + + +55 DATE 12/09/93 DOC MR Pg 63 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 12/09/93 12/09/93 12/09/93 12/09/93 12/09/93 12/09/93 12/09/93 12/09/93 12/09/93 12/09/93 12/09/93 12/03/94 MR MR MR MR MR MR MR MR MR MR MR 65 68 68 68 68 68 68 68 70 70 72 LRSD Audit of Obligations, November 1994 ------------------------------------------------ Page 5 RECOIVIIVIENDATION Abandon the practice of limiting three-and-four-year-old children to walking field trips and allow them to travel by bus to any appropriate site, with parental approval. Whatever the past misunderstanding that resulted in travel restrictions for young students, ADE should confirm that, with appropriate parent permission, it is lawful to transport children of these ages in public school buses. Treat and teach career skills development as an integral part of school life._________ Solicit candid feedback from summer school participants (including staff, parents, and students) about what they most and least valued about the summer school programs. Ask them to identify those elements that enticed them into the program, what facilitated their participation, and any barriers that impeded it._____________________________________ Ask incentive school parents and students who did not take part in summer school to identify why they did not participate and what would most likely induce them to attend. Seek broad-based input from incentive school staff, parents, and students to learn what course offerings or other program features make summer school most appealing to prospective participants. Routinely monitor and evaluate summer school as part of a comprehensive, ongoing process for continuous improvement. Include the incentive school principals, teachers, students, and parents in the assessment, publish and analyze the results, and when act decisively upon what the evaluation reveals._________________________________________ Mount an aggressive marketing campaign for summer school recruitment, getting ideas from staff, students, and parents and also encouraging them to help recruit.________ Maintain thorough and accurate records of all summer school information, including planning, recruitment efforts, surveys or other means of input and feedback, evaluations, a tally of children participating in each program category and individual class, and a record of these students' home school. Comprehensive records will enable program planners to track success and make appropriate program modifications as needed,______________________ Consider implementing the recommendations made by the extended year administrative staff in the district's summary report.________________________ Encourage partnered schools to develop some joint projects and co-activities so students will learn how to plan, organize, and cooperate on activities that they develop. Shared ventures could held increase participation in Saturday School activities. The principals should collaborate with each other to provide the necessary resources and to ensure successful projects. Consider pairing Franklin with two smaller incentive schools for Saturday School activities so no incentive school is without a partner to encourage sharing and variety. Design the extended day survey to include a description of the skills a student develops while engaged in leisure time activities This design will help parents and students recognize the importance of a good balance between work and play. - Needs to be done + In progress PERSON Cheatham Elston Ingram, Asst. Supt. Ingram, Asst. Supt. Ingram, Asst. Supt. Ingram, Asst. Supt. Ingram, Asst. Supt. Ingram, Asst. Supt. Ingram, Asst. Supt. Asst. Supt. Asst. Supt Asst. Supt., Principals DONE 4-94 8-92 10-93 10-92 * Completed + + + + +67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 LRSD Audit of Obligations, November 1994 --------------------------------------------------- Page 6 DATE 12/09/93 12/09/93 12/09/93 12/09/93 12/09/93 12/09/93 12/09/93 12/09/93 12/09/93 12/09/93 12/09/93 12/09/93 12/05/94 DOC MR MR MR MR MR MR MR MR MR MR MR MR Pg 72 76 76 78 78 78 84 85 89 89 89 91 __________________________________RECOMMENDATION Make sure all extended day students have an opportunity for some fun activities, such as jump rope, board games, or making up and reciting rhymes. It's developmentally and emotionally healthy for students to participate in wholesome activities just for fun. Make an effort to pair aides and teachers who are compatible with each other, and provide training that will enable instructional aides and classroom teachers to work together as an effective team. Provide pre-service orientation and training for all aides, and follow-up with regular inservice, on topics that include behavior management techniques and other subjects that will contribute to the aides' effectiveness. Consider having VIPS train incentive school principals to serve as instructors for new mentors so these building leaders can conduct their own streamlined, on-site mentor training. Allow principals to contact and select pre-professionals from institutions of higher education when the opportunity presents itself. Sometimes the best deals occur because of a