{"response":{"docs":[{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1735","title":"Court filings concerning the Pulaski Educational Cooperative, June 19, 1999, order concerning proposed change in grade structure and number of seats at magnet schools, and ADE motion concerning 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":["United States. District Court (Arkansas: Eastern District)"],"dc_date":["1999-07"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System"],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","Special districts--Arkansas--Pulaski County","Arkansas. Department of Education","Joshua Intervenors","Little Rock School District","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","Education and state","Educational law and legislation","Educational planning","School management and organization","Education--Standards","Magnet schools","School improvement programs"],"dcterms_title":["Court filings concerning the Pulaski Educational Cooperative, June 19, 1999, order concerning proposed change in grade structure and number of seats at magnet schools, and ADE motion concerning 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/1735"],"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":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"District Court, motion for extension of time to respond to the Court's June 18, 1999, order and to Pulaski County Special School District's (PCSSD's) motion re: the Pulaski Educational Cooperative; District Court, Arkansas Department of Education's (ADE's) response to the Court's June 19, 1999, order concerning proposed change in grade structure and number of seats at magnet schools; District Court, Arkansas Department of Education's (ADE's) response to motion re: the Pulaski Educational Cooperative; District Court, order; District Court, Joshua intervenors' response to motion to relieve Arkansas Department of Education (ADE) motion concerning monitoring; District Court, Little Rock School District (LRSD) notice of appeal; District Court, Pulaski County Special School District (PCSSD) notice of appeal; District Court, three orders; District Court, reply to Arkansas Department of Education's (ADE's) response to motion re: the Pulaski Educational Cooperative and supplement to Pulaski County Special School District's (PCSSD's) motion; District Court, order; District Court, notice of filing, 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.  IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION JUL 1 1999 OFFICE Of DESEGREGATION MONITORING LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF v. No. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, et al. DEFENDANTS MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO RESPOND TO THE COURT'S JUNE 18, 1999 ORDER AND TO PCSSD'S \"MOTION RE THE PULASKI EDUCATIONAL COOPERATIVE The Arkansas Department of Education (\" ADE\") hereby moves the Court for a - brief extension of time, to and including Friday, July 9, 1999, in which to respond to (a) the Court's June 18, 1999 order concerning a proposed change in the grade structure and number of seats at the magnet schools for 1999-2000, and (b) PCSSD's \"Motion re the Pulaski Educational Cooperative.\" The motion is made on the following grounds: 1. On June 18, 1999, this Court entered an order concerning a proposed change in the grade structure and number of seats at the magnet schools for the 1999- 2000 school year. The court's order allowed the parties to and including July 6, 1999, to file any objections to the MRC's proposal. 2. On June 23, 1999, PCSSD served by mail a document entitled \"Combined Motion and Memorandum re the Pulaski Educational Cooperative.\" ADE's response to - this motion is due on or before July 7, 1999. 3. Undersigned counsel for ADE has been out of town on vacation from June 23, 1999, through July 5, 1999. ADE will therefore require a short extension of time, to and including Friday, July 9, 1999, within which to file its response to this Court's June 18, 1999 order and to PCSSD's motion concerning \"the Pulaski Educational Cooperative.\" WHEREFORE, ADE respectfully requests that the Court enter an order extending ADE's time, to and including July 9, 1999, to respond to (a) the Court's June 18, 1999 order concerning a proposed change in the grade structure and number of seats at the magnet schools for 1999-2000, and (b) PCSSD's \"Motion re the Pulaski Educational Cooperative.\" Respectfully Submitted, WINSTON BRYANT Attorney General Assistant Atto e G neral 323 Center Street, Suite 200 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501) 682-2007 Attorneys for Arkansas Department of Education 2 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Timothy Gauger, certify that on July 6, 1999, a copy of the foregoing document will be served by U.S. mail, postage prepaid, on the following person(s) at the address(es) indicated: M. Samuel Jones, III Wright, Lindsey \u0026 Jennings 2000 NationsBank Bldg. 200 W. Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 John W. Walker John Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72201 Richard Roachell 401 W. Capitol, Suite 504 Little Rock, AR 72201 Christopher Heller Friday, Eldredge \u0026 Clark 2000 Regions Center 400 W. Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201-3493 Stephen W. Jones Jack, Lyon \u0026 Jones 3400 TCBY Tower 425 W. Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 Ann Brown 201 E. Markham, Ste. 510 Little Rock, AR 7220i 3 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION JIJl 1 2 1999 OFFICE OF DESE-aRfGATION MONITCREiG LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF v. No. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, et al DEFENDANTS ADE'S RESPONSE TO THE COURT'S JUNE 18, 1999 ORDER CONCERNING PROPOSED GIANGE IN GRADE STRUCTIJRE AND NUMBER OF SEATS AT THE MAGNET SCHOOLS The Arkansas Department of Education (\" ADE\") submits this response to the - Court'c _. ... ne 18, 1999 order. In that order the Court notes that the Magnet Review Committee, by letter dated May 7, 1999, seeks the Court's approval \"of a change in the grade structure and number of seats at the magnet schools for the 1999-2000 school year.\" The MRC' s May 7 letter to the Court assumes that the proposed changes in grade structure and number of seats will result in a significant increase in the State's share of funding for the magnet schools. Among other things, the MRC' s letter indicates that \"the costs associated with changes in seating will create an initial increase of $129 per student above the current funding level,\" and estimates that the State's share of funding for the magnet schools for 1999-2000 will increase by at least $567,270 over the State's current level of funding.1 ADE does not object to the proposed changes in grade structure for the magnet schools, nor does ADE object to an increase in the number of seats in the magnet schools for 1999-2000. ADE does object to the MRC' s proposal, however, to the extent it implies that the increases in enrollment will result in an increase in the State's funding level for the magnet schools. While the Settlement Agreement does not place any limits on the number of students who might attend the magnets, the Settlement Agreement does set specific limits on the State's funding obligations for the magnet schools. Paragraph II.D. of the \u0026tttlement Agreement provides that \"The State will have no further obligation to contribute any additional funds to magnet schools other than under paragraph II. E. below.\" Paragraph ILE of the Agreement states, in pertinent part, that the State \"will continue to pay ... [t]he State's portion of magnet school operational costs for the six existing magnet schools .... \" Paragraph II.D. of the Settlement Agreement further provides: 1 It is not clear precisely how large this increase in funding will be. The State's funding level for 1998-99 as used in the MRC's projection does not take into account the 7.25% increase in salaries given to LRSD teachers in March, 1999, and the State's \"proposed funding'' level for 1999-2000 used in the MRC's projection does not take into account \"possible changes in salaries and basic operating costs for the 1999-2000 school year.\" It is clear from the MRC's May 7 letter, though, that the MRC assumes that some increase in the State's funding obligation can be expected due solely to the grade level\" restructuring and the increase in the number of seats. 2 Any reference to the six existing magnet schools in this settlement shall mean, for funding purposes, up to their present seating capacities. These seating capacities are as follows: Carver 613 Williams 515 Gibbs 351 Booker 660 Mann 935 Parkview 991 The Settlement Agreement thus makes it clear that, no matter how many students actually attend the magnet schools, the State's' funding obligations for the magnet schools are limited to its share of, for example, the costs associated with a maximum of 991 students at Parkview, 935 students at Mann, and so on. To the extent the MRC's May 7 letter implies that the State's share of magnet school funding will be increased due to the addition of 209 seats at Parkview, such an additional burden on the State would be in direct contravention of the Settlement Agreement. The costs associated with magnet student enrollment in excess of the seating capacities set forth in the Settlement Agreement should be borne either by the  LRSD, whose decision to restructure its schools necessitated the restructuring of the magnets and the concomitant changes in seating capacity, or by the Districts collectively. 3 Respectfully Submitted, MARK PRYOR Attorney General ~/4 /4~~-:: :r== TIMO (G. GApGER #95019 . Assistant Atto~ General 323 Center Street, Suite 200 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501) 682-2007 Attorneys for Arkansas Department of Education CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE L Timothy Gauger, certify that on July 9, 1999, a copy of the foregoing document will be served by U.S. mail, postage prepaid, on the following person(s) at the address(es) indicated: M.SamuelJones,m Wright, Lindsey \u0026 Jennings 2000 NationsBank Bldg. 200 W. Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 John W. Walker John Walker, P.A 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72201 Richard Roachell 401 W. Capitol, Suite 504 Little Rock, AR 72201 Christopher Heller Friday, Eldredge \u0026 Oark 2000 Regions Center 400 W. Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201-3493 Stephen W. Jones Jack, Lyon \u0026 Jones 3400 TCBY Tower 425 W. Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 ~ Ann Brown 201 E. Markham, Ste. 510 Little Rock, AR 72201 ~ fi~~1fu~ ?1- -  ,., . ,, IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION RECEIVED JUL 1 2 1999 OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF v. No. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, et al DEFENDANTS ADE'S RESPONSE TO \"MOTION RE THE PULASKI EDUCATIONAL COOPERATIVE\" In this motion the PCSSD seeks an order requiring the State to distribute funds to an as-yet-to-be-formed education service coorr:!'c1tive1 (\"co-op\") that would serve only the three Districts. The motion is premised or .. PCSSD's belief that an appropriation contained in Act 1392 of 1999 entitles them to funds for such a co-op, and that conditional language restricting the disbursement contained in the appropriation is \"at variance with the requirements of the Settlement Agreement\" PCSSD's motion must be denied. This Court lacks jurisdiction to give PCSSD the relief it requests. Because the State has been dismissed from this action, this Court's jurisdiction over the State is 1 Education service cooperatives are \"intermediate service units in the state's elementary and secondary education system\" that are eligible to receive and spend state and federal funds. They exist to provide to school districts that choose to use them assistance in meeting accreditation standards, using educational resources more efficiently through cooperation among school districts,_ and promoting coordination between school districts and the ADE in the provision of certain services. See Ark. Code Ann.  6-13-1002 limited to enforcing the terms of the Settlement Agreement (see Kokkanen u. Guardian Life Ins. Co., 128 L.Ed.2d 391 (1994), and PCSSD does not allege that the State has breached the settlement agreement The Settlement Agreement does not compel or require the State to fund a co-op for the Districts. Indeed, quite the opposite is true - the Settlement Agreement acknowledges that state funding for a Pulaski County co-op had ceased, and that the co-operative had been dissolved, before the Agreement was signed. Settlement Agreement, section Ill E. (\"State funding for the Pulaski County Education Service [Cooperative] has ceased and the funds were reallocated to the Metropolitan Supervisor by order of the Court\"). PCSSD' s motion is in reality a somewhat convoluted request that the Court direct ADE to do what PCSSD 1'e1i~ves is required under State law. This Court must deny PCSSD's motion because PCSSD's attempt to enforce State law is not within the Court's Kokkonen-type jurisdiction over the State, and there is no other independent basis upon which this Court can base subject matter jurisdiction over such a claim. Such a state-law claim against the State is also barred by the Eleventh Amendment See, e.g., Pennhurst State School \u0026 Hosp. v. Halderman, 79 LEd.2d 67 (1984) (federal-court claims against state officials based upon alleged violations of state law are barred by Eleventh Amendment); Angela R. u. Clinton, 999 F.2d 320, 325 (8th Or. 1993) (Eleventh Amendment bars federal courts from granting relief against state officials for violations of state law). Finally, even if this Court could exercise jurisdiction over PCSSD's claim, the motion must be denied because the Districts are not entitled to form a co-op and receive funds for such a co-op under either the Settlement Agreement or State law. Appropriations merely authorize the release of funds from the treasury, subject to other applicable laws including the Revenue Stabilization Act and other substantive law. Further, appropriations, by themselves, do not require that funds actually be disbursed. In this instance, the provisions of Act 1392 and the provisions of other substantive state law prohibit the release of funds for a Pulaski County co-op. Act 1392 prohibits the release of funds for a Pulaski County co-op because as of this date, no order has been entered by this Court relieving the State of its obligation to provide funds for the operation of the ODM. See Act 1392 of 1999,  17.2 In addition, the General Assembly has not amended or repealed other provisions of State law that prohibit the formation of a new, sixteenth CO-l.'P that would serve only the three Districts. See, e.g., Ark. Code Ann.  6-13-1002 (authorizing State Board of Education to establish \"no more than fifteen\" cooperatives); Ark. Code Ann.  6-13-1003(b)(l) and (b)(2) (cooperatives must include at least three counties and include at least ten school districts).3 2 PCSSD attempts to sidestep this restriction by arguing that the language conditioning the release of the funds  is \"at variance with the requirements of the Settlement . Agreement and must therefore fail and be severed from the Act\"  The problem with PCSSD' s theory is that the conditional language is consistent With the Settlement . Agreement As noted earlier, the Settlement Agreement does not require that the State fund a Pulaski County co-op, and the special language in the Act recognizes that the State's obligation to fund ODM can only be modifi~ by an order from this Court  3 Thus, even if PCSSD were correct that the contingency language in Section 17 of Act . 1392 is both inconsistent with the Settlement and can be severed from the Act the provisions of Ark. Code Ann.  6-13-1002 and 1003 would nonetheless prohibit the  formation of a new \"16th co-op\" that would serve only the three Districts. For the foregoing reasons, ADE respectfully requests that PCSSD's motion be denied, and that the ADE be awarded its costs and attorneys' fee incurred in responding to this motion. Respectfully Submitted, MARK PRYOR Attorney General TIMOT q_ GAUGER #95019 Assistant Attorney G~neral --- 323 Center Street, Suite 200 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501) 682-2007 Attorneys for Arkansas Department of Education CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE L Timothy Gauger, certify that on July 9, 1999, a copy of the foregoing document will be served by U.S. mail, postage prepaid, on the following person(s) at the address(es) indicated:  M. Samuel Jones, ill Wright, Lindsey \u0026 Jennings 2000 NationsBank Bldg. 200 W. Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 John W. Walker John Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72201 Richard Roachell 401 W. Capitol, Suite 504 Little Rock, AR 72201 Christopher Heller Friday, Eldredge \u0026 Oark 2000 Regions Center 400 W. Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201-3493 Stephen W. Jones Jack, Lyon \u0026 Jones 3400 TCBY Tower 425 W. Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 ~ Ann Brown 201 E. Markham, Ste. 510 Little Rock, AR 72201 FILED U.S. DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT ARKANSAS IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION JUL 1,3 1999 ~~~E~~- ~~~K,p C~AK OEPC~ LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, Plaintiff, VS. PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL DISTRICT No. 1, et al., Defendants. MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, et al., Intervenors, KA THERINE KNIGHT, et al., lntervenors, * * * * * * No. LR-C-82-866 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ORDER Without objection, the motion of the Arkansas Department of Education (\"ADE\") for an Order relieving it of its obligation to file a July 1999 semiannual monitoring report is hereby granted. In addition, the Court grants nunc pro tune AD E's motion for an extension of time until and including July 9, 1999, in which to respond to (a) this Court's June 18, 1999 Order - concerning a proposed change in the grade structure and number of seats at the magnet schools for 1999-2000, and (b) PCSSD's \"Motion re the Pulaski Educational Cooperative.\" .-f1\\_ IT IS SO ORDERED this _j.d::_ day of 4--= 1999. 9;1'rruo~j- UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT rH1s DOCUMENT ENTER C(.,MPUIJil WITH RULEED ON DOCKET SHEET fN ':)N L 3/ q Cl 58 AND/OR 79(1) FRCP   / BY m::: __j 2 u.s~(L, ,,,.f;,p C:ASTCR. ':,.;.;,': . .:_ v,111r,r .N DI~,, ,,1.,' ,, /~/1,l\"S \"S ' ,~, I-\\ IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUL l 1 1 EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS 1999 WESTERN DIVISION ~;~MES \\V McCORM,iCK, CLERK LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT RECEIVED DEP. CLERK PLAINTIFF V. NO. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, et al. ,II 11 1 5 1999 OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION M0NITOR~~FENDANTS JOSHUA INTERVENORS' RESPONSE TO MOTION TO RELIEVE ADE MOTION CONCERNING MONITORING The Joshua Intervenors respond to the ADE motion concerning monitoring, served on June 28, 1999, as follows. The ADE motion was filed belatedly, rendering the request fait accompli. The - Joshua Intervenors respectfully request that ADE be ordered to file not later than Wednesday, August 4, 1999, their proposed new monitoring and reporting plan. Intervenors further respectfully request that the Court give priority to the development and approval of a new monitoring plan and require that the first report pursuant to that plan be filed not later than November 3, 1999. By: Respectfully submitted, JOHN W. WALKER, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 (501) 374-3758 -1- Robert Pressman 22 Locust A venue Lexington, Mass 02421 (781) 862-1955 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing has been mailed, postage prepaid to the following counsel or record, postage prepaid on this 14th day of July, 1999. Mr. Tim Humphries Assistant Attorney General 323 Center Street, Suite 200 Little Rock, Arknasas 72201 Mr. M. Samuel Jones, ill Wright, Lindsey \u0026 Jennings 2000 NationsBank. Plaza 200 W. Capitol Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Mr. Richard Roachell 401 W. Capitol, Suite 504 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 -2- Mr. Christopher Heller Friday, Eldredge \u0026 Clark 2000 First Commercial Bldg. 400 W. Capitol Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Mr. Stephen W. Jones Jack, Lyon \u0026 Jones 3400 TCBY Towers 425 W. Capitol Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Ms. Ann Brown 201 E. Markham, Ste. 510 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 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 JUI 1 6 1999 OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING NOTICE OF APPEAL FILED U.S. DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT ARKANSA\u003c:; JUL 141999 JAMfil W, MaQQAMAGK, \"!:.EA ijy'-----~-- DEP.CLERK PLAINTIFF DEFENDANTS INTERVENORS INTERVENORS The Little Rock School District (LRSD) hereby gives notice of its appeal from the order of the district court filed on June 16, 1999 which denied LRSD's request for certain damages related to teacher retirement and health insurance payments from the Arkansas Department of Education (ADE). Appeal is taken to the Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit. This notice is filed based upon the understanding that the Arkansas Department of Education intends to appeal this court's decision awarding prejudgment interest to the districts on their claims concerning teacher retirement and health insurance. If ADE does not pursue such an appeal, this notice of appeal may be withdrawn. Respectfully submitted, LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT FRIDAY, ELDREDGE \u0026 CLARK 2000 First Commercial Bldg. 400 West Capitol Street Little Rock, AR 72201 (501) 376-2011 Christopher Heller J. Clay Fendley CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE A I certify that a copy of the foregoing has been served on the W following on this 14th day of July, 1999 : Mr. John W. 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 TCBY Tower 425 Capitol Avenue Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Richard Roachell Roachell Law Firm 401 West Capitol, Suite 504 Little Rock, AR 72201 2 Ms. Ann Brown Desegregation Monitor Heritage West Bldg., Suite 510 201 East Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Timothy G. Gauger Office of the Attorney General 323 Center Street 200 Tower Building Little Rock, AR 72201 3 EDWARD L . WRIGHT ( 1903 1977) ROBERTS . LINDSEY (1913-1991) ISAAC A , SCOTT , JR . JOHN G . LILE WRIGHT, LINDSEY \u0026 JENNINGS I LP ATTORNEYS AT LAW JOHN 0 . DAVIS JUDY SIMMONS HENRY KI MBERLY WOOD TU CKER RAY F COX . JR . GOROON S. RATHER. JR. TERRY L . MATHEWS DAVID M. POWELL ROGER A . GLASGOW C. DOUGLAS BUFORD. JR . PATRICK J . GOSS ALSTON JENNINGS . JR . JOHN R. TISDALE KATH LYN GRAVES M. SAMUEL JONES Ill JOHN WILLIAM SPIVEY Ill LEE J, MULOROW N.M. NORTON CHARLES C . PRICE CHARLES T . COLEMAN JAMES J . GLOVER EDWIN L . LOWTHER . JR . CHARLES L. SCHLUMBERGER WALTER E . MAY GREGORY T. JONES H. KEITH MORRISON BETTINA E . BROWNSTEIN WALTER McSPADDEN ROGER 0 . ROWE NANCY BELLHOUSE MAY Mr. John Walker John Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 Ms. Ann Brown ODM Heritage West Building, Suite 510 201 East Markham Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Mr. Richard Roachell Roachell Law Firm 401 W. Capitol, Suite 504 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 RE: PCSSD Dear Counsel and Ms. Brown: 200 WEST CAPITOL AVENUE SUITE 2200 LITTLE ROCK , ARKANSAS 7220 1-3699 (501) 371-0808 FAX (501) 376-9442 WEBSITE : www .wlj .com OF COUNSEL ALSTON JENNINGS RONALD A . MAY M. TODD WOOD Writer 's Direct Dial No . 501-212-1273 mj ones@wlj .com July 15, 1999 Mr. Christopher Heller Friday, Eldredge \u0026 Clark TROY A. PR ICE PATRICIA A. SI EVERS JAMES M. MOODY . J R. KATHRYN A PRYOR J . MARK DAVIS CL AIRE SHOWS HANCOCK K EVIN W. KENNEDY JERRY J . SALLINGS FRED M. PERKINS Ill WILLIAM STUART JACKSON MICHAEL 0 . BARNES STEPHEN R. LANCASTER JUDY ROBINSON WILBER BETSY MEACHAM KY LE R. WILSON C. TAO BOHANNON DONS. McKI NNE Y MICHELE SIMMONS ALLGOOD KRISTI M. MOODY J . CHARLES DOUGHERTY M SEAN HATCH PHYLLIS M. McK ENZIE ELISA MASTERSON WHITE JANE M. FAULKNER ROBERT W. GEORG E J ANDREW VI NES 400 W. Capitol, Suite 2200 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Mr. Stephen W. Jones Jack, Lyon \u0026 Jones 3400 TCBY Tower 425 West Capitol Avenue Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Mr. Timothy Gauger Assistant Attorney General 323 Center Street, Suite 200 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 JUI 1 6 1999 OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING Enciosed is a copy of Notice of Appeal which is being filed today. MSJ/ao Encl. 115616-v1 Cordially, WRIGHT, LINDSEY \u0026 JENNINGS LLP IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT V. NO. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL IRi,,.-  ---- \\fEO DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL. t' MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL. 11\\ J' ,.:'.gg KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL. \\ l\u0026\u0026REGI '\\TORlNG NOTICE OF APPEAL PLAINTIFF DEFENDANTS INTERVENORS INTERVENORS The Pulaski County Special School District (PCSSD) hereby gives notice of its appeal from the order of the district court filed on June 16, 1999, which denied PCSSD's request for certain damages related to teacher retirement and health insu-rJ~J ~'::ll ~,( ~..l , _',; ; -~ i ' .,.  l s U:i~1-~ ~- ' .... .., payments from the Arkansas Department of Education (ADE). 11 5268-v1 Respectfully submitted, WRIGHT, LINDSEY \u0026 JENNINGS LLP 200 'Nest Capitol Avenua, Suite 2200 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-3699 (501) 371-0808 FAX: (501) 376-9442 By ~ M. amue Jones Ill (7~060) orneys or Pulaskl..eounty Special cha istrict CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE On July 1..5, 1999, a copy of the foregoing was served by U.S. mail on each of the following: Mr. John W. Walker John W. Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Mr. Christopher Heller Friday, Eldredge \u0026 Clark 2000 First Commercial Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Ms. Ann Brown ODM Heritage West Building, Suite 510 201 East Markham Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Mr. Richard W. Roachell Roachell and Street First Federal Plaza 401 West Capitol, Suite 504 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Mr. Timothy Gauger Assistant Attorney General 323 Center Street, Suite 200 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Mr. Stephen W. Jones 3400 TCBY Tower 425 West Capitol Avenue Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 2 - RECEIVEt' JUL .2 o 1999 OFFICE Of DESEGREGATION MONITORING IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, * * Plaintiff, * * * vs. * No. LR-C-82-866 * * * * PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL * DISTRICT No. 1, et al., * * Defendants. * * * MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, et al., * * Intervenors, * * * KATHERINE KNIGHT, et al., * * Intervenors, * ORDER JUL 181999 Before the Court is a motion by the Pulaski County Special School District (\"PCSSD\") for approval of a new school site (doc.#3266]. In its motion, which was filed June 9, 1999, PCSSD states that it'proposes to close both Bates and Fuller Elementaries and combine that student enrollment at a new site located at the northwest comer of 14S1h Street and Highway - 67/167 proximate to the Siemen's facility with no change of geo codes. The time for filing a response to this motion bas passed without a responsive pleading from any of the parties. Having considered the matter, and without objection from any of the parties, the Court finds that PCSSD's motion to approve the new school site described herein should be and hereby is granted. IT IS SO ORDERED this ii:_ ~ay of fl-4- 1999. ~~ UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 FILED U.S. DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT ARKANSAS iN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION JUL t 9 1999 JAMES f\" ~RMACK, CLERK LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, Plaintiff, VS . PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, et al., Defendants, MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, et al., Intervenors, KATHERINE KNIGHT, et al. , Intervenors. * * * * * * * * * * * * * ORDER By: \\. i~U I) '\u003c'1'. -~ OEP CLERK No. LR-C-82-866 RECEIVED JUL 2 o 1999 OFFICE OF  DESEGREGATION MONITORING Pulaski County Special School District (\"PCSSD\") filed a petition requesting that the Court grant PCSSD unitary status and release it from further court supervision [docket no. 3253]. The Joshua intervenors responded [docket no. 3253], and PCSSD replied to the response [docket no. 3260]. After careful consideration, the Court denies the petition and for reasons that follow will not, at this time, issue detailed findings regarding its decision. I. On October 14, 1997, PCSSD filed its first petition for unitary status, requesting release from federal court supervision over its desegregation efforts. 1 After receiving notice that the parties contemplated settlement discussions, the Court denied PCSSD's petition, without prejudice, noting the District's freedom to refile the petition if settlement efforts failed .2 1 Docket no. 3057. 2 Docket no. 3211. Presently hefore the Court is PCSSD's second petition requesting a declaration of unitary status. Additionally, PCSSD filed a document entitled \"Pulaski County Special School District Post Unitary Commitments,\" which sets forth actions PCSSD pledges to carry out in the event the Court grants the District unitary status. The commitments call for a dispute resolution process, whereby the Joshua intervenors could, as a last resort, seek the Court's assistance in resolving compliance issues.3 Thus PCSSD envisions that once it attains unitary status, the Court could retain jurisdiction over this matter. PCS SD explains it provided for the Court's continued jurisdiction \"as further evidence of its good faith view of desegregation issues and as such as a further matter for the district court to consider in assessing formal relinquishment of supervision .... \"4 However, the Court finds the provision for continued jurisdiction inapposite to whether PCSSD has achieved unitary status. This Court's jurisdiction depends on the existence of a constitutional violation. Once the PCSSD achieves unitary status and thus complies with the command of the Constitution, this Court's jurisdiction ends. See Swann v. Charlotte- Mecklenburg Bd of Educ. 91 S. Ct. 1267, 1276, 1284 (1971). The Joshua intervenors assert that PCSSD has not achieved unitary status and cite their prior submissions addressing PCSSD's 1997 petition to support their position.5 However, the intervenors believe the proposed commitments represent a \"renewed and more targeted\" plan that 3 Docket no. 3235, Attachment A, Pages 8-9. 4 Docket no. 3260, Page 3. 5 Docket no. 3079 (Opposition Response by Joshua to PCSSD's Motion for Release); Docket no. 3196 (Joshua's Proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law Concerning PCSSD's Motion for Release). 2 could serve as a new or-amended desegregation plan. With the sole exception of a provision concerning the duration of the cornmitments,6 the intervenors embrace PCSSD's proposed plan. In the past, the Court has encouraged the parties to amend their plan, if it would further their goals, and agrees that the proposed commitments would provide the basis for an acceptable amended plan and might even be suitable as a plan itself. II. The Court finds that PCSSD has not achieved unitary status and must deny the District 's petition. In light of the Joshua intervenors' recommendation that PCSSD's post-unitary commitments function as a basis for a revised desegregation plan, and the Court's desire to facilitate agreement among the parties, the Court will not, at this time, issue specific findings regarding its decision to deny the District's petition. If the parties can agree, such an agreement is preferable to court directives. See Little Rock Sch. Dist. v. Pulaski County Special Sch Dist., 921 F.2d 1371, 1383 (8th Cir. 1990). As the parties are in agreement on all items except duration, it would be wasteful of their resources and effort to litigate the many issues concerning unitary status. In any event, duration will be determined, for the most part, by whether the District has achieved its desegregation goals. m. THEREFORE, PCSSD's petition for release from court supervision is hereby denied [docket no. 3253]. FURTHER, the parties have 120 days from entry of this Order to submit an amended desegregation plan for the Court's approval. 6 If the parties desire, the Court is willing to conduct a hearing concerning the duration of an amended plan. 3 FURTHER, in the event the parties do not reach an agreement, the Court will issue detailed findings regarding its denial of PCSSD's petition for unitary status. FINALLY, the time to appeal this Order will run from the date such detailed findings are filed. !TIS SO ORDERED 11-!IS / 'f ./i_DAY OF \u003c;)-, t2\" , 1999 ~)t;c UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT fHIS DOCUMENT ENTERED ON DOCKET SHEET IN XiMPLJANCE Wirf ~LE 58 AND/n::1:1) FRCP , 1N '7//CJ  BY - I 4  IN THE UNITED ST A TES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, Plaintiff, FiLED U.S. DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT ARKANSAS JUL 1 9 1999 JAMES w. M~cc MACK, CLERK By: \\/_ - u ,'\\f\\\\ll,\"- 1 DP ClERll vs. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * No. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL DISTRICT No. I, et al., Defendants. MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, et al., Intervenors, KA THERINE KNIGHT, et al., Intervenors, ORDER -JUL 21 1999 om:Ecr DESBHC-\\1 ~ ;roNITORI IJG Before the Court are a number of motions from the Little Rock School District (\"LRSD\"), the Pulaski County Special School District (\"PCSSD\"), and the North Little Rock School District (\"NLRSD\") relating to attorney's fees and costs [see doc. #'s 3199, 3200, 3201 , and 3218]. The Arkansas Department of Education (\"ADE\"), in tum, has before the Court a motion to defer consideration of LRSD's, PCSSD's, and NLRSD's respective motions for attorney's fees and - costs [doc.#3209]. The Court notes-that several of these motions are moot and the Court has been informed that other of these motions will be amended to address circumstances that have arisen since the initial motions were filed. That being the case, and so that the record will "},{"id":"gsl_borm_borm1999-2000","title":"Minutes, Board of Regents, 1999-2000, July 1, 1999-June 30, 2000","collection_id":"gsl_borm","collection_title":"Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia Meeting Minutes, 1932-2005","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, Georgia, Fulton County, Atlanta, 33.749, -84.38798"],"dcterms_creator":["Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia"],"dc_date":["1999-07-01/2000-06-30"],"dcterms_description":["Meeting minutes and agendas of the Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia. Digitization of this collection is a project of the Georgia Public Library Service, a unit of the Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia, in association with the University System. The project is supported with federal LSTA funds administered by the Institute of Museum and Library Services."],"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Atlanta, Ga. : Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia"],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia Meeting Minutes, 1932-2005"],"dcterms_subject":["Education, Higher--United States--Administration","Universities and colleges","Schools","University System of Georgia. Board of Regents","Minutes (Records)","Agendas (Series)"],"dcterms_title":["Minutes, Board of Regents, 1999-2000, July 1, 1999-June 30, 2000"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia"],"edm_is_shown_by":["https://dlg.galileo.usg.edu/do:gsl_borm_borm1999-2000"],"edm_is_shown_at":["https://dlg.usg.edu/record/gsl_borm_borm1999-2000"],"dcterms_temporal":["1999-07-01/2000-06-30"],"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":["Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia. Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia Meeting Minutes, 1932-2005. Office of Legal Affairs, Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia, Atlanta, Georgia."],"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["minute books"],"dcterms_extent":["886 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"noa_sohpcr_k-0182","title":"Oral history interview with Carl A. Mills Jr., June 30, 1999","collection_id":"noa_sohpcr","collection_title":"Oral Histories of the American South: The Civil Rights Movement","dcterms_contributor":["Van Scoyoc, Peggy","Southern Oral History Program"],"dcterms_spatial":["United States, North Carolina, Wake County, 35.79012, -78.65022","United States, North Carolina, Wake County, Cary, 35.79154, -78.78112"],"dcterms_creator":["Mills, Carl A., 1926-1999"],"dc_date":["1999-06-30"],"dcterms_description":["Carl A. Mills Jr. became principal of Cary Elementary and Junior High School in 1953, and by the mid-1960s was serving as superintendent of the Cary district. When desegregation began, Mills was serving as principal of Cary High School, and he welcomed the one African American male who was the first to enter the all-white school. The process that followed was a smooth one, directed by local committees without much contribution from black families, which were few in the area. It is somewhat difficult to dissect the different stages of Mills's career, and how his school dealt with maintaining integration. However, he does reveal what might be distrust of government inspectors when he describes their questions about what appeared to have been the resegregation of his school: by the time the inspectors arrived, black students had left the classroom to learn trades. Not long afterward, Mills left the education business for a career in town recreation.","The Civil Rights Digital Library received support from a National Leadership Grant for Libraries awarded to the University of Georgia by the Institute of Museum and Library Services for the aggregation and enhancement of partner metadata."],"dc_format":["text/html","text/xml","audio/mpeg"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":null,"dc_relation":["Forms part of Oral histories of the American South collection."],"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":null,"dcterms_subject":["School administrators--North Carolina--Cary","School integration--North Carolina--Cary","Schools--North Carolina--Cary--Administration","Education--North Carolina--Cary","Recreation--North Carolina--Cary","Cary (N.C.)--Social life and customs"],"dcterms_title":["Oral history interview with Carl A. Mills Jr., June 30, 1999"],"dcterms_type":["Text","Sound"],"dcterms_provenance":["University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Documenting the American South (Project)"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://docsouth.unc.edu/sohp/K-0182/menu.html"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["transcripts","sound recordings","oral histories (literary works)"],"dcterms_extent":["Title from menu page (viewed on Nov. 10, 2008).","Interview participants: Carl A. Mills Jr., interviewee; Peggy Van Scoyoc, interviewer","Duration: 01:29:35.","This electronic edition is part of the UNC-Chapel Hill digital library, Documenting the American South. It is a part of the collection Oral histories of the American South.","Text encoded by Jennifer Joyner. Sound recordings digitized by Aaron Smithers."],"dlg_subject_personal":["Mills, Carl A., 1926-1999"],"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1412","title":"\"1998-99 Enrollment and Racial Balance in the Little Rock School District and Pulaski County Special School District,\" Office of Desegregation Monitoring, United States District Court, Little Rock, Ark.","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring (Little Rock, Ark.)"],"dc_date":["1999-06-23"],"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","School districts--Arkansas--Pulaski County","Office of Desegregation Monitoring (Little Rock, Ark.)","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","Educational law and legislation","School enrollment","School integration","School management and organization"],"dcterms_title":["\"1998-99 Enrollment and Racial Balance in the Little Rock School District and Pulaski County Special School District,\" Office of Desegregation Monitoring, United States District Court, Little Rock, Ark."],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Butler Center for Arkansas Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://arstudies.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/bcmss0837/id/1412"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["Available for use in research, teaching, and private study. Any other use requires permission from the Butler Center."],"dcterms_medium":["reports"],"dcterms_extent":["41 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1016","title":"\"Compliance for the LRSD Revised Desegregation and Education Plan Programs, Policies and Procedures,\"","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":null,"dc_date":["1999-06-10"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System."],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","Little Rock School District","Education--Arkansas","Educational planning","School integration","Educational law and legislation"],"dcterms_title":["\"Compliance for the LRSD Revised Desegregation and Education Plan Programs, Policies and Procedures,\""],"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/1016"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["reports"],"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\nThis transcript was created using Optical Character Recognition and may contain some errors.\nThis project was supported in part by a Digitizing Hidden Special Collections and Archives project grant from The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation and Council on Library and Information Resoources.\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n\n "},{"id":"noa_sohpcr_k-0144","title":"Oral history interview with Lawrence Ridgle, June 9, 1999","collection_id":"noa_sohpcr","collection_title":"Oral Histories of the American South: The Civil Rights Movement","dcterms_contributor":["Rouverol, Alicia J., 1961-","Southern Oral History Program"],"dcterms_spatial":["United States, North Carolina, Durham County, Durham, 35.99403, -78.89862"],"dcterms_creator":["Ridgle, Lawrence, 1931-"],"dc_date":["1999-06-09"],"dcterms_description":["This is the second of two interviews with Lawrence Ridgle, who spent most of his life living in Durham, North Carolina. Ridgle begins this interview by offering a detailed description of his father's work with the American Tobacco Company, explaining that his father had a fairly good job with the company, considering the opportunities open to African Americans at the time. Following in their father's footsteps, Ridgle's sister also worked for the American Tobacco Company, she for more than forty years. Initially employed as a cleaning woman, Ridgle's sister eventually rose in the ranks of the company to become the first African American foreman. In chronicling her unique achievements, Ridgle argues that her success was a source of tension for some African American workers, who dubbed her \"the slave driver.