{"response":{"docs":[{"id":"tws_oid16_33555","title":"Johnnie Turner, 2006","collection_id":"tws_oid16","collection_title":"Crossroads interviews","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, Tennessee, Shelby County, Memphis, 35.14953, -90.04898"],"dcterms_creator":null,"dc_date":["2006-08-29"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["video/mp4","application/pdf","image/jpeg"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":null,"dcterms_publisher":["Memphis, Tenn. : Rhodes College"],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["https://vimeo.com/278539407"],"dcterms_subject":["Interviews","Oral history","Memphis (Tenn.)","Civil rights","National Association for the Advancement of Colored People","Education","Memphis City Schools"],"dcterms_title":["Johnnie Turner, 2006"],"dcterms_type":["MovingImage"],"dcterms_provenance":["Rhodes College"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://hdl.handle.net/10267/33555"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["oral histories (literary works)"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"hbcula_becu_282","title":"Interview with Albert Bethune, Jr., August 28, 2006","collection_id":"hbcula_becu","collection_title":"Bethune-Cookman University Digital Collection","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, Florida, Volusia County, Panama Beach, 28.86832, -81.22778"],"dcterms_creator":["Bethune-Cookman University"],"dc_date":["2006-08-28"],"dcterms_description":["This audio recording features footage from a four day interview between Cathy Kershaw, Janice Walton, and Albert Bethune, Jr., Dr. Mary McLeod Bethune's grandson, Bethune-Cookman College's archivist, and the founder of the Bethune-Cookman College Gospel Choir. At 00:08:50, Cathy Kershaw details the purpose and schedule of events for Albert Bethune, Jr.'s interview experience. starting at 00:32:58, Albert Bethune, Jr. reflects of Dr. Mary McLeod Bethune's personality, followed by her mistreatment at a hospital. At 00:46:50, Albert Bethune, Jr. speaks about Dr. Mary McLeod Bethune's intentions of being a missionary. 01:07:55, Albert Bethune, Jr. shares a story of President Hoover's visit to Bethune-Cookman College. At 01:13:47, Albert Bethune, Jr. shares Dr. Mary McLeod Bethune's love for sports. This audio recording concludes with questions from student representatives. White noise is present and audio is low."],"dc_format":["audio/mp3"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":null,"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":null,"dcterms_subject":["African American universities and colleges","College presidents","African American students","Interviews","Oral history","African American women"],"dcterms_title":["Interview with Albert Bethune, Jr., August 28, 2006"],"dcterms_type":["Sound"],"dcterms_provenance":["Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCU) Library Alliance"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["https://hbcudigitallibrary.auctr.edu/digital/collection/becu/id/282"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["All rights to images are held by the respective holding institution. This image is posted publicly for non-profit educational uses, excluding printed publication. For permission to reproduce images and/or for copyright information contact University Archives, Bethune-Cookman University, Daytona Beach, FL 32114 (386) 481-2186. http://www.cookman.edu/academics/library/index.html"],"dcterms_medium":["audiocassettes"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"tnn_npldl_nblandrewsn1004clip1","title":"Oral history interview with Nelson Andrews, 2006 August 25, excerpt 04","collection_id":"tnn_npldl","collection_title":"Nashville Public Library Digital Collections Portal: Civil Rights","dcterms_contributor":["Pyle, Cabot Pollard"],"dcterms_spatial":["United States, Tennessee, Davidson County, Nashville, 36.16589, -86.78444"],"dcterms_creator":["Andrews, Nelson"],"dc_date":["2006-08-25"],"dcterms_description":["An excerpt from an oral history interview with Nashville business and civic leader Nelson Andrews, conducted on 25 August 2006 by Cabot Pyle as part of the Nashville Public Library's Nashville Business Leaders Oral History Project:  The Turner Interviews.  Andrews discusses the civil rights movement in Nashville and the status of civil rights in Nashville today.  The complete interview, as well as an index, is available in the repository."],"dc_format":null,"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":null,"dcterms_publisher":null,"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Excerpted from:  NBLAndrewsN digital recording converted from wav to mp3 format in 2006.","Nashville Business Leaders Oral History Project, Special Collections Division, Nashville Public Library."],"dcterms_subject":["Businesspeople--Tennessee--Nashville","Civic leaders--Tennessee--Nashville","African Americans--Civil rights--Tennessee--Nashville","Civil rights--Tennessee--Nashville","Nashville (Tenn.)--History--Sources","Nashville (Tenn.)--Race relations","Nashville (Tenn.)--Social conditions"],"dcterms_title":["Oral history interview with Nelson Andrews, 2006 August 25, excerpt 04"],"dcterms_type":["Sound"],"dcterms_provenance":["Nashville Public Library (Tenn.). Special Collections Division"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://digital.library.nashville.org/u?/nr,643"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":["U.S. and international copyright laws protect this digital content, which is provided for educational purposes only and may not be downloaded, reproduced, or distributed for any other purpose without written permission. Please contact the Special Collections Division of the Nashville Public Library, 615 Church Street, Nashville, Tennessee, 37219. Telephone (615) 862-5782."],"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["sound recordings","oral histories (literary works)"],"dcterms_extent":["audio/mp3 (40 sec.)"],"dlg_subject_personal":["Andrews, Nelson","Andrews, Nelson--Interviews"],"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"tnn_npldl_nblandrewsn1005clip1","title":"Oral history interview with Nelson Andrews, 2006 August 25, excerpt 05","collection_id":"tnn_npldl","collection_title":"Nashville Public Library Digital Collections Portal: Civil Rights","dcterms_contributor":["Pyle, Cabot Pollard"],"dcterms_spatial":["United States, Tennessee, Davidson County, Nashville, 36.16589, -86.78444"],"dcterms_creator":["Andrews, Nelson"],"dc_date":["2006-08-25"],"dcterms_description":["An excerpt from an oral history interview with Nashville business and civic leader Nelson Andrews, conducted on 25 August 2006 by Cabot Pyle as part of the Nashville Public Library's Nashville Business Leaders Oral History Project:  The Turner Interviews.  Andrews discusses the civil rights movement in Nashville and the role of Nashville businessmen, including David Kirkpatrick (Pat) Wilson. The complete interview, as well as an index, is available in the repository."],"dc_format":null,"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":null,"dcterms_publisher":null,"dc_relation":["Forms part of online collection: Civil Rights Online Collection."],"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Excerpted from:  NBLAndrewsN digital recording converted from wav to mp3 format in 2006.","Nashville Business Leaders Oral History Project, Special Collections Division, Nashville Public Library."],"dcterms_subject":["Businesspeople--Tennessee--Nashville","Civic leaders--Tennessee--Nashville","African Americans--Civil rights--Tennessee--Nashville","Civil rights--Tennessee--Nashville","Nashville (Tenn.)--History--Sources","Nashville (Tenn.)--Commerce","Nashville (Tenn.)--Race relations","Nashville (Tenn.)--Social conditions"],"dcterms_title":["Oral history interview with Nelson Andrews, 2006 August 25, excerpt 05"],"dcterms_type":["Sound"],"dcterms_provenance":["Nashville Public Library (Tenn.). Special Collections Division"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://digital.library.nashville.org/u?/nr,644"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":["U.S. and international copyright laws protect this digital content, which is provided for educational purposes only and may not be downloaded, reproduced, or distributed for any other purpose without written permission. Please contact the Special Collections Division of the Nashville Public Library, 615 Church Street, Nashville, Tennessee, 37219. Telephone (615) 862-5782."],"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["sound recordings","oral histories (literary works)"],"dcterms_extent":["audio/mp3 (33 sec.)"],"dlg_subject_personal":["Andrews, Nelson","Andrews, Nelson--Interviews"],"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"tnn_npldl_nblandrewsn1014clip1","title":"Oral history interview with Nelson Andrews, 2006 August 25, excerpt 11","collection_id":"tnn_npldl","collection_title":"Nashville Public Library Digital Collections Portal: Civil Rights","dcterms_contributor":["Pyle, Cabot Pollard"],"dcterms_spatial":["United States, Tennessee, Davidson County, Nashville, 36.16589, -86.78444"],"dcterms_creator":["Andrews, Nelson"],"dc_date":["2006-08-25"],"dcterms_description":["An excerpt from an oral history interview with Nashville business and civic leader Nelson Andrews, conducted on 25 August 2006 by Cabot Pyle as part of the Nashville Public Library's Nashville Business Leaders Oral History Project:  The Turner Interviews.  Andrews discusses the impact of Leadership Nashville on its alumni and the community, including the improvement of race relations.  The complete interview, as well as an index, is available in the repository."],"dc_format":null,"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":null,"dcterms_publisher":null,"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Excerpted from:  NBLAndrewsN digital recording converted from wav to mp3 format in 2006.","Nashville Business Leaders Oral History Project, Special Collections Division, Nashville Public Library."],"dcterms_subject":["Leadership Nashville","Businesspeople--Tennessee--Nashville","Civic leaders--Tennessee--Nashville","Leadership--Study and teaching--Tennessee--Nashville","Nashville (Tenn.)--History--Sources","Nashville (Tenn.)--Commerce","Nashville (Tenn.)--Race relations"],"dcterms_title":["Oral history interview with Nelson Andrews, 2006 August 25, excerpt 11"],"dcterms_type":["Sound"],"dcterms_provenance":["Nashville Public Library (Tenn.). Special Collections Division"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://digital.library.nashville.org/u?/nr,650"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":["U.S. and international copyright laws protect this digital content, which is provided for educational purposes only and may not be downloaded, reproduced, or distributed for any other purpose without written permission. Please contact the Special Collections Division of the Nashville Public Library, 615 Church Street, Nashville, Tennessee, 37219. Telephone (615) 862-5782."],"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["sound recordings","oral histories (literary works)"],"dcterms_extent":["audio/mp3 (1 min., 10 sec.)"],"dlg_subject_personal":["Andrews, Nelson","Andrews, Nelson--Interviews"],"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"noa_sohpcr_u-0193","title":"Oral history interview with Mary Moore, August 17, 2006","collection_id":"noa_sohpcr","collection_title":"Oral Histories of the American South: The Civil Rights Movement","dcterms_contributor":["Thuesen, Sarah Caroline","Southern Oral History Program"],"dcterms_spatial":["United States, Alabama, Jefferson County, Birmingham, 33.52066, -86.80249"],"dcterms_creator":["Moore, Mary, 1948-"],"dc_date":["2006-08-17"],"dcterms_description":["Mary Ann Moore was born in Birmingham, Alabama, in 1948 and was an active participant in both the civil rights movement and the labor rights movement throughout the second half of the twentieth century. Moore begins the interview with a discussion of the segregated school system in Birmingham during the 1950s. In the early 1960s, Moore became a high school student at Carver High School in Birmingham. Moore recalls that her parents' generation was somewhat reluctant to become too involved in movement activism because they feared negative ramifications at their jobs. Young people like Moore, however, became quite actively involved with the support of their parents. Moore recalls in particular how Martin Luther King Jr. called young people to action during a speech at the Sixteenth Street Baptist Church. Shortly thereafter, Moore and her peers participated regularly in civil rights marches, facing arrest and violent intimidation from Mayor Bull Connor. Moore proceeds to explain that her interest in issues of social justice was largely influenced by her father's union activities. An employee of the Birmingham Tank Company, Moore's father saw labor organization as the only avenue for improving conditions and opportunities for African American workers. Moore draws connections between the labor movement of the 1950s and the burgeoning civil rights movement, which she explores more closely in her discussion of her own labor activism beginning in the 1970s. After completing her bachelor's degree at the Tuskegee Institute, Moore was recruited by the Department of Veteran Affairs to earn her certification as a medical technologist at the University of Alabama at Birmingham before accepting a position at the VA Hospital in 1971. Moore worked as a laboratory technician at the VA Hospital for thirty years. She describes in great detail how various forms of racial and gender discrimination operated during her years of employment. She offers numerous anecdotes about inequitable working conditions for black employees, and she cites repeated efforts by the hospital administration to discredit her because they believed her advocacy made her a troublemaker. As an active member of the union, and later its executive vice president, Moore campaigned for more equitable working conditions for African Americans, often appealing to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). Following her retirement from the hospital, Moore became a community politician, eventually seeking election to the state legislature. The interview concludes with Moore's comments on lingering racial and class divisions in Birmingham, which she hoped to assuage in her capacity as a state legislator.","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 women social reformers--Alabama--Birmingham --Interviews","Women medical technologists--Alabama--Birmingham--Interviews","Civil rights movements--Alabama--Birmingham","African American labor union members--Alabama--Birmingham","Hospitals--Alabama--Birmingham--Employees--Social conditions","Hospitals--Employees--Labor unions--Alabama--Birmingham","African Americans--Employment--Alabama--Birmingham","Birmingham (Ala.)--Race relations","Social problems--Government policy--United States"],"dcterms_title":["Oral history interview with Mary Moore, August 17, 2006"],"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/U-0193/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: 01:44:22"],"dlg_subject_personal":["Moore, Mary, 1948-"],"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1449","title":"Report: ''Update of the Status of the Pulaski County Special School District's Implementation of Plan 2000,'' Office of Desegregation and 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":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring (Little Rock, Ark.)"],"dc_date":["2006-08-16"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System."],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--21st Century","School districts--Arkansas--Pulaski County","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","Educational innovations","Educational statistics","School buildings","School discipline","School facilities","School improvement programs","School management and organization","Student assistance programs","Student expulsion"],"dcterms_title":["Report: ''Update of the Status of the Pulaski County Special School District's Implementation of Plan 2000,'' Office of Desegregation and 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/1449"],"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":["105 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"tws_oid16_33554","title":"Mose Yvonne Brooks-Hooks, 2006","collection_id":"tws_oid16","collection_title":"Crossroads interviews","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, Tennessee, Shelby County, Memphis, 35.14953, -90.04898"],"dcterms_creator":null,"dc_date":["2006-08-02"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["video/mp4","application/pdf","image/jpeg"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":null,"dcterms_publisher":["Memphis, Tenn. : Rhodes College"],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["https://vimeo.com/278538823"],"dcterms_subject":["Interviews","Oral history","Memphis (Tenn.)","Civil rights","Education","Segregation"],"dcterms_title":["Mose Yvonne Brooks-Hooks, 2006"],"dcterms_type":["MovingImage"],"dcterms_provenance":["Rhodes College"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://hdl.handle.net/10267/33554"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["oral histories (literary works)"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_76","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":["2006-08"],"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/76"],"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\nARKANSAS DEPARTMENT OF Dr. T. Kenneth .James, Commissioner .Educatilf n 4 State Capitol Mall  Little Rock, AR 72201-1071 (501) 682-4475 http://ArkansasEd.org August 31 , 2006 Mr. Christopher Heller Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark 400 West Capitol, Suite 2000 Little Rock, AR 72201-3493 Mr. John W. Walker John Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72206 Mr. Mark Burnette Mitchell, Blackstock, Barnes, Wagoner, Ivers \u0026amp; Sneddon P. 0. Box 1510 Little Rock, AR 72203-1510 Office of Desegregatio One Union National Plaza 124 West Capitol, Suite 18 Pio 5,zoaa Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Stephen W. Jone!lfiflR ll/i1/1l fONNI Jack, Lyon \u0026amp; Jones 425 West Capitol, Suite 3400 Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. M. Samuel Jones III Mitchell, Williams, Selig, Gates \u0026amp; Woodyard 425 West Capitol Avenue, Suite 1800 Little Rock, AR 72201 RE: Little Rock School District v. Pulaski County Special School District, et al. U.S. District Court No. 4:82-CV-866 WRW Dear Gentlemen: Per an agreement with the Attorney General's Office, I am filing the Arkansas Department of Education's Project Management Tool for the month of August 2006 in the above-referenced case. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at your convenience.  General Counsel Arkansas Department of Education SS:law cc: Mark Hagemeier STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION: Chair: Diane Tatum, Pine Bluff  Vice Chair: Randy Lawson, Bentonville Members: Sherry Burrow, Jonesboro  Dr. Calvin King, Marianna  Dr. Tim Knight, Arkadelphia Dr. Ben Mays, Clinton  MaryJane Rebick, Little Rock  Dr. Naccaman Williams, Springdale An Equal Opportunity Employer UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF V. No. LR-C-82-866 WRW 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 the ADE's Project Management Tool for August 2006. Respectfully Submitted, Scott Smith, Bar# 9,251 General Counsel Arkansas Department of Education #4 Capitol Mall, Room 404-A Little Rock, AR 72201 501-682-4227 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Scott Smith, certify that on August 31, 2006, I caused the foregoing document to be served by depositing a copy in the United States mail, postage prepaid, addressed to each of the following: Mr. Christopher Heller Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark 400 West Capitol, Suite 2000 Little Rock, AR 72201-3493 Mr. John W. Walker John Walker, P.A. 1 723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72206 Mr. Mark Burnette Mitchell, Blackstock, Barnes Wagoner, Ivers \u0026amp; Sneddon P. 0. Box 1510 Little Rock, AR 72203-1510 Office of Desegregation Monitoring One Union National Plaza 124 West Capitol, Suite 1895 Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Stephen W. Jones Jack, Lyon \u0026amp; Jones 425 West Capitol, Suite 3400 Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr.M. SamuelJones,m Mitchell, Williams, Selig, Gates \u0026amp; Woodyard 425 West Capitol, Suite 1800 Little Rock, AR 72201 \u0026lt;kA Scott Smith RECEIVED THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT a SEP O EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS W 5 2006 WESTERN DIVISION LITTl.lJt-~~~OL DISTRICT, ET AL PLAINTIFFS Tnm'f,fl1NITORING V. NO. LR-C-82-866 WRW 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 August 31 , 2006 Based on the information available at July 31, 2006, the ADE calculated the State Foundation Funding for FY 06/07, 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) B. Include all Magnet students in the resident District's average daily membership for calculation. (Continued) 2. Actual as of August 31, 2006 Based on the information available at Jul~ 31 06/07, sub'ect to eriodic adjustments C. Process and distribute State MFPA. 1. Projected Ending Date Last day of each month, August - June. 2. Actual as of August 31, 2006 On July 31, 2006, distributions of State Foundation Funding for FY 05/06 were as follows: LRSD-$67,135,185 NLRSD - $34,528,908 PCSSD - $57,834,709 The allotments of State Foundation Funding calculated for FY 06/07 at Jul 31 2006, subject to eriodic adjustments, were as follows. LRSD- $68,967,608 NLRSD - $35,477,276 PCSSD - $56,463,070 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 August 31, 2006 Based on the information available, the ADE calculated at July 31, 2006 for FY 06/07, 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 August 31, 2006 ~ase on e I onnation availal51e, the AD calculated at July 31, 2006 for F't1 06/07 sub\"ect to riodic adustments 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 August 31, 2006 Based on the infonnation available, tlie ADE calculated at July 31, 2006 for FY 06/07, subject to periodic adjustments. G. Process and distribute state aid for Magnet Operational Charge. 1. Projected Ending Date Last day of each month, August - June. 2. Actual as of August 31, 2006 Distributions for FY 05/06 at July 31, 2006, totaled $13,862,944. Allotment calculated for FY 06/07 was $13,862,944 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 August 31 , 2006 Calculated for FY 05/06, subject to periodic adjustments. 3 I. FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS {Continued) I. Process and distribute M-to-M incentive checks. 1. Projected Ending Date Last day of each month, September - June. 2. Actual as of August 31, 2006 Distributions for FY 05/06 at July 31, 2006, were: LRSD - $4,482,380 NLRSD - $4,691,996 PCSSD - $11,619,283 The allotments calculated for FY 05/06 at June 30, 2006, subject to periodic adjustments, were: LRSD - $4,482,380 NLRSD - $4,691,996 PCSSD - $11,619,283 J. Districts submit an estimated Magnet and M-to-M transportation budget to ADE. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing, December of each year. 2. Actual as of August 31, 2006 In September 2002, the Magnet and M-to-M transportation budgets for FY 02/03 were submitted to the ADE by the Districts. K. The Coordinatorof School Transportation notifies General Finance to pay districts for the Districts' proposed budget. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing, annually. 2. Actual as of August 31 , 2006 In October 2005, General Finance was notified to pay the third one-third payment for FY 04/05 to the Districts. In October 2005, General Finance was notified to pay the first one-third payment for FY 05/06 to the Districts. In January 2006, General Finance was notified to pay the second one-third payment for FY 05/06 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. 4 I. FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS (Continued) L. ADE pays districts three equal installments of their proposed budget. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing, annually. 2. Actual as of August 31, 2006 In November 2005, General Finance made the last one-third payment to the Districts for their FY 04/05 transportation budget. The budget is now paid out in three equal installments. At November 2005, the following had been paid for FY 04/05: LRSD - $4,143,106.00 NLRSD - $834,966.13 PCSSD - $2,884,201.56 In November 2005, General Finance made the first one-third payment to the Districts for their FY 05/06 transportation budget. The budget is now paid out in three equal installments. At November 2005, the following had been paid for FY 05/06: LRSD - $1,415,633.33 NLRSD - $284,716.52 PCSSD - $974,126.58 In February 2006, General Finance made the second one-third payment to the Districts for their FY 05/06 transportation budget. The budget is now paid out in three equal installments. At February 2006, the following had been paid for FY 05/06: LRSD - $2,831,266.66 NLRSD - $569,433.04 PCSSD - $1,948,253.16 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 August 31, 2006 5 I. FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS (Continued) M. ADE verifies actual expenditures submitted by Districts and reviews each bill with each District's transportation coordinator. (Continued) 2. Actual as of August 31, 2006 (Continued) 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 98/99 school year for the Magnet and M-to-M transportation program. School districts should receive payment by October 1, 1998 In July 1999, each district submitted an estimated budget for the 99/00 school year. In September 1999, paperwork was generated for the first payment in the 99/00 school year for the Magnet and M-to-M transportation program. In September 2000, paperwork was generated for the first payment in the 00/01 school year for the Magnet and M-to-M transportation program. In September 2001 , paperwork was generated for the first payment in the 01/02 school year for the Magnet and M-to-M transportation program. In September 2002, paperwork was generated for the first payment in the 02/03 school year for the Magnet and M-to-M transportation program. In September 2003, paperwork was generated for the first payment in the 03/04 school year for the Magnet and M-to-M transportation program. In September 2004, paperwork was generated for the first payment in the 04/05 school year for the Magnet and M-to-M transportation program. In October 2005, paperwork was generated for the first payment in the 05/06 school year for the Magnet and M-to-M transportation program. 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 August 31 , 2006 6 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 August 31, 2006 {Continued) 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. 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. In July 1999, the ADE. purchased 16 new Magnet and M-to-M buses at a cost of $718,355. The buses were distributed accordingly: LRSD - 8\nNLRSD - 2\nand PCSSD-6. In July 2000, the ADE purchased 16 new Magnet and M-to-M buses at a cost of $724,165. The buses were distributed accordingly: LRSD - 8\nNLRSD - 2\nand PCSSD-6. The bid for 16 new Magnet and M-to-M buses was let by State Purchasing on February 22, 2001. The contract was awarded to Ward Transportation Services, Inc. The buses to be purchased include two 47 passenger buses for $43,426.00 each and fourteen 65 passenger buses for $44,289.00 each. The buses will be distributed accordingly: LRSD - 8 of the 65 passenger\nNLRSD - 2 of the 65 passenger\nPCSSD - 2 of the 47 passenger and 4 of the 65 passenger buses. On August 2, 2001, the ADE took possession of 16 new Magnet and M-to-M buses. The total amount paid was $706,898. 7 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 August 31, 2006 {Continued) In June 2002, a bid for 16 new Magnet and M-to-M buses was awarded to Ward Transportation Services, Inc. The buses to be purchased include five 47 passenger buses for $42,155.00 each, ten 65 passenger buses for $43,850.00 each, and one 47 passenger bus with a wheelchair lift for $46,952.00. The total amount was $696,227. In August of 2002, the ADE purchased 16 new Magnet and M-to-M buses. The total amount paid was $696,227. In June 2003, a bid for 16 new Magnet and M-to-M buses was awarded to Ward Transportation Services, Inc. The buses to be purchased include 5 - 47 passenger buses for $47,052.00 each, and 11 - 65 passenger buses for $48,895.00 each. The total amount was $773,105. The buses will be distributed accordingly: LRSD - 8 of the 65 passenger\nNLRSD - 2 of the 65 passenger\nPCSSD - 5 of the 47 passenger a.nd 1 of the 65 passenger buses. In June 2004, a bid for 16 new Magnet and M-to-M buses was awarded to Ward Transportation Services, Inc. The price for the buses was $49,380 each for a total cost of $790,080. The buses will be distributed accordingly: LRSD - 8, NLRSD - 2, and PCSSD - 6. In June 2005, a bid for 16 new Magnet and M-to-M buses was awarded to Ward Transportation Services, Inc. The buses for the LRSD include 8 - 65 passenger buses for $53,150.00 each. The buses for the NLRSD include 1 -47 passenger bus for $52,135.00, and 1 - 65 passenger bus for $53,150.00. The buses for the PCSSD include 6 - 65 passenger buses for $53,150.00 each. The total amount was $849,385.00. In March 2006, a bid for 16 new Magnet and M-to-M buses was awarded to Central States Bus Sales. The buses for the LRSD include 8 - 65 passenger buses for $56,810.00 each. The buses for the NLRSD include 1 - 47 passenger bus for $54,990.00, and 1 - 65 passenger bus for$56,810.00. The buses for the PCSSD include 6 - 65 passenger buses for $56,810.00 each. The total amount was $907,140.00. 