chance meeting at a seminar or conference. It doesn't make sense for a good opportunity to get lost in bureaucratic wastelands. _____________________________ Expand contacts with and widen access to the variety of community-based programs designed to support children and families. Allow teachers who want to leave the incentive schools to do so with impunity. If staff members wish to transfer elsewhere, they are not necessarily unfit or incompetent\nthey may simply not be suited for the incentive school experience. It cannot be overemphasized that the district should only assign people to the incentive schools who are not only talented, committed, and experienced, and who also want to be there. _____________________ Comply with the requirement to develop complete student performance profiles for each child and then use the information to define and guide each student's learning path and to help determine the effect of the variables these profiles record._______________________ Make sure that each incentive school has a full-time certified guidance counselor on staff throughout the school year. Decide each incentive school's need for a social worker, then staff accordingly. Require incentive school counselor to meet as a group on a regular basis. Such meetings will provide an informal atmosphere in which to discuss problems unique to incentive schools, develop solutions, share ideas and success stories, and to explore ways to expand their resources. Counselors need the support and encouragement they could get from an organized group of peers. Assign a district employee the responsibility for fully developing and implementing the plan requirements for a program that will equip parents with job skills necessary for employment at all levels within the incentive schools. Be sure to include program goals, objectives, timelines, persons responsible for each step of implementation, and evaluation criteria. - Needs to be done + In progress PERSON Asst. Supt, Principals Principals Woods Milam Asst. Supt. Principals Hurley. Asst. Supt. Principals Hurley. Asst. Supt. Hurley. Asst. Supt. Elston Marlin DONE 10-92 8-94 9-94 8-94 8-94 1-94 * Completed + + +79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 LRSD Audit of Obligations, November 1994 ---------------------------------------------------- Page 7 DATE 12/09/93 12/09/93 12/09/93 12/09/93 12/09/93 12/09/93 12/09/93 12/09/93 12/09/93 12/09/93 12/03/94 DOC MR MR MR MR MR MR MR MR MR MR Pg 92 92 95 97 97 98 105 105 105 106 __________________________________RECOMMENDATION Follow up to provide appropriate assistance to survey respondents who have expressed interest in receiving specialized help from the district, such as obtaining their GED. Evaluate the cost effectiveness of using local community resources, such as the Parent Learning Center, as a means for providing education opportunities for parents.________ ODM makes no new recommendations\nthe district remains obligated to follow all court orders and to fulfill the commitments in its desegregation plans. Requirement: A Parent Center in each school provides resources and materials, recommended by a parent and staff committee, that can be loaned to parents. A parent has been trained to operate the center, which is to be the source of a monthly communications packet that is distributed to parents. (LRSD Plan, pp. 206, 208)_______________________________________________ Evaluate the parent workshops offered to determine if they are meeting the plan's goal of helping incentive school parents understand and carry out school expectations._______________ Ask workshop participants to evaluate each session at its conclusion to make candid suggestions for training improvement and future session topics. Then carefully analyze the feedback to assess the quality and relevancy of the training and make changes accordingly.________________ ODM makes no new recommendations\nthe district remains obligated to follow all court orders and to fulfill the commitment in its desegregation plan. Requirement: Recognition is used as a tool for community and parent involvement. The school recognizes parents and the community at monthly PTA meetings, displays awards, gives school lunch vouchers to award winners, and involve students in the recognition selection process. (LRSD Plan, pp. 209-210)______________________________________________________________ _______ Standardize the method staff uses to document and report home and school communication to promote data consistency and accuracy. In order to standardize reporting and minimize the burden of documentation, schools could use a simple form identifying the contact date, type of contact (such as parent/teacher conference, home visit, interim or monthly report, phone call, success or alert card), which staff member contacted whom (parent, grandparent, or other), and a brief description of the results of the contact or any other pertinent information.____________________________ Train incentive school principals and staff to serve as trainers for new mentors so they can conduct their own mentor training, if needed, and thereby expedite mentor placement._____________________ Develop transportation policies and procedures, ensuring that principals are aware of this service, know how to identify parents' transportation needs, and understand how to arrange for it to support parent participation where needed.