\" Ridgle shifts to a discussion of his years spent in the army, arguing that much like his sister, he covered new ground in the area of African American leadership. After first serving as a noncommissioned officer over an all-black battalion in the army, Ridgle presided over one of the first integrated battalions during the early 1950s. He offers numerous anecdotes about his experiences in the army, including the racial tensions he witnessed. Ridgle devotes the last third of the interview to a discussion of his thoughts on the state of affairs for the African American community at the time of this 1999 interview, focusing primarily on the impact of demographic changes resulting from a rapidly growing Latino population. In outlining some of the emerging tensions between African Americans and Latinos, Ridgle argues that Latinos offered a good example of industrious behavior for African Americans and expresses his hope that the two groups could learn from one another. Asserting his belief that urban renewal in Durham was detrimental to African Americans, Ridgle also spends considerable time explaining his disdain for the current welfare system and his perception of drug abuse in Durham, arguing that both contributed to the decline of the African American community. The interview concludes with Ridgle's ideas for promoting alliances between African Americans, Latinos, and poor whites to work together for the benefit of all three marginalized groups.","The Civil Rights Digital Library received support from a National Leadership Grant for Libraries awarded to the University of Georgia by the Institute of Museum and Library Services for the aggregation and enhancement of partner metadata."],"dc_format":["text/html","text/xml","audio/mpeg"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":null,"dc_relation":["Forms part of Oral histories of the American South collection."],"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":null,"dcterms_subject":["African American men--North Carolina--Durham","African Americans--North Carolina--Durham--Social conditions","Durham (N.C.)--Race relations","Durham (N.C.)--Population","African Americans--North Carolina--Durham--Relations with Hispanic Americans","African American soldiers","Tobacco workers--Employment--North Carolina--Durham","Women tobacco workers--Employment--North Carolina--Durham"],"dcterms_title":["Oral history interview with Lawrence Ridgle, June 9, 1999"],"dcterms_type":["Text","Sound"],"dcterms_provenance":["University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Documenting the American South (Project)"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://docsouth.unc.edu/sohp/K-0144/menu.html"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["transcripts","sound recordings","oral histories (literary works)"],"dcterms_extent":["Title from menu page (viewed on Nov. 26, 2008).","Interview participants: Lawrence Ridgle, interviewee; Alicia Rouverol, interviewer.","Duration: 02:13:25.","This electronic edition is part of the UNC-Chapel Hill digital library, Documenting the American South. It is a part of the collection Oral histories of the American South.","Text encoded by Kristin Shaffer. Sound recordings digitized by Aaron Smithers."],"dlg_subject_personal":["Ridgle, Lawrence, 1931-"],"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"noa_sohpcr_k-0143","title":"Oral history interview with Lawrence Ridgle, June 3, 1999","collection_id":"noa_sohpcr","collection_title":"Oral Histories of the American South: The Civil Rights Movement","dcterms_contributor":["Rouverol, Alicia J., 1961-","Southern Oral History Program"],"dcterms_spatial":["United States, North Carolina, Durham County, Durham, 35.99403, -78.89862"],"dcterms_creator":["Ridgle, Lawrence, 1931-"],"dc_date":["1999-06-03"],"dcterms_description":["This is the first of two interviews with Lawrence Ridgle, who was born during the height of the Great Depression and spent his childhood on Fayetteville Street in Durham, North Carolina. Ridgle begins the interview by recalling that his neighborhood was impoverished but close-knit. Ridgle describes the various ways in which people made ends meet through innovation during the Depression and helping one another out, arguing that \"getting by\" constituted great success. Ridgle also asserts his admiration for the social welfare programs that Franklin Delano Roosevelt implemented during those years because they put people to work and helped to feed people. Nevertheless, Ridgle also notes that he felt deep disdain for the modern welfare system. In addition to emphasizing community togetherness, he also discusses his father's job with the American Tobacco Company, which he later elaborates upon in his second interview. Ridgle devotes the second half of the interview to what he sees as decline within the African American community, particularly as a result of urban renewal projects that began during the 1960s. Ridgle argues that these projects created a disconnect between African Americans of different social classes, and that thriving African American business in Durham had all but disappeared during the period of urban renewal. He articulates his admiration for business owners who held out as long as possible. Ridgle concludes the interview by arguing that although many people initially understood urban renewal in a positive light, it ultimately served to isolate African American neighborhoods and communities.","The Civil Rights Digital Library received support from a National Leadership Grant for Libraries awarded to the University of Georgia by the Institute of Museum and Library Services for the aggregation and enhancement of partner metadata."],"dc_format":["text/html","text/xml","audio/mpeg"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":null,"dc_relation":["Forms part of Oral histories of the American South collection."],"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":null,"dcterms_subject":["African American men--North Carolina--Durham","African Americans--North Carolina--Durham--Economic conditions","African Americans--North Carolina--Durham--Social conditions","Urban renewal--North Carolina--Durham","African American neighborhoods--North Carolina--Durham","New Deal, 1933-1939--North Carolina--Durham"],"dcterms_title":["Oral history interview with Lawrence Ridgle, June 3, 1999"],"dcterms_type":["Text","Sound"],"dcterms_provenance":["University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Documenting the American South (Project)"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://docsouth.unc.edu/sohp/K-0143/menu.html"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["transcripts","sound recordings","oral histories (literary works)"],"dcterms_extent":["Title from menu page (viewed on Nov. 26, 2008).","Interview participants: Lawrence Ridgle, interviewee; unidentified speaker; Alicia Rouverol, interviewer.","Duration: 01:03:50.","This electronic edition is part of the UNC-Chapel Hill digital library, Documenting the American South. It is a part of the collection Oral histories of the American South.","Text encoded by Kristin Shaffer. Sound recordings digitized by Aaron Smithers."],"dlg_subject_personal":["Ridgle, Lawrence, 1931-"],"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1447","title":"Report: ''Racial Composition of the Certified Staff in the Secondary Schools and the Administrators in the Central Office of the Pulaski County Special School District,'' Office of Desegregation Monitoring, United States District Court, Little Rock, Ark.","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring (Little Rock, Ark.)"],"dc_date":["1999-06-03"],"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","School districts--Arkansas--Pulaski County","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","Educational statistics","School administrators","School employees","School integration"],"dcterms_title":["Report: ''Racial Composition of the Certified Staff in the Secondary Schools and the Administrators in the Central Office of the Pulaski County Special School District,'' Office of Desegregation Monitoring, United States District Court, Little Rock, Ark."],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Butler Center for Arkansas Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://arstudies.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/bcmss0837/id/1447"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["Available for use in research, teaching, and private study. Any other use requires permission from the Butler Center."],"dcterms_medium":["reports"],"dcterms_extent":["23 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1721","title":"Court filings: District Court, Pulaski County Special School District's (PCSSD's) motion to approve new school site; District Court, three orders; District Court, combined motion and memorandum re: the Pulaski Educational Cooperative; District Court, notice of filing, Office of Desegregation Management report, ''1998-99 Enrollment and Racial Balance in the Little Rock School District (LRSD) and Pulaski County Special School District (PCSSD)''; District Court, motion to relieve Arkansas Department of Education (ADE) from its obligation to file a July 1999 semiannual monitoring report; District Court, notice of filing, Arkansas Department of Education (ADE) project management tool","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":["1999-06"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System"],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","Special districts--Arkansas--Pulaski County","Office of Desegregation Monitoring (Little Rock, Ark.)","Little Rock School District","Arkansas. Department of Education","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","Education--Finance","Educational law and legislation","Educational planning","School management and organization","School buildings","School facilities","School enrollment"],"dcterms_title":["Court filings: District Court, Pulaski County Special School District's (PCSSD's) motion to approve new school site; District Court, three orders; District Court, combined motion and memorandum re: the Pulaski Educational Cooperative; District Court, notice of filing, Office of Desegregation Management report, ''1998-99 Enrollment and Racial Balance in the Little Rock School District (LRSD) and Pulaski County Special School District (PCSSD)''; District Court, motion to relieve Arkansas Department of Education (ADE) from its obligation to file a July 1999 semiannual monitoring report; District Court, notice of filing, Arkansas Department of Education (ADE) project management tool"],"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/1721"],"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":["90 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"The transcript for this item was created using Optical Character Recognition (OCR) and may contain some errors.  EDWARD L . WRIGHT ( U03- IQ77) ROBERT S. LINDSEY (1 913  1991) ISAAC A. SCOTT , JR . JOHN G. LILE WRIGHT, LINDSEY \u0026 JENNINGS l.LP ATTORNEYS AT LAW JOHN 0 . DAVIS JUDY SIMMONS HENRY KIMBERLY WOOD TUCKER RAY F . COX . JR. GORDON S. RATHER. JR. TERRY L. MATHEWS DAVID M. POWELL ROGER A. GLASGOW C. DOUGLAS BUFORD. JR . PATRICK J . GOSS ALSTON JENNINGS . JR . JOHN R, TISDALE KATHLYN GRAVES M. SAMUEL JONES 111 JOHN WILL IAM SPIVEY Il l LEE J. MULDROW N.M . NORTON CHARLES C . PRICE CHARLES T . COLEMAN JAMES J. GLOVER EDWIN L. LOWTHER . JR . CHARLES L. SCHLUMBERGER WALTER E . MAY GREGORY T. JONES H. KEITH MORRISON BETTINA E . BROWNSTEIN WALTER McSPAOOEN ROGER D. ROWE NANCY BELLHOUSE MAY Mr. John Walker John Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 Ms. Ann Brown ODM Heritage West Building, Suite 510 201 East Markham Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Mr. Richard Roachell Roachell Law Firm 401 W. Capitol, Suite 504 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 RE: PCSSD Dear Counsel and Ms. Brown: 200 WEST CAPITOL AVENUE SUITE 2200 LITTLE ROCK , ARKANSAS 7220 1-3699 (501) 371 -0808 FAX (501) 376 -9442 WEBSITE : www .wl j .com OF COUNSEL ALSTON JENNINGS RONALD A. MAY M. TODD WOOD Wri ter ' s Direct Dial No . 501-212 - 1273 mj onesQwlj .com June 9, 1999 Mr. Christopher Heller Friday, Eldredge \u0026 Clark TROY A. PRICE PATRICIA A. SIEVERS JAMES M. MOODY. JR. KATHRYN A. PRYOR J. MARK DAVIS CLAIRE SHOWS HANCOCK KEVIN W. KENNEDY JERRY J. SALLINGS FRED M PERK INS 111 WILLIAM STUART JACKSON MICHAEL 0 . BARNES STEPHEN R. LANCASTER JUDY ROBINSON WILBER BETSY MEACHAM KYLE R. WILSON C. TAO BOHANNON DON S. McKINNEY MICHELE SIMMONS ALLGOOD KRISTI M. MOODY J. CHARLES DOUGHERTY M . SEAN HATCH PHYLLIS M. McKENZIE ELISA MASTER SON WHITE JANE M. FAULKNER ROBERT W. GEORGE J. ANDREW VINES 400 W. Capitol, Suite 2200 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 RECEIVED Mr. Stephen W. Jones Jack, Lyon \u0026 Jones 3400 TCBY Tower 425 West Capitol Avenue Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Mr. Timothy Gauger Assistant Attorney General 323 Center Street, Suite 200 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 JUN 1 0 1999 OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING. Enclosed is a copy of PCSSD's motion to approve new school site which is being filed today. MSJ/ao Encl. 108830-v1 Cordially, WRIGHT, LINDSEY \u0026 JENNINGS LLP M. Samuel Jones, Ill IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT V. NO. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL. MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL. KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL. RECEIVED: JUN 1 0 1999' OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORIN\u0026. PLAINTIFF DEFENDANTS INTERVENORS INTERVENORS PCSSD'S MOTION TO APPROVE NEW SCHOOL SITE The PCSSD for its motion, states: 1. In its post-unitary commitments recently filed with this Court for approval, the PCSSD pledged to construct a new elementary school in the southeast sector. 2. Pursuant to the Desegregation Plan dated April 29, 1992, the PCSSD established a biracial building committee including representatives from the Office of Desegregation, all as specified at page 81 of the Plan. 3. The committee spent several weeks evaluating possible sites before recommending a site located at the northwest corner of 145th Street and Highway 67/167 proximate to the Siemen's facility. 4. Counsel for the PCSSD is informed that the ODM has been appropriately involved in the site selection process. 5. This process began some time ago with the view toward closing Bates  Elementary and simply shifting that student population to the new facility. As matters have evolved, the PCSSD now proposes to close both Bates and Fuller Elementaries 108803-v1 and combine that student enrollment at the new site with no change of geo codes. The PCSSD believes that by simply moving these enrollments to a new facility, that its proposal is race neutral and will have no negative impact upon its current desegregation efforts. However, at the same time, approval of this site will enable these present student bodies to enjoy the conveniences and benefits of a new school facility. 6. Attached as Exhibit A are the original offer and acceptance, including special conditions and the outstanding counter offer. Speciai Condition 2 d. provides that approval of this Court is necessary to finalize this transaction. 7. We further wish to advise the Court that there are current active discussions at the district level which, if finalized, would cause the configuration of the building to be constructed on this site to be that for kindergarten through 5th grade. To - accomplish this, Fuller Junior School would be reconfigured for 6th through 8th grades and Mills High School would be converted to grades 9 through 12. The district has, of course, made no final decisions regarding this, but the district felt the Court should be aware of these discussions and deliberations. If and when a decision to change the configuration is made, an appropriate filing with this Court will also be made. WHEREFORE, the PCSSD prays that the school site described herein be approved and that, upon completion of the new facility, that the present Bates and Fuller Elementary Schools be approved for closing. WRIGHT, LINDSEY \u0026 JENNINGS LLP 200 West Capitol Avenue, Suite 2200 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-3699 (501) 371-0808 FAX: (501) 376-9442 By _ ~-1------+-=------- ) Special 2 ' CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE On June 9 , 1999, a copy of the foregoing was served by U.S. mail on each of the following: Mr. John W. Walker John W. Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Mr. Christopher Heller Friday, Eldredge \u0026 Clark 2000 First Commercial Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Ms. Ann Brown ODM Heritage West Building, Suite 510 201 East Markham Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Mr. Richard W. Roachell Roachell and Street First Federal Plaza 401 West Capitol, Suite 504 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Mr. Timothy Gauger Assistant Attorney General 323 Center Street, Suite 200 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Mr. Stephen W. Jones 3400 TCBY Tower 425 West Capitol Avenue Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 3 THE HATHAWAY GROUP I 00 MORGAN KEEGAN DRIVE, SUITE 120 LITTLE kOCK, ARKANSAS 72202 HA I OHT' 1.. I N O SEV - (591) 663-5400 OFFER \u0026 ACCEPTANCE  4 -l 1. BUYER \u0026 SELLER: Pulaski County Special School District, hereinafter referred to as \"Buyer,\" offers to buy, subject to the terms set forth ben,in. the below described property from The Dorothy Eosminier Trust. hereinafter rcfem:d to as '\"'Seller.\" 2. PROPERTY DESCRIBED AS: Approximately 22.569 acres, being part of Tracts 27 and 28, Holman Acres, Pulaski County, Arkansa., mon, particularly described on Bxh.lblt B attached .. 3. PURCHASE PRICE: The Buyer will pay $135,400.00 for the property, payable all in cash at closing. 4. SPECIAL CONDffiONS: Buyer's Offer is conditioned upon satisfaction of the Special Conditions anached hereto on Exhibit A. 5. EARNEST MONEY: Buyer herewith tenders a check for $3,000.00 to be ~ upab accct,1'81-:c as earnest mooey which shall llJll)iy to purcbuc price or closina COit.i. \u0026mcst IDDDDY lball be mid In C9CroW by The Hathaway Group. If tide requin:IDCDU arc not fulfilled, or if thoao Special COllditiool providing for ID earnest moocy refuod UC not aatisficd. 1be earnest mooey deposit shall be refunded to Buyer. If Buyer fails to fulfill his obliptirm or if, after all cooditioi1' have been met, Buyer fails to cloae dlil tramacuoo. the earnest moocy may, at the 901c and cx.clmiYc optim of the Seller, be rctaiucd by the Seller as liquidau,d damages. Alrmnadvely, Seller may recum the eamesr money md uaert all lcpl or cquitlblc rigbta which may exist as a result of Buyer's breach of cootraa. 6 . CONVEYANCE: Convcyaoce shall be made to Buyer, or u mrc::am by Bu:yac, by general wammry deed, excepc It shall be subject to recorded restrictions aod easements, if my, which do D0t ma\u0026erlally affi:cl die property. 7. TJTI..8 INSURANCE: Within twenty-one (21) days of aix:cp(aDce, Seller shall fumiah to Buyer a cnmmirmcnt for an American Land TJtle .As3ociation (ALTA) owner's title insuraDcc policy in tbc amouot of tbc pun:base price issued by a compauy alllhom.ed to insure title to real property in the State of Arbnsas and which company is reuombly accepcable to Buya-. Where Um title commitment shows special excepdoos to title olber Ihm tbole ltandud exccptiom cootaincd in the ALT A commitmcat form. and where such special exa:prlom relare to rcstricdom, 011iMm. det=I or odJcr matters which would interfere with Buyer's use or adversely affi:ct the value of tbc premises, then wilmD fourteeu (14) days of delivery of the title C0111roitmmt, Buyer shall deliver written ootice thei'cof to Seller. Such nock:e \u0026hall awe speciftcally tboee eltCCJl(iom to which Buyer objects. All objecdoos not specifically enumerated within such a timely dclivcnxl DOticc shall be deemed to be waived by Buyer. Within fourteen (14) days of Buyer's delivery of noace of objecdom to Seller, Sell may cun, such objccdoos or baYC the exceptiom waived or removed by the title company issuing the oomrnilJJJtJUf U, witbin sucb fourt.ccn (14) day period, Seller fails to cure and/or have waived such objection., and excepdoas, or within that period, ScDer dclm:ni writlcu notice to Buyer that it will not so cmc, then. within three (3) days from delivery of Slr.b nodce from Seller or the eoci of tbc period within which Seller may CUJ'C (whichever ii applicable), Buyer shall have the option to: a. Tennioale this agreemem by ddlveriDg written nodcc thereof to ScUer, in which evcot all sums paid or dcpo5itcd by Buyer shall be returm:d to Buyer; or b. Purchase the premises subject to such objectioos and~ with no rccluctioo in the purchase price; or c. A\u0026rCC to extend tbc closin\u0026 date for thirty (30) days, to give Seller addiJiooal time ID cure such objectiolls. Ir Buyer falls to deUVer notice of termiDation or grant an extemioo of tbe closing date within that period. the objcctioos shall be deemed to be waived and this condition shall be sarlsfiod. Seller lball furnish tbe commincd owner's title iDsuraDce policy as IOOll u pnctlcablc after c:loliug, and shall pay all expcmcs related to the OWDer's title insurance policy. EXHIBIT I /J WR IGHT L. tNOS E .,  IJ. .PRORA TIONS: Taxca and special assesnnems due 011 or before cl01tn, shall be paid by Seller. ADY dcpoaita oo raJU1 property \u0026re ~ be transfcncd to Buyer at closing. Imunmce, cunm geueral wes and special VSCSSJDl'UI, r'Clllal ~ utilities, and any interest on assumed loam shall be prorated at closing unless odlerwise specified herein. CLOSING: Closina shall occur at such time as mutually agreed by the partiel, provided that the dale shall be no later lban August 31. 1999, unless such rcquircmcut is waived in writiDg by both parties and a new date substituted tbcretor. Unless oberwiae agreed by Buyer and Seller, tramacdo.n costs will be paid by the party indicated below: Scllcr:  Title examination or search fees, Premium for owner's title insurance policy, IRS notification form, Preparation of conveyance documents, One-half of escrow fees., Onebalf of doaimeowy stamps, Other charges as customarily paid by Seller. Buyer. Premium for mortgagee's title in:s1U1111cc policy,  Recording fees, Preparation of loan dOCIIIllents, One-half of oscrow foec, One-half of documentary stamps. Other charges customarily paJd by Buyer. 10. POSSESSION: Poi.seaion shall be delivered to Buyer upon the closing dale. 11. A TI ACHED FIX1URES AND EQUIPMENT: Unless specifically excluded herein, all attached fixtures 111d equipment, if any, are included in the purchase price. 12. INSPEC110NS AND REPAIRS: Buyer certifies that Buyer has inspected or will inspect tho property and is not relying upon any wammtic,. repn:scntatioru or statcmeotll of any a\u0026cnt or Seller as to age or condition of improvements, other than those specified herein. 13. RISK OF LOSS: lf prior to closiog of this ttaosaetloo the lmprovemmm on the property shall be destroyed or m.at.crially damaged by nre or other casualty. tills comract sball, at tbc opt1oD or lbe Buyer, be null and void. If Buyer shall elect, in the cvem of such lou, Chat the comnict lbalJ be performed, he shall be cotitlcd to the proceeds of iu\u0026urani:e applicable to the loss for use in repel.rfng said loss. 14. MISCELLANEOUS: - L This Offer and Ac:ccptaDcc shall be goYClllCd by the 1awa of the Stale of Arlcamas. b. lb.is Offer and Accepcmce, iDcludillg all cxhibkl, contains the compl= agreement bctMcn tho parties and cannot be vuicd ex.c:cpt by writa qr-ccmcut by the panics. The partica a,rco lba1 there are no oral agreemcnta, unde~. representations or warranties which are oot expressly set funh herein. c. Any portion of this Offer and Au eptauce JJDt odJerwise \u003cxDRJrnrnated 'It closing wUl surviYe the closing of this n-anslld:loa aa i:i coodnning agm:mem by aod between lbe parties. d. This Ofm' ilOd Accepc.uu, \u0026ball inure to the benefit of md bind the panie., hereto and their rC3Jiective heirs, rcprcscntativcs, suca:ssms, and assigns. c. Tune is of the caax:e witb respect 10 this Offer and Acccptancc. 15. ACCEPTANCE: The tam-~ .. a UICd hcl'cio shall rm thc larer of thc two dates oo which this Offer and Acceptance Is sipcd by Seller Ol' Buyer, u iDdicared by dlelr sipalUrCI below, whicb later date shall be the date of final execution and agreemem by die putiel hereto. If my dat.e or deadline provided for herein ran. on Saturday, Sunday, or a holiday. the applicable dale shall be the next bmioca day. 16. AGENCY: By virtue of The Hathaway Group's Exclusive Listing Agreement with Seller covering this Property, and The Hathaway Group's Exclusive Agency agreement wi1b Buyer, dated March 15, 1999, Seller and Buyer heRby aclmowlcdgc and agree lbal the Usdog/Sellillg Agem Firm and all licellled pe1101111el ISIOcialed with the Listing/Selling Agcat Firm are representing both Buyer and Scllei- in the purchase md sale of Ille abo't'e relereoccd Property and 1ba1 Listing/Selling Agem F'll1D bas been and is now the agent of bath Scllec and Buyer with ~ 10 this cramactioa, Seller and Buyer have both consented to, and hereby confirm their oonsent to 1FDCY repn:se:otatiao ofbacb parties. Further, Seller alJd Buyer: 2 WR I GHT 1,..I N OSE ., a. agree dial tbe J..istiu\u0026ISelliD\u0026 Agent F'um shall DDl dia::1olo to either Buyer or Se1lc:r aay penoaal, fimucia.l or OCher con.f1dcm1a1 information cooccmmg the olber puty witboul the cxprea wriUm comm or that party. This rcstrictioo doea DOt include ':nformation actually known by Li.sting/Selling A.gm. Firm which IWSt, at Ustiug/Sellioa A\u0026CDt Pirm'a dJscrction. be disclosed. b. aclalowledge ncdfiadoo lbat when Ustina/Sellinl Aacnt rum ,epreaem bodi partica, a coaflic:t of imercst CAD arise, and Seller and Buyer further agree to forfeit their individual right to receive the uodividcd loyalty of Llsting/Sclling Agent Firm. It is understood, however, that Luling/Selling Agent F\"srm is obligated to treat each party fairly and equitably. c. waive any claim now or hereafter arising out of aay c:onffictl of interest from Listing/Selling A\u0026cnt -P-liln rcp~nting bodl parties. Buyer and Seller acknowledge tbe Listiag/Selliag Agent F1rm di9cmed that the L\u0026ting/Sdliaa Agaat F1rm rcpr'CXlltl both partic., ill this tnmactioa, and Daya- md Sellrr ban ghm tbefr couseld to th1I representation before entering into this Offer 1111d Ac:ceptaDce. d. agree that Llsdng/Selliog Ageot P-um'a fee shall be paid by Sell only. 17. EXPIRATION OF OFFER: This offer shall expire unlcsa accepted in writing bySclltrbcfore S:00 p.m. oo June 8, 1999. SELLING AGENT FIRM: The Hathaway Group Jeffrey~(, ~-- s~---1 Urtr:Jr-.....-\"'~'~prtd _________ 1999 at __ AM/PM. w~ ag,w to pay 1M llaw nanwd agar/ a Ju for profusiotlal urvku r in Sffllnllg said o/fer, as ~ in a HJ)Q1'QU listing agnanDII. If for (1lfJ reason w eamt!SI money Af'_TC1VU'kd for lwmn is forfeit, u under the provisions herro/. same shall be divided apllJlly bt:twlln Sd/Lr and Listing .Agmt -Firm after payTMnl of inaured apauu. LISTING AGENT FIRM: . The Hathaway Group ingerTrust J.E. Hathaway, Jr. - Agent Date Supervising Broker Date 3 e - 9--39 : t: -l 9PM ;0 1 S;\"Q 1cr .:::,F = C E wA  C t--1 r L.. , ,._,CSE .,, EXHIBIT B ..: .ar- . , --- S ...... '- -,,---.. 11ft ,.. ---- I ._(.t z.. ' taOf'Ellff Daelll\"r~ Pn et Tr.eta a, 1'4 21 Mel ... Aar ... hllll eouncy. u~. -r partlcularlr deac\u0026\"lbe4  co-Mlft9 ac ~ i11Mtnecr4;1011 ot ne ~ rl.,,ac-ot-var u,.. et \u0026aac Uldl '\"-tend ta. W.at ri11u:-.t-var Une et Dln.11 Del ~-.. ~ l~  , ..... , dqac-af-vr , ... llocUI oo n 40 bsc ,,,.1., teec u u.. 101n or 10::tnucc, tJ\\eaae Nertll  11  .- w.et JCM.51 feecr CMACe SouU oo oc \u003eo vcc 1s,.co , .. c to  poi\"c \" ~ Eaatedy ri48'tot- y u .. or U.S. Ni,aw.y W.. H-161r U..nca alon9 tUld .-1.8'C-e(-V.f UM ua oUovl-, IOUI' ... , bearlnq and dlt.a- 1).IIOru. a,,., \u003eo W..t i10.2t r-.t, JI 110n.a  \u003e s7 w.ac 6a\u0026.oJ t .. c, )) .-oru. s, \u003e 41 w.ac 110.,~ r .. c, c) !llonll 02 \u003eo ,.,. Vet a\u003ec.os fti ~ace SCNta n H' M caac UtJ.n , .. c ~  polnt oa ~ v.ac rlc,Ac_f_J' u .. of Di,.._ DdI '-\"\"el..-. .. ,. l'l.hC ot--r souc.11  11 co w.ac n1.,1 , .. ,, CAanC:41 co.clMalftt 1---. lei rl9~c-ot-r 0A a~ COCM ci.hc 11\u0026vl1119  ra4l- et 71S.6\u0026 , .. c. ell aro dlat.AIIOe of ltt.15 f~ Uld  c::IIOnl vt1icll ~r Souu. oa 11 5\u0026 v.ac 1,,.20 feec, Uaw: con~llllll\"'f IOAtf  ,. rl'fl\\C-O(-vay Souc- 1, 20 .,. Vc 20.ao fec, ua.nco CCM1Cl11111-, al ... a.\u0026 rl~hc-ef-.r on cwrv to t.h4 letc a.v11WJ  rulua of ,1s.1, fNc. \u0026A arc dlaUftCa ot 200.05 f-~ AM CMC'1I lltlicll be~ SovQ Ot l' 21 Vt lt , .. c, ~ CGCIClnulnq IOftlll aald rlqllC-f-vey SOUC!I oo ff' U V.C 25.tO feet to CM ,01111' or am11a11-.. c0Aul11l11o9 a,.~,, ecr aor oc l RECEIVED FILED U.S. DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT ARKANSAS - JUN 2 4 1999 OfflCE OF DcSEGREGATION MONITORING IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION JUN 1, 6 1999 JAMES,~MACK, CLERK By: L~ADtv\\iL\".., OEP CLER;\u003c LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, Plaintiff, vs. PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL DISTRICT No. 1, et al., Defendants. MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, et al., Intervenors, KA THERINE KNIGHT, et al., Intervenors,       No. LR-C-82-866                   ORDER On July 1, 1998, the Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit handed down an opinion on the issue of funding of retirement and health insurance for teachers and directed this Court to decide, in the first instance, exactly what relief is appropriate. See Little Rock School Dist. v. North Little Rock School Dist., 148 F.3d 956 (8th Cir. 1998). The Court stated as follows: The three Pulaski County School Districts should be placed in a position no worse than they would have occupied if the previous system of funding for teacher retirement and health insurance had not been changed. This does not mean that these districts are entitled to receive both an amount equivalent to what the old 3257 system would have produced for teacher retirement and health insurance, and the whole amount now paid to them as Equalization Funding. Such a result would be a double recovery, a windfall. But the districts are entitled to be held harmless against any adverse effect of the funding change. This means that it will be up to the District Court, after appropriate submissions from the parties, to calculate, as near as may be, the difference between what the old system - MFP A plus teacher retirement plus health insurance - would have produced, and what the new system - Equalization Funding in one lump sum - is producing. The appellants suggest that this effort will necessarily involve speculation. Admittedly it cannot be exact, but we believe that the District Court can make a reasonable and informed estimate. 148 F.3d 956, 968. The Eighth Circuit's mandate was filed in this Court on August 17, 1998, and the parties subsequently submitted papers setting forth their respective views on the matter. A hearing on this issue was held on January 6, 1999, following which the parties filed post-hearing briefs on the issues raised at the hearing. Thereafter, the three Pulaski County school districts - the Little Rock School District (\"LRSD\"), the Pulaski County Special School District (\"PCSSD\"), and the North Little Rock School District (\"NLRSD\") (hereinafter ''the districts\") - filed a motion for an Order directing the State of Arkansas to distribute the districts' undisputed teacher retirement and health insurance damages. The State, by and through the Arkansas Department of Education (\"ADE\"), responded in opposition to the districts' motion, and the districts filed a reply to ADE's response. By Order dated March 4, 1999, this Court granted the districts' motion, noting that there was no dispute to be resolved as to the appropriate methodology for determining the districts' damages with regard to teacher retirement and health insurance - all parties having agreed on the ADE's proposed methodology- and that all parties were in agreement that the districts are entitled to at least the amounts shown on Revised Exhibit 504, which total $20,380,490.00. The 2 Court thus ordered that the State of Arkansas make payment to the districts in the amount of $20,380,490.00, to be distributed as follows: 60% to LRSD, 30% to PCS SD, and 10% to NLRSD. In so ruling, the Court stated that it would resolve in due course whether the State should be required to pay the districts 100% of each district's costs for teacher retirement and health insurance or the average percentage of actual costs received by other school districts in the State, and whether the districts are entitled to an award of prejudgment interest. It is those issues to which the Court now turns. The districts first contend that in order to provide equal funding to the districts, the starting point for their damages should be 106% of their actual teacher retirement and health insurance costs -- a percentage they state is approximately the same percentage of teacher retirement and health insurance costs paid by the State to all other school districts in Arkansas1 - and that to provide less is discriminatory and in violation of the Order of the Eighth Circuit. The ADE, however, argues that such a remedy would result in a windfall to the districts that the Eighth Circuit stated was improper, and that the districts' damages should be based on their actual teacher retirement and health insurance costs rather than the average percentage of actual costs received by other school districts in the State. The Court has considered the matter and agrees with the ADE that the State should be required to pay the districts 100% of their costs for teacher retirement and health insurance. In directing this Court to determine the appropriate relief to be accorded the districts, the Eighth Circuit only required that the districts \"should be placed in a position no worse than they would 1 See Mem. Br. in Sup. of Mot. for an Ord. Directing the State to Distribute the Districts' Und. Teach. Ret. and Health Ins. Damages, at 2. 3 have occupied if the previous system of funding for teacher retirement and health insurance had not been changed,\" and stated that the \"districts are entitled to be held harmless against any adverse effect of the funding change.\" I 48 F.3d 956, 968. In this regard, there can be no doubt that requiring the State to pay the districts 100% of each district's costs for teacher retirement and health insurance will make the districts whole as envisioned by the Eighth Circuit. The I 06% figure cited by the districts constitutes the average percentage of actual costs received by other school districts in the State and ignores the fact that some school districts received more and some received less. Accordingly, this Court determines that requiring the State to pay the districts I 00% of their costs for teacher retirement and health insurance will hold them harmless against any adverse effect of the funding change. The districts also contend they are entitled to an equitable award of prejudgment interest  - to compensate them for the State's delay in paying the districts' teacher retirement and health insurance costs. They note that the \"adverse effect of the funding change\" to which the Eighth Circuit held they are entitled to be held harmless against has manifested itself in many ways, including deprivation of funds -- or the use of funds -- to which they have been entitled since 1996. The ADE, however, argues that the districts have cited no case in which prejudgment interest has been awarded in circumstances similar to the case at bar, and that the districts in any case are not entitled to such an award as the amount of the underlying liability is not reasonably capable of assessment. The Court has considered the matter and determines that the districts are entitled to an award of prejudgment interest. Whether or not the districts have cited similar cases in which prejudgment interest has been awarded is of no import as the Court finds that under these 4 circumstances such an award against the State is proper. Prejudgment interest serves purposes of making a claimant whole, promoting settlement, and deterring attempts to benefit unfairly from inherent delays in litigation, and should ordinarily be granted unless exceptional or unusual circumstances exist making the award of interest inequitable. Stroh Container Co. v. Delphi Indus., Inc., 783 F.2d 743, 752 (8th Cir. ) cert. denied, 476 U.S. 1141 (1986). The Court finds no exceptional or unusual circumstances in this case that would make an award of prejudgment interest inequitable, and such an award comports with the Eighth Circuit's directive that the districts are entitled to be held harmless against any adverse effect of the funding change implemented by the State. Contrary to the suggestion of the ADE, existing case law allows an award of prejudgment interest against a state defendant in a case such as this. In Missouri v. Jenkins, 491 U.S. 274 - (1989), the Supreme Court held that adjusting an attorney's fee award against a state under 42 U.S.C.  1988 to account for delay in payment was appropriate and not barred by the Eleventh Amendment. Id. at 284. In so ruling, the majority specifically rejected the view, expressed by the dissent, that the Eleventh Amendment requires an \"ultrastrict rule of construction for interest awards\" comparable to the \"federal no interest rule.\" Id. at 281 n.3 . Based on Jenkins, the Eighth Circuit has refused to impose a strict rule of construction protecting state defendants against prejudgment interest awards, see Winbush v. State of Iowa, 66 F.3d 1471 , 1483-84 (8th Cir. 1995) (holding that under Title VII and its \"make whole\" policy, courts have the power to award prejudgment interest against state defendants), and, as noted in Winbush, other circuits likewise have rejected such a strict construction. See Reopell v. Massachusetts, 936 F.2d 12, 15 5 (!51 Cir.) (noting that \"interest is includible [against a state defendant] if, under nonnal litigation principles and rules of statutory construction, a court could have been expected to allow prejudgment interest on the underlying recovery\"), cert. denied, 502 U.S. 1004 ( 1991 ); Pegues v. Mississippi State Employment Serv., 899 F.2d 1449, 1454 (5th Cir. 1990) (noting that \"Congress did not limit the tools with which courts.could fashion relief to victims of discrimination perpetrated by state defendants\"). Nor does the Court find any merit to ADE's argument that an award of prejudgment interest is not reasonably capable of assessment. All parties have agreed -- and this Court has found -- that the districts are entitled to at least the amounts shown on Revised Exhibit 504, which total $20,380,490.00, and today's decision establishes that the State should be required to pay the districts 100% of their costs for teacher retirement and health insurance rather than l 06%. - Thus, the amount of the underlying liability is in fact reasonably capable of assessment. 2 That being so, and there being no exceptional or unusual circumstances in this case that would make an award of prejudgment interest inequitable, the Court agrees with the districts that they are entitled to an equitable award to compensate them for the State's delay in paying them teacher retirement and health insurance costs. In sum, the Court finds that the State should be required to pay the districts 100% of their costs for teacher retirement and health insurance, and finds that the districts are entitled to an 2 The Eighth Circuit calculates prejudgment interest at the rate specified in 28 U.S.C.  1961. Mansker v. TMG Life Ins. Co., 54 F.3d 1322, 1331 (8111 Cir. 1995) (citing Dependah/ v. Falstaff Brewing Corp, 653 F.2d 1208, 1219 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 968 (1981)). In this regard, 1961 provides for calculation of interest \"at a rate equal to the coupon issue yield equivalent (as detennined by the Secretary of Treasury) of the average accepted auction price for the last auction of fifty-two week United States Treasury bills settled immediately prior to the date of judgment.\" 6 award of prejudgment interest. The Court directs the districts to submit a proposed judgment consistent with this Order within twenty (20) days of the date of its entry. IT IS SO ORDERED this j1,_~ y of ~ 1999. ~~ UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT rHIS DOCUMENT ENTERED ON DOCKET SHEET IN COMPU~:: wmi/WLE 56 AND/OR 79(\u0026) FRCP JN .JeJJk/TI.. ev_n=-JU----- 7 \\ J IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, Plaintiff, VS. PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL DISTRICT No. 1, et al., Defendants. MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, et al., Intervenors, KA THERINE KNIGHT, et al., Intervenors, * * * * * * * No. LR-C-82-866 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ORDER FILED U.S. DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT ARKANSAS JUN f r3 1999 JA~AES 1 MC~ACK, CLERK By. \\  :;:;;~-2. ~ J, ,LL\\ Q,, 0EP CI.Bt( RECE.fVED JUN 2 2 1999 OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING Before the Court is the request of the Magnet Review Committee (\"MRC\") for approval of a change in the grade structure and number of seats at the magnet schools for the 1999-2000 school year. The proposal now under consideration was communicated to the Court by the chair of the MRC in a letter dated May 7, 1999 ( attached). The Court will allow the parties until and 3269 - including July 6, 1999, in which to object to MRC's request. Should no objections be filed within the time allowed, the Court will enter an Order approving MRC's request. !TIS SO ORDERED this / f 11)ay oKr ., 1999. ~)~)t;u UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT rH/S D0cUMENT ENTE ~c MPLIANce WITH Ru~l~ ON DOCKET SHEET IN )N ~ /J-1/ a q AND/OR 79(1) FR(jp -~-1--.r.J.--,';Lf-.~~~~L_ !Y try : ~ 2 . ~~~!\"\" ..;;\":.~   ~ :;::?:__.,*. -Donna Grady Creer Executive Director (501) 758-0156 May7, 1999 The Honorable Susan Webber Wright\" Judge, U.S. District Court Eastern District of Arkansas 600 West Capitol Suite 302 Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Judge Wright: At its December 15, 1998 meeting, the Magnet Review Committee tMRC\"l approved a change in the grade structure and number of seats at the magnet schools for the 1999-2000 school year. This letter is a request for Court approval of this MRC action. t kt The changes approved by the MRC result from the restructuring of schools in the Little Ro~ School District nRSDl to accommodate middle schools rather than the traditional grade  arrangements in elementary, junior high, and senior high schools. The Magnet School Stipulation, dated February 27, 1987, and the March 1989 Settlement Agreement, as revised September 28, 1989, describe the magnet schools' structure and establish the enrollment at each. Because the MRCs action alters the terms of those agreements and adds 132 seats to the K- 12 magnet program, the Magnet Review Committee requests your approval of the changes described below. The LRSD Revised Desegregation and Education Plan calls for the reconfiguration of grade structure from the traditional elementary, junior high, and senior high to allow for middle schools to house grades 6, 7, and 8. If the magnet schools are to conform to the administrative structure of other LRSD schools, the four elementary magnets must serve grades K-5, the middle school magnet school must serve grades 6-8, and the high school magnet must serve grades 9- 12. The results of moving the sixth grade to middle school and the ninth grade to high school in the magnet program as approved by the MRC are describ "},{"id":"noa_sohpcr_k-0168","title":"Oral history interview with Arthur Griffin, May 7, 1999","collection_id":"noa_sohpcr","collection_title":"Oral Histories of the American South: The Civil Rights Movement","dcterms_contributor":["Grundy, Pamela","Southern Oral History Program"],"dcterms_spatial":["United States, North Carolina, Mecklenburg County, Charlotte, 35.22709, -80.84313"],"dcterms_creator":["Griffin, Arthur, 1948?-"],"dc_date":["1999-05-07"],"dcterms_description":["Arthur Griffin, an African American man who attended segregated schools in Charlotte, North Carolina, and later became involved in school politics there, reflects on the legacies of desegregation and the nature of racism in Charlotte and elsewhere. Griffin fondly remembers Second Ward High School (which closed in 1969) and its teachers, who struggled to provide their students with a stellar education despite vastly inadequate resources. While he mourns the loss of Second Ward during desegregation, he thinks the process improved Charlotte by teaching white and black people to work together. Still, desegregation was not a panacea; Griffin believes that race-related problems like low academic achievement among African Americans persist.","The Civil Rights Digital Library received support from a National Leadership Grant for Libraries awarded to the University of Georgia by the Institute of Museum and Library Services for the aggregation and enhancement of partner metadata."],"dc_format":["text/html","text/xml","audio/mpeg"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":null,"dc_relation":["Forms part of Oral histories of the American South collection."],"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":null,"dcterms_subject":["School integration--North Carolina--Charlotte","West Charlotte High School (N.C.)","Charlotte (N.C.)