8 I. FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS (Continued) 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 August 31, 2006 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 August 31, 2006 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 August 31, 2006 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 August 31, 2006 The LRSD received $3,000,000 on September 10, 1998. As of this reporting date, the LRSD has received $20,000,000 in loan proceeds. 9 I. FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS (Continued) 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 August 31, 2006 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 August 31, 2006 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 August 31, 2006 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. Distribution in July 1999 for FY 99/00 was $92,500. This was the total amount due to the Magnet Review Committee for FY 99/00. Distribution in July 2000 for FY 00/01 was $92,500. This was the total amount due to the Magnet Review Committee for FY 00/01. Distribution in August 2001 for FY 01/02 was $92,500. This was the total amount due to the Magnet Review Committee for FY 01/02. Distribution in July 2002 for FY 02/03 was $92,500. This was the total amount due to the Magnet Review Committee for FY 02/03. 10 I. FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS (Continued) u. Process and distribute check to Magnet Review Committee. (Continued) 2. Actual as of August 31, 2006 (Continued) Distribution in July 2003 for FY 03/04 was $92,500. This was the total amount due to the Magnet Review Committee for FY 03/04. Distribution in July 2004 for FY 04/05 was $92,500. This was the total amount due to the Magnet Review Committee for FY 04/05. Distribution in July 2005 for FY 05/06 was $92,500. This was the total amount due to the Magnet Review Committee for FY 05/06. Distribution in July 2006 for FY 06/07 was $92,500. This was the total amounf due to the Magnet Review Committee for FY 06/07. V. Process and distribute payments for Office of Desegregation Monitoring. 1. Projected Ending Date Not applicable. 2. Actual as of August 31, 2006 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. Distribution in July 1999 for FY 99/00 was $200,000. This was the total amount due to the ODM for FY 99/00. Distribution in July 2000 for FY 00/01 was $200,000. This was the total amount due to the ODM for FY 00/01 . Distribution in August 2001 for FY 01/02 was $200,000. This was the total amount due to the ODM for FY 01/02. Distribution in July 2002 for FY 02/03 was $200,000. This was the total amount due to the ODM for FY 02/03. Distribution in July 2003 for FY 03/04 was $200,000. This was the total amount due to the ODM for FY 03/04. Distribution in July 2004 for FY 04/05 was $200,000. This was the total amount due to the ODM for FY 04/05. 11 I. FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS (Continued) V. Process and distribute payments for Office of Desegregation Monitoring. (Continued) 2. Actual as of August 31, 2006 (Continued) Distribution in July 2005 for FY 05/06 was $200,000. This was the total amount due to the ODM for FY 05/06. istribution in July 2006 for FY 06/07 was $200 000. This was the total amount tJue to the ODM for FY 06/07. 12 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 August 31, 2006 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. 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. 13 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 August 31, 2006 (Continued) 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. In August 1997, procedures and schedules were organized for the monitoring of the Cycle 2 schools in FY 97/98. 14 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 August 31, 2006 (Continued) 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. In April 1998, unannounced monitoring visits were conducted, and technical assistance was provided on the school improvement process. 15 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 August 31, 2006 (Continued) 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 tu file a July Semiannual Monitoring Report, and (2) an update of ADE's praa~\"'\"'\"S 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. 16 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 August 31, 2006 (Continued} 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. Staff development regarding test score analysis for Oak Grove and Lawson Elementary in the PCSSD has been rescheduled for April 2000. Staff development regarding test score analysis for Oak Grove and Lawson Elementary in the PCSSD was conducted on May 5, 2000 and May 9, 2000 respectively. Staff development regarding classroom management was provided to the Franklin Elementary School in LRSD on November 8, 2000. Staff development regarding ways to improve academic achievement was presented to College Station Elementary in PCSSD on November 22, 2000. On November 1, 2000, the ADE Implementation Phase Working group met to review the Implementation Phase activities for the previous quarter. The Assistant Director for Accountability updated the group on all relevant desegregation legal issues and discussed revisions to monitoring and reporting activities during the quarter. The next Implementation Phase Working Group Meeting is scheduled for February 27, 2001 in room 201-A at the ADE. The Implementation Phase Working Group meeting that was scheduled for February 27 had to be postponed. It will be rescheduled as soon as possible. The quarterly Implementation Phase Working Group meeting is scheduled for June 27, 2001. The quarterly Implementation Phase Working Group meeting was rescheduled from June 27. It will take place on July 26, 2001 in room 201-A at 1 :30 p.m. at the ADE. 17 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 August 31, 2006 {Continued) On July 26, 2001, the ADE Implementation Phase Working group met to review the Implementation Phase activities for the previous quarter. Mr. Willie Morris, ADE Lead Planner for Desegregation, updated the group on all relevant desegregation issues. Mr. Mark Hagemeier, Assistant Attorney General, and Mr. Scott Smith, ADE Staff Attorney, discussed the court case involving the LRSD seeking unitary status. The next Implementation Phase Working Group Meeting is scheduled for October 11, 2001 in room 201-A at the ADE. On October 11, 2001, the ADE Implementation Phase Working group met to review the Implementation Phase activities for the previous quarter. Mr. Willie Morris, ADE Lead Planner for Desegregation, updated the group on all relevant desegregation issues. Mr. Scott Smith, ADE Staff Attorney, discussed the ADE's intent to take a proactive role in Desegregation Monitoring. The next Implementation Phase Working Group Meeting is scheduled for January 10, 2002 in room 201-A at the ADE. The Implementation Phase Working Group Meeting that was scheduled for January 10 was postponed. It has been rescheduled for February 14, 2002 in room 201-A at the ADE. On February 12, 2002, the ADE Implementation Phase Working group met to review the Implementation Phase activities for the previous quarter. Mr. WilliA Morris, ADE Lead Planner for Desegregation, updated the group on all relevant desegregation issues. Mr. Mark Hagemeier, Assistant Attorney General, discussed the court case involving the LRSD seeking unitary status. The next Implementation Phase Working Group Meeting is scheduled for April 11, 2002 in room 201-A at the ADE. On April 11, 2002, the ADE Implementation Phase Working group met to review the Implementation Phase activities for the previous quarter. Mr. Willie Morris, ADE Lead Planner for Desegregation, updated the group on all relevant desegregation issues. Mr. Mark Hagemeier, Assistant Attorney General, discussed the court case involving the LRSD seeking unitary status. The next Implementation Phase Working Group Meeting is scheduled for July 11, 2002 in room 201-A at the ADE. 18 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 August 31, 2006 {Continued) On July 18, 2002, the ADE Implementation Phase Working group met to review the Implementation Phase activities for the previous quarter. Mr. Willie Morris, ADE Lead Planner for Desegregation, updated the group on all relevant desegregation issues. Dr. Charity Smith, Assistant Director for Accountability, talked about section XV in the Project Management Tool {PMT) on Standardized Test Selection to Determine Loan Forgiveness. She said that the goal has been completed, and no additional reporting is required for section XV. Mr. Morris discussed the court case involving the LRSD seeking unitary status. He handed out a Court Order from May 9, 2002, which contained comments from U.S. District Judge Bill Wilson Jr., about hearings on the LRSD request for unitary status. Mr. Morris also handed out a document from the Secretary of Education about the No Child Left Behind Act. There was discussion about how this could have an affect on Desegregation issues. The next Implementation Phase Working Group Meeting is scheduled for October 10, 2002 at 1:30 p.m. in room 201-A at the ADE. The quarterly Implementation Phase Working Group meeting was rescheduled from October 10. It will take place on October 29, 2002 in room 201-A at 1:30 p.m. at the ADE. On October 29, 2002, the ADE Implementation Phase Working Group met to review the Implementation Phase activities for the previous quarter. Mr. Willie Morris, ADE Lead Planner for Desegregation, updated the group on all relevant desegregation issues. Meetings with the parties to discuss possible revisions to the ADE's monitoring plan will be postponed by request of the school districts in Pulaski County. Additional meetings could be scheduled after the Desegregation ruling is finalized. The next Implementation Phase Working Group Meeting is scheduled for January 9, 2003 at 1 :30 p.m. in room 201-A at the ADE. On January 9, 2003, the ADE Implementation Phase Working Group met to review the Implementation Phase activities for the previous quarter. Mr. Willie Morris, ADE Lead Planner for Desegregation, updated the group on all relevant desegregation issues. No Child Left Behind and the Desegregation ruling on unitary status for LRSD were discussed. The next Implementation Phase Working Group Meeting is scheduled for April 10, 2003 at 1 :30 p.m. in room 201- A at the ADE. The quarterly Implementation Phase Working Group meeting was rescheduled from April 10. It will take place on April 24, 2003 in room 201-A at 1 :30 p.m. at the ADE. 19 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 August 31, 2006 (Continued) On April 24, 2003, the ADE Implementation Phase Working Group met to review the Implementation Phase activities for the previous quarter. Mr. Willie Morris, ADE Lead Planner for Desegregation, updated the group on all relevant desegregation issues. Laws passed by the legislature need to be checked to make sure none of them impede desegregation. Ray Lumpkin was chairman of the last committee to check legislation. Since he left, we will discuss the legislation with Clearance Lovell. The Desegregation ruling on unitary status for LRSD was discussed. The next Implementation Phase Working Group Meeting is scheduled for July 10, 2003 at 1 :30 p.m. in room 201-A at the ADE. On August 28, 2003, the ADE Implementation Phase Working Group met to review the Implementation Phase activities for the previous quarter. Mr. Willie Morris, ADE Lead Planner for Desegregation, updated the group on all relevant desegregation issues. The Desegregation ruling on unitary status for LRSD was discussed. The LRSD has been instructed to submit evidence showing progress in reducing disparities in academic achievement for black students and white students. This is supposed to be done by March of 2004, so that the LRSD can achieve unitary status. The next Implementation Phase Working Group Meeting is scheduled for October 9, 2003 at the ADE. On October 9, 2003, the ADE Implementation Phase Working Group met to review the Implementation Phase activities for the previous quarter. Mr. Willie Morris, ADE Lead Planner for Desegregation, updated the group on all relevant desegregation issues. Mark Hagemeier, Assistant Attorney General, discussed the Desegregation ruling on unitary status for LRSD. The next Implementation Phase Working Group Meeting is scheduled for January 8, 2004 at the ADE. On October 16, 2003, ADE staff met with the Desegregation Litigation Oversight Subcommittee at the State Capitol. Mr. Willie Morris, ADE Lead Planner for Desegregation, and Dr. Charity Smith, Assistant Director for Accountability, presented the Chronology of activity by the ADE in complying with provisions of the Implementation Plan for the Desegregation Settlement Agreement. They also discussed the role of the ADE Desegregation Monitoring Section. Mr. Mark Hagemeier, Assistant Attorney General, and Scott Smith, ADE Staff Attorney, reported on legal issues relating to the Pulaski County Desegregation Case. Ann Marshall shared a history of activities by ODM, and their view of the activity of the school districts in Pulaski County. John Kunkel discussed Desegregation funding by the ADE. 20 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 August 31, 2006 (Continued) On November 4, 2004, the ADE Implementation Phase Working Group met to review the Implementation Phase activities for the previous quarter. Mr. Willie Morris, ADE Lead Planner for Desegregation, updated the group on all relevant desegregation issues. The ADE is required to check laws that the legislature passes to make sure none of them impede desegregation. Clearence Lovell was chairman of the last committee to check legislation. Since he has retired, the ADE attorney will find out who will be checking the next legislation. The Desegregation ruling on unitary status for LRSD was discussed. The next Implementation Phase Working Group Meeting is scheduled for January 6, 2005 at 1 :30 p.m. in room 201-A at the ADE. On May 3, 2005, the ADE Implementation Phase Working Group met to review the Implementation Phase activities for the previous quarter. Mr. Willie Morris, ADE Lead Planner for Desegregation, updated the group on all relevant desegregation issues. The PCSSD has petitioned to be released from some desegregation monitoring. There was discussion in the last legislative session that suggested all three districts in Pulaski County should seek unitary status. Legislators also discussed the possibility of having two school districts in Pulaski County instead of three. An Act was passed by the Legislature to conduct a feasability study of having only a north school district and a south school district in Pulaski County. Removing Jacksonville from the PCSSD is also being studied. The next Implementation Phase Working Group Meeting is scheduled for July 7, 2005 at 1 :30 p.m. in room 201-A at the ADE. On June 20, 2006, the ADE Implementation Phase Working Group met to review the Implementation Phase activities for the previous quarter. ADE staff from the Office of Public School Academic Accountability updated the group on all relevant desegregation issues. The purpose, content, and due date for information going into the Project Management Tool and its Executive Summary were reported. There was discussion about the three districts in Pulaski County seeking unitary status. The next Implementation Phase Working Group Meeting is scheduled for October 17, 2006 at 1:30 p.m. in room 201-A at the ADE. 21 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 August 31, 2006 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 August 31, 2006 To date, no action has been taken by the LRSD. 22 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 August 31, 2006 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. C. 1. Projected Ending Date November, 1994 2. Actual as of August 31 , 2006 The information for this item is detailed under Section IV.E. of this report. 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 August 31, 2006 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 August 31, 2006 The information for this item is detailed under Section IV.E. of this report. 23 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 August 31, 2006 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 81st 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. 24 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 August 31, 2006 (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 review statutes and regulations that impede desegregation will meet on April 26, 1999 at the ADE. The committee met on April 26, 1999 at the ADE. The purpose of the meeting was to identify rules and regulations that might impede desegregation, and review within the existing legislation any regulations that might result in an impediment to desegregation. This is a standing committee that is ongoing and a report will be submitted to the State Board of Education once the process is completed. 25 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 August 31, 2006 (Continued) The committee met on May 24, 1999 at the ADE. The committee was asked to review within the existing legislation any regulations that might result in an impediment to desegregation. The committee determined that Mr. Ray Lumpkin would contact the Pulaski County districts to request written response to any rules, regulations or laws that might impede desegregation. The committee would also collect information and data to prepare a report for the State Board. This will be a standing committee. This data gathering will be ongoing until the final report is given to the State Board. On July 26, 1999, the committee met at the ADE. The committee did not report any laws or regulations that they currently thought would impede desegregation, and are still waiting for a response from the three districts in Pulaski County. The committee met on August 30, 1999 at the ADE to review rules and regulations that might impede desegregation. At that time, there were no laws under review that appeared to impede desegregation. In November, the three districts sent letters to the ADE stating that they have reviewed the laws passed by the 82nd legislative session as well as current rules \u0026amp; regulations and district policies to ensure that they have no ill effect on desegregation efforts. There was some concern from PCSSD concerning a charter school proposal in the Maumelle area. The work of the committee is on-going each month depending on the information that comes before the committee. Any rules, laws or regulations that would impede desegregation will be discussed and reported to the State Board of Education. On October 4, 2000, the ADE presented staff development for assistant superintendents in LRSD, NLRSD and PCSSD regarding school laws of Arkansas. The ADE is in the process of forming a committee to review all Rules and Regulations from the ADE and State Laws that might impede desegregation. The ADE Committee on Statutes and Regulations will review all new laws that might impede desegregation once the 83rd General Assembly has completed this session. The ADE Committee on Statutes and Regulations will meet for the first time on June 11, 2001 at 9:00 a.m. in room 204-A at the ADE. The committee will review all new laws that might impede desegregation that were passed during the 2001 Legislative Session. 26 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 August 31, 2006 (Continued) The ADE Committee on Statutes and Regulations rescheduled the meeting that was planned for June 11, in order to review new regulations proposed to the State Board of Education. The meeting will take place on July 16, 2001 at 9:00 a.m. at the ADE. The ADE Committee to Repeal Statutes and Regulations that Impede Desegregation met on July 16, 2001 at the ADE. The following Items were discussed: (1) Review of 2001 state laws which appear to impede desegregation. (2) Review of existing ADE regulations which appear to impede desegregation. (3) Report any laws or regulations found to impede desegregation to the Arkansas State Legislature, the ADE and the Pulaski County school districts. The next meeting will take place on August 27, 2001 at 9:00 a.m. at the ADE. The ADE Committee to Repeal Statutes and Regulations that Impede Desegregation met on August 27, 2001 at the ADE. The Committee is reviewing all relevant laws or regulations produced by the Arkansas State Legislature., the ADE and the Pulaski County school districts in FY 2000/2001 to determine iftbey may impede desegregation. The next meeting will take place on September 10, 2001 in Conference Room 204-B at 2:00 p.m. at the ADE. The ADE Committee to Repeal Statutes and Regulations that lm!1 .dA Desegregation met on September 10, 2001 at the ADE. The Committee is reviewing all relevant laws or regulations produced by the Arkansas State Legislature, the ADE and the Pulaski County school districts in FY 2000/2001 to determine if they may impede desegregation. The next meeting will take place on October 24, 2001 in Conference Room 204-B at 2:00 p.m. at the ADE. The ADE Committee to Repeal Statutes and Regulations that Impede Desegregation met on October 24, 2001 at the ADE. The Committee is reviewing all relevant laws or regulations produced by the Arkansas State Legislature, the ADE and the Pulaski County school districts in FY 2000/2001 to determine if they may impede desegregation. On December 17, 2001 , the ADE Committee to Repeal Statutes and Regulations that Impede Desegregation composed letters that will be sent to the school districts in Pulaski County. The letters ask for input regarding any new laws or regulations that may impede desegregation. Laws to review include those of the 83rd General Assembly, ADE regulations, and regulations of the Districts. 27 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 August 31, 2006 (Continued) On January 10, 2002, the ADE Committee to Repeal Statutes and Regulations that Impede Desegregation sent letters to the school districts in Pulaski County. The letters ask for input regarding any new laws or regulations that may impede desegregation. The districts were asked to respond by March 8, 2002. On March 5, 2002, A letter was sent from the LRSD which mentioned Act 1748 and Act 1667 passed during the 83rd Legislative Session which may impede desegregation. These laws will be researched to determine if changes need to be made. A letter was sent from the NLRSD on March 19, noting that the district did not find any laws which impede desegregation. On April 26, 2002, A letter was sent for the PCSSD to the ADE, noting that the district did not find any laws which impede desegregation except the \"deannexation\" legislation which the District opposed before the Senate committee. On October 27, 2003, the ADE sent letters to the school districts in Pulaski County asking if there were any new laws or regulations that may impede desegregation. The districts were asked to review laws passed during the~ Legislative Session, any new ADE rules or regulations, and district policies.. 28 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 August 31, 2006 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. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of August 31, 2006 Ongoing C. 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 August 31 , 2006 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 29 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 August 31, 2006 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. 30 V. COMMITMENT TO PRINCIPLES (Continued) 0. 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 August 31, 2006 (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. The State Board of Education received copies of the July 15, 1997 Semiannual Monitoring Report and executive summary at the July Board meeting. 31 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 August 31, 2006 {Continued) 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. In May 1998, the State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary. 32 V. COMMITMENT TO PRINCIPLES (Continued) D. Through regularoversight 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 August 31, 2006 (Continued) 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 wr~ 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. 33 V. COMMITMENT TO PRINCIPLES (Continued) D. Through regular oversight of the Implementation Phase's ProjectManagementTool, 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 August 31, 2006 (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 intervenors 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 lntervenors were invited again to attend 1he meeting of the parties and they attended on January 13, and January 28, 100 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. On April 12, and May 10, 1999, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed the PMT and its executive summary. The Board also was notified that once the financial section of the proposed plan was completed, the revised plan would be submitted to the board for approval. On June 14, 1999, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed the PMT and its executive summary. The Board also was notified that once the financial section of the proposed plan was completed, the revised plan would be submitted to the board for approval. 34 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 August 31, 2006 (Continued) On July 12, 1999, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed the PMT and its executive summary. The Board also was notified that once the financial section of the proposed plan was completed, the revised plan would be submitted to the board for approval. On August 9, 1999, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed the PMT and its executive summary. The Board was also notified that the new Desegregation Monitoring and Assistance Plan would be ready to submit to the Board for their review \u0026amp; approval as soon as plans were finalized. On September 13, 1999, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed the PMT and its executive summary. The Board was also notified that the new Desegregation Monitoring and Assistance Plan would be ready to submit to the Board for their review \u0026amp; approval as soon as plans were finalized. On October 12, 1999, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed the PMT and its executive summary. The Board was notified that on September 21, 1999 that the Office of Education Lead Planning and Desegregation Monitoring meet before the Desegregation Litigation Oversight Subcommittee and presented them with the draft version of the new Desegregation Monitoring and Assistance Plan. The State Board was notified that the plan would be submitted for Board review and approval when finalized. On November 8, 1999, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of October. On December 13, 1999, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of November. On January 10, 2000, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of December. On February 14, 2000, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of January. On March 13, 2000, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of February. On April 10, 2000, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of March. 35 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 August 31, 2006 (Continued) On May 8, 2000, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of April. On June 12, 2000, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of May. On July 10, 2000, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of June. On August 14, 2000, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of July. On September 11, 2000, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of August. On October 9, 2000, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of September. On November 13, 2000, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of October. On December 11, 2000, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of November. On January 8, 2001 , the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of December. On February 12, 2001, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of January. On March 12, 2001, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of February. On April 9, 2001 , the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of March. On May 14, 2001, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of April. On June 11, 2001, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of May. 36 V. COMMITMENT TO PRINCIPLES (Continued) D. Through regular oversight of the Implementation Phase's Project ManagementTool, 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 August 31, 2006 (Continued) On July 9, 2001, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of June. On August 13, 2001, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of July. On September 10, 2001, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of August. On October 8, 2001, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of September. On November 19, 2001, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of October. On December 10, 2001, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of November. On January 14, 2002, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of December. On February 11, 2002, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of January. On March 11, 2002, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of February. On April 8, 2002, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of March. On May 13, 2002, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of April. On June 10, 2002, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of May. On July 8, 2002, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of June. On August 12, 2002, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of July. 37 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 August 31, 2006 (Continued) On September 9, 2002, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of August. On October 14, 2002, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of September. On November 18, 2002, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of October. On December 9, 2002, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of November. On January 13, 2003, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of December. On February 10, 2003, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of January. On March 10, 2003, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of February. On April 14, 2003, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of March. On May 12, 2003, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of April. On June 9, 2003, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of May. On August 11, 2003, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the months of June and July. On September 8, 2003, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of August. On October 13, 2003, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of September. On November 10, 2003, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of October. 