__________________________________________ Provide parents with current school year contracts to sign when they register their children in the incentive schools. Contracts with old dates and information convey a sloppy message that parents can interpret as a sign that either the school, the district, or both don't place much value on the contracts or parent commitments. - Needs to be done + In progress PERSON Martin Milhollen, Martin Gill Gill Gill Principals Principals Woods Cheatham, Principals Principals DONE 3-94 4-94  Completed + + +89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 102 LRSD Audit of Obligations, November 1994 _______________________________Page 8 DATE 12/09/93 12/09/93 12/09/93 12/09/93 12/09/93 12/09/93 12/09/93 12/09/93 12/09/93 12/09/93 12/09/93 12/09/93 12/09/93 12/03/94 DOC MR MR MR MR MR MR MR MR MR MR MR MR MR Pg 109 109 109 116 116 117 117 117 117 117 117 117 120 RECOMMENDATION Assign a LRSD employee the responsibility for coordinating the speakers bureaus and assisting the key communicators. Without consistent direction and support, those who volunteer as a speaker or key communicator can't be expected to carry out their responsibilities effectively Develop and implement a comprehensive plan for utilizing the services of the speakers bureaus and key communicators that includes specific goals, objectives, the persons responsible, and evaluation criteria to determine success and where changes need to be made. Develop job descriptions for the speakers bureau and key communicators that clearly identify the job goal, qualifications, performance expectations, the participant and district responsibilities, and the amount of time that will likely be required to successfully perform each job. Seriously consider placing at Rockefeller an early childhood program specialist who has the credentials and experience that clearly illustrate adequate training and interest in the education of very young children._____________________________________________________________ Re-establish the Rockefeller advisory group. Regularly evaluate Rockefeller's early childhood education policies as specified in the plan and then publish the results in an informational handbook for parents.__________________________ Make sure that the early childhood students receive the services of the school's counselor. Very young children can need the specialized insights and services of a counselor professional just as much as older children._________________________________________________ Concentrate the same level of attention, funding, and materials on the Rockefeller Early Childhood Magnet Program that the district lavishes on other magnet schools and programs._________________ Broadly publicize the Early Childhood Magnet Program. This program is truly unique and the district should capitalize on its success._______________________________________ Refrain from placing any uncertified teacher in an early childhood classroom.________ Provide regular, quality staff development opportunities for the early childhood education staff. Ensure that Rockefeller serves as an early childhood education model, demonstration site, and training center by initiating the innovative practices described in the desegregation plan, utilizing advice and expertise from parents, teachers, and college and university staff.___________ ODM makes no new recommendations\nthe district remains obligated to follow ail court orders and to fulfill the commitments in its desegregation plan. Requirements: Fundings for the Incentive Schools shall be set at two times the level for the elementary area schools to ensure that the children who are in racially-isolated settings are provided meaningful opportunities for desegregated experiences and activities. (Interdis. Plan, pg. 4) The Little Rock School District Board of Directors is committed to improving educational quality and student academic performance in all schools and doubling the financial resources in schools identified in the Court- approved desegregation plan as incentive schools. (LRSD Plan, pg. 1) - Needs to be done + In progress PERSON Wagner, Principals Wagner, Principals Wagner, Principals Matthis Price, Mangan Price, Mangan Mangan Milhollen Mangan Mangan Mangan Mangan Milhollen DONE 1-94 3-94 93-94 8-93 93-94 ongoing Annually * Completed +103 DATE 03/11/94 DOC MR Pg 12 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 03/11/94 03/11/94 03/11/94 03/11/94 03/11/94 03/11/94 03/11/94 03/11/94 03/11/94 03/11/94 03/11/94 03/11/94 12/03/94 MR MR MR MR MR MR MR MR mr MR MR MR 12 12 12 12 12 13 13 13 13 19 20 20 LRSD Audit of Obligations, November 1994 --------------------------------------------------- Page 9 Incentive School Recruitment Monitoring Report RECOMMENDATIONS ____________ Evaluate the means parent recruiters are using to inform the community about the incentive schools hotline, then analyze the findings to determine more effective v/ays to