--Race relations","African Americans--North Carolina--Charlotte","African Americans--North Carolina--Charlotte--Attitudes","Second Ward High School (Charlotte, N.C.)"],"dcterms_title":["Oral history interview with Arthur Griffin, May 7, 1999"],"dcterms_type":["Text","Sound"],"dcterms_provenance":["University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Documenting the American South (Project)"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://docsouth.unc.edu/sohp/K-0168/menu.html"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["transcripts","sound recordings","oral histories (literary works)"],"dcterms_extent":["Duration: 01:33:14"],"dlg_subject_personal":["Griffin, Arthur, 1948?-"],"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_60","title":"Arkansas Department of Education's (ADE's) Project Management Tool","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118"],"dcterms_creator":["Arkansas. Department of Education"],"dc_date":["1999-05","1999-06","1999-07","1999-08"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System."],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Education--Arkansas","Little Rock (Ark.). Office of Desegregation Monitoring","School integration--Arkansas","Arkansas. Department of Education","Project managers--Implements"],"dcterms_title":["Arkansas Department of Education's (ADE's) Project Management Tool"],"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/60"],"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\nLittle Rock School District, plaintiff vs. Pulaski County Special School District, defendant.\nRECEIVED 1998 Of MONITORING Winston Bryant Attorney General Ms. Ann Brown STATE OF ARKANSAS Office of the Attorney General October 30, 1998 Office of Desegregation Monitoring 201 E. Markham, Suite 510 Little Rock, AR 72201 Re: Little Rock School District v. Pulaski County Special School District No. 1, et al, LR-C-82-866 Dear Ms. Brown: Telephone: (501) 682-2007 Enclosed for your files and information, please find copy of Notice of Filing of ADE's Project Management Tool for October, 1998. CJ enclosure Sincerely Carol Robbins Secretary to Timothy G. Gauger Assistant Attorney General 200 Tower Building, 323 Center Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-2610 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF v. No. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, et al. DEFENDANTS NOTICE OF FILING In accordance with the Court's order of December 10, 1993, the Arkansas Department of Education hereby gives notice of the filing of ADE' s Project Management Tool for October, 1998. C D i..,_ 1998 Respectfully Submitted, WINSTON BRYANT Attorney General Assistant Attorney General 323 Center Street, Suite 200 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501) 682-2007 Attorney for Arkansas Department of Education IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, ET AL PLAINTIFFS V. NO. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT, ET AL DEFENDANTS MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL INTERVENORS KATHERINE W. KNIGHT, ET AL INTERVENORS ADE'S PROJECT MANAGEMENT TOOL In compliance with the Court's Order of December 10, 1993, the Arkansas Department of Education (ADE) submits the following Project Management Tool to the parties and the Court. This document describes the progress the ADE has made since March 15, 1994, in complying with provisions of the Implementation Plan and itemizes the ADE's progress against timelines presented in the Plan. IMPLEMENTATION PHASE ACTIVITY I. FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS A. Use the previous year's three quarter average daily membership to calculate MFPA (State Equalization) for the current school year. 1. Projected Ending Date Last day of each month, August - June. 2. Actual as of October 31, 1998 Baseodn theinformationavailable atSeptemberQi 1998,the ADE calculatedthe Equalization Fundingfor FY 98/99 subject to periodic adjustments, B. Include all Magnet students in the resident District's average daily membership for calculation. 1. Projected Ending Date Last day of each month, August - June. I. FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS (Continued) 8. Include all Magnet students in the resident District's average daily membership for calculation. (Continued) 2. Actual as of October 31, 1998 Basei#d1 thinfoermation avaliable atSeptembe3r0, 1998 the ADE calculatedfor FY 98/99, subjecpte rtioodic adjustments C. Process and distribute State MFPA. D. 1. Projected Ending Date Last day of each month, August - June. 2. Actual as of October 31, 1998 On September30, 1998, distributions of State Equalization Funding forEm 98/99 were as follows LRSD-$8,353,887 NLRSD - $4,715,448 PCSSD - $10,063,840 Determine the number of Magnet students residing in each District and attending a Magnet School. 1. Projected Ending Date Last day of each month, August - June. 2. Actual as of October 31, 1998 E. Desegregation Staff Attorney reports the Magnet Operational Charge to the Fiscal Services Office. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing, as ordered by the Court. 2 I. FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS (Continued) E. Desegregation Staff Attorney reports the Magnet Operational Charge to the Fiscal Services Office. (Continued) 2. Actual as of October 31, 1998 BasedIi. the informationavailable tAhDe Ecalcuateadt September301,998,for FY 98/99 subject to periodicadjustments It shouldP! notedthat currently the Magnet Review Committees reporting this informationinstead of the staff attorney ii indicated inthe Implementation Plan. F. Calculate state aid due the LRSD based upon the Magnet Operational Charge. 1. Projected Ending Date Last day of each month, August - June. 2. Actual as of October 31, 1998 Bathes inefordma tioonn availacbalcluelat,e dthaet S eAptDemEber 30, 1998 for G. Process and distribute state aid for Magnet Operational Charge. 1. 2. Projected Ending Date Last day of each month, August - June. Actual as of October 31, 1998 Distributions for FY 98/99 at September 30, 1998 totaled $1,624,606. Allotment calculaatet Sdeptember 30, 1998 for FY 98/99 was $8,935,328, subject to periodic adjustments H. Calculate the amount of M-to-M incentive money to which each school district is entitled. 1. Projected Ending Date Last day of each month, August - June. 2. Actual as of October 31, 1998 I. Process and distribute M-to-M incentive checks. 1. Projected Ending Date Last day of each month, September - June. 3 I. FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS (Continued) I. Process and distribute M-to-M incentive checks. (Continued) 2. Actual as of October 31, 1998 Distributions forFY98/99 at September30, 1998were LRSD - $3,463,507 NLRSD - $1,512,970 PCSSD - $6,832,606 The allotments calcuated for FY 98/99 at September adjustments, were J. Districts submit an estimated Magnet and M-to-M transportation budget to ADE. 1. Projected Ending Date 2. Ongoing, December of each year. Actual as of October 31, 1998 In September 1997, the Magnet and M-to-M transportation budgets for FY 97/98 were submitted to the ADE by the Districts. K. Reginald Wilson notifies General Finance to pay districts for first two-thirds of the Districts' proposed budget. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing, annually. 2. Actual as of October 31, 1998 inAugust1998,GeneraFlinancewasnotified lR pay the final one-third payments for FY 97/98 to theDistrictsn should be noted that the Transportation Coordinator currently performing this function. L. ADE pays districts for first two-thirds of their proposed budget. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing, annually. 4 I. FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS (Continued) L. ADE pays districts for first two-thirds of their proposed budget. (Continued) 2. Actual as of October 31, 1998 payments to theDistricts AtAugust 1998, the following hadf obr eFeYn p9a7i/d98 M. ADE verifies actual expenditures submitted by Districts and reviews each bill with each District's transportation coordinator. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing, annually. 2. Actual as of October 31, 1998 In August 1997, the ADE transportation coordinator reviewed each district's Magnet and M-to-M transportation costs for FY 96/97. In July 1998, each district was asked to submit an estimated budget for the 98-99 school year. In September 1998, paperwork was generated for the first payment in the 1998-99 school year for the Magnet and M-to-M transportation program. School districts should receive payment by October 1, 1998. N. Purchase buses for the Districts to replace existing Magnet and M-to-M fleets and to provide a larger fleet for the Districts' Magnet and M-to-M Transportation needs. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing, as stated in Exhibit A of the Implementation Plan. 2. Actual as of October 31 , 1998 In FY 94/95, the State purchased 52 buses at a cost of $1,799,431 which were added to or replaced existing Magnet and M-to-M buses in the Districts. The buses were distributed to the Districts as follows: LRSD - 32\nNLRSD - 6\nand PCSSD - 14. The ADE purchased 64 Magnet and M-to-M buses at a cost of $2,334,800 in FY 95/96. The buses were distributed accordingly: LRSD - 45\nNLRSD - 7\nand PCSSD- 12. 5 I. FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS (Continued) N. Purchase buses for the Districts to replace existing Magnet and M-to-M fleets and to provide a larger fleet for the Districts' Magnet and M-to-M Transportation needs. (Continued) 2. Actual as of October 31, 1998 (Continued) In May 1997, the ADE purchased 16 Magnet and M-to-M buses at a cost of $646.400. In July 1997, the ADE purchased 16 Magnet and M-to-M buses at a cost of $624,879. In July 1998, the ADE purchased 16 new Magnet and M-to-M buses at a cost of $695,235. The buses were distributed accordingly: LRSD -8\nNLRSD - 2\nand PCSSD-6. 0. Process and distribute compensatory education payments to LRSD as required by page 23 of the Settlement Agreement. 1. Projected Ending Date July 1 and January 1, of each school year through January 1, 1999. 2. Actual as of October 31, 1998 Obligation fulfilled in FY 96/97. P. Process and distribute additional payments in lieu of formula to LRSD as required by page 24 of the Settlement Agreement. 1. Projected Ending Date Payment due date and ending July 1, 1995. 2. Actual as of October 31, 1998 Obligation fulfilled in FY 95/96. Q. Process and distribute payments to PCSSD as required by Page 28 of the Settlement Agreement. 1. Projected Ending Date Payment due date and ending July 1, 1994. 2. Actual as of October 31, 1998 Final payment was distributed July 1994. 6 I. FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS (Continued) R. Upon loan request by LRSD accompanied by a promissory note, the ADE makes loans to LRSD. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing through July 1, 1999. See Settlement Agreement page 24. 2. Actual as of October 31, 1998 The LRSD receiv$e2,d000,000 in April 1998, As of this reportingdate, the LRSD has received $17,000in,0 lo0a0n proceeds. S. Process and distribute payments in lieu of formula to PCSSD required by page 29 of the Settlement Agreement. 1. Projected Ending Date Payment due date and ending July 1, 1995. 2. Actual as of October 31, 1998 Obligation fulfilled in FY 95/96. T. Process and distribute compensatory education payments to NLRSD as required by page 31 of the Settlement Agreement. 1. Projected Ending Date July 1 of each school year through June 30, 1996. 2. Actual as of October 31, 1998 Obligation fulfilled in FY 95/96. U. Process and distribute check to Magnet Review Committee. 1. Projected Ending Date Payment due date and ending July 1, 1995. 2. Actual as of October 31 , 1998 Distribution in July 1997 for FY 97/98 was $75,000. This was the total amount due to the Magnet Review Committee for FY 97/98. Distribution in July 1998 for FY 98/99 was $75,000. This was the total amount due to the Magnet Review Committee for FY 98/99. 7 I. FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS (Continued) V. Process and distribute payments for Office of Desegregation Monitoring. 1. Projected Ending Date Not applicable. 2. Actual as of October 31 , 1998 Distribution in July 1997 for FY 97/98 was $200,000. This was the total amount due to the ODM for FY 97/98. Distribution in July 1998 for FY 98/99 was $200,000. This was the total amount due to the ODM for FY 97/98. 8 II. MONITORING COMPENSATORY EDUCATION A. Begin testing and evaluating the monitoring instrument and monitoring system to assure that data is appropriate and useful in monitoring the impacts of compensatory education programs on disparities in academic achievement for black students and white students. 1. Projected Ending Date January 15, 1995 2. Actual as of October 31, 1998 In May 1995, monitors completed the unannounced visits of schools in Pulaski County. The monitoring process involved a qualitative process of document reviews, interviews, and observations. The monitoring focused on progress made since the announced monitoring visits. In June 1995, monitoring data from unannounced visits was included in the July Semiannual Report. Twenty-five per cent of all classrooms were visited, and all of the schools in Pulaski County were monitored. All principals were interviewed to determine any additional progress since the announced visits. The July 1995 Monitoring Report was reviewed by the ADE administrative team, the Arkansas State Board of Education, and the Districts and filed with the Court. The report was formatted in accordance with the Allen Letter. In October 1995, a common terminology was developed by principals from the Districts and the Lead Planning and Desegregation staff to facilitate the monitoring process. The announced monitoring visits began on November 14, 1995 and were completed on January 26, 1996. Copies of the preliminary Semiannual Monitoring Report and its executive summary were provided to the ADE administrative team and the State Board of Education in January 1996. A report on the current status of the Cycle 5 schools in the ECOE process and their school improvement plans was filed with the Court on February 1, 1996. The unannounced monitoring visits began in February 1996 and ended on May 10, 1996. 9 II. MONITORING COMPENSATORY EDUCATION (Continued) A Begin testing and evaluating the monitoring instrument and monitoring system to assure that data is appropriate and useful in monitoring the impacts of compensatory education programs on disparities in academic achievement for black students and white students. (Continued) 2. Actual as of October 31, 1998 (Continued) In June 1996, all announced and unannounced monitoring visits were completed, and the data was analyzed using descriptive statistics. The Districts provided data on enrollment in compensatory education programs. The Districts and the ADE Desegregation Monitoring staff developed a definition for instructional programs. The Semiannual Monitoring Report was completed and filed with the Court on July 15, 1996 with copies distributed to the parties. Announced monitoring visits of the Cycle 1 schools began on October 28, 1996 and concluded in December 1996. In January 1997, presentations were made to the State Board of Education, the Desegregation Litigation Oversight Subcommittee, and the parties to review the draft Semiannual Monitoring Report. The monitoring instrument and process were evaluated for their usefulness in monitoring the impacts of compensatory education programs on achievement disparities. In February 1997, the Semiannual Monitoring Report was filed. Unannounced monitoring visits began on February 3, 1997 and concluded in May 1997. In March 1997, letters were sent to the Districts regarding data requirements for the July 1997 Semiannual Monitoring Report and the additional discipline data element that was requested by the Desegregation Litigation Oversight Subcommittee. Desegregation data collection workshops were conducted in the Districts from March 28, 1997 to April 7, 1997. A meeting was conducted on April 3, 1997 to finalize plans for the July 15, 1997 Semiannual Monitoring Report. Onsite visits were made to Cycle 1 schools who did not submit accurate and timely data on discipline, M-to-M transfers, and policy. The July 15, 1997 Semiannual Monitoring Report and its executive summary were finalized in June 1997. In July 1997, the Semiannual Monitoring Report and its executive summary were filed with the court, and the ADE sponsored a School Improvement Conference. On July 10, 1997, copies of the Semiannual Monitoring Report and its executive summary were made available to the Districts for their review prior to filing it with the Court. 10 II. MONITORING COMPENSATORY EDUCATION (Continued) A. Begin testing and evaluating the monitoring instrument and monitoring system to assure that data is appropriate and useful in monitoring the impacts of compensatory education programs on disparities in academic achievement for black students and white students. (Continued) 2. Actual as of October 31, 1998 (Continued) In August 1997, procedures and schedules were organized for the monitoring of the Cycle 2 schools in FY 97/98. A Desegregation Monitoring and School Improvement Workshop for the Districts was held on September 10, 1997 to discuss monitoring expectations, instruments, data collection and school improvement visits. On October 9, 1997, a planning meeting was held with the desegregation monitoring staff to discuss deadlines, responsibilities, and strategic planning issues regarding the Semiannual Monitoring Report. Reminder letters were sent to the Cycle 2 principals outlining the data collection deadlines and availability of technical assistance. In October and November 1997, technical assistance visits were conducted, and announced monitoring visits of the Cycle 2 schools were completed. In December 1997 and January 1998, technical assistance visits were conducted regarding team visits, technical review recommendations, and consensus building. Copies of the infusion document and perceptual surveys were provided to schools in the ECOE process. The February 1998 Semiannual Monitoring Report was submitted for review and approval to the State Board of Education, the Director, the Administrative Team, the Attorney General's Office, and the Desegregation Litigation Oversight Subcommittee. Unannounced monitoring visits began in February 1998, and technical assistance was provided on the school improvement process, external team visits and finalizing school improvement plans. On February 18, 1998, the representatives of all parties met to discuss possible revisions to the ADE's monitoring plan and monitoring reports. Additional meetings will be scheduled. Unannounced monitoring visits were conducted in March 1998, and technical assistance was provided on the school improvement process and external team visits. 11 II. MONITORING COMPENSATORY EDUCATION (Continued) A. Begin testing and evaluating the monitoring instrument and monitoring system to assure that data is appropriate and useful in monitoring the impacts of compensatory education programs on disparities in academic achievement for black students and white students. (Continued) 2. Actual as of October 31, 1998 (Continued) In April 1998, unannounced monitoring visits were conducted, and technical assistance was provided on the school improvement process. In May 1998, unannounced monitoring visits were completed, and technical assistance was provided on the school improvement process. On May 18, 1998, the Court granted the ADE relief from its obligation to file the July 1998 Semiannual Monitoring Report to develop proposed modifications to ADE's monitoring and reporting obligations. In June 1998, monitoring information previously submitted by the districts in the Spring of 1998 was reviewed and prepared for historical files and presentation to the Arkansas State Board. Also, in June the following occurred: a) The Extended COE Team Visit Reports were completed, b) the Semiannual Monitoring COE Data Report was completed, c) progress reports were submitted from previous cycles, and d.) staff development on assessment (SAT-9) and curriculum alignment was conducted with three supervisors. In July, the Lead Planner provided the Desegregation Litigation Oversight Committee with (1) a review of the court Order relieving ADE of its obligation to file a July Semiannual Monitoring Report, and (2) an update of ADE's progress toward work with the parties and ODM to develop proposed revisions to ADE's monitoring and reporting obligations. The Committee encouraged ODM, the parties and the ADE to continue to work toward revision of the monitoring and reporting process. In August 1998, the ADE Implementation Phase Working group met to review the Implementation Phase activities for the previous quarter. The Assistant Attorney General, the Assistant Director for Accountability and the Education Lead Planner updated the group on all relevant desegregation legal issues and proposed revisions to monitoring and reporting activities during the quarter. In September 1998, tentative monitoring dates were established and they will be finalized once proposed revisions to the Desegregation Monitoring Plan are finalized and approved. 12 Ill. A PETITION FOR ELECTION FOR LRSD WILL BE SUPPORTED SHOULD A MILLAGE BE REQUIRED A. Monitor court pleadings to determine if LRSD has petitioned the Court for a special election. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing. 2. Actual as of October 31, 1998 Ongoing. All Court pleadings are monitored monthly. B. Draft and file appropriate pleadings if LRSD petitions the Court for a special election. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of October 31, 1998 To date, no action has been taken by the LRSD. 13 IV. REPEAL STATUTES AND REGULATIONS THAT IMPEDE DESEGREGATION A. Using a collaborative approach, immediately identify those laws and regulations that appear to impede desegregation. 1. Projected Ending Date December, 1994 2. Actual as of October 31 , 1998 The information for this item is detailed under Section IV.E. of this report. B. Conduct a review within ADE of existing legislation and regulations that appear to impede desegregation. 1. Projected Ending Date November, 1994 2. Actual as of October 31 , 1998 The information for this item is detailed under Section IV. E. of this report. C. Request of the other parties to the Settlement Agreement that they identify laws and regulations that appear to impede desegregation. 1. Projected Ending Date November, 1994 2. Actual as of October 31, 1998 The information for this item is detailed under Section IV.E. of this report. D. Submit proposals to the State Board of Education for repeal of those regulations that are confirmed to be impediments to desegregation. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of October 31, 1998 The information for this item is detailed under Section IV.E. of this report. 14 IV. REPEAL STATUTES AND REGULATIONS THAT IMPEDE DESEGREGATION (Continued) E. Submit proposals to the Legislature for repeal of those laws that appear to be impediments to desegregation. 2. Actual as of October 31, 1998 A committee within the ADE was formed in May 1995 to review and collect data on existing legislation and regulations identified by the parties as impediments to desegregation. The committee researched the Districts' concerns to detennine if any of the rules, regulations, or legislation cited impede desegregation. The legislation cited by the Districts regarding loss funding and worker's compensation were not reviewed because they had already been litigated. In September 1995, the committee reviewed the following statutes, acts, and regulations: Act 113 of 1993\nADE Director's Communication 93-205\nAct 145 of 1989\nADE Director's Memo 91-67\nADE Program Standards Eligibility Criteria for Special Education\nArkansas Codes 6-18-206, 6-20-307, 6-20-319, and 6-17-1506. In October 1995, the individual reports prepared by committee members in their areas of expertise and the data used to support their conclusions were submitted to the ADE administrative team for their review. A report was prepared and submitted to the State Board of Education in July 1996. The report concluded that none of the items reviewed impeded desegregation. As of February 3, 1997, no laws or regulations have been determined to impede desegregation efforts. Any new education laws enacted during the Arkansas 81st Legislative Session will be reviewed at the close of the legislative session to ensure that they do not impede desegregation. In April 1997, copies of all laws passed during the 1997 Regular Session of the 81 st General Assembly were requested from the office of the ADE Liaison to the Legislature for distribution to the Districts for their input and review of possible impediments to their desegregation efforts. In August 1997, a meeting to review the statutes passed in the prior legislative session was scheduled for September 9, 1997. 15 IV. REPEAL STATUTES AND REGULATIONS THAT IMPEDE DESEGREGATION (Continued) E. Submit proposals to the Legislature for repeal of those laws that appear to be impediments to desegregation. 2. Actual as of October 31 , 1998 (Continued) On September 9, 1997, a meeting was held to discuss the review of the statutes passed in the prior legislative session and new ADE regulations. The Districts will be contacted in writing for their input regarding any new laws or regulations that they feel may impede desegregation. Additionally, the Districts will be asked to review their regulations to ensure that they do not impede their desegregation efforts. The committee will convene on December 1, 1997 to review their findings and finalize their report to the Administrative Team and the State Board of Education. In October 1997, the Districts were asked to review new regulations and statutes for impediments to their desegregation efforts, and advise the ADE, in writing, if they feel a regulation or statute may impede their desegregation efforts. In October 1997, the Districts were requested to advise the ADE, in writing, no later than November 1, 1997 of any new law that might impede their desegregation efforts. As of November 12, 1997, no written responses were received from the Districts. The ADE concludes that the Districts do not feel that any new law negatively impacts their desegregation efforts. The committee met on December 1, 1997 to discuss their findings regarding statutes and regulations that may impede the desegregation efforts of the Districts. The committee concluded that there were no laws or regulations that impede the desegregation efforts of the Districts. It was decided that the committee chair would prepare a report of the committee's findings for the Administrative Team and the State Board of Education. 16 V. COMMITMENT TO PRINCIPLES A. Through a preamble to the Implementation Plan, the Board of Education will reaffirm its commitment to the principles of the Settlement Agreement and outcomes of programs intended to apply those principles. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of October 31, 1998 The preamble was contained in the Implementation Plan filed with the Court on March 15, 1994. B. Through execution of the Implementation Plan, the Board of Education will continue to reaffirm its commitment to the principles of the Settlement Agreement and outcomes of programs intended to apply those principles. C. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of October 31 , 1998 Ongoing Through execution of the Implementation Plan, the Board of Education will continue to reaffirm its commitment to the principles of the Settlement Agreement by actions taken by ADE in response to monitoring results. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of October 31 , 1998 Ongoing D. Through regular oversight of the Implementation Phase's Project Management Tool, and scrutiny of results of ADE's actions, the Board of Education will act on its commitment to the principles of the Settlement Agreement. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 17 V. COMMITMENT TO PRINCIPLES (Continued) D. Through regular oversight of the Implementation Phase's Project Management Tool, and scrutiny of results of ADE's actions, the Board of Education will act on its commitment to the principles of the Settlement Agreement. (Continued) 2. Actual as of October 31, 1998 At each regular monthly meeting of the State Board of Education, the Board is provided copies of the most recent Project Management Tool (PMT) and an executive summary of the PMT for their review and approval. Only activities that are in addition to the Board's monthly review of the PMT are detailed below. In May 1995, the State Board of Education was informed of the total number of schools visited during the monitoring phase and the data collection process. Suggestions were presented to the State Board of Education on how recommendations could be presented in the monitoring reports. In June 1995, an update on the status of the pending Semiannual Monitoring Report was provided to the State Board of Education. In July 1995, the July Semiannual Monitoring Report was reviewed by the State Board of Education. On August 14, 1995, the State Board of Education was informed of the need to increase minority participation in the teacher scholarship program and provided tentative monitoring dates to facilitate reporting requests by the ADE administrative team and the Desegregation Litigation Oversight Subcommittee. In September 1995, the State Board of Education was advised of a change in the PMT from a table format to a narrative format. The Board was also briefed about a meeting with the Office of Desegregation Monitoring regarding the PMT. In October 1995, the State Board of Education was updated on monitoring timelines. The Board was also informed of a meeting with the parties regarding a review of the Semiannual Monitoring Report and the monitoring process, and the progress of the test validation study. In November 1995, a report was made to the State Board of Education regarding the monitoring schedule and a meeting with the parties concerning the development of a common terminology for monitoring purposes. In December 1995, the State Board of Education was updated regarding announced monitoring visits. In January 1996, copies of the draft February Semiannual Monitoring Report and its executive summary were provided to the State Board of Education. 18 V. COMMITMENT TO PRINCIPLES (Continued) D. Through regular oversight of the Implementation Phase's Project Management Tool, and scrutiny of results of ADE's actions, the Board of Education will act on its commitment to the principles of the Settlement Agreement. (Continued) 2. Actual as of October 31, 1998 (Continued) During the months of February 1996 through May 1996, the PMT report was the only item on the agenda regarding the status of the implementation of the Monitoring Plan. In June 1996, the State Board of Education was updated on the status of the bias review study. In July 1996, the Semiannual Monitoring Report was provided to the Court, the parties, ODM, the State Board of Education, and the Desegregation Litigation Oversight Subcommittee. In August 1996, the State Board of Education and the ADE administrative team were provided with copies of the test validation study prepared by Dr. Paul Williams. During the months of September 1996 through December 1996, the PMT was the only item on the agenda regarding the status of the implementation of the Monitoring Plan. On January 13, 1997, a presentation was made to the State Board of Education regarding the February 1997 Semiannual Monitoring Report, and copies of the report and its executive summary were distributed to all Board members. The Project Management Tool and its executive summary were addressed at the February 10, 1997 State Board of Education meeting regarding the ADE's progress in fulfilling their obligations as set forth in the Implementation Plan. In March 1997, the State Board of Education was notified that historical information in the PMT had been summarized at the direction of the Assistant Attorney General in order to reduce the size and increase the clarity of the report. The Board was updated on the Pulaski County Desegregation Case and reviewed the Memorandum Opinion and Order issued by the Court on February 18, 1997 in response to the Districts' motion for summary judgment on the issue of state funding for teacher retirement matching contributions. During the months of April 1997 through June 1997, the PMT was the only item on the agenda regarding the status of the implementation of the Monitoring Plan. 19 V. COMMITMENT TO PRINCIPLES (Continued) D. Through regular oversight of the Implementation Phase's Project Management Tool, and scrutiny of results of ADE's actions, the Board of Education will act on its commitment to the principles of the Settlement Agreement. (Continued} 2. Actual as of October 31, 1998 (Continued) The State Board of Education received copies of the July 15, 1997 Semiannual Monitoring Report and executive summary at the July Board meeting. The Implementation Phase Working Group held its quarterly meeting on August 4, 1997 to discuss the progress made in attaining the goals set forth in the Implementation Plan and the critical areas for the current quarter. A special report regarding a historical review of the Pulaski County Settlement Agreement and the ADE's role and monitoring obligations were presented to the State Board of Education on September 8, 1997. Additionally, the July 15, 1997 Semiannual Monitoring Report was presented to the Board for their review. In October 1997, a special draft report regarding disparity in achievement was submitted to the State Board Chairman and the Desegregation Litigation Oversight Subcommittee. In November 1997, the State Board of Education was provided copies of the monthly PMT and its executive summary. The Implementation Phase Working Group held its quarterly meeting on November 3, 1997 to discuss the progress made in attaining the goals set forth in the Implementation Plan and the critical areas for the current quarter. In December 1997, the State Board of Education was provided copies of the monthly PMT and its executive summary. In January 1998, the State Board of Education reviewed and discussed ODM's report on the ADE's monitoring activities and instructed the Director to meet with the parties to discuss revisions to the ADE's monitoring plan and monitoring reports. In February 1998, the State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and discussed the February 1998 Semiannual Monitoring Report. In March 1998, the State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary and was provided an update regarding proposed revisions to the monitoring process. In April 1998, the State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary. 20 V. COMMITMENT TO PRINCIPLES (Continued) D. Through regular oversight of the Implementation Phase's Project Management Tool, and scrutiny of results of ADE's actions, the Board of Education will act on its commitment to the principles of the Settlement Agreement. (Continued) 2. Actual as of October 31, 1998 (Continued) In May 1998, the State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary. In June 1998, the State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary. The State Board of Education also reviewed how the ADE would report progress in the PMT concerning revisions in ADE's Monitoring Plan. In July 1998, the State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary. The State Board of Education also received an update on Test Validation, the Desegregation Litigation Oversight Committee Meeting, and revisions in ADE's Monitoring Plan. In August 1998, the State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary. The Board also received an update on the five discussion points regarding the proposed revisions to the monitoring and reporting process. The Board also reviewed the basic goal of the Minority Recruitment Committee. In September 1998, the State Board of Education reviewed the proposed modifications to the Monitoring plans by reviewing the common core of written response received from the districts. The primary commonalities were (1) Staff Development, (2) Achievement Disparity and (3) Disciplinary Disparity. A meeting of the parties is scheduled to be conducted on Thursday, September 17, 1998. The Board encouraged the Department to identify a deadline for Standardized Test Validation and Test Selection. 21 VI. REMEDIATION A. Through the Extended COE process, the needs for technical assistance by District, by School, and by desegregation compensatory education programs will be identified. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of October 31 , 1998 During May 1995, team visits to Cycle 4 schools were conducted, and plans were developed for reviewing the Cycle 5 schools. In June 1995, the current Extended COE packet was reviewed, and enhancements to the Extended COE packet were prepared. In July 1995, year end reports were finalized by the Pulaski County field service specialists, and plans were finalized for reviewing the draft improvement plans of the Cycle 5 schools. In August 1995, Phase I - Cycle 5 school improvement plans were reviewed. Plans were developed for meeting with the Districts to discuss plans for Phase II - Cycle 1 schools of Extended COE, and a school improvement conference was conducted in Hot Springs. The technical review visits for the FY 95/96 year and the documentation process were also discussed. In October 1995, two computer programs, the Effective Schools Planner and the Effective Schools Research Assistant, were ordered for review, and the first draft of a monitoring checklist for Extended COE was developed. Through the Extended COE process, the field service representatives provided technical assistance based on the needs identified within the Districts from the data gathered. In November 1995, ADE personnel discussed and planned for the FY 95/96 monitoring, and onsite visits were conducted to prepare schools for the FY 95/96 team visits. Technical review visits continued in the Districts. In December 1995, announced monitoring and technical assistance visits were conducted in the Districts. At December 31, 1995, approximately 59% of the schools in the Districts had been monitored. Technical review visits were conducted during January 1996. In February 1996, announced monitoring visits and midyear monitoring reports were completed, and the field service specialists prepared for the spring NCA/COE peer team visits. 22 VI. REMEDIATION (Continued) A. Through the Extended COE process, the needs for technical assistance by District, by School, and by desegregation compensatory education programs will be identified. (Continued) 2. Actual as of October 31, 1998 (Continued) In March 1996, unannounced monitoring visits of Cycle 5 schools commenced, and two-day peer team visits of Cycle 5 schools were conducted. Two-day team visit materials, team lists and reports were prepared. Technical assistance was provided to schools in final preparation for team visits and to schools needing any school improvement information.  In April and May 1996, the unannounced monitoring visits were completed. The unannounced monitoring forms were reviewed and included in the July monitoring report. The two-day peer team visits were completed, and annual COE monitoring reports were prepared. In June 1996, all announced and unannounced monitoring visits of the Cycle 5 schools were completed, and the data was analyzed. The Districts identified enrollment in compensatory education programs. The Semiannual Monitoring Report was completed and filed with the Court on July 15, 1996, and copies were distributed to the parties. During August 1996, meetings were held with the Districts to discuss the monitoring requirements. Technical assistance meetings with Cycle 1 schools were planned for 96/97. The Districts were requested to record discipline data in accordance with the Allen Letter. In September 1996, recommendations regarding the ADE monitoring schedule for Cycle 1 schools and content layouts of the semiannual report were submitted to the ADE administrative team for their review. Training materials were developed and schedules outlined for Cycle 1 schools. In October 1996, technical assistance needs were identified and addressed to prepare each school for their team visits. Announced monitoring visits of the Cycle 1 schools began on October 28, 1996. 23 VI. REMEDIATION (Continued) A. Through the Extended COE process, the needs for technical assistance by District, by School, and by desegregation compensatory education programs will be identified. (Continued) 2. Actual as of October 31, 1998 (Continued) In December 1996, the announced monitoring visits of the Cycle 1 schools were completed, and technical assistance needs were identified from school site visits. In January 1997, the ECOE monitoring section identified technical assistance needs of the Cycle 1 schools, and the data was reviewed when the draft February Semiannual Monitoring Report was presented to the Desegregation Litigation Oversight Subcommittee, the State Board of Education, and the parties. In February 1997, field service specialists prepared for the peer team visits of the Cycle 1 schools. NCA accreditation reports were presented to the NCA Committee, and NCA reports were prepared for presentation at the April NCA meeting in Chicago. From March to May 1997, 111 visits were made to schools or central offices to work with principals, ECOE steering committees, and designated district personnel concerning school improvement planning. A workshop was conducted on Learning Styles for Geyer Springs Elementary School. A School Improvement Conference was held in Hot Springs on July 15-17, 1997. The conference included information on the process of continuous school improvement, results of the first five years of COE, connecting the mission with the school improvement plan, and improving academic performance. Technical assistance needs were evaluated for the FY 97/98 school year in August 1997. From October 1997 to February 1998, technical reviews of the ECOE process were conducted by the field service representatives. Technical assistance was provided to the Districts through meetings with the ECOE steering committees, assistance in analyzing perceptual surveys, and by providing samples of school improvement plans, Gold File catalogs, and web site addresses to schools visited. Additional technical assistance was provided to the Districts through discussions with the ECOE committees and chairs about the process. In November 1997, technical reviews of the ECOE process were conducted by the field service representatives in conjunction with the announced monitoring visits. Workshops on brainstorming and consensus building and asking strategic questions were held in January and February 1998. 24 VI. REMEDIATION (Continued) A. Through the Extended COE process, the needs for technical assistance by District, by School, and by desegregation compensatory education programs will be identified. (Continued) 2. Actual as of October 31, 1998 (Continued) In March 1998, the field service representatives conducted ECOE team visits and prepared materials for the NGA workshop. Technical assistance was provided in workshops on the ECOE process and team visits. In April 1998, technical assistance was provided on the ECOE process and academically distressed schools . . In May 1998, technical assistance was provided on the ECOE process, and team visits were conducted. In June 1998, the Extended COE Team Visit Reports were completed. A School Improvement Conference was held in Hot Springs on July 13-15, 1998. Major conference topics included information on the process of continuous school improvement, curriculum alignment, \"Smart Start,\" Distance Leaming, using data to improve academic performance, educational technology, and multicultural education. All school districts in Arkansas were invited and representatives from Pulaski County attended. In September 1998, requests for technical assistance were received, visitation schedules were established, and assistance teams began visiting the Districts. Assistance was provided by telephone and on-site visits. B. Identify available resources for providing technical assistance for the specific condition, or circumstances of need, considering resources within ADE and the Districts, and also resources available from outside sources and experts. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of October 31 , 1998 The information for this item is detailed under Section VI.F. of this report. 25 VI. REMEDIATION (Continued) C. Through the ERIC system, conduct a literature search for research evaluating compensatory education programs. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of October 31, 1998 An updated ERIC Search was conducted on May 15, 1995 to locate research on evaluating compensatory education programs. The ADE received the updated ERIC disc that covered material through March 1995. An ERIC search was conducted in September 30, 1996 to identify current research dealing with the evaluation of compensatory education programs, and the articles were reviewed. An ERIC search was conducted in April 1997 to identify current research on compensatory education programs and sent to the Cycle 1 principals and the field service specialists for their use. D. Identify and research technical resources available to ADE and the Districts through programs and organizations such as the Desegregation Assistance Center in San Antonio, Texas. 1. Projected Ending Date Summer 1994 2. Actual as of October 31, 1998 The information for this item is detailed under Section VI.F. of this report. E. Solicit, obtain, and use available resources for technical assistance. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of October 31 , 1998 The information for this item is detailed under Section VI.F. of this report. F. Evaluate the impact of the use of resources for technical assistance. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 26 VI. REMEDIATION (Continued) F. Evaluate the impact of the use of resources for technical assistance. (Continued) 2. Actual as of October 31 , 1998 From March 1995 through July 1995, technical assistance and resources were obtained from the following sources: the Southwest Regional Cooperative\nUALR regarding training for monitors\nODM on a project management software\nADHE regarding data review and display\nand Phi Delta Kappa, the Desegregation Assistance Center and the Dawson Cooperative regarding perceptual surveys. Technical assistance was received on the Microsoft Project software in November 1995, and a draft of the PMT report using the new software package was presented to the ADE administrative team for review. In December 1995, a data manager was hired permanently to provide technical assistance with computer software and hardware. In October 1996, the field service specialists conducted workshops in the Districts to address their technical assistance needs and provided assistance for upcoming team visits. In November and December 1996, the field service specialists addressed technical assistance needs of the schools in the Districts as they were identified and continued to provide technical assistance for the upcoming team visits. In January 1997, a draft of the February 1997 Semiannual Monitoring Report was presented to the State Board of Education, the Desegregation Litigation Oversight Subcommittee, and the parties. The ECOE monitoring section of the report included information that identified technical assistance needs and resources available to the Cycle 1 schools. Technical assistance was provided during the January 29-31 , 1997 Title I MidWinter Conference. The conference emphasized creating a learning community by building capacity schools to better serve all children and empowering parents to acquire additional skills and knowledge to better support the education of their children. In February 1997, three ADE employees attended the Southeast Regional Conference on Educating Black Children. Participants received training from national experts who outlined specific steps that promote and improve the education of black children. 27 VI. REMEDIATION (Continued) F. Evaluate the impact of the use of resources for technical assistance. (Continued) 2. Actual as of October 31, 1998 (Continued) On March 6-9, 1997, three members of the ADE's Technical Assistance Section attended the National Committee for School Desegregation Conference. The participants received training in strategies for Excellence and Equity: Empowerment and Training for the Future. Specific information was received regarding the current status of court-ordered desegregation, unitary status, and resegregation and distributed to the Districts and ADE personnel. The field service specialists attended workshops in March on ACT testing and school improvement to identify technical assistance resources available to the Districts and the ADE that will facilitate desegregation efforts. ADE personnel attended the Eighth Annual Conference on Middle Level Education in Arkansas presented by the Arkansas Association of Middle Level Education on April 6-8, 1997. The theme of the conference was Sailing Toward New Horizons. In May 1997, the field service specialists attended the NCA annual conference and an inservice session with Mutiu Fagbayi. An Implementation Oversight Committee member participated in the Consolidated COE Plan inservice training. In June and July 1997, field service staff attended an SAT-9 testing workshop and participated in the three-day School Improvement Conference held in Hot Springs. The conference provided the Districts with information on the COE school improvement process, technical assistance on monitoring and assessing achievement, availability of technology for the classroom teacher, and teaching strategies for successful student achievement. In August 1997, field service personnel attended the ASCD Statewide Conference and the AAEA Administrators Conference. On August 18, 1997, the bi-monthly Team V meeting was held and presentations were made on the Early Literacy Learning in Arkansas (ELLA) program and the Schools of the 21st Century program. In September 1997, technical assistance was provided to the Cycle 2 principals on data collection for onsite and offsite monitoring. ADE personnel attended the Region VI Desegregation Conference in October 1997. Current desegregation and educational equity cases and unitary status issues were the primary focus of the conference. 28 VI. REMEDIATION (Continued) F. Evaluate the impact of the use of resources for technical assistance. (Continued) 2. Actual as of October 31, 1998 (Continued) On October 14, 1997, the bi-monthly Team V meeting was held in Paragould to enable members to observe a 21st Century school and a school that incorporates traditional and multi-age classes in its curriculum. In November 1997, the field service representatives attended the Governor's Partnership Workshop to discuss how to tie the committee's activities with the ECOE process. In March 1998, the field service representatives attended a school improvement conference and conducted workshops on team building and ECOE team visits. Staff development seminars on Using Data to Sharpen the Focus on Student Achievement are scheduled for March 23, 1998 and March 27, 1998 for the Districts. In April 1998, the Districts participated in an ADE seminar to aid them in evaluating and improving student achievement. In August 1998, the Field Service Staff attended inservice to provide further assistance to schools, i.e., Title I Summer Planning Session, ADE session on Smart Start, and the School Improvement Workshops. 29 VII. TEST VALIDATION A. Using a collaborative approach, the ADE will select and contract with an independent bias review service or expert to evaluate the Stanford 8, or other monitoring instruments used to measure disparities in academic achievement between black students and white students. 1. Projected Ending Date March, 1995 2. Actual as of October 31 , 1998 On March 29, 1995, letters were sent to four national experts about conducting a  test bias validation of the Stanford Achievement Test, Eighth Edition, Form K (SAT- 8). Dr. Paul Williams, Deputy Director of Educational Testing Service (ETS), contacted the ADE in April of 1995 concerning the proposal for validating the SAT-8 test. The ADE requested that Dr. Williams conduct a validity study of test items used in the SAT-8. Dr. Williams submitted a final proposal for his services. The ADE Bias Review Test Committee met Friday, July 7, 1995, and approved Dr. William's contract proposal. The final contract was forwarded to Dr. Williams for his signature. The contract was signed in August 1995, thereby, completing this goal. B. By April 1994, establish a bias review committee to oversee the bias review process, and invite representatives of the Districts and parties to meet with the bias review committee. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of October 31 , 1998 Complete. ADE established a Bias Review Committee in April 1994. In accordance with the Implementation Plan, representatives from the Districts and the parties were invited to attend and participate in this and all meetings of the Bias Review Committee. 30 VII. TEST VALIDATION (Continued) C. Upon completion of test validation procedures by the bias review service or expert, the ADE will adopt and use a validated test as a monitoring instrument. 1. Projected Ending Date March 1995 and ongoing 2. Actual as of October 31, 1998 Dr. Paul Williams met with the staff of the Psychological Corporation to review their methods and procedures. In August 1995, he met with the staff at Georgia State University to review the statistical methods that would be used in the analysis. Dr. Williams reported difficulty with the bias-review study in receiving the names of the bias panel and the complete SAT-8 data set from the Psychological Corporation. Dr. Williams submitted an invoice totaling $8,961 for Task I activities of the SAT-8 validity study for partial fulfillment of the test validation study. On December 6, 1995, a contract extension for Dr. Williams was reviewed by the Legislative Council. In January 1996, he indicated that he was in the final stages of the test validation, and the ADE was presented a draft report in March 1996. In May 1996, Dr. Williams stated that the wrong data sets were sent to him by the Psychological Corporation resulting in Task 3 having to be redone. A new draft of the final report was received by the ADE in July 1996. In August 1996, copies of the test validation report were provided to the State Board of Education and the ADE administrative team for their review. On September 10, 1996, the LRSD notified the ADE that they had reviewed the test validation report and would like to meet with the ADE to discuss the report. The ADE Director indicated that he would schedule a meeting with the LRSD to discuss the report. In October 1996, historical files and data were provided to the ADE Director, the ADE Assistant Director for Technical Services, and the ADE Assistant Director for Planning and Curriculum for their review in preparation for a meeting with the LRSD regarding the validity study. 31 VII. TEST VALIDATION (Continued) C. Upon completion of test validation procedures by the bias review service or expert, the ADE will adopt and use a validated test as a monitoring instrument. (Continued) 2. Actual as of October 31, 1998 (Continued) Test validation procedures by the expert have been completed. A recommendation was drafted proposing the use of the SAT-8 by the ADE as the validated test for monitoring. The ADE is presently working to arrange a meeting with the Administration of the LRSD to discuss the test validation study. Effective September 22, 1997, the State Board of Education hired a new Director of the General Education Division, which should allow the ADE to move forward in this matter. In October 1997, the GED Director was updated on the history of the test validation process to provide the Director with background information in preparation for a meeting with the LRSD. In February 1998, ADE staff met with senior staff members to discuss the test validation and appropriate test scores for consideration by the LRSD. The ADE Director met with the Superintendent of the LRSD to discuss test validation issues. In June 1998, the ADE Director directed the Assistant Director for Accountability to recommend staff to discuss how the ADE would measure LRSD's progress toward meeting the loan forgiveness thresholds of the Settlement Agreement. Plans were made to meet with the staff Tuesday, June 30, 1998. The Test Validation Committee met on June 30, 1998, and discussed the following: 1. The appropriateness of the use of scaled scores on the SAT-8 test as the metric for assessing LRSD compliance with the loan forgiveness provisions of the Settlement Agreement\nand 2. The need for an independent analysis of LRSD students' test scores to determine compliance or noncompliance with loan forgiveness standard, and who would bear the cost of such an independent analysis. 32 VII. TEST VALIDATION (Continued) C. Upon completion of test validation procedures by the bias review service or expert, the ADE will adopt and use a validated test as a monitoring instrument. (Continued) 2. Actual as of October 31 , 1998 (Continued) The Test Validation Committee met on September 10, 1998, to review recent correspondence from LRSD and to further discuss issues related to the loan forgiveness provisions of the Settlement Agreement. of 33 VIII. IN-SERVICE TRAINING A. Through an interactive process with representatives of desegregating districts, identify in-service training needs. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of October 31, 1998 The information for this item is detailed under Section VIII.D. of this report. 8. Develop in-service training programs to address in-service training needs of desegregating districts. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of October 31, 1998 The information for this item is detailed under Section VIII.D. of this report. C. Implement in-service training programs to address in-service training needs of desegregating districts. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of October 31 , 1998 The information for this item is detailed under Section VII I. D. of this report. D. Evaluate in-service training programs developed and executed to address in-service training needs of desegregating districts. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 34 VIII. IN-SERVICE TRAINING (Continued) D. Evaluate in-service training programs developed and executed to address in-service training needs of desegregating districts. (Continued) 2. Actual as of October 31, 1998 In April 1995, the Tri-District Staff Development Committee were provided an overview of the Scott Alternative Learning Center's operation and met with students and staff. In May 1995, the Districts were in the process of self-assessment and planning for fall staff development. The Districts worked on staff development to be incorporated into their fall 95/96 preschool calendars. The uniqueness of each district's needs and their schools was considered in the planning by utilizing the results of needs assessment instruments. The Tri-District Staff Development Committee met on September 13, 1995 to plan for an ADE administered Classroom Management grant. The Tri-District Staff Development Committee met on September 19, 1995 to finalize the Classroom Management grant proposal. The Tri-District Staff Development Committee met on October 24, 1995 to discuss program and staff development evaluation models that might be available to the Districts. On November 15, 1995, the ADE met with an ODM representative to discuss the progress the ADE had made in attaining the objectives outlined in the Implementation Plan with regard to inservice training. The Tri-District Staff Development Committee met on November 21, 1995 to discuss upcoming training events and various NLR programs that focus on nonacademic needs. A new program consisting of placing a graduate student of social work, a field supervisor, and a OHS worker in the district at no cost to the district was discussed. Additionally, NLR provided an overview of their program for credit deficient students. The Tri-District Staff Development Committee met on December 19, 1995 to discuss information dealing with ways to broaden the perspective of multicultural education. The Tri-District Staff Development Committee met on January 17, 1996 to discuss proposed changes in the standards regarding media centers and NLRSD's staff development strategic planning committee. The committee reviewed a video on diversity produced by the Arkansas Elementary Principals Association. 35 VIII. IN-SERVICE TRAINING (Continued) D. Evaluate in-service training programs developed and executed to address in-service training needs of desegregating districts. (Continued) 2. Actual as of October 31 , 1998 (Continued) The Tri-District Staff Development Committee met on February 21 , 1996 to discuss the implications of budget cuts on staff development programs and PCSSD's request for unitary status for their staff development program. They also discussed the need for computer literacy, technology training, and acquisition of hardware and software by the Districts. The Tri-District Staff Development Committee met on March 27, 1996 to discuss available resources concerning sexual harassment. ADE regulations in relation to staff members attending professional association conferences as well as the district staff development and potential sites for training seminars were also discussed. The Tri-District Staff Development Committee met on April 30, 1996 to discuss the reconfiguring of Jacksonville Junior High, PCSSD professional development schedules, and APSCN on-line time lines. A tour of the Washington Magnet school was also conducted. The Tri-District Staff Development Committee received a demonstration of UALR's Baum Decision Support Center's capabilities regarding consensus and planning on May 29, 1996. The Tri-District Staff Development Committee did not meet during September, October, and November 1996 because of scheduling conflicts and the extended medical leave of the ADE liaison. On December 18, 1996, the Tri-District Staff Development Committee met to discuss the linkage between the Implementation Plan, staff development, and student achievement. On January 21 , 1997, the Tri-District Staff Development Committee met and discussed sharing middle school strategies and the Districts' training catalogs. The Tri-District Staff Development Committee met on February 25, 1997 to discuss their current staff development programs and an overview of the relationship of their current programs with their desegregation plans. 36 VIII. IN-SERVICE TRAINING (Continued) D. Evaluate in-service training programs developed and executed to address in-service training needs of desegregating districts. (Continued) 2. Actual as of October 31, 1998 (Continued) The Tri-District Staff Development Committee met on March 26, 1997 to observe the Great Expectations Program. The principal and mentor teachers provided information on the components and philosophy of the program, and students demonstrated selected components. The PCSSD may adopt the program for selected schools in their district. The committee was provided with an update of pertinent information on resources available to the Districts. The committee decided that the ADE liaison to the committee would gather documentation of completed staff development directly from the Districts, instead of the Districts providing this information at the committee meetings. New information on teacher licensure and rules and regulations was shared with the Tri-District Staff Development Committee at their April 1997 meeting. A report was presented to the committee on information from the Arkansas Council for Social Studies about an October 1997 meeting on integrated curriculum. The Districts will provide principal retreats this summer as a part of their staff development. The PCSSD will sponsor a renowned speaker on strategies to serve at risk youth in August 1997 in which the committee is invited to attend. The LRSD shared survey results from a pilot administration to four teachers in each district. The survey found the sample to be strong in content but lacking in context and process. Plans to address these needs will be developed. In another survey to certified and non-certified LRSD staff, stress management was the major concern. The Tri-District Staff Development Committee met on May 14, 1997 to participate in a teleconference with the five 1996 awardees of the National Awards Program for Model for Professional Development. The PCSSD shared their summer and fall staff development catalog with the members. The committee will reconvene in the fall of the 97/98 school year. The Tri-District Staff Development Committee is scheduled to meet on September 30, 1997 to discuss collaborative actions for FY 97/98. 37 VIII. IN-SERVICE TRAINING (Continued) D. Evaluate in-service training programs developed and executed to address in-service training needs of desegregating districts. (Continued) 2. Actual as of October 31, 1998 (Continued) The Tri-District Staff Development Committee met on September 30, 1997 to discuss their staff development for the 1997/1998 school year. The PCSSD had a pre-school in-service for the faculty, and the LRSD conducted a Principals Academy with an expert on the math and science initiative which lasted several days. The NLRSD is providing staff development by satellite. The Tri-District Staff Development Committee met on October 28, 1997. The LRSD and NLRSD shared some of their staff development course offerings with the committee, and the PCSSD discussed ways of optimizing opportunities for staff development with specific emphasis on the junior high school conflict resolution training. In November 1997, the Lead Planner provided technical assistance to Central High School staff regarding data disaggregation, test score analysis and ways to improve student achievement. The Tri-District Staff Development Committee met on November 25, 1997 to discuss the Standards for Staff Development. The LRSD will begin providing technology training to their employees in January by utilizing business teachers. Additionally, they discussed a collaborative venture of the Districts involving a workshop from Chicago on a program called \"Great Expectations.\" The Tri-District Staff Development Committee met on December 16, 1997 to discuss technology plans, strategies for obtaining information currently being provided to the education cooperatives, scheduling of Arkansas history, and the development of a comprehensive list of locations available for staff development. Members agreed to bring information on available locations to the January meeting and have set a tentative completion date for the project of May 1998. The Tri-District Staff Development Committee met on January 27, 1998 to share information for developing a comprehensive list of locations available for staff development. The Tri-District Staff Development Committee met on February 24, 1998 to work on the development of the list of locations available for staff development. The committee also discussed the meeting on student achievement sponsored by the ADE for the Districts, principals' staff development in the Districts and emphasis on improving achievement as reflected on the SAT-9. 38 VIII. IN-SERVICE TRAINING (Continued) D. Evaluate in-service training programs developed and executed to address in-service training needs of desegregating districts. (Continued) 2. Actual as of October 31, 1998 (Continued) The Tri-District Staff Development Committee met on March 19, 1998 to discuss the math and science grant received by the LRSD, the Districts' in-service calendars for August, TESA and Student-Team Learning trainers, and team building for staff. The ADE Deputy Director is scheduled to discuss ways the committee can strengthen their relationship with the regional cooperatives at their May meeting. The Tri-District Staff Development Committee met on April 27, 1998 to discuss their proposal for involvement with the regional cooperatives. The ADE Deputy Director is scheduled to discuss committee's concerns regarding their relationship with the regional cooperatives at their next meeting. The Tri-District Staff Development Committee met Thursday, May 21 , 1998, in the Instructional Resources Center at Little Rock School District. Dr. Woodrow Cummins, ADE Deputy Director, joined the group to discuss ways to develop a closer connection with the Education Service Cooperatives. He also discussed other issues concerning Tri-District Staff Development. Tentative plans were made to meet with the Teacher Center Coordinators at their next regular meeting. The next Central Office meeting will be at 9:00 a.m., Thursday, September 29, 1998, in the PCSSD. The Tri-District Staff Development Committee will attend the Educational Cooperative Teacher Center Coordinators' meeting September 1, 1998, in the ADE auditorium. The next regular meeting of the committee is tentatively set for 9:00 a.m., Thursday, September 29, 1998, in the PCSSD Central Office. The Tri-County Staff Development Committee met Monday, August 24, 1998, at PCSSD central office with four members present: Marion Woods, LRSD\nDoug Ask and Mary McClendon, PCSSD\nand Betty Gale Davis, ADE. Topics of discussion included the September 1 meeting scheduled with the regional cooperatives' teacher center coordinators\nthe staff development task force on which Marion Woods is serving\nthe property tax issue\nand various mathematics and reading programs being used in the districts. The committee met Tuesday, September 1, 1998, with the Teacher Center Coordinators, at which time Dr. Woody Cummins presented. Six Tri-District Staff Development Committee members were present: Marion Woods, LRSD\nDoug Ask and Mary Mcclendon, PCSSD\nDana Chadwick and Estelle Crawford, NLRSD\nBetty Gale Davis, ADE. The next committee meeting will be 9:00 a.m., Thursday, September 24, 1998, at the Little Rock District Instructional Resources Center. 39 VIII. IN-SERVICE TRAINING (Continued) D. Evaluate in-service training programs developed and executed to address in-service training needs of desegregating districts. (Continued) 2. Actual as of October 31, 1998 (Continued) The Tri-District Staff Development Committee met Thursday, September 24, 1998 at the instructional Resources Center, Little Rock, with five Marion Woods and Dr. Bonnie Lesley, LRSD\nDoug Ask Topics ofdiscussion included the meeting with thceo orepegrioatniva. el s' teachercentercoordinators the staff developmenttask force on whMicahrion Woods is serving and theNSCI training traininpgrovided by theFederal EmergencyManagement Agency (FEMA)\ntraining provided by Casio\nand the proposal of a Principals Academy. DougAsk will serve as representative to the O19ct9om8beeer t6in,g of the Teacher Center Coordinators. He will submit Donna Harris, president ofthe group ! request for one othermember ofthe Tri-CountyCommittee (Dana December, Dana Chadwick, January. Thenext committee meetingwill be 9:00 am. Tuesday, Octo1b3e,r1998, at theNorth Little Rock School districtCentral Office 40 IX. RECRUITMENT OF MINORITY TEACHERS A. Facilitate communication between the Districts and Arkansas colleges and universities with teacher education programs. 1. Projected Ending Dates (See dates on individual key activities) 2. Actual as of October 31, 1998 A staff member of the ADE's certification department attended all of the college career days in FY 94/95 in Arkansas and one out-of-state. In FY 95/96, ADE certification staff members attended career and job fairs at the following colleges and universities: Philander Smith College\nUAM\nHSU\nATU\nUCA\nASU\nUA-Pine Bluff\nLIA-Fayetteville\nHarding University\nSAU\nand Jackson State. ADE certification staff met with representatives from the Districts to ensure they were aware that ADE personnel were available to provide assistance in recruitment and certification of minority teacher candidates. A job fair was conducted at the University of Arkansas at Pine Bluff on December 4, 1996. The Districts were advised of the ADE's availability for providing assistance in recruitment and certification. In February 1997, ADE certification staff members attended teacher job fairs at Henderson State University, Arkansas Tech University, and University of Central Arkansas to facilitate communication between the Districts and Arkansas colleges and universities with teacher education programs. ADE certification staff members attended teacher job fairs at Harding University, LIA-Fayetteville, UA-Pine Bluff, and ASU in April 1997 to facilitate communication between the Districts and Arkansas colleges and universities with teacher education programs. From April 16, 1997 through May 6, 1997, ADE certification staff members attended teacher job fairs at Philander Smith College and SAU to facilitate communication between the Districts and Arkansas colleges and universities with teacher education programs. Additionally, ADE staff attended an out-ofstate teacher job fair at Jackson State University at Jackson, Mississippi. Recruitment activities were suspended for the summer, but they will resume in the later part of September for FY 97/98. On September 25, 1997, the ADE's Professional Licensure Supervisor attended a career day job fair at Philander Smith College to provide support to the Districts in recruiting teachers. 41 IX. RECRUITMENT OF MINORITY TEACHERS (Continued) A. Facilitate communication between the Districts and Arkansas colleges and universities with teacher education programs. 2. Actual as of October 31, 1998 (Continued) On November 6, 1997, the Professional Licensure Supervisor attended a career day job fair at the University of the Ozarks in order to facilitate the Districts' recruitment efforts. Recruitment activities will resume in February 1998. Representatives of the ADE's Professional Licensure Unit attended job fairs at Arkansas Technical University, UCA, ASU and the University of Memphis from February 26, 1998 through March 12, 1998. A representative from the ADE's Professional Licensure Unit attended job fairs at LIA-Fayetteville and Harding University on March 30, 1998 and April 2, 1998, respectively. Representatives from the ADE's Professional Licensure Unit attended job fairs at Philander Smith College, SAU and North East Louisiana in April 1998. B. Beginning in 1994, by May and November of each year, Districts will supply to the ADE information about shortages of teachers by grade and subject area. 1. Projected Ending Dates Ongoing, as stated. 2. Actual as of October 31, 1998 Letters were sent in May, August, and December 1995 to the Districts requesting information regarding teaching positions available by grade and subject areas. In May and November 1996, the Human Resources offices of the Districts were requested to provide information regarding teaching positions available by grade and subject area. The ADE sent follow-up letters requesting information from the Districts regarding teacher shortages in February 1997. The NLRSD and the PCSSD indicated that they expect teacher shortages in the areas of Special Education, Mathematics, the Sciences, Foreign Language, English as a Second Language and Gifted and Talented Education. On May 20, 1997, information was requested from the Districts regarding teacher shortages. Follow-up letters were sent in July 1997. 42 IX. RECRUITMENT OF MINORITY TEACHERS (Continued) C. D. Beginning in 1994, by May and December of each year, request information from colleges and universities about the numbers and types of minority-teacher graduates. 1. Projected Ending Dates Ongoing, as stated. 2. Actual as of October 31, 1998 In May and December 1995, letters were sent to all Deans and Certifying Officers of Institutions of Higher Education in Arkansas requesting information on minority teacher graduates. Letters were sent to all Deans and Certifying Officers of Institutions of Higher Education in Arkansas in May and November 1996 requesting information on minority teacher graduates. In May and December 1997, letters were sent to all Arkansas colleges and universities with teacher education programs requesting minority teacher graduate information. On May 14, 1998, letters were sent to all Arkansas colleges and universities with teacher education programs requesting minority teacher graduate information. On August 1, 1998, the ADE Office of Professional Licensure sent advance notice to all Deans/Certifying Officials regarding the change in format for complete minority teacher candidate information. Within 30 days of receiving data from colleges and universities provide the Districts data on teacher openings to the colleges and universities on minority graduates to the Districts. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of October 31 , 1998 In June 1995 and January 1996, ADE sent the information received from Arkansas colleges and universities on minority teacher education graduates to the Districts. In July 1996 and January 1997, ADE sent the information received from Deans and Certifying Officers on minority teacher education graduates to the Districts. On February 3, 1997, a list of minority teacher graduates from the University of Arkansas at Fayetteville was forwarded to the Districts as an addendum to the list of graduates compiled on January 16, 1997. 43 IX. RECRUITMENT OF MINORITY TEACHERS (Continued) D. Within 30 days of receiving data from colleges and universities provide the Districts data on teacher openings to the colleges and universities on minority graduates to the Districts. (Continued) 2. Actual as of October 31, 1998 (Continued) The ADE provided the Districts with the Minority Teacher Graduate Report compiled from the minority teacher graduate information received from Arkansas colleges and universities in July 1997 and January 1998. E. Each November, ADE will request information from the Districts on the effectiveness of ADE's minority recruitment assistance, including an assessment of the minority teacher candidates' database. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of October 31, 1998 On November 30, 1994, letters were sent to the Districts requesting feedback on the effectiveness of the ADE's minority recruitment assistance. Follow-up letters were sent on March 17, 1995 since no responses had been received. Additional follow-up letters were sent to the Districts in August 1995 because the ADE had received no responses from the Districts. A planning and evaluation meeting was scheduled on January 11, 1996 with representatives from the Districts. The Districts did not attend the meeting. In February 1997, letters were sent to the Districts requesting feedback on the effectiveness of ADE's minority recruitment assistance. The NLRSD and the PCSSD submitted favorable evaluations concerning the effectiveness of the ADE's recruitment assistance efforts. The ADE did not received any information from the LRSD regarding this matter. 44 X. FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE TO MINORITY TEACHER CANDIDATES A. Assist ADHE in identifying, analyzing, addressing and eliminating racial disparities in the allocation of scholarships. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of October 31, 1998 The information for this item is detailed under Section X.D. of this report. B. Representatives of the ADE and the ADHE will work together, review ADHE's available data to identify racial disparities in allocation of scholarships. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of October 31, 1998 The information for this item is detailed under Section X.D. of this report. C. Using its knowledge about public schools, teacher education and certification, and through a collaborative effort with the Districts, ADE will analyze racial disparities in ADHE scholarship allocations. ADE will report its findings, conclusions, and recommendations about racial disparities in allocating scholarships to ADHE. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of October 31, 1998 The information for this item is detailed under Section X.D. of this report. D. Working with the ADHE, the ADE will use its relationships in the public education institutional settings to assist implementation of measures designed to reduce racial disparities in allocation of scholarships. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 45 X. FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE TO MINORITY TEACHER CANDIDATES (Continued) D. E. Working with the ADHE, the ADE will use its relationships in the public education institutional settings to assist implementation of measures designed to reduce racial disparities in allocation of scholarships. (Continued) 2. Actual as of October 31, 1998 In April 1995, ADE met with representatives of ADHE concerning identification and analysis of possible disparities in scholarship allocations. In June 1995, a collaborative effort was made between the ADE and ADHE to enhance the rate at which minorities were applying for the 1995 teacher scholarships with special emphasis on the areas of science, math, and foreign language through a direct mail program. In July 1995, representatives from the ADE and the Districts met to review the scholarship applications. The Implementation Committee on Financial Assistance to Minority Teacher Candidates discussed ways to increase minority awareness of the scholarships available for minority teacher applicants. The committee agreed to meet quarterly to identify, analyze, and address eliminating racial disparities in scholarships. The committee met in December 1995 to discuss the distribution of scholarships for the 95/96 school year. The committee meets on a continuous basis to review scholarship distributions and discuss ways of improving the pool of applicants for minority teacher scholarships as detailed further in Section X. E. of this report. Monitor the allocation of scholarships to minority students by the ADHE\nevaluate the impacts of new approaches and new legislation on an ongoing basis. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of October 31, 1998 During the May 1995 Legislative session, Acts 188, 189 and 259 regarding scholarships were passed. A meeting to monitor and analyze the distribution of scholarships for the 95/96 school year was held on December 15, 1995. 46 X. FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE TO MINORITY TEACHER CANDIDATES (Continued) E. Monitor the allocation of scholarships to minority students by the ADHE\nevaluate the impacts of new approaches and new legislation on an ongoing basis. (Continued) 2. Actual as of October 31, 1998 (Continued) The committee met on June 7, 1996 to review the scholarship applications for minority teacher candidates for the 96/97 school year. Representatives from the ADHE stated that the ADHE expected to have the resources to fund : 56 scholarships under the Emergency Secondary Education Loan Program\n100 scholarships under the Minority Teacher Scholars Program\nand 13 scholarships under the Minority Masters Fellows Program. The committee also discussed ways of increasing the scholarship applicant pools, and a recommendation was made to make scholarships available to part-time students. In September 1996, a proposal was submitted to the Assistant to the Director for Legislative Services recommending the Legislature offer minority teacher scholarships to part-time students. The committee met on October 23, 1996 to review the scholarships awarded for the 96/97 school year. The following scholarships were funded: 60 scholarships totaling $144,266 for the Emergency Secondary Education Loan Program\n20 scholarships totaling $107,500 for the Minority Masters Fellows Program\n109 scholarships totaling $505,093 for the Minority Teacher Scholars Program\nand 258 students in the Freshman/Sophomore Minority Grant Program received scholarships totaling $374,000. In March 1997, information on minority teacher scholarships and how to apply was provided to the Districts and Arkansas colleges and universities. The Districts were informed of ADHE's scholarship promotional efforts and legislative updates. The next meeting of the committee will be in September 1997. On April 8, 1997, notifications were sent to all Arkansas colleges and universities on the Minority Teacher Scholars Program reminding them that the deadline for receiving applications was June 1, 1997. This information was also provided to the Districts. The Minority Teacher Scholarship Committee will meet on October 9, 1997 to discuss the scholarships awarded for FY 97/98. 47 X. FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE TO MINORITY TEACHER CANDIDATES (Continued) E. Monitor the allocation of scholarships to minority students by the ADHE\nevaluate the impacts of new approaches and new legislation on an ongoing basis. (Continued} 2. Actual as of October 31, 1998 (Continued) The Minority Teacher Scholarship Recruitment Committee met on October 9, 1997 to discuss the scholarships awarded for FY 97/98. The ADHE Assistant Coordinator for Student Financial Aid provided a comprehensive presentation on scholarships awarded for the 97/98 school year. There were 235 scholarships awarded in the Freshman/Sophomore Minority Scholarship program totaling $344,988. The Emergency Secondary Education Loan program awarded 52 scholarships for a total of $119,370. There were 83 scholarships for $403,520 awarded in the Minority Teachers Scholars program. The Minority Masters Fellows program awarded 20 scholarships for a total of $73,750. The ADHE representative indicated that during the 1997 regular legislative session legislation was passed to allow hispanics and asians to participate in the minority scholarship programs. It was stated that the average GPA for minority teacher scholarship recipients had increased to 3.13, and that the dollars awarded in the Minority Masters Fellows program were down from last year because most of the recipients were part-time students. The committee discussed numerous avenues that might be utilized to inform minority applicants of scholarships available. Communication with the faculty of Arkansas colleges and universities regarding the availability of scholarships was discussed as a way of informing teaching students of possible resources available to them. The next quarterly meeting of the Minority Teacher Scholarship Recruitment Committee will be February 19, 1998. The quarterly meeting of the Minority Teacher Scholarship Recruitment Committee scheduled for February was canceled since only the NLRSD and an ADE representative were present at the scheduled meeting place. The meeting has not been rescheduled at this time. The Minority Teacher Scholarship meeting was rescheduled for March 26, 1998. 48 X. FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE TO MINORITY TEACHER CANDIDATES (Continued) E. Monitor the allocation of scholarships to minority students by the ADHE\nevaluate the impacts of new approaches and new legislation on an ongoing basis. (Continued) 2. Actual as of October 31, 1998 (Continued) The Minority Teacher Scholarship Recruitment Committee met on March 26, 1998. The committee was updated on the requirements and application packets were distributed for the Emergency Secondary Education Loan Program (ESELP), Minority Teacher Scholars Program (MTSP), and Minority Masters Fellows Program (MMFP). The deadline for applications was April 1, 1998 for the ESELP and June 1, 1998 for the MTSP and MMFP. The scholarships will be awarded in July 1998. A committee member requested that ADHE send scholarship applications to the schools as well as the district offices to ensure that their teachers and students were apprised of the scholarships available. It was suggested that the colleges submit prospective graduate information for use by the Districts no later than April since the Districts begin the interview process of Spring graduates in May. The ADE Implementation Plan currently requires that the ADE request information on minority teacher graduates in May, and then it is distributed to the Districts in June or July. A representative from the ADE Teacher Licensure Unit was present at the meeting and stated that the ADE would try to accommodate the Districts with this request, but she cautioned that colleges and universities are reluctant to provide tentative graduate information. The next committee meeting is scheduled for July 30, 1998 at the NLRSD offices. The Minority Teacher Scholarship Meeting was held July 30, 1998. Donna Elliot, ADE Program Support Manager was appointed to the Committee. She indicated that advance notification would be mailed to all University Deans/Certifying Officials regarding the change in format for more thorough minority teacher candidate information. A complete report will be forwarded and reported in the September PMT. Disparities in minority scholarship distributions were not evidenced in the draft report. Lillian Williams, Arkansas Department of Higher Education, submitted the following report on Minority Teacher Scholarships Distribution: 1998-99 PROGRAM STATISTICS PROGRAM NAME APPROPRIATION AWARDED #STUDENTS Freshman/Sophomore 250,000 250,000 Estimated 300+ ESEL 81,717 121,250 50 * Minority Teacher Scholars 450,000 445,000 89  Minority Masters Fellows 80,000 80,000 30 * Please note that only 81,717 was appropriated for the ESEL Scholarship, however, additional repayment funds were used to award an additional 39,533 totaling 121,250.  