38 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 August 31, 2006 (Continued) On January 12, 2004, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of December. On February 9, 2004, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of January. On March 8, 2004, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of February. On April 12, 2004, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of March. On May 10, 2004, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of April. On June 14, 2004, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of May. On August 9, 2004, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the months of June and July. On September 12, 2004, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of August. On October 11, 2004, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of September. On November 8, 2004, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of October. On January 10, 2005, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the months of November and December. On February 14, 2005, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of January. On March 14, 2005, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of February. On April 11, 2005, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of March. 39 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 August 31, 2006 {Continued) On May 9, 2005, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of April. On June 13, 2005, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of May. On July 11, 2005, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of June. On August 8, 2005, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of July. On September 12, 2005, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of August. On October 10, 2005, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of September. On November 14, 2005, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of October. On January 9, 2006, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the months of November and December. On February 13, 2006, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of January. On March 13, 2006, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of February. On April 10, 2006, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of March. On May 8, 2006, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of April. On June 12, 2006, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of May. On July 10, 2006, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of June. 40 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 August 31, 2006 (Continued) On August f4, 2006, the Arkansas State Board of Eaucation reviewed and aJ) PMT and its executive summa~ for the month of Jul 41 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 August 31, 2006 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 NCNCOE peer team visits. 42 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 August 31, 2006 (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. 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. 43 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 August 31, 2006 {Continued) 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. 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, 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. 44 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 August 31, 2006 (Continued) 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 \u0026amp;-ea. 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 August 31, 2006 The information for this item is detailed under Section VI.F. of this report. C. Through the ERIC system, conduct a literature search for research evaluating compensatory education programs. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 45 VI. REMEDIATION (Continued) C. D. Through the ERIC system, conduct a literature search for research evaluating compensatory education programs. (Continued) 2. Actual as of August 31, 2006 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 August 31, 2006 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 August 31, 2006 The information for this item is detailed under Section VI.F. of this report. 46 VI. REMEDIATION {Continued} F. Evaluate the impact of the use of resources for technical assistance. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of August 31, 2006 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. 47 VI. REMEDIATION (Continued) F. Evaluate the impact of the use of resources for technical assistance. (Continued) 2. Actual as of August 31, 2006 (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 NGA 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 teacbio~ 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. 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. 48 VI. REMEDIATION (Continued) F. Evaluate the impact of the use of resources for technical assistance. (Continued) 2. Actual as of August 31, 2006 (Continued) 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. 49 VI. REMEDIATION (Continued) F. Evaluate the impact of the use of resources for technical assistance. (Continued) 2. Actual as of August 31, 2006 (Continued) On April 30, 1999, a Student Achievement Workshop was conducted for Oak Grove Elementary School in PCSSD. The Student Achievement Workshop for Southwest Jr. High in LRSD has been rescheduled. On June 8, 1999, a workshop was presented to representatives from each of the Arkansas Education Service Cooperatives and representatives from each of the three districts in Pulaski County. The workshop detailed the Arkansas Comprehensive Testing, Assessment and Accountability Program (ACTAAP). On June 18, 1999, a workshop was presented to administrators of the NLRSD. The workshop detailed the Arkansas Comprehensive Testing, Assessment and Accountability Program (ACTAAP). On August 16, 1999, professional development on ways to increase student achievement and the components of the new ACTAAP program was presented during the preschool staff development activities for teaching assistant in the LRSD. On August 20, 1999, professional development on ways to increase student achievement and the components of the new ACTAAP program was presented during the preschool staff development activities for the Accelerated Learning Center in the LRSD. On September 13, 1999, professional development on ways to increase student achievement and the components of the new ACT AAP program were presented to the staff at Booker T. Washington Magnet Elementary School. On September 27, 1999, professional development on ways to increase student achievement was presented to the Middle and High School staffs of the NLRSD. The workshop also covered the components of the new ACTAAP program, and ACT 999 of 1999. On October 26, 1999, professional development on ways to increase student achievement was presented to LRSD personnel through a staff development training class. The workshop also covered the components of the new ACT AAP program, and ACT 999 of 1999. On December 7, 1999, professional development on ways to increase student achievement was scheduled for Southwest Middle School in the LRSD. The workshop was also set to cover the components of the new ACT AAP program, and ACT 999 of 1999. However, Southwest Middle School administrators had a need to reschedule, therefore the workshop will be rescheduled. 50 VI. REMEDIATION (Continued) F. Evaluate the impact of the use of resources for technical assistance. (Continued) 2. Actual as of August 31, 2006 (Continued) On January 10, 2000, professional development on ways to increase student achievement was conducted for both Dr. Martin Luther King Magnet Elementary School \u0026amp; Little Rock Central High School. The workshops also covered the components of the new ACTAAP program, and ACT 999 of 1999. On March 1, 2000, professional development on ways to increase student achievement was conducted for all principals and district level administrators in the PCSSD. The workshop also covered the components of the new ACTAAP program, and ACT 999 of 1999. On April 12, 2000, professional development on ways to increase student achievement was conducted for the LRSD. The workshop also covered the components of the new ACTAAP program, and ACT 999 of 1999. Targeted staffs from the middle and junior high schools in the three districts in Pulaski County attended the Smart Step Summit on May 1 and May 2. Training was provided regarding the overview of the \"Smart Step\" initiative, \"Standard and Accountability in Action,\" and \"Creating Learning Environments Through Leadership Teams.\" The ADE provided training on the development of alternative assessment September 12-13, 2000. Information was provided regarding the assessment of Special Education and LEP students. Representatives from each district were provided the opportunity to select a team of educators from each school within the district to participate in professional development regarding Integrating Curriculum and Assessment K-12. The professional development activity was directed by the national consultant, Dr. Heidi Hays Jacobs, on September 14 and 15, 2000. The ADE provided professional development workshops from October 2 through October 13, 2000 regarding, \"The Write Stuff: Curriculum Frameworks, Content Standards and Item Development.\" Experts from the Data Recognition Corporation provided the training. Representatives from each district were provided the opportunity to select a team of educators from each school within the district to participate. The ADE provided training on Alternative Assessment Portfolio Systems by video conference for Special Education and LEP Teachers on November 17, 2000. Also, Alternative Assessment Portfolio System Training was provided for testing coordinators through teleconference broadcast on November 27, 2000. 51 VI. REMEDIATION (Continued) F. Evaluate the impact of the use of resources for technical assistance. (Continued) 2. Actual as of August 31, 2006 (Continued) On December 12, 2000, the ADE provided training for Test Coordinators on end of course assessments in Geometry and Algebra I Pilot examination. Experts from the Data Recognition Corporation conducted the professional development at the Arkansas Teacher Retirement Building. The ADE presented a one-day training session with Dr. Cecil Reynolds on the Behavior Assessment for Children (BASC). This took place on December 7, 2000 at the NLRSD Administrative Annex. Dr. Reynolds is a practicing clinical psychologist. He is also a professor at Texas A \u0026amp; M University and a nationally known author. In the training, Dr. Reynolds addressed the following: 1) how to use and interpret information obtained on the direct observation form, 2) how to use this information for programming, 3) when to use the BASC, 4) when to refer for more or additional testing or evaluation, 5) who should complete the forms and when, (i.e., parents, teachers, students), 6) how to correctly interpret scores. This training was intended to especially benefit School Psychology Specialists, psychologists, psychological examiners, educational examiners and counselors. During January 22-26, 2001 the ADE presented the ACTMP lntermecilate. (Grade 6) Benchmark Professional Development Workshop on Item Writin_g. Experts from the Data Recognition Corporation provided the training. Representatives from each district were invited to attend. On January 12, 2001 the ADE presented test administrators training for mid-year End of Course (Pilot) Algebra I and Geometry exams. This was provided for schools with block scheduling. On January 13, 2001 the ADE presented SmartScience Lessons and worked with teachers to produce curriculum. This was shared with eight Master Teachers. The SmartScience Lessons were developed by the Arkansas Science Teachers Association in conjunction with the Wilbur Mills Educational Cooperative under an Eisenhower grant provided by the ADE. The purpose of SmartScience is to provide K-6 teachers with activity-oriented science lessons that incorporate reading, writing, and mathematics skills. The following training has been provided for educators in the three districts in Pulaski County by the Division of Special Education at the ADE since January 2000: On January 6, 2000, training was conducted for the Shannon Hills Pre-school Program, entitled \"Things you can do at home to support your child's learning.\" This was presented by Don Boyd - ASERC and Shelley Weir. The school's director and seven parents attended. 52 VI. REMEDIATION (Continued) F. Evaluate the impact of the use of resources for technical assistance. (Continued) 2. Actual as of August 31, 2006 (Continued) On March 8, 2000, training was conducted for the Southwest Middle School in Little Rock, on ADD. Six people attended the training. There was follow-up training on Learning and Reading Styles on March 26. This was presented by Don Boyd - ASERC and Shelley Weir. On September 7, 2000, Autism and Classroom Accommodations for the LRSD at Chicot Elementary School was presented. Bryan Ayres and Shelley Weir were presenters. The participants were: Karen Sabo, Kindergarten Teacher\nMelissa Gleason, Paraprofessional\nCurtis Mayfield, P.E. Teacher\nLisa Poteet, Speech Language Pathologist\nJane Harkey, Principal\nKathy Penn-Norman, Special Education Coordinator\nAlice Phillips, Occupational Therapist. On September 15, 2000, the Governor's Developmental Disability Coalition Conference presented Assistive Technology Devices \u0026amp; Services. This was held at the Arlington Hotel in Hot Springs. Bryan Ayres was the presenter. On September 19, 2000, Autism and Classroom Accommodations for the LRSD at Jefferson Elementary School was presented. Bryan Ayres and Shelley Weir were presenters. The participants were: Melissa Chaney, Special Education Teacher\nBarbara Barnes, Special Education Coordinator\na Principal, a Counselor, a Librarian, and a Paraprofessional. On October 6, 2000, Integrating Assistive Technology Into Curriculum was presented at a conference in the Hot Springs Convention Center. Presenters were: Bryan Ayers and Aleecia Starkey. Speech Language Pathologists from LRSD and NLRSD attended. On October 24, 2000, Consideration and Assessment of Assistive Technology was presented through Compressed Video-Teleconference at the ADE facility in West Little Rock. Bryan Ayres was the presenter. On October 25 and 26, 2000, Alternate Assessment for Students with Severe Disabilities for the LRSD at J. A. Fair High School was presented. Bryan Ayres was the presenter. The participants were: Susan Chapman, Special Education Coordinator\nMary Steele, Special Education Teacher\nDenise Nesbit, Speech Language Pathologist\nand three Paraprofessionals. On November 14, 2000, Consideration and Assessment of Assistive Technology was presented through Compressed Video-Teleconference at the ADE facility in West Little Rock. Bryan Ayres was the presenter. On November 17, 2000, training was conducted on Autism for the LRSD at the Instructional Resource Center. Bryan Ayres and Shelley Weir were presenters. 53 VI. REMEDIATION {Continued) F. Evaluate the impact of the use of resources for technical assistance. {Continued} 2. Actual as of August 31, 2006 {Continued} On December 5, 2000, Access to the Curriculum Via the use of Assistive Technology Computer Lab was presented. Bryan Ayres was the presenter of this teleconference. The participants were: Tim Fisk, Speech Language Pathologist from Arch Ford Education Service Cooperative at Plumerville and Patsy Lewis, Special Education Teacher from Mabelvale Middle School in the LRSD. On January 9, 2001, Consideration and Assessment of Assistive Technology was presented through Compressed Video-Teleconference at the ADE facility in West Little Rock. Bryan Ayres was the presenter. Kathy Brown, a vision consultant from the LRSD, was a participant. On January 23, 2001, Autism and Classroom Modifications for the LRSD at Brady Elementary School was presented. Bryan Ayres and Shelley Weir were presenters. The participants were: Beverly Cook, Special Education Teacher\nAmy Littrell, Speech Language Pathologist\nJan Feurig, Occupational Therapist\nCarolyn James, Paraprofessional\nCindy Kackly, Paraprofessional\nand Rita Deloney, Paraprofessional. The ADE provided training on Alternative Assessment Portfolio Systems for Special Education and Limited English Proficient students through teleconference broadcast on February 5, 2001. Presenters were: Charlotte Marvel, ADE\nDr. Gayle Potter, ADE\nMarcia Harding, ADE\nLynn Springfield, ASERC\nMary Steele, J. A. Fair High School, LRSD\nBryan Ayres, Easter Seals Outreach. This was provided for Special Education teachers and supervisors in the morning, and Limited English Proficient teachers and supervisors in the afternoon. The Special Education session was attended by 29 teachers/administrators and provided answers to specific questions about the alternate assessment portfolio system and the scoring rubric and points on the rubric to be used to score the portfolios. The LEP session was attended by 16 teachers/administrators and disseminated the common tasks to be included in the portfolios: one each in mathematics, writing and reading. On February 12-23, 2001, the ADE and Data Recognition Corporation personnel trained Test Coordinators in the administration of the spring Criterion-Referenced Test. This was provided in 20 sessions at 10 regional sites. Testing protocol, released items, and other testing materials were presented and discussed. The sessions provided training for Primary, Intermediate, and Middle Level Benchmark Exams as well as End of Course Literacy, Algebra and Geometry Pilot Tests. The LRSD had 2 in attendance for the End of Course session and 2 for the Benchmark session. The NLRSD had 1 in attendance for the End of Course session and 1 for the Benchmark session. The PCSSD had 1 in attendance for the End of Course session and 1 for the Benchmark session. 54 VI. REMEDIATION (Continued) F. Evaluate the impact of the use of resources for technical assistance. (Continued) 2. Actual as of August 31, 2006 (Continued) On March 15, 2001, there was a meeting at the ADE to plan professional development for staff who work with Limited English Proficiency (LEP) students. A $30,000 grant has been created to provide LEP training at Chicot Elementary for a year, starting in April 2001. A $40,000 grant was created to provide a Summer English as Second Language (ESL) Academy for the LRSD from June 18 through 29, 2001. Andre Guerrero from the ADE Accountability section met with Karen Broadnax, ESL Coordinator at LRSD, Pat Price, Early Childhood Curriculum Supervisor at LRSD, and Jane Harkey, Principal of Chicot Elementary. On March 1-2 and 8-29, 2001, ADE staff performed the following activities: processed registration for April 2 and 3 Alternate Portfolio Assessment video conference quarterly meeting\nanswered questions about Individualized Educational Plan (IEP) and LEP Alternate Portfolio Assessment by phone from schools and Education Service Cooperatives\nand signed up students for alternate portfolio assessment from school districts. On March 6, 2001, ADE staff attended a Smart Step Technology Leadership Conference at the State House Convention Center. On March 7, 2001, ADE staff attended a National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) Regional Math Framework Meeting about the Consensus Project 2004. On March 8, 2001, there was a one-on-one conference with Carole Villarreal from Pulaski County at the ADE about the LEP students with portfolios. She was given pertinent data, including all the materials that have been given out at the video conferences. The conference lasted for at least an hour. On March 14, 2001, a Test Administrator's Training Session was presented specifically to LRSD Test Coordinators and Principals. About 60 LRSD personnel attended. The following meetings have been conducted with educators in the three districts in Pulaski County since July 2000. On July 10-13, 2000 the ADE provided Smart Step training. The sessions covered Standards-based classroom practices. 55 VI. REMEDIATION (Continued) F. Evaluate the impact of the use of resources for technical assistance. (Continued) 2. Actual as of August 31, 2006 (Continued) On July 19-21 , 2000 the ADE held the Math/Science Leadership Conference at UCA. This provided services for Arkansas math and science teachers to support systemic reform in math/science and training for 8th grade Benchmark. There were 200 teachers from across the state in attendance. On August 14-31, 2000 the ADE presented Science Smart Start Lessons and worked with teachers to produce curriculum. This will provide K-6 teachers with activity-oriented science lessons that incorporate reading, writing, and mathematics skills. On September 5, 2000 the ADE held an Eisenhower Informational meeting with Teacher Center Coordinators. The purpose of the Eisenhower Professional Development Program is to prepare teachers, school staff, and administrators to help all students meet challenging standards in the core academic subjects. A summary of the program was presented at the meeting. On November 2-3, 2000 the ADE held the Arkansas Conference on Teaching. This presented curriculum and activity workshops. More than 1200 attended the conference. On November 6, 2000 there was a review of Science Benchmarks and sample model curriculum. A committee of 6 reviewed and revised a drafted document. The committee was made up of ADE and K-8 teachers. On November 7-10, 2000 the ADE held a meeting of the Benchmark and End of Course Mathematics Content Area Committee. Classroom teachers reviewed items for grades 4, 6, 8 and EOC mathematics assessment. There were 60 participants. On December 4-8, 2000 the ADE conducted grades 4 and 8 Benchmark Scoring for Writing Assessment. This professional development was attended by approximately 750 teachers. On December 8, 2000 the ADE conducted Rubric development for Special Education Portfolio scoring. This was a meeting with special education supervisors to revise rubric and plan for scoring in June. On December 8, 2000 the ADE presented the Transition Mathematics Pilot Training Workshop. This provided follow-up training and activities for fourth-year mathematics professional development. On December 12, 2000 the ADE presented test administrators training for midyear End of Course (Pilot) Algebra I and Geometry exams. This was provided for schools with block scheduling. 56 VI. REMEDIATION {Continued) F. Evaluate the impact of the use of resources for technical assistance. (Continued) 2. Actual as of August 31, 2006 (Continued) The ADE provided training on Alternative Assessment Portfolio Systems for Special Education and Limited English Proficient students through teleconference broadcasts on April 2-3, 2001. Administration of the Primary, Intermediate, and Middle Level Benchmark Exams as well as End of Course Literacy took place on April 23-27, 2001. Administration of the End of Course Algebra and Geometry Exams took place on May 2-3, 2001. Over 1,100 Arkansas educators attended the Smart Step Growing Smarter Conference on July 1 0 and 11, 2001, at the Little Rock Statehouse Convention Center. Smart Step focuses on improving student achievement for Grades 5-8. The Smart Step effort seeks to provide intense professional development for teachers and administrators at the middle school level, as well as additional materials and assistance to the state's middle school teachers. The event began with opening remarks by Ray Simon, Director of the ADE. Carl Boyd, a longtime educator and staff consultant for Learning 24-7, presented the first keynote address on \"The Character-Centered Teacher''. Debra Pickering, an education consultant from Denver, Colorado, presented the second keynote address on \"Characteristics of Middle Level Education\". Throughout the Smart Step conference, educators attended breakout sessions that were grade-specific and curriculum area-specific. Pat Davenport, an education consultant from Houston, Texas, delivered two addresses. She spoke on \"A Blueprint for Raising Student Achievement\". Representatives from all three districts in Pulaski County attended. Over 1,200 Arkansas teachers and administrators attended the Smart Start Conference on July 12, 2001, at the Little Rock Statehouse Convention Center. 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. The event began with opening remarks by Ray Simon, Director of the ADE. Carl Boyd, a longtime educator and staff consultant for Learning 24-7, presented the keynote address. The day featured a series of 15 breakout sessions on best classroom practices. Representatives from all three districts in Pulaski County attended. On July 18-20, 2001, the ADE held the Math/Science Leadership Conference at UCA. This provided services for Arkansas math and science teachers to support systemic reform in math/science and training for 8th grade Benchmark. There were approximately 300 teachers from across the state in attendance. 57 VI. REMEDIATION (Continued) F. Evaluate the impact of the use of resources for technical assistance. (Continued) 2. Actual as of August 31, 2006 (Continued) The ADE and Harcourt Educational Measurement conducted Stanford 9 test administrator training from August 1-9, 2001. The training was held at Little Rock, Jonesboro, Fort Smith, Forrest City, Springdale, Mountain Home, Prescott, and Monticello. Another session was held at the ADE on August 30, for those who were unable to attend August 1-9. The ADE conducted the Smart Start quarterly meeting by video conference at the Education Service Cooperatives and at the ADE from 9:00 a.m. until 11 :30 a.m. on September 5, 2001. The ADE released the performance of all schools on the Primary and Middle Level Benchmark Exams on September 5, 2001. The ADE conducted Transition Core Teacher In-Service training for Central in the LRSD on September 6, 2001. The ADE conducted Transition Checklist training for Hall in the LRSD on September 7, 2001. The ADE conducted Transition Checklist training for McClellan in the LRSD O!' September 13, 2001. The ADE conducted Basic Co-teaching training for the LRSD on October 9, 2001. The ADE conducted training on autism spectrum disorder for the PCSSD on October 15, 2001 . Professional Development workshops (1 day in length) in scoring End of Course assessments in algebra, geometry and reading were provided for all districts in the state. Each school was invited to send three representatives (one for each of the sessions). LRSD, NLRSD, and PCSSD participated. Information and training materials pertaining to the Alternate Portfolio Assessment were provided to all districts in the state and were supplied as requested to LRSD, PCSSD and David 0. Dodd Elementary. On November 1-2, 2001 the ADE held the Arkansas Conference on Teaching at the Excelsior Hotel \u0026amp; Statehouse Convention Center. This presented sessions, workshops and short courses to promote exceptional teaching and learning. Educators could become involved in integrated math, science, English \u0026amp; language arts and social studies learning. The ADE received from the schools selected to participate in the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), a list of students who will take the test. 58 VI. REMEDIATION (Continued) F. Evaluate the impact of the use of resources for technical assistance. (Continued) 2. Actual as of August 31, 2006 (Continued) On December 3-7, 2001 the ADE conducted grade 6 Benchmark scoring training for reading and math. Each school district was invited to send a math and a reading specialist. The training was held at the Holiday Inn Airport in Little Rock. On December 4 and 6, 2001 the ADE conducted Mid-Year Test Administrator Training for Algebra and Geometry. This was held at the Arkansas Activities Association's conference room in North Little Rock. On January 24, 2002, the ADE conducted the Smart Start quarterly meeting by ADE compressed video with Fred Jones presenting. On January 31, 2002, the ADE conducted the Smart Step quarterly meeting by NSCI satellite with Fred Jones presenting. On February 7, 2002, the ADE Smart Step co-sponsored the AR Association of Middle Level Principal's/ADE curriculum, assessment and instruction workshop with Bena Kallick presenting. On February 11-21, 2002, the ADE provided training for Test Administrators on the Primary, Intermediate, and Middle Level Benchmark Exams as well as End of Course Literacy, Algebra and Geometry Exams. The sessions took place at Forrest City, Jonesboro, Mountain Home, Springdale, Fort Smith, Monticello, Prescott, Arkadelphia and Little Rock. A make-up training broadcast was given at 15 Educational Cooperative Video sites on February 22. During February 2002, the LRSD had two attendees for the Benchmark Exam t\nThis project was supported in part by a Digitizing Hidden Special Collections and Archives project grant from The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation and Council on Library and Information Resoources.