heighten awareness of this service. Ensure that prospective parents receive information about the incentive schools by expanding the target audience. Assign specific district employees the responsibility and accountability for fully developing and implementing all the district's recruitment obligations identified in the desegregation plans, marketing plan, and court orders. Develop a system to ensure that employees responsible for incentive school recruitment receive all monitoring reports and court orders that deal with the incentive schools. Establish parent recruitment teams in each incentive school, staffing the teams according to qualification and job descriptions that clearly state the team charge, the district's expectations, qualifications (such as skills, experience, or school affiliation), the amount of time involved, and the precise duties anticipated. Implement an orientation and training schedule for the recruitment teams that utilizes the skills and expertise of parents and district personnel who have a track record of successfully promoting desegregation. Utilize up-to-date enrollment and school capacity data to develop a plan to target specific schools and neighborhoods for recruitment to the incentive schools. Survey white parents in LRSD and PCSSD to find out what features they consider when selecting a school and what would prompt them to request a desegregation transfer to an incentive school for their children. Develop a comprehensive and detailed annual recruitment plan for each incentive school. Annually identify specific recruitment goals for each incentive school and regularly frack the headway made toward each goal. Establish a target date for completing recruitment efforts, measuring results, and deciding whether to petition the Court to release available pre-kindergarten and kindergarten seats to black students who could benefit from the district's early childhood education. Routinely survey parents whose children opt out of incentive schools to determine why they leave and to which schools they move. Then use this information to modify recruitment and retention strategies. Consider adding four-year-old classes at the incentive schools which have only one class, thereby achieving a more even grade structure that can help foster desegregation as children rise from one grade level to the next. - Needs to be done + In progress PERSON Wagner Wagner Wagner Mayo Principals, Wagner Principals, Wagner, Ingram Wagner, Principals, Wagner Principals Wagner, Principals Wagner, Mayo Principals, Ingram Matthis DONE 1-94 5-94 9-94 8-94 * Completed + + + + +Audit of Court Orders \u0026amp; Transcripts 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 1 LRSD Audit of Obligations, November 1994 -------------------------------------------------- Page 10 DATE 01-25-94 01-26-94 01-26-94 02-04-94 02-04-94 02-25-94 03-16-94 04-05-94 04-08-94 04-22-94 06-07-94 06-07-94 06-07-94 DOC TR TR TR CO2091 CO2091 TR CO2129 CO2146 CO2155 TR TR TR TR Pg 54 227 241 2 6 115 3 5 1 39 39 150 192 _____________________________________OBLIGATION______ The Court wants PCSSD and LRSD to document and track their success in efforts toward recruitment The LRSD is obligated to build, in addition to the King Interdistrict School in the fall of 1993, the Stephens Interdistrict School. LRSD was instructed to take a careful look at the demographic data it has supplied the ODM, and at student population shifts because black children are going from the central Little Rock area to Crystal Hill and King School. _____________________ The Court instructed the LRSD that it wanted the interdistrict transfers, which are at the heart of the Desegregation Plan, to be done more quickly than the District has done in the past._________ LRSD white students may be permitted to attend King Interdistrict School without violating the desegregation plans. The ideal goal being a student enrollment ration of 50 percent black to white. White students attending an LRSD Interdistrict school will be recruited primarily from the PCSSD or beyond Pulaski County_______________________________ Develop immediately specific guidelines regarding assignments to King School, by extension, apply to its other Interdistrict schools. Guidelines are to reflect past practices and promises and include intradistrict transfer eligibility criteria for both black and white children\nthey must be sufficiently comprehensive to be applicable to all of the district's interdistrict schools\nthey must be clear and unambiguous enough for district workers and parents to understand\nand while a specific numeric quota or cap is neither required nor desirable, the guidelines must describe that portion or range of intradistrict transfers that an individual interdistrict school can reasonably accommodate. The Court goes on the record that the district is to follow through in its efforts to get feedback from its budget process and public input with respect to the budget.