11 Students are pending passing the PPST. 49 X. FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE TO MINORITY TEACHER CANDIDATES (Continued) E. Monitor the allocation of scholarships to minority students by the ADHE\nevaluate the impacts of new approaches and new legislation on an ongoing basis. (Continued) 2. Actual as of October 31, 1998 (Continued) The report on Minority Teacher ScholarshipsDistribution 'mii presentedOctober shortagesin Mathematics, Special Education and Collaborative efforts of theADEand thAeDHE to recruit teachbyers funding more than 450 scholarships forapplicants interested in teaching annually Reasons new teachersgive for leaving tphroefession 50 XI. MINORITY RECRUITMENT OF ADE STAFF A. Administer the ADE Minority Recruitment Plan developed by the ADE staff and Board of Education and officially adopted by the Board of Education (see Exhibit B for the ADE's Minority Recruitment Plan with specific objectives and time lines). 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of October 31 , 1998 The Minority Recruitment Committee met on April 14, 1995. New committee members were assigned tasks and goals to increase the effectiveness of the Minority Recruitment Plan. At the Minority Recruitment Committee meeting on May 18, 1995, the committee was divided into four working sub-teams to update the annual plan. Each team focused on one of the four goals in the Minority Recruitment Plan and monitored specific task completions. From June to October 1995, subcommittees met and worked on monitoring the progress of the ADE in accomplishing the tasks outlined in the Minority Recruitment Plan. In September 1995, the ADE reached an agreement with the Arkansas Statewide Systemic Initiative (ASSI) for conducting an audit of the Minority Recruitment Plan. The committee reviewed the recommendations and comments for updating the plan at the November 1995 meeting and reviewed the final draft at the December meeting. The ASSl's audit findings were presented to the committee on January 16, 1996. It was determined during the initial review that the files were incomplete to the extent that an accurate audit was not possible. The auditor met with the committee in March 1996 to review the additional documentation in the files. The auditor prepared the final report in April 1996 indicating that of the 89 actions contained in the Minority Recruitment Plan, 7 4 of the items had been completed, nine were in progress, and six had not been started. The audit stated that of the 22 items in Goal 1, 15 were completed, one was in progress, and six had not been started. Goal 2 contained 14 items, 13 of which were completed and one in progress. Goal 3 consisted of 30 items with 29 items completed and one in progress. Goal 4 consisted of 23 items with 17 items completed and six in progress. 51 XI. MINORITY RECRUITMENT OF ADE STAFF (Continued) A. Administer the ADE Minority Recruitment Plan developed by the ADE staff and Board of Education and officially adopted by the Board of Education (see Exhibit B for the ADE's Minority Recruitment Plan with specific goals, objectives and time lines). (Continued) 2. Actual as of October 31, 1998 (Continued) The Minority Recruitment Committee met on June 6, 1996 to discuss updates and revisions addressed in the audit and the new racial/gender report on Grades 21 and above. Since the completion of the audit, Goals 2.3.4 and 3.3.8 were completed, and a list of recommendations for retention activities was wriUen. Also, a random sample of ADE employees was asked to fill out questionnaires, but only a limited number were returned. In August 1996, the Minority Recruitment Committee met and discussed the actions necessary to complete Goals 1 and 4 contained in the Minority Recruitment Plan. At the September 1996 meeting, the committee was updated on the progress of all four goals in the Minority Recruitment Plan. The committee heard an analysis of application and hiring practices and discussed the relevance of the data. Suggestions made by the State Board of Education regarding the Employee Tracking Data Check Sheet were discussed at the February 1996 meeting of the Minority Recruitment Committee. Goal 1 of the Minority Recruitment Plan will be completed when the employee tracking sheet is finalized. The Minority Recruitment Committee met on March 14, 1997 and March 27, 1997 to discuss the draft Revised Minority Recruitment Plan and progress toward completing Goal 4. The committee passed a motion to omit Section 1.1 from Goal 1 of the draft revised plan. Additionally, the committee suggested that communication be made an integral part of each goal of the revised plan. The committee discussed the need for professional training programs, incentives for educational opportunities, and upward mobility for all staff within the ADE. In an effort to complete Goal 4, a representative from the ADE communication section presented development costs for media materials to the committee. Additionally, a representative from the ADE MIS section discussed the possibility of using the network to disseminate information to employees. It was suggested that the committee continue to receive assistance from MIS on the orientation video. 52 XI. MINORITY RECRUITMENT OF ADE STAFF (Continued) A. Administer the ADE Minority Recruitment Plan developed by the ADE staff and Board of Education and officially adopted by the Board of Education (see Exhibit B for the ADE's Minority Recruitment Plan with specific goals, objectives and time lines). (Continued) 2. Actual as of October 31, 1998 (Continued) In an effort to represent all sections within the ADE, the committee recommended that representatives from the ADE communication and MIS sections be added as members to the committee. Currently, neither section is represented on the committee. The Minority Recruitment Committee met on April 18, 1997 to discuss the need to revise the action steps for each of the committee's four goals. The committee decided to schedule a two-day retreat in an effort to review all goals and actions. The Minority Recruitment Committee met on May 19, 1997 to discuss the agenda for the annual retreat and revisions to the action plan emphasizing recruitment and retention at all grade levels. A two-day annual retreat was held on June 18-19, 1997 at the Teacher Retirement Building. The retreat facilitated the revision of the Minority Recruitment Committee's action plan for their four goals. Dr. Gary Chamberlain, UALR faculty member, served as the facilitator. The revised plan was distributed to the Minority Recruitment Committee at their July 18, 1997 meeting for final approval before it is submitted to the administrative team and the State Board of Education. The Minority Recruitment Committee meeting scheduled for September 12, 1997 was rescheduled for September 30, 1997 due to members scheduling conflicts. The meeting will be reported in the November PMT. The Minority Recruitment Committee met with the ADE Deputy Director in November 1997 to provide him with a copy of the revised plan and receive his input on the plan. The revised Minority Recruitment Committee (MRC) plan was approved at the December 1997 State Board of Education meeting. The MRC met in January 1998 to discuss the implementation of the revised MRC plan. Reports and documentation of progress in completing the components of each goal will be reported at the next meeting. 53 XI. MINORITY RECRUITMENT OF ADE STAFF (Continued) B. Monitor minority representation at all levels of ADE and assess the effectiveness of the ADE Minority Recruitment Plan. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of October 31 , 1998 As of August 1995, the ADE had hired or transferred 38 employees in Grades 21 and above in the General Education Division. This group was composed of 11 black females, 5 black males, 16 white females, 4 white males, 1 other female, and 1 other male. The racial composition of the these employees was 52.6 percent non-minority and 47.4 percent minority. As of October 1995, there were 161 filled positions in the GED in Grades 21 and above. There were 27 minorities or 22.9 percent in Grades 21 and above. An analysis on Goal 1 regarding application and hiring practices was presented at the September 1996 meeting. Samples of graphs and tables for presenting the data were distributed at the meeting. The Minority Recruitment Committee met on December 13, 1996 to discuss the latest draft of the ADE Employee Tracking Data Check Sheet. The committee recommended various format changes including the addition of a table of contents and an executive summary. The committee met on January 17, 1997 to continue the discussion on the draft ADE Employee Tracking Data Check Sheet. The Assistant Director for Planning and Curriculum agreed with all but three of the committee's recommendations for the employee tracking sheet. He requested that the committee continue discussions on this matter. The Minority Recruitment Committee met on February 14, 1997 to discuss the status of the Employee Tracking Data Check Sheet. The committee also discussed the lack of minority employees in some areas and the loss of several minority employees and the possibility of revising the new Minority Recruitment Plan. The committee received information on Arkansas pupil enrollment by race at their March 14, 1997 meeting. Arkansas enrollment figures for October 1, 1996 revealed that 73.7% of all students are white, 23.4% are black, 1.8% are hispanic, 0.7% are asian, and 0.4% are native american. 54 XI. MINORITY RECRUITMENT OF ADE STAFF (Continued) B. Monitor minority representation at all levels of ADE and assess the effectiveness of the ADE Minority Recruitment Plan. (Continued) 2. Actual as of October 31, 1998 (Continued) To assess the effectiveness of the action steps for each goal, agenda items were developed for the committee's June retreat. The committee recommended that invitations be sent to Senator Beebe, Julie Cullen, Gene Wilhoit, and all State Board members. At the May 1997 Minority Recruitment Committee meeting, the committee discussed reviewing the most recent quarterly hiring and retention report and revisions to the action plan at the annual retreat. Discussions during the July retreat focused on the current plan, the original purpose of the plan, and necessary changes with input provided by committee members and speakers from the Arkansas Department of Higher Education, Employment Securities, and the ADE. At the January 1998 MRC meeting, it was decided that the chair and secretary would prepare a report on minority representation within each unit and section and present it to the committee at the next meeting. The Minority Recruitment Committee met on June 11, 1998, to discuss new membership for the committee and plans for a retreat. The committee recommended a new design and composition of the committee to represent each of the seven sections of the Arkansas Department of Education and included Grade 20's and below. The Minority Recruitment Committee met on July, 16, 1998, to discuss implementation of new membership for the committee for FY98/99, and to update plans for the September retreat. The Minority Recruitment Committee met on August 11, 1998 with Dr. Dave Westmoreland, Acting Chairperson. Members were notified that the dates for the September Retreat are September 10-11, 1998 at the Teacher Retirement Building, Little Rock Arkansas. New Members were introduced and background materials regarding the purpose and progress of the MRC were distributed to new members. The selection of new officers will be conducted at the retreat. The two-day annual retreat was held on September 10-11, 1998, at the Teacher Retirement Building. The retreat focused on the current ADE Minority Recruitment Revised Plan (approved by the State Board of Education in December 1997). Since several of the members had recently joined the committee, issues concerning the implementation of the Revised Plan were examined. Acting Chairperson, Dr. Dave Westmoreland, was elected Chairperson, and Mr. Jimmy Burks was elected Vice-Chairperson. Mrs. Michelle Griffin consented to continue in her role as Secretary for the committee. 55 XI. MINORITY RECRUITMENT OF ADE STAFF (Continued) B. Monitor minority representation at all levels of ADE and assess the effectiveness of the ADE Minority Recruitment Plan. (Continued) 2. Actual as of October 31, 1998 (Continued) ii J resource foprossibleminority recruits 56 XII. SCHOOL CONSTRUCTION A. Improve the effectiveness of the ADE's existing rules, regulations, and site evaluation form for assessing the desegregation impacts of school construction between school districts. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of October 31, 1998 The information for this item is detailed under Section XII .C. of this report. B. Review existing rules, regulations and site evaluation forms and their application to school construction projects within districts and between districts. C. 1. Projected Ending Date October 1994 2. Actual as of October 31 , 1998 The information for this item is detailed under Section XII .C. of this report. Amend the rules, regulations and site evaluation forms as they apply to all districts contiguous to the three Pulaski County school districts to assure that the school construction analysis specifically addresses the impacts on racial balances of individual school sites within the three districts. 1. Projected Ending Date October 1994 2. Actual as of October 31, 1998 ADE's School Site Selection Committee met on April 21, 1995 to revise the proposed rules and regulations. The proposed rules and regulations were presented to the State Board of Education on May 8, 1995. The Board voted to table the decision on public comment until the proposed rules and regulations were reviewed by the Attorney General's Office. The Attorney General's Office reviewed the revised school construction draft and provided a letter of approval. 57 XII. SCHOOL CONSTRUCTION (Continued) C. Amend the rules, regulations and site evaluation forms as they apply to all districts contiguous to the three Pulaski County school districts to assure that the school construction analysis specifically addresses the impacts on racial balances of individual school sites within the three districts. (Continued) 2. Actual as of October 31, 1998 (Continued) On June 12, 1995, the State Board of Education voted to place the revised School Site Approval rules and regulations for public comment. The hearing was held on June 19, 1995 in the ADE Auditorium, and a copy of the revised draft was sent to all school districts in an ADE Director's Memo. Proposed rules and regulations underwent a third revision and were presented to the Board in July 1995 with a request for final approval. The revised rules and regulations were approved by the State Board of Education on July 10, 1995. On August 3, 1995, the proposed School Site Approval rules and regulations were reviewed by the Legislative Council. Due to questions raised by the staff attorney for the Legislative Council, the council voted to defer review until their next meeting so that additional information could be obtained to resolve the questioned items. The proposed School Site Approval rules and regulations were reviewed by the Legislative Council on September 7, 1995 and went into effect on September 8, 1995. Goal completed. No additional reporting required. 58 XIII. ASSIST PCSSD A. Determine if the PCSSD wants and needs assistance in lowering the cost of Black History course offerings to its certified staff. 1. Projected Ending Date April, 1994 2. Actual as of October 31, 1998 A letter was mailed to the desegregation director of the PCSSD on March 16, 1995 regarding offering assistance in facilitating a special arrangement with colleges and universities for reducing the cost of a black history course offering to the PCSSD certified staff. In a letter dated April 3, 1995, the PCSSD responded that their staff development director was working with UALR to develop the black history course offerings. No additional assistance was requested of the ADE. Goal completed as of June 1995. B. If PCSSD wants assistance, communicate with local colleges and universities to facilitate the Black History course offerings to PCSSD teachers at the lower costs possible. 1. Projected Ending Date September 1994 2. Actual as of October 31 , 1998 UALR informed the ADE that they had contacted PCSSD regarding their willingness to provide non-credit black history studies for the PCSSD. UALR indicated that as of November 11 , 1994 they had received no response from the PCSSD. Two universities offered assistance in providing teachers in the PCSSD a black history course. The ADE had not received requests for any assistance with the facilitation of a black history course in the PCSSD as of February 27, 1995. On April 3, 1995, the PCSSD informed ADE that its staff development director was working with UALR to develop the black history course offering. No additional assistance was requested of the ADE. 59 XIV. SCATTERED SITE HOUSING A. Through Executive Branch communication procedures, ADE will inquire about State land holdings in Pulaski County and about the availability of State land holdings for use as building sites for scattered-site housing. 1. Projected Ending Date Not applicable. 2. Actual as of October 31 , 1998 The ADE had previously inquired about State land holdings in Pulaski County and about availability of State land holdings for use as building sites for scattered site housing. All materials were distributed to the appropriate district representatives. There has been no contact with the PCSSD on Scattered Site Housing since July 1995. Goal completed. No additional reporting required. 60 XV. STANDARDIZED TEST SELECTION TO DETERMINE LRSD LOAN FORGIVENESS A. Meet with and propose to the representatives of the LRSD that the current Stanford 8 standardized test, following a bias-free validation study, be used to measure the District's progress toward meeting the loan forgiveness thresholds of the Settlement Agreement. 1. Projected Ending Date May 1994 2. Actual as of October 31, 1998 On April 21, 1995, a letter was sent to the LRSD Superintendent suggesting meeting dates to discuss the variables which affect student achievement. On May 1, 1995, the ADE Director was advised of the need to discuss the selection of the SAT-8 to measure the LRSD's progress toward meeting the loan forgiveness threshold of the Settlement Agreement. On May 21, 1995, the ADE staff discussed the status of the selection of the test relevant to the ADE's Implementation Plan. The Variables Committee, a subcommittee of the Test Selection Committee, received evaluations on the relationship of the various types of scores that could be used on the SAT-8 Test. The Variables Committee recommended using the state-adopted norm referenced test to determine the achievement levels of black and white students. Based on the evaluations, they indicated that scaled scores or raw scores would appear to be the better metrics to use for this purpose. The recommendation from the Variables Committee was submitted to the Test Selection Committee and the ADE Director on July 28, 1995. Until the test validation has been completed, no additional progress can occur on this objective. For the progress being made on the test validation process see Section VII. of this report In August 1996, copies of the test validation report were provided to the State Board of Education and the ADE administrative team. Additionally, the LRSD Director of Planning, Research and Evaluation was provided a copy of the test validation report. 61 xv. STANDARDIZED TEST SELECTION TO DETERMINE LRSD LOAN FORGIVENESS (Continued) A. Meet with and propose to the representatives of the LRSD that the current Stanford 8 standardized test, following a bias-free validation study, be used to measure the Districts' progress toward meeting the loan forgiveness thresholds of the Settlement Agreement. (Continued) 2. Actual as of October 31, 1998 (Continued) On September 10, 1996, the LRSD notified the ADE that the district had reviewed the test validation report and would like to meet with the ADE to discuss the report. The Director of the ADE indicated that he would schedule a meeting with the LRSD to discuss the report. In October 1996, historical files and data were provided to the Director of the ADE, ADE Assistant Director of Technical Assistance, and ADE Assistant Director of Planning and Curriculum for their review in preparation for the meeting with the LRSD regarding the validity study. In February 1997, a memorandum was sent to the Assistant Directors of Technical Assistance and Planning and Curriculum which summarized the test validation and variables subcommittee work and outlined the next step of formalizing an agreement with the LRSD on the use of the SAT-8 and the choice of raw or scaled scores as the metric. Effective September 22, 1997, the State Board of Education hired a new Director of the General Education Division, which should allow ADE to move forward in this matter. In October 1997, the GED Director was updated on the history of the test validation process to provide the Director with background information in preparation for a meeting with the LRSD. In February 1998, ADE staff met with senior staff members to discuss the test validation and appropriate test scores for consideration by the LRSD. In June 1998, the ADE Director directed the Assistant Director for Accountability to recommend staff to discuss how the ADE would measure LRSD's progress toward meeting the loan forgiveness thresholds of the Settlement Agreement. Plans were made to meet with the staff Tuesday, June 30, 1998. The Test Validation Committee met on June 30, 1998, and discussed the following: 1. The appropriateness of the use of scaled scores on the SAT-8 test as the metric for assessing LRSD compliance with the loan forgiveness provisions of the Settlement Agreement\nand 2. The need for an independent analysis of LRSD students' test scores to determine compliance or noncompliance with loan forgiveness standard, and who would bear the cost of such an independent analysis. 62 XVI. MONITOR SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLANS A. Fully implement the Extended COE Improvement Plan Process in all schools in the three Pulaski County school districts. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of October 31, 1998 The information for this item is detailed under Section XVI.D. of this report. 8. Conduct the Extended COE School Improvement Plan peer review process in 20% of the schools each year (every school every five years) and provide peer review team recommendations to the schools reviewed. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of October 31, 1998 The information for this item is detailed under Section XVI.D. of this report. C. Receive from all schools, annual reports on progress toward meeting recommendations of School Improvement Plans. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of October 31, 1998 The information for this item is detailed under Section XVI.D. of this report. D. Follow-up and assist schools that have difficulty realizing their school improvement objectives. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of October 31, 1998 In June 1995, ADE personnel reviewed the Extended COE packet and prepared for holistic reviews of the Cycle 5 schools. 63 XVI. MONITOR SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLANS (Continued) D. Follow-up and assist schools that have difficulty realizing their school improvement objectives. (Continued) 2. Actual as of October 31, 1998 In July 1995, year-end reports were finalized by the field service specialists. Plans to review the draft Cycle 5 school improvement plans, and plans for technical review visits in the 95/96 school year were discussed. In August 1995, holistic reviews of the Cycle 5 school improvement plans were conducted. A school improvement conference was conducted.  In October 1995, computer programs used by Effective Schools proponents were ordered for review, and a draft monitoring checklist for ECOE was developed. In November 1995, two meetings were held to plan for 95/96 monitoring. Onsite visits were conducted to prepare schools for the FY 95/96 team visits, and technical review visits continued in the Districts. In December 1995, technical assistance visits were conducted, and monitoring occurred in all schools in the Districts. Technical review visits continued. In February 1996, announced monitoring visits in the Districts were completed. The field service specialists completed the midyear monitoring reports and prepared for the spring NCNCOE peer team visits. In March 1996, unannounced visits and peer team two-day visits of Cycle 5 schools were conducted. Written reports of two-day team visits were prepared, and field service specialists provided assistance to schools on their school improvement plans. In April and May 1996, unannounced monitoring visits were completed, and monitoring forms were scanned for inclusion in the July monitoring report. Team visits were completed, and the annual COE monitoring reports were prepared. In June 1996, the data from the announced and unannounced monitoring visits of the Cycle 5 schools was analyzed using descriptive statistics. The Semiannual Monitoring Report was filed with the Court, and copies were distributed to the parties. All Cycle 5 school improvement plans were monitored. Team visit reports were included in the Semiannual Monitoring Report. In August 1996, meetings were held with the Districts regarding announced monitoring requirements. Technical assistance meetings with Cycle 1 schools were planned for 96/97. The Districts were requested to record discipline data in accordance with the Allen Letter. 64 XVI. MONITOR SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLANS (Continued) D. Follow-up and assist schools that have difficulty realizing their school improvement objectives. (Continued) 2. Actual as of October 31 , 1998 (Continued) In September 1996, recommendations on the monitoring schedule and content layouts of the semiannual report were submitted to the ADE administrative team for their review. Training materials were developed with tentative training schedules outlined for Cycle 1 schools. In October 1996, a meeting was held with the Districts to identify, update\nand modify the schools in Cycles 1 - 5. Monitoring packets for the Cycle 1 schools were presented during the Principal's Monitoring Workshops. Technical assistance continued to be provided to the Cycle 1 schools regarding their school improvement goals through December 1996. Announced monitoring visits of the Cycle 1 schools began on October 28, 1996 and were completed in December 1996. The ECOE monitoring reports on the Cycle 1 school improvement plans were included in the Semiannual Monitoring Report and presented to the State Board of Education, the Desegregation Litigation Oversight Subcommittee, and the parties in January 1997. In February 1997, the field service specialists prepared for the spring peer team visits of the Cycle 1 schools and the annual NCA reports. From February through August 1997, technical assistance was provided as progress reports were evaluated and when specific requests were made. The NLRSD Cycle 1 ECOE team visits were completed in March 1997. Cycle 5 schools submitted their progress reports from their FY 95/96 team visits, and the outcomes will be reviewed and compiled for inclusion in the PMT after all have been received. Team visits were completed in April 1997 for the PCSSD. The LRSD prepared for their team visits, and Cycle 5 school progress reports were received. An expanded team meeting of Team V was held on April 7, 1997 to provide training for monitoring activities and evaluating school improvement plans during team visits. A presentation was made on Act 338 of 1991. 65 XVI. MONITOR SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLANS (Continued) D. Follow-up and assist schools that have difficulty realizing their school improvement objectives. (Continued) 2. Actual as of October 31, 1998 (Continued) ECOE team visits were scheduled, and all Cycle 1 peer team external visits were conducted as of May 1997. As of June 1997, all Cycle 1 schools had their ECOE team reports provided to them for their review, and information was mailed to the Cycle 5 schools regarding their progress reports. The July 15-17, 1997 School Improvement Conference was held in Hot Springs and emphasized the COE school improvement process. The conference focused on Phase II of COE and the need for the continuation of school improvement. The field service specialists provided technical assistance throughout the conference on school improvement activities and plans and answered questions from delegates. As of August 1997, dates for the ECOE team visits of the Cycle 2 schools were established for FY 97/98, and progress reports were in the final stages. Technical assistance was provided to the Cycle 2 principals at the Desegregation Monitoring and School Improvement Workshop held on September 10, 1997. In October 1997, technical reviews of the ECOE process were conducted along with the announced monitoring visits of the Cycle 2 schools. The field service representatives discussed the ECOE process with principals, ECOE steering committees, and faculty and worked with teachers on analyzing perceptual surveys. Additionally, the need for a database on achievement was emphasized, and guidance was provided on school improvement plans. In November 1997, technical reviews of the ECOE process were conducted along with the announced monitoring visits of the Cycle 2 schools. In November 1997, the field service representatives attended the Governor's Partnership Workshop to discuss how to tie the committee's activities with the ECOE process. Technical assistance visits were also conducted, and copies of the infusion document and perceptual surveys were provided to schools in the ECOE process. In December 1997, technical assistance visits were conducted regarding the school improvement process and consensus building. Additionally, the infusion document and perceptual surveys were provided to schools in the ECOE process. 66 XVI. MONITOR SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLANS (Continued) D. Follow-up and assist schools that have difficulty realizing their school improvement objectives. (Continued) 2. Actual as of October 31, 1998 (Continued) Unannounced monitoring visits began in February 1998, and technical assistance visits were conducted on the school improvement process, finalizing school improvement plans, and external team visits. Unannounced monitoring visits were conducted in March 1998, and technical assistance was given regarding the ECOE team visits, team building, and the school improvement process. Unannounced monitoring visits continued in April 1998, and technical assistance was provided to the Districts regarding the ECOE process. Unannounced monitoring visits were completed in May 1998, and technical assistance was provided to the Districts regarding the ECOE process. The Semiannual Extended COE Monitoring Data Report was completed and presented to ADE Administrative Team in June 1998. A School Improvement Conference was held in Hot Springs on July 13-15, 1998. Major conference topics included information on the process of continuous school improvement, curriculum alignment, \"Smart Start,\" Distance Leaming, using data to improve academic performance, educational technology, and multicultural education. All school districts in Arkansas were invited and representatives from Pulaski County attended. In August 1998, the dates were established for Extended COE Team visits for the 1998-99 school year. Further assistance to schools is dependent on the results of monitoring visits, ECOE team visits, revisions in school improvement plans, and requests made to staff. During September 1998, representatives from ADE provided technical assistance to the Steering Committees at Fuller Jr. Highin PCSSD\nBadgett, Bale1 Otter Creek, Wakefield, and Williams Magnet inLRSD and Poplar Street in NLRSD. Technical assistance training sessions included(1) Steering structure and Extended COE Process, (2) Peer Team Visit preparation, (3) Mission statement development, and {4) ECOE protocol Additionally, the staff in-service coordinator of LRSD reviewed plans for a Saturday in-service concerning all LRSD personnel who have not gone through the ECOE process, 67 XVII. DATA COLLECTION A. Through the School Improvement Plan annual reporting and monitoring process, collect, analyze and monitor data required in the May 31, 1989 Monitoring Plan. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of October 31, 1998 Data was collected in May 1995 from all schools during the unannounced visits. Information that was unavailable during the announced visits was collected during the unannounced monitoring visits. In June 1995, data was collected from the Districts and analyzed for inclusion in the July Semiannual Monitoring Report. In July 1995, data from perceptual surveys was reviewed. In August 1995, the data elements to be reviewed and the data collection process for FY 95/96 were articulated to the Districts. In September 1995, the data collection format for the 95/96 school year was distributed to the Districts. Financial information for FY 93/94 and FY 94/95 was requested from the Districts, and principals were given inservice training regarding FY 95/96 monitoring. The Districts provided fourth quarter data on discipline, testing, nonpromotes, and budget for inclusion in the February 1996 Semiannual Monitoring Report. A workshop to develop a common terminology for monitoring purposes was conducted on October 17, 1995 with the Districts. The workshop identified the data available in the Districts to fulfill the requirements of the Allen Letter's 14 elements. The group correlated the data elements to the five monitoring forms. Monitoring data was verified for inclusion in the February Semiannual Monitoring Report. Data on nonpromotes was analyzed for inclusion in the February Semiannual Monitoring Report. Announced monitoring visits began on November 14, 1995. The preliminary February Semiannual Monitoring Report and its executive summary were presented to the ADE administrative team and the State Board of Education, Announced monitoring visits were completed on January 26, 1996. Unannounced monitoring visits began in late February 1996 for the Cycle 5 schools in the Districts and were completed in April 1996. 68 XVII. DATA COLLECTION (Continued) A Through the School Improvement Plan annual reporting and monitoring process, collect, analyze and monitor data required in the May 31 , 1989 Monitoring Plan. (Continued) 2. Actual as of October 31, 1998 (Continued) A supplemental report to the February 1, 1996 Semiannual Monitoring Report was filed with the Court on April 8, 1996. Data requests for information were forwarded to the Districts. Information was reviewed, analyzed, and formatted for inclusion in the July Semiannual Monitoring Report. The data received from the Districts was analyzed and reviewed. Instructional program reporting was clarified after the Districts and ADE desegregation staff collaboratively established a definition. All data collected for the July 1996 Semiannual Report was disaggregated, analyzed, and displayed in color graphic form for reporting. In August 1996, the Districts were provided with the monitoring requirements and expectations for the 96/97 school year. In September 1996, monitoring formats were revised. Technical assistance was provided to the LRSD on data collection and formatting of certified staffing data. Monitoring packets for the Cycle 1 schools were developed in October 1996 and presented during the Principal's Monitoring Workshops. In November and December 1996, data was received, reviewed, and formatted for the February 1997 Semiannual Monitoring Report. The Semiannual Monitoring Report was finalized in January 1997 and presented to the State Board of Education, the Desegregation Litigation Oversight Subcommittee of the Arkansas General Assembly, and the parties. In February 1997, the format for the July 1997 Semiannual Monitoring Report was developed, and Cycle 1 SAT-9 test data was obtained from the ADE's Assessment Section. In March 1997, data forms were sent to the Districts to assist with the submission of information for the July Semiannual Monitoring Report. Data was also collected through existing reports submitted for the annual report. 69 XVII. DATA COLLECTION (Continued) A. Through the School Improvement Plan annual reporting and monitoring process, collect, analyze and monitor data required in the May 31, 1989 Monitoring Plan. (Continued) 2. Actual as of October 31, 1998 (Continued) In April 1997, the Districts were notified that the deadline for data collection submission was April 24, 1997. As of May 14, 1997, all data was received from the Districts. In June 1997, the July 15, 1997 Semiannual Monitoring Report and its executive summary were finalized and presented to the Desegregation Litigation Oversight Subcommittee on June 25, 1997. In July 1997, the Semiannual Monitoring Report and its executive summary were filed with the Court and copies were distributed to the State Board of Edu\nThis project was supported in part by a Digitizing Hidden Special Collections and Archives project grant from The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation and Council on Library and Information Resoources.\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\u003cdcterms_creator\u003eArkansas. Department of Education\u003c/dcterms_creator\u003e\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n\n "},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_139","title":"Arkansas Department of Education's (ADE's) Project Management Tool","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118"],"dcterms_creator":["Arkansas. Department of Education"],"dc_date":["1999-05","1999-06","1999-07","1999-08"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System."],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Education--Arkansas","Little Rock (Ark.). Office of Desegregation Monitoring","School integration--Arkansas","Arkansas. Department of Education","Project managers--Implements"],"dcterms_title":["Arkansas Department of Education's (ADE's) Project Management Tool"],"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/139"],"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\nLittle Rock School District, plaintiff vs. Pulaski County Special School District, defendant.\n3 1999 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF ARKANSAS Mark Pryor Ms. Ann Brown Office of Desegregation Monitoring 201 E. Markham, Suite 510 Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. John Walker John Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Llttle Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Christopher Heller Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark 2000 First Commercial Bldg. 400 W. Capitol Llttle Rock, AR 72201 April 30, 1999 Mr. Samuel Jones, III Wright, Lindsey\u0026amp; Jennings 2000 NationsBank Plaza 200 W. Capitol Llttle Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Richard Roachell 401 W. Capitol, Suite 504 Llttle Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Stephen W. Jones Jack, Lyon \u0026amp; Jones, P.A. 3400 TCBY Tower 425 W. Capitol Llttle Rock, AR\n72201 Re: Little Rock School District v. Pulaski County SpecialSchool District No. 1, et al, LR-C-82-866 Dear Gentlemen and Ms. Brown: Enclosed for your files and information, please find copy of the Notice of Filing of ADE's Project Management Tool for April, 1999 that I have caused to be filed this date. Enclosure Sincerely Carol Robbins Secretary to Timothy G. Gauger Assistant Attorney General 323 Center Street Suite 200  Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501) 682-2007  FAX (501) 682-8084 Internet Website http://www.ag.state.ar.us/ ' . IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DMSION 3 1999 OF LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF v. No. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, et al. DEFENDANTS NOTICE OF FILING In accordance with the Court's order of December 10, 1993, the Arkansas Department of Education hereby gives notice of the filing of ADE' s Project Management Tool for April, 1999. Respectfully Submitted, MARKPRYOR Attorney General Assistant Attorney General 323 Center Street, Suite 200 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501) 682-2007 Attorney for Arkansas Department of Education IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, ET AL PLAINTIFFS V. NO. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT, ET AL DEFENDANTS MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL INTERVENORS KATHERINE W. KNIGHT, ET AL INTERVENORS ADE'S PROJECT MANAGEMENT TOOL In compliance with the Court's Order of December 10, 1993, the Arkansas Department of Education (ADE) submits the following Project Management Tool to the parties and the Court. This document describes the progress the ADE has made since March 15, 1994, in complying with provisions of the Implementation Plan and itemizes the ADE's progress against timelines presented in the Plan. IMPLEMENTATION PHASE ACTIVITY I. FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS A. Use the previous year's three quarter average daily membership to calculate MFPA (State Equalization) for the current school year. 1. Projected Ending Date Last day of each month, August - June. 2. Actual as of April 30, 1999 Basedon theinformation availaibt Mlearch31,199t9heADcaElculattheed Equalization Funding for FY 98/9s9u,bject to periodic adjustments. B. Include all Magnet students in the resident District's average daily membership for calculation. 1. Projected Ending Date Last day of each month, August - June. I. FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS (Continued) 8. Include all Magnet students in the resident District's average daily membership for calculation. (Continued) 2. Actual as of April 30, 1999 Baseodn the informationavailable at Marc31h, 1999, the ADE calculated for FY 98/99, subject toperiodic adjustments C. Process and distribute State MFPA. 1. Projected Ending Date Last day of each month, August - June. 2. Actual as of April 30, 1999 On March 1999.distributions of State Equalization Funding for FY 98/99 wereas follows\nThe allotments oSftateEqualization Funding calculated for FY 98/99 at March 31, 1999, subjecpte rtioodic adjustments, were as follows: D. Determine the number of Magnet students residing in each District and attending a Magnet School. 1. Projected Ending Date Last day of each month, August - June. 2. Actual as of April 30, 1999 Based onthe informationavailable, the ADE calculated at March 31, 1999 for FY 98/99, subject to periodic adjustments. E. Desegregation Staff Attorney reports the Magnet Operational Charge to the Fiscal Services Office. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing, as ordered by the Court. 2 I. FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS (Continued) E. Desegregation Staff Attorney reports the Magnet Operational Charge to the Fiscal Services Office. (Continued) 2. Actual as of April 30, 1999 Based on the information available, the ADEcalculated at March31 , 1999 for FY 98/99, subject to periodic adjustments. It should be noted that currently the Magnet Review Committee is reporting this information instead of the staff attorney as indicated in the Implementation Plan. F. Calculate state aid due the LRSD based upon the Magnet Operational Charge. 