\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\u003cdcterms_creator\u003eArkansas. Department of Education\u003c/dcterms_creator\u003e\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n\n "},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_652","title":"Program evaluation emails","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":null,"dc_date":["2006-08/2006-10"],"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","School management and organization","Education--Evaluation","Educational law and legislation","School employees"],"dcterms_title":["Program evaluation emails"],"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/652"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["documents (object genre)"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\nPage 1 of 1 Margie From: To: Cc: Sent: Subject: \"Dejarnette, Karen\" \u0026lt;Karen.Dejarnette@lrsd.org\u0026gt; \u0026lt;mqpowell@odmemail.com\u0026gt; \"Wohlleb, Jim\" \u0026lt;Jim.Wohlleb@lrsd.org\u0026gt;\n\"Robinson, Maurecia\" \u0026lt;Maurecia.Malcolm@lrsd.org\u0026gt; Monday, August 07, 2006 4:14 PM meeting toorrow at 1:30 Chris called this afternoon and said PRE staff members are not to attend the meeting scheduled for tomorrow. 8/8/2006Margie Page 1 of 1 From: To: Sent: Attach: \"Dejarnette, Karen\" \u0026lt;Karen.Dejarnette@lrsd.org\u0026gt; \"Margie\" \u0026lt;mqpowell@odmemail.com\u0026gt; Wednesday. August 09, 2006 4:59 PM updateSep06draft.doc Margie, This is a new draft of the Quarterly that is supposed to go to Board members this evening. There are just a couple of minor additions to the text you saw in the draft sent to you yesterday. Karen RECEIVED AUG 1 0 2006 office OF desegregation monitoring 8/10/2006Margie Page 1 of 1 From: To: Cc: Sent: Subject: \"Dejarnette, Karen\" \u0026lt;Karen.Dejarnette@lrsd.org\u0026gt; \"Chris Heller\" \u0026lt;HELLER@fec.net\u0026gt; \"Williams. Ed\" \u0026lt;Ed.Williams@lrsd.org\u0026gt;\n\"Hattabaugh, Hugh\" \u0026lt;Hugh.Hattabaugh@lrsd.org\u0026gt;\n\"Wohlleb, Jim\" \u0026lt;Jim.Wohlleb@lrsd.org\u0026gt;\n\"Robinson, Maurecia\" \u0026lt;Maurecia.Maicolm@lrsd.org\u0026gt;\n\"Roberts, Olivine\" \u0026lt;Olivine.Roberts@lrsd.org\u0026gt;\n\"Brooks, Roy G\" \u0026lt;Royg.Brooks@lrsd.org\u0026gt;\n\"Margie\" \u0026lt;mqpowell@odmemail.com\u0026gt; Thursday, August 10, 2006 11:08 AM RE: quarterly update Thanks. From: Chris Heller [mailto:HELLER@fec.net] Sent: Thursday, August 10, 2006 11:00 AM To: Dejarnette, Karen Cc: Williams, Ed\nHattabaugh, Hugh\nWohlleb, Jim\nRobinson, Maurecia\nRoberts, Olivine\nBrooks, Roy G\nMargie Subject: Re: quarterly update karen - we've got three weeks - i don't see any problem, ch \u0026gt; \"Dejarnette, Karen\" \u0026lt;Karen.Dejarnette@lrsd.org\u0026gt; 8/10/2006 10:58:24 AM \u0026gt; Chris, I posted PRE's quarterly update, due Sep 1 to the Court, and the topic is on the agenda for tonight's agenda meeting of the Board. However, late yesterday Beverly notified me that the Board will not get copies of the report itself. Instead, she posted only the cover or title page for the Board members to see. A couple of issues concern me about this: 1. Will the Board members have adequate opportunity to read and discuss the update before they approve it, so we can deliver it to the Court by Sep 1 ? 2. What if anything should the PRE department do to get the update to the Board members and answer any questions prior to their vote and assure compliance with the Court's remedy? We're able to work on this today and during the remainder of August, since it's a high priority for the department. Thanks for your counsel. Karen 8/10/2006Margie Page 1 of 1 From: To: Sent: Subject: \"Dejarnette, Karen\" \u0026lt;Karen.Dejarnette@lrsd.org\u0026gt; \"Margie\" \u0026lt;mqpowell@odmemail.com\u0026gt; Wednesday, August 16, 2006 7:15 AM training with pricipals PRE will be working with principals today -4 sessions- at the Tech Center beginning at 8:30, 10:00,12:30, and 2:00. The focus is on ACSIP plan development. Dr. Roberts assigned development of ACSIPs to PRE as part of the deeply embedded assessment process. You are invited to attend. Also tomorrow Janine Riggs will meet with PRE and principals at Bale Elementary at 9am to discuss ayp processes. Again, you are welcome to join us. About Chris, we have not met with him yet. He says he is busy with the case related to Central. 8/16/2006Margie Page 1 of 1 From: To: Cc: Sent: Subject: \"Joy Springer\" \u0026lt;jspringer@gabrielmail.com\u0026gt; \"Dejarnette, Karen\" \u0026lt;Karen.Dejarnette@lrsd.org\u0026gt; \u0026lt;mqpowell@odmemail.com\u0026gt;\n\"John W. Walker\" \u0026lt;johnwalkeratty@aol.com\u0026gt; Thursday, August 17, 2006 1:16 PM Data for Evaluation Before I loose my thoughts after attending the meeting re AYP being conducted by Janine Riggs from ADE, I am thoroughly confused regarding the data that is being provided to the experts for program evaluations. Based upon the responses from Ed Williams and several of the principals at the meeting, it appears that the data being provided to the evaluators is not valid, or is fraught with errors, especially as it related to student identity and attendance. Would you kindly explain the process being used by PRE for submitting the electronic data to the experts for their evaluations. Please advise what was done last year, what was done this year and how you plan to obtain the data for future assessments and evaluations. Your attention to this request is appreciated. 8/17/2006Margie Page 1 of 1 From: To: Cc: Sent: Subject: \"Dejarnette, Karen\" \u0026lt;Karen.Dejarnette@lrsd.org\u0026gt; \"Wohlleb, Jim\" \u0026lt;Jim.Wohlleb@lrsd.org\u0026gt;\n\"Robinson, Maurecia\" \u0026lt;Maurecia.Malcolm@lrsd.org\u0026gt;\n\"Williams, Ed\" \u0026lt;Ed.Williams@lrsd.org\u0026gt; \u0026lt;mqpowell@odmemail.com\u0026gt;\n\"Joy Springer\" \u0026lt;jspringer@gabrielmail.com\u0026gt; Thursday, August 17, 2006 1:13 PM FW: assessment process fyi From: Chris Heller [mailto:HELLER@fec.net] Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2006 12:28 PM To: Dejarnette, Karen Cc: Hattabaugh, Hugh\nRoberts, Olivine\nBrooks, Roy G Subject\nassessment process karen - please do not discuss issues which will likely be litigated in December, including our implementation of the compliance remedy, with lawyers or paralegals representing any other party in this case outside my presence, please ask the rest of the pre staff to do the same, thank you. ch 8/17/2006Page 1 of 1 Margie From: To: Sent: Subject: \"Dejarnette, Karen\" \u0026lt;Karen.Dejarnette@lrsd.org\u0026gt; \u0026lt;mqpowell@odmemail.com\u0026gt;\n\"Joy Springer\" \u0026lt;jspringer@gabrielmail.com\u0026gt; Thursday, August 17, 2006 3:43 PM FW: AYP Appeals, Password for Ed. Stats and data you can pull for ACSIP Related to the questions posed today about incorrect data. From: Williams, Ed Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2006 3:15 PM To: Zeigler, Gwendolyn\nAnderson, Barbara\nBarksdale, Mary\nBrooks, Jill\nBrooks, Sharon\nCarson, Cheryl\nCarter, Karen\nCarter, Lillie\nCox, Eleanor\nDunbar, Ethel\nHall, Donna\nHarris, Tyrone\nHobbs, Felicia\nJones, Beverly\nKeown, Ada\nKetcher, Theresa\nMangan, Anne\nMannon, Roberta\nMenking, Mary\nMitchell, Deborah\nMorgan, Scott\nMosley, Betty\nRamsey, Becky\nRay, Katina\nRichardson, Shoutell\nScull, Lillie\nSmith, Darian\nSwaty, Nancy\nTaylor, Leslie\nTucker, Janis\nWhitehorn, Daniel\nBlaylock, Ann\nBoykin, Patricia\nBurton, Marvin\nFields, Frederick\nPrice, Deborah\nSmith, David M.\nThrasher, Eunice\nTodd-Hamilton,Gloria\nAllen, Brenda\nBacon, John\nBrown, Linda\nLaurent, Ronald\nRousseau, Nancy Cc: Dejarnette, Karen\nRobinson, Maurecia\nRoberts, Olivine\nWohlleb, Jim\nMitchell, Sadie\nBabbs, Junious Subject: AYP Appeals, Password for Ed. Stats and data you can pull for ACSIP Per your request: A clarification Their is a tremendous amount of information / data that can be pulled down from the NORMES web page, via the orange Ed.Stats icon on that page. All you need a user name and password. You user name is your lea #, (e.g., 6001000). However, the password is a random bunch of numbers and letters. The password is the same that you were assigned to access EnterprizeGuide. So, many of you should know what your password is. If you do not have a password, then go to the NORMES site as you will need to fax a signed request to NORMES, http://normes.uark.edu/. This site is also where the IRI data is accessed. Okay, I need your help. ADE has advised us that if you feel that the AYP report on percent tested is wrong on the combined population then an appeal is in order. The reason that the AYP report has you testing less than 95% is that the mainframe computer shows students registered at your school that did not take the Benchmark or EOC test. This list of students is accessed through the orange Ed.Stats icon on the NORMES website, thus the importance of the password. I am asking that you print off this apscan nonmatch report and determine why these students were not tested. I will also be sending you an excel file of these students, but would appreciate your help. Pleas call me if you have any questions. Dr. Ed, 7-3386 8/17/2006Page 1 of 1 Margie From: To: Cc: Sent: Subject: \"Dejarnette, Karen\" \u0026lt;Karen.Dejarnette@lrsd.org\u0026gt; \"Joy Springer\" \u0026lt;jspringer@gabrielmail.com\u0026gt; \u0026lt;mqpowell@odmemail.com\u0026gt;\n\"John W. Walker\" \u0026lt;johnwalkeratty@aol.com\u0026gt;\n\"Roberts, Olivine\" \u0026lt;Olivine.Roberts@lrsd.org\u0026gt;\n\"Hattabaugh, Hugh\" \u0026lt;Hugh.Hattabaugh@lrsd.org\u0026gt;\n\"Brooks, Roy G\" \u0026lt;Royg.Brooks@lrsd.org\u0026gt;\n\"Chris Heller\" \u0026lt;HELLER@fec.net\u0026gt;\n\"Wohlleb, Jim\" \u0026lt;Jim.Wohlleb@lrsd.org\u0026gt;\n\"Robinson, Maurecia\" \u0026lt;Maurecia.Malcolm@lrsd.org\u0026gt;\n\"Williams, Ed\" \u0026lt;Ed.Williams@lrsd.org\u0026gt; Thursday, August 17, 2006 7:15 AM RE: Assessment Process Joy, The ACSIP plans are public documents and you may have access to them. As for the other questions posed, I will send a response from the PRE Department after further discussion with the statisticians. I certainly have my opinion but would rather respond as a department since we are a team and work from group consensus. And yes, we have had extensive discussions with Vicky Bernhardt. I will send a more detailed and specific response to both of your questions as soon as the department can meet. This may take a few days since we are facilitating training sessions for principals related to Annual Yearly Progress and the NORMES website today and tomorrow. Karen From: Joy Springer [mailto:jspringer@gabrielmail.com] Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2006 7:10 AM To: Dejarnette, Karen Cc: mqpowell@odmemail.com\nJohn W. Walker Subject: Assessment Process Good morning.. I wanted to let you know that I have been reflecting on the meeting on yesterday and the one at the Embassey Suites. In doing so, several questions comes to mind: 1) Do you and members of your staff believe that the district can deeply embed a comprehensive assessment process as a permanent part of the curriculum and instruction program through the use of ACSIP? 2) Have you had any discussions with Dr. Bernhardt regarding this approach? and if so, what comments has she made regarding the use of this approach/process? Would you kindly share copies of the ACSIP plans? or allow us to view them as they are being develop? Thank you for your cooperation. 8/17/2006Margie Page 1 of 1 From: To: Cc: Sent: Subject: \"Joy Springer\" \u0026lt;jspringer@gabrielmail.com\u0026gt; \"Dejarnette, Karen\" \u0026lt;Karen.Dejarnette@lrsd.org\u0026gt; \u0026lt;mqpowell@odmemail.com\u0026gt;\n\"John W. Walker\" \u0026lt;johnwalkeratty@aol com\u0026gt; Thursday, August 17, 2006 7:10 AM Assessment Process Good morning.. I wanted to let you know that I have been reflecting on the meeting on yesterday and the one at the Embassey Suites. In doing so. several questions comes to mind: 1) Do you and members of your staff believe that the district can deeply embed a comprehensive assessment process as a permanent part of the curriculum and instruction program through the use of ACSIP? 2) Have you had any discussions with Dr. Bernhardt regarding this approach? and if so, what comments has she made regarding the use of this approach/process? Would you kindly share copies of the ACSIP plans? or allow us to view them as they are being develop? Thank you for your cooperation. 8/17/2006Page 1 of 1 Margie From: To: Cc: Sent: Subject: \"Joy Springer\" \u0026lt;jspringer@gabrielmail.com\u0026gt; \u0026lt;wes.whitley@arkansas.gov\u0026gt;\n\u0026lt;wwhitley@arkedu.k12.ar.us\u0026gt; \"Dejarnette, Karen\" \u0026lt;Karen.Dejarnette@lrsd.org\u0026gt;\n\"John W. Walker\" \u0026lt;johnwalkeratty@aol.com\u0026gt;\n\u0026lt;mqpowell@odmemail.com\u0026gt; Thursday, August 17, 2006 7:18 AM ACSIP - LRSD Good morning... I am reflecting on our meetings the last few weeks. I have several questions for you: 1) Are you familiar with the LRSD's obligation to embed a comprehensive assessment process into its curriculum and instruction program? 2) Do you have an opinion regarding the district's use of ACSIP for this process? Finally, correct me if I am in error, but I understand that your role (ADE) regarding school improvement (ACSIP) is to actually develop the ACSIP for schools who are in Year 5 improvement. How do you specifically plan to do this with respect to schools in LR who are in year 5? Thank you for your attention to this inquiry. 8/17/2006Margie Page 1 of 1 From: To: Sent: Subject: \"Dejarnette, Karen\" \u0026lt;Karen.Dejarnette@lrsd.org\u0026gt; \u0026lt;mqpowell@odmemail.com\u0026gt;\n\"Joy Springer\" \u0026lt;jspringer@gabrielmail.com\u0026gt; Thursday, August 17, 2006 2:35 PM FW: An additional database if you choose to use Update: Ed has sent additional data to evaluators. From: Williams, Ed Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2006 2:03 PM To: JNunnerY@odu.edu\n(Catterall@gseis.ucla.edu) Cc: Steve Ross (smross@memphis.edu)\nDejarnette, Karen\nWohlleb, Jim\nRobinson, Maurecia\nRoberts, Olivine Subject: An additional database if you choose to use James and John\nThe attached database is what the State uses for the NCLB Annual Yearly Progress reports. There is much less data on this file than the one I sent Tuesday. However, there are some points you may want to consider. In past years the outside evaluators (i.e., you guys) have deferred to the Districts mainframe data for demographic data (e.g., free and reduced lunch) rather than use the test data information. There is a slight change to that. Schools, this past year, had the option to change demographic test data where it was found to be incorrect and not use the pre-printed labels provided via the District's mainframe. In looking at what is on the mainframe v. test booklet for race, it was decided to defer to the test booklet thus there were some changes. The attached data file is a melding of the mainframe and school level data and my advice would be to use the attached data file for demographic data as in represents the most current information we have on student demographics. Since the attached data file only has the level of performance, you will need to link it to the data file I sent on Tuesday if you want more types of data. Call if you need info on the various codes. Talk to you soon Dr. Ed 501-447-3386 8/17/2006Margie -Oed. O Page From: To: Sent: Attach: Subject: \"Dejarnette, Karen\" \u0026lt;Karen.Dejarnette@lrsd.org\u0026gt; \u0026lt;mqpowell@odmemail.com\u0026gt;\n\"Joy Springer\" \u0026lt;jspringer@gabrielmail.com\u0026gt; Monday, August 21, 2006 4:48 PM updateSep06draftfinal.doc quarterly draft revised The Quarterly was revised to reflect our receipt of needed electronic data and that we passed the data on to external evaluators. I have sent this amended document on to Chris Heller and Dr. Roberts. 8/22/20066 Margie Page 1 of 2 From: To: Sent: Subject\n\"Dejarnette, Karen\" \u0026lt;Karen.Dejarnette@lrsd.org\u0026gt; \u0026lt;mqpowell@odmemail.com\u0026gt; Wednesday, August 23, 2006 3:34 PM FW: Cabinet Recap From: Dejarnette, Karen Sent: Wednesday, August 23, 2006 3:31 PM To: Griffin, Beverly Subject: RE: Cabinet Recap As you know we met yesterday and afterwards I sent Chris (and cc: Roberts and Hattabaugh) a copy of the report with an edit requested by Dr. Roberts. I let Chris know we were fuzzy on the other edits mentioned but not specifically discussed. I have not heard back from anyone. From: Griffin, Beverly Sent: Wednesday, August 23, 2006 3:24 PM To: Dejarnette, Karen Subject: RE: Cabinet Recap Karen\nAny word on the quarterly report? From\nDejarnette, Karen Sent: Wednesday, August 23, 2006 1:28 PM To: Griffin, Beverly\nAdams, Wayne\nBabbs, Junious\nCarter, Karen\nGlasgow, Dennis\nHartz, David\nHattabaugh, Hugh\nMilhollen, Mark\nMitchell, Sadie\nMittiga, Joseph\nRoberts, Olivine\nVann, Suellen\nWatson, Linda Cc: Brooks, Roy G Subject: RE: Cabinet Recap Also, the Magnet Evaluation Report is scheduled for the September meeting. From: Griffin, Beverly Sent: Wednesday, August 23, 2006 11:13 AM To: Adams, Wayne\nBabbs, Junious\nCarter, Karen\nDejarnette, Karen\nGlasgow, Dennis\nHartz, David\nHattabaugh, Hugh\nMilhollen, Mark\nMitchell, Sadie\nMittiga, Joseph\nRoberts, Olivine\nVann, Suellen\nWatson, Linda Cc: Brooks, Roy G Subject: Cabinet Recap Since some of you missed the meeting yesterday morning, thought I would provide a brief recap and a list of Snapshot assignments. Snapshots: Dennis Glasgow - - Southwest Learning Academy Junious Babbs - - Summer School Summary Wayne Adams - - Completed Summer Projects 8/23/2006Page 2 of 2 Olivine Roberts - - ACT Results Updates \u0026amp; Other Assignments: Dejarnette / Roberts - - report to the board at September agenda meeting / Measuring the Vision Watson - - enrollment status report to the board at September agenda meeting / Final October enrollment report at October agenda meeting Hattabaugh / Mittiga / Roberts - - report to Board in July 2007 / 2\"** annual Superintendents Monitoring Report Roberts - - status report! Evaluation of magnet programs Hattabaugh / Watson - - parent notification / school improvement status letters Mittiga - - writing and revising of policies / coordinate with Linda Young Babbs - - have Coach McGee present for introduction at board meeting Glasgow - - have Barbara Williams present for introduction at board meeting Milhollen - - establish date for budget worksession in early September FYI Vann - - Board Candidate Forum / Wednesday, September 6, 6:30 p.m. LRSD board room. Next meeting: Monday, August 28, 9:00 a.m. 8/23/2006August 24, 2006 The Update, which is due September 1 to ODM and Joshua, is the last of eight required of the Planning, Research, and Evaluation (PRE) Department in the remedy issued by the US District Court (June 30, 2004). After this, the Courts remedy calls for reports of the last four evaluations and a final compliance hearing in the coming months. This update may be the last opportunity for the Department to convey its observations about progress toward the first task assigned to PRE by the court-to devise a comprehensive program assessment process which must be deeply embedded as a permanent part of LRSDs curriculum and instruction .... The purpose of this \"'deeply embedded\" process, which was adopted by the Board of Directors in January 2005, is to gauge the Districts progress in improving the academic achievement of African- American students. The Court anticipated a decade or more for LRSD to improve their academic achievement and clearly did not desire to supervise the District that long. At the next compliance hearing, the court explicitly wrote, LRSD \"must include evidence that it has devised and implemented a comprehensive program assessment process, which has been deeply embedded as a permanent part of its curriculum and instruction program. The four professionals of the rejuvenated PRE Department undertook this challenge with enthusiasm and vigor in the autumn of 2004, and they continue to do so. PRE has reported its progress to the Board of Directors in its seven previous updates, all of which the Board has approved before their submission to ODM and Joshua. This one, however, was withheld from the board so legal counsel could edit it, a puzzling action. As a result of the remedy issued by the US District Court (June 30, 2004), the Little Rock School District has advanced its ability to assess its programs and activities. Several critical obstacles have been identified, and the District has embarked on removing them. They are appropriate for consideration by the LRSD Board of Directors. After hiring qualified people to assess and evaluate programs, LRSD must allow them unrestricted access to the data they need for assessments and evaluations. This the District did, putting highest priority on PREs requests for data from Information Services Department, which has quickly responded to requests, and moving toward making the data more directly accessible to PRE. However, PRE did not participate in designing a data warehouse, which it recommended to the District\nand the District rejected the best known software product for this purpose, which probably could have been operating by now. Instead, software is being adapted from a commercial retail application, and no date for its completion has been set. The importance of an efficiently operated, comprehensive data warehouse is evident when one remembers that the PRE Department has only four people assessing LRSD activities, compared to the dozens employed by the external experts who carried out the eight evaluations required by the Court.A greater impediment to assessment which has become evident during the past two years is incorrect data. How many errors (or the error rate) are unknown, since apparently no one has studied the matter. However, PRE and the external evaluators have found much wrong information. PRE has found no individual or department responsible for correct data. So an obvious recommendation is to implement a universal data management system which checks new data, edits it during its lifetime, oversees its use, and deletes wrong and outdated information. Until the District accomplishes that, decisions based on its data will be less uncertain than they should. These are prominent findings by PRE, which the District can now address. PRE remains enthusiastic about the prospect of providing correct and useful evidence on which LRSD can act to become the highest achieving urban school district. The District will be quite unusual if not unique in this respect, which is an accomplishment LRSD can proudly present to the US District Court as well to its patrons.Page 1 of 1 Margie From: To: Sent: Attach: Subject: \"Dejarnette, Karen\" \u0026lt;Karen.Dejarnette@lrsd.org\u0026gt; \u0026lt;mqpowell@odmemail.com\u0026gt; Thursday, August 24, 2006 12:12 PM Ed Services Program Assessments.pdf FW\nassessments of programs From: Dejarnette, Karen Sent: Thursday, August 24, 2006 12:12 PM To: 'Chris Heller'\nHattabaugh, Hugh\nRoberts, Olivine Cc: Brooks, Roy G\nWohlleb, Jim\nWilliams, Ed\nRobinson, Maurecia Subject: FW: assessments of programs I have given all of the reflection and input I feel necessary related to the Quarterly Update. I defer to counsel to amend any portion of the report necessary. From: Dejarnette, Karen Sent: Thursday, August 24, 2006 10:56 AM To: 'Chris Heller'\nHattabaugh, Hugh\nRoberts, Olivine Cc: Wohlleb, Jim\nWilliams, Ed\nRobinson, Maurecia Subject: assessments of programs Chris, Mr. Hattabaugh, and Dr. Roberts, I have called each of you this morning to request further conversation related to program assessments requested by Dr. Roberts and reported in the eighth quarterly update. After further reflection, I am very uncomfortable taking the names of the programs we have been asked to assess out of the quarterly update. The enclosed document was written by Dr. Roberts and given to me as well as other directors attending the February 2006 Ed Services Directors' Meeting. Dr. Roberts and I discussed progress on these assessments many times since the initial February meeting. Now, 6 months later, after we have disclosed in the eighth quarterly report the names of the programs we are assessing we are being counseled and directed to take the names out of the report. Further, we are told to understand that we have not ever received direction to assess any of these programs. Again, I am uncomfortable with amending the report in this way. I hope we can discuss this further. Karen 8/24/2006Program Curriculum Mapping SOAR Voyager CRISS Educational Services Program Assessment 2005-2006 Measures Survey, Lesson Plans, Anchor Assess, SOAR Survey Pre/Post Data Attitudinal Survey Survey Target Group Curriculum-Council Math Coaches Literacy Coaches Subgroups: Parents, Teachers, Students, Principals Students Teachers Participating Teachers When April 30 June 1 June 1 February 18Educational Services Program Assessment 2005-2006 New K-12 Literacy Adoption Survey Focus Group Teachers May 30 Transition to Advanced Mathematics (TAM) Coaches (Instructional, CCSTs, Math, Literacy, Curriculum) Inclusion Attendance Grades Attitudinal Survey ACTAAP Survey Focus Group Focus Group (Middle/High) Students Teachers Coaches Teachers Principals Teachers Principals May 30 May 30 May 30Educational Services Program Assessment 2005-2006 SAPI Module Evaluations Exit Conference Participants May 30 IMargie Page 1 of 1 From: To: Cc: Sent: Subject: \"Dejarnette, Karen\" \u0026lt;Karen.Dejarnette@lrsd.org\u0026gt; \"Miller, Leticia\" \u0026lt;Leticia.Miller@lrsd.org\u0026gt;\n\"Menking, Mary\" \u0026lt;Mary.Menking@lrsd.org\u0026gt;\n\"Hobbs, Felicia\" \u0026lt;Felicia.Hobbs@lrsd.org\u0026gt;\n\"Mitchell, Sadie\" \u0026lt;Sadie.Mitchell@lrsd.org\u0026gt;\n\"Donna Creer\" \u0026lt;donnacreer@magnetschool.com\u0026gt;: \u0026lt;brigette@abpg.com\u0026gt;\n\"Williams, Ed\" \u0026lt;Ed.Williams@lrsd.org\u0026gt;\n\"Wohlleb, Jim\" \u0026lt;Jim.Wohlleb@lrsd.org\u0026gt;\n\"Robinson, Maurecia\" \u0026lt;Maurecia.Malcolm@lrsd.org\u0026gt;\n\u0026lt;mqpowell@odmemail.com\u0026gt;\n\"Joy Springer\" \u0026lt;jspringer@gabrielmail.com\u0026gt;\n\"James Catterall\" \u0026lt;jamesc@gseis.ucla.edu\u0026gt;\n\"Roberts, Olivine\" \u0026lt;Olivine.Roberts@lrsd.org\u0026gt;\n\"Morgan, Nancy\" \u0026lt;Nancy.Morgan@lrsd.org\u0026gt; \u0026lt;Jpdrey@aol.com\u0026gt; Thursday, August 24, 2006 12:41 PM Magnet Team Meeting The following email is sent to you by Karen Dejarnette because Maurecia Robinsons email is currently not working: Hello Team, An evaluation team meeting with Dr. Jeanne Dreyfus, the external evaluator of our Magnet Schools and Programs, will be held on August 30^ at 11a.m. in Room 10 at the IRC. I hope you will attend and provide feedback on the draft report. The draft report will be hand delivered for your review. Please call if you have questions, 447-3382. Thank you, Maurecia 8/24/2006Page 1 of 1 Margie From: To: Cc: Sent: Subject: \"Robinson, Maurecia\" \u0026lt;Maurecia.Malcolm@lrsd.org\u0026gt; \"Miller, Leticia\" \u0026lt;Leticia.Miller@lrsd.org\u0026gt;\n\"Menking, Mary\" \u0026lt;Mary.Menking@lrsd.org\u0026gt;\n\"Hobbs, Felicia\" \u0026lt;Felicia.Hobbs@lrsd.org\u0026gt;\n\"Mitchell, Sadie\" \u0026lt;Sadie.Mitchell@lrsd.org\u0026gt;\n\u0026lt;brigette@abpg.com\u0026gt;\n\u0026lt;mqpowell@odmemail.com\u0026gt;\n\u0026lt;jspringer@gabrielmail.com\u0026gt;\n\"Roberts, Olivine\" \u0026lt;Olivine.Roberts@lrsd.org\u0026gt;\n\"Morgan, Nancy\" \u0026lt;Nancy.Morgan@lrsd.org\u0026gt;\n\"Donna Greer\" \u0026lt;donnacreer@magnetschool.com\u0026gt;\n\"Jeanne Dreyfus\" \u0026lt;jpdrey@aol.com\u0026gt;\n\u0026lt;Catterall@gseis.ucla,edu\u0026gt; \"Dejarnette, Karen\" \u0026lt;Karen.Dejarnette@lrsd.org\u0026gt;\n\"Williams, Ed\" \u0026lt;Ed.Williams@lrsd.org\u0026gt;\n\"Wohlleb, Jim\" \u0026lt;Jim.Wohlleb@lrsd.org\u0026gt; Monday, August 28, 2006 3:05 PM Reminder - Magnet Team Meeting Jeanne Dreyfus, the external consultant and technical writer for the Magnet Evaluation, will hold a conference call to get feedback on the draft of the Magnet report. The meeting will be held on August 30*^ at 11a.m. in Room 10 at the IRC. I hope you will attend and provide feedback on the draft report. Please call if you have questions, 447-3382. Thank you, Maurecia Maurecia Robinson, Statistician Planning, Research, and Evaluation Little Rock School District 3001 S. Pulaski Little Rock, AR 72206 501/447-3382 501/447-7609 8/28/2006Margie Page 1 of 1 From: To: Cc: Sent: Subject: \"Joy Springer\" \u0026lt;jspringer@gabrielmail.com\u0026gt; \"John W. Walker\" \u0026lt;johnwalkeratty@aol.com\u0026gt; \u0026lt;mqpowell@odmemail.com\u0026gt; Monday, August 28, 2006 10:51 AM Joshua Concerns regarding LRSD program evaluation Good morning.... After attending the LRSD Board meeting on Thursday evening, I have some additional concerns that I would like to bring to the attention of the district's administration: The Board voted to continue an incentive program for teachers regarding improving student achievement and it was expanded to additional schools. It is my understanding that PRE has evaluated this program??? It does not seem equitable in that all schools need help in improving student achievement. Additional questions are\n1) why is the district spending thousands of dollars to an external evaluators to do what the court and Joshua envisioned PRE would do\n2) would this money be better spent purchasing the educational program that was recommended by Dr. Bernhardt for embedding program assessments rather than the program used by retail businesses being developed by the district that has no tentative date for completion\nand 3) why was there no attached quarterly report to the Board Agenda package? 