____________________ LRSD reimburse PCSSD $167,113 within 60 days of order Approval of school construction at Jefferson Elementary should be and hereby is granted LRSD will pay an increase of $52,604.09 in the ODM Budget ~ The court wants something justifying the expenditures and explaining why increases, decreases or deletion are made and these business cases for expenditures above $25,000. It wants to know how white students will be recruited for the incentive school, what student assignment zones will be, and the impact on the racial balance of all the schools. Before the court gives final approval to the Stephens and Garland Schools Stipulation it wants more thought on it._________ The court wants more detail on how the district plans to recruit white students for Stephens in light of the demographic trends._________________________ In addition, the court wants to know who will be responsible for recruitment. The Stephens Stipulation of June 7,1994 changes the third inlerdisirict school from Stephens Io Washington. 12/03/94 - Needs to be done + In progress PERSON Wagner Mayo DONE 6-94 Mayo Mayo Mayo Williams Millhollen Eaton Millhollen Millhollen Mayo Mayo Wagner 5-94 8-94 9-94 11-94 APPEAL + PEND. + 6-94 9-94 + + 9-94 * Completed129 130 DATE 06-07-94 06-28-94 DOC TR CO2225 Pg 193 5 131 132 133 134 135 06-28-94 09-07-94 10-24-94 10-24-94 10-24-94 12/03/94 TR CO CO CO CO 81 4 5 6 8 LRSD Audit of Obligations, November 1994 --------------------------------------------------- Page 11 ____________________________________OBLIGATION The court wants a long-range facilities study, which considers the 1988 study and the Deseg. Plan. Approved magnet status for King with the expectation that the LRSD will expeditiously revise its Interdistrict School Assignment Guidelines to facilitate intradistrict transfers of white students, thus promoting racially balanced school enrollments.___________ The court expresses its interest in pursuing the idea of middle schools and asks the Superintendent of Schools to set a goal with interim time lines where the school district will reach point a, b, c and d and finally reach a decision as to whether middle schools are a viable option for the school district. LRSD may fill the vacant seats in kindergarten and 4 year old programs at the incentive schools, and also in the four year old programs at the other schools. The district must reserve half of all incentive school kindergarten and 4 year old seats for 1995-96 and subsequent school years, and must also remain mindful of the target racial balance in the other elementary schools so as to recruit and assign students accordingly. The LRSD must seek court permission before releasing any reserved seats in future school years.________________________________________________________________ Develop and conduct quality, continuous training on the program planning and budget process for all those who participate in that process. At a minimum, these training sessions should address the operational responsibilities of the participants in each of the components of the process (needs assessment, program inventory, goals and objectives, program development, budgeting, monitoring and reporting, and evaluation). The LRSD will work with ODM to ensure that the training is adequately defined and implemented.__________________________ Institute management processes which will actively review progress, in terms of achievements and expenditures, on a regular basis, involving every level of the organization down to at least every budget manager. LRSD must submit on or before Wednesday, November 16, 1994, a concise but complete description of the Spanish program as it is being offered\nThis project was supported in part by a Digitizing Hidden Special Collections and Archives project grant from The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation and Council on Library and Information Resoources.\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n\n "}],"pages":{"current_page":22,"next_page":23,"prev_page":21,"total_pages":35,"limit_value":12,"offset_value":252,"total_count":419,"first_page?":false,"last_page?":false},"facets":[{"name":"type_facet","items":[{"value":"Text","hits":418},{"value":"StillImage","hits":1}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":16,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"creator_facet","items":[{"value":"United States. District Court (Arkansas: Eastern District)","hits":60},{"value":"Little Rock School District","hits":42},{"value":"Office of Desegregation Monitoring (Little Rock, Ark.)","hits":23},{"value":"United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit","hits":5},{"value":"Arkansas Association of Educational Administrators","hits":4},{"value":"North Little Rock School District","hits":3},{"value":"Ross, Steven M.","hits":3},{"value":"Arkansas Policy Foundation","hits":2},{"value":"Arkansas. Department of Education","hits":2},{"value":"Quality Education and Management Associates","hits":2},{"value":"Area School Advisory Committee","hits":1}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"subject_facet","items":[{"value":"School improvement programs","hits":419},{"value":"Education--Arkansas","hits":413},{"value":"Little Rock School District","hits":307},{"value":"Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","hits":287},{"value":"Education--Evaluation","hits":280},{"value":"Educational