1. Projected Ending Date Last day of each month, August - June. 2. Actual as of April 30, 1999 Based on the information available, the ADE calculated at March 31 , 1999 for FY 98/99, subject to periodic adjustments. G. Process and distribute state aid for Magnet Operational Charge . . 1. 2. Projected Ending Date Last day of each month, August - June. Actual as of April 30, 1999 Distributions for FY 98/99 at March 31 1 19991 totaled $6,613,578. Allotment calculated for FY 98/99 was $9,145,016, subject to periodic adjustments. H. Calculate the amount of M-to-M incentive money to which each school district is entitled. 1. Projected Ending Date Last day of each month, August \\ June. 2. Actual as of April 30, 1999 Calculated for FY 98/99, subject to periodic adjustments. I. Process and distribute M-to-M incentive checks. 1. Projected Ending Date Last day of each month, September - June. 3 I. FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS (Continued) I. Process and distribute M-to-M incentive checks. (Continued) 2. Actual as of April 30, 1999 Distributions for BM 98/99 atMarch31, 1999were The allotments calculated 98/99 at March 31, 1999, subject to periodic adjustments,were LRSD -$3,752,546 NLRSD - $1,940,185 PCSSD - $7,463,443 J. Districts submit an estimated Magnet and M-to-M transportation budget to ADE. 1. Projected Ending Date 2. Ongoing, December of each year. Actual as of April 30, 1999 In September 1998, the Magnet and M-to-M transportation budgets for FY 98/99 were submitted to the ADE by the Districts. K. The Coordinator of School Transportation notifies General Finance to pay districts for the Districts' proposed budget. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing, annually. 2. Actual as of April 30, 1999 In January 1999, General Finance was notified to pay the second one-third payment for FY 98/99 to the Districts. It should be noted that the Transportation Coordinator is currently performing this function instead of Reginald Wilson as indicated in the Implementation Plan. L.\n4:DE pays districtsJhree equal installments of their proposed budget. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing, annually. 4 I. FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS (Continued) L. 2. Actual as of April 30, 1999 In January 1999, General Finance made the second one-third payment to the Districts for their FY 98/99 transportation budget. The budget is now payed out in three equal installments. At March 1999, thefollowing had been paid for FY 98/99: LRSD -$2,219,635.34 NLRSD- $317,020.10 PCSSD - $1,268,403.34 M. ADE verifies actual expenditures submitted by Districts and reviews each bill with each District's transportation coordinator. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing, annually. 2. Actual as of April 30, 1999 In August 1997, the ADE transportation coordinator reviewed each district's Magnet and M-to-M transportation costs for FY 96/97. In July 1998, each district was asked to submit an estimated budget for the 98-99 school year. In September 1998, paperwork was generated for the first payment in the 1998-99 school year for the Magnet and M-to-M transportation program. School districts should receive payment by October 1, 1998. N. Purchase buses for the Districts to replace existing Magnet and M-to-M fleets and to provide a larger fleet for the Districts' Magnet and M-to-M Transportation needs. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing, as stated in Exhibit A of the Implementation Plan. 2. Actual as of April 30, 1999 In FY 94/95, the State purchased 52 buses at a cost of $1,799,431 which were added to or replaced existing Magnet and M-to-M buses in the Districts. The buses were distributed to the Districts as follows: LRSD - 32\nNLRSD - 6\nand PCSSD - 14. The ADE purchased 64 Magnet and M-to-M buses at a cost of $2,334,800 in FY 95/96. The buses were distributed accordingly: LRSD - 45\nNLRSD - 7\nand PCSSD - 12. 5 I. FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS (Continued) N. Purchase buses for the Districts to replace existing Magnet and M-to-M fleets and to provide a larger fleet for the Districts' Magnet and M-to-M Transportation needs. (Continued) 2. Actual as of April 30, 1999 (Continued) In May 1997, the ADE purchased 16 Magnet and M-to-M buses at a cost of $646,400. In July 1997, the ADE purchased 16 Magnet and M-to-M buses at a cost of $624,879. In July 1998, the ADE purchased 16 new Magnet and M-to-M buses at a cost of $695,235. The buses were distributed accordingly: LRSD - 8\nNLRSD - 2\nand PCSSD- 6. Specifications for 16 school buses have been forwarded to state purchasing for bidding in January, 1999 for delivery in July, 1999. The ADE accepted a bid on 16 buses for the Magnet and M/M transportation program. The buses will be delivered after July 1, 1999 and before August 1, 1999. The buses will be distributed accordingly: LRSD - 8\nNLRSD - 2\nPCSSD - 6. 0 . Process and distribute compensatory education payments to LRSD as required by page 23 of the Settlement Agreement. 1. Projected Ending Date July 1 and January 1, of each school year through January 1, 1999. 2. Actual as of April 30, 1999 Obligation fulfilled in FY 96/97. P. Process and distribute additional payments in lieu of formula to LRSD as required by page 24 of the Settlement Agreement. 1. Projected Ending Date Payment due date and ending July 1, 1995. 2. Actual as of April 30, 1999 Obligation fulfilled in FY 95/96. Q. Process and distribute payments to PCSSD as required by Page 28 of the Settlement Agreement. 1. Projected Ending Date Payment due date and ending July 1, 1994. 6 I. FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS (Continued) Q. Process and distribute payments to PCSSD as required by Page 28 of the Settlement Agreement. (Continued) 2. Actual as of April 30, 1999 Final payment was distributed July 1994. R. Upon loan request by LRSD accompanied by a promissory note, the ADE makes loans to LRSD. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing through July 1, 1999. See Settlement Agreement page 24. 2. Actual as of April 30, 1999 S. Process and distribute payments in lieu of formula to PCSSD required by page 29 of the Settlement Agreement. 1. Projected Ending Date 2. Payment due date and ending July 1, 1995. Actual as of April 30, 1999 Obligation fulfilled in FY 95/96. T. Process and distribute compensatory education payments to NLRSD as required by page 31 of the Settlement Agreement. 1. Projected Ending Date July 1 of each school year through June 30, 1996. 2. Actual as of April 30, 1999 Obligation fulfilled in FY 95/96. U. Process and distribute check to Magnet Review Committee. 1. Projected Ending Date Payment due date and ending July 1, 1995. 7 I. FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS (Continued) U. Process and distribute check to Magnet Review Committee. (Continue) 2. Actual as of April 30, 1999 Distribution in July 1997 for FY 97/98 was $75,000. This was the total amount due to the Magnet Review Committee for FY 97/98. Distribution in July 1998 for FY 98/99 was $75,000. This was the total amount due to the Magnet Review Committee for FY 98/99. V. Process and distribute payments for Office of Desegregation Monitoring: 1. Projected Ending Date Not applicable. 2. Actual as of April 30, 1999 Distribution in July 1997 for FY 97/98 was $200,000. This was the total amount due to the ODM for FY 97/98. Distribution in July 1998 for FY 98/99 was $200,000. This was the total amount due to the ODM for FY 98/99. 8 II. MONITORING COMPENSATORY EDUCATION A. Begin testing and evaluating the monitoring instrument and monitoring system to assure that data is appropriate and useful in monitoring the impacts of compensatory education programs on disparities in academic achievement for black students and white students. 1. Projected Ending Date January 15, 1995 2. Actual as of April 30, 1999 In May 1995, monitors completed the unannounced visits of schools in Pulaski County. The monitoring process involved a qualitative process of document reviews, interviews, and observations. The monitoring focused on progress made since the announced monitoring visits. In June 1995, monitoring data from unannounced visits was included in the July Semiannual Report. Twenty-five per cent of all classrooms were visited , and all of the schools in Pulaski County were monitored. All principals were interviewed to determine any additional progress since the announced visits. The July 1995 Monitoring Report was reviewed by the ADE administrative team, the Arkansas State Board of Education, and the Districts and filed with the Court. The report was formatted in accordance with the Allen Letter. In October 1995, a common terminology was developed by principals from the Districts and the Lead Planning and Desegregation staff to facilitate the monitoring process. The announced monitoring visits began on November 14, 1995 and were completed on January 26, 1996. Copies of the preliminary Semiannual Monitoring Report and its executive summary were provided to the ADE administrative team and the State Board of Education in January 1996. A report on the current status of the Cycle 5 schools in the ECOE process and their school improvement plans was filed with the Court on February 1, 1996. The unannounced monitoring visits began in February 1996 and ended on May 10, 1996. 9 11. MONITORING COMPENSATORY EDUCATION (Continued) A. Begin testing and evaluating the monitoring instrument and monitoring system to assure that data is appropriate and useful in monitoring the impacts of compensatory education programs on disparities in academic achievement for black students and white students. (Continued) 2. Actual as of April 30, 1999 (Continued) In June 1996, all announced and unannounced monitoring visits were completed, and the data was analyzed using descriptive statistics. The Districts provided data on enrollment in compensatory education programs. The Districts and the ADE Desegregation Monitoring staff developed a definition for instructional programs. The Semiannual Monitoring Report was completed and filed with the Court on July 15, 1996 with copies distributed to the parties. Announced monitoring visits of the Cycle 1 schools began on October 28, 1996 and concluded in December 1996. In January 1997, presentations were made to the State Board of Education, the Desegregation Litigation Oversight Subcommittee, and the parties to review the draft Semiannual Monitoring Report. The monitoring instrument and process were evaluated for their usefulness in monitoring the impacts of compensatory education programs on achievement disparities. In February 1997, the Semiannual Monitoring Report was filed . Unannounced monitoring visits began on February 3, 1997 and concluded in May 1997. In March 1997, letters were sent to the Districts regarding data requirements for the July 1997 Semiannual Monitoring Report and the additional discipline data element that was requested by the Desegregation Litigation Oversight Subcommittee. Desegregation data collection workshops were conducted in the Districts from March 28, 1997 to April 7, 1997. A meeting was conducted on April 3, 1997 to finalize plans for the July 15, 1997 Semiannual Monitoring Report. Onsite visits were made to Cycle 1 schools who did not submit accurate and timely data on discipline, M-to-M transfers, and policy. The July 15, 1997 Semiannual Monitoring Report and its executive summary were finalized in June 1997. In July 1997, the Semiannual Monitoring Report and its executive summary were filed with the court, and the ADE sponsored a School Improvement Conference. On July 10, 1997, copies of the Semiannual Monitoring Report and its executive summary were made available to the Districts for their review prior to filing it with the Court. 10 11. MONITORING COMPENSATORY EDUCATION (Continued) A. Begin testing and evaluating the monitoring instrument and monitoring system to assure that data is appropriate and useful in monitoring the impacts of compensatory education programs on disparities in academic achievement for black students and white students. (Continued) 2. Actual as of April 30, 1999 (Continued) In August 1997, procedures and schedules were organized for the monitoring of the Cycle 2 schools in FY 97/98. A Desegregation Monitoring and School Improvement Workshop for the Districts was held on September 10, 1997 to discuss monitoring expectations, instruments, data collection and school improvement visits. On October 9, 1997, a planning meeting was held with the desegregation monitoring staff to discuss deadlines, responsibilities, and strategic planning issues regarding the Semiannual Monitoring Report. Reminder letters were sent to the Cycle 2 principals outlining the data collection deadlines and availability of technical assistance. In October and November 1997, technical assistance visits were conducted, and announced monitoring visits of the Cycle 2 schools were completed. In December 1997 and January 1998, technical assistance visits were conducted regarding team visits, technical review recommendations, and consensus building. Copies of the infusion document and perceptual surveys were provided to schools in the ECOE process. The February 1998 Semiannual Monitoring Report was submitted for review and approval to the State Board of Education , the Director, the Administrative Team, the Attorney General's Office, and the Desegregation Litigation Oversight Subcommittee. Unannounced monitoring visits began in February 1998, and technical assistance was provided on the school improvement process, external team visits and finalizing school improvement plans. On February 18, 1998, the representatives of all parties met to discuss possible revisions to the ADE's monitoring plan and monitoring reports. Additional meetings will be scheduled. Unannounced monitoring visits were conducted in March 1998, and technical assistance was provided on the school improvement process and external team visits. 11 11. MONITORING COMPENSATORY EDUCATION (Continued) A. Begin testing and evaluating the monitoring instrument and monitoring system to assure that data is appropriate and useful in monitoring the impacts of compensatory education programs on disparities in academic achievement for black students and white students. (Continued) 2. Actual as of April 30, 1999 (Continued) In April 1998, unannounced monitoring visits were conducted, and technical assistance was provided on the school improvement process. In May 1998, unannounced monitoring visits were completed, and technical assistance was provided on the school improvement process. On May 18, 1998, the Court granted the ADE relief from its obligation to file the July 1998 Semiannual Monitoring Report to develop proposed modifications to ADE's monitoring and reporting obligations. In June 1998, monitoring information previously submitted by the districts in the Spring of 1998 was reviewed and prepared for historical files and presentation to the Arkansas State Board. Also, in June the following occurred: a) The Extended COE Team Visit Reports were completed, b) the Semiannual Monitoring COE Data Report was completed, c) progress reports were submitted from previous cycles, and d.) staff development on assessment (SAT-9) and curriculum alignment was conducted with three supervisors. In July, the Lead Planner provided the Desegregation Litigation Oversight Committee with (1) a review of the court Order relieving ADE of its obligation to file a July Semiannual Monitoring Report, and (2) an update of ADE's progress toward work with the parties and ODM to develop proposed revisions to ADE's monitoring and reporting obligations. The Committee encouraged ODM, the parties and the ADE to continue to work toward revision of the monitoring and reporting process. In August 1998, the ADE Implementation Phase Working group met to review the Implementation Phase activities for the previous quarter. The Assistant Attorney General, the Assistant Director for Accountability and the Education Lead Planner updated the group on all relevant desegregation legal issues and proposed revisions to monitoring and reporting activities during the quarter. In September 1998, tentative monitoring dates were established and they will be finalized once proposed revisions to the Desegregation Monitoring Plan are finalized and approved. In September/October 1998, progress was being made on the proposed revisions to the monitoring process by committee representatives of all the Parties in the Pulaski County Settlement Agreement. While the revised monitoring plan is finalized and approved , the ADE monitoring staff will continue to provide technical assistance to schools upon request. In December 1998, requests were received from schools in PCSSD regarding test score analysis and staff Development. Oak Grove is scheduled for January 21 , 1999 and Lawson Elementary is also tentatively scheduled in January. 12 Ill. A PETITION FOR ELECTION FOR LRSD WILL BE SUPPORTED SHOULD A MILLAGE BE REQUIRED A. Monitor court pleadings to determine if LRSD has petitioned the Court for a special election. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing. 2. Actual as of April 30, 1999 Ongoing. All Court pleadings are monitored monthly. 8 . Draft and file appropriate pleadings if LRSD petitions the Court for a special election. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of April 30, 1999 To date, no action has been taken by the LRSD. 13 IV. REPEAL STATUTES AND REGULATIONS THAT IMPEDE DESEGREGATION A. Using a collaborative approach, immediately identify those laws and regulations that appear to impede desegregation. 1. Projected Ending Date December, 1994 2. Actual as of April 30, 1999 The information for this item is detailed under Section IV.E. of this report. B. Conduct a review within ADE of existing legislation and regulations that appear to impede desegregation. 1. Projected Ending Date November, 1994 2. Actual as of April 30, 1999 The information for this item is detailed under Section IV.E. of this report. C. Request of the other parties to the Settlement Agreement that they identify laws and regulations that appear to impede desegregation. 1. Projected Ending Date November, 1994 2. Actual as of April 30, 1999 The information for this item is detailed under Section IV. E. of this report. D. Submit proposals to the State Board of Education for repeal of those regulations that are confirmed to be impediments to desegregation. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of April 30, 1999 The information for this item is detailed under Section IV. E. of this report. 14 IV. REPEAL STATUTES AND REGULATIONS THAT IMPEDE DESEGREGATION (Continued) E. Submit proposals to the Legislature for repeal of those laws that appear to be impediments to desegregation. 2. Actual as of April 30, 1999 A committee within the ADE was formed in May 1995 to review and collect data on existing legislation and regulations identified by the parties as impediments to desegregation. The committee researched the Districts' concerns to determine if any of the rules, regulations, or legislation cited impede desegregation. The legislation cited by the Districts regarding loss funding and worker's compensation were not reviewed because they had already been litigated. In September 1995, the committee reviewed the following statutes, acts, and regulations: Act 113 of 1993\nADE Director's Communication 93-205\nAct 145 of 1989\nADE Director's Memo 91-67\nADE Program Standards Eligibility Criteria for Special Education\nArkansas Codes 6-18-206, 6-20-307, 6-20-319, and 6-17-1506. In October 1995, the individual reports prepared by committee members in their areas of expertise and the data used to support their conclusions were submitted to the ADE administrative team for their review. A report was prepared and submitted to the State Board of Education in July 1996. The report concluded that none of the items reviewed impeded desegregation. As of February 3, 1997, no laws or regulations have been determined to impede desegregation efforts. Any new education laws enacted during the Arkansas 81 st Legislative Session will be reviewed at the close of the legislative session to ensure that they do not impede desegregation. In April 1997, copies of all laws passed during the 1997 Regular Session of the 81 st General Assembly were requested from the office of the ADE Liaison to the Legislature for distribution to the Districts for their input and review of possible impediments to their desegregation efforts. In August 1997, a meeting to review the statutes passed in the prior legislative session was scheduled for September 9, 1997. 15 IV. REPEAL STATUTES AND REGULATIONS THAT IMPEDE DESEGREGATION (Continued) E. Submit proposals to the Legislature for repeal of those laws that appear to be impediments to desegregation. (Continued) 2. Actual as of April 30, 1999 (Continued) On September 9, 1997, a meeting was held to discuss the review of the statutes passed in the prior legislative session and new ADE regulations. The Districts will be contacted in writing for their input regarding any new laws or regulations that they feel may impede desegregation. Additionally, the Districts will be asked to review their regulations to ensure that they do not impede their desegregation efforts. The committee will convene on December 1, 1997 to review their findings and finalize their report to the Administrative Team and the State Board of Education. In October 1997, the Districts were asked to review new regulations and statutes for impediments to their desegregation efforts, and advise the ADE, in writing, if they feel a regulation or statute may impede their desegregation efforts. In October 1997, the Districts were requested to advise the ADE, in writing, no later than November 1, 1997 of any new law that might impede their desegregation efforts. As of November 12, 1997, no written responses were received from the Districts. The ADE concludes that the Districts do not feel that any new law negatively impacts their desegregation efforts. The committee met on December 1, 1997 to discuss their findings regarding statutes and regulations that may impede the desegregation efforts of the Districts. The committee concluded that there were no laws or regulations that impede the desegregation efforts of the Districts. It was decided that the committee chair would prepare a report of the committee's findings for the Administrative Team and the State Board of Education. The committee to review statutes and regulations that impede desegregation is now reviewing proposed bills and regulations, as well as laws that are being signed in, for the current 1999 legislative session. They will continue to do so until the session is over. The committee to reviestwatutes and regulations thadt eismegpreegdateionwill meet on April 26, 1999 at the ADE. 16 V. COMMITMENT TO PRINCIPLES A. Through a preamble to the Implementation Plan, the Board of Education will reaffirm its commitment to the principles of the Settlement Agreement and outcomes of programs intended to apply those principles. 1.  Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of April 3.0, 1999 The preamble was contained in the Implementation Plan filed with the Court on March 15, 1994. B. Through execution of the Implementation Plan, the Board of Education will continue to reaffirm its commitment to the principles of the Settlement Agreement and outcomes of programs intended to apply those principles. C. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of April 30, 1999 Ongoing Through execution of the Implementation Plan, the Board of Education will continue to reaffirm its commitment to the principles of the Settlement Agreement by actions taken by ADE in response to monitoring results. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of April 30, 1999 Ongoing D. Through regular oversight of the Implementation Phase's Project Management Tool, and scrutiny of results of ADE's actions, the Board of Education will act on its commitment to the principles of the Settlement Agreement. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 17 V. COMMITMENT TO PRINCIPLES (Continued) D. Through regular oversight of the Implementation Phase's Project Management Tool, and scrutiny of results of ADE's actions, the Board of Education will act on its commitment to the principles of the Settlement Agreement. (Continued) 2. Actual as of April 30, 1999 At each regular monthly meeting of the State Board of Education, the Board is provided copies of the most recent Project Management Tool (PMT) and an executive summary of the PMT for their review and approval. Only activities that are in addition to the Board's monthly review of the PMT are detailed below. In May 1995, the State Board of Education was informed of the total number of schools visited during the monitoring phase and the data collection process. Suggestions were presented to the State Board of Education on how recommendations could be presented in the monitoring reports. In June 1995, an update on the status of the pending Semiannual Monitoring Report was provided to the State Board of Education. In July 1995, the July Semiannual Monitoring Report was reviewed by the State Board of Education . On August 14, 1995, the State Board of Education was informed of the need to increase minority participation in the teacher scholarship program and provided tentative monitoring dates to facilitate reporting requests by the ADE administrative team and the Desegregation Litigation Oversight Subcommittee. In September 1995, the State Board of Education was advised of a change in the PMT from a table format to a narrative format. The Board was also briefed about a meeting with the Office of Desegregation Monitoring regarding the PMT. In October 1995, the State Board of Education was updated on monitoring timelines. The Board was also informed of a meeting with the parties regarding a review of the Semiannual Monitoring Report and the monitoring process, and the progress of the test validation study. In November 1995, a report was made to the State Board of Education regarding the monitoring schedule and a meeting with the parties concerning the development of a common terminology for monitoring purposes. In December 1995, the State Board of Education was updated regarding announced monitoring visits. In January 1996, copies of the draft February Semiannual Monitoring Report and its executive summary were provided to the State Board of Education. 18 V. COMMITMENT TO PRINCIPLES (Continued) D. Through regular oversight of the Implementation Phase's Project Management Tool, and scrutiny of results of ADE's actions, the Board of Education will act on its commitment to the principles of the Settlement Agreement. (Continued) 2. Actual as of April 30, 1999 (Continued) During the months of February 1996 through May 1996, the PMT report was the only item on the agenda regarding the status of the implementation of the Monitoring Plan. In June 1996, the State Board of Education was updated on the status of the bias review study. In July 1996, the Semiannual Monitoring Report was provided to the Court, the parties, ODM, the State Board of Education, and the Desegregation Litigation Oversight Subcommittee. In August 1996, the State Board of Education and the ADE administrative team were provided with copies of the test validation study prepared by Dr. Paul Williams. During the months of September 1996 through December 1996, the PMT was the only item on the agenda regarding the status of the implementation of the Monitoring Plan. On January 13, 1997, a presentation was made to the State Board of Education regarding the February 1997 Semiannual Monitoring Report, and copies of the report and its executive summary were distributed to all Board members. The Project Management Tool and its executive summary were addressed at the February 10, 1997 State Board of Education meeting regarding the ADE's progress in fulfilling their obligations as set forth in the Implementation Plan. In March 1997, the State Board of Education was notified that historical information in the PMT had been summarized at the direction of the Assistant Attorney General in order to reduce the size and increase the clarity of the report. The Board was updated on the Pulaski County Desegregation Case and reviewed the Memorandum Opinion and Order issued by the Court on February 18, 1997 in response to the Districts' motion for summary judgment on the issue of state funding for teacher retirement matching contributions. During the months of April 1997 through June 1997, the PMT was the only item on the agenda regarding the status of the implementation of the Monitoring Plan. 19 V. COMMITMENT TO PRINCIPLES (Continued) D. Through regular oversight of the Implementation Phase's Project Management Tool, and scrutiny of results of ADE's actions, the Board of Education will act on its commitment to the principles of the Settlement Agreement. (Continued) 2. Actual as of April 30, 1999 (Continued) The State Board of Education received copies of the July 15, 1997 Semiannual Monitoring Report and executive summary at the July Board meeting. The Implementation Phase Working Group held its quarterly meeting on August 4, 1997 to discuss the progress made in attaining the goals set forth in the Implementation Plan and the critical areas for the current quarter. A special report regarding a historical review of the Pulaski County Settlement Agreement and the ADE's role and monitoring obligations were presented to the State Board of Education on September 8, 1997. Additionally, the July 15, 1997 Semiannual Monitoring Report was presented to the Board for their review. In October 1997, a special draft report regarding disparity in achievement was submitted to the State Board Chairman and the Desegregation Litigation Oversight Subcommittee. In November 1997, the State Board of Education was provided copies of the monthly PMT and its executive summary. The Implementation Phase Working Group held its quarterly meeting on November 3, 1997 to discuss the progress made in attaining the goals set forth in the Implementation Plan and the critical areas for the current quarter. In December 1997, the State Board of Education was provided copies of the monthly PMT and its executive summary. In January 1998, the State Board of Education reviewed and discussed ODM's report on the ADE's monitoring activities and instructed the Director to meet with the parties to discuss revisions to the ADE's monitoring plan and monitoring reports. In February 1998, the State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and discussed the February 1998 Semiannual Monitoring Report. In March 1998, the State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary and was provided an update regarding proposed revisions to the monitoring process. In April 1998, the State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary. 20 V. COMMITMENT TO PRINCIPLES (Continued) D. Through regular oversight of the Implementation Phase's Project Management Tool, and scrutiny of results of ADE's actions, the Board of Education will act on its commitment to the principles of the Settlement Agreement. (Continued) 2. Actual as of April 30, 1999 (Continued) In May 1998, the State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary. In June 1998, the State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary. The State Board of Education also reviewed how the ADE would report progress in the PMT concerning revisions in ADE's Monitoring Plan. In July 1998, the State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary. The State Board of Education also received an update on Test Validation, the Desegregation Litigation Oversight Committee Meeting, and revisions in ADE's Monitoring Plan. In August 1998, the State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary. The Board also received an update on the five discussion points regarding the proposed revisions to the monitoring and reporting process. The Board also reviewed the basic goal of the Minority Recruitment Committee. In September 1998, the State Board of Education reviewed the proposed modifications to the Monitoring plans by reviewing the common core of written response received from the districts. The primary commonalities were (1) Staff Development, (2) Achievement Disparity and (3) Disciplinary Disparity. A meeting of the parties is scheduled to be conducted on Thursday, September 17, 1998. The Board encouraged the Department to identify a deadline for Standardized Test Validation and Test Selection. In October 1998, the Board received the progress report on Proposed Revisions to the Desegregation Monitoring and Reporting Process (see XVIII). The Board also reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary. In November, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed the PMT and its executive summary. The Board also received an update on the proposed revisions in the Desegregation monitoring Process and the update on Test validation and Test Selection provisions of the Settlement Agreement. The Board was also notified that the Implementation Plan Working Committee held its quarterly meeting to review progress and identify quarterly priorities. In December, the State Board of Education reviewed the PMT and its executive summary. The Board also received an update on the joint motion by the ADE, the LRSD, NLRSD, and the PCSSD, to relieve the Department of its obligation to file a February Semiannual Monitoring Report. The Board was also notified that the Joshua lntervenors filed a motion opposing the joint motion. The Board was informed that the ADE was waiting on a response from Court. 21 V. COMMITMENT TO PRINCIPLES (Continued) D. Through regular oversight of the Implementation Phase's Project Management Tool, and scrutiny of results of ADE's actions, the Board of Education will act on its commitment to the principles of the Settlement Agreement. (Continued) 2. Actual as of April 30, 1999 (Continued) In January, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed the PMT and its executive summary. The Board also received an update on the joint motion of the ADE, LRSD, PCSSD, and NLRSD for an order relieving the ADE of filing a February 1999 Monitoring Report. The motion was granted subject to the following three conditions: (1) notify the Joshua lntervenors of all meetings between the parties to discuss proposed changes, (2) file with the Court on or before February 1, 1999, a report detailing the progress made in developing proposed changes and (3) identify ways in which ADE might assist districts in their efforts to improve academic achievement. In February, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed the PMT and its executive summary. The Board was informed that the three conditions: (1) notify the Joshua lntervenors of all meetings between the parties to discuss proposed changes, (2) file with the Court on or before February 1, 1999, a report detailing the progress made in developing proposed changes and (3) identify ways in which ADE might assist districts in their efforts to improve academic achievement had been satisfied. The Joshua intervenors were invited again to attend the meeting of the parties and they attended on January 13, and January 28, 1999. They are also scheduled to attend on February 17, 1998. The report of progress, a collaborative effort from all parties was presented to court on February 1, 1999. The Board was also informed that additional items were received for inclusion in the revised report, after the deadline for the submission of the progress report and the ADE would: (1) check them for feasibility, and fiscal impact if any, and (2) include the items in future drafts of the report. In March, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed the PMT and its executive summary. The Board also received and reviewed the Desegregation Monitoring and Assistance Progress Report submitted to Court on February 1, 1999. 22 VI. REMEDIATION A. Through the Extended COE process, the needs for technical assistance by District, by School, and by desegregation compensatory education programs will be identified. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2.  Actual as of April 30, 1999 During May 1995, team visits to Cycle 4 schools were conducted, and plans were developed for reviewing the Cycle 5 schools. In June 1995, the current Extended COE packet was reviewed, and enhancements to the Extended COE packet were prepared. In July 1995, year end reports were finalized by the Pulaski County field service specialists, and plans were finalized for reviewing the draft improvement plans of the Cycle 5 schools. In August 1995, Phase I - Cycle 5 school improvement plans were reviewed. Plans were developed for meeting with the Districts to discuss plans for Phase II - Cycle 1 schools of Extended COE, and a school improvement conference was conducted in Hot Springs. The technical review visits for the FY 95/96 year and the documentation process were also discussed. In October 1995, two computer programs, the Effective Schools Planner and the Effective Schools Research Assistant, were ordered for review, and the first draft of a monitoring checklist for Extended COE was developed. Through the Extended COE process, the field service representatives provided technical assistance based on the needs identified within the Districts from the data gathered. In November 1995, ADE personnel discussed and planned for the FY 95/96 monitoring, and onsite visits were conducted to prepare schools for the FY 95/96 team visits. Technical review visits continued in the Districts. In December 1995, announced monitoring and technical assistance visits were conducted in the Districts. At December 31 , 1995, approximately 59% of the schools in the Districts had been monitored. Technical review visits were conducted during January 1996. In February 1996, announced monitoring visits and midyear monitoring reports were completed, and the field service specialists prepared for the spring NCA/COE peer team visits. 23 VI. REMEDIATION (Continued) A. Through the Extended COE process, the needs for technical assistance by District, by School, and by desegregation compensatory education programs will be identified. (Continued) 2. Actual as of April 30, 1999 (Continued) In March 1996, unannounced monitoring visits of Cycle 5 schools commenced, and two-day peer team visits of Cycle 5 schools were conducted. Two-day team visit materials, team lists and reports were prepared. Technical assistance was provided to schools in final preparation for team visits and to schools needing any school improvement information. In April and May 1996, the unannounced monitoring visits were completed. The unannounced monitoring forms were reviewed and included in the July monitoring report. The two-day peer team visits were completed, and annual COE monitoring reports were prepared. In June 1996, all announced and unannounced monitoring visits of the Cycle 5 schools were completed, and the data was analyzed. The Districts identified enrollment in compensatory education programs. The Semiannual Monitoring Report was completed and filed with the Court on July 15, 1996, and copies were distributed to the parties. During August 1996, meetings were held with the Districts to discuss the monitoring requirements. Technical assistance meetings with Cycle 1 schools were planned for 96/97. The Districts were requested to record discipline data in accordance with the Allen Letter. In September 1996, recommendations regarding the ADE monitoring schedule for Cycle 1 schools and content layouts of the semiannual report were submitted to the ADE administrative team for their review. Training materials were developed and schedules outlined for Cycle 1 schools. In October 1996, technical assistance needs were identified and addressed to prepare each school for their team visits. Announced monitoring visits of the Cycle 1 schools began on October 28, 1996. 24 VI. REMEDIATION (Continued) A. Through the Extended COE process, the needs for technical assistance by District, by School , and by desegregation compensatory education programs will be identified. (Continued) 2. Actual as of April 30, 1999 (Continued) In December 1996, the announced monitoring visits of the Cycle 1 schools were completed, and technical assistance needs were identified from school site visits. In January 1997, the ECOE monitoring section identified technical assistance needs of the Cyde 1 schools, and the data was reviewed when the draft February Semiannual Monitoring Report was presented to the Desegregation Litigation  Oversight Subcommittee, the State Board of Education, and the parties. In February 1997, field service specialists prepared for the peer team visits of the Cycle 1 schools. NCA accreditation reports were presented to the NCA Committee, and NCA reports were prepared for presentation at the April NCA meeting in Chicago. From March to May 1997, 111 visits were made to schools or central offices to work with principals, ECOE steering committees, and designated district personnel concerning school improvement planning. A workshop was conducted on Learning Styles for Geyer Springs Elementary School. A School Improvement Conference was held in Hot Springs on July 15-17, 1997. The conference included information on the process of continuous school improvement, results of the first five years of COE, connecting the mission with the school improvement plan, and improving academic performance. Technical assistance needs were evaluated for the FY 97/98 school year in August 1997. From October 1997 to February 1998, technical reviews of the ECOE process were conducted by the field service representatives. Technical assistance was provided to the Districts through meetings with the ECOE steering committees, assistance in analyzing perceptual surveys, and by providing samples of school improvement plans, Gold File catalogs, and web site addresses to schools visited. Additional technical assistance was provided to the Districts through discussions with the ECOE committees and chairs about the process. In November 1997, technical reviews of the ECOE process were conducted by the field service representatives in conjunction with the announced monitoring visits. Workshops on brainstorming and consensus building and asking strategic questions were held in January and February 1998. 25 VI. REMEDIATION (Continued) A. Through the Extended COE process, the needs for technical assistance by District, by School, and by desegregation compensatory education programs will be identified. (Continued) 2. Actual as of April 30, 1999 (Continued) In March 1998, the field service representatives conducted ECOE team visits and prepared materials for the NCA workshop. Technical assistance was provided in workshops on the ECOE process and team visits. In April 1998, tec.hnical assistance was provided on the ECOE process and academically distressed schools. In May 1998, technical assistance was provided on the ECOE process, and team visits were conducted. In June 1998, the Extended COE Team Visit Reports were completed. A School Improvement Conference was held in Hot Springs on July 13-15, 1998. Major conference topics included information on the process of continuous school improvement, curriculum alignment, \"Smart Start,\" Distance Learning, using data to improve academic performance, educational technology, and multicultural education. All school districts in Arkansas were invited and representatives from Pulaski County attended . In September 1998, requests for technical assistance were received, visitation schedules were established, and assistance teams began visiting the Districts. Assistance was provided by telephone and on-site visits. The ADE provided inservice training on \"Using Data to Sharpen the Focus on Student Achievement\" at Gibbs Magnet Elementary school on October 5, 1998 at their request. The staff was taught how to increase test scores through data disaggregation , analysis, alignment, longitudinal achievement review, and use of individualized test data by student, teacher, class and content area. Information was also provided regarding the \"Smart Start\" and the \"Academic Distress\" initiatives. On October 20, 1998, ECOE technical assistance was provided to Southwest Jr. High School. B. Identify available resources for providing technical assistance for the specific condition, or circumstances of need, considering resources within ADE and the Districts, and also resources available from outside sources and experts. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of April 30, 1999 The information for this item is detailed under Section VI.F. of this report. 26 VI. REMEDIATION (Continued) C. D. Through the ERIC system, conduct a literature search for research evaluating compensatory education programs. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of April 30, 1999 An updated ERIC Search was conducted on May 15, 1995 to locate research on evaluating compensatory education programs. The ADE received the updated ERIC disc that covered material through March 1995. An ERIC search was conducted in September 30, 1996 to identify current research dealing with the evaluation of compensatory education programs, and the articles were reviewed. An ERIC search was conducted in April 1997 to identify current research on compensatory education programs and sent to the Cycle 1 principals and the field service specialists for their use. An Eric search was conducted in October 1998 on the topic of Compensatory Education and related descriptors. The search included articles with publication dates from 1997 through July 1998. Identify and research technical resources available to ADE and the Districts through programs and organizations such as the Desegregation Assistance Center in San Antonio, Texas. 1. Projected Ending Date Summer 1994 2. Actual as of April 30, 1999 The information for this item is detailed under Section VI.F. of this report. E. Solicit, obtain , and use available resources for technical assistance. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of April 30, 1999 The information for this item is detailed under Section VI. F. of this report. 27 VI. REMEDIATION (Continued) F. Evaluate the impact of the use of resources for technical assistance. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of April 30, 1999 From March 1995 through July 1995, technical assistance and resources were obtained from the following sources: the Southwest Regional Cooperative\nUALR regarding training for monitors\nODM on a project management software\nADHE regarding data review and display\nand Phi Delta Kappa, the Desegregation Assistance Center and the Dawson Cooperative regarding perceptual surveys. Technical assistance was received on the Microsoft Project software in November 1995, and a draft of the PMT report using the new software package was presented to the ADE administrative team for review. In December 1995, a data manager was hired permanently to provide technical assistance with computer software and hardware. In October 1996, the field service specialists conducted workshops in the Districts to address their technical assistance needs and provided assistance for upcoming team visits. In November and December 1996, the field service specialists addressed technical assistance needs of the schools in the Districts as they were identified and continued to provide technical assistance for the upcoming team visits. In January 1997, a draft of the February 1997 Semiannual Monitoring Report was presented to the State Board of Education, the Desegregation Litigation Oversight Subcommittee, and the parties. The ECOE monitoring section of the report included information that identified technical assistance needs and resources available to the Cycle 1 schools. Technical assistance was provided during the January 29-31 , 1997 Title I MidWinter Conference. The conference emphasized creating a learning community by building capacity schools to better serve all children and empowering parents to acquire additional skills and knowledge to better support the education of their children. In February 1997, three ADE employees attended the Southeast Regional Conference on Educating Black Children. Participants received training from national experts who outlined specific steps that promote and improve the education of black children. 28 VI. REMEDIATION (Continued) F. Evaluate the impact of the use of resources for technical  assistance. (Continued) 2. Actual as of April 30, 1999 (Continued) On March 6-9, 1997, three members of the ADE's Technical Assistance Section attended the National Committee for School Desegregation Conference. The participants received training in strategies for Exce/fence and Equity: Empowerment and Training for the Future. Specific information was received regarding the current status of court-ordered desegregation, unitary status, and  resegregation and distributed to the Districts and ADE personnel. The field service specialists attended workshops in March on ACT testing and school improvement to identify technical assistance resources available to the Districts and the ADE that will facilitate desegregation efforts. ADE personnel attended the Eighth Annual Conference on Middle Level Education in Arkansas presented by the Arkansas Association of Middle Level Education on April 6~8, 1997. The theme of the conference was Sailing Toward New Horizons. In May 1997, the field service specialists attended the NCA annual conference and an inservice session with Mutiu Fagbayi. An Implementation Oversight Committee member participated in the Consolidated COE Plan inservice training. In June and July 1997, field service staff attended an SAT-9 testing workshop and participated in the three-day School Improvement Conference held in Hot Springs. The conference provided the Districts with information on the COE school improvement process, technical assistance on monitoring and assessing achievement, availability of technology for the classroom teacher, and teaching strategies for successful student achievement. In August 1997, field service personnel attended the ASCD Statewide Conference and the AAEA Administrators Conference. On August 18, 1997, the bi-monthly Team V meeting was held and presentations were made on the Early Literacy Learning in Arkansas (ELLA) program and the Schools of the 21st Century program. In September 1997, technical assistance was provided to the Cycle 2 principals on data collection for onsite and offsite monitoring. ADE personnel attended the Region VI Desegregation Conference in October 1997. Current desegregation and educational equity cases and unitary status issues were the primary focus of the conference. 29 VI. REMEDIATION (Continued) F. Evaluate the impact of the use of resources for technical assistance. (Continued) 2. Actual as of April 30, 1999 (Continued) On October 14, 1997, the bi-monthly Team V meeting was held in Paragould to enable members to observe a 21st Century school and a school that incorporates traditional and multi-age classes in its curriculum. In November 1997, the field service representatives attended the Governor's Partnership Workshop to discuss how to tie the committee's activities with the ECOE process. In March 1998, the field service representatives attended a school improvement conference and conducted workshops on team building and ECOE team visits. Staff development seminars on Using Data to Sharpen the Focus on Student Achievement are scheduled for March 23, 1998 and March 27, 1998 for the Districts. In April 1998, the Districts participated in an ADE seminar to aid them in evaluating and improving student achievement. In August 1998, the Field Service Staff attended inservice to provide further assistance to schools, i.e., Title I Summer Planning Session, ADE session on Smart Start, and the School Improvement Workshops. All schools and districts in Pulaski County were invited to attend the \"Smart Start\" Summit November 9, 10, and 11 to learn more about strategies to increase student performance. \"Smart Start\" is a standards-driven educational initiative which emphasizes the articulation of clear standards for student achievement and accurate measures of progress against those standards through assessments, staff development and individual school accountability. The Smart Start Initiative focused on improving reading and mathematics achievement for all students in Grades K-4. Representatives from all three districts attended . On January 21 , 1998, the ADE provided staff development for the staff at Oak Grove Elementary School designed to assist them with their efforts to improve student achievement. Using achievement data from Oak Grove, educators reviewed trends in achievement data, identified areas of greatest need, and reviewed seven steps for improving student performance. On February 24, 1999, the ADE provided staff development for the administrative staff at Clinton Elementary School regarding analysis of achievement data. On February 15, 1999, staff development was rescheduled for Lawson Elementary School. The staff development program was designed to assist them with their efforts to improve student achievement using achievement data from Lawson, educators reviewed the components of the Arkansas Smart Initiative, trends in achievement data, identified areas of greatest need, and reviewed seven steps for improving student performance. Student Achievement Workshops were rescheduled for Southwest Jr. High in the Little Rock School District, and the Oak Grove Elementary School in the Pulaski County School District. 30 VII. TEST VALIDATION A. B. Using a collaborative approach, the ADE will select and contract with an independent bias review service or expert to evaluate the Stanford 8, or other monitoring instruments used to measure disparities in academic achievement between black students and white students. 1. Projected Ending Date March, 1995 2. Actual as of April 30, 1999 On March 29, 1995, letters were sent to four national experts about conducting a  test bias validation of the Stanford Achievement Test, Eighth Edition, Form K (SAT- 8). Dr. Paul Williams, Deputy Director of Educational Testing Service (ETS), contacted the ADE in April of 1995 concerning the proposal for validating the SA T-8 test. The ADE requested that Dr. Williams conduct a validity study of test items used in the SAT-8. Dr. Williams submitted a final proposal for his services. The ADE Bias Review Test Committee met Friday, July 7, 1995, and approved Dr. William's contract proposal. The final contract was forwarded to Dr. Williams for his signature. The contract was signed in August 1995, thereby, completing this goal. By April 1994, establish a bias review committee to oversee the bias review process, and invite representatives of the Districts and parties to meet with the bias review committee. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of April 30, 1999 Complete. ADE established a Bias Review Committee in April 1994. In accordance with the Implementation Plan, representatives from the Districts and the parties were invited to attend and participate in this and all meetings of the Bias Review Committee. 31 VII. TEST VALIDATION (Continued) C. Upon completion of test validation procedures by the bias review service or expert, the ADE will adopt and use a validated test as a monitoring instrument. 1. Projected Ending Date March 1995 and ongoing 2. Actual as of April 30, 1999 Dr. Paul Williams met with the staff of the Psychological Corporation to review their methods and procedures. In August 1995, he met with the staff at Georgia State University to review the statistical methods that would be used in the analysis. Dr. Williams reported difficulty with the bias-review study in receiving the names of the bias panel and the complete SAT-8 data set from the Psychological Corporation. Dr. Williams submitted an invoice totaling $8,961 for Task I activities of the SAT-8 validity study for partial fulfillment of the test validation study. On December 6, 1995, a contract extension for Dr. Williams was reviewed by the Legislative Council. In January 1996, he indicated that he was in the final stages of the test validation, and the ADE was presented a draft report in March 1996. In May 1996, Dr. Williams stated that the wrong data sets were sent to him by the Psychological Corporation resulting in Task 3 having to be redone. A new draft of the final report was received by the ADE in July 1996. In August 1996, copies of the test validation report were provided to the State Board of Education and the ADE administrative team for their review. On September 10, 1996, the LRSD notified the ADE that they had reviewed the test validation report and would like to meet with the ADE to discuss the report. The ADE Director indicated that he would schedule a meeting with the LRSD to discuss the report. In October 1996, historical files and data were provided to the ADE Director, the ADE Assistant Director for Technical Services, and the ADE Assistant Director for Planning and Curriculum for their review in preparation for a meeting with the LRSD regarding the validity study. 32 VII. TEST VALIDATION (Continued) C. Upon completion of test validation procedures by the bias review service or expert, the ADE will adopt and use a validated test as a monitoring instrument. (Continued) 2. Actual as of April 30, 1999 (Continued) Test validation procedures by the expert have been completed. A recommendation was drafted proposing the use of the SA T-8 by the ADE as the validated test for monitoring. The ADE is presently working to arrange a meeting with the Administration of the LRSD to discuss the test validation study. Effective September 22, 1997, the State Board of Education hired a new Director of the General Education Division, which should allow the ADE to move forward in this matter. In October 1997, the GED Director was updated on the history of the test validation process to provide the Director with background information in preparation for a meeting with the LRSD. In February 1998, ADE staff met with senior staff members to discuss the test validation and appropriate test scores for consideration by the LRSD. The ADE Director met with the Superintendent of the LRSD to discuss test validation issues. In June 1998, the ADE Director directed the Assistant Director for Accountability to recommend staff to discuss how the ADE would measure LRSD's progress toward meeting the loan forgiveness thresholds of the Settlement Agreement. Plans were made to meet with the staff Tuesday, June 30, 1998. The Test Validation Committee met on June 30, 1998, and discussed the following: 1. The appropriateness of the use of scaled scores on the SAT-8 test as the metric for assessing LRSD compliance with the loan forgiveness provisions of the Settlement Agreement\nand 2. The need for an independent analysis of LRSD students' test scores to determine compliance or noncompliance with loan forgiveness standard, and who would bear the cost of such an independent analysis. 33 VII. TEST VALIDATION (Continued) C. Upon completion of test validation procedures by the bias review service or expert, the ADE will adopt and use a validated test as a monitoring instrument. (Continued) 2. Actual as of April 30, 1999 (Continued) The Test Validation Committee met on September 10, 1998, to review recent correspondence from LRSD and to further discuss issues related to the loan forgiveness provisions of the Settlement Agreement. A follow-up administrative meeting was held on October 13, 1998, to discuss issues related to the test validation process. Participants included Tim Gauger, Assistant Attorney General, Dr. Charity Smith, Lead Planner for Desegregation, and Frank Anthony, Assistant Director for Accountability. 34 VIII. IN-SERVICE TRAINING A. Through an interactive process with representatives of desegregating districts, identify in-service training needs. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of April 30, 1999 The information for this item is detailed under Section VIII.D. of this report. B. Develop in-service training programs to address in-service training needs of desegregating districts. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of April 30, 1999 The information for this item is detailed under Section VIII.D. of this report. C. Implement in-service tra ining programs to address in-service training needs of desegregating districts. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of April 30, 1999 The information for this item is detailed under Section VIII.D. of this report. D. Evaluate in-service tra ining programs developed and executed to address in-service training needs of desegregating districts. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 35 VIII. IN-SERVICE TRAINING (Continued) D. Evaluate in-service training programs developed and executed to address in-service training needs of desegregating districts. (Continued) 2. Actual as of April 30, 1999 In April 1995, the Tri-District Staff Development Committee were provided an overview of the Scott Alternative Learning Center's operation and met with students and staff. In May 1995, the Districts were in the process of self-assessment and planning for fall staff development. The Districts worked on staff development to be incorporated into their fall 95/96 preschool calendars. The uniqueness of each district's needs and their schools was considered in the planning by utilizing the results of needs assessment instruments. The Tri-District Staff Development Committee met on September 13, 1995 to plan for an ADE administered Classroom Management grant. The Tri-District Staff Development Committee met on September 19, 1995 to finalize the Classroom Management grant proposal. The Tri-District Staff Development Committee met on October 24, 1995 to discuss program and staff development evaluation models that might be available to the Districts. On November 15, 1995, the ADE met with an ODM representative to discuss the progress the ADE had made in attaining the objectives outlined in the Implementation Plan with regard to inservice training. The Tri-District Staff Development Committee met on November 21, 1995 to discuss upcoming training events and various NLR programs that focus on nonacademic needs. A new program consisting of placing a graduate student of social work, a field supervisor, and a OHS worker in the district at no cost to the district was discussed. Additionally, NLR provided an overview of their program for credit deficient students. The Tri-District Staff Development Committee met on December 19, 1995 to discuss information dealing with ways to broaden the perspective of multicultural education. The Tri-District Staff Development Committee met on January 17, 1996 to discuss proposed changes in the standards regarding media centers and NLRSD's staff development strategic planning committee. The committee reviewed a video on diversity produced by the Arkansas Elementary Principals Association. 36 VIII. IN-SERVICE TRAINING (Continued) D. Evaluate in-service training programs developed and executed to address in-service training needs of desegregating districts. (Continued) 2. Actual as of April 30, 1999 (Continued) The Tri-District Staff Development Committee met on February 21 , 1996 to discuss the implications of budget cuts on staff development programs and PCSSD's request for unitary status for their staff development program. They also discussed the need for computer literacy, technology training, and acquisition of hardware and software by the Districts. The Tri-District Staff Development Committee met on March 27, 1996 to discuss  available resources concerning sexual harassment. ADE regulations in relation to staff members attending professional association conferences as well as the district staff development and potential sites for training seminars were also discussed. The Tri-District Staff Development Committee met on April 30, 1996 to discuss the reconfiguring of Jacksonville Junior High, PCSSD professional development schedules, and APSCN on-line time lines. A tour of the Washington Magnet school was also conducted. The Tri-District Staff Development Committee received a demonstration of UALR's Baum Decision Support Center's capabilities regarding consensus and planning on May 29, 1996. The Tri-District Staff Development Committee did not meet during September, October, and November 1996 because of scheduling conflicts and the extended medical leave of the ADE liaison. On December 18, 1996, the Tri-District Staff Development Committee met to discuss the linkage between the Implementation Plan, staff development, and student achievement. On January 21 , 1997, the Tri-District Staff Development Committee met and discussed sharing middle school strategies and the Districts' training catalogs. The Tri-District Staff Development Committee met on February 25, 1997 to discuss their current staff development programs and an overview of the relationship of their current programs with their desegregation plans. 37 VIII. IN-SERVICE TRAINING (Continued) D. Evaluate in-service training programs developed and executed to address in-service training needs of desegregating districts. (Continued) 2. Actual as of April 30, 1999 (Continued) The Tri-District Staff Development Committee met on March 26, 1997 to observe the Great Expectations Program. The principal and mentor teachers provided information on the components and philosophy of the program, and students _demonstrated selected components. The PCSSD may adopt the program for selected schools in their district. The committee was provided with an update of pertinent information on resources available to the Districts. The committee decided that the ADE liaison to the committee would gather documentation of completed staff development directly from the Districts, instead of the Districts providing this information at the committee meetings. New information on teacher licensure and rules and regulations was shared with the Tri-District Staff Development Committee at their April 1997 meeting. A report was presented to the committee on information from the Arkansas Council for Social Studies about an October 1997 meeting on integrated curriculum. The Districts will provide principal retreats this summer as a part of their staff development. The PCSSD will sponsor a renowned speaker on strategies to serve at risk youth in August 1997 in which the committee is invited to attend. The LRSD shared survey results from a pilot administration to four teachers in each district. The survey found the sample to be strong in content but lacking in context and process. Plans to address these needs will be developed. In another survey to certified and non-certified LRSD staff, stress management was the major concern. The Tri-District Staff Development Committee met on May 14, 1997 to participate in a teleconference with the five 1996 awardees of the National Awards Program for Model for Professional Development. The PCSSD shared their summer and fall staff development catalog with the members. The committee will reconvene in the fall of the 97/98 school year. The Tri-District Staff Development Committee is scheduled to meet on September 30, 1997 to discuss collaborative actions for FY 97/98. 38 VIII. IN-SERVICE TRAINING (Continued) D. Evaluate in-service training programs developed and executed to address in-service training needs of desegregating districts. (Continued) 2. Actual as of April 30, 1999 (Continued) The Tri-District Staff Development Committee met on September 30, 1997 to discuss their staff development for the 1997 /1998 school year. The PCSSD had a pre-school in-service for the faculty, and the LRSD conducted a Principals Academy with an expert on the math and science initiative which lasted several days. The NLRSD is providing staff development by satellite. The Tri-District Staff Development Committee met on October 28, 1997. The LRSD and NLRSD shared some of their staff development course offerings with the committee, and the PCSSD discussed ways of optimizing opportunities for staff development with specific emphasis on the junior high school conflict resolution training. In November 1997, the Lead Planner provided technical assistance to Central High School staff regarding data disaggregation, test score analysis and ways to improve student achievement. The Tri-District Staff Development Committee met on November 25, 1997 to discuss the Standards for Staff Development. The LRSD will begin providing technology training to their employees in January by utilizing business teachers. Additionally, they discussed a collaborative venture of the Districts involving a workshop from Chicago on a program called \"Great Expectations.\" The Tri-District Staff Development Committee met on December 16, 1997 to discuss technology plans, strategies for obtaining information currently being provided to the education cooperatives, scheduling of Arkansas history, and the development of a comprehensive list of locations available for staff development. Members agreed to bring information on available locations to the January meeting and have set a tentative completion date for the project of May 1998. The Tri-District Staff Development Committee met on January 27, 1998 to share information for developing a comprehensive list of locations available for staff development. The Tri-District Staff Development Committee met on February 24, 1998 to work on the development of the list of locations available for staff development. The committee also discussed the meeting on student achievement sponsored by the ADE for the Districts, principals' staff development in the Districts and emphasis on improving achievement as reflected on the SAT-9. 39 VI II. IN-SERVICE TRAINING (Continued) D. Evaluate in-service training programs developed and executed to address in-service training needs of desegregating districts. (Continued) 2. Actual as of April 30, 1999 (Continued) The Tri-District Staff Development Committee met on March 19, 1998 to discuss the math and science grant received by the LRSD, the Districts' in-service calendars for August, TESA and Student-Team Learning trainers, and team building for staff. The ADE Deputy Director is scheduled to discuss ways the committee can strengthen their relationship with the regional cooperatives at their May meeting. The Tri-District Staff Development Committee met on April 27, 1998 to discuss their proposal for involvement with the regional cooperatives. The ADE Deputy Director is scheduled to discuss committee's concerns regarding their relationship with the regional cooperatives at their next meeting. The Tri-District Staff Development Committee met Thursday, May 21 , 1998, in the Instructional Resources Center at Little Rock School District. Dr. Woodrow Cummins, ADE Deputy Director, joined the group to discuss ways to develop a closer connection with the Education Service Cooperatives. He also discussed other issues concerning Tri-District Staff Development. Tentative plans were made to meet with the Teacher Center Coordinators at their next regular meeting. The next Central Office meeting will be at 9:00 a.m., Thursday, September 29, 1998, in the PCSSD. The Tri-District Staff Development Committee will attend the Educational Cooperative Teacher Center Coordinators' meeting September 1, 1998, in the ADE auditorium. The next regular meeting of the committee is tentatively set for 9:00 a.m., Thursday, September 29, 1998, in the PCSSD Central Office. The Tri-County Staff Development Committee met Monday, August 24, 1998, at PCSSD central office with four members present: Marion Woods, LRSD\nDoug Ask and Mary McClendon, PCSSD\nand Betty Gale Davis, ADE. Topics of discussion included the September 1 meeting scheduled with the regional cooperatives' teacher center coordinators\nthe staff development task force on which Marion Woods is serving\nthe property tax issue\nand various mathematics and reading programs being used in the districts. The committee met Tuesday, September 1, 1998, with the Teacher Center Coordinators, at which time Dr. Woody Cummins presented. Six Tri-District Staff Development Committee members were present: Marion Woods, LRSD\nDoug Ask and Mary McClendon, PCSSD\nDana Chadwick and Estelle Crawford, NLRSD\nBetty Gale Davis, ADE. The next committee meeting will be 9:00 a.m. , Thursday, September 24, 1998, at the Little Rock District Instructional Resources Center. 40 VIII. IN-SERVICE TRAINING (Continued) D. Evaluate in-service training programs developed and executed to address in-service training needs of desegregating districts. (Continued) 2. Actual as of April 30, 1999 (Continued) The Tri-District Staff Development Committee met Thursday, September 24, 1998, at the Instructional Resources Center, Little Rock, with five present: Marion Woods and Dr. Bonnie Lesley, LRSD\nDoug Ask, PCSSD\nDana Chadwick, NLRSD\nand Dr. Betty Gale Davis, ADE. Topics of discussion included the meeting with the regional cooperatives' teacher center coordinators\nthe staff development task force on which Marion Woods is serving and the NSCI training\ntraining provided by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)\ntraining provided by Casio\nand the proposal of a Principals Academy. Doug Ask will serve as representative to the October 6, 1998 meeting of the Teacher Center Coordinators. He will submit to Donna Harris, president of the group, a request for one other member of the Tri-County Committee (Dana Chadwick) to attend the meeting. Representatives for future meetings (second Tuesday of each month) will be: Marion Woods, November\nMary Mcclendon, December\nDana Chadwick, January. The next committee meeting will be 9:00 a.m., Tuesday, October 13, 1998, at the North Little Rock School District Central Office. The Tri-District Staff Development Committee met on Tuesday, October 13, 1998, in the NLRSD Administration Building. Doug Ask represented the committee at the Teacher Center Coordinators' meeting in Fayetteville, October 6. He shared with the Tri-District Committee information regarding the upcoming NSCI/Smart Start Training . James Smith spoke with the group about Amendment 4. Members of the Tri-District Staff Development Committee also met with the Teacher Center Coordinators, Wednesday, October 28. Doug Ask, Marion Woods, and Esther Crawford were trained as facilitators, October 29, for the initial Smart Start Summit to be held November 9-12, 1998. Marion Woods will represent the committee at the next regular Teacher Center Coordinators' meeting, Tuesday, November 3, 10:00 a.m. at the ADE. The next Tri-District Committee meeting will be at 9:00 a.m., November 10, in the PCSSD Administration Building. Members of the Tri-District Staff Development Committee met several times with the Teacher Center Coordinators in preparation for the Smart Start Summit. During the Smart Start Summit, they served as facilitators. The meeting planned for November 10 was postponed due to the conflict with the Summit. Doug Ask, Marion Woods, and Esther Crawford met with the Teacher Center Coordinators on Tuesday, December 1, 1998, for the regular monthly meeting. Principal topics discussed were the Smart Start Initiative and Principals' Institute. The next meeting of the Teacher Center Coordinators is scheduled for January 6, 1999, 9:00 a.m., in the ADE Auditorium. The Tri-District Staff Development Committee will meet at 9:00 a.m., Tuesday, December 8, 1998, at the Little Rock School District Instructional Resources Center. 41 VIII. IN-SERVICE TRAINING (Continued) D. Evaluate in-service training programs developed and executed to address in-service training needs of desegregating districts. (Continued) 2. Actual as of April 30, 1999 (Continued) Doug Ask, PCSSD\nMarion Woods, LRSD\nand Esther Crawford, NLRSD, met with the Teacher Center Coordinators on Tuesday, December 1, 1998, for the regular monthly meeting. Principal topics discussed were the Smart Start Initiative and Principals' Institute. The Teacher Center Coordinators held their monthly meeting on January 6 , 1999, 9:00 a.m., in the ADE Auditorium, with Doug Ask, Marion Woods, and Esther Crawford in attendance. At the January meeting, the primary focus was on the Smart Start Initiative. Dates for the future committee meetings have been tentatively scheduled to coincide with meetings with the Teacher Center Coordinators. Due to the Tri-District Committee's involvement with the Smart Start Initiative, no formal meeting of the committee was held in January. Members of the TriDistrict Staff Development Committee met with Teacher Center Coordinators, January 6 and 25, 1999, preparing for and facilitating Smart Start activities. Dates for future meetings have been tentatively scheduled to coincide with meetings of Teacher Center Coordinators. The Tri-District Staff Development Committee met Wednesday, February 17, 1999, at the Best Western lnntowne with four members in attendance. Most of the discussion centered on Smart Start and Character Centered Teaching. A March meeting date was not determined. Members ofthe Tri-DistrictStaff DevelopmeCntommittee met withthe Teacher Center Coordinators attheir regular meeting, April6, 1999, at theADE. Much of the meeting centered on the $mart Start Initiative and the Getting SmarterSunimerConference to be held inHot Springs, July28-31, 1999, 42 IX. RECRUITMENT OF MINORITY TEACHERS A. Facilitate communication between the Districts and Arkansas colleges and universities with teacher education programs. 1. Projected Ending Dates (See dates on individual key activities) 2. Actual as of April 30, 1999 A staff member of the ADE's certification department attended all of the college career days in FY 94/95 in Arkansas and one out-of-state. In FY 95/96, ADE certification staff members attended career and job fairs at the following colleges and universities: Philander Smith College\nUAM\nHSU\nATU\nUCA\nASU\nUA-Pine Bluff\nUA-Fayetteville\nHarding University\nSAU\nand Jackson State. ADE certification staff met with representatives from the Districts to ensure they were aware that ADE personnel were available to provide assistance in recruitment and certification of minority teacher candidates. A job fair was conducted at the University of Arkansas at Pine Bluff on December 4, 1996. The Districts were advised of the ADE's availability for providing assistance in recruitment and certification. In February 1997, ADE certification staff members attended teacher job fairs at Henderson State University, Arkansas Tech University, and University of Central Arkansas to facilitate communication between the Districts and Arkansas colleges and universities with teacher education programs. ADE certification staff members attended teacher job fairs at Harding University, UA-Fayetteville, UA-Pine Bluff, and ASU in April 1997 to facilitate communication between the Districts and Arkansas colleges and universities with teacher education programs. From April 16, 1997 through _May 6, 1997, ADE certification staff members attended teacher job fairs at Philander Smith College and SAU to facilitate communication between the Districts and Arkansas colleges and universities with teacher education programs. Additionally, ADE staff attended an out-ofstate teacher job fair at Jackson State University at Jackson, Mississippi. Recruitment activities were suspended for the summer, but they will resume in the later part of September for FY 97/98. On September 25, 1997, the ADE's Professional Licensure Supervisor attended a career day job fair at Philander Smith College to provide support to the Districts in recruiting teachers. 43 IX. RECRUITMENT OF MINORITY TEACHERS (Continued) A Facilitate communication between the Districts and Arkansas colleges and universities with teacher education programs. (Continued) 2. Actual as of April 30, 1999 (Continued) On November 6, 1997, the Professional Licensure Supervisor attended a career day job fair at the University of the Ozarks in order to facilitate the Districts' recruitment efforts. Recruitment activities will resume in February 1998. Representatives of the ADE's Professional Licensure Unit attended job fairs at Arkansas Technical University, UCA, ASU and the University of Memphis from February 26, 1998 through March 12, 1998. A representative from the ADE's Professional Licensure Unit attended job fairs at LIA-Fayetteville and Harding University on March 30, 1998 and April 2, 1998, respectively. Representatives from the ADE's Professional Licensure Unit attended job fairs at Philander Smith College, SAU and North East Louisiana in April 1998. The staff members of Professional Licensure have scheduled college and university job fairs as they become aware of them. They have scheduled ATU, UCA, ASU, Harding, and UA-Fayetteville. The Professional Licensure staff assisted NLRSD in getting the spring minority graduate list from all college and university teacher education programs. The Licensure unit scheduled staff to attend job fairs coming up this spring. Representatives for the Professional Licensure Unit attended job fairs at ATU, UCA, and ASU from February 25, 1999 through March 9, 1999. Representatives for the Professional Ucensure Unit attended job fairs at Harding, UA-Fayetteville, and UAM from March 25, 1999 through April 7, 1999. B. Beginning in 1994, by May and November of each year, Districts will supply to the ADE information about shortages of teachers by grade and subject area. 1. Projected Ending Dates Ongoing, as stated. 2. Actual as of April 30, 1999 Letters were sent in May, August, and December 1995 to the Districts requesting information regarding teaching positions available by grade and subject areas. In May and November 1996, the Human Resources offices of the Districts were requested to provide information regarding teaching positions available by grade and subject area. 44 IX. RECRUITMENT OF MINORITY TEACHERS (Continued) 8. Beginning in 1994, by May and November of each year, Districts will supply to the ADE information about shortages of teachers by grade and subject area. (Continued) 2. Actual as of April 30, 1999 (Continued) The ADE sent follow-up letters requesting information from the Districts regarding teacher shortages in February 1997. The NLRSD and the PCSSD indicated that they expect teacher shortages in the areas of Special Education, Mathematics, the Sciences, Foreign Language, English as a Second Language and Gifted and Talented Education. On May 20, 1997, information was requested from the Districts regarding teacher shortages. Follow-up letters were sent in July 1997. On November 5, 1998, letters were sent to the three schools in Pulaski County requesting a list of foreseeable teacher shortages. C. Beginning in 1994, by May and December of each year, request information from colleges and universities about the numbers and types of minority-teacher graduates. 1. Projected Ending Dates Ongoing, as stated. 2. Actual as of April 30, 1999 In May and December 1995, letters were sent to all Deans and Certifying Officers of Institutions of Higher Education in Arkansas requesting information on minority teacher graduates. Letters were sent to all Deans and Certifying Officers of Institutions of Higher Education in Arkansas in May and November 1996 requesting information on minority teacher graduates. In May and December 1997, letters were sent to all Arkansas colleges and universities with teacher education programs requesting minority teacher graduate information. On May 14, 1998, letters were sent to all Arkansas colleges and universities with teacher education programs requesting minority teacher graduate information. On August 1, 1998, the ADE Office of Professional Licensure sent advance notice to all Deans/Certifying Officials regarding the change in format for complete minority teacher candidate information. On November 5, 1998, letters were sent to Deans and Certifying Officials requesting a list of their fall minority teacher education graduates which will be sent to the three Pulaski County Schools. 45 IX. RECRUITMENT OF MINORITY TEACHERS (Continued) D. Within 30 days of receiving data from colleges and universities provide the Districts data on teacher openings to the colleges and universities on minority graduates to the Districts. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of April 30, 1999 In June 199.5 and January 1996, ADE sent the information received from Arkansas colleges and universities on minority teacher education graduates to the Districts. In July 1996 and January 1997, ADE sent the information received from Deans and Certifying Officers on minority teacher education graduates to the Districts. On February 3, 1997, a list of minority teacher graduates from the University of Arkansas at Fayetteville was forwarded to the Districts as an addendum to the list of graduates compiled on January 16, 1997. The ADE provided the Districts with the Minority Teacher Graduate Report compiled from the minority teacher graduate information received from Arkansas colleges and universities in July 1997 and January 1998. The 1998 Fall Minority Teacher Graduate Report from colleges and universities have been forwarded to the three Pulaski County School District. Information from the three Pulaski County School Districts regarding vacant teaching positions are being forwarded to the colleges and universities. E. Each November, ADE will request information from the Districts on the effectiveness of ADE's minority recruitment assistance, including an assessment of the minority teacher candidates' database. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of April 30, 1999 On November 30, 1994, letters were sent to the Districts requesting feedback on the effectiveness of the ADE's minority recruitment assistance. Follow-up letters were sent on March 17, 1995 since no responses had been received. Additional follow-up letters were sent to the Districts in August 1995 because the ADE had received no responses from the Districts. A planning and evaluation meeting was scheduled on January 11, 1996 with representatives from the Districts. The Districts did not attend the meeting. In February 1997, letters were sent to the Districts requesting feedback on the effectiveness of ADE's minority recruitment assistance. The NLRSD and the PCSSD submitted favorable evaluations concerning the effectiveness of the ADE's recruitment assistance efforts. The ADE did not received any information from the LRSD regarding this matter. 46 X. FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE TO MINORITY TEACHER CANDIDATES A. Assist ADHE in identifying, analyzing, addressing and eliminating racial disparities in the allocation of scholarships. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of April 30, 1999 The information for this item is detailed under Section X.D. of this report. B. Representatives of the ADE and the ADHE will work together, review ADHE's available data to identify racial disparities in allocation of scholarships.  1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of April 30, 1999 The information for this item is detailed under Section X. D. of this report. C. Using its knowledge about public schools, teacher education and certification, and through a collaborative effort with the Districts, ADE will analyze racial disparities in ADHE scholarship allocations. ADE will report its findings, conclusions, and recommendations about racial disparities in allocating scholarships to ADHE. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of April 30, 1999 The information for this item is detailed under Section X.D. of this report. D. Working with the ADHE, the ADE will use its relationships in the public education institutional settings to assist implementation of measures designed to reduce racial disparities in allocation of scholarships. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 47 X. FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE TO MINORITY TEACHER CANDIDATES (Continued) D. E. Working with the ADHE, the ADE will use its relationships in the public education institutional settings to assist implementation of measures designed to reduce racial disparities in allocation of scholarships. (Continued) 2. Actual as of April 30, 1999 In April 1995, ADE met with representatives of ADHE concerning identification and analysis of possible disparities in scholarship allocations. In June 1995, a collaborative effort was made between the ADE and ADHE to enhance the rate at which minorities were applying for the 1995 teacher scholarships with special emphasis on the areas of science, math, and foreign language through a direct mail program. In July 1995, representatives from the ADE and the Districts met to review the scholarship applications. The Implementation Committee on Financial Assistance to Minority Teacher Candidates discussed ways to increase minority awareness of the scholarships available for minority teacher applicants. The committee agreed to meet quarterly to identify, analyze, and address eliminating racial disparities in scholarships. The committee met in December 1995 to discuss the distribution of scholarships for the 95/96 school year. The committee meets on a continuous basis to review scholarship distributions and discuss ways of improving the pool of applicants for minority teacher scholarships as detailed further in Section X.E. of this report. Monitor the allocation of scholarships to minority students by the ADHE\nevaluate the impacts of new approaches and new legislation on an ongoing basis. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of April 30, 1999 During the May 1995 Legislative session, Acts 188, 189 and 259 regarding scholarships were passed. A meeting to monitor and analyze the distribution of scholarships for the 95/96 school year was held on December 15, 1995. 48 X. FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE TO MINORITY TEACHER CANDIDATES (Continued) E. Monitor the allocation of scholarships to minority students by the ADHE\nevaluate the impacts of new approaches and new legislation on an ongoing basis. (Continued) 2. Actual as of April 30, 1999 (Continued) The committee met on June 7, 1996 to review the scholarship applications for minority teacher candidates for the 96/97 school year. Representatives from the ADHE stated that the ADHE expected to have the resources to fund : 56 scholarships under the Emergency Secondary Education Loan Program\n100 scholarships under the Minority Teacher Scholars Program\nand 13 scholarships under th_e Minority Masters Fellows Program. The committee also discussed ways of increasing the scholarship applicant pools, and a recommendation was made to make scholarships available to part-time students. In September 1996, a proposal was submitted to the Assistant to the Director for Legislative Services recommending the Legislature offer minority teacher scholarships to part-time students. The committee met on October 23, 1996 to review the scholarships awarded for the 96/97 school year. The following scholarships were funded : 60 scholarships totaling $144,266 for the Emergency Secondary Education Loan Program\n20 scholarships totaling $107,500 for the Minority Masters Fellows Program\n109 scholarships totaling $505,093 for the Minority Teacher Scholars Program\nand 258 students in the Freshman/Sophomore Minority-Grant Program received scholarships totaling $374,000. In March 1997, information on minority teacher scholarships and how to apply was provided to the Districts and Arkansas colleges and universities. The Districts were informed of ADHE's scholarship promotional efforts and legislative updates. The next meeting of the committee will be in September 1997. On April 8, 1997, notifications were sent to all Arkansas colleges and universities on the Minority Teacher Scholars Program reminding them that the deadline for receiving applications was June 1, 1997. This information was also provided to the Districts. The Minority Teacher Scholarship Committee will meet on October 9, 1997 to discuss the scholarships awarded for FY 97/98. 49 X. FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE TO MINORITY TEACHER CANDIDATES (Continued) E. Monitor the allocation of scholarships to minority students by the ADHE\nevaluate the impacts of new approaches and new legislation on an ongoing basis. (Continued) 2. Actual as of April 30, 1999 (Continued) The Minority Teacher Scholarship Recruitment Committee met on October 9, 1997 to discuss the scholarships awarded for FY 97/98. The ADHE Assistant Coordinator for Student Financial Aid provided a comprehensive presentation on scholarships awarded for the 97/98 school year. There were 235 scholarships awarded in the Freshman/Sophomore Minority Scholarship program totaling $344,988. The Emergency Secondary Education Loan program awarded 52 scholarships for a total of $119,370. There were 83 scholarships for $403,520 awarded in the Minority Teachers Scholars program. The Minority Masters Fellows program awarded 20 scholarships for a total of $73,750. The ADHE representative indicated that during the 1997 regular legislative session legislation was passed to allow hispanics and asians to participate in the minority scholarship programs. It was stated that the average GPA for minority teacher scholarship recipients had increased to 3.13, and that the dollars awarded in the Minority Masters Fellows program were down from last year because most of the recipients were part-time students. The committee discussed numerous avenues that might be utilized to inform minority applicants of scholarships available. Communication with the faculty of Arkansas colleges and universities regarding the availability of scholarships was discussed as a way of informing teaching students of possible resources available to them . The next quarterly meeting of the Minority Teacher Scholarship Recruitment Committee will be February 19, 1998. The quarterly meeting of the Minority Teacher Scholarship Recruitment Committee scheduled for February was canceled since only the NLRSD and an ADE representative were present at the scheduled meeting place. The meeting has not been rescheduled at this time. The Minority Teacher Scholarship meeting was rescheduled for March 26, 1998. 50 X. FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE TO MINORITY TEACHER CANDIDATES (Continued) E. Monitor the allocation of scholarships to minority students by the ADHE\nevaluate the impacts of new approaches and new legislation on an ongoing basis. (Continued) 2. Actual as of April 30, 1999 (Continued) The Minority Teacher Scholarship Recruitment Committee met on March 26, 1998. The committee was updated on the requirements and application packets were distributed for the Emergency Secondary Education Loan Program (ESELP), Minority Teacher Scholars Program (MTSP), and Minority Masters Fellows Program (MMFP). The deadline for applications was April 1, 1998 for the ESELP and June 1, 1998 for the MTSP and MMFP. The scholarships will be awarded in July 1998. A committee member requested that ADHE send scholarship applications to the schools as well as the district offices to ensure that their teachers and students were apprised of the scholarships available. It was suggested that the colleges submit prospective graduate information for use by the Districts no later than April since the Districts begin the interview process of Spring graduates in May. The ADE Implementation Plan currently requires that the ADE request information on minority teacher graduates in May, and then it is distributed to the Districts in June or July. A representative from the ADE Teacher Licensure Unit was present at the meeting and stated that the ADE would try to accommodate the Districts with this request, but she cautioned that colleges and universities are reluctant to provide tentative graduate information. The next committee meeting is scheduled for July 30, 1998 at the NLRSD offices. The Minority Teacher Scholarship Meeting was held July 30, 1998. Donna Elliot, ADE Program Support Manager was appointed to the Committee. She indicated that advance notification would be mailed to all University Deans/Certifying Officials regarding the change in format for more thorough minority teacher candidate information. A complete report will be forwarded and reported in the September PMT. Disparities in minority scholarship distributions were not evidenced in the draft report. Lillian Williams, Arkansas Department of Higher Education, submitted the following report on Minority Teacher Scholarships Distribution: 1998-99 PROGRAM STATISTICS PROGRAM NAME APPROPRIATION AWARDED #STUDENTS Freshman/Sophomore 250,000 250,000 Estimated 300+ ESEL 81 ,717 121,250 50 * Minority Teacher Scholars 450,000 445,000 89 ** Minority Masters Fellows 80,000 80,000 30 * Please note that only 81 ,717 was appropriated for the ESEL Scholarship, however, additional repayment funds were used to award an additional 39,533 totaling 121 ,250. ** 11 Students are pending passing the PPST. 51 X. FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE TO MINORITY TEACHER CANDIDATES (Continued) E. Monitor the allocation of scholarships to minority students by the ADHE\nevaluate the impacts of new approaches and new legislation on an ongoing basis. (Continued) 2. Actual as of April 30, 1999 (Continued) The report on Minority Teacher Scholarships Distribution was presented October 8, 1998, by the Education Lead Planner during the Break the Mold Workshop: Teacher Recruitment and Retention, sponsored by the Winthrop Rockefeller Foundation. The group was informed about the following: 1. Projected Teacher shortages in Mathematics, Special Education, and Foreign Language 2. Collaborative efforts of the ADE and the ADHE to recruit teachers by funding more than 450 scholarships for applicants interested in teaching annually 3. Reasons new teachers give for leaving the profession 4. The ratio of minority teachers to minority students. The Minority Teacher Scholarship Committee met on November 2, 1998 in the Pulaski County District Conference Room. The committee received (1) an update on the distribution of scholarships, (2) reviewed the scholarship information booklets, (3) approved the quarterly report of progress. The committee also identified, as a legislative issue, the need to allow part-time students access to scholarships. The next quarterly meeting is scheduled for February 2, 1999. A recommendation was received by the Committee on Financial Assistance to Minority Teacher Candidates regarding the Emergency Secondary Education Loan. The Committee recommended that the Arkansas State Legislature increase the minority teacher candidate pool by offering the Emergency Secondary Education Loan to part-time students. The Committee noted that a number of persons currently serving our education system as substitute teachers would take advantage of the assistance offered, if they could receive assistance for part-time student status. Many prospective minority teacher candidates, and candidates seeking advanced degrees are unable to serve our students and go to school on a full-time basis. The next quarterly meeting is scheduled for February 2, 1999. The next quarterly meeting was rescheduled for February 21 , 1999, to accommodate all participants. The quarterly meeting of the Minority Teacher Scholarship Committee was held on February 21 , 1999, in the Little Rock School District. Representatives from all three districts in Pulaski County, the ADHE and the ADE attended the meeting. A scholarship report update and scholarship applications and deadlines for the 1999 school year were provided. Information regarding the national focus on teacher shortages and recruitment were distributed. The committee discussed the status of the following bills related to teacher recruitment: 52 X. FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE TO MINORITY TEACHER CANDIDATES (Continued) E. Monitor the allocation of scholarships to minority students by the ADHE\nevaluate the impacts of new approaches and new legislation on an ongoing basis. (Continued) 2. Actual as of April 30, 1999 (Continued) SB31, \"an act to make emergency secondary education loans available to students enrolled as a major in a program of study leading to teacher certification for foreign languages and special education.\" HB1466 \"state supported colleges and universities must report to Department of Education the name, address, and major of each minority student completing college requirements for licensure as school teacher.\" SB237 \"to make technical amendments to various sections of the Arkansas Code Annotated relative to public education.\" SB261 \"to encourage teachers to participate in and complete NBPTS Certification by authorizing the Department of Education to pay full tuition and incentive bonuses.\" S8113 \"to amend A.CA 6-17-410 to clarify that the Department of Education will pay criminal record check fees for certain public education employees.\" 53 XI. MINORITY RECRUITMENT OF ADE STAFF A Administer the ADE Minority Recruitment Plan developed by the ADE staff and Board of Education and officially adopted by the Board of Education (see Exhibit B for the ADE's Minority Recruitment Plan with specific objectives and time lines). 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of April 30, 1999 The Minority Recruitment Committee met on April 14, 1995. New committee members were assigned tasks and goals to increase the effectiveness of the Minority Recruitment Plan. At the Minority Recruitment Committee meeting on May 18, 1995, the committee was divided into four working sub-teams to update the annual plan. Each team focused on one of the four goals in the Minority Recruitment Plan and monitored specific task completions. From June to October 1995, subcommittees met and worked on monitoring the progress of the ADE in accomplishing the tasks outlined in the Minority Recruitment Plan. In September 1995, the ADE reached an agreement with the Arkansas Statewide Systemic Initiative (ASSI) for conducting an audit of the Minority Recruitment Plan. The committee reviewed the recommendations and comments for updating the plan at the November 1995 meeting and reviewed the final draft at the December meeting. The ASSl's audit findings were presented to the committee on January 16, 1996. It was determined during the initial review that the files were incomplete to the extent that an accurate audit was not possible. The auditor met with the committee in March 1996 to review the additional documentation in the files. The auditor prepared the final report in April 1996 indicating that of the 89 actions contained in the Minority Recruitment Plan, 74 of the items had been completed, nine were in progress, and six had not been started. The audit stated that of the 22 items in Goal 1, 15 were completed, one was in progress, and six had not been started . Goal 2 contained 14 items, 13 of which were completed and one in progress. Goal 3 consisted of 30 items with 29 items completed and one in progress. Goal 4 consisted of 23 items with 17 items completed and six in progress. 54 XI. MINORITY RECRUITMENT OF ADE STAFF (Continued) A. Administer the ADE Minority Recruitment Plan developed by the ADE staff and Board of Education and officially adopted by the Board of Education (see Exhibit B for the ADE's Minority Recruitment Plan with specific goals, objectives and time lines). (Continued) 2. Actual as of April 30, 1999 (Continued) The Minority Recruitment Committee met on June 6, 1996 to discuss updates and revisions addressed in the audit and the new racial/gender report on Grades 21 and above. Since the completion of the audit, Goals 2.3.4 and 3.3.8 were completed, and a list of recommendations for retention activities was written. Also, a random sample of ADE employees was asked to fill out questionnaires, but only a limited number were returned. In August 1996, the Minority Recruitment Committee met and discussed the actions necessary to complete Goals 1 and 4 contained in the Minority Recruitment Plan. At the September 1996 meeting, the committee was updated on the progress of all four goals in the Minority Recruitment Plan. The committee heard an analysis of application and hiring practices and discussed the relevance of the data. Suggestions made by the State Board of Education regarding the Employee Tracking Data Check Sheet were discussed at the February 1996 meeting of the Minority Recruitment Committee. Goal 1 of the Minority Recruitment Plan will be completed when the employee tracking sheet is finalized. The Minority Recruitment Committee met on March 14, 1997 and March 27, 1997 to discuss the draft Revised Minority Recruitment Plan and progress toward completing Goal 4. The committee passed a motion to omit Section 1.1 from Goal 1 of the draft revised plan. Additionally, the committee suggested that communication be made an integral part of each goal of the revised plan. The committee discussed the need for professional training programs, incentives for educational opportunities, and upward mobility for all staff within the ADE. In an effort to complete Goal 4, a representative from the ADE communication section presented development costs for media materials to the committee. Additionally, a representative from the ADE MIS section discussed the possibility of using the network to disseminate information to employees. It was suggested that the committee continue to receive assistance from MIS on the orientation video. 55 XI. MINORITY RECRUITMENT OF ADE STAFF (Continued) A Administer the ADE Minority Recruitment Plan developed by the ADE staff and Board of Education and officially adopted by the Board of Education (see Exhibit B for the ADE's Minority Recruitment Plan with specific goals, objectives and time lines). (Continued) 2. Actual as of April 30, 1999 (Continued) In an effort to represent all sections within the ADE, the committee recommended that representatives from the ADE communication and MIS sections be added as members to the committee. Currently, neither section is represented on the committee. The-Minority Recruitment Committee met on April 18, 1997 to discuss the need to revise the action steps for each of the committee's four goals. The committee decided to schedule a two-day retreat in an effort to review all goals and actions. The Minority Recruitment Committee met on May 19, 1997 to discuss the agenda for the annual retreat and revisions to the action plan emphasizing recruitment and retention at all grade levels. A two-day annual retreat was held on June 18-19, 1997 at the Teacher Retirement Building. The retreat facilitated the revision of the Minority Recruitment Committee's action plan for their four goals. Dr. Gary Chamberlain, UALR faculty member, served as the facilitator. The revised plan was distributed to the Minority Recruitment Committee at their July 18, 1997 meeting for final approval before it is submitted to the administrative team and the State Board of Education. The Minority Recruitment Committee meeting scheduled for September 12, 1997 was rescheduled for September 30, 1997 due to members scheduling conflicts. The meeting will be reported in the November PMT. The Minority Recruitment Committee met with the ADE Deputy Director in November 1997 to provide him with a copy of the revised plan and receive his input on the plan. The revised Minority Recruitment Committee (MRC) plan was approved at the December 1997 State Board of Education meeting. The MRC met in January 1998 to discuss the implementation of the revised MRC plan. Reports and documentation of progress in completing the components of each goal Will be reported at the next meeting. 56 XI. MINORITY RECRUITMENT OF ADE STAFF (Continued) B. Monitor minority representation at all levels of ADE and assess the effectiveness of the ADE Minority Recruitment Plan. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of April 30, 1999 As of August 1995, the ADE had hired or transferred 38 employees in Grades 21 and above in the General Education Division. This group was composed of 11 black females, 5 black males, 16 white females, 4 white males, 1 other female, and 1 other male. The racial composition of the these employees was 52.6 percent non-minority and 47.4 percent minority. As of October 1995, there were 161 filled positions in the GED in Grades 21 and above. There were 27 minorities or 22.9 percent in Grades 21 and above. An analysis on Goal 1 regarding application and hiring practices was presented at the September 1996 meeting. Samples of graphs and tables for presenting the data were distributed at the meeting. The Minority Recruitment Committee met on December 13, 1996 to discuss the latest draft of the ADE Employee Tracking Data Check Sheet. The committee recommended various format changes including the addition of a table of contents and an executive summary. The committee met on January 17, 1997 to continue the discussion on the draft ADE Employee Tracking Data Check Sheet. The Assistant Director for Planning and Curriculum agreed with all but three of the committee's recommendations for the employee tracking sheet. He requested that the committee continue discussions on this matter. The Minority Recruitment Committee met on February 14, 1997 to discuss the status of the Employee Tracking Data Check Sheet. The committee also discussed the lack of minority employees in some areas and the loss of several minority employees and the possibility of revising the new Minority Recruitment Plan. The committee received information on Arkansas pupil enrollment by race at their March 14, 1997 meeting. Arkansas enrollment figures for October 1, 1996 revealed that 73. 7% of all students are white, 23.4% are black, 1.8% are hispanic, 0. 7% are asian, and 0.4% are native american. 57 XI. MINORITY RECRUITMENT OF ADE STAFF (Continued) 8. Monitor minority representation at all levels of ADE and assess the effectiveness of the ADE Minority Recruitment Plan. (Continued) 2. Actual as of April 30, 1999 (Continued) To assess the effectiveness of the action steps for each goal, agenda items were developed for the committee's June retreat. The committee recommended that invitations be sent to Senator Beebe, Julie Cullen, Gene Wilhoit, and all State Board members. At the May 1997 Minority Recruitment Committee meeting, the committee discussed reviewing the most recent quarterly hiring and retention report and revisions to the action plan at the annual retreat. Discussions during the July retreat focused on the current plan, the original purpose of the plan, and necessary changes with input provided by committee members and speakers from the Arkansas Department of Higher Education, Employment Securities, and the ADE. At the January 1998 MRC meeting, it was decided that the chair and secretary would prepare a report on minority representation within each unit and section and present it to the committee at the next meeting. The Minority Recruitment Committee met on June 11, 1998, to discuss new membership for the committee and plans for a retreat. The committee recommended a new design and composition of the committee to represent each of the seven sections of the Arkansas Department of Education and included Grade 20's and below. The Minority Recruitment Committee niet on July, 16, 1998, to discuss implementation of new membership for the committee for FY98/99, and to update plans for the September retreat. The Minority Recruitment Committee met on August 11 , 1998 with Dr. Dave Westmoreland, Acting Chairperson. Members were notified that the dates for the September Retreat are September 10-11 , 1998 at the Teacher Retirement Building, Little Rock Arkansas. New Members were introduced and background materials regarding the purpose and progress of the MRC were distributed to new members. The selection of new officers will be conducted at the retreat. The two-day annual retreat was held on September 10-11 , 1998, at the Teacher Retirement Building. The retreat focused on the current ADE Minority Recruitment Revised Plan (approved by the State Board of Education in December 1997). Since several of the members had recently joined the committee, issues concerning the implementation of the Revised Plan were examined. Acting Chairperson, Dr. Dave Westmoreland, was elected Chairperson, and Mr. Jimmy Burks was elected Vice-Chairperson. Mrs. Michelle Griffin consented to continue in her role as Secretary for the committee. 58 XI. MINORITY RECRUITMENT OF ADE STAFF (Continued) B. Monitor minority representation at all levels of ADE and assess the effectiveness of the ADE Minority Recruitment Plan. (Continued) 2. Actual as of April 30, 1999 (Continued) The Minority Recruitment Committee met on October 15, 1998, and discussed the progress on the 1997 Minority Recruitment Plan. Objectives 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 3.3 were discussed, respectively. It appears that funding is available for the committee to engage an independent auditor. In addition, the committee reaffirmed the importance of the \"minority graduate student internship program\" as a resource for possible minority recruits. The Minority Recruitment Committee met on November 12, 1998, and discussed the following progress on the 1997 Minority Recruitment Plan: 1. Objectives 1.1 through 4.4 were discussed 2. The committee had extensive discussion on where to gather information for a study on the availability of minority workforce. Suggestions were Employment Security Division, UALR's Arkansas Statistical Review, and current data on the World Wide Web 3. 4. The minutes of the November 10, 1998 Employee Focus Group Discussion was distributed to members. The Focus Group participants recommended incentives for staff members to grow in work skills and evaluation of various employees be as objective as possible The committee discussed the ADE newsletter on the Intranet as an avenue for employees to communicate concerns, and accomplishments. The next meeting is scheduled for December 17, 1998. The Minority Recruitment committee meeting scheduled for December 17 was rescheduled for December 16, 1998. Dr. Dave Westmoreland disseminated a Memorandum summarizing the December 14, 1998, Employee Focus Group Discussion on Perceptions of the ADE. The group noted that the ADE is not structured in a manner that allows employees to voice concerns. Members felt salary adjustment would be desirable. Specifically, those employees who remain with the ADE after several years have observed that some less experienced employees are paid more. Perception of opportunities for advancement may not be uniform across the agency. Dr. Westmoreland noted that the focus group however, commented that the ADE was a good place to work. The committee will invite Mr. Artee Williams, Director of Office of Personnel Management, to the next regularly scheduled meeting to address employee salary concerns. The committee will forward comments on the perception of ADE to senior management. 59 XI. MINORITY RECRUITMENT OF ADE STAFF (Continued) B. Monitor minority representation at all levels of ADE and assess the effectiveness of the ADE Minority Recruitment Plan. (Continued) 2. Actual as of April 30, 1999 (Continued) The committee met on January 14, 1999. Dr. Charity Smith reported the progress of the ADE Minority Graduate Student Internship Program. She explained that the program provides for students enrolled in advanced education degree programs, in Arkansas institutions of higher learning, to be interns at the ADE. The higher education program advisor dictates the particular activities of the interns. Typically, the intern works with various ADE personnel for approximately six weeks. Three students have engaged in the program since 1994. The committee also discussed the possibility of a speaker tour bureau for the ADE, with this information being housed on the ADE web site. Mr. Artee Williams from the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) or a representative will be invited in the future to talk about the Career Ladder Incentive Program (CLIP) and training as it relates to the ADE's minority recruitment efforts. Dr. Andre Guerrero recommended that the committee stress to our Licensure Section the importance of keeping a strong mentoring system available for minority teachers. Mr. Reginald Wilson reported that he has contacted three persons that the committee might use as an independent auditor for the Minority Recruitment Plan, and is waiting on a response from them. Mr. Wilson is also working on a report on the racial makeup of the ADE, Grade 21 and above. Dr. Westmoreland updated the committee that the 1997 revised Minority Recruitment Plan is near completion and a draft documentation is available for the audit. The next meeting is scheduled for February 11, 1999. On February 11 , 1999, A follow-up was made prior to the meeting about the invitation of Mr. Artee Williams. Mr. Williams invited the committee to write specific questions regarding personnel issues. He stated that he could not answer specific questions as they related to the ADE, but could answer broad questions based through state government. He stated that questions should be in writing from the Director, and the Director would have to extend an initiation before he could speak to the agency. Mr. Williams also mentioned proposed legislation that could result in the implementation of a merit/performance based program called the Career Ladder Incentive Program (CLIP). If passed, this program will be implemented beginning July 1, 1999. He said this program might address the agencies salary concerns. The committee agreed to monitor this legislation. Dr. Westmoreland reported the Revised Minority Recruitment Plan is ready for the auditor to review. Mr. Wilson reported Ms. Denise Fletcher, Attorney at Law, Fletcher Law Firm has agreed to perform the audit. Mr. Wilson disseminated a draft of the ADE Grade 21 and above Employee Status Report dated February 11 , 1999. 60 XI. MINORITY RECRUITMENT OF ADE STAFF (Continued) B. Monitor minority representation at all levels of ADE and assess the effectiveness of the ADE Minority Recruitment Plan. (Continued} 2. Actual as of April 30, 1999 (Continued) The MRC met oMnarch 11 , 1999. The committee was informed that the Minority Recruitment Plan was forwarded to the audiotr, Denise Fletcher, Attorney, Fletcher Law Firm When the auditor is finished with the Plan, it will be forwarded to the Stale Board of Education for theirreview and approval. After some discussion on possible objectives for the Minority Recruitment Plan, the committee agreed fo forward information to the ADE Director recommending that he share the importance of the MRC with all hiring officials. 61 XII. SCHOOL CONSTRUCTION A. Improve the effectiveness of the ADE's existing rules, regulations , and site evaluation form for assessing the desegregation impacts of school construction between school districts. 1 . Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of April 30, 1999 The information for this item is detailed under Section XII.C. of this report. 8 . Review existing rules, regulations and site evaluation forms and their application to school construction projects within districts and between districts. C. 1. Projected Ending Date October 1994 2. Actual as of April 30, 1999 The information for this item is detailed under Section XII .C. of this report. Amend the rules , regulations and site evaluation forms as they apply to all districts contiguous to the three Pulaski County school districts to assure that the school construction analysis specifically addresses the impacts on racial balances of individual school sites within the three districts. 1. Projected Ending Date October 1994 2. Actual as of April 30, 1999 ADE's School Site Selection Committee met on April 21 , 1995 to revise the proposed rules and regulations. The proposed rules and regulations were presented to the State Board of Education on May 8, 1995. The Board voted to table the decision on public comment until the proposed rules and regulations were reviewed by the Attorney General's Office. The Attorney General's Office reviewed the revised school construction draft and provided a letter of approval. 62 XII. SCHOOL CONSTRUCTION (Continued) C. Amend the rules, regulations and site evaluation forms as they apply to all districts contiguous to the three Pulaski County school districts to assure that the school construction analysis specifically addresses the impacts on racial balances of individual school sites within the three districts. (Continued) 2. Actual as of April 30, 1999 (Continued) On June 12, 1995, the State Board of Education voted to place the revised School Site Approval rules and regulations for public comment. The hearing was held on June 19, 1995 in the ADE Auditorium, and a copy of the revised draft was sent to all school districts in an ADE\nThis project was supported in part by a Digitizing Hidden Special Collections and Archives project grant from The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation and Council on Library and Information Resoources.\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\u003cdcterms_creator\u003eArkansas. Department of Education\u003c/dcterms_creator\u003e\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n\n "}],"pages":{"current_page":147,"next_page":148,"prev_page":146,"total_pages":3369,"limit_value":12,"offset_value":1752,"total_count":40428,"first_page?":false,"last_page?":false},"facets":[{"name":"educator_resource_mediums_sms","items":[{"value":"lesson plans","hits":307},{"value":"online exhibitions","hits":37},{"value":"teaching guides","hits":34},{"value":"timelines (chronologies)","hits":23},{"value":"bibliographies","hits":15},{"value":"worksheets","hits":5},{"value":"annotated bibliographies","hits":4},{"value":"study guides","hits":4},{"value":"learning modules","hits":3},{"value":"slide shows","hits":2}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":16,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"type_facet","items":[{"value":"Text","hits":40428},{"value":"Sound","hits":1050},{"value":"StillImage","hits":803},{"value":"MovingImage","hits":213},{"value":"Collection","hits":10},{"value":"InteractiveResource","hits":4}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":16,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"creator_facet","items":[{"value":"Thurmond, Strom, 1902-2003","hits":2076},{"value":"Mississippi State Sovereignty Commission","hits":1425},{"value":"Newman, I. DeQuincey (Isaiah DeQuincey), 1911-1985","hits":1003},{"value":"Herrera, John J.","hits":777},{"value":"Connor, Eugene, 1897-1973","hits":567},{"value":"Jordan, Barbara, 1936-1996","hits":464},{"value":"South Carolina Council on Human Relations","hits":397},{"value":"AFL-CIO. Civil Rights Department","hits":326},{"value":"Hunter, Charles N., approximately 1851-1931","hits":323},{"value":"United States. District Court (Arkansas: Eastern District)","hits":289},{"value":"Smith, Lillian (Lillian Eugenia), 1897-1966","hits":244}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"subject_facet","items":[{"value":"Race relations","hits":4661},{"value":"Civil rights","hits":3223},{"value":"People--Ethnic Groups--Hispanics","hits":2928},{"value":"African Americans--Civil rights","hits":2321},{"value":"African Americans","hits":1792},{"value":"Education--Arkansas","hits":1747},{"value":"Civil rights--South Carolina","hits":1739},{"value":"Civil rights movements--Mississippi","hits":1550},{"value":"League of United Latin American Citizens","hits":1531},{"value":"LULAC","hits":1517},{"value":"Race","hits":1483}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"subject_personal_facet","items":[{"value":"Smith, Lillian (Lillian Eugenia), 1897-1966--Correspondence","hits":1888},{"value":"Meredith, James, 1933-","hits":1501},{"value":"Baker, Augusta, 1911-1998","hits":1413},{"value":"Herrera, John J.","hits":1312},{"value":"Smith, Lillian (Lillian Eugenia), 1897-1966","hits":713},{"value":"Mizell, M. Hayes","hits":639},{"value":"Silver, James W. (James Wesley), 1907-1988","hits":623},{"value":"Jordan, Barbara, 1936-1996","hits":608},{"value":"Connor, Eugene, 1897-1973","hits":582},{"value":"Snelling, Paula","hits":582},{"value":"McCain, James T.","hits":418}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"name_authoritative_sms","items":[{"value":"Smith, Lillian (Lillian Eugenia), 1897-1966","hits":2592},{"value":"Meredith, James, 1933-","hits":1497},{"value":"Herrera, John J.","hits":1331},{"value":"Silver, James W. (James Wesley), 1907-1988","hits":622},{"value":"Jordan, Barbara, 1936-1996","hits":608},{"value":"Snelling, Paula","hits":580},{"value":"Connor, Eugene, 1897-1973","hits":579},{"value":"Thurmond, Strom, 1902-2003","hits":360},{"value":"De Laine, Joseph A. (Joseph Armstrong), 1898-1974","hits":345},{"value":"King, Martin Luther, Jr., 1929-1968","hits":315},{"value":"Samet, Seymour, 1919-2014","hits":279}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"event_title_sms","items":[{"value":"Ole Miss Integration","hits":1567},{"value":"Housing Act of 1961","hits":663},{"value":"Little Rock Central High School Integration","hits":386},{"value":"Martin Luther King, Jr.'s Nobel Prize","hits":299},{"value":"Freedom Summer","hits":188},{"value":"Birmingham Bombing (Sixteenth Street Baptist Church)","hits":125},{"value":"Memphis Sanitation Workers Strike","hits":104},{"value":"University of Georgia Integration","hits":83},{"value":"Freedom Rides","hits":68},{"value":"Brown versus Board of Education","hits":55},{"value":"Civil Rights Act of 1964","hits":43}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"location_facet","items":[{"value":"United States, 39.76, -98.5","hits":10939},{"value":"United States, South Carolina, 34.00043, -81.00009","hits":4304},{"value":"United States, Georgia, 32.75042, -83.50018","hits":3804},{"value":"United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","hits":3648},{"value":"United States, Mississippi, 32.75041, -89.75036","hits":2519},{"value":"United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","hits":2032},{"value":"United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959","hits":1863},{"value":"United States, Tennessee, Shelby County, Memphis, 35.14953, -90.04898","hits":1801},{"value":"United States, Texas, Harris County, Houston, 29.76328, -95.36327","hits":1564},{"value":"United States, Georgia, Fulton County, Atlanta, 33.749, -84.38798","hits":1236},{"value":"United States, New York, New York County, New York, 40.7142691, -74.0059729","hits":1198}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"us_states_facet","items":[{"value":"South Carolina","hits":6466},{"value":"Georgia","hits":5551},{"value":"Arkansas","hits":3826},{"value":"Mississippi","hits":3452},{"value":"Texas","hits":3432},{"value":"Tennessee","hits":2359},{"value":"Alabama","hits":2352},{"value":"North Carolina","hits":1657},{"value":"New York","hits":1561},{"value":"Florida","hits":1185},{"value":"District of Columbia","hits":1167}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"year_facet","items":[{"value":"1962","hits":5885},{"value":"1964","hits":5684},{"value":"1963","hits":5401},{"value":"1965","hits":5249},{"value":"1966","hits":5016},{"value":"1961","hits":4941},{"value":"1968","hits":4914},{"value":"1967","hits":4901},{"value":"1969","hits":4708},{"value":"1960","hits":4681},{"value":"1957","hits":4182},{"value":"1958","hits":4010},{"value":"1977","hits":3976},{"value":"1959","hits":3971},{"value":"1971","hits":3904},{"value":"1970","hits":3870},{"value":"1976","hits":3790},{"value":"1955","hits":3718},{"value":"1974","hits":3664},{"value":"1972","hits":3650},{"value":"1975","hits":3649},{"value":"1956","hits":3611},{"value":"1973","hits":3461},{"value":"1994","hits":3357},{"value":"1995","hits":3332},{"value":"1950","hits":3315},{"value":"1978","hits":3266},{"value":"1954","hits":3261},{"value":"1979","hits":3249},{"value":"1996","hits":3225},{"value":"1980","hits":3158},{"value":"1948","hits":3126},{"value":"1953","hits":3050},{"value":"1997","hits":3036},{"value":"1949","hits":3022},{"value":"1998","hits":2990},{"value":"1999","hits":2983},{"value":"1952","hits":2967},{"value":"1947","hits":2958},{"value":"1951","hits":2907},{"value":"1981","hits":2856},{"value":"2000","hits":2833},{"value":"2001","hits":2792},{"value":"2002","hits":2693},{"value":"1982","hits":2691},{"value":"1946","hits":2690},{"value":"2003","hits":2675},{"value":"1983","hits":2652},{"value":"1945","hits":2610},{"value":"1985","hits":2584},{"value":"1943","hits":2578},{"value":"1944","hits":2577},{"value":"1984","hits":2573},{"value":"1942","hits":2499},{"value":"1941","hits":2473},{"value":"1940","hits":2447},{"value":"1986","hits":2438},{"value":"1939","hits":2375},{"value":"1930","hits":2352},{"value":"1938","hits":2341},{"value":"1937","hits":2323},{"value":"1936","hits":2303},{"value":"2004","hits":2296},{"value":"2005","hits":2270},{"value":"1931","hits":2252},{"value":"1990","hits":2186},{"value":"1987","hits":2183},{"value":"1991","hits":2181},{"value":"1935","hits":2174},{"value":"2006","hits":2165},{"value":"1934","hits":2161},{"value":"1933","hits":2160},{"value":"1932","hits":2150},{"value":"1992","hits":2139},{"value":"1993","hits":2123},{"value":"1989","hits":1879},{"value":"1929","hits":1874},{"value":"1988","hits":1753},{"value":"1928","hits":1509},{"value":"1921","hits":1393},{"value":"1925","hits":1275},{"value":"1927","hits":1272},{"value":"1926","hits":1266},{"value":"1924","hits":1263},{"value":"1923","hits":1208},{"value":"1922","hits":1188},{"value":"1920","hits":1187},{"value":"2007","hits":1029},{"value":"2011","hits":1029},{"value":"2008","hits":1017},{"value":"2010","hits":992},{"value":"2009","hits":980},{"value":"2012","hits":967},{"value":"2013","hits":965},{"value":"2014","hits":924},{"value":"2016","hits":876},{"value":"1919","hits":850},{"value":"1918","hits":849},{"value":"1900","hits":831},{"value":"2015","hits":826}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":100,"offset":0,"prefix":null},"min":"0193","max":"2035","count":301323,"missing":11},{"name":"medium_facet","items":[{"value":"correspondence","hits":9610},{"value":"documents (object genre)","hits":4200},{"value":"letters (correspondence)","hits":3564},{"value":"newspapers","hits":1925},{"value":"manuscripts (documents)","hits":1690},{"value":"records (documents)","hits":1429},{"value":"oral histories (literary works)","hits":1385},{"value":"reports","hits":1362},{"value":"clippings (information artifacts)","hits":1156},{"value":"articles","hits":903},{"value":"transcripts","hits":816}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"rights_facet","items":[{"value":"http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/","hits":13560},{"value":"http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/","hits":9168},{"value":"http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/UND/1.0/","hits":8110},{"value":"http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/CNE/1.0/","hits":6150},{"value":"http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-NC/1.0/","hits":1673},{"value":"http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/NoC-US/1.0/","hits":1494},{"value":"http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/NKC/1.0/","hits":40},{"value":"http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/NoC-NC/1.0/","hits":20},{"value":"http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-RUU/1.0/","hits":12},{"value":"http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-OW-EU/1.0/","hits":2},{"value":"https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/","hits":1}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"collection_titles_sms","items":[{"value":"John J. Herrera Papers","hits":3271},{"value":"Strom Thurmond Collection, Mss 100","hits":2068},{"value":"Lillian Eugenia Smith Papers (circa 1920-1980)","hits":1887},{"value":"Office of Desegregation Management","hits":1843},{"value":"Isaiah DeQuincey Newman, (1911-1985), Papers, 1929-2003","hits":1717},{"value":"Augusta Baker papers, 1911-1998","hits":1696},{"value":"Memphis World","hits":1484},{"value":"James W. Silver Collection","hits":1430},{"value":"Sovereignty Commission Online","hits":1423},{"value":"Integration Correspondence","hits":1420},{"value":"Land of (Unequal) Opportunity: Documenting the Civil Rights Struggle in Arkansas","hits":1403}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"provenance_facet","items":[{"value":"John Davis Williams Library. Department of Archives and Special Collections","hits":3821},{"value":"South Caroliniana Library","hits":3419},{"value":"University of North Texas. Libraries","hits":3316},{"value":"Hargrett Library","hits":3287},{"value":"University of South Carolina. Libraries","hits":3250},{"value":"Butler Center for Arkansas Studies","hits":2174},{"value":"South Carolina Digital Library","hits":2167},{"value":"University of South Carolina. South Carolina Political Collections","hits":1793},{"value":"Atlanta University Center Robert W. Woodruff Library","hits":1663},{"value":"Rhodes College","hits":1641},{"value":"Mississippi. Department of Archives and History","hits":1435}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"class_name","items":[{"value":"Item","hits":40191},{"value":"Collection","hits":237}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":100,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"educator_resource_b","items":[{"value":"false","hits":40278},{"value":"true","hits":150}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":100,"offset":0,"prefix":null}}]}}