3) 8/28/2006Margie Page 1 of 1 From: To: Cc: Sent: Attach: Subject: \"Dejarnette, Karen\" \u0026lt;Karen.Dejarnette@lrsd.org\u0026gt; \u0026lt;mqpowell@odmemail.com\u0026gt; \"Joy Springer\" \u0026lt;jspringer@gabrielmail.com\u0026gt; Friday, September 01, 2006 4:32 PM LRSD Evaluation Report Status.doc FW: Request for extension Margie and Gene, Looks like Chris will be asking for another extension for three of the evaluation reports. Just wanted to let you know. See enclosed document received from Steve Ross today. Karen From: smross@memphis.edu [mailto:smross@memphis.edu] Sent: Friday, September 01, 2006 4:09 PM To: Dejarnette, Karen Cc: ajmcdnld@memphis.edu\ndslawson@memphis.edu Subject: Request for extension Hi Karen, Based on the current status of the available data, we need to request extensions to be sure that we can satisfy timelines. Please see the attached explanation. Thanks, and rest up this weekend! Steven M. Ross. Ph.D. Faudree Professor and Director Center for Research in Educational Policy The University of Memphis 325 Browning Hall Memphis, TN 38152-3340 Direct Line: 901-678-3413 Center Toll Free: 866-670-6147 Fax: 901-678-4257 http://crep.memphis.edu 9/5/2006LRSD Evaluation Report Status September 1, 2006 21- Century Community Learning Centers and READ 180  CREP received confirmation on September 1,2006 from PRE that the benchmark data we received is complete.  As we established in previous extension requests, CREP needs 6-8 weeks to analyze the achievement data and write the final reports using both achievement and Step 2/Qualtitative data sources.  The projected timeline for sending the 2P CCLC and READ 180 reports to PRE is October 23'^. PRE will need to conduct reviews of the reports before they send them to the court, so they should back up the court due date extension request accordingly. o Important Note - The above timeline presumes that we will analyze the data that we have on hand as of September 1. With regard to the recently discovered unprocessed McClellan High School Algebra 1 tests, CREP will see if there are any systematic concerns that can be teased out with the data that we have. After we get the data for those missing students, the analysis can be rerun if desired by PRE. Pre-K  The district and CREP are still awaiting the QELI data from Riverside Publishing. We will need 6-8 weeks from the date we receive the data before sending the draft reports to PRE.Page 1 of 1 Margie From\nTo: Sent: Subject: \"Dejarnette, Karen\" \u0026lt;Karen.Dejarnette@lrsd.org\u0026gt; \"Margie\" \u0026lt;mqpowell@odmemail.com\u0026gt;\n\"Joy Springer\" \u0026lt;jspringer@gabrielmail.com\u0026gt; Monday, September 11, 2006 7:55 PM FW: foia fyi From: Dejarnette, Karen Sent: Monday, September 11, 2006 7:53 PM To: 'Chris Heller' Cc: Hattabaugh, Hugh\nRoberts, Olivine Subject: foia Chris, I reviewed the four foi requests received today from Mr. Walker. I believe I gave you all of the documents requested in these four foi requests to you in early July. I delivered them to your office and we discussed the items briefly. Afterwards, Khayaam called to discuss some of the items and then he sent me a letter (hard copy) indicating he had passed them on to Mr. Walker. The emails and other items were in response to the June 28* foi received from Mr. Walker. Let me know if I need to provide another copy or if you kept a copy of the file I delivered to your office. It was quite large. Karen 9/12/2006Margie Page 1 of 1 From: To: Sent: Attach: Subject: \"Dejarnette, Karen\" \u0026lt;Karen.Dejarnette@lrsd.org\u0026gt; \"Margie\" \u0026lt;mqpowell@odmemail.com\u0026gt; Monday. September 11, 2006 1:24 PM request from Mr. Walker sept 8.pdf\nsecond request from Mr. Walker sept 8.pdf from PRE Update\n-We received two requests from Mr. Walker last week (enclosed), have sent on to Roberts, Hattabaugh, and Heller -Chris has not yet responded about Ross request for an extension. I sent him Ross' email on September 1 and reminded him twice since then. -Another draft of the Magnet Report is ready for you. Want to pick it up or should I drop it off to your office? 9/11/2006Page 1 of 1 Margie From: To: Sent: Subject: \"Dejarnette, Karen\" \u0026lt;Karen.Dejarnette@lrsd.org\u0026gt; \"Chris Heller\" \u0026lt;HELLER@fec.net\u0026gt;\n\"Margie\" \u0026lt;mqpowell@odmemail.com\u0026gt;\n\"Joy Springer\" \u0026lt;jspringer@gabrielmail.com\u0026gt;\n\"Hattabaugh, Hugh\" \u0026lt;Hugh.Hattabaugh@lrsd.org\u0026gt;\n\"Roberts, Olivine\" \u0026lt;Olivine.Roberts@lrsd.org\u0026gt;\n\"James Catterall\" \u0026lt;jamesc@gseis.ucla.edu\u0026gt;\n\"Wohlleb, Jim\" \u0026lt;Jim.Wohlleb@lrsd.org\u0026gt;\n\"Williams, Ed\" \u0026lt;Ed.Williams@lrsd.org\u0026gt;\n\"Robinson, Maurecia\" \u0026lt;Maurecia.Malcolm@lrsd.org\u0026gt;\n\"Brooks, Roy G\" \u0026lt;Royg.Brooks@lrsd.org\u0026gt; Thursday, September 14, 2006 12:07 PM discussion about extensions for CREP I have scheduled a conference call with Dr. Steve Ross to discuss his September 1 request for an extension of court-mandated evaluation reports. The conversation will focus on potential dates for PRE to receive the three studies being conducted by CREP. My understanding is the Read 180 and 21* Century reports will likely arrive to PRE around October 23''* and the PreK study may arrive around mid-November. CREP has not yet received all of the needed data for the PreK analysis. You are all invited to join this conversation. The call will take place in my office at the IRC. Please let me know if you plan to join us. 9/14/2006Page 1 of 1 Margie From: To: Sent: Subject: \"Dejarnette, Karen\" \u0026lt;Karen.Dejarnette@lrsd.org\u0026gt; \u0026lt;smross@memphis.edu\u0026gt;\n\"James Catterall\" \u0026lt;jamesc@gseis.ucla.edu\u0026gt;\n\"Margie\" \u0026lt;mqpowell@odmemail.com\u0026gt;\n\"Robinson, Maurecia\" \u0026lt;Maurecia.Malcolm@lrsd.org\u0026gt;\n\"Wohlleb, Jim\" \u0026lt;Jim.Wohlleb@lrsd.org\u0026gt;\n\"Joy Springer\" \u0026lt;jspringer@gabrielmail.com\u0026gt; Thursday, September 14, 2006 1:52 PM FW: discussion about extensions for CREP fyi From: Dejarnette, Karen Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2006 1:49 PM To: 'Chris Heller' Cc: Brooks, Roy G Subject: RE: discussion about extensions for CREP Dr. Ross is not available for a call until Tuesday at 1p.m. And, your secretary says you are not in today. Dr. Ross has discussed the status of his evaluations with me and I have relayed the information to you by email and voice mail on September 1' and thereafter. From: Chris Heller [mailto:HELLER@fec.net] Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2006 12:24 PM To: Dejarnette, Karen Cc: Brooks, Roy G Subject: Re: discussion about extensions for CREP when is the call w/ dr ross and what happened to the meeting jim was going to schedule for us to meet today to discuss this same topic? dr ross is our expert and we have an obligation to determine the status of his evaluation and report to the court, odm and Joshua, i don't see any reason for an open conference call w/ dr ross before we have done that, ch \u0026gt; \"Dejarnette, Karen\" \u0026lt;Karen.Dejarnette@lrsd.org\u0026gt; 9/14/2006 12:07 PM \u0026gt; I have scheduled a conference call with Dr. Steve Ross to discuss his September 1* request for an extension of court-mandated evaluation reports. The conversation will focus on potential dates for PRE to receive the three studies being conducted by CREP. My understanding is the Read 180 and 21' Century reports will likely arrive to PRE around October 23'^'' and the PreK study may arrive around mid-November. CREP has not yet received all of the needed data for the PreK analysis. You are all invited to join this conversation. The call will take place in my office at the IRC. Please let me know if you plan to join us. 9/15/2006Page 1 of 1 Margie From: To: Sent: Subject: \"Dejarnette, Karen\" \u0026lt;Karen.Dejarnette@lrsd.org\u0026gt; \"Margie\" \u0026lt;mqpowell@odmemail.com\u0026gt; Thursday, September 14, 2006 12:27 PM RE: discussion about extensions for CREP I understand the District is not interested to request an extension and feels Ross should get it done\". This is the reason for setting up the call. From: Margie [mailto:mqpowell@odmemail.com] Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2006 12:32 PM To: Dejarnette, Karen Subject: Re: discussion about extensions for CREP Karen, Do you know what length of time the district is expecting to ask for in the request for an extension? Do you have a date and time yet for the conference call? Gene plans to attend for ODM. MP  Original Message  From: Dejarnette, Karen To: Chris Heller\nMarqie\nJoy Sprinqer\nHattabaugh, Hugh\nRoberts, Olivine\nJames Catterall\nWohlleb, Jim\nWilliams, Ed\nRobinson, Maurecia\nBrooks, Roy G Sent: Thursday. September 14, 2006 12:07 PM Subject: discussion about extensions for CREP I have scheduled a conference call with Dr. Steve Ross to discuss his September 1 request for an extension of court-mandated evaluation reports. The conversation will focus on potential dates for PRE to receive the three studies being conducted by CREP. My understanding is the Read 180 and 21* Century reports will likely arrive to PRE around October 23\"* and the PreK study may arrive around mid-November. CREP has not yet received all of the needed data for the PreK analysis. You are all invited to join this conversation. The call will take place in my office at the IRC. Please let me know if you plan to join us. 9/15/2006Margie Page 1 of 1 From: To: \"Dejarnette, Karen\" \u0026lt;Karen.Dejarnette@lrsd.org\u0026gt; Sent: Subject: \"Dejarnette, Karen\" \u0026lt;Karen.Dejarnette@lrsd.org\u0026gt;\n\"Chris Heller\" \u0026lt;HELLER@fec.net\u0026gt;\n\"Margie\" \u0026lt;mqpowell@odmemail.com\u0026gt;\n\"Joy Springer\" \u0026lt;jspringer@gabrielmail.com\u0026gt;\n\"Hattabaugh, Hugh\" \u0026lt;Hugh.Hattabaugh@lrsd.org\u0026gt;\n\"Roberts, Olivine\" \u0026lt;Olivine.Roberts@lrsd.org\u0026gt;\n\"James Catterall\" \u0026lt;jamesc@gseis.ucla.edu\u0026gt;\n\"Wohlleb, Jim\" \u0026lt;Jim.Wohlleb@lrsd.org\u0026gt;\n\"Williams, Ed' \u0026lt;Ed.Williams@lrsd.org\u0026gt;\n\"Robinson, Maurecia\" \u0026lt;Maurecia.Malcolm@lrsd.org\u0026gt;\n\"Brooks, Roy G\" \u0026lt;Royg.Brooks@lrsd.org\u0026gt; Thursday. September 14, 2006 12:26 PM RE: discussion about extensions for CREP I meant to include the date and time of the call: Tuesday September 19*^ at 1p.m. From: Dejarnette, Karen Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2006 12:07 PM To: 'Chris Heller'\n'Margie'\n'Joy Springer'\nHattabaugh, Hugh\nRoberts, Olivine\n'James Catterall'\nWohlleb, Jim\nWilliams, Ed\nRobinson, Maurecia\nBrooks, Roy G Subject: discussion about extensions for CREP I have scheduled a conference call with Dr. Steve Ross to discuss his September 1* request for an extension of court-mandated evaluation reports. The conversation will focus on potential dates for PRE to receive the three studies being conducted by CREP. My understanding is the Read 180 and 21 Century reports will likely arrive to PRE around October 23'' and the PreK study may arrive around mid-November. CREP has not yet received all of the needed data for the PreK analysis. You are all invited to join this conversation. The call will take place in my office at the IRC. Please let me know if you plan to join us. 9/15/2006Margie Page 1 of 1 From: To: Sent: Subject: \"Chris Heller\" \u0026lt;HELLER@fec.net\u0026gt; \u0026lt;johnwalkeratty@aol.com\u0026gt;\n\u0026lt;mqpowell@odmemail.com\u0026gt; Friday, September 15, 2006 5:07 PM meet and confer John and margie - i spoke today with Steve ross and aaron mcdonald regarding the three evaluations which they are in the process of preparing, i've got some information which, given judge wilson's expectation that we continue to meet and confer, i would like to discuss with you as i prepare a report for the court, i am also prepared to respond to the Joshua concerns raised at our last meeting, my schedule is fairly open for the next week or so. please let me know when you would like to meet, thanks, ch Jones - i could not find his email address. ps- please forward this to gene 9/21/2006Page 1 of 1 Margie From: To: Cc: Sent: Subject: \"Chris Heller\" \u0026lt;HELLER@fec.net\u0026gt; \"John W. Walker\" \u0026lt;johnwalkeratty@aol.com\u0026gt;\n\u0026lt;mqpowell@odmemail.com\u0026gt; \"Joy Springer\" \u0026lt;jspringer@gabrielmail.com\u0026gt; Monday, September 18, 2006 12:27 PM Re: meet and confer i'll do it. ch \u0026gt; \"John W. Walker\" \u0026lt;Johnwalkeratty@aol.com\u0026gt; 9/18/2006 6:48 AM \u0026gt;\u0026gt;\u0026gt; Dear Chris, Please put your concerns in writing so there will be no misunderstanding about the issues. I am aware that the district remains out of compliance. You and I are both aware that you have not met the previous commitment made in the presence of Gene Jones and Margie Powell regarding program evaluation. That was more than a month ago in the ODM office (conference room). Further, if we \"meet and confer\" I prefer that it be in the presence of Jones and Powell. -----Original Message------ From: Chris Hellei To: iohnwalkeratty@aol.com\nmqpowell@odmemail.com Sent: Friday, September 15, 2006 5:07 PM Subject: meet and confer John and margie - i spoke today with Steve ross and aaron mcdonald regarding the three evaluations which they are in the process of preparing, i've got some information which, given judge wilson's expectation that we continue to meet and confer, i would like to discuss with you as i prepare a report for the court, i am also prepared to respond to the Joshua concerns raised at our last meeting, my schedule is fairly open for the next week or so. please let me know when you would like to meet, thanks, ch ps- please forward this to gene Jones - i could not find his email address. 9/26/2006Margie Page 1 of 1 From: To: Sent: Subject: \"Chris Heller\" \u0026lt;HELLER@fec.net\u0026gt; \"Joy Springer\" \u0026lt;jspringer@gabrielmail.com\u0026gt;\n\"James Catterall\" \u0026lt;jamesc@gseis.ucla.edu\u0026gt;\n\"Ed Williams\" \u0026lt;Ed.Williams@lrsd.org\u0026gt;\n\"Hugh Hattabaugh\" \u0026lt;Hugh.Hattabaugh@lrsd.org\u0026gt;\n\"Jim Wohlleb\" \u0026lt;Jim.Wohlleb@lrsd.org\u0026gt;\n\"Karen Dejarnette\" \u0026lt;Karen.Dejarnette@lrsd.org\u0026gt;\n\"Maurecia Robinson\" \u0026lt;Maurecia.Malcolm@lrsd.org\u0026gt;\n\"Olivine Roberts\" \u0026lt;Olivine.Roberts@lrsd.org\u0026gt;\n\"Roy G Brooks\" \u0026lt;Royg.Brooks@lrsd.org\u0026gt;\n\"Margie\" \u0026lt;mqpowell@odmemail.com\u0026gt; Tuesday, September 19, 2006 9:09 AM Re: discussion about extensions for CREP karen (and everyone) - i spoke last week w/ Steve ross and aaron mcdonald regarding the evaluations, i emailed joshua and odm to let them know that i had information to discuss with them and to suggest another meeting, mr walker requested that i put my concerns in writing, which i will do today, following any discussion with odm and joshua, i will prepare a report to the court, there is no reason for a conference call w/ dr ross today, ch \u0026gt;\u0026gt;\u0026gt; \"Dejarnette, Karen\" \u0026lt;Karen.Dejarnette@lrsd.org\u0026gt; 9/14/2006 12:07 PM \u0026gt;\u0026gt;\u0026gt; I have scheduled a conference call with Dr. Steve Ross to discuss his September 1' request for an extension of court-mandated evaluation reports. The conversation will focus on potential dates for PRE to receive the three studies being conducted by CREP. My understanding is the Read 180 and 21 Century reports will likely arrive to PRE around October 23^ and the PreK study may arrive around mid-November. CREP has not yet received all of the needed data for the PreK analysis. You are all invited to join this conversation. The call will take place in my office at the IRC. Please let me know if you plan to join us. 9/26/2006Page 1 of 1 Margie From: To: Sent: Subject: \"Dejarnette, Karen\" \u0026lt;Karen.Dejarnette@lrsd.org\u0026gt; \"Chris Heller\" \u0026lt;HELLER@fec.net\u0026gt;\n\"Joy Springer\" \u0026lt;jspringer@gabrielmail.com\u0026gt;\n\"James Catterall\" \u0026lt;jamesc@gseis.ucla.edu\u0026gt;\n\"Williams, Ed\" \u0026lt;Ed.Williams@lrsd.org\u0026gt;\n\"Hattabaugh, Hugh\" \u0026lt;Hugh.Hattabaugh@lrsd.org\u0026gt;\n\"Wohlleb, Jim\" \u0026lt;Jim.Wohlleb@lrsd.org\u0026gt;\n\"Robinson, Maurecia\" \u0026lt;Maurecia.Malcolm@lrsd.org\u0026gt;\n\"Roberts, Olivine\" \u0026lt;Olivine.Roberts@lrsd.org\u0026gt;\n\"Brooks, Roy G\" \u0026lt;Royg.Brooks@lrsd.org\u0026gt;\n\"Margie\" \u0026lt;mqpowell@odmemail.com\u0026gt;\n\u0026lt;smross@memphis.edu\u0026gt; Tuesday, September 19, 2006 9:55 AM RE: discussion about extensions for CREP I plan to call Dr. Ross at 1p.m. today to learn what is going on. This email does not have details about what was discussed, whether or not an extension will be requested. If so, when? What was written to ODM and JOSHUA, etc. Chris, please provide details. From: Chris Heller [mailto:HELLER@fec.net] Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2006 9:10 AM To: Joy Springer\nJames Catterall\nWilliams, Ed\nHattabaugh, Hugh\nWohlleb, Jim\nDejarnette, Karen\nRobinson, Maurecia\nRoberts, Olivine\nBrooks, Roy G\nMargie Subject: Re: discussion about extensions for CREP karen (and everyone) - i spoke last week w/ Steve ross and aaron mcdonald regarding the evaluations, i emailed Joshua and odm to let them know that i had information to discuss with them and to suggest another meeting, mr walker requested that i put my concerns in writing, which i will do today, following any discussion with odm and Joshua, i will prepare a report to the court, there is no reason for a conference call w/ dr ross today, ch \u0026gt;\u0026gt;\u0026gt; \"Dejarnette, Karen\" \u0026lt;Karen.DeJarnette@lrsd.org\u0026gt; 9/14/2006 12:07 PM \u0026gt;\u0026gt;\u0026gt; I have scheduled a conference call with Dr. Steve Ross to discuss his September 1* request for an extension of court-mandated evaluation reports. The conversation will focus on potential dates for PRE to receive the three studies being conducted by CREP. My understanding is the Read 180 and 21 Century reports will likely arrive to PRE around October 23''' and the PreK study may arrive around mid-November. CREP has not yet received all of the needed data for the PreK analysis. You are all invited to join this conversation. The call will take place in my office at the IRC. Please let me know if you plan to join us. 9/26/2006Margie Page 1 of 3 From: To: Sent: Subject: \"Dejarnette, Karen\" \u0026lt;Karen.Dejarnette@lrsd.org\u0026gt; \"Margie\" \u0026lt;mqpowell@odmemail.com\u0026gt; Thursday, September 21, 2006 6:12 PM FW: evaluations From: Dejarnette, Karen Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2006 6:12 PM To: 'Chris Heller' Cc: Williams, Ed\nWohlleb, Jim\nRobinson, Maurecia\n'Steve Ross (smross@memphis.edu)' Subject: RE: evaluations The best thing we could do is have a meeting with everyone together to answer your questions. I set up such a meeting for last Thursday. Then, you emailed and said you had talked to people and the meeting did not need to happen. Now, you have lots of questions. All of us have pieces of answers to your questions, together we could provide you with a more complete response. Many phone calls have taken place as well as emails. Not all of PRE staff or CREP staff were on each call or included in every email. The important outcome is that CREP needs an extension of time for each of their three studies. They realized and communicated that on September 1 yet the request had not been forwarded to the Court. From: Chris Heller [mailto:HELLER@fec.net] Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2006 2:31 PM To: Dejarnette, Karen Cc: Williams, Ed Subject: RE: evaluations i have reviewed the emails you just sent, they do not answer most of the questions i sent on Tuesday, would you please review my questions and either answer them or direct me to the particular document which you believe provides the answer, also, after reviewing what ed sent to crep on August 15 and 17, i don't understand why dan at crep did not seem to know on August 21 that crep had received any data, finally, it looks like ed advised crep on August 17 that crep should use the data file he attatched because it \"represents the most current information we have on student demographics\", but that it could be linked with the August 15 file if the evaluators wanted \"more types of data\", i don't see where ed indicated that there was any problem with the data in either the August 15 or August 17 data files, was james confused by this? maybe i'm missing something, but i don't see much sense of urgency, if crep had a problem or a question, why didn't someone contact us when they got the data from ed? from the correspondence i've seen, it looks like they didn't know they had any data until maurecia checked with them, ch \u0026gt; \"Dejarnette, Karen\" \u0026lt;Karen.Dejarnette@lrsd.org\u0026gt; 9/21/2006 1:50 PM \u0026gt; 9/26/2006Page 2 of 3 Chris, We have met and I am forwarding a number of emails to you now that show the line of conversation. The forwarded emails include one sent from Ed on August 15'^, another from Ed on August 171^, one from Debbi Lawson on August 31*, and one from me to Ed today. I am also sending the NORMES posting printed on June 22'^'*. Let me know if you have additional questions after you review these documents. I would have scanned these and sent in one file but our copier is jammed today. Karen From: Chris Heller [mailto:HELLER@fec.net] Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2006 1:38 PM To: Dejarnette, Karen Subject: RE: evaluations karen - i've reviewed the documents you sent this summer and don't find clear answers to my questions, have you had a pre meeting yet to prepare a response? ch \u0026gt;\u0026gt;\u0026gt; \"Dejarnette, Karen\" \u0026lt;Karen.Dejarnette@lrscl.org\u0026gt; 9/20/2006 1:25 PM \u0026gt; I would like to meet with PRE staff before responding because I may not know of all of the communications that have happened between PRE and CREP. Two statisticians are moving among schools today providing test training. We can meet and provide answers tomorrow morning or you can meet with us tomorrow morning to hear the answers. From: Chris Heller [mailto:HELLER@fec.net] Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2006 4:19 PM To: Dejarnette, Karen Cc: Hattabaugh, Hugh\nRoberts, Olivine\nBrooks, Roy G Subject: RE: evaluations karen - did someone from pre tell crep that the mid-august data file was either incomplete or possibly inaccurate? if so, would you please send me a copy of that document, did someone from pre tell crep on September 1 that the data was complete? if so, i'd like that document, too. are you saying that the mid-august data was good data but crep did not begin its analysis because they were waiting for us to tell them that? was there any communication between pre and crep in the last two weeks of August? is the data we sent in mid- august the data that crep is now using? regarding the pre-k evaluation, when did we contract with riverside to produce the qeli data? can i get a copy of that contract (or is it already in a quarterly report)? who at normes declined to produce the qeli data? when? are you saying that the Irsd data had 15,000 errors (we can't have had that many students tested, i don't think)? what happened between the time we filed our motion to extend time in July, where we said that pre expected the qeli data in early August, and now? this may be a question better directed to Steve ross but, if you know, what are the prospects that crep can get their work done in six weeks, rather than eight weeks, so we can meet the current deadline, if it can't be done otherwise, could we authorize the use of more people or do anything else to expedite this work? these are a few of the questions i must be in a position to answer, thanks for your help, ch \u0026gt; \"Dejarnette, Karen\" \u0026lt;Karen.Dejarnette@lrsd.org\u0026gt; 9/19/2006 10:02 AM \u0026gt; 9/26/2006Page 3 of 3 Chris, Here are answers to your questions. Karen first, what happened between the time we sent benchmark data to crep in mid-august and the time \"crep received confirmation on September 1, 2006 from pre that the benchmark data we received from pre is complete\"? Ed sent two files in mid-August and did not verify which on to use until September l^ who said the data may not be complete? what was the problem? NORMES posted incorrect data for the month of August and PRE (Ed, Jim, and Maurecia) worked with schools to clean and correct misinformation for students who showed on the NORMES mismatch and nomatch databases, why didn't crep begin to analyze the data two weeks earlier? They were waiting on us to tell them which file to use and that the data had been verified. second, when was qeli data added to the pre - k evaluation design? In January I believe-at the eval team meeting. why was it added? Steve and Anna felt it necessary. why has it taken so long to get the qeli data from riverside publishing? Riverside did not offer it in an electronic format, NORMES said it would but then determined it had over 15,000 errors and decided not to offer it. PRE then contracted with Riverside to get it. finally, i understand that dr catterall will be on time with his evaluation, is that correct? Yes i understand that the algebra 1 tests recently found at mcclellan will not further delay the 21st century evasluation. is that correct? Yes, Ross proposes to use what he has. We are not sure the McClellan tests will be scored. From: Chris Heller [mailto:HELLER@fec.net] Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2006 9:39 AM To: Dejarnette, Karen Cc: Hattabaugh, Hugh\nRoberts, Olivine\nBrooks, Roy G Subject: evaluations karen - a couple of questions so that i can report to odm, joshua and judge wilson. first, what happened between the time we sent benchmark data to crep in mid-august and the time \"crep received confirmation on September 1, 2006 from pre that the benchmark data we received from pre is complete\"? who said the data may not be complete? what was the problem? why didn't crep begin to analyze the data two weeks earlier? second, when was qeli data added to the pre - k evaluation design? why was it added? why has it taken so long to get the qeli data from riverside publishing? finally, I understand that dr catterall will be on time with his evaluation, is that correct? thanks, ch ps - i understand that the algebra 1 tests recently found at mcclellan will not further delay the 21st century evasluation. is that correct? 