planning","hits":229},{"value":"Educational law and legislation","hits":204},{"value":"Educational statistics","hits":174},{"value":"School management and organization","hits":151},{"value":"Student assistance programs","hits":139},{"value":"School integration","hits":138}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"subject_personal_facet","items":[{"value":"Intervenors, Knight","hits":1},{"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":2}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"location_facet","items":[{"value":"United States, 39.76, -98.5","hits":417},{"value":"United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","hits":415},{"value":"United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959","hits":411},{"value":"United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","hits":405},{"value":"United States, New York, 43.00035, -75.4999","hits":2},{"value":"United States, Arkansas, Phillips County, 34.42829, -90.84802","hits":1},{"value":"United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, North Little Rock, 34.76954, -92.26709","hits":1},{"value":"United States, Connecticut, 41.66704, -72.66648","hits":1},{"value":"United States, Maryland, 39.00039, -76.74997","hits":1},{"value":"United States, Michigan, 44.25029, -85.50033","hits":1},{"value":"United States, Michigan, Wayne County, Detroit, 42.33143, -83.04575","hits":1}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"us_states_facet","items":[{"value":"Arkansas","hits":415},{"value":"New York","hits":2},{"value":"Connecticut","hits":1},{"value":"Maryland","hits":1},{"value":"Michigan","hits":1},{"value":"Missouri","hits":1},{"value":"Texas","hits":1}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"year_facet","items":[{"value":"1995","hits":88},{"value":"1993","hits":74},{"value":"1994","hits":74},{"value":"1996","hits":72},{"value":"1992","hits":64},{"value":"1999","hits":59},{"value":"2001","hits":59},{"value":"1997","hits":58},{"value":"1991","hits":53},{"value":"2003","hits":53},{"value":"2000","hits":52},{"value":"1990","hits":40},{"value":"1998","hits":40},{"value":"2004","hits":40},{"value":"2002","hits":38},{"value":"1989","hits":33},{"value":"2005","hits":31},{"value":"2006","hits":21},{"value":"1986","hits":10},{"value":"1988","hits":9},{"value":"1984","hits":8},{"value":"2007","hits":8},{"value":"2008","hits":8},{"value":"1987","hits":7},{"value":"2010","hits":7},{"value":"1985","hits":6},{"value":"2009","hits":6},{"value":"2011","hits":6},{"value":"1980","hits":5},{"value":"1981","hits":5},{"value":"1982","hits":5},{"value":"1983","hits":5},{"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":"2012","hits":4},{"value":"1950","hits":3},{"value":"1951","hits":3},{"value":"1952","hits":3},{"value":"1953","hits":3},{"value":"1954","hits":3},{"value":"1955","hits":3},{"value":"1956","hits":3},{"value":"1957","hits":3},{"value":"1958","hits":3},{"value":"1959","hits":3},{"value":"1960","hits":3},{"value":"1961","hits":3},{"value":"1962","hits":3},{"value":"1963","hits":3},{"value":"1964","hits":3},{"value":"1965","hits":3},{"value":"1966","hits":3},{"value":"1967","hits":3},{"value":"1968","hits":3},{"value":"1969","hits":3},{"value":"1970","hits":3},{"value":"1971","hits":3},{"value":"1972","hits":3},{"value":"1973","hits":3},{"value":"2013","hits":3},{"value":"2014","hits":3},{"value":"2015","hits":2},{"value":"2016","hits":2},{"value":"2017","hits":2},{"value":"2018","hits":2},{"value":"2019","hits":2},{"value":"2020","hits":2},{"value":"2021","hits":2},{"value":"2022","hits":2},{"value":"2023","hits":2},{"value":"2024","hits":2},{"value":"1910","hits":1}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":100,"offset":0,"prefix":null},"min":"1910","max":"2024","count":1171,"missing":0},{"name":"medium_facet","items":[{"value":"documents (object genre)","hits":244},{"value":"reports","hits":71},{"value":"legal documents","hits":38},{"value":"judicial records","hits":36},{"value":"correspondence","hits":10},{"value":"handbooks","hits":9},{"value":"exhibition (associated concept)","hits":7},{"value":"budgets","hits":6},{"value":"books","hits":2},{"value":"newspaper clippings","hits":2},{"value":"agendas (administrative records)","hits":1}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"rights_facet","items":[{"value":"http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/","hits":419}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"collection_titles_sms","items":[{"value":"Office of Desegregation Management","hits":417},{"value":"Butler Center for Arkansas Studies Photographs Collection","hits":1}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"provenance_facet","items":[{"value":"Butler Center for Arkansas Studies","hits":419}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"class_name","items":[{"value":"Item","hits":418},{"value":"Collection","hits":1}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":100,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"educator_resource_b","items":[{"value":"false","hits":419}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":100,"offset":0,"prefix":null}}]}}