9/26/2006Margie Page 1 of 2 From: To: Sent: Subject: \"Dejarnette, Karen\" \u0026lt;Karen.Dejarnette@lrsd.org\u0026gt; \"Margie\" \u0026lt;mqpowell@odmemail.com\u0026gt; Friday, September 22, 2006 1:32 PM FW: three evaluations From: smross@memphis.edu [mailto:smross@memphis.edu] Sent: Friday, September 22, 2006 1:04 PM To: HELLER@fec.net Cc: Dejarnette, Karen\najmcdnld@memphis.edu\nJNunnery@odu.edu\ndslawson@memphis.edu\nawgrehan@memphis.edu\ndlowther@memphis.edu\njstrahl@memphis.edu Subject: RE: three evaluations Chris, We just had a long meeting with the key researchers. I can tell you, and would certainly be willing to convey this to judge Wilson if deemed appropriate, that extraordinary efforts are already being made to analyze the data and complete the reports. These efforts include weekends and late nights, and concern about stakeholder understanding (assuming quick turnaround is desired or being encouraged) about the complexity of the data bases, the anomalies that are discovered AS WE WORK WITH THE DATA, and the critical importance of informing the district, the court, and the research community of how the targeted programs impact students, especially African Americans. Even for 21* Century, we have recently uncovered anomalies (uninterpretable) data for one of the schools regarding attendance and enrollment. Now is not the time for details, but wed be happy to participate in a conference call with anyone from the district, Joshua, or ODM to describe how challenging it is to work through these problems, and produce a credible report. Six weeks is a very constrained, but potentially achievable deadline, if it assumed that the data sets contain no anomalies or unusual complexities. That is NOT the case here for 21 Century and Pre-K Literacy, respectively. So, its essential that you request an extension, as we requested for Read 180 and 21 Century, until October 15. However, if you want 21 Century by the 15*, there will not be sufficient time to work with PRE and the school in question to resolve the (major) discrepancies in the data for those schools. So, well need to qualify those findings in the report. (If LRSD wanted an amended report, involving re-analysis once the anomalies for that school, are resolved, wed need to discuss and negotiate the additional time involved.) My staff informs me that they hope to be able to verify by Oct 1, all the Pre-K Literacy data sets, to ensure that we have what we need to start the analyses. If so, we will try, by making extraordinary efforts, to complete that report by November 15*. So, for now Read 180 and 21 will be in on Oct 15, and Pre-K by November 15. Well inform you if issues or problems arise that would preclude meeting those projected deadlines. Perhaps there is some flexibility at the district end in reviewing the reports? Steve 10/2/2006Page 2 of 2 We, again, are fully open to conference calls with you or any stakeholders to explain what needs to be done to produce meaningful, accurate, and scientifically valid evidence for LRSD. Steven M. Ross. Ph.D. Faudree Professor and Director Center for Research in Educational Policy The University of Memphis 325 Browning Hall Memphis, TN 38152-3340 Direct Line: 901-678-3413 Center Toll Free: 866-670-6147 Fax:901-678-4257 http://crep.memphis.edu From: Chris Heller [mailto:HELLER@fec.net] Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2006 2:58 PM To: Steven M Ross (smross) Cc: Karen.Dejarnette@lrsd.org\nroy.g.brooks@lrsd.org\nAaron Jeffrey Mcdonald (ajmcdnid) Subject: three evaluations Steve - i've reviewed many of the documents concerning the availability of data for the three evaluations being prepared by crep. i did this with the expectation that i would report to Joshua and odm that additional time would be necessary, and then file a request with the court, it is in Irsd's best interest to do everything possible to meet the current deadline before we consider requesting another extension, please let me know if there is anything that can be done, even at an increased cost, to get the evaluations, or any of them, drafted by October 15. if not, can you assure me that there is nothing that crep or pre could have done to get the evaluations done on time, thanks, ch 10/2/2006Margie Page 1 of 1 From: To: Sent: Subject: \"Dejarnette, Karen\" \u0026lt;Karen.Dejarnette@lrsd.org\u0026gt; \"Margie\" \u0026lt;mqpowell@odmemail.com\u0026gt; Monday, September 25, 2006 4:28 PM FW: deadline fo October 1st From: James Catterall [mailto:jamesc@gseis.ucla.edu] Sent: Monday, September 25, 2006 3:31 PM To: Dejarnette, Karen Subject: Re: deadline fo October 1st Hi Karen  Oops. 1 thought we had discussed on the phone a couple of weeks ago that October 10th would suffice as OK. Sorry if I mis-heard this. I'll assume I did. At this point, I should be able to hand a draft to FedEX on the morning of October 4th, and perhaps earlier by a day or two. So you would get the report between the 3rd and 5th. Sorry about my confusion. James I am at home today if we should talk. 310-455-2720 On Sep 25, 2006, at 9:57 AM, Dejarnette, Karen wrote: Hi James, Just checking in on youre A+ report draft. When will I receive the initial draft? We should file it with the court on Friday if it is to make the October 1* deadline. Karen 10/2/2006Margie Page 1 of 5 From: To: Sent: Subject: \"Dejarnette, Karen\" \u0026lt;Karen.Dejarnette@lrsd.org\u0026gt; \"Margie\" \u0026lt;mqpowell@odmemail.com\u0026gt; Monday, September 25, 2006 4:29 PM FW: evaluations From: Dejarnette, Karen Sent: Monday, September 25, 2006 11:27 AM To: 'Chris Heller' Cc: Hattabaugh, Hugh\nRoberts, Olivine\nBrooks, Roy G Subject: RE: evaluations Chris, I thought I answered your questions. Here goes again\ndid someone from pre tell crep that the mid-august data file was either incomplete or possibly inaccurate? When Ed sent the file to CREP as soon as he received it-without PRE verifying the dataI told everyone it needed to be verified. Then, when Ed sent the 2\"' file it looked to me like he sent it because the demographics were incorrect on the first file. Also, we all had discussion that the first ITBS file was incorrect and being resent from Riverside. did someone from pre tell crep on September 1 that the data was complete? if so, i'd like that document, too. We had a phone call with CREP on September 1^. are you saying that the mid-august data was good data but crep did not begin its analysis because they were waiting for us to tell them that? No. We all had concerns about the file being sent to CREP during mid-August because PRE had not verified the data as we told CREP we would. was there any communication between pre and crep in the last two weeks of August? Yes. is the data we sent in mid-august the data that crep is now using? Yes, but CREP had found errors in the data and even today we are trying to work those errors out. regarding the pre-k evaluation, when did we contract with riverside to produce the qeli data? Jim has provided the PreK dates and copies of contract. can i get a copy of that contract (or is it already in a quarterly report)? 9/26/2006Page 2 of 5 who at normes declined to produce the qeli data? when? Ed received some data from NORMES but not the detailed data Anna needed. are you saying that the Irsd data had 15,000 errors (we can't have had that many students tested, i don't think)? No. what happened between the time we filed our motion to extend time in July, where we said that pre expected the qeli data in early August, and now? this may be a question better directed to Steve ross but, if you know, what are the prospects that crep can get their work done in six weeks, rather than eight weeks, so we can meet the current deadline. In Ross' email last Friday, he said he can provide the Readl80 report by October 15^, the 21stCLC report by October 15* with a disclaimer about the data (WHICH I WOULD DEFINITELY NOT RECOMMEND) and the PREK report by mid-November. if it can't be done otherwise, could we authorize the use of more people or do anything else to expedite this work? No. Chris. I do not understand the delay in seeking an extension for these studies. When we called Dr. Ross last Tuesday at 1p.m. (the call you said we did not need to have) he shared with the group his concern that an extension has not been requested. He then asked me to write a letter to Judge Wilson to notify him of the problems. From: Chris Heller [mailto:HELLER@fec.net] Sent: Friday, September 22, 2006 3:27 PM To: Dejarnette, Karen Cc: Hattabaugh, Hugh\nRoberts, Olivine\nBrooks, Roy G Subject: RE: evaluations karen - you told me yesterday that pre has already met to prepare responses to my questions, i still don't have the responses, just a few emails that don't directly address my questions, please provide responses, if you want to have another meeting \"with everyone together\" to answer my questions, please do that as quickly as possible and then provide me a written response, please understand that i cannot just forward a request to the court without knowing the reasons for it. finally, you say the the \"important outcome is that crep needs an extension of time for each of their three studies\", the court has established a schedule for resolving the remaining issues in this case and its important that we stick to that schedule if at all possible, if we must seek more time, we should have very good reasons, i'm asking to to give me the information i need to explain those reasons, my latest information from dr ross is that, depending on verification of certain data,\" read 180 and 21st century will be in on oct 15, and pre-k by November 15\". what, then, would be the basis for a request to extend the current deadline for all three evaluations? ch 9/26/2006Page 3 of 5 \u0026gt; \"Dejarnette, Karen\" \u0026lt;Karen.Dejarnette@lrsd.org\u0026gt; 9/21/2006 6:11 PM \u0026gt;\u0026gt;\u0026gt; The best thing we could do is have a meeting with everyone together to answer your questions. I set up such a meeting for last Thursday. Then, you emailed and said you had talked to people and the meeting did not need to happen. Now, you have lots of questions. All of us have pieces of answers to your questions, together we could provide you with a more complete response. Many phone calls have taken place as well as emails. Not all of PRE staff or CREP staff were on each call or included in every email. The important outcome is that CREP needs an extension of time for each of their three studies. They realized and communicated that on September 1 yet the request had not been forwarded to the Court. From: Chris Heller [maiito:HELLER@fec.net] Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2006 2:31 PM To: Dejarnette, Karen Cc: Williams, Ed Subject: RE: evaluations i have reviewed the emails you just sent, they do not answer most of the questions i sent on Tuesday, would you please review my questions and either answer them or direct me to the particular document which you believe provides the answer, also, after reviewing what ed sent to crep on August 15 and 17, i don't understand why dan at crep did not seem to know on August 21 that crep had received any data, finally, it looks like ed advised crep on August 17 that crep should use the data file he attatched because it \"represents the most current information we have on student demographics\", but that it could be linked with the August 15 file if the evaluators wanted \"more types of data\", i don't see where ed indicated that there was any problem with the data in either the August 15 or August 17 data files, was james confused by this? maybe i'm missing something, but i don't see much sense of urgency, if crep had a problem or a question, why didn't someone contact us when they got the data from ed? from the correspondence i've seen, it looks like they didn't know they had any data until maurecia checked with them, ch \u0026gt;\u0026gt;\u0026gt; \"Dejarnette, Karen\" \u0026lt;Karen.Dejarnette@lrsd.org\u0026gt; 9/21/2006 1:50 PM \u0026gt;\u0026gt;\u0026gt; Chris, We have met and I am forwarding a number of emails to you now that show the line of conversation. The forwarded emails include one sent from Ed on August 15^, another from Ed on August 17*^, one from Debbi Lawson on August 31 and one from me to Ed today. I am also sending the NORMES posting printed on June 22'^'. Let me know if you have additional questions after you review these documents. I would have scanned these and sent in one file but our copier is jammed today. Karen From: Chris Heller [mailto:HELLER@fec.net] Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2006 1:38 PM To: Dejarnette, Karen Subject: RE: evaluations karen - i've reviewed the documents you sent this summer and don't find clear answers to my questions, have 9/26/2006Page 4 of 5 you had a pre meeting yet to prepare a response? ch \u0026gt; \"Dejarnette, Karen\" \u0026lt;Karen.Dejarnette@lrsd.org\u0026gt; 9/20/2006 1:25 PM \u0026gt; I would like to meet with PRE staff before responding because I may not know of all of the communications that have happened between PRE and CREP. Two statisticians are moving among schools today providing test training. We can meet and provide answers tomorrow morning or you can meet with us tomorrow morning to hear the answers. From: Chris Heller [mailto:HELLER@fec.net] Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2006 4:19 PM To: Dejarnette, Karen Cc: Hattabaugh, Hugh\nRoberts, Olivine\nBrooks, Roy G Subject: RE: evaluations karen - did someone from pre tell crep that the mid-august data file was either incomplete or possibly inaccurate? if so, would you please send me a copy of that document, did someone from pre tell crep on September 1 that the data was complete? if so, i'd like that document, too. are you saying that the mid-august data was good data but crep did not begin its analysis because they were waiting for us to tell them that? was there any communication between pre and crep in the last two weeks of August? is the data we sent in mid- august the data that crep is now using? regarding the pre-k evaluation, when did we contract with riverside to produce the qeli data? can i get a copy of that contract (or is it already in a quarterly report)? who at normes declined to produce the qeli data? when? are you saying that the Irsd data had 15,000 errors (we can't have had that many students tested, i don't think)? what happened between the time we filed our motion to extend time in July, where we said that pre expected the qeli data in early August, and now? this may be a question better directed to steve ross but, if you know, what are the prospects that crep can get their work done in six weeks, rather than eight weeks, so we can meet the current deadline, if it can't be done otherwise, could we authorize the use of more people or do anything else to expedite this work? these are a few of the questions i must be in a position to answer, thanks for your help, ch \u0026gt; \"Dejarnette, Karen\" \u0026lt;Karen.Dejarnette@lrsd.org\u0026gt; 9/19/2006 10:02 AM \u0026gt;\u0026gt;\u0026gt; Chris, Here are answers to your questions. Karen first, what happened between the time we sent benchmark data to crep in mid-august and the time \"crep received confirmation on September 1, 2006 from pre that the benchmark data we received from pre is complete\"? Ed sent two files in mid-August and did not verify which on to use until September 1^. who said the data may not be complete? what was the problem? NORMES posted incorrect data for the month of August and PRE (Ed, Jim, and Maurecia) worked with schools to clean and correct misinformation for students who showed on the NORMES mismatch and nomatch databases, why didn't crep begin to analyze the data two weeks earlier? They were waiting on us to tell them which file to use and that the data had been verified. second, when was qeli data added to the pre - k evaluation design? In January I believe-at the eval team meeting. why was it added? Steve and Anna felt it necessary. why has it taken so long to get the qeli data from riverside publishing? Riverside did not offer it in an electronic format, NORMES said it would but then determined it had over 15,000 errors and decided not to offer it. PRE then contracted with Riverside to get it. 9/26/2006Page 5 of 5 finally, I understand that dr catterall will be on time with his evaluation, is that correct? Yes i understand that the algebra 1 tests recently found at mcclellan will not further delay the 21st century evasluation. is that correct? Yes, Ross proposes to use what he has. We are not sure the McClellan tests will be scored. From\nChris Heller [mailto:HELLER@fec.net] Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2006 9:39 AM To: Dejarnette, Karen Cc: Hattabaugh, Hugh\nRoberts, Olivine\nBrooks, Roy G Subject: evaluations karen - a couple of questions so that i can report to odm, Joshua and judge wilson. first, what happened between the time we sent benchmark data to crep in mid-august and the time \"crep received confirmation on September 1, 2006 from pre that the benchmark data we received from pre is complete\"? who said the data may not be complete? what was the problem? why didn't crep begin to analyze the data two weeks earlier? second, when was qeli data added to the pre - k evaluation design? why was it added? why has it taken so long to get the qeli data from riverside publishing? finally, i understand that dr catterall will be on time with his evaluation, is that correct? thanks, ch ps - i understand that the algebra 1 tests recently found at mcclellan will not further delay the 21st century evasluation. is that correct? 9/26/2006Page 1 of 3 Margie From: To: Sent: Subject: \"Dejarnette, Karen\" \u0026lt;Karen.Dejarnette@lrsd.org\u0026gt; \"Margie\" \u0026lt;mqpowell@odmemail.com\u0026gt; Friday, September 29, 2006 8:55 AM FW: data elements for program assessment From: Dejarnette, Karen Sent: Friday, September 29, 2006 8:33 AM To: Roberts, Olivine Cc: Wohlleb, Jim Subject: RE: data elements for program assessment Okay. Also, Id like more discussion on the comments you made yesterday about PRE does not have the authority to determine the types of data to collectthose decisions need to go through Cabinet. I was very surprised by your statement and need clarification as to what you meant. From: Roberts, Olivine Sent: Friday, September 29, 2006 7:29 AM To: Dejarnette, Karen Subject: RE: data elements for program assessment Lets meet on Monday following Cabinet to discuss the Monitoring Report and the Climate Survey. Please ask Jim to attend. Thank you. Olivine Roberts. Ed.D. Associate Superintendent, Educational Services Little Rock School District 3001 S. Pulaski St. Little Rock, AR 72206 Phone: 501.447.3320 Fax: 501.447.3321 From: Dejarnette, Karen Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2006 9:36 AM To: Milhollen, Mark\nWohlleb, Jim\nHattabaugh, Hugh\nRoberts, Olivine Cc: Morgan, Nancy\nCrawford, Kevin\nCole, Chris\nTipton, Mattie Ruth\nRobinson, Maurecia\nWilliams, Ed Subject: RE: data elements for program assessment In addition to examples provided by Jim, Catterall found the highest error rate in parent contact information. From: Milhollen, Mark Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2006 7:37 AM To: Dejarnette, Karen\nWohlleb, Jim\nHattabaugh, Hugh\nRoberts, Olivine Cc: Morgan, Nancy\nCrawford, Kevin\nCole, Chris\nTipton, Mattie Ruth\nRobinson, Maurecia\nWilliams, Ed Subject: RE: data elements for program assessment When you say inaccurate data would you provide specific examples so that we can investigate From: Dejarnette, Karen 9/29/2006Page 2 of 3 Sent: Wednesday, September 27, 2006 7:05 PM To: Wohlleb, Jim\nMilhollen, Mark\nHattabaugh, Hugh\nRoberts, Olivine Cc: Morgan, Nancy\nCrawford, Kevin\nCole, Chris\nTipton, Mattie Ruth\nRobinson, Maurecia\nWilliams, Ed Subject: RE: data elements for program assessment Thanks for the thoughtful comments Jim. I agree. I left the meeting thinking that we also need to focus on cleaning all data thoroughly before entering it into a data warehouse. PRE staff members, as well as external evaluators, have noted a high error rate in some data sets. For example. Dr. Dreyfus could not carry out her full study last year because data was either not available, not coded properly, or not accurate. Dr. Catteralls upcoming report on the A+ program notes that he found a 65% error rate in the parent data during his study of YRE during the 2004-05 school year and a 70% error rate in the same database during his study of A+ in the 2005-06 school year. And, Dr. Ross informed us on September 1* that reports will be late because of problems with inaccurate data. We really need to focus on cleaning the data. And, the District needs to develop a comprehensive process (with the responsible department or positions named) for maintaining accurate data. Thanks for including PRE in the discussion. From: Wohlleb, Jim Sent: Wednesday, September 27, 2006 5:19 PM To: Milhollen, Mark\nHattabaugh, Hugh\nRoberts, Olivine Cc: Morgan, Nancy\nCrawford, Kevin\nCole, Chris\nTipton, Mattie Ruth\nDejarnette, Karen\nRobinson, Maurecia\nWilliams, Ed Subject: data elements for program assessment Mark, Thanks for arranging this afternoons meeting. It was helpful to see what data is ready for use and hopeful to learn we can recommend more. Some thoughts still fresh in my mind follow. Although the measures presented by Larry are important and appropriate for getting started, there is more I would recommend in the near future and long term: Soon, we should be able to connect multiple years test scores so we can assess students progress longitudinally (rather than compare different groups/cohorts of students as they pass through the same grades). That means at least several years results for ITBS, benchmark, AP, and others mentioned today. These, of course, are not available for all students for all grades. Because were moving fonward with wellness for the ACSIP, well soon want to use health-related data. The attached Excel file has 04-05 data from nurses reports to the health services director. (A disclaimer is that I was the keypuncher, and Ive not thoroughly checked the data.) Margo just delivered last years reports this week, and Ive begun keying them into another Excel file. This will do as a stopgap measure. Long-term, devising a friendly data-entry and management program for the nurses \u0026amp; their helpers would make their data collection efficient and more quickly useful to the nurses, administrators, and others. Such software probably exists somewhere. LRSD can no doubt devise something much better than the states painfully slow and inconvenient web-based data entry for BMI (another measure well want to include in the ACSIPs). I hope to learn more about school health at a public health meeting in November where many school health researchers will present studies and vendors will show their products. At least two aspects of this data interests us(1) the number \u0026amp; variety of services provided to students and staff by nurses et al and (2) the patterns of health events and traits among our students and staff. The first should help administer needed services, while the second should help us discover students needs and understand possibly why some have difficulty learning. Another kind of information is environmental, both social and physical. We have been planning for the past year or more to survey students, parents, teachers, and administrators with the help of Vicky Bernhardts group (with whom Ed, Maurecia, \u0026amp; I studied for a week in July 2005 and who has consulted with us over that period). We want to introduce it as an on-line questionnaire, realizing that we might need to supplement it with paper questionnaires or suffer low participation in early years. This climate survey asks for impressions about the quality of operations and human relations in the schools. It will provide soft but consistent clues for improving 9/29/2006Page 3 of 3 the schools and assessing such efforts. Weve begun exploring what physical environmental information might exist and in what format. This is probably as important as the other information, but we cant be certain until we look at it. It might include data from property inspections, air and other sampling, injuries, etc. Finally, financial information was not mentioned (that I heard) today. An interest we explored with some researchers allied with Vicky Bernhardt is efficiency estimates. Much forethought, of course, will be required with this kind of analysis, but per capita and per program costs are certainly interesting. I hope these notes are helpful. Theyre going to everyone in todays meeting I can remember except Larry (because I dont have an address for him). Jim Jim Wohlleb, Statistician Planning, Research, \u0026amp; Evaluation Department Little Rock School District 3001 South Pulaski Little Rock, AR 72206-2873 iim.wohlleb@lrsd.orq 501/447-3381 or 680-9244 (mobile) (fax) 501/447-7609 9/29/2006Margie Page 1 of 1 From\nTo: Sent: Subject: \"Dejarnette, Karen\" \u0026lt;Karen.Dejarnette@lrsd.org\u0026gt; \"Margie\" \u0026lt;mqpowell@odmemail.com\u0026gt; Friday. September 29, 2006 8:55 AM FW: Report to Court From: Dejarnette, Karen Sent: Friday, September 29, 2006 8:28 AM To: 'Brenda Kampman' Cc: Chris Heller Subject: RE: Report to Court I have not received any report from Chris by email or other. From\nBrenda Kampman [mailto:Brendak@fec.net] Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2006 4:30 PM To: Dejarnette, Karen Cc: Chris Heller Subject\nRe: Report to Court Karen: Chris Heller asked me to check on the status of the report to the court that he emailed you about late yesterday. He needs to provide a response to Judge Wilson tomorrow and would like to review that information first thing. Please see if you can get it to him as early as possible tomorrow. Thanks. Brenda Kampman Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark 400 W. Capitol, Suite 2000 Little Rock, AR 72201 direct line: 501-370-1444 fax: 501-376-2147 9/29/2006Margie Page 1 of 1 From: To: Cc: Sent: Subject: \"Joy Springer\" \u0026lt;jspringer@gabrielmail.com\u0026gt; \u0026lt;HELLER@fec.net\u0026gt; \"John W. Walker\" \u0026lt;johnwalkeratty@aol.com\u0026gt;\n\"Dejarnette, Karen\" \u0026lt;Karen.Dejarnette@lrsd.org\u0026gt;\n\"Margie Powell\" \u0026lt;mqpowell@odmemail.com\u0026gt; Thursday, September 28, 2006 1:54 PM Requests for Information from Dr. DeJarnette Chris, On yesterday I asked Khayyam to have the documents that I requested from Dr. Dejarnette on September Sth available for my review as well as the documents he was providing to me from another request. It is my understanding from Khayyam that those documents consist of 277 pages and were emailed to you by Dr. Dejarnette as an attachment. Great!! Would you kindly email those documents to me and there would be no need for your office to copy them. Thank you for your cooperation. Joy Springer ) 9/29/2006Page 1 of 1 Margie From: To: Sent: Attach: Subject: \"Dejarnette, Karen\" \u0026lt;Karen.Dejarnette@lrsd.org\u0026gt; \"Margie\" \u0026lt;mqpowell@odmemail.com\u0026gt;\n\"Wohlleb, Jim\" \u0026lt;Jim.Wohlleb@lrsd.org\u0026gt; Thursday, September 28, 2006 12:49 PM database revised.doc\nrequest from Mr. Walker sept 8.pdf FW: response to foi fyi From: Dejarnette, Karen Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2006 12:49 PM To: 'Chris Heller' Subject: response to foi Chris, The following email and enclosed file was requested by Mr. Walker on September 8^. The foi is also enclosed. Karen From: Dejarnette, Karen Sent: Friday, July 14, 2006 2:44 PM To: Griffin, Beverly Subject: RE: Snapshot Compliance Remedy - External Evaluations On June 12'^ PRE and Chris Heller were told by ADE staff that electronic benchmark data for individual students would be available to us (and evaluators) from NORMES on July 10'^. So far, the data is not available. Chris Heller has provided an update to the Court saying we expected to receive data by July lO**^. However, he has not filed a motion for an extension. On Monday, the 10^, and again yesterday I let Chris know the data was not available and asked him to file a motion for an extension. To my knowledge he has yet to file a motion. I wish he would file one immediately. I am concerned the Judge will look harshly on a late motion. What else can I do? Compliance Remedy - Deeply Embedded Assessment Process See document enclosed that outlines the timeline and work efforts of PRE to meet this requirement. From: Griffin, Beverly Sent: Friday, July 14, 2006 11:06 AM To: Dejarnette, Karen Subject: Snapshot Karen: An update on the status of completing the compliance report? 10/2/2006In the fall of 2004, three new staff members joined the PRE Department to carry out the Compliance Remedy ordered by the US District Court in the spring of that year. This included developing policy for assessing LRSD programs and overseeing well designed evaluations of eight LRSD programs. The Court also clearly directed LRSD to weave assessment and evaluation into the fabric of its operations, so that programs would start, continue, and end based on evidence of their performance. Consistent with contemporary practice, continuous improvement depends on sound knowledge of effectiveness. The biggest obstacle to fulfilling challenges of the Compliance Remedy was access to current, reliable data related to LRSD and its programs. Both content and process were (and remain) problems: 1) Content - LRSD collects little data other than demographic information and student outcomes such as standardized tests scores, this data is not related to specific programs, and no one checks its accuracy. 2) Process - Individual departments collect data, assemble much of it into data bases, and provide it to Information Services Department and other departments\nso PRE depends on other sources for unchecked data in various stages of automation. On October 5, less than two weeks after PREs new hires, Drs. DeJamette and Roberts discussed a plan of action with Dr. Steve Ross to address the tasks outlined in the Courts Compliance Remedy-developing a comprehensive assessment policy for LRSD and identifying the first four key programs for evaluations. (The Court named Dr. Ross as a preferred consultant.) This policy assumed timely access to reliable information about individual students, staff, resources, and programs. A plan and three experts to carry it out were approved by Dr. Ross, as required by the Compliance Remedy. By the end of October, the three consultants agreed to assist: Dr. Ross would conduct the first three external evaluations. Dr. James Catterall one external evaluation, and Dr. Victoria Bernhardt would assist with development of a comprehensive assessment process to be deeply embedded in our day-to-day educational operations. The work outlined with Dr. Victoria Bernhardt included phases such as 1) 2) 3) determining useful data sets for program assessment, creating a district portfolio in printed format so LRSD staff could immediately access key data for assessment purposes without requesting it, and designing a data warehouse to store all data needed for program assessment. Dr. Bernhardt worked with PRE staff during 2005 to accomplish these tasks. She met with PRE staff during visits to Little Rock, and three PRE staff attended her week-long workshop in Chico, California. The first draft of a printed portfolio, a collection of data collected by October 1, 2005, was helpful to PRE staff and external evaluators. However, other data collected after October 1 and additional data related to other measures were needed.On the recommendation of Dr. Bernhardt, PRE staff engaged in design conversation with personnel from TetraData to determine the type of data warehouse that would be most useful for LRSD program assessments. TetraData is a company that designs, builds, and maintains data warehouses specifically for educational organizations. Its databases offer up-to-the-minute triangulation of multiple measures of data-a time-efficient model for conducting ongoing program assessments. During this same period, PRE encountered two primary deficiencies with current data sent to the Information Services Department and in turn provided to PRE: 1) incorrect, duplicated, and missing data and 2) lack of tags to instructional programs. For example, two external evaluators reported 60-65% error rates in parent contact information as they tried to conduct parent phone interviews for the first round of evaluations. PRE recommended to Cabinet members and the Information Services Department cleaning the data and relating it to programs. Gena Magaruh, a representative of TetraData, met with PRE staff in July 2005. Through the end of 2005 she demonstrated to senior LRSD administrators the ability of TetraData to design, build, and maintain a database tailored to PREs needs. Her forecast for its completion was summer 2006. After these meetings, PRE requested of Dr. Roberts, Mr. Hattabaugh, and Mr. Milhollen that LRSD purchase a TetraData warehouse. Estimated costs varied depending on how much LRSD wished to service or maintain the data, from $250,000 on up. By early 2006, PRE learned that LRSD would not engage TetraData, but instead its Information Services Department would design and build a Crystal Objects database. PRE would have access to the same type of data and services as TetraData proposed to offer. At least one senior programmer of the Department expressed doubts about its capacity to accomplish this task in a reasonable time frame. PRE offered input into the design of the Crystal Objects database. Information Services Department offered a glimpse into the development of the new database. In July 2006, Information Services Department announced that three pieces of student data-demographics, standardized test scores, and transcriptsare available in the new database, but there is no schedule for completion. Thus, PRE faces the same set of problems as in the fall of 2004.Comparison______________________ Crystal Database as of July 11, 2006 TetraData offered Student demographics Standardized test scofes Student Transcripts Student and staff demographics Standardized test scores Perceptions from surveys of students, parents, staff et al. Discipline, graduation, etc. Instructional Programs School resources School finances PRE requests, and CISD supplies data in fonaats requested PRE imports data files into SPSS and Word p)r analyses and reports. PRE staff arrange data Statistical features support analyses and reports.Page 1 of 1 Margie From: To: Cc: Sent: Subject: \"Joy Springer\" \u0026lt;jspringer@gabrielmail.com\u0026gt; \u0026lt;HELLER@fec.net\u0026gt; \"Margie Powell\" \u0026lt;mqpowell@odmemail.com\u0026gt;\n\"John W. Walker\" \u0026lt;johnwalkeratty@aol.com\u0026gt;\n\"Dejarnette, Karen\" \u0026lt;Karen.Dejarnette@lrsd.org\u0026gt; Monday, October 02, 2006 12:02 PM Fw: Requests for Information from Dr. Dejarnette Chris, would you please advise whether you intend to forward the requested information via email. Please advise. If the documents are in an email, I do not see the need for me to come to your office in order to review them. Thank you for your attention to this request. Joy Springer  Original Message  From: Joy Springer To: HELLER@fec.net Cc: John W. Walker\nDejarnette, Karen\nMargie Powell Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2006 1:54 PM Subject: Requests for Information from Dr. Dejarnette Chris, On yesterday I asked Khayyam to have the documents that I requested from Dr. Dejarnette on September Sth available for my review as well as the documents he was providing to me from another request. It is my understanding from Khayyam that those documents consist of 277 pages and were emailed to you by Dr. Dejarnette as an attachment. Great!! Would you kindly email those documents to me and there would be no need for your office to copy them. Thank you for your cooperation. Joy Springer 10/2/2006Page 1 of 2 Margie From: To: Sent: Subject: \"Dejarnette, Karen\" \u0026lt;Karen.Dejarnette@lrsd.org\u0026gt; \"Margie\" \u0026lt;mqpowell@odmemail.com\u0026gt; Monday, October 02, 2006 3:50 PM FW: qeli data From: Dejarnette, Karen Sent: Monday, October 02, 2006 3:50 PM To: 'Chris Heller'\nWilliams, Ed\nWohlleb, Jim\nRobinson, Maurecia Cc: Roberts, Olivine Subject: RE: qeli data We expect initial/draft reports from James and Steve, these reports should go to evaluation team members, Cabinet and Board for feedback. From: Chris Heller [mailto:HELLER@fec.net] Sent: Monday, October 02, 2006 3:40 PM To: Williams, Ed\nWohlleb, Jim\nDejarnette, Karen\nRobinson, Maurecia Cc: Roberts, Olivine Subject: RE: qeli data thanks, on a related matter, would the pre-k eval filed on November 15 be considered a \"draft\"? if so, how quickly could it be finalized? ch \u0026gt; \"Dejarnette, Karen\" \u0026lt;Karen.Dejarnette@lrsd.org\u0026gt; 10/2/2006 3:36:56 PM \u0026gt;\u0026gt;\u0026gt; CREP decided they needed more detailed QELI data than Normes could provide. From: Chris Heller [mailto:HELLER@fec.net] Sent: Monday, October 02, 2006 3:23 PM To: Williams, Ed\nWohlleb, Jim\nDejarnette, Karen\nRobinson, Maurecia Cc: Roberts, Olivine Subject: qeli data we told the court on July 18 that qeli data from normes was \"delayed due to over 15,000 missing numbers and 10/3/2006Page 2 of 2 names\", but that pre expected \"to provide the qeli database to dr ross by early August\", can someone please explain, right away (this is my third request) what happened, also, i understand from aaron that jim is currently working with riverside on the qeli data, what is the status of that effort and when will usable data get to crep? ch 10/3/2006Margie Page 1 of 1 From: To: Sent: Subject: \"Dejarnette, Karen\" \u0026lt;Karen.Dejarnette@lrsd.org\u0026gt; \"Margie\" \u0026lt;mqpowell@odmemail.com\u0026gt; Monday, October 02, 2006 3:40 PM FW: compliance report fyi From: Dejarnette, Karen Sent: Monday, October 02, 2006 3:41 PM To: 'Chris Heller' Cc: Hattabaugh, Hugh\nRoberts, Olivine\nBrooks, Roy G Subject: RE: compliance report Chris, Please review all of the Quarterly Updates we have provided thus far and let me know what else you would expect to be included. I believe PRE has fully informed the Court, through the Quarterly Reports we have sent to you, all of our compliance efforts. Karen From: Chris Heller [mailto:HELLER@fec.net] Sent: Monday, October 02, 2006 2:27 PM To: Dejarnette, Karen Cc: Hattabaugh, Hugh\nRoberts, Olivine\nBrooks, Roy G Subject: compliance report karen - as you know, our compliance report to judge wilson is due in two weeks, we must document our compliance with the section 2.7.1 of the revised plan as specified in the June 30, 2004 compliance remedy (pp. 61 - 67 of the memorandum opinion), although much information has been provded in our quarterly reports, we will want to include everything necessary to fully document our compliance in this final report, in that regard, would you please provide me a summary of the things we have done to comply with each requirement of the compliance remedy and, for each separate requirement, either a list or copies of the documents which demonstrate our compliance, once i have the summary and the documents, we can discuss final preparation of our compliance report, please call if you have any questions, thanks for your help, ch 10/3/2006Margie Page 1 of 1 From: To: Cc: Sent: Subject: \"Chris Heller\" \u0026lt;HELLER@fec.net\u0026gt; \"Joy Springer\" \u0026lt;jspringer@gabrielmail.com\u0026gt; \"John W. Walker\" \u0026lt;johnwalkeratty@aol.com\u0026gt;\n\"Karen Dejarnette\" \u0026lt;Karen.Dejarnette@lrsd.org\u0026gt;\n\"Margie Powell\" \u0026lt;mqpowell@odmemail.com\u0026gt; Monday, October 02, 2006 4:36 PM Re: Fw: Requests for Information from Dr. Dejarnette i just checked w/ khay. he is in the process of having the documents numbered and expects to provide them today, ch \u0026gt; \"Joy Springer\" \u0026lt;jspringer@gabrielmail.com\u0026gt; 10/2/2006 12:02:40 PM \u0026gt;\u0026gt;\u0026gt; Chris, would you please advise whether you intend to forward the requested information via email. Please advise. If the documents are in an email, I do not see the need for me to come to your office in order to review them. Thank you for your attention to this request. Joy Springer -----Original Message------ From: Joy Springer To: HELLER@fec.net Cc: John W. Walker\nDejarnette, Karen\nMargie Powell Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2006 1:54 PM Subject: Requests for Information from Dr. Dejarnette Chris, On yesterday I asked Khayyam to have the documents that I requested from Dr. Dejarnette on September 8th available for my review as well as the documents he was providing to me from another request. It is my understanding from Khayyam that those documents consist of 277 pages and were emailed to you by Dr. Dejarnette as an attachment. Great!! Would you kindly email those documents to me and there would be no need for your office to copy them. Thank you for your cooperation. Joy Springer 10/3/2006Margie Page 1 of 1 From: To: Sent: Subject: \"Dejarnette, Karen\" \u0026lt;Karen.Dejarnette@lrsd.org\u0026gt; \"Margie\" \u0026lt;mqpowell@odmemail.com\u0026gt; Wednesday, October 04, 2006 6:24 PM FW: alleged violations of compliance remedy From: Chris Heller [mailto:HEIJ.ER@fec.net] Sent: Wednesday, October 04, 2006 5:40 PM To: Dejarnette, Karen Subject: alleged violations of compliance remedy karen - i have been made aware of your allegation, made in an employee relations complaint, that you have been required to withhold information from the court, the monitors and the parties in violation of the compliance remedy, please tell me what information \"mandated by the compliance remedy\" you were directed to withhold and who directed you to withhold it. if the information is in document form, please send me copies of the documents, if not, please summarize the information which you believe must be shared with the court, the parties and odm. in order to address this issue with the court, if necessary, i need a response from you as soon as possible, please understand that i do not make this request as a part of the process for resolving your complaint, but in order to fulfill my responsibilities in Irsd v. pcssd. ch 10/11/2006Page 1 of 1 Margie From: To: Sent: Attach: Subject: \"Dejarnette, Karen\" \u0026lt;Karen.Dejarnette@lrsd.org\u0026gt; \"Margie\" \u0026lt;mqpowell@odmemail.com\u0026gt; Thursday, October 05, 2006 1:01 PM documents related to withheld information.pdf FW: alleged violations of compliance remedy From: Dejarnette, Karen Sent: Thursday, October 05, 2006 1:01 PM To: 'Chris Heller' Subject: RE: alleged violations of compliance remedy Chris, In response to your email about information being withheld from the Court, monitors, and parties (and omitting material relating to my allegation that I have been directed to withhold information from the Districts Board), PRE was directed by Mr. Hattabaugh, Dr. Roberts, and yourself to withhold the following information from the September 1, 2006 Quarterly Update: 1) Information included in Section B that relates to the comprehensive assessment process (see Section B of the Compliance Remedy for evidence LRSD must include) 2) Information included in Section F, specifically a list of programs currently being assessed by PRE I am enclosing a file of documents that can provide more details. Karen From: Chris Heller [mailto:HELLER@fec.net] Sent: Wednesday, October 04, 2006 5:40 PM To\nDejarnette, Karen Subject: alleged violations of compliance remedy karen -1 have been made aware of your allegation, made in an employee relations complaint, that you have been required to withhold information from the court, the monitors and the parties in violation of the compliance remedy, please tell me what information \"mandated by the compliance remedy\" you were directed to withhold and who directed you to withhold it. if the information is in document form, please send me copies of the documents, if not, please summarize the information which you believe must be shared with the court, the parties and odm. in order to address this issue with the court, if necessary, i need a response from you as soon as possible, please understand that i do not make this request as a part of the process for resolving your complaint, but in order to fulfill my responsibilities in Irsd v. pcssd. ch 10/11/2006Page 1 of 1 Margie From: To: Sent: Attach: Subject: \"Dejarnette, Karen\" \u0026lt;Karen.Dejarnette@lrsd.org\u0026gt; \"Margie\" \u0026lt;mqpowell@odmemail.com\u0026gt; Tuesday, October 10, 2006 3:26 PM foia October 3.pdf\nfoia October 3 response.pdf FW: foia October 3rd From: Dejarnette, Karen Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2006 3:24 PM To: 'Chris Heller' Subject\nfoia October 3rd Enclosed you will find two files. First, an foia from Mr. Walker dated October 3, 2006. And second, scanned emails in response to the October 3^*^ foia. 10/11/2006Page 1 of 1 Dejarnette, Karen From: Wohlleb, Jim Sent\nTo: Cc: Thursday, October 12, 2006 12:52 PM Roberts, Olivine\nHattabaugh, Hugh\nMittiga, Joseph Dejarnette, Karen\nRobinson, Maurecia\nWilliams, Ed\nParadis, Darral Mr. Hattabaugh \u0026amp; Dr. Roberts, My conclusion from our discussion October 2 was that PRE wont go forward with the climate\" survey designed for LRSD by EPF. Instead, there will be another survey for the monitoring report. If thats true, Id like to inform EFF that LRSD wont follow through with a contract for the survey. Was my conclusion correct? Attached are my notes from the meeting. . Thanks very much. Jim Jim Wohlleb, Statistician Planning, Research, \u0026amp; Evaluation Dept Little Rock School District 3001 South Pulaski Little Rock, AR 72206-2873 501/447-3381 (office voice) 501/447-7609 (office fax) 501/680-9244 (mobile) j i m, wo h 11 eb @ I rsd. o rg 10/17/2006Notes of discussion about the second annual survey for the monitoring report October 2, 2006 Attending: Mr. Hugh Hattabaugh, Dr. Olivine Roberts, Mr. Joe Mittiga, Dr. Karen Dejarnette, Ms. Maurecia Robinson, Dr. Ed Williams, and Mr. Jim Wohlleb Olivine summoned Jim and Karen to the administration building for a conference, and Karen invited Ed and Maurecia. PRE Department members thought it would be about the authority of PRE to determine what it assesses. Instead, Dr. Roberts led discussion about this years survey of teachers, parents, and students for the monitoring report. Mention of on-line surveys by Education for the Future (EFF), ready for administration now, was met by Mr. Hattabaughs declaration that any services by outside organizations require RFPs. Dr. DeJamette noted that EFF is so busy it does not consider RFPs. In her opinion, LRSD is turning away from the best methods and services and instead using its own unvalidated measures. Given this, she prefers that Mr. Mittigas office rather than PRE conduct the survey for the monitoring report. All agreed on a more attractive survey instrument than last years and distribution by some means other than USPS. Showing high priority to the survey is a way to increase participation. For ES parents, teachers can ask them to answer questionnaires at the start of conferences with teachers. This might not work so well with parents of middle \u0026amp; high school students. There was agreement by both Dr. Roberts and Mr. Mittiga that last years questions were ambiguous. They also endorsed stakeholder participation in the design. Martha Hill was mentioned as a good participant. Afterwards, Mr. Wohlleb sent copies of the four EFF questionnaires to Mr. Mittiga, and he sent around a copy of the survey he designed with UALR but did not administer due to lack of funds. Comments sent with the EFF documents noted the intended application of them in PREs assessment of the teacher performance challenge as step 2 evidence.Page 1 of 1 Dejarnette, Karen From: Sent: To: Cc: Roberts, Olivine Thursday, October 12, 2006 2:01 PM Wohlleb, Jim\nHattabaugh, Hugh\nMittiga, Joseph Dejarnette, Karen\nRobinson, Maurecia\nWilliams, Ed\nParadis, Darral Subject: RE: Mr. Wohlleb, I do not know what was told to the PRE staff regarding the purpose of the meeting, but my sole intended purpose was to discuss the monitoring report. Please correct the minutes to reflect that. Thank you. Olivine OCivine 'Roberts, 'PRD. .Associate Superintendent, 'Educational'Servires Eittl'e Rock School''District. 3001 S. Eufastii. St. Little 'Rock, J47\u0026lt; 72406 Pfione: 501.44\n0 fax: 501.447-332I  MWi IW11 From: Wohlleb, Jim Sent: Thursday, October 12, 2006 12:52 PM To: Roberts, Olivine\nHattabaugh, Hugh\nMittiga, Joseph Cc: Dejarnette, Karen\nRobinson, Maurecia\nWilliams, Ed\nParadis, Darral Subject: Mr. Hattabaugh \u0026amp; Dr. Roberts, My conclusion from our discussion October 2 was that PRE wont go forward with the climate\" survey designed for LRSD by EFF. Instead, there will be another survey for the monitoring report. If thats true, Id like to inform EFF that LRSD wont follow through with a contract for the survey. Was my conclusion correct? Attached are my notes from the meeting. Thanks very much. Jim Jim Wohlleb, Statistician Planning, Research, \u0026amp; Evaluation Dept Little Rock School District 3001 South Pulaski Little Rock, AR 72206-2873 501/447-3381 (office voice) 501/447-7609 (office fax) 501/680-9244 (mobile) jim.wohlleb@lrsd.orq 10/17/2006Page 1 of2 Dejarnette, Karen From: Sent: To: Cc: Wohlleb, Jim Thursday, October 12, 2006 2:16 PM Roberts, Olivine\nHattabaugh, Hugh\nMittiga, Joseph Dejarnette, Karen\nRobinson, Maurecia\nWilliams, Ed\nParadis. Darral Subject: RE: climate survey Certainly, Ill correct my notes. They are silent on the matter of not proceeding with the survey prepared by EFF. Do you recall whether it was resolved during that discussion? Thanks. From: Roberts, Olivine Sent: Thursday, October 12, 2006 2:01 PM To: Wohlleb, Jim\nHattabaugh, Hugh\nMittiga, Joseph Cc: Dejarnette, Karen\nRobinson, Maurecia\nWilliams, Ed\nParadis, Darral Subject: RE: Mr. Wohlleb, I do not know what was told to the PRE staff regarding the purpose of the meeting, but my sole intended purpose was to discuss the monitoring report. Please correct the minutes to reflect that. Thank you. Olivine OR-vine 'Roberts, Rif'D. -Associate. Supermtendent, IdiicationaCServices Little 'Rocfi School 'District 3001 S. 'PuLaslii St. Little sA'Rpzeofi 'Pfione: 561.44-.3320 fax: 501.447-3321 From: Wohlleb, Jim Sent: Thursday, October 12, 2006 12:52 PM To: Roberts, Olivine\nHattabaugh, Hugh\nMittiga, Joseph Cc: Dejarnette, Karen\nRobinson, Maurecia\nWilliams, Ed\nParadis, Darral Subject: Mr. Hattabaugh \u0026amp; Dr. Roberts, My conclusion from our discussion October 2 was that PRE wont go forward with the climate\" survey designed for LRSD by EFF. Instead, there will be another survey for the monitoring report. If thats true, Id like to inform EFF that LRSD wont follow through with a contract for the survey. Was my conclusion correct? Attached are my notes from the meeting. Thanks very much. Jim Jim Wohlleb, Statistician Planning, Research, \u0026amp; Evaluation Dept Little Rock School District 3001 South Pulaski Little Rock, AR 72206-2873 501/447-3381 (office voice) 10/17/2006Page 2 of 2 501/447-7609 (office fax) 501/680-9244 (mobile) jim. woh I leb@lrsd.orq 10/17/2006Page 1 of 2 Dejarnette, Karen From: Sent: To: Cc: Roberts, Olivine Thursday, October 12, 2006 2:18 PM Wohlleb, Jim\nHattabaugh, Hugh\nMittiga, Joseph Dejarnette, Karen\nRobinson, Maurecia\nWilliams, Ed\nParadis, Darral Subject: RE: climate survey The group agreed to use a locally developed instrument. Olivine 'Roberts, 'Dtf.'D. Associate Su/)enn tencfent, 'Lducatianal Services RittCe Rocli Scfiool District 3001 S. 'Pulh.-iki SI. Rock, SPR 722 RIitmp.: 301.447.3320 fax: 501.447-3321 00' From: Wohlleb, Jim Sent: Thursday, October 12, 2006 2:16 PM To: Roberts, Olivine\nHattabaugh, Hugh\nMittiga, Joseph Cc: Dejarnette, Karen\nRobinson, Maurecia\nWilliams, Ed\nParadis, Darral Subject: RE: climate survey Certainly. Ill correct my notes. They are silent on the matter of not proceeding with the survey prepared by EFF. Do you recall whether it was resolved during that discussion? Thanks. From: Roberts, Olivine Sent: Thursday, October 12, 2006 2:01 PM To: Wohlleb, Jim\nHattabaugh, Hugh\nMittiga, Joseph Cc: Dejarnette, Karen\nRobinson, Maurecia\nWilliams, Ed\nParadis, Darral Subject: RE: Mr. Wohlleb, I do not know what was told to the PRE staff regarding the purpose of the meeting, but my sole intended purpose was to discuss the monitoring report. Please correct the minutes to reflect that. Thank you. Olivine OCh'me Roberts, 'RfiJ. .'Associate Superhitendent, 'Rdiicat umal Services Lit Ue. Rocii Scl'woC'District 3001 S. 'Rulas/ii. St. PittLe 'Rocli., 7\\'R 7'2206 Tlione: 501.44, 3320 fax: 501.447.3321 r\u0026lt; ................ k ... From: Wohlleb, Jim Sent: Thursday, October 12, 2006 12:52 PM To: Roberts, Olivine\nHattabaugh, Hugh\nMittiga, Joseph 10/17/2006Page 2 of 2 Cc: Dejarnette, Karen\nRobinson, Maurecia\nWilliams, Ed\nParadis, Darral Subject: Mr. Hattabaugh \u0026amp; Dr. Roberts, My conclusion from our discussion October 2 was that PRE wont go forward with the climate survey designed for LRSD by EFF. Instead, there will be another survey for the monitoring report. If thats true. Id like to inform EFF that LRSD wont follow through with a contract for the survey. Was my conclusion correct? Attached are my notes from the meeting. Thanks very much. Jim Jim Wohlleb, Statistician Planning, Research, \u0026amp; Evaluation Dept Little Rock School District 3001 South Pulaski Little Rock, AR 72206-2873 501/447-3381 (office voice) 501/447-7609 (office fax) 501/680-9244 (mobile) iim.wohlleb@lrsd.orq 10/17/2006Page 1 of 2 Dejarnette, Karen From: Sent: To: Cc: Dejarnette, Karen Thursday, October 12, 2006 2:43 PM Wohlleb, Jim\nRoberts, Olivine\nHattabaugh, Hugh\nMittiga, Joseph Robinson, Maurecia\nWilliams, Ed\nParadis, Darral Subject: RE: climate survey Jim, I understood there were two purposes for the meeting. See the following email I received from Dr. Roberts on Friday September 29*^ at 9:29a.m: Lets meet on Monday following Cabinet to discuss the Monitoring Report and the Climate Survey. Please ask Jim to attend. Thank you. Olivine. 'Roberts, 'fd.'D. dissociate Superintendent, XtiiicationaCServices Xittle 'Rock School District 3001 S. 'Put'oski St. Xtttie Rock, SVR 72206 Rkone: 501.447.3320 J'ax: 501.447.3321 From: Wohlleb, Jim Sent: Thursday, October 12, 2006 2:16 PM To: Roberts, Olivine\nHattabaugh, Hugh\nMittiga, Joseph Cc: Dejarnette, Karen\nRobinson, Maurecia\nWilliams, Ed\nParadis, Darral Subject: RE: climate survey Certainly, Ill correct my notes. They are silent on the matter of not proceeding with the survey prepared by EFF. Do you recall whether it was resolved during that discussion? Thanks. ijunorjiiK From: Roberts, Olivine Sent: Thursday, October 12, 2006 2:01 PM To: Wohlleb, Jim\nHattabaugh, Hugh\nMittiga, Joseph Cc: Dejarnette, Karen\nRobinson, Maurecia\nWilliams, Ed\nParadis, Darral Subject: RE: Mr. Wohlleb. I do not know what was told to the PRE staff regarding the purpose of the meeting, but my sole intended purpose was to discuss the monitoring report. Please correct the minutes to reflect that. Thank you. Olivine Olivine 'Roberts, 'Ecti'D. dissocia te S upe. rin ten den I, Educat ionatServ ices Eittle 'Ri)ck .SdiooC'District 10/17/2006Page 2 of 2 SOO I S. 'PuCaski St. ittCe 'KocH, A'R -2206 THme: 501.44/.332o fax: 5O].447.S3:^ From: Wohlleb, Jim Sent: Thursday, October 12, 2006 12:52 PM To: Roberts, Olivine\nHattabaugh, Hugh\nMittiga, Joseph Cc: Dejarnette, Karen\nRobinson, Maurecia\nWilliams, Ed\nParadis, Darral Subject: Mr. Hattabaugh \u0026amp; Dr. Roberts, My conclusion from our discussion October 2 was that PRE wont go forward with the climate\" survey designed for LRSD by EFF. Instead, there will be another survey for the monitoring report. If thats true, Id like to inform EFF that LRSD wont follow through with a contract for the survey. Was my conclusion correct? Attached are my notes from the meeting. Thanks very much. Jim Jim Wohlleb. Statistician Planning, Research, \u0026amp; Evaluation Dept Little Rock School District 3001 South Pulaski Little Rock, AR 72206-2873 501/447-3381 (office voice) 501/447-7609 (office fax) 501/680-9244 (mobile) iim.wohlleb@lrsd.orq 10/17/2006Page 1 of 2 Dejarnette, Karen From: Sent: To: Cc: Roberts, Olivine Thursday. October 12. 2006 3:07 PM Dejarnette. Karen\nWohlleb. Jim\nHattabaugh. Hugh\nMittiga. Joseph Robinson. Maurecia\nWilliams. Ed\nParadis. Darral Subject: RE: climate survey Karen, you are right. That is why it was a part of the discussion. OCivine 'Roberts, Rd.!). .Associate Superintendent, ducatirmul'Servire.s Rittte 'Roca Scfiool District sooi S. 'Pulaski St. ittfe Rock, RX'R recob 'Rhone: 501.447.^'320 Fax: 5O1.44R-3321 From: Dejarnette, Karen Sent: Thursday, October 12, 2006 2:43 PM To: Wohlleb, Jim\nRoberts, Olivine\nHattabaugh, Hugh\nMittiga, Joseph Cc: Robinson, Maurecia\nWilliams, Ed\nParadis, Darral Subject: RE: climate survey Jim. I understood there were two purposes for the meeting. See the following email I received from Dr. Roberts on Friday September 29*^ at 9:29a.m: Let's meet on Monday following Cabinet to discuss the Monitoring Report and the Climate Survey. Please ask Jim to attend. Thank you. Olivine 'Roberts, 'cC.D. Associate Sujierintendent, RdiicatumaCServices fittbe Rock Seboot'District 3001 S. 'Pulaski St. Fittbe Rock, A'R 72206 Rhone: 501.447.3320 fax: 501.447-3321 From: Wohlleb, Jim Sent: Thursday, October 12, 2006 2:16 PM To: Roberts, Olivine\nHattabaugh, Hugh\nMittiga, Joseph Cc: Dejarnette, Karen\nRobinson, Maurecia\nWilliams, Ed\nParadis, Darral Subject: RE: climate survey Certainly. Ill correct my notes. They are silent on the matter of not proceeding with the survey prepared by EFF. Do you recall whether it was resolved during that discussion? Thanks. From: Roberts, Olivine Sent: Thursday, October 12, 2006 2:01 PM 10/17/2006Page 2 of 2 To: Wohlleb, Jim\nHattabaugh, Hugh\nMittiga, Joseph Cc: Dejarnette, Karen\nRobinson, Maurecia\nWilliams, Ed\nParadis, Darral Subject: RE\nMr. Wohlleb, I do not know what was told to the PRE staff regarding the purpose of the meeting, but my sole intended purpose was to discuss the monitoring report. Please correct the minutes to reflect that. Thank you. Olivine Olivine 'd:D. y^ssociale Superint\u0026lt;md\u0026amp;iit, hfucalional Services Utle 'Rocli Scbool 'District 5()()i S. 'Putasbi St. LUlLe 'Rock, SAR 72206 'RIione: 501.447.3320 J'ax: 501.44 21 From: Wohlleb, Jim Sent: Thursday, October 12, 2006 12:52 PM To: Roberts, Olivine\nHattabaugh, Hugh\nMittiga, Joseph Cc: Dejarnette, Karen\nRobinson, Maurecia\nWilliams, Ed\nParadis, Darral Subject: Mr. Hattabaugh \u0026amp; Dr. Roberts, My conclusion from our discussion October 2 was that PRE wont go forward with the climate\" survey designed for LRSD by EFF. Instead, there will be another survey for the monitoring report. If thats true, Id like to inform EFF that LRSD wont follow through with a contract for the survey. Was my conclusion correct? Attached are my notes from the meeting. Thanks very much. Jim Jim Wohlleb, Statistician Planning, Research, \u0026amp; Evaluation Dept Little Rock School District 3001 South Pulaski Little Rock, AR 72206-2873 501/447-3381 (office voice) 501/447-7609 (office fax) 501/680-9244 (mobile) iim.wohlleb@lrsd.orq 10/17/2006Page 1 of 1 Dejarnette, Karen From: Sent: To: Cc: Hattabaugh, Hugh Monday, October 16, 2006 7:11 PM Wohlleb, Jim Dejarnette, Karen\nRobinson, Maurecia\nWilliams. Ed\nParadis, Darral\nRoberts, Olivine\nMittiga, Joseph Subject: I stated that a RFP needed to be processed through LRSD Procurement, if we proceed with EFF. It was stated that EFF is to busy to be subjected to the RFP process. If a RFP for the survey instrument and services is not processed, your conclusion is correct. Sincerely, Hugh E. Hattabaugh, Deputy Superintendent Little Rock School District 810 West Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72210 (W) 501-447-1009 (C) 501-580-6815 (FAX) 501-447-1159 From: Wohlleb, Jim Sent: Thursday, October 12, 2006 12:52 PM To: Roberts, Olivine\nHattabaugh, Hugh\nMittiga, Joseph Cc: Dejarnette, Karen\nRobinson, Maurecia\nWilliams, Ed\nParadis, Darral Subject: Mr. Hattabaugh \u0026amp; Dr. Roberts, My conclusion from our discussion October 2 was that PRE wont go forward with the climate survey designed for LRSD by EFF. Instead, there will be another survey for the monitoring report. If thats true. Id like to inform EFF that LRSD wont follow through with a contract for the survey. Was my conclusion correct? Attached are my notes from the meeting. Thanks very much. Jim Jim Wohlleb, Statistician Planning, Research, \u0026amp; Evaluation Dept Little Rock School District 3001 South Pulaski Little Rock, AR 72206-2873 501/447-3381 (office voice) 501/447-7609 (office fax) 501/680-9244 (mobile) iim,wohlleb@l.rsd,org 10/17/2006Page 1 of 1 Dejarnette, Karen From: Sent: To: Cc: Dejarnette, Karen Tuesday, October 17, 2006 2:35 PM Hattabaugh, Hugh\nMittiga, Joseph\nRoberts, Olivine Wohlleb, Jim\nWilliams, Ed\nRobinson, Maurecia Subject: superintendent's report PRE will attend the meeting about the Superintendents monitoring report on Thursday afternoon. However I will not be bringing a detailed budget to the meeting. I cannot create such until I have the details of the project. At this time, I am unclear on the number of questionnaires, cover letters, and how they will be administered. Will all questionnaires be administered by hard copy? Or, will any surveys be mailed? If questionnaires will be administered to all parents (26,000), most students (3''' -12* would be about 20,000), all teachers (2000) and all community partners (200) then the printing part of this project will likely be large enough to go through the bidding process. We are talking about almost 50,000 questionnaires. And, I am assuming you will want cover letters to go with each questionnaires so that means about 100,000 total pages printed. Last year only 12,000 pages (questionnaires and letters) were printed. If you are planning to include open response items on each questionnaire then there will be need to be discussion about who will transcribe the written comments, likely a group of consultants will need to do this. Last year Metros print shop printed the questionnaires and many parents, staff and students complained that the forms were too hard to read, bubbles printed so lightly they could not see which bubble to fill in. The questionnaires may need to be in two colors (not just black and white) so they are more easily readable. For example, bubbles can be printed in light blue for more easy reading and scanning. Also, last year Metro printed many unusable/unscannable questionnaires, their registration on printing was off. These are just some of the points to be discussed before a budget can be detailed. As you know PRE worked with Dr. Bernhardt last year to draft questionnaires. However, Dr. Bernhardts group does not recommend administering any hard copy questionnaires. They do however have an online system that will provide questionnaires to respondents, quantify the responses as they are collected, and provide a report at any time during or after administration. The cost for online administration of parent, student and staff questionnaires to all LRSD is 45,000 total (about 900 per school site). 10/17/2006Page 1 of 1 Margie From: To: Sent: Subject: \"Dejarnette, Karen\" \u0026lt;Karen.Dejarnette@lrsd.org\u0026gt; \"Margie\" \u0026lt;mqpowell@odmemail.com\u0026gt; Thursday, October 12, 2006 8:37 AM FW: reports from James and Steve From: Dejarnette, Karen Sent: Thursday, October 12, 2006 8:37 AM To: 'Chris Heller' Subject: reports from James and Steve Chris, I received the following emails from James and Steve last night. Karen Hi Karen, I'm planning to get it all into PDF and e-mailing it to you. I might be ready to do that on Friday, but I might need some weekend time. Hope things are good there. james Karen, The two reports (Read 180 and 21* Cent) are almost ready and the researchers in charge plan to email them to you on Oct 15. You can then forward them to Chris. No delays are expected, so check your email on the 15*^. Busy time for all of us! Steve 10/12/2006Page 1 of 2 Margie From: To: Sent: Subject: \"Dejarnette, Karen\" \u0026lt;Karen.Dejarnette@lrsd.org\u0026gt; \"Margie\" \u0026lt;mqpowell@odmemail.com\u0026gt; Thursday, October 12, 2006 8:28 AM FW: Cabinet Recap /10-09-06 From: Dejarnette, Karen Sent: Thursday, October 12, 2006 8:29 AM To: Griffin, Beverly Subject: RE: Cabinet Recap / 10-09-06 Beverly, You have asked for each Cabinet member to send recommended revisions for the organizational chart. As you know, last summer I met with Dr. Brooks to request for PRE to be moved from the Educational Services Division, from where the reorganization of the District moved it, and instead report directly to the Superintendent again. Afterwards, I also sent this request to him by email. It is still the desire of PRE to move from Ed Services, since it seems a conflict of interest for the same division to assess the programs that it selects and supervises. At the least, this arrangement deprives PRE of independent assessments, which the District and its Board require. As we understand the US District Courts opinion, PRE should operate independently without influence from possible self-interest of a department or division. When I began as Director of PRE two years ago, the department reported to Dr. Brooks. Since last years reorganization, PRE has experienced barriers and obstacles from both Ed Services and the Superintendents office. The Board of Directors, which is ultimately accountable for the Districts operations, has not received some reports needed for it responsibility. In the light of its experience, PRE should report directly to the Board of Directors, parallel to the internal auditors position. This arrangement would keep the assessment function within the District but distance it from interests of any one division or department. Karen From: Griffin, Beverly Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2006 9:55 AM To: Griffin, Beverly\nAdams, Wayne\nBabbs, Junious\nCarter, Karen\nDejarnette, Karen\nGlasgow, Dennis\nHartz, David\nHattabaugh, Hugh\nMilhollen, Mark\nMitchell, Sadie\nMittiga, Joseph\nRoberts, Olivine\nVann, Suellen\nWatson, Linda Cc: Brooks, Roy G Subject: RE: Cabinet Recap / 10-09-06 One additional reminder - - please review the org chart for your line of authority and get those revisions to me before Friday. We will probably go over the updated charts at cabinet on Monday. Thanks to those of you who have already submitted your changes. They have been made and Ive sent the revised pages to you to check. From: Griffin, Beverly Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2006 5:25 PM To: Adams, Wayne\nBabbs, Junious\nCarter, Karen\nDejarnette, Karen\nGlasgow, Dennis\nHartz, David\nHattabaugh, Hugh\nMilhollen, Mark\nMitchell, Sadie\nMittiga, Joseph\nRoberts, Olivine\nVann, Suellen\nWatson, Linda Cc: Brooks, Roy G 10/12/2006Page 2 of 2 Subject: Cabinet Recap / 10-09-06 Snapshots: - Dennis Glasgow - Foreign Language / AP Credit for Middle School courses Updates \u0026amp; Other Assignments: - Joe Mittiga / policies drafted re: campaigning on school district properties. Will be presented to the board in November for first reading. - Joe Mittiga! discussed drafting a charter school proposal to provide remedial catch up instruction for fifth through seventh graders, chronically low-performers. Project Management Matrix - Suellen Vann - PTA Officers Breakfast scheduled 11-17-06 - Hugh Hattabaugh / David Hartz - completion of Cycle Reports to Arkansas Department of Education prior to October 15 deadline FYI: Media Event at Central High School at 3:00 on Friday - - ceremony retiring Joe Johnsons jersey Next meeting: Monday, October 16, 2006, 9:00 a.m. Beverly J. Griffin Sr. Executive Assistant Little Rock School District 501-447-1005 10/12/2006Margie Page 1 of 1 From: To: Sent: Subject: \"Williams. Ed\" \u0026lt;Ed.Williams@lrsd.org\u0026gt; \u0026lt;Catterall@gseis.ucla.edu\u0026gt;\n\u0026lt;smross@memphis.edu\u0026gt;\n\u0026lt;blktinzie1@yahoo.com\u0026gt;\n\"Riley, Cheryl\" \u0026lt;Cheryl.Riley@lrsd.org\u0026gt;\n\u0026lt;mqpowell@odmemail.com\u0026gt;\n\u0026lt;gjones@aristotle.net\u0026gt;\n\u0026lt;heller@fec.net\u0026gt;\n\"Roberts. Olivine\" \u0026lt;Olivine.Roberts@lrsd.org\u0026gt;\n\"Robinson. Maurecia\" \u0026lt;Maurecia.Malcolm@lrsd.org\u0026gt;\n\"Wohlleb. Jim\" \u0026lt;Jim.Wohlleb@lrsd.org\u0026gt;\n\"Dejarnette. Karen\" \u0026lt;Karen.Dejarnette@lrsd.org\u0026gt;\n\"Ray. Katina\" \u0026lt;Katina.Ray@lrsd.org\u0026gt;\n\"Fletcher. Danny\" \u0026lt;Danny.Fletcher@lrsd.org\u0026gt; Monday. October 16. 2006 1:53 PM A+ Evaluation Meeting To All: The A+ evaluation team meeting has been rescheduled for the afternoon of the 30*^ at 1p.m, Room 18 of the IRC. Please call me if you have any questions, 447-3386. Ed R. Williams, ph.D. 10/16/2006Page 1 of 1 Margie From: To: Cc: Sent: Attach: Subject: \"Robinson. Maurecia\" \u0026lt;Maurecia.Malcolm@lrsd.org\u0026gt; \u0026lt;jpdrey@aol.com\u0026gt;\n\"Wohlleb. Jim\" \u0026lt;Jim.Wohlleb@lrsd.org\u0026gt;\n\"Williams. Ed\" \u0026lt;Ed.Williams@lrsd.org\u0026gt;\n\"Dejarnette. Karen\" \u0026lt;Karen.Dejarnette@lrsd.org\u0026gt; \"Miller. Leticia \u0026lt;Leticia.Miller@lrsd.org\u0026gt;\n\"Menking. Mary\" \u0026lt;Mary,Menking@lrsd.org\u0026gt;\n\"Hobbs. Felicia\" \u0026lt;Felicia.Hobbs@lrsd.org\u0026gt;\n\"Mitchell. Sadie\" \u0026lt;Sadie.Mitchell@lrsd.org\u0026gt;\n\"Roberts. Olivine\" \u0026lt;Olivine.Roberts@lrsd.org\u0026gt;\n\"Morgan. Nancy\" \u0026lt;Nancy.Morgan@lrsd.org\u0026gt;\n\"Joy Springer - John Walker\" \u0026lt;jspringer@gabrielmail.com\u0026gt;\n\u0026lt;gjones@aristotle.net\u0026gt;\n\u0026lt;brigette@abpg.com\u0026gt;\n\u0026lt;mqpowell@odmemail.com\u0026gt; Monday. October 16. 2006 2:52 PM meeting.ics Magnet Team Meeting When: Wednesday, November 08. 2006 1:30 PM-2:30 PM (GMT-06:00) Central Time (US \u0026amp; Canada). Where: Room 18 IRC Hello Team, Jeanne Dreyfus, the external consultant and technical writer for the Magnet Evaluation, will be here on November 8, 2006 at 1:30 P.M., to begin and discuss year two of the Magnet report. The meeting will be held in Room 18 at the IRC. I hope you will be able to attend. Please call if you have questions, 447-3382. Thank you, Maurecia Maurecia Robinson, Statistician Planning, Research, and Evaluation Little Rock School District 3001 S. Pulaski Little Rock, AR 72206 501/447-3382 10/16/2006Page 1 of 1 Margie From: To: Sent: Subject: \"Dejarnette, Karen \u0026lt;Karen.Dejarnette@lrsd.org\u0026gt; \"Margie\" \u0026lt;mqpowell@odmemail.com\u0026gt; Tuesday, October 17, 2006 7:41 AM database training today PRE will attend a training session offered by the Janis Group today at the Tech Center form 8:30-3 to learn more about data access. 10/17/2006Page 1 of 1 Margie From: To: Sent: Attach: Subject: \"Dejarnette, Karen\" \u0026lt;Karen.Dejarnette@lrsd.org\u0026gt; \"Margie\" \u0026lt;mqpowell@odmemail,com\u0026gt; Tuesday, October 17, 2006 7:34 AM disc06oct2.doc FW: From: Wohlleb, Jim Sent: Thursday, October 12, 2006 12:52 PM To: Roberts, Olivine\nHattabaugh, Hugh\nMittiga, Joseph Cc: Dejarnette, Karen\nRobinson, Maurecia\nWilliams, Ed\nParadis, Darral Subject: Mr. Hattabaugh \u0026amp; Dr. Roberts, My conclusion from our discussion October 2 was that PRE wont go forward with the climate survey designed for LRSD by EFF. Instead, there will be another survey for the monitoring report. If thats true. Id like to inform EFF that LRSD wont follow through with a contract for the survey. Was my conclusion correct? Attached are my notes from the meeting. Thanks very much. Jim Jim Wohlleb, Statistician Planning, Research, \u0026amp; Evaluation Dept Little Rock School District 3001 South Pulaski Little Rock, AR 72206-2873 501/447-3381 (office voice) 501/447-7609 (office fax) 501/680-9244 (mobile) iim.wohlleb@lrsd.orq 10/17/2006Notes of discussion about the second annual survey for the monitoring report October 2, 2006 Attending: Mr. Hugh Hattabaugh, Dr. Olivine Roberts, Mr. Joe Mittiga, Dr. Karen DeJamette, Ms. Maurecia Robinson, Dr. Ed Williams, and Mr. Jim Wohlleb Olivine summoned Jim and Karen to the administration building for a conference, and Karen invited Ed and Maurecia. PRE Department members thought it would be about the authority of PRE to determine what it assesses. Instead, Dr. Roberts led discussion about this years survey of teachers, parents, and students for the monitoring report. Mention of on-line surveys by Education for the Future (EFF), ready for administration now, was met by Mr. Hattabaughs declaration that any services by outside organizations require RFPs. Dr. DeJamette noted that EFF is so busy it does not consider RFPs. In her opinion, LRSD is turning away from the best methods and services and instead using its own unvalidated measures. Given this, she prefers that Mr. Mittigas office rather than PRE conduct the survey for the monitoring report. All agreed on a more attractive survey instrument than last years and distribution by some means other than USPS. Showing high priority to the survey is a way to increase participation. For ES parents, teachers can ask them to answer questionnaires at the start of conferences with teachers. This might not work so well with parents of middle \u0026amp; high school students. There was agreement by both Dr. Roberts and Mr. Mittiga that last years questions were ambiguous. They also endorsed stakeholder participation in the design. Martha Hill was mentioned as a good participant. Afterwards, Mr. Wohlleb sent copies of the four EFF questionnaires to Mr. Mittiga, and he sent around a copy of the survey he designed with UALR but did not administer due to lack of funds. Comments sent with the EFF documents noted the intended application of them in PREs assessment of the teacher performance challenge as step 2 evidence.Page 1 of 1 Dejarnette, Karen From: Sent: To: Dejarnette, Karen Tuesday. October 17, 2006 1:50 PM Roberts. Olivine\nHattabaugh. Hugh\nBrooks. Roy G\nHELLER@fec.net Subject\ntimeline for evaluation reports As you know three of the draft evaluation reports were submitted yesterday to the court. Final drafts are to be submitted by November 17. I need your assistance to define a timeline for Board members to review the draft and provide feedback to evaluators so they can produce final drafts for submission to the court on Nov. 17^. Based on feedback from board members attending last weeks board meeting they seem to want hard copies of lengthy reports. Therefore. I am printing copies of the reports this afternoon and tomorrow and will bring enough copies to Beverly tomorrow for Board members. I will also send copies of each report to Cabinet members via interdistrict mail as soon as they are printed. I need your assistance to complete the timeline below, see number 4: 1. Copies of draft reports delivered to evaluation team members. Cabinet and Board members as soon as possible, or by Friday. 2. Evaluation teams will meet at the IRC (with evaluators on conference call) to give feedback on October 25 (Read 180 and 21 Century) and October 30 (A+). 3. Cabinet members to provide feedback by or during October 30 Cabinet me\nThis project was supported in part by a Digitizing Hidden Special Collections and Archives project grant from The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation and Council on Library and Information Resoources.\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n\n "},{"id":"nge_ngen_king-center","title":"King Center","collection_id":"nge_ngen","collection_title":"New Georgia Encyclopedia","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, Georgia, Fulton County, Atlanta, 33.749, -84.38798"],"dcterms_creator":["Eskew, Glenn T."],"dc_date":["2006-07-28"],"dcterms_description":["Encyclopedia article about The Martin Luther King Jr. Center for Nonviolent Social Change which originated in the weeks after the 1968 assassination of civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr. His widow, Coretta Scott King, proposed that living monument be place in the Auburn Avenue Historic District in Atlanta and her vision of a memorial found fruition as the King Center, which is now managed, along with related sites, by the National Park Service","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":null,"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":null,"dcterms_publisher":null,"dc_relation":["Forms part of the New Georgia Encyclopedia."],"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Forms part of the New Georgia Encyclopedia."],"dcterms_subject":["Civil rights movements--United States","Martin Luther King, Jr. Center for Nonviolent Social Change"],"dcterms_title":["King Center"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["New Georgia Encyclopedia (Project)"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["https://www.georgiaencyclopedia.org/articles/history-archaeology/king-center/"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":["If you wish to use content from the NGE site for commercial use, publication, or any purpose other than fair use as defined by law, you must request and receive written permission from the NGE. Such requests may be directed to: Permissions/NGE, University of Georgia Press, 330 Research Drive, Athens, GA 30602."],"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":["Cite as: \"King Center,\" New Georgia Encyclopedia. Retrieved [date]: http://www.georgiaencyclopedia.org."],"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["articles"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"tnn_npldl_nblrobertsk1003clip2","title":"Excerpt 6 from oral history interview with Kenneth L. Roberts, 2006 July 27","collection_id":"tnn_npldl","collection_title":"Nashville Public Library Digital Collections Portal: Civil Rights","dcterms_contributor":["Pyle, Cabot Pollard"],"dcterms_spatial":["United States, Tennessee, Davidson County, Nashville, 36.16589, -86.78444"],"dcterms_creator":["Roberts, Kenneth L., 1932-"],"dc_date":["2006-07-27"],"dcterms_description":["An excerpt from an oral history interview with Nashville business and civic leader Kenneth L. Roberts, conducted on 27 July 2006 by Cabot Pyle as part of the Nashville Public Library's Nashville Business Leaders Oral History Project:  The Turner Interviews.  Roberts outlines his theory that today's Nashville is a result of five things that happened during the 1960s.  He discusses the first of these events, which was the sit-in movement.  He also discusses civil rights leaders involved in the movement in Nashville, including John Lewis, Kelly Miller Smith, and Stokely Carmichael.  The complete interview, as well as an index, is available in the repository."],"dc_format":null,"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":null,"dcterms_publisher":null,"dc_relation":["Forms part of the online collection: Civil Rights Online Collection."],"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Excerpted from:  NBLRobertsK digital recording converted from wav to mp3 format in 2006.","Nashville Business Leaders Oral History Project, Special Collections Division, Nashville Public Library."],"dcterms_subject":["Businesspeople--Tennessee--Nashville","Civic leaders--Tennessee--Nashville","Lawyers--Tennessee--Nashville","Bankers--Tennessee--Nashville","Business enterprises--Tennessee--Nashville","Central business districts--Tennessee--Nashville","Civil rights movements--Tennessee--Nashville","Civil rights--Tennessee--Nashville","African Americans--Civil rights--Tennessee--Nashville","Civil rights demonstrations--Tennessee--Nashville","Civil rights workers--Tennessee--Nashville","Nashville (Tenn.)--History--Sources","Nashville (Tenn.)--Commerce","Nashville (Tenn.)--Economic conditions","Nashville (Tenn.)--Social conditions","Nashville (Tenn.)--Social life and customs","Nashville (Tenn.)--Race relations"],"dcterms_title":["Excerpt 6 from oral history interview with Kenneth L. Roberts, 2006 July 27"],"dcterms_type":["Sound"],"dcterms_provenance":["Nashville Public Library (Tenn.). Special Collections Division"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://digital.library.nashville.org/u?/nr,533"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":["U.S. and international copyright laws protect this digital content, which is provided for educational purposes only and may not be downloaded, reproduced, or distributed for any other purpose without written permission. Please contact the Special Collections Division of the Nashville Public Library, 615 Church Street, Nashville, Tennessee, 37219. Telephone (615) 862-5782."],"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["sound recordings","oral histories (literary works)"],"dcterms_extent":["audio/mp3 (1.27 MB; 1 min, 23 sec.)"],"dlg_subject_personal":["Roberts, Kenneth L., 1932- --Interviews","Lewis, John, 1940-2020","Smith, Kelly Miller, 1920-1984","Carmichael, Stokely, 1941-1998"],"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null}],"pages":{"current_page":268,"next_page":269,"prev_page":267,"total_pages":6766,"limit_value":12,"offset_value":3204,"total_count":81191,"first_page?":false,"last_page?":false},"facets":[{"name":"educator_resource_mediums_sms","items":[{"value":"lesson plans","hits":319},{"value":"teaching guides","hits":53},{"value":"timelines (chronologies)","hits":43},{"value":"online exhibitions","hits":38},{"value":"bibliographies","hits":15},{"value":"study guides","hits":11},{"value":"annotated bibliographies","hits":9},{"value":"learning modules","hits":6},{"value":"worksheets","hits":6},{"value":"slide shows","hits":4},{"value":"quizzes","hits":1}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":16,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"type_facet","items":[{"value":"Text","hits":40200},{"value":"StillImage","hits":35114},{"value":"MovingImage","hits":4552},{"value":"Sound","hits":3248},{"value":"Collection","hits":41},{"value":"InteractiveResource","hits":25}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":16,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"creator_facet","items":[{"value":"Peppler, Jim","hits":4965},{"value":"Phay, John E.","hits":4712},{"value":"University of Mississippi. Bureau of Educational Research","hits":4707},{"value":"Baldowski, Clifford H., 1917-1999","hits":2599},{"value":"Mississippi State Sovereignty Commission","hits":2255},{"value":"Thurmond, Strom, 1902-2003","hits":2077},{"value":"WSB-TV (Television station : Atlanta, Ga.)","hits":1475},{"value":"Newman, I. DeQuincey (Isaiah DeQuincey), 1911-1985","hits":1003},{"value":"The State Media Company (Columbia, S.C.)","hits":926},{"value":"Atlanta Journal-Constitution","hits":844},{"value":"Herrera, John J.","hits":778}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"subject_facet","items":[{"value":"African Americans--Civil rights","hits":9441},{"value":"Civil rights","hits":8347},{"value":"African Americans","hits":5895},{"value":"Mississippi--Race relations","hits":5750},{"value":"Race relations","hits":5607},{"value":"Education, Secondary","hits":5083},{"value":"Education, Elementary","hits":4729},{"value":"Segregation in education--Mississippi","hits":4727},{"value":"Education--Pictorial works","hits":4707},{"value":"Civil rights demonstrations","hits":4436},{"value":"Civil rights workers","hits":3530}],"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":"King, Martin Luther, Jr., 1929-1968","hits":1809},{"value":"Meredith, James, 1933-","hits":1709},{"value":"Herrera, John J.","hits":1312},{"value":"Baker, Augusta, 1911-1998","hits":1282},{"value":"Parks, Rosa, 1913-2005","hits":1071},{"value":"Jordan, Barbara, 1936-1996","hits":858},{"value":"Young, Andrew, 1932-","hits":814},{"value":"Smith, Lillian (Lillian Eugenia), 1897-1966","hits":719},{"value":"Mizell, M. Hayes","hits":674},{"value":"Silver, James W. (James Wesley), 1907-1988","hits":626}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"name_authoritative_sms","items":[{"value":"Smith, Lillian (Lillian Eugenia), 1897-1966","hits":2598},{"value":"King, Martin Luther, Jr., 1929-1968","hits":1909},{"value":"Meredith, James, 1933-","hits":1704},{"value":"Herrera, John J.","hits":1331},{"value":"Parks, Rosa, 1913-2005","hits":1070},{"value":"Jordan, Barbara, 1936-1996","hits":856},{"value":"Young, Andrew, 1932-","hits":806},{"value":"Silver, James W. (James Wesley), 1907-1988","hits":625},{"value":"Connor, Eugene, 1897-1973","hits":605},{"value":"Snelling, Paula","hits":580},{"value":"Williams, Hosea, 1926-2000","hits":431}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"event_title_sms","items":[{"value":"Martin Luther King, Jr.'s Nobel Prize","hits":1763},{"value":"Ole Miss Integration","hits":1670},{"value":"Housing Act of 1961","hits":965},{"value":"Little Rock Central High School Integration","hits":704},{"value":"Memphis Sanitation Workers Strike","hits":366},{"value":"Selma-Montgomery March","hits":337},{"value":"Freedom Summer","hits":306},{"value":"Freedom Rides","hits":214},{"value":"Poor People's Campaign","hits":180},{"value":"University of Georgia Integration","hits":173},{"value":"University of Alabama Integration","hits":140}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"location_facet","items":[{"value":"United States, 39.76, -98.5","hits":17820},{"value":"United States, Georgia, Fulton County, Atlanta, 33.749, -84.38798","hits":5428},{"value":"United States, Alabama, Montgomery County, Montgomery, 32.36681, -86.29997","hits":5151},{"value":"United States, Georgia, 32.75042, -83.50018","hits":4862},{"value":"United States, South Carolina, 34.00043, -81.00009","hits":4610},{"value":"United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","hits":4177},{"value":"United States, Alabama, 32.75041, -86.75026","hits":3943},{"value":"United States, Mississippi, 32.75041, -89.75036","hits":2910},{"value":"United States, Tennessee, Shelby County, Memphis, 35.14953, -90.04898","hits":2579},{"value":"United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","hits":2430},{"value":"United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959","hits":2387}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"us_states_facet","items":[{"value":"Georgia","hits":12843},{"value":"Alabama","hits":11307},{"value":"Mississippi","hits":10219},{"value":"South Carolina","hits":8503},{"value":"Arkansas","hits":4583},{"value":"Texas","hits":4399},{"value":"Tennessee","hits":3770},{"value":"Florida","hits":2601},{"value":"Ohio","hits":2391},{"value":"North Carolina","hits":1893},{"value":"New York","hits":1667}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"year_facet","items":[{"value":"1966","hits":10514},{"value":"1963","hits":10193},{"value":"1965","hits":10119},{"value":"1956","hits":9832},{"value":"1955","hits":9611},{"value":"1964","hits":9268},{"value":"1968","hits":9243},{"value":"1962","hits":9152},{"value":"1967","hits":8771},{"value":"1957","hits":8460},{"value":"1958","hits":8242},{"value":"1961","hits":8241},{"value":"1959","hits":8046},{"value":"1960","hits":7940},{"value":"1954","hits":7239},{"value":"1969","hits":7235},{"value":"1950","hits":7117},{"value":"1953","hits":6968},{"value":"1970","hits":6743},{"value":"1971","hits":6337},{"value":"1977","hits":6280},{"value":"1952","hits":6161},{"value":"1972","hits":6144},{"value":"1951","hits":6045},{"value":"1975","hits":5806},{"value":"1976","hits":5771},{"value":"1974","hits":5729},{"value":"1973","hits":5591},{"value":"1979","hits":5329},{"value":"1978","hits":5318},{"value":"1980","hits":5279},{"value":"1995","hits":4829},{"value":"1981","hits":4724},{"value":"1994","hits":4654},{"value":"1948","hits":4596},{"value":"1949","hits":4571},{"value":"1996","hits":4486},{"value":"1982","hits":4330},{"value":"1947","hits":4316},{"value":"1985","hits":4226},{"value":"1998","hits":4225},{"value":"1997","hits":4202},{"value":"1983","hits":4174},{"value":"1984","hits":4065},{"value":"1946","hits":4046},{"value":"1999","hits":4018},{"value":"1945","hits":4017},{"value":"1990","hits":3937},{"value":"1986","hits":3919},{"value":"1943","hits":3899},{"value":"1944","hits":3895},{"value":"1942","hits":3867},{"value":"2000","hits":3808},{"value":"2001","hits":3790},{"value":"1940","hits":3764},{"value":"1941","hits":3757},{"value":"1987","hits":3657},{"value":"2002","hits":3538},{"value":"1991","hits":3507},{"value":"1936","hits":3506},{"value":"1939","hits":3500},{"value":"1938","hits":3465},{"value":"1937","hits":3449},{"value":"1992","hits":3444},{"value":"1993","hits":3422},{"value":"2003","hits":3403},{"value":"1930","hits":3377},{"value":"1989","hits":3355},{"value":"1935","hits":3306},{"value":"1933","hits":3270},{"value":"1934","hits":3270},{"value":"1988","hits":3269},{"value":"1932","hits":3254},{"value":"1931","hits":3239},{"value":"2005","hits":3057},{"value":"2004","hits":2909},{"value":"1929","hits":2789},{"value":"2006","hits":2774},{"value":"1928","hits":2271},{"value":"1921","hits":2123},{"value":"1925","hits":2039},{"value":"1927","hits":2025},{"value":"1924","hits":2011},{"value":"1926","hits":2009},{"value":"1920","hits":1975},{"value":"1923","hits":1954},{"value":"1922","hits":1928},{"value":"2016","hits":1925},{"value":"2007","hits":1629},{"value":"2008","hits":1578},{"value":"2011","hits":1575},{"value":"2019","hits":1537},{"value":"1919","hits":1532},{"value":"2009","hits":1532},{"value":"1918","hits":1530},{"value":"2015","hits":1527},{"value":"2013","hits":1518},{"value":"2010","hits":1515},{"value":"2014","hits":1481},{"value":"2012","hits":1467}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":100,"offset":0,"prefix":null},"min":"0193","max":"2035","count":500952,"missing":56},{"name":"medium_facet","items":[{"value":"photographs","hits":10708},{"value":"correspondence","hits":9437},{"value":"black-and-white photographs","hits":7678},{"value":"negatives (photographs)","hits":7513},{"value":"documents (object genre)","hits":4462},{"value":"letters (correspondence)","hits":3623},{"value":"oral histories (literary works)","hits":3607},{"value":"black-and-white negatives","hits":2740},{"value":"editorial cartoons","hits":2620},{"value":"newspapers","hits":1955},{"value":"manuscripts (documents)","hits":1692}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"rights_facet","items":[{"value":"http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/","hits":41178},{"value":"http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/","hits":17554},{"value":"http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/UND/1.0/","hits":8828},{"value":"http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/CNE/1.0/","hits":6864},{"value":"http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/NoC-US/1.0/","hits":2186},{"value":"http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-NC/1.0/","hits":1778},{"value":"http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/NoC-CR/1.0/","hits":1115},{"value":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/","hits":197},{"value":"http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/NKC/1.0/","hits":60},{"value":"http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-RUU/1.0/","hits":51},{"value":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/","hits":27}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"collection_titles_sms","items":[{"value":"Jim Peppler Southern Courier Photograph Collection","hits":4956},{"value":"John E. Phay Collection ","hits":4706},{"value":"John J. Herrera Papers","hits":3288},{"value":"Baldy Editorial Cartoons, 1946-1982, 1997: Clifford H. Baldowski Editorial Cartoons at the Richard B. Russell Library.","hits":2607},{"value":"Sovereignty Commission Online","hits":2335},{"value":"Strom Thurmond Collection, Mss 100","hits":2068},{"value":"Alabama Media Group Collection","hits":2067},{"value":"Black Trailblazers, Leaders, Activists, and Intellectuals in Cleveland","hits":2033},{"value":"Rosa Parks Papers","hits":1948},{"value":"Isaiah DeQuincey Newman, (1911-1985), Papers, 1929-2003","hits":1904},{"value":"Lillian Eugenia Smith Papers (circa 1920-1980)","hits":1887}],"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":8885},{"value":"Alabama. Department of Archives and History","hits":8146},{"value":"Atlanta University Center Robert W. Woodruff Library","hits":4102},{"value":"South Caroliniana Library","hits":4024},{"value":"University of North Texas. Libraries","hits":3854},{"value":"Hargrett Library","hits":3292},{"value":"University of South Carolina. Libraries","hits":3212},{"value":"Richard B. Russell Library for Political Research and Studies","hits":2874},{"value":"Mississippi. Department of Archives and History","hits":2825},{"value":"Butler Center for Arkansas Studies","hits":2633},{"value":"Rhodes College","hits":2264}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"class_name","items":[{"value":"Item","hits":80736},{"value":"Collection","hits":455}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":100,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"educator_resource_b","items":[{"value":"false","hits":80994},{"value":"true","hits":197}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":100,"offset":0,"prefix":null}}]}}